For the reasons set out below, CELA and other aligned organizations and First Nations conclude that the various environmental assessment (EA) proposals set out in these Registry notices are highly problematic, unsupported by persuasive evidence, and contrary to the public interest purpose of the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA), namely the betterment of Ontarians by providing for the protection, conservation, and wise management of the environment.
Accordingly, we collectively recommend that these current proposals should be withdrawn and re-considered by the Ontario government.
Category Archives: Renewable Energy on Crown Land
Is it Renewable Energy if it Degrades the Environment?
Is it really renewable energy when it degrades the environment and impacts on communities in a negative way?
There are 241 hydroelectric dams in Ontario, and only 3 facilities have provided any form of fish passage.
The effects of dams and waterpower facilities on fisheries have been well documented over the past century, and include the loss or serious decline of many iconic fish species, which are resources of importance to Ontario’s economy, biodiversity, and natural and cultural heritage.
ORA Celebrates 10 years of Service to Ontario Rivers
A presentation made by the Chair at ORA’s 16 October 2021 Annual General Meeting:
Reject Schedules 6 and 8 of Bill 229 to Protect Conservation Authorities and Species at Risk
Bill 229 is just the most recent in a long list of omnibus bills containing devastating amendments, exemptions and streamlining of key environmental policy and legislation designed to protect our environment and communities and provide the public and stakeholders with meaningful input. These government actions have created a deep erosion of public trust and confidence. It is unacceptable that it would mislead its citizens and bypass the norms by taking advantage of a world-wide health emergency to aggressively push their destructive agenda through.
Proposed Comprehensive Project List under the EAA – ERO-019-2377
While the effects of large hydro projects (200 MW) have been well known and documented for over a century, small (up to 10 MW) and medium sized (10 MW to 200 MW) hydroelectric projects involve many of the same impacts per unit of power generated and, cumulatively, the environmental degradation can exceed that of large hydro projects. Small and medium sized hydro projects are situated on smaller and often more sensitive riverine ecosystems; however, like large hydro projects, will also alter the river’s flow regime and can have significant impacts on the aquatic environment, as flow is a major determinant of a river’s ecological characteristics and its aquatic biodiversity.
A recent study examined scaled hydropower impacts in the Nu River basin of southwestern China, where the researchers calculated impact per MW of capacity across 14 metrics between small and large hydropower projects (with small being below 50 MW as defined in Chinese policy). They found that small hydropower dams had greater impact per MW for 9 of the 14 metrics, including length of river channel affected and impact on habitat designated as conservation priorities.
ERO-019-0880 Ontario’s Forest Sector Strategy (Draft)
ORA also objects to Ontario ratepayers and/or taxpayers having to subsidize electricity pricing and capital expenditures for industry and private corporations. This Strategy focuses only on the economic benefits of doubling the harvest, without looking at the trade-offs or balancing that with equal measures to maintain a healthy environment. This is the only way to maintain the claim of sustainable forest management in Ontario.
The work to Save the Bala Falls continues
by Mitchell Shnier, Save the Bala Falls
The Township of Muskoka Lakes initiated a Judicial Review in 2013 as the proposed hydro-electric generating station at the Bala Falls would contravene two Sections of the Public Lands Act:
- Section 65(4), which requires that portages not be obstructed – and the proposed generating station would obstruct the traditional Bala Portage. As requested and required by the MNR, we were able to locate historic documents confirming not only that the portage was south of the Bala north falls, but that it was established before the original Crown land patent was granted. That is, as a result of our claim that the Public Lands Act does not permit the MNR to obstruct the Bala Portage, the MNR requested information, and we provided this information, yet they simply ignored and denied what we provided.
- Section 3, which states that if less than 25% of the shoreline frontage of a body of water is Crown land, then the publically-accessible Crown land shoreline cannot be further reduced. And in fact, on the Moon River, there is less than 25% of Crown land frontage, and this would be further reduced by the proposed generating station. The Township was able to show that the MNR did not follow their own required Policy PL 3.02.01 in determing Crown land frontage. However, the MNR simply ignored this policy and presented an incorrect calculation to the Court.
Unfortunately, the end result was that despite the MNR contravening these Sections of the Public Lands Act the Court ultimately decided that Section 28 of the Public Lands supercedes the others, and if the MNR unilaterally decides the lands are unsafe or that the Minister wishes to build a hydro-electric generating station anyways, they can.
Renewable Energy on Crown Land – Decision Notice
Posted 8 March 2014
On February 10, 2014, the Ministry of Natural Resources released its Renewable Energy on Crown Land Policy. A decision notice (Registry # 011-6005) has been posted to Ontario’s Environmental Registry Environmental Registry. The policy document and a summary of key policy content can be downloaded from the Ministry’s website on the renewable energy policy page.
This replaces the Site Release policy, which was a necessary step in the permitting process for waterpower, onshore wind power and solar power developments when Crown land is involved. All proposals with current Feed in Tariff (FIT) contracts will still fall under the Site Release policy; however, new FIT proposals and those under the incoming Large Energy Procurement process will fall under the Renewable Energy on Crown Land Policy. Check out the links above for more details.
Ontario Rivers Alliance made a submission on this EBR posting in October of 2012, and is available below. Continue reading
Coordinated Policy Guidance for Waterpower Projects – EBR 012-0290
MOECC Decision Notice – 5 October 2016: Following the posting of the Proposal Notice on the Environmental Registry, the Ministry decided not to move forward with Coordinated Policy Guidance for Waterpower Projects after considering EBR comments and having discussions both internally and with stakeholders. MOECC continues to look for ways to modernize and improve approvals and permitting for Waterpower Projects in a way that is fully protective of human health and the environment.
MOECC Proposal: The proposed Coordinated Policy Guidance for Waterpower Projects has been developed by MNR and MOE to clarify roles and responsibilities. The proposed Guidance document provides clarification of Ministry specific roles and responsibilities for waterpower projects, in reviewing and issuing authorizations. This proposed policy guidance does not alter the powers or duties of either ministry in their administration of any Act or regulation. Ontario Rivers Alliance and Robert MacGregor made the following submissions on this posting: Continue reading
Discussion Paper – Feedback on Large Renewable Competitive Procurement Process – ORA Submission
21 August 2013