Ontario, Canada electricity rates rise 70% thanks to BigWind

Once again, other countries that are more experienced with renewable energy, show us that electricity rates WILL skyrocket if we continue to put renewables on our grid! BigWind is NOT cheap, it is NOT free, it is NOT efficient and it will NOT make us energy independent. What will it ensure? Increased debt, poverty, increased dependence on other countries, loss of jobs, loss of industry….need we go on? Stop the madness, educate yourselves and your neighbors. And, by the way, don’t vote for Clinton.  She promises to dramatically INcrease the renewables in the USA!!….

Premier Kathleen Wynne felt heat over hydro rates Tuesday at the International Plowing Match as she was booed several times….

But those who booed the premier told the The Canadian Press after the event that they had all heard about the rebates.

“Whoop dee doo,” said Garland Webster, of Thamesville, Ont.

His hydro bill has increased about 35 per cent since Wynne became premier, he said.

Eighty-four-year-old Les Gray from Buckhorn, Ont., said the rebate “doesn’t amount to anything.”

“The price of hydro has gone up so much now that us old people now can hardly afford to live in our homes,” he said.

“She hasn’t done a thing about it since she’s been in power and I don’t expect she will.”…

Auditor general Bonnie Lysyk has said the electricity portion of hydro bills for homes and small businesses rose 70 per cent between 2006 and 2014.

The Green Energy Act is driving up rates, she has said. Hydro customers will pay a total of $9.2 billion more for wind and solar projects under the Liberals’ 20-year guaranteed-price program for renewable energy than they would have paid under the old program….

Source: Ontario Premier booed over hydro rates at International Plowing Match

Advertisements

States that pay the most for power FORCE you to BUY BIGWIND

Screen Shot 2016-05-26 at 3.42.44 PM

(note California, the leader in BigWind) video here: Foxbusinessnews

In the video with Stu Varney, with energy expert Robert Bryce, he details the insane cost of attempting to power economies with sunshine and breezes; and does what policy makers have failed or refused to do: he connects the bitter consequences, born by the many, with the follies of the feckless few.New study finds states that offered greater support for green energy, pay more for electricity. Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Robert Bryce with more….(stopthesethings.com)

Why don’t our Ohio Representatives understand this simple truth? Instead, they are being persuaded by the sales teams who advocate for BigWind, like Iberdrola, Everpower, Apex and now Amazon. Remember, Amazon wants to purchase the wind energy, but NOT build their facilities withIN a wind energy blueprint…hmmmmm…..

Source: States that pay the most for power

Has BigWind created Big Jobs in Ohio? Don’t believe everything you hear…

The Ohio Renewable Energy & Efficiency Study Committee met this past Monday to hear additional testimony from PUCO Chairman Tom Johnson. The Committee had asked Johnson to return and provide more information on the costs of the mandates to residential, commercial and industrial ratepayers. A couple of statements in his testimony stood out to us. First, with respect to job creation, Johnson testified that: “Several members of the committee wanted to know how many jobs have been created through the renewable and energy efficiency requirements. I do not have an answer to this question. As a regulatory agency, tracking and verifying jobs, whether they be green jobs or otherwise, is not considered by any PUCO processes. Nor does the PUCO have any reliable method by which it would do so.” That is quite a statement given the wind industry’s claims that wind turbines meet the “public interest” in part because of job creation. The wind industry uses the flawed JEDI model (Job and Economic Development Impact (JEDI) Wind Model) to project job creation. Further, OPSB’s acceptance of the JEDI jobs model was and is an issue in UNU’s ongoing case against Everpower. 

The second surprising statement in Chairman Johnson’s testimony was that the PUCO (and presumably the OPSB) tries to be as transparent as possible in its work. When an entity claims information is confidential due to trade secrets or other legal protections, the PUCO requests the entity to assert and make clear their legal grounds for protection of the information. “In some instances, a utility is required to file a request for a protective order from the PUCO. Information is only kept confidential if there are legal grounds for keeping the information private,” testified Chairman Johnson. UNU, and likely other communities, have encountered numerous instances where they were denied access to information by wind developers. To our knowledge, protective orders were not routinely required….

RECAP OF JEDI MODEL AND OPSB REVIEW IN THE BUCKEYE WIND II CASE:

Everpower made numerous assertions concerning jobs during the Buckeye Wind II application and presented a report by the Camiros company. The Camiros report made use of the discredited JEDI model and UNU sought to have the “study” thrown out. Failing at that, UNU requested that the OPSB staff person who reviewed the model be required to testify about his findings. Following a dispute on the OPSB staffer’s availability, Richard Huckleberry was finally required to testify. Later, in its July 27, 2013 Request for Rehearing, UNU stated:

The testimony of the subpoenaed Staff member, Richard Huckleberry, revealed why the Staff was so reluctant to volunteer this testimony. His testimony revealed that the Staff blindly accepted Camiros’ economic analysis with no meaningful scrutiny. He did no independent research on the project’s socioeconomic impacts, and he simply copied the economics discussion in the Staff Report from the Camiros’ study. Huckleberry, Tr. XI 2637:19 – 2638:6.

Mr. Huckleberry said that he accepted Camiros’ conclusions without question because he trusted the consultant. Id. at 2679:25 – 2680:4. However, Mr. Huckleberry obviously was not familiar with Camiros prior to reviewing its report, since he had to perform research just to obtain basic background information about the company and its principals. Id. at 2638:12-23. Consequently, his blind trust in Camiros provides no reliable basis for evaluating the benefits of the BW II project.

Camiros generated the statistics for economic benefit in CW’s application by running the Job and Economic Development Impact (JEDI) Wind Model developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Applic. Exh. G, p. 11. While the Board’s Order (at 24) contends that the Staff reviewed Camiros’ JEDI analysis and found it accurate, the Staff’s review was meaningless. The Staff did not re-run the model to test Camiros’ representations, because the Staff has not purchased the necessary modeling software. Huckleberry, Tr. XI 2656:13-25. Mr. Huckleberry merely read Camiros’ report. Id. at 2656:21-25. He has never used the model, was not aware of the model’s limitations, was not familiar with its inputs, has never seen the outputs from a JEDI model, and did not even know whether it is the most accurate model to use. Id. at 2657:3-11, 2673:19-25, 2677:6, 2680:7, 2681:18-23. He further admitted that he was not aware of the model’s limitations, because it was “out of my expertise” and he had “no knowledge of that.” Id. at 2681:5-11; 2684:14-16.“…

Will Ohio SB310 begin a ‘domino’ effect to repeal BigWind mandates?

Today will be a busy day as around 30 witnesses will testify in the Ohio House Public Utilities Committee concerning Senate Bill 310.  Today’s Columbus Dispatch reports that the bill may spark a national movement toward repealing mandates for renewable energy.  Americans for Prosperity has thrown their support behind the bill. 

The Urbana Daily Citizen reports that two appeals were rejected by the Ohio Power Siting Board.  Both appeals were directed toward Everpower projects: Buckeye Wind and Scioto Ridge.  In Scioto Ridge, the citizens were trying to address the fact that they had no real opportunity to  register objections to the project because most are summer people in the Indian Lake area.  Everpower waited until after Labor Day when they were gone, to hold a public hearing.   In Champaign County, the County and Townships had objected to amendments in the Buckeye I project that moved the staging area further to the east and made modifications to roads and underground lines.  Today, one of the witnesses who will testify  in support of Senate Bill 310 is a County Engineer who has similar concerns about damage to local infrastructure that may be beyond the County’s financial ability to repair…

Ohio is on the cusp of becoming the first state to significantly ease its renewable-energy standards, a milestone that would be noticed in statehouses across the country where similar debates are being waged.

Proposals have gained traction in Kansas and several other states and have at least been introduced in a dozen or so others.

But none has had as much success as Ohio’s Senate Bill 310, which has passed the Senate and appears poised to pass the House as soon as this week.

The Ohio bill would place a two-year freeze on annual increases in standards for renewable energy and energy efficiency. It also would repeal a rule that says utilities must buy half of their renewable energy from in-state sources and would make it easier for utilities to buy low-cost hydroelectric power and count it toward the standards.

Many of the same groups with an interest in the subject are active in multiple states. The American Wind Energy Association, Sierra Club and others are fighting to maintain rules that say utilities must obtain a certain amount of their energy from renewable sources. Meanwhile, the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, and Americans for Prosperity are helping to push for change in the rules….

via If Ohio eases green-energy rules, will it spark national trend? | The Columbus Dispatch.

Everpower’s admission = BigWind’s failed mousetrap

The Ohio House of representatives gears up this week to hear testimony on Senate Bill 310. On Tuesday, Senator Balderson will provide sponsor testimony followed by other witnesses in support of the bill. On Wednesday opponents, interested parties and the rest of the world will testify. Speaker of the House, Rep. Bill Batchelder, wants to wrap up passage before Memorial Day. We expect to see every conceivable opponent argument come out in a last ditch effort to derail the bill. We have been on this roller coaster for so long we know anything could happen.

 We share a story from the Bellefontaine Examiner where Everpower’s Michael Speerschneider grumbles about the mandate freeze but says, nevertheless, “This doesn’t make it impossible to build if we can find appropriate buyers, but it certainly doesn’t make it any easier,” he said.

 As we have reported, a significant point in support of repeal of the mandate is the un-Constitutional nature of the in-state mandate. This requires a percentage of wind to be generated inside the state of Ohio even if out of state wind is available and cheaper. This issue has been the subject of litigation in Colorado and in Minnesota. This week in Colorado, a major victory was achieved when a federal court determined that the challengers to the Colorado mandate had “standing” to bring a lawsuit. Often, those who seek to protect mandates will argue that opponents do not have a right – or the legal standing – to sue. In this case, reported May 5th by E&E Legal, “The Court has recognized that the Colorado RES harms interstate Commerce,” said David W. Schnare, E&E Legal’s General Counsel and lead attorney in the case. “Next he will decide whether that damages not only citizens’ pocket books, but the Constitutional rights of our citizens, our businesses and the States that surround Colorado. A decision in favor of E&E Legal’s constitutional argument would follow other recent, similar Federal Court decisions and would lay the cornerstone to building a national effort to challenge the constitutionality of renewable standards in the other twenty-nine states with similar statutes.”…

Legislation that moved in the Ohio Senate this week could have a potential impact on EverPower Wind Holdings’ plans to develop local projects….

EverPower has wind developments pending construction in Hardin, Logan and Champaign counties and the company official said a large part of their development hinges on finding buyers. “This doesn’t make it impossible to build if we can find appropriate buyers, but it certainly doesn’t make it any easier,” he said.

While it displeases alternative energy producers, environmentalists, manufacturers and citizen groups like the local Fight the Wind organization approve of the Senate’s decision. “We are pleased with Senate Bill 310 and its progress through the gauntlet of political barriers to its passage,” Tom Stacy of Fight the Wind wrote in an email. “But this bill is not the end-all for wind or any other renewables. It doesn’t prohibit anything. It just relaxes the rate at which the government is forcing the contrived market for intermittent, undependable, low value sources like wind to grow.

The decision, he said, shows wind developers’ over-reliance on government regulations in their business plans. “EverPower’s admission that SB310 progress puts their Ohio projects at a standstill is case in point to the reality that wind electricity is not sustainable, not affordable and not a good enough mousetrap to capture market share without mandates — even with all the subsidies they receive otherwise,” Mr. Stacy wrote….

via: http://www.examiner.org/images/WebEdition/051014_.pdfonline.pdf

Ohioans say YES to Senate Bill 310 !!!!!!!!!

Ohio Energy Poll

Just released is a new survey from Ohioans for Sustainable Jobs. We have attached a copy of the survey results which provide strong support for either freezing or repealing Ohio’s energy mandates and the press release is below. While we have often taken a measured stance when looking at polls, we applaud this poll for providing copies of the questions asked and for giving the survey respondents enough information to make an informed reply.  The message is that Ohioans do not want government to tell them what to do and they do not want to be forced to pay for something they had no say in. Moreover, they don’t want to vote for someone who supports mandates and higher energy costs….

Sam’s Comments on Release (C43530).DOCX

Contact: Sam Randazzo

Industrial Energy Users-Ohio

(614) 719-2840

Ohio Voters Support Energy Efficiency, But Agree that Government Should Not Mandate Electric Use Reductions

Polling data supports call for reforms by hundreds of Ohio’s leading employers, business groups and labor

 

Sam’s Comments on Release (C43530).DOCX

COLUMBUS, Ohio, April 28, 2014 – Ohioans for Sustainable Jobs, a coalition of Ohio job creators, business organizations and labor groups, today released the results of a public opinion poll finding that a majority of Ohio voters agree that the government should not mandate reductions in electric use by residential and business customers. In light of changing circumstances since the pre-recession mandate was passed, 72% of voters agree that the Ohio legislature should revisit and change the existing law.

In light of these concerns, Ohioans for Sustainable Jobs is calling on the state’s elected leaders to pass Senate Bill 310, which would hold the usage reduction mandate at 4.2% while a study committee reviews the 2008 mandates based on current conditions and, by December 15, 2015, submits recommendations to the General Assembly.

“Ohioans support energy efficiency, as long as artificial charges are not placed on their bills through government mandates,” said Keith Lake of the Ohio Chamber of Commerce. “The results of this poll show strong support for our government to address these costly mandates.”

 

Sam’s Comments on Release (C43530).DOCX

“The results of the poll are hardly surprising, and are consistent with the views of our small business members” said Chris Ferruso of the National Federation of Independent Business/Ohio. “Numerous public opinion polls conducted on this issue – even by those groups who support the current mandates – cite strong attitudes against government mandates that increase electric bills. Energy efficient products are available in the market and customers are participating, so why should state government continue to mandate this behavior?”

 

Sam’s Comments on Release (C43530).DOCX

The poll, conducted by leading research firm The Tarrance Group, includes the following findings:

  •   68% of Ohio voters say that government should not mandate reductions in electric use by Ohio’s residential and business users.
  •   71% of voters favor changing the law to allow electric customers to decide whether or not to pay for the cost of the energy efficiency mandates.
  •   60% of voters would be less likely to vote for their state legislator if he/she voted against making changes to the law.
  •   A majority of customers would favor allowing Ohio electric customers to decide whether or not to pay for the cost of mandates requiring a portion of their electricity from renewable sources like wind and solar.

 

Sam’s Comments on Release (C43530).DOCX

  1. Coalition members include the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent Business/Ohio, Greater Cleveland Partnership, Ohio Steel Council, Ohio Council of Retail Merchants, Youngstown/Warren Regional Chamber, the Ohio Energy Group, and Industrial Energy Users-Ohio. These leading business organizations actively represent thousands of businesses employing millions of Ohioans. A copy of the top-line polling results is available here.

    Other Contacts:

    Keith Lake, Ohio Chamber of Commerce, 614-228-4201
    Tony Paglia, Youngstown/Warren Chamber of Commerce, 330-744-2131 ext. 15 Chris Ferruso, National Federation of Independent Business/Ohio, 614-221-4107 Peggy Claytor, Ohio Steel Council, 330-471-6363
    Carol Caruso, Greater Cleveland Partnership, 216-592-2471
    Lora Miller, Council of Retail Merchants, 614-221-7833
    Sam Randazzo, Industrial Energy Users-Ohio, 614-719-2840