tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post7968764121232910373..comments2023-10-25T07:29:40.789-02:30Comments on UNCLE GNARLEY: CONSUMER ADVOCATE SHOULD BE TAKEN TO WOOD SHEDDes Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02566013585647491614noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-92122506692370791832014-09-11T06:14:09.073-02:302014-09-11T06:14:09.073-02:30This particular consumer advocate has not defended...This particular consumer advocate has not defended the interest of the Consumer. One just has to compare our own CA's performance to that of John Merrick in Nova Scotia. John Merrick defended the rights of the consumer. He asked indepth and challenged questions, and was capable of independent thought. Our poor CA has not demonstrated this last characteristic. <br /><br />A strong CA in Nova Scotia was able to secure additional concessions by Nalcor in the securing of additional surplus power into the future. <br /><br />Our CA in Newfoundland spends taxpayer money and repeats others arguements. He should be pusing to be asking these same questions which are now he is attempting to suppress. <br /><br />This would only occur in our banana republic. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235138415013046381.post-5767203314651761462014-09-08T23:47:46.574-02:302014-09-08T23:47:46.574-02:30A little simple arithmetic shows that an $8 per mo...A little simple arithmetic shows that an $8 per month increase as a result of an $800 million overrun is not including all the costs. It works out to $96 per year and at 280,000 customers including all the tiny one room connections, it is $27 M in revenue or 3.36% of the capital involved. The cheapest money is the loan guarantee at 3.8% and each bit of overrun obtains a higher interest rate so the best rate for this $800 M would be in the 5.8% range. Considering the principal has to be repaid pushes it to more than double the $8 per month. The average family household is a lot bigger than the tiny one room connections so expect it to cost you about $20 per month at least. The next $800M overrun will cost you a lot more as the risk increases to the lenders.<br />The lame Consumer Advocate thing, who is really nothing more than a patronage appointment, was well known from the early days when he endorsed the Muskrat project with little info request.<br />It looks like we have this project for better or for worse so the bigger issue to me is how do we plan to deal with Quebec if and when they win the Water Management Agreement. Quebec will dictate when MF operates so there will need to be arrangements to ship power out through Quebec and also buy back or just spill water at times and operate thermal at other times. Gilbert Bennett, in his article on Canadian Energy megaprojects, talks about the increase in energy storage capacity from 2.5 TWH (island storage) to 22 TWH including the Upper Churchill. That is correct except that Hydro Quebec may control 90% of that storage so who will make the money on what is in the "energy warehouse"?<br />The only benefit that I can see of hiding the full disclosure at this time is that it will certainly hurt the sitting government more. It maybe time for a Plan B and I can't think of anything else other than to start dealing Hydro Quebec.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com