Ontario Power Generation report: waste and loss, more cost to consumers

Spilling, constraining, steaming off–Ontario’s surplus power situation is costing millions

August 14, 2016

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) just released their second quarter results and if you read the news release quickly you might think everything is wonderful — but it’s not.

OMA (operations, maintenance and administration) costs were up $59 million (9.1%) for the quarter compared to 2015, net income was down to $132 million from $189 million in the comparable quarter, and OPG are now the proud owners of Hydro One shares as this excerpt from the quarterly report indicates.

“In April 2016, OPG acquired nine million common shares of Hydro One at $23.65 per share as part of a secondary share offering by the Province through a syndicate of underwriters. The acquisition was made for investment purposes to mitigate the risk of future price volatility related to OPG’s future share delivery obligations to eligible employees under the collective agreements with the PWU and The Society renewed in 2015.”

The Hydro One share acquisition was of course one of the “net-zero” wage settlements touted by the Ontario Liberal government, and this one made specifically by former Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli when the announcement of a settlement with the employees at OPG was made.

Paid to waste power–and you pay them to do it

OPG also disclosed in the news release that they were again forced to spill hydro power which is normally sold into the grid for about 4.4 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh). The amount they spilled in the quarter was 1.7 terawatts (TWh) and 3.4 TWh for the first six months, compared to 1.5 TWh in the comparable 2015 six month period.  If that information makes you feel bad for OPG, don’t — they are paid the same for spilling hydro as for delivering it to the grid.  A change in regulations by the government created the “pay for spilling” situation.  The 3.4 TWh spilled could have supplied about 750,000 “average” households meaning, we wouldn’t have needed other much more expensive power such as intermittent and unreliable wind and solar.

The cost to ratepayers for the spillage of the hydro is about $150 million and will wind up in our electricity bills under the Global Adjustment charge.

While OPG were busy spilling hydro, we were also curtailing wind in the first six months of this year; my friend Scott Luft (http://coldair.luftonline.net/) keeps a record of those curtailments. Curtailments for the first six months on his chart were estimated at 1.245 TWh, and have already surpassed IESO reported curtailments for the whole of 2015 of .733 TWh.   The latter cost ratepayers about $88 million at the reputed $120 per megawatt (MWh) wind generators are paid for curtailment.   Curtailment costs for 2016 so far are about $150 million.

There were other wastes of generation and ratepayers money in the first six months of 2016 too as Bruce Power was frequently asked to “steam off” nuclear generation at two of their units, but no disclosure is yet available to tell us how much. In 2015 it amounted to .897 TWh which cost ratepayers about $60 million; it is probably more in 2016 as demand is down.

So ratepayers for just the first six months of 2016 will pick up the costs for OPG buying Hydro One shares, spilling hydro, curtailing wind, and steaming off nuclear without one kWh delivered to the “average” household despite the ratepayers responsibility for costs of about $600 million.   We also picked up costs to promote conservation which was probably north of $200 million for the six months.

Ontario’s electricity customers should be “steamed” about the increasing waste we continue to pay for.

© Parker Gallant

 

Advertisements

26 thoughts on “Ontario Power Generation report: waste and loss, more cost to consumers”

  1. Parker, thank you for the whole post, including the reference.
    I used the link to OPG’s report and note, from fist look, at just the “financial and operational highlights”, the entire drop in income could be attributed to increased “Depreciation and amortization .”
    That increase is in the nuclear generation segment.
    It seems to me this paragraph says rates are up because OPG is paying paid more for nuclear output as the OEB has blessed the recovery of expenses built up in accounts the OEB hadn’t allowed recovery of previously – but amortization expenses of those accounts wiped out the benefits of the increased revenue.
    “segment revenues increased… due to a higher rate rider authorized by the OEB…As these rate riders allow for the recovery of approved balances in OEB-authorized regulatory variance and deferral accounts, the resulting increase in revenue in 2016 was largely offset by higher amortization expense related to the regulatory balances.”

    Like

    1. Scott, I did notice depreciation was up quite a bit and suspected it was nuclear related but an increase of $59 million in OMA costs translates to $240 million annually and will be hard to reduce particularly due to the “net-zer0” settlement on labour costs so it will be further driving up rates as OPG continues to produce less,

      I liked your post: http://coldairings.luftonline.net/post/148943155456/ontario-curtails-enough-electricity-to-power-11
      which included the Bruce steam off and people should be shocked that all the wasted generation could have supplied 1.1 million “AVERAGE” residential households. As you point out we are basically wasting power for 25% of all Ontario residential ratepayers. Incredible.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. As I understand it, we pay, via the global adjustment shell game, full fare for wind and solar curtailment. Now you point out that we also pay full fare for hydro curtailment as well. Perhaps I missed it but what do we pay for steaming off nuclear, is that full fare as well?

        In any case, what’s the solution? Can we tell wind and solar providers to take a hike? I doubt that since I understand they have been signed up with long-term contracts. Surely any planned wind and solar projects should be stopped immediately. Other than that, are Ontario ratepayers forced to take it up the rectum? If so, when will current wind and solar contracts run their course? Any chance of buying them out?

        Like

  2. Thanks again Mr. Gallant for all the information the Province is trying to hide from us. I am “steamed” and I feel worse and worse as time goes on and see the horrible job the Liberals are doing in Ontario. What can we do besides wait and hope for the next elections????? We need an uprising, like in many Arab countries.

    Like

    1. Andre: No we do not need an uprising like in many Arab countries. That’s because uprisings like those in Arab countries and elsewhere are contrived by non-governmental organizations created and funded by globalists with motives other than looking out for the people of those nations. I suggest that you take a look at the recent ‘leaks’ from the George Soros files. Try dcleaks.com

      It is globalist lies about catastrophic anthropogenic global warming and United Nations directives such as Agenda 21 that got us into this de-industrializing of the west through, among other things, the destruction of an efficient energy system. The non-governmental organizations that pushed at the local level for such change did not rise spontaneously from the local population. They were and are created and funded by multinational foundations whose money-bags are determined to create a one world government run by transnational monopoly corporations. Local environmental initiatives are not local, are not environmental and are produced by global NGOs.

      I totally agree that the Liberals are doing a horrible job in Ontario. Many who voted Liberal by now must be disenchanted. We need to become less politically partisan and to unify if we are ever to overcome the control that international forces exert on most aspects of our lives and to regain sovereignty. The last thing we need is an uprising initiated and controlled by outsiders – an uprising, as you put it, “like in many Arab countries”.

      Like

  3. Ikemeister. We are stuck with 20 year wind and solar contract and I suspect they would be tough and very expensive to cancel. We could cancel those ones who have failed to be commissioned on time or those who have not even started construction as well as those who have not honoured contractual terms as well as the ones the outgoing Energy Minister ordered. WCO and many other groups and individual have made those suggestions but they have fallen on deaf ears.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Sooooooo.. where in hell does all this SHIT leave ME?????
    I am uable to understand any of it.
    Where do we stand as consumers? WHO may we turn to in order to get SOME clarification and or assistance in curtailing some of this shit?
    There MUST be SOME ONE who is responsible?
    Where is John YAKABUSKI – OUR prov. rep. How much longer can this go on?
    I really am anle to understand that we, in Ontario, pay, pay, pay the HIGHEST electricity bills of ANY Province. WHY???
    Surely there is a solution. We holler – we cry – we frustrate yet NOTHING IS DONE for us.
    WHO IS RESPONSIBLE TO CLEAN UP THIS FXXKING MESS??

    Lemme know please !!

    Like

  5. Simpleton’s view here:
    Ontario needs to rid its system or American Management Technologies post haste, and rapidly employ Quebec expertise and German efficiencies. The “sickness” is systemic. The system however, is one of the best on earth. Electricity is a highly valued commodity. We must cleanse the systemic fuck-uppery and come out selling electricity for a profit. Rid the system of “liberal Feeding Troughs” first. Attack the “Red Tape Artists’ next. huge weighted retirement bullshit is next: Stop its growth than tackle the current payouts. (Lofty liberals Included).

    Like

  6. Parker love your spin on OPG results. As usual a real stretch.

    “OMA (operations, maintenance and administration) costs were up $59 million (9.1%) for the quarter compared to 2015, net income was down to $132 million from $189 million in the comparable quarter…”

    Are you saying there is something wrong with these numbers? The higher OMA costs and lower income was the result of higher costs related to: “lower nuclear generation and higher nuclear outage OM&A expenses stemming from the timing of planned outage activities at the Darlington GS during the year.” That is completely warranted and normal. They are refurbishing the Darlington nuclear plant, so you would have to expect this. Overall, the financial numbers are good.

    “OPG are now the proud owners of Hydro One shares…”

    Is buying Hydro One shares suppose to be a bad thing? They bought those shares to give to the Union as the part of the recent collective bargaining agreement involving the Union contributing more to its pension in exchange for shares in Ontario Hydro. Seems completely fair to me. It was a good effective way to reduce the pension liability.

    “…forced to spill hydro power…”

    Again, is that suppose to be a bad thing. At times all electric utilities generate more electricity than they can use. It is extremely hard to predict electricity demand, as it is largely dependent on the weather. So when they over produce, given low demand or sometimes too much supply from greater water flow from hydroelectric generation, they sometimes have to “spill” electricity or even sell it to other Provinces and States and when they under produce,
    given high demand, they sometimes have to buy electricity from other utilities. This is completely normal and common in the North American electricity utility industry. For about the last ten years Ontario Hydro’s net revenue from electricity exports because of over production has actually been well over $2 billion, which is money coming into Ontario Hydro and has helped to reduce electricity costs to consumers.

    From the financial report you quote:

    “Baseload generation supply surplus to Ontario demand was higher in the second quarter of 2016 compared to the same quarter in 2015 primarily due to higher water flows in the province and limitations on the export of surplus power out of the province primarily due to transmission constraints in the state of New York.”

    That says that they were generating more power than usual because of strong water flows to their hydro electric generating stations and they had problems selling the excess to New York, as they normally would, because of transmission problems in New York. That was the reason for the “spill” and is not out of the ordinary and is a normal part of operation. The next quarter the opposite could easily occur and they will be generating revenue from the excess generating capacity that they sell instead of “spilling”. As I mention above, on average they generate additional revenue from over-generating electricity above the provinces demand requirements. That is a good thing.

    Your comment:

    “Bruce Power was frequently asked to “steam off” nuclear generation at two of their units…”

    Again, is that suppose to be a bad thing? Happens all the time. Entirely depends on demand. Given they were over-generating in hydro electric, no a surprise the reduce supply with their nuclear facilities.

    What I see in the numbers is a pretty financially and operationally healthy and completely normal electricity utility company. A utility that has done a good job at transition away from fossil fuels and toward reducing its carbon footprint. I wish all utilities in North America operated as well and as responsibly as OPG.

    Now fire away!

    Like

    1. why do restaurants care about food waste?
      why isn’t shinkage of 10% celebrated by retailers?
      why don’t manufacturers throw out 1 of every 11 items they make?

      I suspect the answer is efficiency, and for many people, the related concept of competitiveness.

      That’s what I thought I was writing on with Parker back in 2013 – when we wrote an article that seemed to provoke a ministerial directive to pay all OPG’s hydroelectric facilities a regulated rate and seemingly an agreement to pay for curtailed power: http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/turning-water-into-debt

      I didn’t intend on facilitating inefficient county clubbing at the public generator.

      Like

      1. Sorry, but running a restaurant is not the equivalent of running an public utility. Investment and development decisions have to be made often a decade ahead of time for utilities.

        There is absolutely nothing wrong with electricity generators having excess capacity to cover the electricity market when you need it. It is normal. Look at Hydro One’s utiltization numbers and they are about where they should be every month for a electric utility. In the 1990s Ontario Hydro had too little capacity due to years of under investment. It was a period of constant summertime brown-outs. We do not need to go back to those years. You guys would be complaining about the brown-outs.

        A restaurant or a manufacturer has much more room for error, as if they run out of product no big deal, but a public electricity utility cannot run out of electricity, so they need a much larger room for error. Ontario Hydro has a very good release valve when it generates excess capacity, as it is able to sell the electricity in to the U.S. market. Ontario ratepayers benefit from that.

        “I suspect the answer is efficiency, and for many people, the related concept of competitiveness.”

        Great, you guys purport to be experts and smart on the electricity utility industry. Why don’t you provide some evidence that Ontario Hydro is not an efficient electric utility? Why don’t you show us with some of your crack financial and electricity industry analysis how inefficient Ontario Hydro is versus other North American or even global utilities? You want to make all these fancy claims then prove them. I suspect that is above your pay grade. As the title of the website says, how about you provide us an energy perspective on how Ontario Hydro stacks up versus other North American utilities in terms of operational efficiency, financial condition, technological prowness, etc.

        I could shoot your 2013 National Post article full of holes. At lot of misinformation, cherry-picking and pure speculation there. Par for the course for you guys. A couple of examples:

        “The company’s hydro, fossil fuel and nuclear generating stations worth billions of dollars to taxpayers are now being eviscerated by policies that are stripping the company of its revenues and income-generating potential.”

        Boy, you guys were just plain wrong in that article. You guys should write an update and get it published in the NP. You can talk abou how OPG’s revenues have increased from $4,8 bn in 2013 to $5.5 bn in 2015 or a 15% increase in those two years and continue to increase in 2016. You can talk about how net income was $133 mm in 2013, $811 mm in 2014 and $417 mm in 2015. So far in the first six months of 2016 it is $263 mm. What happened I thought you guys said the company was in perpetual decline back in 2013?

        You can talk about credit ratings, as you did in your NP article. Quoting your 2013 NP article:

        “The S&P scrutiny of OPG’s credit rating indicates this shell game is finally being seen for what it is.”

        What “shell game”, as DBRS has had a very stable A (low) credit rating on OPG for more than 10 years. No change. S&P lowered their rating one notch to BBB+. No big deal. Hardly a sign of its revenues, income or asset value being “eviscerated”. By the way Hydro One has a very stable across the board “A” credit rating.

        OPG and Hydro One’s credit ratings are amongst the highest if not the highest amongst North American electricity utilities:

        Berkshire Energy Holdings Company A
        Eversource Energy A
        Alliant Energy Corporation A-
        CenterPoint Energy, Inc. A-
        Consolidated Edison, Inc. A-
        Duke Energy Corporation A-
        NextEra Energy, Inc. A-
        OGE Energy Corp. A-
        Pinnacle West Capital Corporation A-
        PPL Corporation A-
        Southern Company A-
        Vectren Corporation A-
        Wisconsin Energy Corporation A-
        Xcel Energy Inc. A-
        ALLETE, Inc. BBB+
        Ameren Corporation BBB+
        Cleco Corporation BBB+
        CMS Energy Corporation BBB+
        Dominion Resources, Inc. BBB+
        DTE Energy Company BBB+
        Edison International BBB+
        Great Plains Energy Inc. BBB+
        MDU Resources Group, Inc. BBB+
        NiSource Inc. BBB+
        PNM Resources, Inc. BBB+
        Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated BBB+
        SCANA Corporation BBB+
        Sempra Energy BBB+
        TECO Energy, Inc. BBB+
        Unitil Corporation BBB+
        Westar Energy, Inc. BBB+
        American Electric Power Company, Inc. BBB
        AVANGRID, Inc. BBB
        Avista Corporation BBB
        Black Hills Corporation BBB
        El Paso Electric Company BBB
        Empire District Electric Company BBB
        Entergy Corporation BBB
        Exelon Corporation BBB
        IDACORP, Inc. BBB
        NorthWestern Corporation BBB
        Otter Tail Corporation BBB
        PG&E Corporation BBB
        Portland General Electric Company BBB
        FirstEnergy Corp. BBB-
        Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. BBB-
        Puget Energy, Inc. BBB-
        IPALCO Enterprises, Inc. BB+
        DPL Inc. BB

        You guys are all about your politics and nothing more. You could care less about the truth. You just use the well worn political tactics of exaggeration, cherry-picking and just plain misinforming to make constant attacks on OPG and Ontario Hydro in a hope to get your political party elected. If you are not all about politics, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

        Like

      2. “Look at Hydro One’s utiltization numbers”
        -we were talk’n OPG

        “In the 1990s Ontario Hydro had too little capacity due to years of under investment. It was a period of constant summertime brown-outs. We do not need to go back to those years.”
        -in the 1990’s Ontario idled 8 nuclear reactors – it wasn’t because supply was tight

        ” Ontario Hydro has a very good release valve when it generates excess capacity, as it is able to sell the electricity in to the U.S. market. ”
        -sure they could – if the existed. OPG has the generators now and maybe they could export everything they curtail profitably, and just curtail over 10% of generation for shits and giggles instead, but honestly, that strikes me as unlikely.

        “Why don’t you provide some evidence that Ontario Hydro is not an efficient electric utility?”
        -Hydro One is a non-existent utility

        “…provide us an energy perspective on how Ontario Hydro stacks up versus other North American utilities …”
        -for one, Ontario Hydro doesn’t exist

        “you can talk about how OPG’s revenues have increased from $4,8 bn in 2013 to $5.5 bn in 2015 …You can talk about how net income was $133 mm in 2013, $811 mm in 2014 and $417 mm in 2015”

        -at the business segment level we can talk of the income that’s left after the expenses but before interest, income taxes and extraordinary items, because that’s what is reported at the business segment level. In 2015 these revenues were $138 million higher than in 2012 – removing the volatile Nuclear Waste Management segment revenues were $256 million higher.
        The regulated hydro segment income was up $326 million over regulated+unregulated in 2012.
        So all of the improvement was in the segment we wrote on – and the riches from the Lower Mattagami contract (can’t comment on that one – never seen it).

        Here’s a chart: https://goo.gl/PqnP9e

        Given the turn-around in the hydro segment, maintaining the credit rating seems another feather in our cap.

        Like

    2. Phillip, If we didn’t have wind turbines and solar panels, we wouldn’t be spilling water, and we might actually be exporting power profitably. Not once did you mention wind turbines. Are you in some way associated with the wind turbine industry or its promoters?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. wind turbines have had absolutely no impact to Hydro One’s or OPG’s numbers. electricity generated from wind turbines is such a minute part of their numbers it is hardly worth mentioning. wind power also have absolutely nothing to do with excess power generation or the spilling of electricity. wouldn’t matter if it did, as the utility should increasing chose alternative energy sources, as it is good for the environment. Not sure why it matters what I do, but I have no association with the industry. all this misinformation being spread by these guys is just disturbing… the public deserves better.

        Like

  7. Cold Air,

    ” “Look at Hydro One’s utiltization numbers”
    -we were talk’n OPG”

    > then look at OPG’s utilization numbers, which are almost entirely made up of Hydro One’s numbers. They are all right there in their numbers to look at.

    ” “In the 1990s Ontario Hydro had too little capacity due to years of under investment. It was a period of constant summertime brown-outs. We do not need to go back to those years.”
    -in the 1990’s Ontario idled 8 nuclear reactors – it wasn’t because supply was tight”

    > you need to go back and look at the 1990s. Ontario suffered from tight electricity markets because almost no major new generating capacity had been built in the 1990s, a period during which power demand increased, straining the system.

    ” ” Ontario Hydro has a very good release valve when it generates excess capacity, as it is able to sell the electricity in to the U.S. market. ”
    -sure they could – if the existed. OPG has the generators now and maybe they could export everything they curtail profitably, and just curtail over 10% of generation for shits and giggles instead, but honestly, that strikes me as unlikely. ”

    > you really have no good feel about how the economics work in a high fixed cost industry. they sell electricity to the U.S. all the time and the marginal gain in revenue from doing this goes straight to the bottom line. you have made no case that they have too much capacity. their utilization rates do not suggest that they have excess capacity.

    ” “Why don’t you provide some evidence that Ontario Hydro is not an efficient electric utility?”
    -Hydro One is a non-existent utility”

    > well then do it for OPG. how good a utility is it? provide some context. how does it rate versus all the other major electric utilities in North America? you guys are good at keeping your readers in the dark by providing no context to anything you say. a classic “spin” strategy.

    “…provide us an energy perspective on how Ontario Hydro stacks up versus other North American utilities …”
    -for one, Ontario Hydro doesn’t exist

    > well then do it for OPG. how good a utility is it? provide some context. how does it rate versus all the other major electric utilities in North America? you guys are good at keeping your readers in the dark by providing no context to anything you say. a classic “spin” strategy.

    ” “you can talk about how OPG’s revenues have increased from $4,8 bn in 2013 to $5.5 bn in 2015 …You can talk about how net income was $133 mm in 2013, $811 mm in 2014 and $417 mm in 2015”

    -at the business segment level we can talk of the income that’s left after the expenses but before interest, income taxes and extraordinary items, because that’s what is reported at the business segment level. In 2015 these revenues were $138 million higher than in 2012 – removing the volatile Nuclear Waste Management segment revenues were $256 million higher.
    The regulated hydro segment income was up $326 million over regulated+unregulated in 2012.
    So all of the improvement was in the segment we wrote on – and the riches from the Lower Mattagami contract (can’t comment on that one – never seen it).

    Here’s a chart: https://goo.gl/PqnP9e

    Given the turn-around in the hydro segment, maintaining the credit rating seems another feather in our cap. ”

    > in your NP 2013 article you talked about general revenue and income. your big statement was: “Once a $6-billion-a-year company, OPG is now down to $4.7-billion.” There is nor denying that the company’s financial results have improved since 2013. The company was not is some kind of dramatic fall, as you guys attempted to portray in your terrible NP article. The credit ratings are also largely the same and remain very good relative to other North American utilities.

    The problem you have and others like you is that when you put political spin ahead of the numbers and the actual facts you fall down. Both of you guys come up with your purely political conclusion that OPG and Hydro One are a failure, completely falling apart and are failing ratepayers and taxpayers and then you try and mold your very selective “facts” or interpretations to fit your pre-determined conclusion. Classic political strategy and spin.

    The reality is that both OPG and Hydro One are very good and well run electric utilities. They are tops in North America and even on a global basis. Yes, mistakes are made, but on average they have done the right things to improve the electricity market in Ontario and to move to become more environmentally responsible utilities. All your spin will not change that. However, I do realize that your political social media strategy does get some traction with some voters, but it has largely failed. You guys tried very hard to make electricity prices, OPG, Hydro One and wind turbines a voter issue in the last election (that was the whole point of your NP stories), but voters gave the current government a majority.

    Like

    1. It was the voters from the beaches and the GTA that gave the OLP a majority. Their voter base looks pretty thin in the rest of the province with the exception of Ottawa. Glad to see you have discovered that Ontario Hydro is no more. I think you miss the point about high electricity rates and what they do to diminishing investment into the province. Why would any company invest in Ontario if electricity is a major operational cost. The lack of investment and job creation (not the minimum wage jobs) has made Ontario a “have not” province (or haven’t you noticed?). If you bothered to take the time to really understand the electricity sector in Ontario you would see how poorly it has operated and how it is political interference that has done that. Just in the time Bob Chiarelli was running the Ministry he issued almost a hundred “directives” to the OPA, IESO, OPG, Hydro One and the OEB. Did he, a non-practicing lawyer really understand the implications of those directives? I will leave that for you to muddle over but I would remind you that Ontario electricity rates are now the highest in Canada and the US (with the exception of a couple of Hawaiian cities).

      Liked by 3 people

      1. “It was the voters from the beaches and the GTA that gave the OLP a majority.”

        you cannot even get the election results right. The Liberals dominated the entire Golden Horseshoe and also pretty much took every single urban riding in the rest of the province. The only place they did not do well is in rural Ontario, which accounts for very little of the population.

        “Glad to see you have discovered that Ontario Hydro is no more.”

        Not sure where you are reading that?

        “Why would any company invest in Ontario if electricity is a major operational cost.”

        You guys keep harping on electricity prices in Ontario. They are about average in North America. You guys have never proven that Ontario has relatively high electricity prices versus everywhere else in North America. In addition, most of the meaningful job creation in Ontario and the modern economy is not in industries where electricity is a meaningful part of the cost structure. There is also zero proof that Ontario has lost any jobs because of electricity prices. Please provide some if you have some.

        “The lack of investment and job creation (not the minimum wage jobs) has made Ontario a “have not” province (or haven’t you noticed?).”

        You really think Ontario is a “have not” province? You live in an alternative echo chamber Internet reality. In recent years Ontario has attracted more foreign direct investment than any other jurisdiction in North America. Ontario has also had some of the strongest job growth in Canada and currently has some of the highest GDP growth in North America. Budget expectations are that Ontario is about to turn into a “have” province, contributing more to the federal government than it takes out (whereas Alberta is about to become a “have not” province).

        “If you bothered to take the time to really understand the electricity sector in Ontario you would see how poorly it has operated and how it is political interference that has done that.”

        I have a pretty good understanding of the Ontario electricity market and how it compares to global electricity markets that is not tainted by politics. Despite all your attempts at misinformation and political spin, the electricity market in Ontario is pretty well run. The electric utilities and regulators in this province do a pretty good job. Electricity prices in this province are very competitive globally and retail customers are well served.

        “…I would remind you that Ontario electricity rates are now the highest in Canada and the US (with the exception of a couple of Hawaiian cities).”

        They absolutely are not. I read your ridiculous pricing analysis. You completely cherry-picked only low density and medium density customers which have delivery charges; i.e. you picked the highest priced electricity in Ontario and then you compared it to average price for electricity in other States and Provinces. You completely left out the high density or lower priced electricity in Ontario. You did completely fraudulent analysis that is entirely apples and oranges to make the false claims that only Hawaii is more expensive. Your numbers and analysis are just political spin and have no basis in reality. You can look at the Hydro Quebec numbers that they update every single year and you can see electricity prices in Toronto and Ottawa, which are a good representation of most of the customers in Ontario, and see that electricity prices in Ontario are about average in North America. If you want to only look at low and medium density customer (or rural customers) then you have to also compare them to other low and medium customers (or rural customers) who also pay distribution charges in other Provinces and States to make the accurate comparisons. Otherwise you are just “cherry picking” to provide false information for political purposes, which has nothing to do with reality.

        see: https://issuu.com/hydroquebec/docs/comp_2015_en

        Like

  8. Phillip, This is from OPG’s Q1 report on page 11 of 51. Perhaps you would like to comment on this and tell us what it means. “Reducing hydroelectric production, which often results in spilling of water, is the first measure that the IESO uses to manage SBG conditions.”

    Like

      1. Phillip, Let me translate it for you. Water is spilled at the hydro dams to make way for wind power. Of course in this hot weather, they have been using every available generator.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Phillip, You must have loved the bad news about the number of people in arrears at year-end 2015. Hydro One has 25% of all Ontario residential ratepayers as customers but had 40% (225,952) of all of those in arrears (566,902) as reported by the OEB. Wonder if it might just have something to do with their delivery costs? Na, couldn’t be according to your analysis-they are just average and those must be the few households that are low and medium density clients eh? The 225,952 ratepayer Hydro One has in arrears represents 19.7% of their 1,141,369 residential ratepayers. I presume you would argue that they are one of the better managed distribution companies judging from your rambles.

        Liked by 2 people

  9. OPG’s reported profits need to be put in context. Although it has added little capacity and is in a slowly declining demand environment, OPG hasn’t paid a dividend in many years, and relies on OEFC to finance its operations. The OEB dutifully grants its outrageous rate increases regularly, yet OPG risks more taxpayer investment and never returns a nickel to the province. The balance sheet is almost impenetrable, but any honest look reveals a financial basket case. This was made clear when Ed Clark’s thorough review of OPG’s assets revealed no net value in any piece of OPG. A pliable OEB notwithstanding, OPG is worth less than its book value and writedowns (remember 1999 ?) are in the pipeline.

    Like

    1. This will sound like disagreement, but it’s not intended to be.

      With Hydro One (just for comparison), Ontario valued the asset, in financial statements, at $3.759 billion when it was born out of Ontario Hydro. In 2014-2015 it valued it at $8.072 billion. It’s being sold at a higher value than that, but this is roughly why the province said they’d make $5 billion on the sale (although the asset was already on the books, so it really doesn’t benefit the finances).

      OPG was valued at $5.126 billion when born, and is valued at $13.545 billion in the 2014-2015 financial statements.
      The point is simply that if that doesn’t reflect actual value, it’s because the OLP has inflated assets that will simply strand debt eventually.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s