News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1K     5 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 770     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.4K     0 

Toronto Hydro aging infrastructure

You haven't heard about the predatory sales tactics, the rip off artists, and the people that locked into long term contracts when gas prices were double the current levels?
Click to expand...
A problem that speaks to uninformed consumers, not the ownership of the utility. The stupid will always be with us as will the con men.

Let's also think about the numerous gas and oil leaks Enbridge has caused in the last two years due to neglected infrastructure.
Click to expand...
I think most, if not all, the Gas leaks within the GTA in recent times have been as a result of human error ie: backhoes and home handymen rather than aged infrastructure. Frequent Hydro outages affecting thousands of people and even the subway are always blamed on aged infrastructure, apparently public ownership is not the answer either.

The public system doesn't sound so bad...
Click to expand...
really?
 
coltaine79,

The only connection I see between the problems in Hinkley and proposed hydro privatization in Toronto is the" Electric" in "Pacific Gas & Electric". If PG&E had been simply named PG would you have a point?
What do you suppose a privatized Hydro station (whatever that is) would be constructed of or how would it function differently from the current model?
Save the radiation and chemicals thank you I am obviously already Spiderman, see you on Hallowe'en.
 
Privatization isn't the answer. I think making them pay a penalty every time there's an outage is the better choice. With privatization, you get example of Rogers (Robbers) and Bell. They charge an arm and a leg and increase their prices every year or so. And their service isn't excellent either. When service is down, there's no compensation nor do they have to answer to anyone. They just apologize their service is down and they'll get it up soon.
 
AKS said:
Privatization isn't the answer. I think making them pay a penalty every time there's an outage is the better choice. With privatization, you get example of Rogers (Robbers) and Bell. They charge an arm and a leg and increase their prices every year or so. And their service isn't excellent either. When service is down, there's no compensation nor do they have to answer to anyone. They just apologize their service is down and they'll get it up soon.
Click to expand...

you'd be lucky if you got an apology. if power was out to a chunk of the city, at least the hydro company doesn't insist to death that the problem is your home.
 
Power has been cut to parts of the city due to an animal causing a short-circuit with a power-line. Hydro crews are responding to the scene, and we'll have electricity restored soon. Please be patient, there is nothing to worry.

godzilla1.jpg


:eek:
 
Privatization isn't the answer. I think making them pay a penalty every time there's an outage is the better choice. With privatization, you get example of Rogers (Robbers) and Bell. They charge an arm and a leg and increase their prices every year or so. And their service isn't excellent either. When service is down, there's no compensation nor do they have to answer to anyone. They just apologize their service is down and they'll get it up soon.
Click to expand...

I am not trying to promote the privatization of Toronto Hydro, I am attempting to find why so many people are so violently opposed to the concept.
If penalties are to be exacted for service outages the ownership of the offender should not matter.
Bell and Rogers are in competition with each other and their pricing reflects that fact. My cellphone service price with Bell is virtually unchanged in 7 years, I can't say the same for my Hydro bill.
 
If there's a knee-jerk reaction against privatization of utilities it's because it's often done as a quick-fix debt elimination strategy. There's an upside to the government owning something that generates revenue.
 
AKS said:
With privatization, you get example of Rogers (Robbers) and Bell.
Click to expand...

You also get Telus, Wind, Koodoo, Solo, Public, etc. While I know that some of those smaller ones are owned by the big companies, it still represents competition providing a cheaper service alternative.
 
Earlscourt_Lad said:
You also get Telus, Wind, Koodoo, Solo, Public, etc. While I know that some of those smaller ones are owned by the big companies, it still represents competition providing a cheaper service alternative.
Click to expand...

how do you encourage competition and provide service alternatives for electrical delivery in toronto? have 5 sets of utility poles with their own wiring to my home? where i can select which one to be connected to, at will?
 
Earlscourt_Lad said:
You also get Telus, Wind, Koodoo, Solo, Public, etc. While I know that some of those smaller ones are owned by the big companies, it still represents competition providing a cheaper service alternative.
Click to expand...

I am referring to TV and internet service. There are many competitions for cell phones hence the price can't get hiked up much. Some even opt for pay as you go to avoid all the extraneous fees. For TV and Cable, there's no choice if you want them. You have to either go through Rogers or Bell. Now that there's satellite, there's a bit more competition. If you go through third parties, they either go through Rogers or Bell. I am lucky to have Telus fibre optics at CP. I only pay $50/month unlimited bandwidth 100Mps. If I was on Rogers or Bell, I would be paying through the nose at over $100/month. Rates are so so, still with third parties that go through Cable or Phone line. Most have bandwidth limit and price isn't all that much cheaper.

Now changing scenario to Hydro. They are the only main providers. There may be third parties if it's allowed to privatize, but the main provider would still be Hydro. So everyone still pays the same amount or more (depending how much the private companies hike up the rates). No matter who has ownership of Hydro, they will always be out to earn money and money is never enough. The more they earn the bigger the bonuses their bonuses are. On top of their 6 digit income and benefits. I read (from the newsletters) that heads of Hydro are earning over half a million income and over 100 staffs are earning 6 digit figures. The money's gotta come from somewhere. If money was spent in upgrading infrastructure, their earnings would be lower and they would get less bonuses. Maybe even need to take a cut on their wages. That wouldn't be a consideration.

spider said:
Promotheus...
Apparently you can exercise some choice of suppliers.
http://www.energyshop.com/es/faq/electricityfaq.cfm
It seems kind of complicated though.
Click to expand...

That might not be the best idea. Unless you can find the best rate, but they are about the same even at the lowest rate I think. Others might even get scammed paying more than what the original supplier charges. They make you sign a locked in rate telling you it's going to save you money. But that rate price is above the current rate. They don't tell you that. But their theory is, even if you're paying more, it's a locked in rate. So as prices go up, it will eventually be the same. But as prices increase past their charge, you end up saving money. BS. You don't save money at all then. You're just paying more in advance. And if rates don't go up as high as predicted by the end of your contract before they give you a new high rate, you end up paying more than you should.
 
Last edited:
Given the ongoing vandalism of North Toronto by Toronto Hydro, where entire streets have seen their utility pole numbers double (and in places trebled) with no discernible end in sight, I would not be opposed to some change in how this company is run. They are an agency that seems completely unaccountable, and the cumulative experience of their stonewalling and incompetence during the Fleet, St. Clair, Bloor, and Roncesvalles rebuilds (and their refusal to contemplate large-scale utility burial as a result) renders them a prime target for whomever is elected mayor. I'm not saying privatize it, but its reliance on 19th century frontier town infrastructure and aesthetic backwardness is an embarrassment and has to stop if this city is ever to attain an attractive public realm. And don't even get me started on the rusted out poles that litter the city.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top