It is time to get real. You are pursuing outdated policies that cause significant damage to the environment and the economy of British Columbia.
Citizens expect competency in management of this crown corporation and you must be accountable. Start by resigning and returning the sums paid you by the utility in the last year.
A fact has been made clear by the company’s records of domestic consumption by residents and businesses of British Columbia: DEMAND IS NOT GROWING.
Yet David Conway, your official spokesman recently said:
…we are forecasting demand to increase by almost 40 per cent over the next 20 years…
Without Site C, B.C. is forecast to have an eight per cent capacity deficit and a two per cent energy deficit within 10 years — equivalent to the power needs of 100,000 homes.
Numbers like these have been offered to the public for more than a decade and during that time, electricity sold to your residential, commercial and industrial customers has reduced in quantity.
- In 1994, BC Hydro said demand for electricity in BC would grow 52% in ten years. It grew only 18%.
- In 2005, BC Hydro said demand would grow 20% by 2016. It grew 0%.
- In 2012, BC Hydro said demand would grow 9% over four years. It dropped 1%.
Despite that record of dishonest forecasting, you are proceeding carelessly with Site C construction.
And, you’ve committed to private power we don’t need and paid a multiple of its value in the marketplace.
Buying private power resulted in unnecessary environmental damages.
Excessive power supply meant bypassing the company’s generating facilities and/or dumping surplus power outside BC at a fraction of the price paid to independent power producers (IPPs).
The losses are huge and you have a fiduciary responsibility to British Columbians. If you continue on the same path, directors must expect to be held personally liable.
By the way, you shouldn’t pretend to be unaware of the declines in electricity sold by utilities. The U.S. Department of Energy records show that our traditional export customers also have growing surpluses and The Economist reports this about demand elsewhere:
In rich countries governments have imposed renewables on electricity systems that had no need for new capacity, because demand is in decline.
Note that last phrase? Demand is in decline.
The Economist continues:
[Bruce Huber] likens the upheaval facing utilities to that seen in the telecoms industry a generation ago, when a business model based on charging per second for long-distance calls was replaced by one involving the sale of services such as always-on broadband. This is bad news for the vertically integrated giants that grew up in the age of centralised generating by the gigawatt.
…dozens of tech-like firms that are “nibbling” away at bits of utilities’ traditional business models through innovations in grid optimisation and smart-home management systems. …technological disruptions doom the traditional utility.
Technology has changed. Dams are not benign and other sources of power are less expensive.
Meaningful conservation is cheaper still.