In recent days, a debate has been launched in Quebec about the new framework expected on electricity production. This issue is of great importance for Quebec. We would collectively be well advised not to go too far or too quickly in this matter. We have an efficient electrical system, which can certainly be adjusted, but not disrupted.
Since the creation of Hydro-Québec in 1944, the nationalization of private electricity companies in the early 1960s and the putting into operation of imposing hydroelectricity production assets, notably in Manicouagan, then in La Baie -James, Hydro-Québec is a true model in the field of electricity.
In my opinion, nationalization in 1963 was the most important public policy decision in the history of Quebec. And the hydroelectric development that followed: our greatest collective achievement.
With Hydro-Québec as project manager and in team with the private sector for the realization of the projects, Quebec has ticked all the boxes of the energy trilemma, the strategic concern of all States: we have greater energy autonomy, we have provided everyone with access to electricity and we focused on clean energy.
We have an efficient Crown corporation, which provides reliable, low-cost electricity, and which provides, year after year, juicy dividends to its government shareholder.
Hydro-Québec invests billions annually in the economy, and thus creates wealth throughout the vast territory of Quebec. In addition, it contributes to the development of a strong electrical industry which, by exporting its products and expertise, makes Quebec shine throughout the world.
A model to evolve?
Regarding this governance model, a few reminders are in order. Despite the impression one may have, Hydro-Québec does not control all electricity production in Quebec.
Companies, large consumers of electricity, take care of their own supply for the purposes of their industrial production. Hydroelectric producers with plants with a capacity of 50 megawatts or less send electricity to the grid. Private producers, in wind power and biomass, provide nearly 10% of the electricity consumed in Quebec.
Over time, these supplies made it possible to diversify Quebec’s electricity production, a little too focused on large-scale hydraulics, and to maintain our water reservoirs, our main asset, at a more comfortable level.
With the energy transition desired by Quebec, which requires a vast deployment of electrical equipment projects that are much more difficult to have citizens accept (power plants, substations, lines), is it possible to maintain the same model?
Making it evolve, towards more flexibility, is certainly an avenue to consider. Every model is called upon to change according to the needs of its time. To this end, the government consulted experts and organizations in 2023 and received more than a hundred submissions. A good effort, but of low intensity and not up to the challenge of the transition.
Important unanswered questions
We should also have debated these electricity contracts envisaged on a larger scale between private companies: what will happen to the assets if these companies go bankrupt?
It’s not theoretical. Hydro-Québec still remembers the spectacular drop in demand for electricity from paper mills, starting in 2008, which led to large surpluses in search of outlets.
These surpluses contributed to the decision to close the Gentilly-2 nuclear power plant (2012), of which we would like to have back the 675 megawatts of installed power today.
We want wind projects from private producers to power large companies? Alright. However, wind turbines provide energy 35% of the time. Who will supply the companies the rest of the time and who will provide balancing? Wind turbines do not provide power in very cold weather. Who will make up for it? If these entities want to resell their surplus, to whom and at what price?
In short, all this requires that citizens become aware of what this energy transition entails. Not all Quebecers are yet in tune with this new situation.
Before committing to any legislative and regulatory modification of potentially historic significance which would seem to shake up a model which has been so successful for us, and given the scale of the challenges of massive electrification required by the transition, the government would be wise to consult more the Quebecois.
That would be in his interest. It must help the population to better understand the future that is being prepared, help them move forward and obtain their support for this vast collective project which will very clearly define what the Quebec of tomorrow will be.