Good!

Keep those welfare complainers at bay for a change

Again a waste of court time and money….

Site c is a disaster. We don’t need another dam in bc.

Findme you just used power to post your response.

The whole court thing is a waste of money that’s for sure. Delays just add up to cost everyone in the province more money and no one is benefiting from it at all but voices being heard. So voices are being heard and the court is denying majority of what is being said for the NO side. See its just a waste of the peoples time lol. Man only 9 more years of this bickering BS!

Its the USA that will be using the power we sure don’t need it but then they are such good neighbours that we should provide for them.
Cheers

Site C is a con job by the Liberal Government to give out some cushy contracts, sell power to the USA and create some jobs. It certainly is not about needing power.

So once again Big Business, Big Government, and Big Unions put the boots to the average taxpayer who will have to foot the bill for this fiasco, and pay higher hydro bills for the next 100 years.

What a farce.

Seamutt I can’t even begin to understand what you are trying to imply.

I guess you could say it’s the right time for this project, with all the Alberta contractors out of work, so they can do the work for less.

When Clark said she was going to streamline reviews involving environmental impact she wasn’t lying.. When you refuse to hear any concerns it’s very fast…yikes

No body has ever shown any facts for not needing the power. Find me why don’t we need site c? Facts now.

The courts ruling AGAINST the natives injunctions…now that IS refreshing.

However I wont get carried away with optimism that this will be a new trend.

Seamutt. Name some new industries that came on line on the last 20 years. Compare them to the industries that shut down in the last 20 years and you will quickly see that we have less industry in this Province. Hence less need for power.

Hydro always states that Site C will generate enough power to supply 450,000 homes. Problem is we do not have, nor are we likely to have 450,000 homes in BC for one hell of a long time. So are we talking about American homes??

With the increased power from Co-generation in every pulp mill in BC, plus some stand alone co-generation plants in Williams Lake, and MacKenzie. Plus all the IPP’s, plus the phony wind mills, plus the extra power generated by Rio Tinto Alcan and sold to Hydro.

Importing and exporting power is a mugs game, that is played by PowerEx and looks good on paper but actually most of the exports go to the USA and the imports are from Alberta, during the night and are balanced by the exports to Alberta during the day.

BC Hydro produces 80% of the power in BC the balance is produced by private companies like Kooteny Power, etc

So there your have it. No shortage of power, no need for Site C, just a big con job by the Liberals to create some short term jobs, satisfy some contractors, and try to get re-elected.

Palopu….you should make a big sign, stand at YVR, and tell the tens of thousands that move to British Columbia every year ….NO BIG SCREEN TV FOR YOU !!

Oh, and on the back of the sign….”I love Stephen, but I hate Christy”.

Thank the soldiers who paid the ultimate price so everyone of you posters could the voice their opinions no matter how right or wrong that they are perceived

@ notsofast.. The courts have been ruling against a lot of First Nations cases lately. One key one that came out last week was Clyde river fn vs the attorney general. I think the courts are starting to get wise to some of the abuse of process the fn are putting the courts through.

Well how come provincial load keeps increasing? Hydro has stated site c is required to back up the IPP’S which is non firm power. Co-generation is also non firm. The wind doesn’t always blow for the bird dicers. The water flow is variable for the run of the river plants. IPP generation is very expensive, contracts of 65 billion, then hydro has to spend 8 billion to back them up. Actually we don’t need the expensive IPP’s, only inexpensive site c. Give that a thought.

Christy was going to look into the contracts but the shakers and movers mob told her to back off, big money to be made, taxpayers money. Look into that.

Palopu you did still not show any numbers as usual. Powerex buys and sells power all over using our cheap power as a guarantee. Hydro also buys cheap power from the states at night then sells it back during the day at a higher rate.

Seamutt. You know full well that there is no need for Site C. You chose to support it, and therefore one has to conclude that

a. You work for Hydro
b. You work for a Company that hopes to get or has contracts with Hydro.
c. You have no idea what you are talking about, and just like to post on this site.

Just another typical Palopu comment. Lots of bluster, no substance, and when asked to back up his position with facts and numbers, uses deflection and personal attack to avoid the obvious conclusion.
Here’s a question for you…where do you think the million new residents of BC are going to get the power for their homes, and all their electronic devices? Not to mention the greenie dream of an electric car in every driveway.
Anybody who has lived in BC for a long enough time knows that those so called expensive dams that were built 50 and 60 years ago are what is providing us with the cheapest power in North America now. I’m sure if you had your way we would have been burning coal for power all these years!

NyteHawwk. You live in a dream world. I supported the dams that were built 50, 60 years ago because it was shown that there was a need for them.

The BC Utilities Commission found no need for Site C 20 years ago, and this time around the Liberal Government circumvented the BCUC because they were afraid they would come up with the same conclusion.

In my (humble) opinion, I don’t believe most people have really looked into this dam situation, and are just parroting the Governments, and BC Hydro’s propaganda.

We may have the cheapest power in North America but we paid one hell of a lot of money for it. Site C will cost us $9 Billion or more by the time its completed. Nothing cheap about that.

PS. Where are you going to get a million new residents for BC??? Are you aware that we at present have a paltry population of 4,659,272 people. In the past 20 years the population of BC increased by 853,912 people, or 42,696 per year. 42,696 people spread around the Province is not a big number.

Prince George as an example has not increased it population for over 10/15 years. Nor has any other Cities and towns in the Northern Interior.
We have sufficient power to supply our needs, and if not we could use some of the power we sell from the Columbia River projects, or build one natural gas electric plant.

Its just that simple.

Bottom line…..We don’t need Site C.

So let’s see: The US exports power, Alberta exports power and yet B.C. shouldn’t be allowed to do the same? Why?

Palopu 20 years ago, what. Palopu that 9 billion is needed to back up the 65 billion. Have you gone on hydro’s website and read about the infrastructure being built? I suppose that is not required by your reasoning.

Bulk hydro is the cheapest source of power on the world.

Palopu:”So once again Big Business, Big Government, and Big Unions put the boots to the average taxpayer who will have to foot the bill for this fiasco, and pay higher hydro bills for the next 100 years.”

Big Business = Harper!

Big Government = Harper!

Big Unions = NDP!

So that leaves only the Federal Liberals in this election if the above Big Three are unacceptable. Or, come to think of it, none of the above!

Quite a dilemma!

So Palopu do you have something against the people who work for hydro? What is your issue with them. So you are saying they are all liars?

The load increase for the next twenty years is 20 to 30%, can you refute that? You do realize the time line required to build a generation source like site c. One can’t wait until the power is required. You are saying excess power should not be sold, are you then suggesting generation should match load with no reserve for outages, maintenance, low water years.

There is no source of generation with out some sort of environmental, social cost.

I guess a dam is a far cry from another Chernobyl. We can all be thankful we have the resources to provide clean energy. Not to mention the record size lake trout that large bodies of water produce. Gotta love B.C.

You cant build huge projects like Site C without destroying thousands of hectares of land, displacing people, and generally screwing up the environment. Huge dams are a thing of the past. Dinosaur technology if you will. These type of projects are good for those who get the multi million dollar contracts, those who get jobs building the project, and BC Hydro, to ensure their longevity, in the power business.

Common sense tells you that if we can export natural gas to foreign countries so that they can build electric generating plants, then we can build these plants in BC and avoid the flooding of large tracts of land, and displacing farmers, and people.

A 400 megawatt (MW) natural gas-fired power generation station using clean and efficient natural gas-fired combined cycle technology can produce enough electricity to power approx. 400,000 homes. These plants employ 300 to 400 full-time jobs during the three year construction phase and 35 or more full time jobs for operating the plant on an ongoing basis.

Two of these gas plants would produce the same amount of electricity as Site C, so what’s the problem. We could have one up and running in three years, and perhaps another 10 years down the road when needed.

The problem is, is that the Government and Hydro want Site C, and are not prepared to look at alternatives.

Site C is a farce.

Gas plants more expensive than hydro, what will be the future price of gas. A hydro plant once built has the lowest operating cost of any generation system. How much are you willing to pay?

“BC Hydro, to ensure their longevity, in the power business.” Did you know Hydro also has thermo plants they could build more but cost politics all get in the picture. Does not have to depend on hydro plants for longevity.

The alternatives cost more

Have you ever addressed the 65 billion question.

Hey I am not against gas just more costly. Build them in lotus land the main load center then less transmission corridors will have to be built. Never happen they want Burrard gone, fight against any gas plant construction in their back yard.

You did not answer my question in expanding electrical infrastructure. Why expand if no load increase? Why is another 500 kv line being built into lotus land?

Palopu you seem to think gas generation is benign while leaving out the issues of pipe lines, gas wells, fracturing. Like I said no form of generation comes with out its own environmental, social baggage.

What about the expanding population into prime farm land in the Okanagan, lotus land.

You still have not addressed load growth with any facts?

Pookerjams wrote: “The whole court thing is a waste of money that’s for sure”

Courts are always a waste of money. People should be able to come to agreements without the intervention of courts, violence, wars, etc. In fact, violence and wars are even more costly than courts.

So, one could say that courts beat the alternatives in cases where agreement cannot be reached.

Palopu wrote: “Huge dams are a thing of the past. Dinosaur technology if you will.”

How do you account for the fact that hydroelectricity is the most widely used form of RENEWABLE energy, accounting for 16% of global electricity generation – 3,427 terawatt-hours of electricity production in 2010?

Fuel fired electricity generation is not renewable. It has a finite term of operation. Small generating stations can use wood, which is a renewable resource, but very limited capacity on a world scale. Other than wood waste, burning wood is not the highest and best use of the resource in a first world nation.

The production of hydroelectricity is projected to increase about over 3% each year for the next 25 years. Using the base year of 2010, it means that by the year 2035 the capacity of renewable hydroelectricity will have doubled.

As Churchill would have said: “Some Dinosaur!!”

B.C. has a population of about 4.5 million. Germany (for instance) has a population of about 82 million. B.C. total area is about 2 1/2 times the area of Germany. If anyone can afford to flood some hectares of land it is B.C.!

Besides, every river in the entire world that has any hydro potential has either been dammed already or will be dammed in the near future in order to satisfy the needs of clean power of an ever increasing world population of over 7 billion humans who demand that the lights come on after they throw the switch. Let’s face facts!

As an aside, how much would building two 400 megawatts gas power plants and all the infrastructure and operating them add to your monthly hydro bill?

Let’s just say: A lot!

1. The infrastructure for Site C that is presently being built will be used to get this electricity to the US market. Mainly because there is no market for additional electricity in BC.

2. We presently have gas pipelines running around the Country and can access gas anywhere in BC if we choose to. We could also piggyback on the lines that might be built for LNG Exports. In addition we could build the Gas Plants in areas that already are serviced by transmission lines (such as Prince George) and supply the Central Interior with electricity. This frees up power to go South to the more populated areas.

3. We appear to have sufficient natural gas to supply some 9 or 10 LNG projects for 30 year contracts, so one would assume that we would have sufficient natural gas to run to gas fired plants in BC.

4. Remember we own the natural gas in this Country, and if necessary we could have the natural gas plants built and operated by Hydro, and purchase the gas as the same price we will sell it to PETRONAS for, or if necessary drill and supply our own gas. We do have a number of options.

5. Right now Hydro is a stupendous mess when you look at it from a business point of view. Billions of dollars in debt and no plan go get out of it. We are already facing some 26% in Hydro increases from 2014 to 2016 and you can rest assured that with Site C and all the associated costs we will be facing a lot more increase.

So there you have it. Cancel Site C. Build two natural gas electric generating plants over the next 10 years producing some 800 MW of electricity that can supply some 900,000 homes. Really not very complicated.

Palopu!
So 20 years out when the price of natural gas has tripled or even quadrupled while at the same time becoming more and more scarce, we will be forced to build site C at whatever it costs at that time.
Sounds to me like saving nickels today so we can spend $10 bills 20 years from now.
A fools bargain in my opinion. Now if you don’t see yourself being around in 20 years, perhaps you don’t give a crap, and hope to save those nickels while your here. Personally I prefer to spend my money once and done …just like the other dams in BC!
The other issue you haven’t addressed is where to build these gas generation plants. I don’t want one in my back yard, and convincing the lower mainland that since they are for there benefit anyway they should be built there is going to be a non starter!
So Palopu, your rather simplistic solution is not so simple after all, and your earlier statement that it is not needed is refuted by your own argument.
Do you have something else???

NyteHawwk. Your arguments are older than Methuselah, and Site C technology is just as old.

1. The Government of BC (citizens) own all the natural resources in BC, and therefore when push comes to shove, we will decide what we pay for natural gas, and no one else. If we want to ensure a supply for the next 100 years, then we need to sell less to foreign Countries.

2. I sincerely doubt that Hydro has paid off the WAC Bennett dam, and certainly wont pay off Site C for over 50 years more or less, so don’t know where you get the idea that you spend your money once and done for.

3. Site C is about generating revenue not power. If we just wanted power for our own use, we could start to draw down the power we are entitled to from the Columbia River Treaty. We are entitled to 1200 MW per year from the American Dams, however rather than use this power in BC Powerex (BC Hydro) sells it to the Americans. So we actually have access to 1200MW of power 300 MW more that Site C but prefer to sell it and build Site C. Whats wrong with this picture.??

4. You don’t want a natural gas generating plant in your backyard, however you have no qualms about building a huge dam, flooding thousands of hectares, and relocating hundreds of people. So not in your backyard, but ok in someone else’s back yard. Hmmmm.

Time for some people to drop the stone age thinking and come into the 21st Century.