Browse
Log in / Register
Share
October 26, 2023 — A chorus of environmental and political voices in British Columbia is urging the provincial government to apply hard lessons from the controversial Site C dam before greenlighting any new major hydropower projects. This call to action follows Energy Minister Adrian Dix’s recent announcement that BC is seriously studying proposals for two new dam complexes, a move critics label as premature without a full accounting of Site C’s lasting consequences.
The government’s sights are set on a potential new dam at "Site E" on the Peace River near the Alberta border and a multi-dam project at Bute Inlet on the central coast. Minister Dix framed the exploration as necessary to meet the province’s escalating electricity demand driven by population growth, electric vehicles, and heat pumps. However, for groups like the Wilderness Committee, this represents a dangerous rush to repeat past mistakes.
"The province needs to hold its horses," said Joe Foy of the Wilderness Committee in a recent statement. He argues that BC must first "come to grips" with the extensive and varied damages caused by the recently completed Site C dam—now officially named the John Horgan Dam—before diverting more rivers. Foy points to massive cost overruns, significant loss of agricultural land and wildlife habitat, and unresolved impacts on Indigenous rights as a cautionary blueprint for what new projects could entail.
The financial shadow of Site C looms large. Originally budgeted at approximately $8.8 billion, its final price tag soared to $16 billion. David Tindall, a sociology professor at the University of British Columbia, notes this has eroded public trust. "The Site C dam was seen, to a certain extent, as a big waste of money," Tindall observed, suggesting citizens may now view future mega-dams through a lens of fiscal skepticism and expect similar budgetary blowouts.
Beyond economics, the intended purpose of such large-scale power generation remains a contentious flashpoint. While officially touted as clean energy for homes and businesses, critics like Foy contend that Site C was ultimately built to power liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects. BC Green MLA Jeremy Valeriote echoed this concern, questioning the lack of transparency. "There is a really strong chance that we are building all of these projects to liquefy natural gas... We know it’s not just domestic demand," he stated, advocating for a clear public accounting of where the power is destined.
This skepticism fuels the argument for alternative energy paths. Valeriote and others advocate for a decentralized model built on solar, wind, and other distributed renewables. "I really don’t see the value in contemplating more large dams, when we know that distributed renewables are entirely feasible and economical," Valeriote said, highlighting that such options avoid flooding valuable farmland and sensitive ecosystems.
The proposed Bute Inlet project, targeting the Homathko River system, faces particular legal and ecological hurdles. Julian Axmann of BC Spaces for Nature emphasized that the Clean Energy Act explicitly lists the Homathko as off-limits to dams. "Government should have never considered damming the Homathko," Axmann declared. While Minister Dix indicated the government would introduce legislation to allow BC Hydro to assess both Site E and Bute Inlet, this move itself signals a potential willingness to rewrite environmental protections, alarming conservationists.
A critical, evolving factor is the modern requirement for "social license." Tindall explains that projects with major environmental and social impacts now face a much higher bar for public acceptance than in previous decades. "People’s worldviews about these things have changed very much from the middle part of the 20th century," he said. The fierce opposition from local farmers, ranchers, and First Nations to Site C is a precedent likely to be repeated at any new proposed site.
However, Tindall also identified a countervailing force shaping public opinion: geopolitics. Events like the war in Ukraine and past trade tensions have spurred a pragmatic desire for energy self-sufficiency. "There has been a real shift in support of building... new infrastructure, partly because of these geopolitical threats," he noted, suggesting some citizens may prioritize security and independence over purely environmental concerns.
The path forward for BC’s energy future is now at a complex crossroads. On one side is the government’s push for substantial, centralized clean power to fuel an electrified economy. On the other is a coalition demanding a meticulous review of past hydropower failures, greater investment in distributed renewables, and unwavering transparency about the true drivers of energy demand. The debate over Site E and Bute Inlet is less about the concept of clean energy and more about the methods, ethics, and lessons that must guide its procurement. As Dix himself noted, the technical studies will determine if the projects proceed, but the court of public opinion, informed by the costly legacy of Site C, may render its verdict first.
