Here is an oldie, but a goodie of a post, from May of last year. Because of the relevance of these projects to the Site C dam issue, I urge you to go back and read this, and click on all the links. I will have an updated version shortly.
12 thoughts on “The Province of BC is criss-crossed with Run of the River projects”
Interesting. So without raising my taxes, flooding some land, paying thru the nose every month, I guess we have to keep the population at zero growth, keep power demand at zero growth, and what else?
Salvatore Bennedetto, when you find a way to expand the planet to allow continued endless growth of human demand, do let us know……last I looked there were already too many people on this orb…perhaps you’re one of them….
A while ago I came across this kakay-adventure page on the Stave River; the last couple of pics include an RoR they found on the river’s lower reaches, not sure who’s company it is. I’m from a Hydro family and that’s not a “small” project to my eyes; the Alouette and Wahleach Powerhouses are in the same size range and while I don’t know the megawattage on this one it’s definitely way more than Alouette:
“minimal damage to the environment” this isn’t. Probably also one of those many RoRs that didn’t meet environmental requirements, and so far out of the public eye as to get built without anyone noticing (the upper Stave is one of the most remote locations in the Lower Mainland and has no road access).
er, that was supposed to be “kayak-adventure”……
There are now over 100 IPPs in BC that BC Hydro has signed contracts with, or is considering. Run-of-river is the most common, with some wind and other projects. 61 IPPs are now in operation.
I learned that BC Hydro buys both firm (reliable) and non-firm energy from each IPP. BCH pays the premium price for the firm, and a lower rate for the non-firm.
What BCH will try to do is export enough non-firm energy at a good price, in order to offset the costs of buying all the expensive firm energy from IPPs.
This is a problem, since the export price is now relatively low. The IPPs are guaranteed their contract price for the power they sell to BCH, regardless of whether BCH can export it at a profit.
With Site C, Waneta, Mica upgrades, BCH is obviously able to increase its own capacity significantly, to meet future demand in BC. So why does it need all that expensive, unreliable IPP power?
The Govt has mandated BCH to have a surplus of BC energy, even in a low water year. Which means a huge surplus in a normal or high water year.
Govt has also prohibited BCH from building new projects (except Site C).
There will likely be more changes in the BC Clean Energy Act, due to come out in June.
Sorry skookay, rhetorical question that asks you for your sage solution.
There’s a significant report from Peace River territory in the April 22 edition of Northeast News. It concerns rail service, but gives a startling image of just how much the current BC government neglects that region.
Not just the farmers but also local government officials aren’t pleased with the desperate quality of CN rail service being offered … and they, with Regional District and Alberta Peace Region have submitted their concerns about CN to the Rail Service Review Panel.
Northeast News (published in Dawson Creek and Fort St John) appears to be a solidly independent newspaper. And they’ve sternly but quietly said they’re being neglected, ignored, and abused by current practices. They’re fed up and not prepared to take it anymore.
They do not sound like supporters of Site C. Almost as if nobody had told them yet about Gordo’s big idea. The story is worth a read:
FARMERS, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CALL FOR BETTER RAIL SERVICE IN THE PEACE
On Page 12.
Rhetorical questions by nature, by definition, are word-traps, asking for a pre-determined answer. Somewhat like pollsters, and very much part of the craft of the propagandist and the spin doctor. And rhaetors, yes, the guys who invented the technique; but Demosthenes was a hateful cad, a poseur, an inveigler, a man of suspect morals and jealous morals. Hardly a recommendation for debates leading to the truth, his was the art of crafting words for political ends. Generally very questionable ones, and ultimately many that were just downright dead-ends. When the time came, he quailed before Alexander, whom he had branded a brat and a tyrant; only to speak up loudly again about him once he’d gone off to conquer other places. His reputation as a speaker and orator lasts to this day, though his actual words and purpose are generally forgotten; Alexander’s name and deeds are not.
Not that Gordon Campbell is an Alexander, except in the sweaty crevices of his own mind.
Oops, gotta look over my posts before posting them; small quibble:
” jealous morals” => “jealous motives”
it was very late
Informative segue skooky, but still does not outline your solutions, other than spelling mistakes.
Salvatore Bennedetto, asking non sequiturs is becoming something of your trademark. A typo is not a spelling mistake, it’s a typo. But you, you’re just pandering nonsense and expecting replies, and when you don’t get them, spout more nonsense……what does life at the PAB pay anyway?
I still dont read any solutions in your tripe. What is your solution skooky, or are you just going to keep trying to beat me up? SOLUTION as you see it please.
Comments are closed.