Your municipality may have had Enbridge reach out to their council seeking support for the continuation of the Natural Gas Expansion Program.

The Clean Air Council network developed a consensus-based submission that was sent into the province of Ontario recommending that the Province not extend the Natural Gas Expansion Program. Because expanding natural gas infrastructure amounts to a very expensive fossil fuel subsidy paid for by the rate base and greatly undermines Ontario's ability to meet our 2030 GHG reduction targets, poses significant stranded asset risks that have not been considered thus far and will greatly diminish the ability of Ontario municipalities to achieve their climate commitments and targets.

For example, just based on the back of the envelope analysis from the province's press release on Phase 2 of the program.

• Phase 2: $234 million for 8,750 connections. Comes to $26,742 per connection.
• Estimated to save customers an estimated $250-$1500 per year ($2.2 million - $13 million) it is somewhere between that as it can't be $13 million since not all save $1500. Also important to keep in mind these cost savings were based on the costs for fossil fuel gas prior to increases in natural gas prices that have taken place over the last 2 years.
• At $250/year that comes to a 106 years pay back; and at $1500 it is a 17 year pay back. We don't know how many are saving 250 versus 1500 so can't calculate actual payback.
• Subsidized on the Ontario wide rate base, estimated at 1$ per month from ALL natural gas customers - not just those within those newly connected communities. Not able to find info for how long that will be on the rate base. This is another example of a fossil fuel subsidy.
• How might have efficiency, geothermal, air source heat pumps, net metering, etc. compared re costs and benefits of reducing electricity costs for these customers?
• The Natural Gas Expansion program amounts to a very expensive fossil fuel subsidy.