Brace for a Hydro Shock

bigideas_2.jpg
Image by: Jeremy Bruneel

While the B.C. government is extensively promoting the benefits of its “green” private power agenda, BC Hydro customers – including businesses across the province – should get ready for a major sticker shock in the coming years. The era of cheap, publicly owned hydro is rapidly coming to an end.

The B.C. government is transforming the province’s electricity system from one owned and controlled by the public through BC Hydro to one shaped by private energy developers and U.S.-based multinational energy corporations. Rejecting all the evidence that W.A.C. Bennett’s legacy of publicly owned electricity has kept prices down, provided energy security for the province and given B.C. a major competitive advantage, the government has arbitrarily banned new investment by BC Hydro in electricity- generating facilities. This policy forces the Crown corporation to buy energy from private interests through long-term contracts at prices almost double those of other options.

While private power developers are cashing in on lucrative energy-supply contracts from BC Hydro, the government is not telling B.C. businesses that they will be providing the revenue stream, through their electricity bills, that is now enriching the private energy industry. Despite the enormous sums of money BC Hydro customers will pay, from now on the public will get no asset ownership, no long-term energy security and no price protection once these expensive contracts expire. Yet despite the magnitude of these changes, there has been virtually no public debate about the government’s energy policy. It is time for a wake-up call.

We have virtually the lowest hydro rates in North America precisely because we are paying prices based on the cost of public investments made during the 1960s and 1970s. But the government is guaranteeing that the future will be quite different. The 2002 BC Energy Plan (revised in spring 2007) is transforming BC Hydro from a generator of publicly owned electricity to a purchaser of energy from private power producers.

To stimulate the growth of private power, the government is claiming the province faces a looming energy crisis. Simultaneously, through the Energy Plan, it has consciously narrowed the options for dealing with this “crisis” so that private developers are virtually the only ones permitted to meet the province’s future energy needs.

Underlying the private-power energy gold rush is the fact that the government is virtually giving away our water and wind resources. The maximum fee for a water-for-power licence is only $10,000, even though it may generate millions or tens of millions of dollars annually. More than 500 private water-for-power licences (or applications for licences) have been registered on a first-come, first-served basis by private power developers, most since 2001 (visit ippwatch.info for details). These include all the most accessible, and most profitable, sites in B.C. Incredibly, there is no effective restriction on foreign ownership, and, through Bill 40, the government has eliminated restrictions on the export of private energy. The same is true of wind-farm developments, where the government is not only giving huge tracts of land to developers, but has structured the land tenure fees and energy revenues in such a way that the public will get almost no financial benefit for decades into the future.

Does B.C. have better options for the additional energy it may need in the future? The answer is clear: it does. First, the province has 1,200 megawatts of energy (4,300 gigawatt-hours) from the Columbia River Treaty owed to us by the U.S. The government now sells this to the U.S. for far less than what it is paying private power developers in B.C. It should bring this energy back. It could re-power the Burrard natural-gas facility, which provides 950 megawatts of peak power to the Lower Mainland when we need it. It could restrict private energy exports. It could explore whether Site C, with its more than 4,000 megawatts of potential capacity, should be built rather than damming up hundreds of pristine streams. It could lift the ban on BC Hydro building its own new energy facilities – the very approach that currently provides us with such affordable and secure supplies of energy. Finally, it could further expand its Power Smart energy conservation program.

All these options underscore the basic point that a real debate about energy policy is long overdue.

John Calvert is an associate professor at SFU, was a member of the 2005 BC Hydro Provincial Integrated Electricity Planning Committee, and is a director of BC Citizens for Public Power.

Do you have a Big Idea to share with us? Email us at bcb@canadawide.com and let us know.

Related Links
Leave Your Comment
If you'd like to post a comment, please or . When submitted, your comment will be queued for approval.

Please note: If you were registered on the old BCBusiness website, your account no longer exists. Please take five seconds to create a fresh account.
hey, Anonymous #2 - my reference to cowardice is simply that you and the previous anonymous writer refuse to disclose your personal identity. To me, this is cowardice as it amounts to taking potshots while hiding yourself. This I do not do. I also do not do picket lines and in fact, I don't believe in strikes. I believe in the rule of law. Labour disputes should be decided in the courtroom, not the streets - but I digress. Private power producers obviously have zero incentive to encourage conservation. The more we conserve, the less money they make. Do the math.
I need websites for why BC hydro should be privatized
Well Chella: After getting past your insults to "Anonymous", it seems that your argument is that private power developers "will have no incentive to conserve energy, and they will of course have every incentive to maximize profit (at the expense of citizens)" The second point is just pure leftist tripe as I'm sure anyone can tell. The first is ridiculous: why would a power producer conserve energy? I presume you mean that private power production discourages the public from conservation, but I cannot understand the logic in this. Are you saying that the only method of encouraging conservation is artificially creating shortages? Since you "imagine" that Anonymous is an investor in private power (which you insist means he or she is therefore "cowardly"), I can only imagine that you are an NDP/member of a union that opposes 1. investment and 2. any kind of production that can't be unionized and therefore controlled. But this is 2008, not 1908. I too am remaining anonymous. I don't want a picket line at my front door because I disagreed with you.
Well, "Anonymous" first of all - why are you anonymous? Do you not stand behind your comments? Interestingly enough, it is impossible to obtain any information from B.C. Hydro as to the matters you raise in the first paragraph of your comments. I would love to know exactly which of Mr. Calvert's statements are "skewed" - however, you simply state that there are "too many to even begin to argue" (how convenient for you). Rather than "magically conjure up power", Mr. Calvert clearly states that B.C. Hydro should be permitted to work meet this so-called "energy crisis", as in the past. The current government has, however, specifically prevented this, forbidding B.C. Hydro from building any new projects and therefore deliberately placing the matter entirely into private hands. Private power developers will have no incentive to conserve energy, and they will of course have every incentive to maximize profit (at the expense of citizens). I imagine, Anonymous, that you are an investor in private power and this is why you take such a cowardly stand, without putting forward any specific facts to support your opinion.
Mr. Calvert: There are too many skewed statements here to even begin to argue, but the one that seems to be glaring in its absence is how BC Hydro is currently meeting power needs, what those power needs will be in future, and how BC Hydro is going to meet them. it seems you think that the BC Government should somehow magically conjure up power to meet those needs. But if, as I suspect, those needs are increasing, then I would think all the options you outline plus what it is doing now in terms of private power plus buying energy from the U.S. will be required. Also, aren't the days when BC could sit within its own boundaries and not take part in a continental energy system long gone? All utilities today belong to this system and are constantly trading power back and forth.
poll

What's your communication weapon of choice?

What's your communication weapon of choice?

Choices

S M T W T F S
 
 
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
 
 
 
Save over 50% off the newsstand price with a subscription to BCBusiness Magazine Subscribe Now
Other BCBusiness Features
Online and in print, BCBusiness articulates the trends and issues affecting business in BC. The award-winning BCBusiness, essential companion to corporate titans and entrepreneurs alike, delivers provocative BC business news and commentary on traditional and digital platforms: videos, articles, blogs, and columns addressing all aspects of business in BC, including management, marketing, leadership, innovation, technology, careers, human resources, finance, and entrepreneurship. Vancouver small business owners, managers, CEOs, and digital entrepreneurs prize BCBusiness for its signature mix of analysis and opinion on the issues and people shaping business in BC. Join BCBusiness on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn - and at the premier West Coast business networking events, like BC's Top 100 Companies, Entrepreneur of the Year, BC's Top Innovators, and Best Companies to Work for in BC.