  
8/9/2025
Gillian Ward
Got water questions? Give us a call at 877-52-WATER (877-529-2837), or email us at info@wtny.us
This article is brought to you in part by
Monday, August 18, 2025 7:00 am EDT
Toronto's long road to Net Zero
- IN 1912, THE YEAR TITANIC SANK, UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO A BECAME DISTRICT ENGERGY (DE) PIONEER, ESTABLISHING A CENTRAL STEAM GENERATION PLANT
- IN 2012, BROOKFIELD PURCHASED THE PROJECT FOR $480 MILLION
- BY 2021, THE VALUATION OF TORONTO'S RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECT HAD GROWN TO $4.1 BILLION
This story is about how Toronto "turned a money-losing steam business into the largest district energy company in North America". The path to the project's success is sprinkled with allegations of corruption, public-private jockeying, and concerns about transparency and public accountability.
The Well, LEED-certified 3.1 million sq ft mixed use space connected to the Enwave district energy grid in Toronto
The world's First City of Climate Action is the third largest on the North American continent by the numbers, home to 6.5 million residents with 25 million visitors every year. Here in Canada's Humid Continental zone, close to half the imported electricity is consumed in the heating and cooling of buildings. As such, the energy efficiency of buildings is top priority for climate action. With a power grid well on the way to full decarbonization, the City of Toronto has done its part to facilitate efficiency in the buildings sector through expansion of District Energy (DE).
Toronto has a long history with District Energy (DE), all the way back to 1912, University of Toronto's central steam plant. A Special Act of legislation in 1969 defined terms for the operation and governance of Toronto's first organized DE utility, with an advantage that no other utility enjoys to this day: the right to tunnel under city streets without a municipal permit or by-law. Ostensibly, this exemption from the Public Utilities Act, Section 58 was intended to ensure an uninterrupted supply of steam for the hospitals.
As the energy market deregulated, ownership and control of the DE utility began to pass in stages from the people of Toronto to entirely private interests. From inception in 1969, the utility was cooperatively managed by the City and stakeholders, the University and the hospitals. Twenty-five years later, the DE utility had expanded at the expense of the City. With the sale of steam barely covering operating cost, the City wrote off millions in interest on the infrastructure investment, with key people losing interest in DE.
In 1999, a legal amendment allowed for the DE utility to engage with private equity investment and/or borrowing. At this stage, Toronto partnered with its own employees' pension fund, raising the funds to develop Deep Lake Water Cooling (DLWC). Under new leadership, the utility rebranded, Enwave, the rates revised, DLWC was designed, built and launched. As of 2008, Enwave was solid, well on its way to 100 connected buildings, delivering a consistent return to the investors. By 2012, Bronfman-legacy investment company, Brookfield undertook its first renewable energy investment, becoming the first private owner of Toronto's DE utility. For nine years, Brookfield owned and directed Enwave Energy, hanging on to Fotinos as manager. When Brookfield cashed out in 2021, the expanded Enwave went to the highest bidder. Ontario Teachers Pension Plan (OTPP) and IFM Investors paid multiples above market value.
This article dives into the Net Zero journey of the first City in the world to commit to climate action, describing how Toronto's green dreams attracted a shadow. On our first approach to Enwave Energy, we found no working phone line, clients and contractors weirdly silent, referring us back to Enwave. When we dropped in to the Enwave office, a senior staff member appeared frightened by the recognition. Phone and email contact followed with a Senior VP standing confidently on a claim of "private utility" status, declining questions about rates and justifying non-disclosure agreements for clients.
WT was denied an audience with the private owners, past and present. We found elevator access to OTPP fenced off behind a locked turnstile in full view of the security desk in TD Plaza. Brookfield has not responded to multiple email requests. Turned away by the private owners, we hit the City Reference Library and Archives to fill in the gaps. We discovered decades of history of DE with almost humorous transparency, audited financial statements, letters of commendation and termination. We noticed a year's worth of City Council Minutes missing from Toronto Reference Library, prompting a City-wide search. Canada Infrastucture Bank declined to answer questions about $1.4 billion dollars worth of projects with Enwave in Toronto. The Ontario Energy Board, and the Independent Electricity System Operator likewise claim no regulatory role with thermal energy, in spite of legislation that says otherwise.
As long as City of Toronto held majority representation on the Board of Directors, this "right to dig without a permit" could have been acceptable. After all, the public has open access to City Council decisions, there are Lobbying laws and regulated transparency around rates and finances. When rights and exemptions enshrined in law pass through to amalgamated corporations down the line, it follows that duties and obligations under the same law must also apply: five Directors for a quorum, all Directors Canadian citizens. Enwave Energy operates today with two Directors, one of whom is a foreign national, both have been or are actively Directors at a terminal operator in the Port of Vancouver. It is possible there is no harm, no foul. Given the state of snow washing, foreign interference and other ills of society that seem to operate with impunity, it seems there may be more to this story than heating and cooling.
Net Zero refers to the state in which emitted carbon is balanced with the carbon absorbed. "It is international scientific consensus that, in order to prevent the worst climate damages, global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) need to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching Net Zero around 2050." University of Oxford
Our planet is heating up much faster than expected.
Fifty-two scientists collaborating on climate monitoring have recently declared, "A large trend has taken us by surprise." An article in the May 10, 2025 AGU Journal considers the Earth's Radiation Budget (ERB), the difference between solar heat units absorbed into the atmosphere and the heat units emitted back to space, Earth's energy balance. "Observations from space of the energy imbalance shows that it is rising much faster than expected...two times higher than the best estimate from IPCC." The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) organized in 1988 to "to provide policymakers with regular scientific assessments on the current state of knowledge about climate change." The IPCC modeling that prompted global climate action in the 1980's had painted only half the picture.
T. Mauritzen et al (52 contributors), Earth's Energy Imbalance More Than Doubled in Recent Decades, May 10, 2025 published in AGU Journal, American Geophysical Advances.
Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) project is one of the comprehensive sets of satellite-based measurements and observations to inform climate, weather and applied science research, from NASA Langley Research Center Atmospheric Science Data Center.
Naysayers argue that natural sources of greenhouse gases contribute more to rising temperatures than sources under human influence and control. A climate non-response is rationalized in some regions based on the logic that the planet has gone through many cycles of heating and cooling, long before human developments and industrial pollution. It is true that the climate has always been changing. We may be powerless to influence the climate for better or worse, therefore, some will argue we should not bother with energy transition. This "maintain status-quo" argument falls down on the point of limited supply of fossil fuels. As Robert Laughlin puts it in his 2011 book "Powering the Future", no matter what one may think about the potential for human influence on climate effects, we must all admit that we are facing an energy crisis by way of limited supply. We do need to find alternate energy supplies, sustainable well into the future. We do need to design and implement power systems based on alternate supplies. We must adapt our industries, our municipalities and our households to ensure continuity and stability of energy supply.
According to climate think-tank Director Richard Gilbert, we have not made much progress reducing absolute emissions in the last forty years. The earth's population has stabilized, no longer the concern that it once was, however energy demand has increased. Efficiency measures have held emissions roughly level. Gilbert says we can do better, the way forward is clear, the buildings sector is where civic emissions reductions are most achievable. The Boltzmann Institute will soon be publishing "Two Pathways to Zero Emissions from Buildings", following two years of studying the most effective investment toward Net Zero, a combination of decarbonization and DE with thermal transfer, watch for the report.
The Climate Institute was established in North America as a counterpart to the IPCC, sharing the task of guiding western nations in coordinated action. Toronto hosted the first annual conferences and led in raising financial support for the work. The City was determined then, as now to make the required adjustments, aligning Net Zero efforts across its operations and departments. The power utilities and energy regulator were also urged to cooperate with the transition to renewable energy. To these ends, Toronto made decisions and investments to expand DE, encouraging developers to connect.
What is District Energy (DE)?
A system of energy transmission across a number of buildings, driving for energy efficiency. "A properly managed system produces heat for buildings at a lower cost than building operators can produce it themselves... and allows them to focus on their core business. By reducing energy consumption and by use of locally available waste heat or co-generated heat where available, a district system helps reduce imports of energy into a business district. Together these various factors help strengthen the economy of an area served by a district heating system."
DE connected buildings benefit in several ways:
- developers avoid the initial outlay and/or replacement cost of heating and cooling equipment on site
- avoid having to operate and maintain steam generators and chillers
- more space available for revenue production
- building managers focus on monitoring and optimizing energy use
- local air quality improvement, waste heat is not released to the air, refrigerant chemicals avoided
- large energy consumers (over 1 MW) electrical rate reduction, avoid Global Adjustment
The City of Toronto's success in DE started with a sizable investment to integrate the 1912 University of Toronto system with the steam generators serving the hospitals along University Avenue with Walton St and Pearl St steam facilities. In-fill heating clients were connected over a period of decades, beginning in the 1970's. The cost of integration was borne by the City, with amortization and interest expected from the operation of the DE grid. Customers deferred their connection cost over the twenty year term of the DE energy supply contract. By the Deep Lake Water Cooling was successfully launched in 2004, expanded in 2024 and serving the largest heritage building with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification in North America. Hospitals, sports stadiums, data centers, public and private buildings on the downtown Toronto DE loop have already achieved Net Zero. There are as many ways to foster sustainable and renewable energy supply for a DE model as there are cities. While the DLWC resource may not be widely available, City of Toronto Manager of Climate, Environment and Forestry David MacMillan says, "There is always something that can be done. Any municipality looking to reduce emissions in the building sector can find a way." No matter the regional energy mix, no matter the alternative energy sources available, all municipalities can implement DE".
Over more than half a century, district energy distribution in Toronto's dense downtown core evolved from governance under special legislation ensuring local control to a fully privatized operation accountable only to its investors. Today there are district energy clusters developing throughout the Greater Toronto Area with a number of private companies providing public utilities based on renewable energy.
Deep Lake Water Cooling (DLWC)
From the genesis of a thermal battery proposition, Toronto's Deep Lake Water Cooling (DLWC) project was born. The rare green-energy concept survived scrutiny by a zealous environmental lobby to become the first and largest district cooling grid of its kind. DLWC was achieved by municipal interests working together, the pinnacle of energy and operational efficiency by sharing of resources and benefits, minimizing capital and operational cost and providing a stable source of revenue to City coffers. The initial developer of DLWC, a City of Toronto owned and operated venture in 1998, sums up the project and defines the expected benefits:
DLWC involves pumping cold water ashore and using it to chill the water in a district cooling system. The major environmental and economic benefits of DLWC arise because pumping cold water in from the lake requires only about one tenth of the energy required to produce the same amount of very cold water using conventional chillers. The adverse environmental impacts are negligible.
The emerging DLWC arrangement has the potential to meet more than half the annual cooling demand for the whole of Toronto's downtown, and about a fifth of the peak demand. The chilled water will cost less to produce than by conventional means, but the overwhelming advantages are environmental. For each unit of cooling replaced by DLWC, fossil fuel use will be cut by as much as 90 per cent; moreover, the use of environmentally damaging coolants will be reduced. As noted, the downtown will be quieter and less humid in summer because there will be no need for noisy chillers or vapour-producing cooling towers, which can also be a source of bacterial contamination and cause a form of pneumonia known as Legionnaires' disease.
With cooling accounting for 40% of the annual electric draw by Toronto buildings, the adoption of direct thermal energy to replace imported electricity for chillers makes a significant dent in carbon emissions. The first to table the proposition was Bob Tamblyn. According to a source, this innovative engineer was inspired by a study concerning Lake Champlain. Tamblyn went ahead and integrated a thermal battery into a small DE project for the City of Toronto, in retrospect, a pilot for DLWC. The success of that first project sparked more ideas, consideration of thermal exchange possibilities to displace imported electricity. After 1991, the concept had a name that began to show up in the minutes of City Council. DLWC gained traction with the committees through the 1990's as Council increasingly recognized the value in support of climate action commitments, the way to reduce demand for prime time electricity. For many years, the City favoured selecting a private proponent to develop DLWC and integrate it with the existing district heating system.
Studies were commissioned in the early 1990's, MacViro Consultants delivered a study on the downtown demand for cooling, comparing the performance of six different mechanical chillers, all requiring copious electricity and highly distasteful chemicals to operate against DLWC. In 1992, a competitive bid process was initiated to find an experienced private company to build and operate DLWC. Around thirty submissions were assessed by Dr. Frank Hooper from the University of Toronto. The selection process was torpedoed with a call to the police, allegations of corruption came from within City Council. An investigation ensued, and though no charges were laid, the bid selection process was deemed compromised. Nothing was said about DLWC for some time. Notes in the City Archive from the police investigation indicate the DE Board and management were not unified.
The DE utility carried on supplying steam for heating and chilled water from steam-fired absorption chillers, nothing was said about DLWC for some time. During the 1990's, the DE heating business was barely covering its direct cost for fuel and operating expenses. A staff of 30 included 14 engineers to run the central heating service, with an operating budget around $1.3 million. The City had not managed to collect a nickel of interest Around the time that Toronto Hydro was contemplating a sizable investment in distribution lines to serve the downtown area, the thermal cooling option resurfaced. Steps were taken to explore the DLWC proposition over a period of years, with advocates and detractors pushing and pulling, as might be expected in any Council chambers. In spite of hesitation and some outright opposition, DLWC prevailed and the City found an investment partner in Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) to build it.
Today, Toronto's DLWC system contains 40km of cooling lines powered by frigid water from Lake Ontario. Thermal transfer to and from the City's potable water lines supports comfortable indoor air conditions all summer in around 100 client buildings, leaving 60 MW in the grid at prime time. A closed circuit of piping circulates cold water from John St. Pumping station through utility corridors beneath the streets to connected buildings. As the cold water passes through client buildings, it takes on excess heat units, returning to heat exchangers in the pipe gallery at John St station a few degrees warmer. The return loop flows through the heat exchangers, rejecting heat units over to the drinking water on its way to City taps. The heat transfer is around 6 degrees Celsius, the potable water lines start out at a chilly 4 degrees, increasing to around 10 degrees before reaching the taps. This thermal exchange cools the connected buildings without detriment to the potable water.
DLWC functions cooperatively with Toronto Water, paying an Energy Transfer fee for the use of City facilities. Initially three quarters of a cent per tonne-hour of cooling, according to former City Councillor Dennis Fotinos, who resigned his Council seat to run the DE venture and establish DLWC. Fotinos shared that the Energy Transfer fee has increased over time by the Consumer Price Index. Annual payments that began around $5 million per year are now much higher, the City benefits from DE with a stable positive cash flow.
Former DE President Dennis Fotinos explains how he fostered the great working partnership in late 1999 and 2000 that is still going strong today. Toronto Water was contemplating an investment in a new filtration system to improve water quality. The raw water intakes in Lake Ontario were taking on water tainted by algae blooms in summer. Chemicals had to be applied around the intakes to control Zebra Mussels. When Fotinos approached Toronto Water management, he suggested DLWC could solve these problems. Fotinos proposed to build new deep water intakes for Toronto Water in exchange for 50 years beneficial use of the pipes and a rooming-in arrangement at John St Pumping Station. Toronto Water jumped on it. Three new intake pipelines were deployed; 42" diameter, 5 km long, sunk 83 m deep in the lake. DE picked up the tab, $30 million for each pipeline and around $140 million for heat exchangers and modifications to the John St pipe gallery.
DLWC expanded in 2024, adding a fourth raw water intake. This is the green line visible in the photos below, it does not run through the Island Water Treatment plant, rather raw water circulated through the Pumping Station heat exchangers and returned to the lake. Benefits of the DLWC system, according to operator Enwave Energy:
- 60 MW peak electric demand avoided
- equivalent of 40,000 cars permanently taken off the road in GHG emissions avoided
- cost saving to the City of Toronto in electrical distribution infrastructure cost avoided
A tour of the John St Pumping Station provided more context. Mechanical chillers are still required to supplement DLWC, about 75% of the cooling demand is supplied by the naturally cold lake water, about 25% of the cooling capacity is supplied with chillers.
Toronto Water potable water pipes painted light blue; DLWC chilling water closed loop pipes in dark blue. Fourth line added in 2024, painted green. May 2025
Toronto Water potable supply pipes in John St Pumping Station, May 2025
Massive heat exchangers in the John St pipe gallery belong to Enwave, the equipment moves heat from one closed loop system to the other, raising the potable water from 4 to 10 degrees C.
Heat exchangers weigh 36000 lbs empty, getting set for the annual de-scaling, May 2025
Programmable Logic Controllers - data collection on system operation, May 2025
Article continues below.
PART II TIMELINE
|
1912
|
University of Toronto central steam generation plant established
|
Currently provides heating and cooling to 75 buildings on St George campus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1962
|
low pressure steam sells for $2.60 per million btu in Toronto
|
Hospitals on University Avenue linked via steam plant include Toronto General (est 1829), SickKids (est 1875), Women's College Hospital (est 1883) and Mt Sinai Hospital (est 1923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1968
|
City of Toronto invests in District Energy (DE) Study
|
Toronto Hospitals Steam Corporation Act 1968-1969 Royal Assent, guarantees stable, low rate steam for the hospitals, includes University of Toronto
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1969, December 17
|
Toronto Hospitals Steam Corporation registered, ON #467633
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1972
|
District Energy (DE) Study continues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1974
|
City of Toronto invests to integrate steam generation facilities into a single district
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1980 December 12
|
Dec 12 Toronto District Heating Corporation Act, 1980 receives Royal Assent
|
ON #467633 amended with name change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1982 November 1
|
ON #467633 amended with new Directors, including Toronto Councillor Richard Gilbert as Chair
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1984, 1986
|
ON #467633 and City of Toronto financial arrangements made and amended regarding use of City infrastructure arrangements made and amended regarding use of City infrastructure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1988
|
City of Toronto commits to 20% reduction in GHG emissions by 2005
|
Targets transportation and buildings sectors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1991, June 10-12
|
Climate Institute meetings in Toronto calls on cities to pursue renewable energy and Net Zero emissions
|
Strategic priorities in Transportation and Buildings
|
|
November
|
City Council Meeting - motion passed opposing electric generation (co-gen) by ON #467633 to avoid conflict with Toronto Hydro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1992 February
|
City Council Meeting - MacViro Consultants DE Upgrade and Expansion Study
|
City seeks private sector proponent to develop DLWC
|
|
December 31
|
- ON #467633 Annual Sales $15.9M
|
Net Income $18,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1993, October 15
|
ON #467633 Board members found interfering with Call for Proposals process
|
Bid selection process compromise
|
|
December 31
|
ON #467633 Annual Sales ~$15.7M
|
Net Income $439,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
1994
|
ON #467633 Annual Sales $18.4M
|
Net Income $113,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1995 February 14
|
Blake Cassels Graydon Proposal to Amend TDHC Act
|
|
|
September 7
|
City receives proposal from FVB District Energy of Edmonton to provide DE service downtown
|
|
|
|
ON #467633 Downtown Energy Supply market share estimated at 13%
|
|
|
December 14
|
Letter from ON #467633 President condemns "market-buying" behaviour of Toronto Hydro
|
|
|
December 31
|
ON #467633 Annual Sales ~$18.7M
|
Net Income ~$289,000
|
|
December 31
|
City of Toronto writes off $7.6 million in interest owed by ON #467633
|
|
|
|
Design plans underway for 200,000 RT capacity cooling system
|
Capital cost of $360M
|
|
|
Toronto Terminal Railways expands to Port of Vancouver, Deltaport
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1996
|
ON #467633 supplies 120 buildings with steam and chilled water
|
With 30 employees, operating budget $1.3 M
|
|
November 27
|
NEWCO "Proposal for a Strategic Partnership in Toronto Energy Market"
|
Joint proposal including Toronto Hydro, Ontario Hydro and ON #467633
|
|
December 31
|
ON #467633 Annual Sales $23 M
|
Net Income $296,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
1997 May 22
|
Berkeley Consulting Group leads process to reorganize ON #467633 for expansion and development of DLWC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1998 August, September
|
Reports and letters exchanged between ON #467633 Board and City of Toronto regarding DE expansion
|
Legal amendment required to comply with Energy Competition Act, 1998
|
|
|
ON Premier Harris allows amendment of ON #467633 to pass with third reading of Energy Competition Act, 1998
|
|
|
October 30
|
Toronto Hydroelectric Commission becomes Toronto Hydro
|
|
|
October 30
|
Kevin Kerr appointed to Board of Directors for Ontario Teachers Pension Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1999 May 11-12
|
City Council directs Toronto Hydro, Ontario Power Generation and Ontario Energy Board align around the City's environmental commitments
|
See OEB Act, 1998 Electricity Act, 1998
|
|
July 27
|
27 City Council meeting - board nominees accepted for ON #467633
|
|
|
September 24
|
NUANS Ontario Business Corp name search conducted for "Enwave"
|
|
|
September 28-29
|
Council meeting
|
City conveys title of Pearl St Steam plant to ON #467633
|
|
December 13
|
Energy Competition Act, Toronto District Heating Corporation Act, 1998 proclaimed law in Ontario
|
|
|
December 15
|
Energy Competition Act, Toronto District Heating Corporation Act, 1998 proclaimed law in Ontario
|
|
|
December 15
|
ON #467633 articles of incorporation amendments issued;
|
Toronto District Heating Corporation lists nine directors, Dennis Fotinos Chair
|
|
December 14 - 16
|
City Council Meeting
|
ON #467633 to finalize municipal access agreement with the City; to work with Toronto Hydro and Northwinds project
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2000
|
City Council Minutes physical copies not available to the public in sequence with the others
|
|
|
January 19
|
From digital records online:
|
City Council receives resignation letter from Councillor Dennis Fotinos
|
|
February 1 - 3
|
From digital records online:
|
Council meeting directs Ontario Energy Board and Toronto Hydro toward green energy
|
|
March 15
|
From digital records online:
|
ON# 467633 articles of incorporation amended - change of name to Enwave District Energy Limited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
ON #467633 amended with name change, Enwave Energy Corporation
|
Enwave Energy Corporation; Deep Lake Water Cooling project launched
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
Metro Hall added to district cooling grid cost $2.9 million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Jan 20
|
Ontario Teachers Pension Plan acquires Global Container Terminals
|
|
|
April 3
|
Enwave Energy Corporation applies to Ontario Energy Board for electrical generator license, Bremner Blvd facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
City of Toronto under pressure to sell shares in ON #467633, OMERS offers $90M to buy out the City shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
Kevin Kerr becomes Senior Managing Director at OMERS Realty Corp
|
He is also Director at Sociedad Austral de Electricidad SA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012
|
Peak cooling demand for commercial buildings reaches 24 thousand RT, residential tops 5000 RT
|
|
|
October 31
|
Brookfield Asset Management (Bermuda) purchases ON #467633 for $480 million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014
|
Global Container Terminal receives Green Marine environmental certification
|
|
|
January 1
|
ON# 467633 is dissolved, ON #1908730 Enwave Energy Corporation registered;
|
with Directors Justin Beber, Jim Ried and Darren Soice
|
|
April
|
Ontario Power Generation shuts down the last coal-fired electric generation plant in Ontario
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016 December
|
Enwave Energy applies for amendment to OEB electric generator license, adding Pearl St Steam Plant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017 January
|
OEB amends Enwave Energy license, adds Pearl St facility
|
Jim Wierstra joins IFM Investors as Executive Director, Infrastructure for North America
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018 June 7
|
IFM Investors acquires 37.5% interest in Global Container Terminals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 January 21
|
#12669013 CANADA INC. registered with Jim Wierstra, Kevin Kerr as directors, dissolved Jan 29
|
|
|
June 7
|
ON #1908730, ON #2380760 amalgamated, continuing as ON #5050342 Enwave Energy Corporation
|
with Directors Kevin Kerr and James Wiersta
|
|
June 7
|
Brookfield Infrastructure nets $950 million profit selling ON #1908730 Enwave Energy Corporation for $4.1 Billion
|
|
|
June 7
|
Ontario Teachers Pension Plan and IFM Investors purchase Enwave Canadian assets for $2.8 billion
|
|
|
July 16
|
Enwave US business sold to QIC and Ullico for $1.3 billion
|
|
|
November 3
|
Enwave Energy issues joint press release with Canada Infrastructure Bank $1.4 billion project for Toronto and Mississauga, including $600 million loan from CIB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022
|
Kevin Kerr becomes Senior Managing Director at Ontario Teachers Private Capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024
|
Enwave Energy connects new raw water intake (4th line) through John St Pumping Station
|
|
|
|
Fairmont Royal York Hotel connects to DLWC
|
$40 million cost, LEED certified, Net Zero
|
|
|
The Well 3.1 million sq feet connnected to DLWC
|
thermal battery makes possible another 20 million square feet of cooling capacity downtown
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024 and 2025
|
Global Container Terminal acknowledged by Deloitte as one of Canada's Best Managed Companies
|
|
Article continues here.
Embarking on the assignment to write about Toronto's unique Deep Lake Water Cooling (DLWC) project, we anticipated a straightforward, if not enthusiastic response from those directly involved. From the initial gathering of background information, engineering journals especially, it seemed the originators and participants in one of the world's largest District Energy (DE) projects would be as enthused to tell about their roles in it, as we were to share it.
WT Research department sent out the initial media inquiries to DE system operator Enwave Energy and owner Ontario Teachers Pension Plan (OTPP) to get the latest update on the well known Toronto DE grid. We would get an update on the status of the highly prized and unique DLWC thermal energy venture following the expansion last year, and from the owner, find out how the DE company was presented and evaluated for investment by one of the largest private pension funds in the world.
Emails requesting an interview for this article went unanswered, the follow up phone calls were abruptly disconnected by the robotic auto-attendant, announcing the mailboxes had not been set up yet, so, "Good-bye". Click.
We expected a going concern company would have a working phone line, at the very least. A Globe and Mail article from 2008 may explain. John Barber writes, "The attraction in selling Enwave, one of the two largest district-energy companies in North America, is that the system is finished. The last pipe will be laid this year, and further expansion of either its heating or cooling operations would require huge outlays for marginal returns. With the system complete and the investment secure, the rationale for public ownership disappeared. The article quotes Dennis Fotinos, then President of Enwave, saying the utility can continue as is, "a very viable, respectable model for the next 30 years." Fotinos made it clear, "You don't need high priced executives to do that, you just need operators". (Apparently not telephone operators.)
As it happened, the City of Toronto was not eager to sell in 2008. Then Mayor, David Miller explains from his current post as manager of C40 Cities for Climate Action group, he was in support of retaining public ownership of the DE utility in perpetuity.
ON #467633, originally the Toronto Hospitals Steam Corporation, was registered in December 1969, a corporation without share capital governed by a Special Act of legislation, with Royal assent. Directors were appointed by the Crown in right of Ontario (2), the University of Toronto (2), a group of four hospitals (2), and the City of Toronto (4). Five Directors was required for a quorum and all Directors had to be Canadian citizens. While the City of Toronto did not "own" the venture, it enjoyed a great deal of control, double the representation of the other members, and the right to appoint the Chair. With the City in control, it would not have seemed an issue for the DE company to hold a general permission to dig as and when needed. The DE company could maintain pipes carrying steam through the grid at any hour, this was necessary to ensure the ill and infirm would never freeze. Hospitals were guaranteed a low, fixed rate, even lower than the cost of the fuel to generate the steam. The DE company bore the seasonal price fluctuations on fuel, when the energy suppliers interrupted the gas supply, DE was forced to buy the more costly heating oil. DE may not have generated surplus prior to DLWC, however the hospitals had their stable heating rates, the public enjoyed year round, functioning medical facilities.
The right to dig (exemption from Sec 58, Public Utilities Act) was conferred upon the original DE company, possibly without consideration that operation might one day be privately owned, with requirement for profits, possibly other priorities and interests. Furthermore, it may not have been anticipated that the DE company would one day operate outside of the initial defined area (from the Don Valley Parkway to Spadina Ave; from College Ave to Lake Ontario.)
The original entity, registered ON #467633 was subject to OEB oversight. After 44 years, ON #467633 amalgamated to form the new entity, ON #1908730 Enwave Energy Corporation in 2014, conveying the special status to the new owners, Brookfield. The digging privilege was passed forward again in 2021, ON #1908730 amalgamated to form ON #5050342, the Enwave Energy Corporation of today, owned by Ontario Teachers Pension Plan and IFM Investors. The current version of Enwave operates the downtown Toronto DE grid, as well as in Markham, ON, London, ON Windsor, ON, and Charlottetown, PEI.
Enwave today operates in a cloaked and secretive manner. Spokesperson Amy Jacobs states in an email May 28, 2025, "We have contracts with each customer, and yes, these are subject to confidentiality." The reason they don't have to disclose rate information, she says, "We are a non-regulated, private 'utility'."
Public vs Private Utility
In Ontario, "public utility" refers to any water works, gas works, electric heat, light or power works, telegraph and telephone lines, railways however operated, street railways and works for the transmission of gas, oil, water or electrical power or energy, or any similar works supplying the general public with necessaries or conveniences. Enwave is a privately owned company subject to operate under various laws, including the Act that confers Enwave's special inherited right to dig without permission, found in the Toronto District Heating Act, 1998. The duties and obligations under this Act were to pass along to the amalgamated entity, along with the privilege.
Enwave is further subject to the Public Utilities Act (except Section 58), Energy Competition Act, Ontario Energy Board Act. Enwave is subject to the terms of its OEB license as an electric generator. It cannot be said that Enwave is exempt from rate disclosure to the public. The principle of rate transparency has been upheld through deregulation and legislation changes, especially necessary given the near monopoly Enwave holds, along with this privilege of digging anywhere.
The exemption from Sec. 58 of the Public Utilities Act says quite a bit, in exempting one part, we can be sure that the rest of the Act applies. It is therefore strange that The investor-owners OTPP and IFM won't respond to media inquiries. After all, this utility has successfully tapped a thermal energy source, making great strides in energy transition. We found clients and subcontractors offered limited feedback, if anything. The best we could get was an approved generic email statement rather than an interview. Our questions were referred back to Enwave. Lawyers won't respond, even those reporting on the Energy sector generally. We went back to Enwave at this point to confirm, and yes, their clients and subcontractors are on non-disclosure agreements. Enwave left us void of the financial picture imperative to this work, no financial layer to share with municipalities. Enwave describes the benefits of the DLWC system in terms of the reduced carbon footprint, the equivalent number of cars-worth of emissions reduced, in equivalent number of households annual use of electricity avoided at peak time. These details are found on the Enwave website.
The black hole effect around Enwave and its investor-owners spurred us on to the Reference Library. We went back in time, to City Council Minutes 1991 to 2001 looking for some context on the DE development to work up a proper report. We read through a decade of City Council Meeting Minutes scanning for motions related to energy, getting a good sense of the history, spirit and intent around the Toronto energy transition. When we could not locate the Year 2000 Minutes in sequence on the shelves, the librarian was alerted. Materials are not supposed to be taken out of the Reference Library, though we have heard it has been done. As one City Council Meeting Minute Book is four to five inches wide across the spine and 10 lbs or more, it would have taken a pack mule to move the entire year out. Librarian Bessie concurred with our assessment, the 2000 Minutes were likely not received with the other years when the Urban Library at 55 John St closed. An email from Bessie dated July 3, 2025 reads, " This is to confirm that I was unable to find the 2000 Toronto City Council Minutes. I have checked in a number of locations in storage as well." Bessie sent us off to the City Archives on Spadina, where Reference Archivist Paul Sharkey declared via email on July 3, "In regards to your visit to the Toronto Archives this morning, I can confirm that the only hard copy versions of post amalgamation minutes we have in our collection are from 1998 and 2001." We later learned from Kelly McCarthy, Deputy City Clerk by email July 21, 2025, "I have confirmed that there is no bound copy of the 2000 City Council Minutes. It was never produced."
We were encouraged to search for what we need in the 2000 Minutes online. As Minutes are a legal record, physical copies must be kept at the registered location for the corporation. We prefer to read the hard copy. Pressing for the paper copies, Deputy City Clerk assures us the physical records are at the Archives, just not in bound format. The archivist does not seem to think so. The reason we need to find the 200 Minutes, this is where we lose the narrative on the history of Enwave. Up to the end of 1999, Toronto District Heating Corporation Act had just become law, the TDHC had taken on equity partner OMERS with shares for the City also. By Volume 1 of the 2001 Minutes series, we see "Enwave" appear, however we are missing the discussion wherein Council moved to rebrand their DE venture. It appears that a change had taken place, with no explanation available. Digital Minutes show the Enwave Annual General Meeting happened in August, with the appointment of Ernst and Young as auditors, and the acceptance of the recently appointed TDHC Directors, still within their terms of office. Searching for some explanation to fill in gaps in our understanding, we paged through boxes of City Councillor's files at the Archives. We found a truly human record of DE development in a big city, with the management, operations, legal and audited financial statements sufficient to satisfy our need to know.
In the course of research came the provincial laws, reading the Energy Competition Act, the Electricity Act, the Ontario Energy Board Act, Toronto District Heating Corporation Act and Public Utilities Act brought more insight. Climate action commitments made in the late 80's clearly drove this legislation of the late 90's. The energy transition has been in motion in Ontario ever since. All players in the energy arena were compelled by these laws to work together for the public benefit, advancing the climate commitments. The priorities for the buildings sector are clear, continue to decarbonize the electric grid, and adoption DE with sustainable alternatives to electric, more waste energy capture and all forms of low cost thermal.
The energy market in Ontario was deregulated in the late 1990's, with all municipal energy ventures required to be registered as business corporations having share capital. This change was not unique to Enwave by any means, all Ontario energy companies scrambled to comply with the legal changes taking effect in 2000. Municipalities could choose to retain control of their local public utilities by holding shares, joint venturing with private equity partners, or turning the works over to private ownership. There was a transfer tax grab, of course, any municipality handing off utilities to new beneficial ownership triggered taxation, 33% of the asset value. In the case of Enwave, the transfer to private ownership also conveyed that unrestricted access to the utility corridors below the streets.
With public-private partnerships enabled, the energy transition work accelerated. Rule changes post-deregulation allowed utilities to access capital or borrow for their DE grid development work. Pension funds proved to be a great fit for the DE opportunity. Long investment horizons and huge pools of cash were a perfect match with the capital hungry DE projects paying back a modest but steady return over long term supply contracts. DE projects have moved ahead rapidly all over North America ever since. The new rules continue to favour development of alternative, renewable, sustainable energy supplies and sources. Climate objectives still drive the energy transition today. Efficiency is the name of the game in buildings, consumers are encouraged and rewarded for reducing consumption of electricity, not an ideal growth opportunity for new electric generating companies.
With initial efforts to communicate Toronto's DE story falling flat, we reached out to the next echelon of DE contacts, contractors and clients. From a joint press release from Enwave and Continual Energy announcing receipt of the 2024 International District Energy Association (IDEA) Joseph M. Brillhart Innovation Award, we reached out to Press contact for Continual Energy. The line was picked up by none other than the Principal Engineer responsible for Royal York retrofit design. Stranges confirmed he would be the one to talk to, and seemed eager to speak about his direct involvement with the project, however had to check with partners before agreeing to give an interview.
With no return call or email after a week, we dropped in to the office tower housing Continual Energy, another Net Zero and LEED certified building. Stranges could not be reached, the main line to voice mail. A call to the International District Energy Association office in Massachussetts was successful, we requested assistance connecting with the IDEA award winners for an interview. Eventually we heard back from Principal, Building Technologies Jason Zwicker. Zwicker provided the following statement by email:
Continual Energy Inc. is very pleased to have worked with Enwave Energy Corporation to design and implement the energy solutions to decarbonize the Fairmont Royal York Hotel. Together with Enwave, we are delivering low-carbon heating solutions to district-connected buildings like the Royal York. Continual’s multi-disciplined team of experts provided the complete implementation (from initial concept design phases to post-commissioning service and support) for the combined district heat pump and controls solutions, using otherwise wasted energy from the district loop as a heating input for the building's systems. "This project was a result of Continual’s strategic approach to designing, implementing, and maintaining tangible value-driven energy conservation measures and decarbonization.", says Jason Zwicker, Principal of Building Technologies, adding, "Our approach enabled the project to achieve the Zero Carbon Building Performance Standard certification via the Canada Green Building Council and win the prestigious 2024 International District Energy Association Annual Innovation Award."
When we pressed Zwicker for more details about fixing custom parts on the ancient steam system during those short shifts in the hotel, curious to know if they had any blow-outs, you know, fun and interesting relatable quips, we were directed to the IDEA website, for the prepared statements there. For more details on the Royal York connection to Enwave's DE grid, see the full article, here.
The final stop of the day was at the office of Enwave Energy on York St. This time the elevator was unlocked, open to an empty reception desk with a sign indicating to go on ahead. WT Research reports finding a spacious common area filled with empty work stations, one of the few staffers still hanging around on Friday afternoon ahead of the May long weekend was willing to help. Research recognized Joyce Lee, Vice President, System Operations and Asset Management, from a video-recorded presentation on line. Waiting in a side room to speak with Ms. Lee, our associate notes it was a most awkward and short exchange. Lee appeared shaken by the unexpected visit, confused and concerned about being recognized. Contact information was exchanged. Enwave Energy Senior VP Amy Jacobs made contact by phone shortly thereafter, scolding Research for making contact with an Enwave shareholder.
Jacobs provided some basic background on DLWC by phone, beginning with the City of Toronto and OMERS pension fund leveraging the City of Toronto's potable water system to cool client buildings, starting in 2004. Initially, DLWC involved three deep water intake pipes stretching 5 km into Lake Ontario, drawing 4 degree Celsius water from 80+m down to cooling around 100 buildings. All of this information is available to the public on the Enwave website, written up in dozens of articles. When we pressed for rate transparency as required under Toronto District Heating Corporation Act, Jacobs claimed "private utility" status. A private company, yes. A private utility? There is no such thing as a private utility. Any corporation that provides utlities to the public is a Public Utility and subject to the Public Utilities Act.
The Well, completed and commissioned in 2024 added another 3.1 million square feet of mixed use space to the DE loop with 6 residential towers and a commercial tower cooled with Enwave's downtown DE pipes. The Well comes with an old-fashioned cistern dug out under Parkade Level 7. Also known as "The Pit", two million gallons of freezing cold lake water act as a thermal battery to store energy generated during off-peak time, for use during peak time to cool the complex. Jacobs noted the new cooling intake line and thermal battery at the Well brings an increase in capacity to DLWC, enabling the addition of new client buildings.
Jacobs volunteered additional info on Enwave's Green Heat project to be commissioned in 2025. Enwave is working on another DE cluster, this one supplied by geo-thermal energy and heat recovery from waste in Etobicoke, set to become the first Net Zero community.
Our quest to understand how the Toronto DE loop was upleveled to nine times its enterprise value between 2012 to 2021 remains unfulfilled. The first renewable energy project in the Brookfield Asset Management portfolio turned out to be a winner. How a capital intensive business with modest returns under Fotinos management rose from $480 million enterprise value to $4.1 billion within a decade is a story we would have enjoyed telling. Brookfield's designated Directors responsible for Enwave deserve the credit. From the ON corporate registry documents, we have Justin Beber of Bay Street, Toronto, along with Jim Reid and Darren Soice of the Calgary Brookfield office receiving the accolades. According to Gowling World Law Group, Brookfield pocketed close to a billion dollars in profit for curating this first renewable energy investment. Acquisitions and mergers of smaller DE grids across North America make up the value. Toronto's downtown DE grid remains the largest of the set, still serving 100 buildings with DLWC. Brookfield sold the business off in two parts in 2021, the Canadian assets including Windsor and Charlottetown were sold to Ontario Teachers Pension and Australian pension fund manager IFM Investors for $2.8 billion. The US assets were sold to QIC and Ullico for $1.3 billion, DE grids operating in Baton Rouge, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Portland, Seattle, Syracuse and Ypsilanti under the flag of Centrio Energy.
From a Brookfield press release announcing the sale Feb 2021, "Under Brookfield’s ownership, Enwave's network was significantly expanded by acquiring other high-quality district energy systems and driving a substantial organic growth strategy. Over this time period, 135 new customer buildings were added and EBITDA grew at a compounded annual rate of over 20%. Today, the business operates in a stabilized and highly contracted environment in 13 major cities, serving over 800 customers under long-term contracts. The business delivers 3,792,000 pounds per hour of heating and 327,000 tons of contracted cooling capacity across its network."
From the CenTrio website, "CenTrio delivers reliable, cost-effective, and sustainable energy to customers across the U.S., providing critical heating, cooling, and electricity solutions to more than 400 buildings in urban centers, universities, and hospitals. The company has established its new corporate headquarters in New Orleans, where it employs 30 of its 170 staff nationwide.
Gowling WLG put out a report in Feb 2025 on Enwave's Deep Lake Water Cooling system. Thomas Timmins is listed as the lead for Gowling Energy Group, however, he has not responded to inquiries about the report. An in-person visit failed to produce a contact, the summer student at reception showed us the way out. A follow up call to Managing Partner Ben Na failed to produce any traction. Our questions about the Gowling Renewable Energy Report on Enwave remain unanswered.
From the outset, it has to be said that the investment for DE infrastructure is often beyond what the resident market can bear, even in wealthy Toronto. Every city that invests in DE expansion contributes value to the global climate mitigation effort, however investments in increasing energy efficiency of buildings are not necessarily money machines. In our study of DE in Toronto, we found neither infill growth potential within an existing DE cluster, expansion of the DE loop or the addition of new DE clusters within the greater city area managed to improve financial returns. Abundant, cheap thermal and waste energy picked up from the other public works facilities, delivered through DE is smart, to be sure. The contribution of recovered thermal energy for heating and cooling is priceless in a number of ways, avoiding peak electrical demand, stabilizing the municipal power grid, by eliminating tonnes of GHG emissions and for saving lives during extreme heat events. At the same time, it goes without saying that a proposition designed to deliver efficiency in the principal commodity would not be a big money maker. Firstly, heating and cooling capacity in the DE loop is finite. Participation here is not required, developers may be enticed to sign on to the DE loop as a way to avoid the front-loading of cost for in-situ HVAC equipment, existing buildings may sign on to DE rather than cough up to replace aged-out HVAC systems. In any case, developers are savvy, they are unlikely to pay more for thermal DE than they would otherwise pay for peak electrical rates. The DE grid will bear the cost of customer connections, deferring collection over the term of the energy supply contract, up to twenty years or more. This is costly, and a bit risky. On the up-side, the revenue stream is as stable as it gets. If the rates have been set appropriately and the business is managed well, the DE venture should return a modest rate of return for investors.
Accordingly, public-private partnerships are integral for cities contemplating DE investment. In the Toronto case, the Province of Ontario and Government of Canada cost-shared 75% of the initial capital outlay for integration of a number of steam generation facilities into a DE grid. Since the bedrock of DE is efficiency rather than increasing peak value sales, those relatively low and stable energy rates simply do not promote significant cash returns on investment. Even when the system is exceptionally well managed, as City of Toronto Chief Administrative Officer commends ON #467633 in a 1999 report, the DE business did not collect enough from its customer base to cover an annual interest payment owed to the City. When the City of Toronto began to integrate the downtown DE grid in 1974, the investment was to be returned, with interest. Construction delays and high interest rates hit the City hard in the 70's and 80's. Sale of steam and chilled water to the hospitals, government buildings and a growing commercial sector adequately covered direct cost of production, however gas supply interruption forced the company to absorb higher cost for heating oil during cold spells. In some years, DE just barely covered operating expenses. The net income in 1992 was just over $18,000. In each of five consecutive years in the 90's, DE customers continued to enjoy low, stable steam rates regardless of the weather and unplanned gas interruption. The audited financial statements of ON #467633 from 1992 through 1996 reveal an income and expense scenario twenty years into DE integration.
By 1995, the City had written off $7.6 million in accumulated interest on $30 million capital investment in the integrated DE grid.
With the high cost of DE, mounting interest and inability to service the debt to the City, directors for Toronto Hydro spoke up in favour of terminating the DE project, instead expanding investment in the electrical grid. Avoidance of grid failure and those earlier climate commitments turned out to be the more powerful drive motivating the City. Energy demand from downtown commercial towers, particularly for air conditioning, required an imminent investment response. As Toronto Hydro contemplated a $75 million dollar price tag to beef up electrical distribution to the downtown core, the supporters of climate action and DLWC called for investment in the thermal alternative. Either way, a considerable capital outlay was coming. City Council discussions and reports indicate the prevailing views of the day. The commitment to emissions reduction made in 1988 is clearly reflected in Council Minutes and archive files through the 1990's. Elected officials did work toward climate goals. Mayor and Council expected the City energy companies Hydro and ON #467633 to work together on climate action strategic priorities, making green and clean alternatives more available and attractive to citizens and
Council members files stacked up in the City Archives show the power struggles that played out between the energy companies over the years. Hydro and DE had been mandated to study the expansion of thermal DE. Notes and letters in Council files at the archives show resistance, energy companies working against each other and against Council direction. Council was back and forth on the matter of private vs public development of district energy. In the early 1990's the trend was to find a private proponent to develop DLWC, it was just a matter of who, and how. A call for proposals went out, competitive bid submissions were assessed by contracted engineers most familiar with the DLWC proposition. A police investigation ensued following allegations of corruption in 1993. A police report in the archives indicates the board of ON #467633 was not operating as one. Hydro had been offering financial incentives to builders to install electrical chillers even while the DLWC study was underway. By the mid-90's, the City led by Mayor Mel Lastman appears determined to retain Board control of ON #467633 while considering corporate structure options for joint venture with a private equity investor. Council also discussed amendments to the special Act defining ON #467633, allowing share capital and debt financing in preparation to develop DLWC.
"Reality Cheque": financial returns from district energy are modest, at best.
Even the wealthiest cities will struggle to self-fund climate mitigation investments, including district energy. Revenue from property taxes spreads thin across the realm of services required to run a city. Toronto is certainly no exception. Capital investment that cannot be recovered from sale of energy over the term of the supply contract does not make a sound business case for most investors. Considering DE investment as an insurance premium rather than an investment expected to return cash dividends, DE delivers as a climate action with positive impacts on air quality, stabilizes the power supply, ensuring life-saving air conditioning as community service. In this way, DE is much like public parks, they add to quality of urban life and undeniably the right move for the planet. Where benefactors can be found to invest philanthropically, having no expectation of profit, the City wins. Where profit-minded investors have offered inflated values for the DE business, it may bear further investigation to ensure social values align.
In the Toronto case, five consecutive years of audited financial statements (1992 through 1996) show ON #467633 producing a fairly consistent revenue stream, $15 to $20 million annually, with equally consistent cost of production (natural gas, and when unavailable, heating oil) and operating expenses. The company was considered well-managed, the long term operations manager George Catsamacis received several letters of commendation for operational efficiencies over the years. The rate structure - favouring the hospitals with steam below cost - was never able to generate net income sufficient to service the debt to the City. Toronto wrote off $7.6 million dollars in accumulated interest on its DE investment by 1995. At this point, the City etched into the record, any future disposal of the DE utility would have to return capital.
Article continues below.
Part III: The Who's Who
Independent Electricity System Operator
The hottest days of summer are the best time to get familiar with Ontario's energy monitoring organization. The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) plays the lead role in the real-time, day to day management of the Ontario power supply. As of Aug 3, 2025 at 7 pm, with peak demand just over 20,364 MW.
See IESO hourly electric demand with anticipated peak daily demand, here.
IESO has a number of roles, including managing supply and demand in the grid and conducting stakeholder engagement as part of planning for future energy needs. The current form of this organization came about through the deregulation of the Ontario energy market. The IESO is a non-profit lisenced by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB). OEB "authorizes the IESO to direct the operation of the transmission system in Ontario, facilitate the IESO-administered markets and carry out its duties as defined in the Electricity Act, 1998."
Thermal energy proves an interesting topic here. The City of Toronto and Province of Ontario have been working in lock-step on climate action in the energy sector, pursuing and encouraging municipalities, builders and developers to develop more thermal energy capacity. Heat transfer directly reduces net demand for electricity for the heating and cooling of buildings. Investment in waste heat recovery, thermal batteries, cold water systems is having an impact on the electric grid, as Deep Lake Water Cooling (DLWC) demonstrates. While thermal energy facilities may not be producing electricity (co-generation), heat transfer from any number of sources certainly does impact electricity demand.
At present, IESO is not concerned with thermal energy. According to spokesperson Michael Dodsworth, "We have no geothermal electric production connected to the grid in Ontario. My understanding after asking around within our organization is that Ontario's geothermal resources aren't as easy to access for electricity production grade heat as they are in other parts of Canada."
Regulator - Ontario Energy Board
The OEB’s mandate is to regulate Ontario’s energy sector as required under provincial legislation, regulating the natural gas sector since 1960 and the electricity sector since deregulation in 1999. As a government agency, the OEB is financially responsible and acts in the public interest. From the OEB online, "In moving forward on the path to modernization, we will be transparent and accountable. We will deliver public value and we will be responsive to the changing needs of Ontario’s economy and those we regulate. We will never lose sight of the individual rate payers, the consumers, the people of Ontario." (OEB website)
OEB objectives, responsibilities and powers are set out in legislation, regulations and directives:
For industry, OEB:
- Sets the delivery rates that electricity and natural gas utilities can charge. Monitor the financial and operational performance of utilities.
- Approves major new electricity transmission lines and natural gas pipelines that serve the public interest.
- Approves mergers, acquisitions and dispositions by electricity and natural gas utilities.
- Sets the payments to Ontario Power Generation for electricity generated by its regulated nuclear and hydroelectric generation facilities.
- Establishes and enforces codes and rules to govern the conduct of utilities and other industry participants.
- Licenses entities in the electricity sector and natural gas marketers.
For consumers, OEB:
- Protects the interests of consumers by setting the rates and prices that utilities can charge.
- Provides the information consumers need to better understand the rules that protect them and their responsibilities.
- Protects their interests in retail electricity and natural gas markets.
- Addresses the particular needs of low-income consumers through the establishment and oversight of utility customer service rules and delivering financial assistance programs.
OEB mandate and authority derive from the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, the Electricity Act, 1998, and a number of other provincial statutes, including the Energy Consumer Protection Act, 2010, the Municipal Franchises Act, the Oil, Gas and Salt Resources Act, the Assessment Act, and the Toronto District Heating Corporation Act, 1998.. Note the City of Toronto passed a motion in Feb 2000 directing OEB to remain involved through the energy transition, extending the mandate and authority to renewable energy sources, including thermal energy.
City of Toronto, Toronto Water, Toronto Hydro
TransformTO is the City's initiative to slash emissions with accelerated action across multiple sectors to achieve Net Zero by 2040. From the City of Toronto website, "The Strategy identifies actions and targets to be achieved in key sectors, including buildings, transportation and waste."
Relative emissions differ by sector from city to city as heating and cooling loads vary with the regional climate characteristics. Toronto's Environment, Climate and Forestry Manager David MacMillan explains, the buildings sector in Toronto is the largest contributor to climate effects, spewing 45% of total emissions. Actions to cut emissions in Toronto buildings rests on the dual strategies of decarbonization of the electricity produced and the application of District Energy (DE) enabling maximum efficiency, offsetting electric demand with thermal energy.
The downtown Toronto DE offering reaches relatively few buildings, around 5%, MacMillan estimates. Even with a marginal market share, the 60 MW of electricity demand avoided by DLWC keeps the grid from failing on the heaviest demand days. Class A electric customers (usage above 1 MW) that manage to cut electric demand for the five highest load-hours of the year earn an exemption from the Global rate Adjustment, reducing the power bill for the entire year following. As cooling load in Toronto accounts for roughly 40% of annual demand, buildings signed on to DLWC benefit from the rate reduction. Clients contract their buildings for DLWC cooling supply for a twenty-year term. Rates for DLWC are undisclosed by the DE operator. With the minimal cost of production for thermal energy from the potable water system, pennies per tonne of cooling paid to the City, the DE operator can negotiate rates up to the value of Global Adjustment saved. A client may even pay more than the value of Global Adjustment if carbon credits are considered. In this way, DLWC has been a win for the City, receiving millions in Energy Transfer payments each year, a win for the profitable DE operation, a win for the electrical grid in terms of stability, and a win for the client to the degree they negotiate to keep a portion of their rate savings.
Enwave Energy Corporation
Toronto's downtown DE grid operator holds a unique advantage over other DE companies. A special feature established in the legislation that created the original DE company in 1969 has been preserved, passed along through name changes, corporate amendments and amalgamations over a half century. Enwave holds a sweeping permission to dig in any street in Ontario.
Enwave holds an electricity generation license from Ontario Energy Board (OEB) for its Bremner Blvd and Pearl St facilities, for 15 MW of electricity produced with natural gas. While OEB regulates Enwave Energy's through the electric generation license, the media spokesperson for OEB initially responded that they do not concern themselves with thermal energy. This surprised us, in light of the energy legislation and the pivotal role assumed for OEB in keeping all things fair for the citizens. When we pressed OEB with an exerpt from Toronto District Heating Act, 1998 we got a follow up response. According to Tom Miller, "Regarding the OEB’s role in overseeing heating and cooling rates, we would like to clarify and expand on our previous response from Tuesday, May 27, 2025. Specifically, in terms of receiving information about rates for geothermal or deep lake water cooling, the OEB only has access to rate details for 'steam'—defined as steam or hot water under the Toronto District Heating Corporation Act (1998)—and only in the context of an appeal under section 7(4) of that Act. To date, we are not aware of any such appeals being filed, and therefore, we do not have any information on steam rates."
The Power Generators and Distributors - Ontario Hydro, Hydro One, Ontario Power Generation
The Province of Ontario has directed energy generators in the direction of renewable energy, a critical component supporting City of Toronto climate action commitments. The decarbonization of the province's power grid has been central to buildings achieving Net Zero emissions.
Ontario Teachers Pension Plan
Partnered with IFM Investors to purchase Enwave Energy Corporation in 2021 for total $2.8 billion
"One team. One set of shared values." located at 160 Front St W in Toronto, ON
266.3 Billion net assets as of 2025
OTPP media spokesperson officially declined participation in this article via email, twice. As we were determined to report the critically important capital investment aspect of DE, we dropped in at the new home of OTPP in the LEED certified, Net Zero TD Plaza. OTPP won't discuss their investment in Enwave Energy, which may have been up to three times the market value, based on annual earnings. Without input from OTPP, we cannot say how the opportunity was presented, how it was evaluated. We can roughly work out how the investment has performed, given the exorbitant price paid for the asset, it does not seem likely the returns align with the target rate of 7 to 9% for retired teachers. According to the OTPP website, the fund meets defined benefit obligations to pensioners, delivering the full benefit to retirees for twelve years running.
Kevin Kerr
- Executive Managing Director, Portfolio Solutions Ontario Teachers Pension Plan (Nov 2024 to present)
- Director at Enwave Energy (June 2021 to present)
- former Director at Global Container Terminals (Feb 2020 to June 2023; April 2005 to April 2009)
- previously OTPP VP President and Global Head of Transactions, Infrastructure (Nov 1998 - Sep 2011)
- previously Partner of Investments at Bastion Infrastructure Group, Inc.
- OMERS - Senior Managing Director, OMERS Strategic Investments (Sept 2011 - Oct 2013)
- Director at Sociedad Austral de Electricidad SA in 2011
- Vice President at Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board from 1998 to 2011
- Deloitte - (Accountant 1996 - 1998)
- Carleton University, B.Comm
IFM Investors
IFM Investors is owned by a collective of 15 Australian and one UK pension fund, an established and highly regarded private equity investor, investing in the asset class since 1998.
From the IFM website, US$144.8bn is invested on behalf of 762 institutional investors (at 31 March 2025), supporting 120 million working people globally.
The IFM Investors began with the Australian trade union campaign for compulsory pensions in the 1980s.
Infrastructure Division - invests in essential infrastructure assets spanning a diverse range of sectors and asset types selecting for monopolistic positioning, long concession life, predictable revenues, inflation protection, exposure to economic growth and a stable regulatory environment. (IFM Investors website)
James Wierstra
- Executive Director Infrastructure at IFM Investors
- Director and Chair at Enwave , Director at Global Container Terminals
- Former partner in Enwave Investments Corp with Kevin Kerr
- previously Head of Canadian Infrastructure and Sponsor Coverage for MacQuarie Capital, head of North American PPPs, with responsibility for MacQuarie's PPP financial advisory, equity investment and development business in the US and Canada.
- previously with MaQuarie Infrastructure and Real Assets, asset management responsibilities in the transport sector
Global Container Terminals, Port of Vancouver
Operating Vanterm and Deltaport
From the GCT website: "Global Container Terminals (GCT) is the largest majority Canadian-owned terminal operator serving world’s leading ocean carriers and shipping lines on the West Coast of Canada. With over a century of experience, GCT has played a major role in developing Canada’s Pacific Gateway. We play a pivotal role in facilitating international trade between Canada and more than 170 world economies through the operation of our 2 terminals – GCT Deltaport and GCT Vanterm. With 4 berths and a combined handling capacity of nearly 3.5 million TEUs annually, our terminals are strategically located on the West Coast of North America granting our shipping line customers and cargo owners convenient access to key international trade routes, as well as direct links to major freeways and class-one international railways.
Toronto Terminal Railways, TTR West Deltaport
TTR owned and operated one of the steam plants purchased and tied in to the Toronto downtown DE grid.
This business owned by CN-CP has performed vital duties around Union Station Rail yards in Toronto since the early 1900's. In 1995, TTR West formed to serve Deltaport operations in the Port of Vancouver. According to the TTR website, the company "teams leverage decades of railroad experience and utilize the latest technologies and processes to perform railcar maintenance, track maintenance, rail yard services, engineering solutions and more for our Class 1 partners."
Brookfield Asset Management, Brookfield Renewable Partners, currently Brookfield Corporation
Investment company formed in 2005 by the amalgamation of Bronfman brothers venture Brascan Corporation, formerly EdperBrascan, later
From the BAM website, "We are a leading global alternative asset manager, headquartered in New York, with over $1 trillion of assets under management across renewable power & transition, infrastructure, private equity, real estate, and credit. Our objective is to generate attractive, long-term risk-adjusted returns for the benefit of our clients and shareholders."
From Brookfield Sustainability Report 2022:
Our Climate Strategy - We are committed to contributing to a low-carbon economy. Our climate strategy is informed by our risk and opportunity assessment and is comprised of four components:
- I. Supporting the World’s Transition to a Net-Zero Economy
- a. Operationalizing Decarbonization
- b. Leading in Transition Investing and Clean Energy Development
- c. Driving Sustainable Financing
II. Encouraging Conservation of Biodiversity and Our Ecosystems
III. Enhancing Value and Building Resilience by Managing the Risks and Opportunities of a Changing Climate
IV. Facilitating Knowledge Sharing and Engagement
CTV News Brennan MacDonald and Vassy Kapelos reports Apr 2 2025 that a number of Brookfield companies share a building with a street level retail bike shop in Bermuda. "Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P., Brookfield Property Partners L.P., and Brookfield Business Partners L.P. all list their business address as 73 Front Street, Hamilton, 5th Floor, Bermuda."
Richard Gilbert
- Board Member with Boltzmann Institute
- former CEO of the Toronto District Heating Corporation (Nov 1 1982)
- local and regional councillor, elected six times in the City of Toronto
- former President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
- first President of the Canadian Urban Institute
- consultant on energy issues and on municipal governance, with public- and private-sector clients across four continents, including Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), International Energy Agency
- teaching at universities in Ontario, including the University of Toronto, one in British Columbia, universities in Ireland, Scotland, Mexico, and the U.S.
Boltzmann Institute Canadian non-profit established in 2022
The overarching mission of the Boltzmann Institute (BI) is to help eliminate harmful emissions from human energy use through research and education.
The current work focuses on reducing emissions from building operations, chiefly space heating, the main source of greenhouse gas (GHG) and other emissions in many parts of Canada.
Space heating and cooling in buildings served by district energy systems use hot water (for district heating) and/or cold water (for cooling) provided through underground piping. The pipes link the buildings to thermal energy sources that can be emissions free. Buildings on modern district energy networks can sell surplus energy to the system – e.g., heat rejected from supermarket chillers – for use by other buildings.
Dennis Fotinos
- Founder, CEO Noventa Energy Partners, Feb 2018
- Board Member at CreateTO
- former Councillor City of Toronto (1991 to 1998)
- President and CEO at Enwave (1999 to 2018) responsible for strategic direction and management of day to day operations including sales, business development, and major construction projects including Deep Lake Water Cooling
Noventa Energy Partners
Founded by Dennis Fotinos in 2018 "to decarbonize our world through disruptive innovation."
Current projects include Toronto Western Hospital - World's Largest Raw Wastewater Energy Project
From the Noventa website,
"Noventa is a renewable energy company that offers customized solutions to reduce carbon emissions and manage energy costs. We use creative design and process innovation to integrate proprietary technologies into conventional HVAC systems to decarbonize buildings. From complete turn-key projects, to engineered equipment sales, we tailor our services to allow communities and businesses to participate in a new economy that is rapidly shifting toward a more sustainable future for all."
David Miller
- Managing Director, C40 Centre for Urban Climate Policy and Economy, C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group
- Former Mayor of Toronto (2003 - 2010)
- former President and CEO of World Wildlife Fund-Canada
C40 Cities
C40 is a global network of nearly 100 mayors of the world’s leading cities that are united in action to confront the climate crisis. Mayors of C40 cities are committed to using an inclusive, science-based and collaborative approach to cut their fair share of emissions in half by 2030, help the world limit global heating in line with the Paris Agreement, and build healthy, equitable and resilient communities.
Continual Energy
Provided design and build services for the Fairmont Royal York Hotel retrofit and connection to the DE system, working in short shifts to minimize disruption in the fully operational hotel.
Jason Zwicker, Principal - Building Technologies
Daniel Stranges, Principal - Engineering
Gowling WLG
Thomas J Timmins leads Gowling's Energy Practice Group in Canada, listed as a contact on "Enwave's evolution: A case study in utility transformation " report published Feb 5, 2025. Several emails, calls and a personal visit to the office resulted in no response to our questions about this report.
By Gowling WLG website: "A sector-focused, international law firm that believes that legal matters are people matters and it takes closer relationships between people and teams to get to the best results, in the right way." (Gowlingwlg.com)
|
Article continues here.
Prepare for eventual privatization, or defend public ownership
Cities holding interest in utilities companies with joint venture or private investment partners do well to prepare for the eventual exit of those partners. Determine the minimum amount of public control and transparency before taking on private investment. If the City Council deems appropriate to take on private equity partners, understand and plan for succession to ensure the City retains the desired control. If the City deems it appropriate to allow today's partner to sell off significant interest or controlling interest to unknown future players, make this decision ahead of time. Alternatively, ensure protections for control of rights-of-way in structuring a share offering or private partnership.
By the time the City of Toronto became an owner of the DE business corporation with its first private equity partner, Borealis Infrastructure (an investment division of Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS)) in 1999, the transition to energy deregulation was well underway in Ontario. Berkeley Consulting Group had years earlier worked with the Directors and executive management of ON #467633 to explore the possible organizational structure options required under de-regulation rules, also allowing for the development of DLWC. Private ownership was the first option presented. With this option, the DE company would be owned by a private company, its directors appointed by the investor owners, leaving the City with no control over its operation and sweeping access to its rights-of-way. The full privatization option did not make the cut, did not rank in the top three options selected by workshop participants. Instead, the City chose a joint venture option, retaining ownership and control.
We caught up with former Mayor David Miller, currently heading up C40 Cities for Climate Action. Looking back to his time as Mayor of Toronto, Miller explained that he had always supported public ownership of the DE utility, and was never in favour of selling the City shares. Pressure to privatize was heavy from the pension fund partner now wanting to cash out and move on. Borealis Infrastructure offered the City $90 million to take public ownership out of the equation, leaving the pension fund in full control of the next chapter. Full privatization of the DE utility was finally sealed in 2012 with Brookfield Asset Management, the Bermuda registered investment company making its first foray into renewable energy. Brookfield and its subsidiary corporations do not report active business income. The asset managers buy, hold and sell other companies to generate interest, dividends and capital gains (and losses).
Files in the City Archives reveal years of power struggle between Toronto Hydro leadership (formerly Hydroelectric Commission) and the DE leadership. Working against Council and Board direction, Hydro undermined DE, offering financial incentives to developers to install electric chillers rather than the thermal chillers supported by DE steam. Council initially looked to the private sector to build out and operate the DLWC proposition. Request for proposals went out with a bid selection process undertaken by professional engineers most familiar with the proposition in 1993. Allegations of corruption led to a police investigation, the bid selection left unopened in a sealed envelope. No corruption was found, however it was noted in the police report that the board of the DE company was not working cohesively. All went quiet on the DLWC front in the mid 90's as steam and chilled water sales barely covered operating expenses. By the end of 1995, City opted to write off $7.6 million in accumulated interest owed on 30 million dollars of infrastructure investment. Another large infrastructure cash injection was already looming. The cooling demand from downtown office towers drove the need for electrical grid reinforcement, according to archival notations. Hydro was considering a $75 million dollar distribution grid upgrade when leadership offered to buy out a portion of DE debt to the City in order to end the thermal DE exercise. This option was not taken by Council. Instead, Council doubled efforts to develop DLWC, opting to relieve electricity demand in the congested Hydro grid. Thermal DE continued to rise as an alternative supply to stabilize the downtown power supply, rather than rely exclusively on Hydro. Chasing DLWC with new enthusiasm, the City pressed forward, bringing on Berkeley Consulting Group in May 1997 to facilitate the DE Directors and Executive through a process examining all options for rolling out DLWC. The process wrapped up with a decision to amend the Toronto District Heating Corporation Act, 1980, enabling the venture to raise share capital and borrow for DLWC infrastructure. The new organizational structure of ON #467633 would continue with four City-appointed directors on the board of nine, and City control of access to rights-of-way.
Province of Ontario worked with the City of Toronto to make it happen. In response to a proposal from the City of Toronto in September 1998, Ontario allowed an amendment to the TDHC Act tagged on the coat-tails of Bill 35 Energy Competition Act, 1998, already through second reading. The TDHC Act, 1998 came into effect with the Act to deregulate the energy market, in December 1999. At this point, ON #467633 became a business corporation, vested with the ability to raise share capital and to borrow on its own merit. TDHC Act, 1998 remains in effect to this day, with a rather curious exemption. Enwave Energy's current position, as expressed by Senior VP Amy Jacobs, is that Enwave is a private utility and does not have to share rate information with the public. According to Bill 35, the Act to allow private energy companies access to public rights-of-way, any corporation supplying a utility to the public is a public utility, and subject to the Public Utilities Act. Curiously, ON #467633 is singled out from other Independent Energy Market Operators (IMO's), exempt from Sec 58. Section 58 requires permission from a municipality by way of a by-law to allow a given IMO, also called local distribution companies (LDC's) the right to access its right-of-way.
Former City Councillor Dennis Fotinos explained the value of ON #467633 goes beyond its face value, the climate-friendly thermal energy stabilizing the electrical grid, avoiding peak demand. Deflecting the pressure from Toronto Hydro, offering millions to sewer DE, and Mayor Mel Lastman eager to end a long term drain on City resources, Fotinos says he saw value in the legislation defining the DE company. This corporation to be maintained in force, ON #467633, formed in 1969 by a Special Act of Legislation, having Royal Assent is uniquely vested with the legal right to dig in any street in Ontario. Accordingly, the legislation was amended, the TDHC Act, 1998 maintains the valuable access to ON rights-of-way without express permission from the municipality, while also allowing for private equity investment and issuing of shares. City Council moved to accept a new roster of Directors for the DE company, the Articles of Incorporation amended in early November 1999 with nine new Directors, including City Councillor Dennis Fotinos. In December 1999, Fotinos resigned his seat on Council to take on the leadership of ON #467633, tasked with overhauling steam rates and beginning the design and build-out of DLWC.
We pick up the trail again in December 2000 with the first mention of Enwave. 2000 City Council Minutes remain missing, as of publication we still don't know where they are. Unable to understand what led to the significant changes that transpired, we jump over to a conversation with Dennis Fotinos, and the ON Corporate Registry to fill in the history gaps. City Council Minutes pick up again in December 2000, that last meeting of 2000 bound up in Volume 1 of the 2001 sequence. By Dec 2000 and on forward we see the new brand, Enwave Energy. ON Corporations documents show the name search for Enwave was initiated back in September 1999. Fotinos says the name came to him in an elevator, as he pondered a rebrand to demonstrate the new leadership, sharp and focused. The graphic design followed, steam and DLWC captured in the new logo. The Articles of Incorporation of ON #467633 were officially amended in mid-March 2000, and Enwave District Energy became the new moniker for ON #467633. This amendment came with the standard caveat, that a change of name does not alter the duties, rights or obligations of the registered company. From 2000 City Minutes on-line, announcement for the annual meeting of ON #467633 in August, the first with the new name, Enwave, retaining all the Directors, in accordance with the law, the TDHC Act, 1998. Ontario Energy Board was still the final arbiter for rate disputes, the Directors still had to be Canadian citizens. The only items on the August 2000 agenda were the adoption of the new Board, installed Nov 1999, and the appointment of Ernst and Young as auditors.
From this point, it was all on Dennis Fotinos to build DLWC. A two-part interview with Dennis Fotinos goes into more detail. Fotinos had to revise the rate structure of the company. The hospitals held priority for steam delivery with low and stable rates entrenched in the legislation. Hydro gas interruption meant the DE operator had to endure random fluctuations in fuel pricing based on the weather. The DE company had always been the buffer for energy rate fluctuations, sheltering customers with rate stability. The rate formula of the day had never worked to produce a profit, the DE venture had so far not made a debt payment, it surely would not be able to issue dividends without significant changes. City CAO Michael Garrett had praised the former TDHC management, the long term operator had been praised for operational efficiency, so there was not a lot of play to improve the bottom line through operational efficiency. Fotinos had only one option, the rates had to go up. OEB says no rate disputes have been brought up for resolution, so whatever Fotinos did, the hospitals did not object. Fotinos took DE from barely covering fuel and operating budget to a profitable venture, gaining the attention of bigger fish in the investment pond.
The building of the most unique and expansive thermal energy project in the world is its own story. Fotinos worked out a beautiful partnership with Toronto Water that takes care of both utilities needs to this day. Warmer water temperatures in summer promoting algae growth near the raw water intakes created taste and odour issues and plenty of complaints to Toronto Water. Invasive zebra mussels had to be controlled with chemicals, a challenging treatment to perform way out in the lake. Satisfying the need for both utilities at once, Fotinos proposed to Water manager Kevin Loughborough, to build three new 42" intake lines, five km long and sink them down to 80m. These lines were built at a cost of around $230 million, a $1 million contribution coming from Natural Resources Canada. The beautiful new deep water lines were sold back to the City for a dollar, with the DE venture assured of fifty years access to the thermal exchange plan, the City assured of a consistent cash transfer, initially set at three-quarters of a penny per tonne of chill.
At depth, the cooling loop was assured consistently cold water, 4 degrees Celsius all year long, while the Island Water Treatment Plant would not have to worry about mussels, algae or taste and odour complaints. It was a match made in heaven. DE moved in to Toronto Water's John St Pumping Station with its giant heat exchanger units tucked in all around the pipe gallery, the heat transfer between the DE closed loop and the closed potable water lines worked like a charm. Heat units collected from the sweaty client towers downtown were rejected at John St, resulting in a slight warming of the potable water on the way to city taps. The now heat-depleted closed loop was recirculated to the client buildings, repeating the process. Rather than mechanical chillers running up the electrical demand, spewing CFC's and shedding heat outside the buildings, Toronto was running a cool and comfortable, climate friendly air conditioning system, the envy of cities around the globe.
In 2004, another name change came for ON #467633, Enwave Energy Corporation launched DLWC to its first customers, the Royal Bank Plaza and Oxford's One University Ave. The grand opening event was attended by thousands to see Alex Baldwin declare a "climate mitigation miracle". Prompted by Fotinos to publicly trap the Province, Baldwin called out the Queens Park dignitaries present, drawing out an unintended public commitment. Trapped by those words uttered before the crowd and reported in the papers, Queens Park had no choice but to sign on for DLWC. According to Fotinos, those same people nursed a grudge for twenty years, dropped DLWC the minute the supply term was up. Chuckling, "They hate me that much." By 2008, Fotinos had the DE company running without a hitch, 27 buildings hooked up and another 46 signed on, well on the way to the target 100 buildings. When Metro Hall connected at a cost ~$2.9M, the Globe and Mail, Toronto Sun articles covered the addition of the 27th building on DLWC, declaring the City of Toronto ready to tell the world how DE is done. Dennis Fotinos was quoted in the Globe and Mail article, remarking it was a good time for the venture to be privatized. Fotinos said there was no need for high priced executives and City control, DE was running smoothly with experienced stationary engineer operators. David Miller was Mayor of Toronto at the time, under pressure by OMERS to sell out to private interests. Miller spoke to us from his home in Victoria, BC where he manages C40 Cities for climate action. Miller says was not in favour of selling the City shares in Enwave Energy as supports public ownership of utilities. OMERS was really itching to cash out at this point and offered to buy the City's 43% for $90 million. Miller held his ground, DE stayed under City ownership and direction for a few more years.
Along came Brookfield
In 2012, OMERS finally got to cash out of DE, the City finally recovered decades of investment with the sale of ON #467633. A group of companies backed by Brookfield offered $480 million for the thermal DE utility. The City took home $167 million for its 43% share, and Borealis Infrastructure pocketed $223 million for the 57%, the lawyer fees and investment broker covered by the balance $90 million. As Brookfield took over ON #467633, the management stayed on, Fotinos would not bow out for another six years. Fotinos left Enwave Energy in 2018 to start Noventa Energy Partners, where he is working on wastewater energy transfer for some of the largest thermal energy projects in the world.
Corporate records for ON #467633 under Brookfield ownership do not show an amendment for new Directors, rather the corporation number was finally amalgamated January 8, 2014 after 45 years in use. A new corporation was formed, ON # 1908730 Enwave Energy Corporation, a private operation under Brookfield management with Directors Justin Beber of Bay St, Toronto, Jim Reid and Darren Soice of Calgary, AB. Over the next decade, the operations would expand into new markets in Canada and the USA. By 2021, Kevin Kerr and James Wierstra had been listed as Directors of at least two new corporations, a new federal Canadian Corp called Enwave Investments and a numbered federal corporation, opened and closed in January 2021. "2380760 Ontario Inc" was also registered with Kerr and Wierstra as Directors in January 2021. When Ontario Teachers Pension Plan and IFM Investors closed the deal to acquire the Canadian portion of Enwave Energy $2.8 billion in June 2021, ON # 1908730 and "2380760 Ontario Inc" were amalgamated to form the present day Enwave Energy Corporation, ON #5050342. Kevin Kerr and James Wierstra are the Directors.
Here we are in 2025. The three billion dollar Enwave of OTPP and IFM is a complete enigma. We cannot fathom what rates DLWC customers must be paying to provide Ontario Teachers with 7% on the enormous sum laid out for this investment. We have no idea of the operating details to share with contemplative municipalities. All clients are on non-disclosure agreements, the OEB doesn't go near it, in spite of the City directing OEB to remain engaged in their mandate concerning the green, clean energy forms. No one seems to know if all clients in the system are on the same rates. The official story from Enwave, with no one answering their main telephone line, reacting with suspicion when a reporter comes around, is they don't have to disclose rate information as a private utility. The current owners Ontario Teachers Pension Plan will not respond to tell us how they evaluated this investment. The Gowling WLG lawyers authoring the recent Energy Report covering Enwave's DLWC will not respond to questions.
It could be that everyone is just really busy, as we all are. The concern is, how far the pendulum has swung from accountability to privacy. the City was determined to maintain control of the rights-of-way, the Public Utilities Act remains in force, as does Toronto District Heating Act, 1998 which says directors of the DE company must be Canadian citizens. Enwave does not seem to recognize what we read in the intentions of City Council for transparency and protection of the people of Toronto. Here we are with a truly private entity air conditioning the downtown, holding sweeping permission to dig tunnels, one of two Directors is not a Canadian citizen, and both Directors sit together on the Board of Global Container Terminals, operating out of the Port of Vancouver.
How to Net Zero Safely
Every municipality has its unparalleled ethos, a particular way of living and being expressed through the presentation and function of its best planned, best built and best managed buildings. Ideally, the local buildings are tied to the local sustainable energy grid for the efficiencies achieved at scale, each city will have its own unique version.
The vision of Net Zero - When the buildings of your city cease contributing fuel to the climate wildfire. Such a vision requires commitment, inspired planning and a great deal of cooperation at Council. A multi-disciplinary team must coordinate to plan, execute and integrate the many strategies required. This effort requires all hands on deck, all minds on point to prune out unsustainable and detrimental practises, grafting in those alternative, sustainable construction techniques and energy sources. Every municipality will naturally find its own unique style, its own way to Zero.
- Construction - Design public and private buildings with the end in mind, site plan for the orientation of greatest efficiency, maximizing passive solar gains, utilize urban forestry to shield from heat, make best use of insulation, tie in to renewable energy. Application of modern methods of construction favour off-site prefabrication to maximize efficiencies through the entire construction process, reducing waste and achieving greater precision.
- Renewable Energy Integration: Incorporate renewable energy sources such as solar panels, wind turbines, or geothermal systems to generate onsite energy sustainably.
- Optimise the insulation - shielding from the effects of heat and cold, utilize advanced insulation materials and construction methods to prevent heat loss from the building envelope.
- Energy-Efficient Mechanical Systems - prioritize high-efficiency heating, ventilation, and air conditioning components to maintain the building's temperature with minimal energy consumption.
- Water Conservation - Integrate water-efficient fixtures, greywater systems, and rainwater harvesting to reduce water consumption and promote sustainable water management.
- Green Roof - integrate living plants on rooftops for enhanced insulation value, enhancing biodiversity and mitigating urban heat island effects.
- Monitor Performance - make use of smart building tech: sensors, measuring and recording energy usage to maximize operational efficiency.
- Lifecycle Assessment - evaluate the environmental impact of materials used, construction processes, and the building's overall performance over time.
- Certifications and Standards - follow the guidance from green building certifications and standards, such as BREEAM or LEED, to ensure the construction aligns with internationally recognised sustainability benchmarks.
|
|
|
|
All rights reserved 2025 - WTNY - This material may not be reproduced in whole or in part and may not be distributed,
publicly performed, proxy cached or otherwise used, except with express permission.
|
|
