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: 207

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

Farm Credit Canada Releases 2026 Hog Outlook

Farm Credit Canada is forecasting a profitable year for the pork sector, similar to last year.

Ag in the House: Feb. 2 – 6

An MP wanted answers about a proposed rail line and how it could affect farmers

Making Soybeans Great Again! And A Fools Gold?

Markets moved sharply during the week of February 2 to 6 as soybeans rallied on trade news while energy, livestock and equities strengthened and metals and cryptocurrencies weakened.

Food Freedom Day 2026 - What Canada’s Grocery Costs Really Tell Us

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture says Canadians reached Food Freedom Day on February 8, 2026 the point at which the average household has earned enough income to pay for a full year of groceries.

USDA Official Calls California’s Prop 12 a Threat to a Unified U.S. Pork Market

A senior USDA official has renewed strong criticism of California’s Proposition 12, calling the state’s animal housing and product sale standards a form of domestic trade protectionism that could disrupt the national pork market and raise costs for producers and consumers. At a recent agriculture policy event, the deputy secretary of agriculture described laws like Prop 12 as creating de-facto trade barriers within the United States. Under the complaint, when a single state sets production standards that apply not just to products sold from within the state but to all products entering its borders, it can place producers in other regions at a competitive disadvantage. Prop 12, first approved by California voters in 2018, sets minimum space requirements for certain livestock and prohibits the sale of pork and other animal products in California that do not meet those standards. Because California represents a large share of U.S. pork consumption but only a small share of production, t

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service