Hy­dro must pay for en­vi­ron­men­tal dam­age

Times Colonist - - Comment -

Re: “Site C dam sed­i­ment deemed threat to fish stocks,” April 18.

Who are we fool­ing?

Let me show you my colours on this sub­ject: Green and Or­ange. The money spent on this dam could have been bet­ter used for re­search into an al­ter­na­tive source of re­new­able en­ergy, and ap­plied to the re­al­iza­tion of th­ese al­ter­na­tive, re­new­able en­ergy sources, rather than the de­struc­tion of our en­vi­ron­ment.

It seems B.C. Hy­dro is “again in trou­ble” with en­force­ment of­fi­cials, af­ter sed­i­ment from con­struc­tion of the $9-bil­lion Site C dam was deemed a threat to the fish stocks in the Peace River sys­tem.

Hy­dro faces the prospect of fines of up to $200,000 on first of­fence and $400,000 on sub­se­quent of­fences if the en­vi­ron­men­tal prob­lems re­main un­ad­dressed. With the words “again in trou­ble” it seems that they ei­ther have not learned their les­son, or they do not care.

If the fines are to be a de­ter­rent, they are not work­ing. Why? I guess that for B.C. Hy­dro, it is just a part of do­ing busi­ness, and the ex­penses will be passed on to the con­sumer, you and me.

Hold­ing a com­pany such as B.C. Hy­dro ac­count­able means that those who are re­spon­si­ble for the project are to be held to ac­count, and fines levied as a re­sult of th­ese and other in­frac­tions should be paid by those who are not do­ing their job, not by you and me. Alexan­der Janssen Saanich

Comments

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.