Revelations from DeSmog Canada’s exclusive sit-down interview with Harry Swain, the chair of the panel that reviewed the $8.8 billion Site C dam, were raised during question period in the B.C. legislature on Thursday.

Andrew Weaver, Oak Bay-Gordon Head MLA and Deputy Leader of the B.C. Green Party, asked the government about the economics of the Site C dam project in light of Swain’s unprecedented interview.

Swain, a former Deputy Minister of Industry Canada and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, is thought to be the first review panel member in Canadian history to speak out about a project in this manner. His comments to DeSmog Canada prompted follow-up by the Globe and Mail, CBC, CKNW and CFAX.

“Mr. Swain was very clear that the government was rushed in approving Site C, and British Columbians will pay for their haste,” Weaver said during question period. “As Mr. Swain said: ‘Wisdom would have been waiting for two, three, four years to see whether the projections they’ — that’s BC Hydro — ‘were making had any basis in fact.’ That’s not exactly a glowing endorsement for the fiscal underpinning of Site C.”

The panel that reviewed Site C predicted that the dam will lose $800 million in its first four years of production while it sells excess power for a third of its cost on the export market.

“My goodness, we could use that money to build a state-of-the-art sewage system in Victoria,” Weaver quipped.

Weaver continued during question period:

“Mr. Swain is only the most recent person to suggest waiting a few years to see if electricity demand for the project materializes. We could still build Site C down the road if necessary, but we could use the additional time to properly explore cheaper alternatives like our vast geothermal potential in B.C. We have the time. LNG final investment decisions are delayed or not happening at all or somewhere down the yellow brick road or perhaps in never-never land.”

Weaver asked Bill Bennett, the Minister of Energy and Mines: “Given the massive costs associated with rushing into Site C, will he hit the pause button on construction for two to four years, as recommended by Mr. Swain, and use the time to save British Columbians money and explore viable alternatives?"

Bennett responded saying, “I categorically disagree with the premise of the question” and then went on to say: “Fair enough questions about the need for the electricity, the cost of the project. These are all legitimate issues that we should be debating in this House.”

Bennett then quoted several excerpts from the panel’s report, including that Site C “would be the least expensive of the alternatives, and its cost advantages would increase with passing decades as inflation makes alternatives more costly” and that BC Hydro “has done a responsible job in forecasting.”

The panel's report also said it did not have the information, time or resources to look at the accuracy of cost estimates and recommended that, if the project proceeds, costs and need should be examined in detail by the province’s independent regulator, the B.C. Utilities Commission. The panel noted it could not conclude the dam was needed on the schedule presented and said the province had failed to investigate alternatives — something it was instructed to do 32 years ago, when the utilities commission first turned down the Site C dam on the Peace River. 

Swain called this failure to research alternatives a ‘dereliction of duty’ in his interview with DeSmog Canada.

“Those are very strong words from a very highly regarded senior official from the Canadian government,” Weaver said Thursday in the legislature. “To be even more blunt, it’s recklessness on the part of the government.”

Weaver continued:

"What we need right now is a government that is willing to show leadership on this, willing to put good policy ahead of ideological politics. My question to the minister is this. Will he listen to the call from every member of this side of the House, along with the expert opinion of the joint review panel and countless others, to send the Site C project to the British Columbia Utilities Commission for a proper regulatory review?"

Bennett continued his refusal to send the project for a review by the B.C. Utilities Commission.

Bennett responded:

"B.C. Hydro figures that we’re going to need 1,100 megawatts of electricity in 2024. We set about, over the past two years, to determine what’s the best way to get that 1,100 megawatts of electricity. We looked at absolutely everything, and the decision that we made on this side of the House was to honour the ratepayer. We chose the option that is the fairest, lowest cost to the ratepayer, but that side of the House wants us to do something different."

But the panel that reviewed the Site C proposal found the government hadn't looked at "absolutely everything," as Bennett states.

“The panel concludes that a failure to pursue research over the last 30 years into B.C.’s geothermal resources has left BC Hydro without information about a resource that BC Hydro thinks may offer up to 700 megawatts of firm, economic power with low environmental costs,” the panel's report read.

The Canadian Geothermal Energy Association (CanGEA) has argued geothermal can meet all of B.C.’s future energy needs at a lower cost than Site C with fewer environmental impacts. The association has requested meetings with Minister Bennett with no success.

"We welcome him to become more informed and to engage in constructive dialogue with the association and with our members," said Alison Thompson, chair of CanGEA.

In a press release, Weaver said the minister's talking points are missing the point. “This dam didn’t make sense for B.C. thirty years ago, and it doesn’t make sense now.”

“The question that needs to be asked is what’s the rush?” Weaver added. “LNG isn’t materializing along the timeline promised by government. Even if B.C. Hydro’s current projections are true, we still have up to four years before we need to start building the dam. We should use that time to explore alternatives before embarking on the largest infrastructure project in B.C. history.”

The full official transcript of the exchange in the Legislature can be viewed on Hansard.

BC Hydro is scheduled to begin construction on the Site C dam this summer, but the project is facing six legal challenges, including one that alleges that Cabinet erred in dismissing key portions of the joint review panel’s findings on the project.  

The dam would be the third on the Peace River and would flood 83 kilometres of the Peace Valley, impacting 13,000 hectares of agricultural land. The project is opposed by B.C.’s Treaty 8 First Nations, several of which have filed lawsuits.

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.

An energy executive is weighing in on the federal review of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain oil pipeline expansion with a scathing letter that calls the National Energy Board’s review process “fraudulent” and a “public deception” — and calls for the province of British Columbia to undertake its own environmental assessment.

Marc Eliesen — who has 40 years of executive experience in the energy sector, including as a board member at Suncor — writes in his letter to the National Energy Board that the process is jury-rigged with a "pre-determined outcome."

Eliesen is the former CEO of BC Hydro, former chair of Manitoba Hydro and has served as a deputy minister in seven different federal and provincial governments.

In his letter, Eliesen tells the National Energy Board (NEB) that he offered his expertise as an intervenor in good faith that his time would be well spent in evaluation Trans Mountain’s proposal.

“Unfortunately, I have come to the conclusion that the board, through its decisions, is engaged in a public deception,” Eliesen writes. “Continued involvement with this process is a waste of time and effort, and represents a disservice to the public interest because it endorses a fraudulent process.”

Eliesen writes that he was dismayed when the oral cross-examination phase was removed from the Trans Mountain hearings. He notes that oral cross-examination has served as a critical part of all previous Section 52 oil pipeline hearings.

“It is my experience that when a proponent does not face the spectre of oral cross-examination, their written responses to interrogatories suffer from a lack of detail and accountability,” Eliesen writes. “Still, I was willing to see the results of the Information Request process the board promised would be sufficient.”

When those information requests came back, however, Eliesen lost all hope in the process.

The unwillingness of Trans Mountain to address most of my questions and the board’s almost complete endorsement of Trans Mountain’s decision has exposed this process as deceptive and misleading. Proper and professional public interest due diligence has been frustrated, leading me to the conclusion that this board has a predetermined course of action to recommend approval of the project and a strong bias in favour of the proponent.

In effect, this so-called public hearing process has become a farce, and this board a truly industry captured regulator.

A regulator is considered ‘captured’ when it turns into more of a industry facilitator, rather than a regulatory watchdog.

Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion proposal would triple the amount of oil the company ships to Burnaby and increase the number of oil tankers travelling through Vancouver Harbour and the Gulf Islands seven-fold.

National Energy Board Has 'Pre-Determined Course of Action' to Approve Trans Mountain: Eliesen

Eliesen argues that a series of National Energy Board decisions reflect a pre-determined outcome.

“They reflect a lack of respect for hearing participants, a deep erosion of the standards and practices of natural justice that previous boards have respected, and an undemocratic restriction of participation by citizens, communities, professionals and First Nations either by rejecting them outright or failing to provide adequate funding to facilitate meaningful participation,” Eliesen writes.

To illustrate this behaviour, Eliesen outlines six examples:

1) Intervenors being excluded from the formulation of the list of issues to be taken under consideration during the review. Kinder Morgan’s opinion, on the other hand, was taken into account when formulating the list.

2) The board refusing requests from intervenors — including municipal governments and First Nations — for more time to prepare information requests (due to the highly technical, voluminous nature of Trans Mountain’s application).

3) The lack of basic professional standards of disclosure, source verification, references and methodology in Trans Mountain’s studies.

“It is shocking that in a process such as this where due diligence is required on a major capital project that the board has not held Trans Mountain to a minimum professional standard of accountability and transparency,” Eliesen writes. “The Board’s veneer examination of the proponent’s case is reflective of a decision not to dig too deeply for fear the economic case may crumble, or a lack of economic, financial and business acumen on behalf of the Board to know where and how to dig.”

When basic business questions are asked by intervenors, Trans Mountain refuses to answer them, Eliesen adds.

4) The board’s axing of oral cross-examination. The Government of Canada’s Department of Justice has informed the board that evidence given without cross-examination should be rejected. The Department of Justice stated “Canada’s position is that cross-examination is necessary to ensure a proper evidentiary record …” Furthermore, “cross-examination serves a vital role in testing the value of testimonial evidence. It assists in the determination of credibility, assigning weight and overall assessment of the evidentiary record. It has been termed ‘the greatest legal invention ever invented for the discovery of truth’ … without cross-examination the board will be reviewing only untested evidence.”

5) The board's failure to compel Kinder Morgan to answer questions adequately. In the absence of oral cross-examination, the board is relying on written information requests between intervenors and the proponent. However, Trans Mountain has failed to respond in a way that addresses the core elements of most questions — and the board has failed to compel them to answer.

“They have either provided non-responses, general statements, or referred back to the inadequate information in the original application that gave rise to the question in the first place. In many instances Trans Mountain has assumed the regulator’s role declaring that the question asked is outside the List of Issues established by the NEB,” Eliesen writes.

Out of the approximately 2,000 questions not answered by Trans Mountain that intervenors called on the board to compel answers to, only five per cent were allowed by the board and 95 per cent were rejected.

6) Trans Mountain has failed to answer even the Province of British Columbia’s questions, so the province asked the NEB to compel Trans Mountain to answer. But guess what? That request was also denied by the board.

“The board has sided with Trans Mountain dismissing the Province of B.C.’s need for answers in pursuit of its duty to British Columbians,” Eliesen writes in his letter. “The NEB’s bias in support of the proponent is reflecting poorly on the Province of B.C. in that it is unable to obtain necessary answers to conduct its due diligence.”

Province of B.C. Should Cancel Equivalency Agreement, Launch Own Review of Trans Mountain

Eliesen finishes his letter by calling on the Province of B.C. to cancel the equivalency agreement with the federal government to undertake its own environmental assessment as the only meaningful way to get answers to its questions.  

Andrew Weaver, Green MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head, joined the call for the B.C. government to issue the 30-day notice required to cancel the equivalency agreement with the feds and launch its own, separate environmental assessment process.

“In the past week alone we have seen Kinder Morgan sue Burnaby residents for trespassing on parkland and one of the most credible intervenors, Marc Eliesen, fully withdraw from the hearing process,” Weaver says.  

The June 2010 equivalency agreement signed between the federal government and province set the review process for major pipeline and energy projects under the National Energy Board, with final approval to be determined by the federal cabinet. The equivalency agreement for the Trans Mountain project can be cancelled with 30 days notice.

“The B.C. government needs to stand up for British Columbians,” Weaver says. “What we need is a made-in-B.C. environmental assessment that is controlled by British Columbians to ensure our concerns get respected and that our questions get answered.”

Marc Eliesen Letter of Withdrawal from Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain expansion NEB process

Photo credit: Jenny Uechi, Vancouver Observer

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 rough track at the foot of West Farnham Glacier, carved by a Glacier Resorts bulldozer in 2008, comes to an abrupt end as the already rough terrain becomes impassable.

Huge boulders block the path, where there is an early-fall dusting of snow and, ahead, the cliffs are festooned with precariously hanging icicles.

“We call it the road to nowhere,” said professional mountain climbing guide Arnor Larson, who, since 1970, has taken visitors into the remote Farnham area of the Purcell Range — 60 kilometres from Invermere along a lumpy, slippery one-track road.

[view:in_this_series=block_1]

Stretching above the track is the money card — blindingly bright snow, broken by icy blue patches, where the prospect of all-season glacier skiing has fuelled a 24-year debate.

Glacier Resorts Ltd. plans to build a billion-dollar ski resort, with hotels, lodges, condominiums and shops, in the adjacent Jumbo Valley. Lifts and gondolas would take visitors from the village to ski on Farnham, Jumbo and Commander Glaciers.

But the most pressing question is how long the glaciers will be around.

While the Jumbo Glacier Resort Master Plan predicts the glaciers will survive or even grow as climate change will mean additional snow at high altitudes, climate scientists say glaciers in the Purcell Mountains will have disappeared by the turn of the century.

Larson, who has had a front-row seat to the glacier melt for more than four decades, points to scraped rocks below the glacier toe, showing how Farnham has receded in the time he has been guiding. Then he glances up at the summer snow and points to semi-concealed crevasses.

Professional mountain climbing guide Arnor Larson. Photo: Pat Morrow.

“I wouldn’t be too keen as a guide to take anyone there in the summer for skiing,” he said.

Larson, who has collected old photos of the glaciers, compares a 1913 photo of Commander Glacier to a 2008 photo, showing massive ice reduction. Over recent years, the process has sped up and Commander has shrunk considerably further since 2008, he said.

Commander Glacier in 1913.

Commander Glacier in 2008.

The melting is further accelerated by machines cutting ice roads on the glaciers or “mining” snow from the upper part of the glacier to build ski runs, he said.

Large machinery on Farnham Glacier. Photo: Arnor Larson.

Tommaso Oberti, vice-president of Pheidias Project Management Corp., the company spearheading the resort design, said the Master Plan is based on information from Michael Maxwell, a geophysicist with global consulting firm Golder Associates.

Maxwell, an honorary research associate at the University of British Columbia, said he worked on monitoring the Purcell glaciers in the mid-1990s, but has not done any research in the area since then.

“I guarantee that things have changed since then, but I can’t say how they have changed,” said Maxwell, who is continuing to do some glaciology work in other areas.

The Jumbo Master Plan fact sheet on climate, water and glaciers argues global warming is actually a compelling reason to build the resort because many low-elevation ski resorts in B.C. will not be able to operate if the worst climate predictions come true.

“Even with extreme glacier retraction and a dramatic increase in global temperatures, JGR will be one of the very few locations in North America where skiing will be possible in winter because of its high elevation. In fact, the moraines that are left behind by retreating glaciers result in some of the most skiable terrain possible, when covered with snow in winter,” Oberti wrote in an e-mail.

The glaciers range from a height of 3,400 metres at the top of Jumbo to a low of 2,450 metres at the bottom of Farnham.

That means the high glaciers could actually grow, rather than recede, says the Master Plan.

However, Brian Menounos, professor of earth sciences and Canada Research Chair in glacier change at the University of Northern B.C., said glaciers in the Columbia Basin are unlikely to survive past 2100.

Brian Menounos. Photo: Univeristy of Northern B.C.

It is likely that precipitation will increase from 10 to 15 per cent because of climate change, Menounos said.

“But that doesn’t compensate for the amount of warming that is likely to occur. The modelling that I have seen says most of the ice in the Columbia Basin will not be there by 2100.”

Glaciers in western Canada started retreating in the 1920s, probably because of natural warming, but most scientists agree that, since 1980, they are strongly retreating because of human-caused climate change, Menounos said.

Large glaciers take a long time to respond, so even if everyone immediately stopped using fossil fuels, the glaciers will continue to melt “because of what we have done to them,” he said.

Some icefields in the North Coast Mountains will survive past the turn of the century, although they will be reduced by half, Menounos said.

“But in the southern interior ranges it’s not a good news story.”

Climate scientist Andrew Weaver is Green Party MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head and a lead author of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientific assessments, including the report that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.

Weaver scoffs at claims that the Purcell glaciers will survive or grow and described long-term plans for year-round glacier skiing as a “bit of a pipedream.”

A group that knows the glacier well is the Canadian Olympic Development Association (CODA), now known as Winsport, which spent six years training at Farnham, eventually pulling out in 2009.

“It was amazing conditions for summer training and we believe it played a key role in as many as three medals won at the Vancouver Olympics,” said Dale Oviatt, Winsport communications spokesman.

“Essentially we pulled out because of finances as it was an expensive operation to run.”

But while ski conditions on the glaciers may be good for now, the Jumbo Glacier Resort project, which will take 20 years to build, flies in the face of scientific understanding of climatic trends, Weaver said.

“It is expected that by 2100 Jumbo Glacier will be largely non-existent. In fact, just looking at the period between 1985 and 2005, the entire southeastern B.C. glacial region lost, on average, roughly 15 per cent of its mass,” he said.

Weaver cannot understand why the provincial government is supporting the private-sector proposal by funding the Jumbo Glacier Mountain Resort Municipality, which has no residents, and he questions whether the project is attracting investors.

“A prudent investor would ask ‘how long is this glacier going to be around?’ and would ask the scientific community,” he said.

Main Image: Commander Glacier by Pat Morrow.

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.