The Hook

A number of years ago

A number of years ago Goldman Sachs got involved with Montana Power which was a good power utility company. It didn't take long but the assests were sold off and it doesn't exist any more. The power rates shot up because their production dropped. With that the power company now had to buy power off the open market. Who benefited? The people on top who made buckets of money.

Tzeporah Berman: Environmentalist? Or business lobbyist?

From the Scott Simpson Van Sun article linked to above:

Tzeporah Berman, PowerUP Canada executive director, said she was "relieved" that the Liberals won "because a moratorium would have meant a flood of investment and green energy companies leaving the province at a critical moment when we need them to help build the clean economy of the future.

"We have narrowly avoided letting ideology and cheap politics guide our energy policy and defer our focus from the growing threat of global warming," Berman added.

Can some please remind me where I have heard this kind of thing before? To me, it sounds like a verbatim repeat of the kind of thing you hear from right-wing politicians and from business lobbyists like Phil Hochstein in every provincial election. There's going to be this huge flood of potential capital investment fleeing the province if the wrong party wins. It's complete and utter Bullshit, no matter who says it.

Green power jobs a go no matter who won

Our geography, as well as BC's position in the Pacific Northwest's transmission system, which has traded energy back and forth with the States for decades, almost assures a growing renewable energy sector. For job creation/economy, to fight climate change, to build skills capacity, whatever the reasons, it is a good idea to involve a private sector who is focused on engineering these various technologies and generation systems. BC Hydro can't do it all anymore. But this can work without meaning a break-apart and sell-off of BC Hydro, a la Montana. For an era in which power utility de-regulation is the norm (see Alberta), I think BCH and the government are doing a decent job so far of working with the corporate sector, giving up some of its exclusive rights and access, while maintaining a sold regulatory regime.

Now, if recent reports that pressure is being exerted on the Ministry of Environment to go easy on run-of-river permitting, that's a red flag that needs to be highlighted. That would be a REAL concern, not a fictional one, and one that watchdogs would do well to bring to the governments, private sector's and public's attention.

No surprise big business was

No surprise big business was the real winner Tuesday night. El Godo has lots more of BC to sell away too...sickening.

Green Brick shares for all

Maybe the Big Unions (cope378) could Put their pension funds where their big Mouths are and .... Invest in BC eh! ...

Or We should restart Brick with the carbon tax and hand out Green Brick shares to everyone in the province.

Tzeporah Berman

Tzeporah Berman... I knew, back when, there was something I didn't like about her. Was it the way she could never get enough of the cameras and microphones? Was it the way her science was severely flawed?

I wanted to like her cause, back then, but she sure made me nervous. Now I know my hunches were bang on.

Be wary of those seeking the limelight.

Run Of The River Who Benefits?

I liked this one

Dear Editor,

Run Of The River Who Benefits?

My fellow British Columbians, this upcoming election is a defining moment for our BC Hydro. In my mind this is the number one election issue for me. Yes, there are lots of other serious issues but this one could be lost for good due to WTO & NAFTA.

Gordon Campbell and the BC Liberals are handing over our rivers to his corporate buddies to make large profits once their short term 20-30 year leases expire.

So, I ask you, who benefits? Well if Gordon Campbell and his insiders have their way it will be exclusively his corporate buddies and not every British Columbian who rightly own these public assets.

Those rivers are ours, British Columbians, not the property of Wall and Bay Street shareholders.

Quite simply, if we are taking all of the environmental risk to our rivers then we the people should own and benefit from cheap dependable electricity not Bay or Wall Street.

In the past, this reward to the people of British Columbia for leaving an environmental footprint on our rivers was under the stewardship of BC Hydro whom returned a great many benefits back to British Columbians.

However, Gordon Campbell did not like this so he brought in a law back around 2001-2002 neutering BC Hydro from developing any new projects in house making us reliant entirely of (IPP) Independent Power Producers for future power needs.

Well, we the people should demand that we once again have BC Hydro on behalf of every British Columbian contract companies to build these projects for BC Hydro so we can once again enjoy the benefits for taking those environmental risks to our rivers and pass the rewards on to future generations, not Mr. Campbell’s corporate buddies.

So please take this serious situation into consideration when you go to vote in this upcoming Provincial election.

Lindsay Hamilton,

New Westminster.

Skookum1 says ...

Quote:

On the Hook article on Plutonic Power by Colleen Kimmett, there's a geographic usage that I find really annoying:

"One project, on the Toba Inlet, is under construction, another in the Bute Inlet is at the pre-environmental assessment stage and a third in the Knight Inlet is in the planning stage."

It's like saying "on the Okanagan Lake", "on the Queen Charlotte Sound" etc. Not just awkward sounding but also rather Yankee-ish, or "quaint" anyway. It's a usage I come across in countless Wiki articles - the needless use of "the" before certain types of geographic names; fine in front of a strait when it's "on the Strait of Georgia" but awkward sounding in "on the Queen Charlotte Strait.

More to the point these developments are NOT on Toba Inlet, Bute Inlet or Knight Inlet. They're no the Toba River, the Homathko River, the Klinaklini River. Talking about them as if they're on the inlets gives a complete misapprehension of their nature and diverts from the word "river".....I'd expect this in the Sun etc but not in the Tyee. It's the RIVERS that are to be affected, not the INLETS (directly).

Has there been any discussion at all about the high-tension power lines that will traverse the landscape as a result of these projects? If the Homathko developments (aka "Bute Inlet" developments) are the same size or larger than Site C would have been, we're not talking about a few lines strung on telephone poles....

Energy Recruiter: Who will highlight that concern?

Energy Recruiter
Now, if recent reports that pressure is being exerted on the Ministry of Environment to go easy on run-of-river permitting, that's a red flag that needs to be highlighted.

Who do you think will highlight that concern? Do you think it will be the commercial mass media, the Sun newspaper for example, possibly their environmental reporter Larry Pynn, or their energy reporter, Scott Simpson?

Do you think that the ENGOs, such as the David Suzuki Foundation will keep an eye on this problem? What about PowerUp Canada?

Do you think that parliamentarians, the MLAs in Victoria or the MPs in Ottawa, will be able to bring public attention and policy changes in this area?