Have you read the new Treaty Review Update? What did you like? What would you like to see in the future?
Newsletter Updates – What’s your feedback?
7 responses to “Newsletter Updates – What’s your feedback?”
Comments are closed.
Have you read the new Treaty Review Update? What did you like? What would you like to see in the future?
I would like to see a discussion of the current and future implications to electricity rates of FortisBC and BCHydro of the CRT operations.
Hi Harold,
Thank you for your suggestion. It is not expected that the strategic decision to continue or terminate the Columbia River Treaty after 2024 will have a significant impact on BC Hydro rates. The main impact of such a decision will be the continuation or loss of the value of the Canadian Entitlement received by the Province. FortisBC electrical rates will not be impacted.
Please let me know if this information is helpful.
Ingrid
Moderator
The latest newsletter is excellent.
The explanation of the Canadian Entitlement is important since I think this could be a negotiating point. The Entitlement should in some way pick up the fact that flood control on the Columbia would be impossible without the upstream storage in Canada regardless of the power optimization potential of the Treaty. The main US impetus for the Treaty was, and still is I believe, flood control not power. However, the Entitlement is tied to power generation and energy values. Flood control is a social and property matter the value of which has inflated over the years and is worth orders of magnitude more today than when the CRT was signed. How are these factors being handled in the review?
Hi Harold,
Points well made. As part of the Columbia River Treaty Review the Province is assessing the full suite of U.S. benefits provided by Canadian storage, such as flood control, fisheries, recreation, and low flow management. As you note, minimizing flood damage is a particular benefit in today’s context. All of these factors are being assessed in the spirit of a fundamental principle of the Treaty – to create and equitably share benefits through collaboration between two countries. This is truly an opportune time to undertake this review after almost 50 years of Treaty implementation.
We’re glad you enjoyed the December e-newsletter. Thank you for your interest in the Columbia River Treaty Review.
Moderator Ingrid
I agree with Harold, I think the Canadian Entitlement should reflect far more than just power generation.
Korie
Just received the July Newsletter and am most interested in the recent paper entitled “U.S. Benefits from the Columbia River Treaty–Past, Present and Future:A Province of British Columbia Perspective”. The section “Treaty Benefits in Canada” is most telling in that there are really no benefits to Canada except the annual Canadian Entitlement amount which is in fact forecast to decrease. On the other hand, we have the ongoing operation and maintenance costs of Treaty facilities which should be deducted from this Entitlement amount. This fact should have been stated more explicitly in the paper.What is the actual annual dollar benefit to Canada/BC on a cost benefit basis?
Also, we should ask the US Entity to give an estimate of the annual dollar US benefits that are outlined in the paper. My guess is it would be is the billions. In fact annual, unpredictable floods would have regional political ramifications in the US in addition to the potential dollar costs. It seems to me that this reality needs to be raised to the political level before it will have much meaning or importance. The constant technical restatement of options and impacts is not enough to establish a bargaining position for an significant increase in the Canadian Entitlement as a requisite to continuation of the Treaty by Canada. What is being done in this regard?
Sincerely,
Harold Etter, PhD
this treaty was a bad deal from the start.
there should be no treaty without the return of all natural fish including the salmon. and a new price for power connected to inflation starting with the price double what it is mandated now.
if we go back to the original blue prints and plan in BC hydro arkives and continue developeing the plan as designed adding turbines to each dam site as was originally preposed increaseing the water level to the recomended level allowing the salmn to return to canada.the fish stocks will rebound and this project will finnally pay for itself with bonuses.
as we all know Teck Inc is prepareing to buy bc hydro with the ministers approval already this shod be stopped asap.and continue to be held in the procincial public trust.