Era Banner: Peaker plant or more transmission lines needed
Letters to the Editor
May 08, 2008 03:16 PM :
There have been many articles and letters to the editor on this topic by many well-meaning people who fail to acknowledge or appreciate the key issue with our electrical supply.As a member of the Ontario Power Authority working group representing Newmarket, I would reinforce efforts to reduce electricity consumption were identified as the No. 1 short-term strategy by the working group.
However, it was fully explained to workgroup members conservation and load demand programs only serve to buy us time.
These measures alone cannot resolve our electricity supply issues that relate to the lack of electrical supply redundancy.
Much of northern York Region is supplied power only via the Clareville-Minden high voltage line.
An additional transformer station being built at Holland Junction is also desperately needed and will also buy time but not provide an ultimate solution.
It is standard practice that urban areas should have a redundant supply of electricity capable of supplying the entire area to minimize potential for power outages. Northern York Region is at risk of a power outage that could last days or weeks if a catastrophic event should occur.
Conservation, localized small-scale combined cycle power systems and solar panels are all highly desirable and worthwhile goals but only a peaker plant or second 230V transmission line into the region can provide redundancy.
Many people are choosing to downplay this risk. In the event of a power outage, there would be undeniable serious personal safety and economic impacts; risks that are unacceptable in a first-world economy such as Ontario.
In the end, should the proposals to build a peaker plant fail to come to fruition, the back-up plan will revert to the originally proposed transmission line from Markham to Newmarket, a proposal Aurora and Markham vigorously oppose.
In addition, another community will have to live with an even larger peaker plant to supply its own and our electricity needs, as well as all the electricity losses to bring the power to our region.
Kevin Brown
Newmarket
MegaWHAT? (by their many names) appears to be mega-misleading...
However well meaning a community based group called "MegaWHAT?" has been, they have in my view, done a great disservice to the power supply discussions currently facing our region. Their facts and tactics do not hold up to closer scrutiny and their methods are more than a bit suspect.
It turns out that a recent press release sent out by a newly created group called Upper York Region Clean Air Alliance was actually authored by one of the founders of "MegaWHAT?". In addition to containing numerous flaws in fact and logic, this press release suggested that groups from across the region are banding together in an effort to fight the proposed power plant. What this press release does not say is that at least three websites were created by the very same people and one has to wonder if they did this due to a loss of perceived credibility or a desire to look like they have wider support than they actually do. Furthermore, a spokesperson of MegaWHAT? has stated his support for nuclear power which is diametrically opposed to what Jack Gibbons of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance (OCAA) says.
The proposed solutions suggested by OCAA and touted at times by members of MegaWHAT? do not actually address the specific need identified in an economically feasible fashion. In fact, if we were to use the type of technology suggested by Aurora's Mayor Morris (i.e. a combined heat and power plant) in order to provide the 375 MW of back up power required, not only would more land and money be required, but we would actually have more emissions than will result from the proposed peaking plant ! The mayor of Aurora, MegaWHAT? and OCAA appear to have either not done their homework or they have chosen to ignore what OPA and APPrO has to say on these matters, or both, despite the efforts of many people and organisations to correct the public record.
Jack Gibbons of the OCAA is on record as supporting 550 MW Portlands Energy Centre as well as suggesting that the Naticoke coal fired power plant be converted to gas power. Now, this same individual is suggesting that a much smaller 400 MW peaking plant designed to run for a far shorter period of time is "too dirty". Go figure ! The OCAA has also made misleading statements about existing transmission infrastructure capacity and they have suggested that sustainable power solutions will meet the identified need,. Before we all rush to judgement I can only hope that the public reads the OPA's 2005 Working Group recommendations posted on the left hand side of Aurora Power Update.com as well as related documentation. The facts speak for themselves for anyone open minded enough to separate fact from fiction.
For more details on misleading statements made by MegaWHAT? please refer to their website and then consider asking the OPA or APPrO what the facts actually are. There are clearly two sides to this story and before you support a group of people that have little or no experience in power planning, you might want to see what the OPA and or APPrO have to say on these matters. This is not to suggest that impacted communities and concerned citizens should not play an important roll in the planning and decision making processes. To be clear, I have always advocated for reasonable concerns to represented and addressed responsibly. I trust that we can all agree that adequate mitigation measures must be identified and put in place in order to address common and reasonable concerns, but I can only hope that we get our facts straight before we rush to judgement and claim that the sky is falling
IMPORTANT MESSAGE from the OPA (Spring 2008):
This note is just to let you know that we have posted the "short list" of qualified applicants that will be invited to move to the next step of the gas-fired generation procurement process for Northern York Region. The link on the Ontario Power Authority's Generation Procurement website is:
http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/gp/Page.asp?PageID=1224&SiteNodeID=182
In summary, we will be inviting a total of five developers (currently representing eight possible sites) to participate in the Request for Proposal process.
The next procurement steps and tentative timelines are:
May Posting of the Request for Proposal
October Receipt of Submissions
December Contract Execution
In the midst of the evident concerns of some people in the region, it is important to be clear why we are doing all this... Northern York Region needs this power to sustain its quality of life and be secure against interruptions. We have spent three years, with the best minds in both the industry, and your community, developing these solutions. It is important the plan moves forward.
As always, I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have.
JoAnne Butler
Vice President - Electricity Resources
Ontario Power Authority
Message from Richard Johnson:
From May 2004 to September 2005 a concerned citizen’s group called S.T.O.P. (Stop Transmission lines Over People) joined forces with the Towns of Aurora and Markham in raising concerns over what thousands of people felt was a flawed planning and environmental assessment process conducted by Hydro One. As a result of our efforts the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) conducted a Working Group review of all possible alternatives which included participation from all of the impacted municipalities. The final Working Group recommendations were conditionally supported by S.T.O.P. and various stakeholders including the Town of Aurora.
The OPA procurement process is now under way in order to find an acceptable local generation solution to meet Northern York Region's needs. This represents a significant opportunity for Aurora to increase tax revenues, improve our power reliability and potentially underground transmission lines through our community while at the same time addressing socio-economic and environmental concerns. This current process requires public input and support in order to be successful.
If an acceptable solution and host community are not found in Northern York Region, an unwanted solution could well be imposed upon us. The good news is that there are many potential benefits for our community that can be derived from a well designed, located and operated gas fired peaking plant. The recommended solution was arrived at after a great deal of effort, expense and consideration and now is the time to ensure that this plan is delivered with an appreciation for the history of this issue.
The current options before us include local generation as proposed, OR to revert to a transmission solution that was clearly unwanted in 2005 and clearly remains unwanted. Aurora's official position is to "adamantly oppose" an overhead transmission solution and to explore undergrounding, as was stated numerous times, including in the Town of Aurora's 2005 response to the OPA recommendations. Now is the time for us to work towards a solution. Unfortunately the current Aurora Council does not seem to fully understand the issues or options currently before us and may well be inadvertently be increasing the chances of an unwanted outcome. Council has clearly not done its homework ! After more than three years of effort on the part of the OPA, proponents, APPrO and informed residents, who have all made efforts to keep Aurora Council informed and engaged in this planning process, Mayor Morris has stated numerous times recently that she is "confused" by the issue and she has quite clearly turned her back on the Hydro Task Force as well as the Town of Markham, who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on our collective behalf in order to address this issue. Even the most basic questions and answers seem beyond our Council to comprehend at this critical time.Two letters of special interest are attached to the left of this webpage. Please see the OPA letter dated April 2nd as well as the APPrO letter dated April 15 for more details.
Mayor Morris and Aurora Council have demonstrated that after four years of effort and millions of dollars spent by stakeholders, Council still does NOT understand either the identified need for a back up power supply, or the viable alternatives. Council has also clearly not considered that a transformer has been proposed for Aurora and if the transmission facilities required to connect to the Armitage TS are less than 2 km long then they can be installed without undergoing an Environmental Assessment (EA) process. In short, we are passing up our single best opportunity to plan and implement needed technology at the expense of the power company proponent who has offered to work with the town ! We are missing a huge opportunity and if the transformer or new generation facilities get imposed on Aurora with new and larger (140 foot high) transmission facilities, then that will be 100% the result of Mayor Morris's refusal to fully research and understand this issue. It is pure folly for Council to adopt a position where they do not do their homework and not negotiate assurances or concessions from any proponent prior to the bid process being closed.
The concept that we have a unique opportunity to address our long term power supply and environmental needs comprehensively seems to escape Aurora Council. As of the end of October, it is Council's position that they will not negotiate with any given proponent (there is only one identified at this time) until after the bids have been submitted to the OPA on November 4th. Not only will the technologies be selected and the financing be locked in, but we will not be negotiating from a position of strength in the event that a site in Aurora is selected by the OPA and the options available to any proponent to address our specific concerns could be more limited in scope. In fact, Aurora has not even identified well reasoned or well documented concerns. They took a stance before even attending an open house or obtaining the information necessary to make an educated decision. Furthermore, they have been told for years that a transformer is slated for Aurora and if the transformer is located within 2 km of the connection point at Armitage, then no further EA process will be required before the new and much larger transmission facilities are installed. Our best chance to address all of our long term power supply needs both comprehensively and proactively has been squandered away.
Groups such as the Ontario Clean Air Alliance (OCAA) and "Mega What?" have made misleading and factually incorrect statements that the OPA and APPrO have gone to great lengths in an effort to correct. Even after being corrected, these groups have not changed their position misleading and alarming statements accordingly. Misinformation and distortions have been stated related to smoke stack sizes, noise, emissions, cost, viable alternatives, the number of transmission facilities serving Northern York Region, the impact of conservation efforts, the need for supply diversity and the need for large amounts of water in a typical peaking plant design likely to be used in areas where water supply is an issue.
OCAA's current position with regards to the proposed peaker does not hold up to closer scrutiny and their past statements in full support of the larger Portlands Energy Centre and other gas fired facilities, however only a full understanding of these issues will clarify what the OCAA is really saying. OCAA's ultimate goal appears to be to kill the OPA's master power plan for Ontario and they appear willing to say and do what ever it takes in order to accomplish that goal, even if their position is not supported by the specific facts facing NYR or the history of the planning and consultation process to date.
Once you have done your homework you can judge for yourself who is being straight with the facts and this website is intended to provide you with information not likely to be shared by "Mega WHAT?" or the OCAA.
The OCAA has stated that a 30 MW combined heat and power (gas fired) power plant will meet our power supply needs however what they don't tell you is that their solution will also require either a clearly unwanted transmission solution or potentially hundreds of smaller back up systems (likely gas fired) that will provide the full 375 MW needed in the event that our primary of source of power gets knocked out. The OCAA has not openly explained why they supported the much larger 550 MW Portlands Power pant that operates for longer (approximately 40% of the time / or 4 to 8 times longer than what is proposed in NYR) and is located to a larger population in the Toronto Beaches and yet the OCAA now calls a smaller 350 MW power plant that runs for 10% of the time "too dirty". You might also want to ask why OCAA proposed to convert the 4,000 MW Nanticoke coal power plant to gas. The answer... because gas is a cleaner source of power and OCAA knows it. They will argue that CHP plants are more efficient than peaking plants however they neglect to tell you that there are many types of power plants that are designed to address specific engineering needs. After an extensive consultation and planning process that has spanned years, the peaking plant solution proposed by the OPA is the best technical and most responsible solution to meet our current power supply reliability needs in Northern York Region.
While any given potential power plant may differ slightly in its design, location and operation the total emissions for the type of power plant proposed for NYR is estimated to be in the range of two residential gas furnaces, after dispersion, at the point of impingement while the Portlands Power Plant located in the Toronto Beaches is equal to approximately 13 residential furnaces, which incidentally met with the OCAA's full support, and yet OCAA now calls the peaking plant proposed for Northern York Region "too dirty". Why ? Don't ask me, ask Jack Gibbons.
Total emissions during the operational time of approximately 900 hours per year will be less than a 1% increase over current emissions so if we are so concerned about the health impacts related to emissions then we may want to concentrate as much or more on the 99% than the 1%. We need to be realistic in addressing these issues and clarifying the facts and viable alternatives is a good start.
As a result of the recently passed Bill 51 municipalities lost rights they formerly had under the planning act related to private power supply projects. Regardless of the objections of any given community an unwanted solution could well be imposed if we do not work constructively and proactively towards a considerate and reasonable solution. I have always fought for socio-economic and environmental concerns to be addressed as early as possible in the planning process and if our respective communities in Northern York Region do not become well informed and address our long term power supply needs proactively in a spirit of co-operation then the OPA and OEB will have no option but to implement a solution that they feel is in our collective best interests.
No matter what may happen with regards to the proposed power plant, Aurora will face issues related to transformers, transmission and power reliability in the future therefore now is the time to address these matters to the best of our ability while taking into consideration the history of these matters as well as long term considerations. Only good input can result in good output so lets hope that the decision makers and our elected representatives do their homework before they take a stance.
The draft request for proposal (RFP) was issued by the OPA on June 6th, 2008 and proponents will be holding information sessions throughout this summer and fall in order to educate the public and seek public input. Final proposals will be submitted to the OPA by November 4th and solution will be identified by year end. Links to proponent websites can be found above and further details can be found at the town as well as on the OPA website.
Please visit this site frequently for further updates.