BC Hydro - yikes!

[twobits]

I see the union flunkies support keeping BCH suckling the government teat instead of privatizing it and having it run like a real business.

Ratepayers would be much further ahead if the parasitic union weren't dictating that employees work inefficiently, too, causing even further increases in our Hydro bills. I, like Dreamon, have witnessed the work (cough) ethic (cough), and it's sickening.

Hydro management needs to read Fortis' playbook on how to reign in those "walk on water" linemen.

[rvrepairnut]

"twobits"][Rwede"]I see the union flunkies support keeping BCH suckling the government teat instead of privatizing it and having it run like a real business.

Ratepayers would be much further ahead if the parasitic union weren't dictating that employees work inefficiently, too, causing even further increases in our Hydro bills. I, like Dreamon, have witnessed the work (cough) ethic (cough), and it's sickening.[/quote]

Hydro management needs to read Fortis' playbook on how to reign in those "walk on water" linemen.[/quote]


NOW!!! aint that a true story if I ever read one.Linemen can make up to 300K per year!!!

[rvrepairnut]

I personally know a women that use to live in Vernon and worked for BC hydro in Vernon +actually quit her job with them out of boredum.In six months of being a personal secretary of one of the Vernon mangers she typed less than 6 letters and
all she did was take the ODD phone call and made coffee whenever he showed up.NOW multiply that abuse alone throughout BC and over the years and see how much that costs

[slootman]

I am unwilling to let this government off the hook for their mismanagement,and incompetence,in running our electrical utility into the ground.They need to be held accountable.Because of this governments bungling many struggling families now have just one more weight placed upon already limited incomes.The rate hike may not be a big deal to some people and probably they may not be effected or are able a to absorb the extra cost,but to others it is a big deal and a burden to struggling families.There are no reasons for this rate hike besides Liberal mismanagement.

Is it rates or management you're so upset about? Can't be the rates, because those have been some of the lowest in the country for years. And the upcoming increases just put them in line with competitors. Can't be management either, as they're the ones who gave you those ridiculously low rates in the first place.

So.....whats exactly the problem? Can you go wave your arms and jump up and down about Fortis so the rest of us can get a piece of those deep discounts you've been getting?

[LoneWolf_53]

@slootman 10/10

[maple leaf]

Is it rates or management you're so upset about? Can't be the rates, because those have been some of the lowest in the country for years. And the upcoming increases just put them in line with competitors. Can't be management either, as they're the ones who gave you those ridiculously low rates in the first place.

So.....whats exactly the problem? Can you go wave your arms and jump up and down about Fortis so the rest of us can get a piece of those deep discounts you've been getting?

If you really want to know,you need to go do some homework on BC Hydro.For a good start you should read everything by The economist Eric Anderson, http://commonsensecanadian.ca/runaway-h ... -minister/ was one of the first people to ring the alarm bells on run of the river independent power projects ,which the liberal government changed laws in order for BC hydro had to buy their power at 4+ times the rate BC hydro can produce it for. Just lately the Liberal government confirmed their mismanagement of BC hydro,in the following areas.

BY VAUGHN PALMER, VANCOUVER SUN NOVEMBER 30, 2013

Snip;
Missing from Energy Minister Bill Bennett's announcement this week on hefty rate increases at BC Hydro was any update on those controversial contracts with independent power producers.

Bennett confirmed much of what critics had been saying about B.C. Liberal mismanagement and interference in the giant utility: Stop siphoning dividends from Hydro, square up the accumulated billions in the deferral accounts and let the utilities commission regulate rates once again.

Then you should read everything on the subject printed at the Common sense Canadian site

http://commonsensecanadian.ca/runaway-h ... -minister/

Then there is lots of information out there, if you really want to know,what the problems are with BC hydro ,look it up.
There is only one reason for these rate hikes and it is this governments mismanagement and incompetence.
Or if you really don't want to know what this government has been up to with BC hydro,you can follow along with a few others on these forums and only listen to government sanctioned information,and stay ill informed.

[rvrepairnut]

YOUR HYDRO BILL EXPLAINED

I complained recently about my Hydro bill and here's the response I received :
Dear Customer,
Just a little note to let you know we understand your anger about the recent price hike, but it should be noted that you have no other option.
We are a big company and you will pay what we tell you. You have no choice.
We have the power; you need the power.
Too bad ... so sad.

Have a nice day and keep those monthly cheques coming!

Sincerely,

BC Hydro.

[maryjane48]

I complained recently about my Hydro bill and here's the response I received :
Dear Customer,
Just a little note to let you know we understand your anger about the recent price hike, but it should be noted that you have no other option.
We are a big company and you will pay what we tell you. You have no choice.
We have the power; you need the power.
Too bad ... so sad.

Have a nice day and keep those monthly cheques coming!

Sincerely,

BC Hydro.

nice try but we both know thats *meant as a joke/Jo*

[Rwede]

*off topic remark removed*/ferri

[rvrepairnut]

Rvnut"]

I complained recently about my Hydro bill and here's the response I received :
Dear Customer,
Just a little note to let you know we understand your anger about the recent price hike, but it should be noted that you have no other option.
We are a big company and you will pay what we tell you. You have no choice.
We have the power; you need the power.
Too bad ... so sad.

Have a nice day and keep those monthly cheques coming!

Sincerely,

BC Hydro.

nice try but we both know thats garbage[/quote]


Oh Vixen your just too smart for me to fool (lmaoau))

[Urbane]

We've been coasting for awhile and we've had some of the lowest rates in North America. We need to stop coasting and start building again:

Site C builds on B.C.'s hydroelectric legacy

By Brad Bennett, Vancouver Sun December 7, 2013

It was 45 years ago this fall that the W.A.C. Bennett Dam and G.M. Shrum Generating Station began producing electricity for British Columbians. It was a significant engineering achievement in 1968 and more than 3,000 people attended a public event in Hudson's Hope to watch my grandfather, premier W.A.C. Bennett, switch on the power at the facility.

The milestone event was the realization of a visionary "Two Rivers" policy to harness the hydroelectric potential of B.C.'s Peace and Columbia rivers. To accomplish this, BC Hydro was created a half-century ago, in 1962, to undertake some of the most ambitious hydroelectric construction projects in the world.

In the two decades that followed its creation, BC Hydro planned and built a series of hydroelectric dams and generating stations on the two rivers. The last large hydroelectric facility built in B.C. was the Revelstoke Dam, which was officially opened in 1985 by the B.C. government, led by my father, premier Bill Bennett. In 1980, the Peace Canyon Dam was the last facility completed on the Peace River.

The implementation of the Two Rivers policy was about more than generating electricity - it was about strategically building our province's economy. The B.C. government of the day understood that abundant, renewable and cost-effective electricity was the cornerstone of economic development. And it worked. B.C. quickly became recognized as an attractive place to invest and the economy grew alongside this hydroelectric development.

Today, these hydroelectric facilities are still providing power to British Columbians, decades after they were built and paid for. Combined, the Peace and Columbia facilities produce about 80 per cent of BC Hydro's total annual energy.

These historic investments have benefited generations of British Columbians - people and businesses - by providing affordable power and allowing us to avoid relying on coalfired or nuclear power like so many other jurisdictions in the world.

But, as impressive as B.C.'s hydroelectric heritage is, it will not be enough to meet the long-term electricity needs of our province, even with BC Hydro's aggressive conservation targets. Our electricity needs are forecast to increase by approximately 40 per cent in the next 20 years, and choices need to be made today about how to best meet this growing demand.

That's why BC Hydro is proposing to build the Site C Clean Energy Project - a third dam and hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River in northeast B.C.

Building on the success of B.C.'s historic Two Rivers policy, Site C would rely on the existing Williston Reservoir for its water storage. This provides significant efficiencies for the BC Hydro system. By passing along water already flowing through BC Hydro's two upstream facilities on the Peace River, Site C would provide more than a third of the energy produced at the W.A.C. Bennett Dam, with a reservoir that is one-20th the size.

Site C would provide a very large amount of energy for a mid-size dam - enough to power the equivalent of about 450,000 homes per year. And this electricity would be clean and renewable, producing among the lowest levels of greenhouse gas emissions compared with other options. Even before Site C starts producing power for British Columbians, it would provide significant economic benefits, creating thousands of jobs in the region and across the province, and bolstering the provincial economy with a $3.2-billion increase in GDP during construction.

Of course, all new electricitygeneration projects have environmental impacts and Site C is no different. That's why the project is going through a rigorous and independent federal and provincial environmental assessment process. This process includes public hearings overseen by an independent Joint Review Panel.

Many years ago, my grandfather's vision for harnessing our hydroelectric potential was met with a lot of skepticism. Today, that vision is perhaps his greatest legacy. It's time to build on our hydroelectric legacy and move ahead with Site C. Future generations will be glad we did.

Brad Bennett is a B.C. businessman and corporate director and is a member of the board of directors of BC Hydro. He is the son of former premier Bill Bennett and the grandson of former premier W.A.C. Bennett.
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

[LoneWolf_53]

We've been coasting for awhile and we've had some of the lowest rates in North America. We need to stop coasting and start building again:

Spot on! 10/10

[NotNorthAnymore]

rvrepairnut -
NOW!!! aint that a true story if I ever read one.Linemen can make up to 300K per year!!!

To gross 300k would require a lineman to work 8 or more hours a day - for 365 days of the year at an average of $821.92 per day.

Wages and benifits for any employee are normally about 1.3 to 1.6 times the stated wage.
If it costs 300k to have a lineman employeed that does not mean that they get 300k.
Income tax would take well over half of that to begin with.
And if they are putting in $150k to Canadaian taxes that is money that I don't have to pay out for the services that you and I use.

I think I will have to call B**** on the $300k wage figure. In this case I will have to ask you to provide actual proof not just a jealous guess of what a lineman makes.

And do you want to be a lineman and work in the conditions they do with high voltage.
I have done a bit of high voltage work under the guidance of a qualified high voltge crew and know that 1 very small mis-step can kill you in less than a heart beat.

If a high voltage contact does not kill you outright you will wish it had.
Know a guy that contacted 13,800 Volts - blew his heals off and screwed his head completly.
He now resides in a care home - no family contact and not sure he would even recognize his family if they ever came around to see him......

[LongHaul]

The following article from the Vancouver Sun contains information that doesn't instill confidence in how the energy policy for BC is being managed and eventually why down the road the citizens of BC will be paying for the mismanagement.

Have wondered why Geothermal Power hasn't been looked at a source of steady, reliable power. It has been successful in Europe and other places so it's known technology.

This question about Geothermal was asked by the panel reviewing Site C. Found the reply by BC Hydro disturbing.

The reply was as follows.

We don’t really have the funding to do research and development,” a Hydro staffer advised the panel. “In fact, we’re not expected to do that.”

Not expected by whom? The provincial government. For as the panel went on to note, even if Hydro knew the full extent of the provincial geothermal energy resource, “it is forbidden by policy to develop it.” The Liberals have reserved that option “for independent power producers,” but so far none have put in bids along those lines.
The cabinet-imposed limitations on Hydro’s ability to develop alternative power sources may go a long way to explaining why the government-owned utility hasn’t invested much in exploration, research and engineering of those options.

Okay, so how did the government come to the conclusion that having Private Producers develop Geothermal power was the best option for the long term benefit of the province?

There are at least three options for development of Geothermal, private, public utility or a combination. How did the government evaluate and supposedly come to a conclusion on the best option without having enough data to even know if Geothermal is feasible? The article quotes a guess of a potential 700 megawatts for Geothermal vs 1100 megawatts for Site C.

It's a question for one's MLA. Is this reservation of Geothermal for only private producers correct? If so is there a link to somewhere on the government's web site that provides the documentation on how this decision was arrived at?

Otherwise it looks like a decision driven by party ideology rather than any kind of sound business planning and evaluation of options. Decisions based only on ideology in a business environment generally end badly and people's wallets take the hit.

Article and link follow.

Political calculations have long trumped sound energy policy making in B.C.
 
By Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun columnist
May 9, 2014

The joint review panel on Site C this week provided stimulating insights into how the B.C. Liberals, in concert with BC Hydro, have narrowed the range of options for satisfying the future power needs of the province.

Take the case of geothermal power, meaning electricity generated by tapping into geological hot spots beneath the surface of the earth.

The panel report, citing Hydro, says that geothermal sources could supply “700 megawatts of potentially cost-effective clean or renewal power,” versus 1,100 megawatts for Site C, and at a comparable price.

Debatable. But the panel’s point is that based on the current state of knowledge, there’s no certainty about the extent of the geothermal resource in the province or the cost of developing it.
Hydro was urged by the B.C. Utilities Commission some 30 years ago to research the provincial opportunities for geothermal and other unconventional energy sources.

“But little was done,” says the panel, meaning then or since. Hydro staff advised the panel that current spending on proving up the geothermal resource was “under $100,000 a year. As of the end of last year, Hydro had already spent $314 million researching, planning, surveying, analyzing, consulting and otherwise compiling paperwork on Site C.

“We don’t really have the funding to do research and development,” a Hydro staffer advised the panel. “In fact, we’re not expected to do that.”

Not expected by whom? The provincial government. For as the panel went on to note, even if Hydro knew the full extent of the provincial geothermal energy resource, “it is forbidden by policy to develop it.” The Liberals have reserved that option “for independent power producers,” but so far none have put in bids along those lines.

The cabinet-imposed limitations on Hydro’s ability to develop alternative power sources may go a long way to explaining why the government-owned utility hasn’t invested much in exploration, research and engineering of those options.

“The consequence,” reported the panel, “is that there is less confidence in the costs of the alternatives than with Site C; likewise, the understanding of the environmental costs of alternatives is necessarily generic.”

Another arbitrary government directive that drew more than passing skepticism from the panel was the Liberal insistence that Hydro develop, construct or otherwise acquire enough domestic power to make B.C. self-sufficient in electricity.
“Taken literally this means a B.C. disconnected to the outside world,” observed the panel. “Truly strange for a province that relies on trade, and a long way from its recent history.”

Self-sufficiency was touted by the Liberals as a major step on the road to developing power for export, which was also their initial vision for Site C — it would produce surplus electricity for sale south of the border.

But as the panel noted, Hydro’s current projection is that would lose $800 million on the first four years of operations on the project, because the surplus power that would be produced by the project would have to be sold at a substantial loss.

Other instructive passages in the report deal with the way the B.C. Liberals have repeatedly interfered with Hydro’s finances by extracting dividends from the company, charging discriminatory rates for the use of the provincial water resource, and blocking approval for necessary rate increases to cover capital costs.

By postponing rate increases, the net effect has been to force the Crown corporation to shuffle hundreds of millions of dollars in current-day spending into myriad deferral accounts, for repayment in future.

“In effect, the province has been increasing the total of its debt, while classifying BC Hydro’s portion of it as being supported by rates it did not allow Hydro to charge,” the panel found. “The effect is to reduce the free cash flow BC Hydro has to support Site C, thus requiring more borrowing, which exposes Hydro and the government to interest rate and possibly exchange rate risk.”

Other cabinet-imposed distortions identified by the panel included “fictional” earnings, “no real equity,” “unfunded mandates” and “artificially reduced” capital costs. All of which makes it difficult to impossible to compare the cost of developing Site C to other options, including conservation and private power.

“Such an accounting marvel should not be allowed to drive choices that would affect the B.C. economy and landscape for many decades,” wrote panel in a singularly withering passage. “The panel cannot be confident that the independent power alternatives versus the BC Hydro alternatives, or supply versus demand management alternatives, are accurately valued.”
Given all those uncertainties, the panel in its closing reflections said that much as it recognized that the province will need more power in the future, it could not say that Site C is the answer for now.

What a mess, much of it traceable back through the board room at BC Hydro to the cabinet rooms of successive B.C. Liberal administrations.

“There’s no politics involved in it at all,” insisted cabinet minister Bill Bennett this week defending the handling of Site C against the criticisms from the panel.

But as I read the report, political calculations have repeatedly trumped sound energy policy making in this province.

http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Vaughn+Palmer+Focus+Site+reduced+power+options/9825010/story.html

[grammafreddy]

I'm sure it didn't take Wacky this long to get a damn dam built.