10. BILL 150 - GREEN ENERGY
AND GREEN ECONOMY ACT, 2009 Projet de loi 150 – Loi de 2009 sur l’énergie
verte et l’économie verte |
Committee recommendationS
That
Council:
1. Approve
the comments on Bill 150 - Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 as
outlined in Document 1 attached; and
2. Direct
that these comments be forwarded to the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure
and to the Standing Committee on Bill 150.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil :
1. approuve
les commentaires sur le projet de loi 150 – Loi de 2009 sur l’énergie verte
et l’économie verte comme il est expliqué dans le document 1 ci-joint;
2. demande
que ces commentaires soient transmis au ministère de l’Énergie et de
l’Infrastructure et au Comité permanent à propos du projet de loi 150.
Documentation
1.
Deputy
City Manager’s report, Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability
dated 2 April 2009 (ACS2009-ICS-CCS-0023).
2. Extract
of Draft Minute, 14 April 2009.
Planning
and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
2 April 2009 / le 2 avril 2009
Submitted
by/Soumis par : Nancy
Schepers, Deputy City Manager
Directrice municipale adjointe,
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability
Services d’infrastructure et
Viabilité des collectivités
Contact
Person/Personne-ressource : Carol Christensen, Manager/Gestionnaire,
Environmental Sustainability/Durabilité de l’environnement, Community and
Sustainability Services/Services de viabilité et des collectivités
(613)
580-2424 x21610, Carol.Christensen@ottawa.ca
SUBJECT:
|
|
|
|
OBJET :
|
Projet de loi 150 – Loi de 2009 sur l’énergie verte et l’économie verte |
That
Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council:
1. Approve the comments
on Bill 150 - Green Energy and Green
Economy Act, 2009 as outlined in Document 1 attached; and
2. Direct that these comments be forwarded to the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure and to the Standing Committee on Bill 150.
Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement recommande au Conseil
:
1. d'approuver les
commentaires sur le projet de loi 150 – Loi de 2009 sur l’énergie verte et
l’économie verte comme il est expliqué dans le document 1 ci-joint;
2. de demander que ces
commentaires soient transmis au ministère de l’Énergie et de l’Infrastructure
et au Comité permanent à propos du projet de loi 150.
Bill 150 - Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 (GEA) received first reading in the Ontario Legislature on Monday, February 23, 2009. This is an Omnibus Bill which affects a number of Acts including the Planning Act. The proposed GEA is enabling legislation designed to facilitate development and distribution of renewable energy, and assist in creating a culture of energy conservation. It carries forward a number of provisions in existing legislation, such as the Energy Conservation Leadership Act, 2006, and the Energy Efficiency Act, and introduces new measures related to the provision of green energy, a feed-in tariff system for green energy projects, and exemptions for green energy projects from Planning Act approvals. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario has produced a synopsis of the Act from a municipal perspective which is included as Document 2, and further details can be found at Ministry web site http://www.mei.gov.on.ca/english/energy/gea/.
Some major components from a municipal perspective are listed below:
These provisions require regulations to define the measures, and the regulations have not yet been developed.
The proposed GEA was posted in the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) registry with a 30-day comment period. To ensure that the comments/concerns expressed below were recorded prior to the expiry of the comment period on the registry, staff provided a staff comment that is attached as Document 1. Most recently, a standing committee has been struck on the Bill and this committee will be in Ottawa the week of April 13 and written comments can be submitted by April 22.
DISCUSSION
As an initial comment, many of the components of Bill 150 are very general and implications are difficult to assess in the absence of regulations and guidelines on matters such as renewable energy project approvals. In other cases, the proposed GEA enables the Province to take actions such as designating goods, services and technologies and enabling their use over and above any other restrictions that may otherwise restrict their application. It is therefore difficult to provide definitive comments on many provisions in the Bill in the absence of regulations.
The overall intent of the proposed GEA aligns well with stated
objectives to encourage energy conservation, promote renewable energy, and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions in approved Council documents such as the
Environmental Strategy and the Air Quality and Climate Change Management
Plan. Corporate efforts to manage
energy consumption, move towards green procurement, and set targets for GHG
reduction are all aligned with the requirements of the former Energy Conservation Leadership Act.
Efforts to raise the profile of energy conservation, focus on provisions in the Ontario Building Code, creation of a Renewable Energy Facilitation Office, and measures related to enabling smaller scale renewable installations through the feed-in tariffs, right to connect, and creation of a smart grid all tend to support municipal objectives in these areas. In the case of installation of small scale renewables as accessory uses, staff have suggested that the Province also needs to look at potential measures which could provide additional assistance with upfront costs, such as enabling use of local improvement charges on a property basis or use of Community Improvement Plans, and measures to remove potential unintended disincentives such as increased property assessment as a result of a small scale accessory installation.
Municipal concerns emerging with the Bill 150 - Green Energy and Green Energy Act, 2009, revolve primarily around the planning approvals component. As noted above, there is very little detail or guidance provided in the proposed GEA to explain how the approvals process would work and what kinds of guidelines would be in place to protect municipal interests. While staff agree that some clarity and consistency between municipalities is required to enable renewable energy development, it is also critical that the approvals process provide appropriate opportunities for municipal input and address municipal concerns. Material provided to date is simply not sufficient to judge this component of the Act. The following comment was provided in response to the EBR posting:
With respect to the approvals of renewable energy facilities, we support the need to provide an efficient and effective approvals process and we acknowledge the need for some clarity and consistency in approvals for renewable energy projects between municipalities. We do, however, have some difficulty in commenting on the proposed provisions in the absence of a clear approvals process and guidelines at the Provincial level. Two points should be made:
· Any approval process must ensure that there is municipal notification, input and consultation. Provisions will need to ensure that there is a mechanism in place to ensure protection of areas defined at the municipal level which would not be appropriate locations for most renewable energy systems such as components of the natural heritage system, cultural heritage landscapes, and hazard lands.
· There also needs to be a mechanism to ensure that municipal requirements related to such matters as access, servicing and site plan provisions are respected. In this respect, we question the removal of Site Plan control from renewable energy installations. In the absence of site plan control, what mechanism will be available through the approvals process to ensure that installations are built as approved, that appropriate landscaping and buffers are established, and that municipal requirements related to such matters as access, road improvements if necessary, etc. are met?
We assume that the EPA approvals process will be applied to larger, utility grade installations as opposed to accessory uses. In terms of smaller accessory installations, we note that provision is being made for the exemption of particular technologies through regulation from planning restrictions or other agreements such as restrictive covenants. This could be an effective tool in some cases, such as historical restrictions on heat pumps or geothermal systems, and has already been applied to eliminate restrictions on outdoor clotheslines. While we could support the creation of this ability, municipal input into enabling regulations will be important as some types of technologies may have implications on community character and design which should be identified and considered through the process and in consultation with municipalities.
The current Draft Official Plan Amendment resulting from the five-year review of the Official Plan, does contain policies related to Renewable Energy installations. These attempt to create a system of increasing zoning and site plan approval requirements as the size and potential impact of installations increases. These policies were developed based on provision in the Provincial Policy Statement which directs that renewable and alternative energy systems are to be permitted in most land use designations, as well as comments on early drafts from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs. These draft policies would not, however, conform to the provisions in the proposed GEA and as a result, there is some question as to how to proceed with this component of the Official Plan review. Currently, the approved comprehensive zoning bylaw permits utility installations in most land use designations while providing some provisions related to smaller accessory uses.
In conclusion, Bill 150 - Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, is an ambitious omnibus bill which includes a wide variety of measures, most of which involve enabling measures which would not come into effect until detailed regulations have been brought forward. The general intent of the proposed GEA and most provisions align well with municipal objectives. The primary concern from a municipal perspective relates to the approvals process for renewable energy installations and the lack of detail in terms of how the approval process would reflect municipal concerns.
There has been no consultation on this report although the proposed draft Official Plan Amendment, which does contain some policies related to renewable energy installations, is currently going through a public consultation process.
There are no legal/risk management impediments to implementing any of the recommendations in this report.
There are no direct financial implications in the report recommendation.
Document 1 Staff comment as submitted to the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry
Document 2 AMO synopsis of Bill 150 - Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009
If approved, Community Sustainability staff will provide the staff comments previously registered on the Environmental Registry to both the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure and the Standing Committee on Bill 150 as formal comments from the City of Ottawa.
STAFF COMMENT AS
SUBMITTED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
BILL OF RIGHTS REGISTRY DOCUMENT 1
As an initial comment, the 30-day response period for the EBR posting is not adequate to meet timelines required for report presentation and consideration by Committee and Council. As a result, the following comments should be viewed as an interim response for your consideration and more formal comments may be forthcoming from the City.
This initial response presents several comments from the perspective of staff of the Environmental Sustainability Division in consultation with other relevant staff.
Staff is supportive of the overall objective and direction of the proposed GEA. Steps to provide for more renewable energy capacity and increased conservation align with objectives expressed through such Council approved documents as the City of Ottawa Environmental Strategy and the Air Quality and Climate Change Master Plan. Provisions designed to improve energy conservation in the Building Code and make it a core objective, provide for a renewable energy facilitation office create a smart grid and improve access for, and creation of renewable energy projects.
We support the efforts to provide additional tools for small scale and rooftop renewable installations through the feed-in tariff provisions. We would offer the following additional comments for consideration on this component of the Act:
With respect to City facilities, most of the relevant provisions in the Act - such as the preparation of Energy Conservation Plans and establishment of targets - are carried forward from previous legislation and are currently awaiting regulations to guide implementation. The City is prepared to continue its efforts at energy conservation through the provisions in the Act and our ongoing efforts to improve efficiency and reduce GHG emissions from corporate sources.
With respect to the approvals of renewable energy facilities, we support the need to provide an efficient and effective approvals process and we acknowledge the need for some clarity and consistency in approvals for renewable energy projects between municipalities. We do, however, have some difficulty in commenting on the proposed provisions in the absence of a clear approvals process and guidelines at the Provincial level. Two points should be made:
We assume that the EPA approvals process will be applied to larger, utility grade installations as opposed to accessory uses. In terms of smaller accessory installations, we note that provision is being made for the exemption of particular technologies through regulation from planning restrictions or other agreements such as restrictive covenants. This could be an effective tool in some cases, such as historical restrictions on heat pumps or geothermal systems, and has already been applied to eliminate restrictions on outdoor clotheslines. While we could support the creation of this ability, municipal input into enabling regulations will be important as some types of technologies may have implications on community character and design which should be identified and considered through the process and in consultation with municipalities.
Staff supports consumer education and the concept of providing energy information as a component of property transactions. We do however suggest that the implementation plan for this component must consider the capacity to deliver home energy audits and to provide a mechanism to ensure quality control in the energy rating process.
AMO SYNOPSIS OF THE GREEN ENERGY AND GREEN
ECONOMY ACT, 2009 DOCUMENT 2
BILL
150 - GREEN ENERGY AND GREEN ECONOMY ACT, 2009
PROJET DE LOI 150 - LOI DE 2009
SUR L’ÉNERGIE VERTE ET L’ÉCONOMIE VERTE
ACS2009-ICS-CSS-0023 City Wide/à l'échelle de la Ville
Correspondence
was received from Gary Chandler, North Gower Wind Action Group, and held on
file with the City Clerk.
Councillor
Doucet put forward the following motion:
WHEREAS the staff report on Bill 150 does not identify the following two
issues:
·
It needs to ensure a level playing
field for renewable energy sources by banning the costly practice of allowing
nuclear power companies to pass their capital cost overruns on to the
electricity consumers and taxpayers.
Renewable power suppliers cannot pass on their capital cost
overruns. The GEA must end nuclear energy’s
special deal.
·
It should encourage the more
efficient and sensible use of natural gas by creating a feed-in tariff
(guaranteed price and terms) for combined heat and power projects. The more efficient use of out limited
natural gas resources will help Ontario make the transition to a 100 per cent
renewable electricity grid.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT these items be included in the report.
Chair Hume noted that the ability to
access the grid will be as of right and the costs will be shared across the
rate base. He pointed out that
renewable power suppliers would be fully equal from a rate-based perspective as
nuclear power. David Miller, Planner 3,
concurred with those statements.
With regard to the feed-in tariff,
Chair Hume explained that it is adjusted to ensure that renewable energy
sources are economic with a higher return per kilowatt/hour.
Mr. Miller indicated that the
feed-in tariffs, which form part of the Schedule released after the bill,
provide for a range of prices that is designed to encourage renewable sources
of energy. He stated that the motion
deals with the role of nuclear energy in the power mix in Ontario and the
upfront capital financing and cost overruns.
Chair Hume explained that a private
sector proponent would enter into a power-purchase agreement with Ontario Power
Authority and would receive 4.6 cents per kilowatt/hour. A preferential return is provided for
renewable sources. For instance, 80
cents per kilowatt/hour is provided for rooftop solar. He requested staff also clarify how cost
overruns would be handled when comparing nuclear and renewable energy sources.
Mr. Miller believed that the tariff
schedule did not include co-generation, but undertook to confirm.
Following discussion, staff agreed
to review the motion to determine if modifications to the submission are
required.
Councillor Hunter touched on the
concerns previously raised by residents on the location of cellular towers
without municipal approval by way of a site plan. He indicated he was surprised by the relatively mild response to
the fact that renewable energy plants would be exempt from municipal planning
approvals. He requested stronger
language reflecting a firmer position that would allow site plan approval.
Mr. Miller responded that the
comment reflects the fact that it is difficult to respond given that the
provincial approval process was not identified. He noted the comments address the need for notification, input
and consultation in order for the City to protect particular municipal
interests within the process. He added
that the province should not do site plan approvals as it would effectively
remove any municipal control.
Councillor Hunter related that
emails were received from the North Gower Wind Action Group.
Chair Hume pointed out that the
Association of Municipalities of Ontario holds a similar position. Municipalities would not have the ability to
deny but could deal with site provisions, as the municipalities will be forced
to regulate the after-effects.
Accordingly, staff undertook to
strengthen the language to be consistent with this position.
Touching on Councillor Doucet’s
earlier motion, Councillor Hunter added that no matter what it costs to install
a wind turbine, even if it is not economically feasible in a particular
location, the cost would be passed onto the consumer at higher rates. He stated that it is incumbent on the
proponent to come in with a cost-effective measure.
Chair Hume responded that the
cost-effectiveness is governed by the fact that energy can only be sold to the
authority, which will only buy it for a specific price. He commented that there are no more
sweetheart deals, because of the tariff agreements.
That Planning and Environment
Committee recommend that Council:
1. Approve the comments on Bill 150 - Green
Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 as outlined in Document 1 attached; and
2. Direct that these comments be forwarded
to the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure and to the Standing Committee on
Bill 150.
CARRIED
DIRECTIONS TO STAFF:
Prior to consideration of this
matter by Council on 22 April 2009, staff will:
1. Review the submission by Councillor
Doucet regarding capital cost overruns and renewable energy sources, as well as
a feed-in tariff for combined heat and power projects.
2. Strengthen language in Document 1 with
regard to the municipal role in regulating site issues through Site Plan
Control or other mechanisms.
The Committee Chair will forward to
staff the Association of Municipalities of Ontario’s position on Bill 150 to
assist with Direction 2.