hamilton: green schools program money well spent - solar street lighting system

It cost $20 million.
This is my initial impression of the government initiative, which aims to equip more than 150 of schools in the province with cleaner technology in OntarioBased on the company.
There are more than 20 Ontario Clean technology enterprises involved in the project, which is co-led by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Research and Innovation. Oakville-
The fifth lighting company, which has the technology to reduce the electricity consumption of fluorescent lighting systems, is transforming eight schools.
Triacta Power Technologies in Ottawa is installing smart meters in more than 20 schools.
REGEN Energy and EnviroTower from Toronto also put their Energy
Reduce product access to schools.
In terms of renewable energy, Dexter-
Its vertical axis wind turbine is being installed based on clean field Energy (
What does the egg beater look like)
On the roof of at least nine schools.
According to the native products of Arise Technologies, Menova engineering and Conserval engineering, some solar projects are also in progress.
I said the $20 million was well spent because the projects were meant to show off Ontario-
Lack of basic technology for reliable deployment records.
Without this record, it would be difficult for these companies to enter the global market and convince others to take risks with their products.
But not all the dollars used to "green" our school need to be donated.
For example, in last April, the McGuinty government earmarked $0. 55 billion for energy --
Reduce the "renovation and renovation" of the school ".
A month later, it announced $50 million for solar, geothermal and micro-renewable energy projects.
Wind energy and other clean energy systems for generating electricity, heating or cooling.
I praised the fiscal commitment at the time, and still to a certain extent, but looking back, I wanted to know that at a time when the provincial budget was under great pressure, is it the right way to just throw money at school.
Energy is recognized.
Maximum emissions from efficiency transformation
For scarce public income, it is reduced.
Through mature and widely used technologies, energy savings can be achieved from 15 to 30.
Of course, this transformation may cost a lot of money in advance, but the return is usually less than two years compared to solar or geothermal-not ten years or more.
So why not lend money to schools and other public institutions? And then have these institutions repay their loans from the resulting energy savings-perhaps with interest of 2 or 3 cents?
What you end up with is a revolving fund, which is basically a constant gift.
Julia Lange, executive director of the Toronto Atmospheric Fund, urged the government to strongly embrace the practice.
"Many measures are repaid within a few months and can be combined with longer term repayments to get a reasonable return on investment," said Lange . ".
She proposed that the Ontario government first create $250 --million low-
Interest revolving loan funds designed to help municipalities, academic institutions, schools and hospitals (collectively, mixed Industries)
Dig deeper into energy efficiency.
The "deep" I'm talking about is going beyond the light bulb.
Some fruits hang lower than others.
Lange wants us to spend more money on a longer ladder that gives us more space, but will save more money over time.
We know that, in Ontario, about 10 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions are being processed.
We also know that their energy costs are high.
In 2009 alone, school boards spent nearly a billion dollars on their utility bills.
Lange said that a $0. 25 billion fund could fund 75 or more renovation projects in two years, and that the total investment of the fund would be its original in 10 years.
There are many different ways to fund this now.
Ontario's infrastructure can raise money by issuing green bonds.
The Treasury Department can simply designate funds in the budget.
Alternatively, the government can provide loan guarantees for direct participation by banks.
The above combination is also an option.
Of course, this requires the government to think creatively and take on more responsibility-not to mention the potential pitfalls that follow.
No one wants to see another electronic.
Health scandal or Ontario Lottery and Gaming Company
This is a risk whenever a government establishes a structure that manages large amounts of money.
Easier, More troublesome-
It is free to spend the money once.
Unfortunately, it's a way and a mindset to stop us from doing more with less money. A $250-
Million revolving funds?
Hell, I can say $1 billion.
Taylor Hamilton writes weekly articles on green energy and clean technology.
Contact him at tyler @ clean break. ca.