Provincial energy development policy

IN AUGUST 2024, THE GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO ANNOUNCED a wide-reaching plan to significantly expand Ontario’s energy production capacity. From refurbishing the province’s existing nuclear facilities to expanding solar and wind power capability, the intention is to ensure Ontario’s energy grid is capable of supplying increased demand from industry (including agriculture) and the increased electrification of homes and vehicles.

What impact this will have on farmers – and what opportunities they could face – is not yet clear. However, representatives from the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and National Farmers Union say the move is an improvement on previous provincial efforts to diversify energy production.

MORE COMMUNITY BUY-IN

In contrast to past energy schemes pursued by the McGuinty and Wynne governments, the Ford government has announced that municipalities can choose whether they want energy developments and, if they do, where those developments can go within their municipal jurisdiction. Drew Spoelstra, president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, considers this a positive move.

“Historically, some of this has been controversial. The way energy development

was done created divisions in communities,” says Spoelstra. “There was a green agenda to move forward with green projects almost at any cost. I think this government is taking a different approach. A more balanced approach on how to generate, store, and transmit power across the province.”

RIGHT METHOD, RIGHT PLACE

Spoelstra says the potential for more on- farm energy production – whether via solar, wind, biogas, or other means – may also be possible under the province’s new policies.

On-farm green energy production is something the Federation has previously advocated for. As its article “Energy Opportunities on Ontario Farms” states, “Ontario farms use about three per cent of Ontario’s electricity or approximately 4.5 terawatt hours each year. While farmers do buy power, they can also produce and sell electricity … Virtually every farmer could take advantage of one or more [energy production methods] in the future.”

The same article reiterates that energy from farms can help power both farms and Ontario more broadly while improving our environment. It also cautions against the use of broad-acre farmland for energy production in an effort to reduce farmland loss, as well as advocating for clear long-term contracts between farmers and energy companies and fair compensation.

“If the right case presents itself and everyone is on board, there’s lots of opportunities for farmers to participate in this space. We just need to ensure it happens in the right place and the right ways,” says Spoelstra.

DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS

The loss of farmland to energy projects is still a concern, however. The province appeared to allay these concerns in June when Todd Smith, past agriculture minister, and Lisa Thompson, then the current agriculture minister, sent a letter to energy companies stating “no new energy projects may be built in specialty crop areas; ground- mounted solar generation cannot be sited on Prime Agricultural Areas; all other resource types may only locate on Prime Agricultural Areas if they have received both Municipal Council approval and municipal approval of an Agricultural Impact Assessment; and rated criteria points will be awarded for projects that avoid Prime Agricultural Areas.”

The province reaffirmed this position in August. Considering Ontario continues to see a high rate of farmland loss, Spoelstra says this assurance is also welcome. The trick now is ensuring impact assessments “have appropriate teeth” to protect farmland. He would also like to see Prime Agricultural Areas include Class 4 soils, whereas the province only considers Classes 1 to 3 under the designation.

OTHER CONCERNS

Transmission corridors must be addressed, too.

“There’s lots of pressure for corridor infrastructure. We also need to ensure impacted farm operations are adequately compensation for the things they’re going to have to deal with today and in the future,” Spoelstra says, adding another benefit of more localized energy generation might be less need for need for large corridor projects.

Max Hansgen, president of the National Farmers Union – Ontario, echoed many of Spoelstra’s comments. Hansgen says the requirement for consent from municipalities, impact assessments for developments proposed for good agricultural land, and other characteristics of the government’s position accommodate many of the concerns the Union and other farm organizations raised. However, an area of remaining concern is the potential for more stray voltage issues as energy production becomes more widespread in farm country.

“How do we marry agrivoltaics and not adversely affect animals? The research has not been done to really know the answer on what the impacts of developments are,” he says.

There is also concern about unlocking Crown land – specifically, whether the environmental benefits of green energy developments will make up for the biodiversity and carbon sequestration- capacity lost in destroying natural features.

“Are we actually coming out further ahead by cutting down Crown land?” says Hansgen. •