Re “Green energy puts Ontarians in the red” (Ben Eisen, April 13): It is important to provide more information about renewable energy in Ontario. Over the past 13 years, Ontario has worked hard to modernize an aging, dirty electricity system that was in profound need of repair and costing us $4.4 billion annually in health-care costs. Eliminating Ontario’s coal-fired generation plants — the equivalent of taking seven million cars off the road — has resulted in a 30-million tonne reduction in harmful carbon emissions and ensured Ontario now benefits from 90% emissions-free electricity. Our government’s investment in renewable sources of energy is an important part of this transition. That Eisen chose to ignore these important facts is not surprising, given the Fraser Institute’s record of ideological opposition to Ontario’s progressive energy policies. But he has also ignored the recent results of Ontario’s first competitive procurement for renewable energy projects, announced a few weeks ago. By putting emphasis on low prices, early community consultation, and aboriginal participation, renewable energy is now a level playing field with other forms of generation. In fact, for the first time, wind power generation is below the average cost of electricity production in our province. The price Ontario contracted for solar power represents the lowest cost solar projects that have been contracted in Canada to date. By successfully building clean, reliable and affordable energy in a way that respects communities, Ontario has firmly established itself as a North American leader in renewable energy. These successes are examples that tell more of Ontario’s full story on clean, renewable energy — a record that should be celebrated.
Bob Chiarelli
Ontario Minister of Energy
(We’ll leave it our readers to decide if they want to celebrate)
CUTTNG THE CORD
Jim McPherson is spot-on in his analysis of the absurdity of the current framework for “renewable” energy (“Ontario’s ill wind,” April 17). With electricity rates in Ontario rising once again, we have to be open to alternatives. I didn’t invest in Tesla because of their electric cars but rather the revolutionary stationary power storage technology. A community could invest today in a CHP (combined heat and power) micro-turbine generator, combine it with battery backup, and be effectively energy self-sufficient. Yes, you’d still have to source the fuel oil or propane, but costs would be predictable and less than what families are currently paying. Funding the current infrastructure, with all those people on the Sunshine List, is no longer credible. It’s past time for people to take matters into their own hands. Contemporary technology is available and affordable. Time to “cut the cord” on another monopoly.
Fred Scuttle
Burlington
(As McPherson wrote, energy storage is the key)
LIBERAL RULES
Re “Tory leadership rules exclusive, expensive” (James Warren, April 17): What Mr. Warren fails to mention is that the entrance fee to the leadership race for the Liberals was also rather large — $75,000, with a cap of $95,000 for spending, and a debt limit of $75,000. This, as well, would incline those without deep pockets from running for the leadership. They had 130,774 members registered to vote — and the results were tabulated using a preferential ballot, which, I believe, the current government is looking to inflict on us, after they ruin the economy. There is no fixing of rules — nor is there any watering down of the election process by accepting non-paying members of the party — if for nothing else than the optics of being able to say “open and inclusive”. The race for leader of the Liberals was more political this time, more than any other time in their history. It was over when Trudeau declared himself a candidate.
Paul Craig
Oshawa
(True, but it doesn’t change the fact that entering and running in the Conservative leadership race is going be more expensive than the Liberal one, which was Warren’s point)
