LIFE WITHOUT COAL

January 14, 2017 By

13 Jan 2017
Lethbridge Herald
Bill Graveland
THE CANADIAN PRESS — HANNA

Two small western towns where coal is king look to the future in uncertain times

The companies come and go, but the coal remains. It’s been the major provider here. – Joe Jarina – Retired Sparwood coal miner
There’s a lot of speculation that you’re going to lose a bunch of your population. How can you get any business or convince industry to invest in our community? That’s a big hurdle right now. – Chris Warwick – Mayor of Hanna

Closure of coal-fired power plant in Hanna could cost 200 high-paying jobs — The hand-painted sign on a bumpy road on the east side of Hanna speaks volumes.

“Hanna supports coal, cows, gas and oil,” it says bluntly. The sign includes a circle with a line through it over the words “carbon tax.”

The town of 2,700, 230 kilometres northeast of Calgary, like many rural Alberta communities, has largely lived off agriculture.

But a large vein of thermal coal east of town led to the construction of the coalfired Sheerness generating plant in the early 1980s and has provided welcome jobs and business in the region ever since.

People worry that economic boost is threatened by a new carbon levy and the provincial government’s plan to shut down coal-fired power plants by 2030 and move exclusively to natural gas, wind, solar and hydro energy instead.

Alberta’s climate-change plan includes an accelerated phase-out coal, which accounted for 55 per cent of electricity generation in the province in 2014.

“If it’s a complete 100 per cent closure we’re going to lose 200 full-time, well paying jobs. That’s about 7.5 per cent of our population,” says Hanna Mayor Chris Warwick.

“To put that into real life numbers, Edmonton losing 7.5 per cent is about 62,000 people — Calgary’s around 90,000 — so it’s a massive hit. These are well paying jobs so it’s not a good situation for us.”

Warwick says some families are already looking at moving out of Hanna if they can find work elsewhere and he worries about a snowball effect.

“It’s really hard right now even just to attract any investment into town. There’s a lot of speculation that you’re going to lose a bunch of your population. How can you get any business or convince industry to invest in our community? That’s a big hurdle right now.”

Alberta has pledged to work with Ottawa and communities affected by the phase out to explore options for the future, including transitioning to gas or hydro. The province has appointed a panel to meet with municipal leaders, workers and companies with the goal of easing the transition.

Still businesses are worried.

“We all have the entry-level jobs that everybody can get, but you can’t take the professional jobs that make the $80,000-plus a year. That’s a huge hole and I don’t know how we’re going to fill it,” says Murray Moench, who owns Hanna Motor Products.

He says it’s too soon to panic because wind turbines and solar power are not that effective and cost more.

Dale Crowle, who runs Hanna Building Supplies, says his customers are concerned.

“There’s going to be a lot of job losses. The tax base will be tough, resale on housing will be tough. There’s not a lot of new homes going up in Hanna,” he says.

“People are nervous. We see it every day here. It’s going to be tough.”

It’s a different situation 450 kilometres to the southeast in Sparwood, B.C., where coal is still king.

“The companies come and go, but the coal remains. It’s been the major provider here,” explains Joe Jarina, who retired a few years ago after more than 40 years in the coal sector.

Jarina has worked at three different sites in the Sparwood-Elkford Valley area and under different owners but, like many people, he simply refers to the operators as “the company.”

“Generally anybody you work for is the company”, he says with a chuckle.

Sparwood, unlike Hanna, has metallurgical coal, which is almost entirely exported to Japan and Korea for steelmaking.

That makes the product exempt from carbon tax.

Jarina comes from a coal mining family that has been in the area since the early 1900s. His father, an underground miner, was crushed by a rock when Jarina was 12 and spent the rest of his life in a wheelchair.

But coal has remained a source of pride.

“It’s got the community together through good times and bad. It’s nice to live in a small town and the coal industry has provided jobs — good-paying jobs — and it’s really helped the town.”

Sparwood’s mayor says an increase in world prices over the past few years has kept the mountain community humming. Teck Resources employs about 4,000 people at its five steelmaking coal operations in the area.

“We’re very dependant. Coal is what we are — 90 per cent of the people who live in Sparwood are dependant on coal one way or another, whether it’s directly with Teck or sub-trades, or contractors,” says Mayor Cal McDougall.

“As the price of coal goes, so goes Sparwood.”

McDougall says even when prices for met coal were at rock bottom, the community managed to survive.

“Teck did a real good job in this downturn. They didn’t panic. They didn’t start laying a bunch of people off. They cut back on some of their contractors, which hurt. But the Teck guys, they kept them all.”

 

Filed Under: News

Carbon tax debate a complex issue

January 5, 2017 By

Letters to the Editor

5 Jan 2017
Lethbridge Herald

Much of the debate over the recently enacted carbon tax, it seems to me, misses the point.

The debate is often portrayed as a struggle between business people and consumers on the one hand, and unyielding environmentalists on the other. Actually, it is a little more complex than that. Admittedly, there are firmly committed environmentalists who are unlikely to compromise on either pipelines or oilsands extraction. But lost in the debate played out on editorial pages and newscasts is that both businesses and consumers have much more to gain from well-thought-out environmental initiatives than is generally recognized.

Albertans will be challenged to find new markets for our energy, agricultural, forestry and industrial products at a time when our traditional market in the United States appears to be softening. For many of these exports, our environmental credibility will have a lot to do with how well they are received.
Both the federal and Alberta governments recognize the link between sustainability and market access. The legislation to cap greenhouse gas emissions in the oil patch at 100 megatons per year is a reflection of that fact. So, too, was the federal government’s insistence that Alberta put a carbon tax in place prior to approving two unpopular pipelines to the West Coast.

Alberta is in the unenviable position of deriving much of its wealth from an environmentally suspect source. Short of leaving the oil, gas and bitumen in the ground, Alberta needs to develop regulations, processes and innovative technologies that persuade our customers that we are serious about mitigating the environmental impacts associated with the energy sector.

Moreover, we should expect that future Albertans will be pressed to do the same thing in the agricultural, forestry, and manufacturing sectors.

Robert (Bob) Tarleck

Lethbridge

 

Filed Under: News

McIver fined by ethics boss ALTA. PC LEADER FINED OVER ELECTRICITY RATE COMMENTS

January 5, 2017 By

5 Jan 2017
Lethbridge Herald
Dean Bennett THE CANADIAN PRESS — EDMONTON

Alberta Progressive Conservative Leader Ric McIver has been fined for a conflict of interest for publicly calling for changes in electricity pricing in a way that could benefit his wife’s company. “I do not believe that Mr. McIver was intending to protect his wife’s business in asking the question,” said Ethics Commissioner Marguerite Trussler, in a written ruling issued Wednesday.

She said while she believed his comments were likely part of the normal political give and take, “there could be unintended consequences that could benefit his wife.”

Trussler fined McIver $500, directed he apologize to the legislature assembly, and refrain from future comments or votes on the electricity file as long as Christine McIver is involved in the industry. McIver said he will abide by the decision. “MLAs need to be held to a high standard,” McIver said in an interview.

“The ethics commissioner says I fell short, even if it was (done) unintentionally, so what can I do but accept the decision.”

Trussler launched the investigation after receiving a complaint from NDP legislature member Heather Sweet in late November.

Sweet, the chair of the NDP caucus, said the Progressive Conservatives retain the me-first ethos from their days in government.

“The PCs haven’t changed their ways,” Sweet told reporters at the legislature. “They’re looking out for their friends and family and not out for the best interests of Albertans.”

Sweet said it’s the first such fine levied by the ethics commissioner’s office.

The investigation arose after Premier Rachel Notley’s government announced in November it would cap electricity prices in the short term as it transforms the power grid away from coal-fired electricity to one based on a mix of renewables and natural gas by 2030.

Filed Under: News

Analysis ‘It’s tricky’: Why there’s no magic number for an effective carbon tax

January 3, 2017 By

A look at 25 years of carbon tax
history around the world to see
what works

By Tracy Johnson, CBC News Posted: Jan 03, 2017 3:00 AM MTLast Updated: Jan 03, 2017 8:16 AM MT

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley’s climate strategy includes a carbon tax that went into effect on Jan. 1. (Amber Bracken/Canadian Press)

Related Stories

It’s Day 3 of Alberta’s new carbon tax regime. Are you driving less? Putting on a sweater and turning down the thermostat? Considering solar panels, perhaps?

Because a carbon tax, after all, is supposed to make us change our behaviour and lead less carbon-intensive lives.

But will it work?

Fortunately, there’s 25 years of history to help us answer the question.

Finland introduced the very first carbon tax in 1990. The share of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions that are taxed has since increased to 13 per cent, having roughly tripled in the past decade.

But evaluating and comparing the impact of different carbon taxes is complicated for several reasons.

First, governments charge very different prices for carbon dioxide emissions. Sweden, for example, charges $150/tonne, while Japan charges just $3/tonne.

Sweden’s carbon tax is $150/tonne. The country has lowered its greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels, while still growing its economy. (REUTERS)

Secondly, it’s not always possible to compare the carbon prices of different governments because some charge a tax, others use emissions trading systems and many European countries do both.

And finally, different governments charge different sectors of their economy. B.C.’s carbon tax, for example, covers 70 per cent of CO2 emissions, while Alberta’s will cover 78 per cent by 2020.

With all that in mind, the evidence does suggest it’s easier to change the way people heat their homes than how they get around. The examples also show it’s definitely possible for a government to grow its economy while imposing a carbon tax, but it’s tricky to lower emissions with a growing energy sector.

Sweden and its $150 tax

Sweden’s greenhouse gas emissions from 1990-2012 (CBC)

Sweden puts the highest price on carbon. It first levied a tax in 1991 and the price has risen to $150/tonne. Swedes pay around $2 for a litre of gas — roughly 35 cents of which is carbon tax — but it hasn’t stopped them from driving. Emissions from the transport sector are down five per cent since 1990.

The major shift has come in the way Swedes heat their homes, with a move away from the burning of fossil fuels to the use of hydro- and nuclear-powered electricity and the burning of wood fibre and household waste.

Sweden’s annual direct greenhouse gas emissions dropped by 22 per cent between 1990 and 2013. At the same time, its economy grew by 58 per cent, which shows you can grow your economy and still decrease emissions.

The Norway example

Norway’s greenhouse gas emissions have risen in the past 25 years. (CBC)

Norway is close to Sweden geographically, but is more similar to Canada and Alberta in that its economy depends on fossil fuel extraction.

Like Sweden, it imposed a carbon tax in the early 1990s, but has kept its tax quite a bit lower. It was recently increased to around $64/tonne on the energy industry, but just $8/tonne for fisheries, while some other industries are exempt. Drivers pay 14 cents tax per litre of gasoline.

Despite a relatively high carbon price, Norway’s emissions continue to increase because of a boom in energy extraction. (Statistics Norway)

Norway hasn’t been as successful in lowering its emissions, in part because of the rapid growth of its energy industry, which saw emissions increase by more than 80 per cent between 1990 and 2015. Manufacturing and mining emissions are down nearly 40 per cent and heating emissions by nearly 60 per cent. But transportation emissions from road traffic are up 32 per cent since 1990.

As a result, Norway’s overall greenhouse gas emissions have grown by four per cent in the past 25 years. That’s quite a bit better than Canada, which saw its emissions increase by 20 per cent over the same period, but it does show the difficulty of controlling emissions with a growing energy sector.

The debate over B.C.’s tax

B.C.’s greenhouse gas emissions have dropped since it introduced a carbon tax in 2008. (CBC)

B.C. is often offered up as shining example of a carbon tax done right. It’s simple and broadly applied. At $30/tonne, it covers 70 per cent of the province’s emissions.

But there is a debate as to whether it actually works. The tax has been in place since 2008, so the province uses 2007 as its base of comparison. That year, B.C. emitted of 66.3 megatonnes of greenhouse gases. In 2014, that number had dropped nearly three per cent to 64.4 megatonnes. It’s interesting to note that Canada’s emissions dropped 3.4 per cent over that same period, which included the 2009 recession.

The B.C. example shows how hard it can be to isolate the impact of a carbon tax. The province’s population grew over that period, as did its natural gas industry. Overall emissions from road transportation were higher, but less energy was used for home heating.

“What we’d like to do is compare a B.C. that implemented the tax to the exact same province in which everything is exactly the same, but they did not implement the tax,” said Nicholas Rivers, Canada research chair in climate and energy policy at the University of Ottawa.

Nicholas Rivers, Canada research chair in climate and energy policy at the University of Ottawa, says there’s evidence B.C.’s carbon tax has helped reduce gas consumption. (Nathan Denette/Canadian Press)

Nonetheless, Rivers says estimates suggest the tax, which equals less than ten cents per litre of gasoline, contributes to a 5-10 per cent reduction in gasoline consumption.

So far, B.C’s carbon tax hasn’t caused a large-scale shift to public transit, but Rivers says his research shows carbon taxes are more likely to encourage people to move closer to work or to buy more fuel-efficient cars.

He says the bigger impact of a carbon price, particularly in Alberta, will be in electricity generation and heating, specifically a move away from coal.

Search for a magic number

History shows the higher the tax, the more incentive there is for people and industry to use energy more efficiently. While it’s difficult to compare jurisdictions, it will come as no surprise that Japan’s emissions have gone up with its $3/tonne tax, while Sweden’s have gone down with its $150/tonne tax.

Having said that, it’s hard to come up with a magic number for a price on carbon, according to Janet Milne, director of the University of Vermont’s environmental tax policy institute.

“It’s tricky for the economist to figure out why people’s behaviour changed,” she said. “In countries like Sweden, they’ve seen a significant improvement in their emissions profile, but you have to question whether that’s because of the tax or other policies.”

“In Japan there’s a very low-level tax, but the revenue is all dedicated to green energy or energy conservation purposes. It’s not a behavioural tax, but it’s pinning a cost on something that’s environmentally damaging and using the revenue to try to address the problem.”

‘It’s tricky for the economist to figure out why people’s behaviour changed.’ – Janet Milne,University of Vermont

Alberta’s tax starts at $20/tonne and will increase to $30/tonne in a year. If the federal government follows through on its commitment to impose a tax nationally, Canadians will pay $50/tonne by 2022. Other measures have also been promised to reduce emissions to meet our 2030 commitment of a 30 per cent reduction below 2005 levels.

We’ll need them, Rivers says. Without other policies, $50/tonne is probably not enough to reach our targets.

“You’d need a pretty high price,” he said. “We would want a price somewhere between $100 to $150 … to get us to our goal.”

Filed Under: News

Site C uproots farm family

December 14, 2016 By

13 Dec 2016

Lethbridge Herald

THE CANADIAN PRESS — VICTORIA

A farmer in northeast British Columbia is still hopeful that he’ll get to stay in his home, despite an announcement by BC Hydro that the company plans to seize the property to make way for a controversial hydroelectric project.

Jessica McDonald, BC Hydro’s president and CEO, said Monday that the company is expropriating Ken and Arlene Boon’s property to allow for the start of highway realignment work linked to the $8.8-billion Site C dam project.

The Boons must be out of their home by May 31, but they will be allowed to continue farming their land for two more years, McDonald said. The agreement allowing the Boons to stay on the property temporarily was not reached by consent but was signed last week by the family and the B.C. government, she said.

Ken Boon said Monday that he and his wife have not turned over their property, but did sign an agreement that will allow them to stay as long as possible.

The process has been a frustrating lesson in what rights landowners actually have, said Boon.

 

Filed Under: News

Pipelines go two-for-three

November 30, 2016 By

30 Nov 2016

Lethbridge Herald

Bruce Cheadle THE CANADIAN PRESS — OTTAWA

Trudeau walks high wire on pipeline approvals

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau approved two major oil pipeline expansions Tuesday, including the deeply controversial Trans Mountain line through suburban Vancouver, while maintaining his government remains on course to meet its international climate commitments.

The announcement ends the new Liberal government’s year-long highwire act seeking to balance environmental stewardship and expansion of Canada’s resource economy.

“We are under no illusions that the decision we made today will be bitterly disputed by a number of people across the country who would rather we had made another decision,” Trudeau — flanked by a number of his senior cabinet ministers — told a news conference in Ottawa.

“We took this decision today because we believe it is in the best interests of Canada and Canadians.”

The Liberals have been setting the stage for pipeline approvals for months, highlighting environmental policy moves like a national carbon price while making the case that the jobs, economic boost and government revenues from fossil fuel exports are critical to the transformation to a low-carbon future.

It’s been a tough sell.

Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion has become a lightning rod for climate protests from coast to coast, with opponents from among Trudeau’s own caucus of Liberal MPs and his political ally, Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson.

Climate campaigners and indigenous groups immediately attacked the government decision as a betrayal, while B.C. Environment Minister Mary Polak issued an anodyne statement noting the province’s own environmental assessment of Trans Mountain continues.

The fight overshadowed quieter deliberations about Enbridge’s proposed replacement of Line 3, a half-century old pipeline from Alberta to the United States that Trudeau approved Tuesday, effectively doubling its current working capacity.

Between the Trans Mountain and Line 3 expansions, the Liberals have approved the export of almost a million additional barrels of oil per day — and the production of between 23 and 28 million tonnes of additional greenhouse gases annually. Line 3 can actually handle another 155,000 barrels per day, but Enbridge would have to apply for a new permit.

The Liberals hoped to leaven those numbers with Tuesday’s decision to permanently shelve the stalled Northern Gateway pipeline across northwestern B.C. and impose a promised oil tanker ban on the northwest Pacific coast.

But the prime minister also left the door open to more pipeline approvals, saying each project would be examined on its merits. The “vital element,” said Trudeau, is the climate leadership of Alberta’s NDP government, which has imposed a 100-milliontonne cap on emission increases from the oil patch.

Trudeau said the Kinder Morgan approval, which includes 157 binding conditions set out by the National Energy Board, would create 15,000 new middle-class jobs.

“And as long as Kinder Morgan respects the stringent conditions put forward by the National Energy Board, this project will get built — because it’s in the national interest of Canadians, because we need to get our resources to market in safe, responsible ways, and that is exactly what we’re going to do,” he said.

Conservatives, however, immediately accused the government of providing less than half a loaf.

Interim Leader Rona Ambrose said the Liberals should have left Northern Gateway “on the table” and must now actively promote the other approved lines, particularly the beleaguered Trans Mountain expansion.

“I see very little prospect, politically speaking, that this pipeline will get built,” Ambrose said.

Alberta’s NDP premier Rachel Notley, who met Trudeau following the announcement, lauded the prime minister for his “extraordinary leadership” — crediting the Liberals for building the economy and moving forward aggressively on the environment while “understanding that you can do both at the same time.”

Notley called the Kinder Morgan approval “very good news

for Albertans” at a difficult time for the province.

“It means that we can diversify our market, we can get our product to China and we can get more money for our product and we can enhance our economic independence not only in Alberta but all of Canada,” she said.

However, Tom Mulcair, leader of the federal New Democrats, said Trudeau “betrayed” British Columbians by breaking his “solemn promise” to never approve Kinder Morgan without redoing the Harper government’s flawed environmental review process.

“He still doesn’t even have a plan to deal with greenhouse gases after the Paris conference,” Mulcair said. “So, there’s no excuse for what he’s doing here today.”

Climate advocates such as Patrick DeRochie of Environmental Defence said the approvals raise “grave doubts” Canada can meet its international 2030 climate goals, and that much deeper emissions cuts will have to be made elsewhere in the Canadian economy.

Many indigenous leaders, with whom the Liberals have promised a new nation-to-nation relationship, were scathing.

“The struggle will simply intensify,” said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of British Columbia Chiefs. “It will become more litigious, it will become more political and the battle will continue.”

There are no conditions under which the chiefs would have been willing to agree to the project, Phillip added.

“The risks are just too grave. The tanker traffic in Burrard Inlet will increase by 700 per cent and it’s inevitable that there will be a collision in a very congested inlet.”

Trudeau made a point of saying overall ship traffic in the inlet would increase by only 13 per cent, but critics said the government clearly lacks community approval for the decisions.

“He doesn’t have social license,” cracked the NDP’s Mulcair. “Heck, he doesn’t even have a learner’s permit.”

Earlier Tuesday, the broad strokes of a year-long Liberal government effort to position the government between fossil fuel development advocates, indigenous groups and climate policy hawks played out during question period in the House of Commons.

Ambrose challenged Trudeau that it is not enough for the government to approve major pipelines; it must then “champion them through to the end” in order to see that they actually get built.

Mulcair, by contrast, accused the Liberals of a “Goldilocks approach” that has browbeat the Liberal party’s own environmentally conscious, antipipeline MPs into silence.

Trudeau was happy to claim the middle ground.

“One side of this House wants us to approve everything and ignore indigenous communities and environmental responsibilities,” he said.

“The other side of the House doesn’t care about the jobs or the economic growth that comes with getting our resources to market.”

The pipeline decisions follow weeks of Liberal government announcements designed to show it is serious about combating climate change, including an accelerated coal phase-out, a national floor price on carbon emissions starting in 2018 and $1.5 billion for ocean protection and spill cleanups.

 

Filed Under: News

Changes for Alta. electricity

November 30, 2016 By

30 Nov 2016

Lethbridge Herald

Dean Bennett THE CANADIAN PRESS — EDMONTON

The Alberta government is making more changes to how it handles electricity as it transitions out of coal-fired power.

The province is giving the entity that brokers the electricity system — known as the balancing pool — the ability to borrow money from the province to manage its funding obligations so those costs don’t get passed on to consumers.

The changes are in Bill 34, the Electric Utilities Amendment Act, which was introduced Tuesday.

The balancing pool was set up when Alberta deregulated electricity two decades ago, but Energy Minister Marg McCuaig-Boyd says that was a flawed approach.

She says power companies have been returning moneylosing power contracts to the balancing pool, with any outstanding costs to passed on to ratepayers.

“We inherited a volatile electricity system that did not look out for consumers,” said McCuaig-Boyd.

“We are correcting that and giving the balancing pool the tools it needs to limit cost impacts on consumers and enable greater predictability and stability.”

As it stands, the average electricity consumer gets a credit from the balancing pool each month of $1.95.

Without the proposed changes, the province says that $1.95 credit would become a monthly fee of $8.40, adding up to about $100 a year starting in 2017.

But opposition Progressive Conservative energy critic Rick Fraser said the province is once again using taxpayers’ money to backstop ill-conceived experiments that have contributed to this year’s $10.8-billion deficit.

“Allowing government to borrow unlimited funds from general revenue to keep the balancing pool afloat is a gross misuse of hard-earned taxpayer dollars,” said Fraser.

“We are facing electricity price volatility and a depleted balancing pool because of aggressive and ideological NDP policies.”

 

Filed Under: News

Alberta to revamp its electricity plan

November 24, 2016 By

24 Nov 2016

Lethbridge Herald

Dean Bennett THE CANADIAN PRESS — EDMONTON

PROVINCE MOVING AWAY FROM ELECTRICITY DEREGULATION

Alberta is changing how it produces and pays for electricity as it enters a new era of greener energy sources.

Energy Minister Marg McCuaig-Boyd announced Wednesday the province is moving away from electricity deregulation, which ties investment to volatile swings in spot prices. It has been in place in Alberta for two decades. “The system must deliver affordable, stable prices and reliable energy,” McCuaig-Boyd said.

“(Alberta’s) current electricity market is an outlier among North American jurisdictions.

“This built-in volatility isn’t enough to make sure there’s incentive to build and pay for the necessary infrastructure to power Alberta’s future.”

McCuaig-Boyd said officials will begin creating the framework, expected to be ready in 2021, for a new system known as a capacity market.

In the new system power producers will be paid for spot prices, as before. But now they will also get contracts to build up capacity — even if it isn’t all needed.

The plan is to ensure there is always enough electricity in reserve to offset any potential shortages as Alberta moves to replace coal-fired electricity with a mix of natural gas-fired power along with renewables like wind and solar.

The province estimates it will need up to $25 billion in new investment in electricity generation to support this shift.

The new approach carries a risk that ratepayers will have to pay more for excess capacity, but it is expected to reduce market volatility.

McCuaig-Boyd said prices will remain affordable.

On Tuesday, Premier Rachel Notley announced prices will soon be capped at 6.8 cents per kilowatt hour through to 2021 to protect homeowners from any price spikes during the transition.

Alberta’s power prices are currently about half that 6.8 cent rate, but have spiked much higher over the past decade.

If they go over 6.8 cents, power producers would be compensated.

Don MacIntyre, energy critic for the Opposition Wildrose party, called the changes unnecessary, and said all risk will ultimately be transferred from power producers to consumers.

“Today’s announcement puts the burden entirely on electricity consumers and taxpayers,” said MacIntyre. “Make no mistake — this feels a lot like Ontario.”

In Ontario, electricity rates for homes and small businesses jumped an estimated 70 per cent between 2006 and 2014 as coal was being phased out.

Progressive Conservative energy critic Rick Fraser said he is cautiously optimistic the new market will work.

But he said it’s a decision driven by the Notley government’s desire to extricate itself from problems it created by rushing through major changes to the economy with its climate change plan.

 

Filed Under: News

Alberta government caps power prices at 6.8 cents per kilowatt hour

November 23, 2016 By
By Online Journalist  Global News

The Alberta government is introducing a cap on electricity prices, which it says will protect consumers from “volatile energy prices” as the province moves away from coal-fired electricity production.

READ MORE: Phasing out coal: good for the environment, bad for your wallet

The cap, which will be fully implemented by June 2017 and run until 2021, will ensure Albertans pay no more than 6.8 cents per kilowatt hour.

That’s about twice what most Albertans pay now.  The current regulated rate stands at about 3.8 cents per kilowatt hour.

The province said when the rate ceiling is in effect, consumers on the Regulated Rate Option (RRO) will pay the lower of the market rate or the government’s ceiling rate, and it will be automatically applied to bills.

Albertans may also choose to continue to take advantage of an offer from any private supplier they believe better suits their needs, the province added.

Premier Rachel Notley said the cap, along with other reforms, will ensure stable and affordable prices during the transition. Notley’s government is working to phase out coal-fired electricity by 2030 and replace it with renewable energy such as wind, solar and hydro.

READ MORE: Alberta NDP’s plan to phase out coal could triple power bills: Coal Association

The province is still working out what will happen if the spot price goes above 6.8 cents. Energy Minister Margaret McCuaig-Boyd will hold consultations with distributors, RRO providers, retailers and consumers, beginning in December.

Notley said one option to cover higher power prices us to use the carbon levy fund.

So is this a step back towards regulation?

“This is part of a plan that will move Alberta back towards the mainstream of electricity production, distribution and sales in North America,” Notley said. “And in so doing it will provide greater stability in prices for consumers and ultimately it will provide greater stability for investors as well.”

Enmax said electricity is essential to Albertans’ lives and the economy and any policy that impacts one part of the system affects all the others.

“Restructuring this system therefore demands proper understanding, planning and consultation,” the company said in a statement.

The rest of the statement reads:

“We appreciate the need to protect consumers in anticipation of the future volatility that is inevitable with Alberta’s shift to renewables and the costs of taking out coal-fired generation. However, the government’s announcement today on a price cap was short on details and ignores the fact that retailers have been providing this protection from price volatility for a decade.

“To put this in context, ENMAX Energy and other electricity retailers have competitive fixed rate contracts that are already protecting customers against the potential volatility of the RRO electricity rate.

“Moving forward, ENMAX intends to be fully engaged in the government consultation, keeping the interests of our customers front and centre.”

The province said historically, regulated electricity rates have been extremely volatile: the price increased 65 per cent in a single month in April 2011, and dropped 42 per cent in June 2014.

“Previous Alberta governments experimented with a risky and volatile form of electricity deregulation,” Notley said. “This experiment left families, businesses and our economy at the mercy of sudden price spikes and uncertainty like we’ve seen in the past and need to protect against in the future.”

A study done at the beginning of this year said that Alberta’s Climate Leadership Plan would result in big reductions in emissions, but that the cost of boosting renewable energy usage would mean significantly higher electricity rates.

READ MORE: Carbon price won’t be determining factor for oilsands development: report

That triggered a backlash from power companies.

A number of private operators, including Enmax and Capital Power, sought to return to the province money-losing electricity deals they say were made more unprofitable by the new climate rules.

The PPAs, or power purchase arrangements, are the backbone of the deregulated electricity system created under the former Progressive Conservative government in 2000.

The idea was for power companies to buy electricity from generators at auction via the PPAs, then re-sell it to consumers for profit. But the rules stipulate that no matter what happens to prices, generators always get a reasonable rate of return.

The power buyers were, in turn, promised that if the government made changes to make the deals unprofitable or made money-losing deals “more unprofitable,” they could effectively turn the contracts back over to consumers through a neutral third-party entity.

In recent months, companies that buy electricity off coal-fired plants have done just that.

READ MORE: Return of Alberta power contracts to cost $600M, says study

They say the decision by Notley’s government in June 2015 to hike the cost of carbon fees on large emitters made money-losing contracts “more unprofitable,” triggering the give-back.

The government is arguing that low power prices, not government action, triggered the decline in PPA value.

READ MORE: Alberta government open to talks with power providers over electricity dispute

— With files from The Canadian Press

*EDITOR’S NOTE: This article originally stated the cap is higher than any price spikes going back more than a decade. However, the province said that was not correct. In 2012, price spiked up to 15 cents and in 2014, prices averaged above 7 cents.

© 2016 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Filed Under: News

Ottawa property owners concerned about farmland protection changes

November 23, 2016 By

City planning for housing

population of 1.2 million

by 2036

By Kate Porter, CBC News

Posted: Nov 22, 2016 5:43 PM

The City of Ottawa has assigned scores to land parcels based on the quality of the soil for farming. Some properties will be downgraded to a general rural designation, while others at set to be protected at prime farmland.

The City of Ottawa has assigned scores to land parcels based on the quality of the soil for farming. Some properties will be downgraded to a general rural designation, while others at set to be protected at prime farmland. (Kate Porter/CBC)

Ottawa is redesignating parcels of land to protect prime farmland, and that’s left property owners challenging new limits to what they’ll be able to do with their land.

The Ontario Municipal Board required the city to update its 20-year-old system for evaluating land, known as LEAR, to reflect changes in farming and soil mapping.

Now, the city has assigned scores to properties based on the soil’s quality for farming and followed up by making on-site visits and taking aerial photos.

Some 300 property owners were sent notices in recent weeks alerting them their land could change from general rural to an agricultural area, or vice versa.

On Tuesday, councillors heard stories from players big and small, all affected in different ways, from housing developers with fields on the edge of suburbia to a Constance Bay resident with a woodworking and pottery studio who’s concerned he won’t be able to ply his craft on land deemed a farm.

‘I don’t want my rights infringed upon’

Tony Faranda was shocked to learn the city thinks his 200 acres in the Munster area should no longer be labelled simply “general rural.”

Tony Faranda, rural property owner

Tony Faranda, who owns 200 acres in the Munster, was shocked to learn his property would soon be deemed prime farmland. He doesn’t think his property is good farmland and is concerned about how that will limit what he’s allowed to do with it. (Kate Porter/CBC)

“You can grow hay on it. That’s not prime farmland,” he said.

Faranda, who’s a carpenter, said he’s been losing sleep thinking the redesignation could limit his options on his own property.

“I’d probably sever a lot for each child in the future. That’s my intention — nothing bigger. But I also don’t want my rights infringed upon. It’s not fair if it’s not prime farmland,” Faranda said.

He said he’s hired an expert to do independent testing of the soil to fight the new designation.

Protecting farmland more important than housing, councillor says

On the other hand, a parcel at the edge of Orléans at Trim and Innes roads has been scored lower than in the past and can become general rural area rather than an agricultural area, staff noted.

Meanwhile, Cardel Homes went to city hall Tuesday to ask the city to consider downgrading land it owns at the edge of Riverside South, where it plans a subdivision, from agricultural area to general rural.

But Coun. Scott Moffatt said there’s little chance that will happen because the soil on that Rideau Road parcel is excellent.

The city thinks differently now about farmland, he said.

“We saw growth, between Kanata and Stittsville that looks like it’s really good farmland. The policies didn’t exist to protect the farmland, and now we’re working harder to protect the prime agricultural farmland,” said Moffatt.

Moffatt said if the city’s going to grow — and the city projects it will need another 130,000 dwellings over the next 20 years to accommodate a population of 1.2 million in 2036 — it will have to happen on marginal soil, not prime farmland.

 

Filed Under: News
« Previous Page
Next Page »