Events

Jobs & Contracts

Sustainable
Energy Directory

Email Lists

Links

Contact Us

Tell a Friend

Sponsors

Site Map

Quote/Unquote:

"If we do not change our direction, we are likely to end up where we are headed."
- Chinese Proverb

The Honourable Barry Penner,
Minister of the Environment
& Co-chair, Alternative Energy & Power Task Force

Mossadiq Umedaly
Co-chair, Alternative Energy & Power Task Force

Dear Honourable Barry Penner and Mossadiq Umedaly,

We are writing this letter, with the attached report Sustainable Energy Solutions for BC, to ask the Task Force to support some new developments in BC’s energy policy and practices.

The BC Sustainable Energy Association was established in January 2004, as a voice for people in BC who believe in the future of sustainable energy, and a vehicle for members to express their commitment in projects, activities, and endeavours. We have built a strong team, with a 15-member Board of Directors, a paid Coordinator, and 520 paying members around the province, with more joining each month. Our members have established six regional Chapters, with three more being planned. We have broad representation from all ages and backgrounds, and many of our members and Board are in their 20s and 30s. Please see Appendix A for a list of our Board of Directors.

This letter is the result of months of work that has been devoted to developing a coherent analysis and a set of policies designed to accelerate the progress of alternative energy in BC.

We believe that these policies are fully aligned with the "A Vision for Growing a World-Class Power Technology Cluster in a Smart, Sustainable BC" report to the Premier’s Technology Council. In particular, we appreciate the integrated view taken in the report (Smart Power + Smart Delivery + Smart End Use). BCSEA agrees with the market opportunities identified in the report, and sees a huge opportunity to assist BC’s cities and regions make a fundamental change in the way they use energy.

The BCSEA recognizes that BC will only be able to capture the global market opportunities through an integrated approach, supporting a suite of technologies and planning approaches, not one narrowly focused on several ‘silver bullets’, and through an integrated effort by provincial and municipal governments, by industry, and by non-profit and community groups. Some products or sectors may not produce as many jobs as others, but are still needed to achieve an overall solution that will give BC global recognition, so that BC’s companies, non-profits, and governments are sought after globally for their expertise and products in years to come.

We would like to request a meeting with the co-chairs of the Task Force to review these proposals, to be followed by a formal presentation to the Task Force.

Yours sincerely,

Guy Dauncey
President, BCSEA

Sustainable Energy Solutions for B.C.

A contribution by the BC Sustainable Energy Association
to the Alternative Energy & Power Technology Task Force

Executive Summary

In the pages below, we first describe three drivers of a sustainable energy economy, both globally and for BC: (1) global climate change; (2) the imminent shortage of global oil supplies as demand outpaces production; and (3) the imminent shortage of first North American and then global natural gas supplies, as demand outpaces production. These three drivers will require changes to at least 90% of the energy that powers the global economy. If BC makes this transition first, it will be in a position to be a global hub for one of the largest market opportunities in history.

We then suggest clear, practical, economically viable options to meet these challenges, which will improve our environment, our business climate, and our children’s future, while generating many jobs based on local demand. This does not include the substantial potential to provide advice, research & development, and products to the other regions globally that will be undergoing a similar transformation.

Our analysis shows that BC has the potential to generate 84,250 GWh of sustainable, renewable energy (including efficiency savings) by various means, and to create over 400 ,000 temporary and permanent jobs involving smart power and smart end use over the next 30 years, including 25,000 GWh and 145,000 jobs from province-wide energy efficiency upgrades and retrofits.

When we look to the future of transport in BC, it appears that the best opportunities may lie with electric vehicles, with supporting roles being played by vehicles powered by hydrogen, biodiesel and biowastes. We note that BC citizens possess an impressive pool of talents that support integrated approaches to urban transport planning, including walking, cycling, transit, car-sharing, urban design, and smart growth.

When we look to the future of heating, we see major opportunities for solar hot water, ground-source and water-source heat, sewer heat, zero energy building designs, biofuels, and district heating systems.

In order to assist these technologies to grow, we see the need for five strategic actions:

1.0 Market Drivers

The BC Sustainable Energy Association sees three market drivers, and one strategic hope for BC to capitalize on this opportunity locally and globally. This leads us to five proposals for strategic action which have the capacity to unlock the potential of alternative energy in BC, along with the sales, jobs, exports, and the social, health and environmental benefits that will follow.

1.1 Global Climate Change: The First Driver of a Sustainable Energy Economy

Our first concern is that global climate change is going to have a far more profound effect on Canada and the world than most people realize. We are already witnessing the impact on our interior forests of the mountain pine beetle outbreak, and the inability of salmon to breed in overheated creeks and streams. There is far more to come, as snowpacks melt, forest fires increase, and sea levels rise. The impact on people in the developing nations of Africa and Asia will be even greater, as droughts, heat waves and torrential floods and downpours become more frequent, and harvests fail. In India, Mumbai’s disaster on July 26^th, when 37 inches of rain fell in eight hours, causing over 1000 deaths, may be a troubling sign of the future "normal".

The projected impact on natural species is grim. A team of conservation biologists based at Leeds University (UK), reported in January 2004, after a global 4-year study, that we are looking at the extinction of 25% of all land-based animals and plants by 2050, as temperatures rise. This gives us a huge moral responsibility, since we are the generation that has the power to decide whether many of these species will become extinct or not, depending on how we make our energy choices.

75% of global climate change is caused by our use of fossil fuels. The simple but demanding solution is for the world to stop burning coal, oil, and gas, except where we can reliably and cost-effectively capture and sequestrate the CO2 emissions, and to make a rapid transition to a sustainable energy economy. If we give this the attention it deserves, we can turn the drama of climate change from an epic disaster into a golden opportunity.

1.2 Peak Oil: The Second Driver of a Sustainable Energy Economy

Our second concern is that since 1858, the world has used almost half of the total conventional global oil supply: one trillion barrels. We are currently using 30.6 billion barrels a year (84 barrels a day), so at the current growing rate of use, the remaining one trillion barrels will last for only 30 more years.

We will not continue at the current rate of use, however. The International Energy Agency Outlook 2005 projects that worldwide energy consumption will grow by 57% between 2002 and 2005, especially in India and China, with world oil use expected (in mathematical terms) to grow to 119 million barrels a day by 2025.

The projections of the economists and statisticians are increasingly out of keeping with the realities of the supply, however. This concern is not just something coming out of left wing think tanks: it is shared by oil companies such as BP, and Chevron:

"It took us 125 years to use the first trillion barrels of oil.
We’ll use the next trillion in 30."

- Chevron Advertisement, July 2005

The global oil crisis will begin when global demand exceeds daily production, known as "peak oil". The 2004 BP Statistical Review points to declining oil production after 2011; the Oil & Gas Journal’s data points to 2009; World Oil data points to 2006(1). From that moment onward, the world’s nations will be trying to consume more than the oil companies can deliver.

"We’re coming up on a brick wall very fast. I don’t see how we can service an 86 barrels a day demand with an 84 barrels a day supply."

Boone Pickens, head of BP Capital Management, interviewed on CNN, June 23^rd 2005.

As the supply gap increases, the price of oil will rise unpredictably, first to $100, then $200 a barrel. There will be enormous impacts in BC (and globally) on businesses that depend on oil for imports and exports, on commuters who base their mortgage calculations on what it costs to drive to work, and on airlines, shipping, and industries that depend on oil as a feedstock. If a transition strategy is not put in place to manage the crisis, it may send the world economy into a recession. For references about peak oil, see www.peakoil.net.

"Without timely mitigation, world supply/demand balance will be achieved through massive demand destruction (shortages), accompanied by huge oil price increases, both of which would create a long period of significant economic hardship worldwide. … In the developed nations, the economic problems associated with world oil peaking and the resultant oil shortages will be extremely serious. In the developing nations, economic problems will be much worse."

- US Department of Energy, Association for the Study of Peak Oil Newsletter, March 2005

New discoveries will not be able to bridge the gap. The Caspian Basin oil-find is only 12 months global supply. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge supply, with perhaps 10 billion barrels (if the US goes ahead with this controversial project) is 4 months global supply. The potential oil reserves under BC’s coastline, of perhaps 2.6 billion barrels, represent 31 days world supply.

Alberta’s tar-sands hold a potential 179 billion barrels, of which 16 billion are under active development, but the oil companies are only able to process one million barrels a day, while the world is consuming 84 million a day. Even if it grows to four million a day, it will not make much difference to the size of the gap between demand and supply. The tar-sands will extend the decline, but they will not prevent the end of the Age of Oil.

For every 5 barrels of tar sands oil extracted, the tar sands also need a barrel-equivalent of natural gas. Knowing that the world’s reserves of natural gas will begin to run scarce before the tar-sands achieve full production, discussions are now taking place about building nuclear power plants to extract the oil.

Maybe peak oil will not happen until 2015: it makes no substantial difference. Within our lifetimes, oil will be too expensive to burn as a fuel, except for expensive specialist purposes. Future historians will write that the Age of Oil was a one-time bonanza, when humans took most of the extractable oil which was created by photosynthesis over 180 million years, and consumed it in 180 years.

They will probably note that the period 2005 to 2025 was the most critical, since those were the years when some nations took steps to protect their economies by organizing a transition to sustainable forms of energy, while others did nothing, and had to suffer the consequences, and yet others resorted to warfare to control the remaining oil fields.

" Government intervention will be essential, because the economic and social impacts of oil peaking will otherwise be chaotic.

World oil peaking represents a problem like none other. The political, economic, and social stakes are enormous. Prudent risk management demands urgent attention and early action."

- US Department of Energy, Association for the Study of Peak Oil Newsletter, March 2005(2)

Global climate change and peak oil both point to the same simple but demanding solution: that British Columbia must embark immediately on a process to organize a smooth transition into an economy based on sustainable, renewable energy.

1.3 Peak Gas: The Third Driver of a Sustainable Energy Economy

Our third concern is that North America’s supply of natural gas may have already passed its peak: the recent rise in natural gas prices may be a measure of the inability of North America’s gas fields to meet the demand. Canada, the US and Mexico are using 27 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of natural gas a year; North America’s proven remaining reserves are 260 tcf, or just under ten years supply. Alberta’s coalbed methane reserves, which total a potential 300 tcf, may be able to produce 1 tcf a year by 2025, if technical difficulties can be resolved. The coalbed methane will not supply enough gas to prevent the looming crisis.

The gas industry, knowing this to be the case, is planning to import liquefied natural gas from gas-rich countries such as Russia, Iran, and Qatar. The full gas supply of the Mackenzie Pipeline has already been committed to Alberta’s tar-sands. The politics of building the LNG terminals is complex, since residents fear LNG’s explosive nature. In the US, the White House has included powers to overrule state authorities in the current Energy Bill in order to nullify these objections. The fall-back plan is to ship it in via Mexico.

Like oil, natural gas is a one time bonanza. The world supply will peak somewhere around 2020, and be substantially gone by 2060. As the supply peaks and then declines, we will see dramatic price inflation:

• Electricity from gas cogeneration plants will become increasingly expensive and uncompetitive, compared to cheaper electricity from wind, microhydro, and other forms of renewable energy. Natural gas plant owners will face bankruptcy before they are able to recoup their costs.
• Homes and buildings that depend on natural gas for heat will lose value unless their owners install alternative means of heating.
• The chemical fertilizers on which global agriculture depends, which require natural gas for their making, will become increasingly expensive, and then unavailable.
• Businesses that depend on gas for heat, feedstock, and industrial processes will lose market share to those that have made a transition to renewable forms of energy, since their products will be cheaper.

For a detailed discussion about the future of natural gas, see High Noon for Natural Gas, by Julian Darley. (Chelsea Green, 2004)

1.4 One Strategic Hope

The problems of global climate change are caused by the very same fuels that are about to peak. If we tackle the challenge of peak oil and gas, we will simultaneously tackle global warming, and vice-versa. It all points to the need for BC’s cities and regions to design and then develop a future based on sustainable energy. If BC can join other global leaders in this endeavour, instead of being towards the back of the pack, we will be well positioned as a global hub for the multi-trillion dollar sustainable energy revolution.

1.4.1 BC Strengths

We agree with the strengths outlined in the Premier’s Technology Council Report, and recognize that one of BC’s greatest strengths is its population, which is solidly behind sustainability. The BCSEA’s 520 members are excited by the new sustainable energy technologies, from efficiency breakthroughs to tidal, wind, and solar applications, biodiesel and electric vehicles, and green fuel cell systems. They feel that these energy systems are essential for our future, and believe that they hold the promise of a clean, healthy, sustainable world, without climate change, oil wars, pollution, and smog. Many of our members hope to work in these fields, and some are already doing so.

BC’s biggest challenge thus far has been a lack of commitment and leadership. We are falling dramatically behind, and must take rapid action if we are to capitalize on the market opportunities presented. It may be useful to compare the experience of BC to that of Quebec, where several years ago the Ministry of Regions sponsored a study to look at which sectors could be developed into global centers of excellence on par with the best in the world, in each region of Quebec. One of the sectors for the Gaspé region was wind: not just generation, but also manufacturing, R&D, and education. The Quebec government and Hydro Quebec have since moved to secure Quebec as one of the primary North American centres for wind energy. BC may have already lost out on this opportunity.

For all these reasons, we believe that the work of the Alternative Energy & Power Task Force is critically important at this particular moment in time.

2.0 ENERGY TRANSFORMATION - BC’s ENERGY FUTURE

We limit our discussion here to four areas where we have a distinct point of view: smart power, smart mobile use, smart stationary use, and food.

2.1 SMART POWER

BC has an excellent potential supply of sustainably sourced electricity. BC Hydro’s website says that "Green energy alone cannot meet all of B.C.'s electricity needs", but the BCSEA believes that in combination with our existing large hydro dams, it can meet the demand – and more.

2.1.1 SMART POWER OPPORTUNITIES

Large Hydro: The ability of our large-scale hydro dams to continue producing reliable power is contingent on the continued existence of good snowpack in the mountains. The trend towards rising temperatures does not bode well: we may see a 25% increase in rainfall over the BC mainland by 2025, but a 25% fall in snowpack. The spring melt will overflow the dams, which will be correspondingly empty in the fall, before the winter rains begin. A climatologist from the University of Washington has warned that we are facing a 60% reduction in the water content of the region’s snowpack by 2050(3).

Another study has suggested that when BC’s climatic patterns are influenced by the melting Arctic ice, the jet stream will be pulled north by the warmer Arctic waters, leading to a 30% drop in year-round rainfall, as well as the loss of snowpack. These considerations suggest that climate change should be a matter of urgent concern for BC’s future power supply, which should be modeled and taken into consideration.

Wind: The international wind power consultant Garrad Hassan, commissioned by BC Hydro, recently reported that BC has 5,000 MW (11,000 GWh/yr) of accessible wind power, with the best resources being in the Peace River region, followed by the waters off the Queen Charlottes, and northern Vancouver Island. Wind is costing 6 to 12 cents kWh, and the energy can be converted into firm energy by using BC’s dams to store hydro energy while the wind is supplying the grid. This is more than the 730 MW (1600 GWh/year) identified in BC Hydro’s Green Energy Study For British Columbia Phase 2: Mainland (Oct 2002)

"If wind turbines were manufactured in BC, their manufacturing and installation would create 6 jobs per MW, so each 100 MW project would produce 600 full-time jobs. For each direct job created, an additional job would be created in associated sectors (planning, etc). Operations and maintenance create another 1-5 jobs per 5 MW. In the USA, it has been estimated that wind energy creates 27% more jobs per kilowatt hour than coal-fired power, and 66% more jobs than natural gas-fired power. A 100 MW installation will typically generate around $850,000 in local purchases." – Sustainable Energy Policies for BC. BCSEA, May 2005.

Microhydro: BC Hydro’s Green Energy Study reveals that on the mainland, microhydro run-of-river projects represent a potential total capacity of 2454 MW (10,712 GWh/yr) for 756 sites, at costs ranging from 4-9 cents/kWh. In addition, there is microhydro capacity on Vancouver Island, estimated at 76 MW (396 GWh/yr) in BC Hydro’s 2001 Green Energy Study, which is almost certainly an under-assessment of the potential.

Wood Residues Biomass: BC Hydro’s Green Energy Study suggests that the productive use of wood residues as fuel for cogeneration and power plants, that are currently being wasted in beehive burners, could provide 210 MW to 220 MW (1750 – 1833 GWh/yr) at a cost of 4-9 cents/kWh.

Geothermal: BC Hydro’s Green Energy Study suggests a capacity ranging from 150 MW to 1070 MW, with a capacity factor of 100% (availability 95%), producing 1200 to 9000 GWh/year at a price between 5-9 cents/kWh. The Meager Creek Geothermal Project has a development capacity of 200 MW, at an estimated cost of 5.9 cents/kWh.

Tidal Current: The Triton Consultants study that BC Hydro commissioned suggested that BC has an accessible tidal current energy potential of 2,225 MW (13,000 GWh/year). The tidal current projects identified in BC Hydro’s Green Energy Study have a potential of 1500 MW (2700 GWh/year) with a capacity factor of about 20%, at a cost of 11-25 cents/ kWh. The best sites are in the Strait of Georgia and Johnstone Strait, which are relatively close to centres of consumption.

Wave Power: This is still an emerging technology, which has yet to be proven in BC waters. Wavegen has installed a 500 kW Limpet wave energy system on the Island of Islay, Scotland, and Ocean Power Delivery is installing a 2.25 MW Pelamis system off the Atlantic coast. Until a test model has been installed in BC waters, it is hard to estimate how much available energy might exist, or how many jobs might be created.

Landfill Gas: BC Hydro’s Green Energy Study suggests that captured methane from mainland landfills have the potential to produce some 15 MW of power (85 GWh/year) at a cost of 4-5 cents/kWh.

Efficiency: Every kwh saved is the equivalent of a kwh generated, or a new kwh that we do not need to generate. BC Hydro’s 1994 Electricity Conservation Potential Review of 1994 estimated that there was the potential to save 25% of the electricity load, or some 12,500 GWh/yr, at a cost of 3 to 6 cents/kwh. This compares to BC Hydro Power Smart’s current planned forecast of just 4,000 GWh/yr savings from efficiency by 2017, which is based on their experience of low consumer uptake for Power Smart’s efficiency programs.

"In BC, the average person consumes 15,000 kilowatt hours in a year. We consume three times as much as the average German, two and a half times as much as the average Briton, and more than the average American. We use electricity in a way that cries out for waste reduction."

- Bob Elton, Chair of BC Hydro, October 2004.

Experience from US utilities suggests that potential energy savings of up to 50% can be realized with a skillful mix of investment, programs, prices and incentives. Based on our current use of 55,000 GWh/yr, this suggests a long-term potential of 27,000 GWh/yr that could be saved over time.

The potential to save this much energy also assumes the widespread adoption of green heat technologies, such as solar hot water and geoexchange heat (see below).

A 1997 study by the Pembina Institute found that for every million dollars invested, an average of 36.3 jobs are created in the energy efficiency sector(4). If 2 million buildings in BC would stand to benefit from being retrofitted, and the average investment was $2,000 per building, this would generate 145,200 jobs.

Solar PV: The global uptake of solar photovoltaics (PV) is conditional on its falling price. In 1980, solar cells cost $100 US a watt. By 1990 they cost $10, and today they cost $3.50 US. Experience from California shows that when the price falls to $2 (thanks to state support), combined with the income from the sale of surplus energy through time-of-use net metering, an investment in solar PV becomes cost-neutral.

The market for solar PV is being driven by Japan, Germany and California, and global production is increasing by 25% - 30% a year, which is slowly driving down the cost through the economics of mass production. The important calculation for BC is to know when the global price breakthrough might occur, so that policies and incentives can be put in place which will generate a strong BC solar industry that is ready to move. Once the price has fallen, it will become normal for every house to have a 2 kw system on its roof, producing 4,000 kWh/year, assuming 2,000 hours of sunshine a year. If we estimate 2 million suitable homes and buildings in BC, this translates to a potential contribution of 8,000 GWh/yr. To this, we can add a further 4,000 GWh to account for the potential on BC’s flat-roofed commercial buildings, as sun-shelters for car parks, at airports, and along roadsides, all of which are being done around the world even at today’s prices, for a total of 12,000 GWh/yr.

12,000 GWh/yr implies the installation of 6,000 MW of solar PV. This is six times the entire annual global production, which makes the numbers seem hard to conceive, but we only have to look at the global growth dynamics of computers and the cell phone revolution to see what is possible.

There are wide open opportunities today on some of BC’s remote native reserves, since they are using year-round expensive diesel that has to be trucked in to provide both heat and power, where combined solar wind systems could substitute for much of the diesel.

Nuclear and Coal: The BCSEA supports the continuation of the moratorium on the development of nuclear power in BC. We do not support the development of coal-fired power, due to its CO2 emissions and other pollutants . The Canadian Clean Power Coalition hopes to have a zero-emissions plant in operation by 2012 where CO2 emissions are captured and sequestrated, but the technology has yet to be finalized.

Summary of BC’s Smart Power Opportunities

When efficiency and solar PV potentials are included, BC’s sustainable energy potential rises to 84,250 GWh, demonstrating ample potential for the production and export of green power.

The simultaneous output of thousands of new energy providers, some large, some small, leads to the need for an automated, smart, integrated grid, to link the providers together in real time, using net metering, time-of-use metering, and smart metering to optimize the flow of power, minimize the inefficiencies, and maximize the market opportunities.

A smart grid also needs smart storage, calling for the strategic use of BC’s hydro reserves, combined with possible short term use of other storage technologies such as flywheels. There will also be need to upgrade the grid to receive an additional 58,000 GWh per year. The cost of the upgrades should be shared by all ratepayers, and not placed as a burden on the independent power producers, which is the current approach.

2.1.2 SMART POWER RESOURCES AND JOBS

Table 1: BC’s Maximum Long-Term Potential for Sustainable Electricity Resources and Jobs

The job creation potential of smart energy systems is enormous, totaling over 400,000 jobs, including both permanent and temporary, if all sustainable energy systems were employed to their maximum over the next 25 years. In all of these areas, however, Canada lags badly behind other nations. In the report Job Creation Potential of Solar (2005), for instance, the Canadian Solar Industries Association says that "Canada lags significantly behind IEA national averages for deployment per capita in both solar PV (28% of IEA average) and solar hot water (11% of IEA average)." The good news is that this gives us an ever greater opportunity to catch up.

2.1.3 SMART POWER ACTIONS

Policy Development A: "The Public Interest"

BC Hydro’s ability to bring new green energy on line is constrained by the BC Utilities Commission’s interpretation of the phrase "public interest" in Sections 45, 46 and 71 of the Utilities Commission Act. The BCUC’s Commissioners are basing their interpretation of "public interest" on a decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which leads them to state that:

"The BC Utilities Commission interprets its jurisdiction as extending only to consideration of environmental and social impacts that are likely to become financial costs in the foreseeable future."

The Commission’s letter of 5 May 2005 to BCSEA regarding the REAP review took an even more restrictive position, excluding even shareholder and other non-ratepayer costs:

"BCUC Staff note that the Commission’s jurisdiction in incorporating broad environmental policy concerns into its utility rate proceedings is limited and the Commission has generally interpreted its mandate as being one of foreseeable costs to ratepayers."

It is our belief that this interpretation of the phrase "public interest" is the critical log in a log-jam that is preventing the flow of alternative energy into BC’s grid. By limiting the interpretation of the public interest to fiscal factors, the BCUC is ignoring concerns that are clearly also in the public interest, such as:

• Participating in the world’s effort to tackle global climate change;
• Protecting local and regional air quality;
• Safeguarding pregnant women, babies, and children against mercury emissions from coal-fired power;
• Protecting farmland and habitat from inundation by large-scale dams;
• Developing a long-term strategy to protect BC against the impacts of the rising prices of oil and gas, as these fuels pass their peak of production and enter their decline.
• Developing a long-term strategy for a vibrant BC energy sector, providing for our energy needs and for economic stimulation in the post-Kyoto, post peak oil and gas world.

Strategic Action No 1.

The first of our five recommended Strategic Actions focuses on the need for the BCUC to widen its interpretation of the phrase "public interest", to encompass social, environmental, and long-term economic matters that are also in the public interest. This could be achieved by a strategic clarification of the BCUC’s mandate by the Premier, and an Order in Council.

Policy Development B: The Advanced Renewables Tariff

In 16 European nations, and in China, there is a specific policy, known as the Electricity Feed Law or the Advanced Renewable Tariff (ART), that has proven it ability to accelerate the progress of sustainable energy far more successfully than other policies such as the quota system (Renewable Standard Portfolios, used in USA and Britain), or tendering (used by BC Hydro and other Canadian provinces).

"Advanced Renewable Tariffs are the world's single most successful mechanism for stimulating the rapid development of renewable energy technologies."

– Paul Gipe, author of Wind Power and other titles

The basic principles of the Advanced Renewable Tariff are as follows:

Germany’s Advanced Renewable Tariff has led to the development of:

• 110,000 PV systems
• 2000 biomass plants
• 6000 small hydro plants
• 16,500 wind turbines
• Totaling new 135,000 power generators, generating 40,000 GWh/yr.

The German industry that has developed as a result of the successful use of the ART is employing:

• 45,000 people in the wind industry (110,000 jobs by 2010)
• 15,000 people in the PV industry
• 135,000 people in renewables, generally

If this success had been copied in BC, with 4 million people compared to Germany’s 82 million, BC would have 6,750 jobs in the renewable energy sector today. In Paul Gipe’s words, "Advanced Renewable Tariffs are a job creation machine." As well as encouraging major investors to enter the industry, ARTs encourage farmers, municipalities, and cooperatives to become investors, widening the base of ownership, and easing the approvals process, since (as they say in Germany) "Your own pig manure doesn’t smell". When local investors can see a wind turbine spinning and think "That’s my pension being generated", the level of community support is correspondingly high.

While the initiative for ARTs has started in Europe, interest is gaining pace in North America. Prince Edward Island, Washington State and Minnesota (Community Based Energy Development) have adopted ARTs, and Ontario is looking to do so for power under 10 MW. California has also introduced legislation to adopt an ART.

The success of an Advanced Renewable Tariff depends on the willingness of rate-payers to pay a premium for green power, in return for the social, environmental and long-term economic benefits that the investment brings. Opinion polls show that there is strong public support for sustainable energy in Canada. When set against the fact that 90% of BC’s energy comes from the heritage power of our large dams, an increase in the cost of additional energy is only 10% of the increase by the time it reaches the ratepayers. If I pay 20% more for green power on 10% of my power bill, my actual bill only rises by 2%. For more information on ARTs, see www.wind-works.org/articles/feed_laws.html

Strategic Action No 2.

Our second recommended Strategic Actions focuses on the merits of Advanced Renewable Tariffs, and the many benefits that would accrue to the province if BC Hydro was empowered to adopt the ART as its means of procuring new energy both for the province and for export, instead of the tendering process, and calls for power.

"To speed the adoption of these technologies, the government should legislate a Sustainable Energy Feed-in Tariff (SEFIT), similar to those that have been successfully adopted in Germany, Spain and 15 other European Union countries, and in China. Producers of wind, tidal current, wave, and other sustainable energies would be guaranteed grid access and a fixed price for 20 years, with the cost of grid extensions being shared equally between the producer and BC Transmission Corporation. BC Hydro would be required to purchase the electricity at a contracted price set by a technical committee that reported to the government. The BC Utilities Commission would be directed to assign the costs to BC Hydro ratepayers.

The price would be specific to each type of sustainable energy, with the level set to encourage the development of those projects that are closest to being market-ready. This suggests a tariff that offers a moderate premium over the current market value of electricity. The total premiums that producers would be paid above market rates should be capped at $25 million per year for wind and $12.5 million per year for each of wave and tidal. This would limit BC Hydro's rate increases to a maximum of about 2%. To distribute the benefits of the tariff as widely as possible, the SEFIT would be available for only the first 100 MW of any one development."

Sustainable Energy Policies for BC, by Tom Hackney, Guy Dauncey and others. BCSEA, May 2005

Strategic Action No 3.

Our third recommended Strategic Action focuses on ways to accelerate the progress of Power Smart and energy efficiency and solar hot water in BC. The best approaches consist of a nested set of interacting policies, programs, incentives and rebates, designed to deliver the 25% to 50% energy saving goal which we believe to be possible. In order to finance such an approach, a Public Benefit Charge could be levied on all BC Hydro utility bills, with 100% of the income being placed in a fund for consumer rebates and incentives. In this way, the consumer pays for his or her own retrofits, which has the effect of reducing the overall bill.

Such funds are used quite widely in the USA, where 16 states, including California, use the mechanism to fund efficiency and renewable energy. (See Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy www.dsireusa.org). Alberta has also established a $100 million Energy Efficiency Fund, for use by municipalities.

"An energy efficiency charge of 0.25 cents per kWh on all residential and commercial electricity use above the first 6,000 kWh per year would net roughly $60 million per year, while minimizing the impact on low-income customers.81 The revenue could be applied as a rebate on the purchase of efficient lighting and used to subsidize residential energy efficiency renovations, including complete funding for retrofits of qualifying low income and rental housing. This would be similar to the $100 million energy efficiency retrofit fund implemented by the Province of Alberta. In 1992, Pacific Gas and Electric, the largest private utility in the US, invested over $170 million (US) in customer efficiency measures and created savings of $300 to $400 million (US) in the form of lower utility bills."

Sustainable Energy Policies for BC, by Tom Hackney, Guy Dauncey and others. BCSEA, May 2005

Steps could also be taken to encourage a far more active role for energy-saving companies (ESCOs), which are able to achieve large-scale savings for commercial and institutional clients, aided by contracts that allow the ECSOs to share in the benefits of reduced power bills, after the retrofits and conservation initiatives have been completed.

2.2 SMART MOBILE USE

There are 2.4 million vehicles in BC, and almost all are dependent on fossil fuels to get around, in the form of oil, diesel, or natural gas.

How will BC function when the oil and gas are too expensive to use, and then virtually unavailable, or when we choose to stop burning fossil fuels because of global climate change? This is a critically important question for anyone who is involved with energy supply. With the peak in the world’s oil supply approaching, the price inflation that we have seen recently is likely to continue.

We can reduce the need for private vehicles by increasing the ease with which people can walk, cycle or use transit. More can be done by encouraging car-sharing, telecommuting, and smart growth. Together, these initiatives could reduce the need for travel by car by as much as 50%.

As a result of Vancouver’s historic decision in 1969 to forgo an urban expressway, and the subsequent commitment to encourage a lively urban form, and Victoria’s similar values, there is a strong pool of people in BC who have professional and other skills in the areas of smart growth, urban design, pedestrian uses, cycling, and car-sharing. These skills will be of enormous value as BC’s communities address the need for their citizens to travel with convenience and ease, and its businesses to operate without the use of oil or gas. The same skills are exportable, and Vancouver’s leadership through initiatives such as Cool Vancouver and the World Urban Forum may provide a platform for people to package their skills and use them around the world, as many are already doing.

2.2.1 SMART FUELS FOR MOBILE USE

That leaves the question: how will the remaining 50% of vehicles travel? There are five fuel technologies on the table:

(a) Biodiesel
(b) Ethanol
(c) Hydrogen fuel cells
(d) Methane
(e) Electric vehicles

(a) Biodiesel

There is an important case to be made for biodiesel to replace the use of diesel in some fleets, where refueling can be easily organized, but the limited supply of biodiesel will not be sufficient to cover private transport. There are several fast moving initiatives underway in BC.

(b) Ethanol

The rush to embrace ethanol should be put on hold until the recent study which suggests that more energy is needed to grow and make ethanol than it delivers has been considered. Ethanol made from crops grown for the purpose may not yield a net energy gain. Ethanol made from forest and agricultural wastes, and other biofuels, such as DynaMotive’s BioOil, deliver a better net energy return, and should be encouraged.

(c) Hydrogen

Hydrogen is not a fuel: it is an energy carrier. The hydrogen for use in fuel cells has to be gathered, either from natural gas, or by using electricity to split water. When natural gas is used, the process still produces CO2 emissions, and the future global scarcity of natural gas must also be considered. There is not a single auto company which is promising to deliver a production line H2 vehicle before 2020, which is the year when the global supply of natural gas will likely peak, and begin to decline. When you consider the scale of the hydrogen delivery infrastructure that would need to be built, it is hard to see where the investment would come from if investors knew that natural gas would soon be too expensive to use.

Hydrogen can also be made by using electricity to split water, for use in a fuel cell to generate electricity. In the process, however, half of the electricity’s energy value is lost. This will make the fuel twice as inefficient as a direct electric drive, and investors will still need to finance a continent-wide H2 delivery system.

Hydrogen may well have specialty uses in equipment such as fork lifts, industrial equipment, and long-distance trucks which can refuel in a limited number of select filling stations. For general use, however, it does not seem to make sense, especially when a more cost effective technology will be competing for the same market: electric vehicles.

(d) Methane

In Zurich, where household compostable wastes are collected on a weekly basis and composted in a closed vessel system, the resulting methane gas is used to power 1200 ‘Compocars’ which run around Zurich. The technology represents a niche market for some city vehicles, while reducing the problems of urban waste disposal.

(e) Electric Vehicles

Electric vehicles are silent, smooth, efficient, and astonishingly cheap to run. The chart below shows that EVs cost only $6 to $22 a month to run, compared with $100 to $150 a month for a regular gasoline vehicle. AN EV is 5 to 25 times cheaper to operate than a gas-power vehicle. If the price of gas doubles, they will be 10 to 50 times cheaper.

Table 2: Electric Vehicle Power Use and Cost

Assumptions: 16,000 km per year. Cost of electricity: 6 cents kWh

The refueling infrastructure for EVs exists wherever there is power, so there are no new infrastructure costs, apart from the recharging posts. The only issue is range: a typical EV might have a range of 100 km; or up to 300 km with a lithium ion battery. Most trips are short, however, for which an EV is just fine.

For longer trips, you could rent a Plug-In Hybrid: a gas-electric hybrid vehicle such as the Toyota Prius that has been fitted with extra batteries, turning it into a fully electric vehicle for local use, and a regular hybrid for longer distances, for which it could use biodiesel, or ethanol from biowastes. (See www.calcars.org)

It is obvious that electric vehicles are not going to be the solution for all uses, and that it is unlikely to work for trucking, or the ferries. In the interest of calculating how much extra demand an EV strategy would place on BC Hydro, however, I have assumed that all vehicles in BC might be electric. Table 3 uses the kWh per 100 kilometer data in Table 2 to show that converting BC’s transport to electric vehicles might place an additional demand on the grid of 8,000 GWh/yr, which places it within the realm of the achievable. Warning: this data is not derived from a reviewed study, so it should only be read as general estimate (see over).

Table 3: Motor Vehicles in BC and Electric Vehicle Power Demand

1. Off road vehicles include snowmobiles, dune buggies and amphibious vehicles.
Source: Statistics Canada, CANSIM, table 405-0004.  Last Modified: 2005-04-22.
* Calculations by Guy Dauncey, July 8, 2005
** Assumes many trailers are not often used.

The suggestion that BC’s future transportation strategy for the post-oil transition be based on electric vehicles clearly raises questions which merit a full discussion. If there is support for this approach, it strengthens the need to develop BC’s sustainable electricity resources.

The over-riding strength of the EV argument is the clear economic benefit to BC’s citizens, business community and government of such an affordable, low-cost solution. The hydrogen strategy, on the other hand, is a high cost, high risk solution.

It also raises an interesting option. If it is on average ten times cheaper to run an electric vehicle than a gasoline vehicle, it is possible that drivers would be willing to pay twice the price for EV electricity, ie 12 cents/kWh, which could be used to cushion the increased cost of the Advanced Renewable Tariff.

A Neighbourhood EV needing 1400 kWh a year to operate could also be run off a 1 kW solar PV system, on three hours average sunlight a day (3 x 365 = 1095 kWh). A 1 kW installed solar system can be bought today in BC for $10,000, which would require a $70 monthly payment on a 25 year loan at 7%. When the market price of solar falls to $2 US per watt ($4 CAN installed), a 1 kW system will cost $4,000, for which the monthly payment would be $28, for a total monthly operating cost of $35. There is one full electric vehicle manufacturing company in BC – the Dynasty Electric Car Corp, based in Delta.

2.2.2 SMART MOBILE USE ACTIONS

Strategic Action No 4.

The fourth of our Strategic Actions emphasizes the need to study the impact on BC’s transport system of the looming end to the Age of Oil, and to reduce CO2 emissions by as much as 80% in order to tackle the problems of global climate change. It also suggests the need to explore future possibilities, and make recommendations for action based on an informed analysis of the options.

This calls for the establishment of a Future of Transport in BC Task Force made up of professional energy and transport analysts who have knowledge of hydrogen, biodiesel, electric vehicles, and other possible candidates.

2.3 SMART STATIONARY USE

Long before the oil and natural gas run out, they will become too expensive for most people to use to heat their homes. We must therefore ask the question: How will we heat our homes, when the oil and gas are gone?

Our buildings are hopefully designed to last for 100 years, but if they are heated with oil or gas, these will effectively be gone by 2030 (oil) and 2040 (gas). Hence, we have a problem which we need to address now. The longer we leave it, the greater will be the resulting heat crisis when the fuels become too expensive for home owners, renters and businesses to use.

Zero-Energy Buildings: The best solution for new buildings is a zero-energy approach, combining passive solar design, super-efficiency, ventilated heat recovery, solar hot water, ground-source or water-source heating, and solar PV to operate the pumps.

The very successful 92-unit Beddington Zero Energy Development in South London, UK, demonstrates what is possible, and the proposed Dockside Green development in Victoria looks set to emulate that success.

To the extent that a year-round heating load would pull too much heat out of the ground, additional solar hot water panels can be installed to recharge the heat in the ground during summer, as the new NRCAN-supported 52-unit housing development at Drake Landing, Okotoks, Alberta, is doing. Heat for new buildings can also be obtained from heat-recovery systems engineered into city sewer pipes, linked to district heating. Based on Zurich’s experience, one and a half metres of pipe will provide enough heat for one home, year round.

Solar Hot Water: Water heating uses 25 to 30% of BC’s residential electricity use, where it is heated with electricity. As the price of gas rises, people who are using gas to heat their water will switch back to electricity, causing a rise in demand. The typical domestic solar hot water system saves 3,000 kWh a year of electricity(21), so residential installations on 2 million homes would save 8,000 GWh/yr. To this we can add a further 2,000 GWh/yr for industry, businesses, hotels and restaurants, institutions, and swimming pools, totaling 10,000 GWh/yr.

In case anyone thinks this is dreaming, it is useful to note that in China, 26 million houses have had solar hot water systems installed, and the government has set a goal of 115 million homes by 2010. The Chinese evacuated tube systems are selling for half the price of the European tubes (the tubes are more efficient than the flat plate systems), but the Chinese tubes have hardly begun to penetrate Canada. Here in BC, we should set a goal of 100,000 solar hot water systems by 2025, as a minimum.

GeoExchange Heat Systems. These systems of heating work excellently, and are cost-effective in the long run. The industry has huge growth potential, but it is little appreciated, and little understood, partly because of the very merits of the technology, which is both silent and invisible. There are developers who are motivated to install such systems, but they need support to develop legal structures such as community or developer owned utilities, so that the homeowner benefits of living with such a low-cost heating system can be used to finance the construction of the system.

In its GeoExchange Energy SWOT Analysis report to the Task Force on Alternative Energy & Power, GeoExchange BC has estimated that if just 1% of BC’s new and retrofit market installed geoexchange systems, this could save more than 150 GWh of electricity a year(22). If 25% of the market was captured, thanks to a coordinated program of policies and incentives, this could save 3,750 GWh a year.

The task of retrofitting all of BC’s existing buildings that depend on oil or gas for heating will be enormous: but it will have to be done. As a province, we do not begin to have a handle on how it should be done, using which technologies, or at what cost. The fallback will be electric baseboards, which is the most inefficient way to use BC’s electricity resources.

2.3.1 SMART STATIONARY USE ACTIONS

Strategic Action No 5.

The fifth of our five Strategic Actions emphasizes the need to find out how we are going to do it, by establishing a Future of Heating Task Force consisting of appropriately qualified engineers, architects, and energy providers. When they have done their work, they can recommend the best policies, programs and incentives to encourage the construction of NEW zero energy homes, the acceleration of the market for solar hot water and geoexchange heat systems, and the retrofitting of all existing homes. The GVRD has already moved in this direction with a study on the topic.

One of the first things that the Task Force will need to consider is the potential for greater home insulation and heat recovery, to prevent heat loss. This carries a huge potential for businesses and jobs in the retrofit business, since so much of BC’s building stock could benefit from a retrofit. A Zero Energy Housing business sector, once established, would be well placed to export its skills and products.

2.4 LOCALIZATION OF FOOD SUPPLY

An element not addressed in the Premier’s Technology Council Report, but critical to enabling energy efficiency, transportation demand reduction, and selling BC’s sustainability transformation know-how globally, is the localization of food supply.

It is important to consider the future security of BC’s food supply, since we depend so heavily on food imported from outside BC. All conventional agriculture depends on the use of natural gas to make fertilizers, and oil to make pesticides and drive farm machinery.

Our heavy agricultural dependence on oil and gas means that the world will have to make a rapid transition within our lifetime, as the global supplies of oil and gas begin to run out.

A solution is available in the form of local organic agriculture, including urban farming, but the transition will have to be managed with care, since we have become so habituated to consuming food grown all over the world using fossil fuels, that is shipped or flown to BC using diesel and kerosene.

In economic terms, the rising cost of non-organic imported food will open up opportunities for locally grown organic food, if there is land, training, and marketing expertise for the thousands of small organic growers who will seek to provide the food. BC is not rich in agricultural land, and our development patterns are placing a heavy pressure on the Agricultural Land Reserve, from which it is now possible to withdraw land for "community interests" (ie real estate development). It is important that BC should start planning for this transition now, and protect its remaining farmland.

3.0 IN CONCLUSION

The opportunities for alternative energy in BC are staggering. The benefits that will accompany the development of this sector are equally large, combining over 400,000 jobs, significant exports of both products and services, and many health, social and environmental benefits. It is highly likely that a successful transformation would also increase tourism in BC and make BC a sustainability tourism destination, increasing tourism jobs. The BCSEA has already been approached by a group of Japanese tourists to provide a tour of a sustainable energy installation.

The immediate challenge is to free the logjam which prevents BC Hydro from embarking on a more ambitious and sustainable approach to meet BC’s power needs: namely the interpretation by the BCUC of the phrase "public interest" to allow wider public interests to be counted as well as financial interests. The present rather narrow interpretation prevents BC Hydro from acting on its commitment to the triple bottom line, and from fulfilling its 2020 goal of having "no incremental net effects to the environment". If BC is to fulfill the dreams of the Golden Decade, which includes the Premier’s commitment "to lead the world in sustainable environmental management, with the best air and water quality…. bar none", this logjam must be released. This calls for policy clarification, and leadership from the Premier.

With the logjam released, BC Hydro will be able to explore more innovative approaches to power acquisition and management, such as the Advanced Renewable Tariff that is generating power and jobs in Europe so successfully.

The long-term challenge, which needs to be addressed immediately, is to consider the combined influence of global climate change and the global decline of oil and gas, and their impact on BC, and to ask how BC will operate in a world where there is no more affordable oil or gas.

We may not know when for sure, but the oil and gas will soon begin to run out. The reshaping of our energy infrastructure for the era beyond oil and gas will encourage very important investments. The BC Sustainable Energy Association and its members are keen to play their part, as we are already doing through our various initiatives and Chapter activities.

BC can be the hub for a global energy transformation, and the jobs that go with it, if:

• We take an integrated approach rather than focus on several ‘silver bullets’;
• We work together in an integrated way with provincial and municipal governments, industry, and non-profit organizations;
• We act now with courage, leadership, and urgency.

We thank you for the time you have spent reading this letter, and we hope that it will make a useful contribution to the your deliberations in the Alternative Energy & Power Technology Task Force.

Guy Dauncey,
President,

Appendix 1:

BCSEA Board of Directors:

Guy Dauncey (President). Author of Stormy Weather: 101 Solutions to Global Climate Change (New Society Publishers, 2001), A Sustainable Energy Plan for the USA (YES! Magazine 2003), and other titles. Green buildings and sustainable communities consultant. Co-founder of Victoria Car-Share Coop.

Kevin Pegg (Vice-President). Owner of EA Energy Alternatives Ltd, a Victoria based renewable energy company established in 1982, focused on design and installation of solar, wind and microhydro systems.

Tom Hackney (Secretary/Treasurer). President of Georgia Strait Crossing Concerned Citizens Coalition.

Naomi Devine. UVic Environmental Studies and Political Science student. Chair of the BCSEA Victoria Chapter. Board member, UVic Sustainable Campus Initiative.

José Etcheverry. Research and Policy Analyst, Climate Change Program, David Suzuki Foundation. Co-author of Bright Future: Avoiding Blackouts in Ontario and Smart Generation: Powering Ontario with Renewable Energy. Resource Planning lecturer, Geography Dept, Simon Fraser University.

Gunther Honold. Retired, after 20 years with BC Buildings Corp, working in building systems related design and project management services, including renewable energy technologies and Solar DHW. Past Chair of BCBC Indoor Air Quality Task Force. Life Member of ASHRAE.

Adam James. Former Regional Endangered Species Specialist for Government of Alberta. Employed with GeoTility Systems Corp. a leading Groundsource Heat Pump firm based in Kelowna, working on building energy analyses, evaluations and feasibility studies, and implementing GSHP systems.

Todd Johnson. Business Admin student at Camosun College, Victoria. Owns and operates an electric vehicle company focusing on electric bikes and scooters.

Dale Littlejohn. Management consultant, Deloitte Touche, Vancouver. Chair of the Vancouver Chapter.

Bruce Mackenzie. Works in a small Victoria company as a project manager and business analyst. BSc Computer Science, with twenty years experience in GIS and Internet mapping.

Morgan McDonald. Engineer with Taylor Munro Energy Systems Inc., one of Canada's leading solar water heating companies.

Chris Mott. Completing a Masters degree in electrical engineering at UBC. Professional experience ranges from positions with large high-tech companies in Vancouver to present role as V.P. Engineering in a local start-up company.

Scott Sinclair. Owner and president of Sinclair Environmental Solutions (SES), a Vancouver based company that specializes in energy efficiency consulting. Member of Cool Vancouver Task Force that developed Vancouver’s Kyoto Action Plan. Founder of Young Energy, an energy education program that teaches youth how to reduce their energy footprint, think critically, and take charge of their future.

TJ Schur. Director External Relations, Aeolis Wind Power Corporation, Sidney, BC. Masters in Environmental Studies (community, planning, and wind energy), York University, Toronto. Spent three years working on WindShare (TREC), Canada's first urban wind turbine.

Geza Vamos. Professional engineer engaged in industrial and commercial building energy efficiency, and feasibility study for Canada’s first wind power project.

Taylor Zeeg. Stewardship Program Co-ordinator at the Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia, Kamloops. Chair of the Kamloops Chapter. Provisional member of the Canadian Institute of Planners since 2004.

Peter Ronald, BCSEA Coordinator. Cofounder of Environment News Service; past Chair of Reach for Unbleached Foundation, focused on achieving cleaner standards and technology in BC's pulp and paper industry; past Program Coordinator with the Georgia Strait Alliance.

Footnotes:

1 US Energy Information Agency, July 22, 2005. www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html
2 For the full US DoE text, see www.drydipstick.com/doemarch05.html
3 Edward Miles, "Climate Change in the Pacific Northwest," presented at 2004 AAAS Climate Change Dialogue, Seattle, Washington, February 13, 2004, www.cses.washington.edu/cig/outreach/files/AAAS_2004.shtml.
4 Comparative Analysis of Employment from Air Emission Reduction Measures, Pembina Institute, 1997.
5 Assumes 6.25 jobs per MW: 6 per MW in manufacturing and installation, 1 in planning, and 0.25 in maintenance. (BCSEA data)
6 Assumes 2.25 jobs per MW; 2 in installation and 0.25 permanent. www.justenergy.org/news/010504freepress.html
7 Assumes same basis as for microhydro
8 Assumes 5.7 jobs per MW. See Employment Benefits of Using Geothermal Energy (US Dept of Energy). www.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/employ_benefits.html
9 Assumes same basis as wind energy.
10 Assumes 1.5 jobs per MW.
11 Assumes 35 jobs per MW, including manufacturing, sales and installation (Job Creation Potential of Solar, CanSIA January 2005).
12 Pembina Institute. 1997. Comparative Analysis of Employment from Air Emission Reduction Measures. Energy efficiency programs produce an average of 37 jobs per million dollars of investment, compared to seven jobs for conventional energy supplies including natural gas and coal.
13 Assumes 6 jobs per 1000 square meters (Job Creation Potential of Solar, CanSIA January 2005). Typical unit = 4 square metres. 2.5 million installations = 10 million square metres = 60,000 jobs. Not included in jobs total, to avoid double-counting with efficiency jobs total.
14 Assumes 25% uptake of market potential for new buildings and retrofits, based on data from www.geoexchangebc.ca
15 In the absence of any known study, this assumes the same “jobs per kWh saved” ratio as for solar hot water, which translates to 6 jobs per GWh saved. Not included in the jobs total, for the same reason as solar hot water.
16 Data from Randy Holmquist, Canadian Electric Vehicles, Errington, BC, who converts regular vehicles to EVs, and sells the S-10 truck
17 Data from www.gemcar.com/asp/cost_calc.asp
18 Data from a New York measured run, see www.ovonic.com/news_events/5_2_press_releases/19980727.htm,
19 Data from Horlacher website, www.horlacher.com/ev_development/sport_1.htm
20 1 million kWh = 1 GWh
21 NRCAN data
22 GeoExchange Energy SWOT Analysis, June 2005. www.geoexchangebc.ca