Energy agency blocking carbon reduction: official
Utilities commission on wrong side of green issue
The B.C. Utilities Commission is standing in the way of society’s move to low-carbon energy systems and needs to change its views, Vancouver city manager Sadhu Johnston said Thursday.
By rejecting a franchise agreement between the city and Creative Energy Vancouver Platforms that included a “carbon reduction rider,” the commission is on the wrong side of society’s efforts to reduce the effect of greenhouse gas emissions, he said.
The rider, which would have required new buildings to pay a special fee to fund a future lowcarbon biomass plant, was considered “unfair” by the BCUC.
Creative and the city argued the rider would help prevent “rate shock” when the proposed energy centre is built sometime before 2020. It would also start conditioning users to pay the true value of a low-carbon energy source.
“To be honest, the disappointment is that there isn’t greater recognition by the BCUC of the need to achieve low-carbon utilities,” said Johnston, who has championed the city’s carbon reduction efforts through its Greenest City Action Plan.
On Tuesday, the utility commission allowed Creative Energy to proceed with construction of a new hot water heat distribution system in Northeast False Creek. But it rejected a neighbourhood energy franchise agreement between Creative and the city, saying parts of it — including the carbon rider — were inappropriate.
Johnston said it wasn’t so much the loss of rider that bothered him as the refusal of the BCUC to consider the need for low-carbon systems. He noted the commission had rejected a similar rider last year for Corix Multi-Utility Services’ district energy system at UBC.
With public attention focused on the United Nations Climate Change conference in Paris, the commission’s ruling sets the goal of carbon reduction back a step, he said.
“It is a bit of a shame, especially coming on the heels of Paris and the global recognition we need to address carbon,” Johnston said. “Here we have the premier recognizing B.C. isn’t going to achieve their 2020 targets and the group at the BCUC not recognizing the need for this. When we see setbacks like this or folks who don’t see the value, it is disappointing.”
The BCUC said it wouldn’t respond to Johnston’s comments.
The city has a lot at stake in the Creative Energy proposal. The heating system, formerly owned by Central Heat Distribution, is the city’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases. The city has been working with the company on a plan to make a “fuel switch” from natural gas to low-carbon sources such as wood waste.
Trent Berry, chairman of Creative Energy, said the company is just finishing a feasibility study on an energy facility and will deliver it to the city later this month. He said the study looked at a variety of fuel sources as well as locations, including a piece of False Creek property the city has reserved. Creative is paying market rent on the land pending the city’s review of the study.
Johnston said Vancouver would not assume financial risk.
“We are not expecting to finance their project. We would expect they would finance it. There may be opportunities for us to play a role in terms of the pipe going through city streets, or even the city owning the pipe, but we definitely don’t intend to pay for the development and we don’t intend to loan any money for the facility,” he said.
Michael Allison, a spokesman for FortisBC, which was an intervener in the case, said the company is reviewing the panel’s decision but is still concerned about Creative enjoying a monopoly.
“Our view is that people should be able to choose the right energy for their use, whether it is electricity or gas,” Allison said.