The Joint Review Panel on the Site C EA issued their recommendation on May 8, 2014.

Summary: http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p63919/99174E.pdf

Full Report http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p63919/99173E.pdf

The JRP report on Site C is a series of recommendations on Site C. It’s clear that the JRP has identified a number of significant and troubling concerns through which clearly indicate that Site C should not proceed.

Specifically, the Panel concluded that the proponent has failed to prove the need for the project. Further, they stated that because there are significant adverse environmental effects, justification for the power must rest on an unambiguous need for the power. Clearly, the need isn’t proven and there are several areas of ambiguity identified within their report.

Additionally, the Panel is not satisfied that the cost estimates for the project are accurate. As such, they’ve recommended that the costs be addressed by the British Columbia Utilities Commission for a detailed examination.

The Panel has also concluded that there are uncertainties regarding BC Hydro’s long term forecasts and that basing a $7.9 billion project on a 20-year demand forecast without an explicit 20-year scenario of prices is not good practice. Thus, the JRP has recommended that BC Hydro address this issue and that their subsequent analysis be considered by the public through BCUC hearings before construction begins.

The Panel stated that policy constraints have made it impossible for them to adequately consider alternatives and they recommended that regardless of whether Site C proceeds or not, BC Hydro must consider a range of energy sources.

Overall, it’s clear that there is no need for Site C now. The JRP concurs that it would result in significant impacts to farmers, First Nations, fish and birds as well as archaeological and heritage sites. They have stated that these losses can only be justified if there is an unambiguous need for the power. Given that they have concluded that there is no need for the power now, it’s clear that the federal and provincial governments have no concrete rationale for proceeding.

Advertisements