specialreport
Fairor foul?
Jonathan Sher
QMI Agency
To fans pointing skyward, it’s
a superhero lifting Ontario into a
cleaner, more prosperous future.
To critics, it’s a villain dressed
in green by an industry seek-
ing profit and Liberals seeking
another term.
The collision of forces has pro-
pelled the fight over wind energy
to an ever-fevered pitch, one
being fought in towns and ham-
lets across Ontario.
In Chatham-Kent, residents
raised legal pitch forks to chal-
lenge plans for a massive wind
farm by Suncor Energy, the first
approved under a new regime
that pays a premium to suppliers
of renewable energy. But officials
in recession-battered Windsor
were joyful with plans for a
Samsung plant that will make
turbines, a celebration repeated
days later in Tillsonburg.
To the north, in Drayton,
police watched as protesters
took over what was to have been
a meeting to provide informa-
tion about a wind farm proposal
by Nextera Energy Canada.
The battlefield stretches even
into the Great Lakes, where cot-
tagers and residents are fight-
ing proposals for offshore wind
farms from eastern Lake Ontario
near Prince Edward County to
the self-proclaimed sunset capi-
tal along Lake Huron.
All told, there are 53 anti-wind
groups in 32 counties — num-
bers certain to grow as the ruling
Liberals roll out plans to double
power from wind turbines in the
next year alone.
So when Ontario’s energy
minister ventures on to the land-
scape he does so armed with
arguments and this one tops his
list: Wind energy will be the hero
that slays coal-burning plants.
“We owe it to ourselves and
to future generations to get out
of dirty coal, to clean up our air.
The impact of doing that will be
the equivalent of taking seven
million cars off of Ontario roads
and highways,” Energy Minister
Brad Duguid said.
But experts say the role of
coal-slayer is not being played by
wind power — that wind is play-
ing, at best, a supporting role to
driving forces whose credentials
are far less green.
They say the Ontario of the
future won’t have coal plants
largely because the province is
ramping up energy from nuclear
reactors and natural gas.
“The significance (of wind)
will never be equal to nuclear
or gas. Even if wind wasn’t
there we could eliminate coal,”
said London Hydro CEO Vinay
Sharma.
The gap between rhetoric and
reality is being seized upon by
protesters and the opposition
Tories hoping to unseat the
Dalton McGuinty government.
“Our members are committed
to go door-to-door and do any-
thing we can to throw out Liberal
incumbents,” said John LaForet,
head of an anti-wind umbrella
group called Wind Concerns
Ontario.
Wind farms squander tax dol-
lars, destroy landscapes, devalue
property, kill birds and bats and
cause health problems anti-wind
activists argue.
The fight raises questions
about the future we want in
Ontario.
• Will wind energy drive out coal
and improve air quality?
• Just how much will the quick
expansion of wind power cost
and how will we pay for it?
• Will wind create an industrial
base for a province that’s lost
much of its manufacturing and
the auto sector that anchored it?
• Can we depend upon the vaga-
ries of wind to be the backbone
of an energy system that eventu-
ally replaces fossil fuels?
WIND ENERGY:
To some, it’s a green saviour.
To others, a villian dressed in green.
Prince Wind Farm
(198.0 MW)
• Is there an untoward relation-
ship between wind companies
and the Liberal government?
The link between wind tur-
bines and the closing of coal
plants is tenuous, experts say.
Wind power was a bit player
as Ontario lowered its reliance
on coal to 6% last year from 18%
in 2003.
That d ro p ca m e ma i n l y
because gas-powered plants
were built and nuclear reac-
tors brought online, said Kim
Warren, who manages wind
energy brought into the Ontario
electrical grid for the agency
that looks after the grid’s work-
ings, the Independent Electricity
System Operator.
Most wind turbines planned
in the province’s energy plan
won’t run until after 2014, when
the last of the coal-fired plants
is targeted to be closed, Warren
said, and it’s possible to close
coal plants without wind energy.
That’s also the view of an
advocate of wind who’s direc-
tor of renewable energy for the
Pembina Institute.
“You could replace coal 100%
with natural gas,” said Tim Weis.
“We’re not replacing coal capac-
ity with wind.”
Experts say wind can’t replace
coal plants because it isn’t avail-
able to power turbines for much
of the time. Last year, turbines
produced 30% of their capac-
ity and less than half that in
summer when demand peaks.
Since demand peaks on spe-
cific days, wind can’t be relied
upon to meet that demand,
Sharma said.
But while wind won’t close
coal plants, it will have a posi-
tive effect on the environment,
experts say.
O n days that w ind pro-
duces energy, the Independent
Electricity System Operator rolls
back use of other energy sources,
with coal and the gas the first to
be cut back.
As the number of turbines
grows, so will the ability to ease
up on the use of fossil fuels.
But extra energy from wind
isn’t always good, and to under-
stand why, you need to know the
basics of Ontario’s electric grid.
There’s more capacity for elec-
tricity in Ontario than the prov-
ince needs because a contin-
gency is needed because some
power sources will be off-line.
The goal of the system opera-
tor is to match the supply to the
demand. Too little and there are
blackouts. Too much and the
grid must rid itself of the excess
or risk surges that can knock out
a power supply.
Ontario can find itself with
too much electricity — as was
the case about 50 times last year
and it forced Ontario to pay
American states and big Ontario
users to take the excess, Weis
said.
That’s not the only cost of wind
and its variability, Sharma said.
As wind power grows, those who
operate gas-powered plants can
be expected to hold back more,
and while that has an environ-
mental benefit, it also has a cost
— in Texas, the government has
had to pay penalties to investors
in such gas-powered plants.
There are other costs, too:
• Producers of wind energy will
Embridge Ont. Wind
Farm, Underwood
(182.0 MW)
Ripley South
(76.0 MW)
Kingsbridge
(40.0 MW)
Port Burwell
(99.0 MW)
Gosfield
Wind Project
(50.4 MW)
Talbot Wind Farm (99.0 MW)
Raleigh Wind Centre (78.0 MW)
Kruger Energy (101.0 MW)
be paid 13.5¢ a kilowatt/hour
for onshore turbines and 19¢
for offshore, even though prices
paid for electricity this year have
averaged closer to 4¢.
• Ontario will still need just as
much conventional capacity
because renewable sources are
intermittent.
• The province’s transmission
system already is near its limit
so new wind farms will require
major investment to move the
electricity.
“I’m not being alarmist. That’s
why the government said a 46%
increase (on hydro bills) the next
five years,” Sharma said.
Advocates of wind power say
its costs should be placed in
context — that Ontario needs
new sources of energy and trans-
mission that will be costly even if
there is no wind added.
“The prices are going up.
Period,” Weis said.
So if rate hikes are inevitable,
Ontarians should get the best
bang for the buck by building a
green industry, wind advocates
say.
Robert Hornung, head of
the Canadian Wind Energy
Association, said wind energy
outpaced other energy sources
last year in Europe and the U.S.
With the world expected to
invest $1 trillion the next decade
in wind, Ontario should grab its
share.
About 1,300 wind-related jobs
have been created in Ontario,
Hornung said, mostly to operate
the turbines.
“This is a tremendous chance
for Canadians,” he said.
Duguid warns Conservatives
are primed to derail a key indus-
try.
“The biggest threat to our
ability to . . . create thousands
of clean energy jobs is undoubt-
edly (Conservative Leader) Tim
Hudak,” he said.
His words don’t resonate with
lead protester LaForet, who
Amaranth
(200.0 MW)
Kruger Energy Chatham Wind Project (101.2 MW)
RENEWABLE ENERGY STANDARD OFFER PROGRAM
North East
x1
West of
London Bruce
x 13
x 13
years ago drafted speeches for
Duguid when the latter was a
minister-in-waiting in Ontario’s
municipal affairs ministry.
“He sold his soul for a seat at
the cabinet table,” LaForet said.
As for L iberals, LaForet
was one until recently, serv-
ing as riding president in
Scarborough-Guildwood until
resigning in early-2009 to pro-
test the Green Energy Act. Now
he says he thinks the Liberal
party and green energy compa-
nies are intertwined, pointing to
Elections Ontario data showing
nearly $250,000 in contributions
this year and last to the Grits
from wind and solar companies.
He’s not the only one making
accusations: so is Tory energy
critic John Yakabuski (Renfrew-
Nipissing-Pembroke), who
has questioned the connec-
tion between Liberals and
International Power Corp.
Canada, which proposes build-
ing 26 turbines in Grey County
and is headed by a former head
of the Liberal Party of Ontario,
Operating
Being built
Up for
approval
WHY WIND
CAN BE FOUL
•R  un at only 12% to 15%
capacity in summer.
•C  an't feasibly store excess
Bryan electricity on windy days.
Wind Project Wolfe
• Must be backed by conventional
(64.5 MW) Island
(198 MW) power sources.
•Q  ueen's Park took away right
of towns and cities to stymie
projects
•G  rassroots revolt by those
fearful of effects on health and
home
• Tourism may be hurt by
offshore turbines.
• Integrating with grid costly
• L ess promise than solar as a
long-term replacement for
fossil fuels.
Contracts in
commerical operations
Contracts under
WHY WIND
development WORKS
• Environment-friendly.
• Less fossil fuel on windy days.
• Cheapest renewable energy.
• Long-established technology.
Central
• Relatively quick to build.
x1
• Growing industry brings jobs.
•S ource of income for
landowners and towns that
x5
GTA host them.
x1
x1 •N ew conventional plants are
costly too.
Niagara
x3
x5
WIND POWER
Mike Crawley.
IN EUROPE
Europe is 20 years ahead
“We do know influential
people have the ear of the Liberal of Ontario, where wind makes
2% of electricity.
party. Has that affected policy
decisions? I’ll leave it to the
• Wind makes 5% of Europe's
public to decide,” Yakabuskisaid.
electricity, more in Denmark
His comments left Duguid (20%) Portugal, Spain and
bristling: “Does that mean if Germany (+10%).
someone engages in the political
• I n 10 years, wind will supply
process they are not allowed to up to 17%, more in Ireland
make a living after?”
(36%), Denmark (31%),
The approval of wind proj- Greece (25%), Netherlands
ects is done independently of
(24%), Spain (22%) and
the Ontario Power Authority, he Britain (21%)
said.
• An industry association
Duguid also challenged Hudak
to come up with his own energy projects that by 2050, Europe
will get half its energy from
plan, something he hasn’t done
yet, though Yakabuski says work wind.
is underway. •C  oal isn't being phased
The lack of an alternative out; countries must reduce
should leave Ontarians wary, emissions but not to
Weis warned. eliminate specific sources.
“What’s concerned me about •S  keptics warn that increasing
the opposition is that no one has
wind above 10% or 15% will
put forward and costed an alter- either prove costly because
native plan.”
of needed backup or risky
because of outages.
jonathan.sher@sunmedia.ca
twitter.com/jsher@lfpress