Independent Power Producers Wait for Word from Province On Fate of their Projects

Thursday, July 30, 2009 04:00 AM

Prince George, B.C.- Independent power producers are waiting for the B.C. Government’s response to a BCUC ruling that has given a jolt to companies developing clean energy projects.

The BC Utilities Commission ruled this week that B.C. Hydro’s plans to buy power from a number of small Independent Power Producers (IPP)was neither practical, nor was the plan in the public interest. In short, the BCUC made it clear it didn't beleive the Government claims that there will be an energy shortage and that the prices to be charged by the IPP's would have been too steep.

There are a number of IPP projects in the region from Williams Lake to Fort St John, that would not only provide power, but much needed jobs at a time when economic diversity is needed. Most of the projects are in the pre-application stage for an environmental assessment.

The BCUC also called on the Province to continue using the Burrard geo-thermal plant which uses natural gas, a move which defies the Provincial Government’s plan to have that facility phased out by 2014. If the Burrard plant remains up and running, then there is no need for other power sources to fill the gap created by it’s closure.

Vancouver energy lawyer, David Austin, says it is time to move away from the Burrard plant “When you have a facility as old and as inefficient as Burrard, which is the largest point source of greenhouse gasses in the province, and you have to spend $350 million dollars on replacement parts and not refurbish it, well, it’s time to move on.”

The Provincial Energy, Blair Lekstrom, says the Province will issue a response soon, and that response could include legal action.

Here is a list of some of the IPP’s in the central Interior which are either in the pre-application or application stage of an environmental assessment:

*Project*	*Location*	*Construction Jobs*	*Operating Jobs*	*Value (in Millions)*
Mt. George Wind Park	38kms SE of P.G.	150	300	$100
McGregor/Herrick Hydroelectric Project	120kms NE of P.G.	?	6	$200
Bullmoose Wind Energy Project	18 km West of Tumbler Ridge	125	7	$115
Hackney Hills Wind Park	100km west of Ft. St. John	?	?	$400
Tumbler Ridge Wind Energy Project	Tumbler Ridge	125	7	$105
Wapiti Power Development Project	30 km NNE of Tumbler Ridge	550	150	$300
Wildmare Wind Energy Project	NW of Chetwynd	125	7	$ 75

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, July 30, 2009 04:00 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: lost it all on July 30 2009 6:43 AM

$1,295,000,000.00 to produce 477 jobs wow?

Posted by: lunarguy on July 30 2009 6:58 AM

The IPP's of course put this spin on it. What they don't tell you is that for the next 25 years they would have a contract to produce power and sell it to BC Hydro at over three times the current market price. Even though the cost of generation will go down over the life of the plant. Then after 25 years they are free to raise the rates to whatever and at that point will be selling through BCTC ( BC Transmission Corp ) directly to the States. So no benefit to BC.

Just an example of how the liberals are selling off BC Hydro, making us pay higher rates and making sure big businesses gets all the benefits. Why doesn't BC Hydro just build all these projects themselves and benefit the people of BC ?

Posted by: REALIST on July 30 2009 8:42 AM

Thank God someone has stood up against the theft and selling of our provimce. Apparently the avaerage voter does not have a clue about what was/is at stake.

Posted by: gus on July 30 2009 8:57 AM

"$1,295,000,000.00 to produce 477 jobs wow?"

Remember, the wind rotates the blades of the windmills, and gravity moves the water through the turbines. The little electrons agitate themselves to transmit the energy.

So .... construction jobs, maintenance jobs, security jobs and management jobs would be the primary ones created as far as I can see.

Posted by: MrPG on July 30 2009 9:08 AM

So most of these are wind projects, which should make the green-environmentally-conscious crowd feel all warm and fuzzy.

By most of the sentiment above, is BC Hydro supposed to be the only one to do these projects? I thought monopolies were supposed to be bad?

Posted by: lost it all on July 30 2009 10:38 AM

No MrPG, it's subsidization that is bad at the expense of the BC Hydro customer.

Posted by: gus on July 30 2009 11:45 AM

BC Hydro is not doing any of those projects. These are independent projects who have to be able to use the transmission lines to sell their energy to end users. It is not much different than Newfoundland building their dam and sending it over Quebec's transmission lines to users in the USA. The initial agreement looked good until the price of electricity went up. Quebec was the reseller. Now Newfoundland will be able to sell directly and will be making the money they should have been making.

http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/exec/0402n06.htm

Not much different than sending crude and natural gas through pipelines to markets outside of the province where the oil and gas are extracted from. Or sending lumber to places other than the province where the trees come from. It is called trade.

If transmission lines were privatized, then we would not have this problem. Remember, we once had the problem with telephone lines and cable.

Rail tracks are the same, and also highways are the same. We do not restrict goods moving between provinces and countries via our taxpayer built highways either. They were built for transportation of people and goods.

Posted by: lost it all on July 30 2009 1:45 PM

A profit will be required once private enterprize is incorporated into the system therefore, the rates will no doubt go up for the consumer.

Posted by: REALIST on July 30 2009 1:49 PM

Let's see how fast Campbell and Company can get rid of the decenting BCUC. Usual practice seems to be to replace the board of those who speek the truth with Shirley Bond types who follow their master's orders regardless of the effect on their consitiuents. I bet it happens before the end of next week.

Posted by: diplomat on July 30 2009 5:06 PM

[urlhttp://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/freeside/--%20u%20--/utilities%20commission%20act%20%20rsbc%201996%20%20c.%20473/00_96473_01.xml[/url]

The Lieutenant Governor in Council is the overseer of the workings of the provisions of BCUC Act (implemented in 1996).

To insinuate that the government can get rid of a commission just because it arrives at a dissenting opinion is ignoring the powers legally given to the Lieutenant Governor in Council and the act itself.

The government can appeal the ruling through the usual legal channels. That's about all.