Saw this article pushing work associated with proposed Site C http://ow.ly/fEvID and here is a response to it from Randal Hadland – worth reading!
“The article on Nov. 19, from Greg D’avignon of the Busuiness Council, and John Winter of
the Chamber of Commerce concerning the proposed Site C and possible business

opportunities was obnoxious to anyone who has thought about our financial and
environmental future. The two make erroneous comments about “The business information
sessions are a great opportunity for businesses and communities to learn about the
significant economic opportunities offered by this project for companies of all sizes, as
well as the long-term benefits that cost-effective electricity provides for all British
Columbians.” I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that no evidence was presented
showing that Site C is a cost effective alternative.

At best their information came from BC Hydros public Relations dep’t and does not
represent in any way a complete analysis of the proposed third dam on the dam-aged Peace
River. At worst, Hydro is trying to run with the same kind of faulty and insufficient
material that they used during the BC Utilities Commission Hearing in the eighties, and
which gave the government of the day the opportunity to deny Hydro the right to proceed.

As Business organization representatives they should both have the integrity to do a
little bit of research on their own concerning what might be the best use of the river
valley and what might be the best option for energy developments in BC before they
endorse Hydros opinions.

Eight billion dollars is a huge amount of capital to have to borrow, to indebt ourselves
to money lenders for, and it behooves us to think hard before incurring that debt. The
costs associated with the environmental and foregone resource costs of damming the Peace
again are of a similar order of magnitude and deserve the same care and attention. BC
Hydro is not doing that analysis, I think…

Advertisements