Advertisement
ontarionewswatch.com NEWSROOM

               Lowering Hydro Prices: Good Policy or Good Politics?

 

By Terri Chu

Premier Kathleen Wynne announced in the Throne Speech Monday that the 8 per cent provincial portion of the HST will no longer be applicable to hydro prices. 

Great politics, but is it really great policy?

There are many ways the Ontario government could have approached the problem of lowering hydro prices for Ontarians, but a blanket cut across the board is one of my least favoured solutions. 

There is no question that generating electricity contributes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  Giving a big break to the rich who have four-car garages and indoor swimming pools to heat is a poor way to target giving a small savings to the poor, who use relatively little electricity.  And a blanket cut is not the kind of public policy that incentivizes conservation. 

According to Quebec Hydro’s annual comparison of electricity prices in major North American cities, the average homeowner in Toronto or Ottawa pays roughly twice what a Montrealer would pay, and about half of what a San Franciscan, New Yorker or Bostonian would pay.  This puts Ontarians, squarely in the middle of the pack. 

For smaller businesses, we do a little better, paying only a 30% premium over our Quebec counterparts and about half of what New Yorkers pay; again, putting Ontario in the middle of the pack.

The story is a different, though, for the large industrial users.  While the Toronto Sun might like to blast hydro prices as job slayers in Ontario, electricity prices are in the bottom third of all markets for big industrial users.  In other words, the big manufacturers - the ones who are supposed to be the big employers - aren’t getting a much of a better deal elsewhere. 

This isn’t to say that there is a real struggle for small and mid-sized businesses, but being in the middle of the pack is hardly the damning indictment that Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Patrick Brown would have us believe.

Electricity accounts for about 10% of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that high consumption prices mean lower usage and a corresponding reduction in GHG. 

However, the problem Ontario has isn’t high hydro consumption prices, it’s the fact that prices remain high even when consumption is nonexistent.

The industry defends the practice of flat fees as a connection charge of sorts.  Whether you turn on a light or not, the ability for you to turn on that light costs money in the form of equipment, maintenance, and supply overheads.  We take electricity for granted so much now that we forget that it costs a lot of money to maintain that infrastructure whether we use it or not.  However, where we have lost our way is that this flat fee, completely unrelated to how many light bulbs we turn on, is such a high portion of the bill that there’s very little point to conserving.  Whether I have one light bulb on in one room, or every room lit in the house, makes little difference to my bill. So there’s really a lack of incentive to go around turning off all the lights.

Power prices themselves remain low in Ontario - it’s the delivery, transmission, and other components of the flat fee that makes hydro costly.  I would argue that since our infrastructure has been around for so long, it’s time to change the pricing model that incentivizes conservation. 

The province could consider tiered pricing, where each kWh of electricity gets more expensive the more you use. 

As it stands, small farmers in the province have little ability to control their hydro bills.  Even scaling back to zero, they would still have to pay 75% of their costs. 

The only way to reduce their electricity bill would be to go completely off grid.  As the cost of off grid technology decreases and hydro rates remain high, cutting off from Hydro One looks ever more attractive. 

But the entire grid faces a crisis if we get to this point.  Imagine every backyard in your neighbourhood powered by a diesel generator when the reliability of the grid falls apart.  This is not an environmental win, nor is it a good for the public. 

In finding ways to lower prices for consumers, Premier Wynne should focus her efforts on lowering the flat portion of the fees.  This is good for business, conservation, and meeting our climate change targets.  Increasing fees during high demand periods (when energy is the dirtiest) is also a good idea. Still, "Time Of Use" rates work fine in principle, but the 7:00 pm spike in demand is anything but green. 

Getting more renewable energy onto the grid is a laudable goal, however, renewable sources are notorious for their unreliability, rendering them unable to meet baseload requirements.  Technology is being developed that can allow loads to turn on and off according to the schedule of the electricity production rather than the other way around, as we have right now.  This ensures that the grid is balanced; green electricity is being put to good use and decreases the amount we sell off to other jurisdictions at a loss.  This helps reduce cost to Ontarians and makes our grid the greenest it can be. 

Investing in the future of the grid must be a priority for this government if we are to maintain the dependability of such an important public resource. Lowering electricity prices in and of itself won’t fix our problem.  Ontarians need the prices to be comparable than going off grid, and need to be given incentives to use electricity when it is the greenest. 

 

Terri Chu is an engineer and Ontario environmental analyst.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted date : September 13, 2016
ontarionewswatch.com NEWSROOM
"There may be trouble in River City" when it comes to the Ontario PCs. Anger inside the party and rumblings of a new movement could affect the leader's election chances.
May 24, 2017
The auditor is suggesting the internal culture of the RCMP is so dysfunctional it requires civilian oversight. Mahoney, Capobianco and Parkin on whether that's a good idea.
May 17, 2017
A Liberal government led by a woman in BC, up for re-election after holding power for more than 15 years. Sound familiar? Randall White on whether there are lessons for Kathleen Wynne.
May 11, 2017
The Liberals are moving left as we near the 2018 election - a reprise of the last provincial and federal campaigns. Will it work a third time? Mahoney, Capobianco and Parkin debate.
May 10, 2017
This past Earth day, the planet surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) of CO2 in the atmosphere. Terri Chu laments that as long as polluting is cheap, it will continue unabated.
May 08, 2017
The Defence Minister is accused of lying when he described himself as "the architect" of a major offensive during Afghanistan war. Should he step down? Mahoney, Capobianco and Parkin debate.
May 03, 2017
Liberal Premier Kathleen Wynne's approval ratings have plummeted a year ahead of next year's Ontario election. But not so fast, says Peter Shurman - don't count Wynne out yet.
April 28, 2017
Hamilton, Thunder Bay and Lindsay will be the pilot sites for the Basic Income Project for 4,000 lower-income people. Is it a good idea? Mahoney, Capobianco and Parkin on that.
April 27, 2017
If Ontario really does put Canada first, it has to be a big supporter of the new Canadian Free Trade Agreement scheduled to take effect July 1st. Randall White delves into the details.
April 22, 2017
It's been thrown around for everything from fat paycheques (read Bombardier) to tax credits for creating jobs. Brad James thinks it's time to give the old phrase a rest once and for all.
April 21, 2017
Finance Minister Charles Sousa is promising to act in the province's budget being brought down next week. What exactly should it do? Mahoney, Capobianco and Parkin on that.
April 19, 2017
Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland says Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must go. But who should be the new leader? Mahoney, Capobianco and Parkin are in the ONW Salon.
April 12, 2017