I have a column in today’s Toronto Star that’s bound to upset a number of solar and wind developers, and the investors behind them. I argue that the $7 billion Samsung deal announced last week in Ontario isn’t a bad deal at all, and that Ontario was right to jump on the opportunity when it presented itself. The deal is controversial because the government gave Samsung an “economic adder” that amounts to a 4 per cent premium (on a price per kilowatt-hour basis) to existing feed-in-tariffs available to other solar and wind developers. The government also set aside 500 megawatts of transmission capacity for Samsung, which in addition to building four manufacturing plants (wind blades, wind towers, solar inverters and solar modules) also wants to deploy 2,000 megawatts of wind and 500 megawatts of solar in Ontario.

Samsung has said publicly that it plans to become the largest maker of solar panels by 2015, and wants to become a major player in wind. The fact that it chose Ontario as the launchpad is significant. This is a huge deal, and while not perfect, it has the potential to bring tremendous long-term benefits to Ontario. Sure, other developers would love the special treatment Samsung got, but have those developers been willing to step up, develop a comprehensive supply chain, and sign a deal that commits them to X amount of renewables and create X thousand amounts of jobs? My only big criticism of this deal is that the government may be overlooking some amazing Ontario-made opportunities — local consortia who have big plans but can’t seem to get the attention and support of the Ontario government. This apparent lack of confidence in local entrepreneurs and investors doesn’t send a good signal. Premier Dalton McGuinty needs to do a much better job of nurturing and having confidence in local ventures, even if they lack the deep pockets and brand appeal of an anchor tenant like Samsung.

Were smaller developers in Ontario betrayed? I can see why they think so, but I don’t recall anyone in the current government ever saying the feed-in-tariff program is the only way they will sign up renewables (or any source of power generation) in the future. What the feed-in tariff program and Green Energy Act does is let these developers access the program, equally, without having to go through an expensive RFP process. The fact is the FIT program, as it is, is more than generous to these developers. And while transmission is scarce, there’s a solid commitment to build more. So there is a bigger picture here, one that needs to be put into perspective.

Okay, let’s open this one up to some civil debated…

Apparently the short list of clean energy technologies being considered for the climate development mechanism excludes carbon capture and sequestration, aka “clean coal” projects. The clean development mechanism, under the Kyoto Protocol, allows developed countries to invest in certain emission-reduction projects in developing countries to offset their own emissions. Since these projects generally cost less to deploy in the developing world it is considered a cheaper avenue for rich countries to meet their obligation. That was the same thinking around CCS and clean coal, but Brazil has roadblocked the technology for fear that its inclusion in the list would suck financial resources away from other options, such as forest preservation. There have also been concerns expressed about CCS liability issues and guarantees around the permanence of long-term storage.

Obviously, this isn’t great news for the coal industry. What’s that expression — cry me a river? It doesn’t mean CCS can’t be put to good use in rich countries, but obviously that will come at higher cost. Will anyone want to pay developed-world prices to get the needed 100 or so clean coal and carbon sequestration projects working? Tough to say, but I doubt it. Developing-world projects were considered a way to get some volume deployment, and without that, it doesn’t look good for coal. But given what’s on the line for Canada, Australia, the U.S. and others, leaving out CCS doesn’t look good for Copenhagen either, so someone’s going to have to give.

Isn’t international politics fun?

I’ve always thought it was amusing how politicians in the U.S. and Canada talk about China as if it’s this backward nation that produces energy from nothing but coal, and how poor China needs help from the West to clean up its act. Uh, yeah, well, perhaps we’ll need help from China to clean up our act.

The Wall Street Journal has a good story here that puts the whole issue into perspective. It’s not that China doesn’t have its problems, and it could certainly benefit from some homegrown innovation, but there’s no question that China’s manufacturing might is beginning to expand into cleantech and the country is taking the economic opportunity — against the backdrop of climate change — very seriously. It should not be underestimated. Solar. Wind. Electric bikes. Electric cars. Batteries. Carbon capture. Watch out…

Fortunately I saw it for what is was, but a hoax e-mail went out today giving reporters the impression that Environment Canada had dramatically changed its tune regarding climate change policy. The fake press release, designed to look like it was coming from Environment Canada, refers to a new policy called Agenda 2020. It would set a binding emissions reduction target of 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020, compared to the 3 per cent committed by the government today. The press release, which has made up quotes from Environment Minister Jim Prentice, also promises to contribute 1 per cent of Canada’s GDP, or $13 billion, in 2010 toward a climate debate mechanism that would help developing countries adapt. The release came from www.enviro-canada.ca, which is a Web address that has been forwarded to the real Environment Ministry Web site at www.ec.gc.ca.

What’s perhaps even funnier is that an hour later another press release was sent out, purporting to come from the real Environment Canada, denouncing the earlier “spoof” e-mail and claiming the story had been picked up by the Wall Street Journal, European edition (seems like a spoof site as well). That second e-mail came from www.ec-gc.ca, also a fake Web address. Seems the hoaxsters are doing this to throw off the international media so that when the real Government of Canada press release comes out, nobody will know what’s true and what’s not true.

Will be interesting to see how this one plays out…

WWF-International released a study today ranking the cleantech market activities of countries around the world. The report predicts that by 2020 the cleantech industry will be worth $2.45 trillion, ranking as the third-largest global industry behind automobiles and electronics.

According to the 44-country ranking, measured by cleantech sales as a percentage of GDP, the Top 3 countries are Denmark, Brazil and Germany. China ranked sixth. The U.S. ranked 19th, just one position behind the United Kingdom. On the bottom half of the list are Australia, ranked 28th, and Canada, ranked 31st. Keith Stewart at WWF said the results come as a warning to Canada. “This report shows that Canada is far behind countries like the U.S. and China in investing in green technologies, in real and relative terms,” he said. “You can be sure the Chinese economy will not sit still while we sit on our hands.”

Stewart said it doesn’t help that come the end of January 2010 a Canadian federal incentive program designed to promote renewable energy development will run out of budgeted funds. While there is talk of re-charging the fund next year there is still likely to be a major funding gap, creating the kind of bust-boom cycle that once held back the U.S. wind and solar markets. Have we not learned from past mistakes?