2006 IEP and LTAP: Comments & News
Advocate sustainable energy to government
Tom Hackney, Sierra Club of BC & BC Sustainable Energy Association, 29-Mar-2006
BCSEA comments on BC Hydro IEP submission
News Release, BC Sustainable Energy Association, 29-Mar-2006
Is a power shortage looming? Let's talk about it for a while
Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun, 30-Mar-2006
Gap is threat to B.C. energy future
Scott Simpson, Vancouver Sun, 30-Mar-2006
Hydro thinks coal as power runs short
Scott Simpson, Victoria Times Colonist, 30-Mar-2006
Hydro - Planning needed now to prevent electrical shortfall
Wendy McLellan, The Province, 30-Mar-2006
Report Revives Controversial Canadian Dam Plan
Allan Dowd, Reuters News Service, 31-Mar-2006
Critics urge Hydro to rethink plan
Andrew A. Duffy, Victoria Times Colonist, 31-Mar-2006
Turn it off when not in use
Editorial, Times Colonist, 31-Mar-2006
We have to stop dithering about looming power shortage
Editorial, Vancouver Sun, 01-Apr-2006
Advocate sustainable energy to government
Tom Hackney
Sierra Club of BC
BC Sustainable Energy Association
29-Mar-2006
The BC Hydro press release on the IEP gives remarkably little information on what energy resources would actually be deployed, doesn't even mention Site C. What it does do is say that it's a choice for all BCers, and BC Hydro will work with the government and BCers.
This is because in the (2002) energy plan, the government told BC Hydro that independent power producers would produce all new electricity, with BC Hydro merely contracting for it on the basis of least cost. In other words, BC Hydro and the BC Utilities Commission are not supposed to look at environmental so-called externalities or social factors.
This means that it is up to us to express our views loudly to government, especially (but also to BC Hydro and the Commission) that we want sustainable energy, not so-called lowest cost energy. If we speak loudly and consistently enough, the government will find ways to implement it through Hydro and the Commission.
As to Site C, not even mentioned in the media release, government has reserved to itself the decision whether to proceed or not. Either government has not told BC Hydro its decision, or BC Hydro is holding so that government can announce it; or perhaps government hasn't decided yet.
Our action remains the same: advocate sustainable energy to government. They need to be educated in (a) BCers commitment to sustainable energy; (b) the practicality of sustainable energy.
It's up to us to tell government that we want a sustainable energy future, not a regression to old-style harmful energies. And that "clean coal" is an industry advertising slogan, not a practical, economic reality. If coal producers actually deployed sufficient clean technology to capture CO2, etc, their product would be more expensive than the alternatives.
Tom Hackney
Sierra Club of Canada, BC Chapter
thackney@island.net
(250) 381-4463
BC Sustainable Energy Association
5 - 4217 Glanford Avenue Victoria, BC Canada V8Z 4B9
(250) 744-2720 - www.bcsea.org - info@bcsea.org
MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release: March 29, 2006
BCSEA comments on BC Hydro IEP submission
Victoria, BC--The BC Sustainable Energy Association (BCSEA) welcomes the today's release of BC Hydro's Integrated Electricity Plan and "Challenges and Choices: Planning for a Secure Electricity Future".
"BC Hydro's electricity acquisitions will be decided in a competitive bid process among coal, wind, gas or other bidders," said Tom Hackney, BCSEA policy analyst. "Unfortunately this process does not reflect the harm of resources like coal that contribute to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions, and this will skew the calculation of what is truly lowest cost."
"This plan presents British Columbia with a huge opportunity for sustainable energy," said Guy Dauncey, BCSEA president. "Energy conservation is the cheapest way to meet most of our new demand. For the rest, government should follow Ontario's recent example and implement a Standard Offer Contract to kick-start a renewable energy industry in BC."
"It's up to British Columbians to tell government that they want an energy plan that will meet current needs without harming future generations," said Peter Ronald, BCSEA Coordinator. "'Clean coal' is just an industry advertising slogan. In spite of pilot programs, carbon sequestration of emissions is a huge problem and unlikely ever to become economically feasible."
Recent polling information published by BC Hydro (Integrated Electricity Plan advertisement, October 2005) shows that British Columbians are squarely in favour of renewable energy and energy conservation to meet future energy needs:
- 66% strongly support energy conservation (PowerSmart);
- 94% support or strongly support wind power;
- 74% support or strongly support small hydro "run-of-river" projects;
- 57% support or strongly support Site C;
- 74% oppose or strongly oppose coal-fuelled projects.
- 30 -
For More Information please contact:
Tom Hackney (250) 381-4463
Guy Dauncey (250) 881-1304
Peter Ronald (250) 744-2720
Is a power shortage looming? Let's talk about it for a while
By Vaughn Palmer
Vancouver Sun
30-Mar-2006
BC Hydro was finally able to release its long-term electricity plan Wednesday, four months after the provincial government forced the giant utility to pull back and rework it.
The so-called integrated electricity plan, covering power needs and sources for the next 20 years, was slated to be released Dec. 8.
But when B.C. Liberal MLAs were given a preview at a caucus meeting two days beforehand, they did not like what they saw.
Premier Gordon Campbell thought Hydro was getting ahead of itself.
The plan emphasized the need to develop new sources of electricity. British Columbians were barely aware of looming shortages.
Government members found too much emphasis on the proposed hydroelectric project at Site C on the Peace River.
Hydro had even highlighted that lightning rod for environmental protests in the advance notice to the news media, promising the electricity plan would "outline the future of the highly debated Site C dam."
Nice of Hydro to remind everyone of Site C's capacity to generate controversy along with electricity.
With the province on a more stable economic track and the world invited to attend the 2010 Winter Olympics, Premier Campbell does not want a high-profile showdown over a hydroelectric dam.
Still, the auditorium was booked for the announcement. Business leaders were lined up to share the platform with Hydro CEO Bob Elton. But with less than 48 hours to go, Hydro was ordered to ashcan the release of the integrated electricity plan.
It was a major, public humiliation for Elton. He had every reason to think government was in the loop. Hydro had briefed the premier's office about the plan well beforehand.
Nevertheless, he played the good soldier. Said nothing publicly. Sent the team back to the drawing board. Recognized a new political reality, where government would keep Hydro on a shorter leash.
The reworked plan was dutifully submitted to the government caucus on Tuesday evening of this week. It passed muster, enabling Hydro to release the plan to the public Wednesday morning.
Gone is the get-on-with-it tone of the first version, which presumed the case for more electrical generation capacity had already been made.
The new emphasis is on "working with the provincial government" to engage the public in another of those "dialogues," the premier likes.
First, Hydro will try to persuade British Columbians of a looming shortage of power, then get on with the options for addressing it.
The initial exercise will take up the rest of this year, according to Energy Minister Richard Neufeld in an interview following release of the electricity plan.
If people come round to the idea that we are short of power now and sure of being shorter in the future, then the government can get on with addressing the options in 2007.
The first priority, Neufeld says, is conservation. Hydro will also continue to commission small-scale and green power projects from private operators.
And Site C? "It's in there," Neufeld said, and sure enough, there are a number of references buried deep inside more than 800 pages of the electricity plan plus appendices.
Site C is said to have some advantages. Dependable power. Increased storage of water. Minimal contribution to greenhouse gases.
But it also means flooding of some agricultural land and impacts on fish, wildlife, local communities and first nations.
The cost is said to be $2.3 billion to $3.2 billion. But that's in 2004 dollars for a project not likely to be completed for another 10 years and without allowance for interest, corporate overhead or mitigating impacts on communities, the environment or first nations.
Neufeld says the cost could run as high as $5 billion, and he might well be low.
In any event, the plan stops well short of pushing Site C is a viable option. Neufeld, who used to make a practice of promoting it, sounds to be back down to earth.
He noted that the dam could generate close to 5,000 gigawatts of power a year, enough for almost half a million homes.
But Hydro has added almost as much capacity in recent years through smaller power projects. A call for additional bids last fall brought proposals whose collective capacity would outstrip that of Site C.
All this, Neufeld notes, "raises the question: Is there a necessity to go to a large dam?"
"I don't think we could make the decision today," he said, answering his own question.
The work to be done involves more analysis of costs, impacts and the concerns of those who would be most affected by the project, especially first nations.
Neufeld sounded to be in no rush to deal with any of this.
If there's a serious electricity shortage in the province, the government conveys no sense of urgency about it.
Gap is threat to B.C. energy future
Scott Simpson
Vancouver Sun
Thursday, March 30, 2006
Hydro options include coal-fired power generation
BC Hydro threw open the doors Wednesday to public debate about a radical reshaping of the province's electricity mix by acknowledging that a coal-fired generation plant could be on the horizon.
Hydro CEO Bob Elton
Photograph by : Ward Perrin,
Vancouver Sun File
Hydro chief executive officer Bob Elton said the Crown corporation is "neutral" on the types of energy projects it will accept as part of its effort to restore B.C.'s independence from imported sources of electricity.
Elton said B.C. could be importing as much as 45 per cent of its electricity from spot-trading markets in Alberta and the Pacific Northwest within 20 years -- leaving the province's residents and industries increasingly vulnerable to price volatility and supply risk.
Elton's comments came as Hydro released its Integrated Energy Plan, a 300-page document detailing a 20-year plan for moving B.C. back to a position of independence from imports.
The document shows that B.C. has been in an electricity deficit position for five years and projects that deficit to increase as the province grows -- unless strong measures are taken to avert it.
"In a competitive, ever-changing global economy where energy will become more expensive and scarce, electricity security is really about helping to ensure future generations enjoy our current standard of living," says a background document accompanying the plan.
In a teleconference, Elton said B.C. needs to act now to turn the situation around -- and said it's essential for residents to awaken to the challenges of securing a reliable electricity supply.
Hydro is proposing three distinct strategies.
One is stepped-up conservation measures. A second is buying more power from independent producers. A third is financing upgrades to Hydro's existing facilities.
"What our plan does is ask British Columbians to look at the challenges that face us, and the choices we have that are fundamental to closing this gap so that we can preserve our energy future and keep us all secure for the future," Elton said.
The most controversial part of the plan will be the addition of new base-load facilities that will generate huge amounts of electricity and ensure that Hydro has a stable supply in the event of any spikes in demand.
Those projects could include thermal generating plants fired by natural gas or coal.
Elton acknowledged that virtually any large scale plant -- even a major hydroelectric facility -- will attract controversy.
But he said B.C. needs to start talking now about those possibilities because of the lengthy lead time -- as much as 10 years -- to bring them into operation.
An open call for new power generation is already underway and at least two coal-fired power plants are among the proposals from private sector bidders.
Meanwhile, the proposed Site C hydroelectric dam -- the last potential hydro megaproject in the province -- is only in the study phase but is already drawing criticism from Peace River valley residents and environmental groups.
"It's absolutely true that it's harder to build projects anywhere, really, not just in our province but around North America and around most countries as populations increase and people become more sophisticated in terms of what they want to see around their backyards," Elton said.
Dan Potts, executive director of the Joint Industry Electricity Steering Committee, said the province's major industrial sector agreed that Hydro must convince the public that new -- and possibly controversial -- projects need consideration.
"We find ourselves effectively in a position of buying more and more on potentially volatile import markets.
"You can't sell major projects which have in some ways adverse impacts without first convincing everybody that there is a fundamental need for it. I agree with Mr. Elton on that point and we've suggested to both Hydro and the B.C. government in past meetings that this needs to be something upon which they exercise some leadership."
Hydro critic David Austin noted that a chart included in the Hydro documents shows the first symptoms of Hydro's "import problem" emerged in 1994.
There was brief recovery later in the decade but since 2001, the chart shows Hydro in a net import position.
Austin said it was unfortunate that Hydro chose to delay action on the problem for an entire decade.
"It's as if you went to the cardiologist in 1994 and he told you that you had a heart problem and should have changed your diet -- but you didn't."
Austin was also critical of Hydro's "soft" estimates for the Site C project, which he said will cost billions more than estimates included in the energy plan documents.
For example, Hydro estimates the cost of Site C at between $2.3 billion and $3.2 billion -- but excludes the cost of corporate overhead, inflation and interest charges during construction.
"Once you include all of those costs, the price for Site C will be somewhere between $4 billion and $5 billion. That makes it a very expensive project," Austin said.
Meanwhile, the B.C. Sustainable Energy Association noted in a news release that a recent poll shows 74 per cent of B.C. residents oppose coal-fired generation.
"BC Hydro's electricity acquisitions will be decided in a competitive bid process among coal, wind, gas or other bidders," said Tom Hackney, BCSEA policy analyst. "Unfortunately this process does not reflect the harm of resources like coal that contribute to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions, and this will skew the calculation of what is truly lowest cost."
"This plan presents British Columbia with a huge opportunity for sustainable energy," said Guy Dauncey, BCSEA president. "Energy conservation is the cheapest way to meet most of our new demand. For the rest, government should follow Ontario's recent example and implement a Standard Offer Contract to kick-start a renewable energy industry in B.C."
- - -
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: NEW POWER SOURCES
BC Hydro has rated these potential power sources in terms of their potential and cost per megawatt hour:
- Conservation: $32-$76; May require new regulation or "significant" behavioural shifts
- Natural gas: $48-$100; May face supply, price risks and greenhouse gas issues.
- Coal: $48-$83; Abundant supply, but potential greenhouse gas and emission issues.
- Large hydro: $43-$62; B.C. has large rivers to dam but there are land-use, fish and wildlife impacts.
- Run-of-river small hydro: $47-$88; Steep terrain good for small hydro development
- Wind: $45-$198; Sites include ridge-based and offshore.
- Geothermal: $44-$60; Potential at a limited number of B.C. sites for geothermal steam generators.
- Biomass $56-$87; Steam generators powered by wood residue or municipal garbage.
- Custom cogeneration: $63-$87; Limited to industrial and large commercial applications.
Source: BC Hydro
A LOT LESS AFFORDABLE
% of household income taken up by home ownership costs (for 2005 Q4):
Average two-storey home
Vancouver 64.2%
Toronto 50.1%
Montreal 43.2%
Ottawa 38.6%
Calgary 37.6%
Source: RBC Financial
© The Vancouver Sun 2006
Hydro thinks coal as power runs short
Scott Simpson
with files from Times Colonist staff, CanWest News Service
Victoria Times Colonist
Published: Thursday, March 30, 2006
Province becoming increasingly vulnerable to electricity shortages
VANCOUVER -- B.C. Hydro threw open the doors Wednesday to public debate about a radical reshaping of the province's electricity mix by acknowledging that a coal-fired generation plant could be on the horizon.
Hydro chief executive officer Bob Elton said the Crown corporation is "neutral" on the types of energy projects it will accept as part of its effort to restore B.C.'s independence from imported sources of electricity.
Elton said B.C. could be importing as much as 45 per cent of its electricity from spot-trading markets in Alberta and the U.S. Pacific Northwest within 20 years -- leaving the province's residents and industries increasingly vulnerable to price volatility and supply risk.
Elton's comments came as Hydro released its Integrated Energy Plan, a 300-page document detailing Hydro's 20-year plan for moving B.C. back to a position of independence from imports.
The document shows that B.C. has been in an electricity deficit position for five years and projects that deficit to increase as the province grows -- unless strong measures are taken to avert it.
"In a competitive, ever-changing global economy where energy will become more expensive and scarce, electricity security is really about helping to ensure future generations enjoy our current standard of living," says a background document accompanying the plan.
In a teleconference, Elton said B.C. needs to act now to turn the situation around -- and said it's essential for the province's residents to awaken to the challenges of securing a reliable electricity supply.
Hydro is proposing three distinct strategies.
One is stepped-up conservation measures. A second is buying more power from independent producers. A third is financing upgrades to Hydro's existing facilities.
"What our plan does is ask British Columbians to look at the challenges that face us, and the choices we have that are fundamental to closing this gap so that we can preserve our energy future and keep us all secure for the future," Elton said.
The most controversial part of the plan will be the addition of new facilities that will generate huge amounts of electricity and ensure that Hydro has a stable supply in the event of any spikes in demand.
Those projects could include thermal generating plants fired by natural gas or coal.
The B.C. Sustainable Energy Association noted in a news release that a recent poll shows 74 per cent of B.C. residents oppose coal-fired generation.
Elton acknowledged that virtually any large scale plant -- even a major hydroelectric facility -- will attract controversy.
But he said B.C. needs to start talking now about those possibilities because of the lengthy lead time -- as much as 10 years -- to bring them into operation.
An open call for new power generation is already underway and at least two coal-fired power plants are among the proposals from private-sector bidders.
A proposed Site C hydroelectric dam -- the last potential hydro megaproject in the province -- is only in the study phase but is already drawing criticism from Peace River valley residents and environmental groups.
Vancouver Island Powerline workers
toil amidst high-voltage lines in James Bay on Wednesday.
B.C. Hydro warns electrical capacity will have to be
increased to keep pace with growing demand.
Photograph by : Darren Stone, Times Colonist
Meanwhile, Vancouver Island still needs a new electricity link. Existing lines bringing power from the mainland are getting old and need to be replaced. At the same time, demand for power is increasing.
A new transmission line is the Island's sole alternative since B.C. Hydro cancelled its Duke Point power plant project last June amid a barrage of questions about the need, cost and design of the plant. Hydro said it would turn instead to conservation measures and upgrading of power lines to maintain a reliable electricity supply.
B.C. Transmission Corp. is proposing a $245-million power line connection that has attracted opposition from Delta and Gulf Islands.
Sea Breeze Power Corp. had proposed a cable between Vancouver and the Island, but on March 1 withdrew its application before the B.C. Utilities Commission. Another Sea Breeze cable plan would see a cable cross Juan de Fuca Strait to link power grids on Vancouver Island and Washington state. National Energy Board hearings into that proposal are to begin May 1 at the Royal Canadian Legion Pro Patria Branch.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2006
Hydro - Planning needed now to prevent electrical shortfall
By Wendy McLellan
The Province
30-Mar-2006
Electricity demand in B.C. keeps growing. In 20 years, the province may be short by as much power as it takes to supply 2.5 million new homes, B.C. Hydro said yesterday.
"With demand on the rise, we need to be planning now to ensure that we preserve the natural competitive advantage that reliable electricity has provided to British Columbians for generations," said Bob Elton, B.C. Hydro's president and CEO.
Hydro filed its 2006 Integrated Electricity Plan with the B.C. Utilities Commission yesterday, outlining options that could fill the forecasted supply gap, estimated at 25 to 45 per cent of electricity demand.
Elton said the province has been an annual net importer of electricity for the past five years and demand will only increase with B.C.'s economic prosperity, population and electricity-consuming new devices.
"The IEP asks British Columbians to look at the challenges that face us," he said.
"The debate about our resource options is important -- even though this is a long-term issue, and the discussion has to begin n ow.p
Power-conservation initiatives, such as Power Smart, may reduce electricity demand by one third, but Hydro will still need to add power-generating capacity to existing facilities, build new facilities, buy more from independent power producers or rely on potentially costly imported electricity to meet the province's forecasted needs, he said.
Some options for power generation include natural-gas or coal-fired plants, biomass, geothermal, wind and small run-of-river hydro projects. Elton said public resistance to large-scale power projects, such as a new dam, is one reason to begin di scussionsearly.p
Vancouver energy lawyer David Austin said Hydro's IEP is just a menu of options rather than a sound plan to ensure the province has a reliable and cost-effective electricity supply in the future.
"What we basically have is a shopping list with prices which are not correct," said Austin, who is also a lobbyist for independent power producers. "The prices are not accurate because they don't take into account the changing market conditions."
He said Hydro also doesn't explain why B.C. is facing such a huge power shortage. "We shouldn't be having challenges -- we're energy rich," Austin said.
"B.C. Hydro got enamored with exporting and they neglected to invest in our long-term electricity requirements."
n B.C. Hydro did not file a rate- increase application with its 2006 electricity plan, but a recent request to the BCUC suggests higher electricity bills are on the way.
The utility has asked the commission to declare its electricity rates as interim effective April, leaving consumers' rights advocates worried B.C. residents will face large retroactive hydro bills in the fall after the BCUC determines the new rates.
"The only reason for the application is to make a retroactive rate increase later," said Jim Quail, staff lawyer with the B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centre.
"And from the various rumours, we expect a substantial increase."
Report Revives Controversial Canadian Dam Plan
Story by Allan Dowd
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
CANADA: March 31, 2006
VANCOUVER, British Columbia - A proposal to flood parts of Canada's Peace River valley is one idea to consider in a bid to meet growing electricity demand in British Columbia, BC Hydro said in a report Wednesday.
But the provincially owned utility will remain neutral as the government debates the controversial Site C dam project in northeastern British Columbia, and it stressed that more financial analysis was needed.
"One of the questions the government will address is what do they think of Site C. But it isn't Site C by itself. It's Site C compared with alternatives," chief executive Bob Elton told reporters.
"There are always alternatives," he said.
BC Hydro, which now serves about 1.7 million residential and commercial customers in Canada's westernmost province, warned in a report on future energy demand that British Columbia has been a net importer for the past five years, even with its large hydro-electric system.
The gap between demand for electricity and BC Hydro's ability to generate power using its existing facilities and purchase contracts will grow by between 25 percent and 45 percent over the next 20 years, the utility said.
The utility said it was looking at increased conservation efforts, adding capacity at its existing hydro-electric facilities, and purchases from independent power producers -- including new facilities.
A plan to add two generators to its existing Revelstoke plant on the Columbia River will add 500 megawatts of capacity, it said.
The utility now has a generating capacity of over 11,000 megawatts, which is about 85 percent of the total electricity produced in the province, it said in the report.
The report to regulators on long-term energy demand had been scheduled for release in December, but it was delayed at the last minute, reportedly over government concerns that the analysis of Site C was inadequate.
The 900-megawatt facility was first proposed in the 1970s, but is strongly opposed by environmentalists and aboriginal groups in the area who say it would flood hunting and fishing territories.
BC Hydro said its initial analysis put the capital cost at between C$2.3 billion (US$2 billion) and C$3.2 billion, but it cautioned the cost in "as-spent dollars would be significantly higher."
"Based on a range of initial estimates of the capital costs of the Site C project, the analysis suggest that Site C is within the range of costs of other resource options," it said in the report.
(US$1=$1.17 Canadian)
Critics urge Hydro to rethink plan
Andrew A. Duffy
Times Colonist
Friday, March 31, 2006
B.C. Hydro's Integrated Electricity Plan, released Wednesday, is getting mixed reviews from watchdog groups and stakeholders on Vancouver Island.
The plan, which detailed the province's growing dependence on importing power and the three-pronged attack Hydro proposes to fill the emerging energy gap, was lauded for its emphasis on conservation but slammed for the suggestion coal and natural gas could fire future generation projects.
"The Sustainable Energy Association is not supportive of coal-fired electricity nor of natural gas-fired electricity for the simple reason that the cost of natural gas continues to climb, making it uneconomic and 'clean coal' is really just an advertising slogan not a proven technology at this point," said Peter Ronald, co-ordinator for B.C. Sustainable Energy Association, who said there's no reason for B.C. to bother with either fossil-fuel.
"B.C. is blessed with huge, clean energy resources," he said. "We've conducted a study which indicates we can produce more than our total energy demand from renewable sources over 30 years if we equip ourselves for the challenge."
In the plan, Hydro points out the province has been a net importer of energy for the last five years and projects that in 20 years, as demand grows, the province will need to import between 25-45 per cent of its power. That's enough to power between 1.4-2.5 million new homes.
To bridge that power gap, Hydro has tabled a three-level plan which would emphasize conserving power, buying more from independent power producers and investing in heritage assets as well as building new generation.
"I'm pleased to see there is honest realism going on at Hydro, a recognition that B.C. does have a deficit of electricity," said Paul Manson, president of Sea Breeze Power Corp. which has proposed two submarine cable routes to bring electricity to Vancouver Island and has a permit to build wind generation in the North Island region.
"Where I would perhaps digress from the concerns expressed that the electricity deficit could grow by up to 45 per cent over 20 years is that B.C. is truly a bread basket of renewable energy potential," he said. "All it takes to harness that is to marry wind energy with the storage capabilities of B.C.'s vast reservoir system."
Manson admits Sea Breeze's wind energy project has "gone sideways" in the last year and a half, essentially because Sea Breeze felt Hydro didn't have a sincere appetite for renewable energy production. He hopes that will change.
"I see this as an opportunity for B.C. and I'm glad to see they recognize solutions have to be found," he said, with a nod to Hydro's plan to purchase more power from independent power producers.
Ronald said his group was pleased to see conservation at the top of Hydro's list.
"In the short-term conservation is by far the cheapest way to make our energy go further, it's absolutely essential," he said.
"Energy conservation is the cheapest way to meet most of our new demand. For the rest, government should follow Ontario's recent example and implement a Standard Offer Contract to kick-start a renewable energy industry in B.C.," added Guy Dauncey, BCSEA president.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2006
Editorial
Times Colonist
Friday, March 31, 2006
The future of British Columbia's electricity supply is a hot topic once again, thanks to the release of B.C. Hydro's Integrated Energy Plan, a 300-page document that outlines how B.C. could become independent from imported power once again.
B.C. has been in an electrical deficit for five years, meaning that we are importing more that we are exporting. Given the number of Interior valleys that have been flooded to bring power to the people in the southwestern corner of B.C., that's a shocking fact.
The Interior has just one spot left for another large-scale hydro dam -- the so-called Site C in the Peace River district. Beyond that, Hydro will need to look at different ways of creating electricity, and none of them will be without controversy.
We're all to blame for our electrical crunch, and it's because of our love for modern technology. Computers, monitors and printers have replaced typewriters over the past generation, and we leave them all on while we're at lunch. Not that long ago we were satisfied with a television set, but now we add a DVD player and an Xbox. And so on.
When we hear that the demand for power is growing faster than our population, we may wonder where all that electricity is going. We don't have to look all that far to find out.
B.C. Hydro says one option for increasing our power supply is a coal-fired generation plant, an idea that is sure to raise environmental concerns. But no matter which option we choose -- coal, water, wind or whatever -- the environment will suffer.
Burning coal pollutes the air. A dam destroys a river, and forces wildlife to seek new habitat. Windmills are ugly, and tend to kill birds.
What's left? We could buy more power from elsewhere, but that just moves the environmental damage to another jurisdiction. And given the rising demand for electricity across the continent, it's hardly a way to make the price or the supply stable.
The best solution remains the one that's cheapest. If we can reduce our use of electricity, we'll save money and delay the need for new sources.
Conservation is the simplest choice, but has proven to be a hard sell so far.
So here's the question: How can Hydro help British Columbians see the light?
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2006
We have to stop dithering about looming power shortage
Editorial
Vancouver Sun
01-Apr-2006
So we're running out of electricity. What else is new?
The much-delayed release of BC Hydro's 2006 Integrated Electricity Plan tells an old story: There's a crunch coming in British Columbia over the next few years due to the fact that we added no significant new generating capacity in a generation.
In 10 years, the B.C. advantage of cheap and stable electricity will be a distant memory if we don't act now to ensure it continues.
In the report, Hydro sagely tells us that what is at stake now is not just the risk of falling short, of brownouts during supper time on cold winter nights, and secure supplies for industry. What's at stake is the ability to ensure that future generations can enjoy our standard of living.
It's a message worth heeding. What we're not sure of, however, is whether either BC Hydro or the provincial government is really listening.
In 1995, Hydro produced a forecast that predicted a doubling in demand over 20 years. Two years ago, under the new structure set up by the Liberal government, the utility produced an Integrated Electricity Plan that had much the same message.
The result two years later is that the projected gap between supply and demand is getting wider and it's not clear that we are any closer to building significant new capacity.
It would not be fair to suggest that nothing is being done, only that nothing useful is being accomplished.
In the past two years we have seen the shameful and expensive collapse of the Duke Point generating project on Vancouver Island at a cost of $120 million up front and untold millions more in future contracts as potential private sector partners build in larger cushions to protect themselves from similar mismanagement when they are bidding on BC Hydro projects.
Hydro managers have not been helped by the lack of determination on the part of Victoria to deal with this very real pending shortfall.
Energy Minister Richard Neufeld seems concerned that the public does not understand that we are already net importers of electricity in some years, the fact that lends urgency to the need to invest in new generating facilities.
But it not clear that he has been able to persuade his cabinet colleagues of the need to get started now on projects that because of their size will take years to develop.
Yes, the public has to understand that the legacy of secure, cheap power left by W.A.C. Bennett has all but been used up in terms of its ability to serve our growing province.
But unless BC Hydro can persuade potential private sector partners that it is really interested and able to do business, unless the government, which controls BC Hydro, is prepared to provide the leadership needed to get controversial projects such as Site C on the Peace River on track, no real progress is going to be made.
Sure, the demand forecasts are just that: Forecasts. We may not need as much power in future years. We may need more.
Either way, we are at capacity now and the one thing we know for sure is that every year we dither our prospects of maintaining the B.C. electricity advantage get that much dimmer.
Posted by Arthur Caldicott on 31 Mar 2006