The cancellation of TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline in early October had major consequences for a rather unexpected player: Manitoba Hydro.

The company had been counting on the energy demand from the pipeline, and now the cancellation is putting extra strain on a company already plagued by debt and in the middle of building an $8.7 billion dam.

Back in 2014, the provincial utility company anticipated that almost 40 per cent of electricity generated by its proposed 695-megawatt Keeyask dam in northern Manitoba would be allocated to “pipeline load” for the Alberta Clipper, Line 3 and Energy East pipelines.

Specifically, the electricity would be used to run pumping stations, which force crude oil through pipelines via a series of pumps and motors. Among those pumping stations were those that would move bitumen from the oilsands to New Brunswick through the Energy East pipeline.

But Energy East is now officially dead.

A recent document filed by Manitoba Hydro to the province’s public utilities board estimated that will result in a loss of 534 gigawatt-hours in annual demand, equivalent to 12 per cent of the dam’s production — which comes at an awfully bad time given the utility’s ongoing debt issues, proposed rate hikes and cost overruns, which have resulted in the utility laying off  900 staff.

Building Renewables for the Fossil Fuel Industry

The connection between the Keeyask Dam and the Energy East pipeline raises important questions about renewable energy projects that are built, at least in part, to meet the demands of the fossil fuel industry.

On the one hand, powering the industry with cleaner electricity is a step in the right direction. But on the other hand, building new electricity, even when it is renewable, has serious impacts, and hydro is no exception.

It’s not the first time a hydro dam has been proposed to meet the electricity demands of the fossil fuel industry. In British Columbia, the rationale given for the controversial $10.7 billion Site C dam has at times included powering the liquefied natural gas export industry and Alberta’s oilsands.

What has been talked about a lot less in B.C. is that the new Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline would use 1,046 gigawatt-hours of electricity per year (PDF, page 64), or the equivalent of about 20 per cent of the production of the Site C dam (about half of that power will be consumed in B.C. with the other half being consumed in Alberta).

In B.C. that power will be sold at a subsidized rate and is expected to result in a cost to BC Hydro of $27 million a year. In Alberta, the Trans Mountain pipeline will use nearly a quarter of the new generating capacity created by the newly announced wind contracts.

Shifting Justifications for New Dams

Manitoba Hydro’s game plan for the Keeyask dam became clear during two sets of hearings during late 2013 and early 2014.

Peter Kulchyski, professor of Native studies at the University of Manitoba and long-time critic of impacts of hydroelectric projects on northern Indigenous communities, said in an interview with DeSmog Canada that Manitoba Hydro presented two very different narratives.

The first presentations — made to the Clean Environment Commission, which explores social and environmental impacts — saw the energy utility boast about the potential for new hydro projects to help fight climate change by exporting electricity to other jurisdictions and displacing the use of coal and natural gas.

In 2016-17, Manitoba Hydro exported $460 million of electricity to other jurisdictions. But that number has effectively flatlined due to the shale gas boom in the United States. In its most recent annual report, Manitoba Hydro listed “loss of export market access” as one of its most significant risks, alongside “catastrophic infrastructure failure” and “extreme drought.”

Kulchyski said the review of the project then moved on to the Public Utilities Board, which looks at economic modelling. At that point, some of the early financials from the newly built and way over budget 211-megawatt Wuskwatim Dam were emerging. They weren’t good.

At the time, Kulchyski said the Wuskwatim Dam was selling power at four cents per kilowatt-hour while it was costing seven cents per kilowatt-hour to actually produce power. The dam hadn’t ever been profitable (and still hasn’t been to this day, resulting in a restructuring of the agreement with local First Nations).

That’s when the “pipeline load” first entered the picture, Kulchyski said.

“As they were scrambling for where they would sell the power, they publicly came out saying they could sell power to the pipelines that are being built,” he said. “On one hand they’re fighting climate change, on the other hand they’re quite willing to sell to the pipelines.”

The connection between the Keeyask Dam and the Energy East pipeline raises important questions about renewable energy projects that are built, at least in part, to meet the demands of the fossil fuel industry. https://t.co/zn9yyRNL9w

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) January 10, 2018

Manitoba Could Sell Excess Power to Saskatchewan

Despite these concerns, Keeyask is still being constructed, anticipated to be in operation by late 2021. A $5 billion transmission line, Bipole III, is also being built to transport electricity from the dam to the south of the province.

Enbridge — which owns both the Alberta Clipper and Line 3 pipelines — didn’t respond to a request for comment by DeSmog Canada.

Manitoba Hydro still expects Keeyask to have a “pipeline load” of more than 1,000 gigawatt-hours, meaning that one-quarter of the dam’s capacity (4,400 gigawatt-hours) will go to helping pump Alberta bitumen through Line 3 and Alberta Clipper.

That leaves a lot of excess electricity without a clear market though, which could require future ratepayers to cover the difference. Manitoba Hydro is already requesting significant hikes in rates — currently pushing for 7.9 per cent increases per year until 2023-24.

Electrification Will Bring New Demand: Clean Energy Analyst

But there are plenty of opportunities for Manitoba to use the excess electricity from Keeyask in positive ways, Dan Woynillowicz, policy director at Clean Energy Canada, said in an interview with DeSmog Canada. That includes moving to electric vehicles (including freight trucks and buses) and heating buildings with electricity instead of with natural gas.

“In a hydro-dominated system like Manitoba where you’ve got plentiful, affordable, clean power, the emissions benefit of applying that to transportation is particularly significant,” Woynillowicz said. “We certainly need to be capitalizing on that from a climate change perspective.”

He added there’s also the potential for increased exports to the U.S. and other Canadian provinces —especially Saskatchewan, given that it’s right next door and “still has one of the dirtiest electricity grids in Canada.”

“There’s still a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of cleaning up Saskatchewan’s system,” he said. “Definitely one element of that could be increased imports of hydro from Manitoba.”

Canada May Need 150 More Keeyasks to Meet 2050 Climate Targets

Canada’s mid-century long-term low-greenhouse gas development strategy reported that over 100,000 megawatts of additional hydro capacity will be required by 2050 to reach greenhouse gas reduction targets.

That’s equivalent to almost 150 Keeyask dams in capacity.

Canada is the third-largest hydro producer in the world, with over 80,000 megawatts of capacity already in place. One of the benefits of large quantities of hydropower is its ‘dispatchable’ nature, meaning reservoirs essentially act as giant batteries that can be drawn from when needed.

ICYMI: What’s the Future of Hydroelectric Power in Canada?

Yet often left unaddressed by proponents of additional hydroelectric power are the devastating impacts that dams can have on local and Indigenous communities, especially the ability to hunt, fish, trap and gather on traditional lands and waters.

Opponents of hydro dams also point out the high costs of building large dams crowd out small-scale and more localized sources of energy like wind, solar and geothermal.

And Manitoba, a hydro-heavy province, hasn’t seriously explored renewable electricity sources other than hydro. In 2014, a former NDP energy minister accused the utility of making it “virtually impossible to build wind [power] here.” The province has just 260 MW of installed wind energy capacity, less than New Brunswick.

But outside of rapid innovations in battery storage, transmission lines and the emergence  of alternative low-carbon baseload power (such as geothermal), it’s unclear how Canada will dodge the conflict over hydro.

There are some obvious options to help reduce demand, such as energy efficiency retrofits for existing buildings and reducing industrial load.

Woynillowicz noted that the biggest chunks of new demand come from large industrial projects. For instance, in B.C., a single large LNG plant could consume the equivalent of all of the power created by the Site C dam.

Ultimately, the public needs to know the planned end use of new electricity projects before being able to form an educated opinion on them.

With files from Emma Gilchrist.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

It sounds like a renewable energy utopia of the distant future.

Twelve million houses with roofs covered in solar panels. Wind turbines whipping the equivalent energy of 170 Site C dams onto the grid. A popular type of hydro called pumped storage, which often leaves a pinky toe of an environmental footprint compared to the imprint of large dams and their reservoirs.

But this is no futuristic climate-friendly Shangri-La. It’s all part of the U.S. government’s national Hydropower Vision for the next 15 to 35 years, a report unveiled in late July at the world’s largest annual hydro event in Minneapolis.

Developed by the U.S. Department of Energy, the report outlines a very different energy path than the “one dam fits all” approach of the B.C. government, whose single-minded focus on building the $8.8 billion Site C dam on the Peace River blew the Canadian Wind Energy Association right out of the province earlier this year.

In the U.S. vision, construction of new large dams is supplanted by more environmentally-friendly energy development, focusing on a fast-growing type of hydro called pumped storage and the deep integration of hydro with wind and solar power.

“The report tries to articulate a future for hydro that is really built on new types of hydro power facilities that intrinsically find themselves to be smaller in size,” Jose Zayas, the Director of Wind and Water Power Technologies for the U.S. Energy Department, said in an interview with DeSmog.

Zayas said “it would be difficult to imagine” that large hydro facilities like the Hoover Dam and Grand Coulee Dam will be replicated in the U.S. given “environmental considerations” and as long as there are renewable energy alternatives.

Instead, he said existing large U.S. dams will be updated with modern equipment to increase their energy output, and they will dovetail with more variable wind and solar power to ensure a steady electricity supply.

Joining wind and solar is a third musketeer in the U.S. renewable energy transition: pumped storage, a smaller footprint form of hydro that was examined by BC Hydro in 2010 and found to be viable in British Columbia.

A 21st Century Electrical Grid

In a keynote address to the hydro convention, which drew almost 3,000 delegates from around the world, Zayas said the U.S. hydro industry wants to partner with a “growing set of technologies such as solar and wind, and it wants to partner quickly.”

“Think about hydro and pumped storage as an enabler for the transmission and modernization of our 21st century electrical infrastructure.”

In keeping with that objective, Zayas and the many stakeholders who worked on the vision report, including industry and the environmental group American Rivers, dubbed it “A New Chapter for America’s First Renewable Electricity Source.”

The U.S. vision stands in sharp contrast to what Robert Hornung, president of the Canadian Wind Energy Association, called a lack of opportunity to develop new wind projects in B.C., despite a “tremendous untapped potential” for wind development in the province. Hornung said the association was withdrawing from B.C. this year to focus on Alberta and Saskatchewan, “markets which provide the greatest opportunities in the short term to see more wind energy deployed in the country.”

As the Canadian Wind Energy Association exits B.C., wind power in the U.S. will amplify by 150 percent over the next few decades, according to Zayas. Wind facilities in the U.S. already generate 75,000 megawatts of energy a year, while Site C’s projected output is a fraction of that at 1,100 megawatts.

“When you look at the growth curves of wind and solar they’re quite exponential, Zayas said in an interview. “What you find into the future is quite a bit of renewables.”

Complementing the projected increase in wind and solar energy, the U.S. Department of Energy points to the potential expansion of pumped storage, which is capable of generating 36,000 megawatts of new power in the U.S., or the equivalent of building 33 Site C dams.

Rendering of the Yecheon Pumped Storage Hydropower Facility. Image: U.S. Department of Energy

Pumped Storage A Potential for B.C.

A 2010 study commissioned by BC Hydro concluded that pumped storage is a viable renewable energy option in the province, raising questions about why the B.C. government has not embraced pumped storage to produce more environmentally-friendly energy than Site C, which will put more than 100 kilometres of the ecologically-unique Peace River Valley and its tributary valleys under water.

The Royal Society of Canada said the environmental impact of Site C would be more severe than any other industrial project ever examined under Canada’s current environmental assessment act, including the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project.

Former BC Hydro CEO Marc Eliesen told DeSmog that BC Hydro has “too much of a vested interest” in large hydro projects.  The only serious way to examine alternatives to Site C, including pumped storage, would be to establish an independent review body, said Eliesen. “You would have to create an independent commission of inquiry to look into this.”

DeSmog twice asked the B.C. Ministry of Energy and Mines why pumped storage was not chosen as a lower-impact hydro option than Site C, but received no reply. BC Hydro also did not respond to a phone call asking for comment.

Previously, BC Hydro has said Site C is the cheapest option for generating new electricity in the province.

U.S. Hydropower Vision Exposes B.C.’s Short-Sighted Thinking on #SiteC Dam https://t.co/Ue2KBXtePJ @sarahcox_bc #bcpoli #cdnpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) August 10, 2016

Pumped Storage Facility in the Works for Ontario

In pumped storage, water is moved back and forth between two smaller reservoirs in a system that can be closed, effectively recycling the water. Reservoirs can be natural water bodies, blasted in rock formations, or they can be repurposed former mine and quarry sites.

“Water is pumped to the upper reservoir at night when electricity prices are low and released down to the lower reservoir during the day to generate power when needed,” explains Northland Power, the developer of a proposed pumped storage facility in Ontario that will make use of an abandoned mine pit filled with water.  

“It’s the project that keeps on giving,” John Wright, Northland’s lead developer for the project, told DeSmog. “It was an open pit iron mine…Then it was used for crushing gravel and at the next phase of its life it’s going to become a long-term clean energy asset. It’s a pretty good use of a natural resource, the ultimate use in my point of view.”

Construction of the Marmora pumped storage facility will cost Northland Power $900 million and the facility will produce 400 megawatts of power, according to Wright, or about 36 percent of the energy that would be generated by Site C. Northland is seeking a power purchase agreement with the Ontario government and will spend four to five years developing the facility once permits are received.

Wright said pumped storage, developed more than a century ago in Italy and Switzerland, is undergoing a worldwide “renaissance” as governments and industry realize it is a perfect complement to more variable wind and solar energy systems.

Significant Alternatives to Site C Available in B.C.

After former Premier Gordon Campbell announced in April 2010 that the provincial government would seek regulatory approval to build the Site C dam, BC Hydro commissioned a report to evaluate the potential for pumped storage in the Lower Mainland and on Vancouver Island.

Despite the Vancouver-based Knight Piésold consulting firm being given just six weeks to analyze pumped storage potential in southwestern B.C., it came to some thought-provoking conclusions. 

“Are there potentially viable greenfield pumped storage hydroelectric sites in the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island region of southwest British Columbia that are economically viable?” Knight Piésold said in its 44-page report. “The answer to this question is YES, there are numerous potential pumped storage sites that meet the basic criteria established for this study.”

After eliminating pumped storage options in terrestrial parks and salmon-bearing rivers, Knight Piésold, an employee-owned firm with offices in 15 countries, concluded that there are 194 potential pumped storage sites in southwestern B.C.

Each of the 194 sites is capable of producing 500 to 1,000 megawatts of electricity.

Of those sites, Knight Piésold identified 45 as the cheapest to develop.

“Freshwater pumped storage is a proven technology with projects operating worldwide,” said the report, which contains a chart of more than 60 pumped storage projects across the globe, each generating more than 1,000 megawatts of energy.

Pumped storage facilities are common in Europe and Asia as well as in the U.S., where 22,000 megawatts of energy are already generated by this method.

B.C. Pumped Storage Would Steer Clear of Salmon Rivers

Pumped storage facilities around the world range from tiny installations that generate less than 100 megawatts of energy to large facilities in China and the United States that create the equivalent power of nearly two or three Site C dams. A 1,700-megawatt pumped storage facility in Wales, the Dinorwig Power Station, was constructed on the former site of slate quarries that closed in the 1960s.

A 2012 report for BC Hydro found that B.C.’s north coast also has a “high potential” for pumped storage hydro at sites that exclude terrestrial parks and salmon-bearing rivers.

In that report, Knight Piésold identified 33 potential freshwater pumped storage sites on the North Coast, each capable of producing 500 or 1,000 megawatts of electricity.

However, the firm cautioned that the North Coast potential for pumped storage was “slightly less than in the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island, primarily due to the relatively undisturbed nature of the landscape and the lack of many existing hydropower and other man-made reservoirs suitable for use as part of a pumped storage facility.”

Eliesen said times have changed and B.C. needs to re-examine its focus on producing most new electricity from large dams, taking into account factors such as the environment, agriculture, recreation, and the ability to produce electricity more locally.

“Now, because of the trade-offs that are involved, this is a serious matter. There’s no question that a full evaluation of alternative forms of generating energy without seriously impacting the environment…and on a local basis…has to be looked at.”  

On the same day the U.S. Department of Energy released its vision report, it also announced a US$10 million contribution to help build “next-generation” pumped storage facilities and for power generation projects at dams that currently have other uses, such as flood control. Unlike in Canada, where hydro is publicly owned, the U.S. has a mix of public and private hydro.

Zayas said the U.S. Department of Energy is striving for an integrated system of wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, and hydro. “We invest in all of those.”

Image: Site C Construction along the Peace River. Photo: Jayce Hawkins/DeSmog Canada

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Federal and provincial climate policies unveiled over the last year are paving the way for Canada to massively increase the amount of energy the country gets from renewable sources, according to a new analysis released today by Clean Energy Canada.

“For the first time the federal government and the provinces are working together to establish a national climate plan,” Dan Woynillowicz, policy director at Clean Energy Canada, said. “A big piece of the puzzle is not just cleaning up the grid, but electrifying other parts of the economy reliant on fossil fuels.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is drafting a ‘pan-Canadian clean growth and climate change framework’ to be released this fall. Meantime, last year Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada’s main oil and gas producing provinces, set ambitious renewable energy targets. And Ontario recently announced one of the most cutting edge greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction plans in Canada to date.

All of that means things are finally looking up for clean energy in Canada. Federal and provincial politicians now need to make good on their climate pledges for the country to reap even bigger benefits from this $500 billion global industry.

“There’s never been a greater opportunity to move forward on this file for Canada. There is certainly reason for optimism,” Robert Hornung, president of the Canadian Wind Energy Association, told DeSmog Canada.

“We are in a unique moment in time. Not just the federal government, but Ontario, B.C., Quebec, and Alberta have all expressed climate change as a priority,” Hornung said.

Clean Energy Canada says the renewable energy challenge facing Canada right now is different from other heavy greenhouse gas emitting countries like China or the U.S. Nearly 80 per cent of all Canadian electricity comes from non-GHG emitting sources (including nuclear power), three-quarters of which is hydroelectricity.

In the United States, on the other hand, fossil fuels produce close to 70 per cent of the country's electricity.

“We have a comparative advantage in Canada because our grid is already pretty clean,” Woynillowicz told DeSmog. “Canada is in an enviable position.”  

While other countries are focused on switching their electricity base from fossil fuels to clean energy, Canada has a different challenge. Sectors heavily dependent on fossil fuels  — oil and gas, transportation, and industrial processes — have hardly any renewable energy in the mix at the moment.

That means to reduce emissions Canada needs to do things like shift to electric vehicles and efficient electric-based home heating systems (like air and ground source heat pumps).

Has #CleanEnergy's Time Finally Come in #Canada? https://t.co/xncUcQSaPM @standearth @merransmith @SciPolEnv pic.twitter.com/9QMtSvt81X

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) June 16, 2016

“Clean electricity is one of the best tools to fight climate change,” Clean Energy Canada’s executive director Merran Smith told DeSmog Canada. “As we shift to power our economy by clean electricity there will be an increase in demand for electricity and we need that to be clean electricity.”

In B.C., that raises the specter of the controversial Site C dam, but even with an increased demand for electricity in the future (demand in B.C. has been flat for the past 10 years), Site C isn’t necessarily the best solution according to Smith.

“From an economic perspective, Site C is concerning because the cost of renewables like wind and solar power have been dropping dramatically,” she said.

“In the U.S. the price of solar has dropped 80 per cent over last six years and the price of wind has dropped 60 per cent over the last six years. As the cost of those keep going down, that makes them attractive — whereas eight of the last 10 hydro projects built globally have gone over budget.”

A new report released by Bloomberg New Energy Finance this week found that wind and solar will be the cheapest ways of producing electricity in many countries during the 2020s and in most of the world in the 2030s.

“The good news for B.C. is we already have so much large hydro, we really can add intermittent renewables on easily because we already have the large hydro that acts as a battery and acts as storage,” Smith said.

“We could build solar and wind in 100 megawatt units as we need it in rural communities. It could create work around the province. And we could bring it on line as we need it. So a decade from now when we need another 100 MW, it will be even cheaper.”

Woynillowicz sees the emerging national climate framework as the space to address how to power more of the Canadian economy with renewable energy.

“That’s the place to articulate a clear priority of electrification and establish renewable energy targets,” Woynillowicz said. “It will change the conversation around climate away from where jobs are going to be lost to what we are going to create and build.”

Studies have shown the two pillars to decarbonizing any industrialized economy are to first transition completely to non-GHG emitting electrical generation and then run the economy off this clean electricity.

Clean Energy Canada’s analysis highlights energy storage and electricity sharing between provinces as areas where Canada is starting to break ground in electrifying the economy. In regards to the latter, Hornung would like to see more happen politically.

“What the federal government could do is provide a platform for provinces and territories to talk about the shared challenges they face in optimizing their electricity systems and enable collaborative relationships,” Hornung told DeSmog Canada.

Hornung points out more renewable energy is sold to the United States than shared between provinces right now.

Ontario and Quebec, and Alberta and Manitoba have all signed separate memorandums of understanding to take steps toward integrating their electrical grids.

In a report released in February, Clean Energy Canada warned Canada was falling behind its peers on the international stage in terms of renewable energy investments. At the time, it was estimated clean energy investments in Canada had dropped by a whooping 46 per cent, while they increased in the U.S., China, India and the United Kingdom.

However, when analysts with Clean Energy Canada took a deeper dive into the numbers for this latest report, they uncovered the decrease in investments was only 15 per cent when accounting for all clean energy projects, making 2015 the second biggest year for renewable energy investments in Canada.

Meantime, the country’s installed clean energy capacity grew by four per cent last year despite that drop in investment dollars, which the think tank concludes was likely due to policy uncertainty.

Smith noted that an increased price on carbon is needed to level the playing field.

“Right now fossil fuels are getting a free ride for their pollution,” Smith said. “Clean energy is the future. This train is going in one direction and that’s off of fossil fuels and onto clean energy.”

— With files from Emma Gilchrist.

Image: 1010/Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Clean energy investment surged to $497 billion worldwide in 2015 while in Canada investment in renewables experienced a massive 46 per cent plunge to around $5.4 billion, according to a new report released Monday by Clean Energy Canada.

Global investment is up from a total of $420 billion in 2014 with nearly one-third of of new investments occurring in China. Spending on renewables increased in the U.S. by seven per cent, in India by 23 per cent and in Mexico by 114 per cent.    “Canada’s performance was out of step with its peers in 2015,” Clare Demerse, senior policy adviser at Clean Energy Canada, told DeSmog Canada. "This should be a wakeup call, although we hope this is a one-off and not the start of a trend."

Cheaper technology can partially account for the drop in investments in Canada. In the U.S., for example, over the last six years the unsubsidized cost of wind energy went down 61 per cent and 82 per cent for utility-scale solar PV. 

The amount of money invested in Canadian clean energy may have been cut in half last year, but the construction of new renewable energy projects only slowed by 30 per cent, according to Clean Energy Canada.   “When you couple [clean energy's] declining costs with free fuel from the wind, sun, water, biomass and the earth’s heat, you have a formula for ever increasing competitiveness with fossil fuels,” the report states.

Source: Clean Energy Canada, 2016

Uncertain Clean Energy Policy in Canada Played a Role

Imprecise policies and a lack of clean energy regulation created uncertainty for investors in Canada, the report finds.   “Pipelines trumped power lines as a national priority,” it concludes.

Canada has no national climate framework or greenhouse gas regulations for the oil and gas sector. The bulk of Canada's climate action in recent years has emerged at the provincial level.   “In the longstanding absence of federal climate leadership, provinces led the charge," Demerse told DeSmog Canada. But, she added, "some of the provinces that are big players in clean energy were rethinking policies in 2015. Uncertainty is hard on investors.” 

British Columbia, a province praised in recent years for its world-class carbon tax, is investing heavily in a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export industry as well as the major Site C hydrodam. A recent review of B.C.'s Climate Action Plan found the province is unlikely to meet its climate targets. 

Ontario, Canada’s leader in wind power, confirmed it will spend over $25 billion on refurbishing aging nuclear reactors to clean up the province’s electrical grid instead of doubling down on domestic renewable energy or importing relatively cheap water power from Quebec.   However, some progress on provincial climate policies was made at the end of 2015.   Ontario and Manitoba both announced they are joining North America’s largest carbon market by linking up with the Quebec-California cap-and-trade system. A new Alberta government unveiled plans to phase out coal, cap oilsands emissions and introduce a carbon tax. Saskatchewan also set admirable renewable energy targets, which aim to have half of the province's electricity coming from renewable sources by 2050.

According to Clean Energy Canada these provincial targets need to be translated into clear policy to boost investment in the sector. 

Canada’s Clean Energy Potential Barely Scratched 

“Canada is incredibly well positioned for clean energy success,” Demerse told DeSmog. "Yes, we may have the third largest oil reserve in the world, but we are also the third biggest producer of hydroelectricity. And we have the potential to do so much more with our clean energy resources."

Demerse believes this week’s national climate strategy meeting between the federal government, Indigenous leaders and the premiers is the perfect opportunity to lay the foundation for a clean energy plan for Canada. 

“The new federal government can do a lot to change this. Adopting real, meaningful clean energy targets would provide more certainty for investors,” Demerse said.   According to a groundbreaking study led by Stanford Engineering Professor Mark Jacobson that examines how countries can run off of 100 per cent renewable energy by 2050 , Canada has only begun to scratch the surface of its ‘clean energy superpower’ potential.

  Canada's energy mix in 2050 according to Jacobson's analysis. Source: The Solutions Project.

“The main barriers to getting to 100 per cent clean energy are social and political, not technical or economic,” Jacobson said during a climate and energy forum in Washington, D.C., last November.   Canada already generates roughly 60 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources and this is nearly all from hydroelectricity or waterpower. By comparison, Germany produced just over 30 per cent of its electricity from renewable energy in 2015, which was mostly from wind, solar and biomass. Canada has one of the world’s cleanest electrical grids.   But currently, non-water based renewables like wind and solar make up a mere three per cent of the electricity Canada generates.   The Stanford study projects solar and wind could make up 21 per cent and 58 per cent respectively of all of Canada’s required energy by 2050. Waterpower in Jacobson's 2050 scenario becomes the junior partner to wind and solar at 16.5 per cent of the total Canadian energy mix. The study's authors conclude there is no need to build additional hydro dams like the Site C dam in B.C. or continue with nuclear power generation.

Image Credit: NAIT via Flickr 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Geothermal energy offers a low-cost, clean and viable alternative to the $8 billion Site C dam proposed for the Peace River, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Canadian Geothermal Energy Association (CanGEA)

The report, Geothermal Energy: The Renewable and Cost Effective Alternative to Site C, estimates that geothermal power would ring in at about $73 per megawatt-hour (MWh). BC Hydro has estimated the cost of Site C at $83 per MWh. The report also says the proposed geothermal plants could be built for approximately $3.3 billion, less than half the cost of the Site C dam.

“Geothermal can be built as you need it, where you need it, and the capital costs are much lower,” CanGEA Chair Alison Thompson told a press conference in Victoria.

The B.C. cabinet is expected to decide whether or not to proceed with the Site C dam before Christmas. The federal and provincial governments issued environmental assessment certificates for the Site C dam in October, but the project is facing five legal challenges and calls from local governments to delay the decision for a year while other options are considered. The dam would impact 13,000 hectares of agricultural land in the Peace Valley and is opposed by B.C.’s Treaty 8 First Nations.

Read DeSmog Canada’s 12-part series on the Site C dam.

The joint review panel’s report on Site C called the province of B.C. out for failing to pursue research into B.C.’s geothermal resources over the past 30 years. That report provided wind beneath the wings of the geothermal industry, Thompson said.

“Evidence at the Site C hearings created new urgency for the mapping work we had already begun,” she said.

Now that favourability mapping indicates that geothermal can meet all of B.C.’s future energy needs, including the 1,100 MW of capacity and 5,100 gigawatt hours per year of energy that would come from the Site C dam.

“It’s been convenient to dismiss geothermal,” Thompson told the press conference. “This mindset around what people think geothermal is, it’s just not true anymore. And so B.C. has remained on the sidelines over the past 30 years when 25 other countries have installed geothermal power plants.”

Canada is the only country around the Pacific Ring of Fire that does not produce geothermal power at a commercial scale. (Read: 5 Reasons Why Geothermal is Nowhere in Canada.)

CanGEA’s new report lays out 10 key advantages of geothermal when compared to the Site C dam.

Those include the generation of more permanent jobs (2,000 permanent jobs for geothermal vs. 150 permanent jobs for the Site C dam) distributed throughout the province and a reduced need for transmission upgrades.

“The $1 billion northeast transmission line can be avoided or delayed,” Thompson said.

Thompson also pointed to a proposed geothermal power plant in Valemount, an area that consistently experiences brownouts due to its location at the end of a transmission line.

“That project provides base-load power for the area, provides economic stimulus and avoids the need to shore up that [transmission] line,” Thompson said.

There are also opportunities to decrease the greenhouse gas emissions of the oil and gas sector by electrifying the region, displacing the use of fossil fuels at well sites, for instance.

Oil and gas companies have helped identify B.C.’s geothermal potential through their drilling in the northeast of B.C. Often the water and gas that comes up out of the ground is piping hot, which presents another opportunity.

“They could run that through a heat exchanger, which then can be sent to the power plant,” Thompson said. “They can produce micro-power, enough probably for their own operations. They often, on purpose, cool the products before it goes into their machines. It’s a win-win for everybody.”

CanGEA is calling for a one-year moratorium on the final investment decision on Site C to allow time for further due diligence on geothermal. The industry group is also calling on the B.C. Utilities Commission to review its findings and make recommendations by November 2015.

“We’re crazy not to look at this further,” Oak Bay-Gordon Head Green MLA Andrew Weaver told DeSmog Canada. “The government has said many times that they want to protect the ratepayer … that requires them to look at geothermal. It would be irresponsible not to do it.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.