Site C dam too be approved in BC Peace

Building a dam floods a valley but it is clean, mass produced energy. Nuclear? That would be a non-starter in this province but nuclear power plant doesn't require a massive reservoir. What to do with the spent rods thou? We don't hear enough about Geo-thermal possibilities. Solar, wind and run-of-river projects would be far too limited in scale and have their own set of problems. Gas turbines perhaps would be our best bet.

Or we can stop growing our economy and put up a sign saying "No vacancy". There are no easy answers but doing nothing is not an option.
 
nowarningshot said:
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.
Click to expand...
Please provide a better alternative than hydroelectric, will you?
We are talking the same thing, but you want me to move to different forum? It is a sign that you lost the debate.
Why I called some "hunters" antis? That is what they are! Just because they go hunting does not mean they are not anti-hunting. My neighbour is a deer hunter, he is against predator hunting, he is mad at anyone who hunts bears. So he is rightly called anti.
 
those of you in BC complaining about dams should go live in onterrible for a while paying 1k a month on powerbill, then youall be quiet.
 
Last edited:
There goes another wintering ground for elk moose and mule deer.
Site C is not needed period
The hydro power it will produce puts profit ahead of environment on a massive scale. Say goodbye to those animals and the decent hunting the area provided despite all the oil and gas development.
What a sad sad joke "beautiful BC" is turning into.
 
Ardent said:
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.
Click to expand...

The morning news financial analyst says site C is specifically to provide cheap energy for industry such as LNG who need cheap power so that they can function.
 
That was another thing raised by the Global financial guy. He said the LNG sites and the dam would be competing for some of the same skilled trades. The implication is there.
 
drifter dave said:
I wonder how many people working on the 9 billion dollar dam will have a Canadian passport.
Click to expand...


At least one or Two site Managers a few Politicians when they are doing the obligatory Breaking Ground Photo Op.
I wonder what the the real environmental impact study will show as to the numbers of indigenous game animals being displaced.

There will be a few residents who will make a few dollars on selling the affected properties and maybe a few fishing opportunities created eventually.

Best Regards,
Rob
 
^You must me an "anti" :)
I guess people also forgot about the Convention Centre ($883 Million), Port Mann bridge (3.3 Billion - 121% over budget) and the roof over BC place ($514 Million): All vastly over budget.
None of this power is destined for the domestic population BTW, we are self sustaining at current levels with our current infrastructure.

Think about that: A convention centre for $883 Million Dollars. That's double what the fast ferry boondoggle cost - at least that created some local jobs. Meanwhile we can't give teachers or nurses a raise. My point is this: These projects always go way over budget and taxpayers end up with the bill in one way or another (read: our hydro bill).
 
Last edited:
DD, if your referring to me as being an anti so be it ;)

It is beyond my pay grade to offer any real world provincial solutions to this very old topic as it has been around since at least 1979 when the BC Social Credit Party tossed this proposal out there.
.
Tight Groups,
Rob

NWS, I'm sorry if this comment or past ones lead to a detraction to your original post, but I despise GC and his gang of merry little thugs.
 
Last edited:
elker said:
Please provide a better alternative than hydroelectric, will you?
We are talking the same thing, but you want me to move to different forum? It is a sign that you lost the debate.
Why I called some "hunters" antis? That is what they are! Just because they go hunting does not mean they are not anti-hunting. My neighbour is a deer hunter, he is against predator hunting, he is mad at anyone who hunts bears. So he is rightly called anti.
Click to expand...

I still dont think you get it. You called the previous posters Anti's when no one in fact had said anything anti. I asked you twice to show where they made a anti comment, instead you started spouting NDP vs Liberal political philosophy. Now the thread is in full derail mode, talking about alternatives to the damn, power bills, and politics. How is this project going to affect hunting....hunting forum? Get that?

So tell me where i debated you to have lost a debate? The government has spent millions on this already, it will happen, not a debatable point. Interest groups will line up, most with legitimate grievances, some to line their pockets, and lawyers get rich. My point is ....that you interjected your political philosophy and derailed things here while insulting half a dozen members. Pretty sure your neighbor the deer hunter that does not like predator hunting is not one of the members that posted and you insulted. Again, where did they say anything anti, and where is the apology from you? If the thread has degenerated into a political s--t slinging contest, that's on you.
 
nowarningshot said:
I still dont think you get it. You called the previous posters Anti's when no one in fact had said anything anti. I asked you twice to show where they made a anti comment, instead you started spouting NDP vs Liberal political philosophy. Now the thread is in full derail mode, talking about alternatives to the damn, power bills, and politics. How is this project going to affect hunting....hunting forum? Get that?
Click to expand...

You will understand in a couple minutes if you have not. Read the followings.

nowarningshot said:
I still dont think you get it. You called the previous posters Anti's when no one in fact had said anything anti. I asked you twice to show where they made a anti comment, instead you started spouting NDP vs Liberal political philosophy. Now the thread is in full derail mode, talking about alternatives to the damn, power bills, and politics. How is this project going to affect hunting....hunting forum? Get that?
Click to expand...

It was you sir who started this political mudslinging first. You injected the fast ferry thing which was the sin committed by NDP and you wanted to confuse us it is the Liberal doing again.
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...



nowarningshot said:
So tell me where i debated you to have lost a debate? The government has spent millions on this already, it will happen, not a debatable point. Interest groups will line up, most with legitimate grievances, some to line their pockets, and lawyers get rich. My point is ....that you interjected your political philosophy and derailed things here while insulting half a dozen members. Pretty sure your neighbor the deer hunter that does not like predator hunting is not one of the members that posted and you insulted. Again, where did they say anything anti, and where is the apology from you? If the thread has degenerated into a political s--t slinging contest, that's on you.
Click to expand...

Read my response immediately preceding this one. It was you who interjected your political philosophy, sir. Go back to edit your post and delete fast ferry accusation which has nothing to to with the Liberal government, then you can pretend you are political neutral.
 
drifter dave said:
^You must me an "anti" :)
I guess people also forgot about the Convention Centre ($883 Million), Port Mann bridge (3.3 Billion - 121% over budget) and the roof over BC place ($514 Million): All vastly over budget.
None of this power is destined for the domestic population BTW, we are self sustaining at current levels with our current infrastructure.

Think about that: A convention centre for $883 Million Dollars. That's double what the fast ferry boondoggle cost - at least that created some local jobs. Meanwhile we can't give teachers or nurses a raise. My point is this: These projects always go way over budget and taxpayers end up with the bill in one way or another (read: our hydro bill).
Click to expand...

If you truly believe BC teachers and nurses are poor and treated miserably, please empty half of your bank account to donate to them. I do not want to feed them as they are over paid already. You can ask the provincial government to tax you heavily, but please leave others alone, ok?
 
I think they are more important then some doomed mega project. Congrats if you don't need healthcare or education. Someday, you or someone you care about will.

Ever been to a cancer ward? Didn't think so.

Get ready for a 10 billion dollar plus tax bill for this BS project: that is where we will be taxed.
 
Seem to have lost a post. Too Elker, your post was #12. Please point out in the previous 11 posts were anyone made a anti comment, or deserves to be called a Anti/insulted.

That would be three times i have asked. I think those posters deserve apologies for the name calling and derailed thread.

I was in error myself, that happens when you watch a story channel surfing. My numbers were way out, so was my geography. Its been a while since i spent thousands of dollars on fuel to travel and hunt in that area.

Back to hunting. I think in the short term with thousands of men and machines working it will affect hunting. In the long term it will have less impact than hard winters and bad Wildlife policy. The project is almost certainly to happen, it is simply too far away for the Latte sipping professional protesters to care. Life goes on. The province benefited greatly from the dam projects of former premier WAC Bennett. I would like to see this project benefit the people of the province as much. Time will tell.
 
OK. I apologize for the broad accusation. But in no way it was an intent to insult anyone. I just thought some guys are doing David Suzuki a favor.

Back to the impact of the dam. I can think of one direct benefit from it. We will get more wet land due to the flooding. I'm not sarcastic. It is really good for habitat
 
"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. "

Why not, I thought it is to be almost directly down stream. Partly to use the Bennett Dam reservoir water twice. The Site C reservoir will only cover 5,500 hectares, which is relatively small. In contrast, Williston Lake (Bennett Dam reservoir) is 176,100 hectares.
 
I was thinking on another post about wintering grounds for game. Since we are just about done feeding billions of pine to the beetles in the South Province.....how about some Elk get transplanted to beetle kill areas from the affected area. There are a lot of areas that historically had Elk, wiped out 150 years ago in Gold rush times. Seems like a win/win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom