The Editor,
With a three-year drought in California, only snow melt and no rain in Hudson's Hope this spring and the warmest and driest May in recorded history in B.C., why would anyone want to build a very expensive dam like Site C to provide energy we don't need and waste rich agricultural land we do need? And less water could have a profound impact on hydro power generation.
Who actually wants to see construction of the Site C dam? The Association of Major Power Customers of B.C., representing about 20 of the largest industrial users, has stated through its executive director Richard Stout that these users have no confidence that Site C is the least costly option and they are very concerned that building Site C will send BC Hydro into serious electrical rate hikes.
While industry pays much lower rates per kWh than residential customers (historical rates that will be unsustainable), many use a lot of electricity. Hydro bills are going up by 9% this year and will increase 28% over the next five years. This increase is required just to invest in new power infrastructure and pay off long-term debt.
Clearly, the provincial government thinks the province's pulp mills already need a bailout to the tune of $100 million, as stated in one of the region's daily newspapers during the summer. Who is going to bail out the rest of us if Site C is built?
In May 2014, the joint review panel report recommended that the Site C proposal be referred to the BC Utilities Commission to review the costs and benefits of the project, as well as alternatives to it. The panel could not do this because they did not have the information, time or resources to examine these crucial questions.
Think about what increases will be required if Site C is built. This dam will cost more than all the recent mega projects put together - a minimum of $8.6 billion. Every single taxpaying citizen will see an enormous increase if this dam goes ahead.
We should all be very concerned.
Adrienne Peacock
Belcarra
