Dear Editor,
Thank you so much for including my previous letter in the Meaford Independent.
As someone who cares about our shift to cleaner energy sources, I found the recent press release from the Western Ontario Wardens Caucus, featured in the March 14 edition of the Meaford Independent, quite intriguing. It talked about the Keeping Energy Costs Down Act, 2024, which caught my attention.
After looking into it further, I discovered that this Act, also known as Bill 165, is aimed at undoing a decision made by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) in December 2023 regarding changes in gas rates proposed by Enbridge.
The OEB is responsible for overseeing our electricity and natural gas sectors, ensuring fairness for consumers and sustainability for the energy sector so that we can have safe, reliable and affordable energy. Enbridge had applied to the OEB for approval to change the rates that it charges for the sale, distribution and transmission and storage of fossil gas. After much deliberation the OEB decided that Enbridge should reduce the timeline over which new gas installations are paid for from the current 40 years to zero. Their reason was: “The energy transition poses a risk that assets used to serve existing and new Enbridge customers will become stranded because of the energy transition. Enbridge has not provided an adequate assessment of the risk to demonstrate that its capital spending plan is prudent. The stranded asset risk affects all aspects of Enbridge’s system and its proposals for capital spending on system expansion and renewal.”
The OEB decision to require that all new gas installations be paid for up front means that homeowners (who usually pay for the installations over a 40 year period) won’t face stranded asset risks, because developers of new homes would have to cover the full upfront costs of gas connections and infrastructure. Requiring upfront payments for new gas connections could push builders and home buyers toward more efficient technologies like heat pumps and induction stoves, especially considering our move towards a net-zero building code.
Immediately following the OEB’s decision the Minister of Energy, Todd Smith, pledged to reverse it, leading to the introduction of Bill 165. If passed, this bill would allow Enbridge to spread the costs of new gas infrastructure across all ratepayers, potentially increasing costs for everyone even though, according to an article in Canada’s National Observer, “high-efficiency heat pumps are more affordable over the lifetime of the equipment than new gas hookups, meaning Ontario’s decision to reverse the regulator’s decision could actually make housing more expensive.”
In addition, Bill 165 grants the Minister worrisome new powers, such as directing the OEB on current and past hearings and appointing a new chair for the board. These provisions raise concerns about the independence of the OEB from government influence.
Given our commitment to reducing emissions, it’s puzzling why our provincial government would support a bill that seems to encourage even more reliance on gas infrastructure. Equally puzzling is the question of who will benefit from this bill. The next hearing for Bill 165 is scheduled for April 8 and 9, and I urge everyone to learn more about it and reach out to their Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP) to share their thoughts before then.
Best,
Melissa Tervit, Meaford
