« Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD Jan 13th 2016 | Main | Marine Scientists speak out - December 2015. »
Wednesday
Dec092015

Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th 2015

Firstly to comment on the costs before you to-day. In the Charter that you have approved the intent is to produce an innovative project that brings in costs at less than original estimates. I notice that to-days published estimates are way in excess of the previous estimates for the McLoughlin Point plan.

 

One assumes these estimates are what British Columbia Professional Engineers call Class D estimates which means +/- 50%. These costs may be 50% higher or 50% lower. The following statement is noted in to-day’s report from the Technical Advisory Panel “The costs now have a wide margin of error on the capital side”.

 

I would like to remind you also that large projects like this almost always have cost overruns. Even the “small” project – the Blue Bridge replacement. The Bridge is one tenth the cost of what you are considering, for land based sewage treatment, and is having its cost overruns. Much of the overruns will likely have to be picked up by the taxpayer even after resorting to arbitration.

 

I would like to remind you also that there has been no cost-benefit (or value for money) study for building the planned land based sewage treatment plants.

 

Secondly to comment on water reuse. I hope you will reconsider the following statement in to-day’s reports that “Each option before you to-day includes the provision for water reuse” Why? Where is the evidence for need for this water reuse? There may be a strong sentiment from the public consultations but is it supported by evidence for need? Do you expect the taxpayers to pay the extra cost when there has not been a demonstrated need? Ideas are cheap! The final decision will be a political decision, that you and the CRD Board have to make, and I hope you consider excluding the water reuse that is included in all the options in to-day’s reports.

 

What do the regulators require? I would remind you that the main applicable regulatory requirement is to meet the TSS (Total Suspended Solids) and CBOD (Carbonaceous Biological Oxygen Demand) levels. This implies secondary treatment if measured at the point of discharge. If however the 100 Meter Initial Dilution Zone is considered (as the Province of BC has allowed) then these parameters are met now with the current screened sewage being discharged through the two deep sea outfalls.  

 

Environmental Stewardship. The term Environmental Stewardship has crept into the lexicon of consultants reports. It refers to the responsible use and protection of the natural environment through conservation and sustainable practice. Is building land based sewage treatment plants for Victoria really sustainable? It will be the expenditure of a vast amount of taxpayers money. Will it not create an unsustainable future with the continued demand for more and more public funds to support this large engineering project?

 

A few news items I would like to report to you. Firstly - ten highly credible University of Victoria Marine Scientists published an article in the December issue of Focus Magazine. It is titled “Scientists to CRD: petition the feds for reclassification”. The article provides a critical analysis of the minimal risk to the Marine Environment from the current practice. See: http://focusonline.ca/?q=node/962

 

Another recently published article titled “Science of the total environment” by University of Victoria Scientist, Sophia C. Johannessen and others: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969714016970

 

This article provides evidence that secondary sewage treatment, slated for completion in Vancouver in 2030, will reduce fluxes of some contaminants, but will have negligible effect on regional budgets for organic carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, metals and PCBs. Removal of PBDEs from wastewater will affect regional budgets, depending on how the sludge is sequestered.

 

In Montreal recently the elected officials (Mayor and Council) listened to the scientists when it was determined that discharging untreated sewage for a short time into the St Lawrence River was going to produce no environmental or public health problem. The St Lawrence River at Montreal is a freshwater non-tidal river.  http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/montreals-raw-sewage-dump-justified-water-treatment-experts

 

In the Channel Island of Guernsey (a population of 66,000) they have recently completed a sewage treatment plant upgrade that relies on deep sea outfalls with preliminary treatment because of their unique marine environment (like Victoria’s current practice) in spite of some public sentiment wanting more treatment. See: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-guernsey-24019396

 

 

 

Thank you, 

 

Dr Shaun Peck, Public Health Consultant.

Medical Health Officer for the CRD 1989-1995

Member of Responsible Sewage Treatment Victoria www.rstv.ca

References (26)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.
  • Response
  • Response
    Response: Russia Govt
  • Response
    Response: for more details
  • Response
    Wonderful presentation published estimates and perfect the thoughts and including the margin of error on the capital side. The blue bridge and improving overruns the based sewage building the planned plants.
  • Response
  • Response
    Response: homepage
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Response: Source
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Response: Suggested Site
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Response: Edit HTML Online
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Response: source web page
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    I found a great...
  • Response
    Response: gps fish finder
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th
  • Response
    Dr Peck's Presentation to CRD December 9th

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>