Sewage treatment in Victoria | McLoughlin Point Wastewater Treatment Plant
#21
Posted 25 August 2006 - 01:11 PM
#22
Posted 25 August 2006 - 01:12 PM
So it looks like the Hydroxyl idea is dead before it can even start the ground.
I'd like to see those pictures, Nomad!! I just hope they're not of condoms, chess pieces and corn flowing through the pipes
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#23
Posted 25 August 2006 - 01:56 PM
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#24
Posted 25 August 2006 - 04:30 PM
#25
Posted 25 August 2006 - 04:39 PM
http://www.digitaljo...?articleID=4888
#26
Posted 25 August 2006 - 04:56 PM
let's put the waste in rockets and sent it towards the sun. That seems to me to be the cheapest solution. And we can launch those rockets from Nova Scotia:
http://www.digitaljo...?articleID=4888
Nova Scotia already has trained [url=http://images.google.ca/images?q=tbn:9BgBHLu2qYzkPM:http://i14.ebayimg.com/03/i/06/2b/be/dd_2.JPG:817d6]astronauts[/url:817d6]:
That was actually [url=http://www.thespacereview.com/article/437/1:817d6]proposed[/url:817d6] for nuclear waste disposal. But what would happen if the rocket were to suffer a Challenger-like explosion during take off. Looks like we're in for crappy weather...
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#27
Posted 25 August 2006 - 04:57 PM
That was actually [url=http://www.thespacereview.com/article/437/1:4d13a]proposed[/url:4d13a] for nuclear waste disposal. But what would happen if the rocket were to suffer a Challenger-like explosion during take off. Looks like we're in for crappy weather...
#28
Posted 25 August 2006 - 07:02 PM
According to an article published by seattlepi.com (Aug 18, 1999 By Joel Connelly, National Correspondent):
“Beginning in 1983, however, the fisheries ministry closed down shellfish harvesting in waters near the discharge outfalls in Victoria and Esquimalt. The closure area now totals more than 30 square miles of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.”
This raises the question: If the sewage is treated as quickly and effectively by the environment, as well as the sewage being continually flushed from the straight via currents, then why is such a large area closed to shell fish? Perhaps there is a greater amount of solids settling to the sea floor than is being reported to the appropriate governing bodies
#29
Posted 25 August 2006 - 08:28 PM
#30
Posted 25 August 2006 - 09:13 PM
#31
Posted 30 August 2006 - 09:11 AM
Strange and wonderful things to do with sewage
CAROLYN HEIMAN
The story was intended as light banter — really no more than a joke. The man who shoulders much of the responsibility for ensuring that the Capital Regional District politicians have the information they need to move forward on sewage treatment, recounted visiting a Chinese city where residential toilets had conversion systems resulted in the owner’s house getting a gas supply for their kitchen stove.
Imagine, said Dwayne Kalynchuk, the general manager of environmental services, every Victorian having a fuel connection between their toilet and barbecue.
Imagine indeed. After taking a moment to get over the yuk factor, I recognized that I have my own indoctrinated notions of sewage being something ideally pushed not only from mind, but disposed as far away from source as possible. A toilet-to-kitchen connection seemed too close. But is it really something to be so squeamish about? Perhaps like politicians and regional bureaucrats now forced to deal head on with the topic of sewage, I needed to open my mind to possibilities that might exist beyond putting it in a football field-sized pond in someone else’s neighbourhood.
Those possibilities are endless if you listen to Stephen Salter, a professional engineer involved with Victoria Sewage Alliance, an organization that has been agitating for sewage treatment in the region.
Salter has nearly made a career of looking at alternative methods of treatment. He has binder full of approaches that have been tried in other places, and in October he’s travelling to Kristianstad, Sweden, to check out their sewage innovations. In particular, he’s lobbying for the region to have a design competition that could showcase treatments not contemplated to date. They’re the kind of treatments that would convert sewage into biogas used to fuel buses and cars and heat homes. It’s done in other jurisdictions, so why not in the capital region, Salter suggests.
From California to Switzerland he has found examples of cities that use sewage as a resource, not a waste. These are places that have taken sewage and all of its components — fat, grease, organic material, sludge, minerals, water — to make fuel, fertilizer, water for irrigation and even ash containing metals and minerals that is rerouted to a mine and blended with ore.
Naysayers are quick to dump on Salter’s ideas, saying they are too expensive or impractical for the region. But this may be old-style thinking at work.
Joe Van Belleghem, of Windmill Developments, recently recounted his reaction to a cost estimate to have the Dockside Green residential development have its own in-house sewage treatment.
“My jaw nearly dropped,” said Van Belleghem. Idealism might have been stomped out by economic assumptions if Van Belleghem didn’t continue to challenge the premise the estimates were made on.
He didn’t try to make the sewage treatment cheaper. Instead, he factored in costs he’d save with the system. How much would he save if he didn’t have to connect to the city’s sewage system? Did the estimate take into account that that Dockside Green residents would require less treatment because of the water-saving appliances and devices that would be installed? What about the value of the treated water that will be used for irrigation?
Tallied up, the high cost of in-house treatment not only made sense, Van Belleghem figures its operation will make money.
If all of this sounds a little implausible, just cast back 20 years or so. Did we ever think we’d be wearing cosy jackets made from recycled plastic pop bottles? At some point it would have sounded crazy to suggest that we’d supply 1,600 homes with electricity from garbage at Hartland landfill. We’re told the 2010 Olympic Village will get its heating from its sewage. This year The Economist reported on a San Francisco project to make valuable methane out of dog feces diverted out of the landfill by pet owners. The city figured that pet waste coming from its 120,000 canine residents accounted for four per cent of household refuse. All of these are strange, but true examples. No joking.
Carolyn Heiman writes Wednesday in the Times Colonist. She can be reached at mailto:cheiman@tc.canwest
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#32
Posted 28 October 2006 - 11:00 AM
Oct 27, 2006
THE B-C GOVERNMENT WILL FUND ONE-THIRD OF THE COST OF SEWAGE TREATMENT IN THE CAPITAL REGION.
PREMIER GORDON CAMPBELL MADE THE ANNOUNCEMENT AT THE UNION OF B-C MUNICIPALITIES TODAY.
LOCAL NDP MLA MAURINE KARAGIANIS IS CONGRATULATING THE PREMIER ON HIS ANNOUNCEMENT.
KARAGIANIS SAYS HER ONLY CONCERN IS THAT THE PREMIER TALKED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY...AND SHE WORRIES THAT MAY MEAN THE PROVINCE WILL PURSUE THE "CHEAPEST" NOT BEST SEWAGE OPTION.
- rs CFAX 1070
Oct 27, 2006
THE VICE CHAIR OF THE CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT SAYS DESPITE THE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP STIPULATION ON PROVINCIAL FUNDING FOR LOCAL SEWAGE TREATMENT, THEY ARE JUST HAPPY THE LAST PIECE OF THE PUZZEL IS THERE.
DENISE BLACKWELL SAYS THEY WERE NEVER CONCERNED THAT THE PROVINCE WOULDN'T STEP UP WITH THE FINAL THIRD OF THE FUNDING.
BLACKWELL SAYS THE 'P-3' STIPULATION WILL ENSURE TAX PAYERS IN THE REGION GET THE BEST AND CHEAPEST SEWAGE TREATMENT POSSIBLE.
PREMIER GORDON CAMPBELL COMMITTED THE PROVINCE TO ONE THIRD OF THE FUNDING DURING HIS ADDRESS TO THE UNION OF BC MUNICIPALITIES MEETING IN VICTORIA TODAY.
- NIKKI EWANYSHYN CFAX 1070
#33
Posted 04 December 2006 - 10:16 AM
#34
Posted 04 December 2006 - 10:28 AM
Furthermore, I think the location issue could hold up this project for quite a while. The districts considered "more" affluent by some are obvious no-gos as far as their residents and civic leaders are concerned. The obvious solution is then to hark on the districts that are harked on already: i.e. Esquimalt, Vic West, perhaps View Royal and the west comms.
Just watch as our civic leaders slowly start focusing on Esquimalt by toting benefits of its waterfront that apparently are first-class compared to others in the region.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#35
Posted 04 December 2006 - 11:24 AM
There's a Canadian guy, John Todd, who has built scores of "living machines" across the world that clean sewage and provide energy. Here's a link to a Time Magazine page, one of their [url=http://www.time.com/time/reports/environment/heroes/heroesgallery/0,2967,todd,00.html:c815c]Heroes for the Planet[/url:c815c] pages (note: page launch starts a short audio clip). (This page also includes a link to another Canadian, [url=http://www.time.com/time/reports/environment/heroes/heroesgallery/0,2967,ballard,00.html:c815c]Geoffrey Ballard[/url:c815c], whose portrait includes a nice BC Transit bus in the background...!)
At the very least, we should have tax incentives for new developments (especially any P3 or strictly public buildings) to build "living machines" onsite (as per Dockside Green).
The [url=http://www.ottawariverinstitute.ca/WatershedWays04/wwLiving-systems-for-sewage.htm:c815c]Ottawa River Institute[/url:c815c] describes Todd's "Living Machines" as follows:
... solar-powered, accelerated versions of the water treatment facilities found in mature natural systems. They incorporate helpful microbes, plants, snails and fish into diverse, self-organizing and responsive communities and re-route waste streams into resources. They are capable of achieving tertiary treatment standards that meet and often surpass municipal discharge requirements and sludge treatment on-site reduces costs and risks associated with off-site disposal.
Around the world, there are currently hundreds of living machines built by John Todd and others who are following in his footsteps. They range in size from 3,000 to 200,000 gallons per day. Canada has at least two that I know of: the municipality of Bear River Nova Scotia, and the Body Shop in Toronto.
Another link (with descriptions / links to projects): [url=http://www.livingdesignsgroup.com/eng-project-master-list:c815c]Living Systems[/url:c815c].
And: [url=http://www.sustainabilityinstitute.org/dhm_archive/index.php?display_article=todded:c815c]Sustainability Institute[/url:c815c].
In my opinion, just about anything, really: anything! would be better than to focus on some horrendous "one-size-fits-all" mega-project. I really hope that the CRD and the province and whoever else has a hand in guiding our path to sewage treatment keeps an open mind in regard to smaller, distributed plants.
#36
Posted 04 December 2006 - 01:52 PM
#37
Posted 05 January 2007 - 10:16 PM
#38
Posted 05 January 2007 - 10:33 PM
#39
Posted 05 January 2007 - 10:40 PM
Those are good ideas but don't translate well into the city environment. My downstairs neighbour might get mad when I try to fertilize the garden from deck
No doubt that particularly would be difficult to scale up, but I believe UBC has a building running something similar to a composting system? In any case, it's unfortunate that the only possibility really being considered is the traditional treatment method.
Here we go:
http://www.iar.ubc.ca/choibuilding/matsuzaki.html
#40
Posted 05 January 2007 - 11:25 PM
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users