• Download the ECO’s 2010/11 Annual Report Engaging Solutions (.pdf).
• Download the Supplement to the Annual Report (.pdf)
• Click to download the Commissioner’s Remarks to the Legislature (.pdf)

(Toronto, November 29, 2011) Ontario’s Environmental Commissioner is worried that Ontario has lost momentum when it comes to the province’s pressing environmental issues.

In his 2010/2011 Annual Report “Engaging Solutions” released today, Gord Miller says there’s no shortage of talk about the problems such as climate change, waste diversion, and the loss of biodiversity. “But when it comes to doing something” says Miller, “there doesn’t seem to be a lot actually happening.

The Environmental Commissioner cited a number of examples of this lack of inertia in his annual report:

• On waste, the Ministry of the Environment has written four different reports and discussion papers outlining options for increasing waste diversion in the province. But this has resulted in little action on what Miller says should be one of the government’s top environmental priorities.

• On species-at-risk, the Ministry of Natural Resources is not doing enough to protect and recover species at risk. Much of what the ministry is doing has become an empty bureaucratic exercise that does little on-the-ground to tangibly benefit endangered species.

• On funding, the Government of Ontario has passed notable legislation such as the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, 2008, the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and the Green Energy Act, 2009, but has not given the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of the Environment the additional resources they need to oversee and monitor new legislation while also covering their previous core responsibilities.

• On the Great Lakes, lengthy negotiations between Ontario and the federal government threaten to paralyze progress towards further clean-up, and Ontario is allowing its existing policy tools to idle. Meantime, the Obama administration has promised $2.2 billion over 5 years.

Miller says this lack of action is not accidental: it’s actually the goal of critics of environmental protection. “We respond to people who say they don’t believe there’s a problem”, says the Environmental Commissioner, “by going back to the research findings to debate and explain it all over again. And then, when it looks like progress is being made, others say the proposed solutions won’t work, or are too costly. And so we go back to the beginning again.”

“We have to find a way to get to a point of action on these issues” says the Environmental Commissioner. “We don’t see ourselves as having a culture of inaction and procrastination. Yet that would be a fair criticism from any impartial observer.”

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario is appointed by the Legislative Assembly to be the province’s independent environmental watchdog, reporting publicly on the government’s environmental decision making.

Click here to download the full report (.pdf).

Accompanying media releases:

MOE and MNR Can’t Handle Core Responsibilities

Ontario Government Failing Endangered Species

Government Failing to Reduce Ontario’s Waste

• Download the full report (.pdf).
• Download the Supplement to the Annual Report (.pdf)
• Click to download the Commissioner’s Remarks to the Legislature (.pdf)

As reported recently in the media, John Podesta from the Center for American Progress in Washington DC visited the MaRS Centre in Toronto and presented a compelling case for continued public policy support for and political commitment to green energy in Ontario.

In his presentation, Podesta praised the Green Energy and Green Economy Act (GEGEA) and its pivotal Feed-in Tariff (FIT) program as being the key drivers responsible for $21 billion in investment in Ontario and the creation of about 20,000 jobs since 2009. He credited the program for creating the kind of stable investment climate that manufacturers, financial institutions and entrepreneurs must have to hasten the transition to a low-carbon economy.

Podesta also referred to a recent Brookings Institute report in his presentation. The report indicated that the growing “clean economy” in the US is manufacturing- and export-intensive, with over 25 per cent of its 2.7 million workers in “green” jobs originating in the manufacturing sector. Median “green collar” wages in the US are 13 per cent higher than median wages in general. Between 2003 and 2010, the US clean economy outperformed the overall economy by a factor of two. He added Ontario is now a North American leader in the creation of these higher paying, export-oriented “green” industries.

Podesta provided the cautionary tale of China’s efforts to corner the renewables market, both in terms of technology development and dominating the export market. Recent media reports make it clear that China, as part of its push to become a world leader in green technology, is intent on putting a price on carbon as a component of its transition to a greener economy. I’ve made my position clear on the need for pricing carbon in Ontario in a previous blog. What’s really interesting about China is that it is being supported, in part, by the US Energy Foundation. As Podesta noted, China’s centrally controlled economy and its ability to regulate “at will” means they will increasingly challenge for world market dominance.

So, it’s concerning when a report just released by the Deutsche Bank in July singled out Ontario as a jurisdiction of concern where the outlook for green energy has “deteriorated” in part due to uncertainty over the future of the FIT program. Ontario has to decide where it wants to be in the international green economy in coming years.

Toronto, June 14, 2011 – Ontario’s Environmental Commissioner says the Ontario Clean Energy Benefit (OCEB) is a perverse incentive that could endanger the energy conservation savings the government is hoping to achieve.

• Watch the webcast of the press conference live from Queen’s Park
• Watch videos of the Commissioner outlining key points of the report:
  • Overview
  • Electricity pricing
  • Smart Grid
• Click here for more information about the report
• Download the report on your computer (.pdf)
• Download the entire report on your mobile device (.epub)

In his Annual Energy Conservation Progress Report – 2010 (Volume One): Managing a Complex Energy System, released today, Gord Miller says “The 10 per cent rebate on electricity bills is an artificial subsidy on the price of electricity so it encourages consumers to use more.” A study by energy analysts estimated that the OCEB could wipe out a third of the planned conservation savings over the next four years.

Miller praises the government for introducing time-of-use pricing that encourages households and businesses to shift their consumption away from periods of high demand, but noted that price subsidies undercut this development. Prices will necessarily rise because of a backlog of transmission investments and new generation projects.. “Unfortunately, the government hasn’t addressed the issue of rising prices in a way that prioritizes conservation,” says Miller. “Instead it has continued the failed policy approach of the past where the government’s only answer to higher electricity prices is to artificially lower electricity prices.”

If the government feels the need to help consumers with the higher energy costs it could make the benefit a fixed amount, instead of tying it to consumption levels. “That way,” says Miller, “the Clean Energy Benefit would be less of a disincentive to electricity conservation.”

Miller is also concerned about delays in rolling out Ontario’s important Conservation and Demand Management (CDM) programs. Between now and 2014, electric utilities, supported by the Ontario Power Authority, are supposed to reduce overall electricity use, as well as peak demand. “Province-wide conservation programs were all supposed to begin in January 2011,” says the Commissioner, “but the delays mean we will miss opportunities this year.”

The Environmental Commissioner is also questioning a recent decision by the Ontario Energy Board to freeze conservation budgets for Union Gas and Enbridge Gas Distribution, particularly at a time when the government has cancelled its own conservation programs for gas consumers. “The Board has too narrow a view about the benefits that will come with increased conservation. It is ignoring the avoided infrastructure costs and reduced greenhouse gas emissions that will come with reductions in consumption of natural gas.”

For more information, contact:
Maria Leung
Communications and Outreach Coordinator
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
416-325-3371 / 416-819-1673
1-800-701-6454
Maria.leung@eco.on.ca

For French language release and bilingual support, please contact:
Jean-Marc Filion, 705-492-6997

The report is available for download at www.eco.on.ca

Aussi disponible en français

- 30 -

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario is the province’s independent environmental watchdog. Appointed by the Legislative Assembly, the ECO monitors and reports on compliance with the Environmental Bill of Rights, the government’s progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and its actions towards achieving greater energy conservation in Ontario.

This section from our 2009/10 Annual Report, Redefining Conservation, is now online.

Ontario faces many challenges as it enters the second decade of the 21st century. The economy is recovering from the effects of the recession that began in late 2008. But, the economy is changing, moving away from such “high carbon footprint” primary industries as iron and steel and pulp and paper to a “greener” economy based on more efficient manufacturing, renewable energy and information technology. At the same time, the environment is facing unprecedented challenges from a growing population, increased pressures on aging infrastructure and a continuing upward trend in greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.

The Ontario government has responded to this “perfect storm” of challenges – and opportunities – with an ambitious agenda of legislative initiatives and policies to green the economy while fostering a “culture of conservation” within the energy sector. This part of the Annual Report describes the role that the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 will play in helping to bring about this fundamental change. As well, this part describes the promise (and pitfalls) of fast-tracking renewable sources of electricity and the development of a “smarter” grid.

This part also describes amendments made to the Environmental Protection Act that are designed to provide a better understanding of where greenhouse gas emissions originate in the province – through mandatory reporting of these emissions by companies within key sectors of the economy. As well, the amendments have established the legislative basis for pricing carbon emissions through the introduction of a cap-and-trade system. Pricing carbon and identifying the big emitters are necessary precursors to the development of a low-carbon economy.

The need to develop a conserving society underscores the maxim that “the economy is the wholly-owned subsidiary of the environment.” We ignore this principle at our peril. But, in embracing the spirit and intent of these legislative initiatives, we should not lose sight of an equally important principle: to safeguard every citizen’s right to a fair, transparent and open process of consultation and public participation in this crucial decision-making.

Read More:

• Powering the Future: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009
• Ramping Up Renewables: MOE’s Renewable Energy Approvals
• MNR Approvals for Greening the Grid
• Mandatory GHG Reporting: What gets Measured gets Managed
• Pricing Carbon: Can a Cap-and-Trade System Deliver the Tonnes?

An article in today’s Toronto Star suggests that the Ontario government may be backtracking on its intention to require home energy ratings at time of sale, a power enabled by the Green Energy Act (GEA). If true, this would be a major disappointment.

Home energy ratings provide prospective buyers with information on the expected energy consumption of a house. The operating energy costs then become incorporated into the buyer’s assessment of the house’s value, and are reflected in the market price. Over time, the market for energy efficiency features in housing (both new builds and retrofits) expands, as builders and homeowners become more confident that the upfront costs of these investments will be recovered through a higher selling price. More cost-effective investment in energy conservation is undertaken, and energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions go down.

Energy labels have been required by law for many years for major appliances, where the “second price tag” of operating energy costs may end up exceeding the initial sticker price over the product’s lifetime. Despite the logical appeal of home energy ratings, opposition from the real estate industry led the government to weaken this section of the GEA before the bill’s passage, by adding a clause that allowed buyers to “opt out” of receiving the home energy information.

When the government introduced the GEA in early 2009, it touted “fostering a culture of conservation” as one of the GEA’s key objectives. However, as I discussed in our office’s first energy conservation report, almost all of the conservation elements in the GEA will have no impact without subsequent regulations and directives. The depth of the government’s commitment to energy conservation will be shown by the specifics of these regulations and directives. More than a year after the GEA was passed, we’ve still seen little follow-up action.

Gord Miller
commissioner@eco.on.ca

Further reading:

• Green Energy and Green Economy Act – Preview (from ECO 2008/09 Annual Report)
• Green Energy Act 2009 (Wikipedia)