McGuinty Liberals Backtrack on a Backtrack On Long Term Energy Plan

Northumberland View

Yesterday, Energy Minister Brad Duguid promised Ontario families they would get a chance to finally see the McGuinty Government’s long-promised and never-delivered plan for the electricity system by the “end of December”. But there’s a catch: the Ontario Power Authority (OPA), the agency responsible for drafting long-term plans, wants to get out of its fundamental mandate. 
 
An OPA letter and supporting documents, dated August 20, 2010, show the OPA wants to amend section 10.1 of its Ontario Energy Board license so it no longer has to provide an integrated power system plan to the OEB every three years. Created in 2004, the OPA has yet to produce a plan and now we know they don’t want to be held accountable for ever producing one.
 
The McGuinty Liberals have stonewalled on releasing an energy plan because Dalton McGuinty is afraid Ontario families will discover the true cost of his smart meter tax machines, the sweetheart deal with Samsung, and his other energy experiments.  It’s time for Dalton McGuinty to stop experimenting with hard-earned tax dollars and provide Ontario with a real energy plan.

Quick Facts

  • Created in 2004, the OPA was to be a virtual and transitional agency with a mandate to create a power plan for Ontario.
  • Ontario Regulation 424/04 states the OPA must “develop and submit” a 20-year integrated power system plan every three years.
  • An OPA letter and supporting documents (File# EB-2010-0220) dated August 20, 2010, calls for amending its OEB licence to ensure it no longer has to file new plans every three years.
  • On August 30, 2010, Energy Minister Brad Duguid told the Ottawa Citizen: “We’re in the process now of putting together our long-term energy plan. We’ve asked the Ontario Power Authority to do that.”
  • On September 29, 2010, Duguid told reporters during a scrum they could expect a long term plan by the “end of December. Just a matter of months, uh, by the end of the year.”

6 thoughts on “McGuinty Liberals Backtrack on a Backtrack On Long Term Energy Plan

  1. If worked for the OPA I would want to ditch the task as well…

    *******************************
    An Excerpt from “Sustainability Due Diligence Assessment – Report by Stratos Inc. – July 6, 2007”

    (Note the LINE NUMBERING!)

    17 Q. How was sustainability considered in the development of the IPSP?

    18 A. The OPA’s approach to considering sustainability is to move from broad concepts to
    19 requirements to context specific decision-making criteria for long-term integrated
    20 electricity system planning. Interpretations of sustainability involve a simultaneous
    21 consideration of economic, social and environmental factors and likely impacts of
    22 development on the well-being of future generations.

    { GOT THAT! ???????}

    23 The focus on sustainability has been increasing in electricity sector development for a
    24 number of years in Ontario. The OPA’s planning builds upon sustainability goals
    25 established in public policy through several recent initiatives, including:

    EB-2007-0707
    Exhibit B
    Tab 3
    Schedule 1

    1 • Select Committee on Alternative Fuels;
    2 • Electricity Conservation and Supply Task Force;
    3 • Conservation Action Team;
    4 • Electricity Restructuring Act, 2004;
    5 • Establishment of the Ontario Power Authority and the Conservation Bureau;
    6 • Supply Mix Advice Report; and
    7 • Ministerial Directive on Supply Mix.

    *********************************

    Seriously folks — would you want to cope with that bafflegab while Minister Do-Good interfered with your every move by reading you McGuinty’s latest directive — obtained only that day from Pembina?

    Seriously folks…

  2. The article isn’t entirely correct. No IPSP was ever accepted by the government, but one was submitted in 2007 – and a revision resubmitted in 2008.
    That was shelved and everything put on hold by the Green Energy Act and FIT programs.

    David, the document you linked to is the CYA document explaining what the OPA did and that they submitted it to the OEB. That’s where it ended – which if funny in hindsight as the OEB was supposed to ensure the “IPSP is
    17 economically prudent and cost effective.”

    It was a lot more prudent than not following any plan aside from the one by the forces inside Smitherman’s head.

    The directive relating to renewables: “The plan should assist the government in meeting its target for 2010 of increasing the installed capacity of new renewable energy resources by 2,700 MW from the 2003 base and increase the total capacity of renewable energy sources used in Ontario to 15,700 MW by 2025.”

    The OPA responded with this language:

    “the IPSP does not seek to exceed the
    26 Directive’s goals for renewable resources. This is because the incremental renewable
    27 resource would be large wind projects. These projects would not be cost effective when
    28 compared to the supply resources included in the Plan that would be displaced.”

    I’d paraphrase that as we’ve put your direction in just to the bare minimum, and we’ve got to that with the smattering of smart things we can do and topped it up with large IWT groupings because they are the cheapest of the useless sources.

    Also note, the OPA 2nd quarter 2010 document we’ve been linking to.
    Capacity Sought 3830 MW
    Capacity got 6622 MW

    That looks to contradict the most recently submitted IPSP.

    http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/Storage/82/7763_B-1-1_updated_2008-09-04.pdf

  3. Hmmmm…………No Plan……….No Debate!

    Sounds pretty safe to me…………if I was McGuinty!

Comments are closed.