Media

For the first time on Voice of BC as panelists, Andrew Weaver, MLA for Oak Bay Gordon Head, and BC Green Party interim leader Adam Olson took questions from Vaughn Palmer, and pundits, on a variety of issues. This lead to an article on IPPs by Vaughn Palmer in the Vancouver Sun newspaper on the role of the government, and the recent announcement on BC Hydro rate increases – see the article.

As mentioned in the Vancouver Sun article: “”The environmental issues of IPPs are very important; let’s deal with that,” Weaver continued. “But when you have virtually every First Nation in B.C. coming on board and saying, ‘We want to work with this – we want to get off diesel power in our little village; we want to create local jobs there,’ and then you find a special interest saying, ‘No, no, no, these are bad for the environment,’ and they’ve never even been to these places, you’ve got to give your head a shake.”

You can follow Andrew Weaver on Twitter (@AJWvictoriaBC) and Adam Olsen (@AdamPOlsen)

BoardVoice is dedicated to improving social services to people in their communities. We do this by speaking to government and to our communities about the importance of social services to the health and well being of our citizens, bringing to their attention key concerns and issues, and telling the good news about the work of community based social service agencies.

We promote excellence in governance by connecting board members from across the province and providing resources that assist in developing their boards.

We help build bridges between agencies at the community level to ensure community-wide understanding of how best services should be organized and delivered. Board Voice.ca

On Friday November 22nd, at the Board Voice conference in Vancouver BC, Andrew Weaver, MLA for Oak Bay – Gordon Head provided his thoughts in a keynote speech to delegates.

Board Voice Conference Speech

“We live in a province of opportunity. Not opportunity that is handed to us, but opportunity that we create. We live in an time where the challenges of today are no longer addressed by the solutions of yesterday, and so we are called upon to find new solutions to new challenges—to create new opportunities—so that together we can continue to build a more prosperous, equitable and just society.

We have heard the Liberal government talk of a generational opportunity to develop a liquefied natural gas sector in BC. Today, I would like to propose that we have another generational opportunity in front of us; a generational opportunity to rethink how we address the social challenges that for years have afflicted British Columbians—our families, friends, neighbours, and ourselves.

To do so, we must start by recognizing the reality around us. We are working in a context of budget cuts and core reviews, growing social issues and an economy that is still bouncing back from the 2008 recession. It is a context of limited resources and significant challenges where we do not have the luxury or the resources to address social, environmental or economic issues as if they are isolated siloes — each independent from the other. We have tried this for years, and it does not work.

Addressing these issues in a context of limited resources requires us to move beyond the traditional framework that a social issue is social, and an economic issue is economic.

Instead we are required to find those nexus points that wed the economic, the social and the environmental into a coherent and comprehensive framework for developing our society. Developing these nexus points requires the political will to steer our society in that direction. And that is what I would like to talk to you about today: Nexus points and political will.

What do I mean by this?

Tomorrow morning, you’ll be hearing more about what Alberta’s Social Policy Framework entails and how the Government of Alberta developed this framework. Board Voice is advocating for a similar social policy framework for BC. I believe this is an idea that has merit and deserves attention. But I would challenge us to take it one step further.

As you all know, our ability to fund and implement a social policy framework is contingent on a strong economy that provides the resources to do so. In turn, building a strong economy is contingent on addressing social issues and on the sustainable management of our environment and the resources it affords to us.

There are countless examples of where our attempts to develop the economy have caused significant social or environmental challenges, and vice versa. We need to build a framework that does not simply address social issues alongside the economic development plan, but one that integrates social issues into, and weds them with, economic development and the sustainable management of the environment.

We need to find the nexus points that allow us to move all three aspects forward for the benefit of British Columbia. These nexus points exist, but finding and developing them requires the political will to do so, and therein lies a significant challenge.

How do we create the political will to not simply take the easy way out and focus solely on a single issue, like the economy, but instead to explore those nexus points between the economy, social issues and the environment? This is where, I believe, the Albertan example can offer some guidance.

In creating their social policy framework, the government of Alberta reached out to over 31,000 Albertans in order to get their feedback. This process offered Albertans the opportunity to define Alberta’s social priorities and values in a comprehensive, holistic, and inclusive manner.

As an example, let me highlight two of the social policy goals that were identified as a priority in the framework:

(1) protect the vulnerable, and (2) reduce inequality.

These are goals derived from the people of Alberta, not the government of Alberta, nor Alberta’s governing party. And they are goals that are now being addressed as a part of a comprehensive social policy framework, because Albertans had the opportunity to raise their priorities thereby generating a social license and building political will.

The large-scale public consultation was a critical aspect of creating a social license and building political will. We could and should do the same in British Columbia.

I believe the rationale for having such a framework also exists in British Columbia. In particular let me draw your attention to the three central reasons for the implementation of Alberta’s Social Policy. Paraphrasing, they were:

(1) to clarify the priorities and goals of Albertans and how roles and responsibilities should be allocated,

(2) to coordinate and harmonize activities between government divisions and also with other stakeholders while also ensuring that there is policy alignment and consistency, and

(3) to provide overall direction and focus to planning and decision-making.

To be sure, the Albertan example is not perfect. There was criticism of both the public consultation and the framework itself and the Albertan context is quite different from the British Columbian context. But nonetheless, let’s consider these goals in the context of British Columbia and let’s do that through the lens of a specific issue: adolescent mental health care.

We have a chronically underfunded adolescent mental health care system. In fact, the Representative of Children and Youth does not even consider it a system, so much as a patchwork of services. These services are primarily offered by two ministries: the Ministry of Children and Family Development and the Ministry of Health.

The problem is, because they are offered by two ministries with insufficient coordination of care, many young people experiencing mental health issues, and their families, struggle to navigate the services and find the support they need. Effective coordination and harmonization of services is lacking and that reality is having a negative impact on our ability to deal with adolescent mental health problems.

This situation has both social and economic consequences. Socially, it means that many people in need of care are not getting the care they deserve. The significant distress and impact this lack of care has on the individual is impossible to put a number to, but sadly we all know from recent cases, just how far it can go.

Economically, mental health problems and illness are estimated to cost our province more than $6 billion each year through service costs and lost productivity. This amount does not include costs related to the criminal justice, education or child welfare systems. The longer we put off effectively treating mental health care issues, the more we suffer the long-term economic consequences of our inaction. Better coordination and harmonization of services—through a comprehensive framework—could allow for more effective allocation of public resources, making economic sense, and for more effective treatment, making social sense.

Taking this further, right now the Liberal government is administering what they call a core review. Their goal is to use public resources more efficiently by eliminating unnecessary spending. Yet issues such as better coordination and harmonization of services and long-term planning that would see the better treatment of mental health as both a smart social, and a smart economical, choice are not being fully considered.

They are not being fully considered, in part, because we see mental health as a social issue—one that is secondary to the government’s primary economic agenda. We have siloed mental health into the social realm and have failed to see that, in its essence, adolescent mental health is also an economic issue and that developing a strong economy also requires that we address what we have traditionally seen to be simply social challenges.

We need to change that. We need to build the political will for a triple-bottom-line understanding of these issues—one that looks for those nexus points and uses them to move our province forward.

Although it remains to be seen how effective the Alberta example will be, I do think there is value to considering their approach. In fact, I believe the public consultation process that Alberta ran could also serve British Columbia as we consider our own framework. It could help us define for our own government, what our priorities as citizens are and what their priorities as a government should be.

Yet, I would challenge us all to see this not simply as an opportunity to address the social challenges of our time, but also as an opportunity to create a more holistic vision for British Columbia, generated by the people of this province, and predicated on triple-bottom line priorities and finding key nexus points of interaction.

Addressing social issues, building a strong economy, and sustainably managing our environmental resources—these are significant and interconnected societal challenges that must be dealt with as such. And creating the political will to see these issues as interconnected and address them in that way is our challenge.

I believe meeting this challenge will require us to transcend partisan politics and go to the root of what matters to British Columbians. An independent, public consultation offers us the opportunity to accurately reflect the true values and priorities of British Columbians without the interference of partisan politics. And it ultimately builds the social license required to implement the resulting policies.

Thank you very much for your time and for affording me the opportunity to speak.”

Andrew Weaver – MLA for Oak Bay – Gordon Head

Media Statement: Pacific Carbon Trust and Carbon Neutral Capital Program

Dr. Andrew Weaver, MLA Oak Bay-Gordon Head

As a part of the BC Government’s Core Review, Minister Bill Bennett made two key announcements today regarding the Pacific Carbon Trust and the Carbon Neutral Capital Program:

1. The Pacific Carbon Trust—previously an independent organization—will be transitioned into the Ministry of Environment (MOE) by 2015/2016 at a cost savings of $5.6 million annually.
2. The Carbon Neutral Capital Program—a program that supports school districts to fund energy-efficiency projects—will be considered for expansion to include hospitals and post-secondary institutions.

As a former member of Premier Gordon Campbell’s Climate Action Team and current Green Party MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head, Dr. Andrew Weaver applauds the government for trying to find cost-effective ways of administering and expanding effective climate action programs.

Pacific Carbon Trust:

“What’s critical about this announcement is that it leaves in place the Carbon Neutral Government legislation which forces the public sector to show leadership in emissions reduction. The Pacific Carbon Trust has been an important tool in British Columbia’s shift to a clean energy future. It is important to find cost-effective ways of administering the offset program and ensuring greater government oversight and accountability of the type of offsets purchased.”

Carbon Neutral Capital Program:

“I support the government’s move to consider expanding the Carbon Neutral Capital Program to include hospitals and post-secondary institutions. In fact, I would go even further and suggest that a process be developed to promote offsets within the public sector such as the conversion of school bus fleets and BC Ferries to run on compressed or liquefied natural gas, respectively”.

While Dr. Weaver is supportive of the government’s announcement today, he remains deeply concerned that BC’s legislated greenhouse gas reduction targets are in jeopardy due to the proposed expansion of fracking in northeastern BC.

Media Contact
Mat Wright – Press Secretary, Andrew Weaver MLA
mat.wright@leg.bc.ca
1 250 216 3382

Over the next twenty years, BC Hydro has forecasted that our energy needs will increase by about 40% as a consequence of both population and economic growth. To meet this growing electricity demand, BC Hydro has proposed to build the Site C dam on the Peace River near Fort St. John (see Figures 1–3). Here I explore whether or not there are better ways from an economic, social and environmental perspective  to meet our future power needs.

The Site C dam

Upon completion, this dam would produce 1,100 MW (megawatts, i.e. millions of Watts) of power capacity and up to 5,100 GWh (gigawatt hours, i.e. billions of watt hours) of electricity each year. According to BC Hydro, this is enough electricity to power about 450,000 homes.

Figure 1: Location of the proposed Site C dam. Source: Site C Project Working Group Environmental Impact Statement Presentation, February 19, 2013.

Figure 2: Panoramic view of the eastern end of the Peace River valley that will be flooded with the construction of the Site C dam. The proposed dam would be constructed just east of the Peace River junction with the Moberly River seen the centre of the photo.

The price tag for the construction of the Site C dam was estimated in 2011 to be 7.9 billion dollars. Assuming a real discount rate (accounting for inflation) of between 5.5% and 6%, BC Hydro estimates that Site C would produce electricity for a cost of between 8.7¢ and 9.5¢ per kWh (kilowatt hour). At present, BC Hydro residential customers are charged 6.9¢ per kWh for their first 1,350 KWh of electricity usage over a two-month billing period and 10.34¢ per kWh after that.

a) b)

c)

Figure 3: Photos of the Peace River Valley to be flooded with the construction of the Site C dam. a) photo of some agricultural land; b) photo taken at Hudson’s Hope with (left to right) Brad Densmore (Legislative Assistant to Vicki Huntington), Arthur Hadland (Director, Peace River Regional District), Vicki Huntington (MLA Delta South), Gwen Johansson (Mayor of Hudson’s Hope); c) photo of a mid-river island important for animal migration and breeding.

The Potential for Wind Power

Currently only about 1.5% of BC’s electricity production is supplied by wind energy (see Table 1). With British Columbia’s mountainous terrain and coastal boundary, the potential for both onshore and offshore wind power production is enormous. The Canadian Wind Energy Association and the BC Hydro Integrated Resource Plan 2013 indicate that 5,100 GWh of wind generated electricity could be produced in British Columbia for about the same price as the electricity to be produced by the Site C dam. And this despite the fact that all costs (including land acquisition costs) incurred to date by BC Hydro with respect to the Site C project are not counted in their estimate for future construction costs. The potential scalability of Site C is minimal; the potential scalability of wind energy is very large.

 Table 1: Percentage of electricity supply provided by wind for a number of jurisdictions. Source: Wind energy in British Columbia, Canadian Wind Energy Association presentation by Nicholas Heap, September 20, 2013.

The minimal production of wind power in British Columbia compared to other jurisdictions (Table 1) is particularly surprising in light of the fact that BC is the home of a number of existing large-scale hydro projects. These include, but are not limited to, the W.A.C. Bennett and Peace Canyon dams already on the Peace River and the Mica, Duncan, Keenleyside, Revelstoke and Seven Mile dams on the Columbia River system. Hydro reservoirs are ideally suited for coupling with wind power generation to stabilize base-load supply. That is, when the wind is not blowing, hydro is used; when the wind is blowing, the reservoirs refill and hydropower is not used. In fact, hydro dams act just like rechargeable batteries with wind providing the renewable recharge to the battery system. And British Columbia is one of the few places in the world that can take advantage of such reservoirs as wind power is introduced into the grid.

Figure 4: Photo of Bear Mountain Wind Park near Dawson Creek.

Given that wind power can easily be introduced into British Columbia at the same, or even lower, price than equivalent power from the Site C dam, we should ask if there are any other reasons that would favour Site C over wind for the production of power to meet BC energy needs. I can think of none. In fact, I can think of a number of reasons why wind power should be considered over Site C to produce the equivalent 5,100 GWh per year of electrical power:

1. The construction of the Site C dam will flood 6,427 acres of Class 1 & 2 agricultural land (a total of 15,985 acres of Class 1-7 agricultural land). Wind power sites would not affect agricultural land. In fact, the Peace River valley contains the only Class 1 agricultural land north of Quesnel.
2. Key regions in the archive of British Columbia history will be flooded. The Peace River has been designated as a BC Heritage River. It was, in fact, traversed by the explorers Alexander MacKenzie, John Finlay, Simon Fraser, John Stuart, A.R. MacLeod and David Thompson (and others) in their early ventures during the 17^th and 18^th century. Rocky Mountain Fort, thought to be the first trading post established in British Columbia (by John Finlay in 1794) as well as Rocky Mountain Portage House (across the river from Hudson Hope and established by John Finlay and Simon Fraser in 1805) are both located in the valley.
3. Job creation associated with wind power is province-wide. Job creation associated with the Site C dam is constrained to one region.
4. The risk of any cost overruns associated with the construction of the Site C dam is borne by the taxpayer. The risk of any cost overruns associated with the construction wind farms is borne by industry. This is important as it limits any risk to the taxpayer.
5. The installation of wind farms can be done in partnership with First Nations who would benefit from both local jobs as well as revenue from the installed facilities. In contrast, the affected Treaty 8 Tribal Association has already expressed a number of serious concerns regarding the Site C dam proposal.
6. It would take much longer to complete the Site C dam project than it would to install wind farms. In addition, wind power is scalable where as the Site C dam is not.
7. Wind farms are distributed and so can be located close to where the energy is needed thereby reducing energy loss during transmission.

To summarize, it is clear to me that the development of the Site C project makes little sense. For the same, or even lower cost, we could develop a similar capacity for wind-power in British Columbia. And the co-benefits of choosing wind power over the Site C project are profound.

Wind power instead of the Site C dam both makes sense and cents.

This week Andrew Weaver is in Fort St. John for the BC Energy Conference. The conference brings together industry leaders, government representatives, and academics to generate awareness and general literacy relating to the energy sector in Canada, and particularly relating to the natural gas sector which is prominent in this region.

Andrew Weaver has raised serious concerns about the government’s plan to develop a liquefied natural gas sector in British Columbia. This conference serves as another helpful step in ensuring that he can continue to offer an informed and constructive voice to the debate.

The first day of the conference was spent touring some of the nearby natural gas facilities. Below are a few of the highlights.