California's SB 2 - NOT full speed ahead for electricity exports from BC

Send to friend

Printer-friendly version

Energy legislation in California can break the BC government's hope of positioning BC as a major renewable electricity supplier to the state. Specifically, the state's Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) defines certain attributes of generation facilities which effectively eliminate most of BC's generation projects.

Changes to the RPS have been envisioned for perhaps a couple of years now, in conjunction with raising the target for renewable energy from 20% of retail distribution by 2020 to 33%.

It was in the context of these legislative initiatives that a junket last year to California by the BC government, the Environmental Assessment Office, the Independent Power Producers of BC and Plutonic attempted to meet with and persuade legislators and the Air Resources Board (ARB) that BC's energy should be a favoured option for renewable electricity. Later, Premier Gordon Campbell flew to California to speak directly to (a nearly empty) Senate, and implore them to recognize BC for what he was banking a big part of his energy and economic policy on - a limitless market for BC energy in California. Both trips failed to achieve their purpose.

On February 24, the Senate approved SB 2 (Senate Bill 2) the renewable energy resources bill sponsored by Senator Joe Simitian. The bill now goes to the State Assembly, and then to Governor Jerry Brown for approval. SB 2 gives legislative support to the 33% renewables target and keeps the RPS intact,

SB 2 is largely unfriendly to BC as a supplier of renewable energy, for these reasons, at least, specified in Section 6 of the bill and conditions of the existing RPS:

- renewables from hydro must be from a facility with capacity of 30 MW or less

- it must have started operation after Jan 1, 2005

- it is developed and operated in a manner that is as protective of the environment as a similar facility located in the state

The RPS also requires that a facility result in "no change in volume or timing of streamflow" - clearly an impossibility for BC's small hydro projects, in which 90% or more of the streamflow may be diverted into the penstock to the powerhouse before being returned to a stream.

Section 7 of the Simitian bill contains the last seeds of hope for the BC government: a requirement to create a report "that analyzes run-of-river hydroelectric generating facilities in British Columbia, including whether these facilities are, or should be, included as renewable electrical generation facilities." In SB 2, this report must be completed by June 30, 2011. Given that it's the end of February now, and the legislation still has both the Assembly and the Governor to get through, June 30 seems unrealistic.

There will be some headlines about SB 2 being passed in the Senate. Some may read like it's full speed ahead for BC in developing electricity for California. Not so, my friends.

It is, however, full speed ahead on the part of the BC Government and IPPs in trying to intercept that report for the California legislators so it says nice things about BC. Or not - it could be that with the departure of Campbell, the IPP and export agendas have also had their day. We can only hope so.

California Senate Bill No. 2
Introduced by Senators Simitian, Kehoe, and Steinberg
of relevance to British Columbia are Sections 6 & 7

Arthur Caldicott, Watershed Sentinel, February 26, 2011