Duke of Hazards
Johnny Frem
Common Ground
March 2005
Would Duke Point's gas burning electric plant be Sumas 3?
Sometimes choices are driven by an agenda of politics or greed with ignorance to the long-term consequences to the environment. The choice by the BC Utilities Commission to allow a consortium to build a gas-fired electrical-generating station at Duke Point near Nanaimo seems like one such decision. The Commission granted permission February 17 for BC Hydro to sign the electricity purchasing agreement with Duke Point power - a project of Pristine Power. Several interveners have indicated that they will file appeals.
The Commission said virtually the same project was too expensive in September of last year, sending BC Hydro back to find a cheaper way to bring electricity to Vancouver Island. Unfortunately BC Hydro, anticipating approval, had already gone ahead and bought the turbines for the project for about $50 million. An interesting question here is who authorized this massive purchase prior to BCUC approval?
Instead of looking for a new way to supply power, BC Hydro put out the call for tenders and defined it such that the likely answer to its call would be a gas-fired plant. BC's utilities commission is supposed to prevent monopolistic practices. Allowing a corporation, any corporation, including BC Hydro, to define the parameters of the case under consideration appears to be an abdication of that responsibility.
First, BC Hydro "encouraged" the new project by offering its untouched turbines at discounted prices if the bidder agreed to take on the Duke Point gas-fired plant project. Then BC Hydro specified to the bidders that the electricity could only be generated on-island. Transmission lines coming from off-island would not be eligible for consideration - even though it defined the project as only a temporary solution and the final solution after 2008 would be new BC Hydro transmission lines from off-island. And finally, BC Hydro offered to guarantee the price of gas for 25 years to anyone agreeing to take its gas-fired project to completion, a gas guarantee that will be paid by BC electricity ratepayers.
Now the Commission is allowing the same project it had rejected the first time around as too expensive - even though BC citizens would be asked to pay extra when the price of gas to the plant increases, even though it's unneeded, unwanted and unhealthy, even though in the Liberals' throne speech they vowed to continue their opposition to a similar gas-fired plant - the Sumas 2 project under consideration south of the US border near Abbottsford, even though it violates their commitment to green energy in that same throne speech, and even though a task force of the biggest industrial users of electricity in BC are against it.
The green light to drive a climate-changing, gas-guzzling toxin-emitting electric-generating plant at Duke Point came one day after Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, likely putting Canada in breach of our international treaty obligations. One estimate states Duke Point would produce as much poisonous exhaust as 40,000 more cars each day. In the long run it seems we are being driven down the wrong road in regards to air pollution, lung damage and increased medical costs. Asthma is already one of the leading causes of emergency hospitalization among children in BC. More air pollution makes it worse. Not a clean choice.
The entire premise for this plant in the first place is that the sub-sea cables which carry high-voltage direct-current to Vancouver Island will be classified as outdated in 2007 and new lines won't exist until October 2008. First, they are not being "retired" as some media has reported. In fact BC Hydro maintenance plans show that it intends to keep them up and energized until 2014. They just lose their "reliability" rating from a system-planners point of view. Yakout Monsour, senior VP of system management for BC Transmission Corporation, testified before the Commission that he was completely comfortable handling the problem with current system assets until the implementation of the transmission solution in 2008 to 2009.
Second, several other solutions to the loss of those cables' reliability rating have also been suggested. Some at BC Hydro seem adamant that the only solution they are willing to entertain is a gas-fired plant. They discarded such submissions to the hearings as Norske Canada's "demand side management" solution, where Norske offered to reduce its use of electricity should the island ever approach crisis during the period of 2007 and 2008. As one of the largest users of electricity on-island it could resolve any shortfall in electricity very easily by shutting down some of its pulp mill process, which is what it offered to do. Norske is also concerned with uncontrolled increases in gas pricing and thus the cost of generating electricity.
BC Hydro's position is it wants "on-island generation." But in fact Duke Point is the farthest thing from "on-island" with Alberta gas piped in across the Georgia Straight. Another solution was offered by Sea Breeze Pacific Regional Transmission Company which is preparing to build a new transmission line across the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Hydro dismisses electrical cables from the bid process but it allows gas pipelines, coming from off-island. As Prince Rupert found out last year, when residents gathered in the civic centre to keep warm, pipelines can break too.
Several truly on-island solutions were offered but were bounced out of the tendering process for various reasons. Green Energy has a planned bio-mass plant, Norske Canada has a demand side management solution wherein it offered to shed its load (one quarter of Vancouver Island's total load) if there were any interruptions in service, two companies offered transmission solutions, there is a fully permitted 450 MW wind farm ready to be constructed on the north end of Vancouver Island that has already passed environmental review. Also several additional smaller runs of river hydro and waste wood plants were offered during tendering.
If this "temporary" solution is allowed then what might become of Duke Point's gas-fired generating plant? Could it be that the BC Utilities Commission or BC Hydro boards were stacked with pro-gas and pro-oil members? Would this future local market demand encourage off-shore oil drilling? It is time for all stakeholders, including ratepayers, to consider this important decision because we all would pay the environmental and increased electrical costs.
For further information and to voice your opinions contact the following:
BC Utilities Commission www.bcuc.com
BC Hydro www.bchydro.com
BC Sustainable Energy Association www.bcsea.org
BC Transmission Corporation www.bctransco.com
BC Wind Energy Association www.bcwea.org
David Suzuki Foundation www.davidsuzuki.org
Green Party of BC www.greenparty.bc.ca
Independent Power Producers of BC www.ippbc.com
Norske Canada www.norskecanada.com Tsawassen Residents Against High Voltage Overhead Lines www.Travhol.com