Providing support in energy litigation, negotiation, and research to governments, industries, utilities, and aboriginal peoples from California to Quebec.

 

Providing support in energy litigation, negotiation, and research to governments, industries, utilities, and aboriginal peoples from California to Quebec.

New Media

Scrapping Site C and developing wind and solar could save billions, analyst says

CBC News, Liam Britten

Scrapping the Site C Dam project and aggressively pursuing wind power could save B.C. between $2 and $4.4 billion according to an energy analyst hired by the Peace Valley Landowners Association, which opposes the project.

Robert McCullough presented his findings Friday at a Vancouver hearing held by the B.C. Utilities Commission in Vancouver to review the project.

Alternatives to Site C would cost $1.8 to $3.4 billion: BCUC

Business Vancouver, Nelson Bennett

Robert McCullough, a consultant hired by the Peace Valley Landowner Association, which is opposed to the dam, praised the BCUC report and generally agrees with its calculations, although he thinks it was unnecessary to include battery storage, since B.C.’s existing hydro-electric dams can be used like batteries to backstop wind when it is not producing power.

Lowball bid proving to be costly for Site C project

Business Vancouver, Nelson Bennett

“Clearly, the evidence is there’s a massive claim from the partners to BC Hydro,” said Robert McCullough, a consultant hired by the Peace Valley Landowner Association, which wants the dam project halted. “They’ve underbid. That’s the definition of underbid.”

New Articles

Opinion: Renewables cheaper, more dependable than Site C

The Vancouver Sun, Robert McCullough

The problem with Site C is not that it is a hydroelectric project. The problem with Site C lies in the economics. When Site C was proposed, fossil fuel prices were high. The cost of renewables were twice what they are now. Loads were not increasing terribly rapidly (load growth has been flat in B.C. for the past decade), but the forecasts were very optimistic. It is not an exaggeration to say that everything has changed. Site C is relatively costly compared to the alternatives and very costly compared to the wholesale market. It is in our power to do far more and spend far less.

Trump plan to sell BPA lines misguided

Portland Tribune, Robert McCullough

“Privatization of BPA would increase costs for consumers. BPA currently sells and delivers its power at cost; under a private regime, an investor-owned utility would likely want a higher rate of return.”

Affordable power or Site C power: British Columbians must choose

Business Vancouver, Robert McCullough and Gwen Johansson

“By choosing cheaper alternatives, British Columbians not only avoid amassing billions of dollars of debt, they also spare a valley capable of feeding a million people in perpetuity, maintain a wildlife ‘nursery’ that has existed for thousands of years and honour First Nation treaty commitments. The choice is a win-win for B.C. ratepayers and, ultimately, for our Crown corporation.”

New Reports

Problems with BC Hydro Response F1.8

We set the record strait for the BCUC by highlighting problems with BC Hydro’s answer to question about the energy market conditions Site C will have to compete in.