Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

You Can't Eat Energy--Peaker Plant in the Holland Marsh

PEAKER PLANT IN THE HOLLAND MARSH


My name is Avia Eek. My husband, Bill, and I farm in the Holland Marsh. My husband, and many of the farmers in the Holland Marsh are descendants of the first pioneers who broke this land in 1934. Although, it should be noted the first industry here was the harvesting of the marsh grass for mattresses. This business took place from 1880 to approx. 1915, when it peaked.

The soil in the Holland Marsh is organic based, the result of thousands of years of vegetation decay. The Holland Marsh contains huge pockets of peat/muck soils which is a tremendous medium for growing the crops that are produced here, which number more than 40. The soil holds the moisture and nutrients so the plants can grow. It should be noted that this type of soil does not occur everywhere, and it is considered “valuable”. In fact, a recent economic impact study shows that the Holland Marsh, through the business of farming and related activities, contributes more than $500 million to the province of Ontario annually!

The Farmers of the Holland Marsh are a community-minded people, and are ready, able and willing to help those in need whenever the need arises. Whether it’s providing fresh vegetables, together with our time to our local foodbanks regularly, giving our time and resources to family crisis shelters, coaching a sports’ team, or simply helping one another when given the opportunity.

Last year, we found out that a property in the “Salad Bowl”, diagonal to an elementary school, metres from a waterway the Farmers irrigate from, and which feeds into Lake Simcoe, which property is also located in a flood plain, Protected Countryside, Greenbelt, etc. (actually we found out there are 17 pieces of legislation “protecting” the Holland Marsh) was to become the home of a 393 MW, simple cycle, natural gas-fired peaker plant. This facility is designed to run at just 36% efficiency, the emissions from this plant will be the equivalent of 3 tonnes of greenhouse gases every hour when it is running, complete with 18 km of 16” high pressure, industrial gas pipeline. It should be noted that this particular type of facility is a “conflicted use” for this highly productive, sensitive growing area which has the designation of “Specialty Crop Area”.

It is my understanding that there were some information meetings held in September or October (this is a very busy time for Farmers here, so I’m unsure how many Farmers actually even knew the meetings were taking place). I do know that there were 5 or 6 chosen sites for this peaker plant. I also know that residents in those particular areas said “NO” to having the facility in their communities. I find it interesting that one of the sites was to be beside a conservation area in the Bradford area. I understand that 300 + people showed up to that meeting, said no, and that was that. While I realize that conservation areas are very important and should be protected, I would think a highly productive, sensitive food growing area would be given, at least, the same consideration.

So, as promised by the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, a Town Hall meeting was held in February, 2009, after the site was chosen (Fall of 2008—harvest time). The meeting was held in King City with the then Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, George Smitherman, addressing the many Farmers and residents of this area (over 500, I believe). Mr. Smitherman opened the meeting with an announcement that “NIMBY’s would not be tolerated, people wanted to flick a switch and know they had electricity…this peaker plant is going to be built on the chosen site”! So began our fight to continue to be able to grow safe, healthy, local food for the people of Ontario! To date all of our requests for re-consideration have fallen on deaf ears!

I won’t get into all the scientific data regarding the emissions (NOX, GHG, PM2.5, etc) this facility will release from its smoke stacks, or how it will increase respiratory problems for people, since I am not qualified in these areas, but the research is available. What I do know is that the Holland Marsh is located within a bowl, hence the name “Salad Bowl of Ontario”. While this peaker plant facility is not technically within the Holland Marsh, it is meters from it, and within our bowl, emissions have a better chance of being trapped here—that’s just common sense! Here is a website you can visit to see the damage that will occur as a result of the added air pollution http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/01-015.htm . Currently, we have the 400 Highway which runs through the Marsh, this is scheduled for expansion, which will add more air pollution to this sensitive area. The name “peaker” refers to the fact that this facility will provide power at “peak” times i.e. summer, when it’s hot, and winter, when it’s cold. The fact that this facility will be running in “peak” times, when it’s hot and extra power is required, also coincides with the crucial growing period for our crops. Therefore, based on facts, if this peaker plant facility is allowed to be built in this area, it will cause additional challenges (air pollution which will affect crop yields) and undue hardship to our Farmers, who are already struggling to compete with a global market.

According to the proponent, the emissions from the peaker plant fall within the acceptable parameters for air quality. I question the “acceptable parameters”, since, I believe the “standard” data used for testing air quality is the air shed at Pearson International Airport. I’m pretty sure that if the air shed where this facility is slated to be built, and not by the 400 either, was to be tested independently, the findings would be quite different, and not so “acceptable”! As well, the soil data that was used was based on mineral soils, not organic soils—again the proper testing should be done to see exactly how the emissions from this peaker plant will affect our organic soil!

Holland Marsh Farmers adhere to strict rules and regulations to ensure food safety, as well as to insure a nurturing environment for our crops.. The Farmers here monitor changes in the soil twice a year, tissue samples are taken, and water samples from the canal are also taken on a regular basis. Our crop yields are reported annually—we know what we produce, and we know our environment. Our Farmers attend workshops and implement environmental farm plans on a regular basis, many of us are Local Food Plus certified (which means a 3rd party attends at your farm and assesses your best farm practices).

Over the last several months, while we’ve been fighting the rash decision to build the facility here in the Marsh, I keep hearing the same lame argument from those who are in favour of the project, and/or who stand to gain from this short-sited vision “we need the energy for northern York Region development…”. Something that I find ironic in this statement is THERE ISN’T GOING TO BE ANY DEVELOPMENT IN THE MARSH, it’s a flood plain. The development this facility will supply energy to is north and east of the Marsh for several kilometers. The Marsh isn’t even on the same grid this plant will be supplying peak energy to! Yes we do need energy, but we also need adequate food production—you can’t eat energy! This area is designated for food production, and should remain protected for food production!

When you consider that: 56% of Canada’s prime agricultural farmland is in Ontario; the Holland Marsh is one of 3 micro climates (the other two being in the Niagara Region); organic based soil pockets such as exist in the Holland Marsh do not occur everywhere, and should be treasured and protected; the population is increasing and we will require MORE food production, not less—then the decision to build a peaker plant in the Holland Marsh, on a flood plain no less just becomes irresponsible.

I believe Mr. McGinty, and the Energy Minister (temporarily) Mr. Phillips have an obligation to the people of Ontario to rescind the directive to build this industrial facility in the Holland Marsh. I extend an invitation to these individuals to meet with us and discuss this project, before it’s too late. The proponent has already made reference to the fact they will be proceeding to the OMB with this matter.

There is a petition at www.gpo.ca that you can sign which will be forwarded to the Minister of the Environment.

Views: 479

Comment

You need to be a member of Ontario Agriculture to add comments!

Join Ontario Agriculture

Comment by OntAG Admin on December 19, 2009 at 6:16am
Good luck Avia, we will help get the message out.

The Farms.com team.

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

‘It’s another blow’: Farmers deal with surging fertilizer prices ahead of seeding

Fertilizer is an essential part of Kevin Peters’ farm in southwestern Manitoba. But since Israel and the U.S. attacked Iran, the average price of urea fertilizer, which is widely used around the world, has skyrocketed, surging around 30 per cent over the last week. Peters says the interruption in supply didn’t come as a huge surprise to him. “We deal with geopolitical issues all the time with markets, be it pork, be it grain, and now fertilizer,” he said. “There’s always some disruption seeming to happen somewhere in the world that is changing our daily prices.” Peters says he pre-purchased his fertilizer for this farming season back in the fall but is concerned about prices later this year when he has to buy fertilizer again. “We’ll see what the market looks like in eight months,” he said. Like Peters, Andrew James also pre-bought his fertilizer in the fall for his farm in Anola, Man., and he says he is happy he did. “My fertilizer bill for that (at the time) was around $350,00

From a Piece of Wire to Contaminated Feed: Preventing Foreign Material Hazards in Beef Cattle Operations

Foreign material and toxin consumption by beef cattle can lead to significant health problems, reduced performance and economic losses. Canadian cattle producers take great pride and care in how they manage their farms and ranches, from providing proper nutrition to stewarding their land and ensuring excellent animal care. Yet even with the best intentions, foreign materials and toxins can quietly find their way into feed, water or pastures. Understanding where they come from and how to prevent exposure is a key part of protecting your herd. Foreign materials and toxins often slip in through everyday farm activities such as repairing fences, running equipment, feeding hay or dealing with weather-stressed crops. A small piece of wire, leftover net wrap or contaminated feed source might not seem like much, but if consumed by cattle, it can trigger health issues, lost performance or even death. Understanding Hardware Disease When cattle consume sharp metal objects like nails or pieces

Farmers Balance Costs and Technology Investments - Tractor Sales Down

Tractor sales fell across most categories in February, but strong combine demand highlights farmers’ continued investment in productivity boosting technology.

Crude Oil and Natural Gas Outlook - What Farmers Need to Know in 2026–2027

Brent crude prices surge as Middle East conflict disrupts supply. See the 2026–2027 outlook for oil, natural gas, and electricity—and what it means for U.S. agriculture

Principal field crop areas, 2026

Canadian farmers expect to plant more canola, barley, soybeans and corn for grain in 2026, while they anticipate area seeded to wheat, oats, lentils and dry peas to decrease compared with the previous year. Wheat At the national level, farmers anticipate planting 26.7 million acres of wheat in 2026, down 1.1% from the previous year. If this anticipation is realized, national wheat area would remain well above the five-year average, despite a decrease from 2025, which would likely be attributable to continued strong global demand. Producers expect spring wheat area to edge down 0.1% to 18.8 million acres in 2026. They anticipate durum wheat area to decrease 2.4% to 6.4 million acres, while they expect winter wheat area to fall 6.7% to 1.6 million acres. Farmers in Saskatchewan anticipate planting 13.9 million acres of wheat in 2026, down 1.0% from the previous year. Producers expect spring wheat area to fall 0.6% to 8.7 million acres, while they anticipate durum wheat area to remain

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service