A green energy future for Ontario

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca in its summer fundraiser today for as little as $5 per month!

Four weeks ago, I wrote a column questioning the McGuinty government's plan to stake Ontario's energy future on nuclear power, despite the fact that nuclear had long proven to be expensive, unreliable and environmentally unsound.

I closed that column by asserting that I would “write another column soon on where the solutions do lie.” I don't know how much clearer I could have been, but I still got several e-mails and phone calls from readers who challenged me on the absence of alternatives that I presented. This is the follow-up piece that I promised to write (so, please don't call or write to ask “But, what's wrong with nuclear?” since that's already been covered).

Ontario can meet (or curtail) its growing demand for electricity in three main ways:

  • By increasing generation of hydro-electric power in Ontario and purchasing more hydro-electric power from Manitoba, Quebec and even Labrador (thereby strengthening the demand for the development of an east-west energy grid);
  • By dramatically increasing investments in other sustainable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass (which would also assist in solving a waste management problem) and geothermal (which take advantage of the fact that 50 per cent of the sun's energy is absorbed by the earth); and
  • By aggressively pursuing conservation initiatives and providing incentives to consumers (such as those adopted by California, which saved 10,000 megawatts a year through its conservation programs).

A report released last fall by the David Suzuki Foundation illustrated how “Ontario can add at least $9 billion to its economy and create 25,000 new jobs by 2010 if the province uses renewable energy [including expanded hydro-electric] to power its electricity system... In return, the province will get a more reliable, cost-effective electricity system, cleaner air, tens of thousands of new jobs, and the development of a vibrant industry.

Many countries around the world are already reaping the economic and environmental benefits of renewable energy,” said Suzuki. “Ontario seems to be unaware it is sitting on a goldmine that will solve its electricity and air pollution problems.”

The report shows how Ontario could install as much as 8,000 megawatts of wind power by 2012 (four times the amount currently projected by the Ontario government, but a target achieved by Germany between 1990 and 2004), which would meet roughly nine per cent of electricity demand — around the same percentage currently served by coal.

“Wind energy offers a new cash crop for Ontario farmers, potentially pumping billions into the rural economy,” said Paul Gipe, author of the report's wind chapter. “Wind turbines require only a very small land area, in some cases allowing farmers to plow to the base of the towers. Farmers, by either leasing their land to wind developers or by installing the wind turbines themselves, can earn tens of thousands of dollars per year in revenue while continuing to produce their traditional crops.”

Ontario's electricity system is currently structured in such a way that conservation is actually discouraged. As David MacKinnon, Executive Director of the Ontario Public Health Association, noted in a letter to the Ontario Energy Board (OAB), the province “discourages energy conservation by linking profits to electricity sales alone. We believe that this trend should be reversed; that the OEB must adopt policies that reward the actions needed by utilities to reduce energy demand.”

Besides reforming its pricing system, Ontario could tighten up the building code and product standards to require more dramatically higher energy efficiency. It could also develop a rebate program for energy efficient appliances (refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers and clothes washers). In 2004, Saskatchewan spent just over a million dollars on rebates, saving consumers over four million kWh or $400,000 over the course of the year. By adopting a similar program, as well as programs to encourage the replacement of inefficient lighting and the installation of electronic ballasts (which, unlike traditional magnetic ballasts, consume almost no power), Ontario could help to negate the need for its massive spending on nuclear infrastructure.

As well, Ontario could accelerate the move toward “smart meters” which encourage customers to move their energy consumption to off-peak hours. You may have noticed that this program was re-announced just last week (for, by my count, the fourth time) by new Energy Minister Donna Cansfield, but the target date for full implementation isn't until 2010.

American author Jeremy Rifkin reports that the European Union's Green Paper on Energy Efficiency estimates that EU states “could save at least 20 per cent of their present energy consumption for a net savings of 60 billion euros per year, by enacting tough energy conservation programs across European society — in homes, commercial buildings, factories, and transport. [It also] says the average EU and American household could save as much as $1,200 per year in cost-saving energy efficient practices, thus offsetting much of the increased price of oil.”

People who are much more knowledgeable than I am (on this subject, at least) are convinced that Ontario can meet its energy needs without coal and without further expansion or refurbishment of nuclear capacity. We have the ingenuity, we have the technology and we have the incentive, so let's do it.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.