Jump to content

      



























Photo

Sewage treatment - What are the implications if Victoria walks away from it?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
17 replies to this topic

#1 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 10:53 AM

After almost 10 years of debate and over 3150 posts on the Sewage Treatment in Victoria thread, what have we accomplished in Victoria?

The other thread is here; http://vibrantvictor...nt-in-victoria/

 

How about a separate thread that deals only with the implications of what would happen if we write off what we have already spent on the sewage treatment process to date, and walk away from doing anything more?

Would there be legal challenges if we do nothing?

If there were legal challenges, would the scientists now be able to present their case, instead of being ignored as before?

 

All we are seeing is an increase in costs for dealing with sewage, as all of the players become more distant as to agreeing to a solution.

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK?



#2 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,238 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:16 PM

There'd be some negative press, particularly in Seattle etc. There already has been negative press there. Shrug. If they want it so much, they should offer to pitch in to pay for it.



#3 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:35 PM

Also from what I understand the science has been very clear that there is harm to the environment. What the science has consensus on is that there is no health risk to humans based on the current flushing out of the straight. So we are fine but the fish are screwed. Likely not a great thing IMO. Something has to get done it is just too bad that we can't have a single city that would have had this approved and being built about 75 million dollars ago. 


Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#4 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 13,115 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 05:45 PM

^ You mean $500M ago don't you?



#5 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 07:29 PM

Sometimes I wish that the CRD directors would just make a secret deal with the province, for the province to take it all over, and then impose the cheapest method.

 

Why can't we do the Big Hole by Knappett?  If it does not work, it's only $175M blown.  


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#6 johnk

johnk
  • Member
  • 1,608 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 07:42 PM

VHF, ain't it crazy that we are really getting used to this sort of nonsense when nobody bats an eye at "only $175 million blown"?

#7 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 07:48 PM

VHF, ain't it crazy that we are really getting used to this sort of nonsense when nobody bats an eye at "only $175 million blown"?

 

You know, listening to The Rite Plan guy today, he's right, its lunacy that we are going to rip up roads, with a big trench to keep shifting loads of wastewater all over the place back and forth.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#8 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 10:17 PM

The politicians are further apart, so anything that is agreed upon now is a knee jerk reaction to the threat of loosing federal funding.

Loose the funding or get roped into spending BILLIONS more.

If we are going to have a BIG ONE, maybe this is the time to have it and shake things up to get our priorities in order.

Can you imagine all those new sewer pipes getting broken up in an earthquake.



#9 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 11:10 PM

"A discussion needs to be had amongst our residents"

Nils Jensen has withdrawn his motion that the Capital Regional District’s technical advisory panel be asked to examine the feasibility of locating a single regional sewage-treatment plant at McLoughlin Point, saying he would resubmit it for debate Feb. 10.

“I think there is an interest in the community to look at this, and I think a discussion needs to be had amongst our residents,” Jensen told members of the CRD’s core area liquid waste management committee on Wednesday.

“And I think time is needed for that. I don’t think we need to rush into this.”

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.drS0zUVH.dpuf

 



#10 North Shore

North Shore
  • Member
  • 2,169 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 11:39 PM

I kinda wonder if that's not gamesmanship on behalf of Jensen - he's keeping public perception of McL alive, as he knows full well that everything else is going nowhere; then, at the last minute, when it looks as if we are going to lose all funding ( notwithstanding current developments in the Fed/Prov timelines,) the crunch is really on, and Floatie and Hartwig are whipping the public into a frenzy, Jensen will shout out 'McLoughlin!', and be seen as the saviour...
  • Bingo likes this
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

#11 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 10:58 AM

Another look...

 

View Royal's mayor agrees the CRD needs to look at McLoughlin Point again as a possible site for sewage treatment if it would be significantly less expensive than other options.

"I think it's only responsible with the amount of money that's on the table.

If we're talking potentially three of four hundred million dollars difference, then, yeah, I do think we have to have a look at that.

""I'm worried about the timelines, you know, the fact that by the end of March we're supposed to have fairly firm decisions made.

And I personally don't think that's realistic."
 http://www.cfax1070....-another-look-a 

 



#12 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,173 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 10:48 PM

Whatever happened to Sweetnam?

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#13 Sparky

Sparky

    GET OFF MY LAWN

  • Moderator
  • 13,115 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 12:04 AM

Whatever happened to Sweetnam?

 

I think he was last seen at the bank.

 

http://www.timescolo...-boss-1.2018332



#14 JohnN

JohnN
  • Member
  • 2,172 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 09:39 AM

Also from what I understand the science has been very clear that there is harm to the environment. What the science has consensus on is that there is no health risk to humans based on the current flushing out of the straight. So we are fine but the fish are screwed. Likely not a great thing IMO. Something has to get done it is just too bad that we can't have a single city that would have had this approved and being built about 75 million dollars ago. 

I don't think that your assessment of the marine science matches that of marine scientists, at least those who have been featured in three recent Focus Magazine articles (links below). Their main point seems to be that the risk to marine environment is low-risk at best and thus the federal classification of Victoria's two long screened outfalls with preliminary treated effluent should be reclassified as low risk. They see source control of especially-noxious contaminants as the only way to go, with example of microbeads and PBDE that can migrate from the liquid effluent into sludge and eventually return to the marine environment. 

 

Classification of risk is key point because if the politicians really believe that the current system is high-risk, they fall prey to making huge mistakes such as the Viewfield, Esquimalt sludge plant plan that would have seen hazardous anerobic digester stacks producing methane just a few metres from nearest homes. Neither the old CRD sewage plant plan (Amendment 8) nor the current effort so far have included any criteria to assess the options that would be safety, hazard, threat or danger. The only risk factors include so far have been seismic and financial. 

 

However, the health risk to humans is very low according to both current VIHA public health chief Dr Richard Stanwick and ex-chief Dr Shaun Peck. While Peck has extended his objection to the current CRD plan for more land-based sewage + sludge plants through his website of science, engineering and public health Responsible Sewage Treatment Victoria, Dr. Stanwick has focused his sewage plant concerns on two aspects: 

  • that the cost of unnecessary sewage plants will impact low-income residents especially and their health outcomes will suffer. Therefore a health impact assessment is needed (but not forthcoming from CRD/province); and
  • storm drains dumping health/environmental high-risk contaminants right at the shoreline and recreational beaches (Gorge, shoreline around Victoria). Currently, there are about 40 such high-risk storm drains in the CRD (map below shows some of the storm drains).

 

An absence of evidence: There’s no scientific case for sewage treatment in Victoria, but the community faces a billion-dollar price tag anyway. Where do the candidates stand?

http://focusonline.ca/?q=node/931

 

Scientists to CRD: petition the feds for reclassification: Marine scientists plead for an evidence-based approach to developing sewage treatment for Victoria.

http://focusonline.ca/?q=node%2F962

 

Environment Canada's billion-dollar screw-up: A study by DFO scientists found that secondary sewage treatment will have a negligible effect on environmental conditions in our waters.

http://focusonline.ca/?q=node/981

Attached Images

  • map image lower shoreline 2013 report.jpg

:)

#15 JohnN

JohnN
  • Member
  • 2,172 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 09:46 AM

I kinda wonder if that's not gamesmanship on behalf of Jensen - he's keeping public perception of McL alive, as he knows full well that everything else is going nowhere; then, at the last minute, when it looks as if we are going to lose all funding ( notwithstanding current developments in the Fed/Prov timelines,) the crunch is really on, and Floatie and Hartwig are whipping the public into a frenzy, Jensen will shout out 'McLoughlin!', and be seen as the saviour...

Jensen is a cunning political tactician who has knit together a coalition of a few CRD directors (ie, Screech), prov/fed NDP and Victoria Chamber of Commerce on this issue. He's playing a short game where more CRD directors will get behind him to return to McLoughlin. A good reason to delay consideration of his motion until February 10 to "see who salutes".

Jensen's backroom negotiating could target Langford/Colwood with a "deal" on getting a cheap sewage plant on Westside - or else go for Macaulay area where mega-plant could be sited with fed/First Nations agreement. Jensen's long game is probably to leap-frog from this issue back into provincial political leadership and/or nomination to run for NDP.

Media falling into line with Jensen's Back to McLoughlin forces now extends to CFAX/Frank Stanford: http://www.cfax1070....t-Wed-Jan-27-16


:)

#16 JohnN

JohnN
  • Member
  • 2,172 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 10:08 AM

Another look...

Mayor Screech's estimate of about a $300-400 million dollar difference should recognize that recent CRD updated estimate that McLoughlin Point site would now be about $880 millions: 

Attached Images

  • comparative cost of old vs new mcloughlin.jpg

:)

#17 JohnN

JohnN
  • Member
  • 2,172 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 10:13 AM

ARESST suggests best move for CRD is to walk away from this unnecessary, risky white elephant of land-based sewage + sludge treatment plants. Or at least do cost-benefit analysis and a serious environmental impact assessment (BCEAA and CEAA) on the sewage plant as soon as technology and site are provisionally selected. ARESST recent letter to federal cabinet members (http://aresst.ca/201...ernment-canada/) also included advert in local newspapers: 

 

 

Attached Images

  • aresst advert large image (1).jpg

:)

#18 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,173 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 11:21 AM

Please continue the sewage discussion at http://vibrantvictor...ctoria/page-159

Looks like this thread and the older one have converged to cover the same content. Thank you!

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users