Opinion

Campbell's Power to Harm Rivers

500 BC streams risked for private profit.

By Rafe Mair, 25 Feb 2008, TheTyee.ca

River

How green is 'run of river' method?

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

Thanks to the Campbell government, British Columbia will be a much different place when they're finished. It will not be a pretty picture and unless there is a public protest of sufficient impact to get the government's attention, the new B.C. will be in place with no turning back.

I should add, in fairness, that if you like development more than the environment, this article will give you considerable pleasure.

Under the government's energy plan, up to 500 BC streams will be severely impacted by private power companies acting under licenses which cost a pittance.

Let's set the stage. British Columbia will need more power in the coming years. The minister of energy, Richard Neufeld, says we import electricity now but doesn't tell you that BC Hydro does that in order to export it to the United States for profit.

But we are told that dozens, maybe hundreds, of private "micro-hydro" generators on B.C. rivers and streams are a "green" answer to our energy needs.

Local zoning power over rivers erased

It all started so innocently with the BC Energy Plan in 2002 telling of opportunities for private capital to get into the electricity game. Of course they would not do so where a stream had "significant fish values," whatever the devil that was supposed to mean. This new policy didn't catch the attention of the public because the government didn't want it to until it was well underway. Well folks, it is now well underway.

A troublesome roadblock to this policy quickly appeared when municipalities and regional districts became alarmed and exercised their land use powers to vote down projects, as respected journalist Mark Hume of the Globe and Mail reported in June of last year.

"Some 33 regional districts and municipalities in areas of British Columbia long courted by the government as the resource-rich "heartlands" have turned against the province in a battle over independent power projects.

"In June 2006 the provincial government passed an amendment to Bill 30 that abolished local zoning authority so that no one can say no to a private power project on a river in BC."

So much for democracy.

Damned if they don't dam

The government's position is that none of these projects involve dams impeding fish migration so everything's just dandy. Once again, as with fish farms, the Campbell government hopes that no one will look too closely at his cheery pronouncements until the projects are a fait accompli when it'll be too late.

Making hydro electricity requires that you control the flow of the water. This means different flows depending on the needs of the producer, and in at least in one case a company took all the water. Stupid fish perished! Mr. Campbell, one would have thought, would know that fish need water.

I suppose one must expect economy of truthfulness with this government's treatment of fish, given its record on the fish farm issue and they haven't disappointed us. For one example, when it states that the project on the Ashlu River near Squamish was upstream from a "waterfall," the "waterfall" turns out to be rapids that kayakers love to run -- rapids the fish can and do traverse.

Here are the facts, folks. Whether or not some projects will impede the fish, and some will, here's what will destroy fisheries: siltation (fish don't do any better than humans when breathing mud). And lack of water. Both of these will occur.

Here's something more that will happen -- dirt roads into wilderness rivers so that equipment can come and go and transmission lines from the power generators. In summary, this will happen on every river, all 500 or more of them: tunnels for water to pass through and create electricity, meaning major changes in the river flow to suit the power company, siltation, erosion of river banks, dirt roads and transmission lines. And it's not just fish that will be decimated. All in the food chain, including many birds, such as Osprey and eagles, bears and other mammals, will suffer. It will adversely affect the neighbouring fauna as well. This policy, so innocent in initial appearance, is deadly.

It will also destroy wilderness areas, a hell of a lot of them. Once you have power plants, dirt roads and transmission lines there is no wilderness. Many of you, like me, can't partake of the wilderness but, like me, I'm sure you're proud of B.C.'s wild areas and want them kept that way.

Regulators without poor records

Ah, but the government says, we must get clearance from the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Right, the same DFO which approved the Kemano II project and turned their authority over fish farms over to the gentle mercies of the provincial Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fish -- the ministry which, after environmental despoilers are fined gives them the fines back.

But there's the B.C. Ministry of Environment. Surely it can be depended upon to look after public interests in the great outdoors British Columbians like to boast about. Unfortunately, we know from other matters such as the Eagleridge case and the South Fraser Perimeter Road that the Environmental Assessment Act is only invoked after the decision has been made.

Who makes sure that these new power millionaires will play by the rules after the project is completed? Are we to assume that these instantly rich companies will take tender loving care of that which surrounds their plant! Dream on, folks, dream on! Hell's bells, neither the DFO nor the minister of environment are capable of safeguarding the environment within easy to reach parts of the province. Only a fool would believe that they will make forays into the wilderness to check out private power projects.

Site C would be better

Why is this happening?

One can only speculate that Campbell & Co. prefer private companies making profits to the publicly owned BC Hydro, which pays dividends over the public purse and helps pay for health care, education and so on. As much as communists and old-line socialists hated private profit at any cost, the Campbell government loves making people rich at the expense of the public. The creation and distribution of power in this province will move from a Crown corporation, over which we have control and which pays huge dividends, to the private sector that pockets our money and is, for all intents and purposes, beyond our control.

To my way of thinking, the answer is not complicated. Instead of a large public power project like Site C on a river that's already all screwed up, the Campbell right wing government prefers sacrificing the environment of the entire province for the profit of their friends. Once this plan is at the point of no return there will be no need for Site C, a project which would create thousands of jobs and leave the public with a precious asset.

We the people elected this government in 2001, 2005, and seem bound to do the same in 2009. We have no one to blame but ourselves proving that Pogo, from that great satirical comic of yesteryear, was right, "We've met the enemy and he is us."

Related Tyee stories:

[Tyee]

Rafe Mair writes a Monday column for The Tyee. Read previous columns by Rafe Mair here.

41 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • Grumpy

    3 years ago

    Campbell doesn't give a god damn.......

    ....... about this province, he will destroy BC to make his 30 pieces of silver.

    We have a Premier who has assembled some of the most stupid and compliant members ever. Not one has the moral fibre to tell Campbell to stick it.

    The sad fact is that Carole James and the NDP make Campbell & Co. look good!

    There is not one politician with the moral fibre to say enough of this nasty bit of business called Campbell.

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    This GD gov't of night-crawlers.

    I've read somewhere that BC Hydro had already done assessments of these streams, and Gordo had decided that "Free Enterprise" could do it better.

    Somehow (ha ha) the "Free Enterprisers" got hold of these assessments without anyone but Gordo's good buddies knowing what was afoot, thus facilitating the bypassing of a bidding process, and leaving public bodies such as Regional Districts in the dark.

    Surely there must be some legal recourse available to the public through which the legality of this secrecy can be challenged ?

  • Bobby Peru

    3 years ago

    Far too simplistic, Rafe

    You draw your conclusions so ignorantly asserting the Crown companies necessarily do a better job than private ones in providing public services at an economical price. You forget many of the wasteful Crown corps of your time and that currently operate. Moreover, you forget that carefully managing taxpayers' dollars is an important mandate.

    No, these private companies are not beyond our control as they are bound by extensive service agreements with the government. And surprisingly, many of their shareholders are the very pension and union funds which will benefit working families. Today, the capitalism vs socialism argument is not as clean cut as Rafe Mair sees it. It's not us versus them as many socialist vehicles like unions are investors in capitalist vehicles. Marx didn't forsee the development of stock markets to widen the means of ownership.

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    How much longer can the media ignore the stink of it?

    The more I think of it, isn't what we are seeing here precisely what we have been accusing corrupt governments of participating in throughout the Third World?

    It seems to me that the behind closed doors selling off of resources and government institutions to friends is the mark of corrupt governments elsewhere, so why is our media - so ready to write exposes of those deals - so unwilling to see them here right under their very noses?

  • jimmy_laroux

    3 years ago

    Far too simplistic, Bobby Peru

    Quote:
    You draw your conclusions so ignorantly asserting the Crown companies necessarily do a better job than private ones in providing public services at an economical price.

    British Columbians pay the third lowest hydro rates of any jurisdiction in North America. #1 and #2 are also crown corporations (Quebec and Manitoba, I think). BC Hydro also makes a profit and keeps job in the province.

    So no, in this case crown corporations do a much better job than private companies.

    Quote:
    You forget many of the wasteful Crown corps of your time and that currently operate.

    I certainly would not say "many". The handful of cases of mismanagement were usually a result of government interference (e.g. fast ferries). Anyway BC Hydro has never been one of them.

    Quote:
    Marx didn't forsee the development of stock markets to widen the means of ownership.

    And what percentage of British Columbians do you think will own stock in these companies?

    Quote:
    No, these private companies are not beyond our control as they are bound by extensive service agreements with the government.

    And once the contracts are up? British Columbians are left with no assets and no guarantees.

    You might want to read up on the situation.

    http://thetyee.ca/Views/2006/10/30/BCHydro/

    http://www.citizensforpublicpower.ca/

  • Fiat lux

    3 years ago

    If these companies are

    If these companies are foreign owned, NAFTA and the WTO will make it sure that their taking over and ruling of BC will be permanent.

    It is always pathetic to see that some people can not go beyond the usual braindead "capitalism vs. socialism" slogans.

    I can well remember when Wacky Bennett nationalized BC Electric and the ferries and he was no socialist by any stretch, but had some brains and logic, politicians have long forgotten.

    The sordid fact is that if humanity wants to survive as any form of civilization, all ideologies will have to be scrapped and replaced with physical laws based economic systems.

    What nobody talks about is what the electricity will be used for? Is it really needed for the enhancement of human lives, or for the insatiable greed of the artificial entities of corporate shares?

    Ed Deak.

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Excellent piece Rafe.

    All over the world multi national corporations are eagerly buying up any utilities that for one reason or another become available for private ownership. Water systems and hydro electric plants are the most sought after because they are a license to make money.

    I just read that Alcan has won the fight to sell all the power it wants from their Kemano facility and they need not use any of it for smelting aluminum as was originally intended. They won because Campbell's government took the same position as Alcan selling out an entire community's future.

    This is Campbell's attempt to privatize hydro in BC. In order to make all the IPP's profitable we have to be willing to pay more for our power so BC Hydro's rates must go up to market value. Pretty soon the argument will be that the private companies can do it just as cheaply and why not sell BC Hydro like BC Rail. Thieves all of them.

  • seth

    3 years ago

    carbon trading ie bs in its raw form

    1)Most of the details up and coming deals are secret(private business). We only see the results as massive increase in power rates.
    2) There are huge campaign donations passed on to Gordo and his neocon henchmen by these so called private power companies. BCHydro can't payout campaign donations.
    3) No doubt there will be many opportunities for retiring/booted MLAs/cabinet ministers for lucrative positions on the boards of directors of these companies. This group of half wit Neocon real estate salesmen and such will have much valuable advice to justify their lucrative stipends.
    4) The Neocons justify the use of private companies due to their incredible efficiency in construction. What is never pointed out is the fact that ALL large public construction projects in the province are built by private construction firms after a competitive bidding process.
    The difference is the public ownership option has skilled engineers evaluating proposals not worn out political hacks with real estate tickets concerned more about campaign donations than benefits to BC.

  • Fiat lux

    3 years ago

    The control of utilities is

    The control of utilities is the obvious next step to global corporate dictatorship.

    While pretending to be "free enterprise private ownership" in reality, some of these corporations operate under hundreds of names, serving the same owners.

    The have used the deregulated money creation powers of the banks to take over and buy up the world's resources, including most of Canada's. The whole world's food supply is now kolkhozified into the hands of 2-3 of this corporate mafia, one of them the royal Windsor family, with Cargill the biggest, depressing prices paid to producers while raising them to the public.

    With utilities under their control, the Sovietization of the world is one step closer. Stalin and Mao must be rolling in their graves for not having thought of this scam.

    So , let's hear the brainwashed faithful come up with some new slogans on "socialism vs. capitalism".

    Who the hell cares what the long dead prophets, like Smith and Marx were preaching? Look at the sordid facts of today, the dead prophets couldn't begin to dream about 150 and 200 years ago.

    Ed Deak.

  • sdgreen

    3 years ago

    Why can't BCHydro do the job?

    BCHydro should be the one that builds, enhances and distributes electrical energy, whether that be hydro, wind, or solar installations. Period.

    The socalled BC Carbon tax is silly in the form such is implemented. The $440 mil 'green gift' everyone is to get, should be provided to either BCHYdro, or otherwise used to enhance tranport services. The current fuel taxes should be used exclusively for 'Green Initiatives'. We are already paying huge taxes.

  • Tsolum

    3 years ago

    BC Hydro should stay

    BC Hydro should stay publicly owned and operated and should be the one that is given the mandate to produce the power this province needs.
    The question that needs to be asked is, if we have one of the lowest electricity prices in North America, why would you change something that works so well. Only an idiots ideology would drive this change.

  • Budd Campbell

    3 years ago

    MANY DON'T LIKE SITE C EITHER

    No one should know better than Rafe Mair that many environmentalists don't like Site C either. It would flood some valuable, valley bottom farmland and deer and moose habitat. The commercial value of these agricultural and wildlife assets may be small in comparison to the electricity to be generated, but that doesn't mean everyone is delighted by the prospect.

    I have an answer. Coal fired thermal in the Peace River area with carbon capture into the oil and gas wells. We use a BC resource, coal, and get power that will be more expensive that the existing hydro power, but less expensive that the contracts being offered to the IPPs. And we get to apply new technology and recover more fossil fuels into the bargain. What's not to like?

    What's not to like is that some so-called "environmentalists" are in reality no more than publicity shills for business interests selling various "green" power generation options, be it wind farm equipment or solar panels or tidal gadgets or what have you. They will bitterly oppose any type of low-cost coal fired thermal, even if all the CO2 goes into the ground, not the atmosphere. They will put forward their "argument" using the same one-in-a-trillion apocalypse scenarios they use when discussing nuclear plants. What if a terrorist attacks the plant at just the very same moment as a one in 100,000 year earthquake strikes, might not all the trapped CO2 suddenly escape, ... and then what???

  • snert

    3 years ago

    Both

    Quote:
    What nobody talks about is what the electricity will be used for? Is it really needed for the enhancement of human lives, or for the insatiable greed of the artificial entities of corporate shares?

  • alive

    3 years ago

    all a game

    Quote:
    Fiat ........The control of utilities is the obvious next step to global corporate dictatorship.

    Anyone playing "Monopoly" knows that Utilities are part of the power groups; just amazed that it took so long for our smart leaders to realize it

  • Energy Recruiter

    3 years ago

    Somewhere in the middle

    TO the Left: Paranoia and entrenchment grows, resisting deregulation to the end.
    To the Right: Corportization, pirates on the river, as it were.

    Its important that these inflammatory articles, which portray the pace of development as more rapid and destructive than it really is (of 16 run of rivers given licenses to build in recent years, only 2 were actually constructed. Recently heard at a Save Our Rivers movie night).

    If activities since 2002 are any indication, about 12% of the "investigative use permits" (the 500 number, essentially the right to hike and take photographs) that are issued ever make it through the on average 5 YEAR process to assess, license, and construct a plant. Which means in roughly 5 years, about 60 new run of river plants may be built, not factoring in the human resources factor, rising cost of fuel due to peak oil, and stringent public pressure to "do it right or not at all".

    So keep it up Rafe and the grassroots! Though given to exaggeration and a quaint socialist blanket distrust of ALL private companies (some are masters of right livelihood, and take major pride in applying best practices in everything they do), the opposition to the private river developments will help ensure they are not an out of control speculative rush, as we know capitalism so often can be. This renewable energy fan will continue to watch for examples of genuine co-operation and ecological best practices, be it from private industry or public.

  • MBCGA

    3 years ago

    Rivers and IPP's

    Rafe Mair did a great job here, and I agree with virtually everything he said. Perhaps Site C really is the lesser of the two evils.

    For me, the point isn't really whether power should be produced by BC Hydro in the public sector, or by the private sector but

    (a) how much power do we really need

    and

    (b) how can we produce it in a way that doesn't wreck the natural capital assets of the province.

    To answer (a), we need to be sure that power is not in fact being underpriced (which leads to it being wasted) and that all opportunities for power conservation and for investment in proven Demand Side Management (DSM) projects have been properly explored.

    To answer (b) we have to make sure (1) that any run-of-the-river or mega-dam projects can survive a proper ecological-economic cost benefit analysis, (2) that operators of IPP's pay a proper realistic price for the water-rental which is not fixed for long terms and certainly not in perpetuity, (3) that operators of IPP's are scrupulously monitored and fined or penalized at a meaninful rate per individual fish for adverse impacts on habitat and on the food chain above the fish, and (4) that operators have their licences continuously on-the-line and at risk of revokation, for poor environmental performance.

    If such a regime makes it unattractive for the private sector to invest in IPP's, tough. Then BC Hydro can take the responsibility back. Like the late Milton Friedman used to say, there is no such thing as a free lunch !

    Michael Barkusky

  • keep the peace

    3 years ago

    Site C

    Hwaet!
    With all due respect Rafe, you are a tad out of line when you describe the Peace River as being "screwed up". The stretch slated to be flooded by Site C is still in a pristine state. Try driving the valley road from Hudson's Hope to Fort St. John, or better yet take along your fly rod on a boat trip and sample some of the most varied and productive fishing in the Province. The scenery is stunning, the farms incredibly productive and the valley is a crucial refuge for wildlife.
    To dam that river again would be an environmental crime; a travesty done in the interest of our hideously wasteful lifestyle. I hear there are murmurings of the construction of two nuclear power stations to be built along the river on the Alberta side.
    Truly a sacrificial river, but one that is so far from our main centres of population that few people really care about its fate.

    Keep the Peace

  • dave49

    3 years ago

    I've been telling people this is coming...

    I've been telling people this is coming. BC Hydro needs something like 20,000 GigaWatts of capacity by 2020. We can build lots of small run-of-river plants but won't get close to that goal. We will of course, spoil every river in the province. However, we will create MANY opportunities for business people and investors to become wealthy at the price of spoiling nature in the name of "green power".

    One of the solutions - build Site C, which will provide 5,000 of those 20,000 GW of electric generating capacity.

    Gordo and gang are cunning. Be wary of the new budget and carbon tax. There will be hidden opportunities to transfer our money into the hands of the avaricious.

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    FIAT LUX

    Fiat Lux, you are adept with polemics belabouring what is obvious to us all. but to date you've offered nothing practical to replace either "Capitalism" or Socialism.

    ANY change, whether financial or civil, will have to involve politics in some form or another, so just what do you propose we should do?

  • UnCivilizedEngineer

    3 years ago

    Rafe is Over-Exaggerating (As Usual)

    Realistically, there is about 8,000 GWh/year of small hydro that can be developed economically as reported by a consultant for BC Hydro (see http://www.bchydro.com/info/iep/iep53123.html). This represents approximately 100 sites, hardly every stream in the province, of which there are 37,000+/-.

    On the issue of roads and powerlines going into the wilderness to reach these sites, the largest cost faced by IPPs are these two items. From an economic perspective, the IPPs will build the shortest route possible, and use existing corridors. Anyone who has looked at an aerial photo of the province knows that it is extensively covered by forestry roads already. The additional intrusion will be minimal in most cases.

    The Ministry of Environment has released draft guidelines on water releases in streams. For non fish-bearing streams, a minimum of 15% of the low-flow rate must remain at all times, while in fish-bearing streams the formula is much more complicated, but from an engineering standpoint, makes development on these reaches nearly infeasible for run-of-river. For developments proposed on salmon streams, you can basically forget it, because DFO will not approve these projects. Period.

    We enjoy low power rates because WAC Bennet decided to build HUGE power developments on the scale unheard of these days in BC, when labour and materials were cheap, and environmental regulations were non-existent. BC Hydro can no longer develop new power sources at this cost! We haven't even paid off the debt (~$7 billion) yet, so why should we, the taxpayers fork out for even more infrastructure that will be financed for many years to come? How about replacing our aging power infrastructure we already have? Does anyone honestly believe that the rates we pay today can pay for maintaining what we've got in perpetuity plus building new infrastructure? Rates should increase to pay for new power, and deter people from over-using. Exporting surpluses helps to offset our costs as well.

    And guess what? BC Hydro already doesn't generate all of the power in this province - as the residents of the Boundary-Kootenay, Okanagan and Similkameen regions know, Fortis BC generates and distributes a percentage of the power for BC. All of this fear-mongering is simply COPE and BC Fed trying to generate some votes for their buddies at the NDP, and garner sweetheart deals for the union brass.

    Last, energy is a global commodity, like it or lump it. If power generated here is being sold to the US, it is offsetting GHG-based power generation down there, which benefits everyone. Why shouldn't we have this as an export industry? For that matter we still have many [First Nations or other] communities running on diesel power generation that could truly benefit from the development of cleaner energy at a lower cost, also providing them with a chance to participate in a larger economy.

  • snert

    3 years ago

    Siphoning

    Quote:
    Rates should increase to pay for new power, and deter people from over-using. Exporting surpluses helps to offset our costs as well.

    These rates would not need to go up near as much if Hydro had not been forced to pay dividends to successive governments, including the current excuse for one.

    Money that could have gone towards new sources or upgrading the older ones has been thrown into general revenue and wasted on other things. It seems that cheap, clean power is not considered to be one of the benefits of living in the best place on the planet.

  • jimmy_laroux

    3 years ago

    UnCivilizedEngineer: Quote:.

    UnCivilizedEngineer:

    Quote:
    ...why should we, the taxpayers fork out for even more infrastructure that will be financed for many years to come?

    We the taxpayers are doing it for the IPPs. We are financing the construction and maintenance of their assets by paying their absurdly high rates. That is the biggest issue.

  • G West

    3 years ago

    That's just utter nonsense

    Quote:
    All of this fear-mongering is simply COPE and BC Fed trying to generate some votes for their buddies at the NDP, and garner sweetheart deals for the union brass.

    writes 'uncivilized engineer'

    You're either a media monitor sent here by the bureau of public affairs or you haven't been paying attention.

    [OFFENSIVE COMMENT REMOVED. - MODERATOR.]

    There are all kinds of academic critics of this asinine plan to Enronize the hydro generating capacity of this province. The fact that Kootenay Power wasn't taken over by Hydro years ago, we need outfits like Alcan, Fortis and the other multi-nationals who are buying up the river leases like a hole in the head.

    Selling some surplus power to the US is one thing - contracting with this bunch of pirates for virtually nothing - and guaranteeing them a land-office return on their investment at the hands of BC citizens is just plain insane.

    That business of global commoditization isn't actually working too well these days is it?

    Checked the forest 'industry' lately?

    I hope you're not designing any bridges for public use.

    Do you get to make these things up yourself, or does the Premier's office provide a draft - just the kind of thing Dave Basi used to specialize in?

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Right on G West! And furthermore...

    Imagine "We haven't even paid off the debt (~$7 billion) yet, so why should we, the taxpayers fork out for even more infrastructure that will be financed for many years to come?" says the uncivilized engineer. Yet we enjoy some of the lowest hydro rates on the continent. Assuming he's correct on the debt, I say let BC Hydro build more. How can we lose. The only way to lose is to turn it over to the multi national corporations who will add a massive profit margin. These resource pimps - and they are no better than the street version - must think we are all pretty dumb.

  • North of Hope

    3 years ago

    UnCivilizedEngineer said

    "We enjoy low power rates because WAC Bennet decided to build HUGE power developments on the scale unheard of these days in BC, when labour and materials were cheap, and environmental regulations were non-existent."

    One of the reasons we enjoyed low power rates was because WAC Bennett "borrowed" money from the public service pension plans. 1% was paid for the use of that money to finance the WAC Bennett dam. The next time you say we have low electricity rates, thank a public service employee (including teachers.)

  • Energy Recruiter

    3 years ago

    Us and Them

    As an enthusiastic, BC-raised, peace loving, avant-bhuddism practicing 31 yr old, this Us & Them thinking is almost no longer relevant, and certainly poisonous. We know they're bad guys!
    Collaboration people, is the key to solutions, especially when there ain;t nobody here, but us and them....

    Lets become involved. Co-ops, municipality-based P3's, European quality standards in engineering, habitat protection, and economic fairness. Call your MLA, MP, and local First Nations and get to work. Call Renewable Recruits.com if you want to philosophize about it first.

    Finally, to make all of this feel-good thinking translate into action, become enlightened... Its a tall order I know, but nothing less will do these days.

    Antagonize in the spirit of co-operation!
    Thanks Rafe, keep 'em coming ~

  • Energy Recruiter

    3 years ago

    PS and thanks for all the fish

    Apparently, the majority of all the WAC dam building activity at the time was primarily for export to the US in the first place... But you won't hear that from Save Our Rivers.

    Did folks think we were ever in control? Grow up, and stop calling eachother stupid. We are all obviously intelligent enough to be on this fine blog.
    Stop blaming the world and all its corporations, religions, or your parents for how screwed up it is. But, don't let power players run amok! Thats not what Im saying.
    There's a "world-class opportunity" here,to use the grandiose verbiage of the Campbell Machine, to turn this shaky capitalism into its sustainable, post-modern equivalent.
    Get prepared to smile and shake hands with the man, and tell him how it needs to be.

  • Energy Recruiter

    3 years ago

    "We ask that news and

    "We ask that news and commentary pieces be scrupulous in citing sources, that stories about life in the province be concise and conversational, and that everyone who contributes to The Tyee maintain a sense of humour and perspective."

    Sounds about write to me

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Borrowing from Pension plans

    "WAC Bennett "borrowed" money from the public service pension plans. 1% was paid for the use of that money..."

    You are right North of Hope but in exchange the pensions were guaranteed. You ever compare the Public Service Pensions to those received by the folks retired from the forest industry or one of the trades. As well Energy Recruiter we shouldn't let these guys run amok? Who is going to protect us? The BC Utilities Commission? Ask the folks getting the shaft by Alcan about that. Or should we trust Gordon Campbell?

  • Energy Recruiter

    3 years ago

    Protect us?

    Dear Skywalker,
    No one is going to 'protect us'.
    We protect ourselves, its a new paradigm and thats one of the unfortunate realities. We are the safety net.
    And the truth is, 'we' happens to include power development companies, some who are many smaller BC-based efforts, ie our neighbours.

    Yes tools like the BCUC, but people have to get engaged, organize, and keep up pressure when cracks show in the old mold. For example, the 'interesting' green BC Energy Plan recommends the BCUC now use triple-bottom line accounting. In a boxing match this is like your opponent dropping their glove and showing his/her jaw. But folks need to inform themselves with the necessary information (not just fear-based reactions) and then take action. This BCUC detail, the 50% efficiency target, getting net metering several years ago, stopping the Duke Point Gas Plant... Pick your battles

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    High finance

    Wrong, Energy R. The Columbia River dams were financed in part by the Yanks in return for water storage, since the water is held back for release in low-flow times, and is then used several times over in driving hydro generation on the downstream US portions of the Columbia.

    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my information is that only surplus power is sold to the Americans.

    Lastly, concerning the "debt" incurred in building dams. These are hugely capital-intensive, and as with all other costly public utilities which require long payback times, private companies cannot acquire the low-interest bond rates which are available to governments which typically have Triple-A ratings. In terms of payback, this "debt" is insignificant.

    However, if Gordo builds another dam on the Peace, you can bet your boots it will be a PPP effort which he will brag is saving you money. But he will use YOUR credit to get the cheaper borrowing rates, and then turn the profits from the Hydro over to the private "investors", his corporate good buddies.

  • snert

    3 years ago

    The Energy Card

    With both Clinton and Obama spouting off about reopening NAFTA there may be some rethinking going on as to how energy exporting should be handled. I would hope there are no new long term contracts signed until the US election is finally over.

    The Energy Card, we may just have to play it.

  • Luke Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Interesting to note that SFU

    Interesting to note that SFU Professor Mark Jaccard was appointed by the New Democrats under the Harcourt/Clark/Miller administrations during the 1990's.

    During the 1990's, he also chaired the BC Utilities Commission and headed inquiries into the structure of the electricity market under the NDP.

    He apparently adised the NDP to split up BC Hydro into two concerns, one for power generation and the other for transmission, which the Liberals implemented subsequent to 2001.

    He also urged BC Hydro to cancel the natural-gas generating station on Duke Point on Vancouver Island... claiming that the project was "Fast Ferries 2".

    Yup, BC Hydro took a financial hit of several hundred millions after that was cancelled.

    And Jaccard, also suggested that, as part of public policy, BC Hydro should commence accepting bids for smaller and greener energy projects from private concerns, including run-of-the-river projects.

    Apparently, the NDP preferred large-scale generation for BC Hydro, such as the now defunct natural-gas generating station on Duke Point and apparently the environmentally contentious Site C dam.

    [To paraphrase Vaughn Palmer]

    Interesting stuff!

    http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=88d8da9d-9cc6-4439-8931-4710392765d5

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    So what are you and Vaughn saying Luke.

    Are you suggesting that the NDP would have allowed the same gold rush mentality and sell- off of the rivers as this bunch just of Jaccard's "suggestions"? Are you also suggesting that what BC Hydro would be paying for that power is the same price that makes all these IPP's a license to print money? I think they would have insisted on a purchase price with a reasonable profit with the people getting a good return for the resource through POWEREX.

    There certainly would never have been an NDP Minister in a court room claiming Alcan had a right to sell all its Kemano power and close down the smelter in Kitimat. Only under this bunch.

  • Luke Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Quote:Are you also

    Quote:
    Are you also suggesting that what BC Hydro would be paying for that power is the same price that makes all these IPP's a license to print money?

    BC Hydro's own costs estimates for a variety of energy sources are listed in the following table:

    http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:alYHQw5yz5IJ:www.energyplan.gov.bc.ca/bcep/default.aspx%3Fhash%3D7+%22Site+C%22+Megawatt+hours&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ca

    Large Hydro-electric: $43 - $62/ MwH
    Run-of-River: $60 - $95/ MwH

    IIRC, those same ROR contracts with BC Hydro are in that range.

    Frankly, I would have preferred BC Hydro build the projects, but neither the NDP nor the Liberals would/ will permit same.

    Quote:
    I think they would have insisted on a purchase price with a reasonable profit with the people getting a good return for the resource through POWEREX.

    Powerex is an arm of BC Hydro, which essentially acts akin to a broker to other utilities for the sale/purchase of electricity on a short-term basis.

    Powerex is certainly profitable during the evening down-time of hydro dams, when it purchases cheap electricity from coal-generation in Alberta, for example.

    From Powerex's own website:

    Quote:
    Within BC, Powerex can purchase energy and generation from Independent Power Producers (IPP's), industrial customers with surplus generation, and other BC electric utilities."

    http://www.powerex.com/offer/bc.htm

  • G West

    3 years ago

    Oh really!

    And I guess Jaccard is a noble disinterested academic...

    What's interesting is that the media monitors don't mention that Jaccard has a serious conflict of interest:

    M.K. Jaccard and Associates, is on a $120,000 contract to provide technical advice to the climate action secretariat, the premier's in-house policy shop.

    It wouldn't be too surprising, would it, that he might think a stupid program he's had a hand in designing was also a damn fine idea?

    Spare me, please. This is about as convincing as Palmer's usual stuff.

    In other words - NOT VERY.

    Do you suppose he waived his usual speaking fee for the engagement?

    The guy has the credibility of a hired gunslinger.

    Ain't 'free' enterprise grand?

  • happy

    3 years ago

    there goes "weathervane west" again

    So today Palmers not credible. Yet whenever he writes an article critical of the government you have no problem referring to it as more proof of their "crimes". You even provided us this link today on another thread:

    "Mr. Mathews's cynicism about the judiciary is never far from the surface and BC Mary's conspiratorial musings about the motives of CanWest journalists are pointlessly distracting. Still, this is a case where even so sober a commentator as Vancouver Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer warned the Premier earlier this month about avoiding "suspicions of cover-up."

    So who's the person with a credibility problem?

  • G West

    3 years ago

    happy - pleased to respond

    The person with the credibility problem, happy, is Gordon Campbell; more and more the fact that the premier is up to his eyes in this mess is coming to peoples' realization.

    This week he even gave a silver 'legacy' award to George Copley, who has been handling the case for the Executive Council (read Gordon Campbell).

    You might think there's nothing wrong with that but in fact, Mr. Copley was superannuated last April - check out this ORDER IN COUNCIL if you don't believe me:

    Approved March 30, 2006

    ORDER IN COUNCIL 184
    Statutory Authority: Public Service
    The effective date for the retirement of George Copley as a public service employee is April 1, 2007.

    Campbell does not have a credibility problem - he has NO credibility.

    If Mr. Copley's service was so exemplary, why didn't he get this little bauble of an award BEFORE he retired happy?

    I think you'll find that last year one of the Premier's awards went to a bunch of 'road builders'.

    Strange eh?

    I'd suggest, my friend, it is George Copley Esq, Q.C.'s recent duty shoving sticks into the wheels of the justice system for which he was rewarded with a silver handshake by the man whose interests he's busy protecting.

    Now, can we get back to the credibility of a few people who've spent a lot of their time over the past 4 years trying to wake the rest of a stupefied British Columbia to what has happened to their assets and their future and their JUSTICE SYSTEM under the government of a convicted criminal?

    I think their dedication, their hard work and their credibility is just fine....

  • G West

    3 years ago

    Oh, and by the way,

    You might want to take the intellectually more difficult avenue in this case - which entails actually looking at what's posted at the Legislature Raids site - and then deciding whether Tom Hawthorn (the journalist from the Globe) is accurately reflecting the work of the people who have managed to finally get a wider range of British Columbians and Canadians interested and aware of what now passes for democracy and justice in this place.

    Why not have a look happy [OFFENSIVE COMMENTE REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]?

    Oh, and note the archives on the left side of the page, I think you'll maybe catch on that some people have actually been WORKING at representing your interests and the interests of the rest of British Columbia rather than giving the province away.

    http://bctrialofbasi-virk.blogspot.com/

  • G West

    3 years ago

    slight correction

    I see the archives are now at the bottom of the page...but still there and very impressive - have a look

  • vegguy

    3 years ago

    Selling off power piece by piece

    There are no positives.
    Keep looking at it Rafe. The sole requirement for a water license or a right to sell power to BCH at an obscene rate is an insignificant (by comparison) donation to the most corrupt and dishonest political party and government that this country has ever seen.
    These projects have neither enviromental credence nor economic need.
    Not only is BCTC paying millions to hook up the grid to these unreliable sources, Not only is BC Hydro paying more for these electrons than they sell for, but also the contracts are only for as long as is necessary to allow these "friends of the Socreds - oops - BC Libs" to recover their investment and then: if the price has gone up, they are not obliged to sell to BC Hydro but, BCTC is obliged to maintain the lines and allow them to use them. This is an amazing end run on the Gordo plan to sell off BC Hydro. It is being sold off from within and at a cost of millions to individual British Columbians.
    Disgusting !
    They deserve to be charged with fraud and dereliction of duty.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.