Fans of Sesame Street will recall the iconic video “Opposites Day,” in which Bert and Ernie learn all about opposites. Whatever they do, the reverse is intended. Whatever they say, the opposite is meant. Hilarious for adults, educational for the kids.
In a stark example of life imitates art, Tantramar Municipal Council and residents were treated recently to their own version of Opposites Day, as NB Power’s Chief Commercial Officer Brad Coady and his entourage appeared before Municipal Council on July 14. The ostensible purpose? To demonstrate transparency about the proposed 500-megawatt fossil fuel power generation plant for Centre Village in Tantramar, to be built, owned and operated by the American firm PROENERGY. But the result? Obscurity, unintelligibility, obfuscation. Opposites Day indeed.
Coady presented to Council for about 12 minutes, supported by a series of PowerPoint slides, and then seemed to artfully dodge a series of questions from Councillors. Did he enhance transparency in connection with the Centre Village proposal? Did he say anything at all to inform Councillors and the public about this dangerous project? Or did he leave all of us more confused, more skeptical, than before?
Many examples might be cited to support the argument that Coady seemed more interested in obfuscation than in enlightening the public. In one case, Coady repeated the oft-quoted claim that the giant turbines associated with the project would operate only 7 per cent of the time, apparently intending to ease our concerns about the combustion of fossil fuels, the poisoning of our climate, and the degradation of the exceptionally important and delicate ecology of the Chignecto Isthmus. Does this claim make sense at all? Does it not strain credulity to suggest that a project whose costs approach $3.5 billion will lie idle 93 per cent of the day?
And what about the commitment to sell 100 MW of power to Nova Scotia, a commitment revealed to the Energy and Utilities Board of New Brunswick, and the public, only on February 2? If the Independent Electricity System Operator in Nova Scotia exercises its option to draw this power from New Brunswick, what impact will that have on the operation of the Centre Village plant? Does this not give the lie to NB Power’s claim that the Centre Village plant is necessary only to meet crises of peak demand in New Brunswick? Will our friends in Nova Scotia accept mere intermittent supply, or will they insist on a steady, reliable source of necessary power?
Coady is quite agile at deflection. At one point in his presentation, he said that the Centre Village plant “…has something called a synchronous condenser capability, and that’s essential for integrating renewable energy.” This statement, one can only assume, is meant to bolster the claim that the Centre Village project would be a transitional resource, helping New Brunswick move away from fossil fuel combustion and toward a more fully renewable energy future. But Coady’s logic here is suspect, at best. The clear implication of his words? Because we have synchronous condenser capability, you ought to believe us when we say that this plant is intended for transitional purposes only. But the truth is that synchronous condenser capability is required by any addition of renewables to the grid; it is not logical to package it with a 25-year commitment to an American company to burn fossil fuels. And so the deflection is on – please think of the synchronous condenser; please don’t think about fossil fuel combustion.
One of the strikingly less expensive and increasingly available alternatives to fossil fuel peaker plants is battery storage, known as BESS (a Battery Energy Storage System). See the very successful Oneida Energy Storage Project in Ontario, operating reliably since May 2025. At the Tantramar Municipal Council meeting, Coady said that “[t]here’s a lot of interest in having a battery, but where it breaks down from [sic] us is once the economics get on the table, we can no longer come up with a business case to move it through the Energy and Utilities Board.” While this may at one point have been true, it is certainly no longer the case. As reported by CBC News on March 18, a BESS facility would be far less expensive and more reliable than a peaker plant. And in addition, it would provide these advantages without dangerous emissions, and without the heightened risks of exorbitant health and environmental costs. Much evidence to this effect was led by the highly qualified intervenors at the Energy and Utilities Board hearings on the Centre Village project. And the Oneida Project in Ontario is living proof that it can be done.
Operating merely seven per cent of the time? Unbelievable. Synchronous condenser capability to give us all some comfort? Deflection from the real dangers of the project. Batteries too expensive? Contrary to all extant evidence.
It’s become quite fashionable these days for corporate leaders and politicians to claim transparency, to promise transparency, to insist that they are committed to transparency. But are these claims and promises real? Or are deflection and obscurity what the public is expected to suffer in the name of openness? Transparency, or obfuscation? There may have been something educational for youngsters about Tantramar’s own version of Opposites Day, but is there anything hilarious there for the rest of us? Not so much.
On July 22, CBC News cited Premier Holt at the Charlottetown Premiers’ conference as saying that New Brunswick ought to be considered as the energy hub of the Maritimes. An admirable ambition, but one that ought to be realized by the progressive development of clean, renewable energy supported by battery storage. This is not an ambition to be anchored in aging, dangerous, dirty technology from the last century that will compromise our environment in every way at radical expense to New Brunswickers for decades to come.
Logan Atkinson is a resident of Tantramar, New Brunswick and a member of the Seniors for Climate Tantramar Steering Committee.
