Wednesday, August 24, 2011

McGuinty Q & A

McGuinty Q&A | London | News | London Free Press

My eyes were drawn to the final Q & A:

Q:Are you being honest with voters when you give them a 10% rebate on electricity costs that they will have to pay anyway in the long run?

A: I don't think it's fair for our generation to rebuild (an electricity) system . . . to pay it all up-front, one-shot when for the (foreseeable future) other people will get the benefit. We are in fact deferring the cost, we're in effect borrowing money, and I think that's a fair way to spread the workload.

Actually, we are contracting almost everything for new generation, and funding it with the public generation built 20-100 years ago, while strangling the rates paid for public power in order to fund the contracted supply - the bulk of transmission spending is also to accommodate new, unreliable, and expensive, supply.

Not that the answer could have been anything but ridiculous. Critics, particularly the anti-nuclear ones, say the debt retirement charge points to the waste of previous governments' spending, while adding the Ontario Clean Energy Benefit, which is twice the size of the DRC.

Does that mean his government is twice as bad as previous ones, or ...
that the green/gas alliance of supply is twice as expensive as nuclear?

No comments:

Post a Comment