This is a supplement to Rafe Mair's earlier article, Seven disingenuous statements from Colin Hansen, on what he termed BC Finance Minister Colin Hansen's "disingenuous" (carefully chosen in lieu of a more accurate but legally perilous word) pre-election statements attempting to justify private river power in BC. The comments by Hansen were made in a youtube video that was posted during the May provincial election campaign. To see the video, click here.

This addendum deals with the "disingenuous" statement that BC (as opposed to BC Hydro - more on that later), our public power province, is typically a net importer of power.  Hansen's statement is significant because usually government and industry spokespeople try to get away with a technicality, saying that BC Hydro is a net importer - ignoring that BC Hydro isn't the full picture of our public power system in BC and that when you factor in the other pieces, we are typically a net exporter as a province.  But Mr. Hansen didn't use this trick - he actually said that BC, our province, is a net importer of power.  Thus, as Rafe demonstrated and this information will further show, Mr. Hansen really crossed the line here.  There is no sneaky technicality or wordplay - there is just...well, disingenuousness.

Below you will find several charts - plus some helpful passages from West Coast Environmental Law's reference book on private power in BC, below.  The BC Stats document, if you look at pages 4 and 5, shows from 1995-2005 (most recent date in this report) 9 out of 11 years we were a net exporter to the US and 7 out of 11 years a net exporter to Alberta.  Overall, combining Alberta and the US we were a net exporter 9 years out of 11 from 1995-2005. The two National Energy Board charts are more up to date (note: they only deal with BC to US, not within Canada), and tell a similar story (note: the 2008 numbers were incomplete here - I don't have the final numbers).  In dollar terms, from 1997 to 2008 we were a net exporter to the US 10 out of 12 years, and in power volume terms 8 out of 12.  Factoring the stats BC numbers for US exports that go further back, we know we were a net exporter of electricity to the US 10 out of 14 years from 1995-2008.

The point is not whether we are a net exporter or importer - clearly we have been both in various years; the point is twofold:

1. For Minister Hansen to suggest BC is typically a net importer is pure baloney;

2. We must remember that our imports and exports are not a reflection of an imbalance in the power we have vs. our needs, but rather of a conscious business decision to trade power on the spot market so as to make a profit for the people of BC (on average close to $700 million/year over the past decade).

I have been given strong legal advice not to call someone a liar because that implies that he is an inveterate liar. Because of this I need your help dealing with the BC Finance Minister, the Honourable Colin Hansen.

Just prior to the last election, Mr. Hansen did a short interview, on camera. Let me tell you what he said and I was taught by one of the best libel lawyers never to call I’ll ask you how I can describe this in a manner that won’t get me using the “L” word.

Mr. Hansen says "BC is a net importer of electricity."

This simply is not true. Both the National Energy Board and Stats Canada, the most reliable sources we have, tell a different story: Over the past decade BC, our public power province, has typically been a net exporter of power. Mr. Hansen makes his statement based upon BC Hydro figures which don’t count energy created and exported by Alcan, Teck-Cominco and Fortis - all of which form part of our larger public power system, and are considered by the National Energy Board as part of BC's energy imports and exports. We grant these companies access to our public resources to produce and distribute power, in exchange for job creation and access to purchasing excess power they create at an affordable rate. For instance, BC Hydro just bought a share of the power from one of Teck Cominco's dams, which further reduces our need for new private river power, yet Mr. Hansen's government makes no policy change in private power development to reflect this. Perhaps I just call Minister Hanson disingenuous which means, according to Merriam dictionary, “giving a false appearance of simple frankness”.

Last week I spoke to a large audience in Nelson where people are up in arms (figuratively) over the Glacier-Howser Independent power project. This followed on the heels of a public meeting in Kaslo (pop 1000) where 1100 showed up.

These meetings raise the critical question as to what can be done.

Trying to persuade the Ministry of Environment not to approve the project is a waste of time. That the government and companies are as close as Siamese twins is evidenced by the fact that the Environmental Assessment process is held jointly by the company and the senior governments. One of their cute tricks is to hold the public meeting in a small centre like Kaslo rather than the larger centre, Nelson. At these meetings one is out of order if they question the project on its merits!

Assessment of what the public can do is based upon the public having had no input into the government’s energy policy which spawned the independent power projects; having their right to a hearing in their municipal region (taken away by Campbell by Bill 30); and no right to raise questions on the merits of the project at the phony baloney meetings under the tender care of the company and senior governments. This leaves citizens two choices – accept the project and the ruination of their rivers or commit civil disobedience.

The consequences of civil disobedience, because of nice and legal abuse of the court system by the company with the blessing of the Tyrant Campbell, inevitably brings jail. It happens this way.

Meet in Nelson on July 15, 2009. British Columbians are invited to attend.

I write this on the eve of leaving for Castlegar and then Nelson for a big rally at the community centre in Nelson this Wednesday at 7 PM, July 15th. British Columbians are up in arms about not being consulted. Rivers and watersheds are being put into the hands of billionaires while BC taxpayers and our environment pay for the private deals. The Glacier-Houser project has seen no local consultation. DUPONT-AXOR, the private power license holder (see ippwatch.info) and the BC Environmental Assessment Office held three information sessions in Meadow Creek, Kaslo and Invermere but would not meet in Nelson, the largest closest city.to the proposed private power project.

Because the project itself – and all private rivers schemes – seem so preposterous, please bear with me as I lay out the bare bones.

Back in 2002 The Campbell government hatched an “Energy Plan” after meetings with industry. Amongst other things, this plan was for electricity to be developed by private companies only. BC Hydro was not to create any new power except by upgrading their own generators and Site “C” on the Peace River. Grandfathering Site “C” was interesting because it permitted government to say “either we do these private river projects or it’s Site 'C'", knowing that the public did not like the latter at all. It was rather like saying “if you don’t like the paddle we’re about to smack your ass with you can have, instead, 80 lashes with a cat-o-nine tails on your bare back.

This policy was never put to the people. This immense change in how we get our power had no public information disseminated publicly and there were no public meetings. In short, British Columbians have had no say in this dramatic decision.

The government plan, if plan it can be called, gives private industry the right to dam or divert our rivers for power which power must be bought by BC Hydro. Because, for the most part, the private power comes during the spring run-off, BC Hydro cannot use it so it must be exported and here’s the rub – because of the “take or pay” contracts BC Hydro has been forced to enter with the private companies, they can only recover 1/3 to ½  on the foreign market. Under these circumstances Hydro will be bankrupted. “Buy high, sell low” is the Campbell business motto. We are in the early stages but already Hydro owes $31 BILLION to private owners which are all big, offshore corporations.

Premier Campbell … if you think that the ravishing of our rivers for private power with private profits off public property will be tolerated because of the election result you are very mistaken indeed. As John Paul Jones said, “we’ve just begun to fight” - as the recent overflow meeting in Kaslo demonstrated.

You were fortunate, Premier, that the opposition ran such a bad campaign. They never understood the rivers issue and left that work to others outside the political process. You are also lucky that your disgraceful policy is so bad no one believes the consequences. What sane government, it’s asked, would give away billions of dollars to private companies to destroy BC Rivers, for power BC Hydro must buy but can’t use, bankrupting BC Hydro in the process? The answer is, of course, that no sane, decent, caring government would ever think of this idiocy let alone embrace it.

You also think you’ll continue to wipe out our salmon with your fish farm policy which has now become a certified conspiracy with the federal government. On both these issues you’ll face ever increasing anger from citizens. If these issues turn nasty – and all history tells us that’s likely – it will be on your head. You won’t debate these issues; nor will any of your MLAs because you know you’re dead wrong and that what you’re doing amounts to a crime against the environment that belongs to us all, not just General Electric and Marine Harvest.

Yes, Save Our Rivers Society will continue to fight and rally honest citizens to the cause. You are politically right to be gutless and prevent your minister to take the podium with me because you know you have no case – as no doubt he knows too. 

I don’t know what’s happened to the Gordon Campbell who once fought Alcan to save the Stuart Sockeye, telling me that he couldn’t live with himself if the wonderful sockeye salmon he’d seen on a billboard would not be there for his children and grandchildren. What did happen, Premier? A lust for power? A greed for corporate approval? Did power convert you to fascism with occasional elections?

Whatever happened, you’ve ignited a fury that won’t easily be extinguished.

Comments (1) | Add as favourites (139) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 815

As I make my way around  the province I find the following the greatest area of misunderstanding (a misunderstanding fostered and encouraged by the government and the private river people) to be that private power will help take care of BC’s energy needs..

When lawyers see a statement like “fish live in water therefore I must visit the North Pole” they call it a non sequitur; literally “it does not follow”.

The Campbell government and the power producers have a pronounced a classic non sequitur in the private power debate. They say “British Columbia needs or will need power therefore we must have private 'run of river' projects.”

Remember that electricity in bulk cannot be stored and must be used as it is created. BC Hydro "stores" electricity by creating a reservoir behind its dams which can be used to turn their generators. For all intents and purposes, private river plants do not have the ability to store significant amounts of water. In fact they boast of the fact that they don’t create reservoirs. They must, then, rely upon the quantity of the river flow. The amount of energy produced by private power must come from the Spring run-off; when the height of the river drops, as it does after run-off, little if any electricity can be created.

It does not, then, follow that if we need power we can use private river projects because the vast majority of power created by private projects comes at the same time BC Hydro’s reservoirs are full thus have no use for private river power.

In short, the only use for private power is export which is what Donald McInnis, CEO of the Plutonic/General Electric partnership freely admits.

As I write this it's one down, 6 to go on my 7 speeches in 7 days tour. It is my intention to speak in every corner of the province against the privatizing of our power.

Since I began this fight I've been wondering what argument the government was going to put up it being impossible for me to see anything to be said for this energy plan.

Forgive me if I go over some old ground today but as the government's spin is now becoming clearer I think it's time to put some things in perspective.

First, let me say that Save Our Rivers Society is opposed to any privatization of power. We have been well served by BC Hydro since the late 60s and we'd be damned fools to let it go.

Second, here's what the government story is. We need power they tell us and quote statistics to demonstrate this. They use BC Hydro figures to demonstrate this but that does not include the 12% of power that comes from other sources such as Alcan, Teck Cominco, Fortis and the like. The National Energy Board, an independent body which issues the export permits, has BC a net exporter of most years.

At the meeting in Squamish was a man with an interest in private river power and his mantra was "we need power therefore we must encourage private river power. He spent much of his questioning stating and demonstrating the need for more power, especially into the future.

Over the next few weeks I’m going to break down our message into its component parts. I do this because on every possible ground the government and the private power people are dead wrong and, to save a lawsuit, are telling, in Churchill’s words, bushels of terminological inexactitudes.

Today let’s talk about BC’s need for power and, if we need it, how it can be obtained.

It seems to me that the old maxim I learned in Law School prevails: “He who alleges has the onus of proof." That would be the Campbell government. It seems to me that they rest their case on two arguments. Rather than putting forth a white paper with their research and holding public meetings where we, the ignorant rabble can have our say, the reasons given by the Campbell government are these:

1.   The public wants more computers and plasma TVs so we must have more power. (You might note the absence of any science in that assertion!)

2.   BC Hydro, our public power utility, is a net importer of energy and have been for 7 of the last 10 years.  It appears this is nothing more than legalistic trickery: they are very careful to say "BC Hydro," as opposed to the province of British Columbia (and then strip away what they consider as power trading directly under Hydro until they are left with numbers that suit their purposes).  Which explains why the most reliable figures we have - on BC, our public power province - tell a very different story. I ask you this question: which would you prefer, the figures of a government that is deeply committed to private power (BC Hydro, as a crown corporation, is under the thumb of the Campbell Government - and therefore under tremendous duress to back up the government's private power policy), or the National Energy Board, which monitors all sales of energy abroad and which says that BC has been a net exporter of energy for 8 of the last 11 years? (Stats BC's numbers also suggest we are typically net exporters of power.)

So let's consider the creative arithmetic the government is using to hoodwink us into believing we're net importer of power and are therefore in a panic to hand over our rivers to private companies to develop new sources of energy. Here is one way it can be accomplished: You can charge as imports the power we get from Alberta and immediately sell it, “flip” it if you will, to the American Market. A moments thought tells you that the only imports that count are those you use yourself. I use this example. Suppose you make widgets and export 1000 of them each year to the States. Suppose you find that you can buy widgets from Alberta cheaper that you can make them yourself so you buy 2000 widgets from them and export them to the US. Does that mean that we are net “importers” of 1000 widgets? Of course not … the 2000 we imported from Alberta were never for our use domestically. There are several other arithmetical twisters used by the Campbell crowd such as messing with the Columbia River Treaty provisions but the plain fact remains – We British Columbians are net exporters of energy.

Now to the second matter. If we were in need of energy, how would we get it? At this point it must be stated that wind, tidal, and solar power, and these private river schemes provide intermittent power – they can’t produce it when there is no wind, it’s slack tide, the sun’s not out or there isn’t enough water in the river. Moreover, electricity cannot be stored – the amount of hydroelectric power “stored” is in the amount of water in the reservoir available to be converted into power (unlike our historic large public dams, "run of river" power cannot be stored this way). None of the above can produce reliable power all the time and you and I want power at the flip of a switch when ever we want the lights to go on...

Let’s deal with the case at hand – private power plants. And here is the nub of the matter – the only time they can make meaningful contributions of power is during the Spring run-off which is the very time BC Hydro’s reservoirs are full to brimming.

What then if private plants make energy when Hydro doesn’t need it, which is to say all the time; what do they do with their power?

Excellent question, since BC Hydro has been forced by the Campbell government to buy this power at nearly 20x the cost of their own power and forced to sell if at less than they pay for it. Because they can’t use the power itself, BC Hydro must sell it into the grid at a considerable loss. This is the latest market philosophy of the Campbell government, learned at the knee of the Fraser Institute: Buy high and sell low!

Therefore one can see that not only does BC not need power it’s public power company, BC Hydro must buy power it doesn’t and sell it at a loss!

One final note – for the foreseeable future all needs in excess of what Hydro can now produce can be achieved through a modest conservation program, expanding the generators on present dams and install new ones at appropriate dams.

Comments (5) | Add as favourites (222) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 1694