In a global context where energy security is becoming an even more crucial issue, it is unfortunate that the issue of Hydro-Québec exports has never been formally debated in the public arena.
Posted at 1:00 p.m.
However, in recent years, Hydro-Québec has signed major long-term contracts with customers in the states of Massachusetts and New York. With its green energy, Québec inc. wishes to become the “battery of North America”, thus responding to the mission it has given itself to contribute to a vast decarbonization operation in Northeast America.
While our state-owned company is announcing to the Quebec economic world that it will no longer be able to supply electricity to all new industrial projects – due to a lack of availability – these massive projected exports to the United States represent two and a half times the production annual electricity bill for the La Romaine Complex.
How, then, are the risks associated with long-term exports, which require mobilizing 4,000 MW of Quebec’s hydroelectric production capacity, managed, while our own greenhouse gas reduction targets are moving away from the measured reality each year?
Energy security
Few jurisdictions have on their territory deposits of green energy as rich as those found throughout Quebec. Such resources should free us from dependence on fossil fuels. However, in 2019, Quebec households imported $7.9 billion ($2,105 per household).
However, the massive exports of Hydro-Quebec favor the play of the fossil cluster, thus compromising our energy autonomy.
In particular, we should be concerned about the dual-energy scenario proposed by Hydro-Québec and Énergir, which are asking the Régie de l’énergie to recognize a completely unusual principle of commercial compensation between two energy distribution monopolies. Hydro-Québec would compensate Énergir for its revenue losses resulting from the replacement of gas heating with a dual-energy heating system powered exclusively by gas during the hours of the cold season when electricity demand is highest. Implicitly, this project promotes the expansion of the peri-urban gas network by facilitating the recruitment of new customers who would benefit from subsidies for their conversion to dual energy. However, a real energy efficiency plan offers other options for reducing heating needs in Quebec.
Executives from Hydro-Québec and Énergir confirm that Hydro-Québec is no longer considering the all-electric option: the TAE would require 2,000 MW of additional power during peak periods, while a deficit power is planned for 2030. How then can we justify reserving 4000 MW of hydroelectric capacity in Quebec in the long term to supply New York and Boston?
Hydro-Québec governance and social acceptability
Maine residents, consulted by referendum in the fall of 2021, answered “no” (59%) to the electricity transmission corridor to Boston. Alleging that they were influenced by the American oil and gas lobby, Hydro-Québec chose to appeal to the courts to try to remove the referendum obstacle.
Couldn’t the people of Quebec also have a say in the commercial use of their heritage electricity? Are Hydro-Québec’s decisions transparent in this respect? As a government corporation, shouldn’t Hydro-Québec make public its annual revenue projections and the contractual conditions for baseload power deliveries intended for export? It is Hydro-Québec’s subscribers who are guaranteed all its financial decisions.
There is certainly an economic risk in fixing for 25 years a selling price three times lower than the current electricity rates in New England. Among other things, these “deliveries” are accompanied by severe penalties in the event of a supply disruption – think in particular of the now predictable extreme climatic events. Moreover, they deprive Quebec for several decades of a power block of 10% of its current hydroelectric capacity, which hinders its own economic development and accentuates the problem of peak hours.
Another consequence of these massive exports is to sell, for the benefit of the United States, GHG emission credits on the carbon markets; these become the property of the buyer, who will benefit from the significant growth in their value over the years.
Finally, faced with the issue of energy resilience in the current context of governance, other generation and transmission projects in Quebec – increasingly expensive – could be announced to us, which will raise lively socio-economic debates. ecological, while energy efficiency (underexploited Negawatt deposits) remains the blind spot of current energy investments.
Export green energy, import fossil energy
The electricity surplus argument cannot be raised as long as we continue to import fossil fuels. The energy flows entering and leaving Québec constitute a whole.
In this sense, we must be concerned about the opacity of the decision-making framework that leads to extreme exports or that would allow a dual-energy Hydro-Québec–Énergir alliance with the GHG contribution paid by Hydro-Québec to Énergir for 30 years. It is also to be feared that lobbying will corrupt the decision-making apparatus.
We believe that a healthy democratic debate is more than necessary to help reframe the energy imagination of decision-makers in Quebec, with a view to effectively using our green energy deposits to develop and diversify our economy, promote food sovereignty and accelerate the electrification of transport, building and industry before 2050.
*The sources and references associated with this article are available on the website of the Collective of scientists on energy issues in Quebec.