NALCO: the power of confusion

A sample of the conflicting policy statements on the Lower Churchill, Holyrood diesel generating plant and the rationale for slinging hydro lines on 43 metre tall towers in a UNESCO World heritage site.

A.  Premier Danny Williams:

"The reason that those lines are actually going through that park and the existing transmission corridor is to take out the dirty emissions that are coming from the Seal Cove-Holyrood plant," said Williams, referring to an oil-burning generating plant in eastern Newfoundland. [CBC story, 24 Feb 09]

B.  NALCO environmental impact submission on the hydro line project (2009):

A key purpose and rationale for the proposed Labrador – Island Transmission Link is to put in place infrastructure to further interconnect Newfoundland and Labrador with the North American electricity system and thus, set the stage for further development and growth in the province’s energy sector and overall economy.

It will also play an important part in ongoing efforts toward securing adequate, reliable and sustainable electricity supply for Newfoundland and Labrador, to address the current and future needs of the province’s residents and industries. [Page ii. Punctuation, capitalisation and italics in original] [Bold added]

…

A key rationale for the project is to put in place infrastructure to further interconnect the province with the North American electricity system, in order to facilitate the future import and export of electricity between mainland North America and Newfoundland and Labrador, and thus, help set the stage for further development and growth in the province’s energy sector….[Page 1] [Bold added]

Similar phrasing appears repeatedly throughout the document’s 199 pages.  Holyrood does not appear as any part of the rationale until page 8. The energy plan makes reference to the Holyrood displacement, but NALCO’s proposal downplays the Holyrood issue in favour of the general development of interconnection “to facilitate the future import and export” of electrical power from the province.

C.  NALCO 20 year capital plan (2008) on the role of Holyrood:

It is important to consider that whichever expansion scenario occurs, an isolated Island electrical system or interconnected to the Lower Churchill via HVDC link, Holyrood will be an integral and vital component of the electrical system for decades to come. In the isolated case Holyrood will continue to be a generating station; in the interconnected scenario its three generating units will operate as synchronous condensers, providing system stability, inertia and voltage control.

Holyrood will not close. The plant will continue to operate under NALCO’s 20 year capital plan with or without the infeed from Labrador. This is in direction opposition to the province’s energy plan released the year before.

D.  The energy plan (2007) commitment on Holyrood:

In the long-term, the current level of emissions from the Holyrood facility is unacceptable. The Provincial Government, through NLH, has investigated the long-term options to address Holyrood emissions and decided to replace Holyrood generation with electricity from the Lower Churchill through a transmission link to the Island. This replacement provides an excellent opportunity to partner with the Federal Government to reduce GHG emissions.

The energy plan envisages the export of wind-generated electricity from the Island.  The infeed environmental document indicates that wind generation is being capped at 88 megawatts because of problems with grid stability.

-srbp-

Holyrood pollution and the Great White Whale

According to the Telegram, Holyrood town council is expected to vote this week to ask the provincial energy company and the provincial government to follow through on commitments to reduce emissions from the thermal generating plant at Holyrood.

The problem both for the town is that it is stuck accepting NALCOR’s own contradictory statements on Holyrood.

On the one hand you have the statement contained in the provincial energy plan.  Under that version, the company would either install scrubbers and precipitators to deal with emissions or  - as a NALCOR spokesperson told the Telegram - “displace existing fossil fuel generation at the Holyrood generating station.”

But as Bond Papers readers know, Holyrood will be a crucial part of the NALCOR system no matter what.  This is not an either/or proposition.  The scrubbers and precipitators will have to be installed.  Even if the heavens open, miracles happen and NALCOR builds the Lower Churchill anytime in the next two decades, NALCOR plans to keep Holyrood on stream.

You don’t just have to believe your old e-scribbler.  Here’s exactly how NALCOR described it:

It is important to consider that whichever expansion scenario occurs, an isolated Island electrical system or interconnected to the Lower Churchill via HVDC link, Holyrood will be an integral and vital component of the electrical system for decades to come. In the isolated case Holyrood will continue to be a generating station; in the interconnected scenario its three generating units will operate as synchronous condensers, providing system stability, inertia and voltage control.

Things don’t get any better, by the by, if you try and follow Calamity Kathy Dunderdale’s version of things.

What seems to be going on here is pretty simple.  NALCOR and the Premier are obsessed with a hydro megaproject that they just can’t build.  Everything else is being held hostage by that obsession.

For example, power from central Newfoundland can’t be used to replace Holyrood since the connection to the Avalon can’t bear the added load NALCOR won’t upgrade that transmission capacity unless the LC goes ahead.  At the same time, NALCOR won’t pursue alternative generation – like say wind power – because it is fixated on the Lower Churchill.  This sort of stuff is well laid out in the LC environmental review documents. 

And if that weren’t bad enough a decades old moratorium on small hydro projects remains in place. The 2007 energy plan committed government to lift it or keep it in place in 2009, the year they were supposed to start the Lower Churchill.

Guess what?

That decision is held up, as well, because the Great White Whale remains just out of Ahab’s grasp.

So if the Holyrood town council wants to get their local air improved, the first thing they need to do is toss aside the bumpf coming from the provincial government and NALCOR about the Lower Churchill.

Instead, they need to hold NALCOR to the statements in its 20 year capital plan.

And that means they need to come up with a timetable to install emission reduction equipment on the facility that NALCOR says will be a vital part of its system for decades to come.

- srbp -

The Dangers of Being a Mythbuster – More Thermal than Thermal #nlpoli

The issue of Holyrood and the future cost of thermal generation is a big part of the argument for Muskrat Falls.

What’s so amazing about it is that people can actually get so confused by something so straightforward.

NALCOR: the power of constipation

Supposedly all we need is to know that the provincial government’s energy corporation, d.b.a. NALCOR, is “aligned” and will take all the time it needs in order to arrive at a “quality decision” on whether or not to install emission control equipment on its diesel generating plant at Holyrood.

For now, let’s leave three things out of this discussion.

First, this isn’t the place to rehash the nonsense which is NALCOR’s two, inherently contradictory position on Holyrood.

Second, and related to that, let’s not draw too much attention to the fact that NALCOR chief executive Ed Martin’s proposed solution to the $600 million cost of cleaning up Holyrood’s act is a multi-billion dollar pair of hydroelectric dams in Labrador and a giant set of power lines, the lines by themselves estimated to cost more than three times the scrubber cost, that will stretch out to the Avalon.

And third, let’s not note that NALCOR’s own capital plant maintains that Holyrood will have to continue running for the next two decades at at least one quarter to one third its capacity.  In other words, it won’t be shutting down at all.  As such, NALCOR will have to spend the $600 million or so in order to reduce noxious emissions from the plant regardless of whether the Great White Whale gets built or not.

Why Ed Martin and his boss, the Old Man, continue to pack around about this and bullshit the people of the province is beyond rational comprehension.

Instead of that, let us focus Martin’s suggestion that maybe some new types of generation might allow NALCOR the dirty power at Holyrood with some nice clean stuff. That might be cheaper, sez Martin than the environmental cleaners.

For starters, Martin is already sitting on juice to help replace Holyrood.  He got it as a gift from Danny in December 2008.  The only problem – apparently  - is that the interconnection between the Avalon and the rest of the island cannot carry the whole load. 

NALCOR needs some cash to make things happen. NALCOR has the cash, of course, or the capacity to borrow it, thanks to some generous gifts of public money  - yours and mine – courtesy of the Old Man and his crowd. The company is in a nifty position, frankly, since they get to play at being an oil company without having to pay all the costs.  NALCOR won’t pay the owners of the resource  - you and me - a penny in royalty for the oil we’ve given then.  We get the liability and the cost.  Martin and his crowd get the cash.

Pretty sweet deal, if anyone is asking.  And frankly, given the generosity of the current administration with resources and cash – yours and mine - it wouldn’t be too much if you and me expected Martin to install the cleansers and the new line most ricky tick.  He can spare us the bullshit and just get on with the job.

But it is when Martin mentions wind energy that he turns from a purveyor of  annoying bullshit to profound disingenuousness.

As Martin knows, this province has the smallest amount of wind power installed or under development of any province in the country.  It is a mere 54 megawatts in two sites. Tiny Prince Edward Island has more than twice that already on the go.  In short, this province, the one the Old Man and his retinue proclaim as a current and future energy warehouse is so far back in the field that it is not even close to being able to see the far distant ass the of the last place contender for the Crown.

There are two reasons for that.  Assuming that Martin read the Lower Churchill environmental applications he already knows that there is actually no reason to build the LC if the main reason is shipping power to St. John’s.  There’s really no need for additional generating capacity and, as it stands, NALCOR can now reduce Holyrood to virtually nil capacity.

As for the rest of the province, that is, the largest bit of it, the reason there are no wind farms under consideration is simply because NALCOR and the province don’t want them.  Official government policy subordinates any new generation, from small hydro to wind, to the Great White Whale project.

Put another way, innovation is dead as a doornail in Newfoundland and Labrador. The provincial government’s energy policy is working against the best interests of the people of the province.

Ed Martin’s comments to CBC recently could just as easily have been summarised with a parody of the old Mexican bandito line:  “Innovation?  We dun need no stinkin’ innovation.” Martin merely affirmed the power of constipation that afflicts the administration and its energy company, at least when it comes to innovation and energy.

- srbp -

Muskrat Love

To help you get ready for the splendiferous announcement later today, here are some things to keep an eye on.  Undoubtedly, there’ll be more spin than a baton twirlers’ convention riding on the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party ride at Disneyworld.

Just keep your head and you won’t get nauseous.

1.  Ready for a better tomorrow.  Just remember that tomorrow is a day that never seems to get here.

There have been memoranda of understanding before that came to naught.  Remember 1998?  Brian Tobin and Lucien Bouchard dropped a half million to announce not only a Lower Churchill deal but a reworking of the Churchill Falls project as well.  Result:  Nada.

Then there was the memorandum of understanding to sell 200 megawatts of power to Rhode Island.  That fell apart because NALCOR couldn’t deliver the power to Rhode Island at a price anyone could afford.

Don’t forget Frank Moores’ big explosions on either side of the Straits.

And as we look at a likely memorandum of understanding between NALCOR on one side and the Government of Nova Scotia and Emera on the other, let’s not forget that NALCOR already has one:  signed in January 2008.

If this isn’t a concrete deal to start work soon, then Thursday’s announcement can all evaporate as easily as the others did.

2. Cost.  The lower the number the less likely it is real.  CBC’s David Cochrane mentioned a figure of $4.0 billion.

The line from Muskrat Falls to Soldier’s Pond, just outside St. John’s came with an estimated cost of $2.2 billion in 1998. That would be close to $3.0 billion today.  There’s an estimate of the Nova Scotia line that runs between $800 million and $1.2 billion. Take the upper one just to be on the safe side since proponents tend to underestimate megaproject costs big time. So just the lines alone are likely to cost more than $4.0 billion.

A 900 megawatt project in British Columbia (Site C) is coming with a $6.6 billion price tag so it is safe to work with a cost estimate for this project of around the same amount.

The 70/30 debt-equity ratio NALCOR boss Ed Martin has mused about publicly would give you a borrowing requirement of around $4.0 billion.  There’s David Cochrane’s number.  The rest of the cash would come from NALCOR’s small equity stakes in three offshore projects, unless Emera is coming on board with an ownership stake.

3.  How much is being exported?   A couple of weeks ago 60% of the project’s estimated 800 megawatts would go to Nova Scotia.  According to reports on Wednesday, 60% of the power is now coming to the island and – here’s the kicker – the island portion of the province doesn’t need it.  However, NALCOR does need the captive market in Newfoundland to help underwrite the massive project.

Keep your eye on this one because it will tell you how expensive electricity will get in Newfoundland and Labrador. As it looks now, things are lining up to prove Danny Williams was right when he said last fall that “…good, cheap, competitively priced energy, can't be offered to that whole region.” 

4.  Environmental process Day Zero:  As regular readers already know, this thing will have to go through an environmental review with a whole new section never before considered.

5.  Holyrood.  For some unfathomable reason, no one seems to want to believe NALCOR’s own words on Holyrood:

It is important to consider that whichever expansion scenario occurs, an isolated Island electrical system or interconnected to the Lower Churchill via HVDC link, Holyrood will be an integral and vital component of the electrical system for decades to come. In the isolated case Holyrood will continue to be a generating station; in the interconnected scenario its three generating units will operate as synchronous condensers, providing system stability, inertia and voltage control.

The diesel plant at Holyrood will not be shuttered, mothballed or otherwise displaced or taken offline.  To the contrary, it will run 24/7/365 but at a reduced capacity. Holyrood will be an “integral and vital” component of the province’s electrical system.

- srbp -

Holyrood an “absolute necessity” for decades to come: Hydro

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is pushing the $10 billion Lower Churchill project and the multi-billion dollar power lines through a UNESCO World Heritage site as a replacement for the Holyrood diesel generating station near St. John’s.

But, Hydro’s 20 year capital plan, submitted to the public utilities board in 2008, notes that “[d]epending on which scenario unfolds, some, or all of the Holyrood generating plant will be required for decades into the future.”

According to Hydro, the Holyrood generating station is an “absolute necessity in the system.”

It is important to consider that whichever expansion scenario occurs, an isolated Island electrical system or interconnected to the Lower Churchill via HVDC link, Holyrood will be an integral and vital component of the electrical system for decades to come. In the isolated case Holyrood will continue to be a generating station; in the interconnected scenario its three generating units will operate as synchronous condensers, providing system stability, inertia and voltage control.

-srbp-

What’s our policy again?

Provincial cabinet ministers like to accuse everyone else of not understanding what is going on or of being mistaken.

Here’s a typical quote from May 18 in Question Period:

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I realize members opposite are not in the habit of stating the facts, but I want to correct the member opposite,…

The problem for Mr. King and his colleagues, though, has been that they often don’t seem to have a sweet clue as to what is going on in the world around them.  Some of them have about as much familiarity with facts and reason as a 12 year old girl looking for tickets to a Justin Bieber concert.

Take, for example, this claim – an old chestnut – by the province’s natural resources minister also made on May 18:

Nalcor has costed out the infrastructure that is going to be required to bring in the right number of megawatts of electricity to serve the Avalon Peninsula with the elimination of Holyrood. That is a stated goal of this Province. It is one of the major reasons why we are so focused on the development of the Lower Churchill, Mr. Speaker.

All of the infrastructure that is going to be required to bring the power onto the Island part of the Province, transmit it across the Province and eliminate Holyrood, and also create a subsea line to Eastern Canada and through to the United States is all part of the planning of the development of the Lower Churchill.

Got that?

Eliminate Holyrood.

Provincial government policy.

Spearheaded by the energy corporation, currently doing business as NALCOR Energy.

Someone needs to tell NALCOR, then, because here’s what the company said in its 20 year capital plan that it submitted to the public utilities board:

It is important to consider that whichever expansion scenario occurs, an isolated Island electrical system or interconnected to the Lower Churchill via HVDC link, Holyrood will be an integral and vital component of the electrical system for decades to come. In the isolated case Holyrood will continue to be a generating station; in the interconnected scenario its three generating units will operate as synchronous condensers, providing system stability, inertia and voltage control.

Holyrood: integral and vital component for years to come.

-srbp-

Muskrat Falls: The Kennedy Tweets #nlpoli #cdnpoli

Here’s a string of tweets from natural resources minister Jerome Kennedy on Friday night:

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
Let me try and simplify Muskrat Falls. First question, do we(NL) need the power? If yes, then question # 2,what are we going to do about it? 

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
MF cont'd. If we need the power what are our options: Muskrat Falls, refurbish Holyrood with small hydro and wind,Gull Island,or do nothing. 

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
MF cont'd. Gull island is not an option at present. To do nothing is not an option. So, do we do Muskrat Falls or refurbish Holyrood. 

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
MF cont'd. Nalcor argues that MF is $2.2B cheaper than Holyrood.Manitoba Hydro will examine this question and they are independent of govt. 

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
The cost of oil makes Holyrood so expensive. At peak it burns 18,000 barrels of oil per day. Experts tell us that oil will continue to rise 

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
Why the cost of oil will continue to rise-not enough supply to meet demand, activities in the Middle East and growth in China. Makes sense. 

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
MF cont'd. Cost of fixing up Holyrood is $600M. Forecasted cost of oil between 2017-36 is more that $7B.Hydro avoids the volatility of oil.

And then came this one:

Mark Watton @mark_watton
@jerome_kennedy You know, if the House were sitting, you could do this using more than 140 characters at a time. #nlpoli in reply to @jerome_kennedy

Followed by complete silence from the minister.

Interesting synopsis of the government argument, though.  Interesting because of what it leaves out.
There’ll be more from SRBP in the days ahead.

- srbp -

More Tweets Update:

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
MF cont'd(No.8) - Environmental benefits - Closing Holyrood is the equivalent of taking 300,000 cars off the road.Reduces GHGs by 1M tons/yr.

Jerome Kennedy @jerome_kennedy
MF cont'd (No.9) - Economic Benefits- peak employment of 2700. Job preference to Labradorians. Billions in income and taxes .Little talk of this.

And yet more tweets (Jan 22):

MF No.10 - Power rates continue to rise due to the price of oil. Critics argue that rates will double because of MF.This is simply not true. 

MF No.11-The average ratepayer will pay $217 monthly in 2016,pre-Muskrat.This is projected to rise to $232 in 2017 when MF starts up (▲$15). 

MF No.12-With Muskrat Falls the average user's rates are projected to go up from $232/mth to $246/mth between 2017-30. Rates will rise $14. 

MF No.13-Without Muskrat rates are projected to go up $57 between 2017-30,as compared to $14 with Muskrat.MF will stabilze [sic] and reduce rates.

Old whine still sour #nlpoli

"I'm concerned that we have an aging asset,”  natural resources minister Siobhan Coady told CBC in explaining the most recent break downs at the Holyrood generating station.

About two years ago, in the midst of darknl,  then-Premier Kathy Dunderdale said pretty much the same thing:  “We've talked incessantly, it seems to me, over the last number of years about the aging facility in Holyrood and the fact that that facility needed to be replaced.”  Before that, Nalcor and its supporters used “aging infrastructure” and the inevitable climb of oil prices as the excuse to build the multi-billion dollar Muskrat Falls project.

The old whine in new skins isn't any sweeter in the ear whether it is coming from Coady or Dunderdale.

Indeed, what’s most disturbing about Siobhan Coady's media interview is that in the two years since darknl we have learned that the lines someone fed Coady are not true.

Yet someone still fed Coady the false lines and Coady used them.

Tom Marshall’s Dead Muskrat Sketch #nlpoli

Tom Marshall used to be the finance minister. 

He’s the guy who consistently, year after year, spent more than the people of the province could afford. Tom didn’t do it by himself:  he had the support of all his colleagues in cabinet.

And since 2009, Tom and his colleagues have admitted that they mismanaged the provincial government accounts by overspending.

Deliberately.

Along the way, Tom has claimed some things that aren’t true.  Like saying that he and his colleagues lowered the provincial debt when they didn’t.

So now that he is natural resources minister, Tom Marshall is still telling people things that aren’t true.  This time it is about the glories of the 2008 expropriation.

What Tom says.

The truth.

Two different things.

Muskrat Voodoo #nlpoli #cdnpoli

A Canadian Press story on Muskrat Falls this week starts with economist Brendan Sullivan’s recent critique of Muskrat Falls:

He said in an interview that the province and its Crown corporation Nalcor Energy are using "voodoo economics" to justify a long-term power purchase agreement.

…

But Sullivan argues the agreement essentially writes off depreciation later — "kicking the can down the road" for future generations — and that it wouldn't get past private shareholders who expect faster return on investment.

CP also gives Nalcor boss Ed martin some space.  Curiously he tosses out some additional voodoo as if to prove Sullivan’s point without realising it.

Try this for starters:

In an email, Nalcor CEO Ed Martin said the province needs more power and that Muskrat Falls is cheaper than if Newfoundland generates its own energy, much of it dependent on an aging oil-fired plant.

Two bits.

First there’s the claim that MF would be cheaper than generating energy on its own.

It’s a weird way to say it:  “cheaper than if Newfoundland generates its own energy.”  After all the end-users foot the entire bill either way so whatever that curious phrase means it doesn’t matter.

Second, the infeed system isn’t cheaper than the alternatives. Nalcor hasn’t studied the alternatives and won’t have studied them before government sanctions the project.  At best they don’t know.  At worst, as some of the critics have suggested, Muskrat falls is actually more expensive and potentially the most financially risky choice of all the ways to me the island’s electricity needs.

Third, look at this:

Muskrat Falls "moves the island from dependence on thermal generation to the use of clean, renewable hydropower," he said.

The island isn’t dependent on thermal generation now.  Thermal is part of the mix.  Any place that has a majority of its year-round generation from thermal sources is “dependent”.  The island uses Holyrood for less than three months a year.  Some years, Holyrood supplies a mere 11% of the island’s electricity needs.

Fourth, and, as Ed Martin knows, if he spent a few hundred millions, he could shutter Holyrood for about 15 years.  Martin has a supply of hydro available from the old Abitibi properties to displace Holyrood.  The problem is that the line between the generators and the consumers on the Avalon can’t handle the extra load.

And for fifth, recall another wonder bit of voodoo on Martin’s part:  the Muskrat Falls scheme actually includes more thermal generation for the island than is currently installed at Holyrood.  It’s right there in the same Manitoba Hydro report Martin keeps citing when he pronounces himself baffled that the public utilities board refused to answer his set-up question with Martin’s pre-determined answer.

- srbp -

The trap of fossil fuels #nlpoli #cdnpoli

Muskrat Falls green.

Right?

Get rid of Holyrood.

Holyrood bad.

No more oil burning.

Must be true.

After all, natural resources minister Jerome Kennedy tweeted a couple of weeks ago that:

The cost of oil makes Holyrood so expensive. At peak it burns 18,000 barrels of oil per day. Experts tell us that oil will continue to rise.

…

MF cont'd. Cost of fixing up Holyrood is $600M. Forecasted cost of oil between 2017-36 is more that $7B.Hydro avoids the volatility of oil.

And Premier Kathy Dunderdale told the St. John’s Board of Trade not even 48 hours ago of the glorious future when there are no more fossil fuel plants in Newfoundland, thanks to the wonders of her Muskrat Falls project:

What is the best thing we can do for our children 30, 40 and 50 years from now? It is to escape from a thermal future, taking our economy off the trap of fossil fuels, where we are hostage to rising oil prices. We will deliver a secure, sustainable economy to our children, and that is a legacy we can all be proud of.

Yeah well, hang on to your long johns, there, kiddies.

According to Manitoba Hydro International, the Muskrat Falls plan includes the construction of seven new oil-fired  - i.e. thermal – generating plants between 2036 and 2037.

The total cost for these additional facilities is estimated to cost a total of $1.4 billion in the MHI documents on thermal generation. Is that included in the $5.0 billion cost estimate for this project, less the connection to Nova Scotia?

Sharp eyes will notice that Holyrood doesn’t shut down in this plan until 2030.  That’s with Muskrat Falls.  it will run as a line condenser to help with the transmission and, if you follow the discussion, as a small back-up generator for a short period.

Don’t think too hard about those dates, though.  The entire Muskrat plan anticipates that construction has already started.  They begin counting time in 2010 and have initial power flowing by 2017.  You can already slide that back by at least 12 months and possible 18 months or more.

And don’t you recall reading somewhere official that with “Muskrat Falls, the Newfoundland and Labrador electricity system will be run on 98 per cent renewable, emission-free energy?”

You can take that to the bank.

That is copper-fastened.

Well, maybe more like brass, with a bit of tarnish on it. According to Manitoba Hydro International’s financial assessment:

By 2067, the generation capacity mix for the Infeed Option will be based on 65% hydroelectric and 35% thermal.

Good thing we will escape the trap of fossil fuels.

- srbp -

Nalcor ignores natural gas, local studies back cheaper alternative to Muskrat Falls project

The provincial government’s energy corporation didn’t study natural gas as an alternative to using Muskrat Falls to replace the Holyrood generating plant according to the company’s final written submission to the environmental panel reviewing the project.

Nalcor dismissed natural gas as “purely hypothetical” since the major oil companies have not identified a “viable business case” (p. 20). The company cited testimony given to the environmental panel to justify its decision.

But information given to the panel in testimony at a hearing into the project in St. John’s on August 4 didn’t come from the major offshore companies.  Some of the information came as hearsay comments from two private consultants interested in developing a natural gas storage facility near Stephenville and from Nalcor’s own vice president Gilbert Bennett.

Neither Bennett nor the consultants could cite specific information.  Neither told the panel, either,  that assessing development of offshore natural gas is hampered because the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador still hasn’t developed a natural gas royalty regime, despite commitments to do so in 1997 and again in the provincial energy plan issued in 2007.

That’s the same plan that committed the provincial government to developing the Lower Churchill.

The other source Nalcor cited to dismiss natural gas is testimony by NOIA president Bob Cadigan at the same April hearing. 

The panel was interested in the prospect of using natural gas from the offshore just for Holyrood and not for export. And when asked by the environmental assessment panel for specifics on a natural gas development, Cadigan didn’t have any information about the viability of natural gas as a replacement for Muskrat Falls of any sort. 

Instead, he relied on the project proponents and their assessments:

And in terms of that feasibility,  I think -- you know, I believe that the province and Nalcor have looked at a global -- from a global  perspective or high level at the opportunities available, and I would be surprised if it was an economically viable source to replace electric 18 generation from Holyrood [p. 141]

NOIA is comprised of supply and service companies for which Muskrat Falls represents a very lucrative business opportunity.

What none of the project boosters talked about were studies done within the past decade on offshore gas development.

A 2005 discussion paper prepared for NOIA by Dr. Stephen Bruneau looked at six options for getting additional electricity for the island grid. Bruneau concluded that development of only 60% of the known gas reserves at Hibernia, White Rose and Terra Nova would give enough natural gas to power a Holyrood size generating plant at full capacity, 365 days a year for over a century.  That would displace 500,000 tons of greenhouse gases each year.

Bruneau estimated the cost of a pipeline to bring the gas ashore to be $300 million. Another $400 million would build a natural gas generating plant, with another $112.5 million needed to build a short on-land pipeline and build natural gas handling facilities at sea.  Total cost would be less than $1.0 billion.

Nalcor estimates the Muskrat Falls project will cost  at least $6.2 billion, with the resulting electricity costs at least 14.3 cents per kilowatt hour.

In contrast, Bruneau estimated the cost of electricity from a Holyrood natural gas plant at five cents a kilowatt hour.  Surplus gas could be converted to liquid natural gas and stored, according to Bruneau, or exported to the American market:

Associated gas transferred to the Island via pipeline is economical and is a wise choice for Newfoundland and Labrador energy strategy. It
will result in lower electricity prices, improved environmental stewardship, will attract major industry including LNG export opportunities, and, is economical to begin IMMEDIATELY.

Bruneau’s conclusions are supported by a 2001 study for the provincial energy department that looked at the feasibility of piping natural gas and gas liquids from the offshore using a pipeline. That study concluded, among other things, that the resources examined by the study could be developed economically even in a low price environment.

 

- srbp -

A sweet energy deal for someone

The following op-ed piece is from opposition leader Kelvin Parsons.  It appeared in several conventional news media last weekend.

 

A sweet deal, but not for the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador

by Kelvin Parsons

The proposed Term Sheet to develop hydroelectric power at Muskrat Falls, Labrador with Emera Energy of Nova Scotia is badly flawed. If it proceeds, it will cause an exorbitant rise in electricity rates and increase our provincial debt by as much as 50 per cent, a worrisome development given that we already have the highest per capita debt in Canada.

The Government of Premier Kathy Dunderdale would have us believe this deal is necessary to provide stable, long term energy prices and that if it doesn’t proceed our energy prices will be even higher. However, neither the premier, nor Nalcor, has provided any information to substantiate that claim. Neither has Ms. Dunderdale or Nalcor offered any proof that energy demand is increasing on the island and that we actually need the additional power Muskrat could provide. It would be instructive to see Nalcor’s energy demand projections given this province has lost two pulp and paper mills under the current government’s watch and our population is projected to decrease over the long term.

As for her contention that replacing the thermal plant at Holyrood with Muskrat power would make this province 98 per cent green, Ms. Dunderdale is not telling the full story. She is failing to disclose that Holyrood generates only 20 per cent of the island’s electricity and that the other 80 per cent is already “green energy” that comes from hydroelectric stations such as the ones at Bay d’Espoir and Cat Arm and from wind farms such as the one at St. Lawrence. Using the premier’s own formula for calculating our “greenness,” which includes the 5,400 megawatts of energy already being produced on the upper Churchill, this province is already 91 per cent “green.”

The premier is proposing that we spend $6.2 billion to build a new power plant in Labrador and run lines thousands of kilometers over land and under water to replace just 20 per cent of our energy production. Adding such a huge financial burden on top of our existing debt - for such limited gain - makes no financial sense.

Refurbishing Holyrood to reduce its emissions is a far cheaper option. Eliminating Holyrood also eliminates the prospect of eventually using this province’s large stores of natural gas for electrical generation here at home. There is much more gas in the oil fields now under production in the Jeanne ‘d’Arc basin than in the Sable reserves off Nova Scotia. And that’s not counting the potential reserves in Western Newfoundland or the large gas reserves off Labrador.

As well, the citizens of this province should be told there are several other potential hydroelectric and wind projects that can be developed on the island of Newfoundland to meet any incremental growth in electrical demand for many years to come. These projects can be developed at far less cost than Muskrat Falls and with much less impact on us as taxpayers and electricity consumers.

Make no mistake, Muskrat will be a financial burden. By the premier’s own admission, the generating and transmission costs of Muskrat Falls power will be at least $143 per megawatt hour. That’s a 120 per cent increase over the base rate Nalcor now charges Newfoundland Power, the main provider of energy to consumers on the island. If there are cost overruns on the project, the base cost will be even higher.

If this project is approved, we will go from having the cheapest power rates in Atlantic Canada to the most expensive. Muskrat’s exorbitant energy costs will also hurt businesses, impair job creation and drive up the cost of living for everyone in this province as the higher electricity charges are added to consumer goods.

But there will be some beneficiaries – just not in Newfoundland and Labrador. Take the case of Emera Energy of Nova Scotia. Ms. Dunderdale claims Emera is paying $1.2 billion for 20 per cent of Muskrat’s energy. That is untrue. That $1.2 billion is being invested in a transmission line that Emera will wholly own for 35 years. The power that will run across that line to Emera will be provided for free. Emera will then sell its free power to consumers in Nova Scotia, recovering its $1.2 billion investment with a guaranteed rate of return. All this has been confirmed by Emera’s president, Bruce Huskilson, in a conference call with investment analysts.

This arrangement is akin to me letting my neighbour take water from my well for 35 years for free, as long as he pays for the hose. Whatever money he gets from selling that water, he keeps it all, not a cent of it comes back to me.

Premier Dunderdale claims the benefit of such a lopsided deal is that Nalcor will be allowed to run excess energy from Muskrat over Emera’s line for sale in the Maritimes and New England. That is true. But Nalcor will have to pay all the associated tariffs and very likely use Emera as the broker. That means more fees paid to our Nova Scotia “partner” and less revenue for the people of this province.

As well, any Muskrat power going to the Maritimes or New England will be sold at a fraction of its production cost. Comparing the current market price in New England of about $50 per megawatt hour with Muskrat’s production cost of $143 per megawatt hour, the people of this province would end up subsidizing two thirds of the cost of electricity going to New England. While Americans and people in the Maritimes would enjoy paying the lower market rate, consumers of electricity here on the island of Newfoundland would have to pay Muskrat’s full production cost plus allowances for profit.

There are other problems with the deal that Premier Dunderdale doesn’t want to talk about. For instance, while Nalcor has agreed to pay half of all cost overruns on the construction of Emera’s Maritime Link, there is no reciprocal agreement on Emera’s part to pay any cost overruns on the transmission line running from Labrador to Newfoundland. That’s despite the fact Emera is getting a 29 per cent ownership stake in our line and will enjoy 29 per cent of all the profits derived from transmitting power from Muskrat Falls to consumers here on the island.

Not surprisingly, financial analysts have hailed the project as a great deal for Emera. They have not made the same assessment for the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The bottom line is this: Premier Dunderdale and her government is asking the residents of this province to pay more than double for their electricity and take on an additional $4.5 billion in debt to finance a project that will provide free energy to Nova Scotia and subsidized energy to consumers in the Maritimes and New England.

As for her contention that keeping Holyrood on stream will lead to energy costs that are even higher than Muskrat’s, to date neither her government nor Nalcor has provided any evidence to back that claim despite our repeated requests to see any such documents.

The Term Sheet to develop Muskrat Falls looks like it was slapped together in a hurry. Incredibly, it’s even worse than the historically unfair Upper Churchill contract. At least in the case of the Upper Churchill, Hydro Quebec pays something for our energy, albeit a pittance of its market value. If Ms. Dunderdale gets her way, Emera Energy will receive Muskrat’s energy for free as well as a 29 per cut of profits on all transmission of energy to our island. Meanwhile, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador will be financing this atrocious deal with even higher debt payments and exorbitant electricity bills.

It’s a sweet deal, alright, but not for the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.

- srbp -

Oil and Gas Update: 2013 edition #nlpoli

First, the oil.

Regular readers will recall the Article 82 issue that will affect how much money the provincial government collects from oil and gas development outside the 200 mile exclusive economic zone.  Article 82 of the Law of the Sea Convention requires the coastal state to put up to seven percent of royalties from offshore oil and gas into a fund that will go to other countries.

CBC reported on Monday that neither the federal nor provincial governments have figure out how they’ll deal with it.  The federal government may have legal jurisdiction but the 1985 Atlantic Accord gives the provincial government the same ability to set revenues from offshore resources as if they were on land.

Gros Morne international status threatened

Gros Morne national park could lose its designation as a UNESCO World Heritage site if NALCOR Energy, the provincial government’s oil, gas and hydro company, succeeds with plans to string a series of high-voltage electric transmission lines through the park.

There are alternatives but NALCOR has dismissed them already as being either costly or technically difficult.
The lines are part of a transmission infeed to bring power from the as yet undeveloped Lower Churchill river to eastern Newfoundland.

The Telegram has that as the front page story on Saturday.

The Gros Morne transmission plan generated opposition from environmental and tourism groups, along with Parks Canada, which must approve the project.

In February, Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador (HNL) chairman Bruce Sparkes first raised the spectre of Gros Morne losing its spot on the United Nations list.

"It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and it's been suggested that if you put this corridor down through it, it (may) lose the designation," he says.

"We believe Parks Canada is correct in opposing this."

No one from HNL or Parks Canada would comment for the Telegram.


Deputy premier and natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale was also unavailable for comment.  While Dunderdale was consumed with the fisheries crisis this week, her office couldn’t even deliver a statement by the Telegram’s deadline, as the department had apparently intended.

In February, Bond Papers and others first raised the issue of slinging transmission lines through the park.

The Premier backed the idea:

“When park officials look at what the trade-off happens to be for the benefits we get at the end of day ... I think they will see the benefit,” he said.

One of the trade-offs would presumably be the international designation.  According to the Telegram only two sites have lost the designation.

When the park was established in the 1980s, transmission towers through its pristine natural beauty was described as “the most serious threat” to Gros Morne.

The power lines may not be needed.

A NALCOR official recently told a business group in Gander that adding more wind generation to the island system would not be a good idea until the transmission line is built.  The transmission line would allow surplus power to be exported.

[ NALCOR manager of business development Greg] Jones told The Beacon the province can only produce a limited amount of wind energy because it can cause water to spill from hydro dams if excessive amounts are produced. This roadblock will be eliminated with the introduction of a transmission link in 2016 for the Lower Churchill hydro project.

The infeed is being justified, in part, on the grounds that the island will need additional power sources by as early as 2013. 

However, the environmental assessment documents for the project project only modest growth in residential and industrial demand in the future.  That was before the AbitibiBowater paper plant in Grand falls closed and before Kruger decided to shut down one of its paper machines at Corner Brook on what appears to be a permanent basis.

Jones’ comments suggest that current and future demand on the island can be met with much smaller, less costly alternative generation sources.  Adding wind power now would add to the current surplus, if the full implication of Jones’ comment about water spilling over hydro dams is clear. 

But that also means that added wind power and small hydro developments could continue to displace the Holyrood generating plant and still meet the island’s energy needs.  Holyrood burns oil to generate electricity and has been a subject of ongoing environmental controversy.

While the plant is currently operating at a severely reduced capacity, due to low demand in the summer months, the infeed proposal would require the plant to operate its three generators year-round in order to stabilise the power transmission from Labrador.

The government’s 2007 energy plan committed to replacing Holyrood with other forms of generation.  Also in 2007, natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale highlighted replacing Holyrood as one of the reasons for building the infeed.

In Dunderdale’s scenario selling Lower Churchill power to consumers in eastern Newfoundland  was one way the government planned to under-write the cost of the multi-billion dollar Lower Churchill project. 

No other power purchase agreements have been identified.  A memorandum of understanding with Rhode Island on a block of 200 megawatts appears to have gone no where since it was signed in 2007.

-srbp-

BLTN Update:   CBC is running the story as well, on Monday.  The most interesting feature of this online story are the comments from a raft of pseudonyms - most of whom apparently like the idea of slinging power lines and steel girders through a park where right now the tallest power line is on a wooden poll. 

Nature schmature.

The power of confusion

In an interview with CBC Radio On the Go, natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale tried to explain why the province's energy plan doesn't include extending Labrador hydro power to small communities in Labrador.

The argument Dunderdale was advancing seemed to puzzle host Ted Blades, since Dunderdale argued that running lines all the way to the island to replace the Holyrood generating station would entail no increased cost to rate payers, even though the project would be significantly more costly than hooking up some of the communities in Labrador currently served by diesel generators.

Here's a taste of the exchange:

Blades: I’ll get back to that subsidy in a minute, but let me just pursue the cost of the line a little bit further, you said roughly a hundred million dollars to put a spur out to the south coast when the line comes across to the island, what would it cost to go out to the northeast coast above Groswater Bay?

Dunderdale: Well, I would have to get those numbers for you Ted, I don’t have
them right in front of me, but it would cost in the hundreds of millions of dollars, would drive rates up significantly for ratepayers in Labrador and on the island.

Blades: Alright, well given that it’s going to cost billions of dollars to
run the line down to the island, so does that mean that our rates are
going to go up here on the island to pay for that?

That's where things got rather odd. Dunderdale explained that the Holyrood replacement would be financed through a guaranteed power purchase agreement with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

She said it twice, which is a bit odd.

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is the entity that would be building the Lower Churchill and the transmission line, either directly or through its Lower Churchill Development Corporation subsidiary.

Now in the context, Dunderdale might have misspoken, saying Hydro when she meant Newfoundland Power. The former is the electricity producer; the latter is the private sector electricity retailer.

Still, it was an odd comment:

Dunderdale: No, what it means is that’s part of the overall project, we’ll need to get financing for the project, we will have to leverage the money that we earn out of our non-renewable projects to help fund the $6- to $9-billion that are going to be required to build the Lower Churchill. What happens with the transmission link is we are able to sell power from the Lower Churchill to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to replace Holyrood, so the transmission link, right in the first instance, gives us the first opportunity to have a power purchase agreement with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro for around 500 MW of power, which will be part of the financing deal, will allow us to leverage financing to develop that project.

Then again, maybe she didn't misspeak. Maybe LCDC will sell the power to its parent, which will in turn sell to Power. Then Hydro - rather bizarrely one might think - would provide the purchase agreement for 500 megawatts of power and somehow give NLDC another bit of leverage to raise the capital to build the project. The Holyrood replacement power represents 18% of the estimated 2800 megawatts that would come from the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls generators.

That's a fair chunk.

Maybe Dunderdale has given another question to ask about Lower Churchill financing. After all, it wouldn't be the first time over the past few weeks when seemingly bizarre comments about energy and royalty regimes led ultimately to more information emerging.

-srbp-

PUB concerned about Nalcor capex and electricity rates #nlpoli #cdnpoli

The province’s public utilities board is concerned about the impact Nalcor’s capital works programs will have on consumer rates even without taking Muskrat Falls into account or considering any increase due to fuel costs for thermal generation.

The comments are in the board’s approval, issued January 24,  for Phase I of  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro’s capital works application for 2012. Hydro is a Nalcor subsidiary.

On page 10 of its order the board expressed concern “about the impacts of the proposed and forecast level of Hydro’s capital spending on customers.”.  The board said that “this level of spending raises concerns as to whether this approach is sustainable given the significant impact on revenue requirement.”

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro showed the percentage change in revenue requirement “as a result of the five-year projected capital spending”, a table the board reproduced on page 10 of the Phase I order:

The board then notes that even allowing for offsetting some of the costs through depreciation, “the impacts of the projected capital spending are significant.”

The board also noted that “these increases do not reflect increases in operational costs which may be expected in the normal course.” That’s code for the cost of oil used to generate electricity at Holyrood for three months of the year.

One of the main arguments in favour of Muskrat Falls has been steady increases in electricity rates due to rising fuel prices.  Natural resources minister Jerome Kennedy, for example, claims that electricity prices in the province will increase due to fuel costs and that Muskrat Falls will cost consumers less than if they stuck with oil.

However, neither Kennedy nor Nalcor have apparently included any of the costs for the proposed capital works program into their imaginary rate calculations they developed in late 201o and are still using today.  In its 2012 order, the board noted that it “is concerned that the significant increases in proposed and projected capital expenditures in 2012 and subsequent years were not forecasted by Hydro as recently as one year ago.” [italics added]

This new information suggests that any increases from Muskrat Falls would be on top of significant increases that neither Nalcor or the provincial government have forecast. 

Apparently not included in the Phase I order was more than $200 million in capital spending Nalcor wants to spend to upgrade the interconnection across the isthmus of Avalon.  The board separated that project out since it was a last minute addition by Nalcor.  It is now considered as Phase III of the 2012 capex application.

SRBP readers will recall that this upgraded line could actually delay the need for a Holyrood replacement.  The provincial government’s current plan is to replace Holyrood with Muskrat Falls and later add more oil- fired generation than the island system currently has at Holyrood.

- srbp -

The First Casualty in Dunderdale’s War #nlpoli

As she launched the first salvo in the final battle of the War for Muskrat Falls, Premier Kathy Dunderdale decided to prove the old maxim correct:  she put Truth up against the wall and shot the old girl squarely between the eyes.

“We adhere to established contracts and respectful business practices,” she told the crowd at a Board of Trade luncheon.  No word if the crowd at Fortis shifted uncomfortably in their seats.  The people from ENEL  - had they been there - could certainly attest to the manifest falsehood in the Premier’s comment.

Dunderdale had a few more bullets to pump into Veracity’s lifeless form off before she was done.

A CHEAP Framework - the PC and Liberal Muskrat Falls plans #nlpoli

The Conservative and Liberal Muskrat Falls rate mitigation plans are the same.  Both include magical assumptions of revenue.  Both omit crucial details.

Note: Some people asked on Monday for comment or analysis of the two plans to mitigate Muskrat Falls' impact on provincial electricity rates.  

This is an abbreviated summary of the two plans and some issues flowing from it. A more substantive analysis will come on Monday 22 April 2019 with the publication here of the SRBP rate mitigation proposal  called "Restoring Power."

General

The Conservative and Liberal rate mitigation plans are the same idea. 

This is not surprising since the Conservatives copied the Liberal approach and used the same information from the Public Utilities Board review as the basis for the plan details.

The Liberal and Conservative plan uses the following approach:

1.  Pick a Number
2. Subtract other Numbers
3. Use Magic
4. Hit zero