It’s not as easy to build a dam in British Columbia as it used to be — and it was never that easy to begin with.
W.A.C. Bennett unleashed a storm of controversy 50 years ago when he embarked on his Two Rivers Policy to build a series of hydroelectric dams on the Peace and Columbia Rivers. He had to overcome fierce political opposition in Victoria, in Ottawa, and in the United States. He had to nationalize a private company to form BC Hydro and push for an extraordinary 60-year resource-sharing treaty with the U.S. before he could get started.
But it is issues that didn’t even enter into the picture then that dominate today — neither Bennett nor his many foes gave much thought to the environmental impact of flooding river valleys or the rights of the people who lived in them.
What hasn’t changed is the reason for tackling such massive undertakings — the potential to reap a long-term source of relatively cheap, reliable electricity. Bennett’s Two Rivers Policy was seen as a huge gamble at the time, but over the years it has paid off many times over. The stable source of abundant power has been the backbone of much of the development that has taken place in this province since.
On Monday, BC Hydro submitted an environmental-impact statement for the proposed $7.9-billion Site C dam, a mega-project on the Peace River that has been under consideration for decades but was put back in the active file in recent years as a potential part of the future energy mix for the province.
As envisioned, Site C would be a 60-metre-high dam that would create a 83-kilometre reservoir and generate 5,100 gigawatt hours of electricity annually — enough to power the equivalent of 450,000 homes.
Opponents of the project, including nearby residents who would be displaced by the rising waters and local First Nations, argue that the loss of farmland and natural habitat along the banks is too high a cost for electricity, which if needed, could be produced through other means.
There is huge uncertainty about the future demand for electricity in British Columbia, in part because of the number of energy-intensive LNG plants that are in the planning stages.
The province cited that uncertainty in putting off Hydro’s Integrated Resource Plan, which was to have been delivered in December, until this coming June, perhaps not coincidentally after the provincial election.
But the documents filed this week argue that the power from Site C will be needed in B.C. even if none of the LNG plants proceed. They argue that the power will be cheaper than other potential sources, more reliable and produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions.
NDP Energy Critic John Horgan says that the environmental impact statement is premature because of uncertainty over future energy needs.
But Hydro’s filing is only the first step in an approval process that has another two years to run. The outcome is far from certain. And it’s hard to imagine when there could be more certainty about demand for power.
What is certain is that any new power source will have an environmental impact and financial costs that will have to be weighed against the benefits.
So we should push ahead with the evaluation process now, with the historical appreciation we have for long-term benefits of large-scale hydro power and the contemporary sensitivity we have gained for environmental values, as well as for the need to compensate anyone who is asked to give up private property for a project that is judged to be in the public interest.