The EXperts - Muskrat Falls

Since 2006 Sue's Blog has been warning through posts about the disastrous Muskrat Falls project.

Bits and pieces of the Inquiry refer to critics of the project - not being experts.

Let's take that at face value and reflect upon the experts.

Clearly the highly paid experts were wrong in many areas of assessment. Clearly they failed initially to project and overcome engineering and design difficulties regarding the site. Clearly the project is a failure on every measurable level.

Miraculously the non-experts were right in many areas of assessment. Miraculously the non-experts did not miss the peculiarities of the site engineering. Miraculously they were successful in assessing the Muskrat Falls deal was horrific.

Now the other non-experts (politicians) were clearly incapable of understanding what the experts were concluding. They were clearly unable to see the massive flaws in the deal and the engineering. They were clearly non-experts listening to paid experts -most of whom will not likely suffer from this boondoggle.

For what use is an expert - if the person acting on an "experts" advice would not be independently be able to see the potential flaws? What's worse - the politicians refused to listen to critics - ignored or worse subjected the non-experts to terms such as partisans, naysayers, and conspiracy theorists.

There were opportunities to engage the citizenry but they were not afforded.

Citizen groups should have been provided funding throughout the processes from conception to sanction. This funding could have provided the non-expert politicians with real concerns, real hazards, and real findings from the non-expert citizenry.

Further this size of a deal should have gone through a referendum process where - the citizen non-experts were given the opportunity to promote and educate regarding their points of view and real concerns.

You see if the non-expert politicians felt expert enough to make the legislative commitment - they should have allowed the non-expert citizenry a real opportunity to be heard.

None of the politicians did this. No political party did this.

Declining population, increasing efficiencies in housing and appliances, closure of two mills, numerous fish plants, schools, clinics etc are examples of reasonable considerations to determine future power supply requirements.

Muskrat Falls versus the entire Lower Churchill or even Gull Island begged the question why choose Muskrat.

Emera owning ANY part of our domestic distribution system is illogical and not to our benefit. It will increase prices.

Dealing with Emera - a company that could be the subject of a hostile or welcome takeover - particularly when Hydro-Quebec is the touted enemy - and could easily consume Emera minus Nova Scotia Power - was a poor choice.

The critical removal of alternate energy sources into the future was naive at best and corrupt at worst.

The engineering challenges - poorly thought out, considered, or even dealt with was another red flag for a layman.

The power needs of Labrador - routinely and as is usual dismissed including but not limited to plugging an industry of substance into the new supply - another red flag.

The continued interference with the Public Utilities Board - when they are the stop gap for consumers - yet another red flag.

Budgets that were routinely over - became the norm - raising another red flag.

The lack of knowledge of many MHA's regarding the history of the hydro-potentials in Labrador was and continues to be a very disturbing situation.

The obvious angst of indigenous peoples despite the approval by some of their leaders should have been addressed.

This is but a short list of how a citizen could have been and some citizens were very concerned about this failed project.

The decision by Dwight Ball and the Liberal government to push through the remainder of the project without thorough analysis and public input into other options - just continued the madness that is Muskrat.

The Inquiry is a political decision to thwart anger of consumers and taxpayers away from the current government and will do nothing to demonstrate the mess that occurred after they took office.

The EXperts they say? Funny how the naysayers, conspiracy theorists, partisan hacks, and all other names given to critics of the project - were miraculously right.

As I write today the folly continues and we are made to look more the fools than we already are.

We can't stop Muskrat now!

You know the old saying If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

We are the proverbial people spoken about.

Lie 1

We need the power

Lie 2

This is the cheapest alternative

Lie 3

We need to get around Quebec

Lie 4

Holyrood will be eliminated

Lie 5

It will cost 7-8 billion dollars

Lie 6

We need it for industry

Lie 7

We will own the transmission line to the Island

Lie 8

Ed Martin quit/retired

and now the biggest whopper of them all

Lie 9

We can't stop Muskrat now

For each and every lie above we had head-bobbing from ignorant MHA's and Ministers, we had a media in report but not research mode, and we had and have leaders who lead us down a garden path.

Each and every one of these lies was repeated, reported, repeated, reported, and repeated and reported.

Each and every one without a modicum of real and unfettered independent investigation.

The first big whopper - "we need the power" was one leader and the last big whopper  "we can't stop Muskrat now" from our current leader.

Both of them have tried to back up the statements with "input" from experts. The current expert Stan Marshall - riddled with government exempt conflict - has proclaimed "this is a boondoggle" but "we can't stop it now".

The first part of his statement "this is a boondoggle" is something that should be used in the Captain Obvious Hotels.com commercials. The second part "we can't stop it now" is coming without real proof or true independent review - that should be demanded by the people.

We suspect there has been/is some form of corruption going on. We know for certain incompetence has been abound and continues. We know we were lied to. Any reasonably minded person would say - it is time to stop the boondoggle, forensically audit the boondoggle, review the results publicly, and then look at all options.

Not here though. Lie repeat. Lie repeat. Lie report repeat.

It is unfathomable.

 

A lie told often enough becomes the truth. Vladimir Lenin
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimirle132031.html

A lie told often enough becomes the truth. Vladimir Lenin
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimirle132031.html

Beware Gull Island and Dwight Ball and 40 cent power

I read with interest the latest post on Uncle Gnarley's Blog 

MUSKRAT WILL DESTROY UTILITY SYSTEM IN 2020

This guest feature by PlanetNL certainly has no problem getting our power rates to 30 cents - even while using conservative estimates. 

As Sue's blog has pointed out many times - population - is and has been a real problem since the Fisheries Moratorium.  That one disaster cost our province at least 100,000 people  between the 1992 and now. It was the destruction of a resource fundamental to us being solvent and growing. 

The PlanetNL feature has not yet accounted for that part of the problem. 

30-35 cent power does not yet include the out-migration - that will absolutely grow exponentially as power becomes unaffordable.It does not yet include the significant numbers of those who will move to fixed income status as our population ages abnormally - without offsetting numbers of babies and youth. 

None of the soon-to-be pensioners have a plan that accommodates 4 or 5 times increase in power rates. None of the government administered programs such as CPP or the OAS were designed to deal with this runaway price on an essential such as power. 

Any attempt by government to subsidize those on low fixed incomes means that those taxpayers/ratepayers left will be subject to even more expense. 

Small to Medium size businesses - not in the industrial sector - will be unable to pay the electric bill without passing it to a consumer who cannot afford to pay it. 

I expect the next installment from PlanetNL to contain pretty catastrophic projections for cost of power as the author includes some of these other factors into the equation. 

I won't say I look forward to reading it - but I look forward to seeing real data and realistic projections finally coming to the fore. We as a people are closing our collective eyes - holding our breath - as we await the boom about to fall directly on top of us. It is likely to suck all the goodwill, hope, and trust out of us as we try and find a way to save this place from complete devastation. 

How do we fix this?

Well as a province that has the 4th largest utility in the country and the second largest underground power station in the world - and possessing first class natural renewable and non-renewable natural resources - we also - unarguably - have had the worst management of those resources.

To fix this - we must stop Muskrat Falls now. We must show the fortitude necessary to withstand corporate leeches who will be up-in-arms that their undeserving gravy train will end. We must conduct a forensic audit and use all the legal tools necessary to rid ourselves of the Emera deal. 

Finishing Muskrat and continuing on with this fiasco means we will have to give away our remaining resources - rightfully belonging to our future generations - to simply stay afloat. Pushing this out is not an alternative. 

This is going to need read leadership, guts, and tenacity. This is going to require a wholesale change in our thinking and if the current politicians will not do it -They must be told to get out of the way.  

Stan Marshall - who has some qualifications for success in the sector (primarily in regulated utilities with reasonable guarantees of profitability) has been of little value here as:

1) he failed to replace some executive in Nalcor,

2) he remains in an otherwise (government exempted) conflict of interest situation with his personal interests in competing entities. 

3) he failed to report existing reports in a timely manner

4) he has not demonstrated the extreme due diligence needed right now (does not know enough about independent contractors) 

5) he has failed to call for a forensic audit despite the red flags

6) he is not engaged enough to make Nalcor his only and first priority

The entire executive of Nalcor must be replaced and we must name a new Board of Directors. The government must stop Muskrat Falls immediately and bring in forensic auditors. When that is completed - government must review all options and lay them on the table for the people and then utilize a referendum on those choices. 

In the coming months we should expect to see government trying to bail itself out with a new potential regarding Gull Island. Do not let them explore touching this asset until we have decided a complete course of action for Muskrat. They will GIVE AWAY another resource if we let them. 

This is a time when we need all our people to pull on the same oar and use our brightest minds to seek a solution - not based on 4 year elections and inadequate solutions. 

Right now Dwight Ball is not engaging with all such people. He is playing a political game with lots of spin to save his political hide and whatever else he may be engaged in. 

The Corporate Muskrat world  is working hard to find a suitable replacement for Ball - should he not be able to continue to deliver for them while maintaining the ability to be reelected. 

The MHA's in the House of Assembly had better buckle down and demand answers and become at least somewhat educated on hydro-power and our history. As it sits now they are woefully ignorant of the situation we are in and possess no ability to fix it.

Do you want a future for your kids and grand-kids in Newfoundland and Labrador? If so speak now. 

Either Newfoundland and Labrador will return to being a wonderful place for all of us to live and raise families in or it will remain a playground for the super-rich to extract more personal wealth from. 

Time is not on our side. 

When I see the media focus on the Dobbin/Williams racket or the where's Costco game - I acknowledge we are have a tough road ahead and the odds of us surviving are pretty minuscule. 

Onward we go.

Quebec controls our power - Emera shareholders rejoice?

In 2011 I wrote a piece on the proposed Emera deal. The big talking point for politicians was to avoid big bad Quebec and Hydro-Quebec.

At the time I asked what protections were in place to keep Emera out of the hands of Hydro-Quebec.

Please read the earlier post HERE

The Government of  Nova Scotia may have some protections against the takeover of Nova Scotia Power (wholly owned subsidiary of Emera) however the parts of Emera important to our province have no such protection.

What has changed since 2011? Hydro-Quebec has. They have announced a new direction.

The Crown Company will back off new large scale hydro while optimizing current assets and completing those started (Romaine 3 and 4), concentrate on energy efficiency, transportation electrification, environmentally sustainable management practices and ...

Putting aside for a moment the exceptional organization, human resources, performance, and tight governmental directions for the corporation - HQ continues to plan 15-20 years out with measurable targets and results.

The ... above represents the real problem for Newfoundland and Labrador. It is the promise to double the profits and size of HQ from $13.5 billion to $27 billion.

They have formed a special new group within the company to focus on mergers and acquisitions.

Specifically their sights are set on assets in Europe, the US and the Maritimes.

Imagine if they follow through - Emera shareholders may be in for a bonanza and HQ will have us going out and in both on the Island and Labrador. Even the line that crosses at Soldiers pond may be partly owned by HQ. Imagine that!

So all the people who pushed Emera and Muskrat down our throats may be in for a big payday - if they are shareholders of Emera. In my opinion the problem with cutting a deal with HQ on the Lower Churchill was never really about avoiding Quebec it was about making sure the partner was a venue that was available for share acquisition. No direct money for the elite if Hydro-Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro cut a deal.

HQ CEO - Éric Martel says, “The idea is to increase the benefit for Quebec, to enrich Hydro-Québec and Quebec at the same time, without having to increase rates too much. So this will help us meet our engagement of maintaining rate increase to the cost of inflation, or less”.

Imagine if our leaders did the same.

Incompetence of Premier, Govt., Martin and Nalcor Executive

In 1971, _________ created __________ which is a subsidiary of ___________. With over 30 years' experience in large-scale projects, ____________ offers a complete range of services in generation and transmission plant engineering, project management and construction.

Over the years, _______ has also developed particular expertise in remote areas and multicultural environments, as evidenced by its role as prime contractor for one of the largest hydroelectric developments in the world— ___________ of northern ____________—which supplies over 50% of the electricity generated by ___________. This was further demonstrated in the _______________, where ___________ personnel constructed a 220-kV transmission line at altitudes of 4,000 metres or more. Every project presents major challenges, and ____________ has the qualified people to meet them.

Part of the considerable know-how __________ has accumulated over the years rests on the solid relationships it has forged with the people affected by its projects. Developing business partnerships and working in close cooperation with the ________, __________, and ________ communities, for example, as well as working to maximize regional economic spinoffs all attest to __________ expertise in this area.

As master builders, __________ personnel are high-calibre professionals. A multidisciplinary team oversees the completion of every phase of a project, from draft-design, detail engineering, procurement and construction management to environmental monitoring and follow-up.

For ________ clients, the benefits are clear—30 years of experience in managing and completing large-scale construction projects in the energy industry, on schedule and within budget.

Can you fill in the blanks? Answers HERE

If the answers included Nalcor - then we might be okay. If Ed Martin was Thierry Vandal and Gilbert Bennett was Real Laporte then overruns would not be considered "normal" and "expected".

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve competence to be "normal" and "expected". To make matters worse - the nit-wits responsible for mismanagement are not replaced - fired.

You see if Nalcor and the government of Newfoundland and Labrador had sought the advice of Hydro Quebec we might have expected the project to be on-time and on-budget; we might have expected that real customers would be found; we would have expected our energy rates to be stable; we would have expected major industry to consume power and create LONG-term jobs.

Danny - Kathy - and the Tories played the Hydro-Quebec fear and hate card and as a result we have a mess - and our children will have a worse mess. We had "experts" remember - the best "experts" remember?

If an 800 million overrun has become "normal" and "expected" it's time to change our attitudes and our government.

Fire the Nalcor Executive and call an election.

A Battle to the Bottom? Muskrat Nightmare!

All - every bit - bad news for us. 

Below please read this story in the Nova Scotia Chronicle Herald (Business):

Acquiring cheaper power essential as Maritime Link costs loom Nova Scotia’s Liberal government is about to hold discussions with Quebec about the possibility of acquiring hydroelectricity.

Energy Minister Andrew Younger told me Friday the talks were supposed to happen before the start of the holiday season but conflicting schedules didn’t allow it. Instead, the tete-a-tete is to occur in the coming weeks.

“The purpose of this is to look at what import options may be available (and) if they benefit ratepayers,” Younger wrote in an email.

As mentioned in Friday’s column, Quebec Premier Pauline Marois has decided to use cheap electricity as the centrepiece of a new development strategy for her province. Before Christmas, her Parti Quebecois government announced it would be offering cut-rate electricity to new manufacturers and industrial users in exchange for job creation.

Quebec’s economy has been sputtering for the last year, and the minority PQ government has been under pressure to do something to spark an economic revival.

Observers in Nova Scotia also believe Quebec’s plan is to become aggressive before the completion of the Muskrat Falls hydro project in Newfoundland and Labrador. If Newfoundland decides to follow Quebec’s lead and use electricity as a loss leader to attract new development, it could be a battle to the bottom.

In the meantime, Nova Scotia ratepayers are paying about $1.5 billion to build the Maritime Link undersea cable to bring Muskrat Falls power to Nova Scotia in exchange for 20 per cent of the power generated there for 30 years. The issue for ratepayers here is the cost of that electricity.
The price of the Nova Scotia block of power under the Maritime Link deal, according to the province’s consumer advocate, John Merrick, is about double the current market rate. It is essential that Nova Scotia gain access to additional power from Newfoundland and Labrador at market rates, which could be blended with the higher-priced Maritime block.

The Maritime Link arrangement was not approved by the Nova Scotia regulator until there was some kind of deal securing access to the additional market-rate electricity from Newfoundland’s Crown-owned utility, Nalcor. The blending of the two rates is supposed to make the acquisition of Muskrat Falls electricity more palatable to Nova Scotia ratepayers.

The sputtering Quebec economy, along with some of its hydroelectricity being replaced with low-cost natural gas by U.S. customers, has meant Hydro-Quebec has excess capacity. Nova Scotia may be hedging its bets if it can acquire some of Hydro-Quebec’s surplus electricity.

Nova Scotia’s energy minister told me he believes Nova Scotians are protected despite Quebec’s aggressive marketing plan. Younger said in his email that the Maritime Link deal is based on the market price of electricity, and if the market price drops, it will also be reflected in the price Nova Scotians pay for the energy.

While in opposition, Younger and the Liberals encouraged the former NDP government to investigate acquiring power from Quebec as an alternative to the Newfoundland and Labrador arrangement. Now that he is in authority, Younger said he was interested when Quebec first made contact about a possible meeting to talk about electricity rates.

He said he was told by Quebec representatives that the NDP government wasn’t interested in meeting. Although there isn’t any evidence to prove the Dexter government refused, Younger said it is “interesting they never met.”

It appears Quebec wants some kind of deal, and blending the Quebec price with the Maritime Link price could have a dramatic impact on Nova Scotia power rates.

At the very least, from a Nova Scotia perspective, it is an opportunity worth exploring. But it may also ruffle the feathers of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Muskrat: Example of Dunderdale's "new" Communication

Beneficiaries of the Muskrat deal:
Emera shareholders
Industry Nova Scotia
People of Nova Scotia
Company owners - engineering, construction, project management
Hydro-Quebec
Losers of the Muskrat deal:
The people and next 4 generations of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians


So the Premier was on a tear yesterday, Muskrat Love - here and there - Muskrat Love everywhere. Kathy Dunderdale has officially done us in. This deal is the worst deal we could have made on such a resource. It not only is a giveaway - it is also a concrete block tied to the feet of our childrens' future.

The polls - the by-election loss - the loss of Jerome Kennedy - and of Tom Osborne - will not stop this Premier from burying us with this fiasco. Kathy Dunderdale said that her government needs to communicate better - so she has started.

So here we go:

Quotes by the Premier yesterday - thanks to the Telegram story

1. “This is a project with tremendous vision. Our province will be practically 100 per cent renewable, powered by clean, emissions free energy, and our electricity customers can bank on stable electricity rates,”

2. “We are shouldering our unshrinkable responsibility to leave no stone unturned, no resource untapped and to ground Newfoundland and Labrador’s future firmly and securely in the solid bedrock of sustainable and renewable prosperity.”

3. “When the greatest moments of our history are recollected long generations from now, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will remember the choice that Prime Minister Harper made  — the choice to stand beside our people in advancing Muskrat Falls.”

So the deal is - it's great - it's perfect - best it could be -  and you all are gonna like it. The new communication strategy has begun. Sounds exactly like the last communication strategy - tell everybody is good and therefore it will be.

So the first quote tells us that we can bank on stable electricity rates. Okay stable - but how high?

The second - the no resource untapped beauty - sure we will tap all our resources but not for our benefit - that's the problem and she certainly has placed our future in bedrock - buried, stuck, sinking.

And as for the third one - the "long generations from now" yeah that is going to be a long ways out alright - and by the time we remember Harper for "stand beside our people" our grandchildren will condemn both the Premier and the Prime Minister for this mess. Our Premier took us to the edge of the cliff and the Prime Minister pushed us. Down we went hand in hand. But wait - the Prime Minister had a safety line connected.

Meanwhile Dunderdale sits up on the hill she so abruptly shut down - while still under a cloak - and bellows to the people beneath her, "this is really good for you, it is really really good for you, it's good really, look at the really really good work we are doing."

New Communication? No - just the drive to ram this project through at whatever cost.

As for the Opposition parties - they have been left to watch our people suffer - without a dime to do anything about it. Gee it sure will be great to become the government a decade from now. Dunderdale, Williams, and Martin long gone - and our revenues with them.

It turns my stomach to even watch the news - the discussion of this project makes me physically ill. The lengths to which the hidden masters will go to own everything and when not owning control the development of everything - is really unmatched in mature democracies.

As for the Federal Government - sure it's a great deal they gave us right? Just like the rest of the things they have done for Newfoundland and Labrador.

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.

What did Hydro-Quebec want? What did we agree to?

I'm sure we can all agree on one thing - Hydro-Quebec does not give up a thing unless something greater of value is there for it.

In 1999 when CFLCo was threatened with going broke - our province sought ways to generate more revenue into the Corporation. This of course was another disastrous consequence of the Upper Churchill deal wherein under certain circumstances HQ could invest money in CFLCo in return for common shares.

It is of course arguable that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador could keep CFLCo afloat with tax dollars - thus avoiding a complete HQ takeover of the Upper Churchill - however Brian and Deano went for a "new" deal.

The Guaranteed Winter Availability Contract (GWAC) was born and with that "new" rights for Hydro-Quebec.

The way CFLCo functioned was a 2/3 (NL) 1/3 (HQ) ownership/management situation wherein we had majority shareholder rights. The new agreement changed that to requiring an approval from HQ on all important business/contract/management issues.

Let's get one thing clear - HQ did not have to accept GWAC - they had rights to power anyway and had them cheap. The GWAC gave us the better deal on the power sales at market value. Therefore it is certain that HQ got something out of the deal.

Despite HQ's winning protest and position that the Upper Churchill Contract could not be changed - leaving us the poor owners of an extremely lucrative resource; HQ got a change and it was definitely in their favour.

So what then was HQ after? Why did they "give" us a deal for power at market value?

Even the current government is out touting HQ as the devil - opposed to Newfoundland and Labrador. So in that case what did we give up in 1999?

Here's the wording in part;

Part of the Shareholders Agreement among NL Hydro, Hydro-Quebec, and CFLCo June 18th 1999

Article 3 Board of Directors

3.4 Special Majority Decisions of the Board of Directors

The following decisions will require the approval of a majority of the directors on the Board of Directors, including at least one director nominated by NL Hydro and one director nominated by Hydro-Quebec on the Board of Directors:

3.4.6

...the entering into, amendment or termination of any Material Contract to which CFLCo or any Subsidiary of CFLCo is a party or to which CFLCo or any Subsidiary of CFLCo may become a party, unless such entering into, amendment or termination has been previously approved in a budget approved under Section 3.4.2 or 3.4.3;

Material Contract defined: "Material Contract" means (i) any contract involving a monetary commitment of CFLCo or having a value to CFLCo of $10 million or more in the aggregate and (ii) any contract which restricts CFLCo from carrying on its Business, including the contracts listed on Schedule E;

Business defined: "Business" means the business of CFLCo which shall be limited to the following purposes and objects:
(a) to produce or otherwise acquire and to transmit and to sell electricity;
(b) to harness or otherwise make use of water for the purpose of producing hydroelectric and hydraulic power and for any other purpose;

Our politicians need to all come clean. Why did HQ want the change above? - and now that they have it - what did they want it for?

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?

U.S. set to overtake Saudi in oil output: IEA

By MarketWatch

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.

PIRA Projections? - Muskrat Nightmare?

The company that supplied Nalcor and the government of Newfoundland and Labrador with projected oil costs has a new focus:

PIRA Energy Group held a seminar that I hope our province attended - before sanctioning the debt elephant and the Muskrat Falls inferior development plan.

It's time for our politicians to stop ignoring or downplaying the shale play in North America. The price of oil - which our reports on Muskrat rely so heavily on - may be taking an absolute turn downward. If this were to happen then our estimates are dead wrong - our export ability is dead, our price for domestic power would be too high, and the debt carried by taxpayers and monies paid by ratepayers would be unacceptable.

This type of error would compare to our failure to recognize the value of hydro - as oil prices soared. Now the opposite may happen - and we need to fully examine this possibility. Just as our mistake in the late 60's has netted Quebec a windfall - this project has the same potential to make multimillionaires of a few while hanging an albatross around the neck of Newfoundland and Labrador for an equivalent number of generations.

Please Read HERE

How about the government show us the latest PIRA report to them on projected oil prices. Where is the new report?

Also please advise if the formula used for projections to determine price of oil for our Hebron equity is the same as that being used for Muskrat.

We need to do more than be force fed fuzzy commercials, dazzled with hotel announcements, and reassured by MHA's who clearly do not have all the information. We need to stop this deal now - have the works go to the Public Utilities Board - which in turn would have complete authority to call any and all witnesses, check the primary data and estimates of Nalcor, and review the energy marketplace for the next 30 years.

We need to be cognizant of the fact that the project estimates have increased by over a billion dollars - which the government says is because of improved engineering and infrastructure plans.

Let's take them at their word. Why were the plans deficient to begin with if we have the BEST experts doing them? If the people, opposition, and media did not complain loudly about the first MHI, Navigant, and Joint Panel Review findings - would the government have proceeded with less than acceptable infrastructure?

If the increased costs are largely due to improper costing - then how do we expect to achieve a 10% maximum on over-runs?

There may very well be a project that works for the Lower Churchill - a domestic project/s that could see partnership between energy intense secondary processing industries and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - where transmission costs and energy loss could be minimized by using the power in Labrador. This of course does not include "johnny come lately" panic for Muskrat power when the Emera deal for Nova Scotia power may be in jeopardy and the potential export sales non-existent. We need to start from scratch and determine what is the best project/s for the Lower Churchill resource and proceed from there.

The television commercials and media buy to sell us something we have no say in - is throwing money for roads, hospitals, schools, and health down the drain.

If the government really wants the people to support the project - then send it to the experts we pay to determine the real costs, risks, and options for domestic supply IF and when we may need it.

This project has all the potential of being a second Upper Churchill nightmare - wherein WE make a mistake again.

We keep hearing that could not happen because of all the experts we have. Well how did it happen with the Upper Churchill?

How did the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro experts get it wrong on privatization?

How did experts with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro make so many errors in predicting power shortages over the past 30 years?

If and when the Lower Churchill is developed business will make money on the construction, engineering, and management of the project. We cannot just do a project to make business happy now by filling their coffers with contracts - that we have no ability to pay without extreme hardship to our people.

While we are at it - have a look at the mess in Nova Scotia regarding this deal and potential partnership and ask yourself is Emera in this? Are we guaranteed that Emera is in this?

 Please read Here and look at the comments from Nova Scotians. 

We are not yet in a position to sanction this deal and the people must step up and force the government to retreat from this fiasco.

Williams - The De Terminator

When one of the Directors of Alderon Iron Ore Corp. addressed the St. John's Board of Trade a week ago - the purported virtues of the Muskrat Falls deal were not the only items discussed.

The representative of Alderon also extolled the virtues of his own investments while taking some quality time to attack some unknown and some known critics of the hydro deal.

As was predicted by Sue's Blog a few weeks ago - the businessman also took the time to use Russell Wangersky's words to demonstrate how the government and Nalcor have been supplying all kinds of information and that critics may be upset with the media because:

"I don’t think it’s correct to say that investigative work isn’t being done. Perhaps it just hasn’t led to what some people want to hear."

Of course what the businessman failed to mention was the numerous editorials Wangersky has done that have questioned process and details of the proposed energy deal. Then again that would not have satisfied the businessman's argument.


The businessman also talked about his massive land development - set to break ground next year - in the City of St. John's west end. He mentioned having acquired the land 15 years ago and that the development could be worth 5 billion dollars. What land was he referring to? What land was acquired 15 years ago? What land was acquired when the businessman was a politician?

Just as a side note to VOCM the businessman while talking about slander and libel and lies - he stated "we must hold people accountable for their words". Maybe the open-line and back-talk hosts should remember the businessman's words the next time they think about allowing callers like "bob" to out and out lie about a private citizen.

Continuing with the "we must hold people accountable for their words" mantra - how is it that the big deal now is to power mines with Muskrat power and that the potential 15 billion in mining projects in Labrador could be jeopardized if the Muskrat deal is squashed.

Now the businessman - a Director of Alderon - a company that has strict corporate governance for its executive - was clearly following those guidelines by pushing the need for Muskrat to power the mines. When that businessman was the Premier the power was for:

Of the total 4.9 terawatt hours per year of power to be produced, initially 2.0 terawatts will be allocated to the Island to meet domestic demand and to displace expensive, dirty bunker "C" oil used in Holyrood; 

Approximately 1.0 terawatt hours per year, or 20 per cent of the output of Muskrat Falls, will be provided to Emera Inc. for use in Nova Scotia.  

The remaining power will be sold into the Maritime Provinces and the New England market place. Nalcor Energy will be able to sell power in these jurisdictions as a result of gaining existing transmission rights from Emera Inc. The total cost of the project will be approximately $6.2 billion 

Clearly holding people accountable for their words - does not mean much.

Will his words of 6.2 Billion hold-up? It used to be the total cost of the project but now the businessman suggests to us that perhaps 8 billion might be the price.

Now further on the Alderon situation - where the power supply is of critical importance to the development. Was the government of Newfoundland and Labrador under the Premiership of businessman Danny Williams unaware of Kami? No of course not. The day after the businessman announced his resignation as Premier - Alderon announced that it had raised over 16 million on a share offering. Monies raised in part to "advance" its Kami property in Labrador.

And so vested was Alderon Resources in this project - that in October 2011 it changed it's Corporate name to Alderon Iron Ore Corp to reflect that importance.

I do not create the facts - others have. How much in business - big corporate business - is happenstance?

Gary Norris
Danny Williams
Todd Burlingame
Brian Dalton

all to the Alderon Team. They list the acquisition of the businessman as a Director for the company as an impressive accomplishment ranked up there with the 490 million tonnes of ore, pre-tax NPV of over 3 billion dollars, completing a 40 million dollar investment, and commencement of trading on the NYSE.

The laws of the province should reflect a reasonable time-frame for government MHA's, Cabinet Ministers, Premiers, senior officials to become involved with any company that has any interest in a file that the politician/bureaucrat had worked directly with.

The time should reflect the relative power the individuals office had. My suggestion as follows:

MHA's 2 years
Cabinet Minister 4 years
Premier 5 years
Deputy or Assistant Deputy Minister 5 years

All within the span of two years - the former Premier announced a deal to develop Muskrat Falls, became a special advisor to Alderon, became a Director in Alderon, began speaking publicly on the importance of the Muskrat Falls project to Alderon.

The businessman also articulated to the Board of Trade that:

"debate is good"
"asking questions is important"
but
"opposition for the sake of opposition is wrong"
"critics who knowingly put misinformation in the public domain are irresponsible and are a disservice to the people of the province"

The businessman will determine what debate is good, what opposition is acceptable, which critics are responsible?

He then asked "what in the world is to be gained" by Ed Martin or Gil Bennett by forcing a bad project on their own province.

So the businessman will determine that people opposed to the project might have less than honourable intentions but the people who are for it have nothing but the best intentions. Once again Danny will determine that.

He has also determined as evidenced by such remarks - that these individuals can't be wrong, might just be making a mistake.

How many politicians, officials, lawyers, and experts got it wrong with the Upper Churchill?
How many Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro officials and politicians and business people got it wrong when privatization was attempted?

The businessman will be the De Terminator on all these matters?

Then how many times - including in the businessman's speech to the Board of Trade did he state "no more giveaways"? Where's all the ore going Mr. Businessman? How much of the ore will be processed here in Newfoundland and Labrador Mr. Businessman?

Alderon Iron Ore Corp. (TSX: ADV) (NYSE AMEX: AXX) (“Alderon" or the “Company”) is pleased to announce that it has signed a definitive subscription agreement dated April 13, 2012 (the "Subscription Agreement") with Hebei Iron & Steel Group Co., Ltd. (“Hebei”), China’s largest steel producer. Hebei will make a strategic investment into both Alderon and its Kami iron ore project (the "Kami Project") in an aggregate amount of C$194 million, in exchange for 19.9% of the outstanding common shares of Alderon (the "Private Placement") and a 25% interest in a newly formed limited partnership that will be established to own the Kami Project.

A newly formed limited partnership? Who owns that?

The businessman will not influence my decision on the proposed Muskrat Falls project, or the land project, or the fibre optic deal. The businessman will not be the De Terminator of what is legitimate or reasonable criticism - or who is or is not an acceptable critic.

Time for a referendum - without question - and let all FACTS be debated openly. What people determine from those facts - of course - is entirely up to them - not the De Terminator.

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.

Province's MHAs pale in Comparison to Business Leaders

As we review the performance of the people involved, impacted by and/or responsible for the proposed Muskrat Falls development - big business shines.

If we as people had MHA's who performed close to the level of big business in representing their shareholders interests - we would not be considering this Muskrat Falls fiasco.

If a business has any opportunity to get it on an 8 billion dollar spend - the decsion gate is clear.

Let's look at what it considers:

1. Can the business make any money on this venture?
2. How much money can the business make on this venture?
3. How many years can the business profit from working on or for this project?
4. What will the business cost be to deliver product, service, manufacture or consulting to the project?
5. What will be the increase in the value of a share and therefore the value of the business?

Let's look at what it does not consider:

1.  Who is paying the bill? (other than if the party was not creditworthy)
2. How will it impact this community or that community?
3. Are the owners of the natural resource getting value from the proposed deal?
4. How will this proposed project affect the province's debt?
5. How many long-term jobs will be created for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

This is why I am not concerned or surprised that businesses around the province and the country are supporting the proposed development.

I am concerned about the mindset of our MHA's who are there to represent us - the people.

Let's look at what they should consider:

1. Who is paying the bill?
2. How will it impact the ratepayer, taxpayer, and shareholder of the resource?
3. How many long-term jobs will be created for billions of dollars?
4. How much value can we add to shareholder?
5. Is this development needed for domestic supply?
6. Is this the only alternative?
7. Can we sell this power competitively in the export market?
8. Will the shareholder subsidize cheap power for business, another province, or American Export?
9. How will the increased price of power to domestic consumers affect our seniors, low/middle income families, and local small business (recessionary impact)?
10. Have I achieved support from the people I represent as an MHA?

As for Nova Scotia - they are playing it coy:

1. The proposed project will go to the PUB there - while Newfoundland and Labrador MHA's are preventing the same process here.

2. They do not have to buy in before the project starts.

3. They can play one energy competitor off against another for the best price - thereby eliminating Muskrat supply or reducing the price wherein the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have to pay more for their power so Nova Scotians get cheaper power.

4. Currently the NDP government in Nova Scotia is in political trouble as it relates to Emera - where people are suffering the impacts of energy privatization that occurred at the same time as we prevented it.

5. Nova Scotia is presenting itself as the energy hub as it continues to attract industry away from Newfoundland and Labrador and to themselves.

As for the Mining exporters in Labrador - they are waiting like the wolf - we are the prey:

1. They are quickly becoming the raison du jour for the proposed development.

2. They have already threatened that without this type of infrastructure they may cancel or downsize development.

3. As other reasons for Muskrat development are destroyed - domestic island supply and export - their hands are wringing for cheaper subsidized power.

4. If they become the only reason for Muskrat - their demand for cheap prices will increase as other competitors (Hydro-Quebec) offer a cheaper price. All the while of course - Quebec gets secondary infrastructure to ship out our raw resources.

5. They have government's ear.

As for performance of CEO's - dead last in my opinion - Ed Martin

Danny Willams - Alderon - Muskrat Falls

What's your opinion?

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics - Alderon 

Below please find a section under: Third Party Relationships - Conflict of Interest
 
Conflicts of interest arise where an individual’s position or responsibilities with the Company present an opportunity for personal gain apart from the normal rewards of employment, officership ordirectorship, to the detriment of the Company. They also arise where an individual’s personal interests are inconsistent with those of the Company and create conflicting loyalties. Such conflicting loyalties can cause an employee, director, officer or consultant to give preference to personal interests in situations where corporate responsibilities should come first. Employees, officers, directors and consultants of the Company shall perform the responsibilities of their positions on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Company and free from the influence of personal considerations and relationships. (emphasis added)

Quote by Danny Williams to Board of Trade - Reported by CBC Newfoundland and Labrador

"I most certainly would not jeopardize years of working for this province or my own personal reputation for the sake of Muskrat Falls or a mining company"

2011 Annual Report Alderon

Section: Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Alderon depends on a single mineral project.

The Kami Property accounts for all of Alderon's mineral resources and exclusively represents the current potential for the future generation of revenue. The costs, timing and complexities of upgrading the mineralized material at the Kami Property to proven and probable reserves may be greater than Alderon anticipates. Mineral exploration and development involves a high degree of risk that even a combination of careful evaluation, experience and knowledge cannot eliminate and few properties that are explored are ultimately developed into producing mines. Any adverse development affecting the Kami Property will have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial position, results of operations and cash flows The successful start of mining operations at, and the development of, the Kami Property into a commercially viable mine cannot be assured.

Alderon needs to enter into contracts with external service and utility providers.

Mining, processing, development and exploration activities depend, to one degree or another, on adequate infrastructure. In order to develop a mine at the Kami Property, we will need to negotiate and conclude various agreements with external service and utility providers for rail transportation, power and port access, and these are important determinants that affect capital and operating costs. The inability to conclude any such agreements could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows and render the development of a mine on the Kami Property unviable.
------------------------------------------------------------

Danny Williams sits on the Board of Directors Alderon

Roger Grimes - For the Record

Former Premier Roger Grimes will join me on Talk with Sue tonight.

This will be a 90 minute program dedicated to the Muskrat Falls deal.

It will be an important conversation for a number of reasons:

1. As a former Premier - he is among a very few that can relate to the job that Premier Dunderdale has.

2. As the Premier who signed the Voisey's Bay deal he can relate to the listener - the comparison between that project and the current proposed Muskrat Falls deal, he can relate to the listener - the sanction processes used for such developments, he can relate to the listener - where potential conflicts may be, he can relate to the listener - former proposed deals on the Lower Churchill, he can relate to the listener - the balance that must be found between industrial development and the maximization of benefits to the people when developing natural resources, he can relate to the listener - his concerns regarding the proposed Muskrat deal based on his experiences as Premier, as a Cabinet Minister, and now as an ordinary citizen, taxpayer, and ratepayer, and he can relate to the listener his experiences with Hydro-Quebec and Quebec.

3. When he was Premier - Danny Williams was the Leader of the Opposition and demanded certain things in the House of Assembly relative to the Voisey's Bay deal - then Danny became Premier and since then Roger has been retired and is unable to directly participate in the upcoming House of Assembly debate. What would he demand if he were in the HOA now?

4. As Premier he was privy to many direct discussions and reports from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, the state of power supply, the choices for new supply, the price of power both industrially and domestic, and the governance of Crown Corporations.

5. It will allow the listener to hear in totality the reasoning behind his concerns about this deal. It will not be interrupted by commercials or shortened based on time restrictions of other programs both talk-shows and news outlets.

This is the type of program that the new social media accommodates. It adds an additional democratic tool that people can avail of. It helps to offset the disproportionate time allotted to government spin paid for by our tax dollars.

More and more in the future we will see these types of programs and learn to use them for information, debate, and discourse. As our political system is now - with the apathy we suffer - we are going to need this medium.

To hear this program join me live tonight Press HERE

Desperate Dunderdale Disingenuous?

The Premier chose Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador to extend a challenge to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Prove her wrong on Muskrat?

First Ms. Dunderdale - the challenge is to you not the voters who pay your salary or the ratepayers who pay for electricity generation, transmission, and distribution. You prove that this and only this proposed development of Muskrat Falls is the best option for us. You prove that the costs are acceptable. You prove that there is an urgent need for power on the Island. You prove the benefits for us of green energy for Nova Scotia. You prove that there is not a better deal to be had. You prove that there are not other and better options. To date - you have not proven these things. To date - you have had reports based on your government's and Nalcor's assumptions.

Now let's take it a little further. You want citizens of the province to prove why the deal is bad. Okay let's say we accept the challenge - will you and your government allot public funds for other research to be completed? Will you and your government provide access to ALL information you are using to make your decisions on? Your government and Nalcor have spent tens of millions of dollars of our money to prove out your theory - now give us the equivalent to prove you wrong.

This is not unheard of and unreasonable - it was offered to ordinary citizens and groups regarding the development of the White Rose field. That is a non-renewable resource that we are not bearing the debt of - Muskrat is renewable and will put us in severe debt - that we will service.

Last week you took it a step further - you gave a speech of fear to the Board of Trade. In that address you made many statements about Quebec and Hydro-Quebec. Prove those statements. Prove that the fear is warranted.

Let's just say this - the following are basic reasons why people oppose this deal:

1. Some citizens simply do not want the river dammed. They do not need to prove anything to hold that ideology.

2. Labradorians have expressed that they will not receive enough benefit from the development - as those who are adjacent to it. They do not need to prove that the benefits do not satisfy them.

3. Your primary reason for this proposed deal has changed more times than we can reasonably keep track of. You pick which one of these paths to disprove.

4. You have not proven that we need this power for the Island. The statements be they referring to 2017 or 2019 as the time when we will not be able to service the Island's power needs are troubling and should cause grave concern regarding the planning competency of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

5. The continued statement about us contributing to "greening up" Canada is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever heard. You do some research and tell us what our current contribution of 5000 MW's from the Upper Churchill equates to on a per-capita basis of "greening up".

6. You made contemptuous in your BOT speech that Hydro-Quebec in your words: "Think about that! Does anybody have any confidence that, when mines in this province go to Hydro-Québec looking for energy for development in Labrador, they are going to get the best industrial rates in Atlantic Canada? Not likely. Hydro Quebec’s history is to seek the best deal for itself..." Yes Premier that is the point and we want you to prove that this current proposed deal is the best for us.

7. You are not the Premier of Atlantic Canada (Atlantica) or the Premier of mining companies or publicly traded companies you are the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador. Prove that what you are doing is best for us - not them.

8. Prove that you are supplying ALL information to us and that none is being withheld.

9. The people are concerned that they are being bullied into this deal - wherein if you ask questions or are opposed to this proposed undertaking - they will be called partisan, naysayers, armchair critics, or worse. The people are concerned that there may be opposition to the deal inside the walls of Nalcor and government but they cannot speak for fear of repercussion. The same could be true for businesses and organizations who rely on government support either fiscally or from a policy perspective.

10. You have not proven that other options for generation or development of any part of the Lower Churchill are not more beneficial than the deal you have proposed.

Either you are being sincere or disingenuous when you challenge the people who employ you. If you are serious - show us the cash, the human resources, and process to respond to your challenge. If not this is just more smoke to cover a rotten deal.

Premier resorts to lying to sell flawed Muskrat deal

The following are statements from the Premier's Board of Trade speech:

1."But that has not stopped Quebec from finding ways to block and interfere with our access to their grid"

2. "Indeed, as we witnessed between 2006 and 2010, Quebec’s actions, through its regulatory process, forced us to reconsider Gull Island for the initial stage of the Lower Churchill development."

3."When we apply creative thinking with good business practices we can avoid the yoke of geography that Quebec has tried to place around us."

4. "Quebec was trying to make us choose between a deal with them or no deal at all. They thought we would have to slam on the brakes of our own economic development."

5. "This is the essence of the choice before us today: slam on the brakes and wait to see what happens in three decades, placing our future in the hands of Quebec."

6. "They understand that if Muskrat Falls does not go ahead, what happens in Labrador from that point on lies squarely in the hands of Hydro-Québec and the province of Quebec."

7. "Does anybody have any confidence that, when mines in this province go to Hydro-Québec looking for energy for development in Labrador, they are going to get the best industrial rates in Atlantic Canada? Not likely. Hydro Quebec’s history is to seek the best deal for itself, which likely means power rates approximating alternatives such as diesel-generated power. This would be disaster with hundreds, indeed thousands, of jobs in this province hanging in the balance"

8. "It breaks Quebec’s hold." (Premier referring to Muskrat deal)

9. "It will not happen if Quebec is deciding how big we can grow"

10. "Escaping Quebec’s predatory grip on our province’s economy is absolutely fundamental if we are to position ourselves to shift from reliance on diminishing non-renewable resources to a renewable-energy economy that will sustain us for generations to come"

Premier Kathy Dunderdale wants us to fear Quebec. Why? So she can proceed with the proposed Muskrat Falls deal.

The Premier insinuates that if we do not do THIS deal NOW - we will never be in control of our own destiny. Why? So she can proceed with the proposed Muskrat Falls deal.

The Premier wants you and I to believe that Quebec wants to cripple our economic development forever. Why? So she can proceed with the proposed Muskrat Falls deal.

Let's for this one moment take the Premier and her dire warnings seriously. Okay - then what twit would partner with a publicly traded company (Emera) when they are able to be taken over by Hydro-Quebec?

You see according to Dunderdale and former Premier Danny Williams - Quebec and its crown corporation Hydro-Quebec would do ANYTHING to stop Newfoundland and Labrador from moving forward. Anything would then likely include the purchase of a publicly traded company vulnerable to takeover.

So then Premier Dunderdale - how are you going to close that loophole?

Well the Premier would say - Hydro-Quebec would not do that. Well Premier why not? Is it possible Premier - can it happen?

Remember the Upper Churchill? Newfoundland and Labrador did not believe that oil prices could or would rise to where they are today. Quebec in financing the project did believe and therefore made a superior deal for its people - one which has created tens of thousands of jobs in Quebec and insured that Quebecers paid the least possible cost for electricity.

The Premier's response? Well - lock out Hydro-Quebec - put the debt on the ratepayers, taxpayers, and future generations of Newfoundland and Labrador - increase not decrease or stabilize rates and then give significant management contracts to Quebec based corporations. What a joke.

So Premier - how can you guarantee that Hydro-Quebec will never own any part of Emera and thereby own assets in our province, control exports, and lock transmission? You can't - therefore what you say is nothing more than desperately doing a deal that will make multimillionaires of millionaires and leave our people in the dark - economically, socially, and industrially. 

One last point - several of the statements made by the Premier in her speech to the Board of Trade are lies. In this regard she has truly joined the rank of her colleague Prime Minister Harper.

Dear Mr. Martin...The Need for Power is???

According to Nalcor Leadership Blog - post author - Ed Martin:

Power is needed for the island and Labrador
Nalcor’s subsidiary, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro (Hydro), has a responsibility to assess and recommend supply options to meet the province’s growing energy needs. This is a function the company has been performing since the 1970s and its predecessors before it. In 2010, Hydro determined new generation was required to meet the growing demand for electricity on the island.

So Mr. Martin let's start here; if we are at such risk of running out of power - why did you only figure that out after you bailed on the Hydro-Quebec possibility?

Second - please tell the people of Newfoundland and Labrador how many times over the past 40 years that Hydro has stated that we would run out of or need power within 5-10 years of the particular statement?

Muskrat - Premier swimming Forwards and Backwards

We will not have a special debate on Muskrat Falls.

We will have a special debate on Muskrat Falls.

We have done our due diligence on all alternatives.

We will now do due diligence on all alternatives.

Forward - Backward - Forward - Backward

Debate all you want Premier Dunderdale - start at the beginning.

Prove to us that we need more power on the Island.

Tell us why Labrador communities will not be electrified.

This is the first step. Sanction? I don't think so.

Ask Nalcor how many times Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro predicted the need for power on the Island. Tell us how many times it was wrong.

It appears there are members of the Dunderdale government who are not willing to support this project.

This is most always the reason for reversing government's stated steadfast direction.

About time - these MHA's should have demanded this a long time ago. Let's say a few hundred million dollars ago. However - I do commend them for showing guts toward a Leader who does not know what she is doing regarding Muskrat.

Stop this deal! Take a plunge and properly represent the people who elected you.