There are some major issues…

It is ineffective to take our province backward in time almost two decades without a proper plan in place. If we think that a current plan/legislation is ineffective we need to come up with a better system first rather than just reverting back to what was done before decades ago. The current legislation was put in place to address challenges and problems that the old system did not address, simply rolling back the clock will not fix the problems. If indeed our new government believes the current state of things in not efficient, then I challenge you to come up with something better before just throwing away a system that is currently working. Cancelling these programs without first doing due diligence and relying on experts to study the problems and listening to their advice will only compound the problems. Please take the time to properly develop the new systems and use evidence to guide your policy development and to support your supposition that the proposed new systems are an improvement over what is currently in place.

However, regarding this proposal specifically, there are some major issues. First and foremost, the idea of strict guidelines that renewable projects must show that the energy is needed before work commences. While on the surface I admit this may seem as if it makes common sense, in practicality, it actually handcuffs the future. In is undeniable that we need to switch to a carbon neutral energy generation system long term. As a requirement for that, we need to have the infrastructure established in order to allow us to shut down the roughly 30% of gas and oil systems running today (by capacity according to 2018 figures from the IESO). Thus further requires that these renewable sources that would be taking over need to be built in advance. Furthermore, with current reports of a looming energy deficit when the Pickering plant is finally shut down, we need to start to plan these green projects soon.

Replacement projects need to be built before the need is established, so that we can compensate for power systems going offline, while not resorting to gas systems that release GHGs. Possible options would include Thorium based nuclear reactors (for which the CANDU reactor can be adapted and which has been proven to show huge benefits over Uranium based systems in safety and half-life of nuclear waste), Wind projects like those your government has short-sightedly shut down, or large scale solar projects. Furthermore, Battery technology similar to what was done in Australia could be adapted here to mitigate some risks of off peak times for wind and solar generating methods. Furthermore, obviously with these systems if wind and solar power were chosen, it would be essential that they were able to generate far more electricity than needed for the mix chosen such that they could partially offset each other in off peak times of each.

The problem with waiting until current systems are at end of life are at least two-fold. First, by not actively working to eliminate the need for gas based energy generating systems, which currently account for 30% of Ontario's energy generation capacity as noted above, we are handicapping Ontario's ability to fight climate change, and making it much more expensive for future generations. For proof of this rising cost and difficulty level simply look as estimates surrounding the fight of climate change around the year 2000 and compare to current estimates after insufficient attempts have been made over the past two decades. Secondly, all new technology takes time to build, test, optimize and then scale up. By not allowing permits for work to start, we are guaranteeing that Ontario will not have the expertise required to install and optimize newer, greener technology as the current systems reach end of life in the coming decade. This in itself would necessitate Ontario falling back on older, dirtier sources of energy to fill in the gap further hampering the fight of climate change.