My name is Mark Watson.  I…

My name is Mark Watson.  I am the President and Assistant Business Manager of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers – Central Ontario Local 804.  Our Local Union represents over 1,000 skilled men and women who are employed in the electrical industry within our jurisdiction as well as 300 retired members.  Our jurisdiction covers a large area of southwestern Ontario.  Our Southern border starts on the Shores of Lake Huron at Point Clark, and runs east through to Listowel, south to St. Mary’s, and east again through Stratford, Cambridge and Milton to Halton Hills, our border then turns north through Orangeville to the Blue Mountains on the shores of Georgian Bay.

This vast jurisdiction includes a large variety of employment opportunities for our members that work in construction, maintenance, renovation and retrofitting in every sector within this area as well as across Ontario.  We install and maintain transmission and distribution lines and we have installed a significant amount of Ontario’s new solar and wind generation capacity.  Examples of these projects include the Enbridge and Armow Wind Farm projects along the shores of Lake Huron and the 50MW transmission station at the Southgate Solar Farm as well as many smaller commercial and residential installations.

It must be noted that one of the largest employment opportunities for our members resides at the Bruce Power site in Tiverton, Ontario.  The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers – Central Ontario Local 804, has a long history of supplying highly trained, skilled and productive members to the Bruce Power site dating back to the construction of the Douglas Point Reactor by G.M Gest in the 1960’s.  Recently during the Refurbishment of Bruce Power Units 1 and 2, our organization had over 300 members from our area employed at the site and at the peak construction demand we employed another 300 members from our affiliated Local Unions throughout Ontario. Additionally, our Local Union was able to start over 100 apprentices, of which we are proud to declare that 98% of them have become certified journeypersons who are registered with the Ontario College of Trades.  These employment opportunities in the nuclear power sector have provided good paying jobs for our members as well as creating many employment opportunities in the sector supply chain within our jurisdiction such as at BWXT, formerly Babcock and Wilcox, located in Cambridge. The significance of the Bruce Power site to our Local Union members is well documented and we appreciate the opportunity that you have given us to share our views with you on Ontario’s Long Term Energy Plan and how our members will be affected both as employees in the electrical industry but also as permanent residents and tax payers in Ontario.

Let me say from the start that our organization, our affiliated union locals and our members support the objectives of Ontario’s green energy plan.  We applaud the provincial government for leading the way in North America by shutting down all of Ontario’s coal-burning generators.  We also applaud the provincial government for showing the courage and foresight to introduce a cap-and-trade system in Ontario.  Of course, there will be problems along the way but the path that the government has chosen, is the correct path.  We must reduce green-house gases.  To do that, we must reduce our reliance on high carbon emitting fossil fuels.

In my remarks to you today, I want to focus on three issues or themes.  The first of these is what we see as a tension between the important commitment to reduce the role of fossil fuels in meeting the province’s overall energy requirements, and the need for a much clearer vision of the alternative strategy to meet those energy requirements.  Ontario’s Five-Year Climate Change Action Plan envisions an Ontario which will substantially reduce its reliance on fossil fuels to meet the province’s energy needs.  The Action Plan also envisions a concurrent increase in the use of electricity to meet those energy needs.  The Action Plan is clear in its intention to bring about a greater role for electricity in heating buildings, both residential and non-residential, and in meeting the energy needs of our transportation sector.  The shift to greater reliance on electricity inevitably raises the question: how will that electricity be generated.  While we strongly support increased generation from renewable resources, we do not believe that renewable sources can be expanded sufficiently to meet the increased role that electricity will play in a low carbon future.

We need; therefore, a much clearer picture of what Ontario’s strategy will be to bring increased generation capacity on line and to deliver that energy efficiently and reliably.

That takes me to the second point that I would like to make;

Nuclear power today accounts for almost two thirds of the province’s power; emissions-free, at approximately half the average unit cost of overall electricity service.  In a time when the Government of Ontario is coming under immense pressure regarding the high cost of electricity, it is difficult to see a future in which the role of electricity will increase without upgrading and expanding Ontario’s nuclear generating capacity.  The nuclear power sector gives Ontario the best opportunity to stabilize and lower the cost of electricity to the rate payer and draw support for the Action Plan.

The government has indicated a timetable for refurbishing our existing nuclear reactors and there are two reasons to bring the refurbishing timetable forward.  The first is interest rates. Long-term interest rates are currently at historic lows.  No one expects these conditions to continue indefinitely.  The interest rate is a major factor in the financing costs for refurbishment.  In our view the government should take advantage of the low interest rates that currently prevail to bring forward the refurbishment timetable.  The apparent savings from delaying the refurbishment will be more than offset by the higher financing costs that will prevail in future years.

The second reason to consider bringing the refurbishment timetable forward is the availability of labour and contracting capacity.  The downturn in the Alberta energy sector means that there is capacity available.  Ontario will not be competing with Alberta’s energy sector for materials and manpower which was, until recently, the single most important factor shaping construction costs in Canada.  However, the downturn in Alberta is cyclical.  Oil prices have been edging up.  When producers can be confident that prices will stay above $60 per barrel, the construction cycle in Alberta’s energy sector will resume.

By bringing the refurbishment timetable forward, Ontario can avoid some of the costs that will inevitably arise when large-scale projects in Ontario must compete with large-scale projects in Alberta for skilled labour and skilled contractors.  By taking advantage of current economic and financial conditions, the government will achieve important, long-term cost savings.  The government will also ensure that we have the low carbon generating capacity that Ontario needs to meet our greenhouse gas reduction targets.

In our view, Ontario cannot achieve its objective of increasing the role of electricity in our energy supply without ensuring the continued reliability and efficiency of our nuclear power sector.     We strongly believe that the government should give serious consideration to bringing forward the timetable to refurbish our nuclear capacity.

The third topic that I want to raise with you is conservation and, more particularly, the need to remove obstacles to investments in conservation.  The typical commercial tenancy agreement and a great many residential tenancy agreements pass the cost of utilities on to the tenant.  Aside from changing the lighting and time of use, there is often very little that a tenant can do to conserve on the use of energy.   A tenant cannot invest in insulation, nor can a tenant invest in more energy efficient mechanical systems.  In many residential tenancies, the appliances are owned by the landlord.  The majority of tenants, whether they are commercial tenants or residential tenants, bear the burden of inefficient buildings and appliances.  In the residential sector, the majority of tenants are in the lower income groups.  It is unfair to tenants to raise the cost of energy when they have no realistic way of dealing with energy inefficient buildings, energy inefficient mechanical systems and energy inefficient appliances.  That may involve incentives or penalties that are delivered through the tax system.  It could involve direct grants or property tax surcharges. Or perhaps, there should be a requirement that landlords pay a portion of the utility costs in the buildings that they own.  We acknowledge that the government has put in place some incentives.  These incentives do not appear to be in corresponding size with the scale of the upgrade investments that will be required in the rented building stock.

If Ontario is to achieve its goal of making buildings more energy efficient, we have to find a way to incentivize landlords to make the investments that are needed in energy efficient structures, energy efficient mechanical systems, and energy efficient appliances and lighting systems.

I want to conclude my remarks by reiterating the points with which I began.    The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers – Central Ontario Local 804 supports the objectives of Ontario’s green energy plan.  We support the decision to shut down all coal-burning generators.  We support the decision to introduce the cap-and-trade system in Ontario.  What we hope emerges from these consultations is a clear message to the government that we need a much clearer picture of what Ontario’s strategy will be to bring increased generation capacity on line and to deliver that electricity efficiently, economically and reliably.  We believe the government needs to develop a system that compels landlords to install energy efficient structures, mechanical systems, appliances and lighting systems. We do not see how the role of electricity can be increased in Ontario’s overall energy usage without at the same time increasing capacity from our nuclear generating plants, such as Bruce Power.  We believe that the government must seriously consider bringing forward the refurbishment timetable to achieve the Five-Year Climate Change Action Plan. Thank you again for affording us the opportunity to share our views.

Respectfully submitted,

[Original Comment ID: 196983]