Accessibility/Mobile Features
Skip Navigation
Editorial News
Classified Sites


Power line to U.S. 'ill-advised' for Manitoban rate-payers: Pallister

Manitoba Progressive Conservative Leader Brian Pallister

Enlarge Image

Manitoba Progressive Conservative Leader Brian Pallister (MIKE DEAL / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS FILES)

Opposition Leader Brian Pallister charged today the NDP is recklessly "Americanizing" Manitoba Hydro at the expense of Manitobans under its plan to build two new dams and a new transmission line to the United States.

"The fact is what we’re guaranteed with here under the NDP’s agenda is a power-aid program," he said. "We get to do all the sweating up here and they get the juice down there."

Pallister said an example of that is that the Crown utility wants approval to build and co-own a proposed transmission line that will run from Winnipeg to Duluth, MN. Under a proposal now being studied by the Public Utilities Board, Manitoba Hydro will own 49 per cent of the 500 KV transmission line with Minnesota Power owning the rest.

The PUB has heard that Hydro’s stake in the line was needed so that it would be upgraded, at Hydro’s request, from the originally-proposed 230 kilovolts to 500. The larger line would allow Hydro to ship more power into the Wisconsin market and import more power to Manitoba from U.S. utilities when needed.

Hydro’s involvement in the line has been described at the hearing as being "an owner of last resort" in order to see it upgraded.

"Who says Manitoba Hydro had to get it done?" Pallister said. "This government, obviously, is driving Manitoba Hydro’s agenda and pushing Manitoba Hydro to make deal that may well be ill-advised for Manitoba ratepayers."

The PUB has heard this week that under a confidential deal with Minnesota Power to build the transmission line, Manitoba Hydro -- at this stage -- will be responsible for 66 per cent of the line’s construction and maintenance. That’s because Minnesota Power does not need the full capacity of the line so it only wants to pay for the portion it will use.

"So with regard to the question of who will pay, Minnesota Power intends to rate-base the cost of their 250-megawatt share of the large (750 MW) interconnection," Hydro's division manager of power sales, David Cormie, told the PUB on Monday. "That means their customers, through their rate-recovery mechanisms with their customers, will recover the cost of their investment.

"That leaves Manitoba Hydro with the obligation to pay for the balance of 66 per cent, including the cost of providing the transmission services to Wisconsin Public Service. However, as we intend to be an owner only of last resort, we are making provisions in these discussions on the business relationship so that a third party can step in and participate."

Cormie also said despite Hydro’s 66 per cent involvement in the 850-kilometre line, it’s still a benefit to the utility because it provides it with an electricity pipeline into the American Midwest.

"Under the contracts dependent on the line, Manitoba Hydro's energy gets shipped first," he told the PUB. "Whether it's dependable or surplus fixed-priced energy or additional energy that Manitoba Hydro intends for the spot market, we own the transmission rights in Canada. They may own the transmission rights on the U.S. side associated with their ownership position, but it's always Manitoba Hydro's energy that will flow on that -- on -- under those firm rights."

He also said it makes sense to build a larger-capacity transmission line now, instead of a smaller one, because having to add another line to Minnesota in later years will be more expensive and more scrutinized by regulators.

Pallister asked if American investors didn’t want to get involved in the line in its earlier stages, why they would get involved after it’s built.

"The fact is Manitoba Hydro has entered into a commitment that obligates Manitoba Hydro ratepayers to subsidize U.S. purchasers of hydro," he said.

Pallister also questioned Hydro’s expectations, and the government’s, that by building the proposed Keeyask and Conawapa generating stations the province will reap billions selling power to Americans as U.S. utilities close old, carbon-belching coal plants and add hydro power as part of state-mandated plans to use more renewable energy.

He said experts to testify at the ongoing PUB hearing will say Hydro’s expectations are overblown.

The PUB is examining whether there are alternatives to building the $6.5-billion Keeyask and $10.7-billion Conawapa generating stations, and if the line to Duluth is needed.

It’s to file its report to government June 20.


Updated on Thursday, March 13, 2014 at 2:08 PM CDT:
Corrects figure re: $6.5-billion Keeyask dam

  • Rate this Rate This Star Icon
  • This article has not yet been rated.
  • We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

    You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

    Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

Sort by: Newest to Oldest | Oldest to Newest | Most Popular 2 Commentscomment icon

You can comment on most stories on You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.

The 66/33 cost split for the "Not so Great Northern Transmission Line" is bizarre considering the enormous potential capacity for this project, a 500 kV line, TRIPLE bundled, it can carry a lot more than the 250/750MW that they're talking about. Yet the split doesn't change if it's more than 750 MW. What? This transmission should be paid for by those on the receiving end. And of course local cost will go up because basic economics says that if they can sell it where the market cost is higher, that's where it will be sold, and you'll have to pay that rate or more to get the electricity in the market. Nope, that's no deal for Manitoba! It's no deal for Minnesota either, taking people's land and charging Minnesota Power ratepayers for a pass through on to Wisconsin and Michigan. And exporting power is NOT a public purpose, so there's no justification for eminent domain. Let them pay "market value" for the land and see if they can build their transmission line! And then there's this dam project -- if not for export, then why? It's greed, not need!

Thanks to Brian Pallister, we as Manitobans are finding out the truth about Selinger. We don't need more dams to sell the hydro at a reduced rate. Then build the hydro line down to MN. What fools we are allowing Selinger to do this at our expense. In 12 yrs. our hydro bills have gone up 75%, where is it going to stop. Selinger is a liar.......remember what he said before he was voted in!! He hasn't keep his word!!

We could actually build natural gas generators (a clean fuel) to produce electricity then sell our excess to the USA. We build them near the USA border giving Canadians jobs.

USA is thinking along these lines using natural gas generator to produce electricity. SO WHY ARE WE BUILDING DAMS!!!! So we can pay for them the rest of our lives. VOTE OUT SELINGER. SEND HIM A LETTER SAYING "NO" TO BUILDING THE DAMS.

Post Your Commentcomment icon

  • You have characters left

The Brandon Sun does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. Comments are moderated before publication. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.


Make text: Larger | Smaller

Brandon Sun - Readers Choice Results
Why Not Minot?

Social Media