This project needs to be abandoned now. Just read this one section alone. This is why we told the NDP #SiteC would go to $20 billion, still remain unsafe, and likely be unfinishable. We don't need the power. Find some guts, stop work now & reassess #bcpoli vancouversun.com/opinion/editor… 
..The same engineer has further remarks on #SiteC & instability, but first, take a look at this 2013 letter to BC & local govts from Peace resident Arthur Hadland. It's a compendium of everything known about the site's instability. GOV'TS KNEW. #bcpoli prrd.bc.ca/board/agendas/…
..Engineer: "What were the engineers designing #SiteC [BC Hydro, SNC-Lavalin, Klohn Crippen Berger] doing? Hydro's early documents said no historical information was available, yet Prof Hardy's report on the Taylor Bridge collapse was in the BC Engineering Association's files."
.."The general public and politicians would not know what that research on the Taylor Bridge instability and collapse meant, but engineers definitely would, and would be required to find out the properties of the foundation material at #SiteC. Instead...
.."Instead #SiteC foundation material was classified as "bedrock" because drill holes there all brought up the same material, which "looks" like rock. This highly compressed, cohesionless soft clay masquerades as hard rock when dry but swells & breaks down to mud when saturated..
Now, we've known that #SiteC's north bank (what BC Hydro calls the left bank) has been fraught with instability from the beginning. It contains the twin river diversion tunnels, which have required an excessively expensive fix, an inner lining of steel ribs and 6' thick concrete.
.#SiteC's north bank suffered so much instabilty/erosion that they kept shaving material off it until one local contractor said if they kept going, it'd be "nigh on horizontal." What wasn't clear until Hydro's reports on Friday was the degree of instability on the SOUTH bank too.
..I just want to emphasize that point: 'Turbine/ generators run within small 1000ths of an inch alignment, i.e. perfectly aligned, & anything that alters this can wipe out bearings & anything rotating.' So a key part of this dam cannot sit on weak shale. But that's where it sits.
.& the engineer's final note: "People think things can built anywhere I guess, but if the material won't allow it, geotech makes the final decision. We just don't know when." Based on Hydro's new reports, that time is now. They don't know how to fix this, let alone what it'd cost
In conclusion, we know the BC gov't/Hydro knew all this. They had access to geological study of this shale. They had Prof. Hardy's report & Arthur Hadland's comprehensive letter at the very least. For a project of this monumental scale, do we assume they did due diligence? #SiteC
Thank you to all the volunteer engineers & construction experts who, out of a high level of concern over the dangers at #SiteC, have come forward to advise us. But this engineer in particular has offered endless patience and hours to articulately explain complex problems. Thanks!
PS: None of this investigative work would be be necessary if we had any transparency from BC govt & BC Hydro. Look at the difficulties @sarahcox_bc (who has done the most in-depth reporting on #SiteC) has had trying to request/FOI information from #bcpoli thenarwhal.ca/site-c-dam-bc-…
