market analysis of ontario s renewable energy sector final_moe ontar… · the ministry engaged...
Post on 07-May-2018
223 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
FINAL Report
MARKET ANALYSIS OF ONTARIO’S
RENEWABLE ENERGY SECTOR
Presented to
Ministry of Energy c/o Sam Colalillo
Renewable Energy Facilitation Office
77 Grenville St., 5th Floor
Toronto, ON M7A 2C1
JUNE 30, 2017
Compass Renewable Energy Consulting Inc.
215 Spadina Ave, Suite 300
Toronto, ON M5T 2C7
http://compassenergyconsulting.ca
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 2 | 89
Table of Contents
1 Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................ 4
2 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 5
3 Current Market Status ....................................................................................................................... 8
3.1 Green Energy and Green Economy Act & Green Energy Investment Agreement ........... 9
3.2 Current Manufacturing Activity ............................................................................................ 10
4 Key Trends and Implications .......................................................................................................... 12
4.1 Net Metering ............................................................................................................................. 13
4.2 Neighbouring Markets and Potential Export Activity ....................................................... 14
5 Solar .................................................................................................................................................... 21
5.1 Solar Supply Chain in Ontario ............................................................................................... 21
5.2 Economic Impacts from Solar Installations in Ontario ....................................................... 23
5.3 Economic Impacts from Potential Solar Export Activity .................................................... 28
6 Wind ................................................................................................................................................... 31
6.1 Wind Supply Chain in Ontario .............................................................................................. 31
6.2 Economic Impacts from Wind Installations in Ontario ...................................................... 33
6.3 Economic Impacts from Potential Wind Export Activity ................................................... 37
7 Hydroelectricity ................................................................................................................................ 40
7.1 Hydroelectric Supply Chain in Ontario ................................................................................ 40
7.2 Economic Impacts from Hydroelectric Installations in Ontario ........................................ 41
7.3 Economic Impacts from Potential Hydroelectric Export Activity .................................... 47
8 Biogas ................................................................................................................................................. 49
8.1 Biogas Supply Chain in Ontario ............................................................................................ 49
8.2 Economic Impacts from Biogas Installations in Ontario .................................................... 50
9 Biomass .............................................................................................................................................. 55
9.1 Biomass Supply Chain in Ontario ......................................................................................... 55
9.2 Economic Impacts from Biomass Installations in Ontario ................................................. 56
10 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 61
11 Appendix A – Glossary ................................................................................................................... 64
12 Appendix B – Scope and Objectives .............................................................................................. 65
13 Appendix C – Detailed Approach ................................................................................................. 66
13.1 Sector Engagement ................................................................................................................... 66
13.2 Overview of JEDI Model ......................................................................................................... 67
13.3 Methodological & Simplifying Assumptions....................................................................... 69
13.4 Exclusions .................................................................................................................................. 70
14 Appendix D – Data Tables .............................................................................................................. 71
14.1 All Renewable technologies .................................................................................................... 71
14.2 Solar ........................................................................................................................................... 73
14.3 Wind ........................................................................................................................................... 74
14.4 Hydroelectricity ........................................................................................................................ 75
14.5 Biogas ......................................................................................................................................... 76
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 3 | 89
14.6 Biomass ...................................................................................................................................... 77
15 Appendix E – Representative Supply Chains in Ontario ........................................................... 78
15.1 Solar ........................................................................................................................................... 78
15.2 Wind ........................................................................................................................................... 79
15.3 Hydroelectricity ........................................................................................................................ 82
15.4 Biogas ......................................................................................................................................... 83
15.5 Biomass ...................................................................................................................................... 84
16 Appendix F – JEDI Industry Multipliers ....................................................................................... 85
16.1 Solar ........................................................................................................................................... 85
16.2 Wind ........................................................................................................................................... 86
16.3 Hydro ......................................................................................................................................... 87
16.4 Biomass ...................................................................................................................................... 88
16.5 Biogas ......................................................................................................................................... 89
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 4 | 89
1 Disclaimer
This report was prepared by Compass Renewable Energy Consulting Inc. (“Compass”)
exclusively for the benefit and use of the Ministry of Energy (“Ministry”). The work presented
in this report represents our best efforts and judgments based on the information available at
the time this report was prepared. Compass is not responsible for the reader’s use of, or reliance
upon, the report, nor any decisions based on the report. Compass makes no representations or
warranties, expressed or implied. Readers of the report are advised that they assume all
liabilities incurred by them, or third parties, as a result of their reliance on the report, or the
data, information, findings and opinions contained in the report.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 5 | 89
2 Executive Summary
Ontario is a North American leader in the level and nature of support that it has provided to its
renewable energy sector. As a result of several targeted procurements, it has supplemented its
historic base of hydroelectric power and now boasts both the highest level of solar PV and wind
power penetration compared to any other province or territory in Canada. Its Domestic Content
policy, while temporary, created manufacturing jobs across the wind and solar supply chains.
However, beyond the remaining original Feed-in Tariff (FIT) contracts, the last Green Energy
Investment Agreement (GEIA) projects, FIT 4, FIT 5, microFIT 2017 and the Large Renewable
Procurement (LRP) I, the future level of support in Ontario is less certain and as a result its
renewable energy sector has and continues to evolve.
The Ministry engaged Compass to provide a comprehensive market assessment of Ontario’s
renewable energy sector, defined as project developers, manufacturers, engineering consultants
and related service providers (e.g., installers, maintenance workers) whose primary economic
activity is in the delivery of goods and services related to wind and solar photovoltaic (PV)
power, bio-energy, and hydroelectricity. The market assessment provides a market status
update and a five-year outlook of the sector’s performance from a qualitative and quantitative
perspective. More details on the scope and objectives are available in Appendix B – Scope and
Objectives.
The qualitative research involved both electronic and telephone surveys and interviews across
the four technology specific supply chains. In total, input was received from over 60
participants including, 31 telephone based interviews and 26 electronic based survey
responses.1 The quantitative analysis evaluated economic impacts that occur throughout the
various renewably energy supply chains present in Ontario. Compass leveraged the National
Renewable Energy Laboratories (NREL) Jobs and Economic Development Impact (JEDI) model
to assess the economic impacts from manufacturing, development, construction, permitting,
consulting, and operations and maintenance. Economic impacts were calculated for both
Ontario based projects as well as potential export activity. More details on the approach are
available in Appendix C – Detailed Approach.
Local market forces as well as external trends are having both positive and negative impacts on
Ontario’s renewable energy sector.
Key findings from this market assessment include:
• The reduction in centralized procurements will have the biggest impact on the sector
in the near term. From 2010 to 2016 Ontario added over 7,400 MW of contracted
1 Electronic survey responses were counted if a respondent provided more than their contact information.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 6 | 89
generation or more than 1,000 MW/year on average, compared with the next five years,
where Ontario is forecast to add approximately 2,050 MW, which is an average of just
over 400 MW/year. This reduction in build-out has a direct impact on economic activity
throughout the sector.
• The transition to net metering creates revenue and counterparty risks that will reduce
installations in the near term. Another important factor impacting the sector is the
transition from centralized procurements for distributed generation resources via the
FIT and microFIT programs to a more decentralized development of these resources
through Ontario’s net metering regulation. In the near term, solar is anticipated to gain
modest adoption under the recent changes to the net metering regulation, however at a
fraction of the market size under FIT and microFIT. Hydro, bio-energy and wind power
are not likely to be candidates for net metering projects due to the locational constraints
associated with these technologies, nor are hydro or bio-energy likely to be economic
under the recent changes.
• In the longer term, the evolution of Ontario’s net metering regulation coupled with
falling technology costs are anticipated to support the development of distributed
generation. Allowing third party ownership in conjunction with single or multi-entity
virtual net metering should drive activity for larger projects. In the medium to long
term, developers and installers anticipate the distributed generation market to grow
beyond the current market size on an annual basis compared to what was procured
under FIT and microFIT, due primarily to the falling capital costs of solar PV.
• Ontario’s focus on reducing Green House Gas (GHG) emissions will support the
development of renewable energy in the medium to long term. The introduction of
Ontario’s Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) and the electrification of transportation
and other fossil fueled energy use represents both GHG reduction and renewable energy
growth opportunities. The IESO’s Ontario Power Outlook (OPO) presents two scenarios
where the demand for energy increases to 177 and 197 TWh annually by 2035.2 These
higher demand scenarios represent a 29 to 49 TWh per year increase over the base case
demand scenario. As discussed in the OPO, this increase will require investment in
additional non-emitting sources of generation.
• Over the five-year forecast period, legacy assets as well as Ontario-based renewable
capacity additions are anticipated to create 56,500 FTEs, generate $3 billion in
employment earnings, and contribute $5.4 billion to Ontario’s GDP. Both solar and
2 Independent Electricity System Operator, Ontario Planning Outlook, accessed on line June, 25, 2017:
http://www.ieso.ca/sector-participants/planning-and-forecasting/ontario-planning-outlook
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 7 | 89
wind display higher employment intensity in 2017 and 2018, due to large projects with
Domestic Content requirements achieving commercial operation in those years. Overall,
solar represents the highest proportion of the employment impacts over the forecast
period due to its relatively higher employment intensity on a per MW basis. Despite a
modest amount of forecast installations, hydroelectricity represents the second highest
proportion of employment impacts and the highest contributions to GDP over the
forecast period. This is due to the higher capital cost on a per MW basis, higher local
spending percentages and the large number of operating legacy assets.
• Growing demand for renewable energy development outside Ontario is creating
export opportunities for Ontario based businesses. Outside of Ontario, there is
growing demand for renewable energy, as demonstrated by current procurements in
Alberta and Saskatchewan, as well as strong targets for additional renewables
throughout the U.S. Ontario’s renewable energy sector, it’s manufacturing base, are
already serving these markets and are positioned to take advantage of their growth.
• Over the five-year forecast period, export activity has the potential to generate an
additional 10,700 FTEs, contribute $740 million toward employment earnings, and $1
billion to Ontario’s GDP. Manufacturers in the renewable energy supply chain in
Ontario that were operating before the introduction of the Green Energy and Green
Economy Act, 2009 (“GEA”) have historic roots and bankable supply chains. Exporting
products has been a normal course of business for them and is expected to continue. For
example, on average, Ontario based hydroelectric component manufacturers export
approximately 70% of their production capacity. Proximity to the U.S. impacts
transportation and logistical costs, which is an advantage for large wind turbine
component manufacturers (i.e. towers and blades). The largest potential impact from
export activity comes from the solar sector, estimated at 8,300 FTEs and $785 million to
GDP over the five-year period, from exporting module, inverter and racking
components.
Ontario’s renewable energy sector is going through a period of transition. Despite the near-term
contraction due to a reduction in procurement activity, Ontario-based sector activity will make
important contributions towards jobs, earnings and GDP from 2017 to 2021. Further, Ontario’s
renewable energy component manufacturing base is anticipated to take advantage of export
markets, which will contribute additional jobs and GDP to the Ontario economy. In the short
term, the sector will continue to need the government’s support to bridge the gap in the
transition from FIT and microFIT to net metering. In the medium to long term, the transition to
the net metering, as well as a low carbon energy system throughout Ontario and North
America, will support the sector’s growth.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 8 | 89
3 Current Market Status
Ontario is a Canadian leader in the amount of support it has provided to its renewable energy
sector. As of the end of June 2017, Ontario had over 16,400 MW of renewable energy generating
capacity installed as shown in Figure 1 below. Hydro has the largest share of renewable energy
capacity followed by wind and solar PV, with biomass and biogas representing a smaller
overall proportion of the current installed capacity.
Figure 1 - Ontario Installed Renewable Energy Capacity as of March/June 2017 (MW)3
Source: IESO data and Compass analysis
Hydroelectricity has historically been an important part of Ontario’s supply mix, however
support for non-hydro renewables began with the first Renewable Energy Supply (RES)
procurement which dates to 2004. This was followed by RES II in 2005, RES III and the
Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program (RESOP) in 2007, and the Atitokokan and Thunder
Bay coal to biomass conversions, Combined Heat and Power (CHP) III, Hydro Electricity
Supply Agreement (HESA), FIT, microFIT, Green Energy Investment Agreement (GEIA) and
the Large Renewable Procurement (LRP) from 2009 to 2016. As of the end of 2016, the
Independent Electricity System Operator reports that it has 11,667 MW of renewables under
contract, 9,716 MW of which has achieved commercial operation. From 2010 to 2016 Ontario
3 The data used to develop this graph is a combination of March and June 2017 IESO data, available here:
http://www.ieso.ca/learn/ontario-supply-mix/ontario-energy-capacity
4,782
8,689
2,340
525 78
Wind Hydro Solar Biomass Biogas
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 9 | 89
saw approximately 7,400 MW in capacity additions from IESO lead procurements, see Figure 2.
This figure excludes the Hydroelectric Contract Initiative (HCI) projects which were procured
by the IESO in 2010 but were already operating.
Figure 2 – Annual Renewable Energy Capacity Additions, 2010 – 2016
Capacity additions from 2010 to 2016 represent an average of more than 1,000 MW of new
installations per year, which is more than double the planned average annual installations of
400 MW per year from 2017 to 2021.
In addition to these renewable resources, Ontario procured additional non-renewables
including conservation, natural gas and nuclear power at the same time as manufacturing
activity in the province was declining.
The combination of the new supply, conservation and lower demand resulted in Ontario being
in an oversupply condition. Not surprisingly, this oversupply condition has influenced the
slowing pace of renewable energy procurements in Ontario, and a result, manufacturing
activity in Ontario’s renewable energy sector has also slowed.
3.1 Green Energy and Green Economy Act & Green Energy Investment Agreement
The GEA was introduced in 2009 at a time when Ontario’s economy was suffering the impacts
of the 2008 global financial crisis. Ontario was losing jobs within its traditional auto sector
manufacturing base and the GEA had multiple objectives including increasing the role of
renewable energy within Ontario’s supply mix, while also creating jobs associated with the
development and manufacturing of the equipment to be used in solar and wind projects.
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
Solar Wind Hydro Bio
400 MW / year 1,000 MW / year
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 10 | 89
The GEA also required Domestic Content to be included in the implementation of the FIT
program. The Domestic Content obligation applied to wind and solar projects only and was
introduced at a time when Ontario had almost no existing wind and solar manufacturing
capacity. A variety of manufacturers entered the market to serve the solar sector while the wind
sector’s component supply chain’s response was generally more muted, with fewer
announcements of new manufacturing plants.
The Green Energy Investment Agreement (GEIA) involved the government of Ontario
negotiating power purchase agreements with a Korean Consortium (“KC”) led by Samsung, in
exchange for Samsung guaranteeing its supply chain would establish manufacturing facilities in
Ontario. The GEIA helped FIT and the KC contract holders to meet their contractual Domestic
Content obligations. The majority of renewable energy projects that achieved commercial
operation between 2012 and 2016 would have been subject to these Domestic Content
requirements and resulted in higher economic impacts associated with construction and
manufacturing than if the Domestic Content requirements were not in affect.
Ontario’s Domestic Content policy was formally challenged at the World Trade Organization
by Japan and the European Union. After an appeal, Ontario agreed to update its policy by
eliminating Domestic Content obligations for any procurements post FIT 2.
3.2 Current Manufacturing Activity
Manufacturers of solar and wind components were incentivized to come to Ontario through the
GEA, however, there has been a decrease in the number of the solar and wind manufacturing
supply chains that are active in Ontario today. Some manufacturers have either moved their
manufacturing equipment to other markets or did not invest a significant amount in an Ontario
facility and have simply stopped production here. The manufacturers that remain are actively
seeking export opportunities with mixed success.
From a peak of eleven solar module manufacturers operating in Ontario, currently three major
manufacturers remain in operation, and a number of smaller manufacturers also continue to
produce solar modules. Module manufacturers are finding some success with exports, however
this is not a consistent trend across all module manufacturers. However, solar racking
manufacturers are finding success at exporting their products to the U.S. due to the expertise
they have developed in serving the Ontario market. Historically they have served other
markets, like construction and automotive, with solar helping to diversify their product mix.
From as many as seven major wind component manufacturers, two continue to operate in
Ontario. Those that remain produce components (i.e. blades and towers) that form part of their
organization’s global supply chain. Additionally, wind towers and blades are large components
and have transportation challenges, therefore Ontario based manufacturers should have a cost
advantage in neighbouring export markets.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 11 | 89
Hydroelectric component manufacturers have been active before the introduction of the GEA
and have historic roots and bankable supply chains in Ontario. These manufacturers remain
active and have offset the contraction of Ontario’s renewable energy sector by exporting.
Major components for the bio-energy sector are generally imported with some minor
components manufactured in Ontario.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 12 | 89
4 Key Trends and Implications
The business environment surrounding the renewable energy sector in Ontario is evolving. The
base case forecast for electricity demand, scenario B in the OPO, is relatively flat and the
number of procurements for renewable generated electricity are decreasing with the wind-
down of the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) and microFIT program, as well as the suspension of the second
Large Renewable Procurement (LRP II). Simultaneously, the Government of Ontario has
released its Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) that will be focused on reducing emissions
throughout the Ontario economy, which includes the cap and trade program that held its
second auction in June 2017.4 Outside of Ontario, provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan and
U.S. states like New York, Ohio, New Jersey, and Massachusetts are increasing the role of
renewable energy within their supply mix and economies.
These and other local market forces as well as external trends are having both positive and
negative impacts on Ontario’s renewable energy sector. Table 1 displays several examples of
key context and/or trends, as well as the implication and impact in Ontario.
Table 1 - Summary of Key Trends and Implications
Context / Trend Implications Impact
Reduction in local
procurements
Reduces economic activity and investment
throughout all parts of the supply chain(s).
-ve
Falling costs of solar and
wind
Improves economics of these technologies in
a wider geography and scenarios
+ve
Evolution from contracts to
net metering
Increases revenue uncertainty and
disadvantages geographically constrained
technologies.
-ve (near term)
+ve (long term)
Introduction of Fair Hydro
Plan
Further reduces the economics of net
metering in the near term for some customers
-ve
Increased focus on
reducing emissions
Potential funding through CCAP and longer
term electrification represents growth
potential
+ve
Export markets continue to
grow
Ontario based companies have experience
and growing markets to serve in Canada and
U.S.
+ve
In the near term, the transition from FIT and microFIT to net metering as well as export market
4 Government of Ontario, Ontario Announces Results of June Cap and Trade Program Auction, accessed on
line, June 25, 2017: https://news.ontario.ca/ene/en/2017/06/ontario-announces-results-of-june-cap-and-
trade-program-auction.html
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 13 | 89
growth have the greatest potential to offset the impacts from reduced centralized procurements.
4.1 Net Metering
4.1.1 Recent and Potential Net Metering Regulation Updates
Over the forecast period, the Ontario renewable energy sector will be transitioning from
centralized procurement mechanisms to a largely distributed arrangement for new generation.
Net metering is soon to be the primary mechanism by which distributed renewable energy
generation will be developed. Net-metering is a billing arrangement which allows customers to
generate renewable energy onsite for their own use, and to receive bill credits, that can be
carried forward for any surplus electricity they send to the grid. In February 2017, Ontario
posted an amended Net Metering Regulation (O.Reg. 541/05) to e-Laws.
The first phase of updates to the regulation, the “recent changes” include:
• Clarifying the description of the method used to calculate bill credits;
• Clarifying the carryover period for bill credits at a consecutive 12 month period;
• Removing the 500 kilowatt (kW) project capacity size limit to allow for any sized
renewable energy generation system, subject to the system being used primarily for the
generator’s own use;
• Allowing for the use of energy storage and its recognition for the purposes of net
metering; and
• Allowing participants with existing net metering agreements to choose to opt into the
updated terms, or to maintain their existing agreements.
These changes were implemented July 1, 2017, the in-force date.
The Ministry is also examining potential additional program updates, the “potential changes,”
related to third-party ownership of net metering facilities and allowing virtual net metering in
Ontario.
Third-Party Ownership (TPO) could involve a company (third-party) owning and operating a
renewable energy system at a customer site and selling electricity to the customer under a
power purchase agreement or similar arrangement. The customer, participating under a net
metering arrangement with their LDC, would receive bill credits for electricity delivered to the
grid from the renewable generation system similar to conventional net metering arrangements.
Virtual Net Metering (VNM) could involve the distribution of net metering credits either (a)
across multiple accounts held by an individual or corporation (Single Entity Virtual Net
Metering), or (b) across multiple accounts held by multiple individuals or corporations
associated with a shared generation facility (Multiple Entity Virtual Net Metering). It could
involve utility-owned or third-party business models. While TPO and VNM have been used in
conjunction with solar PV development in the U.S., they would also allow for non-solar
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 14 | 89
distributed generation to be more easily developed.
In the longer term, the transition to net metering is anticipated to have a positive impact on the
development of distributed generation in Ontario, but there are several challenges to overcome.
The transition to net metering creates revenue risk and third-party ownership would create
counterparty risk. Revenue risk is created because net metering generators are offsetting
energy, measured in kWhs, and the value of those kWhs changes as cost of electricity evolves
over time, unlike the rate certainty that a long-term contract, like a FIT or microFIT, provides.
Third-party ownership, similar to leasing or financing arrangements currently eligible for net
metering, creates counterparty risk as the owner of the net metering generation asset is selling
the power to the consumer of the power, or load customer. The creditworthiness of load
customers will vary and this will impact the ability for solar energy providers to secure
financing to provide TPO, leasing, or financing options to potential net metering customers.
This will impact the cost of solar and uptake of net metering.
Despite these challenges, under the recent changes to net metering, solar is anticipated to
display modest adoption initially, although at a fraction of the market size under FIT and
microFIT. Hydro, wind and bio-energy are not likely to be candidates for net metering projects
due to the locational constraints associated with these technologies, nor are they likely to be
economic under the recent changes. The recent changes to Ontario’s net metering regulation
continue to require generation to be electrically connected behind the load customer’s meter,
and therefore located in the same place as the load customer. However, hydro, wind and to a
lesser extent bio-energy projects should be located where there is a strong available resource,
which may or may not be at the same location as the load customer.
Allowing third party ownership in conjunction with single or multi-entity virtual net metering
should drive greater activity for larger solar projects as well as enable other technologies to
participate, which could help offset the reduction in renewable energy sector activity.
4.2 Neighbouring Markets and Potential Export Activity
An important trend supporting Ontario’s renewable energy sector is the growing demand for
new renewable energy in neighboring markets in Canada, the U.S. as well as farther afield
around the globe. This trend is being supported by technology and cost improvements for wind
and solar power, as well as a renewed focus on reducing Green House Gas (GHG) emissions as
global leaders reaffirm their COP 21 commitments.5 In total, one hundred and ninety-five
countries have agreed to tackle climate change with a majority also committing to scale up
renewables.6 Many provinces and most states within Canada and the U.S. have set renewable
5 The one exception is the U.S.; however, many U.S. state and municipal governments continue to support
the COP 21 targets and objectives. 6 REN21, “//2016 Renewables 2016 Global Status Report” http://www.ren21.net/wp-
content/uploads/2016/10/REN21_GSR2016_FullReport_en_11.pdf, access March 11, 2016
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 15 | 89
electricity targets and will continue to procure new renewable energy capacity over the next 15
years. Table 2 presents a sample of renewable electricity targets and associated procurements in
Canada and the U.S.
Table 2 - North American Renewable Procurement Targets
North American Provinces
and States
Renewable Energy
Target (%)
New MWs Target Year
Alberta 30% 5,000 2030
Saskatchewan 50% 2,400 2030
New Brunswick 40% - 2020
Nova Scotia 40% - 2020
Connecticut 27% - 2020
Delaware 25% - 2025-2026
Illinois 25% - 2025-2026
Indiana 10% - 2025
Iowa - 105 -
Maine 40% 8,000 2017
Maryland 25% - 2020
Massachusetts 25% 1660 2025
Michigan 15% - 2021
Minnesota 25% - 2020
Missouri 15% - 2021
New Hampshire 25% - 2025
New Jersey 20% - 2020-2021
New York 50% 16,000 2030
North Carolina 12.5% - 2021
Ohio 12.5% - 2026
Pennsylvania 18% - 2020-2021
Rhode Island 38.5% - 2035
South Carolina 2% - 2021
Vermont 75% - 2032
Virginia 15% - 2025
Of note are Alberta’s and Saskatchewan’s commitments to increase the role of renewable energy
in their electricity supply mix. Alberta has committed to 30% of all electricity come from
renewable sources by 2030 and procuring 5,000 MW of renewable energy through successive
rounds of its Renewable Electricity Program (REP), the first 400 MW procurement is already
under way. Further, there is an ongoing Alberta Infrastructure solar specific procurement
targeting government facilities for approximately 100 MW.
Saskatchewan has made a commitment to have 50% of their electricity generating capacity come
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 16 | 89
from renewable energy sources by 2030. This would include adding almost 1,900 MW of wind
and over 60 MW of solar. SaskPower, the vertically integrated crown corporation, has ongoing
procurements in market for 200 MW of wind power and 10 MW of solar power.
In the U.S., the solar PV market is forecast to average above 12,000 MW per year over the 2017
to 2021 period, as shown in Figure 3. With the utility scale segment representing the majority of
the forecast installations.
Figure 3 – U.S. PV Installation Forecast
Source: Green Tech Media Research / Solar Energy Industry Association
The wind market in the U.S. has also grown substantially in the U.S. with almost 8,600 MW
installed in 2015, see
Figure 4.
Figure 4 – U.S. wind market growth
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 17 | 89
Source: NREL
These neighbouring markets with renewable targets serve as opportunities for Ontario’s
renewable industry to export components and services such as development, engineering
design, and operations and maintenance expertise.
4.2.1 Why are Ontario’s Exporter’s Successful?
Ontario’s renewable energy sector currently exports both products manufactured in Ontario as
well as services provided by Ontario based employees. Manufacturers in each of the solar, wind
and hydro supply chains have either historically exported part of their production or anticipate
doing so soon, as the amount of procurement and policy supporting Ontario-made products
has softened. Manufactured components that have historically or are anticipated to be exported
from Ontario include:
• Solar: modules, inverters and racking
• Wind: blades, towers
• Hydro: generator coils and turbines
Growth and proximity to the U.S. are reported by all technology component manufacturers as
an advantage, however, each technology supply chain distinguishes itself in other ways that
help to explain their success.
Hydro component manufacturers, who have been present in Ontario before the introduction of
the GEA, report the proximity to the U.S. as well as the quality of their historic Ontario supply
chain as being differentiators supporting their export activity. Based on survey results, over
70% of the production from hydro component manufacturers will serve export markets.
Solar component manufacturers reported increasing export activity to the U.S. as the Ontario
market has contracted. Solar module manufacturers describe the proximity to the U.S. increases
their ability to sell into this market. Despite aggressive price competition from offshore
manufacturers, some Ontario module manufacturers report that purchase decisions related to
modules are based on a combination of factors including factory gate pricing, quality of
product, shipping and logistics costs as well as payment terms. These manufacturers are
competing based on a combination of these factors, such as reduced shipping and logistical
costs. Most Ontario module manufacturers are within a one hour drive of the U.S. border and
can provide just-in time delivery of modules to distributed roof top portfolios, reducing cost
and complexity for their U.S. clients.
Solar racking component manufacturers reported success in exporting to the U.S. The racking
component manufacturers operating in Ontario today are primarily the result of the GEA.
These manufacturers leveraged Ontario’s pre-existing steel component manufacturing capacity,
such as roll forming, stamping and extruding, to produce their products in Ontario. Due to the
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 18 | 89
strong supplier relationships formed over the production of the components used in Ontario,
these same supply chains are now serving U.S.-based projects.
In general, Ontario wind component manufacturers have exported relatively less than
manufacturers in other sectors, due to strong market demand in Ontario. Although they have
less experience exporting, the remaining manufacturers are expected to be able to export to
nearby U.S. markets due to the fact they are producing large components, such as blades and
towers, which can have high shipping and logistical costs over long distances, see Figure 5
below.
Figure 5 – Example of Wind Turbine Blade Transportation Challenges
A 2013 study by NREL compared the costs associated with shipping turbine blades from local
and foreign manufacturers, and found that for projects located near to manufacturing plants,
the delivered cost of local manufacturers was similar or lower than overseas manufacturers.7 As
wind turbines continue to increase in size the challenges and costs associated with shipping
blades and tower components are likely to grow, therefore proximity will continue to be an
important factor in determining turbine selection.
Moreover, the remaining wind component manufacturers, Siemens and CS Wind, form part of
global supply chains within their respective organizations, so it is the Ontario manufacturing
locations that are intended to serve broader markets throughout Canada and the U.S. Figure 6
below shows the location of the Ontario wind component manufacturers and the markets that
are within a 1,000 km shipping distance. As shown, there are a variety of markets that have high
7 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Supply Chain and Blade Manufacturing Considerations in the Global
Wind Industry, accessed June 20, 2017 on line: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/60063.pdf
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 19 | 89
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) targets that fall within this distance, demonstrating the
potential within close proximity.
Figure 6 – Wind Turbine Manufacturer’s Proximity to Export Markets
Canadian wind component manufacturers have been able to serve the U.S. market in the past.
In 2015, the U.S. was reliant on wind turbine component imports and approximately $90 million
USD of the value of the imports came from Canadian made wind towers, see Figure 7. 8
Figure 7 – U.S. Wind Component Imports: Countries of Origin and U.S. Districts of Entry
8 U.S. Department of Energy, 2015 Wind Technologies Market Report, accessed on line June 20, 2017,
https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/08/f33/2015-Wind-Technologies-Market-Report-08162016.pdf
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 20 | 89
Source: U.S. Department of Energy
The combination of proximity and historic ability to serve exports markets suggests that
Ontario manufacturers should be able to export over the forecast period.
4.2.2 Export Forecast
Appendix C – Detailed Approach provides a more detailed description of how export activity
was estimated. For the purposes of the quantitative analysis, exports associated with services
have been ignored. Further, for component exports, the forecasts are based on those
manufacturers that Compass could engage with either through the web or telephone surveys
and is likely only a subset of actual overall activity.
The forecast of export activity and its associated economic impacts are subject to greater
uncertainty compared to forecast installations in Ontario that are already committed or under
contract, so throughout the report these impacts have been broken out separately from Ontario-
based impacts.
Figure 8 presents the forecast of export activity by technology. Export activity is estimated
based on historical exports and anticipated future production capacity, as well as assumed
production utilization. For each technology, export activity is the sum of the total MW of
exports for each component, for example solar exports include modules, racking and inverters.
Figure 8 – Forecast Export Activity by Technology (MW)
The summation of each component’s potential exports is used in the quantification of economic
impacts from potential export activity in each of the technology specific sections that follow.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
Wind Hydro Solar
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 21 | 89
5 Solar This section focuses on the solar industry in Ontario, its supply chain, forecast installations, and
economic performance indicators over the next five years
5.1 Solar Supply Chain in Ontario
A solar PV system is either a rooftop or ground mounted system and generally falls into 3 size
categories: residential (≤10kW), commercial (>10kW-1MW), and utility (+5 MW). Generally, a
solar PV system is made up of modules, inverters, transformers, racking, and electrical
connections and related equipment. Elements of the solar supply chain are shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9 – Images of Solar Supply Chain
In 2012, Ontario had eleven module manufacturers, a silicon manufacturer, several inverter
manufacturers and a variety of racking manufacturers operating.9 An important distinction
between the module, inverter and racking manufacturers was the requirements embedded in
the Domestic Content obligations that resulted in different levels of investment on behalf of
manufacturers to establish a facility that was compliant with the obligations. For example, the
module manufacturers had to electrically connect and laminate cells in Ontario, which required
the electrical connections to be made, manually or robotically, and the laminants to be
9 Natural Resources Canada, National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Canada, 2012, accessed on
line, June 6, 2016:
http://www.cansia.ca/uploads/7/2/5/1/72513707/national_survey_report_of_pv_power_2012.pdf
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 22 | 89
laminated in Ontario. The combination of electrically connecting cells and laminating meant
that the modules would be fully assembled in Ontario also requiring all of the manufacturing
equipment used in module lamination to be brought to Ontario.
Inverters on other hand required final assembly and testing to occur in Ontario to comply with
the Domestic Content obligations, but allowed for certain components to be pre-assembled.
Therefore, the largest investment on behalf of inverter manufacturers was the test equipment
and by comparison to module manufacturers, inverter manufacturers overall level of
investment was lower.
Racking manufacturer’s obligations were developed to ensure that all structural components
were formed in Ontario. However, Ontario has a large existing base of steel component
manufacturers such as roll forming and extruders to draw from, therefore racking
manufacturers generally invested little in new facilities or equipment. They did, however, have
to bring their expertise as well as develop relationships with the existing steel component
manufacturing supply chain. Figure 10 displays the level of representation throughout the solar
supply chain in Ontario.
Figure 10 – Illustrative Solar Supply Chain Activity in Ontario
Despite the success in the Domestic Content policy in attracting manufacturers, the market size
was never large enough to support the overall supply capability. For example, the total annual
production capacity for module manufacturers was as high as 1,066 MW10 yet the cumulative
installed capacity over the last seven years was less than 3,000 MWDC. Not surprisingly, there
was a material reduction in module manufacturers and none of the largest inverter
manufacturers present during the peak years for FIT projects are assembling inverters in
10 Natural Resources Canada, National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Canada, 2014, accessed on
line, June 6, 2016:
http://www.cansia.ca/uploads/7/2/5/1/72513707/national_survey_report_of_pv_power_applications_in_ca
nada_2014.pdf
Development
•Well respresented
•Potentia
•Grasshopper
•Northland Power
ProfessionalServices
•Well represented
•Hatch
•Osler
•Stantec
ComponentManufacturing
•Somewhat represented
•Modules: Silfab, Heliene
•Inverters: Sparq
•Racking: Solar Flexrack, KB Racking
Construction
•Well represented
•Bondfield
•H.B. White
•RES
•GP Joule
•Endura Energy
Operationsand
Maintenance
•Well represented
•Northwind
•EDF-EN
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 23 | 89
Ontario today. Racking manufacturers continue to operate and export their products from
Ontario. Based on discussions with manufacturers, this is due to larger market size in the U.S.,
the well-established Ontario supply chain and in some instances the favourable USD/CAD
exchange rate.
From a non-manufacturing perspective, the solar supply chain continues to be well represented
both from a developer, professional services and construction perspective. However, due to the
reduction of activity in Ontario from new and contracted generation, see Figure 11, these parts
of the supply chain are also supporting projects outside Ontario.
A representative list of active Ontario companies in each section of the supply chain are
attached in Appendix E – Representative Supply Chains in Ontario.
5.2 Economic Impacts from Solar Installations in Ontario
5.2.1 Forecasted Solar Installations in Ontario
Based on current contracts and commitments, forecast attrition, and forecast net metering
adoption, there are almost 948 MWAC, or 1140 MWDC11, of solar capacity anticipated to be
installed over the forecast period, see Figure 11. These installations include projects contracted
under the GEIA that will achieve commercial operation in 2017, as well as under FIT, microFIT,
LRP and net metering.
Figure 11 – Forecasted Solar Annual Capacity Additions 2017 - 2021 (MWDC)
11 MWAC were converted to MWDC using prevailing or contract related DC/AC ratios.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
LRP I GEIA FIT 3 - Roof FIT 3 - Ground
FIT 4 - Roof FIT 4 - Ground FIT 5 - Roof FIT 5 - Ground
microFIT 2016 microFIT 2017 Net Metering - Res Net Metering - Com
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 24 | 89
5.2.2 Total and Local Capital Expenditure
Table 3 and Figure 12 display the MW installed in each year, along with the total and local capital
expenditures, on a per MW basis, and the local content percentage, which is the weighted average
spending in Ontario as a percentage of the total capital expenditures. In the next five years, just
over $2.1 billion will be spent on solar project capital costs, 63% of which will be locally spent in
Ontario.
Table 3 - Total and Local Capital Expenditures from Solar
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
MW Installed MW 272 358 337 123 51 1,140
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 2.03 1.92 1.82 1.91 1.70 1.91
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 1.50 1.13 1.09 1.15 0.93 1.20
Local Content Percentage % 74% 59% 60% 60% 55% 63%
Of note is the local content percentage which drops from a high in 2017 to a steadier state of
around 60%, post-Domestic Content obligations.
Figure 12 - Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Solar Power ($ 2017 Millions)
5.2.3 Summary of Solar Economic Performance Indicators
Based on forecast installations and total and local capital expenditures, Ontario specific jobs,
earnings and GDP were calculated. As shown in
Table 4, the solar sector will contribute almost 24,000 FTE’s, approximately $675 million in wages,
and over $1 billion in GDP over the forecast period.
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Total Cap Expenditures Local Cap Expenditures Installation Forecast
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 25 | 89
Table 4 – Overview of Solar Related Economic Impacts
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs Total FTEs/year 7,539 6,192 5,404 2,751 1,982 23,868
Earnings Total $ 2017 Millions 361.33 113.73 60.42 62.37 76.01 673.86
GDP Total $ 2017 Millions 499.18 179.87 109.13 112.03 131.40 1031.61
An additional breakdown of the economic impacts is available in Appendix D – Data Tables.
The following sections describe each performance indicator in greater detail as they relate to
new build activity and operations and maintenance (O&M) activity.
5.2.3.1 Jobs
Figure 13 displays the total annual jobs from Ontario installation decreasing over the 5 years.
What at first seems contradictory is that annual jobs decline in 2018 and 2019, even though annual
installations increase. However, this higher job intensity can be explained by the Domestic
Content obligations associated with the 2017 installations.
Figure 13 - Annual Employment Impacts from Solar Power (FTEs)
5.2.3.2 Earnings
Figure 14 displays total earnings over the five years from 2017 to 2021, which follow the same
trend as jobs for the same reason, the installations that occur in 2017 are more employment
intensive due to the Domestic Content requirements.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
dc
FTEs
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 26 | 89
Figure 14 - Solar Related Economic Impacts - Annual Earnings
While there is an overall fall in earnings over the forecast period, annual O&M earnings
increase very slightly as new projects achieve commercial operation. These O&M earnings will
persist for the contract term and likely beyond as projects operate post-contract.
5.2.3.3 GDP
Figure 15 shows the annual GDP contributions of solar in Ontario. GDP follows the same trend
as jobs and earnings. GDP from Ontario based solar installations peaks at $499 million in 2017,
drops in 2018 and 2019, but begins to increase again from 2019 to over $130 million in 2021.
Figure 15 - Solar Related Economic Impacts - Annual Contributions to GDP
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
dc
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 27 | 89
5.2.3.4 Tax Treatment
On January 4 2012, changes were made to the Assessment Act in Ontario (298/28) that applied
retroactively to January 1, 2011. These changes clarified the property tax treatment of renewable
energy systems, including solar PV. Generally speaking, rooftop solar PV systems should not
result in a property tax increase if their use is ancillary to other building uses. Determining
whether the use is “ancillary” depends on a number of factors, such as the relative amount of
income from other activities within the building compared to income from solar PV.
For ground-mount solar PV, a similar ancillary use / non-commercial treatment applies, with
additional details. For a system less than 10 kW, no change in either the assessed value or
property classification occurs. For systems 10 to 500 kW, the assessed value can change but the
tax classification should continue to be based on the property’s original use. For systems larger
than 500 kW, the assessed value will change and the tax classification will at least partly change.
The property will be reclassified as industrial from its previous classification to a degree
proportional to the system size up to 500 kW, so a 1 MW system would be entirely reclassified.
The potential changes in assessed value and the tax classification for larger systems could result
in large increases in the tax rate for these systems. Ground-mount systems operated by entities
whose primary business is the generation, transmission or distribution of electricity will be
taxed at an industrial rate.
Table 5 - Property Tax Changes with Solar PV Project in Ontario
System Size (kW) Assessment Value Assessment Class
<= 10 No Change No Change
10 - 500 Increase Possible No Change
> 500 Increase Possible Increase Possible
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
dc
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 28 | 89
5.3 Economic Impacts from Potential Solar Export Activity
Ontario’s solar sector exports both components and services. However, this analysis focuses on
export potential from components alone. Components exported from Ontario are modules,
inverters, and racking.
While solar component manufacturers do have some export experience, they were drawn to
Ontario as a result of the Domestic Content policy which required projects to purchase
components from local manufacturers. Therefore, export markets have not traditionally been
Ontario manufacturers’ focus. To estimate the level of exports over the forecast period,
Compass engaged with the supply chain to understand their:
1. Current production capacity – How much they can produce.
2. Current production – How much they actually produce.
3. Current exports / Ontario market share – How much they could export.
4. Forecast export activity - A combination of historic production, local market share
and forecast export market growth.
However, much of this information is considered confidential and as a result Compass did not
receive a comprehensive set of responses. Further, there are varying levels of uncertainty
associated with forecasting sales and export activity, so several assumptions were made that are
associated with manufacturers known current and forecast production and exports. For
example, data on several module manufacturers current production was used and applied to
other manufacturers that would not provide it.
The total exports for modules are shown in Table 6. To estimate export potential for modules,
Compass assumed an overall market share over the forecast period for all module
manufacturers and then allocated this market share among them based on their ratio of the
calculated 2016 production. Each manufacturer’s anticipated actual production, less their
estimated local market share, was their maximum export potential. The anticipated actual
production is based on the estimated historic actual production plus a growth rate for export
activity.
As shown in Table 6, it is assumed that Ontario-based module manufacturers will capture 50%
of the Ontario residential and commercial solar markets and none of the utility scale market
over the forecast period. Manufacturers are anticipated to serve Ontario market before export
markets. Based on the methodology described above, module export potential of 400 MW in
2017 falls towards 2019 and then increases – the opposite of that for local market sales.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 29 | 89
Table 6 - Ontario Module Export Potential (MWDC)
Year Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Ontario Residential & Commercial Market Size MWDC 152 285 271 135 56
Ontario Utility Scale Market Size MWDC 130 91 91 - -
Total Ontario Market Size MWDC 282 376 362 135 56
Local Market Share MWDC 76 143 135 68 28
% of Residential & Commercial Market % 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Production Ontario Production Capacity MWDC 565 565 565 565 565
Export Potential (MW) MWDC 400 372 389 415 442
For inverters, a steady 20 MW of sales to the U.S. is expected as no evidence for a change in the
magnitude of Ontario sales is found. For racking manufacturers, the surveys did not return a
comprehensive set of responses from the supply chain, but several manufacturers indicated they
are exporting, so known exports were added to account for assumed under reporting.
Table 7 – Forecast Ontario Inverter & Racking Exports
Year Unit 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Inverter Exports MW 20 20 20 20 20
Racking Exports MW 250 250 250 250 250
Figure 16 presents a summary of the solar related exports. As described above, module exports
are anticipated to fall slightly and then rebound as the Ontario solar market contracts, while
inverter and racking exports are anticipated to stay relatively stable over the forecast period.
Figure 16 – Summary of Solar Exports (MWDC)
Based on the forecast export activity shown above, employment from solar exports will fall
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
dc
Module Inverter Racking
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 30 | 89
from a peak of 1,850 FTEs in 2017 to just under 1,600 in 2021. Even though overall export
activity increases from 2018 to 2021 as shown in Figure 16 above, Figure 17 shows that earnings
and GDP fall. This is due to the assumed falling cost of solar PV equipment which will reduce
the overall spending occurring in Ontario.
Figure 17 - Economic Impacts from Solar Exports
1,400
1,450
1,500
1,550
1,600
1,650
1,700
1,750
1,800
1,850
1,900
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
FTEs
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Earnings GDP Jobs (FTE)
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 31 | 89
6 Wind
This section focuses on the wind industry in Ontario, its supply chain, forecast installations and
economic performance indicators over the next five years.
6.1 Wind Supply Chain in Ontario
Wind power is the second largest contributor to renewable energy electricity capacity in
Ontario with 4,772 MW installed and an additional 985 MW in development at the end of 2016.
These utility scale wind turbine projects are built with Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines.
Developments in tower design and blade materials are allowing the use of towers that are now
as high as 120 metres, which allow access to stronger wind regimes and higher capacity factors.
The wind turbines consist of mechanical and electrical components to control and efficiently
harness wind and convert it to electrical energy, as seen below in Figure 18. The components
being produced by Ontario manufacturers include production of blades, towers, converters,
nacelles and nacelle components.
Figure 18 - Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Components
Source: Department of Energy - Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
The installed cost of utility scale wind power is affected by several factors including the size of
the wind farm, local site conditions, proximity to the electrical grid, and the availability of an
established supply chain. Approximately 70% of the total cost of a turbine installation comes
from three main components: the nacelle, blades and tower. Ontario currently has
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 32 | 89
manufacturing capability for both blades and towers as a result of its Domestic Content policy.
Since the removal of the Domestic Content requirements and suspension of LRP II, the wind
industry in Ontario, while still represented across the supply chain including development,
professional services, component manufacturing, construction, and operations and
maintenance, is in decline. The greatest declines within the Ontario wind industry are in the
early stages of development, professional services, and component manufacturing, see below in
Figure 19.
Figure 19 – Illustrative Wind Power Supply Chain Activity in Ontario
A representative list of active Ontario companies in each section of the supply chain are
attached in Appendix E – Representative Supply Chains in Ontario.
The uncertainty around Ontario’s future wind developments creates a cascading effect through
the supply chain. Developers have begun to pivot out of Ontario and reallocate team members
to assess other markets with ongoing procurements. Several developers have estimated a shift
of upwards of 60% of Ontario office staff spending time supporting other markets including
Alberta and Saskatchewan.
As developers pivot, it limits the number of opportunities where Ontario’s professional services
industry can support projects in engineering, environmental studies, permitting, legal, and
consulting work. Many of the large professional service providers typically work across a
number of industries and have a global footprint. These larger professional service providers
are shifting unused resources to other sectors as a result of renewable energy market decline.
On the positive side, other firms are reporting an intention to allocate Ontario staff with
renewable project experience to other markets, leveraging lessons learned here.
With no new large scale utility scale procurements known post-LRP I, it limits the local outlook
for manufacturers. Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that established their own
Development
• Declining Representation
• Engie
• EDF EN Canada
• Renewable Energy Systems Canada
Professional Service
• Declining Representation
• Hatch
• Torys LLP
• Sussex Strategy Group
Component Manufacturing
• Significant Declining Representation
• Siemens Wind Power Ltd.
• CS Wind Canada
• Subcontracted Manufacturers
Construction
• Well Represented
• SURESPAN wind energy services
• AMEC Foster Wheeler Americas Limited
Operations and
Maintenance
• Well Represented
• GE Renewable Energy
• ENERCON
• Senvion Canada Inc.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 33 | 89
manufacturing facilities have been more successful in continuing to operate, while others that
used contract manufacturers have reduced their Ontario based manufacturing. Even OEM’s
with their own manufacturing facilities have had to manage through variations in Ontario
demand by cutting production as well as short term and permanent layoffs.
6.2 Economic Impacts from Wind Installations in Ontario
6.2.1 Forecast Wind Installations in Ontario
The following figure shows just over 985 MW of anticipated installations by procurement
between 2017 and 2021. The GEIA will contribute 200 MW in 2017, FIT 1 will contribute to 482
MW across 2017 and 2018, the LRP I is anticipated to contribute 300 MW across 2019 and 2020,
and the FIT 4 and FIT 5 procurements are anticipated to contributed approximately 4 MW
between 2018 and 2020. There are currently no forecasted installations for 2021 as industry is
awaiting new procurements or other incentives mechanisms to become available.
Figure 20 – Forecasted Wind Annual Capacity Additions 2017 - 2021 (MW)
6.2.2 Total and Local Capital Expenditure
Table 8 displays the forecasted installations of wind power over the next five years. For each year,
the associated total and local capital expenditures, on a per MW basis, and local content percent.
In the next five years these 985 MW of projects will require a total capital investment of just under
$2.2 billion. Of this total, approximately 44% or $958 million will be spent in Ontario.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FIT 1 GEIA LRP I FIT 5 FIT 4
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 34 | 89
Table 8 – Total and Local Capital Expenditures from Wind
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
MW Installed (MW) MW 307 378 152 150 0 986
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 2.25 2.22 2.19 2.17 - 2.22
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 1.10 1.09 0.70 0.69 - 0.97
Local Content Percentage % 49% 49% 32% 32% - 44%
Total and local capital expenditures peak in 2018 along with the amount of procurement in that
year. Capital expenditures are reflective of market size and local capital expenditures are
reflective of the local content anticipated to be achieved, see Figure 21.
Figure 21 - Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Wind Power ($ 2017 Millions)
6.2.3 Summary of Wind Performance Indicators
As shown in Table 9, the wind sector will contribute over 16,000 FTE’s, approximately $1.1 billion
in earnings and over $2.3 billion in GDP over the forecast period.
Table 9 - Overview of Wind Related Economic Impacts
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs Total FTEs 4,220 4,591 2,685 2,705 1,825 16,027
Earnings Total $ 2017 Millions 304.91 329.39 190.37 191.51 126.98 1,143.15
GDP Total $ 2017 Millions 569.12 620.83 422.88 428.35 339.90 2,381.07
An additional breakdown of the economic impacts is available in Appendix D – Data Tables.
The following sections describe each performance indicator in greater detail as they relate to
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Total Cap Expenditure Local Cap Expenditure Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 35 | 89
new build activity and operations and maintenance (O&M) activity.
6.2.3.1 Jobs
Wind power is expected to produce just over 16,000 FTEs over the forecast period. New projects
are anticipated to generate over 7,250 FTEs while O&M activities are anticipated to contribute
to an increase in annual FTEs from over 1,500 FTEs associated with legacy projects to over 1,800
FTEs by 2020.
Figure 22 - Annual Employment from Wind Power (FTEs)
6.2.3.2 Earnings
The cumulative total earnings in the wind sector is approximately $1.1 billion over the next 5
years, see Figure 23.
Figure 23 - Annual Earnings from Wind Power ($ 2017 Millions)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FTEs
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 36 | 89
6.2.3.3 GDP
New or incremental expansions to existing projects are anticipated to contribute just over $740
million of GDP over the next five years with the bulk in 2017 and 2018. The aggregate anticipated
total GDP contributions from the wind sector is approximately $2.3 billion over the next 5 years.
Figure 24 - Annual Contributions to GDP from Wind Power ($ 2017 Millions)
6.2.3.4 Tax Treatment
Property taxes for wind turbines have evolved over time and are based on property
assessments, classification of land and associated tax rates. The Municipal Property Assessment
Corporation (MPAC) has classified the land occupied by a wind turbine to be industrial.12 The
property tax revenue from wind turbine facilities is based on property evaluation of MPAC on a
MW basis multiplied by the host municipalities industrial tax rates. MPAC prescribes a
property assessment of $50,460 per MW for wind turbines larger than 1.5 MW from 2017 to
2020. The average industrial tax rate within the municipalities that have the highest
concentration of wind turbines, including Chatham-Kent, Owen Sound, Goderich, Brantford,
and Kitchener is 4.23%, see Figure 25. Using this as the tax rate, the property tax associated with
the installed wind turbines will generate approximately $2,150 per MW of installed capacity,
which at 4,772 MW at the end of 2016 will generate $10 million in annual property tax revenue,
growing to $13 million per year from by 2020.
12 Impact of Industrial Wind Turbines on Residential Property Assessment in Ontario 2016 Assessment Base Year Study
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 37 | 89
Figure 25 – Ontario Wind Turbine Installations
Source: Renewable energy policy and Ontario wind turbine development, Margaret S. Loudermilk,
Ivey Business School Western
6.3 Economic Impacts from Potential Wind Export Activity
Although the Ontario wind sector has been looking outside of Ontario for the last few years, as
discussed above, the remaining wind manufacturers in Ontario are well positioned to capitalize
on the opportunity to supply to projects in neighbouring jurisdictions. Figure 26 below displays
the potential export activity over the next five years.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 38 | 89
Figure 26 – Summary of Annual Wind Power Exports
There has been continual growth in wind developments globally with an additional 52 GW of
capacity added in 2016.13 Neighbouring markets with export opportunities will procure over
10,000 MW of wind generation over the next 15 years or approximately 750 MW annually. As
described above, Ontario manufacturers are anticipated to be competitive with other equipment
suppliers in order to capture part of this market. Figure 27 displays the economic impacts from
potential wind exports over the next five years.
Figure 27 – Economic Impacts from Wind Exports
13 Global Wind Energy Council “Global Wind Statistics 2016” http://www.gwec.net/wp-
content/uploads/vip/GWEC_PRstats2016_EN_WEB.pdf
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
Blade Tower
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
FTEs
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Wages GDP Jobs
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 39 | 89
The expected wages and GDP from wind power exports is expected to grow over the next five
years to just under $40 million and approximately $55 million, respectively. Additionally,
Ontario jobs relating to exports for wind power are expected to rise to over 550 in the next five
years.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 40 | 89
7 Hydroelectricity
This section focuses on the hydroelectricity industry in Ontario, its supply chain, forecast
installations and economic performance indicators over the next five years.
7.1 Hydroelectric Supply Chain in Ontario
Hydroelectricity has a long history in Ontario, as it was responsible for the electrification of the
province almost a century ago. There are more than 120 hydroelectric facilities across Southern
Ontario and over 210 in the province. Generally, there are two types of hydroelectric facilities,
run-of-river and reservoir (or dam). The main difference being the presence of a reservoir and
therefore the availability of constant and controlled water flow. Run-of-river facilities must
depend on the flow of the river year-round, which may lead to excess flow that cannot be used
in the spring due to snow melt and potentially reduced flows in summer and winter months.
The main components of a hydroelectric facility are the reservoir (as applicable), intake,
penstock, turbine, generator within the powerhouse, and the tailrace leading back into the river
as displayed below.
Figure 28 - Overview of a Hydroelectric Facility
Source: Ontario Waterpower Association
The natural drop in elevation or a manufactured height using a reservoir is used to convert
potential energy to kinetic energy and finally to electricity by the use of a turbine and generator.
Figure 29 below displays different sections of the hydroelectric supply chain and the level of
activity in Ontario.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 41 | 89
Figure 29 – Illustrative Hydroelectric Supply Chain Activity in Ontario
The hydroelectric supply chain is generally well represented in Ontario, with developers,
professional services, construction and operation and maintenance services offered by companies
located in Ontario. The component manufacturing is somewhat represented in Ontario. The most
notable pieces of equipment are the turbines and generators. There are two turbine manufacturers
located in Ontario, both of which serve the small hydro market, under 25MW. Both turbine
manufacturing companies have been operating in Ontario for approximately 25 years.
Additionally, there are two Ontario manufacturing locations of copper coils for hydroelectric
generators. These two facilities export upwards of 50% of their manufacturing capacity per
year. A representative list of active Ontario companies in each section of the supply chain are
attached in Appendix E – Representative Supply Chains in Ontario.
7.2 Economic Impacts from Hydroelectric Installations in Ontario
7.2.1 Forecast Hydroelectric Installations in Ontario
Over the next five years, it is expected that just over 120 MW of hydroelectric projects will be
designed, constructed or upgraded, and achieve commercial operation in Ontario. Ontario has a
large operating capacity of hydroelectricity made up of large hydro projects on the multi-MW
scale (100MW+). Further development in Ontario is primarily focused on upgrading existing
sites rather than developing new large scale hydroelectric projects. Additionally, it is expected
that there will be development of small hydro, under 20 MW per project, as the remaining IESO
contracted projects are constructed and achieve commercial operation. The forecasted
hydroelectric installations by procurement type over the next five years are displayed below in
Figure 30.
Development
•Well represented
•Ontario Power Generation
•Andritz Hydro Canada
•Voith Hydro
Component Manufacturing
•Well respresented
•Golder Associates
•SNC-Lavalin
•Dillon Consulting
•Pinchin
Professional Services
•Well respresented
•Maple Reinders Construction
•Chant Group of Companies
•TESC Constracting Company
Engineering, Design, and Construction
•Well respresented
•Ontario Power Generation
•Capstone Infrastructure Corp.
•Andritz Hydro Canada
•Voith Hydro
Operations and
Maintenance
•Somewhat represented
•Canadian Hydro Components
•Norcan Hydraulic Turbine
•Andritz Hydro Canada
•Voith Hydro
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 42 | 89
Figure 30 – Forecasted Hydroelectric Annual Capacity Additions 2017 - 2021 (MW)
The forecast hydroelectric installations in Ontario over the next five years peak in 2018, at just
over 50 MW, and decline dramatically into 2020 and 2021, at 1.4 MW and 0.95 MW respectively.
Installations leading up to and following the peak year in 2018 are just over 45 MW in 2017 and
just over 20 MW in 2019.
Due to longer permitting and build times required for hydroelectric projects, more recent
procurements including FIT3, FIT4, FIT5, and LRP I, are expected to come online within the
next 6 to 10 years. These projects total approximately 60 MW of additional hydroelectric
facilities are not included in the forecasts of economic activity.
7.2.2 Total and Local Capital Expenditure
Table 10 displays the MW installed in each year, along with the total and local capital
expenditures, local content percent, and the total and local capital expenditures on a per MW
basis of installed capacity. In the next five years, approximately $660 million will be spent on
hydroelectric projects, $463 million of which, or 68% on average, will be locally spent in
Ontario.
Table 10 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Hydroelectricity ($ 2017 Millions)
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
Installed Capacity MW 47 51 21 1 1 121
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 4.90 6.70 3.80 2.50 7.00 5.00
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 3.40 4.80 2.50 1.50 5.10 3.50
Local Content Percentage % 69% 72% 67% 61% 72% 68%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
HESA HESOP HCI FIT 1 FIT 2
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 43 | 89
Figure 31 displays the total and local capital expenditures on an annual basis, as well as the MW
installed in each year.
Figure 31 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Hydroelectricity ($ 2017 Millions)
As expected, total capital expenditures peak in 2018 at just under $350 million. The local
expenditures are a percentage of the total capital expenditures and depend on the source of the
materials, goods, or services used in the development of the project. Similar to the total capital
expenditure, the local capital expenditure is related to current development, therefore it peaks
in 2018 and dramatically decreases in 2020 and 2021, along with installations. Total and local
capital expenditures depend on the amount of procurements in a given year.
7.2.3 Hydroelectric Specific Performance Indicators
The performance indicators used to assess the hydroelectric industry in Ontario are displayed
below in Table 11. Over the next five years, the hydroelectric industry is anticipated to
contribute approximately 13,690 FTEs, over $1 billion in wages and over $1.6 billion in GDP
over the forecast period.
Table 11 – Overview of Hydroelectric Related Economic Impacts
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs Total FTEs/year 3,255 4,214 2,377 1,909 1,938 13,693
Earnings Total $ 2017 Millions 256.40 335.10 180.50 141.00 143.20 1,056.20
GDP Total $ 2017 Millions 380.28 472.88 286.38 237.28 239.98 1,616.79
An additional breakdown of the economic impacts is available in Appendix D – Data Tables.
The following sections describe each performance indicator in greater detail as they relate to
new build activity and operations and maintenance (O&M) activity.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Total Cap Expenditure Local Cap Expenditure MW Installed
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 44 | 89
7.2.3.1 Jobs
Figure 32 displays the annual number of jobs created due to activity in the hydroelectric supply
chain in Ontario.
Figure 32 – Annual Job Impacts from Hydroelectricity (FTEs)
As expected the number of jobs peak in the same year that installations peak. The highest job
contributions come from O&M for legacy hydro capacity, which represent 67% of total jobs. It is
important to note that there is a constant amount of jobs from operations and maintenance
maintained over the lifetime of the contracts, at approximately 1,830 FTEs.
7.2.3.2 Earnings
Figure 33 displays the annual wages over the next five years due to new development of
hydroelectric projects and operations and maintenance activities.
Figure 33 – Annual Earnings Impacts from Hydroelectricity ($ 2017 Millions)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FTEs
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 45 | 89
The annual earnings from Ontario based installations peak in 2018, at just over $335 million,
relating to the amount of project development in that year. The constant portion of operations
and maintenance for legacy projects is displayed across all years at just over $139 million in
annual wages.
7.2.3.3 GDP
Figure 34 displays the annual GDP contributions from hydroelectric projects over the next 5 years.
As expected, the highest contributions occur in the peak year for hydroelectric installations, in
2018, with just over $470 million contributing to GDP in Ontario.
Figure 34 – Annual Contributions to GDP from Hydroelectricity ($ 2017 Millions)
A large portion of contributions to GDP come from operations and maintenance of legacy hydro
capacity. The GDP contributions due to operations and maintenance activities, which will
remain generally stable over the lifetime of the contracts, is approximately $235 million.
7.2.3.4 Tax Treatment
In 2001 changes were made to existing property taxes and water rental charges paid by
hydroelectric generating facility owners and water power leaseholders. These charges were
replaced with taxes and charges on the gross revenues of the hydroelectric generating facilities.
The Gross Revenue Charge (GRC) is made up of the following three components:
1. The GRC Property Tax component payable to the Minister of Finance;
2. The GRC Property Tax component payable to the Ontario Electricity Financial
Corporation (OEFC); and
3. The GRC Water Rental component payable to the Minister of Finance
The GRC rates for property tax components and the water rental charge are displayed below in
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 46 | 89
Table 12. Only incremental annual generation above 700 GWh per year is charged at the
increased rate.
Table 12 – Gross Revenue Charge Breakdown
Total Annual
Generation (GWh/yr)
Property Tax
Rate (%)
Water Rental
Rate (%)
Total Tax
Rate (%)
0 – 50 2.5 9.5 12
50 – 400 4.5 9.5 14
400 – 700 6.0 9.5 15.5
> 700 26.5 9.5 36
The average provincial taxes paid by representative project sizes are displayed below in Table 13.
Gross revenue is the amount calculated by multiplying the facility's annual generation of
electricity for the year by a price of $40,000 per gigawatt hour. Each facility is assumed to have a
capacity factor of 50%.
Table 13 – Average Gross Revenue Charge by Representative Project Sizes
Project Size
(MW)
Annual Generation
(GWh/yr)
Gross
Revenue ($) GRC Tax (%) GRC Tax ($)
5 21.9 $876,000 12 $105,120
20 87.6 $3,504,000 14 $490,560
100 438 $17,520,000 15.5 $2,715,600
500 2190 $87,600,000 36 $27,944,400
For the purposes of determining the annual average amount spent on GRC, it is assumed that
Ontario’s installed capacity is operating at a 50% capacity factor and that the average annual
generation is between 5-400 GWh per year, corresponding to a total tax rate of 14%, resulting in
GRC payments ranging from $214 to $217 million per year.
Table 14 – Annual Gross Revenue Charge Total
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Installed Capacity MW 8,714 8,761 8,812 8,833 8,834
Capacity Factor % 50 50 50 50 50
Annual Generation GWh/yr 38,167 38,371 38,595 38,689 38,695
Gross Revenue $ 2017 Millions 1,527 1,535 1,544 1,548 1,548
GRC Tax Paid $ 2017 Millions 214 215 216 217 217
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 47 | 89
7.3 Economic Impacts from Potential Hydroelectric Export Activity
Ontario manufacturers of hydroelectric components, namely the turbines and generators, supply
the Ontario the U.S., and global markets. The local Ontario market demand is heavily correlated
to procurements and refurbishments. Figure 35 displays the annual exports of manufactured
hydroelectric components on a MW basis.
Figure 35 – Summary of Hydroelectric Exports (MW)
Ontario manufacturing supply chains that served Ontario projects are shifting towards exports
due to the lack of procurement in Ontario and therefore lower local demand. There is, however,
still demand within Ontario for upgrades/refurbishments, but this represents a fraction of
previous activity. The current installed capacity undergoes upgrades/refurbishments
periodically. Generally, this is 40-50 years after the installation date, barring other extensive
damage to the equipment.
Many manufacturers and service providers serve markets outside of Ontario, including other
provinces, like British Columbia, and some U.S. states including New England states and New
York. The export potential for Ontario hydroelectric manufacturers of turbines and copper coils
of generators are displayed below in Table 15 and Table 16.
Table 15 – Average Annual Ontario Hydroelectric Turbine Export Potential
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Local Market Size MW 47 51 21 1 1
Production Capacity MW 45 45 45 45 45
Local Market Share MW 8 8 8 8 8
Export Potential MW 37 37 37 37 37
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
Generator Turbine
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 48 | 89
Table 16 - Average Annual Ontario Hydroelectric Generator Export Potential
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Local Market Size MW 47 51 21 1 1
Production Capacity MW 284 284 284 284 284
Local Market Share MW 67 67 67 67 67
Export Potential MW 217 217 217 217 217
Of the export markets served by the Ontario hydroelectric manufacturers and service providers,
most have specific targets of renewable energy procurement that must be met within the next 5-
10 years. Generally, there are few hydroelectric specific procurements, however it is expected
that hydroelectric projects will be successful in these export markets. Of note is the 60 MW of
small hydroelectric procurement expected in Massachusetts in the near future.
As shown above, this analysis assumes a steady state of hydro export activity, including 37 MW
of turbine exports and 217 MW of generator exports per year. Using these export figures, the
jobs, earnings and GDP impacts accruing to Ontario were calculated using the JEDI model.
They result in just under 200 people employed per year, earning a total of $17.5 million and
contributing over $20 million in GDP on an annual basis, see Figure 36.
Figure 36 – Economic Impacts from Hydro Exports
0
50
100
150
200
250
0
5
10
15
20
25
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
FTEs
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Wages GDP Jobs
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 49 | 89
8 Biogas
This section focuses on the biogas industry in Ontario, its supply chain, forecast installations
and performance indicators over the next five years.
8.1 Biogas Supply Chain in Ontario
Biogas is created when organic matter breaks down in an oxygen free environment, also known
as anaerobic digestion. The feedstock for a biogas facility generally fall into these main
categories:
• agriculture (livestock manure or crop residue)
• source-separated organic materials from residences and commercial buildings
• landfills
• bio-solids from wastewater treatment
A diagram of a biogas facility is displayed below in Figure 37. The feedstock is what drives
production, but is limited by local availability/production. In many cases, an on-farm biogas
facility cannot produce enough feedstock for a large enough capacity to be economically
feasible and must import additional feedstock from a local source. Not only is this an additional
cost, it is typically not a reliable source of feedstock for an extended period of time.
Figure 37 - Overview of a Biogas Facility
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 50 | 89
The main component of biogas is methane, similar to natural gas. Biogas can be upgraded to
Renewable Natural Gas, which has similar applications to natural gas. It should be noted that
this report focuses solely on the economic benefits of biogas to electricity.
Figure 38 below displays different sections of the biogas supply chain and the level of activity in
Ontario.
Figure 38 – Illustrative Biogas Supply Chain Activity in Ontario
The biogas supply chain is generally well represented in Ontario, with distributors,
engineering, design and construction, operations and maintenance, and professional services
offered by companies located in Ontario. The exception is component manufacturing, which is
generally not present in Ontario. The most notable pieces of equipment are the digesters and
generators. A majority of the digester technology is imported from Europe. Other components
including odour control are also sourced from outside of Ontario. A representative list of active
Ontario companies in each section of the supply chain are attached in Appendix E –
Representative Supply Chains in Ontario.
8.2 Economic Impacts from Biogas Installations in Ontario
8.2.1 Forecasted Biogas Installations in Ontario
Over the next five years, it is expected that approximately 7 MW of biogas projects will be
designed, constructed, and achieve commercial operation in Ontario. The forecasted biogas
installations by procurement type over the next five years are displayed below in Figure 39.
Development
•Well represented
•CCi Bio Energy
•PlanET Biogas
•Yield Biogas
Component Manufacturing
•Somewhat respresented
•CEM Engineering
•Golder Associates
Professional Services
•Well respresented
•CCi Bio Energy
•PlanET Biogas
•Yield Biogas
Operations and
Maintenance
•Well respresented
•CCi Bio Energy
•PlanET Biogas
•Yield Biogas
Engineering, Design, and Construction
•Not well represented
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 51 | 89
Figure 39 – Forecasted Biogas Annual Capacity Additions 2017 - 2021 (MW)
8.2.2 Total and Local Capital Expenditure
Table 17 displays the MW installed in each year, along with the total and local capital
expenditures, local content percent, and the total and local capital expenditures on a per MW
basis of installed capacity. In the next five years, approximately $90 million will be spent on
biogas projects, $43 million of which, or 47% on average, will be local spending in Ontario.
Table 17 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Biogas ($ 2017 Millions)
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
Installed Capacity MW 2 0 1 4 0 7
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 12.30 - 12.30 12.30 - 12.30
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 5.80 - 5.80 5.80 - 5.80
Local Content Percentage % 47% - 47% 47% - 47%
Figure 40 displays the total and local capital expenditures on an annual basis, as well as the MW
installed in each year.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FIT 2 FIT 3 FIT 4 FIT 5
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 52 | 89
Figure 40 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Biogas ($ 2017 Millions)
The local expenditures are a percentage of the total capital expenditures and depend on the
source of the materials, goods, or services used in the development of the project. Total and
local capital expenditures depend on the amount of installations in a given year.
8.2.3 Biogas Specific Performance Indicators
The performance indicators used to assess the biogas industry in Ontario are displayed below in
Table 18. As shown below, over the next five years, the biogas industry is anticipated to contribute
almost 1,000 FTEs, approximately $77 million in wages and approximately $106 million in GDP
over the forecast period.
Table 18 – Overview of Biogas Related Economic Impacts
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs Total FTEs/year 183 95 161 367 180 986
Earnings Total $ 2017 Millions 14.40 7.20 12.50 28.90 13.60 76.60
GDP Total $ 2017 Millions 19.76 10.96 17.56 38.26 19.56 106.11
An additional breakdown of the economic impacts is available in Appendix D – Data Tables. The
following sections describe each performance indicator in greater detail as they relate to new
build activity and operations and maintenance (O&M) activity.
8.2.3.1 Jobs
Figure 41 displays the annual number of jobs created due to activity in the biogas supply chain
in Ontario.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Total Cap Expenditure Local Cap Expenditure Installed Capacity
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 53 | 89
Figure 41 – Annual Employment Impacts from Biogas (FTEs)
As expected the number of jobs peak in the same year that installations peak, with a steady
increase in the O&M related jobs over time.
8.2.3.2 Earnings
Figure 42 displays the annual wages over the next five years due to new development of Biogas
projects and operations and maintenance activities.
Figure 42 – Annual Earnings Impacts from Biogas ($ 2017 Millions)
The annual earnings from Ontario based installations peak in 2020, at approximately $29 million,
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FTEs
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 54 | 89
due to the amount of installations in that year.
8.2.3.3 GDP
Figure 43 displays the annual GDP contributions from biogas projects over the next five years. As
expected, the highest contributions occur in the peak year for biogas installations, in 2020, with
approximately $38 million contributing to GDP in Ontario.
Figure 43 – Annual Contributions to GDP from Biogas ($ 2017 Millions)
Over the next five years it is expected that the biogas industry in Ontario will contribute
approximately $83 million to GDP.
8.2.4 Economic Impacts from Potential Biogas Export Activity
As there is no significant Ontario manufacturing of the major biogas components, no export
activity is anticipated over the forecast period.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
-
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 55 | 89
9 Biomass
This section focuses on the biomass industry in Ontario, its supply chain, forecast installations
and performance indicators over the next five years.
9.1 Biomass Supply Chain in Ontario
A biomass facility uses a biological fuel containing high amounts of carbon, such as wood
pellets or other types of plants. Generally, these biomass fuels are not used for food or feed and
are classified as renewable because the feedstock can be regrown. Figure 44 displays a standard
biomass to electricity facility.
Figure 44 - Overview of a Biomass Facility
The biomass enters the facility from a storage container system, is combusted to produce heat,
which in turn creates steam within a hot water boiler. The stream from the boiler powers a
turbine, which powers a generator and produces electricity.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 56 | 89
Figure 45 – Illustrative Biomass Supply Chain Activity in Ontario
The biomass supply chain is somewhat represented in Ontario, with some developers and
professional service providers serving this market. There is not any significant component
manufacturing present in Ontario, but engineering, design and construction, operations and
maintenance, and professional services are well represented. A representative list of active
Ontario companies in each section of the supply chain are attached in Appendix E –
Representative Supply Chains in Ontario.
9.2 Economic Impacts from Biomass Installations in Ontario
9.2.1 Forecasted Biomass Installations in Ontario
Over the next five years, it is expected that just over 2 MW of biomass projects will be designed,
constructed, and achieve commercial operation in Ontario. The forecasted biomass installations
by procurement type over the next five years are displayed below in Figure 46.
Figure 46 – Forecasted Biomass Annual Capacity Additions 2017 - 2021 (MW)
Development
•Somewhat respresented
•KMW Energy
Component Manufacturing
•Somewhat respresented
Professional Services
•Well respresented
•Andy Veenstra Farms Ltd.
•Atitkokan Renewable Fuels
•etc.
Operations and Maintenance
•Well respresented
•KMW Energy
•Naanovo Energy
•Ontario Power Generation
Engineering, Design, and Construction
•Not represented
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FIT 3 FIT 4 FIT 5
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 57 | 89
9.2.2 Total and Local Capital Expenditure
Table 19 displays the MW installed in each year, along with the total and local capital
expenditures per MW and the local content percent. In the next five years, approximately $28
million will be spent on biomass projects, $13 million of which, or 47% on average, will be local
spending in Ontario.
Table 19 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Biomass ($ 2017 Millions)
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
Installed Capacity MW 0.5 1 0.3 0.5 0 2.3
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 12.30 12.30 12.30 12.30 - 12.30
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 5.80 5.80 5.80 5.80 - 5.80
Local Content Percentage % 47% 47% 47% 47% - 47%
Figure 47 displays the total and local capital expenditures on an annual basis, as well as the MW
installed in each year.
Figure 47 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Biomass ($ 2017 Millions)
The local expenditures are a percentage of the total capital expenditures and depend on the
source of the materials, goods, or services used in the development of the project. Total and
local capital expenditures depend on the amount of procurements in a given year.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Total Cap Expenditure Local Cap Expenditure Installed Capacity
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 58 | 89
9.2.3 Biomass Specific Performance Indicators
The performance indicators used to assess the biomass industry in Ontario are displayed below
in Table 20. As shown below, over the next five years, the biomass industry is anticipated to
contribute almost 2,000 FTEs, approximately $160 million in wages and approximately $255
million in GDP over the forecast period.
Table 20 – Overview of Biomass Related Economic Impacts
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs Total FTEs/year 382 420 391 410 388 1,992
Earnings Total $ 2017 Millions 30.60 33.00 29.40 30.60 28.20 151.80
GDP Total $ 2017 Millions 49.36 52.36 47.86 49.36 46.36 245.31
An additional breakdown of the economic impacts is available in Appendix D – Data Tables. The
following sections describe each performance indicator in greater detail as they relate to new
build activity and operations and maintenance (O&M) activity.
9.2.3.1 Jobs
Figure 48 displays the annual number of jobs created due to activity in the biomass supply chain
in Ontario. The majority of jobs in the biomass industry in Ontario are related to operations and
maintenance for legacy biomass projects at approximately 350 FTEs. Two large legacy biomass
projects were procured through the Atikokan Biomass Energy Supply Agreement (ABESA) and
Thunder Bay Biomass Energy Supply Agreement (TBESA), which came online in 2014 and 2015,
respectively. These projects converted coal burning facilities to biomass.
Figure 48 – Annual Employment Impacts from Biomass (FTEs)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FTEs
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 59 | 89
9.2.3.2 Earnings
Figure 49 displays the annual wages over the next five years due to new development of biomass
projects and operations and maintenance activities. The annual earnings are relatively stable at
around $30 million. This is mainly due to wages relating to operations and maintenance on legacy
biomass projects.
Figure 49 – Annual Earnings Impacts from Biomass ($ 2017 Millions)
9.2.3.3 GDP
Figure 50 displays the annual GDP contributions from biomass projects over the next 5 years. The
largest contribution comes from operations and maintenance of legacy biomass projects, which
remain relatively stable at approximately $46 million per year.
Figure 50 – Annual Contributions to GDP from Biomass ($ 2017 Millions)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
New Build O&M Legacy O&M New Build Installations
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 60 | 89
Over the next five years it is expected that the biomass industry in Ontario will contribute
approximately $255 million to GDP.
9.2.4 Economic Impacts from Potential Biomass Export Activity
Similar to the biogas sector, as there is no significant Ontario manufacturing of the major
biomass components, no export activity is anticipated over the forecast period.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 61 | 89
10 Conclusion
The Ontario renewable energy sector is evolving away from centralized procurements for
distributed generation resources over the near term. Contracted, committed, net metered and
operating renewable energy assets in Ontario are forecast to create 56,500 FTEs, contribute $3
billion to earnings, and $5.4 billion to GDP, across all renewable technologies over the next five
years, see Figure 51.
Figure 51 – Summary of Jobs and GDP from Ontario Based Installations
Local projects have been the primary driver for economic activity and these have been tied to
local procurements. In the near term, net metering and export activity represent two ways in
which Ontario will see economic activity within the renewable energy sector that is not driven
by Ontario based procurements.
The transition to net metering creates revenue and counter party risk not currently present in
the FIT and microFIT programs, which will reduce initial uptake during the forecast period.
Modest uptake for solar is anticipated in the near term, but other renewable energy technologies
are not expected to be feasible or economic under the recent changes to the net metering
regulation that come into force in July 2017. Allowing third party ownership in conjunction
with single or multi-entity virtual net metering – all potential changes to the net metering
regulation – should drive activity for larger and a more technology diverse set of projects. In the
medium to long term, the shift to net metering is anticipated to support the growth of the
distributed generation market as technology costs, such as solar PV, continue to fall.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FTEs
Wind Hydro
Solar Biomass
Biogas Installation Forecast
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
GD
P -
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Wind Hydro
Solar Biomass
Biogas Installation Forecast
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 62 | 89
Outside of Ontario, the demand for renewable energy continues to grow, driven by falling
technology costs as well as an increase in renewable portfolio standards. Despite global
competition, many of Ontario’s renewable energy sector manufacturers have already been
serving exports markets in Canada and the U.S. and are anticipated to continue to do so in the
near term. The proximity to the U.S., one of the largest markets for wind and solar development
globally, provides a competitive advantage to Ontario exporters associated with lower shipping
and logistical costs. Exports have the potential to create an additional 10,700 FTEs, contribute
$740 million to earnings, and $1 billion to GDP over the forecast period, see Figure 52 below. As
shown, solar represents the largest export opportunity in terms of jobs and GDP.
Figure 52 - Summary of Jobs and GDP from Potential Export Activity
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
FTEs
Axis Title
Wind Hydro Solar
Biomass Biogas Export MW
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
0
50
100
150
200
250
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
MW
GD
P -
$ 2
01
7 M
illio
ns
Axis Title
Wind Hydro Solar
Biomass Biogas Export MW
Ontario’s CCAP demonstrates its commitment to decarbonizing its economy via a shift towards
electrification of fossil fuelled energy use, resulting in higher electricity demand, as modelled in
the IESO’s OPO. This increased electricity demand will be served in part by a variety of low or
non-emitting resources, including renewables. Ontario is among many sub-national
jurisdictions in North America seeking to reduce its carbon footprint which means there will be
long term growth of export markets for Ontario based component manufacturers. It is this
combination of decarbonization, at home and abroad, in conjunction with falling renewable
technology costs that will generate growth in Ontario’s renewable energy sector in the medium
to long term.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 64 | 89
11 Appendix A – Glossary
Capital Expenditures refers to the total capital costs associated with developing and installing a
renewable energy project, measured in $/kW or $/MW installed. For example, connection costs
are included.
Earnings refers to wage and salary compensation paid to workers.
Employment or “Jobs” is measured in Full Time Equivalents (FTE).
Export activity refers to any economic activity associated with the renewable energy sector that
occurs in Ontario or by Ontario-based employees for projects or clients outside of Ontario.
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - Gross domestic product (GDP) is the total unduplicated value
of the goods and services. It is typically measured for an economic territory of a country or
region during a given period. In this study, GDP refers to impacts occurring in Ontario as result
of economic activity occurring within the renewable energy sector.
Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines have the main rotor shaft and electrical generator at the top of
a tower, and may be pointed into or out of the wind.
Jobs refers to Full Time Equivalents (FTE) which represents full time employment for one year.
(1 FTE = 2,080 hours)
Local Capital Expenditure is the percentage or allocation of the total Capital Expenditure spent
in Ontario.
Output refers to economic activity or the value of production in the region or local economy.
Output is defined more broadly than other metrics of economic activity including value added
(or GDP). Output is the sum value of all goods and services at all stages of production (i.e., as a
raw material and as a finished product), where value added refers only to the market value of
the final product.
Value Added is an estimate of GDP and is the difference between total gross output and the
cost of intermediate inputs.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 65 | 89
12 Appendix B – Scope and Objectives The market assessment included qualitative and quantitative components. From a qualitative
perspective, the market assessment:
1. Identifies recent trends affecting the sector’s composition and performance in domestic and
international markets; and
2. Highlights strategies the sector is taking to evolve and adapt to anticipated future trends
domestically and internationally, including its growth prospects;
From a quantitative perspective, this market assessment:
3. Evaluates the sector’s current overall status using the following performance indicators:
a) Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
b) Employment
c) Capital Expenditures
d) Government (e.g. tax revenue)
e) Export activity
f) Company Performance Indicators
4. Evaluates the current and anticipated direct and indirect jobs and investments from:
a) The current and future procurements and climate change initiatives in Ontario including:
i. LRP I, FIT 4, FIT 5, microFIT 2017
ii. Forecasts of uptake under the recently updated net metering regulation
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 66 | 89
13 Appendix C – Detailed Approach
Economic impacts from the renewable energy sector occur across the supply chain including
development, contracting, permitting, construction, manufacturing and operations. Ontario’s
economic impacts from the renewable energy sector are determined by local economic activity,
which is a function of local installations as well as the level of the sector’s export activity. When
Ontario-based companies sell their goods or provide their services to projects outside of
Ontario, they are considered “export activities” as they result in economic benefits to Ontario
even if they are provided to another jurisdiction.
To provide this market assessment Compass combined its existing knowledge base with sector
outreach and Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) data to develop a forecast of
market activity measured in Megawatts (MW) by renewable energy technology. This forecast was
then used in combination with National Renewable Energy Laboratories Jobs and Economic
Development Impacts (JEDI) model to calculate annual impacts.14
13.1 Sector Engagement
Sector engagement was critical to provide a richer picture of sector activities and responses to
the current environment. To support our engagement, Compass worked through the following
four industry associations to promote and circulate the survey instrument.
Solar: Canadian Solar Industry Association
Wind: Canadian Wind Energy Association
Hydro: Ontario Water Power Association
Biogas: Canadian Biogas Association
Key areas of research included forecast installations in Ontario, anticipated adoption under
recent and potential changes to Ontario’s net metering regulation, technology costs (i.e. capital,
operations and labour) and export activity.
The primary research involved both web and telephone interviews across the four technology
specific supply chains that are the focus of this assignment. In total, input was received from
over 60 participants including, 31 telephone based interviews and 26 web based survey
responses15, see Figure 53 and Figure 54 below. Input was received from a cross section of
technology and supply chain participants.
14 NREL, Jobs and Economic Development Impact Models, http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/jedi/ 15 Web responses were only counted if a respondent provided more than their name and company
affiliation.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 67 | 89
Figure 53 – Survey Sample Size by Technology
Figure 54 – Survey Sample Size by Role in Supply Chain
13.2 Overview of JEDI Model
NREL’s JEDI models are input-output based models designed to assess employment and
economic impacts in a province or region from investments in a power generation project. JEDI
utilizes industry specific economic data to estimate local economic activity and the resulting
impacts. Economic impacts are based on project specific costs (capital and operations), project
cost allocations, local spending and inter-industry effects using industry specific multipliers.
For example, the cost of a wind turbine, the amount of that turbine that is purchased in Ontario
and the resulting industries impacted by that purchase, e.g. metal fabrication, are incorporated
into the JEDI model’s calculation of economic impacts. Multipliers for employment, wage and
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Solar Wind Hydro Biogas Biomass
#
Telephone Web
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Developer Manufacturer EPC/Installer Service Provider
Telephone Web
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 68 | 89
salary, output, value added and personal spending patterns are embedded within the JEDI
model and used to analyze the direct, indirect and induced impacts from power generation
investments. Figure 55 provides an overview of the different types of data used by the JEDI
model.
Figure 55 - JEDI Model Mechanics
Figure 56 provides an overview of the key input parameters needed to calculate the performance
indicators and economic outputs.
Figure 56 – Overview of Key Parameters Impacting Economic Outputs
Compass took several steps to ensure the JEDI model was calibrated for Ontario-based projects.
These included ensuring the multipliers used in the model were specific to Ontario as well as the
capital costs and capital cost allocations reflective of Ontario-based projects. In addition, Compass
accounted for the contribution of Ontario-based component and service providers and as well as
local wages, taxes and land lease rates.
Both the installation forecast and the JEDI input parameters related to costs, both capital and
operating, and local content were vetted through the sector outreach which included both an on-
line and phone-based survey. Overall over 25 JEDI models were created to account for differences
across technologies, market segment (i.e. residential, commercial, utility scale) and evolving
capital costs. JEDI calculates the following economic outputs: Jobs, Earnings, Output and
approximate contributions towards Gross Domestic Product (GDP), using industrial sector
Capital Costs
•Total Cost
•Component Cost
•Other: Wages, taxes, lease payments, etc.
Local Spending
•Components
•Balance of Plant
•Professional Services
•Development
Economic Multipliers
•Jobs (FTE)
•Earnings
•Outputs
Economic Outputs
•FTEs
•Earnings (Wages)
•Output
•GDP
Procurement or Trend
(MW)
•FIT, mFIT, LRP I
•Net Metering
•CCAP & Carbon Pricing
•Global Growth
Renewable Sector
Activity
•Development
•Professional Services
•Manufacturing
•Construction
•Operations
Costs ($)
•Total Captial Cost
•Component Cost
•Other: Wages, taxes, lease payments, O&M
Local Spending (%)
• Manufacturing
•Balance of Plant
•Professional Services
•Development
Economic Multipliers
•Jobs (FTE)
•Earnings
•Outputs
•GDP
Economic Outputs
•FTEs
• Earnings (Wages)
•Output
•GDP
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 69 | 89
relationships.
13.3 Methodological & Simplifying Assumptions
Methodological assumptions include:
• All projects of the same technology and size range, within a given procurement had
similar costs and economic impacts on a per unit basis
• Attrition is included for FIT 4 and FIT 5 solar projects based on FIT 3 attrition rates. No
additional attrition for contracted FIT or Green Energy Investment Agreement (GEIA)
projects.
• Jobs and investments were calculated on a per MW basis by procurement type, by year
and then applied to actual Ontario installations
• Only direct and indirect impacts included
• Economic activity, and costs, were linked to the year that projects achieved Commercial
Operation
• All economic performance indicators including earnings and GDP are reported in 2017
dollars.
As described above, this analysis includes assessing economic impacts associated with future
net metering and export activity. Compass engaged with local supply chains to understand
their anticipated level of activity.
13.3.1.1 Net Metering
Net metering activity was forecast based on respondent’s answers to questions regarding their
anticipated level of installations in 2018, in a net metering environment, versus 2017, in a FIT
and microFIT environment. While there was consensus that the market would contract
following the end of FIT and microFIT, there was high variation by how much. In addition,
most respondents were unable to quantify the forecast market contraction and provided
qualitative assessments of the reduction in market size.
Compass considered the overall trend and the quantitative responses it did receive in
conjunction with its own assessment of renewable energy adoption under net metering to
develop the net metering forecasts.
13.3.1.2 Export Activity
Export activity was estimated based on a combination of current local component supplier
production capacity, historic production utilization, local market size and local market share. In
general, for a specific component type, export activity was derived using the following
relationship:
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 70 | 89
Export Activity = Production Capacity (MW) x Production Utilization (%) less Local Market
Share (MW)
For a given component this then allowed for modelling a quantity of MWs being exported in
each year over the forecast period.
There are two counterbalancing limitations associated with this approach:
1) It relies on voluntary self-reporting, limited to those manufacturers that Compass engaged
with, and therefore the total volumes of activity are likely to be conservative.
2) There were several instances where information for specific manufacturers was not available
or limited and therefore Compass had to infer the data points based on other respondent’s
information.
3) Assumes that there is no decline in production capacity as a result of a decline in local market
activity.
13.4 Exclusions
The following economic impacts were excluded from this analysis:
1. Financing / Local Ownership – The equity and debt capital needed to develop, construct
and operate these facilities comes from both local and extra-Ontario sources. While several
locally owned developers and debt providers serve the Ontario market, their relative
share of the total capital requirements was not incorporated into the analysis.
2. Induced Impacts – The JEDI model does calculate induced impacts based on input
assumptions provided, including Ontario specific induced multipliers. However, due to
the nature of induced impacts, being associated with personal expenditures, and the
assumption that these impacts respond perfectly elastically from direct and indirect
activity, they can overstate actual impacts and were therefore ignored.
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 71 | 89
14 Appendix D – Data Tables
This appendix provides additional detailed figures for each of the technologies economic
impacts.
14.1 All Renewable technologies
Table 21 – Combined Forecast of Employment Impacts (FTEs/year)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Wind 4,220 4,591 2,685 2,705 1,825 16,027
Hydro 3,255 4,214 2,377 1,910 1,938 13,694
Solar 7,538 6,191 5,403 2,751 1,982 23,865
Biomass 382 420 391 410 388 1,992
Biogas 183 95 161 367 180 986
Total 15,578 15,511 11,018 8,143 6,314 56,564
Table 22 – Combined Forecast of Employment Intensity for New Installations (FTEs/MW)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Wind 9 8 6 6 -
Hydro 30 46 23 13 48
Solar 23 14 12 11 11
Biomass - - - - -
Biogas - - - - -
*Biomass and biogas are not included as this is a ratio and the relatively small amount of procurements
skews the numbers
Table 23 – Combined Forecast Earnings ($ 2107 Millions)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Wind 304.91 329.39 190.37 191.51 126.98 1,143.15
Hydro 256.42 335.13 180.48 140.99 143.26 1,056.28
Solar 361.33 113.73 60.42 62.37 76.01 673.86
Biomass 30.57 32.97 29.37 30.57 28.17 151.65
Biogas 14.39 4.79 10.07 25.19 4.79 59.25
Total 967.62 816.01 470.71 450.64 379.21 3,084.19
Table 24 – Combined Forecast GDP Impacts ($ 2017 Millions)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Wind 569.12 620.83 422.88 428.35 339.90 2,381.07
Hydro 380.34 472.87 286.41 237.27 239.93 1,616.82
Solar 499.18 179.87 109.13 112.03 131.40 1,031.61
Biomass 49.36 52.36 47.86 49.36 46.36 245.31
Biogas 19.76 7.76 14.36 33.26 7.76 82.91
Total 1,517.76 1,333.69 880.64 860.27 765.36 5,357.72
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 72 | 89
Table 25 – Combined Forecast Employment Impacts from Potential Exports (FTEs/year)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Wind 55 7 426 423 563 1,474
Hydro 197 197 197 197 197 987
Solar 1,869 1,663 1,617 1,597 1,576 8,322
Biomass - - - - - -
Biogas - - - - - -
Total 2,122 1,867 2,241 2,217 2,337 10,783
Table 26 – Combined Forecast Earnings from Potential Exports ($ 2017 Millions)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Wind 3.91 0.50 29.95 29.39 39.60 103.33
Hydro 17.53 17.53 17.53 17.53 17.53 87.65
Solar 124.17 110.52 107.42 106.06 104.67 552.84
Biomass - - - - - -
Biogas - - - - - -
Total 145.60 128.54 154.90 152.98 161.80 743.82
Table 27 – Combined Forecast GDP Impacts from Potential Exports ($ 2017 Millions)
Technology 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Wind 5.56 0.80 41.70 40.80 55.12 143.98
Hydro 21.22 21.22 21.22 21.22 21.22 106.09
Solar 176.23 156.84 152.46 150.54 148.57 784.63
Biomass - - - - - -
Biogas - - - - - -
Total 203.00 178.85 215.37 212.56 224.91 1,034.70
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 73 | 89
14.2 Solar
Table 28 - Total and Local Capital Expenditures from Solar
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
MW Installed MW 272 358 337 123 51 1,140
Total Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 552 686 614 235 86 2,172
Local Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 407 403 366 142 47 1,364
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 2.03 1.92 1.82 1.91 1.70 1.91
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 1.50 1.13 1.09 1.15 0.93 1.20
Local Content Percentage % 74% 59% 60% 60% 55% 63%
Table 29 - Solar Related Economic Impacts – Annual Jobs
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build FTEs 6,338 4,878 4,002 1,322 547 17,087
O&M Legacy FTEs 1,103 1,103 1,103 1,103 1,103 5,515
O&M New Build FTEs 98 211 299 326 332 1,266
Total FTEs 7,539 6,192 5,404 2,751 1,982 23,868
Table 30 - Solar Related Economic Impacts - Annual Earnings
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 326.70 78.64 25.06 26.71 39.92 497.03
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 31.80 31.80 31.80 31.80 31.80 159.02
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 2.83 3.29 3.56 3.86 4.28 17.81
Total $ 2017 Millions 361.33 113.73 60.42 62.37 76.01 673.86
Table 31 - Solar Related Economic Impacts – Annual GDP Contributions
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 422.23 101.90 30.63 32.90 51.31 638.97
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 70.67 70.67 70.67 70.67 70.67 353.34
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 6.28 7.30 7.84 8.46 9.43 39.31
Total $ 2017 Millions 499.18 179.87 109.13 112.03 131.40 1031.61
Table 32 - Solar Related Economic Impacts – Potential Export Activity
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs FTEs 1,869 1,663 1,617 1,597 1,576 8,322
Earnings $ 2017 Millions 124.17 110.52 107.42 106.06 104.67 552.84
GDP $ 2017 Millions 176.23 156.84 152.46 150.54 148.57 784.63
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 74 | 89
14.3 Wind
Table 33 – Total and Local Capital Expenditures from Wind
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
MW Installed (MW) MW 307 378 245 242 0 1,171
Total Capital Expenditure $ 2017 Millions 307 378 152 150 0 986
Local Capital Expenditure $ 2017 Million 690 839 333 324 0 2186
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 2.25 2.22 2.19 2.17 - 2.22
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 1.1 1.09 0.7 0.69 - 0.97
Local Content Percentage % 49% 49% 32% 32% 0% 44%
Table 34 - Wind Related Economic Impacts – Annual Jobs
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build FTEs 2,607 2,861 907 880 - 7,255
O&M Legacy FTEs 1,516 1,516 1,516 1,516 1,516 7,580
O&M New Build FTEs 97 214 262 309 309 1,192
Total FTEs 4,220 4,591 2,685 2,705 1,825 16,026
Table 35 - Wind Related Economic Impacts – Annual Earnings
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 192.49 208.94 66.63 64.53 - 532.60
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 105.62 105.62 105.62 105.62 105.62 528.12
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 6.79 14.82 18.11 21.35 21.35 82.43
Total $ 2017 Millions 304.91 329.39 190.37 191.51 126.98 1,143.15
Table 36 - Wind Related Economic Impacts – Annual GDP Contributions
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 266.29 297.51 91.20 88.45 - 743.45
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 284.55 284.55 284.55 284.55 284.55 1,422.73
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 18.29 38.77 47.13 55.35 55.35 214.89
Total $ 2017 Millions 569.12 620.83 422.88 428.35 339.90 2,381.07
Table 37 - Wind Related Economic Impacts – Potential Export Activity
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs FTEs 55 7 426 423 563 1,474
Earnings $ 2017 Millions 3.91 0.50 29.95 29.39 39.60 103.33
GDP $ 2017 Millions 5.56 0.80 41.70 40.80 55.12 143.98
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 75 | 89
14.4 Hydroelectricity
Table 38 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Hydroelectricity
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
Installed Capacity MW 47 51 21 1 1 121
Total Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 227 342 81 3 7 660
Local Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 156 246 54 2 5 463
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 4.90 6.70 3.80 2.50 7.00 5.00
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 3.40 4.80 2.50 1.50 5.10 3.50
Local Content Percentage % 69% 72% 67% 61% 72% 68%
Table 39 – Hydroelectric Related Economic Impacts – Annual Jobs
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build FTEs 1,405 2,333 487 18 46 4,288
O&M New Build FTEs 20 51 61 62 62 256
O&M Legacy FTEs 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 9,150
Total FTEs 3,255 4,214 2,377 1,909 1,938 13,693
Table 40 – Hydroelectric Related Economic Impacts – Annual Earnings
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 115.30 193.60 40.40 1.50 3.80 354.60
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 1.70 2.10 0.70 0.10 - 4.60
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 139.40 139.40 139.40 139.40 139.40 697.00
Total $ 2017 Millions 256.40 335.10 180.50 141.00 143.20 1,056.20
Table 41 – Hydroelectric Related Economic Impacts – Annual GDP Contributions
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 142.90 234.50 50.00 1.90 4.60 433.90
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 2.10 3.10 1.10 0.10 0.10 6.50
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 235.28 235.28 235.28 235.28 235.28 1,176.39
Total $ 2017 Millions 380.28 472.88 286.38 237.28 239.98 1,616.79
Table 42 - Hydro Related Economic Impacts – Potential Export Activity
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
Jobs FTEs 197 197 197 197 197 987
Earnings $ 2017 Millions 17.50 17.50 17.50 17.50 17.50 87.50
GDP $ 2017 Millions 21.20 21.20 21.20 21.20 21.20 106.00
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 76 | 89
14.5 Biogas
Table 43 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Biogas ($ 2017 Millions)
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
Installed Capacity MW 2 0 1 4 0 7
Total Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 25 0 13 52 0 90
Local Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 12 0 6 25 0 43
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 12.3 - 12.3 12.3 - 12.3
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 5.8 - 5.8 5.8 - 5.8
Local Content Percentage % 47% - 47% 47% - 47%
Table 44 – Biogas Related Economic Impacts – Annual Jobs
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build FTEs 88 - 48 187 - 323
O&M New Build FTEs 32 32 50 118 118 349
O&M Legacy FTEs 63 63 63 63 63 314
Total FTEs 183 95 161 367 180 986
Table 45 – Biogas Related Economic Impacts – Annual Earnings
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 7.20 - 4.00 15.30 - 26.50
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 2.40 2.40 3.70 8.80 8.80 26.10
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 24.00
Total $ 2017 Millions 14.40 7.20 12.50 28.90 13.60 76.60
Table 46 – Biogas Related Economic Impacts – Annual GDP Contributions
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 8.80 - 4.80 18.70 - 32.30
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 3.20 3.20 5.00 11.80 11.80 35.00
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 7.76 7.76 7.76 7.76 7.76 38.81
Total $ 2017 Millions 19.76 10.96 17.56 38.26 19.56 106.11
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 77 | 89
14.6 Biomass
Table 47 – Total and Local Capital Expenditure from Biomass ($ 2017 Millions)
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total/Avg.
Installed Capacity MW 0.5 1 0.3 0.5 0 2.3
Total Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 6 12 3 6 0 28
Local Capital Expenditures $ 2017 Millions 3 6 1 3 0 13
Total Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 12 12 12 12 - 12
Local Cap Ex / MW $ 2017 Million/MW 6 6 6 6 - 6
Local Content Percentage % 47% 47% 47% 47% - 47%
Table 48 – Biomass Related Economic Impacts – Annual Jobs
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build FTEs 22 44 11 22 - 99
O&M New Build FTEs 8 24 28 36 36 132
O&M Legacy FTEs 352 352 352 352 352 1,761
Total FTEs 382 420 391 410 388 1,991
Table 49 – Biomass Related Economic Impacts – Annual Earnings
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 1.80 3.60 0.90 1.80 - 8.10
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 0.60 1.20 0.30 0.60 - 2.70
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 28.20 28.20 28.20 28.20 28.20 141.00
Total $ 2017 Millions 30.60 33.00 29.40 30.60 28.20 151.80
Table 50 – Biomass Related Economic Impacts – Annual GDP Contributions
Year Units 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total
New Build $ 2017 Millions 2.20 4.40 1.10 2.20 - 9.90
O&M New Build $ 2017 Millions 0.80 1.60 0.40 0.80 - 3.60
O&M Legacy $ 2017 Millions 46.36 46.36 46.36 46.36 46.36 231.81
Total $ 2017 Millions 49.36 52.36 47.86 49.36 46.36 245.31
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 78 | 89
15 Appendix E – Representative Supply Chains in Ontario
15.1 Solar
Table 51 – Representative Supply Chain in Ontario – Solar PV
Company Role in Supply Chain Products Location
Silfab Manufacturer Modules Mississauga, ON
Heliene Manufacturer Modules Sault Ste Marie, ON
Canadian Solar Manufacturer Modules Guelph, ON
Sparq Solar Manufacturer Inverters Kingston, ON
KB Racking Manufacturer Racking Toronto, ON
Solar Flexrack Manufacturer Racking Arnprior, ON
Presstran Manufacturer Racking St. Thomas, ON
Boreal Solar Distributor Toronto, ON
Potentia Developer Toronto, ON
Grasshopper Developer Toronto, ON
Northland Power Developer Toronto, ON
RES Installer/EPC Toronto, ON
Bondfield Installer/EPC Toronto, ON
H.B. White Installer/EPC Toronto, ON
Northwind O&M Provider Oakville, ON
Stantec Professional Services - Engineering Toronto, ON
Hatch Professional Services - Engineering Mississauga, ON
Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt LLP Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 79 | 89
15.2 Wind Table 52 – Representative Supply Chain in Ontario – Wind
Company Role in Supply Chain Products/ Services Location
Rankin Construction
Inc. Construction
Access roads, crane pads,
substations, foundations St. Catherines, ON
PowerTel Utilities
Contractors Ltd. Construction High voltage electrical lines Whitefish, ON
Mortenson
Construction Construction/ EPC/ O&M Mississauga, ON
ENGIE Canada Developer Markham, ON
Prowind Canada Inc. Developer Hamilton, ON
Samsung Renewable
Energy Inc. Developer Mississauga, ON
Saturn Power Inc. Developer Baden, ON
EDF EN Canada Developer/ Construction/ EPC Toronto, ON
EDP Renewables
Canada Ltd. Developer/ Construction/ EPC Toronto, ON
Northland Power Inc. Developer/ Construction/ EPC Toronto, ON
WPD Canada Developer/ Construction/ EPC Mississauga, ON
NextEra Energy
Canada Development
& Acquisitions, Inc.
Developer/ Construction/ EPC/
Operate Etobicoke, ON
Longyuan Canada
Renewables Ltd. Developer/ Construction/ Operator Toronto, ON
Algonquin Power Developer/ Operator Oakville, ON
BluEarth Renewables
Inc. Developer/ Operator Guelph, ON
Boralex Inc. Developer/ Operator Milton, ON
TransCanada Energy
Ltd. Developer/ Operator Toronto, ON
Invenergy Wind
Canada Developer/ Operator Toronto, ON
Potentia Renewables Developer/ Operator Toronto, ON
Acciona Wind Energy
Canada Developer/ Operator Toronto, ON
Ridge National EPC/Construction Windsor, ON
Northwind Solutions Installer/O&M
Construction management
and installation services,
operations and maintenance,
project monitoring
Whitby, ON
Surespan Wind
Energy Services Installer/O&M Oakville, ON
CS Wind Canada Manufacturers Towers Windsor, ON
Siemens Wind Power Manufacturers/O&M Turbine Blades and O&M Tillsonburg
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 80 | 89
Company Role in Supply Chain Products/ Services Location
Ltd.
Schaeffler Canada Inc. O&M Bearings supplier Oakville, ON
GE Renewable Energy O&M Provider Mississauga, ON
Vestas Canada O&M Provider Toronto, ON
AECOM Professional Services - Engineering Professional technical and
management Markham, ON
CSS Wind Inc.
Professional Services - Engineering Blade repairs, auto-lubrication
components, gearbox services,
and fire protection
Carp, ON
AMEC Foster Wheeler
Americas Limited
Professional Services - Engineering Consultant, engineering, and
project management Oakville, ON
Aercoustics
Engineering Ltd.
Professional Services - Engineering Engineering Services (Noise,
vibration, and acoustics) Etobicoke, ON
Anixter Power
Solutions Canada Inc
Professional Services - Engineering Products, services and
solutions to drive down
supply chain costs
Colborne, ON
Avertex Utility
Solutions Inc.
Professional Services - Engineering Underground high voltage
cable trenching
Amaranth &
Smithville, ON
Bladefence Canada
Ltd.
Professional Services - Engineering Monitoring and service of
wind turbine lades Toronto, ON
Carlsun Energy
Solutions Inc.
Professional Services - Engineering Technical Services Port Elgin, ON
Operating Engineers
Training Institute Of
Ontario
Professional Services - Engineering
Engineer Training Morrisburg, ON
Select Elevator
Solutions Inc.
Professional Services - Engineering Elevator Solutions London, ON
Sherwood
Electromotion Inc.
Professional Services - Engineering Generator Experts Concord, ON
Dillon Consulting Ltd.
Professional Services - Engineering
& Environmental
Planning, engineering,
environmental and
management
Toronto, ON
Hatch
Professional Services - Engineering
& Environmental
Planning, engineering,
environmental and
management
Oakville, ON
Pinchin Ltd. Professional Services – Engineering
& Environmental Environmental and
engineering Timmins, ON
Stantec Professional Services – Engineering
& Environmental Environmental and
engineering Guelph, ON
Natural Resource
Solutions Inc.
Professional Services -
Environmental Environmental Waterloo, ON
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 81 | 89
Company Role in Supply Chain Products/ Services Location
Novus Environmental
Inc
Professional Services –
Environmental Environmental Solutions Guelph, ON
Sussex Strategy Group Professional Services -
Environmental Energy and environmental
Policy Toronto, ON
Aird & Berlis LLP Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
Blake, Cassels &
Graydon LLP
Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
Dale & Lessmann LLP Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
McCarthy Tetrault
LLP
Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
Osler, Hoskin &
Harcourt LLP
Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
Stikeman Elliott LLP Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
Torys LLP Professional Services - Legal Toronto, ON
Bulldog Turbine
Systems
Professional Services – Other Fire Protection Grand Bend, ON
CanACRE Professional Services - Other Land feasibility and land
acquisition Toronto, ON
PowerHub Professional Services - Other Cloud based asset
management solution Toronto, ON
Stonebridge Financial
Corporation
Professional Services – Other Financing Toronto, ON
Capstone
Infrastructure
Corporation
Owner/ Operator Toronto, ON
Pattern Renewable
Holdings Canada ULC Owner/ Operator Toronto, ON
Brookfield Renewable
Partners Owner/ Operator Toronto, ON
Challenger Motor
Freight Inc. Transportation Cambridge, ON
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 82 | 89
15.3 Hydroelectricity Table 53 – Representative Supply Chain in Ontario – Hydro
Company Role in Supply Chain Products/ Services Location
Golder Associates Professional Services –
Engineering
- Siting, permitting, environmental
impact assessments, construction and
operation compliance, due diligence,
and decommissioning
Toronto, ON
(+ many other
ON locations)
SNC-Lavalin Professional Services –
Engineering
- Design, build, permitting,
environmental
Toronto, ON
(+ many other
ON locations)
Dillon Consulting Professional Services –
Environmental
- Environmental assessments,
permitting, and due diligence
Toronto, ON
(+ many other
ON locations)
Pinchin Professional Services -
Environmental
- Environmental assessments,
permitting, and due diligence
Toronto, ON
(+ many other
ON locations)
Canadian Hydro
Components Ltd. Manufacturer
- Turbine manufacturer (small hydro
500kW to 30MW) Almonte, ON
Norcan Hydraulic
Turbine Inc. Manufacturer
- Turbine manufacturer (small hydro
500kW to 30MW) Carleton Place, ON
Andritz Hydro
Canada Inc.
Manufacturer/ EPC/
O&M
- Generator coil manufacture and
assembly
- Gates engineering and manufacturing
plant
Peterborough, ON
Paris, ON
Voith Hydro Inc. Manufacturer/ EPC/
O&M
- Generator coil manufacture and
assembly Mississauga, ON
Thordon Bearing Inc. Manufacturer - Bearing and seal systems Burlington, ON
The Chant Group of
Companies EPC - Project and construction management Aurora, ON
Maple Reinders
Construction EPC
- Integrated design/ build/ operate/
finance solution Mississauga, ON
TESC Contracting
Company EPC - Construction services Sudbury, ON
Spaans Babcock EPC - Waste water treatment and hydro
power designers and builders Barrie, ON
Capstone
Infrastructure Corp. Owner/ Operator
- Operates 16.8 MW in Ontario and
35.8 MW in Canada Toronto, ON
Ontario Power
Generation Owner/ Operator
- Operates 66 facilities across Ontario
ranging from 800kW to 1,400MW Toronto, ON
Power Tel Utilities
Contractors Ltd. Other Service Providers - High voltage specialists Whitefish, ON
Sealogic Other Service Providers - Sealing solutions Belleville, ON
Shark Marine
Technologies Other Service Providers
- Underwater equipment (imaging,
etc.) St. Catharines, ON
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 83 | 89
15.4 Biogas Table 54 – Representative Supply Chain in Ontario – Biogas
Company Role in Supply Chain Products/ Services Location
CEM
Engineering
Professional Services –
Engineering
- Engineering design and consulting
services
St. Catharines,
ON
Golder
Associates
Professional Services –
Environmental
- Permitting, environmental impact
assessments, odor assessments
Toronto, ON
(+ many other
ON locations)
CCi Bio Energy EPC/ O&M
- Project design, development,
construction, and operation and
maintenance
Newcastle, ON
PlanET Biogas EPC/ O&M
- Project design, development,
construction, and operation and
maintenance
St. Catharines,
ON
Yield Biogas
Solutions EPC/ O&M
- Project design, development,
construction, and operation and
maintenance
Toronto, ON
Stormfisher
Environmental Owner/ Operator
- Operator of a 2.85 MW biogas facility in
London London, ON
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 84 | 89
15.5 Biomass Table 55 – Representative Supply Chain in Ontario – Biomass
Company Role in Supply Chain Products/ Services Location
Andy Veenstra Farms
Ltd. Manufacturer Straw pellets Sherkston, ON
Atikokan Renewable
Fuels Manufacturer Wood pellets Atikokan, ON
Canadian Bio-Fuel Manufacturer Biomass pellets and briquettes Chatham, ON
Direct Pellet Industries Manufacturer Premium hardwood pellets Fenelon Falls, ON
Dongara Manufacturer Municipal solid waste fuel
pellets Woodbridge, ON
Ecostrat and General
Biofuel Manufacturer
Wood chips/ fuel/ pellets, and
miscanthus & alternative fuels Toronto, ON
Gildale Farms Manufacturer Biomass pellets St. Mary’s, ON
Lacwood Industries Manufacturer Wood pellets Hearst, ON
Nott Farms Manufacturer Switchgrass and oat hull pellets Central Huron, ON
Ontario Biomass
Producers Co-op Manufacturer Biomass pellets Markdale, ON
KMW Energy Developer/ Installer/
EPC Biomass projects London, ON
Naanovo Energy, Inc. Installer/ EPC Biomass projects Orleans, ON
Ontario Power
Generation Owner/ Operator
Atikokan GS and Thunder Bay
GS Toronto, ON
P r i v i l e g e d a n d C o n f i d e n t i a l P a g e 85 | 89
16 Appendix F – JEDI Industry Multipliers
16.1 Solar
Table 56 – JEDI Industry Sectors and Multipliers – Solar PV
Multipliers per Million Dollars Change in Final Demand
Jobs Per Earnings Per Output Per Value Added Per
JEDI Sector of the Economy
Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced
Ag, Forestry, Fish & Hunting 7.40 3.24 1.23 0.20 0.17 0.06 1.00 0.61 0.22 0.41 0.28 0.13
Mining 3.94 1.95 1.94 0.35 0.12 0.10 1.00 0.35 0.35 0.61 0.19 0.21
Construction 6.35 2.71 1.89 0.39 0.17 0.10 1.00 0.48 0.34 0.47 0.25 0.20
Construction/Installations -
Non Residential
10.18 1.83 2.37 0.63 0.10 0.12 1.00 0.31 0.43 0.69 0.15 0.26
Construction/Installation
Residential
10.18 1.83 2.37 0.63 0.10 0.12 1.00 0.31 0.43 0.69 0.15 0.26
Manufacturing 2.42 2.09 1.08 0.16 0.13 0.06 1.00 0.46 0.20 0.26 0.21 0.12
Fabricated Metals 4.74 2.38 1.68 0.28 0.15 0.09 1.00 0.52 0.31 0.35 0.22 0.18
Machinery 3.36 1.79 1.35 0.26 0.12 0.07 1.00 0.36 0.25 0.31 0.18 0.15
Electrical Equip 4.41 1.67 1.62 0.33 0.11 0.08 1.00 0.34 0.30 0.44 0.17 0.18
Battery Manufacturing 3.46 1.40 1.16 0.22 0.09 0.06 1.00 0.28 0.21 0.31 0.14 0.12
Energy Wire Manufacturing 3.46 1.40 1.16 0.22 0.09 0.06 1.00 0.28 0.21 0.31 0.14 0.12
Wholesale Trade 5.02 2.67 1.92 0.34 0.16 0.10 1.00 0.45 0.35 0.58 0.25 0.21
Retail trade 11.52 2.65 2.28 0.44 0.16 0.12 1.00 0.47 0.41 0.61 0.27 0.25
TCPU 2.22 2.18 1.42 0.29 0.14 0.07 1.00 0.36 0.26 0.63 0.20 0.15
Insurance and Real Estate 1.88 3.83 1.55 0.17 0.25 0.08 1.00 0.58 0.28 0.49 0.35 0.17
Finance 4.19 1.60 1.77 0.37 0.10 0.09 1.00 0.27 0.32 0.76 0.15 0.19
Other Professional Services 6.95 2.02 2.00 0.60 0.12 0.10 1.00 0.33 0.36 0.73 0.19 0.22
Office Services 9.49 1.89 2.03 0.64 0.11 0.10 1.00 0.30 0.37 0.72 0.17 0.22
Architectural and
Engineering Services
7.44 2.33 2.40 0.48 0.14 0.12 1.00 0.39 0.44 0.72 0.22 0.26
Other services 6.72 2.53 2.28 0.51 0.15 0.12 1.00 0.40 0.41 0.65 0.23 0.25
Government 8.31 2.16 2.19 0.48 0.12 0.11 1.00 0.38 0.40 0.61 0.19 0.24
Semiconductor (solar
cell/module) manufacturing
5.83 1.22 1.63 0.33 0.08 0.08 1.00 0.25 0.30 0.44 0.13 0.18
16.2 Wind
Table 57 – JEDI Industry Sectors and Multipliers – Wind
Multipliers per Million Dollars Change in Final Demand
Jobs Per Earnings Per Output Per Value Added Per
JEDI Sector of the Economy
Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced
Agriculture 7.40 3.24 1.23 0.202 0.175 0.064 1.00 0.607 0.224 0.412 0.285 0.285
Mining 3.94 1.95 1.94 0.350 0.123 0.100 1.00 0.348 0.352 0.609 0.190 0.190
Construction 6.35 2.71 1.89 0.391 0.167 0.098 1.00 0.479 0.343 0.472 0.253 0.253
Manufacturing 2.42 2.09 1.08 0.165 0.126 0.056 1.00 0.462 0.196 0.265 0.206 0.206
Fabricated Metals 4.74 2.38 1.68 0.285 0.153 0.087 1.00 0.521 0.306 0.354 0.224 0.224
Machinery 3.36 1.79 1.35 0.259 0.118 0.070 1.00 0.360 0.245 0.312 0.177 0.177
Electrical Equipment 4.41 1.67 1.63 0.327 0.110 0.084 1.00 0.342 0.296 0.442 0.166 0.166
TCPU 2.22 2.18 1.43 0.286 0.136 0.074 1.00 0.357 0.259 0.627 0.202 0.202
Wholesale Trade 5.02 2.67 1.92 0.339 0.158 0.099 1.00 0.453 0.349 0.585 0.245 0.245
Retail Trade 11.52 2.65 2.28 0.444 0.158 0.118 1.00 0.472 0.414 0.606 0.268 0.268
FIRE 3.12 3.01 1.54 0.239 0.187 0.080 1.00 0.494 0.280 0.574 0.282 0.282
Misc. Services 3.08 2.41 1.38 0.226 0.143 0.071 1.00 0.461 0.251 0.521 0.248 0.248
Professional Services 6.95 2.02 2.00 0.597 0.117 0.103 1.00 0.328 0.363 0.727 0.186 0.186
Government 8.31 2.16 2.19 0.481 0.120 0.113 1.00 0.380 0.399 0.608 0.186 0.186
16.3 Hydro
Table 58 – JEDI Industry Sectors and Multipliers – Hydro
Multipliers per Million Dollars Change in Final Demand
Jobs Per Earnings Per Output Per Value Added Per
JEDI Sector of the Economy
Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced
Agriculture 7.395 3.245 1.230 0.202 0.175 0.064 1.00 0.607 0.224 0.412 0.285 0.132
Mining 3.942 1.951 1.940 0.350 0.123 0.100 1.00 0.348 0.352 0.609 0.190 0.209
Construction 6.352 2.711 1.890 0.391 0.167 0.098 1.00 0.479 0.343 0.472 0.253 0.204
Manufacturing 2.420 2.085 1.080 0.165 0.126 0.056 1.00 0.462 0.196 0.265 0.206 0.116
Fabricated Metals 4.740 2.379 1.680 0.285 0.153 0.087 1.00 0.521 0.306 0.354 0.224 0.181
Machinery 3.361 1.787 1.350 0.259 0.118 0.070 1.00 0.360 0.245 0.312 0.177 0.145
Electrical Equipment 4.415 1.669 1.620 0.327 0.110 0.084 1.00 0.342 0.296 0.442 0.166 0.175
TCPU 2.215 2.179 1.420 0.286 0.136 0.074 1.00 0.357 0.259 0.627 0.202 0.154
Wholesale Trade 5.022 2.673 1.920 0.339 0.158 0.099 1.00 0.453 0.349 0.585 0.245 0.207
Retail Trade 11.517 2.654 2.280 0.444 0.158 0.118 1.00 0.472 0.414 0.606 0.268 0.246
FIRE 3.117 3.005 1.540 0.239 0.187 0.080 1.00 0.494 0.280 0.574 0.282 0.166
Misc. Services 3.076 2.405 1.380 0.226 0.143 0.071 1.00 0.461 0.251 0.521 0.248 0.149
Professional Services 6.949 2.025 2.000 0.597 0.117 0.103 1.00 0.328 0.363 0.727 0.186 0.216
Government 8.310 2.162 2.190 0.481 0.120 0.113 1.00 0.380 0.399 0.608 0.186 0.236
16.4 Biomass
Table 59 – JEDI Industry Sectors and Multipliers – Biomass
Multipliers per Million Dollars Change in Final Demand
Jobs Per Earnings Per Output Per Value Added Per
JEDI Sector of the Economy
Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced
Agriculture 7.395 3.245 1.227 0.202 0.175 0.064 1.00 0.607 0.224 0.412 0.285 0.132
Mining 3.942 1.951 1.938 0.350 0.123 0.100 1.00 0.348 0.352 0.609 0.190 0.209
Construction 6.352 2.711 1.886 0.391 0.167 0.098 1.00 0.479 0.343 0.472 0.253 0.204
Manufacturing 2.420 2.085 1.077 0.165 0.126 0.056 1.00 0.462 0.196 0.265 0.206 0.116
Fabricated Metals 4.740 2.379 1.680 0.285 0.153 0.087 1.00 0.521 0.306 0.354 0.224 0.181
Machinery 3.361 1.787 1.347 0.259 0.118 0.070 1.00 0.360 0.245 0.312 0.177 0.145
Electrical Equipment 4.415 1.669 1.625 0.327 0.110 0.084 1.00 0.342 0.296 0.442 0.166 0.175
TCPU 2.215 2.179 1.425 0.286 0.136 0.074 1.00 0.357 0.259 0.627 0.202 0.154
Wholesale Trade 5.022 2.673 1.919 0.339 0.158 0.099 1.00 0.453 0.349 0.585 0.245 0.207
Retail Trade 11.517 2.654 2.277 0.444 0.158 0.118 1.00 0.472 0.414 0.606 0.268 0.246
FIRE 3.117 3.005 1.541 0.239 0.187 0.080 1.00 0.494 0.280 0.574 0.282 0.166
Misc. Services 3.076 2.405 1.381 0.226 0.143 0.071 1.00 0.461 0.251 0.521 0.248 0.149
Professional Services 6.949 2.528 2.275 0.597 0.117 0.103 1.00 0.328 0.363 0.727 0.186 0.216
Government 8.310 2.162 2.191 0.481 0.120 0.113 1.00 0.380 0.399 0.608 0.186 0.236
16.5 Biogas
Table 60 – JEDI Industry Sectors and Multipliers – Biogas
Multipliers per Million Dollars Change in Final Demand
Jobs Per Earnings Per Output Per Value Added Per
JEDI Sector of the Economy
Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced Direct Indirect Induced
Agriculture 7.395 3.245 1.227 0.202 0.175 0.064 1.00 0.607 0.224 0.412 0.285 0.132
Mining 3.942 1.951 1.938 0.350 0.123 0.100 1.00 0.348 0.352 0.609 0.190 0.209
Construction 6.352 2.711 1.886 0.391 0.167 0.098 1.00 0.479 0.343 0.472 0.253 0.204
Manufacturing 2.420 2.085 1.077 0.165 0.126 0.056 1.00 0.462 0.196 0.265 0.206 0.116
Fabricated Metals 4.740 2.379 1.680 0.285 0.153 0.087 1.00 0.521 0.306 0.354 0.224 0.181
Machinery 3.361 1.787 1.347 0.259 0.118 0.070 1.00 0.360 0.245 0.312 0.177 0.145
Electrical Equipment 4.415 1.669 1.625 0.327 0.110 0.084 1.00 0.342 0.296 0.442 0.166 0.175
TCPU 2.215 2.179 1.425 0.286 0.136 0.074 1.00 0.357 0.259 0.627 0.202 0.154
Wholesale Trade 5.022 2.673 1.919 0.339 0.158 0.099 1.00 0.453 0.349 0.585 0.245 0.207
Retail Trade 11.517 2.654 2.277 0.444 0.158 0.118 1.00 0.472 0.414 0.606 0.268 0.246
FIRE 3.117 3.005 1.541 0.239 0.187 0.080 1.00 0.494 0.280 0.574 0.282 0.166
Misc. Services 3.076 2.405 1.381 0.226 0.143 0.071 1.00 0.461 0.251 0.521 0.248 0.149
Professional Services 6.949 2.528 2.275 0.597 0.117 0.103 1.00 0.328 0.363 0.727 0.186 0.216
Government 8.310 2.162 2.191 0.481 0.120 0.113 1.00 0.380 0.399 0.608 0.186 0.236
top related