Now that we have seen the first moves of Nalcor's new CEO - underwhelmed seems an appropriate reaction.
Stan Marshall the successful head of regulated private utilities has either lost his touch or has been directed to stay the course.
Ed Martin was not the only executive responsible for the complete failure of our corporation. Martin however appears to be the only casualty.
We have already been told that Marshall will carry on with Muskrat without real justification or real numbers relative to cancel or go on the project.
The savvy that the former head of Fortis demonstrated at the helm of the private utility is absent now.
One very telling comment came during a media event last week when Marshall was responding to a question regarding potential privatization of the Crown Corporation. He stated "The sheer fact that I'm in my role means it can't be done."
In a world of real journalism this would have been like a red flag to a bull. This would have caused a flurry of questions similar to a nor'easter - fast furious and fierce. Here in Newfoundland and Labrador progressive natural resource deals were placed on the endangered list starting with the Upper Churchill deal - and competence on the subject from our "journalists" has been extinct for decades.
There is no excuse for missing this. We must be able to have some faith in the news media - but we can't. If we are relying on them to keep their eye on the ball - we have lost the game before we played.
What was Stan Marshall saying? He is in a conflict? What role? What can't be done? What prevents him from considering that option?
As all of you know I am the champion of keeping Nalcor/Hydro Crown - but if what Marshall says means what I think it does - it would also prevent the company from looking at the reverse - nationalizing Newfoundland power. It would also prevent Nalcor from becoming aggressive with other potential opportunities. Ones that could make us money.
Worse than all of this - in a round about way - was Marshall indicating that the conflict of interest provisions applicable to the former CEO of Nalcor's contract do not exist in his?
If this is the case and Marshall refuses to clean up the conflict - he too should be replaced.
Enough already. Show us Marshall's contract - what are you hiding now?
MacDonald Tobin Williams - the three amigos - whose turn is it this time?
Showing posts with label Hydro. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hydro. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Bas Jamieson and the Mystery Lady
Three of the Jamieson boys were kind of the same - but Bas was a great combo of Don and Colin's memorable personalities.
I grew up hearing about Don - his intelligence, his diplomacy and politics. Colin was my boss at my real first job at Q-Radio - later to become part of the CHUM group.
Bas - however - was Don and Colin rolled into one. He had a wonderful mind and a great broadcasting presence. I got to experience both - and that is what I recall today.
When former Premier ClydeWells and his government were going to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - I along with a few others became incensed. We knew that Clyde had planned some privatizations due to the economic times of the day - but until he uttered it from his mouth - after the election - did we know it would include Hydro.
So - we had to make a noise - we had to be heard. We needed to let people know how shortsighted this was and that Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro was a Crown Jewel.
I began really listening to open-line programs then to see if anybody was going to speak up. Clearly this was not going to happen unless somebody (outside politicians) raised the issue publicly.
I remember picking up the phone and calling VOCM - not sure if it was open-line or the night line - big gulp - then a producer picked up the phone. He asked what my name was and I chose to remain anonymous. I was frightened to death. I knew what I wanted to say - sort-of - but I was shaking. Sweat on the brow - Bas announced that line #1 was up - and that was me. We had a good chat - and he made me feel comfortable. He told me I did alright as a first time caller and to call back again to talk about the Hydro issue.
At that time the VOCM talk shows were really the voice of the common man. There was no inundation of politicians and people lined up on the phone in the order they called and Bas got through the list.
I called several times over the following weeks - remained anonymous - but as Bas was - he had to give me some sort of nickname. I became the "mystery lady". Well the mystery lady and Bas had some pretty significant chats about Hydro and politicians started to perk their ears up. As a host Bas was fantastic - he challenged then listened - with patience - to hear a reply. He took the information in almost moment by moment and within short order - Bas - demonstrated a knowledge of Hydro that the majority of PC Ministers don't have yet.
Bas's memory and analytical thinking were crisp and his broadcast personality and diplomacy took the fear out of people who might otherwise not have weighed in. He was challenging - but with great restraint - as he tested the theories on Hydro that were now coming from all directions. He made me think - every time I finished a call. I would check my facts - review more material - and be eager to share it with him - and through him have a wonderful conversation with thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
I was joined on the line after a few months by Greg Malone, Cy Abery, and Hydro workers (who remained anonymous). Everybody was getting engaged - we even managed to drag in the Opposition Party - at that time Len Simms and LynnVerge - were at the forefront. As more and more people became involved Bas treated them all with respect and patience as the debate on Hydro waged on. The more heated it became the more diplomatic Bas became and because of that others felt comfortable weighing in. He was the best host of a talk show we had ever seen and likely to see. His job was to get the information out - and challenge rhetoric - so the people - his audience - could make an educated decision on the issue.
Bas did not hold back when he needed to get through the nonsense and he did not distinguish between a Cabinet Minister or a caller from the Big Land. Everybody felt their opinions and positions on the Hydro debate held value - that's because Bas made sure it was that way.
The real difference between Bas and others who came before and after his hosting was his driven desire to let everybody get involved - he loved it when the population used their democracy as it should be used. He loved it when the politicians got bees in their bonnets and reminded them that they serve the people - and the people have the right to speak and be heard.
Eventually myself and Greg Malone got together and formed Power of the People and gathered other like minded individuals together to fight the privatization full-on. I knew Greg - as most did - from the Wonderful Grand Band and his artistic accomplishments - but I came to know more as we met on the Hydro issue. Bas in his usual way - encouraged Greg to call and bring his passion and knowledge to the debate. I think Bas knew he had two feisty ones on his hands - but managed to bring the best out of us both. Greg had a more calm demeanor - while I (the younger Sue) was filled with impatience and somewhat intolerant of the politicians and their spin. Bas however - got the best out of Sue - and eventually I became Sue - after I needed to identify myself as we - the Power of the People - were granted an meeting with Premier Wells to have our say directly.
The decision not to privatize the Crown utility was the right one and has netted the people billions of dollars both in value and lower utility rates than would have been in the years that followed. Bas Jamieson was the social catalyst that allowed the full debate to occur. Bas Jamieson was the reason the people - not the politicians - won the day. His intelligent, kind, diplomatic, and patient and social persona allowed democracy to work at its best.
The decision was left to the people because Bas was the consummate professional - and we - the people - were the winners.
Obviously Bas had a long distinguished career that entailed many more broadcasting feats and his voice is one I will not forget. I wonder what he would have done if Twitter was the rage when he was doing the show? My guess is we might have heard "there's more brains in a can of rabbit" more than a few times - as partisan backbench Tories put out the fluff.
Thank you Bas and thanks to his family for sharing this gentleman - who truly made a difference in all of our lives.
I grew up hearing about Don - his intelligence, his diplomacy and politics. Colin was my boss at my real first job at Q-Radio - later to become part of the CHUM group.
Bas - however - was Don and Colin rolled into one. He had a wonderful mind and a great broadcasting presence. I got to experience both - and that is what I recall today.
When former Premier ClydeWells and his government were going to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - I along with a few others became incensed. We knew that Clyde had planned some privatizations due to the economic times of the day - but until he uttered it from his mouth - after the election - did we know it would include Hydro.
So - we had to make a noise - we had to be heard. We needed to let people know how shortsighted this was and that Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro was a Crown Jewel.
I began really listening to open-line programs then to see if anybody was going to speak up. Clearly this was not going to happen unless somebody (outside politicians) raised the issue publicly.
I remember picking up the phone and calling VOCM - not sure if it was open-line or the night line - big gulp - then a producer picked up the phone. He asked what my name was and I chose to remain anonymous. I was frightened to death. I knew what I wanted to say - sort-of - but I was shaking. Sweat on the brow - Bas announced that line #1 was up - and that was me. We had a good chat - and he made me feel comfortable. He told me I did alright as a first time caller and to call back again to talk about the Hydro issue.
At that time the VOCM talk shows were really the voice of the common man. There was no inundation of politicians and people lined up on the phone in the order they called and Bas got through the list.
I called several times over the following weeks - remained anonymous - but as Bas was - he had to give me some sort of nickname. I became the "mystery lady". Well the mystery lady and Bas had some pretty significant chats about Hydro and politicians started to perk their ears up. As a host Bas was fantastic - he challenged then listened - with patience - to hear a reply. He took the information in almost moment by moment and within short order - Bas - demonstrated a knowledge of Hydro that the majority of PC Ministers don't have yet.
Bas's memory and analytical thinking were crisp and his broadcast personality and diplomacy took the fear out of people who might otherwise not have weighed in. He was challenging - but with great restraint - as he tested the theories on Hydro that were now coming from all directions. He made me think - every time I finished a call. I would check my facts - review more material - and be eager to share it with him - and through him have a wonderful conversation with thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
I was joined on the line after a few months by Greg Malone, Cy Abery, and Hydro workers (who remained anonymous). Everybody was getting engaged - we even managed to drag in the Opposition Party - at that time Len Simms and LynnVerge - were at the forefront. As more and more people became involved Bas treated them all with respect and patience as the debate on Hydro waged on. The more heated it became the more diplomatic Bas became and because of that others felt comfortable weighing in. He was the best host of a talk show we had ever seen and likely to see. His job was to get the information out - and challenge rhetoric - so the people - his audience - could make an educated decision on the issue.
Bas did not hold back when he needed to get through the nonsense and he did not distinguish between a Cabinet Minister or a caller from the Big Land. Everybody felt their opinions and positions on the Hydro debate held value - that's because Bas made sure it was that way.
The real difference between Bas and others who came before and after his hosting was his driven desire to let everybody get involved - he loved it when the population used their democracy as it should be used. He loved it when the politicians got bees in their bonnets and reminded them that they serve the people - and the people have the right to speak and be heard.
Eventually myself and Greg Malone got together and formed Power of the People and gathered other like minded individuals together to fight the privatization full-on. I knew Greg - as most did - from the Wonderful Grand Band and his artistic accomplishments - but I came to know more as we met on the Hydro issue. Bas in his usual way - encouraged Greg to call and bring his passion and knowledge to the debate. I think Bas knew he had two feisty ones on his hands - but managed to bring the best out of us both. Greg had a more calm demeanor - while I (the younger Sue) was filled with impatience and somewhat intolerant of the politicians and their spin. Bas however - got the best out of Sue - and eventually I became Sue - after I needed to identify myself as we - the Power of the People - were granted an meeting with Premier Wells to have our say directly.
The decision not to privatize the Crown utility was the right one and has netted the people billions of dollars both in value and lower utility rates than would have been in the years that followed. Bas Jamieson was the social catalyst that allowed the full debate to occur. Bas Jamieson was the reason the people - not the politicians - won the day. His intelligent, kind, diplomatic, and patient and social persona allowed democracy to work at its best.
The decision was left to the people because Bas was the consummate professional - and we - the people - were the winners.
Obviously Bas had a long distinguished career that entailed many more broadcasting feats and his voice is one I will not forget. I wonder what he would have done if Twitter was the rage when he was doing the show? My guess is we might have heard "there's more brains in a can of rabbit" more than a few times - as partisan backbench Tories put out the fluff.
Thank you Bas and thanks to his family for sharing this gentleman - who truly made a difference in all of our lives.
Friday, January 03, 2014
If you're Happy - Clap your Muskrat Paws
The biggest tell-tale of a problem is when the happy believers find it necessary to thwart those who want more information and answers.
It is one of the largest red flags of white-collar crime and corporate corruption. Silence the naysayers.
If you are one of the happy ones - content that Muskrat is the best deal - content that NL Hydro is run to perfection - that Kathy Dunderdale is one of our times best minds and that Ed Martin is an energy guru - then good for you. Sit quietly in your content houses and dream of butterflies and lollipops.
There is no reason whatsoever for those who are "onside" to try and dissuade others from being more skeptical, inquiring, or involved in public discourse. There is no reason whatsoever for government members to use words like naysayers, or pessimists, or partisans and/or conspiracy theorists - when speaking about the people they work for. People who want to ask questions and dig deeper into 8-10 billion dollar projects that they and the future generations will pay for.
When government members do that to citizens - it is not for altruistic purposes. It is only for political reasons - in that they do not want to subject themselves to criticism.
The world is damn well square and don't you question our experts. We will build things to fit a square world and don't be damn partisan and stop progress. Square is the least cost option and we will hear nothing more. We will hire "independent" analysts and tell them to investigate "square" and check to see if the information we provide that resulted in "square" is accurate.
If we remove skepticism and inquiring minds from our world - it would be square.
The mess we are in today should cause more questioning and more skepticism - and right on time like trained seals - the spinners - or happy people appear. If you are happy good for you - let others who want to prevent another Enron or Canary Wharf do their thing.
It is one of the largest red flags of white-collar crime and corporate corruption. Silence the naysayers.
If you are one of the happy ones - content that Muskrat is the best deal - content that NL Hydro is run to perfection - that Kathy Dunderdale is one of our times best minds and that Ed Martin is an energy guru - then good for you. Sit quietly in your content houses and dream of butterflies and lollipops.
There is no reason whatsoever for those who are "onside" to try and dissuade others from being more skeptical, inquiring, or involved in public discourse. There is no reason whatsoever for government members to use words like naysayers, or pessimists, or partisans and/or conspiracy theorists - when speaking about the people they work for. People who want to ask questions and dig deeper into 8-10 billion dollar projects that they and the future generations will pay for.
When government members do that to citizens - it is not for altruistic purposes. It is only for political reasons - in that they do not want to subject themselves to criticism.
The world is damn well square and don't you question our experts. We will build things to fit a square world and don't be damn partisan and stop progress. Square is the least cost option and we will hear nothing more. We will hire "independent" analysts and tell them to investigate "square" and check to see if the information we provide that resulted in "square" is accurate.
If we remove skepticism and inquiring minds from our world - it would be square.
The mess we are in today should cause more questioning and more skepticism - and right on time like trained seals - the spinners - or happy people appear. If you are happy good for you - let others who want to prevent another Enron or Canary Wharf do their thing.
Thursday, November 28, 2013
The Problem Premier is Muskrat Falls
Our Premier can look to the stars, reflect to eternity, and wonder her heart out - the problem she has is Muskrat.
The loss of support for her leadership and her government is because people do not want the Muskrat deal with Emera. That is further amplified by the secrecy afforded by Bill 29.
1. We do NOT believe we need the power on the Island.
2. Residential customers in certain areas of Labrador are NOT going to be connected.
3. We do NOT trust this government or Nalcor on costs, estimates, and other data.
4. Develop it for industry in Labrador - we DON'T need of line to Nova Scotia or the Island.
5. Muskrat jobs are construction only - and do NOT generate long term jobs in smelters or refineries.
6. We do NOT want to give Nova Scotia an advantage over us for industrial growth.
7. We do NOT want Emera to have ANY ownership of lines for our use.
8. We do NOT want our children and grandchildren to pay for this fiasco.
9. If we develop hydro we WANT to make money from somebody other than ourselves.
10. We believe it is the WORST possible deal for that resource.
You no longer have the moral authority to govern - and certainly NOT to undertake such a massive expenditure and project.
Stop the Muskrat deal with Emera - or your party will be wiped off the political map in 2015.
You do NOT know what you are doing.
This is the problem - this is why the polls have collapsed and you have lost a by-election. There is no secret formula to bring you out of this political disaster. Ross Reid cannot make this go away. This is the biggest giveaway in our history.
The ten or fifteen corporations that you are serving do not represent enough voters to get you re-elected.
The loss of support for her leadership and her government is because people do not want the Muskrat deal with Emera. That is further amplified by the secrecy afforded by Bill 29.
1. We do NOT believe we need the power on the Island.
2. Residential customers in certain areas of Labrador are NOT going to be connected.
3. We do NOT trust this government or Nalcor on costs, estimates, and other data.
4. Develop it for industry in Labrador - we DON'T need of line to Nova Scotia or the Island.
5. Muskrat jobs are construction only - and do NOT generate long term jobs in smelters or refineries.
6. We do NOT want to give Nova Scotia an advantage over us for industrial growth.
7. We do NOT want Emera to have ANY ownership of lines for our use.
8. We do NOT want our children and grandchildren to pay for this fiasco.
9. If we develop hydro we WANT to make money from somebody other than ourselves.
10. We believe it is the WORST possible deal for that resource.
You no longer have the moral authority to govern - and certainly NOT to undertake such a massive expenditure and project.
Stop the Muskrat deal with Emera - or your party will be wiped off the political map in 2015.
You do NOT know what you are doing.
This is the problem - this is why the polls have collapsed and you have lost a by-election. There is no secret formula to bring you out of this political disaster. Ross Reid cannot make this go away. This is the biggest giveaway in our history.
The ten or fifteen corporations that you are serving do not represent enough voters to get you re-elected.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Dean MacDonald come Clean
Dean MacDonald has placed himself right in the middle of the Liberal Leadership Campaign and therefore in the middle of debate and discussion.
So who are you Dean MacDonald? What is your claim to fame that makes you somebody to be listened to regarding this leadership contest?
1. You support the Muskrat Falls deal.
What we need from you on this is for you to compare the deal you were doing on the Lower Churchill when Brian Tobin was in power, the proposed development you rejected under the Roger Grimes administration and the deal in front of us under the Danny Willams administration.
You are in a perfect and unique position to be able to compare all three. You can tell us what makes this Muskrat deal superior to the other two you worked on.
You can tell us what happened to the Brian Tobin deal and what you gave up for a development that did not even happen.
2. You support Cathy Bennett - who supports the Muskrat Falls deal.
Did you at any time sit with Cathy Bennett on the Nalcor or various hydro boards?
The Muskrat Falls deal was cut under Danny Williams. Did you support Danny when he was Premier? Did you support him when his government cut a cheque for your company Persona? As a supporter of Danny Williams as a PC - do you acknowledge that he turned the Premiership over to Kathy Dunderdale? What has Kathy done differently than Danny Williams that has caused you to go Liberal? What can Cathy Bennett do with a Muskrat Falls deal that she was part of, supported, and was the poster face for - all under the PC government?
Did you at any time express to anyone that Cathy Bennett was not a Liberal and you could not support her?
Have you spoken to Danny Williams about the Bennett campaign? Has Cathy Bennett spoken to Danny Williams either before announcing or bid or after?
If one is to take you seriously and follow your "lead" to the Cathy Bennett camp - you need to prove your worth following anywhere.
Last time I looked you were on Twitter telling Con O'Brien to open his mind. That's a joke right?
Is this yet another Solid Gold idea?
So who are you Dean MacDonald? What is your claim to fame that makes you somebody to be listened to regarding this leadership contest?
1. You support the Muskrat Falls deal.
What we need from you on this is for you to compare the deal you were doing on the Lower Churchill when Brian Tobin was in power, the proposed development you rejected under the Roger Grimes administration and the deal in front of us under the Danny Willams administration.
You are in a perfect and unique position to be able to compare all three. You can tell us what makes this Muskrat deal superior to the other two you worked on.
You can tell us what happened to the Brian Tobin deal and what you gave up for a development that did not even happen.
2. You support Cathy Bennett - who supports the Muskrat Falls deal.
Did you at any time sit with Cathy Bennett on the Nalcor or various hydro boards?
The Muskrat Falls deal was cut under Danny Williams. Did you support Danny when he was Premier? Did you support him when his government cut a cheque for your company Persona? As a supporter of Danny Williams as a PC - do you acknowledge that he turned the Premiership over to Kathy Dunderdale? What has Kathy done differently than Danny Williams that has caused you to go Liberal? What can Cathy Bennett do with a Muskrat Falls deal that she was part of, supported, and was the poster face for - all under the PC government?
Did you at any time express to anyone that Cathy Bennett was not a Liberal and you could not support her?
Have you spoken to Danny Williams about the Bennett campaign? Has Cathy Bennett spoken to Danny Williams either before announcing or bid or after?
If one is to take you seriously and follow your "lead" to the Cathy Bennett camp - you need to prove your worth following anywhere.
Last time I looked you were on Twitter telling Con O'Brien to open his mind. That's a joke right?
Is this yet another Solid Gold idea?
Sunday, May 05, 2013
Muskrat Falls - Roger Grimes - Kathy Dunderdale - PUB
Roger Grimes made a public statement yesterday in a Letter to the Editor; the Telegram's Weekend Edition.
With reasoning - more thoughtful than the garbage information we have been fed by Dunderdale and Co. - Grimes highlights gaping errors in the thinking used to make this particular Muskrat Falls deal.
The former Premier also made a comment which reflects the true signs of leadership - the project can still be stopped. The Tories approach of well now that its started, sanctioned, signed - gotta keep going - is simply trying to convince people that there is no hope left to stop this mess.
The NDP in Nova Scotia has shown two qualities during this process - an ability and a weakness.
Somehow their politicians have shown that they are able to convince our politicians - that subsidizing power for Nova Scotia is a good thing and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador should be happy to do that. The weakness of course is that they appeared to do this work for a private company, Emera and by doing so just simply ammassed wealth for the private corporation on the backs of their own people.
So for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador the deal is bad - very bad - and in my opinion that is either from naivety or corruption on some level or a combination of both.
Corporately, Emera and Nalcor, will make money on each and every kw - Emera (private) - Nalcor (crown). The question is who is that good for specifically?
Emera's shareholders (private) will make a killing if they operate in any way similar to how they currently operate both domestic and foreign assets while Nalcor's shareholders (the people of NL) will be gouged to keep Nalcor's spending viable.
When the PUBlic Utilities Board was banished from it's role as a regulator - protecting us - from unnecessary spending by our own corporation - Nalcor - became an agent by which politicians could cut deals that they wanted for whatever reasons - and those reasons can be very self-serving and sinister.
The PUB may have rejected this expenditure on behalf of the consumers of electricity - and the fact that people like Kathy Dunderdale, Jerome Kennedy, Tom Marshall, and Darin King felt it okay to bypass the ratepayer component of the process is legislatively corrupt.
Now the PUB should have no right to stop a deal for power development - if others - not us - the ratepayers - are paying for it. If the government wanted to make this pet project a legacy - they should have directly pinned it on the taxpayers and forced every taxpayer in the province to pay for this disaster. In this way the political fall-out is more instant - more direct.
Roger's points in his letter make sense - in a very basic real way. We have no real idea what the true energy asset base is in the province and whether or not those assets could have been used differently, expanded, or altered to accommodate the Island need for power. As for Labrador - this development - if allowed to proceed would not remove many Labradorians from thermal generation or supply from Quebec. That is ridiculous.
The idea of developing such a valuable resource such as Muskrat and then Gull Island in either order should have accomplished the following:
1. Mandatory renewable assets for all inhabited regions of Labrador,
2. Development of Industry which would spur tens of thousands of jobs (long-term) after the construction phase is complete, or
3. The sale of the majority of power to another Province or State wherein the power produced would cause our rates to be kept where they are now - for a generation or two, money for our treasury, and equity build-up for our people (similar to a tenant renting your property) they pay the mortgage - we own the asset,
4. Some combination of 2 and 3.
The added little bonus for the private Emera is that they now are going to be paid every time you and I pay our electric bill. They get a cut of the action that was once held solely for Newfoundland Power and Nalcor (Newfoundland and Labraor Hydro division). Why are they getting that cut? The truthful answer to that will start to unravel some pretty questionable decisions by our government.
There was and is a real potential to stabilize our rates by simply acquiring Newfoundland Power and eliminating the doubling up profits and eliminate administrative and asset duplication. By doing what we have done - Nalcor gets it up price, passed to Emera for its up price and then on to Newfoundland Power for its piece.
If we continue with this project - we are absolutely getting the least out of this asset - which in time will look worse than the Upper Churchill.
The former Premier should be commended for his leadership and be an example for those seeking to take office and government. The project should be stopped.
With reasoning - more thoughtful than the garbage information we have been fed by Dunderdale and Co. - Grimes highlights gaping errors in the thinking used to make this particular Muskrat Falls deal.
The former Premier also made a comment which reflects the true signs of leadership - the project can still be stopped. The Tories approach of well now that its started, sanctioned, signed - gotta keep going - is simply trying to convince people that there is no hope left to stop this mess.
The NDP in Nova Scotia has shown two qualities during this process - an ability and a weakness.
Somehow their politicians have shown that they are able to convince our politicians - that subsidizing power for Nova Scotia is a good thing and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador should be happy to do that. The weakness of course is that they appeared to do this work for a private company, Emera and by doing so just simply ammassed wealth for the private corporation on the backs of their own people.
So for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador the deal is bad - very bad - and in my opinion that is either from naivety or corruption on some level or a combination of both.
Corporately, Emera and Nalcor, will make money on each and every kw - Emera (private) - Nalcor (crown). The question is who is that good for specifically?
Emera's shareholders (private) will make a killing if they operate in any way similar to how they currently operate both domestic and foreign assets while Nalcor's shareholders (the people of NL) will be gouged to keep Nalcor's spending viable.
When the PUBlic Utilities Board was banished from it's role as a regulator - protecting us - from unnecessary spending by our own corporation - Nalcor - became an agent by which politicians could cut deals that they wanted for whatever reasons - and those reasons can be very self-serving and sinister.
The PUB may have rejected this expenditure on behalf of the consumers of electricity - and the fact that people like Kathy Dunderdale, Jerome Kennedy, Tom Marshall, and Darin King felt it okay to bypass the ratepayer component of the process is legislatively corrupt.
Now the PUB should have no right to stop a deal for power development - if others - not us - the ratepayers - are paying for it. If the government wanted to make this pet project a legacy - they should have directly pinned it on the taxpayers and forced every taxpayer in the province to pay for this disaster. In this way the political fall-out is more instant - more direct.
Roger's points in his letter make sense - in a very basic real way. We have no real idea what the true energy asset base is in the province and whether or not those assets could have been used differently, expanded, or altered to accommodate the Island need for power. As for Labrador - this development - if allowed to proceed would not remove many Labradorians from thermal generation or supply from Quebec. That is ridiculous.
The idea of developing such a valuable resource such as Muskrat and then Gull Island in either order should have accomplished the following:
1. Mandatory renewable assets for all inhabited regions of Labrador,
2. Development of Industry which would spur tens of thousands of jobs (long-term) after the construction phase is complete, or
3. The sale of the majority of power to another Province or State wherein the power produced would cause our rates to be kept where they are now - for a generation or two, money for our treasury, and equity build-up for our people (similar to a tenant renting your property) they pay the mortgage - we own the asset,
4. Some combination of 2 and 3.
The added little bonus for the private Emera is that they now are going to be paid every time you and I pay our electric bill. They get a cut of the action that was once held solely for Newfoundland Power and Nalcor (Newfoundland and Labraor Hydro division). Why are they getting that cut? The truthful answer to that will start to unravel some pretty questionable decisions by our government.
There was and is a real potential to stabilize our rates by simply acquiring Newfoundland Power and eliminating the doubling up profits and eliminate administrative and asset duplication. By doing what we have done - Nalcor gets it up price, passed to Emera for its up price and then on to Newfoundland Power for its piece.
If we continue with this project - we are absolutely getting the least out of this asset - which in time will look worse than the Upper Churchill.
The former Premier should be commended for his leadership and be an example for those seeking to take office and government. The project should be stopped.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Politicians are Seals We are Cod - Extinct?
What's happening with the land that used to be the Salmonier Prison Camp?
How does anybody get an acre of land in the St. John's metro for $300 an acre?
How does somebody get ownership of a river or the power it produces?
How does one miraculously get a time record setting land use change at City Hall?
How does one move so smoothly from a top public service or elected position to a corporation seeking things from the government?
How does one get to cheat and break the Elections Act and then immediately run again for office?
How do corporations that violate the Elections Act waltz around continuing to operate without punishment?
How do heads of these same corporations not suffer legal consequences for breaches of the law?
How do fish corporations in Newfoundland and Labrador continue to get permission to offload raw resources for their profitability while causing loss of jobs in the jurisdiction they harvest the resources from?
Where is all our money?
Why is the Auditor General's report not followed completely?
Why are political party bag men allowed to hold publicly paid positions - resign from them to politic - then return to those same highly paid positions?
Why indeed!
Why is Nalcor permitted to fund charities - then celebrate itself - like it's a private corporation?
What questions do you have?
How does a young man die on the ice - and no Inquiry, though needed, is called?
My stomach is still turning - I still have sleepless nights - they are still gutting us.
How does anybody get an acre of land in the St. John's metro for $300 an acre?
How does somebody get ownership of a river or the power it produces?
How does one miraculously get a time record setting land use change at City Hall?
How does one move so smoothly from a top public service or elected position to a corporation seeking things from the government?
How does one get to cheat and break the Elections Act and then immediately run again for office?
How do corporations that violate the Elections Act waltz around continuing to operate without punishment?
How do heads of these same corporations not suffer legal consequences for breaches of the law?
How do fish corporations in Newfoundland and Labrador continue to get permission to offload raw resources for their profitability while causing loss of jobs in the jurisdiction they harvest the resources from?
Where is all our money?
Why is the Auditor General's report not followed completely?
Why are political party bag men allowed to hold publicly paid positions - resign from them to politic - then return to those same highly paid positions?
Why indeed!
Why is Nalcor permitted to fund charities - then celebrate itself - like it's a private corporation?
What questions do you have?
How does a young man die on the ice - and no Inquiry, though needed, is called?
My stomach is still turning - I still have sleepless nights - they are still gutting us.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Will Oil Prices really hit Dunderdale Govt. Projections?
As we watch the Muskrat fiasco continue to unfold - one important factor continues to be puzzling.
We already know the Dunderdale administration has been off on oil price projections over 1 year let alone 30-50 years. We also know that Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has been off on need for power over the past 30 years - however we need them to be spot on now.
How about this headline?
We already know the Dunderdale administration has been off on oil price projections over 1 year let alone 30-50 years. We also know that Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has been off on need for power over the past 30 years - however we need them to be spot on now.
How about this headline?
U.S. set to overtake Saudi in oil output: IEA
LONDON--A shale oil boom means the U.S. will overtake Saudi Arabia as
the world's largest oil producer by 2020, a radical shift that could
profoundly transform not just the world's energy supplies, but also its
geopolitics, the International Energy Agency said Monday.
In its closely watched annual World Energy Outlook, the IEA, which
advises industrialized nations on their energy policies, said the global
energy map, "is being redrawn by the resurgence in oil and gas
production in the United States."
The assessment is in stark contrast with last year, when it envisioned Russia and Saudi Arabia vying for the top position.
"By around 2020, the United States is projected to become the largest
global oil producer" and overtake Saudi Arabia for a time, the agency
said. "The result is a continued fall in U.S. oil imports (currently at
20% of its needs) to the extent that North America becomes a net oil
exporter around 2030."
This major shift will be driven by the faster-than-expected development
of hydrocarbon resources locked in shale and other tight rock that have
just started to be unlocked by a new combination of technologies called
hydraulic fracturing.
According to Washington's Energy Information Administration, U.S. oil
production has increased 7% to 10.76 million barrels a day since the
IEA's last outlook a year ago. The agency's conclusions are partly
backed by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which
last week acknowledged for the first time that shale oil would
significantly diminish its share of the U.S. market.
The group said the U.S. would import less than 2 million barrels a day
in 2035, almost three-quarters less than it does today. That's not to
say OPEC's role will be marginalized globally. The group's share of
global production will increase from 42% today to 50% in 2035, with much
of it going to Asia, according to the IEA.
Friday, October 26, 2012
News keeps getting Worse! Muskrat Exports?
Below please find an excerpt from a recent Globe and Mail article: Should we continue to ignore this?
This “over my dead body” attitude from a former engineer and environmentalist made Natural Resource Minister is emblematic of what former Parti Québécois premier Bouchard refers to as the “new religion” of Quebec. In a province where the gas industry’s first and often tactless developments have divided the population, gas wells – and even hydroelectric dams – have come to symbolize man’s self-destructive appetite for energy, at the expense of land, water and air.
It is a fine debate. Yet for all its sociological, environmental and economic considerations, it is somewhat vain. The valve on Quebec’s gas industry is shut for a foreseeable future that extends well beyond the current ban on gas exploration – which will last until environmental studies are completed, by 2014. Blame it on the shale gas boom in the United States. Blame it on the low gas prices that have ensued.
And the consequences of these depressed prices are felt not only by the province’s nascent gas industry, which had already drilled before the ban some 30 wells in Quebec in the hopes of creating a 5,000- to 19,000-job industry.
They also hurt the venerable Hydro-Québec, the state-owned electricity producer that has seen its export revenues since 2008 melt even as it is pumping more electricity into the northeastern U.S., its main export market. Gas-powered thermal electricity plants are heating up Hydro-Québec’s competition.
The price of natural gas has rebounded in recent months after it cratered in April under $2 (U.S.) per million British thermal units (BTU). As gas prices rise while the mercury falls on the eve of the winter heating season, it now trades close to $3.50 per million BTU in New York. However, Quebec’s gas industry estimated in earlier public hearings that the price of gas needs to trade between $5 and $6 for it to cover its production and delivery costs.
Even if gas-powered plants replace coal plants, even if diesel trucks are converted to gas, it will likely take a decade before the increased demand allows the price of natural gas to rebound significantly – it spiked at close to $9 in 2008. Quebec’s main gas distributor, Gaz Métro, expects prices to hover around $5 for the next 10 years. Jean-Thomas Bernard, guest lecturer at the University of Ottawa’s faculty of economics and an energy expert, thinks the depressed prices could even last 15 years.
This presents a headache for Hydro-Québec, which is already swarming with electricity surpluses as the recession weighs on industrial demand, especially from the pulp and paper mills that are in the midst of a structural downturn. And the problem will only be made worse as the state-owned electricity producer brings new capacity into service.
The complex project Eastmain-1-A-Sarcelle-Rupert, which includes the construction of two plants, four dams and the diversion of the Rupert River in the James Bay region, will add 8.7 terawatt-hours of electricity production. The Romaine hydroelectric complex in the Côte-Nord region will add another eight TWh on average a year.
Hydro-Québec‘s electricity exports have steadily gone up since 2007 to 26.8 TWh from 19.6 TWh. Yet as electricity prices have fallen while the Canadian dollar has shot up, the revenues the state producer collects from these out-of-province sales have gone down – although they slightly rebounded in 2011. The trend has continued in the first quarter of 2012: The year-over-year exports shortfall accounts for Hydro-Québec’s 28 per cent drop in revenue and 18 per cent reduction in profit.
And with any fall in Hydro-Québec’s profits comes a reduction to the dividend it pays the government, as 75 per cent of its profit are funnelled to Quebec.
To paraphrase the title of an acclaimed Louis Bélanger film, Quebec is suffering a severe case of “Gaz Bar Blues.”
So as Western Canadian energy producers are lamenting the surge in U.S. shale gas and oil production, which are threatening their exports south of the border, this time around, they will find a sympathetic ear in Quebec.
This “over my dead body” attitude from a former engineer and environmentalist made Natural Resource Minister is emblematic of what former Parti Québécois premier Bouchard refers to as the “new religion” of Quebec. In a province where the gas industry’s first and often tactless developments have divided the population, gas wells – and even hydroelectric dams – have come to symbolize man’s self-destructive appetite for energy, at the expense of land, water and air.
It is a fine debate. Yet for all its sociological, environmental and economic considerations, it is somewhat vain. The valve on Quebec’s gas industry is shut for a foreseeable future that extends well beyond the current ban on gas exploration – which will last until environmental studies are completed, by 2014. Blame it on the shale gas boom in the United States. Blame it on the low gas prices that have ensued.
And the consequences of these depressed prices are felt not only by the province’s nascent gas industry, which had already drilled before the ban some 30 wells in Quebec in the hopes of creating a 5,000- to 19,000-job industry.
They also hurt the venerable Hydro-Québec, the state-owned electricity producer that has seen its export revenues since 2008 melt even as it is pumping more electricity into the northeastern U.S., its main export market. Gas-powered thermal electricity plants are heating up Hydro-Québec’s competition.
The price of natural gas has rebounded in recent months after it cratered in April under $2 (U.S.) per million British thermal units (BTU). As gas prices rise while the mercury falls on the eve of the winter heating season, it now trades close to $3.50 per million BTU in New York. However, Quebec’s gas industry estimated in earlier public hearings that the price of gas needs to trade between $5 and $6 for it to cover its production and delivery costs.
Even if gas-powered plants replace coal plants, even if diesel trucks are converted to gas, it will likely take a decade before the increased demand allows the price of natural gas to rebound significantly – it spiked at close to $9 in 2008. Quebec’s main gas distributor, Gaz Métro, expects prices to hover around $5 for the next 10 years. Jean-Thomas Bernard, guest lecturer at the University of Ottawa’s faculty of economics and an energy expert, thinks the depressed prices could even last 15 years.
This presents a headache for Hydro-Québec, which is already swarming with electricity surpluses as the recession weighs on industrial demand, especially from the pulp and paper mills that are in the midst of a structural downturn. And the problem will only be made worse as the state-owned electricity producer brings new capacity into service.
The complex project Eastmain-1-A-Sarcelle-Rupert, which includes the construction of two plants, four dams and the diversion of the Rupert River in the James Bay region, will add 8.7 terawatt-hours of electricity production. The Romaine hydroelectric complex in the Côte-Nord region will add another eight TWh on average a year.
Hydro-Québec‘s electricity exports have steadily gone up since 2007 to 26.8 TWh from 19.6 TWh. Yet as electricity prices have fallen while the Canadian dollar has shot up, the revenues the state producer collects from these out-of-province sales have gone down – although they slightly rebounded in 2011. The trend has continued in the first quarter of 2012: The year-over-year exports shortfall accounts for Hydro-Québec’s 28 per cent drop in revenue and 18 per cent reduction in profit.
And with any fall in Hydro-Québec’s profits comes a reduction to the dividend it pays the government, as 75 per cent of its profit are funnelled to Quebec.
To paraphrase the title of an acclaimed Louis Bélanger film, Quebec is suffering a severe case of “Gaz Bar Blues.”
So as Western Canadian energy producers are lamenting the surge in U.S. shale gas and oil production, which are threatening their exports south of the border, this time around, they will find a sympathetic ear in Quebec.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
The Lowest Common Denominator - says Dunderdale?
A new concept has been introduced by our Premier.
The lowest common denominator is not new however using it for Board appointments is.
In a CBC report on Monday Premier Kathy Dunderdale defended the skills and experience of four new appointees to the boards of Nalcor and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
In the Telegram today Dunderdale is quoted as saying "it’s not a problem that recent appointees to the Nalcor board have no experience in oil and gas, hydroelectricity or megaprojects."
First of all Premier - which is it? Do they have the experience or not?
Then in defending the lack of experience in the energy sector the Premier added the following: “What qualifies me to be premier of Newfoundland and Labrador?” Dunderdale asked. “What qualifies Dwight Ball or Lorraine Michael?”
That may be a good question for the Premier to ask herself - however in this very real fiasco unfolding before us - her comment is beyond ridiculous.
The people elected you - and you can be summarily dismissed - which I predict will be soon - by booting you out. Not so with the Nalcor appointees (don't be cute with this one - I'll tell you why in the next post).
So basically what the Premier is saying is - I have no qualifications and you elected me - so I will appoint others with no relevant qualifications to the Board of Nalcor.
Premier, are we the people, or experts in the sector, or the Opposition parties permitted to have a question period in the House of Assembly with these new appointees? No? Well they are not the same thing.
However if you should choose to allow this - sign me up.
The Premier has now introduced the lowest common denominator in the equation of appointing people to the Boards of Crown agencies and companies. What might we guess will be the outcome of that?
The lowest common denominator is not new however using it for Board appointments is.
In a CBC report on Monday Premier Kathy Dunderdale defended the skills and experience of four new appointees to the boards of Nalcor and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
In the Telegram today Dunderdale is quoted as saying "it’s not a problem that recent appointees to the Nalcor board have no experience in oil and gas, hydroelectricity or megaprojects."
First of all Premier - which is it? Do they have the experience or not?
Then in defending the lack of experience in the energy sector the Premier added the following: “What qualifies me to be premier of Newfoundland and Labrador?” Dunderdale asked. “What qualifies Dwight Ball or Lorraine Michael?”
That may be a good question for the Premier to ask herself - however in this very real fiasco unfolding before us - her comment is beyond ridiculous.
The people elected you - and you can be summarily dismissed - which I predict will be soon - by booting you out. Not so with the Nalcor appointees (don't be cute with this one - I'll tell you why in the next post).
So basically what the Premier is saying is - I have no qualifications and you elected me - so I will appoint others with no relevant qualifications to the Board of Nalcor.
Premier, are we the people, or experts in the sector, or the Opposition parties permitted to have a question period in the House of Assembly with these new appointees? No? Well they are not the same thing.
However if you should choose to allow this - sign me up.
The Premier has now introduced the lowest common denominator in the equation of appointing people to the Boards of Crown agencies and companies. What might we guess will be the outcome of that?
Friday, June 08, 2012
Hydro Appointments - It's Not April 1st Right?
There are No Words for This!
Minister Announces Board Appointments
The Honourable Jerome Kennedy, Minister of Natural Resources, today
announced four appointments to the Board of Directors of Nalcor Energy (Nalcor)
and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro (Hydro). “These appointments reflect the strong level of leadership and expertise on both Nalcor and Hydro’s Board of Directors, and I look forward to the valuable contribution each individual will make in their new roles,” said Minister Kennedy. “Their experiences and varied skill set will help strengthen the boards, and I thank them for their dedicated service to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.”
Under the authority of Section 7 of the Energy Corporation and Hydro Corporation Acts, Terry Styles has been appointed Chair of the Board of Directors of Nalcor and Hydro.
Under the authority of Section 6 of the Energy Corporation and Hydro Corporation Acts, Allan Hawkins, Leo Abbass, and Erin Breen have been appointed members to the Board of Directors of Nalcor and Hydro.
All appointments are effective immediately.
- 30 -
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
Terry StylesTerry Styles is the owner and operator of Appalachia Distributing Limited in Stephenville. Initially developed to service the Bay St. George area of the province, the company has expanded to service the entire west coast of the island in distribution and transportation with warehouses, staff, and trucks in Stephenville and Corner Brook. The company is currently in the process of expanding into real estate and development. He previously served as Chair of the Board of Governors for College of the North Atlantic. Mr. Styles has a proven track record as an active member of the community through previous involvement with various minor and high school sports teams.
Allan Hawkins
Allan Hawkins is the Mayor of Grand Falls-Windsor and was elected in September 2009. He previously served on several other council committees including Chair of the Recreation Committee, Chair of the Multi-Cultural Committee, and Chair of the Economic Development Committee. Mayor Hawkins is actively involved in many community groups and organizations including the Alzheimer Society and Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador.
Leo Abbass
Leo Abbass is the Mayor of Happy Valley-Goose Bay and is currently serving his third term. In his capacity as Mayor, he represents the community on a number of committees including the Atlantic Mayors’ Congress; Labrador Director of Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador; Member of the Urban Municipalities Committee; Destination Labrador; Goose Bay Airport Corporation; and Labrador Winter Games. Mayor Abbass is actively involved in the community.
Erin Breen
Erin Breen is a partner with the St. John’s-based law firm Simmonds+Partners Defence, and was called to the Newfoundland Bar in April 2003. She is an active community member, and volunteers with the MacMorran Community Centre in St. John’s.
Tuesday, June 05, 2012
The Romance is Over - NL on Death Watch
As I sat down the other morning - looked at the beautiful blue sky and dancing ocean - something happened.
I was listening to CBC Radio to a story about Quinlan's fishplant in Bay de Verde. Primarily it was regarding the import of workers from Thailand to process crab.
The "shock" value is they could not find 20 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to take the employment - rate of pay $12/hr.
Here are my questions:
1. How much does it cost to bring 20 Thai workers to Canada?
2. How much does it cost to house and feed them?
3. Where is the FFAW on this story?
4. What is up people?
So I gulped hard and listened to another story about an Otto Young from Twillingate and how he has essentially turned an old beauty salon and couple of outbuildings into cabins for tourists looking for icebergs and scenery.
It also talked about Otto's later in life discovery that he was a model boat builder and artist. Very folksy, charming, and romantic - it really turned my stomach.
Yes that's right - it made me feel ill.
There is nothing charming, quaint, or pleasantly poetic about a place - my country - Newfoundland and Labrador becoming extinct.
I am actually tired - exhausted - from fighting for the survival of one of the greatest food baskets in the world - our fishery.
The story about Otto would have normally warmed my heart and promoted feelings of pride - but today - after a month where we've seen a half dozen fish plants were eulogized - it just rubbed me very wrong.
I watch Darin King - the latest political clone of ineptness - blabber on and on about nothing and everything. I - Darin - am a Minister - and may yet be the next Premier - thinks he.
The ladies, Kathy - Joan - and Susan are like a trio of hen peckers on a partisan journey of retribution. They have the power to destroy and so far a fine job is being done.
Kathy was muttering something the other day about Harper and the fact he represents all Canadians whether they voted for him or not. Well Kathy - if he took a page from your book he would learn he is not being vengeful enough.
So now we are on death watch for the Corner Brook mill - time for the violinists to begin.
The same old garbage will spew - it is not the end for Corner Brook - we will recover - we will recover.
Meanwhile as more industries are lost weekly - the apparent need for power increases?
We must take our collective ostrich head out of the sand and boot these people out. We are going to leave nothing but debt and leave our children and grandchildren destitute.
Our culture so rich and unique - disappearing - under the watchful eye of the House of Assembly.
I was listening to CBC Radio to a story about Quinlan's fishplant in Bay de Verde. Primarily it was regarding the import of workers from Thailand to process crab.
The "shock" value is they could not find 20 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to take the employment - rate of pay $12/hr.
Here are my questions:
1. How much does it cost to bring 20 Thai workers to Canada?
2. How much does it cost to house and feed them?
3. Where is the FFAW on this story?
4. What is up people?
So I gulped hard and listened to another story about an Otto Young from Twillingate and how he has essentially turned an old beauty salon and couple of outbuildings into cabins for tourists looking for icebergs and scenery.
It also talked about Otto's later in life discovery that he was a model boat builder and artist. Very folksy, charming, and romantic - it really turned my stomach.
Yes that's right - it made me feel ill.
There is nothing charming, quaint, or pleasantly poetic about a place - my country - Newfoundland and Labrador becoming extinct.
I am actually tired - exhausted - from fighting for the survival of one of the greatest food baskets in the world - our fishery.
The story about Otto would have normally warmed my heart and promoted feelings of pride - but today - after a month where we've seen a half dozen fish plants were eulogized - it just rubbed me very wrong.
I watch Darin King - the latest political clone of ineptness - blabber on and on about nothing and everything. I - Darin - am a Minister - and may yet be the next Premier - thinks he.
The ladies, Kathy - Joan - and Susan are like a trio of hen peckers on a partisan journey of retribution. They have the power to destroy and so far a fine job is being done.
Kathy was muttering something the other day about Harper and the fact he represents all Canadians whether they voted for him or not. Well Kathy - if he took a page from your book he would learn he is not being vengeful enough.
So now we are on death watch for the Corner Brook mill - time for the violinists to begin.
The same old garbage will spew - it is not the end for Corner Brook - we will recover - we will recover.
Meanwhile as more industries are lost weekly - the apparent need for power increases?
We must take our collective ostrich head out of the sand and boot these people out. We are going to leave nothing but debt and leave our children and grandchildren destitute.
Our culture so rich and unique - disappearing - under the watchful eye of the House of Assembly.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
A note from Dean MacDonald - More Beano Please!
"It is essential to the provincial economy that we maintain our relative competitiveness in energy pricing. Our options are now more limited with respect to new sources of competitively-priced generation to service Island requirements. With a relatively low growth forecast, we expect to meet the future energy requirements through a combination of small hydro developments and thermal power. Should differing circumstances emerge with respect to new capacity requirements, the challenge to maintain competitive electricity prices will increase. Of particular significance in the future for the Island portion of the province is whether natural gas may become an energy source for power generation."
The above quote is from none other than Dean MacDonald as Chair of Hydro in 1999.
This - of course - follows the 1990 forecasts where Hydro was wrong by predicting strong growth.
In 1999 after correcting for the errors of 1990 - they predicted a low growth - which according to Hydro today would have been wrong again.
So in 1999 Dean says low growth - but in the event they are wrong - look to natural gas.
So then in 2010 after apparently Hydro was wrong again - now we need power again.
All of these statements are factual and real. If history serves us right - we should expect the exact opposite to occur with respect to load growth and power needs.
So Dean wants us to rely on the Hydro experts - who failed him directly in the past.
Again I ask about the personal portfolios of interested parties who support this Muskrat deal.
The above quote is from none other than Dean MacDonald as Chair of Hydro in 1999.
This - of course - follows the 1990 forecasts where Hydro was wrong by predicting strong growth.
In 1999 after correcting for the errors of 1990 - they predicted a low growth - which according to Hydro today would have been wrong again.
So in 1999 Dean says low growth - but in the event they are wrong - look to natural gas.
So then in 2010 after apparently Hydro was wrong again - now we need power again.
All of these statements are factual and real. If history serves us right - we should expect the exact opposite to occur with respect to load growth and power needs.
So Dean wants us to rely on the Hydro experts - who failed him directly in the past.
Again I ask about the personal portfolios of interested parties who support this Muskrat deal.
Nalcor - Premier - Hydro Quebec Worst is Yet to Come
 | ||
| Hydro-Quebec Document (Current Strategic Plan) |
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Goodbye Canada and Corruption - Hello Iceland
A lesson from Iceland - I have added bolding to areas of the Story.
You must love the People First approach.
Iceland with half our population and less natural resources - they are doing fine.
Iceland’s economy suffered a meltdown in 2008, with its banks defaulting on $85 billion. In 2009 its citizens took to the streets and demanded action from the government against those they saw as responsible for the crisis. The government responded, putting people before markets, and now Iceland’s economy is outgrowing the euro one and, on average, the developed world.
Bloomberg reported that after it was determined in October 2008 that the banks could not be saved, the government intervened. It ring-fenced domestic accounts and shut out international creditors. Iceland’s central bank prevented the sell off of krona through capital controls, and new banks were created that were controlled by the state. Then the government and the state-controlled banks agreed that amounts in excess of 110% of home values would be forgiven on mortgages.
The country’s supreme court also ruled in 2010 that debts indexed to foreign currencies were illegal, which saved households from having to cover losses resulting from drops in the value of the krona.
An Icelandic Financial Services Association report cited by Bloomberg pointed out that the country’s banks have forgiven loans amounting to 13% of Iceland’s GDP. That lessened the debt load of the population.
Lars Christensen, chief emerging markets economist at Danske Bank in Copenhagen, was quoted saying, “You could safely say that Iceland holds the world record in household debt relief. Iceland followed the textbook example of what is required in a crisis. Any economist would agree with that.”
Not only that, but the cost to insure against an Icelandic default is about the same as to insure against a credit event in Belgium. And Icelanders are no longer eager to join the eurozone. Most would rather stay solo. Housing as an element of the consumer price index is only down about 3% from what it was in September 2008, just prior to the collapse.
Fitch Ratings just last week also conceded that Iceland’s approach has worked, raising the country’s rating to investment grade with a stable outlook. At the time it said that Iceland’s “unorthodox crisis policy response has succeeded.”
Thorolfur Matthiasson, an economics professor at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik, was quoted saying, “The lesson to be learned from Iceland’s crisis is that if other countries think it’s necessary to write down debts, they should look at how successful the 110% agreement was here. It’s the broadest agreement that’s been undertaken.”
According to Christensen at Danske Bank, “the bottom line is that if households are insolvent, then the banks just have to go along with it, regardless of the interests of the banks.”
You must love the People First approach.
Iceland with half our population and less natural resources - they are doing fine.
Icelandic Economy Bounces Back From Brink
Debt relief put people’s needs ahead of markets
Iceland’s economy suffered a meltdown in 2008, with its banks defaulting on $85 billion. In 2009 its citizens took to the streets and demanded action from the government against those they saw as responsible for the crisis. The government responded, putting people before markets, and now Iceland’s economy is outgrowing the euro one and, on average, the developed world.
Bloomberg reported that after it was determined in October 2008 that the banks could not be saved, the government intervened. It ring-fenced domestic accounts and shut out international creditors. Iceland’s central bank prevented the sell off of krona through capital controls, and new banks were created that were controlled by the state. Then the government and the state-controlled banks agreed that amounts in excess of 110% of home values would be forgiven on mortgages.
The country’s supreme court also ruled in 2010 that debts indexed to foreign currencies were illegal, which saved households from having to cover losses resulting from drops in the value of the krona.
An Icelandic Financial Services Association report cited by Bloomberg pointed out that the country’s banks have forgiven loans amounting to 13% of Iceland’s GDP. That lessened the debt load of the population.
In addition, the government is investigating, and prosecuting,
numerous prominent figures from the meltdown. Currently more than 200
face criminal charges and a special prosecutor has said as many as 90
may be indicted.
Lars Christensen, chief emerging markets economist at Danske Bank in Copenhagen, was quoted saying, “You could safely say that Iceland holds the world record in household debt relief. Iceland followed the textbook example of what is required in a crisis. Any economist would agree with that.”
The result? According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development, Iceland’s economy is in line to expand 2.4% both this
year and next, after growth of 2.9% last year and in the wake of
shrinkage of 6.7% in 2009. In contrast, the OECD estimated in November
that the euro area will only expand by 0.2% and the OECD area by 1.6% in
2012.
Not only that, but the cost to insure against an Icelandic default is about the same as to insure against a credit event in Belgium. And Icelanders are no longer eager to join the eurozone. Most would rather stay solo. Housing as an element of the consumer price index is only down about 3% from what it was in September 2008, just prior to the collapse.
Fitch Ratings just last week also conceded that Iceland’s approach has worked, raising the country’s rating to investment grade with a stable outlook. At the time it said that Iceland’s “unorthodox crisis policy response has succeeded.”
Thorolfur Matthiasson, an economics professor at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik, was quoted saying, “The lesson to be learned from Iceland’s crisis is that if other countries think it’s necessary to write down debts, they should look at how successful the 110% agreement was here. It’s the broadest agreement that’s been undertaken.”
According to Christensen at Danske Bank, “the bottom line is that if households are insolvent, then the banks just have to go along with it, regardless of the interests of the banks.”
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Simple Energy Question Government/Nalcor will NOT answer
Here it is and I send this challenge to all sitting MHA's in all parties and Nalcor Officials.
What happens in 2041?
Please answer this question - you all keep talking about 2041 - what happens?
Please provide the following information
1. What ends in 2041
2. Who owns the assets in 2041 and what assets are involved?
3. What about the water rights?
4. Who owns CFLCo?
5. How are decisions on future contracts regarding Upper Churchill power made?
6. Who sits on the Board of CFLCo?
7. Are there special decisions regarding CFLCo that need a majority of the board?
8. Do Hydro-Quebec representatives on the CFLCo Board have the power to stop future contracts?
What happens in 2041?
Please answer this question - you all keep talking about 2041 - what happens?
Please provide the following information
1. What ends in 2041
2. Who owns the assets in 2041 and what assets are involved?
3. What about the water rights?
4. Who owns CFLCo?
5. How are decisions on future contracts regarding Upper Churchill power made?
6. Who sits on the Board of CFLCo?
7. Are there special decisions regarding CFLCo that need a majority of the board?
8. Do Hydro-Quebec representatives on the CFLCo Board have the power to stop future contracts?
Thursday, February 03, 2011
There are good PC MHA's on the Hill and they need to Act on Churchill
- got a message from Sarah - who if she's reading this needs to attach her email so I can return her message -
Here's the test of a good project for a natural renewable resource development - unlike what Steve Kent leads you to believe on person-years of employment - it relies on full benefits forever.
You see the proposal here does offer employment - just like its predecessor the Upper Churchill - it has to the infrastructure is massive. That's where the benefits stop and the giveaway begins.
First: financing for the project -oh yeah you and me and escalating power bills.
Who is doing that financing and how much will they make? What will you and I pay for the privilege of shipping out our wealth and Labrador's potential for industrial development?
When developing hydro-electric power - one must consider the environmental impacts of such a development and whether or not that impact can be justified by socio-economic benefits. There must also be consideration for what the power is being developed for and whether or not at the end of that assessment - that Labrador particularly will continue to benefit from not only power sales but permanent jobs from industry plugged into the power. All advanced societies develop hydro developments for that purpose. NOBODY gives away this power potential without first advancing significant industrial developments and a reduction of fossil fuels in the development region and reducing the cost to domestic consumers (you and me). That is the model which we know as Hydro-Quebec. Make no mistake - they are the most progressive and successful energy company in the world. This is measurable amounts due from the Upper Churchill development.
Newfoundland and Labrador has significant energy potentials - natural gas, oil, wind, wave, tidal, peat, and of course hydro-electric both small and large scale projects.
Which ones do we prefer to export? All of them if we have enough hydro-electric power - which we do - unless these PC Cabinet Ministers go ahead with this legacy of shame.
Wind is something like aquaculture - still developing - still with problems...
Wind also needs to be backed up by reliable sources - which makes it great for export - that is we can ship it while it is producing. We cannot rely on it for domestic uses - it is not as reliable as hydro-electric and it is more expensive. There are also real concerns as to where these costs will be going and also that most developments are by the private sector - which is not preferable for energy domestically as it is an essential product. That is why we continue to own Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
We have failed if we do not accomplish the following:
1. Employment - virtually all by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with emphasis on Labradorians.
2. Newfoundland and Labrador retain ownership of the resource and project.
3. Hydroelectric power the entire province particularly all of Labrador for domestic purposes.
4. 90% of energy produced from large scale projects such as the Lower Churchill be used to fuel industry in the region where it is produced.
5. Offset environmental effects using every means possible.
6. Achieve federal support for the project as partners - wherein we utilize federal funds for financing - similar to the Hibernia arrangement - with the exception that we do not pay it back - but accept it as partial payment for the lost ground fish resources.
Wind energy to be developed should be exported at market prices as well as other non-renewable potentials. Wave and tidal power potentials should be researched and developed by Nalcor for future growth and export potentials.
I will further explain to PC mha's the following - not difficult - the fuel that drives hydro-electric power is free - it is water - the fuel that drives thermal generation is not free and volatile, oil gas coal. Which one should we use for our domestic and industrial use? The answer is very simple.
Wind although arguably a good source of renewable energy does have problems with reliability, storage, and continued infrastructure costs. One must also remember how many turbines it would take to generate 700- 1000 megs of power needed for an aluminum smelter. In either case you have to back it up with another source.
This is just the beginning of the assessment and we will have to explore fully the role of the proposed partners, the gouging expected by the private sector. The vulnerability to Quebec as the proposed partner, Emera is a publicly traded company and open to takeover - hostile or other.
The examination of what it will mean to the future of our province - particularly Labrador as we continue to export and giveaway our best industrial advantage.
Then for getting nothing, giving it all away, and ruining our potential - we as consumers will see astronomical increases in our light bills. The same thing was anticipated when we proposed to sell Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
Last but not least - Labrador communities will remain unconnected and reliant on either Hydro-Quebec or thermal generation for domestic power - while Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, maybe Ontario and New England States get their hands on our cheap renewable hydro power - that for some reason they can find industry to use.
Back to the basic equation - Hydro development costs + transmission + loss of energy through transmission + maintenance + marketing + administration + profit = affordable power that Nova Scotia can attract industry with.
While Hydro development costs + minimum transmission + virtually no loss of energy through transmission = more than affordable power - deliverable in Labrador to industry that our incompetent politicians cannot attract.
Without a doubt - this is a giveaway - the same as the Upper Churchill except this one will be more expensive for us. This would be a legacy of shame that these PC MHA's would have to live with as their grandchildren ask the whys.
Liberal MHA's eventually took Clyde Wells on and advised the Premier that the sale of Hydro was not acceptable. Now these PC's must look within and do the right thing - before they leave public life.
Without a doubt this is not a good deal and there will be no excuses for those who would allow this to happen this time.
Here's the test of a good project for a natural renewable resource development - unlike what Steve Kent leads you to believe on person-years of employment - it relies on full benefits forever.
You see the proposal here does offer employment - just like its predecessor the Upper Churchill - it has to the infrastructure is massive. That's where the benefits stop and the giveaway begins.
First: financing for the project -oh yeah you and me and escalating power bills.
Who is doing that financing and how much will they make? What will you and I pay for the privilege of shipping out our wealth and Labrador's potential for industrial development?
When developing hydro-electric power - one must consider the environmental impacts of such a development and whether or not that impact can be justified by socio-economic benefits. There must also be consideration for what the power is being developed for and whether or not at the end of that assessment - that Labrador particularly will continue to benefit from not only power sales but permanent jobs from industry plugged into the power. All advanced societies develop hydro developments for that purpose. NOBODY gives away this power potential without first advancing significant industrial developments and a reduction of fossil fuels in the development region and reducing the cost to domestic consumers (you and me). That is the model which we know as Hydro-Quebec. Make no mistake - they are the most progressive and successful energy company in the world. This is measurable amounts due from the Upper Churchill development.
Newfoundland and Labrador has significant energy potentials - natural gas, oil, wind, wave, tidal, peat, and of course hydro-electric both small and large scale projects.
Which ones do we prefer to export? All of them if we have enough hydro-electric power - which we do - unless these PC Cabinet Ministers go ahead with this legacy of shame.
Wind is something like aquaculture - still developing - still with problems...
Wind also needs to be backed up by reliable sources - which makes it great for export - that is we can ship it while it is producing. We cannot rely on it for domestic uses - it is not as reliable as hydro-electric and it is more expensive. There are also real concerns as to where these costs will be going and also that most developments are by the private sector - which is not preferable for energy domestically as it is an essential product. That is why we continue to own Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
We have failed if we do not accomplish the following:
1. Employment - virtually all by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with emphasis on Labradorians.
2. Newfoundland and Labrador retain ownership of the resource and project.
3. Hydroelectric power the entire province particularly all of Labrador for domestic purposes.
4. 90% of energy produced from large scale projects such as the Lower Churchill be used to fuel industry in the region where it is produced.
5. Offset environmental effects using every means possible.
6. Achieve federal support for the project as partners - wherein we utilize federal funds for financing - similar to the Hibernia arrangement - with the exception that we do not pay it back - but accept it as partial payment for the lost ground fish resources.
Wind energy to be developed should be exported at market prices as well as other non-renewable potentials. Wave and tidal power potentials should be researched and developed by Nalcor for future growth and export potentials.
I will further explain to PC mha's the following - not difficult - the fuel that drives hydro-electric power is free - it is water - the fuel that drives thermal generation is not free and volatile, oil gas coal. Which one should we use for our domestic and industrial use? The answer is very simple.
Wind although arguably a good source of renewable energy does have problems with reliability, storage, and continued infrastructure costs. One must also remember how many turbines it would take to generate 700- 1000 megs of power needed for an aluminum smelter. In either case you have to back it up with another source.
This is just the beginning of the assessment and we will have to explore fully the role of the proposed partners, the gouging expected by the private sector. The vulnerability to Quebec as the proposed partner, Emera is a publicly traded company and open to takeover - hostile or other.
The examination of what it will mean to the future of our province - particularly Labrador as we continue to export and giveaway our best industrial advantage.
Then for getting nothing, giving it all away, and ruining our potential - we as consumers will see astronomical increases in our light bills. The same thing was anticipated when we proposed to sell Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
Last but not least - Labrador communities will remain unconnected and reliant on either Hydro-Quebec or thermal generation for domestic power - while Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, maybe Ontario and New England States get their hands on our cheap renewable hydro power - that for some reason they can find industry to use.
Back to the basic equation - Hydro development costs + transmission + loss of energy through transmission + maintenance + marketing + administration + profit = affordable power that Nova Scotia can attract industry with.
While Hydro development costs + minimum transmission + virtually no loss of energy through transmission = more than affordable power - deliverable in Labrador to industry that our incompetent politicians cannot attract.
Without a doubt - this is a giveaway - the same as the Upper Churchill except this one will be more expensive for us. This would be a legacy of shame that these PC MHA's would have to live with as their grandchildren ask the whys.
Liberal MHA's eventually took Clyde Wells on and advised the Premier that the sale of Hydro was not acceptable. Now these PC's must look within and do the right thing - before they leave public life.
Without a doubt this is not a good deal and there will be no excuses for those who would allow this to happen this time.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Labrador and Alcoa We need all the facts!
Please look and understand there are so many things we as people of Newfoundland and Labrador have not been told.
PRESS HERE
Thank you to Norm in Labrador for the link.
I also call on CBC again to air the program on Lower Churchill discussions with PASNY (Power Authority State of new York) during the Peckford days.
We really need the history on this project and now that energy is even more valuable be very careful what we do with our tremendous Lower Churchill.
PRESS HERE
Thank you to Norm in Labrador for the link.
I also call on CBC again to air the program on Lower Churchill discussions with PASNY (Power Authority State of new York) during the Peckford days.
We really need the history on this project and now that energy is even more valuable be very careful what we do with our tremendous Lower Churchill.
Saturday, January 01, 2011
Trying to Silence Critics
Who is the real Kathy Dunderdale? Does she believe in an open and accountable democracy. No she does not. Does she believe that more women should be involved in politics? Only those she chooses. Does she have a right to sign resource deals? Not by her own standards - she is an unelected Premier.
Track record on the fishery, forestry, and energy sectors? Dismal, dismal, and attempting to be dismal.
The cone of silence will be lifted.
Track record on the fishery, forestry, and energy sectors? Dismal, dismal, and attempting to be dismal.
The cone of silence will be lifted.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)