The "Out" clause

Keir made a comment today on an article about the out clause.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2009/12/09/nb-nbpower-out-clause.html

Posted this reply :

"The out clause won't do much good. The government obviously thinks we can't afford to keep NB Power, so how does Keir expect to buy it back (not that he'll ever get that option as a politician) in the future? Are we to borrow more money that the government doesn't have now, and put us all another few thousand dollars per person in debt.? Besides the fact that this is a horrendous deal for NB in the mid to long term, the true facts behind this deal wll only reveal themselves in about 10 years. Then it will blindingly obvious when NBer's are paying high rates. Rates we used to laugh at because those were the rates all our neighbours (except HQ of course) paid. So, whether it has to do with the 7 TWhr surplus that HQ has this year because of the economic downturn, or the blocking of Newfoundland by tying up the grid, or the panic by Graham to finance his aspirations, or the super early positioning to make up for the loss of revenue from Churchill falls, or unknown issues with Lepeau, something big and ugly will rear it's head. The truly sad part is that NB was in the drivers seat. Quebec has a surplus and needs the revenue. Profits were down over $500,000,000 by the third quarter of this year. Shouldn't have been a problem to negotiate a short term ( 5 years or less) power purchase agreement. And for the future, the huge availabilty of wind power (thousands of MW per province) in the Maritimes is a perfect compliment to the vast hydro resources of Quebec. The wind energy can't be developed without a way to store the excess on a windy day, and generate the shortfall on calm day. Hydro does that. With this deal the only benefactor would be Hydro Quebec. And because HQ gets to own the NB system operator, HQ gets to control the dispatch, the players, and the profit."