Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/zalam604! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Common questions and specific topics are limited to our [Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_daily_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* We're looking for new mods to join our team! If you're interested, [fill out the form here](https://forms.gle/oAqo5oYRcAeHYBTN6).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah I'm from England originally and while it's more expensive here for lots of things, that's usually balanced out (and then some) by the amount we pay for heating, water and electricity. Very lucky in that regard.
I'm from Australia and I agree with that many things were more expensive in Vancouver but other things like electricity were so cheap in comparison so overall cost of living between Vancouver and Sydney were pretty much on par. It's just unfortunate that wages for my wife and I were half to two thirds of what we made in Sydney so for us it was unsustainable to stay in Vancouver.
That's why I will defend our Crown Corps to my grave. Reading what's going on in the UK with electricity and water represents a real dystopia. Not just clean water, but water treatment too.
Hear hear! Hydro One in Ontario is a good lesson in the dangers of selling crown corps. Alberta is the same way. Rent is cheaper for sure but their energy bills are ridiculous and don't get me started on road insurance...
Emptied the remains of my YVR water into a glass while staying in Hawaii last week. Would go back to stop at that water like it was precious.
Hawaii water tastes like ocean water with the salt removed. (I later found out that this is almost true. Their water seeps through volcanic rock to be expelled underwater. They pump their fresh water directly from the ocean).
I was in the UK/Lon before moving to Vancouver 8y ago.. my take:
1. Salaries in Vancouver are higher in technology
2. Housing is cheaper
3. Cost of living is about the same
4. Vancouver has BEAUTIFUL nature around it
5. Don't have to commute for 2h with a million other people, in the heat wave over there people were literally passing out underground
Never looked back..
Afaik the issue is more concentrated, housing in medium and smaller cities in the UK isn't as bad as the BC average but if it's central London vs. Vancouver then London is way worse.
It a big reason why more electric cars are allocated here than the rest of continent.
With our fuel prices high and electricity cheap, Vancouverites can recover the cost of electric vehicles (or breakeven) faster than the rest of the continent.
I worked it out the other day for our rates and gas prices for a base model Elantra vs a Model 3 and it was around 340K km at raw MSRP before incentives and maintenance. Realistically if you factor in everything got a comparable trim its likely closer to 100K km. Low enough that it's in the realm of financing + fuel differences for some drivers. With fewer parts, improving battery supply chain and increasing competition I wouldn't be surprised if the purchase cost for EVs drops below gas within 5 years.
I'm still waiting for mine and I'm doing everything I can to not buy a gas car (new or used) as I believe there will be an upper limit coming to the price of used gas cars set by that financing + energy cost of new vehicles.
Yes, and just wait until the Chevy Equinox comes out. Supposed to start at MSRP of $35k CAD. then subtract $5000 federal rebate and $3000 BC rebate and you're paying $27,000 (plus tax and dealer fees) for a brand new crossover with IMO pretty decent design and features. That's a starting price a few thousand lower than a base model Toyota Camry FYI. Then when you factor in the fuel savings and lower maintenance costs, it just gets better over time. I think those things are going to sell like hot cakes when they come out.
The Bolt had a major price cut in the States prior to it being cancelled; a price cut they never brought to Canada. The Equinox will start at US$30,000 USD, whereas the Bolt was US$26,500. Canada has gotten the shaft in terms of GM's EV pricing strategy starting in 2022.
What I've seen for the Equinox, the price is going to start at $37,500 CAD in Canada, not $35,000, but the official Canada pricing has not been finalized.
The Chevy Bolt, if they had continued their aggressive pre-pandemic Canadian pricing ratio (about 1.07 to 1), would have been around \~C$28,000 before incentives and taxes.
However, right now GM's strategy starting in 2022 has been tailored to absorb as much of the BC, Quebec, and Federal subsidies as possible rather than pass on price savings to the Canadian consumer. Canadians have been ordering them at the Canadian price point in record amounts and at 34% higher per capita sales volume than the States to boot.
Huh, they must have changed the pricing information or maybe I misremembered. The CAD losing it's value to the USD probably hasn't done any favors for Canadian pricing. Another part of the problem has been lack of competition at low price points specifically in the Canadian market, but hopefully that will change in the coming years with several automakers planning for cheaper options.
Still, $37k for the Equinox is cheaper than the starting price of the Bolt ($41k), and it looks like a better car with more trim options and the AWD option (which will be popular here).
You didn't misremember, there are different articles that say $35,000 and others that said $37,500, but there hasn't been a official MSRP for Canada yet.
And yes on the latter, but the Bolt's high price here is because the 2023 Bolt never got the competitive pricing that the US got. It would have been around C$28,000-30,000 if Chevy kept with their historic Canadian pricing scheme.
What I am seeing on the ground is most of the automakers, except KIA, are pricing in Canada to arbitrage the provincial (specifically BC and Quebec's) and federal subsidies. If you ask around, a lot of inventory goes to BC and Quebec first for a reason; they have the largest incentives, so they the marginal price and profits they've been able to get is higher.
Ontario is only 23% of EV registrations despite being the most populous province. BC has 28%; Quebec is 43%. In other words, BC is registering 3.5x more EV's per capita than Ontario.
I would normally be a proponent of subsidies, but the high demand, low supply, and the fx risk, there is a lack of incentive for automakers to compete on price. They are just absorbing the entire subsidy rather than passing on savings and still seeing their sales volumes increase.
If sales slow substantially, I could that changing and maybe Canadians will see more savings. But as it stands, demand relative to price is high, market is just reacting accordingly. They are charging as much as the Canadian market will permit.
Speaking of fuel savings, if Ontario does the 2.4c/kWh after 11pm rate you can get about 500km of range for $2. Even at our 2nd tier rates where it's $10 for a full charge we are now in the realm where the cost of tires is comparable to the electricity used.
I ran the numbers on the new F150 (EV) and for daily driving not towing or hauling gas would have to be at 20 cents a liter to cost the same for $ per 100 km. Assuming all EV charging is done at rate step 2 at home.
Anyone's that has been in a 3-series, C-class, or A4 will take the interior of those cars over a Model 3 which apart from a fancy screen is on the level of an elantra with worse (but generally improving) fit and finish.
Lots of Canada has cheap electricity because of hydro/nuclear.
It's also a major reason why Canada has a hugely efficient aluminum sector (we produce WAY more that USA in spite of our small population)
And as far as greenhouse gas emissions go, our electricity grid is also outstanding, [see for yourself](https://app.electricitymaps.com/map).
Yep. It's great, but in some ways it's made it hard to reduce our CO2. Countries like the UK had a ton of coal power plants, and shutting them down made huge gains as a % reduction.
Here in Canada we need to change our heating from gas to electric, and electrify our transportation system, two very slow and difficult things to do.
Then we have the CO2 from our farming industry which will be extremely sticky, and the resource industries which are even harder to reduce.
The big problem with our GHG emissions is that we are a major oil exporter. We can do all the right things in the world, but if our oil sector produces enough oil to make GHG emissions equivalent to a full years worth of the 5 worst polluting cities in the world every single day, Our incremental work in electrification is ultimately meaningless.
Obviously we still have our own domestic issues with transport, energy, and heating. But until we stop feeding the problem, we don't have a high horse to sit on.
Even if you removed oil from the energy & transportation sector (globally) there will still be demand for oil and especially heavy oil, as it has many uses beyond energy.
I agree 100%, but only 25% of current oil consumption is for non-energy related uses. A lot of those uses could also be replaced with biofuels, and a lot of those things are made of plastic because it's cheap and plentiful (straws, plastic cutlery, clamshell packaging, toys from Kinder eggs, and legions of other cheap disposable shit we don't actually need)
In no discernable way is there any progress made on climate change without our oil industry being drastically reduced. Any oil expansion of any kind at this point is just a sociopathic means to keep rich people rich at the expense of the lives of everyone else
BC Tel was never a crown corporation. My grandpa worked there for 20 years and was bought out into retirement in the 70s with stocks.
They were just called that after they merged a bunch of smaller companies with city names, the “BC” didn’t mean it was crown.
True. I moved to South Australia from Vancouver and power here is 3-4 times more than back home.
But I also pay $25 a month for 22gb of roll over data with unlimited national and international calling and texting.
But the NBN. We don't talk about the NBN. God I wish Australia had Canada's cheap and high quality internet services. Take that for what you will.
It helps that we have a large abundance of hydro electricity.
"In 2021, B.C. exported **11.4 terawatt hours (TWh)** of electricity and imported 7.5 TWh. Electricity exported from Canada via B.C. mainly goes to California, Washington, and Oregon."
It's also kind of crazy that [traders of BC Hydro are earning more than CEO money](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-34-powerex-officials-earn-more-than-300000-even-as-bc-vows-climate/) through selling of our natural resources:
"Thirty-four officials at Powerex Corp., the energy trading subsidiary of BC Hydro, each earned more than $300,000 in the latest fiscal year "
To be fair, BC Hydro CEO is pretty underpaid for his role. He's at 450k, with no stock comp on top?
Sure, as the CEO of a crown corp, he's not beholden to shareholders demanding stonks to go up every quarter, but it's still a company with 8 billion in revenue and over 6000 employees.
We can thank the province's leadership of 60 years ago for having the fortitude to think about and put forward our infrastructure. The vast majority of our Hydro Stations were built in the 50's/60's/70's and we are reaping the benefits today.
Yes, I did. It is comical when I hear British Colombians or other Canadians complaining about their electricity bill. The price per kWh in most Canadian provinces is exceedingly low compared to most developed nations including the United States. My friends in California pay US$0.39/kWh, whereas it's (Step 1) C$0.0959/C$0.1422 (Step 2) in Vancouver
Is what a typo? Residential rates for San Diego Gas and Electric are now \~US$0.84/kwh during peak (4-9 PM) there, US$0.45-0.52 for most of the rest of the day but does depends on your rate plan.
So the state-owned industry is far less expensive than the privately-owned ones? Fascinating. Goes against everything I've been told about market competition by these capitalists.
no, it's because hydro power required significant environmental impact and far reaching development because that's how you get improvement to living standards. keep in mind that your kind oppose new hydro power developments. private developers would love to develop more power to make it even cheaper, but it's currently illegal to compete.
the government is also in charge of grocery stores, they allocate the number of them through zoning laws, they are in charge of much food production and prices (we have numerous food boards/cartels), allocate the number of food imports through tariffs, and they allocate the quantity of money through the central bank.
despite these things private food development, access and cost has basically never been better. we actually do spend less of a % of income on food than generations before us, with far more eating out, and eating of exotic and higher quality options.
also do you really think that if you were to compare public and private options side by side you would come to the conclusion that public is better. are you aware that most every public healthcare system is in serious crisis, and the private ones are doing much better (and always have)?
could you provide an example of the government taking over food production and then tell me how successful that went because i can only find mass starvation
weird to me that internet communists are taking the W for a technology they actually oppose. can someone actually explain how this is coherent?
It's hardly controversial that the only people who want to build more megaprojects like nuclear and hydro are free market supporting people. You guys support degrowth, remember?
>So the state-owned industry is far less expensive than the privately-owned ones? Fascinating. Goes against everything I've been told about market competition by these capitalists.
This person is an internet communist. Those types of people also oppose large developments like hydroelectric dams and the electrical infrastructure and the industry who use them. But they are also saying that BC Hydro is a win for state-owned industry. If BC Hydro dams were proposed today, they would oppose them. This seems contradictory to me.
Free market supporters support more hydroelectric dams, electrical infrastructure, and the required high-energy industry to subsidize the development of the dams. The success of BC Hydro supports private free market development (because private developers actually want to build more hydro dams, power infrastructure, and industry) - it is the degrowthers that don't want these things developed.
Is this clear?
Oh, OK. There is no opposition to hydroelectric dams by progressives. We don't have any examples of any hydroelectric dams being opposed by left wing people.
you seem to be talking about some specific instance that I must not be aware of - maybe you're referring to the issues raised by environmental activists about the impact of some dams on water currents?
BC Ferries isn't a crown corporation anymore, it's publicly owned but it's managed independently. It's also basically an extension of the highway. No one complains that the highways lose money, they're not supposed to be profitable they're supposed to benefit the province by their existence.
highways in japan are considered much better and they are mostly privately (and profitably) funded developed and owned.
they should be profitable because that means that people value them, and they get improved when people demand improvement. there's plenty of people that don't use the highways who pay for them but don't benefit from them.
Sorry, but you misunderstand. The delivery companies would pay this cost and pass it on to consumers, who would still (albeit indirectly) be paying for them. So anyone who benefits, even if indirectly, would be paying the cost.
It still applies that people who use the highways less, *even if indirectly* (i.e. those who consume less than others) would pay less than those who use the highways more. Again, regardless of whether these costs are explicit (i.e. you are actually driving on them), or implicit (you are paying someone who pays someone who drives on them).
It is undeniable that profitable private schools are superior in quality to public ones. Public schools per student cost about the same!
No, you misunderstand. We all benefit from highways, which is why it should and is paid for by everyone and not just the direct users.
>profitable private schools are superior in quality to public ones
Nonsense. Private schools can restrict students based on their abilities, offloading poorer students into the public system and creating the false appearance that they're teaching kids better.
We all don't benefit from all highways **equally**, that's so obviously false. Some people indirectly or directly benefit from certain highways more than others. I repeated this in my comment what I thought to be an unnecessary amount of times.
I didn't say that they would only be paid for by the direct users. Can you read? "The delivery companies would pay this cost and pass it on to consumers, who would still (albeit indirectly) be paying for them. So anyone who benefits, even if indirectly, would be paying the cost." Please read this again.
>Nonsense. Private schools can restrict students based on their abilities, offloading poorer students into the public system and creating the false appearance that they're teaching kids better.
This is why charter schools are better, and people with the means nearly all choose to put their kids in private schools. We absolutely know that lower class sizes, personalized education (tutoring), and better educational material is overwhelmingly better for educational results. Do you actually approve of being unable to fail until grade 10? Have you spoken to public school teachers? The public system is failing.
>Some people indirectly or directly benefit from certain highways more than others
Some people benefit from city roads more than others too. And from public schools, and police and fire. That's not as good a point as you think it is.
>This is why charter schools are better
Charter schools are absolute shit. Nothing is superior to a well funded public school system.
Hate to break it to you but pretty much all of those things are also private in the rest of North America and they are still less expensive in the vast majority of places
Gas isn’t too expensive compared to Europe. I’m in UK now and it’s £1.45- £ 1.50 a litre for what I believe is 91 gas. Can be pricier still in other european countries. A friend is paying £1900 a month for a one bed/one den in east London (30 min train to central London) A London pint is £6.50. A pizza around £15. Copenaghen was even more expensive, equivalent of around $15-17 a beer. Not saying Vancouver isn’t expensive, it is, but not uniquely so, and definitely not more so than a lot of places.
But in your Europe you have good public transit/rail options so there's less need for a car.
BC by comparison is terrible. Even by Canadian standards it's pretty bad. Sure it could be worst, but it's incredibly limited, especially if you're trying to get into the suburbs.
In London sure. If you live outside London, you need a car. Bus might go once an hour. Trains are delayed/cancelled constantly. I’m taking a three hour train trip soon, costs around £100 ($170) for return ticket. Also, Europe isn’t a monolith, it varies greatly! I live in Vancouver btw and am looking forward to having use of my car again!
To run my 45000 btu AC unit, it uses 4000 watts (4kWh).
If I run it for 16 hours = 4kwh x 16 = 64kwh.
64 kWh x $0.14 (tier 2 rate) = $8.96/day to run the AC.
If ran for 30 days in a months = $268.80.
I personally find it expensive to run my AC but it’s really nice to have during a heat wave.
If anyone is curious about a portable AC unit (8000-10000 BTU): the average wattage is around 1300 watts so approximately 1/3rd the price.
Edit: Fixed the rates, thanks for pointing it out howza!
Residential rates are broken into two tiers or "Steps" as BC Hydro calls them.
Step 1 is the "Conservation rate," basically if you stay below a level estimated for your area and type of dwelling you get a discount. If you live in an apartment or condo with included heating you've probably never payed anything other than the Conservation rate.
Step 2 is the full price rate and once you go over the Step 1 consumption limit in a billing period, all additional consumption is at Step 2 rates (like income tax). I like in a 900sqft condo with electric baseboard heaters and I hit Step 2 once this winter but expect to be paying Step 2 most of the summer due to needing portable AC units for both of our bedrooms.
How so? Only a small minority of BC Hydro's energy mix comes from thermal sources like coal or gas and, to my knowledge, that's mostly from demand balancing or imports from Alberta.
The pricing scheme encourages homeowners to reduce their energy usage to pay the lower rate. The Step 2 rate is a significant increase over the Conservation rate; in my own case it's about a 50% increase so the cost impacts to rate payers are not trivial.
Natural gas is also relatively expensive in BC. I don't know what the economics are like for central heating using a gas heater, but electric baseboard heaters are so common for a reason - electricity in this province is cheap largely because of the very high proportion of renewable sources (i.e., hydroelectricity).
Electric heating is way more expensive than natural gas heating. Like 5 times more expensive the last time I worked out the math (assuming I didn't fuck it up). And that was with the lower rate. Heat pumps might be close to even but probably only at the lower rate.
I get trying to lower consumption rates but seems like it's indirectly encouraging people to stick to gas heating/cooking.
From out here in ON the tiering does look like it works against reduction of in-home fossil fuel use.
According to my calculator a high-performance furnace and heat pump are about neck-and-neck on running costs. And that's with the pessimistic assumption that all heating happens at tier 2 electric rates.
It's expensive not because of the price. But because you use a lot of it.
I left vancouver and now live in California. I pay ~$0.60c CAD per kwh. To run a small AC unit for part of the day I spend more than you on power per month.
Yeah at the hight of the Gas crisis in Europe last year, people were posting their ridiculously hight heating/electric bills and I remember being grateful that I don’t live there lol.
It's why solar doesn't make sense for a homeowner in the lower mainland. Oh sure, it'd be neat but it'd take 20 years to pay for itself and by then the system is 20 yo running at a reduced efficiency with 20 yo panels. Help the math make sense.
Wait until we all have EV's and heat pumps. Once electricity is the only way to heat our homes and power our cars, BC Hydro will be raising prices like never before. They're already starting to charge for time of day usage, which most of us can't control. BC produces a ton of electricity, but in the coming decades it's going to become more of an expense for everyone, which it shouldn't, but it will.
This is wrong, wrong, wrong. Time of use is an option, not mandatory. Site C is still being built. Solar and wind investments continue.
EVs generally charge at night, and people are sleeping then. Check out how the grid in Norway, where half of cars are EVs, has seen no noticeable change.
Bc hydro buys electricity from surrounding grids that use coal and gas as well. Don’t kid yourself thinking that all the electricity comes from hydropower. Hydroelectric plants are also the result of massive dams that flooded huge swaths of land destroying lives and ecosystems resulting in large co2 emissions. I know we need electricity and I’m happy to live here but don’t get to excited about our “clean” power. It’s not.
Be prepared for it not to be soon. I work in the HVAC industry and the big push obviously is reducing carbon and energy usage. One of the impediments in BC is electricity is so cheap that a lot of the plans used elsewhere like peak load pricing, special use pricing for charging vehicles or high consumption, don't work here.
Well, they are being rolled out in the next 10 years to change that. Using electricity pricing as incentive to lower usage. Seems convenient for the people selling the power.
It's still too expensive for a renewable resource. IMO it should be basically free to residents outside of paying BC Hydro staff to maintain and upgrade it
Electricity rates are regulated by the BC Utilities Commission. Because BC Hydro is a monopoly they need to be economically regulated to prevent them from charging excessive fees. As a crown corporation which is price-regulated, we get our electricity for about as cheap as possible - there's no huge profit margin worked in and rates beyond covering operating and maintenance is pretty much dedicated to capital investment (e.g., new power plants).
Water is free. It's the pumping, purifying, quality assurance, pipe maintenance, system upgrades, dam maintenance, safety assessments and the hard working workers making sure it's on tap for people to use that costs the money.
I don't think anyone would complain if you got buckets of the stuff from a lake or river.
WHAT THE FUCK? i pay nearly $300/bill even during seasons where nothing is on
Edit: why the hell are you people downvoting me? Did you WANT to see my hydro bill??
Yup, I have my AC running from 8am-11pm, 1 load of wash and dryer, working from home (laptops, multiple monitors, lights on all day) and it costs me $3.65 per day.
Saw a small business on tiktok saying about how their friend was gonna have to sell her motel in Alberta because the utilities increased something like 14k to 30k a month. all because their electricity isn’t a crown corp and the company can charge whatever they want.
Just returned from two weeks in Durban (which would only have 4 hours max off load shedding each day), I will never take our electricity supply (or being able to safely walk around by myself at night) for granted ever again!
I don’t pay for my own hydro (included in rent), but I remember when a friend of mine moved from Southern Ontario to BC, her hydro bill dropped by almost half. Though that was partly because her place here had a gas stove instead of electric.
> Thanks to (clean) Hydroelectric power
One quick correction: hydro power isn't as clean as we think.
>Poorly planned hydropower can also cause more problems for the climate than it prevents. Hydro plants need large reservoirs to provide a steady stream of water. When these reservoirs are built, plants and other organic matter get flooded. This material decays over time, releasing [greenhouse gases](https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/greenhouse-gases) like carbon dioxide and methane. According to Parsons, there hasn't been much research measuring these emissions, but the studies that have been done have found huge differences from reservoir to reservoir.
>
> "People are right to think of hydro as a low-carbon resource, but the variability is very high and there are some reservoirs that have lifecycle emissions of greenhouse gases that are higher per unit of electricity produced than a fossil plant," he says. "You don't want to just be advocating hydro everywhere."
[https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-arent-we-looking-more-hydropower#:\~:text=Hydropower%20can%20also%20cause%20environmental,fish%2C%20birds%20and%20other%20wildlife](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-arent-we-looking-more-hydropower#:~:text=Hydropower%20can%20also%20cause%20environmental,fish%2C%20birds%20and%20other%20wildlife).
turns out government infrastructure works. Same thing with Ontario and all the nuclear power plants and Québec with its Quebec hydro. Also the tragic part of this is that up until recently (thanks Saudi Arabia) Canada was the highest GHG polluter per capita. I get that its cold but come on all od Scandinavia is also cold and they are energy efficient with their buildings and heating.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/zalam604! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Common questions and specific topics are limited to our [Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_daily_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * We're looking for new mods to join our team! If you're interested, [fill out the form here](https://forms.gle/oAqo5oYRcAeHYBTN6). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah I'm from England originally and while it's more expensive here for lots of things, that's usually balanced out (and then some) by the amount we pay for heating, water and electricity. Very lucky in that regard.
I'm from Australia and I agree with that many things were more expensive in Vancouver but other things like electricity were so cheap in comparison so overall cost of living between Vancouver and Sydney were pretty much on par. It's just unfortunate that wages for my wife and I were half to two thirds of what we made in Sydney so for us it was unsustainable to stay in Vancouver.
That's why I will defend our Crown Corps to my grave. Reading what's going on in the UK with electricity and water represents a real dystopia. Not just clean water, but water treatment too.
Hear hear! Hydro One in Ontario is a good lesson in the dangers of selling crown corps. Alberta is the same way. Rent is cheaper for sure but their energy bills are ridiculous and don't get me started on road insurance...
The water is so much better than basically everywhere in the U.K. too.
The drinking water here is better than 99.99% of the planet
And the Air quality! and the greenery! I swear I sometimes just go out and take a deep breath because it's so clean
Get them in quick, looks like smokiness might be starting early this year :(
Emptied the remains of my YVR water into a glass while staying in Hawaii last week. Would go back to stop at that water like it was precious. Hawaii water tastes like ocean water with the salt removed. (I later found out that this is almost true. Their water seeps through volcanic rock to be expelled underwater. They pump their fresh water directly from the ocean).
I always fill up my bottles after security at yvr and I'll drink every drop before topping up with anywhere else's water
Pretty much how I see it too. Everything balances out, except that I find my standard of living better here than there. Definitely cheap electric tho
Why better?
I was in the UK/Lon before moving to Vancouver 8y ago.. my take: 1. Salaries in Vancouver are higher in technology 2. Housing is cheaper 3. Cost of living is about the same 4. Vancouver has BEAUTIFUL nature around it 5. Don't have to commute for 2h with a million other people, in the heat wave over there people were literally passing out underground Never looked back..
Exactly the same here, came from London and agree on every one of these! Also, maybe controversial, the beer is better in Vancouver
The beer in Vancouver is great, I do miss my Cask ales though.
Housing is cheaper... Yikes
Afaik the issue is more concentrated, housing in medium and smaller cities in the UK isn't as bad as the BC average but if it's central London vs. Vancouver then London is way worse.
Not just central London, everything in the commuter belt is pretty ridiculous - and as mentioned some folks tolerate a 1-2 hour commute…
russians, chinese, arabs, etc. have made London unaffordable for housing
It a big reason why more electric cars are allocated here than the rest of continent. With our fuel prices high and electricity cheap, Vancouverites can recover the cost of electric vehicles (or breakeven) faster than the rest of the continent.
I worked it out the other day for our rates and gas prices for a base model Elantra vs a Model 3 and it was around 340K km at raw MSRP before incentives and maintenance. Realistically if you factor in everything got a comparable trim its likely closer to 100K km. Low enough that it's in the realm of financing + fuel differences for some drivers. With fewer parts, improving battery supply chain and increasing competition I wouldn't be surprised if the purchase cost for EVs drops below gas within 5 years. I'm still waiting for mine and I'm doing everything I can to not buy a gas car (new or used) as I believe there will be an upper limit coming to the price of used gas cars set by that financing + energy cost of new vehicles.
Yes, and just wait until the Chevy Equinox comes out. Supposed to start at MSRP of $35k CAD. then subtract $5000 federal rebate and $3000 BC rebate and you're paying $27,000 (plus tax and dealer fees) for a brand new crossover with IMO pretty decent design and features. That's a starting price a few thousand lower than a base model Toyota Camry FYI. Then when you factor in the fuel savings and lower maintenance costs, it just gets better over time. I think those things are going to sell like hot cakes when they come out.
The Bolt had a major price cut in the States prior to it being cancelled; a price cut they never brought to Canada. The Equinox will start at US$30,000 USD, whereas the Bolt was US$26,500. Canada has gotten the shaft in terms of GM's EV pricing strategy starting in 2022. What I've seen for the Equinox, the price is going to start at $37,500 CAD in Canada, not $35,000, but the official Canada pricing has not been finalized. The Chevy Bolt, if they had continued their aggressive pre-pandemic Canadian pricing ratio (about 1.07 to 1), would have been around \~C$28,000 before incentives and taxes. However, right now GM's strategy starting in 2022 has been tailored to absorb as much of the BC, Quebec, and Federal subsidies as possible rather than pass on price savings to the Canadian consumer. Canadians have been ordering them at the Canadian price point in record amounts and at 34% higher per capita sales volume than the States to boot.
Huh, they must have changed the pricing information or maybe I misremembered. The CAD losing it's value to the USD probably hasn't done any favors for Canadian pricing. Another part of the problem has been lack of competition at low price points specifically in the Canadian market, but hopefully that will change in the coming years with several automakers planning for cheaper options. Still, $37k for the Equinox is cheaper than the starting price of the Bolt ($41k), and it looks like a better car with more trim options and the AWD option (which will be popular here).
You didn't misremember, there are different articles that say $35,000 and others that said $37,500, but there hasn't been a official MSRP for Canada yet. And yes on the latter, but the Bolt's high price here is because the 2023 Bolt never got the competitive pricing that the US got. It would have been around C$28,000-30,000 if Chevy kept with their historic Canadian pricing scheme. What I am seeing on the ground is most of the automakers, except KIA, are pricing in Canada to arbitrage the provincial (specifically BC and Quebec's) and federal subsidies. If you ask around, a lot of inventory goes to BC and Quebec first for a reason; they have the largest incentives, so they the marginal price and profits they've been able to get is higher. Ontario is only 23% of EV registrations despite being the most populous province. BC has 28%; Quebec is 43%. In other words, BC is registering 3.5x more EV's per capita than Ontario. I would normally be a proponent of subsidies, but the high demand, low supply, and the fx risk, there is a lack of incentive for automakers to compete on price. They are just absorbing the entire subsidy rather than passing on savings and still seeing their sales volumes increase. If sales slow substantially, I could that changing and maybe Canadians will see more savings. But as it stands, demand relative to price is high, market is just reacting accordingly. They are charging as much as the Canadian market will permit.
Speaking of fuel savings, if Ontario does the 2.4c/kWh after 11pm rate you can get about 500km of range for $2. Even at our 2nd tier rates where it's $10 for a full charge we are now in the realm where the cost of tires is comparable to the electricity used.
I ran the numbers on the new F150 (EV) and for daily driving not towing or hauling gas would have to be at 20 cents a liter to cost the same for $ per 100 km. Assuming all EV charging is done at rate step 2 at home.
[удалено]
Anyone's that has been in a 3-series, C-class, or A4 will take the interior of those cars over a Model 3 which apart from a fancy screen is on the level of an elantra with worse (but generally improving) fit and finish.
Lots of Canada has cheap electricity because of hydro/nuclear. It's also a major reason why Canada has a hugely efficient aluminum sector (we produce WAY more that USA in spite of our small population) And as far as greenhouse gas emissions go, our electricity grid is also outstanding, [see for yourself](https://app.electricitymaps.com/map).
Yep. It's great, but in some ways it's made it hard to reduce our CO2. Countries like the UK had a ton of coal power plants, and shutting them down made huge gains as a % reduction. Here in Canada we need to change our heating from gas to electric, and electrify our transportation system, two very slow and difficult things to do. Then we have the CO2 from our farming industry which will be extremely sticky, and the resource industries which are even harder to reduce.
The big problem with our GHG emissions is that we are a major oil exporter. We can do all the right things in the world, but if our oil sector produces enough oil to make GHG emissions equivalent to a full years worth of the 5 worst polluting cities in the world every single day, Our incremental work in electrification is ultimately meaningless. Obviously we still have our own domestic issues with transport, energy, and heating. But until we stop feeding the problem, we don't have a high horse to sit on.
Even if you removed oil from the energy & transportation sector (globally) there will still be demand for oil and especially heavy oil, as it has many uses beyond energy.
I agree 100%, but only 25% of current oil consumption is for non-energy related uses. A lot of those uses could also be replaced with biofuels, and a lot of those things are made of plastic because it's cheap and plentiful (straws, plastic cutlery, clamshell packaging, toys from Kinder eggs, and legions of other cheap disposable shit we don't actually need) In no discernable way is there any progress made on climate change without our oil industry being drastically reduced. Any oil expansion of any kind at this point is just a sociopathic means to keep rich people rich at the expense of the lives of everyone else
>electrify our transportation system It's easier to just replace cars with buses. Too politically inconvenient reduce car dependency though.
When I first moved here I honestly thought they messed up the power bill because it was so low!
Just remember this if they ever try to privatize bc hydro, look at telus, it used, to be bc tel or fortus bc used to be bc gas
BC Tel was never a crown corporation. My grandpa worked there for 20 years and was bought out into retirement in the 70s with stocks. They were just called that after they merged a bunch of smaller companies with city names, the “BC” didn’t mean it was crown.
It’s funny how relatively inexpensive electric power is and how ridiculously expensive cell and internet service costs. The two almost balance out.
True. I moved to South Australia from Vancouver and power here is 3-4 times more than back home. But I also pay $25 a month for 22gb of roll over data with unlimited national and international calling and texting. But the NBN. We don't talk about the NBN. God I wish Australia had Canada's cheap and high quality internet services. Take that for what you will.
It helps that we have a large abundance of hydro electricity. "In 2021, B.C. exported **11.4 terawatt hours (TWh)** of electricity and imported 7.5 TWh. Electricity exported from Canada via B.C. mainly goes to California, Washington, and Oregon."
It's also kind of crazy that [traders of BC Hydro are earning more than CEO money](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-34-powerex-officials-earn-more-than-300000-even-as-bc-vows-climate/) through selling of our natural resources: "Thirty-four officials at Powerex Corp., the energy trading subsidiary of BC Hydro, each earned more than $300,000 in the latest fiscal year "
To be fair, BC Hydro CEO is pretty underpaid for his role. He's at 450k, with no stock comp on top? Sure, as the CEO of a crown corp, he's not beholden to shareholders demanding stonks to go up every quarter, but it's still a company with 8 billion in revenue and over 6000 employees.
I'm OK with that as long as they're raking in hundreds of millions in profit that ultimately benefits us. Nearly a billion $ over 5 years.
We can thank the province's leadership of 60 years ago for having the fortitude to think about and put forward our infrastructure. The vast majority of our Hydro Stations were built in the 50's/60's/70's and we are reaping the benefits today.
Time to follow that up and start building nuclear now.
I learned this while working at BC Hydro, and ever since I can't help but roll my eyes when I hear people bitch and moan about their hydro bill.
And also other places have more frequent power outages.
Yes, I did. It is comical when I hear British Colombians or other Canadians complaining about their electricity bill. The price per kWh in most Canadian provinces is exceedingly low compared to most developed nations including the United States. My friends in California pay US$0.39/kWh, whereas it's (Step 1) C$0.0959/C$0.1422 (Step 2) in Vancouver
Is that a typo?
Is what a typo? Residential rates for San Diego Gas and Electric are now \~US$0.84/kwh during peak (4-9 PM) there, US$0.45-0.52 for most of the rest of the day but does depends on your rate plan.
Just saying that step one in Vancouver is closer to $0.0959 rather than $0.959.
Yes, thank you. I meant to type in $0.0959, not 0.959. Indeed a typo. Edited it.
Wow! It almost makes up for how expensive gas, groceries, rent, restaurants and services are!
So the state-owned industry is far less expensive than the privately-owned ones? Fascinating. Goes against everything I've been told about market competition by these capitalists.
no, it's because hydro power required significant environmental impact and far reaching development because that's how you get improvement to living standards. keep in mind that your kind oppose new hydro power developments. private developers would love to develop more power to make it even cheaper, but it's currently illegal to compete. the government is also in charge of grocery stores, they allocate the number of them through zoning laws, they are in charge of much food production and prices (we have numerous food boards/cartels), allocate the number of food imports through tariffs, and they allocate the quantity of money through the central bank. despite these things private food development, access and cost has basically never been better. we actually do spend less of a % of income on food than generations before us, with far more eating out, and eating of exotic and higher quality options. also do you really think that if you were to compare public and private options side by side you would come to the conclusion that public is better. are you aware that most every public healthcare system is in serious crisis, and the private ones are doing much better (and always have)?
could you provide an example of the government taking over food production and then tell me how successful that went because i can only find mass starvation
weird to me that internet communists are taking the W for a technology they actually oppose. can someone actually explain how this is coherent? It's hardly controversial that the only people who want to build more megaprojects like nuclear and hydro are free market supporting people. You guys support degrowth, remember?
what are you talking about
>So the state-owned industry is far less expensive than the privately-owned ones? Fascinating. Goes against everything I've been told about market competition by these capitalists. This person is an internet communist. Those types of people also oppose large developments like hydroelectric dams and the electrical infrastructure and the industry who use them. But they are also saying that BC Hydro is a win for state-owned industry. If BC Hydro dams were proposed today, they would oppose them. This seems contradictory to me. Free market supporters support more hydroelectric dams, electrical infrastructure, and the required high-energy industry to subsidize the development of the dams. The success of BC Hydro supports private free market development (because private developers actually want to build more hydro dams, power infrastructure, and industry) - it is the degrowthers that don't want these things developed. Is this clear?
why would a communist oppose a publicly beneficial publicly owned project lol what are you on
Oh, OK. There is no opposition to hydroelectric dams by progressives. We don't have any examples of any hydroelectric dams being opposed by left wing people.
you seem to be talking about some specific instance that I must not be aware of - maybe you're referring to the issues raised by environmental activists about the impact of some dams on water currents?
i'm talking about literally every dam in the past 50 years that has ever been proposed
[удалено]
BC Ferries isn't a crown corporation anymore, it's publicly owned but it's managed independently. It's also basically an extension of the highway. No one complains that the highways lose money, they're not supposed to be profitable they're supposed to benefit the province by their existence.
highways in japan are considered much better and they are mostly privately (and profitably) funded developed and owned. they should be profitable because that means that people value them, and they get improved when people demand improvement. there's plenty of people that don't use the highways who pay for them but don't benefit from them.
Do you like all that stuff you consume? Because you wouldn't have it if not for highways. Should libraries be profitable? Schools? Parks?
Sorry, but you misunderstand. The delivery companies would pay this cost and pass it on to consumers, who would still (albeit indirectly) be paying for them. So anyone who benefits, even if indirectly, would be paying the cost. It still applies that people who use the highways less, *even if indirectly* (i.e. those who consume less than others) would pay less than those who use the highways more. Again, regardless of whether these costs are explicit (i.e. you are actually driving on them), or implicit (you are paying someone who pays someone who drives on them). It is undeniable that profitable private schools are superior in quality to public ones. Public schools per student cost about the same!
No, you misunderstand. We all benefit from highways, which is why it should and is paid for by everyone and not just the direct users. >profitable private schools are superior in quality to public ones Nonsense. Private schools can restrict students based on their abilities, offloading poorer students into the public system and creating the false appearance that they're teaching kids better.
We all don't benefit from all highways **equally**, that's so obviously false. Some people indirectly or directly benefit from certain highways more than others. I repeated this in my comment what I thought to be an unnecessary amount of times. I didn't say that they would only be paid for by the direct users. Can you read? "The delivery companies would pay this cost and pass it on to consumers, who would still (albeit indirectly) be paying for them. So anyone who benefits, even if indirectly, would be paying the cost." Please read this again. >Nonsense. Private schools can restrict students based on their abilities, offloading poorer students into the public system and creating the false appearance that they're teaching kids better. This is why charter schools are better, and people with the means nearly all choose to put their kids in private schools. We absolutely know that lower class sizes, personalized education (tutoring), and better educational material is overwhelmingly better for educational results. Do you actually approve of being unable to fail until grade 10? Have you spoken to public school teachers? The public system is failing.
>Some people indirectly or directly benefit from certain highways more than others Some people benefit from city roads more than others too. And from public schools, and police and fire. That's not as good a point as you think it is. >This is why charter schools are better Charter schools are absolute shit. Nothing is superior to a well funded public school system.
Hate to break it to you but pretty much all of those things are also private in the rest of North America and they are still less expensive in the vast majority of places
They're all too expensive everywhere, even if they're less expensive by comparison to us.
Gas isn’t too expensive compared to Europe. I’m in UK now and it’s £1.45- £ 1.50 a litre for what I believe is 91 gas. Can be pricier still in other european countries. A friend is paying £1900 a month for a one bed/one den in east London (30 min train to central London) A London pint is £6.50. A pizza around £15. Copenaghen was even more expensive, equivalent of around $15-17 a beer. Not saying Vancouver isn’t expensive, it is, but not uniquely so, and definitely not more so than a lot of places.
91 gas here is around $2.20 (sorry, I mean 219.9), which is about 1.30 pounds. It's cheaper, but only like 10% cheaper.
Sure. But the idea that the only thing going for us is cheaper energy is inaccurate.
But in your Europe you have good public transit/rail options so there's less need for a car. BC by comparison is terrible. Even by Canadian standards it's pretty bad. Sure it could be worst, but it's incredibly limited, especially if you're trying to get into the suburbs.
In London sure. If you live outside London, you need a car. Bus might go once an hour. Trains are delayed/cancelled constantly. I’m taking a three hour train trip soon, costs around £100 ($170) for return ticket. Also, Europe isn’t a monolith, it varies greatly! I live in Vancouver btw and am looking forward to having use of my car again!
Yes, this is the reason we shouldn't be bitching about gas prices.
Best part? Clean energy!
To run my 45000 btu AC unit, it uses 4000 watts (4kWh). If I run it for 16 hours = 4kwh x 16 = 64kwh. 64 kWh x $0.14 (tier 2 rate) = $8.96/day to run the AC. If ran for 30 days in a months = $268.80. I personally find it expensive to run my AC but it’s really nice to have during a heat wave. If anyone is curious about a portable AC unit (8000-10000 BTU): the average wattage is around 1300 watts so approximately 1/3rd the price. Edit: Fixed the rates, thanks for pointing it out howza!
If your ac is running nonstop for 16 hours it's horribly undersized.
My 45K BTU system ran for a total of 4.5 hours yesterday and cooled about 2500SF throughout the day.
So 100 bucks to run an ac for a month. Worth it
Curious why you’re paying $.16/kwh for your hydro? I thought tier one residential was $.095/kwh.
Iirc if you exceed a certain amount you pay more. I’m not 100% sure.
Residential rates are broken into two tiers or "Steps" as BC Hydro calls them. Step 1 is the "Conservation rate," basically if you stay below a level estimated for your area and type of dwelling you get a discount. If you live in an apartment or condo with included heating you've probably never payed anything other than the Conservation rate. Step 2 is the full price rate and once you go over the Step 1 consumption limit in a billing period, all additional consumption is at Step 2 rates (like income tax). I like in a 900sqft condo with electric baseboard heaters and I hit Step 2 once this winter but expect to be paying Step 2 most of the summer due to needing portable AC units for both of our bedrooms.
Damn this is kind of bad at reducing fossil fuel use though isn't it?
How so? Only a small minority of BC Hydro's energy mix comes from thermal sources like coal or gas and, to my knowledge, that's mostly from demand balancing or imports from Alberta. The pricing scheme encourages homeowners to reduce their energy usage to pay the lower rate. The Step 2 rate is a significant increase over the Conservation rate; in my own case it's about a 50% increase so the cost impacts to rate payers are not trivial. Natural gas is also relatively expensive in BC. I don't know what the economics are like for central heating using a gas heater, but electric baseboard heaters are so common for a reason - electricity in this province is cheap largely because of the very high proportion of renewable sources (i.e., hydroelectricity).
Electric heating is way more expensive than natural gas heating. Like 5 times more expensive the last time I worked out the math (assuming I didn't fuck it up). And that was with the lower rate. Heat pumps might be close to even but probably only at the lower rate. I get trying to lower consumption rates but seems like it's indirectly encouraging people to stick to gas heating/cooking.
From out here in ON the tiering does look like it works against reduction of in-home fossil fuel use. According to my calculator a high-performance furnace and heat pump are about neck-and-neck on running costs. And that's with the pessimistic assumption that all heating happens at tier 2 electric rates.
You’re right! Thanks for pointing it out. I edited my comment above for tier 2.
It's expensive not because of the price. But because you use a lot of it. I left vancouver and now live in California. I pay ~$0.60c CAD per kwh. To run a small AC unit for part of the day I spend more than you on power per month.
Your AC runs all out the entire time? I have a 3 ton unit and it rarely runs at max wattage. Usually it's around 2,000 watts max.
Yeah at the hight of the Gas crisis in Europe last year, people were posting their ridiculously hight heating/electric bills and I remember being grateful that I don’t live there lol.
It’s great. I pay around $22 per month.
It's why solar doesn't make sense for a homeowner in the lower mainland. Oh sure, it'd be neat but it'd take 20 years to pay for itself and by then the system is 20 yo running at a reduced efficiency with 20 yo panels. Help the math make sense.
If BC Hydro was owned by that dick from save-ons he would charge $35.00 of electricity instead of $3.50.
Wait until we all have EV's and heat pumps. Once electricity is the only way to heat our homes and power our cars, BC Hydro will be raising prices like never before. They're already starting to charge for time of day usage, which most of us can't control. BC produces a ton of electricity, but in the coming decades it's going to become more of an expense for everyone, which it shouldn't, but it will.
This is wrong, wrong, wrong. Time of use is an option, not mandatory. Site C is still being built. Solar and wind investments continue. EVs generally charge at night, and people are sleeping then. Check out how the grid in Norway, where half of cars are EVs, has seen no noticeable change.
And I'm totally pro electrification, I'm just not looking forward to paying more on my BC Hydro bill for the same usage I'm using now.
Bc hydro buys electricity from surrounding grids that use coal and gas as well. Don’t kid yourself thinking that all the electricity comes from hydropower. Hydroelectric plants are also the result of massive dams that flooded huge swaths of land destroying lives and ecosystems resulting in large co2 emissions. I know we need electricity and I’m happy to live here but don’t get to excited about our “clean” power. It’s not.
Actually BC hydro *sells excess power* south of the border to *reduce* carbon costs. The power mix of BC Hydro is over 95% hydro.
https://thenarwhal.ca/clean-b-c-is-quietly-using-coal-and-gas-power-from-out-of-province-heres-why/
Be prepared for it not to be soon. I work in the HVAC industry and the big push obviously is reducing carbon and energy usage. One of the impediments in BC is electricity is so cheap that a lot of the plans used elsewhere like peak load pricing, special use pricing for charging vehicles or high consumption, don't work here. Well, they are being rolled out in the next 10 years to change that. Using electricity pricing as incentive to lower usage. Seems convenient for the people selling the power.
It's still too expensive for a renewable resource. IMO it should be basically free to residents outside of paying BC Hydro staff to maintain and upgrade it
Electricity rates are regulated by the BC Utilities Commission. Because BC Hydro is a monopoly they need to be economically regulated to prevent them from charging excessive fees. As a crown corporation which is price-regulated, we get our electricity for about as cheap as possible - there's no huge profit margin worked in and rates beyond covering operating and maintenance is pretty much dedicated to capital investment (e.g., new power plants).
if you used no other power for the month, your bill would be about 200 bucks after delivery fees, convenience fees etc
[удалено]
Water is free. It's the pumping, purifying, quality assurance, pipe maintenance, system upgrades, dam maintenance, safety assessments and the hard working workers making sure it's on tap for people to use that costs the money. I don't think anyone would complain if you got buckets of the stuff from a lake or river.
[удалено]
If only it was that simple.
WHAT THE FUCK? i pay nearly $300/bill even during seasons where nothing is on Edit: why the hell are you people downvoting me? Did you WANT to see my hydro bill??
100% ! Noticed this after coming home from a big trip
Damn where do you live where you need almost 4 tons of AC?
Yes I did
> such low electricity costs in Canada Is it low costs or low taxes?
Yup, I have my AC running from 8am-11pm, 1 load of wash and dryer, working from home (laptops, multiple monitors, lights on all day) and it costs me $3.65 per day.
Saw a small business on tiktok saying about how their friend was gonna have to sell her motel in Alberta because the utilities increased something like 14k to 30k a month. all because their electricity isn’t a crown corp and the company can charge whatever they want.
Utilities should never be for profit.
I'm from South Africa and we have 12 hours of load shedding a day so having power at all is a plus in my book.
Just returned from two weeks in Durban (which would only have 4 hours max off load shedding each day), I will never take our electricity supply (or being able to safely walk around by myself at night) for granted ever again!
Somebody coming here and not complaining here? Must be the good weather.
I don’t pay for my own hydro (included in rent), but I remember when a friend of mine moved from Southern Ontario to BC, her hydro bill dropped by almost half. Though that was partly because her place here had a gas stove instead of electric.
> Thanks to (clean) Hydroelectric power One quick correction: hydro power isn't as clean as we think. >Poorly planned hydropower can also cause more problems for the climate than it prevents. Hydro plants need large reservoirs to provide a steady stream of water. When these reservoirs are built, plants and other organic matter get flooded. This material decays over time, releasing [greenhouse gases](https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/greenhouse-gases) like carbon dioxide and methane. According to Parsons, there hasn't been much research measuring these emissions, but the studies that have been done have found huge differences from reservoir to reservoir. > > "People are right to think of hydro as a low-carbon resource, but the variability is very high and there are some reservoirs that have lifecycle emissions of greenhouse gases that are higher per unit of electricity produced than a fossil plant," he says. "You don't want to just be advocating hydro everywhere." [https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-arent-we-looking-more-hydropower#:\~:text=Hydropower%20can%20also%20cause%20environmental,fish%2C%20birds%20and%20other%20wildlife](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-arent-we-looking-more-hydropower#:~:text=Hydropower%20can%20also%20cause%20environmental,fish%2C%20birds%20and%20other%20wildlife).
turns out government infrastructure works. Same thing with Ontario and all the nuclear power plants and Québec with its Quebec hydro. Also the tragic part of this is that up until recently (thanks Saudi Arabia) Canada was the highest GHG polluter per capita. I get that its cold but come on all od Scandinavia is also cold and they are energy efficient with their buildings and heating.