- Email: [email protected]
Identifying barriers to aboriginal renewable energy deployment in Canada
Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Energy Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol
Communication
Identifying barriers to aboriginal renewable energy deployment in Canada Joel Krupa n Pic River First Nation Energy, 36 Pic River Road, Heron Bay, Ontario, Canada P0T 1R0
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 13 December 2011 Accepted 23 December 2011 Available online 11 January 2012
As one of the largest and wealthiest countries in the world, Canada stands well-positioned to take advantage of ongoing growth in North American demand for primary energy supply by expanding domestic delivery of renewable energy generation to internationally interconnected electric grids across the country. There are myriad benefits of adopting the renewable energy approach to development—as the province of Ontario has acknowledged through the implementation of their 2009 Green Energy Act—including drastic reductions in carbon emissions, the decommissioning of existing fossil fuel power generation that cause serious public health problems, and opportunities for sustainable development at the community level. One group in particular stands poised to shape these debates. In Canada, historically marginalized Aboriginal peoples remain one of the groups with the greatest potential for meeting these enormous renewable energy deployment needs. Aboriginal involvement in renewable energy generation in Canada has been as diverse as Canada’s Aboriginal peoples and groups have already adopted a range of different solutions to meet energy supply needs. However, many significant barriers exist that prevent this diverse cultural group from reaching its full potential. The article identifies some of these shortcomings and analyzes their roots. & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Aboriginals Canadian energy policy Renewable energy
1. Introduction With the acceleration of global climate change and the inability of the international community to implement successful market-based or voluntary consent-based compliance mechanisms for regulating greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), alternative and innovative methods for reducing carbon emissions continue to be explored internationally, nationally, and regionally. The primary contributor to anthropogenic climate change remains heavily polluting energy development and consumption (Jefferson, 2008; Diamond, 2005). The former is a particularly under-explored contributor; for example, the oil sands of northern Alberta (Canada) comprise only 2% of the global oil supply, yet this one super-project alone contributes in excess of 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions (GOA, 2011). Yet climate change is not the only factor that poses significant systemic risk to long-term energy delivery stability and security; for example, significant debt burdens, inadequate long-term investment, negative public health consequences, and aging grid infrastructure are all contributing to the unattractiveness of building new fossil fuel electricity generation at a time of increasing demand. Energy has long played a central role in the growth of the resource-based Canadian economy. In recent years, policy makers and government have chosen to pursue the ‘‘petro-dollars’’ model to
n
Tel.: þ1 2503003118. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]
0301-4215/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.051
growth. Canada has become increasingly reliant on constant influxes of domestic and foreign direct investment for developing its domestic unconventional energy supplies, which rank as some of the largest in the world. Given that the well-respected International Energy Agency recently announced an abrupt shift in its long-term projections on rates of decline in global conventional oil production, simultaneously predicting peak oil by 2030 and revising its estimated post-peak annual rate of decline, this trend of an energyfocused (and energy-intensive) economy seems likely to continue unabated (Monbiot, 2008).
2. Renewable energy The incumbent Canadian government has declared long-term intentions to make Canada an ‘‘energy superpower’’, promoting development of unconventional heavy oil supply in the Prairie Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, innovative shale gas extraction techniques for parts of both Western and Eastern Canada, and continuing extraction of coal at locations throughout the country. In contrast, comparatively minor incentives have been offered at the federal level that could potentially induce a move towards laying the framework for the creation of developing Canada as a ‘‘renewable energy superpower’’, despite an abundant and diversified national resource base that, if sensibly and adequately developed, could constitute a much higher proportion of the energy supply mix within a relatively short time span. The United Nations, working in
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
partnership with the EU Commission, have adopted a particularly useful description of what renewables are constituted of: ‘‘renewable non-fossil energy sources [can be defined as] wind, solar, geothermal, wave, tidal, hydropower, biomass, landfill gas, sewage treatment plant gas, and biogases’’ (TUNSD, 2008). The benefits of such a transition are well-covered elsewhere (see Goodall, 2008, among others), but include energy security, environmental security, and economic prosperity. Renewable energy is more robust, decentralized, and capable of withstanding energy security threats than centralized fossil fuel generation and it is worth emphasizing the long-term benefits to Canada’s energy security—the element of energy policy that supersedes all others—if there is progress in domestic renewable energy deployment. Given continued underinvestment in US energy markets that are crucial to the facilitation of cross-border energy exchanges and trading, significant political risk in energy supply markets in the Middle East, and the risks posed by environmental degradation through climate change, harnessing an emission-free and wholly domestic supply of energy for electricity generation is crucial for Canada’s long-term economic competitiveness, social cohesion, and energy supply stability. The relatively fiscally sound provinces of British Columbia and Ontario have recognized the important benefits of increasing renewable energy use and are both at various stages of implementing a feed-in tariff, a proven policy mechanism for making renewables deployment highly attractive. Even the fossil fuelbased province of Alberta has made steps towards a renewable energy future, with new premier Alison Redford enthusiastically endorsing the work of groups like the Southern Alberta Alternative Energy Partnership (SAAEP, 2011).Through this process, Canada will have the opportunity to realize true sustainable development and achieve the inevitable and diffuse social, environmental, and economic improvements that accompany it. Yet despite intense interest on the part of a variety of stakeholders—big business, NGOs, community groups, environmentalists, and Aboriginals—in seeing Canada enter a period of energy supply transformation, policy has, too often, focused on business-asusual. The article will focus on the barriers to Aboriginal-owned renewable energy projects, a key sub-set of the population that stands poised to realize true sustainable development—economic, social, and environmental—if the ‘‘Four Cs’’ of ‘‘cash’’, ‘‘capacity’’, ‘‘clarity’’, and ‘‘circumstances’’ and the ‘‘Two Ls’’ of ‘‘lack of legitimacy’’ and ‘‘lack of equality’’ can be overcome.
3. Aboriginals in Canada Aboriginals comprise a distinct group of diverse peoples sprinkled throughout Canada, ranging from the Inuit in the Far North to the Haida on the British Columbian coastline to the Ojibways on the northern shores of the Great Lakes, and are also known as Canada’s ‘‘First Nations’’. Many of the 633 individual nations hold remnants of their unique past—languages, customs, and traditions—that stretch back well over 12,000 years. Indian, Inuit, and Metis peoples are all identified as Aboriginals under Section 35 of the 1982 Canadian Constitution Act and have their rights enshrined in Canadian law. The act reads as follows (IF, 2009): (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed. (2) In this Act, ‘‘aboriginal peoples of Canada’’ includes the Indian, Inuit and Me´tis peoples of Canada. (3) For greater certainty, subsection (1) ‘‘treaty rights’’ includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
711
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons. Aboriginals have not always possessed such relatively clearly defined rights and title to their traditional territory. In a situation that bears many marked similarities to the Aboriginal peoples of Australia, the history of Aboriginals in Canada is one of repeated assimilation and attempts at cultural extermination (de Blij, 2008). The Aboriginals who were able to escape the collapse of their traditional subsistence economies, introduced diseases, and grinding poverty were forced to endure legacies of official British– Canadian domestic policy that ‘‘encouraged civilization and save Indians from a state of perceived barbarism’’ (Miller, 2003). This included residential schools, in which abuse was extremely common, and attempts to label traditional ceremonies as ‘‘evil’’ (Ibid.). Yet despite repeated attempts to ostracize and assimilate Aboriginals into ‘‘modern’’ life (sometimes as an explicit provision of Canadian government policy), many communities are overcoming past hardships and emerging as self-sufficient, selfgoverning entities with innovative development agendas. Renewable energy is an attractive choice as a central pillar of a First Nations development strategy. In contrast to the development strategy discussions involving other historically marginalized groups, such as the interviewer’s dialog with marginalized Indian villagers at the beginning of Agrawal (2005), Aboriginals generally possess a sophisticated understanding of the intricate complexity of the natural world and the importance of reducing societal impacts on the environment in which they live. Importantly, Canadian Aboriginals are often not relegated to the position of relative powerlessness in the face of neoliberal forces, a recurring paralysis that affects other indigenous groups around the world. For example, they do not need to adopt a more radical ‘‘counterglobalization’’ stance (even if more progressive version are currently being enacted—see discussion in Kirsch, 2006) or a simplified and idealized reversion to an anti-capitalist ‘‘back to the land’’ ideology. Instead, many of the bands are idiosyncratically integrating (slowly in some cases, quickly in others) into modern Canadian society and bringing their own new voices and their own new perspectives to the relevant debates. Although this paper will not discuss the variety of benefits available to Aboriginal groups, such as a very favorable taxation regime, rapidly decreasing renewable energy technology costs, generous grants and loan guarantees from the government, and an intermittently propitious policy environment (e.g. Mclauglin et al., 2010), these benefits should be outlined from the onset. It should also be noted that this paper does not attempt to portray a business-focused path to development as ‘‘ideal’’ or immune from criticism; indeed, strong evidence exists that the political ecology of energy systems should be factored into energy decisions (Krupa and Burch, 2011). Researchers have noted that there is a certain paradox inherent to discussions regarding sustainable development and ecological modernization, as it assumes that ‘‘modernization’’ is inevitable and that ‘‘economic underdevelopment’’ is a threat that needs to be extinguished (e.g. Frank, 1969; Kay, 2005). Although these issues are critical and merit further analysis, they can only be addressed here. Nevertheless, the time is right for rapid deployment and the First Nations peoples across Canada stand well-positioned to be at the forefront; as discussed earlier, there is no one project formula or outline that has been uniformly adopted and the opportunities (including choice of renewable energy technology) remain as diverse as Aboriginal peoples. I have divided the barriers to serious improvements into the ‘‘Four Cs’’ and the ‘‘Two Ls’’, facilitating easy classification and analysis. This discussion will be the focus of the next six short sections.
712
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
4. Barrier 1—‘‘cash’’ According to the Canada Revenue Agency (2008), Aboriginals are exempt from taxes on income derived from on-reserve activities. This creates a tremendous window for development, as both resource-based and non-resource-based opportunities are available. To complement this benefit, federal and provincial entities have implemented generous funding and financing opportunities. For example, Mclauglin et al. (2010) note that the federal Department of Indian and Northern Affairs offers nonrepayable grants of up to $250,000 for Aboriginal energy initiatives that result in appreciable environmental improvements, while the Province of Ontario offers a $250 million Aboriginal Loan Guarantee Program to facilitate loans from banks (OPA, 2009). Yet although the situation is improving through initiatives like the aforementioned ones, First Nations often continue to lack the financial acumen and resources to adequately meet stringent financial requirements for new renewable energy generation. In many cases, there is simply not enough cash on-hand to meet the day-to-day needs of communities and utilize capital for revenuegenerating activities. This leaves communities in a perplexing dilemma, especially in an atmosphere of potential threats to future funding as governments grapple with quasi-permanent, recession-era budgets. The problem of ‘‘cash’’ is exacerbated by a general preference on the part of regulators and government for big business incumbents. In a 2008 filing to the Ontario Energy Board, leading Aboriginal energy developer Byron Leclair discusses how his diversified renewable energy company lost a large bid on the basis of an arbitrary minimum threshold of financial ability. According to Leclair, his situation is particularly perverse, as it appears to have been based on no objective factors (OEB, 2008); indeed, the project even fully satisfies a purported key element of review called ‘‘Identified Aboriginal Communities Participation’’. Leclair goes on to note in the same presentation that Pic River has demonstrated in past projects the ability to assemble a strong team and raise cumulative financing in excess of $60 million dollars, yet this still was not enough to satisfy the requirements (Ibid.). Clearly, ability to raise cash—on the level of a corporation or business entity—presents a formidable challenge to even the most advanced Aboriginal proponents.
5. Barrier 2—‘‘capacity’’ As we enter the second decade of the 21st century, renewable energy development remains a key issue in both public and private sector debates across Canada. To effectively engage in these debates, interested groups need to obtain a great deal of preliminary capacity to perform effectively. Preliminary project preparation, regulatory processes, and community consultation—requirements that extend in similar depth to both private and Aboriginal project developers—are difficult to adequately meet without significant capital and expertise outlays. On many reserves, this issue is difficult to overcome, especially in the face of lack of even more basic capacity on-reserve. It is also often difficult for First Nations to determine the optimal avenues to pursue. Technologies are inherently difficult to navigate, especially when coupled with significant regulatory burdens, and often require a great deal of outside consultation. For example, bioenergy is heavily promoted by a variety of federal and provincial agencies and is routinely touted as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuel electricity generation. Yet analyses of its actual climate and environmental impact show that it is actually poses large-scale risks to biodiversity and climate change mitigation efforts (see Greenpeace, 2011) and could conflict with other elements of First Nations worldviews. This example demonstrates that the optimal
solution for meeting a community’s energy goals is not necessarily readily obvious—capacity issues need to be overcome. 6. Barrier 3—‘‘clarity [for the long-term]’’ Due to a general lack of large-scale deployment to date (with the notable exception of utility-scale hydroelectric), renewable energy has had difficulty attaining grid parity and, consequently, continues to be erroneously classified as economically uncompetitive with fossil fuels. In many cases, this has been as a result of poor debt management programs, unsustainable pricing, and shortfalls in supply (OME, 2011). Sovacool and Cooper (2007) note that renewable energy sources correct an important and persistent market failure; that is, the externalities imposed on society through unaccounted costs like higher medical expenses, water contamination, and the possibilities of resource wars. Renewable energy also allows society to overcome the persistent free rider problem of energy producers that are not responsible for the full cost of their products, thereby making it more difficult for those interested in innovation to justify the millions of dollars in research and development costs that are required (Ibid.). Despite these benefits of increasing transparency and accountability that will be rendered through greater renewable energy proliferation, it remains unclear how government will be incentivizing additional development into the future and leads to the crux of the issue—‘‘clarity for the long-term developer’’ and how it can be remedied. For example, the Ontario Power Authority is currently in the process of reviewing the 2009 feed-in tariff. Downward revisions to rates seem likely and many projects continue to be hamstrung by a lack of transmission capacity. No concrete deadlines have been proposed to address these issues, making it difficult for many First Nations to make capital-intensive investments. To further complicate the issues, fossil-fuel energy exploration and development—particularly that pursued by multinational corporations and nation-states—continues to attract the bulk of government subsidies, foreign direct investment, and premium financing. Both in Canada and worldwide, fossil fuel remains preferred by traditionally conservative energy development interests. Consequently, technological lock-in, systemic inertia, and a deepening hegemony of entrenched interests remains difficult to overcome and future projections remain unclear. Fossil fuel is seen as a low-risk, high-return activity, whereas renewable energy is more troublesome (Diamond, 2005). How these barriers—resolvable with strong coordinated action and sufficient political will—can be or will be resolved remains to be seen. Finally, it is worth noting that, as renewable energy technologies continue to mature, they have become hamstrung by issues familiar to fossil fuels, particularly pertaining to innovation and technological lock-in. Even if these renewable energy technologies do manage to reach fully cost-competitive levels, it is likely that policy-driven future growth will still be required for further significant expansion. For example, Yang (2010) shows that solar innovation and uptake will likely be dependent on more than simple cost-competitiveness if global proliferation is to take place. Subsidies will likely be required for the foreseeable future unless government refine and promote financial incentives, mitigate barriers, and ensure streamlined regulatory procedures. Without subsidies, uptake of many renewable energy technologies will be restricted to a relatively small core group of visionaries (Ibid.). This is another issue of clarity that will need to be resolved, although the optimal path to resolution remains unclear.
7. Barrier 4—‘‘circumstances’’ Another formidable barrier that renewable energy technologies in Canada must overcome can be succinctly described as
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
‘‘circumstances’’, or the inherent traits of renewable energy generation. An overview will be provided that includes some of the most important recurring concerns; consequently, the description in this sub-section is very brief. According to Calvert and Simandan (2010), the new energy landscape forged by renewable energy technologies stands in stark contrast to the centralized, largely fossil-fueled models upon which modern civilization was built. This is not solely a function of unwarranted political or economic bias; rather, it is as a direct result of the fundamental qualities of the various technologies. The chemical nature of renewable energy technologies is different from highly dense carrier fossil fuels. As a result, the energy density per unit remains far lower, making it difficult for renewable energy to be readily implemented as a viable alternative (Ibid.). This issue is compounded by the fact that renewable energy is often intermittent, optimal in decentralized delivery, and located in remote or transmission-less areas. Widespread integration of decentralized generation on to grid infrastructure remains a significant challenge—even in progressive jurisdictions like the Provinces of British Columbia and Ontario—as issues surrounding grid stability and security of supply begin to emerge. Large-scale distributed generation is still uncommon globally, and technical issues are certain to arise if it is implemented on the scale suggested here and elsewhere (see Jacobson and Delucchi, 2010). Furthermore, the circumstantial problems extend beyond the more technical or financial, as renewable energy developers have encountered significant societal resistance to the introduction of heretofore unknown infrastructure projects. Long accustomed to the constant and centralized delivery of coal, hydro, nuclear, and gas plants, society remains poorly equipped to deal with the (relatively minor) visual and esthetic impacts of renewable energy developments. So-called ‘‘NIMBY’’ syndrome plagues a variety of technologies, with wind power as the primary target. For example, the Ontarian volunteer organization ‘‘Wind Concerns’’ has created significant opposition to a variety of renewable energy generation projects across the province, going so far as to maintain a dedicated website that lists upcoming board hearings, news articles, and policy briefings that could benefit additional wind generation in Ontario (WCO, 2011).
8. Barrier 5—‘‘lack of legitimacy’’ In Canada in general and Northern Ontario in particular, many renewable energy projects involving First Nations are hamstrung by a lack of social license or a ‘‘lack of legitimacy’’. Treaty issues often remain unresolved, and the consultative process for new initiatives can be troublesome as bands struggle to ensure that they do not interfere with ongoing treaty negotiations with the federal government. For example, patriarchal and top–down ‘‘solutions’’ like the Robinson Superior treaty in Northern Ontario (a treaty designed to open the area’s natural resources to exploitation by colonialists) leave many very fundamental questions unanswered. This lack of social license has hamstrung First Nations efforts to fully develop the region’s abundant natural resources (AANDC, 1986) and to settle land claims. Other jurisdictions, both within Ontario and across the country, are plagued with the same issues in varying degrees.
9. Barrier 6—‘‘lack of equality’’ Despite progress in recent years, an enormous economic gap still exists between First Nations and mainstream Canadian society. The 2006 Canadian census notes that there are approximately 1.17 million Aboriginals living in Canada; of the children
713
included in this survey, approximately 40–50% live in families with incomes defined as low, a number which far exceeds the less than 20% of all Canadian children that fall into the ‘‘low-income’’ bracket (Benzies et al., 2010). This lack of equality manifests itself at all levels, from representation in government to representation in business to representation in post-secondary education. Although these processes are being reversed through measures to incentivize and promote Aboriginal participation, a great deal of progress still needs to be made.
10. Conclusion Developing a full understanding of both the social and cultural barriers to realizing significantly greater renewable energy deployment remains one of the most important opportunities for academics interested in public policy, energy, and the environment. As Nader (1981) outlined in her seminal Physics Today article, ‘‘we have gotten to the point in our society at which we can no longer entertain obvious solutions’’. She goes on to say that ‘‘the energy problem is not a technological problem y it is a social problem y we must build technologies that recognize human frailty’’. There are a number of tools at the disposal of policymakers interested in facilitating a renewable energy transformation across the country. Although this article does not discuss indepth how such barriers can be overcome, a number of options are worthy of consideration and could form the basis for future research. In a broad sense, Aboriginal developers face many of the same obstacles that plague renewable energy developers across Canada. In a 2009 interview study of over 181 energy experts that is profiled in Harvey (2010), Sovacool outlines some of the key proven methods for accelerating renewables uptake, including the national implementation of a comprehensive feed-in tariff program (Ontario has been a global leader in this regard), a removal of subsidies for fossil fuels, a full accounting of impacts coupled with an accurate pricing scheme for electricity, and systemic public education outreach. Aboriginal-specific changes that could facilitate additional Aboriginal-owned renewable energy project uptake include price adders for both generation and transmission, additional funding and financing bodies dedicated to Aboriginal projects, and continuing education programs that incentivize onreserve Aboriginals to build their own project development capacity. There is no single solution, as any optimal solution will need to incorporate some or all of the elements outlined above. Through forums for applied studies like Energy Policy, academics and practitioners can continue to bring some of the most important issues to the forefront. Canada in general and Aboriginal peoples in particular have a tremendous opportunity to shape what is certain to be one of the most important policy areas of the next hundred years. It is time that the barriers to their effective participation are dismantled. References Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. (1986). The Robinson Treaties. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc. ca/eng/1100100028974S. Agrawal, A., 2005. Environmentality: Technologies of government and the making of subjects. Duke University Press, Durham. Benzies, K., Tough, S., Edwards, N., Mychasiuk, R., Donnelly, C., 2010. Aboriginal children and their caregivers living with low income: Outcomes from a twogeneration preschool program. Journal of Child and Family Studies 20 (3), 311–318. doi:10.1007/s10826-010-9394-3. Calvert, K., Simandan, D., 2010. Energy, space, and society: A reassessment of the changing landscape of energy production, distribution, and use. Journal of Economics and Business Research 16 (1), 13–37. Canada Revenue Agency, 2008. Information for Status Indians. Retrieved November 24, 2011, from /www.cra-arc.gc.ca/brgnls/stts-eng.html#heading5S.
714
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
Diamond, J., 2005. Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. Penguin Group, New York, NY. Frank, A.G., 1969. Latin America: Underdevelopment or revolution: Essays on the development of underdevelopment and the immediate enemy. Monthly Review Press, New York, NY. Goodall, C., 2008. Ten technologies to save the planet. Profile Books Ltd, London. Government of Alberta, 2011. Alberta’s Oil sands: Climate Change. Retrieved November 23, 2011, from /http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/climatechange.htmlS. Greenpeace, 2011. Fuelling a biomess: Why burning trees for energy will harm people, the climate and forests. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http:// www.greenpeace.org/canada/Global/canada/report/2011/10/ForestBiomes s_Eng.pdfS. Harvey, D., 2010. Carbon-free energy supply. Earthscan, London. Indigenous Foundations, 2009. Constitution Act 1982. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from /http://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/?id=1050S. Jacobson, M.Z., Delucchi, M.A., 2010. Providing all global energy with wind water and solar power, Part 1: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials. Energy Policy 39, 1154–1169. Jefferson, M., 2008. Accelerating the transition to sustainable energy systems. Energy Policy 36, 4116–4125. Kay, C., 2005. Andre´ Gunder Frank: From the ‘development of underdevelopment’ to the ‘world system’. Development and Change 36 (6), 1177–1183. Kirsch, S., 2006. Reverse anthropology: indigenous analysis of social and environmental relations in New Guinea. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. Krupa, J., Burch, S., 2011. A new energy future for South Africa: The political ecology of South African renewable energy. Energy Policy 39, 6254–6261. Mclauglin, D.V.P., McDonald, N.C., Nguyen, H.T., Pearce, J.M., 2010. Leveraging solar photovoltaic technology for sustainable development in Ontario’s Aboriginal communities. Journal for Sustainable Development 3 (3), 3–13.
Miller, B.G., 2003. Invisible indigenes: The politics of nonrecognition. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE. Monbiot, G., 2008. (December 15). When will the oil run out? The Guardian. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/ 2008/dec/15/oil-peak-energy-ieaS. Nader, L., 1981. Barriers to thinking new about energy. Physics Today 34 (3), 9–103. Ontario Energy Board, 2008. Witness Statement of Mr. Byron Leclair, of the Pic River First Nation on behalf of the First Nations Energy Alliance, Intervenor. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http://www.rds.ontarioenergyboard.ca/ webdrawer/webdrawer.dll/webdrawer/rec/73834/view/ FNEA_EVD_20080801.PDFS. Ontario Ministry of Energy, 2011. Ontario’s long-term energy plan: Building our clean energy future. Retrieved November 24, 2011, from /http://www.energy. gov.on.ca/docs/en/MEI_LTEP_en.pdf#page=26S. Ontario Power Authority, 2009. Feed-in tariff program: Program overview. Retrieved Nov. 19, 2011, from /http://fit.powerauthority.on.ca/S. Southern Alberta Alternative Energy Partnership, 2011. Letter to Premier Redford and key ministers. Retrieved December 13, 2011, from /http://www.saaep.ca/ letter.pdfS. Sovacool, B., Cooper, C., 2007. ‘‘State efforts to promote renewable energy: Tripping the horse with the cart?’’. Sustainable Development Law & Policy 78, 5–9. Wind Concerns Ontario, 2011. A coalition of 60 grassroots citizen’s groups across 34 Ontario counties & districts. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from /http:// windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/S. Yang, C.-J., 2010. Reconsidering solar grid parity. Energy Policy 38, 3270–3273. de Blij, H., 2008. The power of place. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Energy Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol
Communication
Identifying barriers to aboriginal renewable energy deployment in Canada Joel Krupa n Pic River First Nation Energy, 36 Pic River Road, Heron Bay, Ontario, Canada P0T 1R0
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 13 December 2011 Accepted 23 December 2011 Available online 11 January 2012
As one of the largest and wealthiest countries in the world, Canada stands well-positioned to take advantage of ongoing growth in North American demand for primary energy supply by expanding domestic delivery of renewable energy generation to internationally interconnected electric grids across the country. There are myriad benefits of adopting the renewable energy approach to development—as the province of Ontario has acknowledged through the implementation of their 2009 Green Energy Act—including drastic reductions in carbon emissions, the decommissioning of existing fossil fuel power generation that cause serious public health problems, and opportunities for sustainable development at the community level. One group in particular stands poised to shape these debates. In Canada, historically marginalized Aboriginal peoples remain one of the groups with the greatest potential for meeting these enormous renewable energy deployment needs. Aboriginal involvement in renewable energy generation in Canada has been as diverse as Canada’s Aboriginal peoples and groups have already adopted a range of different solutions to meet energy supply needs. However, many significant barriers exist that prevent this diverse cultural group from reaching its full potential. The article identifies some of these shortcomings and analyzes their roots. & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Aboriginals Canadian energy policy Renewable energy
1. Introduction With the acceleration of global climate change and the inability of the international community to implement successful market-based or voluntary consent-based compliance mechanisms for regulating greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), alternative and innovative methods for reducing carbon emissions continue to be explored internationally, nationally, and regionally. The primary contributor to anthropogenic climate change remains heavily polluting energy development and consumption (Jefferson, 2008; Diamond, 2005). The former is a particularly under-explored contributor; for example, the oil sands of northern Alberta (Canada) comprise only 2% of the global oil supply, yet this one super-project alone contributes in excess of 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions (GOA, 2011). Yet climate change is not the only factor that poses significant systemic risk to long-term energy delivery stability and security; for example, significant debt burdens, inadequate long-term investment, negative public health consequences, and aging grid infrastructure are all contributing to the unattractiveness of building new fossil fuel electricity generation at a time of increasing demand. Energy has long played a central role in the growth of the resource-based Canadian economy. In recent years, policy makers and government have chosen to pursue the ‘‘petro-dollars’’ model to
n
Tel.: þ1 2503003118. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]
0301-4215/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.051
growth. Canada has become increasingly reliant on constant influxes of domestic and foreign direct investment for developing its domestic unconventional energy supplies, which rank as some of the largest in the world. Given that the well-respected International Energy Agency recently announced an abrupt shift in its long-term projections on rates of decline in global conventional oil production, simultaneously predicting peak oil by 2030 and revising its estimated post-peak annual rate of decline, this trend of an energyfocused (and energy-intensive) economy seems likely to continue unabated (Monbiot, 2008).
2. Renewable energy The incumbent Canadian government has declared long-term intentions to make Canada an ‘‘energy superpower’’, promoting development of unconventional heavy oil supply in the Prairie Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, innovative shale gas extraction techniques for parts of both Western and Eastern Canada, and continuing extraction of coal at locations throughout the country. In contrast, comparatively minor incentives have been offered at the federal level that could potentially induce a move towards laying the framework for the creation of developing Canada as a ‘‘renewable energy superpower’’, despite an abundant and diversified national resource base that, if sensibly and adequately developed, could constitute a much higher proportion of the energy supply mix within a relatively short time span. The United Nations, working in
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
partnership with the EU Commission, have adopted a particularly useful description of what renewables are constituted of: ‘‘renewable non-fossil energy sources [can be defined as] wind, solar, geothermal, wave, tidal, hydropower, biomass, landfill gas, sewage treatment plant gas, and biogases’’ (TUNSD, 2008). The benefits of such a transition are well-covered elsewhere (see Goodall, 2008, among others), but include energy security, environmental security, and economic prosperity. Renewable energy is more robust, decentralized, and capable of withstanding energy security threats than centralized fossil fuel generation and it is worth emphasizing the long-term benefits to Canada’s energy security—the element of energy policy that supersedes all others—if there is progress in domestic renewable energy deployment. Given continued underinvestment in US energy markets that are crucial to the facilitation of cross-border energy exchanges and trading, significant political risk in energy supply markets in the Middle East, and the risks posed by environmental degradation through climate change, harnessing an emission-free and wholly domestic supply of energy for electricity generation is crucial for Canada’s long-term economic competitiveness, social cohesion, and energy supply stability. The relatively fiscally sound provinces of British Columbia and Ontario have recognized the important benefits of increasing renewable energy use and are both at various stages of implementing a feed-in tariff, a proven policy mechanism for making renewables deployment highly attractive. Even the fossil fuelbased province of Alberta has made steps towards a renewable energy future, with new premier Alison Redford enthusiastically endorsing the work of groups like the Southern Alberta Alternative Energy Partnership (SAAEP, 2011).Through this process, Canada will have the opportunity to realize true sustainable development and achieve the inevitable and diffuse social, environmental, and economic improvements that accompany it. Yet despite intense interest on the part of a variety of stakeholders—big business, NGOs, community groups, environmentalists, and Aboriginals—in seeing Canada enter a period of energy supply transformation, policy has, too often, focused on business-asusual. The article will focus on the barriers to Aboriginal-owned renewable energy projects, a key sub-set of the population that stands poised to realize true sustainable development—economic, social, and environmental—if the ‘‘Four Cs’’ of ‘‘cash’’, ‘‘capacity’’, ‘‘clarity’’, and ‘‘circumstances’’ and the ‘‘Two Ls’’ of ‘‘lack of legitimacy’’ and ‘‘lack of equality’’ can be overcome.
3. Aboriginals in Canada Aboriginals comprise a distinct group of diverse peoples sprinkled throughout Canada, ranging from the Inuit in the Far North to the Haida on the British Columbian coastline to the Ojibways on the northern shores of the Great Lakes, and are also known as Canada’s ‘‘First Nations’’. Many of the 633 individual nations hold remnants of their unique past—languages, customs, and traditions—that stretch back well over 12,000 years. Indian, Inuit, and Metis peoples are all identified as Aboriginals under Section 35 of the 1982 Canadian Constitution Act and have their rights enshrined in Canadian law. The act reads as follows (IF, 2009): (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed. (2) In this Act, ‘‘aboriginal peoples of Canada’’ includes the Indian, Inuit and Me´tis peoples of Canada. (3) For greater certainty, subsection (1) ‘‘treaty rights’’ includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
711
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons. Aboriginals have not always possessed such relatively clearly defined rights and title to their traditional territory. In a situation that bears many marked similarities to the Aboriginal peoples of Australia, the history of Aboriginals in Canada is one of repeated assimilation and attempts at cultural extermination (de Blij, 2008). The Aboriginals who were able to escape the collapse of their traditional subsistence economies, introduced diseases, and grinding poverty were forced to endure legacies of official British– Canadian domestic policy that ‘‘encouraged civilization and save Indians from a state of perceived barbarism’’ (Miller, 2003). This included residential schools, in which abuse was extremely common, and attempts to label traditional ceremonies as ‘‘evil’’ (Ibid.). Yet despite repeated attempts to ostracize and assimilate Aboriginals into ‘‘modern’’ life (sometimes as an explicit provision of Canadian government policy), many communities are overcoming past hardships and emerging as self-sufficient, selfgoverning entities with innovative development agendas. Renewable energy is an attractive choice as a central pillar of a First Nations development strategy. In contrast to the development strategy discussions involving other historically marginalized groups, such as the interviewer’s dialog with marginalized Indian villagers at the beginning of Agrawal (2005), Aboriginals generally possess a sophisticated understanding of the intricate complexity of the natural world and the importance of reducing societal impacts on the environment in which they live. Importantly, Canadian Aboriginals are often not relegated to the position of relative powerlessness in the face of neoliberal forces, a recurring paralysis that affects other indigenous groups around the world. For example, they do not need to adopt a more radical ‘‘counterglobalization’’ stance (even if more progressive version are currently being enacted—see discussion in Kirsch, 2006) or a simplified and idealized reversion to an anti-capitalist ‘‘back to the land’’ ideology. Instead, many of the bands are idiosyncratically integrating (slowly in some cases, quickly in others) into modern Canadian society and bringing their own new voices and their own new perspectives to the relevant debates. Although this paper will not discuss the variety of benefits available to Aboriginal groups, such as a very favorable taxation regime, rapidly decreasing renewable energy technology costs, generous grants and loan guarantees from the government, and an intermittently propitious policy environment (e.g. Mclauglin et al., 2010), these benefits should be outlined from the onset. It should also be noted that this paper does not attempt to portray a business-focused path to development as ‘‘ideal’’ or immune from criticism; indeed, strong evidence exists that the political ecology of energy systems should be factored into energy decisions (Krupa and Burch, 2011). Researchers have noted that there is a certain paradox inherent to discussions regarding sustainable development and ecological modernization, as it assumes that ‘‘modernization’’ is inevitable and that ‘‘economic underdevelopment’’ is a threat that needs to be extinguished (e.g. Frank, 1969; Kay, 2005). Although these issues are critical and merit further analysis, they can only be addressed here. Nevertheless, the time is right for rapid deployment and the First Nations peoples across Canada stand well-positioned to be at the forefront; as discussed earlier, there is no one project formula or outline that has been uniformly adopted and the opportunities (including choice of renewable energy technology) remain as diverse as Aboriginal peoples. I have divided the barriers to serious improvements into the ‘‘Four Cs’’ and the ‘‘Two Ls’’, facilitating easy classification and analysis. This discussion will be the focus of the next six short sections.
712
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
4. Barrier 1—‘‘cash’’ According to the Canada Revenue Agency (2008), Aboriginals are exempt from taxes on income derived from on-reserve activities. This creates a tremendous window for development, as both resource-based and non-resource-based opportunities are available. To complement this benefit, federal and provincial entities have implemented generous funding and financing opportunities. For example, Mclauglin et al. (2010) note that the federal Department of Indian and Northern Affairs offers nonrepayable grants of up to $250,000 for Aboriginal energy initiatives that result in appreciable environmental improvements, while the Province of Ontario offers a $250 million Aboriginal Loan Guarantee Program to facilitate loans from banks (OPA, 2009). Yet although the situation is improving through initiatives like the aforementioned ones, First Nations often continue to lack the financial acumen and resources to adequately meet stringent financial requirements for new renewable energy generation. In many cases, there is simply not enough cash on-hand to meet the day-to-day needs of communities and utilize capital for revenuegenerating activities. This leaves communities in a perplexing dilemma, especially in an atmosphere of potential threats to future funding as governments grapple with quasi-permanent, recession-era budgets. The problem of ‘‘cash’’ is exacerbated by a general preference on the part of regulators and government for big business incumbents. In a 2008 filing to the Ontario Energy Board, leading Aboriginal energy developer Byron Leclair discusses how his diversified renewable energy company lost a large bid on the basis of an arbitrary minimum threshold of financial ability. According to Leclair, his situation is particularly perverse, as it appears to have been based on no objective factors (OEB, 2008); indeed, the project even fully satisfies a purported key element of review called ‘‘Identified Aboriginal Communities Participation’’. Leclair goes on to note in the same presentation that Pic River has demonstrated in past projects the ability to assemble a strong team and raise cumulative financing in excess of $60 million dollars, yet this still was not enough to satisfy the requirements (Ibid.). Clearly, ability to raise cash—on the level of a corporation or business entity—presents a formidable challenge to even the most advanced Aboriginal proponents.
5. Barrier 2—‘‘capacity’’ As we enter the second decade of the 21st century, renewable energy development remains a key issue in both public and private sector debates across Canada. To effectively engage in these debates, interested groups need to obtain a great deal of preliminary capacity to perform effectively. Preliminary project preparation, regulatory processes, and community consultation—requirements that extend in similar depth to both private and Aboriginal project developers—are difficult to adequately meet without significant capital and expertise outlays. On many reserves, this issue is difficult to overcome, especially in the face of lack of even more basic capacity on-reserve. It is also often difficult for First Nations to determine the optimal avenues to pursue. Technologies are inherently difficult to navigate, especially when coupled with significant regulatory burdens, and often require a great deal of outside consultation. For example, bioenergy is heavily promoted by a variety of federal and provincial agencies and is routinely touted as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuel electricity generation. Yet analyses of its actual climate and environmental impact show that it is actually poses large-scale risks to biodiversity and climate change mitigation efforts (see Greenpeace, 2011) and could conflict with other elements of First Nations worldviews. This example demonstrates that the optimal
solution for meeting a community’s energy goals is not necessarily readily obvious—capacity issues need to be overcome. 6. Barrier 3—‘‘clarity [for the long-term]’’ Due to a general lack of large-scale deployment to date (with the notable exception of utility-scale hydroelectric), renewable energy has had difficulty attaining grid parity and, consequently, continues to be erroneously classified as economically uncompetitive with fossil fuels. In many cases, this has been as a result of poor debt management programs, unsustainable pricing, and shortfalls in supply (OME, 2011). Sovacool and Cooper (2007) note that renewable energy sources correct an important and persistent market failure; that is, the externalities imposed on society through unaccounted costs like higher medical expenses, water contamination, and the possibilities of resource wars. Renewable energy also allows society to overcome the persistent free rider problem of energy producers that are not responsible for the full cost of their products, thereby making it more difficult for those interested in innovation to justify the millions of dollars in research and development costs that are required (Ibid.). Despite these benefits of increasing transparency and accountability that will be rendered through greater renewable energy proliferation, it remains unclear how government will be incentivizing additional development into the future and leads to the crux of the issue—‘‘clarity for the long-term developer’’ and how it can be remedied. For example, the Ontario Power Authority is currently in the process of reviewing the 2009 feed-in tariff. Downward revisions to rates seem likely and many projects continue to be hamstrung by a lack of transmission capacity. No concrete deadlines have been proposed to address these issues, making it difficult for many First Nations to make capital-intensive investments. To further complicate the issues, fossil-fuel energy exploration and development—particularly that pursued by multinational corporations and nation-states—continues to attract the bulk of government subsidies, foreign direct investment, and premium financing. Both in Canada and worldwide, fossil fuel remains preferred by traditionally conservative energy development interests. Consequently, technological lock-in, systemic inertia, and a deepening hegemony of entrenched interests remains difficult to overcome and future projections remain unclear. Fossil fuel is seen as a low-risk, high-return activity, whereas renewable energy is more troublesome (Diamond, 2005). How these barriers—resolvable with strong coordinated action and sufficient political will—can be or will be resolved remains to be seen. Finally, it is worth noting that, as renewable energy technologies continue to mature, they have become hamstrung by issues familiar to fossil fuels, particularly pertaining to innovation and technological lock-in. Even if these renewable energy technologies do manage to reach fully cost-competitive levels, it is likely that policy-driven future growth will still be required for further significant expansion. For example, Yang (2010) shows that solar innovation and uptake will likely be dependent on more than simple cost-competitiveness if global proliferation is to take place. Subsidies will likely be required for the foreseeable future unless government refine and promote financial incentives, mitigate barriers, and ensure streamlined regulatory procedures. Without subsidies, uptake of many renewable energy technologies will be restricted to a relatively small core group of visionaries (Ibid.). This is another issue of clarity that will need to be resolved, although the optimal path to resolution remains unclear.
7. Barrier 4—‘‘circumstances’’ Another formidable barrier that renewable energy technologies in Canada must overcome can be succinctly described as
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
‘‘circumstances’’, or the inherent traits of renewable energy generation. An overview will be provided that includes some of the most important recurring concerns; consequently, the description in this sub-section is very brief. According to Calvert and Simandan (2010), the new energy landscape forged by renewable energy technologies stands in stark contrast to the centralized, largely fossil-fueled models upon which modern civilization was built. This is not solely a function of unwarranted political or economic bias; rather, it is as a direct result of the fundamental qualities of the various technologies. The chemical nature of renewable energy technologies is different from highly dense carrier fossil fuels. As a result, the energy density per unit remains far lower, making it difficult for renewable energy to be readily implemented as a viable alternative (Ibid.). This issue is compounded by the fact that renewable energy is often intermittent, optimal in decentralized delivery, and located in remote or transmission-less areas. Widespread integration of decentralized generation on to grid infrastructure remains a significant challenge—even in progressive jurisdictions like the Provinces of British Columbia and Ontario—as issues surrounding grid stability and security of supply begin to emerge. Large-scale distributed generation is still uncommon globally, and technical issues are certain to arise if it is implemented on the scale suggested here and elsewhere (see Jacobson and Delucchi, 2010). Furthermore, the circumstantial problems extend beyond the more technical or financial, as renewable energy developers have encountered significant societal resistance to the introduction of heretofore unknown infrastructure projects. Long accustomed to the constant and centralized delivery of coal, hydro, nuclear, and gas plants, society remains poorly equipped to deal with the (relatively minor) visual and esthetic impacts of renewable energy developments. So-called ‘‘NIMBY’’ syndrome plagues a variety of technologies, with wind power as the primary target. For example, the Ontarian volunteer organization ‘‘Wind Concerns’’ has created significant opposition to a variety of renewable energy generation projects across the province, going so far as to maintain a dedicated website that lists upcoming board hearings, news articles, and policy briefings that could benefit additional wind generation in Ontario (WCO, 2011).
8. Barrier 5—‘‘lack of legitimacy’’ In Canada in general and Northern Ontario in particular, many renewable energy projects involving First Nations are hamstrung by a lack of social license or a ‘‘lack of legitimacy’’. Treaty issues often remain unresolved, and the consultative process for new initiatives can be troublesome as bands struggle to ensure that they do not interfere with ongoing treaty negotiations with the federal government. For example, patriarchal and top–down ‘‘solutions’’ like the Robinson Superior treaty in Northern Ontario (a treaty designed to open the area’s natural resources to exploitation by colonialists) leave many very fundamental questions unanswered. This lack of social license has hamstrung First Nations efforts to fully develop the region’s abundant natural resources (AANDC, 1986) and to settle land claims. Other jurisdictions, both within Ontario and across the country, are plagued with the same issues in varying degrees.
9. Barrier 6—‘‘lack of equality’’ Despite progress in recent years, an enormous economic gap still exists between First Nations and mainstream Canadian society. The 2006 Canadian census notes that there are approximately 1.17 million Aboriginals living in Canada; of the children
713
included in this survey, approximately 40–50% live in families with incomes defined as low, a number which far exceeds the less than 20% of all Canadian children that fall into the ‘‘low-income’’ bracket (Benzies et al., 2010). This lack of equality manifests itself at all levels, from representation in government to representation in business to representation in post-secondary education. Although these processes are being reversed through measures to incentivize and promote Aboriginal participation, a great deal of progress still needs to be made.
10. Conclusion Developing a full understanding of both the social and cultural barriers to realizing significantly greater renewable energy deployment remains one of the most important opportunities for academics interested in public policy, energy, and the environment. As Nader (1981) outlined in her seminal Physics Today article, ‘‘we have gotten to the point in our society at which we can no longer entertain obvious solutions’’. She goes on to say that ‘‘the energy problem is not a technological problem y it is a social problem y we must build technologies that recognize human frailty’’. There are a number of tools at the disposal of policymakers interested in facilitating a renewable energy transformation across the country. Although this article does not discuss indepth how such barriers can be overcome, a number of options are worthy of consideration and could form the basis for future research. In a broad sense, Aboriginal developers face many of the same obstacles that plague renewable energy developers across Canada. In a 2009 interview study of over 181 energy experts that is profiled in Harvey (2010), Sovacool outlines some of the key proven methods for accelerating renewables uptake, including the national implementation of a comprehensive feed-in tariff program (Ontario has been a global leader in this regard), a removal of subsidies for fossil fuels, a full accounting of impacts coupled with an accurate pricing scheme for electricity, and systemic public education outreach. Aboriginal-specific changes that could facilitate additional Aboriginal-owned renewable energy project uptake include price adders for both generation and transmission, additional funding and financing bodies dedicated to Aboriginal projects, and continuing education programs that incentivize onreserve Aboriginals to build their own project development capacity. There is no single solution, as any optimal solution will need to incorporate some or all of the elements outlined above. Through forums for applied studies like Energy Policy, academics and practitioners can continue to bring some of the most important issues to the forefront. Canada in general and Aboriginal peoples in particular have a tremendous opportunity to shape what is certain to be one of the most important policy areas of the next hundred years. It is time that the barriers to their effective participation are dismantled. References Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. (1986). The Robinson Treaties. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc. ca/eng/1100100028974S. Agrawal, A., 2005. Environmentality: Technologies of government and the making of subjects. Duke University Press, Durham. Benzies, K., Tough, S., Edwards, N., Mychasiuk, R., Donnelly, C., 2010. Aboriginal children and their caregivers living with low income: Outcomes from a twogeneration preschool program. Journal of Child and Family Studies 20 (3), 311–318. doi:10.1007/s10826-010-9394-3. Calvert, K., Simandan, D., 2010. Energy, space, and society: A reassessment of the changing landscape of energy production, distribution, and use. Journal of Economics and Business Research 16 (1), 13–37. Canada Revenue Agency, 2008. Information for Status Indians. Retrieved November 24, 2011, from /www.cra-arc.gc.ca/brgnls/stts-eng.html#heading5S.
714
J. Krupa / Energy Policy 42 (2012) 710–714
Diamond, J., 2005. Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. Penguin Group, New York, NY. Frank, A.G., 1969. Latin America: Underdevelopment or revolution: Essays on the development of underdevelopment and the immediate enemy. Monthly Review Press, New York, NY. Goodall, C., 2008. Ten technologies to save the planet. Profile Books Ltd, London. Government of Alberta, 2011. Alberta’s Oil sands: Climate Change. Retrieved November 23, 2011, from /http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/climatechange.htmlS. Greenpeace, 2011. Fuelling a biomess: Why burning trees for energy will harm people, the climate and forests. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http:// www.greenpeace.org/canada/Global/canada/report/2011/10/ForestBiomes s_Eng.pdfS. Harvey, D., 2010. Carbon-free energy supply. Earthscan, London. Indigenous Foundations, 2009. Constitution Act 1982. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from /http://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/?id=1050S. Jacobson, M.Z., Delucchi, M.A., 2010. Providing all global energy with wind water and solar power, Part 1: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials. Energy Policy 39, 1154–1169. Jefferson, M., 2008. Accelerating the transition to sustainable energy systems. Energy Policy 36, 4116–4125. Kay, C., 2005. Andre´ Gunder Frank: From the ‘development of underdevelopment’ to the ‘world system’. Development and Change 36 (6), 1177–1183. Kirsch, S., 2006. Reverse anthropology: indigenous analysis of social and environmental relations in New Guinea. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. Krupa, J., Burch, S., 2011. A new energy future for South Africa: The political ecology of South African renewable energy. Energy Policy 39, 6254–6261. Mclauglin, D.V.P., McDonald, N.C., Nguyen, H.T., Pearce, J.M., 2010. Leveraging solar photovoltaic technology for sustainable development in Ontario’s Aboriginal communities. Journal for Sustainable Development 3 (3), 3–13.
Miller, B.G., 2003. Invisible indigenes: The politics of nonrecognition. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE. Monbiot, G., 2008. (December 15). When will the oil run out? The Guardian. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/ 2008/dec/15/oil-peak-energy-ieaS. Nader, L., 1981. Barriers to thinking new about energy. Physics Today 34 (3), 9–103. Ontario Energy Board, 2008. Witness Statement of Mr. Byron Leclair, of the Pic River First Nation on behalf of the First Nations Energy Alliance, Intervenor. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from /http://www.rds.ontarioenergyboard.ca/ webdrawer/webdrawer.dll/webdrawer/rec/73834/view/ FNEA_EVD_20080801.PDFS. Ontario Ministry of Energy, 2011. Ontario’s long-term energy plan: Building our clean energy future. Retrieved November 24, 2011, from /http://www.energy. gov.on.ca/docs/en/MEI_LTEP_en.pdf#page=26S. Ontario Power Authority, 2009. Feed-in tariff program: Program overview. Retrieved Nov. 19, 2011, from /http://fit.powerauthority.on.ca/S. Southern Alberta Alternative Energy Partnership, 2011. Letter to Premier Redford and key ministers. Retrieved December 13, 2011, from /http://www.saaep.ca/ letter.pdfS. Sovacool, B., Cooper, C., 2007. ‘‘State efforts to promote renewable energy: Tripping the horse with the cart?’’. Sustainable Development Law & Policy 78, 5–9. Wind Concerns Ontario, 2011. A coalition of 60 grassroots citizen’s groups across 34 Ontario counties & districts. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from /http:// windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/S. Yang, C.-J., 2010. Reconsidering solar grid parity. Energy Policy 38, 3270–3273. de Blij, H., 2008. The power of place. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.