Toronto's energy related editorial content today

In an editorial today, The Toronto Sun offers, "some ideas for how McGuinty could have saved money in the past, which might provide helpful guidance for the future."

McGuinty must restrain himself | Editorial | Opinion | Toronto Sun:

(3) McGuinty could have saved another $1 billion, approximately, by not cancelling two natural gas plants to save the political hides of two Liberal MPPs leading up to the 2011 election. In fairness, McGuinty has said one of the plants will be moved. We invite readers to treat this claim with all the seriousness it deserves.

(4) In future, we urge McGuinty not to force Ontarians to pay, through higher electricity rates, up to $250 million annually to green energy companies not to produce electricity. Someone in government should tell the premier you can actually pay zero dollars for zero electricity.

Read the full article at The Toronto Sun site



In other editorials today, the Toronto Star provided space to the Ontario Clean Air Alliance (OCAA) propagandist Jack Gibbons.
Gibbons has moved on from selling natural gas to selling nothing at all.

I wrote on my original content blog, some time ago, "If we added a lot more nothing we’d have way more supply not to consume, allowing our bureaucrats to achieve far greater theoretical reductions. "
I got that one wrong, as the OPA recently claimed a shortfall in their demand reduction targets due to reduction in demand.


I posit a business cannot dedicate itself to condescending on customers who use it's products in a manner it judges to be inappropriate; the current experience of Toronto Hydro is to be expected from an organization that institutionalized contempt for its customer base (see the many posts at Tom Adams' site for Toronto Hydro's recent escapades).
 If you condescend to reading Gibbons' piece in the Star, you probably should do a reality check by reading up on the recent history of demand reduction program performance at Energy Probe too.