Article content continued

While there are those who argue we can undo the decisions that have been made, for the most part we can’t, or would be foolish to do so. The low-value, high-cost independent power projects (IPPs) that the government forced B.C. Hydro to acquire are under long-term contract. The heavily subsidized and under-utilized Northwest Transmission line is built. Smart meters have been installed even if there are no smart-energy management and rate strategies in place to use them effectively.

As for Site C, it’s well on its way and, while there may still be aboriginal treaty issues that need to be resolved, the economic arguments that opponents of the dam have put forward to stop it, despite the billions that have already been spent or committed, are flawed — understating the export value of the surplus Site C will produce, particularly with increasing carbon taxes or their equivalent; ignoring the long-term benefit of Site C when B.C. Hydro will need new sources of supply; and failing to take any account of the dependable peak-generating capacity and storage Site C offers, supply characteristics that greatly increase its value to the B.C. Hydro system.

The leader of the Green party has said he would stop Site C presumably without regard for the economic consequences that would have. Stopping Site C at this point would require B.C. Hydro to write-off the billions it has already spent or committed to the project, adding greatly to the immediate pressure on rates. And it would mean abandoning a project that almost certainly offers long-term value far in excess of the remaining costs required to complete it.