BC Political Discussion: Election 2024 & 43rd Parliament

[RedArbutus]

What ChangingCity said ^^^^. I won't deny that the BC NDP was against the LNG expansion, nor that since then they have obviously gone all in on BEVs (as they should), but (and I know I'm not citing any sources here) I keenly remember that consumer electrical demand was projected to stagnate at the time, and thus the opposition from indigenous groups and Peace River Valley farmers was based on the fact that they didn't feel such a drastic terraforming of the environment was strictly necessary. But again, if that narrative is actual fact is incorrect, then I'm mistaken.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by RedArbutus

What ChangingCity said ^^^^. I won't deny that the BC NDP was against the LNG expansion, nor that since then they have obviously gone all in on BEVs (as they should), but (and I know I'm not citing any sources here) I keenly remember that consumer electrical demand was projected to stagnate at the time, and thus the opposition from indigenous groups and Peace River Valley farmers was based on the fact that they didn't feel such a drastic terraforming of the environment was strictly necessary. But again, if that narrative is actual fact is incorrect, then I'm mistaken.

BC Hydro was saying that anticipating demand was low, despite population increases and EV adoption. Not to mention heat pump and AC adoption.

It always felt a little strange but I trusted them since they had the whole picture. Now we're a few years into net importing electricity...

[mcj]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

BC Hydro was saying that anticipating demand was low, despite population increases and EV adoption. Not to mention heat pump and AC adoption.

It always felt a little strange but I trusted them since they had the whole picture. Now we're a few years into net importing electricity...

Didn't BC Hydro also push back on adopting Solar / Wind for the same reason?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by RedArbutus

What ChangingCity said ^^^^. I won't deny that the BC NDP was against the LNG expansion, nor that since then they have obviously gone all in on BEVs (as they should), but (and I know I'm not citing any sources here) I keenly remember that consumer electrical demand was projected to stagnate at the time, and thus the opposition from indigenous groups and Peace River Valley farmers was based on the fact that they didn't feel such a drastic terraforming of the environment was strictly necessary. But again, if that narrative is actual fact is incorrect, then I'm mistaken.

Here's what BC Hydro said in the summary of the Business Case for Site C (in 2014). They were expecting demand to grow without LNG, and even more with it.

"As our province and our economy continue to grow, so will our demand for electricity. Current forecasts show that demand in B.C. is expected to increase by approximately 40 per cent over the next 20 years, driven by a projected population increase of more than one million residents, and continued economic expansion. B.C.’s emerging liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry could further increase electricity demand.

BC Hydro is planning to meet 78 per cent of future load growth through conservation, the first and best option to meet electricity demand. In addition, BC Hydro is investing $6 billion over the next three years to upgrade the capacity, safety and reliability of its aging facilities. However, even these important investments will not be sufficient to meet future need.

To meet long-term electricity demand, BC Hydro is proposing to build an additional hydroelectric generating facility that will provide clean and renewable power to households, businesses and industrial customers for more than 100 years."

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Here's what BC Hydro said in the summary of the Business Case for Site C (in 2014). They were expecting demand to grow without LNG, and even more with it.

And since then they have done multiple additional calls for power ahead of their planned schedule.

[RedArbutus]

delete

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

And since then they have done multiple additional calls for power ahead of their planned schedule.

I wasn't aware of any calls for power from BC Hydro for ten years after Site C was approved. Have I missed something?

Of course, with the provincial government green washing of LNG, and new demand from AI Centres, they will now need additional (non-carbon) sources of power, but those are relatively recent developments.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

I wasn't aware of any calls for power from BC Hydro for ten years after Site C was approved. Have I missed something?

Of course, with the provincial government green washing of LNG, and new demand from AI Centres, they will now need additional (non-carbon) sources of power, but those are relatively recent developments.

Why are you picking this specific time frame to try and show how smart you think you are?

We are talking about reality, which is BC Hydro forecasting limited increase in power demand and now changing their tune with large calls for power ahead of their original forecasts.

https://www.bchydro.com/work-with-us/selling-clean-energy/2024-call-for-power.html

https://www.bchydro.com/work-with-us/selling-clean-energy/2025-call-for-power.html

[kikin]

BC Conservative Party new leader will be announced tomorrow!

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by kikin

BC Conservative Party new leader will be announced tomorrow!

Again, I believe prediction markets are still mostly gambling but they do tend to be pretty accurate in the lead-up to any event. Polymarket has Elliott with a 69% chance and Findlay with a 22% chance.

https://polymarket.com/event/bc-conservative-party-leadership-election-winner

Interestingly, I read that Elliott is the clear favourite amongst polled male conservative voters and Findlay is the clear favourite amongst polled female conservative voters.

https://pallas-data.ca/2026/05/04/pallas...-findlay-24-black-18-milobar-9-fulmer-7/

Gender and Age

Elliott leads men at 34% and drops to 23% among women. Findlay is close to the mirror image: 19% among men, 33% among women.

Elliott peaks with the 35-49 cohort at 39%. Among members 65 and older, Findlay edges ahead, 27% to 24%. Black and Milobar both run stronger with older members.

“Findlay’s voters are women, older members, and members outside Metro Vancouver. That’s a real coalition. But Elliott’s lower mainland numbers put her in pole position and make her vote more efficient, given how BC Conservative membership is distributed regionally,” said Angolano.

At the end of the day, conservatism sways male in the province so that probably gives Elliott the edge.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Changing City

That's not how it was viewed in 2014, when the 'Liberal' government (and the federal government) approved it. There were three sources of opposition; The local First Nations, who launched an unsucessful lawsuit, citing a devastating impact on their traditional land, local farmers, throught the Peace Valley Landowner Association, who launched a legal challenge, citing the 3,800 hectares of agricultural land (much of it of very high agricultural value) which has now been lost and environmental groups, who were concerned with habitat loss.

LNG wasn't (at the time) the justification, it was overall need for additional power. There wasn't an expectation that LNG would need additional electricity until later. LNG was actually said to be why the government might not have been approved the dam. There was concern that the cost and manpower of Site C and a fledgling LNG industry may be too prohibitive at once. In 2014, in New York, Christy Clark told Bloomberg media that “LNG is our priority in British Columbia and we don’t need to do Site C in order to fuel up the LNG industry…Hopefully, we will find a way to do both, but if it’s one or the other, I’m choosing LNG.”

Lol.

Suzuki criticized the B.C. government's plan, unveiled in February, which proposes that three liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities be built by 2020. “Where the hell does she [Premier Christy Clark] think she'll get the power [to run the facilities]?” He claimed that Site C's so-called clean energy would be sucked up by industry if the LNG plan goes ahead as proposed.

https://www.straight.com/news/david-suzuki-paddling-protest-proposed-site-c-dam

Even the LNG argument — used by Premier Christy Clark in last year’s election campaign as a major reason for building Site C — is losing traction as most companies indicate that, for compression and liquefaction of the gas (which takes vast amounts of electricity), they will generate their own power by burning natural gas already flowing through their pipes.

In order to burn natural gas, the LNG industry has been handed a blanket exemption from the Clean Energy Act, raising concerns about the government’s commitment to cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

The Pembina Institute estimates that if five LNG facilities are built, the industry would more than double B.C.’s carbon pollution, single-handedly emitting nearly three-quarters as many greenhouse gases as Alberta’s oilsands.

However, even those who argue that LNG plants should be powered using renewable electricity don’t necessarily point to a need for the Site C dam.

Clean Energy Canada, for instance, argues that the LNG industry can power itself on regionally produced clean electricity, mostly wind power on B.C.’s north coast.

Even under that scenario, LNG plants will need power from BC Hydro for ancillary needs, such as running the site, said Dave Conway, BC Hydro spokesman.

Initial estimates said increased capacity would be needed by 2027/28, but, with taking LNG plans into account, even a “low LNG load forecast” moves the need for energy up to 2024.

https://reddeeradvocate.com/2014/05/31/is-the-site-c-dams-electricity-destined-for-lng-industry/

LNG industry driving demand projections

The majority of BC Hydro's projected growth in demand for electricity will come from the natural gas industry; turning it into a liquefied form takes massive amounts of energy.

According to an analysis published last year in the Financial Post, citing Calgary-based LNG generator TransAlta Corp:

"Power demands to cool up to 10 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas into a frozen fuel could range from 2,000 to 4,000 megawatts between 2018 and 2025."
A view of Peace River, B.C., above the proposed Site C dam site. (Eliza Massey Stanford)

The same Financial Post report also provides an insightful quote from energy lawyer Warren Brazier:

"If all the LNG plants are built, they're going to need the equivalent of 50 per cent of the existing power in B.C."

And while some LNG facilities are likely to use self-generated power, some of the energy produced at Site C is already earmarked for the LNG industry. In November, BC Hydro signed its first deal with an LNG proponent.

The problem is that using hydroelectricity to power LNG production is essentially turning a clean power source into a dirtier one for the sole purpose of export.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c...wer-actually-fuel-dirty-energy-1.2879785

[kikin]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Again, I believe prediction markets are still mostly gambling but they do tend to be pretty accurate in the lead-up to any event. Polymarket has Elliott with a 69% chance and Findlay with a 22% chance.

https://polymarket.com/event/bc-conservative-party-leadership-election-winner

Interestingly, I read that Elliott is the clear favourite amongst polled male conservative voters and Findlay is the clear favourite amongst polled female conservative voters.

https://pallas-data.ca/2026/05/04/pallas...-findlay-24-black-18-milobar-9-fulmer-7/



At the end of the day, conservatism sways male in the province so that probably gives Elliott the edge.

I'm hoping Polymarket is wrong and I took the big odds on Findlay there recently. I've had some luck recently bucking the odds on Polymarket, the bettors there are often really wrong.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by kikin

I'm hoping Polymarket is wrong and I took the big odds on Findlay there recently. I've had some luck recently bucking the odds on Polymarket, the bettors there are often really wrong.

You were right, Findlay is the next BC Conservative leader.

EDIT: Oops, that was just the first round. Findlay is in the lead of the first round.

EDIT: And she takes it away with 51%. Not a strong mandate, but looks like the BC Conservative Party is confirmed to be the conservative party and not the BC Liberal Party.

[MIPS]

Isn't the BC Communist Party still making it on the ballots every four years?

Their platform sucks, but compared to our two alternatives here, it can't be much worse.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by chowhou

You were right, Findlay is the next BC Conservative leader.

EDIT: Oops, that was just the first round. Findlay is in the lead of the first round.

EDIT: And she takes it away with 51%. Not a strong mandate, but looks like the BC Conservative Party is confirmed to be the conservative party and not the BC Liberal Party.

I’ve not heard flattering things about her from those who have had contact with her. It will be interesting to see how this goes.

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I’ve not heard flattering things about her from those who have had contact with her.

I think that's the point though? If they elect someone clear-minded the conservatives might actually not suck and progress further in the polls than they have in decades. Eby made dragging your ass into an art, so what do you do when you ACTUALLY have responsibilities? It makes far more sense to elect someone who takes no risks, checks all the boxes, smiles for every press event and makes sure they are still a party known as villains who skitter off into dimly lit corners when the sun comes out.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by MIPS

I think that's the point though? If they elect someone clear-minded the conservatives might actually not suck and progress further in the polls than they have in decades. Eby made dragging your ass into an art, so what do you do when you ACTUALLY have responsibilities? It makes far more sense to elect someone who takes no risks, checks all the boxes, smiles for every press event and makes sure they are still a party known as villains who skitter off into dimly lit corners when the sun comes out.

Is she clearminded? Her attacks on Milobar were pretty gross. And then there’s this, straight outta Trumpland:

Faith, family and freedom, that's what it's all about – and I can't wait to get started," she said.

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Is she clearminded?

Okay, that part was subjective.

[Bcasey25raptor]

BC cons chose a fa right lunatic as leader. Typical.

Guess I’m voting NDP again.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

BC cons chose a fa right lunatic as leader. Typical.

Guess I’m voting NDP again.

Yes, I think many of us are voting NDP again.

It is interesting looking at her platform. Very focused on creating villains.

She defines SOGI as a villain, that she is going to fight. She wants to "Address violence, bullying, and chronic classroom disruption". Someone needs to explain to her that is what SOGI is all about.

She views the federal government as the villain that is stopping development in BC through pipelines, mines, etc. She wants to unite with Alberta and Saskatchewan to fight the elites in Ottawa. I guess no one has explained to her yet the Feds are not the level of government that has been blocking those things.

She would be a disaster for the environment.

The rest of here agenda is far right stuff. Dominated by, concerns over COVID freedom, gun rights, legal regulation of professionals etc.