1. Sustainable Energy Policy1

2. 2

3.  Strategic – BC Hydro Long Term Planning  Project level  Environmental Assessment ▪ Federal ▪ Provincial  Integration Sustainable Energy Policy3

4. 4

5.  Integrated electricity planning - the long-term planning of electricity generation, transmission, and demand-side resources to reliably meet forecast requirements.  2000s - long-term acquisition plan (LTAP) every 4 yrsLTAP  Needs to be reviewed and approved by BCUC  2010 Clean Energy Act – IRP replaces LTAP  Same problem for analysis and decision-making  but different consultation, review, and approval Sustainable Energy Policy5

6.  Planning context, objectives  Gross (pre-DSM) demand forecasts  Resources (supply and DSM) – ID and measurement  Develop resource portfolios  Evaluate and select resource portfolios  Develop action plan  Consult  Get approval Sustainable Energy Policy6

7.  Application submitted to BCUC June 2008 Application  Evidentiary update December 08 Evidentiary update  Formal hearings in BCUChearings  BCUC decision rejecting plan July 2009 BCUC decision  Greenpolicyprof summarysummary Sustainable Energy Policy7

8. 1. did not adequately addressed self‐sufficiency 2. DSM plan not adequately supported by analysis 3. Rejected plan to reduce its reliance on Burrard Thermal 4. Rejected special target for Clean Power Call Sustainable Energy Policy8

9.  Mostly, critical of the lack of evidence or analysis underlying BC Hydro’s plan  not a challenge to government policy, but as a criticism of BC Hydro for not providing sufficient evidence that it was complying with government policy  Exception: refusal to endorse BC Hydro’s desire to reduce reliance on Burrard Thermal Sustainable Energy Policy9

10.  Critics of private power projects, including the BC New Democratic Party, declared victory, claiming the decision is a rejection of the BC government’s plan to rely on private power for future electricity supply. CriticsNew Democratic Party  Climate activists blasted BCUC “a serious blow to the clean energy transition and climate leadership in British Columbia.” Climate activists  First Nations denounced the Commission for creating roadblocks to their ability to use green power projects to promote economic development.denounced Sustainable Energy Policy10

11.  April 2009 Throne Speech : BC government clarified that the BCUC “will receive specific direction” Throne Speech  October 2009: Special direction #2: ordered BCUC to rely on no more than 900 MW capacity and 0 GW/yr firm energySpecial direction #2  May 2010: Clean Energy Act passed.  New IRP process  Removed from BCUC scrutiny Sustainable Energy Policy11

12. Sustainable Energy Policy12

13.  What are the consequences of removing BC Hydro planning from BCUC review? Sustainable Energy Policy13

14.  http://www.bchydro.com/etc/medialib/intern et/documents/planning_regulatory/iep_ltap/2 011q2/bc_hydro_irp_- _webinar.Par.0001.File.BC-Hydro-IRP- Webinar-Presentation-April-2011.pdf http://www.bchydro.com/etc/medialib/intern et/documents/planning_regulatory/iep_ltap/2 011q2/bc_hydro_irp_- _webinar.Par.0001.File.BC-Hydro-IRP- Webinar-Presentation-April-2011.pdf Sustainable Energy Policy14

15.  Timing delayed by rate review  Old: by 2016 enough B.C.-based energy to meet customer demand even in critical water conditions; and by 2020, an extra 3,000 gigawatt hour per year of insurance energy  New: by 2016, enough B.C.-based energy to meet customer demand in an average water year  The Province will also propose changes to the Clean Energy Act to eliminate the insurance requirement Sustainable Energy Policy15

16. Sustainable Energy Policy16

17.  Approved plan calls for new independent power projects  What happens now? Sustainable Energy Policy17

18. Sustainable Energy Policy18

19.  49.9 MW – Ledcor – Innergex  Extensive review by Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (SLRD)  SLRD rejected  BC government passed Bill 30 to “bring certainty” to approval process – 2006 Bill 30  Project approved – commercial operation began Dec 09 Sustainable Energy Policy19

20.  Should local or regional governments have the right to veto power projects? Sustainable Energy Policy20

21.  Environmental Assessment as a policy tool – a “procedural policy instrument”  Requires analysis and procedure but does not specify outcome Sustainable Energy Policy21

22. 1. Proposal from proponent 2. Screening – is EA required and if so what kind? 3. Scoping – what issues? 4. Assessment of the proposal 5. Report preparation, submission, and review 6. Decision: recommendation by EA body, authoritative decision by political body 7. Monitoring and compliance follow-up Sustainable Energy Policy22

23.  Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Canadian Environmental Assessment Act  Came into force in 1995  Since 1972, governed by cabinet guidelines  applies to anything that requires federal approval or permit  Procedures managed by Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, within Environment CanadaCanadian Environmental Assessment Agency  Usually, if federal EA no provincial EA Sustainable Energy Policy23

24. 1. Determine if an environmental assessment is required 2. Identify responsible authority (RA) 3. screening – initial assessment If potentially significant adverse effects or significant public concern, requires mediation or panel review 4. Conduct the analysis and prepare the environmental assessment report 5. RA Reviews environmental assessment report 6. Make environmental assessment decision 7. Implement mitigation and follow-up program, as appropriate Sustainable Energy Policy24

25. (a) where, taking into account the implementation of any mitigation measures that the responsible authority considers appropriate, (i) the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects, or (ii) the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that can be justified in the circumstances the responsible authority may exercise any power or perform any duty or function that would permit the project to be carried out in whole or in part Sustainable Energy Policy25

26.  99% of projects approved Sustainable Energy Policy26

27.  Gold and copper mine west of Williams Lake BC  Proposal would use Fish Lake as tailings pond  Federal EA process  Proponent insisted a BC EA be done Sustainable Energy Policy27

28. PROVINCE  BC gov approves despite serious problems identified by gov agencies in quality of analysis and magnitude of impacts FEDERAL  Panel assessment far more rigorous on data, analysis  Concluded significant impacts to environment and First Nations concerns  Cabinet rejects mine proposal Sustainable Energy Policy28 Update: Taseko has resubmitted a revised proposal that is now under review

29.  Vertical Coordination (across jurisdictions)  Horizontal Coordination (across agencies)  Includes issues of “substitution”  Scoping  Cumulative effects  Followup  Strategic assessments  Missing? Sustainable Energy Policy29

30.  “effects that are additive or interactive and result from the recurrence of actions over time. Cumulative impacts are incremental and result when undertakings build on or add to the impacts of previous impacts.”  Consideration required in federal rules, permitted but not required in BC  What is the best way to deal with cumulative effects in project level assessments? Sustainable Energy Policy30

31.  Sustainability as core objective  Strengthen public participation  Meaningfully engage Aboriginal governments as decision makers  Legal framework for strategic and regional EA  Require comprehensive, regional cumulative effects assessments  Coordinate multiple jurisdictions with highest standards  Transparency  Fair, predictable, accessible  Rights over efficiency Sustainable Energy Policy31

32.  protect and advance the public interest;  promote a fair and competitive market economy;  make decisions based on evidence;  create accessible, understandable, and responsive regulation;  advance the efficiency and effectiveness of regulation; and  require timelines, policy coherence, and minimal duplication. Sustainable Energy Policy32

33. Sustainable Energy Policy33

34. IRP + PROJECT SPECIFIC ASSESSMENT/APPROVALS  risks larger than necessary local environmental effects  Risks less satisfied public STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT  Risks delay in renewable development (and climate change mitigation) Sustainable Energy Policy34 An important tradeoff that needs to be considered in process design