Ottawa Battery Project Down But Not Out After Failed Committee Vote
A proposed 250-megawatt battery storage project in Ottawa's rural west is down but not out, after the city's Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee (ARAC) voted unanimously last week to reject the plan.
The Energy Mix has learned that supporters of the Marchurst Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) expect a closer margin when the full city council meets June 11-with the possibility that at least two ARAC members will change their votes.
The 10-hour meeting last Thursday heard 68 public delegations before denying official backing for the project, CBC reports. Gatineau, Quebec-based Evolugen, a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management, already has a contract from Ontario's Independent Electricity System Operator to build the project on a 4.5-hectare site, about 30 kilometres west of downtown Ottawa. But it's conditional on a municipal support resolution (MSR) from the city.
"The technology is a key part of the Ford government's plan to solve a looming energy supply crunch, as demand in the province is expected to increase by 75% by 2050," CBC writes. "But for many residents, the location of this particular battery trumped any broader provincial picture."
Still, while the ARAC vote "was unanimous at face value," some committee members were "very conflicted", a committee observer told The Mix , with one councillor comparing the introduction of battery storage to the arrival of the motor car in a horse and buggy community.
View our latest digests
"I believe that BESS is a good technology, and this, on its merits, may actually be a good project," said Councillor Matthew Luloff (Orleans East-Cumberland), according to a segment of an unofficial meeting transcript viewed by The Energy Mix . While Luloff said his committee vote followed the wishes of councillor Clarke Kelly (West Carleton-March), who vehemently opposes the project in his ward, "I reserve the right to make my own decision at Council, where this matter will come forward again for further discussion."
Luloff added: "I will be taking the lessons I learned here today at that vote. Let this also be a lesson on consultation, it is not a box to be checked but a fundamental part of decision-making. Community education is incredibly important, and we must continue to do better... in how we inform."
Angela Keller-Herzog, executive director of Community Action for Environmental Sustainability (CAFES), said the community adjacent to the Marchurst site "needs to come together" in order to negotiate with Evolugen for local benefits from the project. But at the moment, "avowed opponents... distrust information offered up by the project proponent company," she wrote in an email. "The anti-BESS group is talking about 'raising pitchforks' and the local Facebook group ejects anyone who has positive things to say about the project."
[Disclosure: CAFES is a partner of the Green Resilience Project, a joint community listening effort hosted by Energy Mix Productions and the Basic Income Canada Network.]
The Energy Mix could not verify the content of the private West Carleton BESS Facebook group. Courtney Argue, a leading project opponent who lives about 400 metres from the site, said "it really depends" how visitors are treated when they join the group.
"People get deleted if they are being disruptive or we have a suspicion that they have ties to Evolugen or their potential or confirmed partners," she told The Mix in an email. "You try your best. Sometimes you get it right and sometimes you get it wrong."
As for the comment about pitchforks, "we hold our pitchforks in our hearts when it comes to protecting our land, wildlife, and way of life," Argue wrote. "Rural folk are not violent folk. We handle things together. We show up in the masses at town halls, we help neighbours. In this fight, we cannot leave any stone unturned."
While the group is meeting neighbours who support sustainable energy solutions-Argue said she'd "love to add solar to our farm to help sustain our operations"-she maintained that most of the people she's heard from oppose the BESS project. Keller-Herzog said the local community newspaper, West Carleton Online, which has covered the issue extensively over the last two years, recently estimated that "the community was pretty evenly split but that the anti-BESS voices consistently tried to present a picture as everybody against."
In spite of the furor and the "significant coverage" it has received, "there is probably a majority of busy working families that are not tuned in to the local news and have no engagement on the issue," she said.
"The real problem? Our community lacks a calm and credible space to talk things through," Keller-Herzog wrote in a mid-May opinion piece for West Carleton Online. "Many thoughtful West Carleton residents, who might offer balance or ask good questions, have simply gone silent, understandably reluctant to wade into a conversation that has become conflictive and dominated by a few loud voices."
Evolugen, meanwhile, "now appears hesitant to engage further, perhaps understandably, given how strident the misinformation has become," she said. Evolugen's Canadian head of development, Geoff Wright, had not responded to a request for comment as The Mix went to virtual press Monday evening.
But "there are other BESS conversations that affirm of course residents and businesses in Ottawa want the lights to stay on, want the grid to be stable, want power to be affordable, want the jobs, investment, taxes paid and local community benefits from a safe, non-polluting energy infrastructure solution," Keller-Herzog added.
Source: The Energy Mix
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
10 minutes ago
- Global News
Trump's tariffs on Canada, world to stay in place during case, court rules
A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs will remain in place while a case is heard — extending an emergency stay granted after a lower court found the devastating duties unlawful. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found 'a stay is warranted under the circumstances.' It provides a temporary victory for the Trump administration as it hits its first legal barriers for realigning global trade. 'The Trump administration is legally using the powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address our country's national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking,' said White House spokesman Kush Desai in an emailed statement Tuesday. 'The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' stay order is a welcome development, and we look forward to ultimately prevailing in court.' Story continues below advertisement The U.S. Court of International Trade last month said Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. The ruling from the three-judge panel at the New York-based federal court in May said 'any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional.' It said 'the challenged tariff orders will be vacated,' representing a nationwide injunction against any further imposition of the duties. The Trump administration quickly was granted an emergency motion, essentially freezing the decision by the trade court that blocked the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs. The appeals court upheld that stay but noted the need for an expedited hearing, saying 'these cases present issues of exceptional importance warranting expedited en banc consideration.' A proposed schedule says arguments are expected in court by July 31. That means that countries will continue to be hit by those duties, for now. 5:32 Economist says counter-tariffs on the United States would hurt Canada George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called it an 'unfortunate decision.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, represents five American small businesses pushing against the tariffs. Story continues below advertisement He noted that the court did go out of its way to indicate this is not a ruling on the merits, and ordered an expedited schedule for consideration of the case. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'We have a strong case, and I remain guardedly optimistic that the appellate court will ultimately see that the president's claim of virtually unlimited power to impose tariffs is blatantly illegal — which is what every court to have considered the issue so far has concluded,' Somin said in an email to The Canadian Press. Stock markets have been in turmoil and supply chains have been upended as Trump used unprecedented presidential power to enact his tariffs. Up until Trump's return to the White House, IEEPA had never been used by a president to impose tariffs. Trump hit Canada with economywide duties in March after he declared an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of fentanyl. He partially paused levies a few days later for imports that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. Trump took his trade war to the world in April with duties on nearly every country saying America's trade deficits amounted to a national emergency. The president walked back the most devastating duties a few hours later but left a 10 per cent universal tariff in place for most countries. Story continues below advertisement Trump said the 90-day pause would give countries time to negotiate a deal. The president said if countries didn't comply he would simply set tariff rates himself. 2:41 U.S. trade court 'brazenly abused' judicial powers to block Trump tariffs, WH says White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this' and called the lower court's decision 'judicial overreach.' The appeal ruling will consider two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One included the five American small businesses against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other stemmed from 12 states arguing against both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. At least seven lawsuits are challenging the tariffs. Lawyers for the businesses say IEEPA does not mention tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. They say Trump is misusing the statute. Story continues below advertisement Lawyers for Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont argued that tariffs make U.S. trade policy dependent on Trump's whims. Thirty-three senators also filed an amicus brief — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — in the case, saying the duties would cause harm to small- and medium-sized businesses while also grabbing powers that should be assigned to Congress. 'Small businesses do not have cash-on-hand or capital reserves to pay the increased tariffs, nor can they quickly adapt to them by modifying supply chains,' it said. 'If they cannot pass on the tariff costs to consumers — which would create additional harms for… constituents — many face letting employees go or filing for bankruptcy. Even a few weeks of additional tariffs means small businesses will suffer irreparable harm.' Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.
National Observer
2 hours ago
- National Observer
Toronto eyes burning trash as landfill capacity nears limit
With its primary landfill nearing capacity, Toronto is asking residents to consider a range of future waste disposal options, including at least one controversial idea — burning thousands of tonnes of garbage every week. The idea is raising alarms among environmental advocates, who warn that burning trash releases harmful pollutants and poses health risks to nearby communities. To gather public feedback on various disposal solutions, the city is currently running a 10-minute online survey about how waste should be managed in years ahead. Options include expanding landfill capacity, exporting waste to other municipalities or incinerating it to generate electricity — a process known as 'energy-from-waste,' already used in Brampton and Durham Region, and under consideration in Ottawa. Charlotte Ueta, acting director of policy, planning and outreach for Toronto Solid Waste Management Services, says it's too early to commit to any specific plan, and no incineration facility or technology is currently under consideration. However, she acknowledges the situation is urgent, as Canada's largest city still sends an average of 450,000 tonnes of waste annually — more than three CN Towers' worth — to its primary disposal site, the Green Lane Landfill. Ueta says the focus of its ongoing consultation is on waste reduction, reuse and diversion. Toronto has no available land for a new landfill, and provincial policies limit the city's ability to expand or build one elsewhere, she added. However, the survey did ask residents about the option of building an incineration facility within the city. 'That's why we're asking the public about all potential options, including energy-from-waste,' she said. With its primary landfill nearing capacity, Toronto is asking residents to consider a range of future waste disposal options, including at least one controversial idea — burning thousands of tonnes of garbage every week. The incineration pitch Joseph Lyng, general manager of Brampton-based Emerald Energy From Waste (EFW), says his company has submitted an unsolicited proposal to Toronto to process up to 500,000 tonnes of its garbage annually. The facility already burns about 150,000 tonnes of municipal and commercial waste, generating electricity and heat. Lyng says the plant is expanding to handle up to 900,000 tonnes and produce more than 100 megawatts of energy. Toronto's looming garbage crisis is part of a larger problem across Ontario, where landfill capacity is projected to run out by 2034. Roughly one third of the province's waste is exported to the US, a strategy many say is unsustainable amid rising trade tensions. Recent changes to Blue Box recycling rules and the scrapping of a deposit-return system for non-alcoholic drink containers have further strained diversion efforts. Meanwhile, resistance to new landfills is growing. Under Bill 197, municipalities can block new sites within 3.5 kilometres of their boundaries, making it harder for Toronto to find alternatives. Lyng believes his company offers part of the solution. 'We don't produce the garbage — we manage it,' he said. Lyng argues that by processing waste close to where it's generated, facilities like Emerald's avoid shifting the environmental burden onto unwilling communities. Environmental concerns grow Environmental groups have long opposed incineration, citing toxic emissions and long-term environmental and health risks. Emily Alfred of the Toronto Environmental Alliance said she's disappointed by the direction of the city's current consultation. While Toronto has long promoted a zero-waste goal and a circular economy, she says the framing of the survey places too much focus on whether to choose landfill or incineration — and not enough on how to meaningfully reduce waste in the first place. Alfred criticized the city's survey design, saying some questions appear biased or confusing, particularly those suggesting incineration could occur in the city. She argues that this frames burning waste as a neutral or even favourable option, without clearly outlining the environmental and health risks. 'Incinerators lock cities into decades of burning garbage — garbage that should have been reduced, reused or composted. They undermine the city's goal of zero waste.' Facilities like the Emerald plant in Brampton, she said, would need to burn hundreds of thousands of tonnes annually for decades, regardless of improvements in recycling or waste reduction. Instead of investing in incineration, Alfred believes Toronto should focus on improving organics and recycling programs, particularly in high-rise buildings where access to green bins is often limited. The Zero Waste International Alliance also opposes energy-from-waste, calling it incompatible with circular economy principles. Health experts have voiced similar concerns. The Peel region's medical officer of health warned that expanding the Brampton facility could push pollution beyond safe limits for local communities. The World Health Organization has linked uncontrolled incineration—facilities without proper emission controls—to cancer-causing dioxins and respiratory harm. Lyng says Emerald's operations meet strict environmental standards, with real-time emissions monitoring and annual third-party testing. Health impact studies commissioned by the company found no added risk to the surrounding area, he added. Waste-to-energy: A risky fix for a growing problem Calvin Lakhan, a professor and co-investigator of the Waste Wiki project at York University, says waste-to-energy incineration has historically been viewed negatively in Canada, largely due to its legacy as a dirty, inefficient and costly technology. In Ontario, it isn't even recognized as waste diversion. But modern systems used in Europe and Japan have changed that perception, and are widely used in dense urban centres. If Toronto moves forward with the idea, Lakhan believes it would likely involve best-in-class technology modelled on international examples. Still, he acknowledged concerns that incineration undermines zero-waste goals by destroying, rather than recovering, materials. While not ideal, he argued the city may need to consider all available tools, including advanced incineration, to address its landfill crisis. He urged the province to help municipalities pilot reuse and repair programs, such as textile repair fairs, which offer affordable, community-based ways to cut waste. Many cities, he said, lack the resources to launch such initiatives on their own. Lakhan called for more consistent provincial policy. Recent shifts — like weakening Blue Box targets and delaying organics bans — have left cities unsure of how to proceed. Clear goals and stable rules, he said, are key to long-term progress.
Ottawa Citizen
3 hours ago
- Ottawa Citizen
Dunrobin resident finds prior 'misconduct' by engineer on new battery project
An engineer who presented safety data about battery energy storage systems to the city's Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee last week had his registration with a professional body yanked in February after he 'admitted that he demonstrated professional misconduct.' Article content Stephen Ramsay, an engineer with a PhD from Cambridge University, spoke to the committee on June 5. He was one of 60-plus speakers with a five-minute time slot to address a controversial proposal to build a six-hectare battery energy storage system (BESS) facility on Marchurst Road near Dunrobin. Article content Article content Article content Brookfield Renewable Power Inc., through Evolugen, a Canadian company, was seeking a Municipal Support Resolution (MSR), an instrument introduced by the provincial government to gauge a municipality's interest in building new energy projects. Article content Article content BESSes are needed as Ontario grapples with increased demand for energy, say proponents of the $650 million project. But one of the most contentious issues around BESSes, which use lithium-ion batteries to store electricity during off-peak periods in order to release it during peak demand periods, is the possibility of fire. Article content Ramsay told the committee he was speaking on the scope of the work that was done by Calvin Consulting in support of the Evolugen application. Article content 'We were responsible for modelling the consequences of potential fires from the BESS facility and the consequences in terms of the emission of hazardous gasses, particularly focusing on hydrogen fluoride,' said Ramsay. Article content Article content BESS Systems have transitioned to ones that use the LFP chemistry, which is used in the current application, he said. (LFP batteries are also known as lithium iron phosphate batteries.) Article content Article content 'This is a process which has occurred over many years during which we have been actively involved in this aspect of BESS projects,' Ramsay told the committee. 'The motivation for this, of course, was to try to improve the safety by reducing the incidences of thermal runaway and the consequences resulting from fires.' Article content In response to questions from Orléans East-Cumberland Ward Coun. Matt Luloff asking him to simplify his comments, Ramsay responded: 'Basically what we're saying is that as we've changed from the old chemistry, which seemed to be essentially inherently dangerous, to the one which is LFP, which we are beginning to see is much, much safer.'
