Doug Ford's power play: meet increased demand for a cleaner economy & lifestyles with dirtier, costlier electricity

While Ontario lauds itself for phasing out coal-fired power generation, gas-fired generation increased “significantly over the last six to seven years.”

In 2017, Ontario proudly announced it had nearly eliminated carbon emissions from its electricity infrastructure, with a grid that was 96 percent non-emitting.

Then came the Doug Ford-led Progressive Conservative government in 2018, which cancelled 758 renewable energy projects at a cost of more than $230 million.

"If we had the chance to get rid of all the windmills, we would," Ford said in 2019.

The PCs scrapped the $3-billion cap-and-trade program with Quebec and California, which was designed to cut emissions, and ripped apart plans for electric vehicle charging stations across the province.

In its 2018 campaign ‘Plan For The People’ the Ontario PC Party promised to “clean up the hydro mess” with “no carbon tax or cap-and-trade schemes.”

(Progressive Conservatives)

This decision prompted the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) to warn of a 1,300-megawatt electricity shortfall in the summer of 2023, projected to grow to 3,500 MW later in the decade. 

The PC government essentially created a problem it aimed to solve using natural gas and nuclear power—solutions that bring their own significant challenges at a time when the fight against climate change cannot afford setbacks.

In 2019, seven percent of the province’s electricity came from natural gas, a fossil fuel composed mainly of methane, which, when burned, releases carbon dioxide, and when leaked, is an even more potent greenhouse gas (GHG).

The 2023 provincial budget reported that 90 percent of Ontario’s electricity grid was emissions-free until 2022, down from 94 percent in 2021, marking a sharp drop in just one year. While the Ministry of Energy declined to comment on the cause of this decline, evidence shows that Ontario’s electricity generation is becoming dirtier, largely due to an uptick in natural gas use under Ford’s policies.

In 2024, gas-fired power plants supplied 16.3 percent of the province’s electricity, a sharp increase from just four percent in 2017, according to The Atmospheric Fund (TAF).

Projections show that natural gas will supply 25 percent of the province’s electricity by 2030 and 23.6 percent by 2040.

Why this upward trend?

According to Aakash Harpalani, TAF’s director of clean energy, two main factors are behind the trend: nuclear refurbishments and rising electricity demand.

Ontario’s population has been on a steady climb, growing by 22 percent between 2005 and 2022 and surpassing 16 million in 2024, according to Statistics Canada. 

As one of the country’s fastest-growing provinces, its energy needs are skyrocketing. The IESO now predicts electricity demand will surge by 75 percent by 2050, outpacing earlier forecasts, with annual consumption jumping from 151 terawatt-hours (TWh) in 2025 to a staggering 263 TWh by 2050.

(Ontario PC party/Plan For The People)

In 2018, the Progressive Conservative government promised to keep hydro bills down, but they never explained how they planned to achieve this. 

Between 2019 and 2023, a total of $23.6 billion was allocated to electricity cost relief programs, which is $2 billion more than what was budgeted for long-term care in the same period. 

By 2023, the electricity cost-relief budget had grown so large that it surpassed the combined budgets of several other ministries, including economic development, environment, agriculture, northern development, mining, natural resources, forestry, Indigenous affairs, labour, training, and skills development. 

According to a 2022 report by Ontario’s Financial Accountability Officer (FAO), Peter Weltman, these electricity subsidies would cost taxpayers an estimated $118 billion over the next two decades, or approximately $6 billion per year.

In other words, while Ontarians may see lower hydro bills, they end up footing a bigger bill through their taxes.

That's not the only concern. 

These subsidies have also contributed to higher electricity consumption, with about $600 million in rebates going to households in the top 20 percent of income earners, according to the FAO’s 2022 report.

The Ontario Electricity Rebate (OER) was projected to cost $45.4 billion from 2020-21 to 2039-40, accounting for 38.4 percent of the total cost, while the Renewable Cost Shift was expected to be $38.6 billion (32.7 percent); the latter offers long-term benefits.

(FAO)

The IESO’s 2021 Annual Planning Outlook projected that energy demand was expected to grow by an average of 1.7 percent per year from 2023 to 2042, with demand expected to exceed supply as early as 2025-26.

The PC government insisted it had no choice but to build new gas plants, pointing to the IESO’s December 2023 interim Resource Eligibility report, which—at the request of the Energy Minister—determined that the only viable solution to meet rising electricity demand was to add 1,500 megawatts (MW) of new gas generation.

This directly contradicts the Ford government’s 2022 re-election pledge to tackle emissions by creating a “100 percent” clean energy system.

Two years later, as speculation about an early election grew, a wave of clean energy announcements resurfaced. But it was just history repeating itself.

In late August 2024, the province announced a large-scale energy procurement aimed at securing an additional 5,000 megawatts (MW) of electricity to support the anticipated 60-75 percent increase in energy needs by 2050 from the industrial sector, data centres, EV adoption and households. 

Lecce emphasized the province was taking a "technology-agnostic" approach, meaning the new supply will come from a mix of natural gas, hydroelectric, renewables, nuclear, and biomass.

Shortly after, Lecce wrote a letter to the IESO, instructing them to report back on the Long-Term Procurement process (LT2).

This letter marked a reversal of the government’s previous commitment to focus on non-emitting energy sources, opening LT2 to gas plants.

Under former Energy Minister Todd Smith, the IESO had specified that bids for the electrical grid should be limited to wind, solar, hydro, or biomass.

TAF’s Climate Policy Coordinator, Laura McCloskey, expressed concern over this change, noting that LT2 was originally designed to quickly and affordably meet energy demands while supporting decarbonization.

“The sudden shift towards a “technology-agnostic” approach is concerning. LT2 was intended to create new electricity supply quickly and affordably while meeting decarbonization goals. Rapid action to generate new capacity is necessary, but this new approach undermines long-term affordability, the climate, and predictability for the clean energy industry,” McCloskey said in a statement. 

She pointed out that, according to the IESO’s procurement, natural gas is significantly more expensive than clean energy, with clean storage projects costing $672.32 per MW, compared to $1,681.14 per MW for gas-fired generation.

In a 2022 IESO decarbonization report, the agency proposed that Ontario could realistically implement a moratorium on new natural gas infrastructure by 2027.

Harpalani explained to The Pointer that it's important to note that this proposal did not mean eliminating all gas-fired generation from the grid, but rather halting the procurement of new natural gas plants. 

“Most of the gas fire generation that currently exists on the system was built to serve sort of what's called a peak capacity meet,” which is intended to address incremental demand that wouldn't otherwise be met by the grid, and operating these plants outside peak periods is both carbon-intensive and costly, he said.

So, why does the PC government continue to rely on natural gas to meet the province’s growing energy demand?

While natural gas is often touted as a cleaner option than coal or oil, its climate impact is far from straightforward. 

Yes, it produces less carbon dioxide when burned, but that’s just part of the story. 

Methane, a potent greenhouse gas with 80 times the heat-trapping power of carbon dioxide in the first 20 years, leaks at every stage of natural gas’s journey. From the wellhead to pipelines, power plants, and even your home, methane escapes through deliberate venting, accidents, or aging infrastructure. This hidden leakage significantly amplifies its environmental footprint. To make matters worse, burning natural gas still releases large amounts of carbon pollution, with emissions from gas plants more than doubling in the last 15 years.

The resulting air pollution is also costly, contributing $120 billion annually to Canada's economy and leading to 6,000 premature deaths in Ontario and 15,300 across the country, according to Health Canada.

The Pointer reached out to IESO for clarification on whether they still stand by this recommendation but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

By January 2025, when the planet was experiencing the warmest January on record, the Ford government allocated over $17 billion to energy projects in that month alone.

This includes the $10.9 billion Home Renovation Savings Program, a 12-year initiative, supposedly “the largest in Canadian history,” aimed at supporting homeowners in installing heat pumps, solar panels, battery storage, and smart thermostats.

“As the demand for electricity continues to rise, we’re giving families and small businesses more ways to save money and energy as we launch the largest energy efficiency program in Canadian history,” Ontario minister of energy and electrification Stephen Lecce said in a statement. 

“Ontario’s new Home Renovation Savings Program will put more money back in your pockets, covering up to 30 percent of the costs of new windows, doors, insulation, heat pumps, rooftop solar panels, and battery storage.”

On January 24, the PCs announced a $2 billion investment to support Ontario Power Generation’s plan to refurbish and expand hydroelectric stations in Northern Ontario, securing 830 MW of clean electricity to power 830,000 homes.

Within a week in the same month, the Ontario government surprised many by announcing two significant nuclear energy initiatives, marking a notable pivot towards cleaner energy solutions. 

On January 15, the provincial government unveiled its proposal to potentially build a new nuclear power station near Port Hope, which could become the largest in the province. 

On January 23, the government greenlit Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) next steps in the refurbishment of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station’s "B" units, pushing forward another key nuclear project

But the distrust in the government has been looming large.

Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist at Greenpeace Canada, dismissed the Port Hope announcement as more of a political play than a genuine move toward nuclear energy. “We're a long way from getting anywhere close to actually having nuclear there. It was basically a pre-election move, trying to get some votes in that area by promising a big investment,” Stewart had told The Pointer.

While nuclear power is a low-carbon energy source that generates a significant portion of the world's carbon-free electricity, the way the PCs are managing expansion projects raises safety and sustainability concerns among experts.

“There’s a reason why the oil and gas industry is cheering nuclear announcements—they know a nuclear plant is essentially just a gas plant,” Stewart explained.

In many cases, natural gas is used as a ‘bridge fuel’ to support the transition to nuclear, helping to balance the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

While nuclear energy is seen by some as a step forward, it raises the question of whether it’s too late to make a meaningful impact after the damage has already been done.

A January 2025 report from the Pembina Institute highlighted Ontario's grid, which was 94 percent emissions-free in 2020, had already declined to 87 percent in 2024.

This decline is expected to continue due to an increasing reliance on gas generation, which is expected to account for nearly a quarter of the province’s electricity supply by 2030.

A February 2025 report by the Pembina Institute warns that increasing reliance on natural gas not only jeopardizes the province’s progress toward a cleaner grid but also exposes Ontarians to price volatility and energy security risks tied to fossil fuel imports. 

“Over-expanding the use of natural gas (beyond what is needed for short-term reliability during planned nuclear refurbishments) would make Ontario’s grid less affordable and less reliable in the long run, as well as much less clean. This would go against what is needed to create a strong, resilient economy into the 2030s and beyond,” the report notes.

The IESO's 2024 Annual Planning Outlook forecast also reveals a troubling statistic: greenhouse gas pollution from Ontario’s gas plants will be 570-580 percent greater in 2030 than it was in 2017.

The IESO projects that by 2030, fossil gas will account for 25% of Ontario's electricity supply.

(Ontario Clean Air Alliance)

“Some gas fire generation will still be needed over the next decade, but we need to start investing in alternatives. And the good news is that we have a bunch of cost-effective solutions,” Harpalani said.

“Energy efficiency, demand flexibility, investments in utility-scale, wind and solar, local generation, like rooftop solar, batteries, these are all things that, some of which have dropped in price substantially over the last decade. These are all technologies or resources that have been proven across the world and can help Ontario reduce its reliance on natural gas.”

By tripling wind and solar capacity and investing in energy efficiency and storage, Ontario can phase out gas power by 2035, a 2024 report by Ontario Clean Air Alliance echoes Harpalani’s recommendations.

Thirty-five Ontario municipalities, collectively representing nearly 60 percent of the province's population, urged the PC government in 2024 to phase out gas power by 2030—or sooner. Yet, despite this overwhelming call for action, the Ontario government continues to overlook these requests.

In nearly all recent models aimed at reducing carbon intensity and expanding Canada's electricity supply, wind and solar play a pivotal role.

(David Suzuki Foundation)

Jack Gibbons, Chair of the OCAA, argues the PCs are “absolutely going in the wrong direction,” pouring billions into expensive new nuclear reactors, while more affordable alternatives like wind, solar, and energy efficiency could power our homes at less than half the cost, and can also be deployed much more quickly, unlike nuclear, which takes over a decade to build.

Ironically, Ontario plans to purchase nuclear technology and enriched uranium from the U.S., a country whose trade policies currently harm Ontario’s economy. This move also contradicts Premier Ford's purported opposition to Trump’s trade wars.

“Doug Ford is opposing Donald Trump's tariffs. But he's not taking the actions we need to actually reduce our dependency on the U.S. It's clear to virtually all Canadians that we need to reduce our dependency on the U.S. economy, but he wants to do the opposite. He actually wants to build nuclear reactors in Ontario and build new North-South transmission lines to export even more nuclear electricity to the United States. And that's the wrong way to go,” Gibbons noted.

He argues that, instead of investing in costly nuclear infrastructure, Ontario should focus on expanding its east-west electricity grid, connecting with neighbouring provinces like Quebec and Manitoba, where lower electricity rates could benefit the province.

Recommendations by The Pembina Institute.

(Pembina Institute)

By tapping into the renewable resources of Quebec and Manitoba, where electricity rates are much lower than in Ontario, the province could lower energy costs and reduce its reliance on U.S. exports. Expanding Ontario's transmission links with Quebec by 7,500 MW could be done at a fraction of the cost of building new nuclear reactors, enabling immediate electricity trade. In the future, this could allow Ontario to access wind power from Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nova Scotia, providing more affordable, sustainable energy for Ontarians.

For Scott MacDougall, Program Director of Electricity at the Pembina Institute, the ongoing bias in the province's rules, particularly regarding solar developments, is a bit frustrating. He believes Ontario could adopt “a little bit more even-handed approach” to these projects.

“Specifically, it's around development of solar projects on prime agriculture land, which is very important to protect, but it would be good if solar was treated the same way as other types of development, where they have an opportunity to demonstrate how they can coexist with with agricultural production,” MacDougall added.

But there’s a broader trend at work—one that’s slowly but surely making the province’s electricity grid dirtier, even as Ontario remains the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Canada, trailing only Alberta. In 2022, Ontario generated a staggering 157 megatonnes of carbon emissions.

In 2023, Ontario’s natural gas production averaged 6.2 million cubic feet per day, contributing about 3 percent of Canada’s total output, with the majority coming from southern Ontario.

That same year, the province’s electricity sector alone emitted 3.8 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, accounting for eight percent of Canada’s total emissions from power generation.

According to a June 2024 report from TAF, natural gas is being relied on more heavily for baseload power, a shift that has caused emissions from electricity generation to rise significantly.

This shift has had a notable impact locally as well with electricity emissions in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) surging by 28 percent in 2022 and another 26 percent in 2023.

“They're choosing the highest cost and slowest option to meet our future electricity needs, and in the meantime, they're cranking up the output from our gas plants,” Gibbons emphasized. 

He warns that this strategy is leading to a dirtier electricity grid and rising costs, which will result in higher electricity rates and bills. However, large companies like “Ontario Power Generation, Bruce Power, TC Energy, and Enbridge Gas stand to benefit from Doug Ford's plan, though it comes at the expense of both our climate and our pocketbooks.”

“They're making political decisions about how to meet our future electricity needs in a way that will benefit some very large energy utilities, but not in a way that's good for electricity consumers or the climate.” 

Email: [email protected]

At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you