City’s report on power plant plan delayed
By Sandi Krasowski, Local Journalism Initiative, The Chronicle Journal
A report to Thunder Bay city council about the proposed development of Versorium Energy’s gas-fired power-generating facility at the intersection of Central Avenue and Maureen Street will be delayed until the next meeting.
Jeff Trynchy, Versorium’s manager and stakeholder, and Chris Codd, Versorium’s vice-president of asset development, appeared at the City’s growth standing committee on Sept. 23 to obtain a municipal support resolution as part of the Independent Electricity System Operator’s (IESO) procurement process. They followed up the next day with an open house at the Slovak Legion.
On Oct. 28, activist group Citizens United for a Sustainable Planet (CUSP) was led by organizer Paul Berger in a deputation to the standing growth committee recommending councillors reject the proposal. Another individual opposed the development as well.
“We had lots of discussion at the growth standing committee on Oct. 28 and I was being really optimistic about the turnaround time to get the updated report to council for Nov. 4, and that I would be able to get all of that done,” said Devon McClouskey, the City’s manager of planning service.
“It was impossible, just because of the amount of dialogue, information and questions that the growth standing committee had.”
She said that they have now decided to provide more information about the Independent Electricity System Operator process.
“The applicant (Versorium) also wants to provide some further information about that process and the role of natural gas in Ontario’s electricity system,” she said, adding that they are still able to meet Versorium’s timeline for submission to the province with the adjusted date.
“We felt that that was the best way to move forward.”
Meanwhile, Berger disputes that Versorium would be displacing greenhouse gas emissions from somewhere else, and developing the plant in Thunder Bay wouldn’t make any difference for the climate.
“At the city council meeting, I called out a lie. I said the only reasonable response to their chart of greenhouse gas emissions was to laugh, and I think that was a bit of a shock for some city councillors,” Berger said.
“I think that needs to be looked into seriously. They need to know that this is a gas plant. It’s only a gas plant. It adds to greenhouse gas emissions. The idea that it displaces some other source somewhere else is really fantasy.”
He added that it seemed like city councillors that evening were a bit surprised about the greenhouse gas, the climate implications, and that it goes against the net zero strategy.
“When they asked administration about the net zero strategy, the response was, ‘Well, the net zero strategy says we’re going to need more power in the future, and in that way, this fits with the plan.’ But that’s patently absurd to anybody who thinks that,” he said. “We’ll need more power because we’re going to electrify cars and home heating systems and so on, and to then create that power by burning fossil fuels doesn’t make any sense. So I really hope that (council) is going to listen to citizens and experts in terms of those matters, and they’ll make a decision ultimately,to follow their own plans and their growth strategy that says we need to pay attention to the environment.”
Codd said it was a bit of an awkward process at that council meeting, where he says they couldn’t actually speak because they had previously been deputized at the Sept. 23 meeting.
“It was a bit awkward, where people were opposing the project, saying things that weren’t accurate about our project, and we couldn’t really respond,” Codd said.
He added that the information they provided to council is accurate and they’re happy to speak to it.
