What will Horgan do with Site C?

[hobbyguy]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontarians-pay-millions-for-ineligible-power-generator-costs-auditor/article37221071/

"Ontario electricity ratepayers are paying millions for power generators' ineligible expenses – including scuba gear and raccoon traps – and are footing the bill for large industrial companies' savings, the province's auditor general reported Wednesday."

The "power generators" referred to in this article are primarily independent wind power sharks. They are IPPs. We know IPPs are bad news. Hrogan hisself called the IPPs producers of "junk power".

The BCUC advised a so called alternative that includes a lot of wind power, and substantially higher prices for ratepayers.

That would mean lots more IPPs putting their grubby fingers into the public till. Somehow the NDPers opposed to site C can put together a circular logic where IPPs are bad (correct) - but we want MORE of them. ?????

Oh, and don't get me going about this quote from that article:

"Lysyk also wrote that teachers and other school board employees are taking more sick days – almost 12 days each per year up from nine days five years ago"

Anyway, I can not believe the deliberate denial of reality that the NDP anti-site C groupthink contains. One of the dumbest and most ignorant things the Liberals did was the IPP program. Yet somehow the NDP want to expand that stupid IPP program. Ontario is getting absolutely raped by the wind power IPP sharks, and somehow the NDPers think "oh, that won't happen here - they'll play nice with us".

The simple and only renewable option is site C, and scrap almost the entire IPP program, including the wind sharks, as the contracts expire.

[Urbane]

^^ Absolutely right HG. It amazes me that some of the NDP'ers on here who have railed against IPP's (fair enough), are now on the IPP bandwagon. Incredible.

[hobbyguy]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/cancelling-site-c-will-be-a-tough-pillto-swallow-but-alternatives-are-harsher/article37193233/

I had another look at this opinion piece by group of NDP has beens. Aside from spinning the same sort of false economic reasoning that lead to the debacle of the 1990s NDP (of which they were part of), these political spinners demonstrate the NDP penchant for circular logic and the failue to ask the "then what" questions.

"As we see it, cancellation of the Site C project can be the centrepiece of British Columbia's action on climate change. Cabinet can re-direct enormous legislatively committed resources. Public initiative can turn from a project that is costly, unnecessary and environmentally and socially destructive to projects that are essential, positive and socially restorative.

A cabinet decision to proceed with or to cancel Site C will deliver electrical energy. But cancelling Site C and initiating a modern renewable energy program can deliver much more than power. Additional long-term benefits from cancellation include a moral and psychological sea change for our province and for Canada. Turning away from our unsustainable assault on nature can generate real optimism for our own future and that of our children."

Dear Corky and crew:

1) I would invite you to view the environmental damage and blight on the landscape that the costly IPP wind farm has caused.
2) I would invite to examine the social costs that wind farms have inflicted upon the rural residents of Ontario.
3) You make no viable case for site C not being needed, in fact, you contradict yourselves entirely by saying that there is a need to built wind and geothermal.

In other words, you are just spinning in a loop of circular logic.

"We also believe that cancellation with remediation should be accompanied by a detailed plan for British Columbia to follow a path to less costly, less invasive and more flexible renewable energy sources. Appropriate technologies (wind, solar, geothermal) are available, proven and cost-effective. But Canada and British Columbia lag far behind others in implementing these technologies."

Dear Corky and crew:

1) you fail to answer the most obvious question you raise. You do not ask the "and then what" questions that have placed BC in this position that for you has taken on an ideological bent.

You make the statement, upon which you base every argument, that wind, solar and geothermal are less costly. Yet the real world proves that you are making a false assumption.

BC's geothermal potential is not hydrothermal (like Iceland) but rests on EGS, which has no proven end cost being experimental.

No grid jurisdiction that has gone windy-solar has been able to provide abundant, reliable, renewable and affordable electricity without subsidies. Yet that is precisely what hydroelectricity provides.

The reason that "Canada, and BC lag far behind others in implementing these technologies" is that Canada and especially BC, Manitoba, and Quebec are renewable hydroelectric superpowers. Wind, solar, and geothermal can not compete with hydroelectric. Just ask Ontario about their $50 billion + in subsidies they have and are forking out for wind only to deliver pretty much the highest electricity costs in Canada.

Ask yourselves why renewable hydroelectric superpowers Quebec, Manitoba, and BC have the lowest electricity rates in North America, without subsidies. All 3 are "laggards" in wind and solar. BC has done "more" than Quebec and Manitoba, and has higher rates than either. Hmmm.

Ask yourselves what the social costs are of the so called better plan you offer. Higher rates are disproportionately hard on the working poor and create energy poverty. TOU billing is a massive tax on the working class to pay for utopian dreams of shallow thinking pretend green elitists.


No Corky and crew, your political spinning on behalf of your party is just circular logic. Start with false assumptions and circle back to them. Definitely 1990s NDP all over again.

[Urbane]

Keith Baldrey says that the Site C decision is likely to be announced tomorrow (Thursday).

[Cactusflower]

^^ Absolutely right HG. It amazes me that some of the NDP'ers on here who have railed against IPP's (fair enough), are now on the IPP bandwagon. Incredible.

There are the IPPs that El Gordo forced on BC Hydro, and then there are true IPPs. From Wkipedia:
"Grid defection - As there is some resistance in the electrical utility sector to the concepts of distributed generation with various renewable energy sources and microscale cogen units, several authors have warned that mass-scale grid defection is possible because consumers can produce electricity using off-grid systems primarily made up of solar photovoltaic technology."

Re: Baldrey's prediction, I hope he's right for a change. We need to get this thing settled once and for all and move on.

[hobbyguy]

^^ Absolutely right HG. It amazes me that some of the NDP'ers on here who have railed against IPP's (fair enough), are now on the IPP bandwagon. Incredible.

There are the IPPs that El Gordo forced on BC Hydro, and then there are true IPPs. From Wkipedia:
"Grid defection - As there is some resistance in the electrical utility sector to the concepts of distributed generation with various renewable energy sources and microscale cogen units, several authors have warned that mass-scale grid defection is possible because consumers can produce electricity using off-grid systems primarily made up of solar photovoltaic technology."

Re: Baldrey's prediction, I hope he's right for a change. We need to get this thing settled once and for all and move on.

Oh good grief. There goes the partisan orange tinfoil hat going on again to justify hypocrisy, partisan nonsense, and the simplistic "Liberal = Bad, NDP = drooly wunnerful "starry eyes".

The only reason people fork out the money to go off grid when grid connected is because the grid becomes ridiculously expensive when the windy-solar hucksters get their greedy mitts into it. So the snake oil con men selling wind and solar get to sell more, and batteries to boot.

"Distributed generation" SHOULD be resisted, it is an utter scam and a fools paradise as the real world experience shows.

Areas that have gotten sucked in by this nonsense are now backing away in a big, big hurry. Must admit, the scamming of the public by sharks like Elon Musk (note: Tesla has yet to post a profit) is getting more and more sophisticated. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-great-solar-power-scam-20170207-gu7j7o.html

[maryjane48]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/po ... e23668386/


Interesting hobby thinks gas fired plants are windmills


The facts or truth elude some folks it is clear

[maryjane48]

Site c will cost jobs for quesnel

http://theprovince.com/opinion/op-ed/bo ... ts-at-risk

Currently, 17 B.C. firms produce a combined 850 megawatts of “biomass” power — 77 per cent of the power equivalency of Site C should that dam be completed.

Chemical pulp mills, in particular, are at the forefront of forest company gains in energy efficiency and energy output, gains made largely possible by a $1-billion “green transformation” fund initiated by the federal government that assisted nearly 100 mills across Canada.

In my community of Quesnel, where more than 450 people are employed in two pulp mills, the fund provided $41.5 million to Cariboo Pulp and Paper to install equipment and gain efficiencies that allowed it to produce enough electricity to power more than 14,500 homes annually and to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by 18,000 tonnes.

But with Site C’s potential to add another 1,100 megawatts of hydropower to a province already awash in electricity, questions must be asked.

What happens when Cariboo Pulp and Paper’s sales agreement with B.C. Hydro expires? What happens when the agreements with B.C.’s other 16 biomass power suppliers expire? A strong possibility is that such agreements won’t be renewed and that as they lapse, mills will be far less financially viable.

Facts vs bchydro bclib fantasy

[maryjane48]

First nations bear the brunt of dam damage

A coalition of 14 First Nations and Metis communities in Alberta and the Northwest Territories called on B.C. Premier John Horgan to cancel the Site C dam on the same day provincial cabinet ministers consulted with energy experts to help decide the fate of the controversial project.

"History has shown that downstream indigenous communities bear enormous costs when BC Hydro puts the Peace River and downstream waters at risk," the signatories of an open letter to Horgan write.


https://www.google.ca/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4427481

[Cactusflower]

Oh good grief. There goes the partisan orange tinfoil hat going on again to justify hypocrisy, partisan nonsense, and the simplistic "Liberal = Bad, NDP = drooly wunnerful "starry eyes".

You're the one who keeps making this a partisan issue, Urb. There was nothing biased one way or the other in my comment.

[alanjh595]

Horgan wouldn't dare cancel the project 2 weeks before Christmas. It's going to go ahead and this thread will be done.

[Urbane]

On Twitter, Tom Fletcher says that the cabinet has reached a final decision on Site C. Decision to be announced very soon. I expect tomorrow to be the day and I expect the decision to be a positive one.

[Queen K]

<--------------Can I make anyone else popcorn while we wait?

[Cactusflower]

On Twitter, Tom Fletcher says that the cabinet has reached a final decision on Site C. Decision to be announced very soon. I expect tomorrow to be the day and I expect the decision to be a positive one.

Positive for whom?

[maryjane48]

On Twitter, Tom Fletcher says that the cabinet has reached a final decision on Site C. Decision to be announced very soon. I expect tomorrow to be the day and I expect the decision to be a positive one.

Lol. Its going to be positive for real trade unions if john says build it as thrle fake christian one will get the boot and positive. For bc if he says nope .

Either way it wont be any victory for rightwing coalition known as bclibs . They still busy running watts into the ground