A Case against boutique Sewage Treatment Plants
Presentation to the CRD's Core Area Liquid Management Committee by Bob Furber March 10th 2010
Chair, Members of the Committee: Yes, it is me ..again. My name is Bob Furber. I am a resident of Saanich. I am here today as a retired engineer who hates seeing money and resources wasted. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
Why am I here? The more I analyze this huge and complex project, the more I realize the challenges inherent in making informed decisions on it, especially when data is presented as a jumble of bits and pieces without any glue to tie them together into a coherent whole.
The 3-Mar-10 PRT Report brings up an overwhelming number of issues. Where does one start?
Of the hundreds of issues, one stands out: Appendix C, item 7:
“We would like to state again that any discussion of potential program delivery options is premature until the CRD ascertains whether or not it is in a position to control property that may be used for a central main wastewater treatment facility in lieu of McLoughlin Point.”
A year ago, we were prepared to put up with a number of sewage treatment plants because of all the money we would make and the warm feelings derived from resource recovery. Planning proceeded on this basis. However, studies commissioned by the CALWMC have since shown that resource recovery is neither economical nor viable. Regrettably, what might have made sense a year ago, no longer makes sense today.
The 16 ML/d Haro Woods (a.k.a. SENOB) plant and the 14 ML/d West Shore Plant are boutique sewage treatment plants that will cost twice as much to build than a central plant for every m3/day treated, and, will cost more than twice as much to operate for every m3 treated. The combined cost of these two boutique plants will cost more than a central plant processing over 3 times the flow. Put another way, treatment of all the sewage in a central plant will save over $200 Million or 3 to 4 Blue Bridges.
But, there is a catch. Plans are hard to change, and current plans call for a main sewage treatment plant at McLoughlin Point; a site that may be marginally too small to treat all the sewage. Current plans depend on the boutique plants to handle the small satellite flows. But, do we really know the ultimate capacity of a McLoughlin plant? Why not? What alternate sites could accept a full capacity central plant? Why there has not been a serious effort to find a suitably sized central location is a $200 Million conundrum.
So, let's take stock. If the entire project is not seriously revised, we will spend about $1 Billion on sewage treatment with still no evidence that the ocean ecology will be improved, will not recover energy other than biogas, will not reclaim water, and may reclaim some low grade heat if new developers can be forced to pay handsomely for it through special zoning. And we are faced with the dilemma of dealing with sludge that no one wants. Granted, biogas may be sold at a small profit, thanks to a carbon tax quirk. What is far from clear is how two boutique plants improve anything. So, if the benefits are minor and doubtful, would it not make sense to at least reduce the costs, scrap the boutique plants and spend $200 Million less? For the same benefit? Or, some may argue: “Why proceed at all?”.
Thank you,
Bob Furber,
Retired Chemical Engineer
Member of the Association for Responsible and Environmentally Sustainable Sewage Treatment
www.aresst.ca