Developing Canada's Clean Techs Sectors: WTO Decision on Local Content

Recently the World Trade Organization ruled against Ontario in an Appeal decision regarding complaints from Japan and the European Union concerning the Ontario content eligibility requirements under Ontario's Green Energy Act.  The content exigencies in question link approvals of clean energy projects to the development of Ontario's clean energy technology manufacturing sectors.

This ruling stands in contrast with the "US model" for which the $70B invested the US green economy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), and covering the years 2009 to 2011, was subject to a Buy American Provision. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/recovery/buy_american_provision.html  Thanks to these investments coupled with the US content rules, 1) there are now 500 wind tech manufacturing plants in the US; 2) the largest new source of electrical power generation in the US in 2012 was wind energy; 3) 20% of US venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 was invested in the US clean tech sectors; and 4) there were 119,000 employed in the US solar sector in 2012.

The US cash grants, 30% Investment Tax Credit for solar projects and  2.2 cents/kWh Production Tax Credit for wind projects have survived the post ARRA years, post 2011, but are no longer as well-financed as the 2 good years.

Regarding the implications of the WTO ruling for Ontario, under the Ontario Green Energy Act, Ontario has Feed-in-Tariff rates - the price above market rates which are offered to winning bidders for Ontario renewable energy production sites.  These FIT rates, at 13.5 cents/kWh for wind and 34.7 cents/kWh for large solar projects, are content conditional to the effect that solar and wind projects must have 60% and 50% Ontario content respectively.

The content stipulations have given rise to an emerging Ontario clean tech industry base in the province that includes a Siemens blade plant in Tillsonburg; a CS Wind turbine tower plant in Windsor; a GE turbine hub plant in Peterborough; TSP's turbine tower facility in Thorold; the Enercon wind turbine electric components and tower facilities in the Niagara region; and the solar manufacturing plants, Siliken in Windsor and Centennial Global in Kingston.  Other manufacturing facilities are in the planning stages such as the REpower turbine blade plant.

For somewhat similar reasons, Quebec nascent wind technology industrial base is the result of provincial content requirements. The first 1000 MW Request for Proposals (RFP) had a 60% Gaspésian content requirement and the second RFP for 2000 MW had 60% Quebec and 30% Gaspesian content requirements.  Wind tech manufacturers that have set up shop in Quebec include LM blades in Gaspé; Marmen towers in Trois-Rivières and Matane; VCI nacelles in Matane; Enercon towers and switch gears in Matane; REpower/Woodward convertors in New Richmond; and Fabrication Delta towers in St-Siméon.

In response to the WTO decision, a federal government committed to developing Canada's clean tech sectors would intervene to assist these provinces and perhaps establish a national program in this regard. -- Of course we cannot count on the Conservatives for such action.

One option to go around the WTO ruling is to focus new projects on community-led initiatives.  Under this community-led option, the national government might set up a green infrastructure program that includes manufacturing facilities and the construction of renewable energy production sites.  http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/05/ontario-loses-wto-appeal-what-happens-next

 Will Dubitsky
willdubitsky@gmail.com

 

Wakeboats: The "Hummers" on our Lakes (Updated July 8, 2013)

Wakeboats: The "Hummers" on our Lakes

Just how insane is having wakeboats on our lakes can be expressed in relative terms.  Their HP ranges can go from 330HP to 555HP. http://www.malibuboats.com/boats/  http://www.moomba.com/mobiuslsv/  This is about the same range of HP offered on Volvo tractor-trailer trucks, 325HP to 550HP. http://www.volvotrucks.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/VTNA_Tree/ILF/Products/Powertrain/power_ratings_050510.pdf

Why do they need so much HP? Well for one thing, they have ballasts in the 1500lb to 2000lb range.  These ballasts are what weighs down these boats to cause those exceptionally high waves that not only generate shoreline erosion but also damage docks. 

Furthermore, the combination of the powerful waves bringing shoreline nutrients into the lake and the turbidity caused by their propellers- turbidity which can go down to a length of 9 metres and stay around for 24 hours --contribute to the proliferation of algae.

As for the less tangible merits of peace and quiet on what would otherwise be a peaceful weekend afternoon, one can forget about it when the wakeboats are out in force.  Even at slow speeds, these boats generate high waves, the noise of the waves and the boats combined making reading a newspaper on the dock a real challenge.  Here it is important to note that snowmobiles were banned from the St-Faustin (Québec Laurentides, near Mont-Tremblant) portion of the Parc-Linéaire, in part, because of noise pollution, a judicial precedent.

Then there's the matter of climate change. This May 2013, the planet has reached a most undesirable level of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere, 400 parts per million, heading us into greater frequency and intensity of extreme weather situations and accelerated desertification in Africa.  Those who's wakeboats can burn over 60 litres for one hour's use are obviously not too concerned about this.

On smog related emissions, the US Environmental Protection Agency noted that marine engines being are "among the highest contributors of hydrocarbons (HC) and oxide of nitrogen (NOx)emissions. HC and NOx emissions contribute to ground-level ozone, which irritates the respiratory system causing chest pain and lung inflammation."  http://www.epa.gov/otaq/documents/420f13006.pdf.

Working on Legislative Solutions

This brings us to the matter as to what we can do about these nuisances.  To begin the current legislative context is as follows.

First, under the Canada Shipping Act, a municipality can submit a request to the federal government for a new regulation concerning safety, the environment and/or a public interest matter but the process is long, up to 5 years, and the existing legislation is not well-adapted to address considerations pertaining to protection of the environment. In effect, in keeping with the Canada Shipping Act encouragement of non-regulatory solutions, a municipality must try a non-regularity social contract with users of the water body concerned for a period of 2 years. Subsequently, only if the municipality claims that after the trial period, it still wants to have a regulatory solution, can the Government of Canada act upon the municipality's request.

Second, up until the legislative revisions by the Conservatives, The Fisheries Act was the key legislation to provide protection for marine life and habitat.  But the new Fisheries Act  regulations stipulate that only commercial, First Nations and recreational fish can be protected -- and this limited protection does not apply to marine habitats.

Against this background, what is required is an overhaul of both of the aforementioned Acts that includes linking them in such a way so that, environmental degradation attributable to certain types of motorized boats, could be used as a basis for imposing effective and binding restrictions on the boats concerned within a reasonable time frame.

That said, with the Conservatives in power until 2015, the overhaul of the two Acts would have to come after the next federal election 2015.  This means that those who want to see legislative changes of the type described here, would operate with a time line to the effect that their innovative proposals for legislative changes would be finalized by 2015.

To achieve these goals, it is clear that, if each small Laurentian community acts on its own,  it would be difficult for any given community to have the attention it wants for its proposals. 

However, since the legislative context is Canada-wide, a more effective approach would be that of establishing inter-municipal alliances across the Laurentians, Quebec and/or with other provinces.  This group approach could be enhanced by including supportive stakeholders such as the Conseil regional de l'environnement, MRCs/regional municipalities, elected representatives of both the federal and provincial governments and others interested in backing a multi-stakeholder approach.  

This multi-stakeholder approach would ensure that their recommendations on legislative changes would get the attention it deserves. Equally important it makes good sense for communities to be open to a cross fertilization of ideas and expertise among communities and stakeholders, given the common legislative challenges and goals.

Accordingly, I invite you to write to me at willdubitsky@gmail.com to share your thoughts or get information on other communities interested in an inter-municipal multi-stakeholder approach to addressing the matter of wakeboats, the "Hummers" on or lakes.

Ombudsman Radio-Canada: l'Intégrité et l'arrière garde

Bonjour Pierre Tourangeau

(I am bilingual, watch RDI 7 days a week, but have difficulty writing in French)

On the panel segment of Le Téléjournal, May 16, 2013, in reference to the BC election, Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin made it clear that the BC Liberals won because of their strong message on the economy and belittled the environmental messages of the NDP suggesting that this is not a prominent consideration when people vote -- the economy trumps over the environment.

While these journalists are entitled to their perspectives, one does expect a little integrity.  Since the NDP got 39% of the vote and the Greens got 8% of the votes,  the pro-environment votes, 47% of the total, were more numerous  than the Liberal votes at 44%, or about 50,000 votes more than the Liberals.  In other words, the so-called views of Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin were factually incorrect and the factual  story is the split in the environmental vote resulted in the victory of the Liberals.

100 years ago, the majority establishment view was that women cannot  be equal in the workplace, 75 years ago the right to abortion was unthinkable for most Canadians, 50 years ago gay rights and marriage was belittled by the majority of the followers of public opinion and today this same arrière-garde belittles references to the environment as an important public issue.

I don't expect Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin to know that the clean technology sectors are among the strongest growth and job creating sectors in the world today, that there were 1.6 million people working in these sectors in China in 2011 and 372,000 employed in these sectors in the same year in Germany, more than the German auto industry.  Nor do I expect them to know that wind energy was the largest source of new electrical power generation in the US in 2012 or that 20% of the US venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 was invested in the clean tech sectors,  there are now over 500 wind technology manufacturing facilities in the US , 119,000 currently employed in the US solar sector and California is expected to have 1 million employed in the clean tech sectors by 2020.

The arrière-garde always defends a vision of a future that will be the same as the past and belittles indications of any new economic social and environmental orders.   In contrast, the avant-garde promotes a vision, which as Wayne Gretzky might put it, focuses on , "where the puck is going."

I am not saying that Radio-Canada should not have representatives of the arrière-garde.  But I do expect integrity.  And on this score Michel Côté and Tasha Kheiriddin are sadly lacking, time after time.  RDI/Radio-Canada, true to its integrity standards, must ensure that panel members meet these standards or be replaced.

Will Dubitsky