Comments for ARESST

Comment on The Wastewater Issue – Science and Politics at Odds in Victoria by Steve Filipovic

Steve Filipovic — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 01:25:31 +0000

I am with you guys on this, I am presently offering myself up as Mayor of Victoria. Let your members know that I am up against $60,000 campaigns and need some help. I think many of the big infrastructure projects are just a boondoggle for forcing the economy up in a world wide recession. Help me end the establishments rule and lets get our democracy functioning for the people! Thanks for doing what your doing.

Comment on Wastewater Treatment – is it worth the $ 1.43 Billion price tag? by marc heibey

marc heibey — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:17:07 +0000

Can you tell me, please, will the proposed wastewater facility remove ALL chemical(toxic) chemicals?

Comment on Advocacy group seeks answers to Greater Victoria sewage questions by albe

albe — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 23:00:40 +0000

The Province insists that the project , the sewage treatment secondary system, go forward.
Is it that the public is so ill informed that just the mention of sewage will quiet all critics, and this is known by the province.
The major constructors that garner the tenders are to be watched, will it be a transfer of taxpayers funds to shareholders of unknown ,numbered corp. ? perhaps an order in council created numbered firm, to allow the elites to trickle up money from general revenue that may be donated to a party? Will we ever be informed of that possible case, or are we just to pay for something we have science for that isn’t needed. To be seen .

Comment on Esquimalt councillors ‘appalled’ by sewage-plant plan by freddy beamer

freddy beamer — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:53:04 +0000

Is it time for torches and pitchforks, or maybe tar and feathers? Perhaps a demonstration of the displeasure of the residents of Esquimalt should follow the example of the Run-of-River project on the Pitt River. In March 2008, an angry mob headed by Rafe Mair gathered to oppose the Pitt River Hydro Project. Environment Minister Barry Penner, who was a booster of the project, promptly wet himself and summarily cancelled the whole thing.

Comment on Esquimalt councillors ‘appalled’ by sewage-plant plan by Elizabeth Woodworth

Elizabeth Woodworth — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:37:29 +0000

It is certainly understandable that Esquimalt would be very concerned about this sudden and unexpected turn of events. Such a large decision requires careful and orderly study. Once again, decisions are being made to meet artificial deadlines which are exerting the perception of time pressure, when in fact there is no hurry at all. It really seems as if this project might implode altogether. That would be good. Then, in the fullness of time, rational and unhurried plans can be made, with full public participation, that will serve everyone involved in the best possible way.

Comment on Esquimalt councillors ‘appalled’ by sewage-plant plan by Loves Esquimalt

Loves Esquimalt — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:26:36 +0000

Esquimalt neighbourhoods near this unnecessary billion-dollar sewage plant will be at risk from the sludge trucks, from the toxic sewage treatment chemicals stored onsite, and will most likely get occasional odour problems.

However, they won’t be the only ones to suffer, as McLoughlin Point is right at the mouth of Victoria Harbour – so if you don’t like mega-marinas, you’ll find that the ecologically-sensitive foreshore at the Point also an environmental negative.

Too many environmental negatives when there is NO sound environmental reason for additional, land-based sewage treatment.

Mayor Desjardins appears to have publicly taken a critical view of some of the CRD CALWMC process, but problem is that she doesn’t oppose the unnecessary land-based sewage treatment project itself – just quibbles over the siting.

Neither does STAG/Bellefontaine appear to challenge the very weak rationale for this wasteful, environmentally-hazardous sewage treatment plant project, but her focus is just on the resource recovery aspects and siting.

Tim Morrison, writing in the blog Esquimalt Review, has two current articles, one of which features Bellefontaine:
esquimaltreview.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/crd%E2%80%99s-stinky-decision-making-on-sewage-treatment/

and the other article by Beth Burton-Krahn:

esquimaltreview.wordpress.com/2010/06/22/crd%E2%80%99s-sewage-treatment-plan-should-be-flushed-down-the-toilet/

Comment on Sewage choices can’t be rushed by Alex Murdoch

Alex Murdoch — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 22:39:31 +0000

I agree with every point made in this commentary, but nevertheless wish to commend the CRD’s Liquid Waste Management Committee [CALWMC] for having the courage to change a bad plan at this late date. Once a plan has been announced, millions spent on studies and land acquisition, and a PR campaign mounted to sell it to the public, it must be extremely difficult for politicians of any stripe to say “we were wrong – there’s a better way.” Good for you, CALWMC!

But now, more than ever, the Committee needs time to get it right. From its inception in 2006 most of this project’s problems have resulted from hasty decisions, often driven by the impossibly short deadlines imposed by BC’s Environment Minister. How many times over the past four years have CALWMC members been quoted as saying, in effect: “I don’t like the plan in its present form but we have to meet a deadline so I’ll hold my nose and vote for it.”

Repeated studies, and the independently-monitored reports of the CRD’s own Science staff, have shown that the existing system poses no immediate threat to public health or the environment, and the argument for land-based treatment has always been that as our population grows “we can’t do this forever.” The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, in the Canada-Wide Strategy document signed in 2009, suggests a 30-year time frame as appropriate for such situations. And postponement of a $750 million expenditure, in the present economic climate, could not be a bad thing. Surely Mr. Penner can give the CRD a year or two.

Comment on Feds still onside with funding CRD sewage by Alex Murdoch

Alex Murdoch — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 19:32:41 +0000

I hope Stockwell Day has asked his staff to conduct a proper analysis of the “Business Case” submitted in support of the requested $308 million in federal funding, as it is so absurd as to be laughable. According to the plan the proposed treatment plants will generate over 10,000 permanent jobs, suck CO2 from the atmosphere, generate vast revenues, and make our American neighbours love us. It promises benefits such as heat and water recovery which the CRD’s very-expensive consultants have already told them are impractical. While reading it I kept expecting a claim that it would end the Palestinian conflict, eliminate HIV/AIDS, and issue in a new ere of world peace and prosperity! The scary thing is that some on the CRD board appear to actually believe this nonsense.

Comment on Anderson doubts commitment of governments to sewage plan by Bob Furber

Bob Furber — Thu, 20 May 2010 16:40:18 +0000

I would love to see the scientific studies referred to by Mr. Penner. They simply do not exist. At best he has misinterpreted a couple of reports that his aide has read.

If Mr. Penner is referring to the MacDonald Report, this report simply brings to light contamination of the ocean floor surrounding the Macaulay sewage outfall. But it fails to link this contamination to sewage. It merely recommends further studies. Moreover, this report makes no mention that this area used to be used as Victoria’s garbage and nuisance dump before the Hartland landfill was brought on stream. Amongst the many nuisance items dumped there were car radiators and batteries, both rich in lead and other heavy metals. There are also reports of a sunken coal barge near the outfall. The fact that ocean bed contamination is DECREASING around the outfalls further weakens the link between ocean bed contamination and sewage.

Or, perhaps Mr. Penner is referring to a curious paragraph in the SETAC report: “Relying on the dilution and natural dispersion …is not a long-term answer to wastewater disposal…also contribute contaminant loads to the Strait and to Puget Sound ”. This is unfortunate because there is evidence this paragraph was added after the fact, given that it has zero support in the body of the report and its absurd claim that Victoria’s effluent will [travel up stream] to the contaminate the Puget Sound.

Comment on Anderson doubts commitment of governments to sewage plan by John Newcomb

John Newcomb — Wed, 19 May 2010 23:18:45 +0000

Right Alex! I sent email to the reporters on that story with correction. Of course, the irony is that Rob Shaw was the chief sewage reporter for the Times Colonist until he got bored with it

My email to Kim and Rob:

Hey Kim and Rob:

I think Rob has been away from the “sewage file” for too long!

“Sewage here goes through a six-millimetre screen before being shot via 100-metre-long pipes into the Strait of Juan de Fuca”

…and the correct answer from Times Colonist files:

“The Macaulay Point outfall pipe in Esquimalt travels 1.8 kilometres away from shore and sits 60 metres below the surface. The Clover Point pipe is 1.2 kilometres long, and 65 metres deep.

http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/features/sewage/story.html?id=6944f801-be05-424b-939d-ea7896c00f59

Grateful you include correction in upcoming newspaper? I’m sure our RSTV members will also be sending you lots of emails about this! Its really a serious issue, when the greatest threat to our marine environment isn’t from our LONG outfalls, but from the storm drains that are so short.

John Newcomb
aresst.ca
rstv.ca
victoriasewagetreatment.ca/ccost/
sites.google.com/site/sewageplantsvictoria/