Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Newfoundland and Labrador Energy Plan Consultations Underway on the Island

As a precursor to the development of a Provincial Energy Plan the government is currently involved in Province wide public consultations. I was fortunate enough to have had the opportunity to attend the third of these sessions last night at the Holiday Inn in St. John’s, the first two took place in Labrador, and I have to admit the well attended session was very enlightening.

Although the session, attended by Minister of Natural Resources Ed Byrne and several Deputy Ministers, attempted to squeeze too many presentations into a limited timeframe some valuable points were discussed. Since all presentations were also supplied to government in full the actual session came across more as an exercise in public relations. In other words, it’s not enough to be doing something you must also be seen to be doing something.

The presenters at the St. John’s consultation ran the gambit from ex-politicians to business owners, from environmentalists to oil industry executives and from union representatives to a consumer advocate. All in all a good mix with a very diverse set of ideas and concerns.

During the session several issues resonated with me. Below are some of the highlights.

Thomas Johnson – Consumer Advocate for Newfoundland and Labrador: Going forward changes should be made to the regulations governing electrical rate setting. The current process sets consumer rates based on the utility’s earnings and doesn’t provide an incentive for them become more efficient. (The less efficient they are the lower their earnings and the higher they can raise their rates).

Recommendation: Switch to performance based rate setting or PFB. This would allow consumers to take advantage of off peak period rates. The cost of supplying electricity is lower during periods when demand is low. Consumers should be given an opportunity to reap the benefit of lower rates during those periods if they choose to do so. In this way consumers would be more likely to schedule usage during off peak periods.

Fonse Fagan – AJ Fagan Consulting: Government needs to improve efficiency in the area of changing legislation within the oil and gas sector. The current process requires both federal and Provincial agreement and since the federal government requires consistency across all provinces this in essence means the tacit agreement of all producing provinces for anything to happen.

Current policy allows an exploration company to take advantage of a “Significant Find” license when they discover a petroleum deposit. These companies should be forced to prove the economic viability of their find before such a license is issued. Currently companies can receive a license and sit on the property in perpetuity without developing it, denying access to anyone interested in exploring the area. (An example given is a situation in the Jean D’Arc Basin where a company tested a well and discovered as little as 17 barrels of oil. That company now has a Significant Find license and has full control of the entire area.)

Bob Clarke – IBEW (representing several hundred hydro workers): The supply of power on the island will not be enough to meet demand in the coming years. The situation is such that the Province cannot wait for any potential interconnectivity with Labrador and the Lower Churchill. Instead Hydro must move to install a new unit at Holyrood before it’s too late. The seriousness of this situation was evidenced on the night of the federal election when Newfoundland and Labrador Power requested that consumers ease up on their use for the evening or possible brown outs would likely take place.

Carl Powell – Retired Mining Engineer: Mr. Powell recognized the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador as “A man who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing”. He went on to say that the Province should not only produce power at Lower Churchill but use it. According to Mr. Powell the financial benefit to Quebec from Upper Churchill power is well beyond the 1 billion a year estimate often used and is actually closer to 5 billion. This is due to the secondary and tertiary jobs that have developed as a result of that power, jobs in smelters, mills, construction and even at Bombardier. According to Mr. Powell the actual numbers show a benefit of 20 jobs per MWH or 100,000 jobs in total.

Bruce Pierce – Green Communities Canada: Any plan must have conservation and efficiency as a major pillar not just an after thought. Movement in the direction of energy savings should be as important as any new development. According to Mr. Pierce, since 1970 conservation and efficiency have provided more available power than any new sources of energy at an average cost of 3.1 cents per KWH.

Stephen Campbell – Trans Ocean Gas: In the early 1970’s $30 billion dollars worth of natural gas was discovered on the Labrador Shelf and this gas find was never developed. At the time technology and the lack of a distribution system did not make the find economically feasible however this is not the case today. Mr. Campbell, who is involved in the development of technology to transport compressed natural gas via ship and container, stated that the company exploring the area at the time took a tax write off on the find and left it unused. Due to current regulations this company still has all rights to the area and as a result nobody else has the opportunity to develop it. Mr. Campbell said would like these regulations to change to more of a “use it or lose it” approach.

Mr. Campbell stated that he was currently involved in a $250,000 study into the potential for tidal power in the Bell Island Straits which he believes has the potential to supply up to 10,000 Megawatts of energy.

Jerry Heffernan – Axxel Consulting: Mr. Heffernan identified the fact that the government’s discussion paper on the proposed energy plan states that he Province would like to become an energy warehouse. He challenged the government to put some solid numbers around that statement. Mr. Heffernan would like to see targets set that would clearly identify the Province’s direction. He suggested goals of power 25% in excess of need, zero thermal energy use by 1012 and the lowest energy costs in North America as possible targets.

Mr. Heffernan also suggested that one of the natural bi-products of hydro generation is hydrogen and that this is a potentially untapped resource of great value that could be exported onto the international market.

There were many other points made however the sample outlined above gives some idea of the diversity of thought that has been feeding the current process. The session closed with Minister Byrne thanking everyone for their input and identifying the fact that he was very impressed with some specific presentations especially the ideas of changing exploration regulations and the suggestion that any benefits from the energy sector needs to benefit all areas of the Province, not just the Avalon. (This point was raised by Burt London of the NL Federation of Labor who said that the plan must re-deploy wealth throughout different areas of the Province.) Mr. Byrne’s response to this point was, “…if that doesn’t happen then this plan will be a failure.”

Two notable local figures were also in attendance and although they did not make formal presentations they did comment during the open question period at the end of the session. Jim Morgan questioned the Minister on the ability to pipe power through Quebec and also why the Province did not approve a proposed wind farm in Labrador. The Minister responded that times had changed and with the international agreements and regulations in place today Quebec could not force the same sort of deal they did in the 1960’s.

On the wind farm he stated that he was not prepared to approve any plan until he had all the necessary information on impacts and possible benefits that might accrue from such a development. Byrne went on to say that doing so would be the same as telling SNC Lavilin (the developer of the Upper Churchill project) to go ahead and develop the Lower Churhill and that they could reap all of the benefits. According to Byrne he would not allow that to happen and he expected the people of the Province wouldn’t stand for it either.

Another well known figure was Tom Kearns, long time proponent of a fixed link between Newfoundland and Labrador who spoke of the potential impact of not creating such a link (one that would supposedly transport not only people but oil/gas and electricity as well). According to Mr. Kearns highway 128 from Quebec into Labrador will be completed in a short timeframe. Eventually Quebec will have two roads into the big land and once that happens it will open up the area to Quebec interests more so than Newfoundland interests.

Kearns proposed that within 50 years Newfoundland would lose its hold on Labrador if a fixed link was not put in place. According to Kearns allowing Quebec to have closer contact than the island was capable of would allow for more industrial and personal interaction with the other Province and over time the people of Labrador would have more ties economically and socially with Quebec than they would with Newfoundland. He saw this as the beginning of the end for this Province as we know it.

16 comments:

  1. Steve here,

    Thanks for the reporting on the meetings. It would have been interesting to attend.

    A couple of items you reported were of particular interest. First, was the indirect benefit to the province as a whole of increased available power. While I think the value of 100,000 additional jobs may well be overstated, it is likely to be higher than the current estimates, simply because indirect job creation is usually only considered for the first year or so. It's the long term that shows that kind of increase.

    At the risk of being cynical, the comments about international agreements precluding a "raw" deal for power out of Labrador, makes me want to giggle. The entire power generation and transmission industry is being defined in terms to maximize the industry net revenue regardless of the government or source of the initial power. It's not wrong of them to do so, but it's certainly a big stretch to say that the province's interests will be protected. It's not the industries job to do that, its the governments.

    Hopefully the result of all of these meetings will be a future growth energy policy that makes sense for the entire province.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What's with the Newfoundland paranoia about "losing" Labrador?

    The only way Newfoundland will lose Labrador is if Newfoundland fails -- or continues to fail -- to live up to its obligations to Labrador as a supposedly integral part of the province; and if Newfoundland continues to treat Labrador's resources as its "old age pension".

    All the highways between Quebec and Labrador won't make any difference. There are many highway links between Ontario and Quebec, or NB and Quebec, after all.

    In any event, how does Tom Kieran's tunnel make any sense without highways linking the tunnel to the rest of Canada? Can you route such a highway from Labrador without going through Quebec? Of course not.

    The province, as a whole, needs highway links between Labrador and Quebec. This paranoia that it will lead to "losing" Labrador is worthy of Joe Smallwood, ca. 1965, but it's completely out of place in the 21st century. Labrador needs transportation ties along all its edges: to Newfoundland, to Quebec, to the Arctic. To suggest that Labrador should have transportation ties with Newfoundland, and that ties elsewhere are dangerous, is an insult to Labrador, and reflects a Smallwood-colonial attitude towards Labrador that should have been buried years ago.

    Is the province in danger of losing Newfoundland to Nova Scotia? The two are connect by a ferry after all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We've already lost Newfoundland ...... to Canada.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks a lot for this report. I'm gonna add a link to it from the Green Party Blog and talk about it a little as well.

    Also, just wanted to let you know that I added your blog to an all NL BlogRoll. If you want the code for your site, you can get it here:http://nlblogroll.blogspot.com

    Ta for now,
    Stephen

    ReplyDelete
  5. To WJM:

    This has to be one of the most reasonable comments you've made in some time. My only point of clarity is that "losing Labrador" was the feeling of one individual, not the province itself. Nobody is saying he is right or wrong, just reporting what was said.

    Not to beat a dead horse, but I would still like to know the answer to the question posed of you a while ago.

    Thanks,

    ReplyDelete
  6. This has to be one of the most reasonable comments you've made in some time. My only point of clarity is that "losing Labrador" was the feeling of one individual, not the province itself. Nobody is saying he is right or wrong, just reporting what was said.

    He's far from the only one who's ever expressed that idiotic sentiment.

    ReplyDelete
  7. WJM:

    You said: He's far from the only one who's ever expressed that idiotic sentiment.


    Who exactly are you talking about. I speak with an awful lot of people about NL issues, not to mention reading the unsolicited comments like the ones you provide this site and that was the first time I have ever heard anyone actually express a fear of this happening.

    Why is that you would hear so much of this sentiment from islanders that I don't when (I assume ) you live in Labrador and I live on the island?

    Bye the way, you still havn'nt answered the question on whether or not you are a part of the Liberal machine.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Who exactly are you talking about. I speak with an awful lot of people about NL issues, not to mention reading the unsolicited comments like the ones you provide this site and that was the first time I have ever heard anyone actually express a fear of this happening.

    Joey Smallwood, Loyola Sullivan, Roland Card, Danny Williams, among others, have expressed similar views.

    Why is that you would hear so much of this sentiment from islanders that I don't when (I assume ) you live in Labrador and I live on the island?

    What island?

    Bye the way, you still havn'nt answered the question on whether or not you are a part of the Liberal machine.

    I only speak (write) for myself here.

    ReplyDelete
  9. TO WJM:

    I live on the island of Hawaii, which island do you think. No, not Bell island, no not Funk Island but the most obvious one.

    As to your answer on the big question, I know now that you must be a part of the Liberal machine.

    2 reasons: First, You still did not answer the question and unless you have something to hide you would have no reason not to answer it.

    Secondly, only a Liberal could have learned how to so easily appear to give an answer without actually giving one.

    Saying you only speak for yourself here is not an answer to the question but of course you know that.

    Non-denial is as good as anything else though so I now feel that I have my answer.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I live on the island of Hawaii, which island do you think. No, not Bell island, no not Funk Island but the most obvious one.

    If it has a name, you should call it by it.

    As to your answer on the big question, I know now that you must be a part of the Liberal machine.

    That's funny! If only you knew...

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/3330/constitution/labr.htm

    http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/3330/

    http://www.solon.org/whats-new.html
    25 sept 1998

    ReplyDelete
  12. Patriot,

    I, as well as every other adult, knew that "island" in the context you used it, meant Newfoundland. Don't be thrown off by infantile questions.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Steve here,

    Patriot, it should be obvious to anyone who reads the blog regularly that wjm doesn't wish to make his identity more readily available. Much as it intrigues me, I think that should be respected.

    However, I do think wjm is being disengenuous in stating that he only writes for himself. In general he has previously given an impression that he represents a considerable segment of Labrador's population.

    The larger point as a regular reader of the blog, is that patriot has offered on multiple occasions for individuals to express opinions and thoughts regarding issues of importance to Labrador and the island portions of the province. At times this has generated an interesting and lively set of posts from which I for one have learned more than a simple description could possibly provide. A case in point is where you asked in an entry a week or more ago for Labradorians to express their views and opinions.

    About the only significant thing I picked up (which was not new), is that wjm has a fixation on the province paying for the TLC. Frankly, isn't the real concern getting the dang thing done. Beyond that I get the perception that wjm feels a sense of disenfranchisement by the island portion of the province.

    While feelings are important, they can't directly be addressed or altered. That only comes through addressing issues and prioties.

    And that can only be done by commenting on issues and making issues known, regardless as to whether it's Daisy Mae or Lil Abner, or Danny Williams or Paul Martin (and grudgingly perhaps even Paul Watson).

    One last comment. In the interests of fairness you may want to consider removing the anonymous posting above. I believe the intent it to try to "out" wjm, which I for one believe is kind of out of bounds.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If I wanted to be completely anonymous, I would post anonymously or certainly at least not under my initials!

    Yes, the concern for the TLH is getting the damn thing done. But there's a bigger issue at play: what does it say for provincial unity, for Labrador's place in the province, if the provincial government does nothing in Labrador but collect taxes and revenues, and pawn its own responsibilities off on Ottawa?

    It's not just the TLH. The provincial government has done the same with education, health, and other areas of spending. If it makes the government money, it's provincial jurisdiction, if it costs, suddenly it's a federal responsibility.

    90% of the money that's ever been put into the TLH has come from the federal government, yet the province still wants more, more, more. Why won't it put any of its own money into Labrador's highways? It takes enough out!

    It seems like Labrador is viewed as little more than a source for quick cash for the provincial treasury, that becomes invisible whenever there's a need to re-invest that money. Or a way to leverage more federal transfer payments, without any obligation to actually spend that federal cash in Labrador.

    What is the point of being part of such a province? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi folks. I've been away for a few days so I apologize for not responding to your comments earlier.

    As ususal, very interesting and sane comments from Crazy A. As always they are appreciated.

    As for the Anon poster trying to "out WJM" I'm not sure this is true. There may indeed be a connection to WJM at the links anon lists but if there is then it isn't readily available from a cursory look through the site.

    It may or may not have been the intention of the poster to "out him" but I see the links more as a way to discover more information about Labrador and the more we can learn about that part of our province the better.

    If WJM's true identity (not that I'm overly concerned with who it is either) but if it can be found through the site then that is of no concern to me. If it is of concern to WJM then he shouldn't have provided that info about himself on the site.

    Later.

    ReplyDelete
  16. On the resources front here is an interesting article from the Globe and Mail:


    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060204/WILLIAMS04/TPNational/Canada

    ReplyDelete

Guidelines to follow when making a comment:

1) Comment on the topic
2) Do not provide personal information on anyone,
3) Do not name anyone unless they are publicly connected with the topic
4) No personal attacks please

Due to a high volume of computer generated spam entering the comments section I have had to re-institute the comment word verification feature.