be aware people, bc hydro is not at all being above board on this project.

a previous joint review panel found the list of species at risk from this project was “incomplete and inconsistent.”

a new list was provided a few weeks ago, nov.15, but it has mysteriously vanished from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency website where it was posted.

this dam will remove .1 % or 1/1000 of our possible farmland in bc.

in 35 years canada will be one of only a handful of nations on the globe that will be able to produce more food than it consumes.

do the math, the farming potential is far more valuable than the hydroelectric potential.

bc hydro’s lack of transparency and the habitat loss tells me we should not be letting this happen.

We use more electricity per capita than we did 20 years ago. there is more of us as well. Its easy to say no development. But what happens if we start getting brownouts on a consistent basis.

Site C, should go ahead to ensure our electrical needs future. I rather have Site C, than Gas fired power plants.

100% against this dam. If we need to the electricity we should be looking at methods that don’t permanently remove land from being used.

Speaking about Pot. Are these people smokin’ joints during the review? ;-)

“we should be looking at methods that don’t permanently remove land from being used.”

Tell that to the people who are developing single family detached dwellings in the sprawling Fraser Valley’s agricultural belt.

How much income is derived from that land as northern farm/ranch land versus energy generation?

Build new generation nuclear. Very small footprint compared to all other forms of energy generation. Bring on the catterwalling.

•Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily, with over 60 reactors under construction in 13 countries.
•Most reactors on order or planned are in the Asian region, though there are major plans for new units in the USA and Russia.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Plans-For-New-Reactors-Worldwide/

Italian company Energy Catalyzer is selling its ECAT 1MW portable cold fusion plant for about $1.5 million.

new fission and hydro projects seem illogical with the arrival of fusion tech.

Hydro is still the best route to go..

Although a flooded valley looks like a long term effect.. in the longer term the dam can be breached and you have the valley bottom back.. Just living in prince george you are living on the bottom of a glacial lake and we have productive farm lands forests ect..

With nuclear.. the radio active waste will take far longer to decay than a valley bottom can reclaim itsef.. And we still dont know the long term effects of this stuff. Only our great great greater.. ect ect ect. grand childern will fully understand the effects of radioactive waste. However we are finnally getting a taste of the effects with Fukashima..

Genereating electricity will always have an overall effect on the environment just we have to figure out the lesser risks are or turn the lights off..

northman, how can you say something so insensitive?

or do you believe that in this fantasy future of yours that when the dam is breached and the waters recede, the endemic species that were rendered extinct will magically fall from the heavens and repopulate the valley?

this valley in question is a micro climate home to species only found there.

the species at risk list is being hidden from us. why? because informed people will not agree to this genocidal dam project.

Because im a realist..and know the risks vs rewards of modern living that provides all of us with a quality of life that has never been matched in history.

Here are your choices..

-You can decide if you want a feel good “mircro” climate in tact..
-Short term neculear energy benefits with long term nuclear waste storage. How about we propose a nuclear wast storgage near princ george or in BC..?
-Hydro Dams (flooded valley)
-Coal Generation (Coal mining, acid rock/metal leaching, S02, C0, C02 emmissions)
-Wind Generation (migratory bird mortality, high maintance, low output..)

If you choose none of the above..the solution is simple.. Turn your lights and home heating off..

given your lack of recognition of available natural gas generation and fusion generation systems, i can only assume you have a personal agenda to push this project thru in spite of ethics and logic.

there is absolutely no need whatsoever for this dam to be built.

those who would choose to have it built must have some bias or vested interest.

those who choose to line the pockets of billionaire industrialists, bureaucrats and politicians at the expense of food production, habitat loss and species diversity are sick people in my mind.

as well, using ridiculous unreal ‘logic’ by stating we have to stop using electricity if the dam is not built bears all the hallmarks of corruption.

your disinformation campaign is offensive.

Are you aware that you are using power rigth now.. from WAC BennetDam in combination with run of river projets and power that comes from Alcan? So in some sense you are justifying the ideals which you are so firmy against..

Looks like i firmly hooked a left wing nut bar here..

and your true colours continue to shine.

you are obviously not a supporter of the 2kw initiative that has some of us striving to achieve electrical power consumption at about 1/10 of current average usage.

as well, when the bennett dam was built fusion tech was not an option.

it has been shown that we have considerable natural gas resources in bc. current gas powered electrical generation is much more gas efficient than anything the so called ‘government’ has proposed so far. lng production is so ridiculously inefficient in comparison it is hard to believe anyone other than the above referenced parties could be part of anything so destructive and wasteful.

if you have an issue with my mental health i suggest we meet and you can judge me in person. but i suspect a gutless scumbag like yourself that would sacrifice whole species so some corrupt politicians and such can have all the larger bank accounts, wouldn’t have the guts face to actually someone, rather just mount your attacks behind a wall of assumed anonymity.

You started the defamation of character and accusations long before I did. Then get a bee in your bonnet when someone challenges you on your bullshit!! By the way I never said I support this project. And I alpogize for the nut bar comment. But if the shoe fits lace that baby up and wear it!!

Bang on, northman. Some people just hate being challenged.

For those who don’t want Site C, what is the alternative? As someone mentioned above, we are using far more power per capita than we did years ago. The status quo is not an option.

more disinformation.

i have not been challenged, no one has presented a single thing that suggests there is any good reason, or for that matter any reason at all, why our minimal arable land reserve should be depleted by such a large amount, or why whole species should be eradicated, all for a paltry bit of electricity we do not need.

as for allegation that i have ‘defamed’ or ‘character assassinated’ someone, please illuminate me, what is it i have presented that would constitute either?

1100 MW is a “paltry bit”?

yes. that is a paltry bit, with respect to the cost of it.

the cost in lives, whole species, and potential food production is far too large for such a small return, and again, to produce something that we have no need for.

the fusion tech i cited would produce 5000 times the electricity for the same $8 billion without the carnage, and loss of land.

site c 1.1 GW for $8 billion
fusion 1.1 GW for $16.5 million.

seems like a no brainer to me.

a_britishcolumbian has it right.

There is no need for Site C. If you want to see the prove just look at who is supporting the project. 1. Concrete Industry, 2. Electric Car Industry, 3. Construction Industry. These are all vested interest groups, and they could give a s..t less whether any electricity was produced at all, because all they want is the money that the construction generates.

We know that we can produce the same amount of electricity with a natural gas generating plant at 1/3 of the cost. We, as a Province have sufficient gas to run 1, 2, or 3 natural gas plants for 100 years or more.

We could locate these plants close to where the electricity was needed, and thus eliminate the need for thousands of miles of transmission lines. (the people who make the towers to transmit electricity love these projects)

In addition what (smart?) people like JohnnyBelt, Northmen, and Interceptor don’t know, or choose to ignore, is that 7% of the power that is produced at Williston Lake is lost in transmission. The same would apply to Site C. So just the savings by producing the electricity in the area where it would be used, would pay for itself over time.

On another note. There have been so many industries shut down in BC in the past 20 years, that it is absolutely impossible for us to have a shortage of power.

1. Pulp Mill at Prince Rupert
2. Pulp and Paper Mill at Kitimat.
3. Paper Mill at MacKenzie
4. North Central Plywoods
5. Rustads Bros Mill
6. Clear Lake Sawmills
7. Upper Fraser Sawmill
8. Two Mills in MacKenzie
9. Bell Copper, Topley BC
10,Granisle Copper, Topley BC
11 The Pas Lumber Prince George BC
12.Bull Moose coal mine in Tumbler Ridge
13.Quintette coal mine in Tumbler Ridge
14.BC Rail Electric Railway serving Tumbler Ridge coal mines.
15.Kemess North Mine
16.Many many more mills in BC.

In addition to the above there was little or no new industry taking place in BC. Futhermore a lot of the pulp mills that are left are generating a lot of their own electricity.

Sooooo. Anyone who thinks there is a shortage of power in BC doesn’t have a clue what the hell they are talking about.

Site C is not about the need for more power, never was, never will be. Its about making money for the vested interest groups.

Don’t forget that next March two more lumber mills one in Houston and one in Quesnel will be shutting down.

“On another note. There have been so many industries shut down in BC in the past 20 years, that it is absolutely impossible for us to have a shortage of power. “

So what does listing a bunch of shut down mills prove? That’s right, nothing. Your list might have accounted for 0.001% of the power draw in BC. Big deal.

The fact of the matter is that people use a lot more power than they used to. Look at all the stuff plugged into your average house nowadays. Were those items around when the Bennett dam was built? I don’t think so. Heck, count the number of outlets in your average home compared to 10-20-30-40 years ago.

JohnnyBelt. Are you out of your mind??? Do you have any idea how much power is used by Major Industry. Do you think a bunch of people sitting around Pr George with their lights on burn a lot of electricity??? Not much when compared to industry.

The industries listed above would burn more electricity than all of North Central BC, with plenty left over.

You have been listening to the Hydro hogwash for to long, and now seem to be fully brainwashed.

Don’t know where you got the 0.001% figure from, but I suggest it was a place that the sun doesn’t shine.

AVERAGE B.C. ELECTRICITY DEMAND BY USER GROUP 2003-2006
(Average generation:65,000gigawatt hours per year)

Manufacturing and Mining 47.0%
Commercial & Institutional 20.1%
Residential 26.8%

Balance, Urban Transit, Street lighting, Agriculture, Public Administration, Unallocated.

So there you have it JohnnyBelt. the whole of British Columbia residential is about half of Manufacturing and Mining and about a 3rd when you factor in Commerical/Institutional.

So take some time to think before you post and make disparaging remarks about other posters, your rush to impress us, only makes you look foolish.

@Palopu

From BC Hydro: Total BC Power Usage (GWH/Yr):

1980 – 46000
2013 – 57000
2033 – 80000 (Predicted at current growth)

So let’s stop with your usual BS.