The panel tasked with evaluating the need for two north-south power lines in the province heard two very different views on the need for power in Alberta at hearings in Edmonton this week.
The government-appointed, four-person panel has been tasked with recommending possible changes to Bill 50, which allows the government to deem transmission lines as critical infrastructure.
The panel has also been asked whether the Alberta Electric System Operator's (AESO) plans for expanded transmission in the province are reasonable, especially regarding two proposed north-south power lines between Edmonton and Calgary.
On that issue the panel heard very divided opinions.
Keith Wilson, a St. Albert lawyer, presented for the Alberta Landowners Council. He told the panel the AESO's plan amounted to a massive overbuild.
"We are on the cusp of potentially committing Albertans and our industries to significant, unnecessary and expensive transmission lines," he said.
Wilson pointed to presentations from other groups including the Industrial Power Consumers' Association of Alberta, who said the lines were simply not needed.
He said Bill 50 had taken checks and balances out of the system and that power companies were now pushing for lines they wouldn't have been able to justify under the old process.
"When AltaLink says we need to build a north-south line, or any other line, do they really need it or do they just want it?" Wilson asked the panellists.
Executives from EPCOR who addressed the panel took another tack on Thursday, arguing the lines were needed if new generators were going to have confidence before building new plants.
Guy Bridgeman, the company's senior vice president for strategic planning and development, argued that in Alberta's system investors had to know there would be somewhere to sell the power.
"It is important that we make sure the grid is there and investors can have confidence when they make their investment decisions," he said.
Bridgeman said the proposed north-south lines would allow the system to be flexible and responsive to the grid's needs.
He said forecasting power demand is difficult, but the lines will be needed.
"These assets are in place for decades, 40 or 50 years, so they are going to provide a very long service life and it is very hard to time the front end," he said.
With the possibility of another boom coming to Alberta, the system has to be ready, Bridgeman argued.
"We don't want the transmission system to be a pinch point that won't enable that growth."
Bill 50
Wilson, who has given dozens of presentations on property rights across the province, said Bill 50 is more about the cost to utility customers, but said there are property rights issues as well.
"Albertans want to know that if public infrastructure is placed on their land, that it is truly needed," he said.
Bridgeman said the bill was a blunt instrument for getting power lines built, which he hoped could be avoided in the future.
"It is a brute force piece of legislation, but at the time, the concern about the Alberta economy and the concern about the need to get on with this — after some stops and starts — was so severe that the cabinet took it on its own," he said.
Brian Heidecker, chair of the committee — which is composed of industry experts and academics — said he believes they will have the information to sort through both sides of this debate.
"We have heard a very wide range of views, which is what we anticipated hearing and all people are making some excellent points," he said.
Heidecker said the panel invited groups they thought would give them a range of views.
"We didn't just invite the people in favour or the people against or the people in the middle. These are all active players in this conversation."
The panel has until Feb. 10 to present a report to Energy Minister Ted Morton and Heidecker said he sees no issue in meeting that timeline.
