IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
From today's Globe & Mail:
Green Premier's agenda hits snag as energy plan rejected
Commission says British Columbia government's initiative not in public interest
Mark Hume
Vancouver — From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
Last updated on Wednesday, Jul. 29, 2009 03:01AM EDT
The British Columbia government's energy plan and the future of new renewable-power projects in the province have been shaken by a ruling from the B.C. Utilities Commission.
After hearings that lasted almost a year, the commission has rejected BC Hydro's long-term acquisition plan as “not in the public interest” and has refused to endorse its push for clean energy.
The government's clean – or green – energy plan has been a key initiative pursued by Premier Gordon Campbell and was a major issue in the May election. The ruling could call into question the viability of the B.C. government's policy of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020. That promise, and a long term goal of an 80 per cent reduction by 2050, was put into law last year with passage of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act.
Some analysts say the ruling – which shocked the government and the stock market – indicates B.C. has been over-estimating the amount of power the province needs in order to justify the development of independent power projects.
“We have a very flawed energy plan in this province … the government cannot continue to exaggerate the need for power,” said Lori Winstanley, a spokeswoman for the professional employees' union known as COPE, which has long been critical of BC Hydro's energy plan.
For years the opposition NDP has questioned the Campbell government's energy plan, claiming independent hydro projects that harness some of the province's rivers – known as run of river projects – pose hazards to the environment, and sports fisheries.
The ruling delivered a quick blow to independent power producers (IPPs), with shares for Plutonic Power Corp. plunging about 24 per cent yesterday, falling $1.00 to $3.08.
A spokesman for Plutonic, the biggest bidder in B.C. Hydro's calls for new projects, said the company would react later.
Dow Jones Newswires said the commission's decision “could put the development of new renewable-power projects in the province on hold.”
But Blair Lekstrom, B.C.'s Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, tried to steady the market by saying the government remains committed to pursuing the development of more clean, renewable energy through IPP's.
“We are focused on developing clean and renewable energy resources. We are going to continue down that path,” said Mr. Lekstrom.
He said he was surprised by the ruling, which included a refusal to allow BC Hydro to downgrade the Burrard Generating Station. Burrard is a conventional thermal plant fuelled by natural gas that supplements hydroelectric generation in years of low water flows.
BC Hydro wanted to rate Burrard as capable of producing a maximum of 3,000 gigawatt hours annually, while BCUC said the figure should be 5,000 GWh. If the Burrard potential is rated 2,000 GWh higher, then the need for private power would have to drop by the same amount.
“Fully the biggest surprise is Burrard thermal, talk of moving that from 3,000 to 5,000 [GWh],” said Mr. Lekstrom. “That certainly doesn't fit with the direction that we have set as a province … and that's clean renewable energy and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions where we can.”
Bob Elton, CEO of BC Hydro, said the 236-page decision is a detailed and complicated ruling.
“It will take us two or three days to really be clear about what it does mean for the clean power call,” said Mr. Elton.
“As a matter of urgency, we are going through [the ruling] and we will figure out what our position is, what we intend to bring forward. As we've always said a lot will depend on the prices of those [IPP] projects,” he said.
He said BC Hydro did get much of what it wanted in the ruling.
“We were looking for a bunch of things, a total of $630-odd-million of expenditures on different things … and they approved all but $2-million,” he said. “They approved, for example $418-million on demand side management, that's a huge thing for us. ”
BCUC also approved $41-million to continue consultation on Site C, a proposed mega-project on the Peace River.
On the rejection of the overall long-term acquisition plan, Mr. Elton said BC Hydro will be back before the utilities commission next year with a revised proposal.
Ms. Winstanley, director of strategic communications and campaigns for COPE, the Canadian Office and Professional Employees Union, said the ruling has three key aspects: the rejection of the long-term acquisition plan, a refusal to endorse the clean energy call, and a refusal to allow BC Hydro to downgrade the capacity of Burrard thermal.
“Those are the most significant pieces of the decision, but also there were deficiencies in the government's [energy] conservation plan,” she said.
Tom Hakney, vice-president of Policy for the BC Sustainable Energy Association, said his organization “is frankly surprised and somewhat concerned,” by the ruling.
“The commission is telling BC Hydro to go back and rely on Burrard thermal for energy. We're concerned about that. That is antiquated technology,” he said.
“The commission essentially told them to rely more on Burrard thermal, and there would therefore be less need for [new renewable] energy,” said Mr. Hakney. “Our view is there is a real need to develop renewable energy in B.C. to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.”
...........................................................
THREE Thumb's Up for the Commission showing the ONLY</u> common sense to be displayed in this issue since Gordo and his Crew of Clowns dreamed it up. KUDOS! And VERY much Appreciated! [^]
And in typical GovSpeak one of the underlings responds.
Translation: We don't agree with their findings. We know better. They don't know what they're talking about. We WILL find a way to end run these findings. We are Committed and have made a LOT of promises to our rich buddies in this regard, and simply can't afford to P them off. Thus, we will carry on to carry on...
Should be "Committed" alright! [xx(]
Gonna be interesting to see how The Circus tries to get around this one...
Cheers,
Nog
Green Premier's agenda hits snag as energy plan rejected
Commission says British Columbia government's initiative not in public interest
Mark Hume
Vancouver — From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
Last updated on Wednesday, Jul. 29, 2009 03:01AM EDT
The British Columbia government's energy plan and the future of new renewable-power projects in the province have been shaken by a ruling from the B.C. Utilities Commission.
After hearings that lasted almost a year, the commission has rejected BC Hydro's long-term acquisition plan as “not in the public interest” and has refused to endorse its push for clean energy.
The government's clean – or green – energy plan has been a key initiative pursued by Premier Gordon Campbell and was a major issue in the May election. The ruling could call into question the viability of the B.C. government's policy of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020. That promise, and a long term goal of an 80 per cent reduction by 2050, was put into law last year with passage of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act.
Some analysts say the ruling – which shocked the government and the stock market – indicates B.C. has been over-estimating the amount of power the province needs in order to justify the development of independent power projects.
“We have a very flawed energy plan in this province … the government cannot continue to exaggerate the need for power,” said Lori Winstanley, a spokeswoman for the professional employees' union known as COPE, which has long been critical of BC Hydro's energy plan.
For years the opposition NDP has questioned the Campbell government's energy plan, claiming independent hydro projects that harness some of the province's rivers – known as run of river projects – pose hazards to the environment, and sports fisheries.
The ruling delivered a quick blow to independent power producers (IPPs), with shares for Plutonic Power Corp. plunging about 24 per cent yesterday, falling $1.00 to $3.08.
A spokesman for Plutonic, the biggest bidder in B.C. Hydro's calls for new projects, said the company would react later.
Dow Jones Newswires said the commission's decision “could put the development of new renewable-power projects in the province on hold.”
But Blair Lekstrom, B.C.'s Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, tried to steady the market by saying the government remains committed to pursuing the development of more clean, renewable energy through IPP's.
“We are focused on developing clean and renewable energy resources. We are going to continue down that path,” said Mr. Lekstrom.
He said he was surprised by the ruling, which included a refusal to allow BC Hydro to downgrade the Burrard Generating Station. Burrard is a conventional thermal plant fuelled by natural gas that supplements hydroelectric generation in years of low water flows.
BC Hydro wanted to rate Burrard as capable of producing a maximum of 3,000 gigawatt hours annually, while BCUC said the figure should be 5,000 GWh. If the Burrard potential is rated 2,000 GWh higher, then the need for private power would have to drop by the same amount.
“Fully the biggest surprise is Burrard thermal, talk of moving that from 3,000 to 5,000 [GWh],” said Mr. Lekstrom. “That certainly doesn't fit with the direction that we have set as a province … and that's clean renewable energy and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions where we can.”
Bob Elton, CEO of BC Hydro, said the 236-page decision is a detailed and complicated ruling.
“It will take us two or three days to really be clear about what it does mean for the clean power call,” said Mr. Elton.
“As a matter of urgency, we are going through [the ruling] and we will figure out what our position is, what we intend to bring forward. As we've always said a lot will depend on the prices of those [IPP] projects,” he said.
He said BC Hydro did get much of what it wanted in the ruling.
“We were looking for a bunch of things, a total of $630-odd-million of expenditures on different things … and they approved all but $2-million,” he said. “They approved, for example $418-million on demand side management, that's a huge thing for us. ”
BCUC also approved $41-million to continue consultation on Site C, a proposed mega-project on the Peace River.
On the rejection of the overall long-term acquisition plan, Mr. Elton said BC Hydro will be back before the utilities commission next year with a revised proposal.
Ms. Winstanley, director of strategic communications and campaigns for COPE, the Canadian Office and Professional Employees Union, said the ruling has three key aspects: the rejection of the long-term acquisition plan, a refusal to endorse the clean energy call, and a refusal to allow BC Hydro to downgrade the capacity of Burrard thermal.
“Those are the most significant pieces of the decision, but also there were deficiencies in the government's [energy] conservation plan,” she said.
Tom Hakney, vice-president of Policy for the BC Sustainable Energy Association, said his organization “is frankly surprised and somewhat concerned,” by the ruling.
“The commission is telling BC Hydro to go back and rely on Burrard thermal for energy. We're concerned about that. That is antiquated technology,” he said.
“The commission essentially told them to rely more on Burrard thermal, and there would therefore be less need for [new renewable] energy,” said Mr. Hakney. “Our view is there is a real need to develop renewable energy in B.C. to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.”
...........................................................
THREE Thumb's Up for the Commission showing the ONLY</u> common sense to be displayed in this issue since Gordo and his Crew of Clowns dreamed it up. KUDOS! And VERY much Appreciated! [^]
And in typical GovSpeak one of the underlings responds.
Translation: We don't agree with their findings. We know better. They don't know what they're talking about. We WILL find a way to end run these findings. We are Committed and have made a LOT of promises to our rich buddies in this regard, and simply can't afford to P them off. Thus, we will carry on to carry on...
Should be "Committed" alright! [xx(]
Gonna be interesting to see how The Circus tries to get around this one...
Cheers,
Nog
