Site C on Time and On Budget…So Far
rendering of Site C courtesy BC Hydro
Prince George, B.C.- The first annual progress report on the construction of the Site C dam on the Peace river has been submitted to the BC Utilities Commission. The report covers the period from July of 2015 to the end of September of 2016.
The report says during that period, the project is on track to be both on schedule and on budget with $1.3 billion dollars spent on the project as of the end of September. The construction is coming at a time when prices for materials are down and there are skilled workers available because of a slowdown in the natural resource sector… Those factors, say BC Hydro, are helping to reduce financial pressures on the project which has a price tag of $8 billion dollars.
The project has seen 900 hectares of land cleared, and 2.5 million cubic metres of material excavated.
Milestones for the project include the completion of the 16hundred person worker accommodation site. and the 329 metre construction bridge which spans the Peace River.
As of September, t here were 1,750 workers on the project, with workers from B.C. making up 80% of the work force.
Comments
No mention of us not needing this electricity though..
As soon as the Feds legalize pot we will need the power for all the new grow-ops that will sprout up. (:
This is a good news story. Too bad the headline writer had to smear it with the ‘so far’ opinion piece. And not needing the project? Perhaps you and the rest of the lefties on here should read BC Hydro’s rational for the dam and you might learn something. You lost the last election and you still use O250 as an outlet for ndp spewage.
Contractor,
There was no intent to “smear” the good news, The addition of the words “So far” in the headline are only to reflect on the fact this is a multi year project, and in the first year, things are as planned.
-Elaine Macdonald-Meisner
How about you try reading more than one report…and not the one from the company who is having it built..
Try reading some unbiased ones..they all say we don’t need it.. hydro just wants it to sell..at a huge cost to us tax payers..
Just like you use it for your Con slop, Contractor.
You are just wasting your time contractor, they will not read it. Their mind is set in stone. However if they flicked the switch and the power did not come on then they would really start complaining how this government was to stupid not to predict this would happen.
contractor-
I guess as long as it does not affect your land or property why would you be concerned.
oldman1,How about a wind farm in your backyard?
Oldman here is the link
ht tps://saveourskylineohio.com/2016/12/14/irish-people-win-lawsuit-against-bigwind-why-wont-ohio-protect-its-citizens/
From what I understand, the land that is going to be under water was already purchased by hydro, and or fairly compensated.
9 Billion could be used for all kinds of better ways to generate the power that we won’t need for another 20 to 30 years according to Harry Swain, who’s informative video was removed from facebook. This argument is about power now and not the electrical kind.
Takes 10 years to build a dam on budget, just look at Labrador trying to complete a project in half the time cost almost twice the forecast budget. Needing the power in 20 years, how much money would the dam cost in another 10 years? Should have been built 20 years ago for half the money, who cares if we have surplus power? If it is firm cheap power for 100 years why not? What other power source gives you over 100 years of firm power for only maintenance costs?
Cheap power? Seriously? Cost of power from Site C will be 5x current north American spot market. Who’s going to buy that power? No industrial user that’s for sure. You are, whether you want to or not, and your hydro rates are going to go up massively to pay for it.
100 years of power for only maintenance costs? Really? Did you conveniently forget the (current) $8.8 Billion dollars of debt BC Hydro is taking on to pay for it? Do you think that is magically going to go away?
BC Hydro needs to cost of power in north America to increase significantly to be able to sell their power at a profit to then be able to pay off that debt. If they can’t, that cost will be passed on to someone else, you the consumer.
If you’re paying attention at all to what’s happening with power generation in North America, you should be very worried about our government taking on massive debt to create unneeded power. We will be paying for it for generations…
“What other power source gives you over 100 years of firm power for only maintenance costs?”
—————————————————————–
The way Hydro has increased our rates since the last spate of dam building in the 1960’s and early 70’s ‘maintenance costs’ must be pretty high!
Now before anyone accuses me of being a ‘lefty’, which I’m not, lets remember that it was the NDP’s Dave Barrett who DOUBLED industrial electricity rates way back when BC Hydro had such a surplus of power it was pushing everybody to “…live better electrically”. And the lights in the old BC Electric building in Vancouver were on 24 hours a day.
By doing that Barrett gave away our ‘natural advantage’ in having electricity rates no one else could compete with. It’s about the same as doubling the price of tomatoes in California because they get two crops a year!
Yes, we’ll get 100 years of firm power, alright. But it will cost us far more than what we should ever be paying for it.
Fate hydro electric power is the cheapest source of generation. Everywhere in the world areas that have abundant hydro electric enjoy the lowest power rates.
Is this projects costly yes, price of construction goes up year by year. Running and maintenance costs are dirt cheap considering its 100 year lifespan or more compared to any other generation.
If you have been paying attention to power generation around the world you would see how costs have skyrocketed for those foolishly invested in wind solar. Those areas invested in wind and solar has seen their reliability and stability of grid at great risk. Look at whats been happening in South Australia, Germany avoids blackouts day by day. Those are just a couple of examples.
Hydro rates are increasing to also cover system upgrades and to pay for very expensive power Hydro is forced to buy from IPP’s and wind sources.
Hydro isn’t “forced to buy expensive power from IPPs.” BC Hydro and the BC LIbs chose to enter into those contracts.
BC has a power surplus, and has for years (with no end in site), as a result it buys power from IPPs (under contract) and then turns around and sells it on the North American market for pennies on the dollar. This practice cost BC Hydro more than a billion dollars last year. Know who’s paying for that? Yup, the residential user.
There is no home for Site C power. Even if (big if) an LNG plant or two gets built, and IF (bigger if) they decide to use BC Hydro to power their plants (instead of cheaper NG), the eDrive rate that BC Hydro has created for their LNG friends is $28 per MWh less than the cost of production will be from Site C. Who’s going to be paying that difference? Yup, the residential user.
If those LNG plants don’t get built, or if they decide to use their own NG to power the plants, what is BC Hydro going to do with the power? Sell it on the NA market, that overall has a surplus, and all projections show this will continue? That’ll cost the residential user even more.
That’s why home owner rates are going up and will continue to go up.
Sorry fate you are wrong and trying to change up the discussion because you know you are wrong.
The government encouraged IPP’s to build and gave them contracts that Hydro is forced to pay. IPP power generation is more expensive to produce than BC Hydro generation. Why would Hydro buy more expensive power if not forced to? Yes the stupidity of the government is buying power at the higher price and selling it at a lower price, you are right there.
Fate you are confused about surplus power, there has to be a built in contingency as I mentioned earlier.
@Fate – maybe actually look at the numbers
Since when is 6-8 cents a kWh 5x spot price? Maybe at midnight when noone is using power? The price of the power is what pays off the dam, you don’t have payments separate of the power costs. Payments are calculated into the production price.
Solar city is going to go heavily into debt in the US to make a large power generating facility and what is their production price? They hope to be able to sell it for 8 cents US a kWh – and it has a lifespan of 30 years – then what is the decommissioning costs and rebuild costs? What will the power have to be sold for then? Site C will still be producing power at 8 cents a kWh in 30 years. This dam should have been built 20 years ago and we would be producing power for 3-4 cents a kWh today.
How much debt do you have to take on to guarantee 5 gigawatts annually for 100 years? Burrard Thermal which was attacked daily for spewing out 7-10 percent of BC’s total annual co2 is shuttered – that capacity is no longer on the grid and its capacity was 7 gigawatts annually. When it was running the cost to produce power was the highest of all the facilities that BC Hydro owned, hence why they wanted it mothballed.
Check your rates with the rest of Canada, or the US. Power prices have gone up for everyone not just BC. Cheapest power in BC used to be Kootenay Power – where did that power come from? Dams of course, used to drive by at least 3 of them from Castlegar to Nelson
BC imports power as well as exporting it
The charge for electricity to BC industrial is roughly .11 per kWh, their delivery charge is calculated differently from residential customers. They get a basic charge, demand charge, and energy used charge. TSR and GSR rates is what I think you are attempting to quote. You can’t just read the Tyee and expect to be educated by the NDP. Industry complains regularly that it is subsidizing transmission costs to residential customers, not the other way around.
Generation is just not built to cover actual load, but a contengency has to be built in to cover maintenace outages, forced outages, low water periods. Lets not also forget backup is needed for non firm IPP’s and when the wind don’t blow.
Now having said all that molten salt nuclear reactors once developed have the potential for being the cheapest source of power. Also the smallest environmental footprint.
All of those “power not needed” folks are so oblivious it’s laughable. You do realize that during the last cold snap two weeks ago when even Vancouver was cold, we were at 100% capacity. Yes Hudson Hope was wide open with no more to give. Would you prefer rolling brown outs when it gets cold?
I would prefer BC Hydro buy the power for that short term need on the NA market which is currently at $35/MWh than construct a damn that will have costs north of $85/MWh that there is no home for so will have to sell on the NA market at that $35 MWh (a $50/MWh loss just in case you couldn’t keep up)…almost every single day, for 100 years.
Fate so you are happy to depend on others for our power and be a slave to what ever they want to charge. Are you saying BC has no need for its own generation and that we can shift what ever generation issues there are out of province.
Are you saying BC can shut down its generation and drain the lakes?
I guess you do not realize BC electrical costs are in the running for lowest in North America? You have to think of the present generation mix and Site c inclusion.
What is the current spot price? It is not $35 all day long, the price is more at peak times than off peak hours.
You can quote rolling averages but just look at Alberta – they export power to BC at off peak times and import power at peak times. In 2013 they (Alberta) exported power at an average of $26.16 per mWh and imported it at an average of $103.80. 75% of their imported power comes from BC. Maybe look at what BC’s import export ratio is, I am too bored to continue.
What, I would love to pay $85/Mwh. That is less than a penny a kilowatt…. I think Fate, you have made a major mistake…. But hey, I’m not university educamated. so I not good in rithimitic and moving the decimal points around.
That 8 billion budget is also being spun off into an economy spurt in a region which has been hard hit the past couple of years. The spin off effect is already far felt in the north of BC with local companies profiting and employing people.
The SoCreds were famous for their “mega projects” This one is having long term and short effects.
That’s all true, Stompin Tom, but where the SoCreds made the one big mistake was in NOT factoring in the full extent of inflation. THAT is what ended their 20 years in office as the most successful government BC has ever had. One would think that their successors would learn from that one big mistake. And find a method to ensure it’s not repeated, with the same negative results that befell WAC Bennett’s government. And ALL of us, when it fell. But they don’t seem to. They’re still confusing ‘prosperity’ with ‘inflation’ ~ and we’ll ALL pay dearly for their confusion.
intercepter-yes it is laughable when someone like you would read that Hudson Hope power was at full capacity, no more to give and you believed it.
Old man what are you talking about?
I know your generation hates progress but sometimes it is necessary.
No worries, I didn’t read it ;)
I grow a little weary of the “we don’t need the power ” rhetoric re: Site C. I worked on the Revelstoke project in 1985 and the fathers of today’s naysayers said the same thing – we didn’t need the power and it would never be used. And even worse, BCHydro extravagantly wasted money by provisioning the project with space for two more useless generators to be added in the future. Guess what – those extra units have long since been added and we’re now responding to even more future capacity needs by building Site C. It takes decades to plan/gain approvals/build something like this. Just like planning your retirement, only thinking abut it when it’s five years out is foolhardy. (and to the natural gas proponents, my response is always , “they’re not making this stuff any more”. It’s a finite resource and in a couple lifetimes, we’ve largely tapped all the ‘easy’ stuff already, hence the tar sands, fracking, etc. )
I’ll admit that solar and wind have more legitimacy than I ever thought they would, but if you think that’s the answer, go look at the mother of all wind farms north of Palm Springs and convince me that’s more environmentally friendly and cheaper per MWh than hydro.
And if along the way we can sell some BC power to support our tax-based coffers, why not? Would workers in any other natural resource sector like mining or forestry or oil demand their products never leave the province? If I can continue to pay some of the lowest electricity rates in the world (check Ontario – shudder), I’m in.
Huh, read through the entire article and there was no mention that Site C will put us (BC) in debt until the year 2094. Yet we have some geniuses on here who don’t care if we need all that extra hydro power or not… which of course we don’t need.
This government make work project is so big and costly, it will negatively affect our provincial credit rating for years to come… thanks a lot Christy and company, and the irresponsible idiots who support this sham of a project!
It will not, put us in debt that long. Stop and think about, even if we borrow 8 billion dollars to build it. Likely the BC Government thru income tax, consumer tax etc, will likely be recovering no less than 10% of the project. This is not even talking the business multiplying factor.
Think about what a house in PG costed in 1991, a mere 24 years ago. in the 80k range. Today it is worth 250k.
If the government makes the annual interest payment and principle payment, than in 25 years, it will easily be paid for, the 8,8 billion dollars they paid so long ago has a value of 30 billion dollars.
I am glad that we don’t have a bunch of useless NDP’ers running this province, they will make us a have not province in under 4 years…. Oh that is what the last run of NDp’ers did to us in the 90’s.
It WILL put us in debt that long, stop being delusional, and at least post some link that supports your ridiculous notions!
ht tps://www.biv.com/article/2016/10/taxpayers-be-hook-site-c-dam-until-2094/
Bh take a look at the energy disaster in Ontario, then tell me who is being delusional? Watch Alberta, same thing happening there. We will be selling lots of power to them in the near future.
Perhaps all the brainiacs in favour of Site C have forgotten about the Columbia River Treaty and the benefits to BC/.
Canada gets 505 megawatts of power from the Columbia River Treaty (half of what Site C will produce). PowerEx a subsidiary of BC Hydro sells this power on the open market.
Soooo. If there was a shortage of power in BC (Which there is not) why could we not just use the power we are now selling to the US and others from the Columbia River.????? This would negate the need to build any more power stations or dams for years to come and provide us with cheap power.
Worst case scenario would be that the US,. and other customers who buy BC power would have to generate the higher cost power for their needs, and we could use the Columbia River, and WAC Bennett power for industrial, commercial, residential use in BC. Which incidentally was the original purpose of building the Columbia River project.
Those in favour of Site C basically stand to make some money on the project, and therefore support it. Either that or they are sadly misinformed.
Palopu I have explained to you before how the grid works but you seem to ignore it for your agenda.
Christy Clarke time this out perfectly. After the Fukishima disaster, she rolls out site C, and as we roll thru a downturn in the oil industry, the project is front and center in the Peace region.
I believe in the government building major infrastructure during the slow times. best bang for the buck. Look at the united states, they built the interstates, and hoover dam thru this period.
My calculation shows me 1,100,100 kw/hr @ $0.105/kw x 24 hr x 365 days, is over a billion dollars a year. to service a 8.8 billion dollar debt. Hmmm seems like a good investment to me. keeping in mind the 10.5 cents per kilowatt, is likely going to be in the 25cent range before 2030. Risk and reward. WAC Bennett took a chance building his dam, and he looks like a genius in my mind. but then again I am right of center.
Because the power was not immediately needed to serve
its demand, Canada sold the first 30 years of the Canadian
Entitlement to a U.S. consortium of utilities for $254 million
in 1964. The value of the Canadian Entitlement, combined
with pre-payment for flood risk management, helped finance
Duncan, Keenleyside and Mica dams. Now that the
30-year contracts have expired, the U.S. delivers the
Canadian Entitlement energy to BC Hydro over Bonneville
Power Administration transmission lines. BPA estimates
that this energy entitlement is worth between $250 million
and $350 million a year.
ht tps://www.crt2014-2024review.gov/Files/Columbia%20River%20Treaty%20Review%20-%20Purpose%20and%20Future%20Fact%20Sheet-FOR%20PRINT.PDF
I am amazed at how naïve educated people can be. Take a good look around, everything we have needs to be plugged into a wall. 50 years ago, a 60 amp service was enough power. Now we are looking at 200 amp service for a house.
We are spoiled little brats, that expect power to be there when we plug something in. We are reliant on the electrical power. Yet, such well educated people has no qualms standing in the spotlight to claim it is a bad idea to build site C. How about if in 5-8 years from now we start having brown outs, and or black outs, because we don’t have enough power. than we want this fixed right away. Site C was in the making for over 35 years. This is how long it takes to bring mega projects on line these days. I credit our government for the vision.
The problem with Wind is, it is not reliable, and kills to many birds. The problem with LNG plant is, on the long run maintenance cost is way higher, as well the carbon foot print is too large. Forget about talking Coal power. nuclear is always an option, but not in BC, as long as we have the hydro option. Geothermal had been discussed, but I think tapping into the earth Magma might be beyond our knowledge.
So what happens when the power goes out. Well, chances are you will be sent home without pay. no power = no computer, no office lights. cell phones will be charged off the vehicle, oh, wait you have no job, no money to buy gas. It is at this point it starts hitting people, that it is easy to get on the bandwagon to bash site C, but wait when your fragile little over privileged world comes crashing down on you……. Wait, you want me to talk about oil next.
Really good how you fail to account that technological improvement in electrical appliances and lighting reduces power needs every year. No, about all you can do is try to scaremonger people into agreeing to the destruction of an entire river valley based on your ridiculous feverish imaginings of an imminent civilization-ending electrical apocalypse.
You should write screenplays for Hollywood disaster movies, because that is where your Sci-Fi scenario belongs.
WE DON’T NEED NEED SITE C POWER… British Columbians can plug in everything they have for at least 40 years, and we will STILL have sufficient power for our own consumption and needs!
No Site C supporter has ever posted any evidence that we are running out of hydro electric power and need Site C to meet our immediate demand. Christy herself can’t get her facts straight, first we needed Site C to power the LNG industry, now that it is in the tank and going no where, now we need it to sell to Alberta? WTF?
So totally inaccurate it’s laughable but no one will change your mind so enjoy your delusion.
maybe it is not about running out of power, but our government capitalizing on an opportunity build infrastructure that will pay for our great grandchildrens health care. if we don’t use it, we will sell our power for market value, and more than recover our investment over the next 100 years.
People think past your limited socialistic view. We have a lot of stupid American’s south of the border, who is willing to pay for it. To them it is cheaper to buy our power for 20 cents a kilowatt. We make good money, they save money. Let them think we are loosing money in the deal.
Sorry, they are going to have to place a deposit before we link you up with the power.
I rather have the money in Victoria, than in Washington.
You think the Americans are stupid when they have been getting power for less than it costs to produce for decades now? There is someone is stupid all right, but it isn’t the Americans.
Yeah, and you just tell the Americans that you won’t link them up to power unless they place a deposit first. You really think we are in the driver’s seat here? You’ve got gall to call the Americans stupid. LOL
“It cost B.C. Hydro $17.5 million last year to ask eight Independent Power Producers of biomass energy to turn off production because their power was not needed, a sizeable figure that B.C.’s energy minister said actually resulted in millions of dollars in savings for ratepayers.”
ht tp://vancouversun.com/news/politics/b-c-hydro-spent-17-5-million-to-not-buy-power
It’s a bizarre world when BC Hydro pays eight Independent power producers NOT to produce power because it is NOT NEEDED!!!
So on to the next reason; but, but, but… we will need the power 100 years from now! In 100 years everything will run on alternative energy (wind and solar), so who is kidding who here?
This all sounds familiar… lets build a longer airport runway, because who knows, maybe in 100 years some big cargo jets might land here in good ole PG!!! Big Lib-Con dreams with no base in reality… just like the LNG pipe dream!
Let’s see how much they pay to keep the 40MW bio-mass energy plant in Fort St James from producing power, assuming it ever gets finished that is.
Seamutt. You forgot to mention that the Canadian Entitlement from the Columbia River that is worth $250 to $350 million per annum is sold on the open market by PowerEX which is a subsidiary of BC Hydro.
So the question is. If we have a huge surplus of power from the Columbia River Entitlement that is sold on the open market, how can we have a shortage of power in BC. Surely if we had a shortage we would use some of the 505 megawatts that we sell. Right.??
A lot of this power does not in fact return to BC Hydro, as it is sold and transmitted in the USA. So the exchange of power is a paper trade. However we could take this power if we had a need for it. (Which we dont)
Has BC Hydro ever collected the $300 million from the Americans that they bought from PowerX?
Cheers
The surplus changes with load, water storage availability, outages forced and planned. Like I said before which you do not seem to understand, generation is not built to match load or do you believe that is the way Hydro should operate? Reread earlier post. If there is generation available to be sold should it not be or should excess water from a full reservoir just be spilled for no revenue.
Now I do find it interesting that hydro does not report its generation in real time like Alberta, Ontario, Australia does. It does report load and generation ratios but no real time. Would be interesting to see how the wind generation is doing.
ht tp://ets.aeso.ca/ets_web/ip/Market/Reports/CSDReportServlet
ht tp://anero.id/energy/wind-energy/
ht tp://www.ieso.ca/Pages/Power-Data/default.aspx
On time and on budget for the destruction of an entire river valley for the b***h’s monument to herself.
They have to build site C. Because the NDP in alberta are shutting down the 3 power plants in favour of Bird Slicers… trouble is you only get power when there is wind. There is a reason BC is the only province doing good. Without the handouts that ontario and quebec get.
Where do you Cons get your information from? Site C was already in the development stages before the Alberta NDP and it’s decision to shut down coal plants. Site C isn’t being built because of the Alberta NDP investing in wind power. It is nothing but a 9 billion dollar plaque for Christy Clark to hang her name on and pretend that she is on the same level of “vision” as Wacky Bennett.
And quit trying to act like you people give a s**t about the environment by referring to wind power generators as “bird slicers” when you don’t give a s**t that an entire river valley ecosystem is going to be destroyed by “clean” power.
About those bird slicers, greenies all get on a war footing when some ducks die in a settling pond and big fines issued, but birds in a slicer, well a sacrifice for a common good. In the states Obama okayed permits to kill upto 5000 eagles a year for the common good.
Would be interesting to read how many birds, bats are killed with BC’s slicers but that information seems to be buried or covered up. But hey all for the common good. SPCA, and the Hodge podge of wild rescue outfits don’t seem to give a dam. Bunch of hypocrites, but hey for the common good.
Everyone keeps talking about bird slicers, rather there are lots of different wind power devices that are safe and environmentally friendly.
ht tp://www.alternative-energy-news.info/tree-shaped-wind-turbines-paris/
Technology changes, and now it is less expensive to generate power from alternative energy sources that it is from fossil fuels… how about that!
ht tp://qz.com/871907/2016-was-the-year-solar-panels-finally-became-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels-just-wait-for-2017/
@Seamutt
More half-truth nonsense from your cakehole. That is what makes you so credible as an information source, Seamutt. /s
You should write for Breitbart. You would probably be a master at ginning up bull***t news for that pack of lying idiots.
From Snopes:
Claim: The Obama administration has proposed revising power guidelines that could affect eagles, but the President hasn’t issued a “kill order” allowing the slaughter of thousands of bald eagles per year.
mixture
WHAT’S TRUE: Proposed revisions to wind power guidelines could allow wind power companies to injure or kill more bald and golden eagles per year without penalty.
WHAT’S FALSE: The revised guidelines are unlikely to lead to thousands of additional eagle deaths because they impose more stringent requirements on wind power companies to minimize such accidents, and there’s little evidence that wind turbines currently kill anywhere close to 4,200 eagles per year.
Origin:In early May 2016, a number of alarmist blog posts reported that President Obama had issued a “kill order” allowing more than 4,000 bald eagles to be slaughtered each year for the next 30 years. A popular version published by Liberty Writers was heavy-handed with symbolism, maintaining that President Obama “really hates” bald eagles:
“And quit trying to act like you people give a s**t about the environment by referring to wind power generators as “bird slicers” when you don’t give a s**t that an entire river valley ecosystem is going to be destroyed by “clean” power.”
Exaggerating a little on “an entire river valley ecosystem .” aren’t you?
Hahaha you really are getting worked up. About the wind farms they self report, that should go well.
Like you said bird slicers are allowed to kill more without penalty but let some ducks die in a settling pond all hell breaks loose. Glad we agree on something.
Hahaha, take a deep breath and slowly let it out. Watch your blood pressure.
Site C is about politics and elections. It has nothing to do with electricity.
Well what isen’t about politics and elections from any side?
“As of September, t here were 1,750 workers on the project, with workers from B.C. making up 80% of the work force”
Most of the workforce are from Alberta with BC addresses.
Got proof of that or just rhetoric. Would be interesting to know the facts. Maybe it’s BC workers who worked in Alberta and now have come back. Maybe hahaha can snope it out.
When someone doesn’t provide evidence to refute your asinine comments, you repeatedly tell them that they won’t or can’t provide evidence to contradict you. Then when someone does provide evidence of how you spout half-truths and twist what really occurred, you try to belittle them for doing so. Sad.
Comments for this article are closed.