Editor,
Our ongoing debate surrounding energy storage solutions in Ontario has brought forward a number of critical points, particularly considering inaccurate representations in other letters regarding battery and pumped storage technology. It is essential our municipal council consider why other, less expensive and less complex energy storage systems are not being explored as viable alternatives. A key question arises: are pumped storage systems being adopted globally, or are battery storage systems being advanced as the preferred solution? Evidence suggests battery systems are leading the way.
Contrary to Mr. MacDougall’s claim that Canada lacks battery manufacturers, there are several companies across the nation actively pursuing large-scale battery storage systems. This focus on battery technology reflects its growing importance and potential for future energy solutions. One significant issue often overlooked with pumped storage is the necessity for annual repairs and upkeep (averages about $1M annually in 1973 to 2011 at Ludington PSP) and then major overhauls after approximately fifty years. That number will be in the $billions as demonstrated by the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant in Michigan that had a rebuild of $800M in 2010. Project that figure to today’s costs and note those 2010 dollars could build 4 modern 250MW BESS projects today. Furthermore, the required components for such PSP construction are not readily available within Canada or North America. So TCE’s claim of using made in Canada equipment/machinery is…interesting!
Mr. MacDougall’s assertion that only “proven technologies and well-known defined impacts” should be considered mirroring the rhetoric of Trans Canada Energy corporation. This approach raises questions about technological progress: Why is Canada investing in high-speed electric trains when the proven technology of diesel-powered trains remains prevalent across North America? Why not revert to steam engines, which share a similar technological origin as pumped storage systems? That is proven technology as well.
The impacts of large-scale pumped storage projects on Georgian Bay and surrounding lands are considerable, especially regarding construction complexity and the potential for water contamination, both during and after construction. The underlying motivation obviously financial: money and profits. Corporate profits and Community Benefit Agreements—rather than a genuine commitment to sustainable solutions for all of Ontario. The proposed pumped storage may offer some monetary advantages for Meaford, but its broader effects on the Georgian Bay area must be addressed.
Ontario does not simply require a “local solution”; it needs a modern, cost-effective approach that benefits the entire province. Contemporary technologies, such as battery storage, can be efficiently deployed on existing lands beneath high-power transmission lines. Unlike pumped storage, battery systems can be installed as small, local 250 MW units across various townships, adjacent to the energy grid. These projects not only benefit communities but also create opportunities for collaboration with indigenous partners. Considering lifespan and operational costs, battery solutions could be one-third to one-half the cost of traditional pumped storage, without the associated challenges.
A recent letter published on December 11th, 2025, by Kinder Essington presents a compelling argument regarding energy storage initiatives. The author suggests that simply increasing energy supply could save both money and time, in contrast to the significant investment proposed for Energy storage. The $8–10 billion allocated for the TCE project could instead be used to upgrade and modernize Ontario’s energy grid, supporting sustainable systems such as hydroelectric and smaller-scale nuclear power. If additional backup storage is required, small-scale solutions can be implemented with relative ease.
In summary, Ontario’s energy future should be guided by modern technologies that offer practical, cost-effective, and sustainable solutions. Battery storage systems present a viable alternative to pumped storage, addressing both local and provincial needs without the significant drawbacks of larger, more complex projects.
Pat Maloney, Meaford
