Canada has big stake
in national hydro grid

By NIGEL MORGAN
iscussion of what could
become one of the great-
est projects yet in Canadian
history, took place in Ottawa
recently. Involved is the pos-
sibility of establishing a great,
all-Canadian, national power
grid stretching from coast to
coast. :
At stake is the life-blood
for the all-round development
and expansion of Canadian

industry; enough jobs to puta .

very substantial proportion of
Canada’s army of otherwise
permanently unemployed
back to work; and a plentiful
supply ef cheap light and
power for every home, farm
and factory from Cape Breton
to Vancouver Island. The
welfare of all Canadians, both
of this and generations yet
unborn, will be decisively
affected by the outcome.

Whether Ottawa means to
go ahead, or is engaging in a
purely political manoeuvre
with an eye to the forthcom-
ing Federal election; whether
the various Provincial admin-
istrations will set aside sec-
tional considerations for the
national weal; and, whether
the Canadian people will per-
mit this unique opportunity
to be lost or bartered away to
the power-hungry U.S. mono-
polies, are questions that will
be determined within the
next few months.

A fierce controversy has
been raging for nine years
over control and development
of British Columbia’s hydro
resources. The concentration
of the power struggle in B.C.
stems from the fact that the
“rainy” province, with its
high mountain peaks and tur-
bulent rivers, possesses un-
-developed hydro sites capable
of producing more electricity
than the total power genera-
tion of the highly-industrial-
ized British Isles.

Not only is it the largest
source of undeyeloped hydro
power left in Canada, but. it
has the potential for produc-
ing big blocks of the cheapest
power in the western world.
The Columbia — smaller in
its potential than either the
Peace or the Fraser (if its fish
problem couid be solved), has
a capacity five times that of
the St. Lawrence!
KEY QUESTION :

The key question is: will
this waterpower be harnessed
under Canadian control to
produce hydro-electric power
needed for the indusirial de-
velopment of Canada, or will
it be used to create storage
dams to increase the power
capacity, and with it process-
ing and manufacturing of
Canadian raw materials on
the U.S. side? ss

A further large-scale inva-
sion of B.C. by U.S. capital
and a North-South tie-in with
the» newly-planned, national
U.S. grid to “wheel” B.C., and
eventually Alaskan power,

down the Pacific coast and

right across the U.S. is being
promoted by the Bennett gov-
ernment.

Both the Federai and B.C.
governments committed them-
selves to ratizication of the
Columbia River draft treaty

with the U.S., which would ~

surrender Canada’s vital in-
terests, doom B.C.’s_ rich
Kootenay country to provid-
ing water storage for a for-
eign power, and all without
any real compensation.

F. C. Bartholomew, dean of
electrical consulting engin-
eers in B.C. has presented
evidence to prove that the so-
called ‘‘downstream benefits”
we woulg get from the United
States in the years to come,
do not by. any means compen-
sate Canada for: ‘‘(1) Our ex-
pense on providing control for
the States; or (2) the full
power we could develop on
the all-Canadian Columbia
scheme that McNaughton
(Canadian chairman of the
International Joint Commis-
sion) wanted.”

‘fhe drait treaty, initialed
by Diefenbaker and FEisen-
hower over a year ago, and
discussed and ratified by the
U.S. Senate in the record time
of 30 minutes flat, has not
yet been ratified by the Cana-
cian Parliament because of
widespread criticism and
kroad cpposition.

U.S. DEMANDS

U.S. monopoly interests are
arrogantly demanding satis-
faction. Three deadlines they
impudently set for Canada to:
act have already passed—the

bevoncd the stage where it was
a vear and a half ago. Victoria
won't give Ottawa assurances
of a water license (which the
B.N.A. Act pleces under its
jurisdiction), and Cttawa
(which has the power to veto
any development on the Can-
adian side under the Interna-
tional Waters Act passed in
1955 to step Bennett’s deal
with Kaiser) won’t ratify the
treaty without such a license
to assure the treaty can be
honored.

NEW ALTERNATIVE

It is on this background
that the immediate import-
ance of recent preliminary
national grid discussions make
themselves felt. It opens up a
new alternative centred
around—

(1) abandonment of the
Columbia treaty with the
U.S., which could only de-
stroy the possibilities for
developing cheap hydro pow-
er in Canada in order to satis-
fy the plan to generate power
in the U.S. from water stored
in Canada;

(2) establishment immed-
iately of a National Energy
Board to protect, conserve,
develop and distribute on an
eauitable basis Canada’s pow-
er resources, and restrict all
power exports until Canada’s

A national power grid wll make possible the building
of many hydro dams in various parts of Canada which
are now considered uneconomical. It would bring untold
benefits to Canada and provide many new jobs.

last one March ist. President
Kennedy has already author-
ized in his 1962 budget the
funds to build the transmis-
sion lines to tie-in B.C. hydro
with the new U.S. national
end

Ottawa still says it wants
early ratification of the treaty.
But Premier Bennett (whose
government controls the
granting of water licenses)
wants to go even further with
the U.S. ‘giveaway, insisting
that before any agreement is
reached, UNLIMITED export
permits be given by Ottawa
for Peace River and other
B.C. hyéro resources, and that
all “downstream benefits” be
sold for cash to the U.S. to
hetp finance his other big
“giveaway” project on the
Peace River.

This the Diefenbaker gov-
ernment has so far refused to
grant, with the result that the
craft treaty has nct advanced

full present and potential re-
quirements are guaranteed

(3) Bringing all existing
generating facilities (includ-
ing such private stations as
the U.S.-controlled Kitimat
and Arvida systems and the
C.M. & S.’s Kootenay Light
and Power) under national!
public ownership;

(4) developing facilities for
switching to direct-current for
long-distance transmission;
and utilizing the varying’
times for ‘peak demands’,
improvements in the “load
factor’ and decreased require-
ment in ‘generating capacity”
to reduce light and power
rates.

Agreement on such a new
approach would not only
break the present deadlock
and end the grave threat of a
further surrender of Cana-
dian independence, with all
its harsh consequences for

this and future generations of

‘

Power will be carried over huge transmission lines across
Canada serving the needs of the entire nation under 2

national power grid.

Canadians. It could provide
the basis for considerable sav-
ings in Canada’s overall elec-
trical needs, helping to stim-
ulate the expansion of
Canadian industry.

Because there is nalf a work-
day diiterence between when
eastern and western Canada

goes to work (four time zones’

across the country), substan-
tial economies could be ef-
fected in supplying “peak
power demands’. Similarly
with the increased “load fac-
tors’ which a national grid
with it’s accompaning expan-
sion would create.

A “reserve capacity”, which
can be drawn upon when a
power unit temporarily
breaks down, is needed to
maintain the reliability of all
power supplies. Every isolat-
ed station must have such a
supply. In a power grid, how-
ever, a considerably smaller
“reserve capacity” can ensure
the safe operation of several
power stations. It is authorita-
tively estimated that the sav-
ings on cost of “installed
generating capacity” needed
by a grid in comparison with
the present unconnected sys-
tems to supply ‘peaking de-
mands” and “standby re-
serves” for emergencies, could
pay for the needed transmis-
sion facilities.

NEED EARLY START
Another major contribution
such a national grid could
provide by increasing the
efficiency and lowering costs
of transmission, is to make
possible the development of a

conference. What

obvious advantages; to call 4

number of hydro sites — the
economics of which are pre-
sently held questionable. ©
Among them, Labrador’s |
Hamilton; Quebec’s Koksoak;
Manitoba’s Nelson ang Chur-—
chill; the Nass, Stikine, Yukon
and Peace Rivers in B.C., t0
mention but a few.

Favorable power positions
have been responsible for at-
tracting a number of heavy
power - consuming industries,
such as aluminum. Great
smelting, electro - chemical
and perto-chemical industries
relying on heavy power dé
mands will increasingly seek
locations where large amr
ounts of hydro-sieuiricity cable
be provided at attractive
rates. Canada’s development
demands that we push our
hydro development, which, 1%
the view of most authorities; —
can provide the cheapest oP
the continent.

The advantage of a public
owned, all-Canadian grid aré
unquestionable! And, noW
the feasibility is establishe¢
too! Prime Minister Diefen-
baker has finally been conv ~
pelled to acknowledge it i?
the recent federal-provincial
is neede
now is a vigorous, unit
demand of the people from
coast to coast, to realize its

halt to the surrender of Cal”
ada’s interests involved i
both the Federal and B.C:
government’s attitude to the ~
Draft Columbia River treaty:
and insist an early start be
made on a Candian nation@
power grid.

WHEN THE SHOE IS ON
THE OTHER FOOT... ©

When the announcement was made this month that the
United States was going to resume nuclear testing in the aim?
phere, Soviet Premier Khrushchev sent a letter to Preside
Kennedy, an excerpt of which reads: ;

“Not so long ago you and the entire Western press proved |
— and rightly — the harm done by these tests.

“How much was then said about nuclear tests poisoning
the atmosphere, soil and plant life, and about how radioactiv®
fallout together with infected vegetation enters the organism
animals, especially cows, and that such deposits are transmitte@
through the milk consumed by children.

- “But when you yourself conclude that you must conduc”
such tests, what happens to these arguments, where is
philanthropy with which you were so lavish in your statemé'

and messages?

“Now it proves that all these arguments were direct
only against the Soviet Union, and utilized only in order th
the United States could retain its superiority in some tYP

of weapons.

March 30, 1962—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page