Michael Bond – Just Saying…

For several years now, Chatham-Kent Council has been evaluating a major infrastructure proposal that could reshape how the municipality handles waste, energy, and long-term finances: the Waste-to-Energy (WTE) project.

As Council approaches a final “go/no-go” decision on April 27, 2026, residents are asking an important question: Is this a smart investment—or an unnecessary risk?

This post is a simplified break down of the facts, the costs, the potential returns, along with the pros and cons of moving forward.
—
What Is the Waste-to-Energy Project?
The proposed project would convert organic industrial, commercial, and institutional waste into Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) using anaerobic digestion technology.

Instead of sending waste to landfill, the facility would:
Process organic waste streams
Produce renewable gas for energy use
Potentially create a new revenue stream for the municipality

The project would be developed in partnership with Greenfield Global, a private-sector firm with similar facilities already operating elsewhere in Canada.
—
How Long Has This Been Before Council?
This is not a new idea.
First introduced and studied: 2021
Multiple reports and approvals: 2021–2025
Number of council discussions: At least 9 times over 3 years
Final decision expected: April 27, 2026

Over that time, Council has approved:
Engineering and feasibility studies
Financial due diligence
Legal and governance structures (including a Municipal Services Corporation)
In short: this has been a multi-year, heavily studied proposal, not a last-minute idea.
—
What Will It Cost?
The numbers are significant—and central to the debate.
Total Project Cost: Approximately $160 million
Municipal Contribution About $16 million from Chatham-Kent
Funding Breakdown
~$60 million in federal/regional funding
~$24 million from Greenfield Global (equity partner)
~$60–70 million in debt financing (including Infrastructure Ontario)

Ownership Structure:
40% municipal ownership
60% private partner ownership
—
What Are the Expected Returns?
Supporters argue this is not just a cost—it’s an investment.
Estimated Financial Benefits
$123 million in dividends over 30 years (conservative estimate)
$9 million in avoided costs to the Public Utilities Commission

Potential Use of Revenue
Offset property tax increases
Stabilize wastewater rates
Support long-term infrastructure funding
However, like any long-term infrastructure investment, returns are projections—not guarantees.
—
The Case FOR the Project
1. Environmental Benefits
Reduces landfill usage
Converts waste into renewable energy
Supports local climate commitments

2. New Revenue Stream
Potential for long-term dividend income
Less reliance on taxation and user fees

3. Economic Development
Positions Chatham-Kent as a regional hub for waste processing
Could attract additional industrial partnerships

4. Leveraging Outside Funding
Significant portion funded by federal programs and private investment
Municipal contribution is relatively small compared to total project size

5. Proven Model (Elsewhere)
Similar facilities already operating successfully (notably in Quebec)
—

The Case AGAINST the Project
1. Financial Risk
$160 million total project size carries inherent risk
Revenue projections may not materialize as expected
Long-term debt obligations could impact future budgets

2. Market Uncertainty
RNG pricing and demand could fluctuate
Dependence on consistent waste supply streams

3. Governance Complexity
Municipal Services Corporation structure adds layers of oversight
Shared ownership may limit municipal control

4. Opportunity Cost
$16 million could be directed to:
Roads and bridges
Water/wastewater infrastructure
Recreation or housing initiatives

5. Public Trust and Transparency
Large-scale projects can raise concerns about:
Cost overruns
Long-term accountability
Risk exposure to taxpayers
—
Where Things Stand Today
As of April 2026:
Engineering and financial analysis are nearing completion
A third-party review (Deloitte) is being finalized
Council is preparing for a final vote on April 27, 2026
This decision will determine whether the project proceeds to construction, potentially starting as early as 2027.
—
A Balanced Path Forward
The Waste-to-Energy project represents a classic municipal dilemma:
Do we invest today to reduce costs tomorrow?
Or do we avoid risk and focus on core infrastructure needs?

A balanced, centre-focused position recognizes that:
The project has real potential benefits, particularly in revenue diversification and environmental leadership, but it also carries real financial risks that must be carefully managed

If Council proceeds, residents should expect:
Clear accountability measures
Transparent reporting on financial performance
Strong oversight of the Municipal Services Corporation
A defined exit or risk mitigation strategy
—
Final Thought
This is one of the most significant investment decisions Chatham-Kent has faced in years.
It is not simply about waste or energy—it’s about:
Financial strategy
Risk tolerance
The future direction of the municipality

Whether you support or oppose the project, one thing is clear:
**This decision will shape Chatham-Kent for decades to come.**