In his regular column in the Wednesday edition, Telegram editor Peter Jackson succinctly explains why Kathy Dunderdale’s Muskrat Falls scheme is a very bad idea:
Reading the review panel’s comments, one comes to the conclusion that the rationalization for the project is circular. The Muskrat project is a given, and the statistics that are gathered only justify its existence. Statistics that fall outside the project — that of alternative sources — are sparse and poorly developed.
And simple considerations — like the impact on consumption of the trend towards energy efficiency — are ignored.
Jackson hits the nail squarely on the head in every respect, including his warning that the whole thing could cost us very dearly if the assumptions on which the project is based on turn out to be junk.
Verily, these must be the end times foretold by prophecy.
Well, by prophecy or the words muttered last fall as someone scurried out the Confederation Building side door:
“Apres moi, le deluge…”
Stand by to get your feet damp.
- srbp -