Spears Spins the SE-91 Topic

The Toronto Star's John Spears goes to Jason Chee-Aloy for the inside scope on the SE-91 committee tasked with structuring a system to operate despite the expected avalanche of surplus baseload generation events predicted for the near future
Mr. Chee-Aloy is a consultant for the Korean consortium.
Fine choice on their part.
Prior to becoming a professional 'consultant' Mr. Chee-Aloy's jobs included "short and long-term resource adequacy mechanisms" with the IESO. "Mr. Chee-Aloy was the Chair of the IESO’s Long Term Resource Adequacy Working Group."
Following that, Mr. Chee-Aloy moved to the Ontario Power Authority where a current bio notes his history:

Director of Generation Procurement at the Ontario Power Authority where he was responsible for procuring over 13,000 MW of generation through direct negotiations, standard offer programs and competitive processes. Jason lead the development, consultation and implementation of North America’s first comprehensive Renewable Feed-in Tariff Program.

The IESO SE-91 issues are complex, but in my recent column on the issue, I noted the IESO defers any talk on payments to the contractor, which is the OPA.

In Samsung's case, their contract negotiations were with their new consultant - which is who Spears went to in order to provide you the crooked goods on the story.


Renewable power targets at risk, Samsung consultant warns - thestar.com:

"A consultant for the province’s biggest renewable energy firms – including Samsung Renewable Energy – says that the province’s goal of installing 10,700 megawatts of renewable generating capacity by 2018 is at risk.
“Things need to move faster,” Jason Chee-Aloy said in an interview Thursday.
“If the government is serious about getting these contracted renewable generation projects in service, (then) the developers that have to construct these things and the lenders that have to finance these projects – everyone needs a lot more certainty.”
At the heart of Chee-Aloy’s concern is a paper written by the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO).
It is being kicked around in committee with the opaque name “SE-91”.
But there’s nothing meaningless about the work of the committee, which is has labouring since 2010.
Its job, in part: To decide, when there’s surplus power, which producers get to keep running, and which ones must shut down. A corollary: If they shut down, do they get paid for lost production?"

Emphasis added.
There is no corollary at the IESO.

The question of whether they get paid or not is contractual - that's why they bought the guy who wrote the contracts - although I'd note Mr. Chee-Aloy is not quoted in the article as saying anything I disagree with aside from 'things need to move quicker'

40% of planned wind generation will not have demand to absorb it.  By 2014 it may be as high as 60%.

The reason there is no visibility for future generation projects is because there is no reason to assume the projects are necessary.

Things don't have to move.