Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Thunderstorm
30°/16°
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
27°/19°
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 27, 2012
Chance of a Thunderstorm
30°/16°

22 Comments

politics

Queen’s Park Watch: Liberals Get Scolded On Electricity

This week the minority Liberals got hammered for not conserving enough electricity and for paying too much to make more of it.

Rookie Ontario Energy Minister Chris Bentley is probably he wishing he hadn’t picked up when Premier Dalton McGuinty called to offer him the job back in October. This week both the Ontario auditor-general and the environmental commissioner scolded the Liberal government for their mediocre performance in keeping Ontario clean, lit, and solvent.

In volume two of his 2010 Energy Conservation Progress Report, released yesterday, Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller takes the Grits to task for not delivering as promised on conservation efforts. Miller notes that Ontario has only achieved 65 per cent of its 2010 energy-conservation target, although he softens the blow by observing that the goals were awfully ambitious in the first place. Peak demand was reduced by 1,750 megawatts in 2010 (versus a goal of 2,700 megawatts) for an estimated saving to Joe and Jane Ratepayer of $3.8 billion on an investment of $1.7 billion.

The government won’t even meet targets for its own facilities, where it had committed to a 20 per cent reduction in energy use from 2003 levels by 2012. With 2012 looming, the report estimates the real reduction will be about 15 per cent (barring a possible apocalypse, in which case usage is expected to spike briefly before stopping altogether).

Smart meters, which allow for “time-of-use” pricing, were a target of Conservative bile during the election campaign when they conjured mental images of impoverished families forced to choose between doing their laundry at 3 in the morning or eating cat food. The good news is that the meters are being installed as planned; however, since the analysis of data on their use is only beginning, it’s not known what, if any, impact they’re having on the way we consume electricity. As a result, the time-of-use pricing model is based on guesswork and can’t yet be optimized to maximize conservation.

So, overall, Gord Miller tells us that Ontario isn’t meeting all its targets, but we’re getting there—we probably don’t deserve a gold star but certainly we could get a smiley face or a kitten sticker for our work.

More damning and correspondingly more useful to the political aims of the opposition is Auditor-General Jim McCarter’s assessment of the government’s energy policies and in particular its showcase Green Energy program.

The good news is that we’re on track to get 10,700 megawatts of renewable electricity online by 2018, as promised; the bad news is that the cost to you, me, and the lady doing her laundry at 3 a.m. was slightly underestimated. “In May 2009, when the Green Energy and Green Economy Act (Act) was passed, the Ministry said the Act would lead to modest incremental increases in electricity bills of about 1% annually—in November 2010, the Ministry forecast that a typical residential electricity bill would rise about 7.9% annually over the next five years, with 56% of the increase due to investments in renewable energy.”

The increased cost for juice-use seems to have been at least partially avoidable. The report notes that prices paid to renewable-energy producers under the Feed-In-Tariff program are notably higher than under the earlier and already successful Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program program, and the difference could set us back $4.4 billion more over 20 years. Other examples of what the McCarter deems unnecessarily high payments are expected to cost another $2–$3 billion over the same period.

Equally politically sensitive is the deal with a Korean consortium to build green-energy projects in Ontario. The group will invest $7 billion and in return will get not only higher-than-market-rate FIT prices for delivering electricity but bonuses of hundreds of millions if job creation targets are met. While it’s admirable to reduce dependency on fossil fuels, the auditor-general says that he can’t be sure if the deal is a good one—and neither can anyone else, because no analysis or business case was done.

To add insult to injury, the report notes that “Renewable energy sources such as wind and solar provide intermittent energy and require backup power from coal- or gas-fired generators to maintain a steady, reliable output.” In other words, renewable energy is available when the wind blows and the sun shines, not when we need it. Which is pretty obvious when you think about it.

Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak responded with gratification at being vindicated in some measure on his campaign claims about Liberal waste, and barely concealed resentment that the report didn’t come out before the election when it could have done him some good. He also accused the premier of “giving the finger” to the auditor by celebrating the release of the report with a trip to a wind-turbine plant in Windsor (Hudak withdrew the remark after a request by the Speaker).

The report should serve as a wake-up call to the Liberals, who got so excited about greentech that they didn’t plan properly or even listen to their own advisors, possibly costing us a few billion. It’s not enough just to do what looks like the right thing—you also have to do it the right way. Time to start doing your homework, Mr. McGuinty.

Comments

  • DRYDRY

    “since the analysis of data on their use is only beginning, it’s not known what, if any, impact they’re having on the way we consume electricity. ”

    If you’re wondering if it’s changing behaviour, why don’t you just ask the people around you?
    I’ve changed my ways and do laundry and run the dishwasher at the cheapest time.
    I bet the vast majority of people are doing the same.

    • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

      The Fords and the federal Conservatives are trying hard to make it seem normal, but governments should really try to measure things, not guess or extrapolate from a couple anecdotes.

      • Anonymous
        • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

          Here are some other numbers: 3, 45, 7.18

          …there’s nothing in that slide deck about smart meters or time-of-use pricing.

    • Anonymous

      Oh it’s had an impact. We’ve lost plenty of jobs in manufacturing. In case you hadn’t heard, there are lots of unemployed people out there these days, and the middle/working class is disappearing. (Although 50% of the economy is still manufacturing believe it or not, so there are a lot more to lose yet!)

      • Anonymous

        I really don’t think smart meters are responsible for manufacturing jobs or the middle class disappearing.

        • Anonymous

          No, it’s our insane energy policy of implementing energy solutions that don’t produce energy. Wind requires $2 subsidy for every $1 of power output (maybe even worse now with these latest audit figures.)

          (By the way – as you probably already believe – every dollar we make here supposedly has an ecological footprint attached to it. Where do you think those subsidy dollars come from? Wind power in Ontario is a lose-lose situation for everyone.)

          Smart meters might not even be a bad idea in themselves, but they’re hardly going to change much of anything. I guess some people will get to feel good about changing their schedule, as if they’re “doing something.”

          • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

            Energy policy of any sort couldn’t be responsible for manufacturing jobs or the middle class disappearing.

            It helps to go easy on the hyperbole if you’re interested in an actual discussion.

  • Anonymous

    My electricity is mostly used for lighting (when it’s dark) and cooking (when it’s nearing meal times). Can someone tell me how I can change when I use electricity?

    • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

      It must take a lot of hand-washing to get all of that wood smoke out of your clothes.

      • Anonymous

        I have a washing machine, which only runs at off-peak times already. The dryer is gas-fired, as is the heating.
        Do you have an answer to my question?

        • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

          I don’t. The policy is aimed at getting people to behave as you already do; why do you want to change?

          • Anonymous

            Because the rates for peak-time usage will end up higher than the current all-day rate. (And the off-peak will end up lower, to make things nominall revenue-neutral). So, I end up paying more, even though I am already doing the right thing.

          • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

            That comes ’round to something that was discussed during the campaign—that electricity bills are forecast to double in nominal terms, or increase by about 50% in real terms, by 2030. The PCs thought this was bad.

            The underlying cause there is supposedly infrastructure debt. We were (are?) not paying the true cost of electricity, so there was not enough revenue to keep transmission in good repair, keep pace with growth, etc.

            In that sense, no one was doing the right thing because everyone was underpaying. To keep the system operational, prices for everyone need to rise, and this can’t be addressed by changing individual behaviour.

            You can take issue with that line of argument, but it’s independent of time-of-use billing.

  • Nick

    I wonder what is an acceptable cost to society to not having air so horrific in quality that the airport has to be shut down (google: Beijing airport shut due to smog – 3 days ago!).

    • Anonymous

      Our air quality has been improving for a long time, and not in any way because of wind power. (link)

      • Nick

        Thanks for the link, Ross (?) – very well researched and it’s seems true that people are perhaps too obsessed with air quality, which has been getting better due to a combination of auto emission and powerplant regulations and improved technologies (recall the huge argument over clean diesels ordered for the Airport Rail Link). The number of smog days in Toronto, however, was zero this year versus 39 in 2007 – does this have anything to do with the closing of Lakeview, one of the Liberals green promises? And to the point about the US coal-fired plants, well, maybe it will help to lead by example by shutting down coal fired plants here, and building one of the largest tunnels in the world to generate new electricity from Niagara Falls. We can hardly criticize Ohio if we’re still belching our own smoke. Finally, the stone age did not end because we ran out of stones, so I’m not sure if I entirely agree with the “do nothing” option, even though it is as cheap as the going all gas/nuclear one. It would seem some tweaks could be made to their platform, but overall I’ve been quite impressed with their energy efforts.

        • Anonymous

          Not Ross. :)

  • Anonymous

    “On target to reach 10700 MW”, eh? That’s an interesting number. I wonder how they came up with that.

    From the audit PDF: “Wind generators operate at 28% capacity factor but have only 11% availability at peak demand due to lower wind output in the summer.”

    Maybe more like 1000MW then?

    How the hell did anyone ever come up with the 50% of capacity number originally promised??

    • Anonymous

      It’s not clear whether the 10,700 MW refers to installed capacity or average output. The average output of any power station will always be subtantially below installed capacity. That’s because the installed capacity must exceed peak demand, while the average output must match average demand (which is much lower).

      • Anonymous

        lol, I very much doubt it’s average output.

        But as I recall, we installed wind power under the assumption we’d get 50% of capacity (which was still a stupid idea for the cost.) Finally, after 10 years and billions of dollars wasted on blighting the landscape, we finally now to find out it’s only a small fraction of that.

        Other power sources tend to have capacity available when you need it. Wind? Who knows. Most of that 10700 MW will probably have to be made up for by buying coal power from the US.

        • Anonymous

          Wind power has a key advantages for power companies: wind power is robust. If something trips on a genartor at Darlington, you suddenly need 700MW of power production in a hurry. (That’s 5% of peak load). If something trips on a wind turbine, you only need to find (at most) 7MW in a hurry – much easier to cope with.

          Wind power is also very predictable, thanks to weather forecasts. It’s not like a random thing like you make out.