The B.C. Green Party wants British Columbia to follow Ontario's lead on renewable energy development by legislating feed-in tariffs.
The party's energy critic, Philip Stone, told The Hook that the Green Party is advocating for a feed-in tariff scheme to support more diversified and small-scale power generation.
Last month, Ontario proposed legislation for new feed-in tariff policies. Feed-in tariffs guarantee electricity purchase prices that vary with the type of technology, depending on its capital, operating and maintenance costs.
Stone said the party hadn't developed specific price points for this policy, but said "we could certainly look to the Ontario example."
He said the potential backlash to raising electricity prices was a concern, but added, "the truth is that rising energy costs are going to happen...the question is whether we're going to use the money to subsidize large mega-projects or put the money in to a public-owned utility."
BC Hydro currently has a type of feed-in tariff, the standing offer program, for projects under 10 MW, but the purchase price does not differentiate between technologies.
Steve Davis, president of the Independent Power Producers of B.C. (IPPBC) said that feed-in tariffs are one tool for renewable development, but BC Hydro's existing competitive bid process works fine.
"We're OK with the existing methods, we're OK with feed-in tariffs," he said.
The Green Party is also advocating for elected regional resource management boards that would manage a portfolio of projects based on regional resources.
Stone said that the private industry "certainly has a role to play...having a local say in how development happens is pretty key to building self-reliant energy sources."
When asked if such regional energy boards could alleviate some of the public push-back to renewable development in the province, Davis said "Adding another layer, I don't think would add any value. There is already ample opportunity for local government and the public to participate in processes."
However, recent campaigns against IPPs, and particularly run-of-river projects, suggest there is a segment of the population concerned about the public's role (or lack thereof) in renewable development.
Jamie Lawson, a political science professor at the University of Victoria said the issue could be a significant one for the election, "if it gets presented in terms of the degree to which local communities are consulted with what goes on in their backyards. That would appeal to people who might not identify as environmentalists."
Colleen Kimmett reports for The Hook.
3
Login or register to post comments
seth
2 years ago
Greenies for Mr Brown
Of course the Greenies are there to get Mr Brown - Gordo himself reelected so this tacit support of his IPP program is hardly surprising.
"..the truth is that rising energy costs are going to happen..."
With solar boiler tech coming in at 3 cents a kwh, mass produced generation 3.5 nukes like the Candu ACR1000 predicted at 2 cents, and 10 years down the road pulse fusion reactors at .5 cents, costs are not necessarily going to go up. Low cost 3 cent a kwh 100 mw green tech sealed reactors like the Hyperion will be available with less than two year leads.
Nuclear is the only way out of the global warming crisis, and the few genuine Greenies that are able to think are promoting it. Big Oil and Big Coal fear nuclear realizing it is the only green tech that can put them out of business. They provide massive support to any politicians or Greenies who come out against it.
We need to beware of making commitments to any high cost tech before it is needed. Unlike Ontario, BCHydro has plenty of Green Power and needs no more. BCHydro can build Green tech run of the river,wind, geothermal and nuclear easily at very low cost with two year lead times years down the road when power needs dictate.
reallife
2 years ago
Great ideas!
Stick consumers with inefficient technology and increase the bureaucracy - sounds like a couple great ideas.
Frank
2 years ago
Stone deaf
"There is already ample opportunity for local government and the public to participate in processes.""
As long as they don't say no. Participation is only good if people paint flowers on their cheeks and cheer river diversions I guess.
Apparently the Greens back habitat destruction if it means more juice for their Ipods.
It would be nice if there was a party that put the environment ahead of growth.