Anyway NDP can go against whatever the Liberals propose….
Be careful NDP….
Those votes that were calculated in your favour today might be extinguished if you start sticking your hands in this one.
Tread lightly….

Hey John whatcha gonna do, review it in to the ground?
Is that what you would do if you were premiere? Reviews cost money. The provincial and federal government reviews ad nauseum not good enough for you?
Come back when you have something you can sink your teeth in to.

They want a independent review and then they can say big Corps. owned the review , then they will have that to bitch about…

” California has rejected BC Hydro’s offer of a $125 million rebate as inadequate. The offer was made in failed talks between the state and various power generators that California alleges owe it $8.9 billion for excessive prices.

The utility, which is owned by the province of British Columbia, maintains that California owes it $290 million in unpaid electric bills. It offered to reduce that amount by $125 million in order to get the rest of the money.”

Aside from the back door hand shakes. Who stands to benefit?

It’s all about LNG. You need power and lots of it to compress natural gas, the site C will be located so that power is available to any northern LNG facility. You can’t have LNG without the site C project. This was written on the wall months ago, amazed no one noticed it….huh

First thing is shut off all power leaving our province..then see where we are power wise.

You can’t shut it off, you need to sell the power when you don’t need it and other areas do or it is just wasted as you cannot store it and then buy it back when you need it until your generation ability catches up to demand. North America is pretty much one big grid. Cutting the lines will give you brown outs when demand spikes or you have to generate over usage by a fair margin. It is not like a generator that revs up when you turn on your light, a lot more complicated than that.

Hogan just showing his absolute ignorance around power.

So Pval what about power entering the province?

Hey Hogan you say the power is not needed, let’s see your crystal ball tens years out for power needs. Come Hogan man up.

Every power project built was opposed, where would we be now without them. Hey naysayers you got an answer?

Seamut. Where are we now with the power from WAC?? We have lost a number of industries.

1. BC Rail
2. Paper Mill in MacKenzie
3. Pulp Mills in Prince Rupert and Kitimat
4. At least 20 Sawmills.

So over the past 20 years **in spite** of the cheap power from WAC. we have lost thousands and thousands of jobs. Hmmmmmm. Seems cheap power didn’t save the day.

Will Site C be any different than WAC. Not bloody likely. It will provide a few jobs in the short term, and after that, it will basically supply the USA with cheap power (if they need it) to provide industrial jobs South of the border.

Why do you think that Christy Clark has a better crystal ball to see into the future, than Horgan??? I suggest to you neither one of them has a clue as to what the future holds.

Putting 53 sq kilometres of good farmland under water is not exactly a smart idea. In fact one could argue that it is stupid.

The power entering the Province comes in at night from Alberta, where it is not needed, and is used in BC. During the day Alberta uses its power, and if we have a surplus its either used in Alberta or exported, or we shut down a generator.

So the import or export numbers on power while true, don’t tell the whole story. I suppose one could study the shenanigans of PowerEx if they wanted to find out the whole story, however suffice to say that most of the information from Hydro, PowerEx, and the Provincial Government leave a bit to be desired. Each one of them have a vested interest in Site C.

“You can’t have LNG without the site C project. This was written on the wall months ago”

Please explain what the sell was when they first started talking about site c more than 30 years ago?

This site c has been on the provincial radar since Bennett.

Not only does this project concept predate any LNG, it also has a negative ROI. Some of the posters on here have great financial and business acumen. Why has no one noted that the only way to pay for this project is to dramatically increase user fees. As to supplying LNG, it would take 2.5 or 3 site c’s to power it and the LNG plants are mainly self-generating anyway.

Watch for the wool over the eyes, shuck and jive.

By the way, it is spelled Hor”r”gan.

Darn it! He keeps making sense for an NDP.

Good post Loki. One can always hope that common sense will prevail, however I have my doubts.

Investment in a tin mine is looking better all the time.

Hogan and the NDP are not on the side of the working man any more, but have sold out to the mega rich NGO’s. Sold their souls for money.

Palopu’s, I think you need to go campaign to demolish all infrastructure in the lower mainland as the sterilized agricultural land there would be far more productive than the agricultural land in the Peace.

Loki, of course rates are going to increase as the construction of infrastructure to generate more electricity is required. It wasn’t all that long ago that many people on this site and in the Province were attacking the Government for encouraging IPPs and paying such high rates for the power. Now, apparently, the high cost IPPs, that generally are not firm power, have become the holy grail of power generation in BC. To me it is kind of like the Kinder Morgan protestors in Burnaby protesting oil while wearing fleece and gortex petroleum based jackets.

If anyone thinks power consumption is going to go down, I would sincerely like to understand their thesis on that topic. BC Hydro has done a great job of educating and providing incentives to their ratepayers to reduce their power consumption but at some time we just need more production capacity. Every IPP biomass, run of river, wind farm, tidal system, etc faces as much opposition and claims of Government interference, permanent environmental damage, negative ROI, overspending, etc. I still don’t see viable alternatives being put forth that don’t have just as significant economic and/or environmental concerns. There are no easy answers that there sure does seem to be easy complaints but no action about everything.

Site C is required for LNG as it will produce the massive amount of electricity required for those projects.
This project was given a green light a long time ago, all you had to do was cross the peace at Taylor and see the construction occurring along the river and see what was underway. Today’s announcement was just formalizing what was going on in the peace region. The whole process was a farce, this was why a large number of people dropped out of the environmental assessment process as they felt this project had received assent prior to the process of consultation even beginning. How do I know? I was there and was given confirmation that it is going to occur. Now for those looking for jobs, BC Hydro could not comment on the use of TFW