Clean coal ignored by Liberal Electricity Act

As we debate the Liberal government's Bill 100, The Electricity Restructuring Act, 2004, I once again had the chance to remind the House of the high stakes gamble of this government’s commitment to close down Ontario's coal-fire electricity production by 2007.

I began by drawing attention to the proposed purposes of the bill, which I contend can be enhanced by continued investment into clean coal technology.

Much of what is cited as the purpose of Bill 100 runs counter to the government’s blind rush to snuff out coal. This includes the Bill's direction to; "ensure the adequacy, safety, sustainability and reliability of electricity supply..."; "promote the use of cleaner energy sources and technologies..."; and to "protect the interests of consumers with respect to prices". In my opinion, the commitment to "phasing-out coal-fired generation" - referenced later in the bill - places all of these goals at risk.

As I pointed out in the legislature, there is an overwhelming amount of proof to show that - quite simply - closing down coal energy will not ensure the "adequacy, safety, sustainability and reliability of electricity supply" – as called for in Bill 100.

Ontario's coal-fuelled plants supply more than a quarter of our electricity - so if the Liberals carry through with their wrong-headed coal closure plans by 2007, we have only two years to replace 25 per cent of our energy supply.
During debate, I asked that the government not overlook the fact that coal is both affordable and abundant - globally we have 1000 years worth - while natural gas reserves are dwindling. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, of North America's hydrocarbon reserves, coal represents 85 per cent while natural gas is only 10 per cent.

The government's Electricity and Conservation Supply Task Force has pointed out that, "the potential economic impact of a major increase in dependence on natural gas fired generation is magnified by the ongoing volatility in gas prices and growing concern about the availability of affordable natural gas supplies over the next ten years."

If this government is looking to natural gas as the major player replacing coal, it better keep looking, because supply is not reliable nor sustainable. As demand continues to increase - and supply decreases – prices continue to rise, undermining the Bill 100’s goal of "protect[ing] the interests of consumers with respect to prices..."

So, natural gas may have already reached its peak, our nuclear power is aging quickly with current facilities expecting to have less than 15 years left in their life span; and coal? Our world has a thousand year supply of the Liberal's favorite fossil fuel scapegoat.

In regard to the promotion of, "the use of cleaner energy sources and technologies", the potential of 'clean coal' is being ignored by this government.

Again, I point to the Task Force recommendation that, "the government should quickly develop generation, transmission and conservation alternatives, including clean coal technologies."

Both George W. Bush and John Kerry included clean-coal technology as a plank in their energy platforms - Bush calling for a $2 billion investment and Kerry planning for a $10 billion expenditure into the research and implementation of clean-coal technology. With those kind of numbers being thrown around, it begs the question: what do they know that this Ontario government doesn't?