Site C dam “not required”, NDP leadership hopeful John Horgan says
The B.C. NDP’s only Vancouver Island–based leadership candidate has said he believes the proposed Site C hydroelectric dam is unnecessary at this point in time.
“Each pulp mill or sawmill that shuts down, that’s more power that’s available to B.C. Hydro through the existing supply,” John Horgan, long-time NDP energy critic, told the Straight by phone today (January 18). “Housing starts have not been what they were projected to be in 2005-2006, so residential demand is not growing at the rate that B.C. Hydro projected. So my view is that Site C is not required at this time, and there are other potentially lower-cost, best-use options available to the corporation.”
In a wide-ranging interview, Horgan confirmed the NDP still supports a moratorium on any new run-of-river power projects. If the NDP forms government, it would review the power-purchase agreements made by B.C. Hydro and private power producers in order to ensure they are in the “public interest”, according to him.
“If it’s determined that they are not in the public interest, after the light of day has been shone upon them, then we would take action to rectify that. What that action is would depend on what the deficiencies are,” Horgan said.
Horgan noted he helped draft the energy policy of the NDP government of former premier Mike Harcourt in the mid ’90s. However, that government never reconciled the economic activity created by the dams on the Peace River with the damage done to the communities. He said the same of the industrial activity around the Nechako River.
“I would certainly be open to looking at a Peace River accord or a Nechako accord in the future,” Horgan said. “But when it comes to micro hydro, it was our position then, and it’s my position now, that if five-, 10- and 20-megawatt facilities can be established by the private sector more cost-effectively than they can be by B.C. Hydro—there are no fish implications and the generation is for local distribution and not for export to service the needs of air-conditioners and swimming pools in California—then that’s good public policy.”
Regarding the Site C dam project, Horgan said he has seen firsthand the damage done to the communities of the northeast, and wants to see a proper environmental assessment.
“They want some peace in the valley, and as long as the spectre of Site C hangs over their head, there’s never going to be a comfort level in the community,” Horgan said. “They want a full-fledged, full-on environmental assessment, so that they can put on the table the science of the sloughing, the costs of dredging, and the total costs on ratepayers of a $6- to $7- to $8- or even $9-billion project.”
Last April, Premier Gordon Campbell and then-energy minister Blair Lekstrom announced the Site C dam project would move forward to the regulatory review phase, the third stage in a five-part planning and development process.




Now let's hear something on the P3 sellouts!
Ensure that enough businesses close so that no new power needs to be generated in BC?
New electricity sources become ever more expensive, the low cost options long exhaused. The #1 energy resource in the world and BC, utterly ignored is Energy Efficiency. Current technology allows us to maintain curernt living standards with 75% to 90% less energy. In 1975 California, BC, and North America used the same amount of electricity per person. Today California uses HALF the electricity. Residential, commercial, and industrial power use can be economically reduced by 50% today. All we need to do is to adopt the building, appliance, and utilty standards, regulations, and incentives that California has. BC led the word in demand side management in 1990, PowerSmart Inc consulted in 20 countries. Then PowerSmart was neutered in the 1990's and has since, intentionally failed to implement a single significant effective program.
However, BC will never need to build any more expensive large hydro dams with all the alternatives available that are more environmentally friendly.
Ingmar Lee - dirty oil? You mean oil from saudi arabia? Or oil from Nigeria? Or oil from California? or oil from Venezuela? All these places have cleaner oil than Canada? or like the oil in tankers off the coast of Vancouver?
Site C isn't about meeting BC's energy needs. It's about powering up the NW transmission line so they can really get the mining going and for NE BC shale gas frack extraction.
Keep The Peace.
If the tarsands are dirty oil, this stuff is jet black.
The Peace River Valley has other values besides being a giant holding tank to generate electricity – agriculture, ecosystem, archaeological, innate beauty.
It doesn't make sense to compromise such a unique spot in our BC for a commodity that will be poorly valued in the future.
Emotional counter-factual statements does not help BC to cope with the energy shortage and global warming issues.
Do you know any better way to conserve, when consumers are paying only 6 cents a KWh and sawmills are paying 3 cents a KWh?
Rates have to go up in order to conserve. Law of economics.
The Mid-C price for electricity today is at $18.42/MWh. Ouch!
http://www.bloomberg.com/energy/
Pages