At some point, the $9-billion Site C dam project on the Peace River is going to hit the point of no return, where it's just common sense to carry on, rather than cancel.
It's debatable where that point is. It has already cost $522 million, mostly in the form of a library full of studies. Bulldozers arrived on the site last summer. Another $1.2-billion contract for the serious earth-moving was announced Wednesday.
So some would assume that for better or worse, the point is already long past. The B.C. Liberals gave the mammoth project the green light 11 months ago and it has built up a considerable amount of momentum since then.
But Opposition New Democrats, who are loath to see an expensive Liberal project take shape, are betting the point of no return is still a minimum of 16 months away, and if they win the May 2017 election they can abandon or postpone the project. It's a risky position, but it reflects the view of a skeptical 33-member caucus that votes against the dam every time the Liberals offer the chance.
In order to make cancelling a mega-project with a full head of steam look anything close to logical, the main thing that has to happen is a protracted stall on the construction schedule. A successful lawsuit against the project would put the brakes on in a big way. A number of cases have been launched by aggrieved landowners and some First Nations, but B.C. Hydro is winning most of them at this point.
Still, there's a potential for the dam site to be knee-deep in injunctions and suits by the next election. There's a potential for a general slowdown that would ease long-term power demands. The independent review of the project found the power won't actually be needed for four years after it's finished in 2024.
There's the potential for the LNG dream to evaporate, which could indirectly ease demand. And there's the potential -- familiar to anyone who watches public-sector projects -- for costs to spiral out of control for unexpected reasons.
Some combination of those factors could make for a scenario where mothballing the project looks feasible.
The B.C. Liberals would never dream of doing that. An NDP government would do it in a minute.
But first it would have to win the election. That's where the risk comes in. Because opposing the dam over the past year and continuing to oppose for another year-and-a-half leaves the impression the party lags behind the Liberals when it comes to avidly committing to job creation.
And that impression is largely what cost them the last election.
NDP Leader John Horgan recently outlined a different energy plan he says would create just as many jobs by way of retrofitting buildings, conserving electricity and embracing alternative forms of generation. It includes upgrading the plant at the Revelstoke dam. It's an expansion of what is already been done or is underway, but the outline so far doesn't have a single job number or dollar figure in it.
Demand-side management looks good in theory. Energy mega-projects employing thousands of hard-hats look better politically.
Horgan reacted to the earth-moving contract Wednesday by reciting the NDP stance of the last decade -- Site C should go to the independent utilities commission for review.
More precisely, his position is to put the Liberal and NDP energy plans side by side before the utilities commission and let it decide.
"I think we're building it [the dam] before its time," he said. "If I'm wrong, so be it -- we'll proceed."
That puts an enormous amount of power over the vision in the hands of unelected bureaucrats.
And it entails a multi-year delay, which would add costs.
If they had built the thing in the 1980s, they could have pumped the economy in the midst of a serious recession, finished it at a third the current cost estimate, and B.C. would have entered the age of climate change with even more cheap, clean power than it already has.
The B.C. Liberals made a major move to barge ahead. It would be just as big a move, if Horgan, as premier, were to balk.
