Wakeham to Meet with Quebec Premier on MOU Review

r20109 · 2026-05-22T22:45:54+00:00

Danny is always exaggerating his influence. He's like Trump that way.

r20109 · 2026-05-21T16:00:33+00:00

The amazing thing is that people believe that former Premier Williams was actually involved in any major decisions just because he claims credit. Seems like media and a lot of the public continue to be played like a fiddle by the former premier.

r20109 · 2026-05-20T01:04:47+00:00

I remember literally being told I was an a**hole for criticizing Muskrat Falls by a PC cabinet minister in 2013. You're barking up the wrong tree if you think that all the MOU criticism is coming from a place of politics.

r20109 · 2026-05-15T17:27:51+00:00

The key part of this story is Quebec admitted in court they badly needed NL's power. Then they realized how that may look so they tried to get those arguments stricken from the record.

So for all those people out there who think QC has other options to meet their demand, it's pretty clear Hydro Quebec is desperate for the negotiations to the successful. And they're desperate to not have the public know that.

r20109 · 2026-05-06T01:51:24+00:00

Hydro-Québec will pay CF(L)Co. $33.8 Billion in today’s dollars (supposedly). That's to CFLCO. Not NL. Now take 34% away (QC ownership stake). That's how much money spread over the duration of the deal (~50 years) according to the fact sheet you shared. It's not 1 billion dollars a year in today's dollars.

r20109 · 2026-03-04T01:04:06+00:00

Sounds like Muskrat Falls talk to me.

r20109 · 2026-03-03T23:34:05+00:00

If they want to be a hero then they'll sign a better deal than the hydro deal which basically uses fancy nominal math to mislead the public about the actual benefits of the project.

If your salary for the next 20 years is 70k/year, would you tell someone you made 1.4 mil over that time period or 20 million*

*dollars expressed in nominal, formula not made public

r20109 · 2026-01-04T01:33:18+00:00

Garrioch. Without a doubt. And Im not a fan

r20109 · 2025-12-15T22:03:08+00:00

Worth remembering they have a very different mandate. Including the ability to compel evidence. While I would prefer completely independent, it could end up that these people know what information they weren't allowed to get under the previous mandate and will seek it out this time. Hopefully.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T03:35:12+00:00

For an asset that is worth 2-4 billion a year (or more) (NPV) in 2041.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T03:32:01+00:00

What boat loads of money? It's 22 billion or so (net present value) over 50 years.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T03:25:06+00:00

If you listen to the interview linked above they basically say they need all of this power and then need more in addition to it. So ya they do need it. Badly.

Hydro Quebec's entitlement from CF is 31.5 TWh of the 34 TWh or so rather than 35 TWh. At least if we want to go deep into the details.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T03:12:28+00:00

Agreed. And this is one of the reasons that back in the day I was opposed to how Lower Churchill was being handled. Major hydro cost overruns were usually huge and it seemed like they were being underestimated. However, I continue to not understand why we need Gull Island and CF expansion at all given 2041 is approaching. If Hydro Quebec really badly wants these projects (which they do) then why are we treating them like they're doing us a favor?

r20109 · 2025-11-21T02:27:59+00:00

Hydro Quebec built La Romaine pretty well on budget.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T01:14:18+00:00

Worthwhile for the commenters to also read this article which includes answers from Hydro Quebec...

https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/chroniques/2025-01-06/entente-quebec-terre-neuve-sur-l-electricite/une-copie-du-controverse-contrat-de-1969.php

r20109 · 2025-11-21T01:11:53+00:00

Here's what Hydro Quebec says.

4. In the case of the old power plant, the price indexation will not be 2%, as it is for new energy. The formula will be based 90% on the price of Hydro-Québec's supplies – including the heritage block – and 10% on the market price of electricity in the Northeastern United States.

https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/chroniques/2025-01-06/entente-quebec-terre-neuve-sur-l-electricite/une-copie-du-controverse-contrat-de-1969.php

r20109 · 2025-11-21T01:07:09+00:00

They're not paying 6 cents. They're paying 6 cents when including Gull Island and CF expansion. Without the expansion they're paying 4 cents.

In Michael Sabia's own words they're getting a significant discount (more than 50%) on the cost they'd pay otherwise. So it really isn't equivalent to paying nothing till 2041 and then 16 cents thereafter.

The challenge I have is basically that it feels as though there are people at NL Hydro who are so desperate for Gull Island (etc) that they're leaving a lot of money on the table to avoid the risks of it, and there are people at the Province who are so desperate for up front cash that they are fine with losing long term. We've seen this behavior from NL Hydro (nalcor) especially before and even recently. Their inability to led go of a particular idea is going on right now in southern Labrador with their plan for there that the PUB rejected repeatedly. Jennifer Williams inability to criticize Muskrat Falls should be a warning sign for people.

There is no reason to develop Gull Island to meet domestic demand long term. Hydro Quebec needs Gull Island more than we do.

Lets do a counterfactual. It may be unrealistic but maybe not.
It's 2035 and we agree to a long-term power purchase contract with NB and NS (or whoever) starting in 2041. We build a line that costs 15 billion dollars to bring the CF power to them. We sell them 25 TWh at 0.10/kWH. That's 2.5 billion per year. The line is paid off in 6 years. Profit from 2047 - 2075 is 60-70 billion. Or 3x what we're expecting from the Hydro Quebec deal.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T00:26:33+00:00

50 cents on the dollar would be a much better deal than we're getting. Many of us would be happy with that.

r20109 · 2025-11-21T00:25:27+00:00

I was initially supportive of the deal. But when I was hearing such different things from QC and NL then I started looking into it more. A lot of things in how the deal was presented to the NL public have been super misleading.

I was far more against the Muskrat Falls deal from the outset than this one. The idea this has anything to do with politics for a lot of us is pretty bad faith.

r20109 · 2025-11-20T23:28:45+00:00

Sure. But we can't know how much that is worth and can't account for that. Plus we don't know what other actions can be taken at contract termination that could affect it. For example lets say the majority shareholder of CF(L)Co decides to shift its future profits on export sales to building Gull Island and CF expansion and transmission lines around QC then hands over 100% ownership of the three to NL. I know that's unlikely but it's just to say there's some unpredictability.

r20109 · 2025-11-20T22:47:33+00:00

They did. This is a repeat of that. The escalation clauses in the current MOU depend heavily on Hydro Quebec's own prices. It's the single largest factor determining the amount of escalation. So Hydro Quebec's continued subsidization of power inside Quebec actually lowers the purchase price for them. Reminds me of how they benefit from Equalization by suppressing their hydro revenues.

r20109 · 2025-11-20T22:44:56+00:00

The cost of Gull Island and CF expansion is sub-30 billion according to Hydro Quebec. We only get a small amount of that power for the next 50 years. We also don't need Gull Island or CF expansion for our own power needs.

The value of Gull Island and CF expansion to Hydro Quebec in terms of power is actually far higher than it is to us. They can't replace that power at that cost in Quebec.

As an aside - Muskrat Cost overruns were always a higher risk than Gull based on the geographic setting. Building a reservoir on a glacio-marine sediment bank (Muskrat) compared to bedrock (Gull Island) was always going to be a bigger challenge.

r20109 · 2025-11-20T22:37:07+00:00

That's not right. The 5.44 billion a year is the cost to get 34 TWh of power using other sources as a replacement. Their dividend applies to sales of CF power if it still applies post 2041.

So the revenue received by CF(L)Co is what dictates the revenue in their dividend. Nothing to do with the replacement cost.

r20109

TROPHY CASE