- James G. Learning
- May 01, 2013 - 09:09
Hard to imagine in the 21st., century this argument and Project even exists. Average rate and tax payers are being skinned publicly Yet not a peep from anyone on how off the wall all of this is in reality, as in who has the authority and sense to stop this MF thing. Instead we have to wait till 2015 and the Dunderdale Administration turfed (hopefully). There has to be sanity somewhere. Will it be finally up to a small group at the epicentre of this Project to stop it? It sure is looking that way. This risky and not the way such destruction of purse and property should be guarded. the next time I see Ed martin will he be wearing a Crown?
- The province of Newfoundland and Labrador needs an Anti-Corruption Commission established.
- April 30, 2013 - 16:08
Why are projects sharply escalating in cost in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, in a time when the Unemployment statistic is high all over North America and the emergence of the new economy shows no sign of recovering? Would it have anything to do with the Engineering Firms that have control over project costs? Could it be the same malaise that has caused contracts to escalate for no reason, other than corruption, in Quebec? Whatever the malaise, it needs to be investigated before Billions of dollars are unnecessarily spent on over priced contracts.
- Alec C
- April 30, 2013 - 11:54
'meanwhile, the cost of Muskrat Falls power in this province has been pegged as HIGH as 21.4 cents a kWh' More like as LOW or at a MINIMUM 21.4 cents kWh for MF power. Law of diminishing returns - higher the electricity prices goes up (+10.4 cents kWh is close to DOUBLE current 11 cent kWh rate) and Nalcor's assumed demand takes quite a steep dive.
- Maurice E. Adams
- April 30, 2013 - 11:13
While the cost estimate increased substantially from the DG2, $6.2 billion to the DG3, $7.4 billion (if my memory serves correctly). I also seem to recall that the the DG3 estimate would have been over Wade Locke's 'uneconomic' number of $8 billion, except that that was prevented by Nalcor reducing the 15% DG2 contingency down to 7.5%. So the 20-30% increase in estimated cost todate is NOT a cost overrun, or an increase in contingency, but merely an increase in the estimated cost even before construction is completed. Cost overruns nearer the 30+% mark will blow the existing 7.5% contingency out of the water.
- Jon Smith
- April 30, 2013 - 10:10
None of the numbers ever quoted for Muskrat seem to add up satisfactorily-must be the new math. However if the average cost to the taxpayer in this province is $ 450 million per year as quoted by government the subsidy to the Nova Scotia consumer for the free power must be in the order of $100 million to $150 million per year for the 35 year period. The subsidy to other mainland consumers will be only $ 75 million to $110 million per year for the same period and the same block of power. WOW Newfoundlanders have been known to be generous but this has got to take all of the cake ever made!?!!!.
- John Smith
- April 30, 2013 - 13:38
There is no such thing as free power. You only show us all how utterly ignorant you are about this project when you make such absurd, inane remarks...
- John Smith
- April 30, 2013 - 09:36
Cost overruns have been built into the overall cost of muskrat falls...as can be easily seen from the MHI report there has been 20-30% added to the estimates to allow for cost overruns...and this is the worldwide norm for projects such as this. Maybe Mr. Joyce should do some thorough reading on the subject before he starts his daily pander....
- Maurice E. Adams
- April 30, 2013 - 07:27
Cost overruns? Nalcor says the Labrador-Island transmission line (1,100 kilometers) will cost $2.1 billion. Yet Transmission Developers Inc. (from the April 20 G & M) estimates it will cost them $2.2 billion to build a 539 kilometer line from Quebec to NY City (similar capacity line, easier terrain). We ain't seen nothin yet.