With the warming temperatures and extreme rain and drought events that climate change is predicted to bring with increasing frequency and intensity as time passes, decision makers and legislators bear a responsibility to strengthen freshwater protection and resiliency – not weaken it. If this proposal moves forward it will be a precipitous turning point for our future with freshwater in Ontario and beyond.
You will find ORA’s submissions regarding Bill 132 here.
Check out ORA’s speech to the Standing Committee on General Government: Continue reading
These proposals are bad for communities and great for the waterpower industry. The proposed changes do not improve or strengthen the delivery of the government’s mandate to stakeholders and the public, instead it places the protection of the environment, safety and best interests of communities in the hands of the for-profit waterpower industry and individual waterpower facility owners. The proposed changes may cut red tape but at the same time they compromise safeguards that protect public health and wellbeing, safety and the environment.
Below you will find ORA’s 22 November 2019 submission which had great support from several Environmental organizations. When Bill 132 was reported back on 4 December 2019 with no changes to Schedules 9 and 16, ORA submitted a supplemental submission on 5 December. Continue reading
CELA stresses that, regardless of whatever water charge is required to recover actual management costs, the amount of water that is available based on long term sustainability and other goals such as meeting population growth targets, ensuring climate change resiliency, and realizing benefits to future generations is finite. As such, simply recovering the province’s water management costs must not be used as the determinant as to whether a water permit ought to be issued or a specific water use ought to be prioritized. Second, while not directly related to the new proposed charge, we believe our general comments and recommendations discussed above are important considerations to ensuring the aims of the water charges program are met.
Namewaminikan Hydro (NH) is proposing to develop the Namewaminikan Waterpower Project (NWP), which consists of two “run-of-river” hydroelectric generating stations on the Namewaminikan River. This river is essentially located in the municipality of Greenstone and runs north of the community of Beardmore, Ontario. The sites to be developed are called Long Rapids and Twin Falls. The Long Rapids station will generate 5.6 megawatts (MW) of hydroelectric power whereas the Twin Falls station will produce 4.4 MW, for a project total of 10 MW.
The project will require the construction of a new 34.5 kV powerline. This line will bebuilt along existing roads and along the High Falls powerline over a distance of approximately 22 km.
A Feed-In-Tariff (FIT) contract for 40 years of electricity purchase was signed with the OPA in April 2010. The construction schedule was produced taking into consideration restrictions related to clearing, instream works and moose calving activities.
Construction is planned for summer 2012, whereas commercial operation is scheduled for fall 2014. More information here.
A Permit to Take Water has been applied for and is open for comment under an EBR 012-1976 until 19 July 2014.
Victor Mine – De Beers, near Attawapiskat First Nation
“ORA is in full support of the submission made by Mr. Charles Hookimaw, an Attawapiskat First Nation member. The proponent’s duty to consult impacted stakeholders and First Nation communities is paramount to an open, transparent and accountable approvals process, and is constitutionally mandated. Many impacted stakeholders live in remote communities that have no access to internet, and it is inexcusable that the proponent has made no effort to meet with the Attawapiskat First Nation community, especially when this operation could have long lasting impacts on water quality, water quantity, and heavy metal contamination of local fisheries.” Continue reading