Site C a difficult decision for B.C. premier

Re: “Power from Site C no longer needed,” letter, Nov. 14; “Consider Europe’s greenenergy experience,” column, Nov. 10. The letter-writer got it right when he challenged Lawrie McFarlane’s assumptions on cancelling Site C.

B.C. Hydro reports that most of the $3.9 billion already spent on the project went toward long-needed upgrades to transmission lines and roads in the northeast. Thank goodness much less money was spent on the construction site itself. Geotechnical problems there have meant serious cost overruns that show no sign of abating.

Present estimates for completion have us spending another $7.1 billion for a project already mired in cost overruns. This to build a dam to produce energy that the B.C. Utilities Commission says we won’t need for another quarter century. Throwing good money after bad doesn’t make sound economic sense.

If the NDP government stays the course set by Christy Clark, they will own the project, its cost overruns and project delays. They will own future losses (estimated at $800 million over the first four years of operation) selling power to the U.S. for less than it costs to produce.

All of this will come at significant political cost, given that borrowing to pay for Site C will squeeze out the NDP government’s ability to pay for their election-platform promises. While, the findings of the BCUC inquiry support ending Site C now, it’s still a difficult decision for Premier John Horgan. Steve Gray Victoria