Pierre Fitzgibbon wants you to start your dishwasher at 2 a.m. rather than after supper.
Basically, the Minister of Economy, Innovation and Energy is right. We must “flatten the curve” of our electricity consumption, as Horacio Arruda would say while clapping one hand with the other.
The demand for electricity in the province is about to jump as we electrify Quebec to decarbonize it.
However, if everyone charges their electric car on their way home from work, we will have problems. Around 6 p.m., on very cold evenings, electricity consumption could become unmanageable. The government wants to avoid having to increase its production just to meet the winter peaks, which only last about 100 hours a year.
The Minister is therefore right to warn us now that we must consume electricity in a more “intelligent” way.
He also tells us that we will have to become “sober” and consume less, in particular by reducing waste. That too is true.
Hydro-Quebec, which had an energy efficiency target of 8 TWh, now wants to approach 25 TWh. Achieving this goal will be far from simple. In the midst of a labor shortage, finding workers to change windows, insulate walls and install heat pumps for thousands of Quebecers will be a challenge.
But we must go as far as possible and we will never blame Hydro and the government for having ambition.
The problem lies in the means that the minister intends to use to make us consume less and more intelligently. Or rather, in those he already dismisses without taking the trouble to analyze them.
This week, Mr. Fitzgibbon brought together some sixty experts to discuss the best ways to produce, consume and price our electricity.
For a government that sometimes rushes without listening, such an exercise is reassuring. It is only just beginning. An online consultation will soon be launched, and the whole thing will lead to a bill this fall.
The problem is that we start the exercise by already closing some doors.
Thus, to encourage you to program your dishwasher, Mr. Fitzgibbon wants to lower the prices during the off-peak period. However, he refuses to consider raising them during peak periods.
It also closes the door to the idea of higher residential rates at all times to limit waste.
“We are not a tax government, we lower taxes,” he said.
This obsession with avoiding any discussion on possible increases in taxes and tariffs is set up as dogma at the CAQ. We saw it when, faced with the deficits of public transport companies, the Minister of Transport Geneviève Guilbault dismissed out of hand solutions such as tolls, the increase in registrations on polluting vehicles or the kilometer tax without debate nor analysis.
We are about to make the same mistake with electricity.
Above all, it is not a question of saying that we should launch headlong into price increases. But we must be able to question our sacred cows, if only to ensure that they are still justified.
Take what is called cross-subsidization.
When you pay your Hydro-Québec bill, you no doubt feel that the money is coming out of your own pockets. In fact, the local cafe and the factory in the area help you a little.
Businesses subject to Rate “M” pay 28% more for their electricity than what it costs Hydro-Québec to supply them. For industry, the supplement is 13%. This allows residential consumers to benefit from a 14% discount.
Is such a policy still relevant?
The question was put to the experts meeting last Monday at the invitation of Mr. Fitzgibbon. Except that the latter already has his answer.
“I don’t think that needs to change,” he said in a scrum last week.
What’s the point of asking questions if you have ready-made ideas?
Let us agree: it is clear that any increase in electricity prices should be accompanied by measures to protect low-income households.
It is also clear that such policies should never be aimed at filling Hydro-Québec’s coffers, but at reducing electricity consumption. If we help citizens improve their energy performance, they will not pay more in the end. The rate increase may even be the trigger that will lead to recurring savings.
Will the carrots Mr. Fitzgibbon wants to give us be enough to change our habits to meet future needs? Or will it take a few sticks to entice us to schedule our dishwasher for 2 a.m.?
We should not be afraid to ask ourselves these questions.