So Climate Change will benefit us for what maybe 5 -20 years, before the Earth is too hot for life to exist, so instead of trying to stop Climate Change, lets just stop Site C? and enjoy more food before we all die? Wouldn't a better argument be Site C will contribute to Climate change? So don't build it? Just a crazy idea.

yes these people would use the alignment of the stars if they thought that they hoodwink us into believing that the stars oppose site c .im just waiting for them to trot dave susuki out ,so he can spew some bs about global warming .lets get bc hydro producing power before cambell sells the rights to some of his buddies first.that way you and i own the power not some multi national company......

First off, in the long run a hydroelectric dam will pollute far less than any other means of creating power. The construction portion being minor to what a coal power plant would emit. With all the new green smart goals and climate change concerns, I am surprised it's even a question when it comes to utilizing a natural means of electricity where available. The windfarm in Dawson being a perfect example of how BC and Canada is doing our part in cutting back emissions and striving for more green power alternatives. For the farmers in the Peace Valley, I can understand how it's tough when the government tells you to move off your property. You however, have known about this for the last few decades and the land being tentatively yours. It would also be a great boost in our economy and be another step ahead in Canada's climb from the recession.

First off, in the long run a hydroelectric dam will pollute far less than any other means of creating power. The construction portion being minor to what a coal power plant would emit. With all the new green smart goals and climate change concerns, I am surprised it's even a question when it comes to utilizing a natural means of electricity where available. The windfarm in Dawson being a perfect example of how BC and Canada is doing our part in cutting back emissions and striving for more green power alternatives. For the farmers in the Peace Valley, I can understand how it's tough when the government tells you to move off your property. You however, have known about this for the last few decades and the land being tentatively yours. It would also be a great boost in our economy and be another step ahead in Canada's climb from the recession.

Yes, I would like to understand more on how the arguement of Site C dam is going increase global warming? WTF!!!!!. With the new emissions laws that the BC MoE of environment is putting out there, the carbon tax, cap and trade etc. etc. It really makes more sense to build the Site C dam. Those people who are against the site C, and any other energy developments, i ask these questions? what do you drive? how is your home heated and how is your home powered? i am betting that all three of your answers support Site C and oil and gas. As Mike126 mentioned above the farmers and families living in the Peace Valley have known that their land was owned by BC Hydro and were just hoping that Site C wouldn't go ahead. I am glad to see BC looking at energy alternatives and agree the wind farms they are building are fantastic. However, they will not be able to supply the province with its growing needs.

First they claim that global warming can be slowed and that it is a terrible thing, next thing you know they're claiming the effects from global warming are going to help increase the yield of crops from the small amount of land that this will affect? If this is the case, all the other ag reserve will produce so much more that this land will be available and possibly even rendered useless?!?! Wow, I'd have to agree with the previous posts... this may be the dumbest position that I've ever heard the opposition to the Dam produce... Whats next? Encouraging people to eat fast food everyday so they can go out and get exercise to work it off? :P Judging from this article, It wouldn't surprise me in the least to hear something even more far fetched!!!

Best informative comment, nicely written. Thanks.

This would only be relevant if CO2 were the cause of warming. If you look at the ice core records from Greenland and Antarctica, CO2 increase is preceded by warming.

Global Warming is a hoax, even Al Gore admitted it. It has been proven time and time again that the planet goes through heating and cooling cycles. Whoever believes in Global Warming obviously never had to go for a 6.5km run in -30 weather...

People should realize that there is no free lunch in the world. Hydropower may not be 100% perfect, but it is still better than most. It is cleaner than coal fired thermal, much cheaper than nuclear and gas turbines, more reliable than wind power. If in this case, it can improve agricultural production, why not?

Thanks to rattler and mike126 for having something rational to say. I have done a lot of research on Site C, and am dead against it for many reasons, but I can respect someone with a differing point of view who is willing to engage in rational discussion. As far as how we heat our homes, the perceived “need” for Site C is not about us, it is about the governments export plans. BC Hydro’s own studies show that with realistic conservation BC’s energy use could return to 2007 levels by 2027 (only a few years after Site C would come online). Site C is for export. And I do conserve energy wherever possible as well. As for global warming, reservoirs contribute to climate change by reduce earth’s carbon sink capacity through forest destruction, as well as through methane releases as vegetation and soil matter rot in the reservoir. According to BC Hydro’s “conservative” estimates, Site C would release an amount of greenhouse gases equal to putting over 25,000 vehicles on BC’s roads every year. Let’s remember that almost all of the info the public has received about Site C has come through its proponent; including the outrageous “green power” label. Some other posters may want to take note of the fact that not all people with environmental concerns think the same about every issue, and not even everyone who opposes Site C think the same. But this is not about who agrees on what aspect of global warming. The destruction of a valley is a serious matter that deserves rational discussion, especially when the generations who will live with the consequences are not here to have a voice.

Hydro starts buying land around Site C for future development. Build the dam and keep drilling oil and gas wells. This is what makes Canada a GREAT country. Awesome industry to keep it running. Countries without these industries and lots of them are usually THIRD WORLD.

The scenic Peace Valley becoming extinct is a tremendous downside to building a dam I agree. Such a vast area with highways winding from top to bottom is very rare, especially in the north. From another point of view, a beautiful man made lake would also be an incredible attraction with endless possibilities for this area. I agree with how the idea neglects future generations from having a voice but with the least of having an actual beach and clean flowing lake nearby (Beatton River and Charlie Lake excluded for obvious reasons) one would have to assume they would agree and be all for it. It might even encourage people to take alot more pride in the north and relocate here regardless of just employment. Lets face it, when your only options are to go out and drink at the many establishments, work and enjoy muddy water you're not going to care what it looks like up here or how much garbage you throw out the window. Again this is just speculation at how future generations may or may not agree. In my opinion I believe that you're changing one aspect of beauty for another with many other additional benefits.

I seem to recall that was the promise from Hydro regarding Williston Lake as well. 'Superb recreational opportunites' that never materialized. Won't with Site C, either. Keep The Peace.

...on how many tonnes greenhouse gases the dam is expected to emit, or why it would be valuable to have a food source and intact ecosystem in place to help deal with the effects of climate change - or even if you're just curious! - please feel free to download your own copy of the report at http://www.itourvalley.ca

it's beatiful ! and guess what, the valley is still there with abundance of wildlife, not to mention the recreation that people enjoy there.

You should run for Mayor, get something good out of this city!

I thought I would add my two cents as well... First, we all recognize that we need industry. This being said we do not need to sell our souls for very few (less than 10) long term jobs that Site C will provide. Yes I use electricity and drive a car, etc. doesn't mean we have to wreck our home so Vancouver yippoids can run that third blender. Let them crap in their own homes instead of ours for a change. BC does not need the hydro. This is shown in their own annual financial reports and projected energy use for the Province. Hydro also admits a between 13% and 15% loss just by sending the hydro that far South - not efficient at all. All industry uses resources way differently than they used to - we no longer strip mine in North America, nor do we clear cut forest for miles and God knows that oil and gas production has drastically smartened up since the 70's when I started on drilling rigs. The captains of these industries rarely make these positive changes without being forced to - BC Hydro is no different. They will continue to rape the North as long as we let them, dams are easy so they keep building them. Anyone notice all the letters from Vancouver residents lately in our weekly newspapers supporting Site C ? This is because they don't want these projects in their home even though they are the ones that will eventually need the power. Next, jobs - the construction phase will hire mostly out of province workers. Just like the last two dams. Think not? Count Alberta license plates on 100th. Again, I support all Canadians in the quest for employment. This does not mean that we need to keep taking it in the ear for the rest of the country though. Think Hydro will only hire local? Wanna buy a bridge? Next recreation, yes Dinosaur Lake is pretty - it is also a narrow, steep, and rocky canyon (I know. I used to walk it). It is also accessible at only one point. Site C and Williston are much more similar - wide, shallow, sandy, geologically unstable. Even BC Hydro admits that there will be no recreation in the reservoir for at least 10 years and we are still waiting for Williston to be usable after 40+ years. Site C will likely never be clear and prisitine based on the geological surveys and will continually erode like Williston does. Next, green power - dams are not green sources of energy. Just cause you can't see it doesn't mean it's not harmful. Doubt it? Go suck on a tailpipe for awhile and see how you do. Due to the rotting vegetation in the reservoirs, dams produce huge amounts of CO2 annually - this will be what your kids and grandkids will be breathing and enjoying the effects of for the years to come. I think that Hydro will continue to build these types of projects, instead of honestly researching alternatives - because we let them. Other posters have mentioned that we own BC Hydro and how grand that is - lets make them prove it and actually do something positive for the North instead of just gouging us for our power. We do not have the right to lose the valley forever for a few jobs and political expediency. Google the places that worship industry at all costs and see what they end up with - if they appeal so much, move there. Lets keep what we have left so the our kids and grandkids can see why we live in the North. Lets use industry wisely instead of allowing them to use us.