IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cdh/commen/528.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dammed If You Do: How Sunk Costs Are Dragging Canadian Electricity Ratepayers Underwater

Author

Listed:
  • A.J. Goulding

    (London Economics International)

Abstract

The push towards renewable energy sources has prompted major investments in mega-projects to generate hydroelectricity. However, government decisions to make such large investments in generating capacity must be scrutinized for economic soundness – particularly relative to the costs of alternatives for producing this power. Canada has several large hydroelectricity projects presently under construction including three that are the subject of this paper: Site C on the Peace River in northern British Columbia, Keeyask on the Nelson River in Manitoba, and Muskrat Falls on the Churchill River in Labrador. Each of these projects represents a multi-billion dollar upfront investment by public entities in long-lived generation capacity. This study examines the cost-effectiveness of these hydro projects by comparing the costs of equivalent generation from carbon cost adjusted combined cycle natural gas turbines (CCGT). The analysis demonstrates that the levelized costs from the Site C and Keeyask projects may exceed the costs of alternative CCGT generation. The study notes that risks of building large generation capacity in anticipation of uncertain future demand for electricity and contends that, relative to large hydro projects, the roll-out of CCGT generation can be more flexibly timed (and paired with environmental initiatives) to meet demand as it materializes. Even building-in the likely costs of cancellation, the author concludes that present economics would favour cancelling Site C and Keeyask and replacing the respective capacity with equivalent dispatchable CCGT generation capacity. The study shows that replacing Site C or Keeyask with equivalent CCGT capacity is cost effective even when applying a lower discount rate. While an emphasis on renewables generation has motivated these major hydroelectric projects, the analysis shows that Site C exceeds the levelized cost of a CCGT alternative that faces a $50/tonne carbon price. Moreover, drawing from results in recent renewable energy procurement, the study observes that wind generation can provide a much lower levelized cost of zero-emission electricity than such large-scale hydro projects. This study concludes by recommending that provinces re-examine the economics of these projects and consider cancelling projects which have more cost effective alternatives. To avoid uneconomic projects in the future, the report also recommends strengthening institutional independence – in particular, by ensuring independent regulatory review for mega-projects and leveraging greater private-sector discipline for the design and delivery of major electricity projects.

Suggested Citation

  • A.J. Goulding, 2019. "Dammed If You Do: How Sunk Costs Are Dragging Canadian Electricity Ratepayers Underwater," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 528, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/Commentary_528.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arbuckle, Evan J. & Binsted, Matthew & Davies, Evan G.R. & Chiappori, Diego V. & Bergero, Candelaria & Siddiqui, Muhammad-Shahid & Roney, Christopher & McJeon, Haewon C. & Zhou, Yuyu & Macaluso, Nick, 2021. "Insights for Canadian electricity generation planning from an integrated assessment model: Should we be more cautious about hydropower cost overruns?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    2. Dolter, Brett & Fellows, G. Kent & Rivers, Nicholas, 2022. "The cost effectiveness of new reservoir hydroelectricity: British Columbia’s Site C project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Energy and Natural Resources; Capital Projects Costs and Benefits; Competition; Electricity; North American Integration; Provincial Comparisons; Technological Change;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:528. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kristine Gray (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdhowca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.