By Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun, February 13, 2010
VICTORIA - It was barely a passing reference in the throne speech. But it may well herald a move by the B.C. Liberal government to boost public power generation in a multibillion-dollar way.
"Government will report on the Site C review this spring," it said, inviting renewed speculation about the long-standing proposal to erect a 900-megawatt hydroelectric dam at a spot seven kilometres southwest of Fort St. John on the Peace River.
That was all the speech said. But Energy Minister Blair Lekstrom, whose Peace River South riding borders on the site, filled in some of the blanks in a recent interview.
First, a decision on the fate of Site C is imminent. "I expect a decision will be made by spring," he told me during a recent interview on Voice of B.C. on Shaw TV. "It is time for government to make a determination to either build it or not build it."
Second, he personally supports the project.
"For 20 years, I've said that I think it is a good, clean way to produce electricity. It's on a river that already has two dams. But I'm going to base my decision -- I'll be one voice on that, along with my cabinet colleagues -- on the information we've gathered."
Third, it would be BC Hydro all the way. "Oh, very much. It would be a heritage asset ... I think Hydro is one of the finest Crown corporations in North America, so nothing has turned us against BC Hydro."
Fourth, the project won't happen without a deal with first nations. "I think you have to [include them]," he told me, acknowledging what government legal experts have insisted. He also raised the likelihood of a "Peace Valley Trust," to share financial benefits with other communities in the region.
Fifth, any decision would only take the project to the next phase. "If a determination is to move ahead, there's a great deal of work that has to go on yet."
For there's the key thing to keep in mind about Site C. It is a slow-motion exercise, if ever there was one. The site's potential for hydroelectric development was originally identified more than 60 years ago, along with (you guessed it) sites A, B, D and E.
It became the subject of active planning only in the 1970s, after construction of two other dams on the Peace and the sites associated with the other letters of the alphabet were scrubbed for technical reasons.
Planning was stepped up in the 1980s. However, the project was declared "dead" in the 1990s, a victim of cost considerations, diminished need for electricity, and concerns about the proposed flooding of several thousand hectares of agricultural land.
After the B.C. Liberals were elected, Hydro was prodded to revisit the option. The economics had shifted. Water power was now regarded as "green" because it's relatively free of emissions. Maybe the province could turn a profit by selling the power outside its borders.
The process of bringing Site C back from the dead began almost six years ago, starting with a feasibility study. Released at the end of 2007, it was mostly favourable: "No project characteristics have been identified that would render Site C unfeasible. It would deliver firm, dependable electricity with a high degree of flexibility to meet peak periods of demand."
Plus the reliable hydro power would backstop the development of power from wind and other intermittent sources. The project would be "immune" to the rising cost of natural gas. There would be "minimal greenhouse gas emissions" once the dam was operational. And water power is "a renewable resource."
That report cleared the way for two years of consultations, the subject of a further report now being digested by Lekstrom and his colleagues. Most likely, it recommends that the government move to the next stage, formal planning and evaluation of the project, including environmental assessment.
Figure another two years at minimum. Presuming approval (including the essential nod from first nations), the Liberals might be in a position to green-light construction before the end of the current term.
Then allow for another seven years, meaning the big dam would not likely be operational before the end of the current decade.
Cost? Hydro pegged it at $5 billion to $7 billion two years ago. But at this distance from any potential completion date, it could just as easily be $8 billion.
None of which addresses any of the lingering controversies over the project, from the loss of the agricultural land to expectations that it would be built for the export market.
But I expect the Liberals to brush aside those concerns at this stage, knowing that they will be addressed during the environmental assessment, review by the utilities commission and negotiations with first nations.
Besides, Site C could prove to be more of a tough call for the Opposition than for the government.
Hard for New Democrats to support the flooding of all that
Read Vaughn Palmer's blog at vancouversun.com/PALMER
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
