Quote:
Originally Posted by evman150
Even if a sewage treatment were to treat the water for "toxic chemicals and pharmaceutical saturated liquids" (which remains in question, by the way), what happens to them once they're filtered? Is dealing with them on land better?
The bottom line is, the system we have now works, and is proven to work, and is proven to not damage the environment beyond any reasonable level (you guys in Alberta should know all about such a criterion).
An alternative system, which will cost a billion dollars, is not likely to have any net environmental benefit, and is actually far more likely to be FAR more damaging to the environment.
There's a reason why the former Liberal Environment Minister under Chretien has spoken out vehemently against the initiative.
Also, since when do communities ever balk at $500,000,000 of federal funding? Here's a hint: when it makes zero sense, is horrible for the environment, and is a blatant waste of FEDERAL taxpayer money!
I live here, I pay taxes here, I consider myself an environmentalist, I vote Green, and I'm about as progressive as they come. I, of all people, should support this, if it was worth supporting. My strong disapproval of this measure should be a clue that it is beyond ridiculous and has zero support in science or fact-based policy.
|
So basically your argument is
"I don't think it's causing that much damage"
And the only data you have to back up your claim is a couple quotes by a physician and a politician.
Your own cited articles mention that the waste being dumped into the ocean does not pass federal regulations.
I am a resident of BC as well. I pay taxes as well. I am ashamed that the capital city of my province is pumping an average of 82 million litres daily of toxic waste into the ocean.
Dumping your untreated waste into the ocean is something I'd expect in Liberia and not Canada.
Some actual science for you:
http://www.victoriasewagealliance.or...inalReport.pdf
Some gems:
"The sewege plume is not always efficiently trapped at depth but does at times come to the surface of the ocean and can
negatively and significantly impact water quality"
"The sewage discharged at the two outfalls is a complex mixture of nutrients and hundreds of organic and inorganic chemicals. Chemicals are dissolved and in suspension, including metals and metalloids, oil and grease, persistent organic pollutants"
"
Due to elevated levels of ammonia and oxygen demanding organic materials, raw sewage discharges are acutely lethal to fish and other aquatic organisms
"The effluent from Victoria is largely from households and small businesses. The present wastewater treatment only removes bigger objects such as plastics, paper, vegitative matter, and organic lumps"
The scariest part:
At 400 fecal coliforms/100 mL corresponds to a gastrointestinal illness of 1-2%. Aka this is the threshold for safe water. The mean levels 1211 FC/100mL at McCauley Point and 750 FC/100 mL at Clover Point
At near 1000FC/100 mL GI illness rate is about 5% and non enteric illness (example ear infection) is 20%.
Never in my life I thought I'd have to argue that dumping raw toxic waste into the ocean is indeed bad. Common sense ain't really that common. Now I've shown (through science) that the toxic waste is killing fish and making people sick.
If I was living in Victoria I would not let my children go into the ocean with all this toxic waste.