Back grounder
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Bipole III Transmission Routing Study: Review of Environmental Considerations and Potential Role of
Environmental Organizations (September 2007) by CMC Consultants Inc., Principal, David A. Farlinger,
P.Eng., F.E.I.C.
Key Findings of Study Include:
 There is an immediate need to increase the security of Manitoba’s HVdc transmission system
including existing converter capacity.
 While an east-side corridor for Bipole III offers the most attractive technical solution, other factors and
considerations make the choice of corridor difficult and complicated.
 The province should be directly involved in corridor selection as it involves interests and
responsibilities beyond Manitoba Hydro’s mandate.
Need for Bipole III Line:
 The vulnerability of the existing system was demonstrated in September 1996 when a wind storm
interrupted transmission on both existing bipoles, requiring the use of imported power to meet
domestic load.
 Eastern and western options provide for system reliability; the Interlake would not at present.
The Environmental Landscape of Alternative Routes:
 An east-side route for Bipole III would dissect boreal forest that is more intact and of higher ecological
integrity than on the west side. The forested areas of the west route, while containing some
environmentally significant areas, are much more intensively developed than on the east side, with roads,
rail lines, geotechnical survey lines and transmission lines as well as forestry and mining operations, and
provide opportunities to follow existing infrastructure. The west side also presents the best option for the
threatened woodland caribou.
Consideration Associated with Different Routing Options:
 Environmental opposition on the east side is likely much greater than on the west side, presenting potential
obstacles to licensing processes.
 The east side has gained an upscale ‘address’ and become symbolic of international efforts to save the
boreal forest.
 The Crown (Manitoba government) has an important responsibility to engage in routing assessment,
given the potential impacts of the project on Crown borrowings (cost of the project), the Crown’s
reputation, the Crown’s duty to consult and a variety of land-use and community-development issues.
Impact on Other Initiatives in the Area  UNESCO:
 While not necessarily incompatible, an eastern routing for Bipole III represents a risk to the current
UNESCO world heritage designation process in that it would weaken the case for inscription based on
natural values and could weaken the case for inscription based on cultural values.
 While there are numerous world heritage sites with fully developed modern infrastructure, in most of these
cases, the infrastructure preceded nomination. A number of potential world heritage sites are in danger of
being removed from consideration including cases involving controversy over large-scale developments.
 East side communities may favour a road but not a bipole, because a road is viewed as something
with direct community benefits.
Scope of Interest and Environmental Organizations:
 Controversy around and opposition to an east-side bipole line could develop into a ‘cause celebre’
representing a serious economic risk to Manitoba Hydro in that the corporation’s reputation and access to
export markets could be negatively impacted.
 There is already a strong anti-Manitoba Hydro environmental lobby in Minnesota which has lobbied for
legislative barriers to electricity trade with Manitoba.

The east side features prominently in international campaigns to save the boreal forest.