- SEWAGE TREATMENT FOES OUT IN FORCE
- VICTORIA CITIZENS OPPOSE SECONDARY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLAN
- CRD DIRECTORS PUSH FOR TWO-DECADE SEWER TREATMENT DELAY
- FOES RENEW BATTLE AGAINST SEWAGE MEGAPROJECT
- VIEW ROYAL TO REEXAMINE SEWAGE APPROACH
- CULLEN PRESENTATION ON SEWAGE - AUDIO RECORD
LETTERS:
- PROGRESSIVE APPROACH FOR SEWAGE PLANT NEEDED
- CANDIDATE REPEATED SEWAGE MISCONCEPTIONS
- SEWAGE PROJECT ECHOES LEAKY CONDO FIASCO
- TAKE ADVICE FROM WORLD'S MOST INFORMED NATIONS
- REVIEW OF FACTS CHANGED ENVIRONMENTALIST'S MIND
CRD-RELATED SEWAGE NEWS:
- COLWOOD EYES AXING SEWER EXPANSION FEE
------------------------------
CRD directors aim to force vote that could stall plans
Rob Shaw
Times Colonist
November 10, 2012 6:39 AM
CLICK HERE TO SEND LETTER TO TIMES COLONIST
A strong resurgence of opposition to Greater Victoria's sewage treatment
plan could derail the megaproject at a meeting of politicians next week.
Two of the 14 directors on the Capital Regional District's sewage
committee plan to force a vote that would delay the $783-million plan.
Esquimalt Mayor Barb Desjardins and Saanich Coun. Vic Derman say their
separate motions would lead the CRD to challenge the federal government's
wastewater regulations, which currently deem Greater Victoria a high risk
and mandate secondary treatment by 2020.
They want Ottawa to lower the CRD's risk rating, potentially making
treatment unnecessary until 2040.
"If they insist we do something stupid, they have the power," Derman said
of the federal government. "But I think we should go kicking and
screaming."
Derman has tried more than a dozen times over the past four years to
redirect, change and stall the treatment plans.
He has been largely outvoted by a large block of other members from
Saanich, Victoria and Langford, though he has found allies at times in
View Royal, Esquimalt, Colwood and Oak Bay.
The two motions by Desjardins and Derman have at least some support from
other politicians, though it's unclear if it's enough to pass.
"Many people are starting to feel uncomfortable around the table with
where we're at," Desjardins said.
"I'm really trying to get our committee, and therefore the board, to stop
and take a breath and stop this plan from going forward as it is."
Greater Victoria currently screens sewage for solid items and discharges
it into the ocean at Macaulay and Clover points.
The provincial government ordered treatment in 2006. The CRD is planning
to build a treatment plant at McLoughlin Point in Esquimalt by 2018.
The $783-million cost would be shared with the federal and provincial
governments.
Opposition to the plan has risen sharply in the last few months, Derman
said. It doesn't benefit the environment and will financially limit the
region's ability to pay for more important future projects, he said.
"The general public now is in the range of 60 to 75 per cent saying, 'What
are you guys doing? This is a waste of money,' " Derman said.
He said he believes sewage treatment is ultimately necessary, but should
be designed in the future when better treatment technologies are
available, which could provide more resource recovery at less cost.
The federal government doesn't appear interested in a delay or change of
plans, according to a recent letter.
In a Nov. 6 letter to be discussed by politicians on Wednesday,
Environment Canada's manager of wastewater programs told the CRD there are
"no exceptions or exemptions" to its wastewater regulations.
Meanwhile, citizen advocates have more than 2,200 signatures on a petition
opposing the treatment plan, and plan to be out in force to protest
outside Wednesday's CRD meeting, said Richard Atwell, organizer of
stopabadplan.ca.
He said 338 protest letters have been sent to local politicians, MLAs and
MPs.
"There's a lot of momentum pushing this forward," he said.
"It's going to take an equal amount of momentum to push it back."
rshaw@timescolonist.com
http://www.timescolonist.com/
-----------------------------
VIEW ROYAL TO REEXAMINE SEWAGE APPROACH
ARESST ACTION:
SEWAGE TREATMENT FOES OUT IN FORCE
Vote delayed, $783M plan's science disputed
Rob Shaw
November 15, 2012
Opponents of Greater Victoria's sewage-treatment plan descended on a meeting of regional politicians Wednesday, overwhelming the agenda and forcing a delay in a vote on whether to suspend the project.
More than 50 people filled to capacity a Capital Regional District sewage committee meeting room. Most were dressed in yellow shirts with slogans opposing the $783-million treatment plan.
So many people registered to speak to the committee that after two hours of presentations, politicians said they did not have enough time to debate and vote on the issues.
Two motions to suspend the project until 2030 or 2040 - from Esquimalt Mayor Barb Desjardins and Saanich Coun. Vic Derman - were put off until later in the month.
It's important for the committee to have time for a full debate, said Derman. "I'd hate to see this be a rushed 15-, 20-or 30-minute debate and then a decision made. We need to really talk this out."
Desjardins said she hopes other members of the 14-person committee clearly heard the public's concerns.
Most of the 28 presenters called the CRD sewage-treatment plan flawed and unnecessary, saying the region's unique ocean currents are adequate for treating the 129 million litres of screened sewage that are discharged each day into the ocean.
Former federal environment minister David Anderson, honorary chairman of ARESST (Association for Responsible and Environmentally Sustainable Sewage Treatment), called the plan "a waste of a billion dollars that could be used for some other desirable project with genuine benefits."
He warned the region could be denied future federal funding for other projects because of the expense of sewage treatment. The provincial and federal governments have agreed to cost-share the project with the CRD.
Victoria resident Gray-don Gibson called the CRD politicians "deplorable and unworthy" of elected office if they support the project despite the criticism.
Not everyone agreed. "The idea you could call dumping sewage into the environment 'sewage treatment' is irresponsible and reprehensible in my view," said Christianne Wilhelmson, executive director of the Georgia Strait Alliance.
"There's a term for dumping effluent into the ocean. It's called pollution."
Other presenters expressed confusion at how opposing sides of the treatment debate could have such different interpretations of the same reports and research.
Janet Grey of the Greater Victoria Water Watch Coalition compared the issue to debating biblical scripture, with each side finding different meaning in the same words.
The committee will reconvene Nov. 21 or 28 to hold a vote on the motions from Desjardins and Derman.
Both motions ask the CRD to fight to have Ottawa designate the region a lower pollution risk under federal wastewater regulations, delaying treatment until 2030 or 2040.
Currently, the region is rated a high pollution risk under the federal law and is required to have secondary treatment by 2020.
The CRD's plan calls for a single treatment plant at McLoughlin Point in Esquimalt by 2018.
rshaw@timescolonist.com
http://www2.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=5dfe104b-4077-424f-bcc8-8c275e43328f
------------------------------
VICTORIA CITIZENS OPPOSE SECONDARY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLAN
CBC News
Nov 14, 2012
Dozens of Greater Victoria citizens packed a regional district meeting Wednesday demanding a challenge to the federal government's order to build a secondary sewage treatment plant.
They say the billion-dollar project is not based on any scientific evidence to prove discharging screened sewage is harming the environment.
Saanich director Vic Derman and Esquimalt Mayor Barb Desjardins put forward a motion to suspend the project, but time ran out before regional district directors could vote.
Derman hopes fellow directors will listen to the majority of citizens who spoke at Wednesday’s meeting.
"When you look at the weight of expertise that came forward today, incredibly qualified people who are saying, 'You haven’t done this right. You need to go back, you need to take a look, you need to make sure that you are making the best possible investment for the environment, for the taxpayers,'" Derman said.
"So hopefully they’ll heed that advice."
No date has been set to vote on Derman's motion.
------------------------------
CRD DIRECTORS PUSH FOR TWO-DECADE SEWER TREATMENT DELAY
CTV Vancouver Island
14 December 2012
Video link: http://goo.gl/oG6dp
VICTORIA – Protesters show up at CRD Headquarters Wednesday with a long list of reasons why Greater Victoria’s secondary sewage plan stinks. “It is a plan based on optics and politics and completely ignores science” says one.
Right now Greater Victoria’s sewage is filtered through a six-millimetre screen then pumped a kilometre out to sea. For years, experts have disagreed about how much damage that is doing underwater. Many suggest the $783 million plan approved by the CRD, the biggest capital expenditure ever in Victoria, won’t solve anything either way. “We obviously have a sewage problem in Greater Victoria. You can’t continue to dump raw sewage with all the toxins in it into the ocean in perpetuity. The question is – is the solution being proposed solving the problem that exists? The answer is clearly no” says UVic Climate Scientist Andrew Weaver.
Federal wastewater regulations mandate secondary treatment by 2020 and the two senior levels of government will help pay. Two CRD Directors, Barb Desjardins and Vic Derman, are pushing for that deadline to be extended to 2040 with motions that were set to be voted on Wednesday. “We need to take a step back and make a political statement to the other two levels of government, that we need some time to really understand what we’re committing tax payers to, and is this the right plan” says Desjardins.
But do they have the votes? Others around the CRD table think picking a fight with Ottawa won’t end well. “The idea we are going to be allowed to continue to dump this stuff into the ocean and assume it does no harm because we can’t detect the harm is something that is not going to appeal to regulators…when we talk about delay we have to be concerned about the fact they’re offering us two thirds of the cost” says CRD Chair Geoff Young.
As for the vote on the issue, it’s been delayed. Too many people wanted to speak at what became a marathon session Wednesday, and the committee will re-visit the motions later in the month.
Follow Andrew Johnson on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/
------------------------------
FOES RENEW BATTLE AGAINST SEWAGE MEGAPROJECT
CRD directors aim to force vote that could stall plans
Rob Shaw
Times Colonist
November 10, 2012 6:39 AM
CLICK HERE TO SEND LETTER TO TIMES COLONIST
A strong resurgence of opposition to Greater Victoria's sewage treatment
plan could derail the megaproject at a meeting of politicians next week.
Two of the 14 directors on the Capital Regional District's sewage
committee plan to force a vote that would delay the $783-million plan.
Esquimalt Mayor Barb Desjardins and Saanich Coun. Vic Derman say their
separate motions would lead the CRD to challenge the federal government's
wastewater regulations, which currently deem Greater Victoria a high risk
and mandate secondary treatment by 2020.
They want Ottawa to lower the CRD's risk rating, potentially making
treatment unnecessary until 2040.
"If they insist we do something stupid, they have the power," Derman said
of the federal government. "But I think we should go kicking and
screaming."
Derman has tried more than a dozen times over the past four years to
redirect, change and stall the treatment plans.
He has been largely outvoted by a large block of other members from
Saanich, Victoria and Langford, though he has found allies at times in
View Royal, Esquimalt, Colwood and Oak Bay.
The two motions by Desjardins and Derman have at least some support from
other politicians, though it's unclear if it's enough to pass.
"Many people are starting to feel uncomfortable around the table with
where we're at," Desjardins said.
"I'm really trying to get our committee, and therefore the board, to stop
and take a breath and stop this plan from going forward as it is."
Greater Victoria currently screens sewage for solid items and discharges
it into the ocean at Macaulay and Clover points.
The provincial government ordered treatment in 2006. The CRD is planning
to build a treatment plant at McLoughlin Point in Esquimalt by 2018.
The $783-million cost would be shared with the federal and provincial
governments.
Opposition to the plan has risen sharply in the last few months, Derman
said. It doesn't benefit the environment and will financially limit the
region's ability to pay for more important future projects, he said.
"The general public now is in the range of 60 to 75 per cent saying, 'What
are you guys doing? This is a waste of money,' " Derman said.
He said he believes sewage treatment is ultimately necessary, but should
be designed in the future when better treatment technologies are
available, which could provide more resource recovery at less cost.
The federal government doesn't appear interested in a delay or change of
plans, according to a recent letter.
In a Nov. 6 letter to be discussed by politicians on Wednesday,
Environment Canada's manager of wastewater programs told the CRD there are
"no exceptions or exemptions" to its wastewater regulations.
Meanwhile, citizen advocates have more than 2,200 signatures on a petition
opposing the treatment plan, and plan to be out in force to protest
outside Wednesday's CRD meeting, said Richard Atwell, organizer of
stopabadplan.ca.
He said 338 protest letters have been sent to local politicians, MLAs and
MPs.
"There's a lot of momentum pushing this forward," he said.
"It's going to take an equal amount of momentum to push it back."
rshaw@timescolonist.com
http://www.timescolonist.com/
-----------------------------
VIEW ROYAL TO REEXAMINE SEWAGE APPROACH
Kyle Wells
Goldstream News Gazette
November 13, 2012 5:00 PM
View Royal is also taking a look at its approach to the Capital Regional District’s proposed sewage treatment plant.
At its Nov. 6 council meeting a delegation from the Association for Responsible and Environmental Sustainable Sewage Treatment spoke against the project as a whole.
View Royal resident and mechanical engineer Brain Burchill and former federal cabinet minister David Anderson spoke of the economic, environmental and scientific arguments against building the plant.
Mayor Graham Hill, vice chair on the CRD board, explained he has consistently voted against the project for reasons other than the delegation brought forward.
Hill would like to have seen a provincial order debated in the B.C. legislature to decide the merits of the federal order, which is mandating the sewage be treated.
“I found that we did not have, to my thinking, the solution that I was looking for. I felt uncomfortable,” Hill said. “I was unsuccessful in getting more than, frankly, 40 per cent of the vote around that table to support our position. And so the proposition has rolled forward.”
Hill explained the project is in a delicate stage and on hold due to disagreements between the province and the CRD on the wording surrounding how the project will be managed.
Council passed a motion to bring the issue before the next committee of the whole to discuss the town’s involvement in the project.
----------------------------
CULLEN PRESENTATION ON SEWAGE - AUDIO RECORD
Dr Jay Cullen was fabulous on Tuesday at Herman's Jazz Club.
Audio recording: http://
Audio recording: http://
----------------------------
LETTERS:
LETTER: PROGRESSIVE APPROACH FOR SEWAGE PLANT NEEDED
Filippo Ferri
Times Colonist
November 10, 2012
Although Macaulay Point has been touted as the best location for the region's proposed centralized sewage plant, it is worth noting that the expert panel (paid for by the Capital Regional District) indicated that Macaulay Point, like McLaughlin Point, is too small and recommended locations on the West Shore.
The continued focus on Macaulay Point reflects its convenient location near one of the major outfalls and beside apparently empty DND lands. Couple this with a location in a municipality with little regional clout and you have the makings of an easy political decision for a contentious issue. DND lands were never available and the CRD was caught at the last minute with no real plan (i.e. no location), resulting in the seriously flawed project before us.
A more progressive approach would have fully embraced resource recovery, plant locations in areas where there are abundant nearby users (i.e. the old B.C.
Hydro plant, empty dealership lot on Finlayson Road) to efficiently tap into recovered heat and to use treated water for industrial and other applications.
This more sustainable path requires vision, innovation and political will.
Filippo Ferri
Esquimalt
------------------------------
CANDIDATE REPEATED SEWAGE MISCONCEPTIONS
Times Colonist
November 13, 2012
Re: "Sewage, pot hot topics for candidates," Nov. 8.
Dale Gann, at the all-candidates' meeting, repeated what many people mistakenly believe regarding the sewage situation.
At Thursday's Victoria council meeting, authorities on the subject, David Anderson and Dr. Shaun Peck, again presented the true picture.
Dr. Peck noted the current deep-sea discharges are meeting the new regulated levels of total suspended solids and other waste substances. He dispelled misconceptions regarding the supposed mandatory legal situation, while pointing out the serious problems with the proposed financing. He repeated available alternatives that would better fit the region's needs.
All this information is also available on the ARESST (Association for Responsible and Environmentally Sustainable Sewage Treatment) website.
It seems to me that people such as Gann, who wish to represent us on areas that require us to help finance their policies, should be better informed and, in this case, take notice of the extensive health and scientific evidence that does not support the present water treatment plan.
Anne Spencer
Victoria
------------------------------
SEWAGE PROJECT ECHOES LEAKY CONDO FIASCO
Times Colonist
November 13, 2012
Re: "Foes renew battle against sewage megaproject," Nov. 10.
Just as we had condo building standards and codes forced on a West Coast environment they were completely unsuitable for, so we are again faced with another astronomical bill for bureaucratically established sewage treatment standards that are totally inappropriate for Victoria.
Those qualified in the field of sewage treatment are almost unanimous in their condemnation of the plan to flush the best part of a billion dollars down the toilet for no measurable environmental benefit.
If the upcoming meeting really is the last opportunity for saner heads to prevail, we can only hope that the experts will finally be listened to, and not the unqualified politicians and bureaucrats pushing for this madness.
Paul Kelly,
retired sewage treatment engineer,
Victoria
------------------------------
TAKE ADVICE FROM WORLD'S MOST INFORMED NATIONS
Times Colonist
November 13, 2012
When the most senior organizations of the most knowledgeable nations, namely a committee of Congress and a Royal Commission, both state that long outfalls protect the environment as well as or better than secondary treatment, it is appalling that Capital Regional District board members still do not acknowledge the fact.
The best overall summary is an article in the Canadian Institute of Civil Engineering Journal that "provided they are well-designed, ocean outfalls generally present fewer environmental problems than land-based treatment and this is obvious when the complete environmental picture is studied for both types of facility."
So it is.
Ted Dew-Jones, P.Eng.
Victoria
------------------------------
REVIEW OF FACTS CHANGED ENVIRONMENTALIST'S MIND
Times Colonist
November 13, 2012
As a fairly hardcore environmentalist, I was initially in favour of sewage treatment. However, as I checked the facts, in order to bolster my pro-sewage treatment stance, I was surprised to learn there are no scientific reports that state we need land-based sewage treatment in the CRD.
Proponents of sewage treatment point to the Scientific and Technical Review, published in 2006 (SETAC). But it does not say we need sewage treatment. It says we should "assess the impacts."
The Macdonald report, also published in 2006, stated that land-based sewage treatment was "one option" that could be explored.
The above is the sum total of the argument supporting sewage treatment.
However, we do have several highly respected scientists at the University of Victoria Department of Ocean Sciences, who have repeatedly stated the sewage-treatment facility is a bad plan, and if we want to spend money protecting the ocean environment, we should look elsewhere.
The scientific opinion appears firmly weighted against sewage treatment.
Privately, one city councillor admitted to me that this has nothing to do with science - just "optics."
Are we really going to spend close to a billion dollars, and shackle future generations with perpetual payments so we can solve a "problem" science says doesn't even exist?
Richard Brunt
Victoria
------------------------------
CRD-RELATED SEWAGE NEWS:
COLWOOD EYES AXING SEWER EXPANSION FEE
Goldstream News Gazette
November 13, 2012 3:00 PM
Colwood’s Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is recommending council stick to its original capacity estimates for the city’s buy-in for the Capital Regional District’s proposed sewage treatment plant.
In July council passed a motion to ask for enough capacity to service 11,500 sewer users, approximately half what CRD originally recommended. This covers all current sewer users, plus the projected growth until 2020.
The discussion at the committee’s Monday. Nov. 5 meeting came from the publicly released results of a questionnaire handed out to Colwood residents earlier in the year.
The questionnaire asked what type of system homeowners were currently on, how much capacity they feel the city should request and how residents should have to pay for that capacity.
Like other growing communities, Colwood has to determine how much capacity it will need as the city grows. If the city buys in for future capacity then current residents will pay for that capacity before it is ever used. Whether all residents or only current sewer users chip in on costs is the main debate.
About 500 questionnaires were returned to the city, about 300 from residents currently connected to septic systems. City engineer Michael Baxter explained that septic users were underrepresented in the results, given that the vast majority of Colwood residents are on septic.
About 275 respondents replied they would like to see Colwood purchase 2.5 per cent capacity of the treatment plant, enough to serve Colwood’s current needs. Just over 150 people approved asking for 3.5 per cent, which is projected to serve Colwood’s needs until 2030.
“I think it was fairly overwhelming in terms of the number of people who said we should take as little as possible,” committee chair Judith Cullington said. “That’s consistent with direction council has already given.”
Just under 200 respondents said there should be a blended approach to how residents pay, meaning both sewer and septic users should ante up, but perhaps on a graded scale. About 160 said only current sewer users should be asked to pay.
Many residents attended the meeting and asked questions of committee members, staff and three CRD representatives.
Many residents expressed discomfort at being asked to pay for sewage treatment when they have no option to hook up to sewage and have no idea when that might be possible.
Coun. Cynthia Day, who does not sit on that committee but attended as a resident, agreed.
“We’re actually asking our taxpayers to pay for sewage treatment when we can’t actually afford to put the sewer line to their house,” Day said. “So they’re paying for treatment that they can’t afford to hook up to. Which I think is completely wrong.”
Baxter explained at this time it’s unknown when sewage will be available for particular neighbourhoods.
Committee member Gib Small argued everybody in Colwood should have to pay at least a portion of the cost, given the municipalities are being told they have to do this and that sewage treatment is a general upgrade for the entire community.
“Everybody pays school taxes because it’s for the betterment of the community,” Small said. “I think that’s one of the ways that we maybe need to look at this, is that paying for the future sewer use is for the betterment of the community.”
Ultimately the committee decided to recommend to council it stick to its original decision on capacity. It also recommended it publicize the report and give the public another opportunity to discuss it and bring back that information to the committee. Staff is also being asked to put together a report on the viability and numbers associated with each payment option.
Full questionnaire results, including comments, are available on the City of Colwood’s website (colwood.ca), in the agenda package for the Nov. 5 Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
------------------
END
