Body: Council Type: Agenda Meeting: Regular Date: May 2, 2012 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: Frontenac County
[View Document (PDF)](/docs/frontenac-county/Published Agendas/Advisory Committees of Council/Green Energy Task Force/2012/Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee - 02 May 2012.pdf)
Document Text
Green Energy Task Force Committee Agenda
Date and Time
May 2, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.
Place
County of Frontenac Administrative Boardroom 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie
Members: Matt Fiene, Community Member David Hahn, Chair John Kittle, Vice Chair Maris Krumins, Community Member
Brad Leonard, Community Member Janet Gutowski, Warden Denis Doyle, Deputy Warden John Inglis, County Councillor
Page 1.
Call to order
Adoption of the agenda
Disclosure of pecuniary interest and general nature thereof
Deputations and/or presentations
Closed meeting
Adoption of minutes
2-7
•
8-12
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Business arising from the minutes •
OSEA Membership
•
Green Energy Act -Green House Gas Workshop Update
•
Community Energy Network Retreat- “Renewable Energy Co-operatives”
•
Ministry of Labour Regulation Changes
Communications
Reports/Topics for Discussion
13-18
•
OPA Review
19
•
Work Plan Review
- Other business •
Approved 2012 Budget
- Next meeting date
- Adjournment
Page 1 of 19
Agenda Item # 6•
MINUTES OF THE GREEN ENERGY TASK FORCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE March 7, 2012
A meeting of the Green Energy Task Force was held in the Frontenac Boardroom of the County Administrative Office, 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie on Wednesday, March 7, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. In attendance: David Hahn, Chair John Kittle, Vice Chair Warden Janet Gutowski Deputy Warden Denis Doyle Maris Krumins, Community member Brad Leonard, Community Member Regrets: Councillor John Inglis Staff: Joe Gallivan, Manager of Sustainability Planning (Acting Clerk), Alison Vandervelde, Sustainability Assistant, Casey Buchanan, Executive Assistant (Recording Secretary) 1.
Call to order David called the meeting to order at 10:10 a.m.
Adoption of the agenda The agenda was received.
Disclosure of pecuniary interest and general nature thereof David requested that it be noted that no member of the Committee declared a pecuniary interest.
Deputations and/or presentations Solar Panels Report The committee accepted the Solar Panels report for information.
Closed meeting: nil
Adoption of minutes
Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes March 7, 2012
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Page 1 of 6
Page 2 of 19
Agenda Item # 6•
January 11, 2012 Minutes Committee Recommendation THAT the minutes of the meeting of January 11, 2012 be adopted as presented. CARRIED 7.
Business arising from the minutes Green Profit Conference
The conference dates are March 18-19. David, Brad, Denis and John all confirmed that they are planning on attending the conference. Alison noted that there are two free registrations with the sponsorship and the intention is to have one staff member attend on Monday to provide coverage at the table. Alison noted that the time frame for the conference is from Sunday afternoon to 4:45 p.m. on Monday. The committee discussed the need for staff to be at the Monday session and noted that if required, staff could attend on the Monday morning as it is the busiest and they would be fine on their own for the Sunday afternoon session. Alison circulated the Green Energy Task Force brochure and discussed presentation material for the conference. Brad suggested that we add to the document a picture of the ambulance base solar project and other initiatives from the County as pictures tend to interest people more so than the text of the document. Alison noted that Liz suggested that staff would create a PowerPoint presentation to play on a laptop throughout the conference, and this would be an excellent opportunity to incorporate more pictures of the various projects the County has taken on and completed. Alison committed to modifying the brochure according to the changes requested and would start the PowerPoint presentation; Janet will forward photos. Additionally, Alison informed the committee that she will have a new banner for the conference as well as the latest version of the ICSP document. David requested that further suggestions for the conference or brochure document be sent to Alison. Media Release Alison presented the MicroFit Project Media Release and asked for feedback. It was suggested that SWITCH be the contact for further information and Brad did not expect it to object. David suggested that the County’s contact information be included and the instructions be more specific for whom to contact. The committee agreed OSEA should also be a contact for the media release. John suggested that the media release be taken to the Green Profit Conference as a take-away material. Denis requested that Alison add the number of projects into the release. The committee discussed with Alison the process of media releases and noted that she generally does receive follow up from media on her releases. The committee suggested Alison refer to the OSEA website for conversion factors. The committee requested that staff create generic GETF Business cards for the Green Profit Conference. Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes March 7, 2012
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Page 2 of 6
Page 3 of 19
Agenda Item # 6•
Committee Recommendation THAT the MicroFit Project media be released. CARRIED 8.
Communications: nil
Reports/Topics for Discussion OPA Review
Brad informed the committee that the OPA review should be released within the month. Monthly Energy Production Report The committee received the monthly Energy Production report for information. Ontario Feed-In Tariff Forum 2012 The committee discussed the forum and noted that it is a fairly high level conference and the information would be highly valuable. Brad noted that the registration cost is $1689. Deputy Warden Denis Doyle noted that it would be difficult to get approval from County Council to attend the conference and committee members were encouraged to attend, but at their own cost. Proposed Solar Farm in South Frontenac Brad discussed the Samsung Solar Project report and noted that there is growing restlessness with community members because public relations on the project are less than satisfactory. Brad informed the committee that he is working collectively with SWITCH to help respond to some of the growing concerns in the community. Brad noted that he attended the Rural Affairs Committee with the City of Kingston to address their response to residents’ concerns and wondered if we as the County should be responding in some way. Deputy Warden Denis Doyle requested that the committee leave any responses to this issue up to the lower tier municipality. Brad presented concerns that the group of residents will most likely be contacting the County of Frontenac with their issues and he believed the GETF should be prepared to respond on behalf of the County. Warden Janet Gutowski suggested that there is an opportunity to educate the community through positive communication such as press releases; however it would be seen as interference if the Task Force were to start attending meetings and releasing statements. Chair David Hahn suggested sending out information on the OSEA webinar to all of the municipalities in the Frontenac’s as a resource and learning tool for how to respond to resident concerns. The committee agreed that the Green Energy Task Force would not become involved in the response to the issues surrounding the proposed solar farm, but requested that Brad continue to update the committee on concerns and progress of the project. Meeting with the Honourable John Gerretsen, Attorney General Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes March 7, 2012
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Page 3 of 6
Page 4 of 19
Agenda Item # 6•
Brad presented a power point to the Committee. He explained new regulations are coming forward for the installation of solar panels that will see electricians performing all work including racking and therefore the ‘average’ person would no longer be able to be employed to install solar panels. Brad requested that the Warden and County Council send a letter to the Minister of Environment making note of the low number of instances of injury related to solar installations. Brad and Alison will work on the draft. The committee agreed that the Green Energy Task Force should request County Council to direct staff with the assistance of Brad to draft a letter to send to the Minister of Environment. Committee Recommendation THAT County Council send a letter to the Minister of Environment expressing concerns with new legislation noted in Brad Leonard’s presentation to the committee on March 7, 2012. CARRIED Green Energy Act, 2009 - O.Reg 397/11 David provided a brief summary of the regulations under the Green Energy Act and requested the committee consider how County staff should steer through the changes. Denis suggested that our position at the County would simply be to inform the lower tier municipalities that it is new. David suggested that the County consider hiring a summer student to take on the new work. Alison discussed with the group the possibility of using Adam Fenik of Frontenac Arch Biosphere to complete one of the first milestones from the plan presented at the last Sustainability Advisory Committee which focuses on measuring specifics through the green house gas initiative. Denis noted that LAS is providing an opportunity to learn more about the Green Energy Act regulations and two staff members from the Islands will be attending. David requested that staff provide a report to the committee on progress through milestones and opportunities to work collectively with other townships. David also requested that we consider that work plan item. Denis will circulate information regarding the seminar being hosted by LAS. John K noted that a request has come forward from John I to make a presentation to County Council noting that the County could take a role to ensure that meeting the regulation is a coordinated effort. Denis noted that this regulation is beyond the County’s role. Janet noted that there is opportunity for collaboration and it would be worth it for the County to find out where everyone is at and where people are requiring assistance. The committee agreed that the topic should be brought to the CAOs’ table to explore opportunities for collaboration. 10.
Other business Budget Presentation to County Council
David suggested that the committee be available to County Council for the budget deliberations, but noted after discussion with Geoff Sandiford (Chair of the Sustainable Advisory Committee) he believed it was not necessary. Janet noted that there is value in the GETF attending the budget meeting to make a presentation to County Council to report on the work plan; however Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes March 7, 2012
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Page 4 of 6
Page 5 of 19
Agenda Item # 6•
Geoff would be able to present the broader budget for all advisory committees and associated projects. Draft Work Plan David discussed the work plan with the committee noting that the format that it has been presented in is quite different from the past. Alison spoke to the format noting it is consistent with the work plans of the other advisory committees and noted it is important in making presentations to council in a similar format. In terms of content, Alison noted that the text is quite flexible and can be changed as the committee sees fit. David presented concerns about the timelines, and Janet noted that in cases where the committee is unsure of the completion date we would note that the project is ongoing. Alison suggested that the committee look at the work plan over the weekend, send suggestions to staff and committee members via email and a new draft would be released next week prior to taking it to County Council on March 21, 2012. The Committee went through each point of the old work plan. Some committee members requested more detail in the work plan and in response, Janet and Denis noted that a summarization of the projects is important and the level of detail that is presently being presented is the right amount for County Council. The committee agreed that the work plan should have an appendix to expand on the level of detail to serve the purposes of the GETF as well as meet the standards of County Council. John K committed to providing further detail for item number one in the work plan. For item number four, the committee requested that it speak specifically to Wintergreen. Alison is to distinguish items five and one. For item number seven, the committee requested that it be clarified to indicate community and municipal and to explore opportunities to cooperate between the townships and the County. David suggested that item eight referenced Directions for Our Future (page 78 number 2) and suggested that item eight and nine are linked and that the GETF consider doing public consultations to work through these items. The committee agreed that looking ahead to public consultations would be premature and requested that item number nine be dropped off the work plan. The committee agreed that an item should be added regarding its efforts to continue to lobby on behalf of the County with OPA and Hydro One. The group requested that item one note communications efforts be incorporated into the wording. OSEA Webinars David suggested that we become a member of OSEA and noted the value in the webinars that are being hosted. The committee discussed that OSEA does have credibility and influence with Hydro One and it is an excellent opportunity for the County to have a voice with them on green energy issues. David informed the committee that he believed Liz will be moving forward with membership registration and noted that once the group is registered, there will be many free webinar and networking opportunities. 11.
Next meeting date
Wednesday, May 2, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.
Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes March 7, 2012
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Page 5 of 6
Page 6 of 19
Agenda Item # 6•
Adjournment
Committee Recommendation THAT the meeting be adjourned at 12:06 p.m. CARRIED
David Hahn, Chair
Joe Gallivan, Acting Clerk
Green Energy Task Force Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes March 7, 2012
Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2012
Page 6 of 6
Page 7 of 19
Agenda Item # 7•
Frontenac Arch Biosphere (FAB) GHG Inventory Meeting #2: Boundary Setting Workshop Attendees:
Name:
Representative of:
Contact Info:
Adam Fenech Adegboyega (Babs) Babasola David Bull Don Ross Graham Whitelaw Gulaid Egeh Holly Mitchell Ron Hipfner Stephen Knechtel
University of PEI St. Lawrence College FABN FABN Queen’s University U of T / Queen’s Brockville Frontenac County - South Frontenac Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority
afenech@upei.ca ababasola@sl.on.ca david@fabr.ca don@fabr.ca graham_whitelaw@gmail.com g_egeh@hotmail.com holly@ripnet.com rjh@ronhipfner.com knechtel@cataraquiregion.on.ca
Boundary Setting: Spatial (Geographic): Based on but not limited to the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve region: including 2 Counties (Frontenac and Leeds-Grenville) and about 18 municipalities and communities located in and around it (refer to Appendix A) Data to be gathered at and distinct for the municipal level and county level; and consolidated as the “biosphere region”
Level 3
Biosphere
Consolidate
Level 2
Counties/Communities
Consolidate
Level 1
Municipalities
Gather Data
Green Energy Act -Green House Gas Workshop Update
Page 8 of 19
Agenda Item # 7•
Temporal Boundary:
- Baseline: 1990
- Inventories to be made for 2000 (if data available) and 2010
- a new inventory may be made every 5 years (in line with Stats Can Census data)
Operational Boundary - Activity Data: Residential Activities Heating: oil, natural gas, propane, wood and electricity also consider Renewable Energy (not necessary for accounting but good to include) Data Source: Stats Can, Queen’s Data and Municipal Data Electricity: lights, appliances, cooling Data Source: Stats Can, Queens Data or Municipal Data Transportation: cars, trucks, boats obtain data regarding # of vehicles per household, annual fuel use and fuel type consider recreational/domestic vehicles/equipment (boats, ATVs, lawnmowers, snowblowers, leafblowers, etc.)
- also consider back-up generators Commercial Activities:
- Building Heating/Cooling (cubic metres)
- Building Electricity (kWh)
- Vehicle Fleets
- Industries in the region include:
- Electricity Production from Natural Gas and Hydroelectric obtain data from Queen’s University, SLC, other sources determine the amount of energy produced versus what is used in the region
- DuPont, 3M Canada, Proctor and Gamble; several others Agriculture (separate from commercial)
- varies between counties
- Data Source: Queens Data and Stats Can
- look for data regarding # of livestock (cows, sheep, pigs, horses, poultry, other)
- add a separate section for emissions produced from fruit farming, vegetable production, etc.
- Pipes – determine the length and type of pipes going through the region and look for data regarding fugitive emissions
- Forestry - wood decay, machinery, mills
Green Energy Act -Green House Gas Workshop Update
Page 9 of 19
Agenda Item # 7•
- Waste Management: land-filling, incineration, septic tanks
- Mining:
- Road and Building Maintenance: data - emissions produced from maintenance activities look into Municipal Data
- Construction: emissions associated with new construction Municipal Activities:
- Building Heating/Cooling and Electricity: schools, hospitals, libraries, civic centres
- Vehicles: cars, trucks, boats, planes
- Waste Management: incineration, land-filling, composting and transfer Data Source: check Queens Data
- Road Maintenance and Construction emissions associated with production of cement and equipment use Other Activities:
- Transient Traffic Cars: passing through the region (Highway 401) Data Source: look into Queens Data should be separated based on municipality Boats: passing through waterways, seaway commercial and tourism Trains: VIA Rail, CPR Planes: airports in Kingston, Brockville and other
- Waste Transport out of the region – to remote landfill, composting
- Burning of Wood
- Private Sewage Lagoons (in Bedrock)
- emissions of methane GHG Removals:
- Tree planting
- Carbon Credits
- Wetland Restoration/Removal Ducks Unlimited
- Renewable Energy
- No-Till Agriculture: sequesters carbon
Green Energy Act -Green House Gas Workshop Update
Page 10 of 19
Agenda Item # 7•
GHG Offsets:
- Switching to Hybrid vehicles
- Emissions Offsets from eating locally quantify reduced transport emissions check distribution cost on Stats Can ask Warren Maybee for possible data
Gathering Data:
- Statistics Canada Data
- Queens faculty and reports
- Students: Queens University and St. Lawrence College to assist with data collection
- Municipalities/Counties fleet size and type 3 years of inventory experience from Brockville
- FCM.com – Federation of Canadian Municipalities
- Sustainable Kingston Possible Sources of Funding:
- Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM)
- Ontario Power Authority (OPA) Whitelaw and Ross to draft collaborative funding application; all parties to send notes of needs and contributions
Green Energy Act -Green House Gas Workshop Update
Page 11 of 19
Green Energy Act -Green House Gas Workshop Update
APPENDIX A: Counties and Subdivisions
List of Counties and Subdivisions County:
Frontenac Township of North Frontenac Township of Central Frontenac Township of South Frontenac Township of Frontenac Islands
Subdivisions:
Leeds-Grenville Township of Athens Township of Augusta Township of Edwardsburgh/Cardinal Township of Elizabethtown-Kitley Township of Front of Yonge Township of Leeds and the Thousand Islands
Other Brockville Kingston Perth Gananoque Prescott
Municipality (township) of North Grenville Township of Rideau Lakes Village of Merrickville-Wolford Village of Westport
Agenda Item # 7•
Page 12 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
microFIT Rules, Contract and Eligible Participant Schedule Feedback Submission Form Completed forms should be sent to microFITsubmissions@powerauthority.on.ca. Please identify the section number of the rules and contract you are providing feedback on. Note that there are separate sections for feedback on the rules, contract and eligible participant schedule. Feel free to add additional rows to the form. Note that there is a separate form for FIT submissions – please refer to the FIT website for more information – FIT.powerauthority.on.ca Optional Information: Name: Brad Leonard, Partner Company: Renewable Energy of Plum Hollow Inc.
microFIT Rules Section
Section 8 Definitions
Feedback
FIT 2.0 Rule: Definition of nameplate capacity, both AC and DC Nameplate Capacity must be less than 10 kW. Requested Change: a) Either AC or DC Nameplate Capacity less than 10kW as was the case in FIT 1.0 ; or b) AC capacity can be 120% of DC capacity. Rationale: Limiting the total project capacity to a maximum of 10 kW AC or DC will reduce project size to ~8kW AC. The result will be lost revenues to manufacturers and businesses and will make the projects less economical to system owners since the fixed costs will be a higher ratio of project spending. Sound solar design advises a higher module DC capacity than inverter AC capacity because modules are expected to reduce their DC output by 20% over 20-25 years and the modules only produces this peak capacity for very short periods in a day, allowing the production to be more consistently close to the AC capacity. FIT 2.0 Rule: The OPA will process applications in 60 days.
Section 3.3 Completeness Requested Change: Applications submitted before Nov. 1 will receive that Review calendar year’s tariff rate but will have all the same conditions of the Section 3.5.c) Application Approval Notice from the date of issuance.
OPA Review
Page 13 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
Application Approval
Rationale: This change is designed to provide hold the OPA accountable to the 60 day time window. Under FIT 2.0, the contract price will be determined by the issuance date of the Application Approval Notice. If the OPA does not meet Section 5.2 Contract Price the 60 day timeframe, applications submitted prior to Nov. 1 will be subjected to the next year’s tariff. This will lead to frustrations with potential owners, and directly impacting small business staffing, and ultimately leading to fewer Generation uptakes in the program. Payments Section 3.4 c) Pending LDC Offer to Connect FIT 2.0 Rule: The OPA will satisfy the Annual Procurement Limit (APL) when Section 1.2 approving applications. Important Information for Applicants Requested Change: The OPA must make the fulfillment of the APL transparent. We request the OPA provide, on a weekly basis:
- The application date currently processing (e.g. currently processing Section 1.3 applications submitted on or before Oct. 12, 2012). Overview of
- The number of new applications submitted but not yet processed (e.g. there the microFIT are 1,236 new applications submitted but not yet processed after Oct. 12, Program 2012.) Process
- The annual procurement limit fulfillment (e.g. 35% full) Rationale: With the above information, it would be possible for all involved in the microFIT sector to anticipate business demands. Without transparency, it is impossible for small businesses to plan their staffing, purchasing decisions, and drive the consumer market. FIT 2.0 Rule: Less-than-10kW project size tranche has a tariff of 54.9 Section 5.2 Contract Price cents/kWh. and Requested Change: Include of project size trench of less-than-5kW DC with a Generation tariff of 72.4 cents/kWh to stimulate the urban rooftop market. Payments Rationale: The average urban roof mount solar system is less than 5 kW and these smaller projects do not benefit from the economies-of-scale of projects up to 10 kW. The fixed costs remain and labour rates are less attractive on a kW basis. In addition, many urban roofs are generally less productive (due to shading and azimuth), and have different roof planes (need multiple inverters increasing equipment costs). Each of these factors reduce the economic payback of the less-than-5kW projects. Fixed costs include structural engineering and building permit ($1,000),
OPA Review
Page 14 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
electrician and ESA costs ($1,300) and LDC connection fees ($1,500). They total approximately $3,800 per project. Project Size 10 kW 5 kW 2 kW
Installed Cost ($/W) $5.50 $6.50 $7.25
Total Cost $55,000 $32,500 $14,500
Fixed Costs $3,800 $3,800 $3,800
Fixed Costs % 6.9% 11.7% 26.2%
The difference between 10 kW and 2 kW installed cost is $1.75/W or 31.8% higher. Therefore, we suggest a tariff of 54.9 cents/kWh x 1.381 = 72.4 cents/kWh.
microFIT Contract Section
Feedback
APPENDIX A FIT 2.0 Rule: Definition of nameplate capacity, both AC and DC Nameplate DEFINITIONS Capacity must be less than 10 kW. Requested Change: a) Either AC or DC Nameplate Capacity less than 10kW as was the case in FIT 1.0 ; or b) AC capacity can be 120% of DC capacity. Rationale: Limiting the total project capacity to a maximum of 10 kW AC or DC will reduce project size to ~8kW AC. The result will be lost revenues to manufacturers and businesses and will make the projects less economical to system owners since the fixed costs will be a higher ratio of project spending. Sound solar design advises a higher module DC capacity than inverter AC capacity because modules are expected to reduce their DC output by 20% over 20-25 years and the modules only produces this peak capacity for very short periods in a day, allowing the production to be more consistently close to the AC capacity.
OPA Review
Page 15 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
microFIT Eligible Participant Schedule Feedback
OPA Review
Page 16 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
Final Submission Regarding FIT 2 draft “Local Community Project: A co-op with a minimum equity participation of 15 per cent and a minimum participation level of 50 property owners in a municipality where the FIT Project is located.” This proposal is intended to encourage community ownership of renewable energy projects. A local community project will be awarded 3 points which will help the co-op gain priority approval. For the Wintergreen Renewable Energy Co-op the way the Local Community Project is defined here will present a lot of difficulties. Our Co-op will be seeking to invest in projects in Kingston, Frontenac County and Lennox and Addington Counties. The first issue is which level of municipality is referred to here, County or lower tier such as towns, villages or townships. In rural Ontario communities regularly cross boundaries of municipalities especially of townships but also of counties. If our co-op has to get 50 members in every township where we wish to develop a project, the burden will be almost insurmountable. If it is in every County (or upper tier municipality) the odds against success are a little lower. I would like to point out that Frontenac and Lennox and Addington are “very skinny” counties ie they are long from north to south and narrow from East to west. It is especially true here that real communities here cross political boundaries. Our Public Health (KFL&A Public Health) and our Public Education System( Limestone School Board) are both organized on the basis of serving all the parts of the greater Kingston, Frontenac and Lennox and Addington community. The population of these three municipalities together is less than 200,000. Contrast that to Metro Toronto with 2m residents and you will see the greater challenge that would attach to scuring 50 members in only one of the municipalities. We would like to suggest that it might be best to drop the requirement for members of the co-op to own property in the municipality where the project is located. If, however, it is desired to maintain the local community focus, a better way to define the residency requirement would be as follows: “a minimum participation level of 50 property owners or residents in the municipality where the project is located or in a municipality adjacent to the municipality where the project is located.” We would like to add that property owners may not be residents or members of the community whereas residents are more likely to be members of the community. We also recommend that
OPA Review
Page 17 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
municipalities be defined as upper tier municipalities where there are two municipal tiers. We would also like to point out that we expect our co-op to have more than 50 members and to meet FSCO requirements to issue offering statements. However a smaller co-op might wish to not pass the limits that occasion the issuing of an offering statement and therefore avoid the delays of the FSCO approval process. A small wind development in a small township would have a tough time getting 50 members in their small municipality. Perhaps in the future when our rural residents have had more experience with renewable energy co-ops these targets might be more easily reached within individual townships or counties. It remains difficult to gain members now, especially with the stop and go nature of the policy and approvals environment in which we are attempting to grow.
OPA Review
Page 18 of 19
Agenda Item # 9•
Green Energy Task Force - An Advisory Committee of the County of Frontenac Work Plan for 2012 (i) Goal/Vision
The vision of the County of Frontenac stated in Directions for Our Future is Fresh with Opportunity Growing Vibrant, Innovative, Natural, Sustainable Places . Within the context of the Values and Principles, the GETF will be guided by the Energy Vision Statement: The County of Frontenac is a leader among rural communities in the development, conservation, generation and efficient use of clean, renewable energy that fulfils the community’s energy needs. The County of Frontenac’s diverse energy systems reduce emissions and externalities on air, water, and the climate. (ii) Mandate To further the community’s vision of the Energy Focus Area of Directions for Our Future. To report periodically to County Council and to produce an annual work plan for adoption by Council.
Proposed Activities for 2012
1st Q
2nd Q
3rd Q
4th Q
1 Contribute to the development of a communications plan for the GETF including the strengthening of communications with all stakeholders, including County and Township Councils and community groups 2 Continue working with County and Townships on Municipal Solar Installation Projects 3 Continue work towards Economic Development of the Energy Sector in the Frontenacs 4 Continue to liaise with key groups - County’s SAC, New Energy Project, SWITCH, EcoPerth, TREK, 401 Energy, Wintergreen, LDSB/ESAC, etc 5 Seek opportunities to gain insights into Green Energy through webinars, conferences, workshops, etc 6 Energy Efficiencies - Research and advise County-level response to Green Energy Act Regulation 397/11; explore possible coordination between Townships and County, continue public promotion of energy conservation 7 Explore possibilities surrounding a Community Energy Plan and ways to approach initial phases 8 Continue to lobby Hydro One on behalf of the Frontenac Region in regards to grid capacity and connection issues Major 2012 Calendar Events: SWITCH conference* Wintergreen Renewable Energy Workshop OSEA Community Power Conference* (* County funding requested)
Work Plan Review
Page 19 of 19
