McKee on IPPs
April 11, 2009 by Mark McKee
Filed under BC government, Business, Energy, Environment, Local news
Mark McKee, BC Liberal candidate, Columbia River-Revelstoke
Press release —
IPPs: A Key Part of BC’s Green Future.
FACT: Independent Power Projects (IPPs) have been part of BC’s energy grid since the late 1980s.
FACT: All BC Hydro contracts with IPP’s must be approved by the independent BC Utilities Commission to ensure they are cost-effective and consistent with the public interest.
FACT: IPPs have a low carbon footprint and will help wean the province away from dependence on power imported from coal-fired generating plans in Alberta and the United States.
FACT: IPPs create the kind of Green Economy jobs that should be celebrated — not condemned.
FACT: Carole James and the NDP are once again playing fast and loose with the facts through a fear-mongering propaganda campaign intended to bamboozle the public.
Many British Columbians believe – and wrongly so – that BC Hydro produces all of the electrical power needed to service its ratepayers. That’s definitely not true. In fact, for seven of the last 10 years we have been importing a great deal of our electricity from coal-fired generating plants in Alberta and the United States to keep our lights on.
Here are some relevant stats: In 2004 we imported 10% of our needs, about 5,500 gigawatt hours; in 2005 we imported 13%, about 7,000 gigawatt hours. That is certain to go up. BC Hydro has stated that even with conservation measures, our demand for electricity is expected to grow by 45% over the next 20 years and that new sources of generation must be provided by BC Hydro and by IPPs.
Recognizing this, the BC Liberals have committed the province to becoming self-sufficient by 2016 and that at least 90 % of all new generation comes from clean sources.
How can we achieve those goals? The Energy Plan put out in 2007 by this government has BC Hydro working on a three-pronged approach —buy more, build more and conserve more. IPPs, which take advantage of British Columbia’s vast hydro-electric, biomass and wind potential, are a key part of that solution.
More than 1,100 workers are currently employed on 48 operating projects and another 15 projects under construction. These projects represent an estimated $5.4 billion in capital investments (at 2008 values). BC Hydro’s current Calls for Power – based on 2008 cost levels per megawatt and net of estimated attrition – are estimated to result in an additional $3.8 billion in new capital investment.
The impact on B.C.’s Gross Domestic Product including direct, indirect and induced effects is estimated at $3 billion with 40,000 person-years of construction employment for all IPP projects including 2008 Calls.
Sustainable. Green. Economical. Those are words that can accurately be applied to the IPPs now being built in British Columbia. Once upon a time even the NDP believed that. Here’s what the NDP’s then-employment and investment minister Gordon Wilson stated: “Small hydro projects successfully balance environmental sustainability with economic growth.” And here’s NDP Energy Minister Anne Edwards in 1992: “Independent producers have a big role to play in making sure we reach those goals” of low environmental impacts, regional economic benefits and long-term sustainability… Independent power producers will be a source of expertise and innovation to keep B.C.’s electricity sector efficient and competitive.”
So why is the NDP now campaigning against the IPPs — even those that are supported by local communities and First Nations?
Carole James and the NDP have one objective — to eliminate the IPP industry in BC for nothing more than ideological reasons. As a result, our economy and our environment will pay the ultimate price.
The NDP’s campaign against IPPs is perplexing unless one understands that it is all about supporting those who regard any change to BC Hydro’s traditional operations as a plot to privatize BC Hydro. And that is one thing the BC Liberals’ Energy Plan does not do.
No less an authority than the David Suzuki Foundation has supported IPP development in BC. The foundation’s Submission to the BC Energy Policy Development Task Force in 2001 stated;
In order to support the renewable energy industry, the BC government should encourage the development of low impact renewable sources of electricity such as wind, solar and micro-hydro through specific initiatives such as net metering and portfolio standards. These will encourage utilities to purchase renewable energy, or to encourage producers to build new projects.
By nurturing a provincial renewable energy industry, British Columbia will be well positioned to take advantage of emerging energy markets worldwide.
… potential mechanisms for taking advantage of renewable energy in British Columbia. These include renewable energy portfolio standards, which require electrical utilities to purchase renewable energy; environmental cost adders, which equalize the cost of renewable energy sources; tax rebates and incentives for renewable electricity producers…
To date, BC Hydro has committed to acquiring up to 10 per cent of its new resources from small scale renewable energy projects, if they are commercially competitive and cost effective. One can only assume that any utility would purchase all of its energy from these sources if it met these criteria, since they have no future greenhouse gas liability.
Ours is an industrial civilization that depends on power to provide people with the jobs, services and consumer products they need and want. Where will we get the power we need in a Green and sustainable manner?
In a column written for the Victoria Times Colonist, independent fisheries biologist Glenn Wagner said he hopes “that a majority of people choose solutions such as run-of-river and wind energy instead of the alternatives of oil and coal that destroy vast expanses of habitat and severely pollute our land, water, and atmosphere.”
So do all thoughtful British Columbians. Don’t be swayed by Carole James and the NDP propaganda machine.
April 10, 2009
Mark McKee
BC Liberal Candidate
of course the majority of people would choose run-of-river energy instead of oil or coal. the problems with the BC Liberals Energy Plan are many: Bill 30 is at the top of the list, which takes the decision-making process away from local communities. Why exclude the public if these projects are environmentally and fiscally sound?
Next is a clause in the Energy Plan which prevents BC Hydro from developing any of these run-of-river projects. Again this begs the question of why? Why take BC Hydro, our public utility, out of the equation? Why deny a crown corporation that invests its profits back into our health care, education and infrastructure system, the opportunity to be involved in any of these projects, and instead, leave them to private interests who have, well, private interests?
Another problem is not looking at the whole picture – with some 500 applications on the rivers of BC it’s absurd to look at each project individually. Why not have a comprehensive plan, looking at what rivers are the most viable to develop as far as existing roads, access to transmission lines, year-round production capacity, etc, etc, and then develop these projects with our existing crown corporation? We have one of the cheapest energy rates in the world – looking at the history of privatization it seems unlikely to remain.
SURE the NDP has said this in the past, and still does!
That was when the only IPP’s that were allowed, were those that passed very stringent Environmental Assessments, and Democratic Process was part and parcel of it all.
Never would anything as assenine be considered, for example, as allowing a river to be diverted into an entirely different watershed, in a different valley. Nor were they allowed in the habitat of endangered species. Nor did they ignore land use plans carefully worked out by local communities. And cumulative impacts would have been considered. And local government had a voice — one which your government has silenced in this regard and with regard to any major projects in our backyards.
“Sustainable. Green. Economical. ……. Once upon a time even the NDP believed that. Here’s what the NDP’s then-employment and investment minister Gordon Wilson stated: “Small hydro projects successfully balance environmental sustainability with economic growth.” And here’s NDP Energy Minister Anne Edwards in 1992: “Independent producers have a big role to play in making sure we reach those goals” of low environmental impacts, regional economic benefits and long-term sustainability… Independent power producers will be a source of expertise and innovation to keep B.C.’s electricity sector efficient and competitive.”
So why is the NDP now campaigning against the IPPs ? ”
They aren’t, when the projects are indeed sustainable and make economic sense. Ask Anne Edwards. And nor am I, who worked on and praised the Pingston Hydro project at the time, campaigning against Small Hydro or other alternative electricity-generation projects per se.
In the NDP’s books, the criteria for Sustainability are as follows. And here’s my checklist as to whether the Campbell Liberals’ Energy Plan with this crazy IPP component, matches up:
Ecosystem protection — very very many of the current projects fail, due to the mediocre, fast-tracked environmental assessment processes. And even when individual projects meet the Ecosystem Protection criteria, they fail in terms of the cumulative effects of all of these projects, not to mention the effects of all the clearcuts for hundreds of miles of transmission lines that many of these projects require.
Resource Conservation — a FAIL, in the future, since transnational corporations with no interest in looking after our resource, will acquire rights to our rivers. Profit will come first, and Resource Conservation be dammed. And NAFTA tribunals will say Go Right Ahead, help yourselves, local environmental and conservation laws are not allowed to get in the way of profits.
Biodiversity — FAIL. IPP’s are and have been approved in critical habitat of even threatened species, including Grizzlies and Mountain Caribou and salmon, to name just a few.
Resilience — Generating power from a variety of sources, is a great Resilience strategy BUT not if it fails in all these other regards. Also, this particular IPP scheme doesn’t supply power when WE are at risk and need it most, e.g. mid-summer and winter. How does having river diversion projects on many small streams where the majority of power is generated during Spring Freshet, when our existing dams are full to the brim with stored water (= stored hydro power for when we need it later either for ourselves or to sell to other Provinces and the USA), help us be resilient?
Protection for the “Commons” — FAIL FAIL FAIL. Our backcountry is being privatized holus bolus, and without us being allowed to have any meaningful say in the matter whatsoever. These rivers are supposed to be ours. The backcountry is supposed to be ours. We, collectively, are supposed to participate in decisions about our Commons. Fishers, hunters, ecotourists, hikers, kayakers, nature-lovers, etc etc etc are facing “Private Property — Keep Out,” signs on gates blocking roads all over the place.
Food Security — fail, for those whose food and medicinal plants are no longer accessible. (see “private Property — Keep Out”). A thorough environmental assessment and public process, would take Food Security into consideration and allow those projects that meet this and other criteria.
Social Equity — In itself, neither pass nor fail. But the present system is taking advantage of social INequity, namely by proposing projects in territories plagued by such poverty that the people will do anything to get bread on the table in the short term.
Also, in the longterm the BC Energy Plan fails to promote Social Equity, since private corporations instead of BC Hydro and hence our society will be making the profits. BC Hydro’s profits used to play a huge role in funding the Province’s Health and Social and Education budgets, all of which enable and ensure Social Equity.
Full Cost Economics — FAIL. Short term economics, namely the jobs during the construction phase, is the only part that gets a passing grade
Exercising the Precautionary Principle — Glacier-Howser project is an example of a massive FAIL that is to be allowed provided they do some minor tweaks. Who knows what will happen to fish, birds, whole ecosystems and even weather, when water of a different temperature and different microbiological composition is removed from its natural course and dumped into a different river and watershed?
Adaptive Management — well-planned, truly sustainable Small Hydro could indeed be a good Adaptive Management move, as could other small power projects such as wind, geothermal, tidal power etc.
Democracy and Due Process — FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL and FAIL AGAIN
Just Transition — Let’s wait and see who gets displaced by this BC Hydro privatization scheme, and whether they are helped to find other careers.
Mr McKee has his facts wrong.
http://www.saveourrivers.ca
He joins a long list of BC Liberals recently coming out for a public spin from Kinsella to Campbell too long to list. .
VOTE FOR CHANGE
MAY 12 2009
GLACIER HOWSER update
Two Liberal bullies just issued a press release announcing road upgrades to the FSR that climbs past the Grabowski’s farm. Not only is the Montreal stock promoter harassing them but as they have claimed all the way along the BC Liberal government is a lead bully. The FSR upgrade is blatant continued harassment of citizens by the BC Liberals.
When the David Suzuki Foundation states that the NDP tax policies are a major step in the wrong directions for action on climate change and that that includes getting rid of IPP’s, you know that the NDP are on the wrong foot again.
When the NDP have already put in place 17 or 18 IPP’s themselves while in power, you know the NDP is on the wrong foot again.
How many times do we have to see the wrong footed group’s actions and words before we understand that they just don’t get it. They have simply caved to the unions again.
Where is their positive plan for our province? No where on the horizon. Where is their financial plan for our province? No where on the horizon. In fact it seems very similar to that of Glen Clark and his fudgit budgit of years gone by.
This would certainly not be good enough for my kids and grand kids Thank you very much.
It would appear that some McKee/ Campbell Liberals can’t read. Where here in the Platform does it say the NDP would ‘get rid of’ small power generation projects?
The NDP will:
“Foster community power initiatives that involve and benefit local residents and businesses, and allow local governments and First Nations to once again have oversight over power generation projects in their communities.
Read my lips:
the NDP will indeed ‘get rid of’ the IPP scheme as it now stands. The NDP never did allow many of the sorts of power projects that are now being promoted by the Liberals.
the N D P is not “getting rid of’” Small Hydro development. They will put a moratorium on new developments until the proper groundwork is done.
They will then get rid of the Privatization aspect (as in ‘Independent’ Power Projects) and ensure that the only new projects that go ahead are the sustainable ones.
Yes they allowed and encouraged Small Hydro before, and yes they will do so again. But only if it’s done right, in accordance with Sustainable BC principles as I outlined above, and without privatizing power generation.
Here is the platform, on the Privatization aspect that the NDP opposes:
“Ending privatization at BC Hydro to control rising rates. BC businesses and households face increased costs of hundreds of millions of dollars because of Gordon Campbell’s drive to privatize BC Hydro and new electric power sources.
“Carole James and the NDP will end the privatization of our electricity system, which will help stabilize rates and keep BC’s Hydro advantage for you and for future generations.”
Here is the platform, on the Democracy aspect:
“Restoration of local autonomy: Carole James and the NDP will repeal the Significant Projects Streamlining Act, end Gordon Campbell’s requirement that all projects over $50 million be public-private partnerships, and restore local oversight of power generation.”
Here’s the platform for A Sustainable Energy Plan for BC. Nowhere does it say all Small Hydro projects will be got rid of:
“Carole James and the NDP will keep the control of our natural resources in public hands and will ensure BC Hydro takes the lead in providing clean, affordable energy.
“Gordon Campbell has forced BC Hydro to purchase all new energy from private producers. This puts British Columbians in a lose-lose situation: we’re losing our resources and we’re paying more for private power.
“Carole James and the NDP will stop privatization and escalating power rates. BC Hydro will again play a leading role in the development, generation, transmission and sale of electricity based on 3 core principles:
1. Public ownership
2. Environmental stewardship
3. Effective public oversight of all energy resources
“The roles of the BC Utilities Commission, Oil and Gas Commission, and Environmental Assessment Office will be strengthened to ensure effective public accountability.
“To move BC towards a clean, affordable and renewable energy future, the NDP’s Sustainable Energy Plan will:
“Place a moratorium on new private power projects until a full review of anticipated supply and demand is completed. Existing contracts with private suppliers will be honoured.
“Allow BC Hydro to generate new sources of energy including renewable, green energy sources and energy conservation initiatives.
“End the privatization of BC Hydro.
“Foster community power initiatives that involve and benefit local residents and businesses, and allow local governments and First Nations to once again have oversight over power generation projects in their communities.
“Expand Community Energy Trusts to help First Nations and regional governments develop cost-effective,sustainable energy projects.
The distrust people in BC have of General Electric’s involvement in IPP’s is not just backlash by “so-called environmentalists.” GE’s record of pollution of the Hudson River and its continued stalling of remediation in court (because of potential liability of its 75 other Superfund toxic sites) justifies local suspicions about its Bute Inlet project. ”Green”-energy proponents condemn delay, and those who don’t “get it. They criticize Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., because he, using an old water protection statute similar to Canada’s common law-based Navigable Waters Act (gutted by the Conservatives in the name of urgency). has won judgment after judgment against GE for its destruction of the Hudson River.
The recent motion by Members of the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities calling for a moratorium on ruin of the river projects is founded not in denial, nor was it funded by fossil-fuel foundations, but in recognition that this was the third driest winter recorded, and we must guard our water from those only answerable to shareholders. We need to put the brakes on water diversions like those blamed by scientists for the chinook salmon collapse along the US west coast:
“Destruction of river habitat, water diversions and dams in the Central Valley so weakened the fall run that it couldn’t withstand two recent years of scanty food supply in the warming Pacific Ocean, according to the study commissioned by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.”
Sorry Antoinette, but the NDP has already approved 17 or 18 IPP’s in their destructive government tenure. The IPP’s were good, the governance was very very bad.
The system now in spite of your rhetoric has a hugh amount of over site to the extent that only a very small percentage is ever approved for placement of IPP’s.
You are completely wrong about the following:
privatization of water ways Never happens 40 year lease yes, scare tactic NO
increase in Hydro rates where on earth did you get that scare tactic
selling to the Americans Never on the radar another scare tactic
privatization of Hydro legislature is already in place so that doesn’t occur – another scare tactic
Sorry, but you are simply ignoring facts and spouting the union line Antoinette.
It does not happen that way in the real world. Sorry to break down that paradigm
Hey David,
“only a very small percentage is ever approved”.
if you are ready to defend the most corrupt government in Canadian history by repeating their stuff, prove it.
The truth is you need to decide where you stand. We have time to wait for you to prove what you say. Do you know if what you said is true or not? It’s not.
We, you and me, all of us British Columbians had our rights taken away from us by Gordon Campbell in June 2006 by-Bill 30 and we have no way to stop a private power project. That’s a truthful statement and I can prove it. Does that not mean something important to you? You should watch my back because I’ve been fighting for yours since the Ashlu was taken from us. Carole James will be the next Premier of BC and every single vote will count. We need our water and our power and the benefits from both to remain exclusively in our democratic hands. We are out of the deal any other way. Save Our Rivers on May 12th because it is our last and only chance and I can prove it.
Thank you Tom. I appreciate what you are saying but you have missed a number of points in your words.
Of the 500 applications for IPP’s and after the myried (sp?) of environmental processes in place 10 MIGHT, I repeat Might be approved. That’s about 2%. THAT is a small percentage.
Also, i appreciate that you are watching my back as you say, but so have I been watching yours, just as every one does in our society. Please don’t be so sanctimoneous. i appreciate your vigor and your passion in support of the unions and the single focus groups but there is so much more happening that is good in this province through others, it truly is encouraging.
We have the lowest taxation levels in Canada on a provincial basis. We have more locations being renovated and turned over to different societies for the homeless in Victoria and the lower mainland than ever conceived by the NDP. We have new post secondary collages and universities than ever before. We have a new hospital and cancer clinic being built. How many different positives do you want to deal with on a planned systemic basis for our province. AND the overall deficit has been reduced by over $ 14,000,000. Just the interest alone on that has paid for much of the above.
Having a plan rather than a knee jerk reaction works far better for every one.
Since a private power plant depends on selling its energy in order to make a profit, what incentive is there to conserve energy? Absolutely none! More power plants, more energy sales, more profit. The environment bears the costs.
It is a Liberal party lie that privately produced energy is good for the environment. The capitalist system doesn’t work that way and they know it. BC needs a publicly owned system that focuses on long term conservation for future generations, not short term profit for Liberal insiders.
Kingsley, thank you. Very good (and new) point.
@ David:
Do you happen to be David Field, spokesperson for the astroturf organization BC Citizens for Green Energy?
http://thetyee.ca/News/2008/12/18/GreenEnergy/
Sorry Kingsley, nobody ever said that IPP’s were good for the environment. They said they are the best available and the least impact on the environment.
Wind turbines are just as good but not good in and of themselves.
What is best for the environment is for every one to stop consuming and that is one of the ” Planks ” and stated objectives of the BC Liberal action plan on energy. That “Plank” is to reduce the use of electricity in our province as one of many planks in the plan.
Unforturnately, the NDP , if they had a plan, would have only one plank and that seems to be a moratorium, make that read STOP. This, even though the NDP gave away water rights to about 20 different IPP’s in the past when in power. Hypocritical?
Go figure eh ?
Ok, David. Are you going to go first? What is your Kwh usage per day compared to the BC residential average? How much do you think you can cut that down by, and how?
My usage is about 10Kwh/day. I could maybe get it down to 8 Kwh if I bought a smaller fridge and drank fewer hot drinks while working, lol.
More importantly, how much do you spend on energy-laden consumer items per year? Spending is a pretty good approximation of indirect energy-consumption.
Sorry DaveHilbka but I never heard of BC Citizens for Green Energy?
Mi Kai lee, I’m glad you live in the woods and have a low electric bill, that is nice.
Sorry but this is not about two 14 year old kids talking about how much better one is over the other. I don’t play those infantile games.
Every thing in my life is predicated on how I and our family can help our society and that includes power consumption in my vehicle, our use of reusable waste and our purchases.
The Liberals have expanded fish farms with devastating effects on wild salmon, they are promoting offshore oil and gas drilling, they ended the ban on trophy hunting for grizzly bears, they have slashed programs for wildlife protection, they continue to underfund public transit while expanding freeways, and they are offering millions of dollars in tax incentive for fossil-fuel exploration.
Borrowing the carbon tax idea from the Greens doesn’t change the Liberals disastrous record.
I’m trying very hard Kingsley to understand your logic line here.
The BC Liberals you say are promoting offshore oil and gas drilling, yet this is a federal responsibility so for now, it is simply talking to some one.
The BC Liberals you say ended the ban on trophy hunting for grizzly bears. If that is so, I for one will lobby to reintroduce the banning of hunting of the griz in BC along with you I am sure.
The BC Liberals continue to underfund public transit while expanding freeways you say but have actually spent multiply millions upon millions of dollars for rapid transit called the Centennial Line from Richmond to down town Vancouver – - – multiple millions.
Also in the planning stages are rapid transit lines from Langley and beyond into the megalopolis of Vancouver. Also, another bridge over the Fraser River to reduce highway traffic times and include rapid transit lines and access.
Seems they really are doing a lot of things right Kingsley. The lowest taxes in Canada both for individuals and companies, 5 new universities in our province, a new cancer clinic and hospital in Abbotsford under budget and ahead of time, reducing the overall deficit from $ 14 to $ 7 billion in only 8 years. Increasing teaching spots and learning spots at universities for doctors and nurses.
It would appear they have done lots of things right I would say in a lot of different and diverse areas.
‘Talking points for good Liberals’ — they hand them out to all Liberal Constituency Association Presidents.
Too bad we’re not buying.
Again Mr / Mrs / Ms Anonymous, you are trying to change the subject because it’s uncomfortable for Norm. The topic is that Norm has been caught in writing, as supporting IPP’s in spite of his current words.
Now, Norm is again covering and scratching trying to say it is old news. In other words, trying to spin his way out of a fact from his own letters. Now his helpers and handlers are as well, covering and scratching that is.
That is the topic of conversation.
Liberals announce that Norm supports IPPs citing letter in 2006. Norm says, you’re right, I wrote this letter, and I’ve said so in every speech I’ve given on this topic.
Not much of a story, I’m afraid.
Actually it really would appear to be a major story Mr/Mrs/Ms Anonymous
Norm is writing one thing and saying another. Will the real Norm please stand up? Carol James is doing the same thing Norm is doing, only on a much larger scale. Covering up her mistakes caused by lack of knowledge.
Apparently, Gerry Scott, NDP Campaign Co-Manager admitted that they did not know what the NDP were talking about when they arbitrarilly decided to tax the flaring of gases from oil wells. Covering by saying, Oh, it was just an editing error. Yeh, right.
They – the NDP – admitted and have since reneged on their taxation plans because they had not done their research prior to the knee jerk reaction to try and raise funds into the future. That would have cost how many rural jobs ??
Norm however has never gone back on his word though, has he? It appears to be “Oops again.”
Norm wrote the letter for a local IPP provider in 2006 – it existed on his website since it was written, he has always mentioned it in every IPP forum.The town of Golden also supported the project at the time and has since passed a resolution to support a moritorium on these projects.
It is a weak trick to suggest a lack of trustworthiness but the letter has never been covered up. There are likely good independent power projects but the reality is that the process for environmental accountability is weak and the public does not trust in the current government to care about it’s citizens and not just the large fat cat international corporations promising jobs to various political players and paying huge political contributions.
And I’m interested in quotes straight out of the speaking points for liberal constituency presidents…?? Is that where all this rhetoric is all coming from David?
Leslie, you like so many of Norm’s supporters want to change the topic because the topic is getting far too hot for Norm. It shows him for what he really apparently is.
The topic is whether Norm is talking pro something to one audience and negative to another audience. In this instance, we are talking about IPP’s.
I go back to my previous comment, Will the real Norm please stand up and stand for something other than what is expediant at the time?
We know that Norm and the NDP have waffled and changed and skipped and scurried time after time to hide their mistakes. This appears just another time that the NDP has been exposed. Opps Again
David, I think the real question here is why you (and others) are stereotyping support for power projects as all black or all white, when in reality there are many shades of gray. Some projects have obviously been refused in the past by the Liberal government, so *those projects* were not exactly lily white, were they? And so how is it any different in reverse, huh? If the Liberals can distinguish between good IPPs and bad IPPs, why can Norm and the NDP not do the same?