Does B.C. need Site C?

by the OminecaExpress.com

The main reason for looking at the massive, $5 billion to $6.6 billion dam is to provide the province with additional “firm” power capacity.

Firm capacity, as opposed to intermittent capacity, is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week — whether the sun is shining, the wind is blowing or tide is coming in.

The 900 megawatt (MW) dam would produce approximately 4,600 gigawatt hours (GW/h) per year. It would also flood an 83 km long section of the Peace River and put over 5,300 hectares of land underwater.

The same amount of firm capacity could be produced by a series of bioenergy plants throughout the Interior at a fraction of the cost.

A November, 2007 report by BioChip Energy Systems LP quoted a construction cost of $2.3 million per megawatt of bioenergy capacity. To build 1,000 MW of bioenergy plants would cost $2.3 billion.

Bioenergy is carbon neutral, uses existing forestry industry infrastructure, would have a footprint on the landscape literally thousands of times smaller than Site C and generate employment in rural forestry-dependent communities hard-hit by the mountain pine beetle.

Electricity from bioenergy isn’t as cheap as hydro power, because there is fuel and logistics costs, but that could be offset by investing the remaining $3.16 billion to $4.76 billion in low-cost intermittent sources like wind, solar and tidal.

The Canadian Wind Energy Association estimates a construction cost of $2.3 million per megawatt of wind capacity.

Spending $2.3 billion on developing wind farms would create 1,000 MW of capacity, enough to produce 6,100 GW/h per year.

For $4.6 billion B.C. could have 1,000 MW of firm capacity and 1,000 MW of intermittent capacity — over twice as much power for less money, less controversy, less impact on the land and more jobs.

The private sector could be used to build much or all of the projects, meaning less burden on the B.C. taxpayer.

Perhaps our carbon tax dollars could be used to fund wind, solar and tidal power projects, instead of simply providing an income tax rebate to corporations and the wealthy.

In addition, that type of approach would provide greater energy security in B.C. by spreading out the sources and types of power.

If Site C is built, there is no going back. Once the dam is in place, it’s there for good.

If turns out to be a mistake, there is no way to fix it.

On the other hand, it’s relatively easy to take apart a wind turbine or bioenergy plant. If circumstances change, we would retain the flexibility to change with them.

Perhaps it is time to change B.C. Hydro’s name to B.C. Energy. Perhaps that will help them, and their political masters, realize there is more ways than one to crank a turbine.