Critics Say Pipeline May Punish Consumersby Charlie Smith Georgia
Straight December 13-19, 2001B.C. Hydro has withdrawn an application
to build a $300-million natural-gas-fired power plant in Port Alberni.
However, the Crown corporation still intends to build a controversial
$260-million Georgia Strait Crossing (GSX) natural-gas pipeline to Vancouver
Island, even though the Port Alberni power plant was listed in an application
to the National Energy Board as a justification for the GSX project. Critics
have claimed that the GSX project could lead to higher electricity prices
across the province by increasing consumers' reliance on natural gas, which
has experienced astonishing price volatility. Last month, Port Alberni
council refused to rezone the land where B.C. Hydro and its joint venture
partner, Calpine Canada Power Holdings Ltd., wanted to put the power plant.
On November 27, B.C. Hydro sent a letter to the provincial Environmental
Assessment Office, alleging that the assessment process was "legally flawed".
On December 10, EAO project director Jan Hagen wrote a sharp response,
concluding with: "I shall be looking forward to hearing from you how BC Hydro
intends to pursue a gas-fired power generation project on Vancouver
Island." B.C. Hydro spokesperson Ted Olynyk told the Georgia Straight
that another location for the plant will be found because Crown corporation
officials want more power generated on Vancouver Island. "We are reviewing
sites from Lake Cowichan to Tahsis and Gold River, and we're in discussions
with community leaders in all of those towns in between to see if there is
a suitable site," Olynyk said. "The delay of the Port Alberni
generation project-which is now a Vancouver Island generation project-let's
say the delay in siting the new facility will have no effect on GSX. GSX is
still needed and it's still going ahead." The proposed pipeline would
carry northern B.C. natural gas from Sumas, Washington, across the northern
portion of the state and Georgia Strait to Cobble Hill on Vancouver Island.
In its application to the National Energy Board, the proponents say the
pipeline is necessary to bring natural gas to the Port Alberni plant and to a
new cogeneration plant in Campbell River. The project is opposed by many
residents of Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands, environmental and Native
groups, and a public-interest advocacy group representing seniors and
low-income B.C. residents. They argue that B.C. Hydro should pursue other
options, including developing more renewable sources of energy and upgrading
the existing cables that bring 80 percent of Vancouver Island's electricity
supply from the Lower Mainland. Olynyk said that just 20 percent of the
electricity used on the island is actually generated there, with the rest
transmitted from the Lower Mainland. B.C. Hydro has claimed that building the
GSX pipeline and a new power plant is more economical than repairing or
replacing existing cables. Arthur Caldicott, a resident of Cobble Hill,
told the Straight that Centra Gas already has a renewable contract to deliver
80 percent of the natural gas on a "firm basis" to the Campbell River
cogeneration plant. He claimed that the remaining gas could be obtained on a
discretionary basis when consumption falls during summer or when island pulp
mills shut down. "B.C. Hydro says we need this pipeline because we're going
to run out of power on Vancouver Island," Caldicott said. "We've done our own
assessment of that, and we don't believe it. So that needs to be examined in
a lot more detail." In a December 3 application for intervenor status
at the National Energy Board, lawyer Michael Doherty-who works for the
British Columbia Public Interest Advocacy Centre-claimed that B.C. Hydro's
decision to substitute a natural-gas pipeline for repairs to the transmission
line would increase consumers' vulnerability to fluctuating energy
prices. B.C. Hydro and the U.S.-based Williams Gas Pipeline Company
are joint-venture partners on the GSX project, which is expected to be
in service by 2004. Olynyk said the completion date has been delayed by a
year because B.C. Hydro was too optimistic about the regulatory process.
The National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
are conducting a joint review, with a formal hearing scheduled to begin
next June. A former chair of the British Columbia Utilities
Commission, Marc Jaccard, told the Straight that Premier Gordon Campbell will
be unable to keep pre-election promises on energy if the pipeline isn't
justified beforehand in a broad public review involving a comparison with
other energy-supply options. Jaccard, who is with SFU's energy-materials
research group, said the proposed pipeline will have a "monumental" impact on
B.C. Hydro's future decision-making, forcing the Crown corporation to build
four or five natural-gas-powered plants on Vancouver Island during the next
decade to spread out the pipeline's capital cost over several
projects. "I've seen this so many times at the utilities commission,"
Jaccard said. "A utility comes in and says, 'Look, we built this pipeline.
It's all sunk costs now. We've got to amortize it.' " He said that the
proposed pipeline would bring enough natural gas to generate 600 to 800
megawatts of capacity on the island; the Port Alberni plant would have only
generated 265 megawatts. B.C. Hydro's integrated electricity plan, which was
released last year, mentioned a 640-megawatt natural-gas-fired B.C. Hydro
plant on Vancouver Island to be completed in 2007. Since then, B.C. Hydro
officials have refused to confirm if this larger plant is still part of their
plans. "A third plant may very well be in the offing," Olynyk said, "but
it's not something that I'm aware of that we're planning for at this
point." The BC Liberal Party's New Era campaign platform promised to
"promote clean and renewable alternative energy sources, like wind, thermal,
solar, tidal, biomass and fuel cell technologies". The New Era document also
promised to "restore an independent BC Utilities Commission, to re-regulate
B.C. Hydro's electricity rates". During the campaign, Campbell promised that
his party would allow more independent power projects and stop
economically unjustifiable megaprojects similar to fast
ferries. Jaccard claimed that Campbell won't be able to accomplish any of
this if the GSX pipeline proceeds, because the unused capacity of the project
will dictate future electricity-supply options. Jaccard described GSX as
"fast ferries II", noting that the last pipeline built to Vancouver Island
during the Socred era cost the government huge sums of money. Even if the
Liberal government announces early next year that it is placing B.C. Hydro
back under BCUC regulation, Jaccard said, this will be too late to have
any meaningful effect if the GSX project is already proceeding. "You
have to understand, once they build the pipeline, they're going to have to
build additional [Vancouver Island] generation," Jaccard said. "So when they
sit down and do an economic analysis of 'Do we do small hydro somewhere in
B.C. or a wood-waste project or more cogeneration?' all that analysis loses
once you've sunk money into a pipeline." He added that in B.C., these
alternatives to fossil-fuel generation could be done relatively
inexpensively. But he said that these projects would move down on B.C.
Hydro's priority list. "Environmentally, what that means is we end up going
down this fossil-fuel path which is complete counter to what the federal
government is hoping to do [under the Kyoto Protocol]," Jaccard said, "and
we're actually walking away from one of the cheaper areas where that could be
done." Olynyk said that B.C. Hydro has already identified possible
cogeneration sites at Crofton and Duke Point on Vancouver Island. "We're very
aggressive at looking at alternative energies, but the bottom line is we have
to make sure we keep the lights on," he said. Jaccard, however,
accused B.C. Hydro of "scare-mongering", saying there are less risky options.
"How do we know Vancouver Island isn't going into a recession right now?"
Jaccard asked. www.straight.com ---END---
|