What will Horgan do with Site C?

[The Green Barbarian]

I simply add a few inconvenient truths

when???? where??????

[Urban Cowboy]

Do you never get tired of that same old shtick? Whenever someone puts up a good defense, you never fail to fall back on your BC Hydro talking points. How about a REAL challenge for a change?

That's quite funny coming from someone who can't keep their story straight from one post to the next. Your the one making the outragious claim that alternatives are the same price or cheaper than hydro so you prove it. I won't hold my breath for that post though.
Still waiting for that good defence you mentioned.

I have never changed my story. I simply add a few inconvenient truths for you to gnaw on.You, on the other hand, never change your boring old 'windy solar challenge'. How about posting a link from something other than the BC Hydro website?

If it's so "boring" why don't you simply answer the challenge and end it once and for all? You should be eager to prove hobbyguy wrong, and provide us with a jurisdiction anywhere in the world, that has wind or solar power that's not subsidized, and cheaper than hydro.

Problem is we've been onto you and your tactics for quite some time now, and when it comes to boring you've got it nailed.

You have no credible ammunition whatsoever, thus keep regurgitating the same alternate facts, spewed by your favorite IPP sponsored propaganda outlets.

Your credibility went down the drain the moment you feigned concern for the environment where Site C is concerned, yet absolutely no concern when informed that solar panel production is much more toxic than a dam could ever be, but that's OK because China isn't in BC.

Boring hypocrites the lot of you!

[Walking Wounded]

I have never changed my story. BSI simply add a few inconvenient truths for you to gnaw on.You, you mean your spreading propaganda from websites like, desmog.ca and others.on the other hand, never change your boring old 'windy solar challenge'. personaly I have never mentioned HG's challenge until today.How about posting a link from something other than the BC Hydro website?[color=#FF0000]

[Smurf]

Cactusflower wrote:

I have never changed my story. I simply add a few inconvenient truths for you to gnaw on.You, on the other hand, never change your boring old 'windy solar challenge'. How about posting a link from something other than the BC Hydro website?

I think you better go back and read this thread again because you have missed a large portion of it. Many posters like Hobbyguy and erinmore3775 have posted page upon page of factual information from around the world, from universities, from jurisdictions using alternative energies proving the alternative energies are not ready for the real world grid systems yet. They have at one time or another proven all the snake oil salesman BS wrong numerous times. I have not seen anyone come up with a factual argument to prove them wrong.

Please show me an argument complete with facts that the alternative energies can compete with hydro from production to our doors including land purchase, site construction, permits, any necessary agreements, transmission, that it won't displace people, and all the other things necessary for a working system and I will listen. Show me the alternatives will work in the real world. Please use factual arguments like Hobbyguy and erinmore3775 , not might, could, maybe which really mean nothing. Till then it all means nothing.

[Jx3]

Do you never get tired of that same old shtick? Whenever someone puts up a good defense, you never fail to fall back on your BC Hydro talking points. How about a REAL challenge for a change?

Two points:
1) Not once in several hundred posts relating to Site C have you put up a "good defense".
2) HG's challenge is a very REAL challenge that, for some unexplained reason, you refuse to accept. Why is that?

[Jx3]

Yea merry the answer is you can make your own power. No bills end of story

No bills? Really? What's your secret? Where can I get my own wind/solar setup capable of powering my entire home 24/7/365 for free?? Sign me up!

[The Green Barbarian]

No bills? Really? What's your secret? Where can I get my own wind/solar setup capable of powering my entire home 24/7/365 for free?? Sign me up!

If you are high all the time, you never have to pay for anything. It's the way Canada works.

[seewood]

HG's challenge is a very REAL challenge that, for some unexplained reason, you refuse to accept. Why is that?

In my opinion, CF( and MJ) are opposed for purely ideology reasons. Not really the best way to make a decision me thinks.
Remember, just an opinion...

The dam and hydro is the best form of comparatively cheap, renewable electricity 24/7 365 days a year. whether the wind blows or not, night or there is 3 feet of snow on the ground and -30 outside. Hydro is BEST and much of the world wishes they had this form to generate electricity for their citizens.

[Jx3]

People up there recall dozens of moose carcasses floating in the reservoir, for just one example.

So when the WAC Bennett Dam was built are you saying that the water level in the Williston Reservoir rose so quickly that moose could not escape the rising waters levels? That must have been some seriously rapid water level increases or some seriously slow moose.

People in the lower half of B.C. don't realize what's at stake up there in the Peace country. Between the fracking and the flooding, we are losing everything that was good about northern B.C.

Wow, over dramatic much?? Just exactly how much land do you think would be flooded if Grinning Johnny does decide to complete Site C?

[The Green Barbarian]

Well, I have, and you could put enough wind farms in that 1,761 sq. km. area to power the entire province, and then some.

when it's windy anyway, for the rest of the time, we'd just have to freeze in the dark. Oh well.

[jayro]

True I think we can all agree that we need energy no one wants to freeze in the dark..... and there are pros and cons to with all forms of electricity generation but I think its clear that with Site C the benefits far outweigh the risks not to mention all the jobs that it would generated

[Cactusflower]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4408157

If all you're worried about is job loss, scroll down to the "More jobs from alternative energy" portion of the article.

[Muzza]

According to Salary.com, "green" jobs pay on average, $10,000 less than traditional jobs. I'll keep my traditional job, thank you.

[Urban Cowboy]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-utilities-commission-admits-mistakes-in-site-c-report-but-says-conclusions-still-valid-1.4408157

If all you're worried about is job loss, scroll down to the "More jobs from alternative energy" portion of the article.

Too bad the downside is that as is the case in all matters, the whole picture needs to be kept in mind.

We already know that solar requires a lot more maintenance than a dam does, hence obviously that translates into more jobs.

The problem is that in that context the "more jobs" also translates into the higher associated overall costs of using solar as an alternative.

The goal is to ultimately provide the least expensive form of power production to us as the end user, and any jobs created in accomplishing that objective are justifiable and good. The goal needs to be kept in mind first and foremost.

On the other hand going with solar and all it's drawbacks, including more ongoing maintenance costs, that have to be covered by electricity rates, takes us to a place where justifying those jobs becomes much harder to do, when we can get the power at a lesser rate.

It's always about the big picture, not just pulling one detail, and using that alone to decide the fate of such an endeavor.

[rustled]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-utilities-commission-admits-mistakes-in-site-c-report-but-says-conclusions-still-valid-1.4408157

If all you're worried about is job loss, scroll down to the "More jobs from alternative energy" portion of the article.

As a taxpayer, I'm wondering what the cost-benefit analysis for these jobs would show us.

BC Hydro alternative portfolio. In the long-term this portfolio outperforms Site C for job creation. This is because alternative energy generates more jobs per dollar spent.
BCUC alternative portfolio. The Commission’s alternative portfolio provides somewhat less employment than Site C by 2024, but soon substantially exceeds Site C, due to site remediation, energy conservation, and alternative energy jobs.

http://watergovernance.sites.olt.ubc.ca ... atives.pdf

Basically, it seems to me we'd be paying a great deal for these jobs which will be required long term in addition to the actual infrastructure costs of any alternative energy source, well past the date of jobs required for Site C's completion.

Knowing we have burgeoning needs in health and other sectors, it sounds to me like the jobs in the BCUC alternative portfolio constitute a serious misdirection of our resources.

Here's hoping Site C proceeds, so we will be in a better position to direct our resources toward hiring more people where they are most needed.