Ninety-seven per cent of energy produced in Manitoba comes from hydroelectricity. The vast majority of that energy comes from a string of dams on the Nelson River system in the province’s north. There, a sixth mega dam, known as the Keeyask, is under construction to provide electricity for export to the United States.

Manitoba’s hydroelectric dams have always been marketed as clean, renewable energy. And yet, these projects have massively transformed the province’s northern ecosystems, impacting the culture, lives and livelihoods of Indigenous communities. 

After decades of undertaking hydroelectric development without Indigenous consent, Manitoba Hydro offered to partner with four Cree First Nations whose traditional territories will be impacted by the Keeyask dam.

The Tataskweyak, Fox Lake, York Factory and War Lake nations signed on to an agreement with Manitoba Hydro that sets aside 25 per cent of the project for “potential” ownership by the First Nations. 

The arrangement has divided these communities, driving a wedge between those attracted to the promises of new industry and those wary of the impacts of development. Many who voted in favour of the partnership agreement said they were told, and believed, the Keeyask dam would be built with or without their cooperation.

Since 2012, the price tag for the dam and transmission line has grown from $9.8 billion to almost $14 billion, while the price of electricity has dropped in the U.S. due to an uptick in fracking. The profitability of the dam has been undercut, affecting the likelihood of local First Nations benefitting from the project.

This is of direct concern for the Tataskweyak Cree Nation, located 60 kilometres upstream of the new dam. Impeded by a critical housing shortage, high unemployment, the trauma of youth suicide and a drug crisis — all within the context of a long-term boil water advisory — the community will face the compounding impacts of the Keeyask dam as water levels begin to rise.

But the Tataskweyak are not alone in their experience.

This collection of photos explores the reality of hydroelectric development in northern Manitoba within the broader devastation of Canada’s ongoing history of environmental colonialism.

Robert Spence rests while cutting firewood near his trapline on the Churchill River, where he takes his family to hunt moose each fall. Spence is an elected councillor of the Tataskweyak Cree Nation, known as the community of Split Lake. At one time, Spence was able to provide for his family as a commercial fisherman and fur trapper, but he left the profession after the fishery became unprofitable due to declining stock and fish quality. Spence has long been a critic of Manitoba Hydro and yet, as a councillor, works closely with the utility provider in an effort to mitigate further impacts on the land, the river and his community.

A fisherman’s boat approaches Two Mile Channel, an artificial channel created by Manitoba Hydro between Playgreen Lake, upstream from the community of Norway House Cree Nation, and Lake Winnipeg. Historical construction activities in the 1970s resulted in soil and groundwater contamination and construction debris along the channel’s banks. Significant erosion continues around the artificial channel to this day, resulting in the sedimentation of Playgreen Lake, which impacts drinking water as well as prevents light penetration and oxygen production in the broader ecosystem.

Aalaiyah wears a Keeyask hat while she plays on riprap-enforced river banks that surround the community of Split Lake, 60 kilometres upstream of the dam. Elders often speak about how they used to swim and play in the shallow waters, catching crayfish that are now rarely seen. They lament that their grandchildren are unable to do the same as the shoreline in normally flooded and the polluted waters are known to cause rashes.

Raymond Anderson of the Fox Lake Cree Nation fishes next to the Kettle dam near Gillam. His grandfather’s house was bulldozed during construction to facilitate development of hydroelectricity on the lower Nelson River in the 1960s. Anderson works for Manitoba Hydro. “I started working in 1988. I’d never thought I’d work at hydro for 25 years,” he says. “Hydro isn’t all bad, you know. They did a lot of bad in the past, but it’s changed — they can’t get away with what they used to.”

Jackson Osbourne holds an old image to compare a marshy bay near his home before and after it had been flooded by the nearby Jenpeg dam in the community of Cross Lake, home to the Pimicikamak Cree Nation. Regulated water flow from the Jenpeg dam has impacted the community through drastic and sudden fluctuations in water level, causing substantial long-term erosion, difficulty navigating the water by boat and dangerous ice conditions for travel in the winter months. The cumulative impacts have devastated wildlife and fish populations and eroded a cultural way of life.

Father Kennith Kitchekeesik stands at the doorway to the church during a funeral for James Beardy, who died due to diabetes complications in Split Lake on Sept. 20, 2018. Diabetes has become a health crisis in many First Nations communities, where the problem is linked to changing diets that can no longer rely on traditional foods.

A cross marking the place where Fox Lake member “Big” John Henderson killed himself at age 42, directly below the Long Spruce dam on the Nelson River near Fox Lake First Nation. Henderson was employed by Manitoba Hydro at the time of his death. His sister Sarah says whenever her brother was off work, he was in the bush.

From left to right: Cohen, Carter and their cousin Richard harvest plants on an island in the Churchill River during a moose hunting trip. Annual hunting trips to the traplines are supported by funding from Manitoba Hydro, which covers the cost of flights under what is known as the Land Access Program. The program supports the cost of travel because hunting and fishing near their community of Split Lake on the Nelson River have been severely impacted by hydro development.

Langford Saunders, president of the Norway House Fisherman’s Co-op, rests in his boat after a day of commercial fishing on Lake Winnipeg in 2016. Many fisherman in Manitoba’s north complain of changes to their waterways due to hydro regulation, from a green slime that appears in the water to debris that gets caught in their nets. They also speak of catching more lower grades of fish, such as mullet, while noting a decrease in the abundance of valuable pickerel and whitefish.

Jared Morde and Jared Lachose stand for a portrait on the streets of Easterville, Man. Easterville, the reserve community of the Chemawawin Cree Nation, was founded in 1962 after the nation was forcibly relocated from its original community closer to the mouth of the Saskatchewan River during the construction of the Grand Rapids dam.

Fisherman pack their catch at the Playgreen Point Station processing facility near Norway House Cree Nation. Commercial fishing continues to be a main employer of northern First Nations communities in Manitoba, but impacts on water from hydroelectric development has negatively impacted the industry.

Former councillor for the Tataskweyak Cree Nation and teacher Melanie Spence is interviewed by a reporter about the Keeyask dam and hydro impacts to her community.

Able Flett, from the Tataskweyak Cree Nation, returns to the community after taking youth out on the land for a traditional knowledge program. To reach their camp, the group had to pass the Kelsey dam, the first dam built on the Nelson River. It was completed in 1960 to power the Vale Nickel mine and the new town of Thompson.

Fisherman’s helper Murdock Saunders during his work day fishing on Lake Winnipeg near Norway House First Nation.

Bruno Decesco buys furs at the Thompson Fur Table from local trappers in December 2018. Decesco has been buying furs in Thompson since 1972. Many tappers depend on the income they generate from trapping to cover Christmas expenses.

Split Lake Councillor Robert Spence reaches for a knife while butchering a moose during a hunting trip to his trapline on the Churchill River. The meat is flown back by plane and shared with Elders in the community of Tataskweyak Cree Nation. In recent years, fewer moose have been successfully hunted in and around the community and many believe it is due to the loss of willows, a favourite food source for moose, along the riverbanks due to erosion from hydro dams.

Community priest Martha Spence reads from a Bible written in the Cree language in her home in Split Lake. Spence spent a year as a cultural awareness assistant at the Keeyask dam site, working to reduce racism and prejudice toward First Nations workers. But she says she doesn’t approve of the dam. “Us Elders, we are sad in our hearts … each time I go there, I cry.”

Jonathan Kitchekeesik, from the community of Tataskweyak First Nation, collects plants for medicinal tea on an island in Gull Lake, which was recently flooded during the impoundment of the Keeyask dam in September 2020. Kitchekeesik participated in the environmental assessment for the Keeyask project and was one of the members of his community to support the dam, believing it would provide good jobs. But more recently, he has begun to speak critically about the project and worries fellow Tataskweyak Nation members have become spiritually sick because of the community’s involvement in the dam. “We have funerals every week. Something is going on. I think we are being punished for what we did.”

Caleb shows off his catch on a beach that is now lost to permanent flood waters from the impoundment of the Keeyask dam in August 2020.

Zachary Kitchekeesik carries wood for a bonfire on the beach with his friends in Split Lake.

Hayden Flett and Marcus Gay walk the roads of Split Lake.

Protesters march outside the headquarters of Manitoba Hydro in Winnipeg during World Water Day on March 22, 2019.

Hydro workers dangle above the ground as they build the Bipole III transmission line, which will carry energy south from the Keeyask dam once completed.

Delaney Mcgilvery, Keenan Young and Mitchell Turner of the Misipawistik Cree Nation work as fisherman’s helpers on Lake Winnipeg near Grand Rapids. The Grand Rapids dam on the mouth of the Saskatchewan River was the first dam built in northern Manitoba and severely impacted the fishing industry for years.

Players use homemade sticks to play hockey during the 60th anniversary of the Cross Lake Trappers’ Festival. The festival includes a dog sled race, square dancing, jigging, a talent show and a contest to name the king and queen trappers.

Children play on the roof of an old cabin in the community of Cross Lake, home to the Pimicikamak Cree Nation. In 1977 Cross Lake and four other First Nations signed the Northern Flood Agreement with Manitoba Hydro and the Government of Canada for compensation for the impacts of Lake Winnipeg regulation and diversion of the Churchill River. The broad agreement, which would last the life of the projects, stipulated that Manitoba Hydro and the federal government would offer economic stimulus to the communities and seek “the eradication of mass poverty and mass unemployment.” The agreement went unfulfilled by the province and Canada until four of the five First Nations settled on new agreements with large cash payments in the 1990s. To this day Cross Lake has refused to enter into any new agreements and continues to advocate for the implementation of the Northern Flood Agreement.

A caribou carcass sits on the side of a winter road during the caribou migration near Split Lake. The caribou hunt has always been vital for the survival of the communities in the north. In 2016 Canada’s barren-ground caribou herds were listed as threatened and are in decline.

Kara Blacksmith, left, and her twin sister, Fara, embrace while visiting the grave of their late father, Abrose Thomas Ross. Ross died in 2015 after falling through ice while driving an ATV in the community of Cross Lake, home to the Pimicikamak Cree Nation. The water levels on Cross Lake fluctuate widely due to the nearby Jenpeg dam. The change in water levels causes unstable ice conditions and dangerous travel in winter, a common concern for many northern communities living near dams.

Father Kennith Kitchekeesik administers a funeral in Split Lake. The banks of the cemetery have been reinforced by riprap to prevent erosion after human remains were found exposed. “Skull and bones are starting to pop out here and there along the banks,” Kitchekeesik says. “Hydro is flooding our sacred grounds, where people were buried 50 or 100 years ago. They are now just drifting down the Nelson River.”

The Keeyask dam construction site at Gull Rapids on the Nelson River in June 2019. Since 2012, the cost of the dam and associated transmission lines has increased from $9.8 billion to almost $14 billion. The dam will create a flood reservoir that will cover 93 square kilometres. A hydro impact report for the Fox Lake Cree Nation notes that, due to more than 50 years of hydro development, the community has permanently lost the sound of “Kischi Sipi,” or the voice of the rapids, at each of the dam locations.

A mural commissioned by Manitoba Hydro depicting Indigenous children on the bank of a blue river is a visual landmark in the city of Winnipeg. Hydroelectric energy is often marketed as a reliable resource that is “clean and green” to consumers, but the story is more complicated for the communities near these dams. This is especially true for the Indigenous communities forced to contend with the province’s legacy of environmental and cultural degradation.

Hunters from Split Lake drive the winter ice roads looking for caribou crossing during the winter herd migration. The community of Split Lake has been severely impacted by hydro development’s degradation of the landscape for the better part of a century — despite long-standing efforts of the Split Lake Cree First Nation to prevent dam construction. In the 1960s, the Kelsey dam flooded 150 kilometres of land along the Nelson River upstream from Split Lake.

Commercial fisherman Leon Kencatch fishes with his grandson, James Walker, on Cedar Lake in the community of Easterville. When the new site of Easterville was created, a number of problems for the community arose. The soil thin and poor quality as a thick layer of limestone covered the area. This prevented the community from building pit toilets and eventually the well water the community depended on was contaminated with human waste. In 1970, the dam’s flooding was found to have caused mercury contamination in Cedar Lake, forcing the government to shut down the fishing industry many in the community depended upon. At the same time, the trapping industry declined due to the loss of beaver and muskrat habitat.

The Long Spruce dam was the fourth dam built on the Nelson River in the 1970s. It is near Gillam, about 745 kilometres northeast of Winnipeg. When the dam was built, water behind the structure rose by 26 metres, flooding the river and smaller estuaries over 13.7 square kilometres.

Students play outside the Split Lake School on Halloween night in 2018.

Tataskweyak Cree Nation Elder Betsy Flett stands outside her home in Split Lake. “I have no hope for the future,” she says. “You won’t be able to live here cause it’s gonna flood. It’s already flooded where our loved ones rest. I tell my kids, ‘When I die, why don’t you just throw me in the water, because that’s where I’m gonna end up anyways.’ ” Although Tataskweyak Cree Nation is an official partner in the new Keeyask dam, years of impacts, trauma and broken promises from Manitoba Hydro have eroded people’s trust in the provincial utility.

Indigenous spiritual teacher Allen Keeper holds a dead snowy owl that was found near the base of the Long Spruce dam. Snowy owls are a sacred animal to the Cree people and Keeper planned to use the creature’s feathers for ceremonial purposes.

A cemetery is illuminated by the Northern Lights in the Tataskweyak Cree Nation community. Due to fluctuating water levels and erosion along Lake Winnipeg, Manitoba Hydro was forced to reinforce the banks surrounding the cemetery. Human ancestral remains from historical cemeteries have been found in the lake in recent years.

The Vale Nickel Mine near Thompson in northern Manitoba. The town of Thompson was originally founded in 1956 as a mining town and was the impetus for building the Kelsey dam, the first hydroelectric dam on the Nelson River. The Kelsey dam paved the way for more dams on the river system, which now produce 75 per cent of Manitoba’s electricity.

A trapline and cabin is seen next to the 1,384-kilometre Bipole III transmission line, which was completed in 2018 to transport energy from the Keeyask dam. The transmission line cuts through numerous First Nations territories and cost $5.04 billion, far more than its original price tag of $2.2 billion. Transmission lines add to the impacts of northern Manitoba’s remote hydroelectric dams by cutting through swaths of forest, muskeg and farmland. Herbicides are also applied to the land below the lines to prevent new growth.

With files from and edited by Carol Linnitt. Assigning editor, Emma Gilchrist. Cultural editor, Stephanie Wood. Copy editor, Raina Delisle.

Editor’s note: Aaron Vincent Elkaim’s documentary work in northern Manitoba was supported by funding from the Ontario Arts Council and the University of Manitoba’s Wa Ni Ska Tan, an organization that works with hydro-impacted communities. Neither organization had any influence on the production of this work.

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.

For eight years, Graham Lane headed a watchdog commission that raised red flag after red flag about the Keeyask dam hydro project on Manitoba’s Nelson River.

Politicians ignored the warnings and in 2012 Lane resigned as chair of Manitoba’s Public Utilities Board, concerned that Manitoba Hydro had strayed far from its main purpose — to provide low cost energy to Manitobans.

Now the retired chartered accountant is speaking out in the hopes of stemming the losses from the Keeyask dam project and a related transmission line, which he calls “an albatross around the necks of Manitobans.”

“In Manitoba basically everything has gone wrong,” Lane told The Narwhal. “It’s quite a disaster.”

Even though the utilities board kept flagging “runaway expenses and changing markets” as reasons to reassess the projects, Lane said the provincial government “just kept going” while the price tag for the dam and transmission line soared from $9.8 billion to almost $14 billion, with the dam’s final cost potentially $2 billion more.

“I’d had enough. I hung up my skates. I waited my year away. And then I started writing columns about it.”

‘Vast majority of Canadians don’t even know what Keeyask is’

The lesser known Keeyask dam joins B.C.’s Site C dam and Labrador’s Muskrat Falls dam on the list of hugely over budget big hydro projects currently under construction in Canada.

“Keeyask seems to fly beneath the radar,” said Garland Laliberte, a dean of engineering emeritus at the University of Manitoba. “Muskrat Falls gets a lot of exposure and even Site C gets more coverage. I think the vast majority of Canadians don’t even know what Keeyask is let alone what problems it’s causing in this province.”

Four years into construction 730 kilometres northeast of Winnipeg, the Keeyask dam will inundate 93 square kilometres of the Nelson River and boreal taiga lands or “snow forests” of pine, spruce and larch. It will destroy spawning areas and other habitat for fish such as sturgeon and result in habitat loss, alteration and fragmentation for caribou, moose and beaver.

Like the Muskrat Falls and Site C dams, the Keeyask project will also have a significant impact on Indigenous peoples, eliminating trapping, fishing and hunting sites in the traditional territory of Treaty 5 nations. The dam, which will be built at Gull Rapids, is named after the Cree word for gull.

With three large dams in the works, Canada is bucking the trend in Europe and North America, where the unacceptable price tag and profound social and environmental impacts of large hydro projects means that more big dams are being dismantled than are being built.

Keeyask dam map. Image: Manitoba Hydro

Laliberte said the global energy market has changed far faster than Canada’s politicians realized, as the price of wind and solar energy plummets, new energy storage options become available and the cost of building large hydro dams soars, in part because of hefty payouts to affected Indigenous communities.

Manitoba Hydro, for instance, has paid $169 million to First Nations who will be impacted by the project and is expected to pay out another $100 million.

“I think the main driver is politicians not understanding the market and thinking that it’s good to be seen to be investing, in all three cases, in renewable energy and thinking it’s going to fly,” Laliberte said in an interview.

“And our politicians were too busy doing other things and they believed that the market doesn’t change. And, of course what happened is that the speed of change now is so much greater than it was even 10 years ago and these guys went out on a limb and they got caught.”

Coalition warns of ballooning Keeyask costs

LaLiberte is a founding member of a grassroots Manitoba group called the Bipole 111 Coalition. The coalition was established by engineers — most of them retired from careers in Manitoba Hydro, the University of Manitoba and the consulting world — to inform provincial hydro customers about the impacts of proceeding with construction of the transmission line and Keeyask dam.

The coalition’s members include dozens of farmers in the Red River Valley whose land is being expropriated for a transmission line that will run through the heart of Manitoba’s most productive agricultural region, dividing farm lands.

The coalition is named after the line that will carry Keeyask’s energy southward, where Laliberte estimates it will be sold to U.S. markets for an average of $36 per megawatt hour even though it will cost about $140 per megawatt hour to produce. One consultant for the utilities board warns the Keeyask dam could balloon by another $2 billion by the time it becomes partly operational in 2021.

Lane said coalition members call the Keeyask dam “our stranded white elephant.”

“The Americans will buy [the power.] Of course they’ll buy it. But they’ll only buy it at a price that works for them.”

Watchdogs undermined

The Keeyask, Site C and Muskrat Falls dam projects have much in common besides their hefty environmental footprint, which includes poisoning fish, a traditional food source for Canada’s Indigenous peoples, with methylmercury.

In all three cases, the independent watchdog body that normally looks out for the public interest was removed, hamstrung or ignored by provincial politicians who were determined to push ahead with big hydro projects even though their electricity was not needed domestically.

B.C., for instance, has had so much extra power that BC Hydro has paid independent energy producers not to generate electricity. And as the Site C project moved forward, BC Hydro slashed its budget for energy conservation programs — programs that according to BC Hydro had saved about as much energy as the Site C dam would produce.

In each province, a change in government brought an opportunity to cancel the projects as costs surged and far cheaper, more nimble and less destructive renewable energy sources became readily available. Yet those opportunities went unseized, with newly elected governments of different political stripes continuing construction and approving cost overruns of billions of dollars.

That has led to another striking parallel: when the dams are complete, after seven to nine years of construction, their electricity will be sold for considerably less than it costs to produce, leaving hydro customers in all three provinces on the hook financially.

The impending pinch is already being felt in Newfoundland and Labrador, where the cost of the Muskrat Falls dam on the Churchill River, now nearing completion, has jumped from $6.2 billion to $12.7 billion. Hydro rates are expected to double as a result, and households can calculate how much their bills will likely increase.

Manitoba Hydro recently asked for annual 7.9 per cent rate hikes. Instead, a rate hike of 3.6 per cent was approved this year.

But it’s only a matter of time before the “amazing amounts of money” spent on the Keeyask dam and transmission line need to be accounted for, Lane said.

“If costs get to the point where you’ve got government siphoning it off to the sides so that ratepayers aren’t going to be too shocked when they go to the polls this is a bad thing.”

In B.C., the $10.7 billion bill for the Site C dam — which will flood 128 kilometres of the Peace River and its tributaries, destroying prime farmland, Indigenous burial sites and habitat for more than 100 species vulnerable to extinction — will only come due if the project becomes operational about five years from now.

In October, a B.C. Supreme Court judge ordered that a full civil trial, to determine whether or not the Site C project violates treaty rights, must take place before the reservoir is flooded, raising the possibility that British Columbians could be left with a stranded asset if two Treaty 8 First Nations win the case.

Site C dam construction along the Peace River, B.C. Photo: Garth Lenz / The Narwhal

Viability of large hydro dams a question in clean energy future

Lane and Laliberte question whether large hydro dams are still financially viable because there are much cheaper and faster ways to produce clean electricity.

“I can’t see another dam being built in Manitoba,” Lane said. “There’s probably enough river opportunities to build a couple more. But they’re gone. There’s no need for them with the renewables and even with natural gas, the energy efficiencies and everything else under the sun.”

Laliberte pointed to a recent call for bids to replace coal plants in Pueblo, Colorado. Out of 430 bids, 350 were for renewables, he said. The median price for wind power was US $18 per megawatt hour, and the median price for wind power with storage was US $21 per megawatt hour.

The Site C dam’s power, by comparison, will cost at least $120 per megawatt hour to produce, according to independent energy experts such as Eoin Finn, a former partner with KPMG, one of the world’s largest accounting and consulting firms.

“You’ve got too much electricity and you’ve got a lot of hydro in your system now in B.C.,” Laliberte pointed out. “So you have a lot of storage already. Can you really justify Site C in the B.C. circumstance on the basis of storage? I would be surprised.”

“So how are we going to sell this electricity? What are we doing in Canada just because we have hydro and we can claim that it’s renewable, although many would challenge how renewable it is considering what the impact is on the environment?”

Among other environmental impacts, large dams are major emitters of greenhouse gas emissions during construction, due to vast amounts of concrete used to build them and the burning of slash piles when tracts of land are cleared for transmission lines. Reservoirs are also significant carbon emitters, with about 80 per cent of emissions coming from methane, a greenhouse gas 34 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

A November 7 statement from the Bipole 111 coalition and the Manitoba Energy Council noted that Manitoba Hydro’s claim that the transmission line was needed for reliability has never been proven, pointing out that Manitoba Hydro’s reputation as the “crown jewel” of the province is in “tatters.”

“The proponents in the NDP provincial government and Manitoba Hydro who championed the expansion are long gone, living comfortably on pensions and termination benefits,” noted the statement.

The energy council, established this month by Bipole 111 coalition members, aims to find ways to promote the “economic, efficient and beneficial” use of electricity moving forward.

Dams face costly retroactive scrutiny

Faced with Manitoba Hydro’s insolvency, the Manitoba government recently announced a $2.5 million review to examine if the projects were based on sound economics and why the Keeyask project — like the Site C and Muskrat Falls projects — was approved in the absence of domestic demand.

The Manitoba review comes on the heels of a $37.5 million inquiry launched by the Newfoundland and Labrador government to determine why the Muskrat Falls dam proceeded, why it is so over budget, and whether the decision to exempt it from independent review was justified. As inquiry hearings continued last month, 500 workers were sent home from the Muskrat Falls construction site because there was no money to pay them.

The appointment of former B.C. premier Gordon Campbell to head the Manitoba review concerns Lane, who pointed out that Campbell has little experience in this area.

Campbell championed the Site C dam, announcing it as a $6.6 billion project when he was premier.

Campbell’s government also changed the law to remove the watchdog B.C. Utilities Commission (BCUC) from scrutinizing the Site C project to determine if it was in the financial interest of BC Hydro customers. A two-year BCUC review in the 1980s rejected the dam, which was also turned down in the early 1990s by BC Hydro’s board of directors on the grounds that its energy was not needed and the project was too expensive and unnecessarily destructive.

Campbell, now the CEO of Hawksmuir International Partners, a company that appears to have no website, has until December 2019 to deliver his report.

Lane said he believes the review is a “set up” to help Manitoba’s ruling Conservative government “whack the NDP before the next election.”

Manitoba’s NDP government approved the Keeyask project and the Conservative provincial government opted to continue the project after it was elected in 2016, despite repeated warnings that it was a boondoggle.

“You can just see it coming,” Lane said. “They’ll be labelling the waste and the cost…but it won’t necessarily be an open transparent process.”

Lane and other members of the Manitoba Energy Council are calling for a transparent, independent public inquiry to determine why the checks and balances of Manitoba’s system failed. Such an inquiry would allow the books to be “thrown open” and the ability to call witnesses so “people could actually understand what’s happened over this period of time,” said Lane.

In one column for the Winnipeg Sun, Lane wrote that, “Hard questions need to be asked about governance, political oversight, the influence of engineering contractors, the competence of executive managers, the advice provided by consultants, and the role of labour unions in this train wreck.”

“None of those parties will emerge looking good, but it is time to ensure a ‘never again’ future for key provincial infrastructure,” he wrote.

Lane also said that special attention needs to be placed on the “lack of action” by Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister, who had an opportunity to cancel the project after he was elected.

Pallister, along with his cabinet and advisors, failed to “grasp the immensity of the problem and take appropriate actions,” Lane said.

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.

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.

BC Hydro’s new CEO Chris O’Riley has written a letter to the B.C. Utilities Commission stating that the crown corporation will not meet the timeline for river diversion for the Site C dam, which will add $610 million to the project’s price tag.

“BC Hydro has encountered some geotechnical and construction challenges on the project and the risk to the river diversion timeline has now materialized,” O’Riley wrote.

“Based on the recent completion of a constructability review and an executive meeting with our Main Civil Works contractor on September 27, 2017, we have now determined that we will not be able to meet the current timeline for river diversion in 2019.”

The letter was in response to questions set out in the BCUC’s preliminary report issued on Sept. 20th.

ICYMI: What That 205-Page BCUC Report on the Site C Dam Actually Said

“Not meeting the current river diversion timeline has created new pressures on the project’s budget. We estimate that this development in the project is expected to increase its cost by 7.3 per cent or $610 million, for a total forecast project cost of $8.945 billion,” reads the letter.

BC Hydro had identified risks to the river diversion timeline in its August 30 filing with the B.C. Utilities Commission. An independent audit by Deloitte also identified the risk.

"BC Hydro are finally being a bit more transparent. It’s what we had expected for some time that this project has been mismanaged," said former BC Hydro CEO Marc Eliesen.

BREAKING: Site C Dam $600 Million Over Budget, Will Miss River Diversion Timeline, Says BC Hydro CEO https://t.co/ExEm9pgmu6 #SiteC #bcpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) October 5, 2017

The Site C dam is the most expensive public project in B.C. history and, if completed, will flood more than 100 kilometres of river valley, destroying farmland and First Nations spiritual sites.

“Today’s filing provides an opportunity for us to share new information with the commission and the public,” O’Riley wrote in his letter. “Like all large, complex projects, Site C faces risks and uncertainties.”

The letter also notes that while the delay will set some activities back a year, there was a one-year float built into the schedule and BC Hydro is “confident we can still deliver this project ton time by November 2024.”

But Eliesen says that’s not a credible claim.

“There’s no way they’re going to meet the 2024 deadline. Keep in mind we’ve only completed two years of a nine-year project. We’ve got seven years to go with all of the problems and challenges and geo-technical issues,” Eliesen told DeSmog Canada.

The BC Hydro letter also notes that “due to the project’s complexity, we expect to continue to face risks in other areas, including our second largest procurement (i.e. the Generating Station and Spillway) that remains open and the highway realignment.”

Eliesen estimates the final price tag on Site C will escalate to $12 billion if the project is not terminated.

ICYMI: Revealed: Inside the B.C. Government's Site C Spin Machine

ICYMI: EXCLUSIVE: B.C. Government Broke Law to Expedite Site C Dam Construction, Legal Experts Say

“It is following almost the identical track that the other two major hydro projects in Canada — Keeyask in Manitoba and Muskrat Falls — have followed.”

Those two projects have been struck by major cost overruns and delays.

Despite the challenges Site C is facing, the letter states that BC Hydro’s analysis “continues to confirm that completing Site C as planned is still the most cost-effective option for our customers.”

“We remain committed to Site C and are confident in our ability to deliver the project,” the letter reads.

Eliesen finds that conclusion “totally bizarre” and credits the “very good work” of the Deloitte consultants for forcing BC Hydro to admit the project is over budget and behind schedule.

“To try to complete this project at this time is throwing good money at bad,” he said. “All of the evidence that’s coming out from this inquiry is that we don’t need the power.”

DeSmog Canada first reported on June 30, 2016, that the Site C dam was behind schedule and over budget. Documents obtained via Freedom of Information legislation later revealed a co-ordinated attempt by BC Hydro and the Premier's Office to discredit the story.

Image: Site C dam construction June 2016. Photo: Garth Lenz|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.