During a recent power outage in the North Okanagan a friend of mine, let’s call him “Bob”, who is bit of an inquisitive doozer of sorts, decided that after the lights went back on, then dimmed periodically, to plug a voltmeter into an electrical outlet.
Bewildered Bob discovered a voltage drop from 120 volts down to 80 volts within intervals lasting up to a minute and a half each time. This event transpired for quite sometime.
So, what does this mean?
Well, we really don’t know.
You see Bob made sure that he shut his large flat screen TV and his home computer off as a safe measure before he phoned BC Hydro eager to share this voltage drop discovery, and to ask about the risk of such an event on his many electrical appliances including a water pump deep down in his well.
After explaining the situation to the BC Hydro “Help” person, the reply Bob heard was, “Really!”
“Well we don’t see anything like that happening on our screens”
“But we’ll send a crew out to check it out, and we’ll let you know what we find.”
Bob tells me he never saw a crew, nor did he get a call explaining what the post blackout voltage drop was all about.
So, Bob doesn’t really know what’s happening on his neighbourhood power grid, and neither do we, in fact BC Hydro may not know either.
If you live in a rural part of the Okanagan you may be experiencing more power outages than 10 years ago, or maybe it’s just your imagination because you’re more dependent and aware of your electrical consumption today?
Whichever the scenario, you are not alone.
Our communities consider key infrastructure issues as having to do with roads, water and garbage, but perhaps we have become complacent about certain other staples such as our electricity and telephone?
The issue of weak electrical infrastructure continues to surface in rural BC as residents of the remote community of Goldbridge 100 kilometres west of Lillooet rallied at a meeting last November to share stories about the day their home appliances were destroyed.
According to a by Larry Pynn of the Vancouver Sun report much of the anger is being directed at BC Hydro for failing to take responsibility for the damage.
"You know those compact fluorescent lights that Hydro told us we should have?" said Judy Hartmann, bartender at the Gold Bridge Hotel. "They blew out all the way down the hallway. We had pieces of glass lodged in the walls and the floors. Someone could have been injured."
On November 15, 2007, a power surge to Gold Bridge and a nearby recreational destination, Gun Lake, blew out all manner of electrical devices and appliances.
Hartmann claimed the surge also destroyed the hotel's electric cash register, debit machine, central vacuum system, satellite TV and washing machine.
“Name the electrical appliance, and it's pretty much guaranteed to have been destroyed,” she said.
However, for the population of about 40, not much satisfaction is coming from BC Hydro, which blames the destructive event on weather and not corporate negligence.
Hartmann told the Sun that there has been talk of a class action lawsuit against Hydro unless the corporation changes its tune and helps local residents with the cost of repairing damage and buying new electrical appliances.
Hydro spokeswoman Gillian Robinson said in an interview with the newspaper that high winds caused wires to touch four times on the main 60-kV transmission line to the communities between 8:47 a.m. and 2:42 p.m. on November 15th.
"The cause appears to be inclement weather," she said. "And that is beyond Hydro's control. We don't accept the liability in those cases."
Robinson said Hydro is not responsible for losses or injuries as a result of problems, failures or defects in the delivery of electricity, adding the corporation would also not be responsible for loss of meat in a freezer caused by power loss.
A public meeting held just after the event, drew about 40 people to the Gold Bridge Community Club, residents were quick to dismiss Hydro's explanation of the problem, arguing it was not even blowing hard in town in the period cited by the corporation.
Lynda Illidge, a 26-year resident of Gold Bridge, said a wind and snowstorm two days earlier is a likelier explanation, perhaps having toppled trees that eventually caused the surge.
Whatever the cause, she said the event is only the latest and most dramatic example of how poorly the area is served by Hydro despite its location next to La Joie Dam on Downton Lake.
Russ Oakley, a local resident and chair of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, dismissed Hydro's explanation and urged the residents to gather for a second meeting soon if Hydro officially rejects their compensation claims.
He estimated more than 200 homeowners in Gold Bridge and Gun Lake may have sustained losses from the surge, which was so powerful that it fried and even melted surge protectors designed to protect against electrical damage.
"I had a big black mark on the carpet," he said.
Homeowner insurance may pay for some of the damage, but residents say they must weigh the benefits of a claim against the cost of the deductible and the potential for higher premiums the following year.
Another concern is that only one-tenth of Gun Lake homeowners are permanent residents and some could be unaware of the power surge. They might return this summer to find damage resulting from frozen pipes or lack of interior heat.
In October of 2007, Vancouver Island residents were told that they face an "acute" risk of a major power failure by one of the aging submarine cables that deliver electricity from the B.C. mainland, according to a document filed in August in the Supreme Court of Canada.
The document, an affidavit filed by the B.C. Transmission Corporation (BCTC) vice-president Bruce Barrett, states that the corporation's high-voltage direct current (HVDC) system "is not in a position to continue to provide reliable transmission service to Vancouver Island after this fall."
The BCTC is a crown corporation, has a mandate to plan, operate and maintain B.C.'s electricity transmission system, so it plays a key role as far as insuring that the big picture electrical service in the province is maintained.
Vancouver Island is served by three sets of submarine cables. Two southern sets that run along the sea floor in the Strait of Georgia, including the HVDC, are nearing the end of their useful lives and are no longer considered sufficient or reliable to meet peak winter electricity demand on the Island.
Canwest News reported that the high-voltage lines are in the worst shape, and have been serving only as backups for peak winter electricity consumption on the Island -- but there's only one left in service as a result of damage during recent construction at the Deltaport container port.
Barrett states that the corporation is now relying on a single 30-year-old high-voltage cable to provide backup power for a set of 50-year-old 130-kilovolt submarine cables situated a few kilometres farther south.
"The HVDC system is obsolete and a number of its major components are not replaceable should a major failure occur. The risk to customers is especially acute over the winter when the load is at its peak."
The transmission corporation in 2005 was authorized by the British Columbia Utilities Commission to install a new set of cables that will provide Vancouver Island with a more secure supply of electricity -- but the project continues to be delayed by some Tsawwassen residents.
The Tsawwassen portion would be built on an existing 50-year-old right-of-way through the backyards of about 40 residents, replacing lines on H-frame wooden poles with lines on single steel poles.
The Tsawwassen Residents Against Higher Voltage Overhead Lines Society has been rebuffed in a series of court challenges aimed at deflecting their portion of the project to another part of the community.
The society is seeking leave to appeal the project to the Supreme Court of Canada on the premise that electromagnetic field radiation from new, higher-voltage lines will elevate cancer risks for residents living in the vicinity.
In documents filed in Supreme Court, the transmission corporation argues that the court should reject the society's appeal and allow the project to proceed.
"The scientific community has not proposed, much less accepted, any biological mechanism for a possible connection between [electromagnetic field] levels and any health effects," the corporation states.
Barrett says a delay would be expensive: "If the 2008 window for the submarine cable laying operation were missed, BCTC would incur significant costs, which I estimate to be at a minimum of 15 per cent of the submarine cable contract, or approximately $22 million."
A route change would delay the project up to two years, making 2010 the probable earliest date to set the cable, and would add anywhere from $25 million to $109 million to the cost of the project, Barrett states.
This Vancouver Island scenario may not be out of the norm. In fact the provincial governments new Energy Plan places new pressures on our power utilities to prepare for new sustainable energy projects around the province and to guarantee that electrical transmission can grow and be maintained.
The big question is can BCTC afford to meet the costs of the government’s new demands and still pay for the old demands?
We may be witnessing the first of many such reports as utilities and BCTC begin to come clean with reporting just how bad our electrical infrastructure might be, in an effort to avoid issues of future liability. Such realities also expose the ultimate conundrum on our utility infrastructure: a growing population, increasing electrical demands, and no one wanting transmission lines and substations in their backyard.
Our community leadership may be wise to closely look at a recent decision registered by the BC Utilities Commission last summer that outlines the infrastructure projects approved by the commission as well as comments and even warnings that the commission and critics have made that may impact communities.
Through the technical jargon, the document includes warnings about the ramifications brought on by the provincial governments New Energy Plan which hopes to bring about energy self sufficiency sooner than later. The plan contains nineteen policy actions that are directly related to electricity of which five are directly related to the transmission of electricity by BCTC.
In short, it appears that BCTC is in no way prepared for the demands that the provincial government is placing on it with regards to the extra infrastructure and responsibilities being proposed.
The report suggests BCTC is being “rushed” and it remains concerned about errors in judgement along the way.
So this pits the glamour of political policy-making against actually getting the job done as government becomes interested in energy self sufficiency with no real definition as to what that means, against BCTC which is most concerned about “congestion relief” which means, not enough supply and infrastructure to a populated area, and the Okanagan may be one of those.
But alas, both the province and BCTC may be stalled in their endeavours if you and I simply don’t want energy projects and transmission lines in our backyards. The BC Utilities Commission outlined something called a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CNCP) as it relates to the Commission Panel approving any transmission project, which includes the corridor that delivers the transmission line, towers and substations. In short, the commission is suggesting that community’s give their blessing to such projects, and if they don’t BCTC needs to go back to the drawing board and figure out how to deliver the power another way.
Needless to say, new transmission lines may take quite a bit of time to approve let alone construct, and given First Nations Land Claims, viewscapes and health issues we may be in for more power outages in the future regardless of Premier Campbell’s wishes of energy self sufficiency.
So Bob, keep that voltmeter plugged in and let us know when Hydro calls you back.
(30)
