SaskPower

I do not want to see our province go further into coal as a power source when there are clearly other, less harmful sources. If we are going to spend over $26 billion, we should be spending it to bring clean energy sources into the province. I would also rather see the money spent on power use reduction measure such as energy efficiency programs, home solar, or power storage programs

As this Saskatchewan taxpayer, I am disappointed in the Sask party and the decisions they are “making “. I do not feel like the data centre has been transparent, and the costs of who is covering for that facility has been made no one. I do not want to be paying for that data centre to run and use the electricity grid or the water source. I feel like that needs to be on hold until we can figure out who’s paying for it. How it’s going to be supplied energy that is not going to affect the residence of Saskatchewan. I also am not in support of syncing a bunch of money to keep Coal going for a short period of time. I think that’s very backwards thinking and they’re better ways of having more stable, renewable energy that does not cost taxpayers more money. During this time in the economy, hiking up rates to cover stupid costs, I cannot justify and understand why we are going backwards and having to pay more for these poor decisions. I would like a pause on all of these, and for the government to be more clear transparent and provide information to residence and potentially have residence be able to vote on what they would like. If it made sense to have a data centre that was not costing residence anything and that was not gonna be detrimental to the environment or use a resources than I would have no problem. Same with the energy and wanting to maintain a dirty energy, such as coal. If that wasn’t going to cost a ridiculous amount and that it could be done, cost-effectively efficiently and environmentally as friendly as possible then potentially I could justify continuing that, but that is unfortunately not the case for this resource and source of power. I do not support any of these and really would like to see the government reconsider and use their brains and step outside of the box and stop trying to make friends of their party more rich while taking advantage of Saskatchewan and taxpayers and residence and stealing their money and spending on dumb things.

I totally oppose the rate increase to move towards refurbishing coal mines! Coal is dirty, polluting, and more expensive than wind and solar, and the whole idea is shortsighted and doesn’t consider the harms to us as humans or to the climate crisis. Let’s think ahead and move towards clean energy!

All around us prices are rising, at a seemingly uncontrollable rate. These SaskPower increases further exacerbate the difficulty all residents and businesses face in trying to stay viable. Some common sense would be a timely intervention to cancel, or at least minimize the increases. This certainly would benefit every Saskatchewan resident.

In the spring of 2012, my parents decided to purchase 5 acres of land and 250 solar panels. One of my fondest childhood memories is of my dad drilling and hammering anchors into concrete blocks to which the panels were later mounted (and being bitten agressively by blackflies in the process). In the intervening years, the plant has been entirely forgettable. Apart from sweeping off especially heavy snowfall and clearing brush and tree limbs every few years, the only maintenance that has been required is when lightning directly struck one of the inverters, and very recently when rainwater leaked into a junction box. Around 7 panels have cracked and been bypassed, which has had a negligible impact on production. The system continues to produce and the best evidence on degradation suggests they will do so until I am middle-aged. Although not the kind of investment an advisor would usually suggest, the outcome has been tremendously positive both on the scale of my family, but also to the grid. The income from the plant allowed my parents to support me to receive a bachelors' degree. This income is earned by the PV strings already saturating the output of the inverters by mid-morning, powering about 3% of all the air conditioners in the nearest town. In the intervening years, the per-kilowatt cost of solar has dropped three-fold. The balance-sheet case for powering society by panes of molten sand epoxied to a sheet of more pure molten sand with thin ribbons of silver glued on is now clear to every economist. Between the discovery of the photovoltaic effect and the year 2022, 1 terawatt of solar capacity was added to the grid. Between 2022 and 2024, the second terawatt was installed. Following the Texas blackouts, it has been claimed that solar power is unreliable and causing dangerous instabilities and oscillations. To the contrary, inverters built to modern standards have so-called ride-through algorithms that actively stabilize fluctuations in power. As summarized by a recent report by the NREL, large grids have been built with >90% capacity supplied by grid-forming PV inverters and suffer from no stability issues at all. I hope that Saskachewan can reevaluate a decision which seems likely to prove to impair the competitiveness of our province. No generative AI tools were used to write this comment.

We need to shift to more renewables to keep the rates down. Solar and wind is more cost effective than refitting old coal plants. Get the coal ideologues out of the decision making process and get people who are focused on the fiduciary responsibility of SaskPower to keep rates low for Sask citizens

I do not support a rate increase to pay for the refurbishing of coal plants. The panel needs to have all of the information, including the cost to the province of this refurbishing, especially when alternate power sources should be explored for future generations

As a Tax paying Saskatchewan citizen, I am completely opposed to using tax dollars or rate increases for size power in any way that will extend the life of our coal fired power stations

I’m tired of paying for projects that are never finished that don’t include any green thinking . Do better you guys . 26 billion is ridiculous

I am dismayed that the Saskatchewan government has decided to extend the use of coal-powered electric power stations beyond the deadline of 2030. Rather than turn to sources of renewable energy, it has chosen the most environmentally unfriendly option available to fund the development of the most costly and uncertain energy option for the future, namely nuclear energy. These choices will lead to higher power rates for citizens already struggling to keep economically afloat, ignore the urgent need to conserve energy, and put Saskatchewan on the wrong side of federal laws and goals. The debts incurred by Sask Power to support this misguided plan should not be offset by raising power rates for individual consumers. The provincial government needs to alter its thinking to benefit the general population and the land.

In the spring of 2012, my parents decided to purchase 5 acres of land and 250 solar panels. One of my fondest childhood memories is of my dad drilling and hammering anchors into concrete blocks to which the panels were later mounted (and being bitten agressively by blackflies in the process). In the intervening years, the system has been eminently forgettable. Apart from sweeping off especially heavy snowfall and clearing brush and tree limbs every half-decade, the only maintenance that has been required is when lightning struck one of the inverters, and very recently when rainwater leaked into a junction box. Around 7 panels have cracked and been bypassed, which has had a negligible impact on production. The system continues to produce current and the best evidence on degradation suggests it will do so efficiently until I am middle-aged. Although not the kind of investment an advisor would usually suggest, the outcome has been tremendously positive both on the scale of my family, but also to the grid. The income from the plant allowed my parents to support me to receive a bachelors' degree. This income is well-earned by the PV strings already saturating the output of the inverters by mid-morning, powering about 3% of all the air conditioners in the nearest town. In the intervening years, the per-kilowatt cost of solar has dropped three-fold. The balance-sheet argument for powering our communities by panes of molten sand epoxied to a sheet of more pure molten sand ornamented by ribbons of silver metal is now clear to every economist. Between the discovery of the photovoltaic effect and the year 2022, 1 terawatt of solar capacity was added to the grid. Between 2022 and 2024, the second terawatt was installed. Following the Texas blackouts, it has been claimed that solar power is unreliable and will inevitably cause dangerous instabilities and oscillations. To the contrary, inverters built to modern standards have so-called ride-through algorithms that actively stabilize fluctuations in power. As summarized by a recent report by the NREL, large grids have been built with >90% capacity supplied by grid-forming PV inverters and suffer from no stability issues at all. The economic argument holds before costing in externalities from other sources of electricity. I recently attended a lecture at USask campus by atmospheric scientist Sergey Khaykin, a scientist who operates a stratospheric monitoring system in France. The professor described an incredible phenomenon seen following consecutive years' wildfires in Alberta and Saskachewan, fires of such ferocity and covering such a wide area that he referred to them as "pan-boreal" - affecting the entire forest band of the northern hemisphere. The amount of black-carbon smoke that was released in these events caused a "self-lofting vortex" in the atmosphere above, visible to the naked eye. This phenomenon had never been observed before 2010, but now appears to be a seasonal occurence. According to the the Canadian Forestry Service, the intensity of these fires was caused by snowmelt occuring weeks earlier than historically seen, leading to extremely dry conditions over more than a quarter of Canada's land mass. According to international consensus, this shift will be exacerbated by continuing to increase the concentration of infrared-absorbing gases in the atmosphere. I believe that Saskachewan may be leaving a great deal of competitiveness on the table by continuing to expand existing power generation forms.

SaskPower has decided to refurbish and extend coal-fired power generation. The lack of transparency surrounding the economic analysis, alternatives considered, long-term risks, and projected impacts on Saskatchewan ratepayers and industry is concerning. At the same time, SaskPower is proposing electricity rate increases while the province moves toward spending billions on coal refurbishment projects. As Saskatchewan residents, businesses, industries, municipalities, and communities, we deserve: - clear information - transparent analysis - meaningful public engagement - and confidence that major long-term energy decisions are being made through a rigorous and accountable process Electricity policy affects far more than just power bills. It impacts industrial competitiveness, investment attraction, GHG emissions reduction commitments, and ultimately Saskatchewan’s long-term economic future.

This seems a very fast and loose use of provincial revenues, ill advised with no thought for future generations. It makes one wonder who is making these budgetary decisions. Why is this government running our crown corporations down, and then selling them? The crown land sales were a travesty.

Facts: 1. Hatch Engineering capital cost estimate of $11.4 M to refurbish the fleet of existing coal fired generators = $8,062/kW. When amortized over a 25-year life span of the generators and when costs of fuel, operating and maintenance are included the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) from the refurbished coal fired generator will be about $153/MWh. This cost to produce electricity is about 3x the costs to generate electricity from renewables and 2x the cost of electricity from SMRs. 2. The LCOE from refurbished coal plants assumes no carbon pricing applied to emissions. Application of $130/t carbon price as per the Alberta/Canada energy agreement would nearly double the LCOE. 3. Annual emissions from the generation of electricity in Saskatchewan under a scenario of refurbishment and continued operation of these generators as coal-fired units would result in about 320 Mt of CO2 accumulated emissions over the next 25 years. These emissions are projected to result in about $252 B in costs of damage from climate change. 4. Refurbishment and continued operation of these generators as coal-fired units would be illegal under Canadian law. It is unlikely that the Government of Saskatchewan and SaskPower would be eligible to access Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credits under a scenario of non-compliance with the law of the land. ITCs offer a refundable tax credit of up to 15% of costs for investment in low emitting electricity generation, storage and transmission between provinces. ITCs of up to 50% are available for carbon capture and storage equipment and up to 37.5% for carbon transport and storage equipment. A scenario of non-compliance with the federal coal-fired electricity laws would likely excludes access to these credits and drive up the levelized cost of electricity from all generators in Saskatchewan. 5. There is no economic foundation for further consideration of refurbishment and continued operation of coal-fired generators in Saskatchewan. The costs of electricity and emissions associated with this scenario should exclude further consideration of this option for future power generation in Saskatchewan. 6. There are other options including a repurposing of the coal-fired generators to negative emissions BioEnergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) fueled by forestry and agriculture biomass residues. Sales of high valued certified Carbon Removal Credits has the potential to drive down the LCOE from these generators to the lowest cost option. The net effect would be a drop rates for supply of what would be clean electricity to industry and consumers in Saskatchewan.

These rate increases and the push to refurbish coal plants are a failure to the Saskatchewan people. Increasing rates in order to fund a backwards energy source like coal is unconscionable and will damage our well being and the well being of future generations. We should be investing in clean energy sources and moving away from fossil fuels and their destruction. Enough of this greed and stubborn failure to adapt to reality! Our planet is burning and we have a choice as to whether we help it go up in flames or do what it takes to move in responsible, sustainable directions for the benefit of all. Please choose wisely.

I am very concerned about the proposed power increase. I wouldn't mind paying more for power, but when it is produced using dirty coal and natural gas, I do not agree to an increase. How is it that we cannot move forward with clean energy in Saskatchewan? We are the sunniest province! Why is our grid not powered by solar energy?

I do NOT support extending the operation of coal-fired plants. There are so many better options that give us secure power and jobs while also being better for our health and not worsening the climate crisis.

When Scott Moe announced his plan to partner with Bell to build an AI data center outside of Regina, he DID NOT bring coal-burning power plants into the discussion when asked about how the 300 MW power requirement would be met. It was not until after that announcement that he announced that nearly $3 000 000 000 of resident taxes would be spent to refurbish coal plants. This equates to a 4% power rate hike to residents in order to pay for a project that is now deemed to cost 10 times that amount by 2050. (So much for 2050 emissions targets!) The Sask Party continues to align with current US policy in propelling us back to the 1950's at a time when every other country on the planet is investing in and seeking investment for renewable and nuclear energy as well as hydroelectricity. Ironically, Scott Moe continues to proudly promote the burning of fossil fuels as he watches his own province burn. This stance is visible in most policies initiated by the Sask Party such as expensive and dubious carbon capture investment, legislation of mandatory oil and gas classes in high schools, pushing for environmental deregulation and disincentivizing electric vehicle purchases, the only province to do so by placing a tax on the purchase of EVs. Raising power rate taxation for Saskatchewan citizens to refurbish an obsolete industry, is a failure of leadership on the part of this government.

I am opposed to the proposed rate increases for residential, small business, and farm customers. It is time for industry to pay more for the electricity it consumes, as it is primarily industry that is driving the need for expanded electricity generation in Saskatchewan. On a per kilowatt hour basis, large industrial customers are paying roughly half the rate of residential customers. I find this appalling. Moreover, industry gets to write off their expenses for electricity consumption, whereas I and senior citizens like me across the province do not. I want your proposed rate increases to apply to industry, but not to residential customers. I also want to address the revelation that re-furbishing Sask Power coal-fired power plants will entail 11.4 billion in capital costs. I am appalled that the Sask government intends to run these dirty energy plants in violation of federal law which requires their closure by January of 2030. I am simply not prepared to pay for refurbishment costs at the expense of our climate and health. I ask the Rate Review Panel to reject any rate increases related to this illegal refurbishment.

I oppose these proposed rate increases because Saskatchewan residents are being asked to pay more to support the continued use and refurbishment of aging coal-fired power plants. SaskPower’s current direction shifts the financial burden of delayed energy transition planning onto ratepayers while extending reliance on one of the highest-emission and increasingly costly forms of electricity generation. SaskPower has stated that part of the justification for these increases is continued investment in coal infrastructure and grid reliability. However, many jurisdictions are reducing dependence on coal in favour of lower-cost renewable generation, storage, energy efficiency, and grid modernization strategies. Saskatchewan households and businesses should not face repeated rate increases tied to maintaining outdated coal assets rather than accelerating a transparent, diversified, and forward-looking energy transition. I encourage the Panel to scrutinize whether continued coal refurbishment represents the lowest-cost long-term option for ratepayers and whether sufficient consideration has been given to alternatives that could reduce both emissions and future electricity costs.

I am writing to ask that you scrap the current rate application and start again because the estimated cost of the government coal refurbishment has gone up dramatically since the beginning of this application and accurate information needs to be considered. Sask residents absolutely have the right to know what the government is doing with our infrastructure. They must be open and transparent about what is going on in our province. Thank you.

I do not support rate increases being used to refurbish or extend coal-fired power stations. You can say that continued investment in coal is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure, while cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, energy efficiency, and grid modernization are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions rather than more spending on coal.

I'm a lifelong Regina resident. In general I'm in support of raising rates to renew infrastructure and keep up with require system expansion and improvements. However I have deep concerns about rates being raised to extend the lifespan of coal-fired power plants. I have three main concerns. Firstly, refurbishing our old coal power plants flies in the face of our national GHG emissions commitments. As I write this, we're in the midst of a May heat wave the likes of which I've never seen in my lifetime. I want the rates I pay to SaskPower to contribute to greener power than coal will produce. Secondly, keeping our coal plants running longer has a high risk of becoming a stranded asset and a colossal waste of money. The rest of Canada (and the world) is making strides to move away from coal. Why are we trying to keep it rolling? This is the power equivalent of subsidizing Blockbuster Video stores. Let's move on. Finally, I am very displeased with the process by which the decision to stick with coal was made. I know folks who work for SaskPower, and my understanding is that they learned from the Provincial Government's press release that they were now supposed to keep coal alive. This gives me exactly zero confidence in the decision making process behind this. How am I supposed to believe that this decision is based on sound management of our provincial grid and ratepayer dollars? What will assure me that this is not an ideologically-driven decision with not input from the power utility itself?

I am opposed. Why further invest in coal when even our neighbour to the west has more renewal sources of energy then we do.

I oppose this rate increase. This government should be looking at reducing costs for families not increasing them

I believe that rates need to consider long term view and the energy services provided to this province by a crown corporation which must take into consideration the full interests of Saskatchewan people including protecting future generations from climate change. The haphazard way this most recent supply plan has been approached does not signal confidence in the rate plan. The fact that SaskPower quietly began charging the rate before seeking approval further signals that more direction and guardrails need to be placed on the utilities decision to ensure long term sustainability for the people of this province.

No rate increases for extending coal-fired power in Saskatchewan. Let’s move forward rather than backward. Our children and grandchildren will thank us.

Moe, do better. Spend the billions on something more environment friendly.

$26 billion on coal while my rates go up again. This isn't energy security, it's ratepayer-funded recklessness. We're being asked to foot the bill for a bet that your own people call extreme risk. Saskatchewan deserves better than this.

I am very disheartened by the idea of spending 26 billion on coal power which needs to be phased out. Rate increases cannot be made to help fund coal any further. Almost every jurisdiction is moving away from coal and we are one of the few pushing it further into the future. Coal is an old technology and we cannot keep it any longer than absolutely necessary. I was disheartened to hear that this would likely cut the amount of renewables being implemented which only become more efficient and cost effective by the year. I would also like to see more comment by Saskpower as well as the government on the reasoning for increases and believe we need more information and time for all sides to deliberate.

Not necessary at all… we have the solar and wind, real renewables, no need to subsidize nuclear (not ready soon enough not worth the toxic waste) to power massive AI data centres

I have yet to read anything to convince me that there is a sound business case in Sask Power's proposals. I fear that decisions are being made for ideological reasons rather than practical ones. This fear was not allayed in reading the qualifications of most of the panel members as described in their bios. There is little there to give me confidence in the panel's ability to deal with the material involved. It is reassuring that the Panel has 'technical consultants' to work with them but only one of these seems to have any back ground in energy production and distribution. Perhaps go back to the drawing board and bring in a balanced panel of qualified 'technical consultants'.

Hello, These rate increases are unnecessary, because they arise from an unnecessary and exceptionally costly politically-driven decision to refurbish coal power plants. Coal burning is obsolete and extremely destructive to our precious climate. We are witnessing this destruction before our very eyes in real time, with chaotic and extreme harmful fluctuations in weather and temperature. Continuing with coal power will be illegal after 2030, pursuant to federal law. This makes any significant capital expenditure on coal today extremely unwise-ratepayers should not have to pay for this financially and legally risky plan. The current economic climate is already harsh enough on ratepayers with record increases in the cost of fuel and food. To add to this with extravagant and unnecessary costs for coal power will punish ratepayers who are already tapped out. SaskPower would be much better off replacing coal power with renewable solar (rooftop and industrial) and wind energy. Renewables are much cheaper in terms of capital and operating costs. The business case for renewables today is overwhelming. SaskPower should be ordered to request an independent evaluation of the cost of generating an equivalent amount of solar and/or wind power, and if this Panel is minded to award any increase at all, it should be based on the lesser costs of the renewable option, all other things being equal. Yours truly, John Krowina Saskatoon

Wasting precious funds on the ridiculous, outdated, laggard plan to refurbish coal energy is nonsense! Plus, another burden on limited funds will end up with more Saskatchewan people living in a cardboard box (if one is lucky!) on the street! How long will it take Mr. Moe's 'financial management' to force me - at 84 years of age - out of my small home???

I am writing to request that SaskPower not extend the life of coal power plants, should cease investing in nuclear power, and absolutely should not be subsidizing any AI Data Centres. Public funds should be invested in renewable energy. SaskPower should bring back the solar power program that was very successful in the mid 20-teen years (where people would receive credit for the excess power that was created and put back into the grid). We should also be investing in wind power, hydro power, and compressed gas power. All of these options are more environmentally friendly and sustainable. We should not be building nuclear power plants for the sake of the Earth. When a problem occurs, sometimes it requires manual correction by a person to fix it. If, in the distant future, an incident occurs that required manual action but people are no longer around to intervene (due to extinction or a lack of knowledge), the environment and all animals that live there would be in danger of a meltdown or other similar disaster. Another down side to a nuclear facility (or AI data centre, for that matter) would be that it makes an attractive target for anyone with nefarious intentions. Infrastructure for private property should not be subsidized with public funds and the existing customers should not have to compensate or subsidize incoming private entities' projects. If power is required by a private entity, that Private entity should foot the bill for 100% of what it needs on its own. Their "business" is not more valuable than our existence. Please do not extend coal plants, please do not proceed with nuclear power, and please do not subsidize AI Data Centres.

Why doesn't the government invest the coal power cost into sun and wind generation? It's cheaper (including storage systems) and has, relatively, much fewer ongoing inputs (wind and sun, available to all!). 1. Sustainable power will keep us competitive on the international stage for the coming generations. 2. Coal investments will be stranded assets that we the people have to shoulder. 3. Most importantly, GHG emissions! Investing in coal is ethically wrong! 4. Used as a stopgap measure until nuclear power takes over is, at least partially, driven by big corporations, big capital, that removes individual agency and individual producers. As we swoon to the nuclear and big business CEOs, we lose sight of the massive costs, the intractable problem of nuclear waste, and the inevitable security risks.

It is very clear that the renewable energy is a better investment for Sask. than coal. It is more cost effective, less polluting, and will employ more people. It aligns with federal and international climate commitments. Building a modern grid suitable to take advantage of renewable energy provides more resilience. Under the current economic pressure on Sask residents the more expensive coal options should not be considers and do not position SK for the future.

Extending the use of coal seems like simply a politically motivated move. So short-sighted and contrary to worldwide trends. And nuclear is too expensive and dangerous. And now we the taxpayers have to pay for all this!

I wouldn't be opposed to a rate hike if it meant we were progressing towards renewable energy sources. But to regress back to coal? That not only is short sighted but also very costly to implement.

I do not support a rate increase to extend our reliance on coal power.

I oppose the current SaskPower plans for rate increases for the following reasons: 1. Coal burning requiring refurbishing of generators 1.1 will be very expensive, much more than initial stated estimates 1.2 will be illegal under federal law 1.3 will be highly polluting in terms of human health which has economic and social costs 1.4 will be highly productive of CO2 emissions, therefore exacerbates climate change which is already a global emergency 1.5 suggests questionable decision making processes (abrupt changes, reversals, lack of transparency) 2. Plans for nuclear energy 2.1 are extremely expensive, dependent on federal government subsidy 2.2 costs not even estimated, normally ignore costs to store radioactive wastes thousands of years 2.3 require much water for cooling, when droughts may be more frequent 2.4 normally construction of nuclear power plants goes over budget and experiences delays 2.5 nuclear energy would take at least 10 years to become operational, too late to delay major impacts of climate change 3. Plans make little use of renewable energy, including non-utility rooftop solar and batteries (used widely in USA) and wind, in a province where both solar and wind are abundant. Renewables are much quicker and also cheaper than nuclear or coal to implement. 4. Plans indicate no use of energy efficiency/energy conservation/demand side management (does SaskPower have any programs and specialists for this?) or Smarter consumption (adjusting consumption to avoid peak load times)

Please record my disapproval of using rate increases to refurbish our coal power plants. We need to be shifting away from damaging fossil fuels.

I oppose SaskPower’s proposed 3.9% rate increases in 2026 and 2027. These increases are not justified or responsible at a time when households are already under significant financial pressure, especially given the direction the provincial government has chosen for Saskatchewan’s electricity system. Saskatchewan’s decision to extend the operation of coal‑fired power stations beyond 2030—despite federal regulations requiring their phase‑out and despite every other province complying—raises serious concerns about long‑term costs, regulatory risk, and environmental impact. Continuing to invest in coal exposes residents to unnecessary financial and health burdens, and it undermines the province’s credibility in energy planning. This is particularly troubling when renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, paired with modern energy storage, are now widely recognized as among the most cost‑effective options for new electricity generation. Choosing higher‑cost pathways while simultaneously requesting rate increases places an unfair burden on residents. Furthermore, energy conservation remains one of the most effective tools for reducing both system costs and customer bills. Yet conservation and efficiency measures appear to play only a minor role in SaskPower’s planning, despite their proven ability to delay or avoid expensive new infrastructure. I am also deeply concerned about SaskPower’s financial position. The utility already carries a large debt load, and its current long‑term plans would require even greater borrowing. This trajectory is not sustainable and creates significant risk for ratepayers, who will ultimately be responsible for servicing that debt. For these reasons, I oppose the proposed rate increases for 2026 and 2027.

I'm going to vent here because Moe doesn't seem to care how the people of this province feel about what he's doing.... maybe your review panel can make him listen. I don't agree with the direction in which Scott Moe is trying to take our province. Why does he insist on spending 26 billion dollars on coal-fired power when we have so much sun and wind. Europe has windmills that don't have blades, they're more environmentally friendly, why can't we invest in that direction. Scott Moe insists on barreling ahead with multi billion dollar projects that rely heavily on water.... a precious commodity that this province does not always have great amounts of. With the Saskatchewan river system originating in Alberta, they have plans for the water as well, and the glaciers are getting smaller every year... these projects of Moe's are not going to be sustainable. I thought 4 billion for the irrigation project was irresponsible, but this is even so much worse. Coal is supposed to be phased out, not invested in by the billions... I suppose he'll also spend our money fighting the federal government in court because he refuses to phase out coal. And I also suspect he'll be selling our crowns to pay for this. And why is he being so secretive about the costs involved with his coal extension project and pushing the data centre through while ignoring people's objections and not even allowing questions. I don't expect you to answer my questions, I'm just trying to convey my frustration and down right anger at this government. I do not agree with the cost hikes in my power bill because of the coal-fired power extension.

I am opposed to these proposed increases in rates - especially since they are being made on the back of poor choices for electrical sources, continued reliance on coal and the introduction of nuclear power. Nuclear power is a very poor fit for Saskatchewan as it requires water - in very great quantities - for cooling. Continued reliance on coal or petroleum products is also a poor choice. We have more sun and wind probably than any other province. Furthermore I see no attempt to improve the grid making it "smart" and geothermal is completely ignored. This proposal is a for a future that is really our past. It is not the proposal of a brilliant innovative power company. You were doing better a decade ago.

I do not support this. We need to invest in cleaner sources of energy and the costs to continue to invest in dirty coal energy are too high for consumers.

I do not support rate increases being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan beyond the 2030 phase-out date. Continued investment in coal-fired power is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure. Meanwhile, cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions. I do not agree with the Sask Party plan to extend life of coal plants and do not want to contribute to that plan through rate increases.

I do not support these rate increases, because strategically Sask Power is being directed to spend unreasonable amounts of capital to further the life of outdated and expensive infrastructure, namely, coal generation. Manager jurisdictions, have discovered and proven that renewables, and the projects associated with them can be scaled up quickly, provide a better cost structure, and most importantly, are much greener. It’s time for leadership with power to push back against the CIC, and ultimately government by any means that they can to keep us power from pursuing this disastrous strategy

Taxpayers cannot afford anymore increases! Saskatchewan residents never asked for a surveillance "data" centre.

I oppose any rate increase that goes to rebuilding coal power plants, which are against federal regulations. Increases should only be going into upgrades that support renewable power or battery storage.

I do not support increased rates to refurbish coal plants in SK. Coal plants are illegal and cause harmful emissions. It is a bad idea to keep them going. Sask Power should have stuck with their original plan to phase them out per federal rules.

I’m not opposed to a rate increase in itself, but I strongly oppose investing more money into extending the life of coal-fired power plants. This is short-sighted and out of step with the direction the world is moving. I care about the next generation of Saskatchewan residents, and even if cleaner energy costs more in the short term, that would be the right investment to make. Saskatchewan can and should do better.

I don't support this rate increase. It is being done without transparency and analysis. I don't support investment on antiquated energy technology during a time when SK should be investing in clean energy. I want science and evidence to direct future energy investment. This investment is to come from Canadians and Canadian companies and not back room deals with american companies without independent pubic, expert scrutiny and debate in the legislature.

I do not support rate increases being used to refurbish or extend coal fired power stations. Continued investment in coal is costly, very damaging to the environment and may keep our province connected to outdated infrastructure for a long time. There are many more environmentally friendly options: wind power, solar, energy efficiency and grid modernization. I believe that public dollars should support reliable and environmentally friendly energy solutions. The government has the opportunity to more forward with less damaging technology for energy generation. Using coal has already caused significant environment damage to our province.

With old infrastructure and expanding demand rate increases are expected but to invest in limping along old coal power vs nuclear, solar, wind and storage is so wasteful. We have such opportunity to be a clean energy leader in this province.

I do not support rate increases for the purpose of extending coal-fired power in Saskatchewan. I'm concerned about the environmental and financial impacts of this decision. We should be focusing on how we can best use cleaner, cheaper energy sources such as wind and solar power (which I would support rate increases for!). Many other countries across the world are working to phase out coal - let's be innovative and not fall behind.

I oppose extending use of coal to generate electricity and building nuclear reactors. Both are much more expensive ways to generate electricity than alternatives, such as wind and solar, combined with batteries and other forms of energy storage. In addition to being extremely expensive, extending the use of coal power stations and building nuclear reactors would be harmful to health. The Saskatchewan government plans to refurbish electric power stations that use coal and run them at a cost that SaskPower has an estimated to be about 26 billion dollars. The Saskatchewan government plans to burn coal to generate electricity beyond 2030. Canadian federal law requires ending use of conventional coal-fired power stations by 2030, and all other provinces are complying with the law. Instead of violating the law, Saskatchewan should be working to reduce the severity of the effects of climate change by working to rapidly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Droughts, floods, wildfires, and other effects of climate change are causing considerable harm, and the effects of climate change are predicted to become much worse if greenhouse gas emissions are not lowered rapidly. The size of SaskPower’s debt (about 10 billion dollars) is already large compared to its revenue (about 3 billion dollars). SaskPower’s assets are worth over 15 billion dollars, according to its application to the Rate Review Panel. SaskPower’s expenses are about the same as its revenue. Thus, SaskPower’s financial position is already difficult. Adding the expenses associated with extending use of coal and the very high price of nuclear reactors can be expected to bankrupt SaskPower and result in people in Saskatchewan paying much higher rates for electricity in the future. The nuclear reactors are likely to cost much more than current estimates, since recent nuclear reactors have been much more expensive than predicted and required much more time to be completed than predicted. A recent estimate for the first small modular nuclear reactor in Ontario that would produce 300 megawatts of power is 6.1 billion dollars. SaskPower’s maximum power use was a bit less than 4000 megawatts. The cost associated with building nuclear reactors to make a substantial contribution to meeting Saskatchewan’s electricity needs would be very high. However, based on experiences with recent nuclear reactors, the reactors might not be finished after spending billions of dollars, and the final price could be twice or three times the predicted price. There would also be the cost of operating the nuclear reactor, including the cost of nuclear fuel. Nuclear reactors need to be shut down for maintenance and for unexpected problems like hot weather, which can interfere with cooling the reactor core. Radioactive contamination and the risk of a nuclear accident are also concerns when nuclear reactors are used to generate electricity. SaskPower should expand support for energy conservation, since this is the least costly way to reduce the electricity cost for people in Saskatchewan. The strategy for electricity that was adopted by the Saskatchewan government in 2025, was not the result of proper evaluation of options and this plan would cause much higher electricity charges than alternative strategies. We should use the less costly and healthier alternative strategies, such as wind, solar, energy storage, and energy conservation. I would support increases in electricity rates if used to support renewable energy, improvements to the electricity grid, energy storage, and energy conservation. Some references and sources of related information: CBC. 2026-05-13. Leaked SaskPower documents show ‘extreme’ risk in $26B coal refurbishment plan. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-saskpower-coal-refurbishment-9.7198807 CBC. 2025-10-21. Saskatchewan plans nuclear future despite uncertain costs, funding. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/nuclear-power-uranium-mining-energy-saskatchewan-9.6947306 Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility https://wp.ccnr.org Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan https://cleangreensask.ca Saskatchewan Environmental Society https://environmentalsociety.ca SaskPower. Where your power comes from. Accessed 2026-05-28. https://www.saskpower.com/our-power-future/our-electricity/electrical-system/where-your-power-comes-from

I am strongly opposed to any rate increases being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power plants in Saskatchewan.

To whom it should concern, but doesn't seem to - we are in a global financial crisis, what is going through your minds*? Divest from coal already, and you will see funding strains ease. This isn't a difficult concept. Put people before corporations, tax the rich. *I don't believe you have minds, you are simple synchophants for wealthy white men.

I do not think we should increase our rates in order to continue using coal, which is bad for the environment and contributes to high emissions in our province.

I do not support rate increases that are intended to fund the refurbishment of coal-fired power plants. The burning of coal to produce electricity is not only outdated, but it results in significant health risks, causes higher emissions than any other form of electricity generation, and is a major contributor to climate change. There is no justification for the government's plan to refurbish seven coal plants and to allow them to continue operating well beyond 2030. Every other province in Canada has ended the use of coal or is in the process of winding down coal power generation. It is time for Saskatchewan to join the rest of the world in focusing on clean, renewable sources of electricity.

I think it’s appalling for the NDP to instruct people of Saskatchewan to call to cancel this review. It undermines the rate review panels intelligence and knowledge of the subject at hand. If the rate review panel feels information is inadequate or unjust, they need to make that call. Not a political bystander. Another example of government interference that needs to stop. I would encourage this review mice forward and recommendations be made or amended to meet the needs to saskpower and the people of Saskatchewan. All political parties need to stop using this rate review as a political chess piece.

I strongly object to any increases in power rates going to refurbish coal power plants. Coal is a very dirty source of power and we should be moving away from it. Renewables and geothermal should be our main sources of power moving forward. Even if coal plants will save money in the short term we will pay in damages to the environment. Last year it was forest fires (called unprecedented by Scott Moe). This year it was damaging winds and floods. This is all exacerbated by climate change from burning fossil fuels. We have to decrease our reliance on fossil fuels now.

The rate increase, if necessary, should be used to modernize the electrical grid and plants. I oppose the use of funds for refurbishing the old coal power plants or extending their life beyond 2029. As stated clearly in SaskPower's consultation earlier, many other options are available and more beneficial in very many ways, including cost.

I do not support rate increases being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan beyond the 2030 phase-out date. Continued investment in coal-fired power is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure just for political means. Meanwhile, cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency are available and should be supported. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions. I do not agree with the Sask Party plan to extend life of coal plants and do not want to contribute to that plan through rate increases. I would like to further add that SaskPower works better without this significant political interference that is forcing them to choose the future based on politics instead of science or economic advancement.

Regarding the coal plant refurbishment being planned by the Sask Party government, I feel it makes zero sense to continue burning coal especially at such great expense financially and to the environment. It’s the worst possible option we have. Please do not let this plan go forward. Please. Thank you, Scot Thayer Saskatoon

I understand the need to expand and upgrade, but increasing rates to pay to retrofit coal seems like good money after bad. Please explore other options… SMR, large scale solar, home solar wind, hydro upgrades, gas…

I strongly oppose the rate hikes proposed for Sask Power. This rate hike will greatly impact my family’s monthly costs and I can’t imagine how it will be for families who have a lower household income. This plan is all based on extending the life of coal power plants which is fiscally irresponsible and does not prioritize what is best for Saskatchewan citizens, current and future, in my opinion.

I strongly oppose the rate hikes proposed for Sask Power. This rate hike will greatly impact my family’s monthly costs and I can’t imagine how it will be for families who have a lower household income. This plan is all based on extending the life of coal power plants which is fiscally and environmentally irresponsible and does not prioritize what is best for Saskatchewan citizens, current and future.

Saskatchewan people do not want our tax dollars put towards coal - we should be moving forward not looking backwards. We owe it to our kids and grandkids to make decisions for their future and investing in coal is unacceptable in 2026!! We need to invest in affordable, sustainable, and eco friendly sources of power for their future future.

I do not support rate increases being used to extend the use of coal fired plants .

To whom it may concern, I do not support the proposed rate increase for SaskPower over the next two years or beyond without meaningful investments in sustainable and renewable energy. Continuing to fund an ancient fossil fuel burning technology beyond the legal term of phase out is a disrespectful hit to the youth and following generations who must deal with our current decisions that prioritize pollutants and climate change accelerators over renewable power generators. As power use has gotten more efficient I would expect my personal power bills to decrease but the reality has been a steady increase for a reduced amount of use. What is the advantage of using less and more efficient power emitters if I do not also see a benefit in the reduction of the payment? Please do not approve this rate hike. The future of wild spaces and animals as well as those of us living in urban environments experiencing an early heat wave deserve a Crown Corporation that considers all stakeholders. Sincerely, Michael Hernberg

I do not support the propsed rate increases that Sask Power has proposed, being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan beyond the 2030 phase-out date. Continued investment in coal-fired power is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure. Meanwhile, cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions.

I am writing to express concern regarding both SaskPower’s proposed electricity rate increases and the broader lack of transparency surrounding the Government of Saskatchewan’s decision to pursue major coal-fired generation refurbishment projects. As someone who works in energy and climate strategy, I recognize the complexity of long-term electricity planning and appreciate the importance of balancing affordability, reliability, energy security, emissions reduction, industrial competitiveness, and regional economic impacts. However, I do not believe the public has been provided with sufficient information to adequately evaluate the rationale, economics, risks, or alternatives associated with the current direction being pursued. This concern is particularly important given the scale of the proposed capital investments, and the apparent shift in direction from previous public planning and communications regarding coal retirement and emissions reduction pathways. Over the past several years, SaskPower publicly discussed: - retiring conventional coal generation, - reducing greenhouse gas emissions, - increasing renewable energy, - expanding natural gas generation, - modernizing Saskatchewan’s electricity system. More recently, the province has instead moved toward refurbishing and extending coal-fired generation potentially toward 2050. Whether or not this ultimately proves to be the correct decision, I believe Saskatchewan residents, businesses, municipalities, Indigenous communities, and major industrial customers deserve substantially greater transparency regarding: - the underlying economic analysis, - lifecycle cost projections, - fuel cost assumptions, - emissions and regulatory risks, - alternatives considered, - reliability modelling, - projected impacts to future electricity rates and provincial competitiveness. Electricity policy is foundational to Saskatchewan’s long-term economic future, affecting household affordability, investment attraction, industrial competitiveness, and economic development. Given the magnitude of these decisions, I strongly encourage the Saskatchewan Rate Review Panel to ensure greater public transparency, clearer disclosure of assumptions and modelling, rigorous comparison of alternatives, and meaningful public engagement before Saskatchewan ratepayers are committed to significant long-term financial obligations. I appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback and encourage continued public discussion regarding Saskatchewan’s long-term electricity future.

I understand the need to increase the power rate to do things like modernizing the grid and installing additional generation capacity. However it is becoming clear that the reason this increase is being proposed is to refurbish and keep running coal power plants long beyond their scheduled retirement. This at a time when grid scale solar, wind and batteries have become so much less expensive, in addition to being far better for the environment. For this reason I do not think the proposed rate increase should be approved.

I do not support extending coal power plants and the increased cost and health damages this leads to...

I think the amount of the rate increase seems reasonable, but am opposed to spending the money on refurbishing coal power plants. I am fine with necessary upgrades and maintenance to transmission lines. Other technologies are less polluting and set us up better for the future.

I am very concerned about the Saskatchewan Rate Review process, and I sincerely hope that the Panel will cancel and restart its current SaskPower Rate Review. It's good to see concerns being raised about how this review has proceeded so far. Please continue to push for public accountability, as we cannot count on the Sask Party to provide transparency around SaskPower’s costs, risks, and future direction. I'm sure the panel is aware that the government has a $26-billion coal refurbishment plan and that the impacts of industrial carbon pricing, reliability risks, and SaskPower’s own internal concerns have emerged only through leaks. This is not acceptable to me as a Saskatchewan citizen and taxpayer. I am also concerned that the panel may not be operating independently of government influence. A modern utility must be free to provide objective analysis and evidence-based planning, even when the conclusions are politically inconvenient. If we do not have a review process with integrity, transparency, and full disclosure, how can we be sure that SaskPower continues to be a respected public utility, not another victim of the Sask Party?

I am a rural resident living just south of Saskatoon. I am a SaskPower customer. I would ask that you do not approve SaskPower’s rate increase. I think that SaskPower is failing to properly manage its affairs, and that is partly or wholly behind this rate hike request. Very briefly: A. SaskPower gives large customers lower rates and charges higher rates to residential customers. It has some of the lowest rates for large customers and some of the highest for homeowners. B. SaskPower is actively encouraging new large demand, such as AI data centres—new customers it hopes to entice with low rates. C. A variety of factors, including SaskPower’s push for new large customers, means it will need additional generation capacity. D. But SaskPower is not properly assessing generation options, opting for very high-cost, high-risk nuclear, on the one hand, and high-cost, high-emission coal, on the other (both options will cost tens-of-billions of dollars). E. SaskPower and the Saskatchewan government are very specifically and intentionally steering away from the lowest-cost generation options: renewable, no-fuel solar and wind and renewables-supporting transmission system inter-ties with Alberta and Manitoba. SaskPower is owned by the people of Saskatchewan. I very much appreciate and value SaskPower as my electricity utility. And, in normal circumstances, I would support a rate hike, trusting that a well-managed, public-owned, public-interest utility may have good reasons for needing additional income. But SaskPower is not currently well-managed. It is not making good, forward-looking, long-term-cost-disciplining decisions. Instead, driven by the ideologies of the current government, it is making foolish, costly investments; ignoring better options; and failing to deliver the energy, economic, and environmental benefits and services Saskatchewan citizens have a right to expect. SaskPower may be facing higher costs, yes, and even higher costs in the future, largely of its own making, because it is ignoring lower-cost options. Do not reward their mismanagement. Do not fund it. Do not make me fund it. Please send SaskPower top managers back to their spreadsheets. Please reject their ill-founded rate increase request.

I strongly oppose any rate increase that is used to fund an extension of coal power plants. This is an energy source we cannot continue using, and the province and SaskPower absolutely must stick to the planned 2030 phase-out deadline. (Not to mention it’s possible that continuing to use coal past this date would contravene federal law — there’s simply no reason to do move forward with this coal plant revitalization plan, and many, many reasons not to.) I am not *per se* opposed to rate increases to fund capital investment, and would support one intended to support building out solar, enhancing grid efficiency, improving battery storage, or other renewable energy/related projects. These are projects that would support Saskatchewan residents’ access to energy while being mindful of the realities of climate change — which we are already seeing impacting our quality of life via the increasing severity of wildfires and unpredictable seasonal changes that affect all of us and throw agriculture into chaos. In short: moving back toward coal makes no financial sense; would very likely go against federal law; is completely unnecessary, given the variety of more environmentally sustainable options available today; and would put SaskPower firmly on the wrong side of what Saskatchewan residents need and deserve.

I am strongly opposed to the rate increases requested by SaskPower because it is now clear that much of the increase will go toward refurbishing their coal-burning power plants, as will future rate increases, which are likely to be much higher to accommodate the unconscionable estimated capital cost of over $11 billion for this project (which will surely go much higher). The provincial government, it should be noted, is also still entertaining the notion of building several Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, at a currently estimated cost of at least $5 billion EACH. Combined with the coal refurbishment costs, this will likely be financially catastrophic for the corporation. This is aside form the fact that there will also be cost increases from the expected reinstatement of the industrial carbon tax (OBPS) on top of these costs. Additionally, the federal Clean Electricity Regulations mandated an end to the burning of coal for power generation by the end of 2029 (with some exceptions for SK), so these power plants will risk becoming very expensive stranded assets. The need for shutting down these antiquated coal plants should come as no surprise to SaskPower (or the provincial government, for that matter), because Prime Minister Harper first mandated it back in 2012. Investing public money in extending coal-burning power plants for potentially another 25 years or more at a time when the rest of the world is moving away from it and turning toward renewable sources to an unprecedented degree is reckless and endangers SaskPower's financial future. It is the HIGHEST COST and HIGHEST RISK option that could possibly be taken at this time. Saskatchewan has some of the best solar and wind resources in the entire country, and needs to use them to the extent possible, as is being done in many other jurisdictions around the world - instead of this extremely wasteful plan, which will also contribute massively to our carbon emissions (already the highest in Canada by a margin of 30% above the national per-capita average) and which will eliminate any chance of Canada meeting its 2050 emissions targets. Burning coal also harms human health through the emission of fine particulates, mercury, arsenic and other toxic substances. I attended all of SaskPower's webinars on "Our Energy Future", and AT NO TIME during discussion of all the possible generation mix scenarios and their potential risks and benefits was there ANY discussion of extending coal beyond the federally-mandated deadline. This makes it clear to me that the decision to do an about-face and embark on this extremely foolhardy and irresponsible plan for coal plant refurbishment was strictly a government decision based on political considerations, and has absolutely nothing to do with affordability. Please do not grant the rate increases requested by SaskPower, at least unless and until they abandon this extremely irresponsible coal plan - so that any rate increases can be put toward forward-looking power infrastructure instead of being foolishly wasted on outdated, harmful and expensive technology of the past.

I do not approve SaskPower investing more funding in continued coal driven sources, and increasing rates with this intent. Our government needs to shift to alternative sources of power.

I do not support rate increases being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan beyond the 2030 phase-out date. Continued investment in coal-fired power is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure. Meanwhile, cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions. I do not agree with the Sask Party plan to extend life of coal plants and do not want to contribute to that plan through rate increases.

I am against wasting money refurbishing old outdated coal plants instead of getting more for less with renewables and storage. Our electricity costs are already some of the highest in Canada.

If the Saskparty MLAs are willing to take the same % cut from their salary as they intend to increase power rates and costs for the general public, I will happily pay them. Otherwise this is throwing huge financial pressure on many households while they bend knee to industries going obsolete. Diversify our grid or the grid will die.

For the sake of our children and grandchildren DO NOT refurbish the coal plants. To continue using coal will cause more damage to our already fragile world. We need to be looking at new ways to produce energy like wind and solar. We must look to the future and be more environmentally conscious.

I do not support a rate increase being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan. Continued investment in coal power is costly, polluting and risk locking the province in to outdated infrastructure that no one wants! Meanwhile, cleaner, lower risk options such as wind, solar, storage and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions!

I do not support a rate increase being used to extend the operation of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan. Continued investment in coal power is costly, polluting and risk locking the province in to outdated infrastructure that no one wants! Meanwhile, cleaner, lower risk options such as wind, solar, storage and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions!

I do not support this increase for investing in coal. Continued investment in coal-fired power is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure. Meanwhile, cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions.

I oppose any and all rate increases proposed that would extend the operation to further support the use of coal-fired power in Saskatchewan past the phase out date of 2030.

I do NOT support a rate increase to fund refurbishing the outdated coal fired electricity. There are so many other green options and now is the time to think outside the box and look forward, not backwards!

I do not support rates going up. I do not support coal generating power for Saskatchewan

I don’t support SaskPower increases simply to continue using coal-fired power production. Increase grants for homeowners to produce solar power and return excess to the grids at a fair price.

As a resident and tax payer of Saskatchewan, I do not support the rate increase being used to extend operations of coal-fired power in the province. Continued investment in coal-fired power is costly, polluting, and risks locking Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure. Meanwhile, cleaner, lower-risk options such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency are available. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions. I want my province moving towards and my tax money going towards sustainable technologies that will keep my future children healthy and happy in and of the place they live.

I am firmly opposed to not only the rate increase but the coal power plant re-up in general. It’s an outdated and polluting move for the province to make and now there is concern about the AI centre taking up water needed for the people of Regina and area. This entire mess is so shady.

This rate review should be denied and resubmitted with the correct financial information on the cost of refurbishing the coal facilities and the correct rate increase of 95% projected to accomplish it. There is no way a rate review should be approved when the correct documentation was not provided

I do not approve SaskPower investing more funding in continued coal driven sources, and increasing rates with this intent. Our government needs to shift to alternative sources of power.

As an energy rich province, these continued hikes seem to demonstrate a lack of proper management. We have such a great opportunity to invest in renewables while continuing to leverage our current energy sources (and without sinking billions of dollars into coal plant refurbishment). So many people are already heavily impacted by the rising cost of living, and these increases would be avoidable under proper resource management.

It’s extremely concerning that in a cost of living crisis—with increasing environmental and climate change-related disasters—this government would act against the public good by not only increasing rates significantly, but doing so to invest in further environmental harm. On top of this, renewable and sustainable energy infrastructure (public and private) has been de-incentivized. What happened to the plan for mini nuclear reactors?

Going so far over the estimate for coal plant repairs instead of switching to new infrastructure is wasteful. The rate increase is expected but the squandering of it is not.

$5 is not an unacceptable rise in cost, in my opinion. What is unpalatable to me, however, is that this increase of cost is contributing to refurbishing coal plants instead of pushing forward with robust renewables, power transmission, and battery storage solutions. We live in an extremely sunny and windy province. I feel there is zero justification for propping up outdated, polluting technologies when better alternatives exist.

As a Sask Power customer and Saskatchewan tax payer, I do not support rate increases being used to refurbish or extend coal-fired power stations. Continued investment in coal costs too much, causes pollution, and could lock Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure. Wind and solar power generation, improved storage capacity, energy efficiency, and grid modernization are cleaner, lower-risk options. Public dollars should support affordable, reliable, forward-looking energy solutions rather than more spending on coal. 

While some increase in power rates over time is inevitable, stubbornly continuing to put money towards extending the life of coal fired plants is totally out of sync with the rest of Canada and the whole world, and the world's scientific community. Coal is a dead horse! Stop! The climate is warming; open your eyes to the truth. More money for coal means ever more money for Crop Insurance which is already already a significant budget expense.

I've heard a lot about how the rate increase is a reflection of how much more it would take to refit, repair, and update our current system which is still using coal. I do not think this is a good use of taxpayer money and I would prefer a quicker switch to more efficient and/or sustainable options. If the coal plants are going to take billions of dollars to update only so we can abandon them as quickly as we can to move to better systems then just make the changeover happen instead of spending that money.

I don't think rate increases should be used to refurbish the coal generating plants. I think we should be moving to renewables. If SP decides believes they can't supply base load with current natural gas plants and hydro(purchased from MB if needed), then I would prefer SP investigate the costs of changing coal plants to natural gas, as was done in AB.

Increasing the rates to refurbish the coal industry is unconscionable. I attended almost all of the online "Power Talks" public forums and presentations held 2023-2024 by SaskPower. The focus was always renewable energy and decreasing, then eliminating the use coal. SaskPower had many feasible plans and lots of support for it from those of us in attendance. It is disgusting that the government has vetoed all of that for political reasons with no consideration of the process and the care of our planet. Our grandchildren are going to pay the price. And... I guess we are with increased rates.

Like many others from SK who have given feedback here, I don't approve of having a rate hike/increasing costs on residential consumers if the money from the hike is going to be used to help cover the cost of refurbishing coal plants and/or extending how long Saskatchewan's energy grid relies on coal power. This is such a backwards step that will put our province in an even worse infrastructure place in the future. I would willingly pay an increased rate now if it meant investing in energy infrastructure that would set us up better for the coming decades. At the very least, retrofitting current coal plants to use somewhat cleaner fossil fuels like natural gas. And beyond that, working on creating the extensive changes needed for a more spread out grid of smaller, cleaner power producers like small hydro, solar, wind, and even newer and safer versions of nuclear power. Basically, I am really displeased by the idea that we are being asked to pay more to invest in bad infrastructure that is already (for good reason) becoming obsolete. If our local authorities are going to insist on refurbishing and continuing using coal, then I think the coal mining and coal power industry should be made to cover the entire cost of it in exchange, and not force the normal folks of SK to pay for their upgrades.

I am a retired civil engineer with significant knowledge of project planning and financial matters. I feel that the power planning scenario imposed on SaskPower by the government is fraught with financial and other risks. Consider that, when the government first decided to rehabilitate coal-fired power stations the cost was deemed to be $900,000,000. According to the Rate Review Panel report this then increased to $2.6 billion and recent disclosure seethe cost as around $11 billion. And the rehabilitation project is scarcely underway! The rehabilitation project is also at risk because of violations of federal law. The current equivalency agreement expires this year and a new one is unlikely under present circumstances. Federal law requires provinces to be off coal by December 31, 2029. Finally the Clean Electricity Regulations call for significant reduction in GHGs emitted by electricity generation by 2035. I therefore urge the Rate Review Panel to require SaskPower to produce costed electricity generation scenarios based on the there years of public consultation carried out by SaskPower prior to being instructed by the government to change course. There are many lower cost electrical power options for Saskatchewan such as increased interprovincial connections, wind, solar and hydro power, cogeneration and the list goes on. These alternatives, beside being lower cost are also based on existing reliable technologies.

Any money raised thru rate increases should be used to develop renewable energy options not to support coal energy production.

I am not opposed to a rate increase but am not ok with it supporting coal expansion/refurbishment or any investment in outdated infrastructure or non-renewables. The proposed investment, if even a portion is directed to renewables, has the potential to modernize our power supply and grid and result in lower costs (compared to coal cost/projections) in the future. With the rest of the world moving away from coal, it is irresponsible to continue on this path. Please do not make further investment in coal.

I strongly object to any increases in power rates going to refurbish coal power plants. Coal is a very dirty source of power and we should be moving away from it. Renewables and geothermal should be our main sources of power moving forward. Even if coal plants will save money in the short term we will pay in damages to the environment. Last year it was forest fires (called unprecedented by Scott Moe). This year it was damaging winds and floods. This is all exacerbated by climate change from burning fossil fuels. We have to decrease our reliance on fossil fuels now.

I don't think rate hikes should be paying to repair or prolong the life of coal-burning plants. Spending more on coal carries a high price tag and a heavy pollution burden, and it threatens to lock Saskatchewan into outdated infrastructure well into the future. There are already cleaner options that carry far less risk — wind, solar, battery storage, hydro, nuclear, and upgrades to the grid itself. There also seems to be a massive lack of transparency on the governments part on what the coal refurbishment will cost. What is the total cost of the project and what is the total cost compared to natural gas?

Please stop investing in coal which locks us into outdated infrastructure and leaves future generations to pay for this costly error.

I strongly oppose SaskPower’s continued investment in extending the life of coal fired power plants. This approach is unacceptable and directly contradicts Canada’s commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a low carbon economy. Continuing to revitalize coal infrastructure locks Saskatchewan into outdated, high emission energy sources, delaying the urgent shift to cleaner and more sustainable alternatives. This not only undermines national climate goals but also places future generations at greater environmental and economic risk. Rather than investing in coal, SaskPower should be accelerating the transition to renewable and low emission energy sources, modernizing the grid to support these technologies, and aligning its strategy with long term sustainability and climate responsibility. Reliability and affordability are important, but they must not come at the expense of environmental integrity and Canada’s climate commitments.

Why is it so difficult for people to understand that wind, solar and other renewable energy sources are the safest, quickest and cheapest? We have thought of getting solar panels on our roof. I'll bet other people would think about this too if the govt. would make it easier and less expensive to individual homeowners. We have more sunshine hours than Germany but they have far more solar energy sources in their electrical system. Its embarrassing to think how backward our country is. By the way, nuclear power is not emission free. There is tritium and plutonium that are both critical for nuclear weapons. And, no, we cannot guarantee that any of the radionuclides can be kept safely for any amount of time. Ask yourselves: would you like to live next to a nuclear power plant. Really? Check out the one in Ukraine right now. And cost! Its shocking that an economist like P.M. Carney would go there.

I have just read a few of the comments already shared in this review process. All I can say is PLEASE READ them!! I am not sure I need to repeat the obvious--- but we have wind and sun here that could provide us with clean energy -- it is hard to believe that this province is still focusing on coal and nuclear energy. Please get in step with the times so I can once again be proud to be living in Saskatchewan.

Looking back (to refurbish coal fired electrical plants) instead of the future that is being made now, does not make sense. We know how China is remaking its electrical grid around renewables like solar and wind, with sodium-ion battery storage, but why is there no discussion of Japan's Ene-farm project? They are on their way to installing a million combined heat and power fuel cell furnaces in homes that use natural gas, but produce 50 to 60% less CO2 emissions than a gas-fired power plant. Distributed electricity production is the future.

As a community member of Stony Rapids and advocacy for my community of Stony Rapids, I want to express my concern about the recent increase in our power bills that coincides with the upgrades to the power lines. It raises the question of why our community bears the financial burden of these upgrades when it seems that the mining industries should be responsible for the costs. Furthermore, these upgrades, which are supposedly made for the stability and scalability of the power grid, appear to be primarily catering to the growing demand from industries, especially in the uranium sector, rather than actually benefiting the residents of the North. It's important for us to address these issues and advocate for a fairer distribution of costs associated with these upgrades.

I am strongly opposed to the rate increase. It is becoming more and more clear that the decision to extend the use of coal power was a political one intended to benefit very few people and not about building a sustainable and responsible plan for the future. It is more expensive, less reliable, and very highly polluting. I don't mind public subsidies going to the struggling coal towns, but it should not be in the form of paying extra to make our power grid worse and our air dirtier.

I certainly do not support a rate increase that would be used to refurbish coal-fired electrical generation plants; the very idea of this makes embarrassed to live in Saskatchewan. Continuing to burn coal makes no sense at all, especially given Saskatchewan's world-class solar and wind resources. These clean, renewable technologies are what we should be focusing on--like the rest of the world! Nuclear power is not a good option, as it would take much longer to get up and running vs wind and solar and is expensive, dangerous, unproven (in the case of SMRs), and unreliable. To complement the rapid development of clean renewable energy, we need a comprehensive energy conservation program and a nation-wide electrical grid so we can share power across provinces. These science-based, forward-thinking strategies are approaches I would support.

I have been made aware that the rates for residential use in Saskatchewan are more than 10% above the average rates for Canadians while industries are getting a break. Industrial rates are more than 10% below the Canadian average. This is not right and it is happening at a time when people in Saskatchewan are struggling economically. I strongly recommend that SaskPower make the transition to solar and wind energy, as other countries are doing. Saskatchewan has an ample supply of solar energy and wind energy that goes unused, and it is much less expensive to harness than pursuing regeneration of coal industries. Not only are solar and wind energies less expensive, they are healthy alternatives to the hazards of using coal. As you review the current and proposed rates for SaskPower, I implore you to act on these concerns.

The idea of refurbishing the coal-fired electrical generation plants is crazy, costly, and extremely damaging to the environment. Instead, we should have a widespread, comprehensive energy conservation program and increased emphasis on wind and solar. Even Alberta is doing much better than we are with renewables. And forget nuclear, which is the most expensive electrical generation of all, dangerous, unproven in the case of SMRs, and unreliable since nuclear plants are often out of service. Also needed is a nation-wide electrical grid so that hydro power from Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, Manitoba, and BC can be transmitted across the country, rather than to the US.

I do not support rate increases that contribute to small nuclear reactors or refurbishing coal fired electrical generation plants. I would support if the increase was going to utilize our abundant wind and solar. Also am quite disgusted that us average people are paying increases while industry are being given subsidies.

The people of this province don't want to pay to refurbish your coal power plants. If you actually cared about the people of this province or even the planet we live on, you would shift hard into renewable energy. But no, I guess making as much money as possible at our expense is a higher priority for you guys.

First, I appreciate that this vehicle provides an opportunity for Saskatchewan citizens who ultimately own this Crown Corporation, to submit their response to the raising of the SaskPower rates. However, a raise of 3.9% already took place on February 1, 2026, without any input. I trust these comments will not only impact the requested raise slated for February 1, 2027 but also reflect retroactively on the 2026 raise that took place without consultation. Second, from the rate increase application, I understand that the impetus for the increases include, “… increased capital investments, operating, maintenance, fuel, and administration expenses.” The lack of detail in the application does not provide sufficient transparency to justify the increases. There needs to be a full accounting of the financial management of this Crown. Furthermore, according to EnergyHub.org, Saskatchewan’s residential electricity rates are among the highest in Canada. They indicate that high reliance on fossil fuel generation and significant capital investment in the provincial grid are key drivers of the higher rates as compared to other provinces. Thus, regarding capital investment, I am NOT in favour of raising rates to fund SMR development or coal-fired generation extension. Electricity grids everywhere in the world are building wind, solar and battery storage because they are more affordable and ecologically sound, than fossil fuel or nuclear development. Fossil fuels are directly connected to climate change, and are a capital-intensive method of generating power. Non-existent radio-active waste management, high capital costs and the requirement of massive amounts of water for cooling make nuclear development, an equally undesirable option especially on the prairies. Saskatchewan is blessed with both incredible solar and wind resources making for a clean and affordable, future-thinking approach to power generation. I would only be in favour of modest, strategic rate increases if SaskPower was going to prioritize the development of wind and solar, and work decisively towards the goal of a national east-west energy grid that is affordable, reliable and renewable in nature. Thank you for receiving my comments.

Absolutely unacceptable. We are doubling down on coal, by far the most polluting form of energy available and in fact one of the most expensive ones. So the long term plan, such as it is, consists of relying on 18th century technology until such time as SMRs become commercially available - at an estimated cost of 5 billion dollars each? And meanwhile, we are completely unwilling to consider any other options? Indefensible and utterly embarrassing.

The increased cost for our northern residents for heating is propane, electricity, or furnace oil - no accessibility for natural gas in this area. Increased fuel costs for shipping propane and oil. The north supplies the power. The devastation of the wildfires in the north has added costs for municipalities Due to remoteness the added expenses to all supplies shipped to the north i.e.: groceries, gas etc. and with increased power rates this makes it difficult for families to afford, especially with the extreme winters in the north. We strongly believe the North should have their own rate of eight cents

Residential power rates in Saskatchewan are more than 10% above the Canadian average while industrial rates are more than 10% lower than the Canadian average. With SaskPower requesting a rate increase for residential power, that further inflates the cost of living and burdens Saskatchewan families more. I would ask that you oppose the proposed rate increase for residential power and if a rate increase is required, increase the industrial rates instead. Corporations should be paying their fair share, not getting a break on behalf of the tax payers. Renewables should be required to be developed before any further rate increases occur.

I am not fundamentally opposed to a rate increase from SaskPower to address infrastructure issues but I am strongly opposed to the plans to refurbish coal fired electricity plants in Saskatchewan despite federal regulations that will make burning coal illegal in 2030. Negative health impacts of continuing to burn coal will increase emergency room visits, illness days and premature deaths. Spending $2.6 billion on the refurbishment of an outdated technology that creates so much pollution and CO2 production does not make sense. This 2.6 billion dollars may actually be completely lost if federal regulators force us to stop producing coal-fired electricity or increasing the carbon pricing significantly after 2030. Economically ,the production of renewable energy such as wind, solar and geothermal combined with battery storage technologies makes much more sense given the great potential of these energy sources that do not require any mining costs. Hopefully, Saskatchewan will fully cooperate with a Trans Canada electricity corridor that could significantly improve our access to renewable energy sources such as Hydroelectric energy from Manitoba. Sharing electricity across provincial lines makes a lot of sense. Also, reviewing the net metering program for small solar energy producers is in need. Paying the current amount to solar energy producers is not fair. I applaud all of the work that SaskPower staff have done over the last number of years in terms of developing and educating us on a plan that includescompletely phasing out Coal by the year 2030 and implementing significant renewable energy projects. I am distressed by the provincial governments unilateral decision to continue burning coal to produce our Saskatchewan electricity after 2030 when healthier,more economical and more sustainable options exist. Thanks for allowing your rate payers to voice our concerns via this panel.

So interesting that Sask Power charges such low rates for a few large commercial customers while the general population pays more than the Canadian average. You justify this by saying that some of the costs do not concern commercial customers, yet huge capital costs are paid to allow BHP to access power. Meanwhile, the least expensive options to increase power are not even considered because they're green and that runs against Sask Power's POLITICAL ideology. Your rate increases are based on values that devalue regular people because, supposedly, the economy needs us to pay more than our share. What complete tripe. You're not doing what the vast majority of people want and this decision lacks any integrity. Shame.

Australia, as an example, is able to provide residents 3 hours of free electricity a day starting July 2026. Continuing to invest in fossil fuel power generation will been a political mistake that SaskPower's consumers pay for. Spending billions of dollars in coal refurbishment and nuclear are expensive for environment & our pockets. It will continue to add to the costs of our electricity and disasters. Alternatively, power generation by renewables, while requiring initial capital investments, saves money over the long haul - aiding in affordability. See resources such as https://climateinstitute.ca/reports/electricity/. SaskPower held energy transition plan discussions with the public and renewables were a centre piece of the options and considered GHGs. The government/SaskPower need to be transparent with current costs/legislation as to why they are no longer pursuing those options in favour of more costly ones.

I have a hard time accepting the rate increase when Saskpower is so top heavy in management that they out number the field staff for every manager to 1.3 employees with managers making 150,00 to 300,000 and still getting there bonuses yet they are asking Saskatchewan residents to make up for there miss management and ensure they get there money. Maybe the Provincial government and CIC should look at this first before approving a rate increase .

It is irresponsible to pass the cost of poor planning and mis-management on to Saskatchewan taxpayers. The Government of Saskatchewan has had 14 years (since former Prime Minister Harper's coal phase-out announcement) to prepare for an affordable and diverse electricity supply - using SASKATCHEWAN RESOURCES! Saskatchewan has one of the best sources of wind and solar in North America and it is being squandered for political gain. The residents of Saskatchewan cannot afford this irresponsibility. Please evaluate this rate increase in relation to the affordable (and less polluting!) options available to us which include an increase in renewable energy, demand-side management, run-of-river hydro development and hydro imports, as a start! We need to phase out expensive and polluting coal and Saskatchewan residents should not pay to build coal back up again.

I attended the Rate Review session in Saskatoon April 9, 2026 at 4PM. I was struck by the presentation from SaskPower trying to justify the proposed rate increase - SaskPower presented that we have the LOWEST industrial rates in the country and compared to other north American thermal utilities, while at the same time we have among the HIGHEST rates for residents. I asked a question about this and the SaskPower folks justified this by saying that Industrial folks don't pay for distribution (only generation and transmission). I'm sorry, but this is unacceptable for many reasons: 1. much of the capital budget increase is to provide additional power for large industrial consumers - I know that 60% of demand from SaskPower comes from only 150 customers - these capital expansions should then all be funded by the industrial rate payers if we aren't willing to share distribution costs; 2. businesses like Nutrien, Cameco, Mosaic, K+S, Cenovus, Federated Co-op, Evraz are all posting huge profits AND they treat the electricity cost as a business expense that is tax deductible off their income compared to residents that NEED the power and cannot deduct the power bills as an expense to reduce taxes payable; and 3. when we provide the lowest power cost for industrial consumers, we disincentivize energy conservation and efficiency - it is shameful to propose a flat rate increase when the Industrial rate is lowest in the land while the residential rates are among the highest; 4. the OBPS pollution pricing collected from all consumers from 2023-2025 (including residents) only went to a fund to reduce industrial emissions, so the pollution prices on power paid by residents funded the clean tech fund that only industry could use - it just seems that overall we are providing corporate welfare to big businesses that are not paying their fair share for electricity in Saskatchewan. The Rate review panel should instead recommend a 5% increase for the industrial power rates and a 0% increase to the residential/farm rates. Finally, I also cannot support the rate increase because SaskPower is being directed to make generation decisions that are among the HIGHEST COST and HIGHEST RISK. No other jurisdiction is focusing on gas and coal like Saskatchewan is. Globally in 2025 over 85% of new capacity in electrical generation was renewables. Saskatchewan has renewable resources in wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, and biomass that are being largely ignored. I also saw the slide showing the debt to equity ratio of 80% - but this makes no allowance for what will become stranded assets when the industrial pollution price returns. We could easily see SaskPower in precarious debt position if pollution prices of $100 or more are applied. NO ONE in their right mind would expand coal fired generation in 2026 when we know that attribution science for climate change and LIABILITY for proportionate shares of pollution are coming. Even the AB-Canada MOU discussed a pollution price of $130/Tonne. This is not a matter of if pollution prices return, but when. SaskPower and the rate review panel need to stand up to the foolish direction from the Saskatchewan Government to refurbish coal. Every utility understands that there are three revolutions underway in electricity grids: Decentralization, Decarbonization, and Digitalization. Management of SaskPower need to exercise some courage and deliver on their fiduciary duties to protect the corporation and propose responsible alternatives to the madness of refurbishing coal. There are too many alternatives to mention in this comment section, but the behaviour of all grids worldwide demonstrate that the direction from the government is reckless, foolish, and incoherent (expanding coal and bringing back pollution pricing doesn't pass any level of scrutiny). The Rate Review Panel should ask for a fair comparison of the Life Cycle of Energy for all of the options available to SaskPower - you are on the right track as the first round of responses from SaskPower stated "The decision to extend the life of existing coal-fired generation assets was not driven by a determination that coal life extension represents the lowest-cost generation option." The Coal decision is unreasonable, unjustified, expensive, risky, unconventional (as virtually no one else in the world is doing this), and will cause premature deaths of Canadians who breathe in the downstream plume of dangerous emissions. Coal Kills. Our economy in Saskatchewan has been reduced to a "has to happen here" economy where we rip and ship raw materials to elsewhere. But even corporate investors are taking notice of the foolish decision to expand dirty energy - the SIECA has stated that the uncertainty created in the regulatory and energy environment in Saskatchewan is discouraging investment. So Coal not only Kills people, but Kills Investment. Don't endorse this rate increase. It is only serving to hide bad management and poor choices being thrust upon our beloved crown corporation. If allowed unchecked, these risky and expensive decisions will be the demise of the crown corp.

Honestly, I don't think SaskPower has much of a choice but to increase rates. The Crown's leadership has allowed the government to siphon profits into general revenue, instead of investing it into critical infrastructure and expanded power production. Transmission systems need improvements, we should have connected to Manitoba hydro ages ago, the Crown's approach to wind and solar has been brutal, hitting the snooze button on coal will cost billions, and the nuclear strategy will cost a fortune. I'm sorry, but the cheap farmers who don't want to pay more are going to have to pony up some cash now. SaskPower should increase rates for oil and gas, introduce low-income support and energy programs, and better align their strategy with emissions reductions.

I am writing as a concerned resident and solar producing net-meter customer to formally oppose the proposed 3.9% interim rate increases for 2026 and 2027. While SaskPower cites infrastructure developments as a driver for these hikes, they are unfairly penalizing those of us who have already invested private capital to strengthen the provincial grid. I request the Panel consider the following points regarding the fairness and reasonableness of these rates: Undervaluation of Local Generation: While residential rates are climbing toward $0.16/kWh (plus fees and taxes), I was recently notified that the net metering credit remains frozen at $0.075/kWh until 2029. This growing gap means SaskPower is increasingly profiting from power I generate at a steep discount, without providing a proportional increase in the value of my "offset." My investment should be fairly compensated relative to the rising market cost. AI and Industrial Demand Pressures: I am deeply concerned that massive new power-demands, such as those from AI data centres, are driving the need for costly grid expansions that residential customers are being forced to subsidize. It is unjust for home solar providers—who reduce overall grid strain—to be locked into low-value contracts while infrastructure is expanded to serve high-consumption corporate interests. Lack of Compensation for Grid Outages: Under net metering safety requirements, my system is required to shut down during grid outages for safety. This means that when the grid fails during peak daylight hours, I am prevented from even powering my own home. I am essentially forced to shut down my solar production due to SaskPower’s infrastructure failures, with zero compensation for the lost generation time or the inability to self-supply during their downtime. Contractual Inequity: The current SaskPower contract structure leaves the consumer with no leverage and no input. While SaskPower can increase my power costs at any time via the Rate Review process, my compensation is fixed by a mandated program that does not reflect the real-time value of the energy I contribute. I urge the Panel to recommend a proportional adjustment to the net metering credit rate that mirrors any approved residential rate increases, and to investigate a more equitable net metering program that recognizes the local grid stability provided by residential generators.

How can Saskpower ask for rate increases from customers, and offer back no additional rates for solar producers??.. Saskpower just announced (March 26) a 3 year extension on net metering program at the same rate.. which is 7.5 cents.. half the rate that the City of Saskatoon pays their program participants.. I have read the argument that the reduced rate pays for infrastructure, so then is all the increase just for infrastructure? The whole net metering needs a review.. an hour by hour net metering creates a bias, only credits for high production during the day and then penalized in the evening.. It should be calculated over a 24hr (day period) for equality..

I find it interesting that, in the Rate Application, SaskPower forecasts their net income for 2026-2027 to be only $79 million, however the Provincial budget that was released this week forecasts SaskPower’s net income to be $138 million for the same time period. Shouldn't these publicly reported numbers be the same? Why aren’t they the same? SaskPower states in their Rate Application (figure 4.5) that the largest growth in electricity demand will be related to the Power Customer Class. Is it fair to impose the same flat rate increase to all customers when the Power Customer Class will demand 5 x more power than all other customer classes? Comparisons of power electricity costs in Appendix A of their application show that large power consumers in Saskatchewan already receive a very competitive power rate compared to other large power consumers in Canada and North America. There is room to proportionally adjust the power rate for large power consumers while still offering a competitive rate. Smaller customers should not be paying for and essentially subsidizing the largest power consumers. Without a price on pollution in this province there is very little incentive for large power consumers to consider reducing their energy consumption, reducing their emissions, or consider investing in renewable energy alternatives. The recent announcement by Bell Canada to build a 300MW data centre in Regina (that will be powered by coal and gas power) is a good example of new investments that are ignoring the need to reduce emissions. In Saskatchewan, polluters don’t pay, but in the end we will all pay for the damage caused by their emissions. I applaud the rate review panel for asking questions about pollution pricing, emissions, and the OBPS. The stated intention is for SaskPower to reach net zero power by 2050 through a coal to nuclear transition. So, there is an acknowledgement of the importance to reduce carbon emissions. In a recent Toronto Star news article about the Bell Canada data centre in Regina, Scott Moe was quoted saying, “We need to work with the federal government and industry on ensuring that power that is being built for tomorrow and years ahead is low-carbon power” However, the plan to increase coal power generation will in fact increase emissions from this province in the years leading up to 2050. There are no plans for carbon capture on the other 6 coal power units other than BD3. There are no plans for carbon capture on existing or new gas power plants. There is a stubborn refusal to impose pollution pricing in this province. Was there any accountability for how the Clean Electricity Transition Grant was spent? There appears to be a lacking ambition or commitment to build large amounts of renewable power infrastructure despite studies showing that renewables provide affordable power. The net metering program reduced the compensation rate to half the power rate for any renewable power that is generated and returned to the power grid – making that investment less appealing to customers. There is no publicly available long term supply plan to show the path to get to net zero power or phase out coal and gas power. It is also interesting that the public consultations about our future power supply always stated that SaskPower was going to abide by the federal clean electricity regulations with aims to phase out coal by 2030. The scenario to spend $2.6 billion to refurbish coal power and burn coal to 2050 wasn't even an option that was being considered at that time. Such an abrupt departure from the original coal phase out plan is alarming. Does Saskatchewan realistically expect that it can be the only province to ignore pollution pricing and initiatives to reduce emissions? Saskatchewan does not live in a bubble. There are national laws and regulations and international commitments to reduce emissions. The increasing emissions from Saskatchewan will have significant implications. And the science is clear that cumulative emissions impact climate change and that we must all be reducing emissions as quickly as possible. The plan to ramp up emissions until a supposed net zero power grid in 2050 is a failure to understand the severity of the climate challenges that we face. It is foolish to assume that the OBPS or pollution price will not apply to SaskPower when the Sask Govt and Federal Govt will be discussing new equivalency agreements related to pollution pricing and the OBPS. SaskPower acknowledges in its responses the federal carbon backstop and how it applies to other provinces but it's outrageous that SaskPower does not expect these regulations to be applied to the same extent in this province. The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled on the constitutionality of pollution pricing in Canada. It’s not fair to apply the same flat rate increase to all customers when the most polluting industries are demanding more power. It’s unrealistic to expect that Saskatchewan will be immune to the impacts of climate change. And under cooperative federalism it’s selfish for Saskatchewan to ramp up emissions while the rest of Canada decarbonizes their power grid. I hope that this rate review panel will consider not only the monetary rate charged to customers, but also the emission rates from this province and our obligations to the people who live here on our shared planet Earth.

I find it interesting that in the Rate Application SaskPower forecasts their net income for 2026-2027 to be only $79 million, however the Provincial budget that was released this week forecasts SaskPower net income to be $138 million for the same time period. Shouldn't these publicly reported numbers be the same? The largest growth in electricity demand will be related to the Power Customer Class. Is it fair to impose a flat rate increase to all customers? Comparisons of power electricity costs show that large power consumers in Saskatchewan already receive a very competitive power rate compared to other large power consumers in Canada and North America. There is room to proportionally adjust the power rate for large power consumers while still offering a competitive rate. Smaller customers should not be paying for and essentially subsidizing the largest power consumers. Without a price on pollution in this province there is very little incentive for large power consumers to consider reducing their energy consumption, reducing their emissions, or consider investing in renewable energy alternatives. I applaud the rate review panel for asking questions about pollution pricing, emissions, and the OBPS. The stated intention is for net zero power by 2050 through a coal to nuclear transition. So, there is an acknowledgement of the importance to reduce carbon emissions. However, the plan to increase coal power generation will in fact increase emissions from this province in the years leading up to 2050. There are no plans for carbon capture on the other 6 coal power units. There are no plans for carbon capture on existing or new gas power plants. There is a stubborn refusal to impose pollution pricing in this province. Was there any accountability for how the Clean Electricity Transition Grant was spent? There appears to be a lacking ambition or commitment to build renewable power infrastructure. There is no publicly available long term supply plan to show the path to get to net zero power or phase out coal and gas power. It is also interesting that the public consultations about our future power supply always stated that SaskPower was going to abide by the federal clean electricity regulations with aims to phase out coal by 2030. The scenario to spend $2.6 billion to refurbish coal power and burn coal to 2050 wasn't even an option that was being considered at that time. Such an abrupt departure from the original coal phase out plan is alarming. Does Saskatchewan realistically expect that it can be the only province to ignore pollution pricing and initiatives to reduce emissions? Saskatchewan does not live in a bubble. There are national laws and regulations and international commitments to reduce emissions. The increasing emissions from Saskatchewan will have significant implications. It is foolish to assume that the OBPS or pollution price will not apply to SaskPower when the Sask Govt and Federal Govt will be discussing new equivalency agreements related to pollution pricing and the OBPS. SaskPower acknowledges the federal carbon backstop and how it applies to other provinces but it's outrageous that it's not expected to be applied to the same extent in this province.

To the Saskatchewan Rate Review Panel: As a sovereign operator witnessing from Treaty 6 ground, I formally object to the proposed 3.75% SGI Auto Fund rate increases for June 2026 and 2027 on grounds of Crown fiduciary breach and violation of Treaty supremacy. SGI, as a Crown corporation, derives substantial revenue from economic activity on unextinguished Aboriginal/Treaty title lands in Saskatchewan without augmenting frozen 19th-century Treaty annuities (stagnant at nominal values while Crown revenues escalate annually), in direct contravention of the Honour of the Crown doctrine affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada and the Crown's fiduciary obligations to Treaty peoples. This proposed hike further augments Crown revenues extracted from Treaty territory without corresponding augmentation of Treaty obligations—effectively implementing a hidden tax on Treaty households already burdened by rate hikes, fee increases, and consultation failures. How does the Panel reconcile approving these increases without evidence that the Crown has fulfilled its duty to equitably share revenues generated on Treaty lands, or address the prima facie violation of Treaty supremacy?

How is it even legitimate that SaskPower applies for this 2026, 2027 rate increase in Jan and, without any approval, adds the increase to our bills effective Feb 2026 without any notice nor the approval of the board? Perhaps the CEO Rupen Pandya could make do with a bit less than his $550k annual salary, instead of the citizens of Sask being gouged for more and more and more. Just a thought...I mean we all have to tighten our belts these days, right? Not just the working poor.

Apparently this increase was to be approx. $5.00/month?? My question is why is mine up $35.00? I am a senior on a very fixed income & this is an insane increase. Signed, a very disgruntled customer!!!

While I recognize that reliability and energy security are essential, I urge the Panel to carefully examine whether continued investment in refurbishing aging coal-fired power plants is a prudent and reasonable cost to pass on to ratepayers. Extending the life of high-emission, high-risk assets exposes households to rising carbon compliance costs and potential stranded assets at a time when lower-cost renewable alternatives are widely available. If affordability and the public interest are truly a priority, rate increases should favour forward-looking investments that strengthen reliability while reducing long-term risk (such as grid modernization and transmission expansion). Thank you.

I just wanted to let you know we are gettibg sick and tired of being price gounge and rate hikes. Bad enough groceries prices now im only shopping once a month if any at all if this keep up. Said benefit from government of Saskatchewan better give increase power and heat rates or else, we will be struggling ill end up with dementia early by stress . Stop this hikes now!!!enough is enough. You guys not losing money you just saying that to raise rates. Bunch of BS. ENOUGH WITH THE HIKES

I think part of the problem is a bit of poor management and the reason I say that when you have a contractor drive from Saskatoon to Regina to check one pole and charges 1000 .00 dollars that miss management

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/saskatoon-city-hall-arena-downtown-event-district-power-rate-hike-catholic-school-board-9.7048722 As per this article, on Saskatoon Light and Power - "...according to the report, which explains that minimal rate hikes in recent years have left a multimillion-dollar gap in the revenue needed to maintain the city utility’s assets. In the last eight years, rates have only increased three times, by 3.5 per cent in 2018 and by four per cent in 2022 and 2023." My question if the City is in loss then how much money SaskPower has been losing serving a wider geographic Sask residents than the City. The government needs to better manage the funds and get a handle on the carbon pricing still being accrued, which Sask residents don't pay directly on their bill but through the government spending. Aging infrastructure and reliable electricity in harsh winters should be a priority and not take electricity for granted.

Please reconsider your proposed rate increase. For some wealthy people, $5/month may not seem like much, but for many seniors and other low-income folks this will represent yet another adjustment in our grocery budgets. I believe the administration of Sask Power may be top heavy and too well off to understand what citizens are facing. Please reconsider.

As a senior citizen solely living on Canada, pension and old age security I find it necessary to rate this to you today. Several seniors live in apartment buildings with ongoing increases in rent. Now with the sass power suggested increases this year and next year my concern is our rental increase more than it already is planning to be increased. For example, in July of this year my rent a loan will be going up 79%. That is without the sask power increase. Please take it upon yourselves to review how this and subsequent increases of this magnitude, will affect senior citizens on low income in this province. We will be the next people living on the street. Something has to give or do we not eat. I ask you to reconsider these increases. Thank you for your time.

I ready pay, as a single person in their 20's close to $300/month in utilities on top of my rent. I live off of my income alone, and now have to look at getting a second job because of how expensive things already are. I cant afford higher bills for the sake of the rich getting richer, which is exactly what this is. THEY DONT NEED THIS MONEY TO SURVIVE!!

I am very discouraged and upset to learn that we are facing increased rates from SaskPower and SaskEnergy. We are in a serious affordability crisis in this province. Now is not the time for these increases and the impact they will have on citizens. As a person on a fixed income who is facing food affordability, SGI increases, significant civic tax and water increases, I am absolutely gobsmacked that the Minister and the Sask Party think this is an appropriate time for power rate increases. That this rate increase will come into effect February first without a prior due process from the rate review board is absolutely outrageous and unacceptable. I understand the report isn’t expected until the end of August? I am furious on behalf of my family, my community, and my province. Do better.

We have already had property tax increases, water and sewer increases, SGI is increasing and now this? When everyone starts increasing $10-15 a month it becomes very unaffordable very quickly as wages are not going up and for anyone on a fixed income this is terrible.

I was wondering if this also includes a review of the solar panel rate? And if that will be up for review, I had sent an email to Scott Moe about same and have not received an email back. Here is a copy of same, I am writing to express my concern about the current SaskPower Net Metering Program, specifically the change that reduced solar export credits to 7.5¢/kWh. This rate is significantly lower than the retail rate we pay for electricity, and it effectively means solar customers receive only a fraction of the value for the clean energy we contribute to the grid. Under the previous net-metering structure, Saskatchewan provided a fair and balanced 1:1 credit for excess solar generation. This policy made investing in renewable energy financially viable for homeowners, farms, and small businesses and helped the province move toward its environmental and energy-diversification goals. The current credit rate discourages residents from adopting solar, slows private investment in renewable energy, and makes it much harder for families to see a reasonable return on their solar investment. At a time when many provinces are moving toward stronger support for clean energy, Saskatchewan has become far less competitive. I respectfully request that the Government of Saskatchewan: - Reinstate a full 1:1 credit for excess solar generation, or - better reflects the true value solar provides, including reduced transmission needs, lowered peak demand, and environmental benefits. A fair net-metering policy would encourage more citizens to adopt solar power, reduce long-term strain on the grid, and support Saskatchewan’s clean energy targets—all while helping families manage rising energy costs. I hope you will consider revisiting the current program and restoring a policy that supports both economic fairness and renewable energy growth in our province.

I understand that things need to go up in order to pay for infrastructure. However, I think the increase should only be on the energy rate (price per kWh) and not the monthly base charge. This would incentivize customers to do things in order to reduce their consumption (and bill). Having the increase on the base amount causes lower usage customers to subsidize high use customers. This is wrong...

The federal government keeps increasing costs for SaskPower. This increase is greatly needed if we're going to grow access for our economy to the North and to increase resiliency in the face of tariff aggression.

Now I see that sask power. Main C.O NEED A PAY RISE TO MAKE MORE MONEY. THERE NO NEED KEEP TAKING MORE MONEY FROM POOR PEOPLE OF SASKATCHEWAN ANYTHING SHOULD BE LESSER MONEY TO THEM

I hope the increase is in the form of a c/kwh increase and not an infrastructure increase. It would do more to encourage reducing power consumption than only having an infrastructure increase.

At a time when everything is so expensive and we're living hand to mouth on a good day, this increase of 5.00 a month makes a huge difference. Its not nothing. Instead of putting the burden on already struggling people maybe the higher ups could take a pay cut. We are being nickle and dimed to death

As I am a low income person .with limited funds. Alreading facing a 6.70%property tax hike ,a 5.18% water rate hike and now a 3.9% power hike .I can't afford this hike .I request you deny the rate hike .they were asked in the legislature about a rate hike .they were silent in that .an audit should of been done .please keep the low income on mind .with the cost of living high already .

I think our power is high enough already especially in Bradwell where it’s out more than it’s on

Considering the staggering inflation of all inputs, a rate increase by a utility provider is warranted. My feedback pertains to net metering on solar. We are an organic farm located north of Saskatoon where natural gas was not economically feasible. Instead we opted for ground mount solar with on site Tesla backup and heat pump for HVAC. The issue is that the whole system was designed to be “neutral” power draw in a one year period, however, SaskPower only credits power generated at 50%. Even with 4 Tesla power walls we can barely sustain 1 day of usage plus have the headache and safety of batteries. SaskPower argues the 50% discount covers infrastructure, and that makes sense for solar power producers intending to SELL power, however, we only receive non refundable credits and at 50%. The whole point of net metering is so that farms like ours can make power for all those that need AC in the hot summer sun, while drawing electricity in the dead of winter. The net meter just helps to balance their annual usage. There needs to be 1:1 power generation credit for those who are under a certain generation threshold and only receiving usage credits. We’ve invested heavily in the solar infrastructure at no cost to SaskPower, with no grants or subsidies from the government and yet they receive the benefit of the extra cooling power when they need it most in summer cooling (peak generation at peak demand). All the while we are penalized 50% for attempting to do our part to remain utility neutral.

I do not approve of another rate increase People are struggling to feed their children and keep a roof over their heads Child going hungry or pay inflated utility I will choose the child

I don't believe a rate increase is needed if the crown corporation is still making money,plus still paying a CEO close to a half a million a year, while the rest of public is struggling to buy food and manage bills. This is not the time for any increase with the current economic situation.