Farm biofuels: a green solution to the peaker and off-grid problems

The centrale de Bécancour gas-fired generation
plant remains operable despite the wave of fossil-
fuel plant closures in Québec (Image: Le Devoir)

When it comes to electricity generation, Québec is a model to be followed. Hydro-Québec's massive high-north projets have ensured that 97.2% of Québec's total energy production is sustainable hydroelectricity, while simultaneously having the lowest electricity prices in North America. Coal and oil power plants have been completely abolished across the province.

And yet, Hydro-Québec hasn't been able to crawl that final few percentile to total sustainability. For better or worse it is unable to rid itself of its few remaining gas and diesel power plants, which together provide 541MW of generation capacity in the province - which, though it comprises less than 2% of total electricity generation, is essential to the provincial electrical grid.

There are two functions these remaining plants serve. The first is to produce electricity in remote locations off the main electricity grid. Hydro-Québec runs 24 such plants, mostly located in remote far northern communities but also including the centrale des Îles-de-la-Madeleine diesel generation plant which supplies the entire electricity needs of the Magdelan Islands, a chain in the Gulf of St Lawrence famous for its pied-de-vent cheese and extensive white sand beaches.

The second is as what is known as a "peaker plant". Hydroelectricity is not a form of power generation which can be turned on and off rapidly, and when rapid changes in electricity demand occur causing "peaks" the grid requires large amounts generated within a very short time frame. The only reliable method we have of doing this is thermal power generation from fossil fuels. Québec's current peaker station is the centrale de Bécancour near Trois-rivières, a 4-unit gas turbine plant using natural gas. As described by Hydro-Québec itself,

"Given the relatively high cost of fuel needed to run these facilities, they are used only during periods of peak demand. These generating stations have the advantage of taking only minutes to start and stop operations, compared to the longer time frames required by other thermal power stations."

And right now, while Québec continues to burn fossil fuels fracked from shale and rinsed from tarsand in other provinces, there exists a renewable, carbon-neutral source of electricity the province could utilize without any capital investment that can be produced in Québec nearly immediately and in doing so help revitalize the rural economy: the biofuels - biogas and biodiesel.

Anaerobic digesters like this one in Stirling, ON
can utilize waste manure as well as wet biomass
like corn silage to produce biogas suitable for
electricity generation (Image: Biogas Association)

Here in Ontario the idea of producing agricultural biogas to fuel gas turbine power generation is nothing new. Currently 35 farms across the province have installed anaerobic digester / gas turbine systems which derive biogas from manure, vegetable crop stalks and excess silage. The system is surprisingly efficient: a single tonne of cattle manure can produce 48KWh of electricity, while a single tonne of corn chaff produces 335KWh.

In the case of manure, with a single head of cattle producing 21.9 tonnes of manure a year, the entire Bécancour plant could be fueled by capturing the gaseous output of only 391 cattle - or, put otherwise, the output of only 7 average québécois dairy farms. The equivalent in corn silage, with average wet biomass yields coming out to about 20 tonnes to the acre, would require only 62 acres.

Biofuels can also help to deal with the Magdelan Islands' diesel dependency. The madelinots have had to contend with oil spills recently from the shipment of diesel to the plant, when instead it could be using some of the $1.1 million worth of cereal crops produced in the region annually to produce their own diesel, creating jobs in this region with some of the highest unemployment levels in Québec.

Creating value-added production such as biogas is not only ecologically sound it is economically stimulating. The simple reality is that when processing of agricultural products is moved to the farm, jobs are created, and agricultural communities flourish. For Québec - and furthermore, the world - to make the final leap away from fossil fuels, it will take biofuels to be possible.

Mythbusting the critique of the dairy quota system

It's hard to get straight facts about the much maligned quota system which governs Ontario dairying. Despite the fact that every single major farmer organization supports the system - from the National Farmers Union to the Ontario Federation of Agriculture to the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario - the major media outlets tell us time and time again just how awful it is. From staunchly conservative papers like the National Post and Maclean's to liberal papers like the Toronto Star, even in academia such as this paper from the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy, the average Canadian hears nothing but opposition to supply management.

It seems that everyone is against supply management except for farmers themselves, for whom it has done exactly what it was intended to do - keep milk prices consistent and fair. So where's the truth to it all? What is supply management really doing for Canada? We're going to break down some common misconceptions about the quota system, and what its real impact is on Canadians.


Myth: The quota system, with the total cost for a single head of milking cattle being above $20,000 in most provinces, makes it impossible for new farmers to break into the industry

"if you’re a new farmer, [supply management] is a major barrier to entry: as much as 75 per cent of start-up costs." - Maclean's Magazine 15/08/11

Fact: The reality is that the quota system has several options set up to provide a start-up quota to new farmers. As an example, Dairy Farmers of Ontario, the body responsible for transfer of quotas, offers the New Entrant Quota Assistant Program, which will loan new farmers 12kg of quota for up to 16 years without cost - which, in Ontario, is currently a $300,000 value.

Also, quotas are not the majority of start up costs for most new farmers. With average farm land prices at $4000/acre, a single pedigreed Holstein heifer at $2600 - $3400, and state of the art milking technology running a $210,000 price tag, dairying is a tough game to break into, which is why New Entrant program exists to lessen the burden.


Myth: Supply management is effectively a subsidy from the Canadian consumer to farmers, since dairy prices are much higher in Canada than in countries without supply management.

"Canadians pay up to three times as much for milk than their neighbours to the south... dairy production quotas alone cost the economy $28-billion per year. That’s thousands of dollars per household." - National Post 20/09/13

Fact: unlike most major dairy producing countries, Canada does not directly subsidize farmers a single nickel. The United States, a country without supply management, provides over $4 billion in direct subsidies annually to the dairy industry. In no sense of the word is supply management a "subsidy", it is in fact supply management which allows dairy farmers to continue farming without any subsidies whatsoever. And, the quota system itself does not cost the economy a single penny since quota exchanges are entirely farmer-run, farmer-operated, and farmer-funded, and are not government institutions.

As to the allegation that Canadian dairy costs 300% that it does in the USA, the current average retail difference between US and Canadian milk is $0.44/L or a 29% increase, the current retail different between US and Canadian cheddar is $0.93/kg or a mere 6% increase. This is actually lower than the general difference between the two countries in food prices, which are 57% higher on average in Canada than in the US.


Myth: Eliminating supply management would reduce the price of dairy products for consumers.

"There is no question that phasing out supply management brings benefits to almost all members of society, excluding the producers, through lower prices and especially to low-income people." - Professor Ian Lee, Carleton University Sprott School of Business

Fact: When Australia eliminated supply management of dairy in June 2000, the price of milk rose three times as fast in the proceeding 3 years as it had in the preceding three years - having increased only $0.9/L from 1997-2000, but having increased $0.27/L from 2000-2003. Over the same time period, milk prices in both Canada and New Zealand (Australia's neighbour which has retained its supply management system) remained near-constant. The only side effect that Australia's experiment in eliminating supply management has produced is making farm gate prices for milk more volatile.