Finally: BC Legislature debates coal-fired generation
"My focus today is the first-ever approvals for coal-fired generation in British Columbia. In an era of climate change, when everyone else in the world is looking for solutions to global warming, why is it that the knuckle-draggers in the B.C. Liberal Party are promoting coal-fired generation? Will you go and talk to the people in the Similkameen Valley? Will you go and talk to people in Princeton and say to them that their health is not a consequence and that the B.C. Liberal energy policy takes priority? Is that your plan?"
Debates of the Legislative Assembly
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Afternoon Sitting
Volume 13 Number 1
B.C. HYDRO CONTRACTS WITH
COAL-FIRED PLANTS
J. Horgan: It's nice to be here, and it's nice to be here to ask a question of the Minister of Energy. I've got a number of them to go, but let's start with this one.
This summer B.C. Hydro signed a number of overpriced contracts with independent power producers, two of which deal with burning coal to generate electricity in British Columbia for the first time. My question is to the Minister of Energy: why — when other jurisdictions are closing coal plants, and with all of the green, clean and renewable energy sources available to us — would you and this government be supporting coal-fired technology?
Hon. R. Neufeld: Actually, during the '90s there was a government in place that did not look forward to British Columbia's needs for electrical generation. When I assumed the post of Minister of Energy and Mines it became pretty evident to me that there was no plan in place to actually provide electricity in British Columbia, and we had to embark on some processes to get electricity.
We put out the 2002 energy plan that actually included…. I'm sure the member has read it from cover to cover. I would hope he has read it. It, in fact, talked about coal-fired power for the province, to use the best available technology.
B.C. Hydro has made a call. There are two coal projects, but besides that there are 36 other projects that are clean and green in British Columbia.
Those two projects will have to go through a very rigorous environmental assessment process that we believe in on this side of the House. Contrary to, maybe, what they believe on the other side of the House, we believe it's important for that to go through that process and meet the very stringent rules that the Ministry of Environment has in place.
Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.
J. Horgan: I do have a supplemental, and I'm delighted to engage with the minister on these important issues. I'm always delighted to go back to the 1990s. I know the minister starts there every morning and looks at all the positive things that happened there, like the Keenleyside power plant and the return of the downstream benefits, and I could go on.
My focus today is the first-ever approvals for coal-fired generation in British Columbia. In an era of climate change, when everyone else in the world is looking for solutions to global warming, why is it that the knuckle-draggers in the B.C. Liberal Party are promoting coal-fired generation? Will you go and talk to the people in the Similkameen Valley? Will you go and talk to people in Princeton and say to them that their health is not a consequence and that the B.C. Liberal energy policy takes priority? Is that your plan?
Hon. R. Neufeld: I want to remind the member that the public is appalled to find out that we're actually net importers of electricity in British Columbia. That happened while we had an NDP government who didn't care. There were some projects that came on stream, but not enough to look after what we need well into the future. We want to have safe, secure electricity generated within the borders of the province, and self-sufficiency is one thing we're going to do.
But it's interesting that this member talks about coal the way he does now. Environmental protection guidelines from 1996: all new thermal power generation projects, as well as existing facilities that are undergoing significant modifications, are required to install controlled technologies that will achieve emission directives based on best available control technology. That's from the NDP. That's from Anne Edwards, who actually approved of coal-fired generation, and from Joy MacPhail, who said she didn't have any problem with coal-fired generation.
Here we are with coal-fired generation, including biomass. Wood waste is already being burned. Now we hear that they just woke up to the fact that we are short of electricity and that we need to actually look forward to what we're going to do for electricity.
COAL-FIRED PLANTS AND
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
S. Simpson: It is good to be back.
Environment Canada's inventory of provincial greenhouse gas emissions for 1990 through 2004 shows where our province has stumbled badly in the last few years. It shows emissions for British Columbia running at about a 30-percent increase over that time. By comparison, Quebec was at 6 percent.
Probably the most disturbing number here, though, is that in 2004, the last year this study looked at, British Columbia had the second-worst emissions of any province in the country in terms of increase of rate of emissions.
The question that I have for the government is: how does the government respond to this? What we know is the government responds to what is a very disturbing situation by accelerating global warming, by choosing the worst-possible power source at this time, which is coal. My question is to the Minister of Environment. Can the minister explain how this decision by his government can be justified at a time when British Columbians are looking for action to decrease our greenhouse gas emissions, not support radical increases?
Hon. B. Penner: As my colleague the Minister of Energy pointed out, it wasn't just financial deficits that the previous government left this province and that doubled the debt in ten years. It left us with an electricity deficit.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
Hon. B. Penner: They left us, unfortunately, with an electricity deficit. While they were busy building fossil-fuel power plants in places like Pakistan that cost us millions of dollars — we lost money on that — and didn't provide a single kilowatt of electricity for people here in British Columbia, they were leaving us more and more dependant on imported electricity.
Our government has been active. We've supported a variety of green power projects which those members actively oppose. In fact, the Environment critic has been actively opposing the Ashlu River small hydro project despite the support of the Squamish First Nation and despite approvals from all environmental agencies, including the federal government and the Canadian environmental assessment process.
The member for Nelson-Creston, the former Energy critic and the person who said the NDP has no idea how to handle climate change — and he is right — has been actively opposing another small hydro project at Cascade Falls.
We have to build more electricity, and we have to do it in an environmentally responsible way. That's why we tightened the standards just last year after I became minister, the second time our government has done that in terms of coal-fired generation. It will be subject to a comprehensive environmental assessment process review, and we look forward to those results.
Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.
S. Simpson: Well, this government and this minister certainly have something in common with the federal minister. They are the only two Environment Ministers in the country who campaign in favour of emissions instead of against them. Clearly, this minister knows nothing about global warming, but maybe he can do some simple math. With 1,000 homes in British Columbia powered by hydroelectric power and natural gas, 325 tonnes of emissions annually. The same 1,000 homes in Alberta powered by coal, 8,800 tonnes of emissions. That's what you're campaigning in favour of, Mr. Minister.
These two plants are going to produce 1.7 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. That will double the amount of emissions in our energy sector, the equivalent of putting 300,000 new cars on the road for the next ten years.
My question to the minister is this: how can this minister expect to have any credibility at all on global warming when he is condoning these types of radical greenhouse gas–emission increases rather than supporting the environment and the interests of British Columbians, who want action to reduce our emissions, not increase them by almost two million tonnes a year?
Hon. B. Penner: We can certainly see why the NDP's former Energy critic, the member for Nelson-Creston, says the NDP has no legitimacy on climate change or global warming, because the report that the member referenced in his first answer about a 30-percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions for British Columbia…. Some 24 percent of that occurred while the NDP was in office.
That was in a time when our economy was on its back, thanks to their policies that doubled our debt. If the member opposite is so concerned about greenhouse gas emissions, why does his party continue to actively oppose green power projects like the Ashlu River project and the Cascade hydro project — which, by the way, would displace 77,000 tons of CO2 emissions? Think about that. Make yourselves consistent.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members, members. Listen to the questions; listen to the answer.
Hon. B. Penner: Perhaps it's time they took the advice from the member for Nelson-Creston and had a conversation with the Green Party so they could get ideas of their own.
Interjection.
Mr. Speaker: Member, member.
H. Lali: If the minister is looking for inconsistencies, he might start looking in the mirror first. We know that the B.C. Liberal Party has received over $700,000 dollars in donations from the coal industry. We also know that in 2005 the B.C. Liberals brought in new regulations that now allow coal-fired plants to emit 70 times more nitrogen oxide, 260 times more sulphur dioxide and seven times more particulate matter than Sumas 2 did.
We further know that on May 10, 2000, the Minister of Environment then said, regarding Sumas 2: "Well, I just can't see how you can pump thousands of pounds of particulate matter, including toxic chemicals, into our air without leaving a serious impact on our already dubious air quality in the Fraser Valley… I can't, for the life of me, understand why the provincial Ministry of Environment has remained on the sidelines here and is taking a neutral position."
My question is to the invisible minister from Chilliwack. I'd like to ask…. I can't, for the life of me, understand why the provincial Minister of Environment has remained on the sidelines here and is taking a neutral position. Will the minister please explain the blatant hypocrisy of his position when it comes to the coal-fired project in Princeton?
Hon. B. Penner: The member is quite right. The previous NDP government did take no action on the SE2 project. That was a project, as you know, that would have provided no electricity for British Columbians, would not have been contingent or required to comply with our conditions. We would not be able to impose conditions on that project. Again, it would not supply any benefits to British Columbians.
Now, I happen to have a letter from the member for Yale-Lillooet, dated January 26, 2006, and it appears he's changed his position a bit with respect to this project, because what he asked me in January is quite a bit different than what I'm hearing today about an apparent outright opposition to this project. What he asked me in January was that this project be allowed to go through an environmental assessment process review. The member has been successful. That's exactly what's going to happen.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. The member has a supplemental.
H. Lali: I'd like to read another quote here. "Few things are as important as…
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
H. Lali: …ensuring the safety of the very air we breathe." This is from the MLA for Bulkley Valley–Stikine. This Liberal government would never propose a coal-fired power plant for the lower mainland, but they seem to believe that they can get away with forcing one against the will of the people of the Similkameen Valley.
My question is to the Minister of Energy or to the Minister of Environment: do either of these hon. ministers care enough about the lives of people that they are about to mess up, and also, would they have the guts enough to commit today that they will come to the beautiful Similkameen Valley and meet with my constituents in an open public forum and try to sell their snake oil there? I'll even volunteer to set up the meeting for them.
Hon. B. Penner: It's not the first time, but we're way ahead of the member. I've already met with the mayor from Princeton as well as members of the public from the Similkameen Valley.
As the member requested in his letter of earlier this year, there will be a comprehensive environmental assessment review of the Compliance Energy proposal. The member should know — I hope he knows — that that agency operates under its own statute. After all, it was created by the NDP government, so I would hope they have some confidence in how it operates and wouldn't appreciate interference in that process.
However, at the end of the day that process allows for public participation. I would encourage all people who have an interest in the issue to get actively engaged. That's what the environmental review process is for, and that agency will do a comprehensive and thorough analysis of the social, economic and environmental consequences or benefits of any proposal. I look forward to that report.
http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th2nd/H61122p.htm
You can also watch the show on video. This segment begins at 14:50
http://bcleg-ds1.insinc.com/ibc/mp/md/play/f/8/1353/200611221345wv150en.asx?s=00:14:50