Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

The Ontario government is changing the price they will pay for solar power -- here's what they have to say....

"To help ensure the program remains sustainable the OPA has proposed a new price category for microFIT ground-mounted solar PV projects. Ground-mounted solar PV
projects of 10 kilowatts or less will be eligible to receive a proposed price of
58.8 cents per kilowatt-hour (¢/kWh). Rooftop solar PV projects, as defined in
the microFIT Rules, version 1.4, will continue to be eligible for 80.2 ¢/kWh.


The proposed new price category will better reflect the lower costs to install a ground-mounted solar PV project versus a rooftop project. It will provide a
price that enables future project owners to recover costs of the projects as
well as earn a reasonable return on their investment over the long term."

The business side of me is actually pretty angry with the move. We are getting ready to file an application - taking the cautious approach. Making sure to comb over a number of deals to make sure when we lock into 20 years -- we don't get the short end of the stick. Now - because we have taken the time to do that (which they encouraged) we are out over 20 cents. After all they said the price wouldn't change until October 2011.

That said - I couldn't figure out how they were going to pay 80 cents to begin with. Although - 58 cents is still too high.

This all makes believing what government says pretty tough to do -- doesn't it....

Views: 1505

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Price has not been set in stone yet. Comment period is open for 30 days (or less by now). I have not yet found where to make comments but rest assured - we are working on it.
Point is though - the price will be dropping as it has in other jurisdictions. By how much?
Does 58 cents still pay well enough for the investor (such as farmer Andrew)?
I also can't find the place to send any comments.....it makes me wonder if they really want them.

Although, you will notice that they have had the time to already published these new 58c price points and the new 58c category.

They have also included a phrase that for RoofTop projects, that the building has to be 'pre-existing' to the solar application - ie you can't build a building after being awarded the solar project.... there goes a whole bunch of projects aswell !!

Watch the fine print !!!
Comments!! - Check out http://microfit.powerauthority.on.ca for July 6 & 8 Sessions and for comment instructions.

There will be a 30-day comment period on the proposed new price category. Please send all comments and submissions to microFIT@powerauthority.on.ca. While all emails will be read, not all emails will receive individual responses.

Comments also can be mailed to the following address and must be postmarked no later than Tuesday, August 3, 2010.

Ontario Power Authority
120 Adelaide Street West, Suite 1600
Toronto, Ontario M5H 1T1

Attention: Ground-Mounted Solar PV
we all knew it was to high to be true. The ones getting screwed are the people that have already bought the equipment and signed contracts. I know a farm that is putting in a biogas digester and OPA changes the rules almost by the day. OPA is a government body that doesn't like to do what the politicians have made manditory. Why buy power from everyone when you are used to buying from a couple of people.
Really?

Somebody believed something the McGuinty government said?
There's lots to be angry about in this whole thing, starting with the slowness of reply to applications. There's the issue of financing, which is difficult at best for a lot of people in animal agriculture. They could really use a little pocket change. People have gone through legal costs to arrange financing, spent time on investigating and researching. Those I know who don't have the money sitting around and arranged financing, are seriously considering cutting out.
The 80 cents is not a really big issue, when the sun is hot, and the air conditioners get humming, it costs more than that to bring in outside power at peak times, exactly when the solar is working best. I dislike conspiracy theories, but it seems like someone figured out that farmers in the province might be getting some cash, and put a damper on the whole thing.
I don't think you are not too far off Mary Ann.

The idea that the cost of rooftop panels are that much more expensive that ground mounted is outrageous. They should have known the costs before putting this in place, and made decisions based on that. If application numbers weren't so high - would they be doing the same thing?

All of the sudden - farmers are taking advantage of this is big numbers - and then get their legs cut from underneath them.
What kind of contracts did Farmers have with the developers...with this price drop - do people need to continue to install and pay for a solar project even though revenue has dropped by 30% ??
This is mainly for individuals who bought and installed on their own. Farmers who have a signed contract will still get the 80.2 cents from my understanding. It is the ones who, like has been stated, waiting to check things over with a fine tooth comb, that will be disadvantaged. The technology has not improved that much in the last 30 days to account for the big drop in price.
As with any government program - it will change... and not likely for the best.
The bigger projects (over 10 kW) will be on a different price structure (and much lower than 80 cents).

Graham Dyer said:
What kind of contracts did Farmers have with the developers...with this price drop - do people need to continue to install and pay for a solar project even though revenue has dropped by 30% ??
The truth is even though they are paying 80.2 cents it doesn't mean that is what it is costing them.
1. Distributed Generation, generates the power where it is needed without large power losses in the resistance of the wire ove long distances, I have heard that this can be up to a 30% loss from nuclear, coal or Hydro plant to your home
2. Job creation, part of the money put into the coffers to fund this program was for job creation in the much needed manufacturing sector
3. Dept repayment, Would you rather pay a larger Dept repayment charge one the new nuclear reactors that are built and once again 40% over priced ( that's a lot of money on a 20 billion dollar expenditure.)
4. Your Hydro is already subsidized, Would you rather have the subsidy or would you rather give it to the big businesses so they can pad their executives pockets.

Do you still think 80cents is to high
I agree with you Andrew. A 60 page agreement, I can imagine, has plenty of wiggle room in it. I can well imagine there will be more surprises in the future.

Many people questioned how the government can afford paying 80 cents to produce hydro only to turn around and sell for 9 cents.

When one looks up the definition of "ponzi scheme" and "pyramid scheme"....... one wonders if the whole solar bandwagon is a hybrid of the two.

Our provincial government shows little to no respect towards agriculture and the latest stunt amplifies the contempt they have towards farmers.
Why does the "Pigeon King" come to mind?

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