Bird’s eye view of Muskrat Falls site work

Ashley Fitzpatrick
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Nalcor will make presentation to government within weeks: Martin

Flying high by helicopter along the Churchill River towards Muskrat Falls, you can spot lines cutting through otherwise untouched sections of forest.

Dropping closer to the land, the lines gradually grow wider, until heavy equipment becomes easy to spot within them — workers creating a treeless path through the Labrador wilds.

Should the Lower Churchill development be ultimately sanctioned by Nalcor Energy and approved by government, this access road will be a main artery for contractors moving people and equipment to and from Muskrat Falls.

A clearing just off the emerging roadway, a campsite for contract workers should the project proceed, is also in development.

Down river, a similar clearing was created decades ago, in anticipation of the development of a hydro dam at the Gull Island site — a project that was not given a final green light.

Back at Nalcor’s office in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Lower Churchill project leader Gilbert Bennett said contracts awarded to date on the present-day Lower Churchill plans cover the creation of the new road, as well as the building of communications infrastructure through Bell Aliant and a power line to supply dam site work.

“Work is valued at the tens of millions of dollars and it’s important though for us to get this work underway right now so when we do sanction the project we’re in a position that we can actually start work immediately and that we’re not waiting several months in order to start work at the site,” he said, explaining the work as a calculated risk.

Waiting on the prep would risk pushing back the overall schedule and, as a result, cost overruns.

“I think the most important thing is there is a tremendous amount of work that has been done in preparation for a sanction decision,” said Nalcor’s president and CEO, Ed Martin.

Martin said updated cost estimates for the overall project are in, following detailed engineering work on the proposed hydro dam and Labrador-island power transmission system.

“The fact of the matter is when we come forward with a recommendation in the coming weeks to the provincial government that we will have our homework done, it’ll be very detailed and we’ll be in a position to offer a recommendation.”

Meanwhile, Manitoba Hydro International is continuing its review of the project, he said, adding that review process is “about half way through.”

Martin said the Crown corporation continues to be open to questions in regards to the project.

Debate on the project is scheduled for the House of Assembly this fall.

Organizations: Bell Aliant, Manitoba Hydro International

Geographic location: Muskrat Falls, Churchill River, Gull Island Happy Valley Goose Bay Labrador-island

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Maurice E. Adams
    August 20, 2012 - 13:09

    So MHI (who has already previously said it supports Muskrat Falls) is already half way through its review of Nalcor's final numbers. ..... How is it then that MHI will have many weeks MORE to review and prepare its report than our own MHAs will have? Where the is the objectivity, and where is the respect for island ratepayers, the people who will bear the multi-billion dollar cost of this project?

  • Winston Adams
    August 20, 2012 - 13:05

    Given we now have 85 percent hydro on the island, I think our rates should continue to be below the national average. We are now 50 percent more than Man., BC, and Que. and with MF will be double them. Given our existing high percentage of hydro , we should not have to go much more than 50 percent more than Man,BC. and Que If lowest cost is properly assessed we should be able to achieve that. We should have costs lower than the Maritime provinces and Ont.For many products are costs are more than elsewhere. But for electricity this should not be the case. strange that we want to give/sell our electricity at low prices for export while substancially increasing our domestic prices. I think you are right- MF would be good at 3 billion, but not at 6 billion, and a disaster at 9 billion, maybe too at 8 billion. Even wade Locke questions the local demand and therefore the cost at 8 billion. And low local demand makes for bad economics even at 6 billion

  • Cold Future
    August 20, 2012 - 09:06

    As long as the project can be built while keeping the domestic rates for consumers at the canadian average with canadian average escalation rates, it should proceed. If not it should be stopped and ecomomically viable projects developed when the power is needed. It is not accepatble to build it and have Consumers in this province pay extra high rates to subsidize rates to mainland consumers. It should be viable at $ 3 billion but not at $6 billion. $9 billion would be a disaster for Newfoundland.