2012 apr 15 minister osea presentation fit 2.0 v7

185 views

Published on

Presentation given to the Minister of Energy April 15 2012

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
185
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

2012 apr 15 minister osea presentation fit 2.0 v7

  1. 1. 7 things to make FIT 2.0 a successMinister of Energy and OPA briefing noteswww.ontario-sea.orgApril 25, 2012Draft 7
  2. 2. http://tinyurl.com/d52cnkl2013-­‐05-­‐07  OSEA builds community and commercialcapacity and collaboration2  
  3. 3. 3  2013-­‐05-­‐07  The  Ontario  Sustainable  Energy  Associa4on  (OSEA)  is  a  non-­‐par3san,  member-­‐based  non-­‐profit  dedicated  to  inspiring  and  enabling  the  people  of  Ontario  to  improve  the  environment,  economy  and  their  health  by  conserving  and  producing  clean,  renewable  energy  in  their  homes,  businesses  and  communi3es.        Who  we  represent:    Members  include  individuals,  manufacturers,  installers,  developers,  municipali3es,  First  Na3ons,  farmers,  co-­‐opera3ves  and  other  community  organiza3ons  suppor3ve  of,  and  engaged  in,  the  full  porHolio  of  sustainable  energy  in  Ontario    Vision:    Every  Ontarian  conserves  energy  and  generates  sustainable  energy  either  as  a  household  or  as  part  of  a  local  community-­‐owned  business,  contribu3ng  to  the  rapid  transi3on  to  100%  sustainable  energy.    Mission:    To  be  recognized  as  one  of  Ontario’s  most  respected  sustainable  energy  advocates  and  facilitators  by  providing  credible,  accurate  and  3mely  informa3on  and  an  unparalleled  network  of  community  and  commercial  sector  supporters  and  par3cipants.    OSEA works to advocate and facilitate the transition toa sustainable energy economy in Ontario
  4. 4. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  1.  Re-instate the definition of community endorsed by the Community Powersector2.  Require all projects to have a minimum of 15% Community, Aboriginal and/or Educational/Health ownership3.  Create  a  Community  Power  Advisory  to  advise  the  CEPP,  DeloiQe  and  the  OPA  on  the  challenges  and  needs  of  the  sector.  4.  Allow  each  Aboriginal  Support  Resolu3on  granted  by  an  Aboriginal  community  to  achieve  the  required  criteria,  gran3ng  1/2  a  priority  point  up  to  a  total  of  2  points.  5.  Offer  system  benefits  priority  points  and  adder  to  all  renewables    6.  Con3nue  to  use  the  regional  alloca3on  model  for  ground-­‐mounted  solar  PV  on  Class  3  Soils    7.  Raise  the  target  for  renewables  and  indicate  capacity  targets  over  the  next  5-­‐10  years  7 things to make FIT 2.0 a success4  
  5. 5. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  1:    For  the  purpose  of  the  adder,  access  to  the  CEPP  and  the  set  aside  re-­‐instate  the  defini=on  of  community  to  include:  1.  One  or  more  individuals  Resident  in  Ontario;  2.  A  Registered  Charity  with  its  head  office  in  Ontario;  3.  A  Not-­‐For-­‐Profit  Organiza3on  with  its  head  office  in  Ontario;  or  4.  A  “co-­‐opera3ve  corpora3on”,  as  defined  in  the  Co-­‐opera3ve  Corpora3on  Act  (Ontario),  all  of  whose  members  are  Resident  in  Ontario.    The  Challenge  The  revised  defini3on  in  the  draa  FIT  2.0  rules:  -­‐  Constrains  community  innova3on  excluding  farmers,  chari3es,  community  corpora3ons,  LLPs,  Not-­‐For-­‐Profits  and  other  structures  (including  municipali3es  and  u3li3es)  -­‐    all  of  which  are  currently  being  used  by  community  groups  across  the  province  Benefit  -­‐  Significant  streamlining  for  the  OPA  -­‐  The  previous  defini3on  of  community  was  based  on  extensive  consulta3on  and  has  been  endorsed  by  OSEA,  the  Community  Power  Fund,  OFA  and  the  OPA  –  the  new  defini3on  has  not  -­‐  The  original  defini3on  spurs  innova3on,  broad  par3cipa3on  and  does  not  punish  those  groups  already  established  and  invested  in  a  community  based  model  Re-instate the definition of community endorsedby the Community Power sector5  
  6. 6. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  2:    Require  all  small  and  medium  sized  projects  to  have  a  minimum  of  15%  aboriginal  or  non-­‐aboriginal  community  par3cipa3on  involving    at  least  1  Property  Owner  from  within  the  upper-­‐=er  municipality  where  the  project  is  located.        The  challenge  -­‐  To  minimize  administra3ve  burden  and  unnecessary  costs  to  the  ratepayer  -­‐  To  build  long  term  community  acceptance  and  support  for  renewable  energy  projects  across  Ontario  -­‐  To  distribute  greater  benefit  to  local  aboriginal  and  non-­‐aboriginal  communi3es  -­‐  To  increase  par3cipa3on  and  build  capacity  in  communi3es  -­‐  To  spur  increased  renewable  energy  and  create  a  culture  of  conserva3on  -­‐  To  level  the  playing  field  and  create  a  stable  business  environment  for  developers  The  benefit  -­‐  Reduced  administra3on  burden  for  the  OPA  and  in  turn  lower  cost  to  the  rate  payer  -­‐  Increases  long  term  support  and  distribu3on  of  benefits  -­‐  Prevents  the  “purchase  of  priority”    -­‐  Increase  the  stability  of  the  project  development  and  investment  environment  Require all projects to have a minimum of 15% Community,Aboriginal and/or Educational/Health ownership6  
  7. 7. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  3:    Create  a  Community  Power  Advisory  to  advise  the  CEPP,  DeloiQe  and  the  OPA  on  the  challenges  and  needs  of  the  sector.    The  challenge  -­‐  The  CEPP  Administrator  is  not  an  associa3on  and  does  not  represent  a  stakeholder  group  or  ac3vely  engage  all  stakeholders  on  issues  of  program  development  and  policy  -­‐  Recommenda3ons  like  the  change  of  the  defini3on  of  Community  Power  to  only  include  co-­‐opera3ves  (one  form  of  Community  Power)  is  contrary  to  the  sector’s  broader  defini3on  and  vision  of  Community  Power  The  benefit  -­‐  The  government  and  its  agents  would  have  direct  formal  and  regular  access  to  construc3ve  feedback  from  those  on  the  ground  that  represent  and  support  local  residents  and  community  groups  including  the  Ontario  Sustainable  Energy  Associa3on,  the  Ontario  Federa3on  of  Agriculture,  the  Chris3an  Farmers  Associa3on,  the  Ontario  Co-­‐opera3ve  Associa3on,  the  Non-­‐profit  Network  and  Greening  Sacred  Spaces.  -­‐  Assurance  that  certain  models  and  proponents  are  not  being  favoured  by  the  CEPP  Administrator  Create a Community Power Advisory to advise theCEPP administrator, Deloitte and the OPA7  
  8. 8. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  4:    When  there  are  more  than  four  aboriginal  communi3es  listed  by  the  MOE  for  consulta3on,  allow  each  Aboriginal  Support  Resolu3on  granted  by  an  Aboriginal  community  to  achieve  the  required  criteria,  gran3ng  1/2  a  priority  point,  up  to  a  total  of  2  points.    For  projects  located  on  reserve  land  not  owned  by  the  aboriginal  community  a  resolu3on  passed  by  Chief  and  Council  will  result  in  2  points.    The  challenge  -­‐  In  some  instances  proponents  may  find  themselves    with  four  or  more  Aboriginal  Communi3es  on  the  MOE  roster.  Recognizing  that  the  support  resolu3on  is  the  beginning  of  a  consulta3ve  process,  proponents  should  not  be  penalized  for  failing  to  obtain  Support  Resolu3ons  in  the  short  3meline  proposed  while  incen3ng  the  beginning  of  the  consulta3ve  process  .    The  benefit  -­‐  This  approach  is  more  in  line  with  the  level  of  engagement  that  will  garner    2  points  for  Municipal  Support  Resolu3ons    -­‐  The  Support  Resolu3on  is  an  endorsement  in  principle  for  the  project  that  ini3ates  the  consulta3ve  process  Award priority points for each AboriginalSupport Resolution secured8  
  9. 9. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  5:    Offer  system  benefits  priority  points  and  adder  to  all  renewables  including  solar  and  wind  if  they  can  demonstrate  firm  supply  and  responsiveness  (10%  of  peak  supply).    The  challenge  -­‐  The  variability  of  wind  and  solar  -­‐  Voltage  quality  -­‐  Shortage  of  supply  in  load  centers  -­‐  A  lack  of  innova3on  and  support  for  the  transi3on  from  the  rigid  Baseload  paradigm  to  a  flexible  and  resilient  Auxillary  Load  paradigm  The  benefit  -­‐  Captures  surplus  supply  and  shias  it  to  when  and  where  it  is  needed  -­‐  Firms  up  renewable  supply  and  responsiveness  -­‐  Can  address  voltage  quality  issues  -­‐  Spurs  developer  investment  rather  than  ratepayer  investment,  while  avoiding  costly  transmission  and  system  upgrades  -­‐  Spurs  innova3ve  solu3ons  for  export  without  choosing  “winners”  Include system benefits priority and adder forwind and solar9  
  10. 10. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  6:    Con3nue  to  use  the  regional  alloca3on  model  for  ground-­‐mounted  solar  PV  on  Class  3  Soils  while  requiring  cer3fica3on  by  an  Agrologist  un3l  OMAFRA  has  updated  its  maps  with  more  accuracy.    The  challenge  -­‐  OMAFRA’s  maps  have  an  error  of  2-­‐3kms  and  are  out  of  date  -­‐  Farmers  are  interested  in  doing  larger  projects  then  10kw  -­‐  Municipal  leaders  are  frustrated  that  their  control  is  being  taken  away  The  benefit  -­‐  Developers  have  the  opportunity  to  demonstrate  that  their  site  is  usable  u3lizing  expert  cer3fica3on  -­‐  Controlled  release  of  some  sites  -­‐  Farmers  and  municipali3es  regain  control  and  opportunity  Return to the allocation approach to Class 3 Soils10  
  11. 11. 2013-­‐05-­‐07  Recommenda)on  7:    Raise  the  target  for  renewables  and  indicate  capacity  targets  over  the  next  5-­‐10  years    The  challenge  -­‐  There  is  only  ~1,000  MW  of  the  10,700  MW  of  capacity  lea  -­‐  To  build  a  strong  export  market  there  needs  to  be  a  healthy  domes3c  market  -­‐  To  spur  community  and  aboriginal  development  there  needs  to  be  real  support  and  accountability  to  measure  whether  the  targeted  progress  is  being  made  -­‐  The  remaining  capacity  is  not  enough  to  retain  the  current  manufacturers  and  aQract  new  investment  The  benefit  -­‐  Spread  development  while  building  up  necessary  supply  to  fill  the  gap  in  2015  while  controlling  surplus  supply  -­‐  Create  surety  in  the  market  for  community  and  commercial  developers  and  the  manufacturers  that  are  going  to  supply  them  -­‐  Minimum  targets  serve  as  success  indicators  and  allow  for  review  and  improvement  to  ensure  the  appropriate  support  is  being  provide  to  make  community,  aboriginal  and  commercial  projects  are  opera3onal  within  a  reasonable  3meframe    Raise the target now and indicate the yearlycapacity available11  
  12. 12. 2013-­‐05-­‐07   12  -­‐  A  combined  renewable  power  plant  -­‐  Biogas  storage  facili3es  -­‐  100%  distributed  sustainable  energy  communi3es  -­‐  Grid  operators  managing  deep  penetra3on  of  renewables  -­‐  Financial  experts  who  work  with  the  community  and  commercial  sector  -­‐  Community  wind,  solar  and  biogas  projects  -­‐  The  Community-­‐Ci=zen  Power  World  Wind  Energy  Conference    Join us in Germany to visit
  13. 13. The old paradigmImage by David Roberts, 2002 (Grist News) - http://tinyurl.com/cwn9w6o 14  
  14. 14. The new paradigmImage by David Roberts, 2002 (Grist News) - http://tinyurl.com/cwn9w6o
  15. 15. A change in scale and distributionImage by P Maegaard, 2010 – Nordik Folkecenter, Denmark
  16. 16. Image by P Maegaard, 2010 – Nordik Folkecenter, DenmarkAn integrated approach to energy

×