Ontario Government Narrowly Defeats Anti-Renewable Energy Proposal

Online, April 19, 2013 (Newswire.com) - The Ontario legislature has defeated proposed legislation that would have serious curtailed the province's feed-in tariff for solar and wind energy.

Bill 39, An Act to provide for control by local municipalities over renewable and affordable energy undertakings, was introduced as a private members bill by Lisa Thompson, the energy critic for the opposition Conservative party.

It was introduced in March but was defeated on second reading Thursday by a vote of 40 to 33.

The Bill would have prohibited the installation or operation of industrial wind turbines unless authorized by municipal by-law and would have given municipalities the power to outlaw conservation investments. Thompson explained that the Green Energy Act and a planned expansion of wind energy would raise the cost of electricity by 40% to 60%. It would have prohibited the provincial power authority from contracting for the supply of electricity from renewable energy sources "unless the price for the supply or capacity does not exceed the price that would be payable if the supply or capacity were derived from non-renewable energy sources."

Ontario has a minority government managed by the Liberal party, but the new premier must table a budget next month that could precipitate an election.

A recent report from a Canadian think tank claims that Ontario's Green Energy Act is ten times more costly than alternatives that could yield the same environmental benefits/

"Overall, GEA-related energy cost increases will yield a net loss of investment and employment in Ontario, in pursuit of environmental benefits that could have been obtained at a fraction of the cost," explains Ross McKitrick of the Fraser Institute and author of 'Environmental and Economic Consequences of Ontario's Green Energy Act.' "Already, the GEA has caused major price increases for large energy consumers, and we're anticipating additional hikes of 40% to 50% over the next few years," and the report criticizes the province for citing a confidential 2005 cost-benefit analysis for its support of the legislation.

"That report did not recommend pursuing wind or solar power; instead it looked at conventional pollution control methods which would have yielded the same environmental benefits as the GEA, but at a tenth of the current cost." If the province continues to support its targets for renewable energies, the GEA "will end up being 70 times costlier than the alternative, with no greater benefits," claims McKitrick.

Manufacturing and mining sectors will be particularly hard hit by rising energy costs, with returns to investment likely to decline by 13% to 29%. The study is particularly critical of the GEA's focus on wind, estimating that 80% of wind output occurs when power demand is so low that the entire output is surplus and must be dumped on the export market at a substantial loss. The Auditor General estimates the province has already lost $2 billion on surplus wind exports, and ongoing losses are $200 million a year, it adds.

The government has backtracked on its claim that the GEA would create 50,000 jobs, but that projection "failed to account for permanent job losses due to electricity price increases under the GEA.

canadian association for renewable energies (we c.a.r.e.) promotes feasible applications of green power, green fuels and green heat.