May 14th, 2009
Green Energy Act or Greenwash? We’ll Know Next Month
Shawn Patrick Stensil
Ontario just passed its much-hyped Green Energy Act. This could be an historic moment for green energy in Ontario or it could be an empty gesture by a government that wants to be perceived as green. We’ll know next month when the government is set to announce whether it will build new reactors to replace the ageing Pickering nuclear station.
To put the Green Energy Act to work, the McGuinty government will need to revisit its 2005 decision to reserve 50 per cent of the province’s electricity grid for nuclear power in 2025. This decision effectively stops green power from expanding.
The government has good reason to back away from its 2005 nuclear plan. The cost for new nuclear plants has more than doubled and the electricity growth used to justify building additional reactors has failed to materialize.
In 2005, Ontario’s electricity planners also believed green energy could only play a marginal role in the province’s electricity system. The success of green energy legislation in Europe, which inspired Ontario’s new law, proves green energy can play a major role.
The ability of green energy to move from a marginal to major power source in Ontario depends on whether the McGuinty government is willing to give green energy room to grow on the electricity grid. Otherwise put, the government must ratchet back its 2005 nuclear targets.
We’ll know next month. So far the government has only considered nuclear options for replacing the Pickering reactors, which are set to close in 2014. Either spending billions to rebuild Pickering, or billions to build new reactors. Last November, Canada’s largest environmental organizations gave Energy Minister George Smitherman a plan for replacing with green power – renewables, conservation and local generation.
If Green Energy Act is more than just a public relations exercise, the government will allow Pickering to shut down in 2014 and replace it with green energy.
If the government opts for nuclear, the Green Energy Act is nothing more than a greenwash.
Green Energy Act or Greenwash? We’ll Know Next Month
Categories: Agriculture, Greenpeace, KYOTOplus, Nuclear
Share this post
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
May 28th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
It’s nice to know this is progress but it comes as no surprise that Ontario government’s boy George is wavering given the amount of pressure a Crown corp can put on the elected knowing billions is on the line, as well, the future of the manufacturing workforce. Should AECL get it’s money to build 2 reactors then George will have a lot of explaining. 1- About why this money did not go to education/training programs for renewable energy 2 - Better feed-in-tariffs for green producers.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Is the concentrated decision to plan sites for turbine wind generation compatible for the right impossibility of solving the other problems for energy in the World: OIL is truly the neo-liberal agenda for the future. What it should be used for, is suddenly a Greenpeace problem as any green. What economically sustains the withdrawal of crude oil is somewhere in the knowledge of Utility changeing into Luxury, quantity becoming quality.
Tweedledeedee.
June 28th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
I found a posting on the Ontario Environmental registry for an applicaiton by Bruce Power to discharge more heat/energy into the lake (EBR Registry Number: 010-6758 ). The comment period closes on July 1 st 2009. Is Greenpeace investigating this issue? It appears strange that heating up the lake is not an issue for the province!