NDP Re-Issue Call For Oversight Of Site C Project
Prince George, BC – The BC New Democrats say several recommendations in the Joint Review Panel’s assessment of the proposed Site C dam and hydroelectric project underscore concerns they’ve raised for years…
The panel recommended that the ministers responsible consider ‘referring the load forecast and demand-side management plan details to the BC Utilities Commission,’ (click here, for previous story) and also recommended the BCUC look at the costs of the proposed $8-billion dollar project.
However, Energy and Mines Minister, Bill Bennett, has dismissed calls for BCUC oversight. Bennett says BC Hydro already brought in an independent audit firm, KPMG, to review the project costs. "I think it's fair to point out that this project has been poked and prodded and analyzed and reviewed for the last 35-years and I think Hydro knows it well, they brought in a lot of international experts to help them build their cost estimates." He says the $8-billion dollar price tag includes approximately $1.5b – $2-billion for inflation and contingency.
The minister says, if the project proceeds, the Utilities Commission will have a role at the end in determining how the costs will be re-paid by ratepayers.
"The Site C Panel agreed with what New Democrats have been saying for years," says NDP leader John Horgan. "It asked the same questions I've asked and raised the same concerns. Instead of accepting what the panel had to say on the proposed project, the BC Liberals rejected independent expert oversight in favour of their political agenda."
Horgan says, "The bottom line is BC families are already going to pay 28-percent more for electricity over five years and, now they're going to be stuck with a bill for an $8-billion dollar project that we may not even need."
Comments
Firstly, Isn’t it a bit late in the game to start squawking like this.
Secondly, we in BC are spoiled with low electricity prices. Maybe when it hits 15 cents a kilowatt, we will start to respect it a bit more.
Thirdly, we need the dam, we import power on peak demands, we should be exporting our excess power and reduce our over all tax burden.
Great post, HeSpoke.
Horgan, where is your source of power, moonbeams.
The panel recommended that the ministers responsible consider âreferring the load forecast and demand-side management plan details to the BC Utilities Commission,â (click here, for previous story) and also recommended the BCUC look at the costs of the proposed $8-billion dollar project.
That’s taken from the JRP assessment.
Not to mention the mismanagement of Hydro over the last 15 yrs, the Accenture scam, and the deferral of liabilities being pushed off the books and into the future. I think the public will embrace the privatization of Hydro once the rates start to reflect all the voodoo bookkeeping.
As far as KPMG goes, aren’t they the ones Mayor Green hired to examine the city’s finances, for the same price they charged Toronto for a similar study?
Wonder how ng it will take to pay off 8billion ?
You do realise Hydro gets its orders from the government of the day. Just how will privatizing Hydro improve anything? Please expand. Do you want a patchwork of electrical enities like Alberta?
Our costs are increasing because of governments using Hydro as a piggy bank thus no aging infrastructure planning. There are also the costly contracts with IPP’S that Christy seems to be trying to get out of, thanks Gordo.
I’m not saying I want privatized power in BC, I’m saying that looks like the end plan. Ruining BC Hydro on purpose? Low cost energy attracts industry. BC should generate with NG, in addition to hydro.
This is a little dated, but relevant:
http://web.uvic.ca/~kooten/documents/BCgeneratingSystem.pdf
I don’t understand the governments position on not generating with NG. It’s going to get burnt, maybe not here, but wherever we ship it.
Emissions and carbon arguments aside, we could set up facilities to generate firm power here, with our cheap and abundant NG, create jobs and generate income in addition to doing industry related R&D. (which has its own benefits) Doesn’t that make more sense than pulling as much as we can, using a method that’s longevity is questionable, and using massive amounts of power to compress it and ship it overseas? We can do both. Keeping our rates low and attracting heavy industry.
Also, Canada has some of the best people in geothermal generating plants working across the globe. We have great geothermal potential, yet Canada has no geothermal generation. Hydro is probably significantly cheaper, until you add in the ecological costs. With most things in life, diversification is good. Some geothermal generation might make sense.
I agree with govsux. We can do a much better job creating electricity using NG. Its much cheaper, creates employment, and is less environmentally harmful than Hydro.
Building Site C is irresponsible and the Liberal Government had better wake up and smell the roses.
Hopefully the people in the Ft St John area, will put the run on both the Government and Hydro.
Horgan and his dippers should keep Dixie’s failure in mind during the next election when it comes to energy and job policy here in B.C. I remember mentioning Horgan’s job security until the next election in another post. Tread carefully, Mr. Horgan.
Jobs and energy policy’s of the current government? I think the truth would shock most people.
http://media.commonsensecanadian.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/debt-contractual-obligations-infographic.jpg
While BC job growth lagged the national average during the late 90s, one could link it to the Asian economy, however that was a long time ago. Let’s talk about now. Exscuses are for those that need them.
http://www.esdc.gc.ca/eng/jobs/lmi/publications/bulletins/bc/bc-empgrowth-2012annual.jpg
Building a large hydro electric generating station before there is sufficient demand for that electricity is irresponsible and reckless MO.
Reminds me of a certain airport runway expansion built to meet… no demand and no use!!!
Comments for this article are closed.