Site C dam too be approved in BC Peace

nowarningshot

nowarningshot

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 99.6%
257   1   1
Location
On a Island in the Pacific. Gulf Islands
Feel free to move this to a different forum. Not sure where to post this, but since thousands of hectares of land will be flooded it will definitely affect hunting.

News on Global BC is now reporting a press conference is being scheduled for later today to announce technical details of the proposed Site C dam on the Peace River. Today was the day for the announcement on whether the controversial project would get a green light or not. The press conference on technical details point too a approval.

Enviromental groups, locals, farmers, and first nations are expected to protest and launch court challenges. The project is expected to cost in excess of 600 Million dollars.
 
Well, river boating up the Moberly will be a lot easier.... but there may not be much left to shoot! ... and you'll have to drive WAAYY around to the north side of the reservoir to launch (no launch sites planned for the south side, above the dam). I do think this will have a negative effect on most local wildlife species. I hope the natives can de-rail it. Would rather see a big natural gas plant built locally than Site C
 
Poor planning on BC's part in my mildly informed opinion. No matter, our government couldn't organize a one man jerk off contest on a million dollar budget, they'll #### it up properly. They should be completing LNG ports, plants, and pipelines to get the huge reserves of natural gas under their proposed reservoir to a real market in Asia. Could build a lovely NG generating station while they are at it and avoiding destroying a watershed. But that wouldn't prove popular in BC, as the footprint of industrial activity and a healthy economy might be visible from Vancouver.

One thing is for sure, it will be fun to watch from the peanut gallery!
 
Dam will be paid for by Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and the Western States. When it starts to be built, the customers
for power will come. Since Alaska wants to use US steel for the ferry dock, we shouldn't use US material for this Dam. Russia will
build the main parts
 
elker said:
Wow, antis are everywhere
You antis should tell me your cleaner projects than a hydro plant. Tip my hat to my premier. She is the best.
Click to expand...

Wow....point out where anyone made a anti comment? Some people pointing out the obvious cost overruns and protests that this will include. That is just part of living in a province that can loose 97% on fast ferries and where the process of consultation and protests will likely cost half the projected budget.

Even the guy from there was pretty reserved, and it is not at all popular there. This project Dams the only major river that is free of them.
 
nowarningshot said:
Wow....point out where anyone made a anti comment? Some people pointing out the obvious cost overruns and protests that this will include. That is just part of living in a province that can loose 97% on fast ferries and where the process of consultation and protests will likely cost half the projected budget.

Even the guy from there was pretty reserved, and it is not at all popular there. This project Dams the only major river that is free of them.
Click to expand...
Fast ferries were committed by NDP, not Liberal.
Let us cool down,think thoroughly. No dam? Ok, what is the alternative? Building millions of wind turbines to kill all the migratory birds? How about put another millions pieces of shining sonar panels somewhere in BC? Maybe LNG plant? But LNG is finite, maybe used up after certain period of times.
If you guys don't have a better plan, then we should build the damn dam. More jobs, more incomes,more money, more hunting
 
elker said:
Fast ferries were committed by NDP, not Liberal.
Let us cool down,think thoroughly. No dam? Ok, what is the alternative? Building millions of wind turbines to kill all the migratory birds? How about put another millions pieces of shining sonar panels somewhere in BC? Maybe LNG plant? But LNG is finite, maybe used up after certain period of times.
If you guys don't have a better plan, then we should build the damn dam. More jobs, more incomes,more money, more hunting
Click to expand...

You're a rose glasses optimist, I'll give you that. :) Now lets watch this well managed Liberal project play out. To those elsewhere in the country, for clarity, these are the closest thing in BC to the right / conservatives oddly enough.
 
Seems you are spoiling for a political fight, and the only one in this thread. I still dont see where anyone came off as anti's......that we needed to be referred to as "You anti's" and "anti's everywhere". Cynical of the political process and the governments ability to loose money printing money....ya.

The forum i believe is hunting....sure you can find some forum for political expression.
 
H4831 said:
Provincial approval was only given this afternoon, Dec.16.
Click to expand...

I understood that Hank, but when I went to the CBC Vancouver page there was a headline it had been approved.

Let the potheads and tree hugger protests begin and the draining of the taxpayers pocket book.

Maybe if California had paid there debit to BC for power consumed back in 2001 +/- a couple of years it would not have been so bad a hit financially.

There will be millions of acres flooded and lost livelihood that I personally do not like the idea and I think I as a BC Resident will be paying for a years to come with ''No Net Benefit'' to me personally.

Tight Groups,
Rob
 
Hydro electric dams do not 'last forever' as if they are an infinite resource. Sediment build up eventually gets to costly to manage. The Bennett Dam has existed this long because of its height and the cleanliness of the water. SITE C will not benefit ftom either of these.

As for who pays for it? BC residents will. The whole premise on why we need this dam is for our own use to be self sufficient! (Which is ridiculous anyway). It's not supposed to be for 'sale' to anyone.

Many people are ok with ramping up our economy with LNG to be burned elsewhere in the world but no way we can use it here. The cost savings would be enormous! It's clean and there is a great deal of it. Been in Fort St. John my whole life and it will be sad to see this happen.
 
Nuclear, solar, hydroelectric, wind, geothermal, coal, wood, natural gas, diesel, tidal or garbage plasma gasification - none are perfect and all have detrimental side effects. If the water is headed downhill, why not let gravity turn some turbines and make sparks? How and who runs the project is a human problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom