Energy Probe

Canadian Press
CTV.ca
April 19, 2006

More Ontarians are turning to long-term, fixed-price electricity contracts following last week’s announcement that regulated prices are rising May 1, but experts caution that prices would have to rise dramatically for the contracts to pay off.

"Signing one of those (long-term) contracts is extremely pessimistic,” says Tom Adams, executive director of Energy Probe, a national consumer group. "What they’re offering is peace of mind at a huge premium."

Most Ontarians are still under the province’s regulated price plan, where they are charged a regulated price per kilowatt hour for the electricity they use for heating, air conditioning, lighting and appliances.

On May 1, the regulated price will rise to 5.8 cents per kilowatt hour for the first 600 kWh’s used per summer month, and 6.7 cents per kWh after that. Regulated bills vary across the province depending on what the local utility charges to deliver power.

About 25 per cent of residential consumers have instead chosen to lock in their rates through a long-term contract offered by one of the six electricity retailers serving Ontario, said Ian MacLellan, spokesman for Energyshop.com.

Following the Ontario Energy Board’s announcement that regulated electricity bills will rise between three and 15 per cent for most homeowners starting May 1, "we noticed a very large increase in the number of people signing up (for fixed-rate contracts) through our website,” MacLellan said.

Those consumers are placing a bet on how high electricity prices will rise.

"What customers need to think about is, over the next five years, do I think that electricity prices will go up more than 25 per cent?” said Ian Mondrow, spokesman for Direct Energy, the province’s largest electricity retailer.

"If they go up by more than 25 per cent over the next five years, you could end up being better off. It’s important to say that we don’t sell savings, because no one can say for sure what prices are going to do. We sell certainty.”

For the certainty of knowing what their electricity will cost them for the next five years, Direct Energy’s customers are currently signing up at 9.65 cents per kWh.

However, Mondrow noted that the regulated price includes two types of rebates that fixed-price customers will receive directly. Those two rebates add up to 1.124 cents per kWh, bringing Direct Energy’s effective price down to about 8.53 cents per kWh.

"So, by my math, our price is about 25 per cent higher, after you account for the rebates, than the regulated price plan,” said Mondrow.

Mondrow said Direct Energy, which also operates in Alberta, originally entered Ontario’s electricity market in May 2002. That fall, the market was "effectively closed by Ernie Eves” when the province froze the retail price at 4.3 cents per kWh, which was below cost, Mondrow said. The company re-entered the market about a year ago, when the regulated price plan came into force.

The regulated prices are now determined by a number of factors, including the amount of electricity produced by generators, natural gas prices, and the weather.

The May 1 price rise comes after the Ontario Energy Board underestimated the price of supplying regulated customers. Customers paid about $3.7 billion over the past year, while the electricity cost $4.1 billion.

The summer of 2005 was the hottest in Ontario for 30 years, increasing demand as low water levels reduced output from hydroelectric plants. High natural gas prices also contributed to the cost.

"In terms of supply mix, looking out over the next five years, the most important factor is the government’s announcement that they intend to close down the coal plants by 2009," said Adam White, president of the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario.

"If they do that, our analysis suggests that electricity prices are going to rise significantly. You can generate electricity using coal with our existing plants for about four cents per kWh. With current natural gas prices, you’re looking at at least six."

MacLellan notes that the government has announced incentives for wind power, which is 11 cents per kWh. And solar power is about 42 cents per kWh.

"Anything that they’re going to replace coal with, or just to compensate for our natural growth, it’s pricey," he said.

A rise in the cost of supplying power will not necessarily directly translate into a rise in the regulated price, Adams pointed out.

"We can talk about what the future’s likely to bring in terms of the wholesale price of power, but how that translates into retail prices for households in this highly-politicized environment – I’d love to stick my neck out, but I just don’t know which direction," he said.

For now, he insists, "the only (fixed-price contract) worth thinking about would be green power customers that are prepared to pay a little more."

Bullfrog Power bills itself as the first 100 per cent green electricity retailer in Ontario. The company offers one-year rates, which are currently among the cheapest fixed rates available.

Canadian Press
CTV.ca
April 19, 2006

More Ontarians are turning to long-term, fixed-price electricity contracts following last week’s announcement that regulated prices are rising May 1, but experts caution that prices would have to rise dramatically for the contracts to pay off.

"Signing one of those (long-term) contracts is extremely pessimistic,” says Tom Adams, executive director of Energy Probe, a national consumer group. "What they’re offering is peace of mind at a huge premium."

Most Ontarians are still under the province’s regulated price plan, where they are charged a regulated price per kilowatt hour for the electricity they use for heating, air conditioning, lighting and appliances.

On May 1, the regulated price will rise to 5.8 cents per kilowatt hour for the first 600 kWh’s used per summer month, and 6.7 cents per kWh after that. Regulated bills vary across the province depending on what the local utility charges to deliver power.

About 25 per cent of residential consumers have instead chosen to lock in their rates through a long-term contract offered by one of the six electricity retailers serving Ontario, said Ian MacLellan, spokesman for Energyshop.com.

Following the Ontario Energy Board’s announcement that regulated electricity bills will rise between three and 15 per cent for most homeowners starting May 1, "we noticed a very large increase in the number of people signing up (for fixed-rate contracts) through our website,” MacLellan said.

Those consumers are placing a bet on how high electricity prices will rise.

"What customers need to think about is, over the next five years, do I think that electricity prices will go up more than 25 per cent?” said Ian Mondrow, spokesman for Direct Energy, the province’s largest electricity retailer.

"If they go up by more than 25 per cent over the next five years, you could end up being better off. It’s important to say that we don’t sell savings, because no one can say for sure what prices are going to do. We sell certainty.”

For the certainty of knowing what their electricity will cost them for the next five years, Direct Energy’s customers are currently signing up at 9.65 cents per kWh.

However, Mondrow noted that the regulated price includes two types of rebates that fixed-price customers will receive directly. Those two rebates add up to 1.124 cents per kWh, bringing Direct Energy’s effective price down to about 8.53 cents per kWh.

"So, by my math, our price is about 25 per cent higher, after you account for the rebates, than the regulated price plan,” said Mondrow.

Mondrow said Direct Energy, which also operates in Alberta, originally entered Ontario’s electricity market in May 2002. That fall, the market was "effectively closed by Ernie Eves” when the province froze the retail price at 4.3 cents per kWh, which was below cost, Mondrow said. The company re-entered the market about a year ago, when the regulated price plan came into force.

The regulated prices are now determined by a number of factors, including the amount of electricity produced by generators, natural gas prices, and the weather.

The May 1 price rise comes after the Ontario Energy Board underestimated the price of supplying regulated customers. Customers paid about $3.7 billion over the past year, while the electricity cost $4.1 billion.

The summer of 2005 was the hottest in Ontario for 30 years, increasing demand as low water levels reduced output from hydroelectric plants. High natural gas prices also contributed to the cost.

"In terms of supply mix, looking out over the next five years, the most important factor is the government’s announcement that they intend to close down the coal plants by 2009," said Adam White, president of the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario.

"If they do that, our analysis suggests that electricity prices are going to rise significantly. You can generate electricity using coal with our existing plants for about four cents per kWh. With current natural gas prices, you’re looking at at least six."

MacLellan notes that the government has announced incentives for wind power, which is 11 cents per kWh. And solar power is about 42 cents per kWh.

"Anything that they’re going to replace coal with, or just to compensate for our natural growth, it’s pricey," he said.

A rise in the cost of supplying power will not necessarily directly translate into a rise in the regulated price, Adams pointed out.

"We can talk about what the future’s likely to bring in terms of the wholesale price of power, but how that translates into retail prices for households in this highly-politicized environment – I’d love to stick my neck out, but I just don’t know which direction," he said.

For now, he insists, "the only (fixed-price contract) worth thinking about would be green power customers that are prepared to pay a little more."

Bullfrog Power bills itself as the first 100 per cent green electricity retailer in Ontario. The company offers one-year rates, which are currently among the cheapest fixed rates available.

Tara Perkins
Toronto Sun
April 19, 2006

More Ontarians are turning to long-term, fixed-price electricity contracts following last week’s announcement that regulated prices are rising May 1, but experts caution that prices would have to rise dramatically for the contracts to pay off.

"Signing one of those (long-term) contracts is extremely pessimistic," says Tom Adams, executive director of Energy Probe, a national consumer group.

"What they’re offering is peace of mind at a huge premium."

Most Ontarians are still under the province’s regulated price plan, whereby they are charged a regulated price per kilowatt hour for the electricity they use.

On May 1, the regulated price will rise to 5.8 cents per kilowatt hour for the first 600 kWhs used per summer month, and 6.7 cents per kWh after that.

Regulated bills vary across the province depending on what the local utility charges.

About 25% of residential consumers have instead chosen to lock in their rates through a long-term contract offered by one of the six electricity retailers serving Ontario, said Ian MacLellan, spokesman for energyshop.com.

Those consumers are placing a bet on how high electricity prices will rise.

"It’s important to say that we don’t sell savings because no one can say for sure what prices are going to do," said Ian Mondrow, spokesman for Direct Energy, the province’s largest electricity retailer. "We sell certainty."

He said customers need to determine how high they think electricity prices will rise in the next five years.

For the certainty of knowing what their electricity will cost them for the next five years, Direct Energy’s customers are currently signing up at 9.65 cents per kWh.

However, Mondrow noted that the regulated price includes two types of rebates that fixed-price customers will receive directly.

Those two rebates add up to 1.124 cents per kWh, bringing Direct Energy’s effective price down to about 8.53 cents per kWh.

SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER BEFORE FIXING YOUR RATE

Some tips for consumers considering a fixed-price electricity contract:

Canadian Press
Toronto Sun
April 20, 2006

Nuclear power may be the best option to fulfil Ontario’s future electricity needs despite its obvious risks, Premier Dalton McGuinty said yesterday.

"That’s an issue," McGuinty said of fears associated with nuclear power, including the devastating Chernobyl accident in 1986 that led to thousands of deaths.

"But I think we should look at our particular history in this country," McGuinty said, noting that there have been no major nuclear accidents in Ontario, where reactors have operated for more than two decades.

Next week marks the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl meltdown. The catastrophe killed thousands of people, mostly in Russia.

McGuinty’s government is about to issue a formal response to recommendations in December that called for $40 billion in nuclear refurbishments and expansion over the next 20 years.

The premier denied he’s waiting until after the Chernobyl anniversary to respond.

Critics say there have been some problems at Ontario’s nuclear stations, including incidents at the Pickering station in 1983 and 1991.

‘Near misses’

Industry observer Tom Adams of Energy Probe called those incidents "near misses" that should deter governments from considering nuclear energy as an option.

And this week a Greenpeace report predicted the fallout from Chernobyl was grossly underestimated.

The report predicts that 270,000 cancers will have been caused by Chernobyl, 93,000 of them fatal. The report also notes that there have been 60,000 additional deaths in Russia in the last 15 years due to the Chernobyl accident, and that the total death toll for Ukraine and Belarus is another 140,000.

McGuinty acknowledged nuclear energy isn’t without its problems. "The downside is, of course, that it does produce nuclear waste. The upside is we can contain it . The downside, again, is we’ve got to contain it for a thousand years," he said.

Steve Erwin
Calgary Sun
April 20, 2006

Nuclear power may be the best option to fulfil Ontario’s future electricity needs, despite its obvious downsides – including Chornobyl-type accidents and radioactive waste, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said Wednesday.

Natural gas is too expensive, wind power is unreliable, coal plants pollute the air and Ontario’s hydroelectric potential has largely been maxed out – leaving nuclear power expansions "on the table" for the province, Mr. McGuinty said.

"There is nothing that is neat and tidy by way of a solution to our energy challenges," Mr. McGuinty said when asked about the risks associated with nuclear power, including the devastating Chornobyl accident in 1986 that led to thousands of deaths.

"But I think we should look at our particular history in this country," Mr. McGuinty added, noting that there have been no major nuclear accidents in Ontario.

Mr. McGuinty later said it’s "irresponsible" to compare Chornobyl with Canada’s Candu nuclear technology anyway.

"We’ve had [nuclear] technology in place here for some 30 years. There has been nothing like, nothing even approaching like, what happened unfortunately in Chornobyl," he said inside the Ontario legislature.

Next week marks the 20th anniversary of the Chornobyl nuclear meltdown. The catastrophe killed thousands of people, mostly in Russia, but also in Ukraine and Belarus.

Energy Minister Donna Cansfield is about to issue a formal response to recommendations in December that called for $40-billion to construct or replace up to 12,400 megawatts of nuclear power in Ontario – requiring 12 or more new nuclear reactor units in the province.

The Premier denied New Democrat accusations that the Liberals are waiting until after the Chornobyl anniversary to respond.

Critics say there have been close calls at Ontario’s nuclear stations, including two incidents at the Pickering station – a coolant leak in 1983, and brief problems with computers that operate a reactor in 1991. In both cases, safety systems kicked in as they should to prevent potentially devastating accidents.

But industry expert Tom Adams called those occurrences "near misses" that should have deterred governments from ever considering nuclear again.

"To use an air traffic control analogy . . . when a Cessna sweeps in front of a 747 and they miss each other by a few hundred metres, the air traffic controllers don’t say, ‘Oh well, that was nothing.’ They say, ‘We’re never going to let that happen again.’"

China and India have embarked on nuclear energy programs in recent years. But Adams noted that the western world is largely shying away from nuclear plants with the notable exception of Finland, which is constructing a nuclear station to reduce that country’s reliance on Russian gas.

This week, a Greenpeace report predicted that 270,000 cancers will have been caused by Chornobyl fallout, 93,000 of them fatal.

"Nuclear power is just as dangerous for Canada in 2006 as it was for Ukraine in 1986," said Greenpeace Canada’s Dave Martin. "A catastrophic accident has a low probability, but devastating consequences."

Mr. Martin said safety risks are rising as Ontario’s existing nuclear plants age.

Mr. McGuinty acknowledged nuclear energy isn’t without its problems.

"The downside is, of course, that it does produce nuclear waste. The upside is, we can contain it. The downside, again, is, we’ve got to contain it for a thousand years."

But Mr. McGuinty has long argued that nuclear has the ability to generate clean, affordable and reliable baseload electricity compared to its alternatives.

The Conservatives say the Liberals are ignoring coal, an abundant commodity that produces cheap electricity. The government has promised to close Ontario’s four remaining coal plants by the end of 2009 due to air pollution concerns.

Nuclear stations can take a decade or more to build and past projects have gone billions of dollars over budget. The original cost to construct Ontario’s Darlington nuclear station, located 70 kilometres east of Toronto, tripled to some $14-billion during the 1980s.

Sources have said the Liberals are discussing the potential of a major expansion at Darlington.

Kevin Werner
Stoney Creek News
April 20, 2006

Most Hamilton residents will only get singed by their local hydro utility after the Ontario Energy Board unveiled last week a series of price shocks across the province.

Households will start paying on May 1, 5.8 cents per-kilowatt-hour, per month up to 600 kilowatts from May to October. Beyond the 600 kilowatt hours, residents will pay 6.7 cents. Customers are now paying five cents per-kilowatt-hour and 5.8 cents per-kilowatt-hour.

The threshold will rise to 1,000 kilowatt hours from November to April.

The threshold rises during the winter months because homes dependent on electric heating have less flexibility in reducing their power consumption.

For non-residential users, the cost will remain at $750 kilowatt-hours per month throughout the year.

The OEB also jacked up the cost of distribution utilities charge for residents who use 1,000 kilowatts per month. Horizon Hamilton, of which the City of Hamilton is its only shareholder, will charge an extra $6.50, but Horizon St. Catharines customers will pay an extra $8.35. Hamilton Utilities Corporation and St. Catharines Hydro own Horizon Utilities Corporation.

Hydro One, the largest provincial electricity provider, will charge its customers $11.70 extra. Hydro One has a number of customers in Ancaster and Glanbrook, meaning a higher electricity bill of, on average, about $191 for the mostly rural customers.

Horizon Hamilton had one of the lowest increases across the province and certainly the lowest in the Golden Horseshoe.

Niagara Falls received a whopping $14.56 increase, while London Hydro will have a $13.80 hike. Grimsby Power’s rate will increase $12.72 and Burlington Power increased by $9.58.

Overall, Ontario residents will pay between three to 15 per cent more in electricity bills this year, depending on the prices utilities charge to deliver power.

The Ontario Energy Board blamed the higher electricity costs on last year’s summer, which was the hottest in 30 years, that forced the Ontario government to buy more expensive electricity; higher than anticipated prices for natural gas; and lower water levels, which reduced the electricity output from hydro plants.

Ontario households paid on average $60 less than the actual cost of supplying electricity. It resulted in a $384-million deficit.

The new prices are also part of a government policy to have consumers pay the actual cost of buying electricity on the open market.

And expect those energy prices to skyrocket, says Tom Adams of Energy Probe. He says if the Liberals carry out their plan to replace Ontario’s coal-fired generating plants by 2009, prices will continue to rise.

Environmental groups said the hikes would help encourage people to reduce their electricity use, but they criticized the Liberals for not doing enough to promote conservation.

Energy Minister Donna Cansfield urged people to close their blinds to keep out the hot sun, replace air conditioners with fans and if it’s neccessary to use air conditioners, turn them up a few degrees.

Edward de Gale, founder and executive director of Share the Warmth, a non-profit organization that assists low-income families from higher energy costs, says people will have to bear the brunt of skyrocketing electricity prices.

He urged the government to create a permanent fund to assist people who are at risk to ever climbing electricity prices.

Anticipating public outcry for the impact higher electricity prices will have on low-income residents, the Liberals introduced legislation last week to provide $100 million in assistance to nearly 1.5 million families hurt most by the rate hikes.

The OEB in November will be authorized for the first time to revise electricity prices again in the same year, which could mean further price shocks to the public.

Tom Adams
Presentatio to CAMPUT
May 16, 2006

1

2

3 

 5

6

7 

8   

9 

10

Canadian Press

May 26, 2006

A surprise Ontario government cabinet shuffle that returned Dwight Duncan to the Energy portfolio has further delayed a key report outlining the province’s strategy to prevent electricity shortages, sources said yesterday.

The report – a formal response to December recommendations that $40 billion be spent on upgrading and expanding existing nuclear plants to prevent blackouts – was expected weeks ago.

Donna Cansfield, who was energy minister before the shuffle, had been expected to respond to the Ontario Power Authority’s proposal in the next week or two.

But her move to Transportation – part of a domino effect caused by Greg Sorbara’s reinstatement to the Finance portfolio – will further hold up the response, which is highly anticipated by energy sector stakeholders including environmentalists, nuclear power proponents and consumer watchdogs.

A government source said it could be mid- to late June before Duncan is in a position to release such a statement, which would launch a process that could eventually result in the construction of new nuclear power facilities.

Even after the government responds to the report, Premier Dalton McGuinty has promised months of discussion about how to meet energy supply targets in an environmentally safe manner.

Without substantial new electricity generating capacity, Ontario is poised for shortages five years from now, the report warned.

The government’s plan of action has been delayed several times. It was last expected in mid-April, but sources have said Cansfield was stalling in a bid to squeeze in more measures to encourage energy conservation among Ontarians.

"The government is way behind schedule," said Tom Adams, executive director of Energy Probe, a Toronto consumer research watchdog. "This file’s on fire. They’re in such trouble on this thing."

The Ontario Clean Air Alliance, however, said it isn’t too concerned about another holdup, despite summer’s impending arrival.

"A delay of a few months to get the job done right is certainly worthwhile," said Jack Gibbons, who chairs the alliance of 89 health, environmental and consumer organizations.

Gibbons said he was pleased with Duncan’s reappointment, prompted by a judicial ruling that removed Sorbara’s name from warrants used in an RCMP investigation.

Rob Ferguson
Toronto Star
May 31, 2001

It seemed more like July yesterday as the heat wave set a record for hydro use in May and appeared to melt the Liberal promise for closing the last of Ontario’s coal-fired power plants by 2009.

While Ontarians cranked up their air conditioners and smog cloaked much of the province, Energy Minister Dwight Duncan repeatedly refused to reaffirm the coal pledge aimed at making the air easier to breathe.

It was just last June that he admitted the Liberal election promise to close all the coal plants, which contribute to smog and global warming, by 2007 was not feasible and had to be pushed back two years.

"Only these guys could break a broken promise," said Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory, telling Duncan: "You owe it to the people to be clear."

About 30 per cent of Ontario’s power comes from coal plants.

Duncan hinted the government is more concerned about limiting pollution from the coal plants than it is about how soon the plants are shut down as Ontario struggles to meet growing demand for hydro.

"We remain committed to moving forward on reduction of emissions and making sure that as we go forward, as we’ve always said, that we don’t compromise the reliability of the system."

The system was stretched in yesterday’s 33C sauna, at one point seeming it might approach the all-time record set last July 13, when 26,160 megawatts of electricity were used.

Yesterday’s demand was an early reminder of last year’s summer of heat, which recorded nine of the top 10 all-time days for electricity demand in Ontario history.

Yesterday’s maximum use reached just under 25,000 megawatts, nearly 25 per cent higher than during the previous May record set two years ago. It included more than 2,000 megawatts of imported power because plants in the province couldn’t produce enough to meet demand.

"What’s significant is it’s happening in May," said Terry Young of the Independent Electricity System Operator, the government agency in charge of securing enough power for the province.

Customers won’t feel the pinch from the cost of imported power until next year when rate increases are set, said Tom Adams of the watchdog group Energy Probe.

"This is going to come back to bite us."

The heat wave that began a few days ago is "just the beginning of what looks like a warm summer," climatologist David Phillips of Environment Canada told Canadian Press. "Find out where your halter tops and your muscle shirts are and where your cool beer is, because we’re going to see more of it."

Duncan said he’s not too worried about blackouts or a repeat of last summer’s brownouts this year because Ontario has 600 more megawatts of generating capacity than it did last year, mainly from a restarted unit at the Pickering nuclear station.

"This summer should not be as challenging as last summer," he said. "We should be okay."

But Adams challenged that view given the power use yesterday.

"I expect it’s going to get a lot worse this summer," he said. "The first heat wave is never the worst. A lot of people don’t even turn their air conditioners on until day three."

The high temperatures of the last two days were caused by an air system from the Gulf of Mexico and are expected to ease off by tomorrow, but the political heat is expected to remain on Duncan.

His plan from last June was to close three remaining coal plants near Sarnia, Thunder Bay and Atikokan by 2007 but keep the huge Nanticoke coal-fired plant near Lake Erie, the largest polluter in Canada, open until early 2009.

That’s in doubt given Duncan’s refusal yesterday to repeat those dates.

"Now he’s getting wishy-washy all of a sudden," said Adams, warning that shutting coal plants could be a disaster in terms of keeping the lights on.

The irony is that imported power is largely from coal-fired plants in the U.S. Midwest that spew pollution and smog into Ontario, Adams added.

Duncan promised more details "very shortly" on his plan for meeting Ontario’s need for energy over the next couple of decades.

It is widely expected his plan will include more nuclear power.

Canadian Press
CTV News
June 7, 2006

A team of companies lobbying to build new nuclear plants in Ontario say they’re willing to ensure any new reactors will be built on budget, though critics say it’s a misleading pledge that can’t be guaranteed.

Representatives of so-called "Team Candu," a group of five Canadian firms that includes federal Crown corporation Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., say government officials have asked for price guarantees for new nuclear projects in an effort to avoid cost overruns under an energy strategy slated to be unveiled within the next week.

It’s expected the government will set the stage for a massive expansion of the Darlington nuclear site east of Toronto.

The initial cost to build the plant nearly tripled to $14 billion by the time construction was completed in 1993.

"The province wants a guarantee – a schedule and a fixed price," said Ken Petrunik, AECL’s chief operating officer who spent the last six years working on nuclear projects in China.

"We recognize that we need to step up and deliver and meet the requirements of the province, which is to transfer risk and be able to give a fixed price."

Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said Wednesday he will "very, very soon” announce a long-awaited government response to a report released in December by the Ontario Power Authority.

The report included recommendations for $70 billion in electricity generation spending over the next 20 years, more than half of it on nuclear projects.

Critics say cost guarantees by the nuclear industry are meaningless, pointing to past cost overruns at Darlington and the impact of future changes in government and political will.

"They’re not commercial guarantees, they are political guarantees," said Tom Adams of Energy Probe, an electricity sector watchdog.

"Because the nuclear industry is so highly dependent on political favours . . . changes in political favours could cause drastic changes in the outcome."

Petrunik said officials from AECL and four private firms, Babcock & Wilcox Canada, General Electric Canada, Hitachi Canada Ltd. and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear Inc., plan to meet with Duncan over the next two weeks to outline their fixed-price promise.

Candu will be competing with foreign companies for any government projects.

"We’ll take the load off the taxpayers,"said Martyn Wash, general manager of the Organization of Candu Industries.

"That’s a big difference between where we are right now, and when Darlington was first started back in the late ’80s."

But New Democrat Leader Howard Hampton said while the province might negotiate price guarantees, the federal government would have to cover cost overruns.

Ultimately, taxpayers would have to foot that bill, he said.

"At the end of the day, the people who live in Ontario will end up paying for this, either on their hydro bill through some kind of fee, or some other tax," Hampton said.

Observers widely expect Duncan will position the province to build up to 12,400 megawatts of new nuclear capacity by 2025. Much of that could involve refurbishments of existing reactors, but additional new capacity will most likely be required.

The amount of Ontario’s electricity generation supplied by nuclear power, however, would remain at about 50 per cent.

Darlington, with four reactors, was built to contemplate a Darlington "B” set of four more reactors.

The mayor of Clarington, which is near the Darlington station east of Toronto, has been lobbying for the project that would create thousands of jobs in his community.

"This whole discussion is all about Darlington B," said Adams.

Adams suspects the province has known that it wanted to expand the site for more than a year and that talk of public debate about the issue is mere "window dressing."

Duncan hasn’t said how much public input will be allowed after he responds to the OPA report, beyond voters casting ballots on that and other matters in the October 2007 election.

"Once we reveal our plan, it will be incumbent of me to go out and sell it," Duncan said, adding that "at the end of the day, an election will be a pretty important public consultation I would think."