Re: Site C to pay for itself over 70 years
An article in The Prince George Citizen is wrong to suggest that the 70-year economic life applied to Site C was not made public by BC Hydro. In fact, BC Hydro has provided this information publicly on the record countless times dating back to 2004.
The 70-year economic life has been discussed in multiple electricity planning documents, the Site C Business Case, the Site C Environmental Impact Statement and BC Hydro's 2013 Integrated Resource Plan. This 70-year economic life was also discussed in the Report of the Joint Review Panel in 2014.
In that report, the Joint Review Panel concluded that: "Site C would be the least expensive of the alternatives, and its cost advantages would increase with the passing decades as inflation makes alternatives more costly."
Contrary to what is suggested in the article, the difference in the economic life applied to Site C and independent power projects reflects their true costs to ratepayers. That is, for independent power projects, electricity purchase agreement (EPA) costs are recovered over a shorter period of time (e.g., 40 years, although this can vary based on negotiations with the producer) because the private contractor requires cost recovery within the term of the EPA.
For a long-term public asset like Site C that will last more than 100 years, the 70-year economic life reflects the weighted average depreciation term of the asset.
Asset depreciation periods are based on standard accounting practice and the methodology is applied to other large hydro projects and approved by the BCUC.
This amortization period also means that the costs for Site C are paid for by the ratepayers who are benefiting from the project.
Finally, intermittent resources like wind and run-of-river hydro are not always available to generate electricity (e.g., when the wind is not blowing or when the river is not running). As a result, they are not, on their own, an alternative to Site C since they may not be available to meet peak demand.
As a source of dependable and flexible electricity, Site C would support the development of renewable resources in B.C. by providing a reliable backup to intermittent resources.
Other jurisdictions that are pursuing wind and run-of-river hydro usually need to include gas-fired generation to provide needed backup, a point not mentioned in the article.
Dave Conway
BC Hydro
