'Alternative' energy and less energy

“We are spending tens or maybe hundreds of megawatts on producing something that has no tangible existence and no real use for humans outside the realm of financial speculation,” he said. “That can’t be good.”

Jan. 10/18

It has been a month now since the BC government announced that Site C would continue. The accounting rationale used by Premier Horgan makes absolutely no sense in light of the findings from the recent BCUC review, and the much greater financial woes of continuing the project.

The following is a compilation of articles and interviews by Dr. Jason Hickel. He is an anthropologist and author at the University of London and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts. He serves on the UK Labour Party task force on international development. He is an advocate for global social equality and an advocate of ‘degrowth’ as a solution to the global warming emergency.

Premier John Horgan had an opportunity to protect British Columbians from a huge financial burden. He failed to do so. Instead, on Monday he announced that his government would complete construction of Site C.

Continuing with Site C is a bad decision on so many levels. What’s worse is how low Horgan had to stoop to try to rationalize it. He engaged in irresponsible fear-mongering, the logic of which does not stand up under scrutiny.

British Columbia Premier John Horgan announced on December 11 that his New Democratic Party government will proceed with construction of the $11 billion-and-counting ‘Site C’ hydroelectric dam on the Peace River in the province’s northeast.

There is much to debate about Monday’s decision by the B.C. government to move forward with the Site C dam, but one thing is not debatable: construction should never have started without a full review of costs and demand.

If we don’t change the conversation, if we don’t deal with the systemic problems of capitalism and come up with a viable alternative, our goose is cooked.