Ontario’s Electricity Export “Profits”

MPP Bob ChiarelliTVO – the Agenda
At the beginning of December, Ontario’s Liberal government released its new Long Term Energy Plan. Bob Chiarelli, the minister of energy, sat down with Steve Paikin to discuss the government’s new direction. During that conversation, he stated that “since 2008, the province of Ontario – and you can verify it with the IESO – has made a $6 billion profit on the trading of electricity.” You can view it here, just after the 4:55 mark. (see video here)

Here’s what happened on Twitter in response. It started with a tweet from Tom Adams, an independent energy advisor, that was retweeted by Steve: (see here)

Since the minister himself said it could be verified directly with IESO, I contacted them to do just that. And as it turns out, they could not verify that figure. It was an error, one that their CEO has made, which was quoted in the Sun story mentioned in the Twitter conversation and also apparently to the minister himself. Read article

14 thoughts on “Ontario’s Electricity Export “Profits”

    • Including all the other Ministers like Deb Matthews who doesn’t read anything important handed to her……or Wynne who signs her name to documents before reading….the list goes on.

  1. Speaking of Electricity Frauds
    our friend, John Kourtoff has lots to say!

    “We believe there’s a clear path to a negotiated, non-financial settlement,” Kourtoff said. “It’s astounding to me that (the government) said, in essence, thanks but no thanks, and wants to leave the risk of a $500-million judgment on the taxpayers. We just can’t understand that.”

    “We’re pleased that we can go forward, we’re displeased that we have to go forward to sort of get justice and get things back on the rails.”

    “Power from our site is less costly than solar, which they still do,” he said. “It’s more reliable than onshore (wind power). It matches the load throughout the day.”
    Studies show that offshore wind projects, unlike those on land, generate a steady and reliable supply for electricity, Kourtoff said.
    “The government needs to make a distinction between onshore and offshore,” he said. “They’re totally different animals.”

    “We’re the kind of project that pull large investment from the private sector and create large job,” (sic) he said.

    “We do all the things that everyone has asked, but we got caught up in a political maelstrom.”

    “Trillium Power itself, we’ve become an inconvenient truth and that’s because we’re less expensive than solar, we’re far more consistent and dependable than on-shore wind, we’re one-15th the price of nuclear,” he said.
    Ontario could be a leader in electricity production and export, with direct borders on two provinces and eight US states and another 12 states behind the border states.
    “Those 20 states represent 41.7% of the U.S. population,” he said.
    “Ontario could build a tremendous amount of renewables if we got our act together.”

  2. This is what this renewable energy scheme is all about furnishing the U.S. with “clean” energy at Ontarians expense and furnishing developers with huge amounts of cash.
    Same thing is happening in Ireland.
    A Presidential Permit will be required to make connections from Canada to the U.S. power grid.
    Watch for any developments in this area with the cable from Nantacok to Erie, Penn.

    • /But it doesn’t work. The source of electricity to the US is still going to be coming form intermittent unpredictable wind turbines. therefore we will simply be offloading our grid stability problem to the US grid. Jusl like us they will still need one MW of backup from gas/nuclear/coal for each potential MW coming from Ontario windmills. When they are importing our wind turbine electricity they will have to idle base load plants. That is why we have to pay them to take our wind sourced electricity … because it is worth LESS THAN NOTHING. Electricity doesn’t care about borders. Making the geographic size of the stupidity bigger doesn’t make anything better.

  3. The $1 billion Nantcok to Erie,PA is already in the works. One proceedure has already been done in Washington and money is being raised for this project. And the project can’t be done unless a Presidential Permit is issued.
    Coal fired base load plants are going to be closed in the U.S. and the electricity to replace this has to come from somewhere.
    Dosen’t matter if it works or not. Look at Germany with all the grid problems they have.
    Department Of Energy
    Presidential Permits-Proceedures
    Executive Order 12038
    http://energy.gov/oe/services/electricity-policy-coordination-and-implementation/-international-electricity_regulatio-9
    Website provides lists of all U.S-Canada connection along with those proposed.

  4. Yes, we’re horrified to be witnessing these frauds, knowing that our kinfolk don’t understand them and so do not consent.

    Toby Heaps, for example, from Corporate Knights alleges:

    “There’s really been a surge in investors who have an appetite for green bonds, investment grade bonds that are investing in climate change solutions, things like transit, things like renewable energy, things like transmission infrastructure and so this is a well-timed bond because there has been a surge over the last five years in demand and it doesn’t appear to be falling off at all.”
    http://ww3.tvo.org/video/197810/transit-funding-goes-green

    What in hell is environmentally-beneficial about transmission infrastructure???

  5. We look at how Mike Crawley’s AIM PowerGen structured their fraud at Clear Creek-Cultus-Frogmore in Norfolk County, Ontario.

    Registering a $500,000,000 (MILLION) charge, bearing interest at the rate of 25% per annum,
    on property deeds, for the 3 X 6 = 18 wind turbines at Clear Creek-Cultus-Frogmore, and another 9.9MW project AIM developed in Haldimand, at Lowbanks.

    That’s right — a $500,000,000 (MILLION) dollar valuation for 24 Vestas 1.65 MW wind turbines.

    In 2009, when AIM laundered their fraud in international markets and International Power “invested” in the scheme, what kinds of liabilities did this create for Ontario and Canada?

    Toby Heaps helps us out a bit in the same Steve Paikin piece, stating, “when the government makes a promise to the bonds market, it means it’s going to happen.”

    Is the negotiation of the resolution of these toxic schemes happening at Tory’s law firm? Some kind of mysterious “Investor-State” relations? How come Free Thinker hasn’t posted details about these billable hours charged to Ontario taxpayers?

    • I’m interested to hear more. I’m not sure I understand how this works. Who buys the bonds? Or are they really sold at all?

      I’m interested in this stuff because I’m reading “Tower of Basel” a book about international banking (and fraud) in Europe. The interesting thing here is everything is formulated by “legal” principles that are outside the jurisdiction of any country.

  6. You can’t run a cable/extension cord from Canada and just plug it in anyplace in the U.s. without a Presidential Permit.

  7. The reasons are U.S. grid stability and national security issues.
    The Presidential Permits have been around for many years dating back to the 1960’s.

  8. “Green” bonds are the same as other bonds. “Green” is supposed to make people feel good about buying them. Similar to the governmnet savings bonds that people are already familiar with.
    This makes these bonds backed by the government and taxpayer money. Probably general obligation bonds not tied to any specific project but there are government bonds are tied to specific projects like to fund a particular school or hospital or library for examples.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *