BC Controls Crypto Power, First Nations Partnerships

Summary#

• This bill changes B.C.’s energy laws. It has two main goals.
• First, it lets BC Hydro share ownership of parts of a new North Coast transmission line with First Nations through partnership deals.
• Second, it gives the provincial cabinet (the B.C. government) new power to control electricity service for crypto mining, large data centers/AI, and hydrogen made for export.

Key changes:

• Allows BC Hydro and First Nations to co-own parts of a 500-kilovolt transmission line from near Prince George to Bob Quinn Lake, in three phases.
• Lets cabinet approve, validate, and enforce co-ownership agreements, including services and payments between BC Hydro and the partnerships.
• Lets cabinet ban, cap, or set special electricity rates for crypto mining, electronic data storage/processing (including AI), and hydrogen made for use outside Canada.
• Allows different rules by place, facility, or time, and lets cabinet delegate details to the utilities regulator or to the utility.
• Lets utilities collect from customers the costs or lost revenue tied to these new rules.
• New rules can override past regulator decisions. The Act takes effect when it gets Royal Assent.

What it means for you#

• Residents and households

  • Your bill could change if utilities recover costs or lost revenue from these rules through rates or riders on customer bills.
  • Limits on very power-hungry uses (like crypto or some data centers) could help protect grid reliability and reduce pressure on rates.

• Small and medium businesses

  • If you are not in crypto, big data, or hydrogen export, you may face fewer rate impacts from new large power users. But you could still share in any cost recovery the utility is allowed to collect.

• Crypto miners and large data centers (including AI)

  • You may face a ban, a power cap, a queue, or special rates. Government can set selection rules for who gets served and how much power is available.
  • Rules can differ by location or facility, and can be set or changed by regulation.

• Hydrogen producers for export

  • Electricity service for hydrogen made for use outside Canada can be restricted or priced differently. Government can set how to decide whether hydrogen counts as “for use outside Canada.”

• First Nations

  • New paths to co-own parts of the North Coast transmission line with BC Hydro through limited partnerships.
  • Potential for ownership revenue and greater say in major grid assets, along with shared responsibilities and risks defined in the agreements.

• Communities along the North Coast corridor (Prince George → Fraser Lake → Terrace → Bob Quinn Lake)

  • Transmission build-out can support jobs and future industrial growth. The bill focuses on ownership and service rules; it does not change environmental approvals or land-use reviews.

• BC Hydro and the utilities regulator

  • Cabinet can direct special rates, limits, and selection methods for listed uses and can override older decisions.
  • Utilities must follow these regulations even if they differ from usual processes.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Creates real economic participation for First Nations in a major transmission project.
• Protects reliability and keeps bills fair for homes and small businesses by managing very high-demand uses.
• Prevents cross-subsidies by allowing special rates and letting utilities separate the costs of serving crypto, big data, and hydrogen export.
• Gives government flexible tools to respond quickly to fast-growing power demands from AI, crypto, and new hydrogen markets.
• Aligns electricity use with provincial goals by prioritizing domestic needs while enabling clean industry growth.

Opponents' View#

• Gives too much power to cabinet to override the independent utilities regulator and standard rate processes.
• Uncertain or restrictive rules could discourage investment in data centers, crypto, or hydrogen, and cost jobs.
• Allowing utilities to recover “lost revenue” or new costs from customers could raise bills without clear limits.
• Validating complex ownership agreements by regulation may reduce transparency and public oversight.
• Co-ownership could shift financial or operational risks to First Nations and the public if projects face delays or cost overruns.