Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

From John Cowan:

I do not buy into the rhetoric coming from Minister Brad Duguid on the new price rates proposed for ground-mounted solar units. In a newspaper story on July 15/10, Duguid uses a return of 20-25 % on the ground units. In another newspaper on July 16/10, Duguid uses a stated rate of 25-30 % return.  What paltering! The government hierarchy of authority saw a flood of solar applications come in. This is too successful, we do not want this, power plants could be idled back, and union members would be upset if jobs could be lost. Is this the logic for their “rational”? Let’s go with the most inefficient solar power unit with lowest output. Plus lots of urban homes do not have a suitable rooftop. This tells me that the McGuinty government and Duguid are not serious about green energy. They have thrown a monkey wrench into this program. I am sure that through the green energy act, OPA did not have returns of 20-25-30 percent projected for the solar ground units.  The people selling the solar ground units only predict a 10-14 % return on their units for sale. I am sure they are lenient with the projected rate of return for their units to sell as many units as possible. What hat did Duguid use to pull out the number of 30 percent?

I now have friends and neighbors with ground-mounted solar units with a .82 cent contract! Because I was leery of the projected return from the ground units and the high cost as I would have to borrow the money, I did not commit myself to sign up on the OPA web site until February 2010. At first I looked at a micoFIT lease with a company. I took the lease to a lawyer and he wrote down a dozen points for me to think about. That company lease would have been a leap of faith for me to sign. After talking to a company representative, this lease was not even what was advertized in the paper. My lawyer was also in the middle of a lawsuit for a farmer over being sued by the contractors of the solar company whom had not been paid for any of the work done for the ground-solar unit as he had gone broke. I am sure the legal lawsuits are just starting with this renege in the price for ground-solar units.

Where is the morality of the green act as a function of the government for the solar power projects and as the terms are performed, are allowed to change in a few months, not twenty years. I am still on the fence thanks to the McCuinty government flip flopping!

Views: 244

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Looks suspiciously like the solar offer of a few years ago.
Window dressing policies, they have no intention of the project suceeding. No when a power company makes it for free, if they buy extra power from the comsumer or convert everyone to solar, they lose money. A government will never do anything unless there is a benefit for them, in the form of revenue or information. But to their mind they think they are showing the sheep, how much they care. Its like the sign, on vacate piece of land saying site for the new police station. Four years later the sign is the only thing built. Ps who is Mc guinty never heard off him in Northern Ontario. I suppose he's waiting for more Dion Quintplettes for before he pays a visit.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

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

2025-2026 Year in Review Showcases Impacts of Beef Producer Investments

What have your investments in the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off accomplished for the industry lately? The Beef Cattle Research Council’s 2025–2026 Year in Review highlights how producer investments and input are advancing research, addressing industry priorities and delivering practical value back to Canada’s beef producers. “The BCRC continues to enhance coordination across the broader beef system, bringing researchers and industry groups together so we can make the best use of limited resources and move solutions and benefits to producers more quickly,” said BCRC Executive Director Tracy Herbert. “The BCRC’s collaborative approach is essential as we address complex challenges and position the Canadian beef industry for long-term success.”   The 2025-2026 BCRC Year in Review provides a broad funding overview by program area and source. In the past fiscal year, the BCRC received on average $0.66 (unaudited) of every $2.50 of the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off collected by provincial

Pre-harvest products and how to use them

Canola growers have three primary reasons for a pre-harvest spray application: Weed control ???????Desiccation Manage uneven crop ??????????????Use scenarios for pre-harvest spray Weed control Pre-harvest can be a good time to manage weeds, especially when straight combining. The act of swathing and curing can also provide weed control. Effective control is challenging on big weeds: apply product at the recommended rate with high water volumes to penetrate the crop canopy and achieve thorough coverage. Note: Set reasonable expectations on preventing seed set. Charles Geddes, weed management scientist with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Lethbridge, Alberta, says: “There is no easy way to tell if weeds will have mature seed, but in my experience, it happens earlier than one might think. I suggest that the latest a weed should be left is until it is flowering. Once it starts to flower, then some of the seed can mature on the plant after it is terminated. From a weed management p

Pre-harvest glyphosate staging tips help produce market-ready crops

As harvest approaches, Keep it Clean is reminding Canadian canola, cereal and pulse growers to follow proper staging practices for pre-harvest glyphosate application to help protect crop marketability and preserve access to domestic and export markets. Applying pre-harvest glyphosate for weed control too early can result in unacceptable product residues in harvested grain. Keep it Clean’s Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Staging Guide provides visual examples to help growers identify when grain moisture content in canola, cereals and pulses is less than 30 per cent – the only stage at which pre-harvest glyphosate may be applied. Where allowed, glyphosate is registered for pre-harvest weed control and is not to be used as a desiccant. Pre-harvest glyphosate may only be applied when grain moisture content is less than 30 per cent in the least mature part of the field, including any areas of regrowth that may produce seed. “Glyphosate is an important tool in the grower’s toolbox for crop manage

Safeguarding Cereals Against Allergens

Maintaining a reputation for clean, safe grain is essential for both domestic and international markets. Shipments contaminated with allergenic grains can lead to costly rejections, recalls and long-term damage to market confidence. Unintentional mingling of allergenic grains with cereals is a concern for export markets and must be actively managed.  Certain crop types can be allergen sources in our export markets. When these crops are unintentionally mixed with cereals, they can pose serious food safety and market access risks.   Common allergen sources in grain exports include:  Mustard   Soy   Buckwheat   Buckwheat is considered highly allergenic, and even very small amounts mixed into wheat, barley or oats can cause severe reactions in some markets. Because of these risks, many export markets apply strict limits for allergenic material in cereal shipments.  How allergens can contaminate grain  Allergen contamination most often occurs through shared equipment and handling system

Canada Launches First Private Forest Owner Survey in Over 20 Years, Farmers Invited to Participate

Canadian farmers who own woodlots or private forests are being asked to participate in the first national survey of private forest owners in more than 20 years.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service