st27 Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 The hypocrisy exhibited by the Ontario Liberals is unbelievable. When a election is looming, Dalton cancels a gas plant to cave in to some city folks complaints, damn the cost. When rural people complain, the Libs say they are just following the process. And what a joke the consultation process is...listen to people and then go ahead with the government agenda anyway, and then have the gall to say "hey, we listened"! http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-pc-mpp-says-liberals-risk-lives-allowing-wind-turbines-near-collingwood-airport A sad commentary of our governments misguided energy policy...who would have thought our government could do this to people?? http://ontario-wind-resistance.org/2015/03/26/watch-tvo-documentary-big-wind-online/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lakelad Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Oh, it gets even better.... Price of climate change fight could be 4.3 cents per litre of gas, Wynne says Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Raising the price of gas will have ZERO effect on emissions. GHG will still flow into the air at the same rate as always. If you really want to do something then improve Transit and LOWER the fares on transit so people actually use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st27 Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 And more green energy jobs down the drain...George Smitherman, how do you explain this??? [and don't blame it on Nova Scotia] http://www.dsmetrenton.com/ http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/steel-manufacturing-plant-to-close-in-nova-scotia-after-56-million-investment-369424861.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 32 minutes ago, st27 said: And more green energy jobs down the drain...George Smitherman, how do you explain this??? [and don't blame it on Nova Scotia] http://www.dsmetrenton.com/ http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/steel-manufacturing-plant-to-close-in-nova-scotia-after-56-million-investment-369424861.html I'm missing something here...Why does "George" ,an Ontario politician, have to explain the failure of a steel plant in Nova Scotia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Hmmm, seems that there is mostly a negative result (based on past history) when a government bails out or takes a shareholder position in a non government corporation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inchman Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 3 hours ago, boestar said: Raising the price of gas will have ZERO effect on emissions. GHG will still flow into the air at the same rate as always. If you really want to do something then improve Transit and LOWER the fares on transit so people actually use it. As you suspect, it just adds to the coffers to give them more money to waste. Once they do this, it leaves money currently spent on green projects in general revenue for general spending and money for green projects will now come out of the Carbon Tax bucket. The Carbon Tax is there for the consumer because it would be almost impossible to track everyone's carbon use. In theory, the extra cost of carbon fuel will encourage people to insulate, buy more efficient equipment and use less carbon. The Cap and Trade system is for business and it basically says that total Carbon emissions in the province cannot increase. If you need to increase your emissions, you have to buy credits from companies that have decreased theirs. There's a pretty good article in the Globe describing it. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/cap-and-trade-explained-what-ontarios-shift-on-emissions-will-mean/article23895285/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Carbon. The sixth most common element in, wait for it...THE UNIVERSE. What an international crock of ca-ca. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 If you look at the basics of the carbon tax we're supposed to pay, wouldn't the more appropriate course for government to follow include plans that actually have a chance to succeed at reducing carbon emissions and by extension result in a lower rate of taxation on the productive members of society? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st27 Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 Hi Kip....it was a sarcastic comment but it was intended to question where the green jobs are, jobs that were supposed result from the green energy act that Smitherman helped implement. Canada was supposed to be a world leader in the green industry. This is the second plant to shut down while trying to produce components for wind turbines. But being the typical politician...Georgie isn't around to explain his governments actions....he is trying to cash in on the anticipated legalized marijuana Industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 42 minutes ago, st27 said: Hi Kip....it was a sarcastic comment but it was intended to question where the green jobs are, jobs that were supposed result from the green energy act that Smitherman helped implement. Canada was supposed to be a world leader in the green industry. This is the second plant to shut down while trying to produce components for wind turbines. But being the typical politician...Georgie isn't around to explain his governments actions....he is trying to cash in on the anticipated legalized marijuana Industry. Ok..Thanks for the explanation...got me caught up now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 15 hours ago, inchman said: As you suspect, it just adds to the coffers to give them more money to waste. Once they do this, it leaves money currently spent on green projects in general revenue for general spending and money for green projects will now come out of the Carbon Tax bucket. The Carbon Tax is there for the consumer because it would be almost impossible to track everyone's carbon use. In theory, the extra cost of carbon fuel will encourage people to insulate, buy more efficient equipment and use less carbon. The Cap and Trade system is for business and it basically says that total Carbon emissions in the province cannot increase. If you need to increase your emissions, you have to buy credits from companies that have decreased theirs. There's a pretty good article in the Globe describing it. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/cap-and-trade-explained-what-ontarios-shift-on-emissions-will-mean/article23895285/ Thats why the whole Cap and Trade system is BULLCRAP. It does absolutely NOTHING to reduce GHG emissions. All it accomplishes is moving the emissions to companies that can afford to buy credits from companies that spend on the infrastructure to actually reduce them. Do people not see the issue with this? The big polluters will become worse and it will all be within the "system". The money needs to be spent on infrastructure that will begin to reduce the emissions and no company should be allowed to INCREASE emissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QFE Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 How else are we suppose to pay the ELEVEN BILLION dollar interest payment on our provincial debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 14 minutes ago, QFE said: How else are we suppose to pay the ELEVEN BILLION dollar interest payment on our provincial debt? Higher Taxes..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QFE Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Well, if he uses it to reduce our debt and not waste any on windmills, gas plants, smart meters, etc. I'm voting for Malcolm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 Make no mistake... This IS a tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 More news for Ontario Consumers: Quote Ontarians just signed up for more expensive, unreliable electricity they don’t need Tom Adams and Scott Luft, Special to Financial Post | March 17, 2016 9:39 AM ETMore from Special to Financial Post Mike Hensen/London Free Press/Postmedia News files In 2015, the auditor general found that from 2009 to 2014, Ontario consumers paid generators $339 million for curtailment. And the more wind and solar power we add, the bigger these expensive surpluses become. The costs may be high and the need questionable, but Ontarians signed up to buy a lot more renewable power last week when Ontario’s Independent Power System Operator (IESO) announced the results of the province’s latest procurement. The new deal brings “low prices” for new wind and solar generation, says Ontario Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli. No, not “low” like Ontario’s dysfunctional market price for electricity, which was less than two cents/kilowatt-hour (kWh) over half of all hours in 2015. And not “low” like the average 1.2 cents/kWh rate that electricity bound for New York and Michigan has sold for this year. When the Ontario government says “low,” it means seven to fourteen times as much as that, with the IESO reporting the weighted-average price of the new wind power at 8.6 cents/kWh and new solar at 15.7 cents/kWh. But the effective cost to consumers for the new power, taking into account the portion of the total output that Ontario consumers will actually use, will be much higher than the costs the government quotes in its press releases. Ontario’s power system is … flooded with far more renewable power than it can use. The system operator’s announcement relies on the fallacy of relative privation. In other words: “this unreliable power is not as costly as some other unreliable power you’ve been stuck with.” For instance, the operator’s press release proclaims, “For context, these prices are lower than the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) rates…” That’s not saying much. The non-competitive FIT wind and solar program started in 2010. Recall in 2011 Ontario’s auditor general warning the province was paying among the highest FIT prices in the world. Revisiting the issue last year, a subsequent auditor general said the program would add billions of dollars to future bills when compared to contracting solar and wind power purchase agreements through competitive bidding. But rather than heed such warnings, the government barges on. Under the current version of the FIT program, the government will buy wind power from small projects at a 50 per cent premium over the competitive wind price, and solar power at a 30 to 90 per cent premium over competitive solar prices. Other bonuses available to FIT producers allow them to add even higher charges to the bill by, for instance, finding First Nations to accept ownership positions with their projects. Whether procured competitively or non-competitively, payments to generators for wind and solar production are only the beginning of the ratepayer impact. Related Kevin Libin: Ontario’s new cap-and-trade plan is a tawdry tax-and-spend scheme sold as a gift of ‘clean air for our children’ Joe Oliver: Ontario’s fiscal train wreck The Ontario power system’s ‘broken’: Auditor General New wind and solar contract holders will likely be paid not only for how much power they actually generate, but for a significant portion of their “deemed generation” — that is, what they didn’t produce but might have had the grid been able to accept all of their production, but instead ended up “curtailed” because the grid was oversupplied. Limiting generators’ exposure to potential curtailment is one way to attract more solar and wind investment (it was even made retroactive to contracts that originally only covered actual generation). When there’s no wind and no sun, such producers aren’t much good, of course. But, now when the wind really blows or it’s brilliantly sunny, Ontario’s power system is increasingly flooded with far more renewable power than it can use. The IESO manages this excess production by selling its power to export markets (with Ontarians subsidizing American power). But even then, the transmission system is often unable to manage carrying the entire surplus away. That leads to nuclear, hydro-electric, wind, and solar production being curtailed, while generators get paid anyway for what they didn’t produce. In 2015, the auditor general found that from 2009 to 2014, Ontario consumers paid generators $339 million for curtailment. And the more wind and solar power we add, the bigger these expensive surpluses become. Using the most recently available data, the amount of potential production from nuclear, hydro-electric, and wind sources that had to be curtailed in 2014 to manage excess supplies amounted to five times the amount that these new contracts will produce. Curtailments in 2015 were even greater but the official figures have yet to be reported. The new procurements also reflect a continuation of the government’s negligent practice of ignoring the transmission consequences of its contracting. Of the 300 MW of new wind power, more than one-third will be sited in Chatham-Kent, a region of the province already experiencing higher-than-average wind curtailments. Not only are Ontario ratepayers burdened with payments to generators to not generate, but as the auditor general has pointed out, our losses on exporting surplus power keep growing. Net exports in 2014 equalled 10 per cent of Ontario usage — well over half of Toronto’s total usage, sold to the U.S. at a fraction of the price that actual Torontonians paid. In 2015, net exports hit 12 per cent of Ontario’s usage. Figuring out how much all this new procurement will cost, taking into account indirect impacts like curtailment and exports, would require intensive analysis. Trying to convince Ontarians that the prices are “low” gives no indication such an evaluation occurred. What we do know is that Ontario just signed up for yet more costly, unreliable and unnecessary energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 The solar industry should be thriving in Phoenix but it isn't. You have to pay the power suppliers to hook up to their grid, and the more solar installations there are the higher the rates go. I assume it is similar in Canada, where the supplier of power was promised x number of households they could supply power to and that is what they based their costs and rates on. Each time they "lose" a customer it cuts into their profits, so they raise the floor rates to connect to the grid. The only way a customer would really benefit is if they had some storage facility (Tesla?) so that they could actually disconnect from the grid and become self sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 A coworker just picked ups place on the east coast right on the ocean. completely off the grid. Wind and solar with storage batteries. Thats the only way to live Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 18 minutes ago, boestar said: A coworker just picked ups place on the east coast right on the ocean. completely off the grid. Wind and solar with storage batteries. Thats the only way to live until of course you come to replace the various parts of the energy system. And also: http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/03/the-ugly-side-o.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st27 Posted March 29, 2016 Author Share Posted March 29, 2016 Nice to see all these green energy jobs coming back now that the St Lawrence Seaway is open again....foreign manufactured windmills coming up the river on foreign flagged ships...thank you Dalton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st27 Posted October 16, 2016 Author Share Posted October 16, 2016 http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/david-reevely-ontario-to-pay-another-28-million-for-not-producing-electricity-this-time-to-u-s-wind-farm-firm It wasn't like the Liberals were not warned about this ill advised program! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted October 16, 2016 Share Posted October 16, 2016 Once again, it isn't the green energy that is the problem. It is the deals that politicians make to line their buddies pockets that is the problem. Over in Europe, where the adoption of clean energy is way ahead of us, if they are overproducing, they pay for citizens to up their consumption! Not give it away to other jurisdictions and have their own people pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted October 16, 2016 Share Posted October 16, 2016 The green power system as designed was useless to the Province from the get go. To make it all workable we'd need to construct plants that would remain in standby mode while the sun shines and or the wind is blowing. IOW's for every green megawatt produced to be useful would require a plant in standby to pick up the load during the hours of darkness and calm wind conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.