From Manitoba Hydro to Manitoba Energy

RE: Political High Wire (WPG Free Press, April 6, 2008)

The complex web of political-bureaucratic-public relationships governing Manitoba Hydro is an interesting topic for discussion. The way that decisions are made is supposed to be democratic, but in reality it is far from transparent or accessible for citizens. It is no wonder that we do not debate the entire decision to spend between $11-$20 billion over the next 15 years on hydroelectric dams and transmission lines. This kind of expenditure (more than the entire Manitoba budget for 2008) warrants a more nuanced process, involving citizens envisioning the kinds of energy projects they want to spend this massive amount of borrowed money on.

These projects are not “clean energy”, and will not help us build a “green economy”, as the article and endless Hydro and Government propaganda suggests. Rather, it is $20 billion dollars that could be invested in a soft energy path, one which localizes and diversifies energy production, using a wide range of alternative technologies that exist today (solar panels, micro wind turbines, geothermal, straw-bale construction and renovation, etc). Part of the problem is that all of the major decisions have been made by Hydro’s engineers and executives, cheered on by both the NDP Government and PC Opposition. Why is it that citizens only get to debate the relatively meagre $400 million dollars (2% of the total estimated cost of all projects)? We should open up more decision-making of public boards and utilities to citizens, so that we can truly consider all alternative uses of public dollars.

A real Green and democratic economy would consist of thousands of small-scale producers of energy, food, housing, and even transportation systems. It would be designed to meet local needs year-round, in a non-polluting, socially just, and grassroots democratic way. Hydro dams and transmission lines still emit greenhouse gases, destroy forests, disrupt water flows and fish life-cycles. The only way it is to be considered “clean” is compared to coal power, which also does not need to be built, and shouldn’t be – anywhere. There is a huge potential for creating sustainable communities with proper public investment in them.

A shift in the ways we use energy, the ways we organize society, the methods of construction and renovation of homes and workplaces, all affect our relative level of energy use, our health, and our environment. Understanding how these issues are connected and how the broader policy direction of our governments affects them is critical to empowering citizens and making change. I am glad that this article exposes some of that and provides an overview of the history of Manitoba Hydro. I wish though that we would begin to discuss how the infrastructure of Manitoba uses energy and pollutes the environment and how we must change the structure and design of our society to protect us from any disruptions in the supplies of oil and natural gas, which will eventually be exhausted anyways, likely in my lifetime. Together we can write a new chapter in Hydro’s history, perhaps as “Manitoba Energy”: a re-constituted institution leading us down the soft energy path to a sustainable future. But only with a drastic change in thinking in the public and in our elected officials.