Harper Government tells Canada's three oceans to go eff themselves.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I just love that example. It's the epitome of the hippies that claim to care about the environment, yet they crap all over it just the same.

The hippies aren't the problem. It's the rather large block of NIMBY seniors who don't want a treatment facility damaging the property value of their $1,000,000+ houses in Oak Bay.

[driveway]

My biggest concern is the implication that industry can be trusted to provide accurate and responsible data to the public.

This is essentially the same thing as trusting a drug addict with your wallet.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by rubecube

The hippies aren't the problem. It's the rather large block of NIMBY seniors who don't want a treatment facility damaging the property value of their $1,000,000+ houses in Oak Bay.

Bay implies it's on the ocean where the raw sewage currently goes.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by SebC

Bay implies it's on the ocean where the raw sewage currently goes.

I don't think I get where you're going with this. The entire city is surrounded by ocean.

[Bunk]

Calgary has probably the most effective sewage and water treatment on the planet. Calgary is one of the only cities that has 100% tertiary treatment of sewage. Something to be very proud of as a city.

From a National Report Card even from way back in 1999. Things are even better since then:
We evaluated 21 cities in all, from Vancouver to St. Johns, assigning them a letter grade based on the quality of their sewage treatment as determined by various criteria, including level of sewage treatment, volume of raw sewage discharged, and permit and regulation compliance. The reports revealed some shocking environmental violations, and although there has been substantial progress in some cities over the past five years, the lack of discernible progress in many cities is alarming. Of the 21 cities documented in this report, five (Victoria, Saint John, Halifax, St. John’s and Dawson City) dump a combined total of 365 million litres of untreated sewage directly into the nation’s rivers, lakes and seas every day. Eleven other cities dump an average of 437 million litres of untreated sewage per day through by-passes and combined sewer overflows. In Montreal, Charlottetown and Vancouver, a further 2.4 billion litres of effluent is discharged daily which has received only primary treatment – little more than settling and skimming off large debris. That’s 3.25 billion litres per day – nearly 38,000 litres per second – enough to fill the House of Commons every three and a half minutes. In fact, whilst considerable advances have been made in Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon, Quebec City, Fredericton, Yellowknife and Whitehorse, only one city – Calgary – is using truly effective, environmentally sound technology in its effluent treatment.

http://www.ecojustice.ca/publication...-ii/attachment

We're not sh*tty and we don't eff our rivers.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Calgary has probably the most effective sewage and water treatment on the planet. Calgary is one of the only cities that has 100% tertiary treatment of sewage. Something to be very proud of as a city.

From a National Report Card:
We evaluated 21 cities in all, from Vancouver to St. Johns, assigning them a letter grade based on the quality of their sewage treatment as determined by various criteria, including level of sewage treatment, volume of raw sewage discharged, and permit and regulation compliance. The reports revealed some shocking environmental violations, and although there has been substantial progress in some cities over the past five years, the lack of discernible progress in many cities is alarming. Of the 21 cities documented in this report, five (Victoria, Saint John, Halifax, St. John’s and Dawson City) dump a combined total of 365 million litres of untreated sewage directly into the nation’s rivers, lakes and seas every day. Eleven other cities dump an average of 437 million litres of untreated sewage per day through by-passes and combined sewer overflows. In Montreal, Charlottetown and Vancouver, a further 2.4 billion litres of effluent is discharged daily which has received only primary treatment – little more than settling and skimming off large debris. That’s 3.25 billion litres per day – nearly 38,000 litres per second – enough to fill the House of Commons every three and a half minutes. In fact, whilst considerable advances have been made in Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon, Quebec City, Fredericton, Yellowknife and Whitehorse, only one city – Calgary – is using truly effective, environmentally sound technology in its effluent treatment.

http://www.ecojustice.ca/publication...-ii/attachment

Doesn't really jive with the perception that we're environment wreckin rednecks.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Doesn't really jive with the perception that we're environment wreckin rednecks.

my understanding is the water needs to be clean so it can be used for fracking......................

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Doesn't really jive with the perception that we're environment wreckin rednecks.

Nope - we do have real strengths in water, ground and air quality but aren't as effective elsewhere. Four instance, our physical footprint of our city is too large for our population, we are too dependent on automobiles, we are behind on things like recycling and waste diversion, etc. We also rely too heavily on coal for electricity. That's a big one.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Nope - we do have real strengths in water, ground and air quality but aren't as effective elsewhere. Four instance, our physical footprint of our city is too large for our population, we are too dependent on automobiles, we are behind on things like recycling and waste diversion, etc. We also rely too heavily on coal for electricity. That's a big one.

Regardless of the other things... doesn't water, ground and air quality cover everything?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Nope - we do have real strengths in water, ground and air quality but aren't as effective elsewhere. Four instance, our physical footprint of our city is too large for our population, we are too dependent on automobiles, we are behind on things like recycling and waste diversion, etc. We also rely too heavily on coal for electricity. That's a big one.

That tends to be the way it goes anywhere people live. In Calgary (and Alberta as a whole), water issues are very important because there is a limited amount and agriculture is so important. Land on the otherhand, is seen as inexhaustible.

It's the opposite on the coast of BC where the ocean (water) seems like it is inexhaustible, but trees are an integral part of life there.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by SebC

Regardless of the other things... doesn't water, ground and air quality cover everything?

Ground quality in the sense that we don't have widescale environmental contamination from industry or waste disposal. Our footprint consumes a tremendous amount of land though, it also has the effect that our city is far less energy efficient and functions not nearly as well as it could for modes of transportation like transit and pedestrian movement.

[Bill Bumface]

The only reason we have good air quality is we live in a windy city. That sweet smell of pollution on inverted days and the glorious yellow horizon sunsets show it pretty obviously.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Doesn't really jive with the perception that we're environment wreckin rednecks.

anyone who thinks that is a ######.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Nope - we do have real strengths in water, ground and air quality but aren't as effective elsewhere. Four instance, our physical footprint of our city is too large for our population, we are too dependent on automobiles, we are behind on things like recycling and waste diversion, etc. We also rely too heavily on coal for electricity. That's a big one.

Having spent the past 3 years in Ontario, I can tell you that if they're the benchmark for recycling, Alberta is so far ahead, its staggering.

For one, they have no bottle deposit on soda cans/bottles, juice containers and milk cartons. They also still use milk bags. Alcohol containers from Canada only are accepted at the Beer Store. As a result, tons of pop cans and bottles end up in the trash, and their rate of recovery is about 30%, despite having blue bins. Alberta's is somewhere in the high 80s.

Second, they have very limited hazardous chemical recycling compared to Alberta in many of their cities. In Windsor, only the main dump takes used propane containers, paint cans, car batteries and other hazardous materials. It tends to run banker's hours and they also tend to charge a fee on many items. Calgary meanwhile runs the program through the fire department in several locations free of charge, many of which having more convenient hours than 9-4:30.

The footprint argument is pretty overblown too. Not many cities have their airport, a large provincial park, railyards, all its industrial parks, multiple nature reserves, as well as 90% of their suburban population within its municipal border. Calgary's metro and city are far more dense than Ottawa and Edmonton, which are reasonably comparable cities. Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are far more difficult to compare because all their sprawl is outside the municipal borders, making demographic cherrypicking a lot easier.

Calgary may not be compact, but its certainly not this glorious example of sprawl either. In fact, the unicity model has been instrumental in preventing the levels of sprawl that could have occured.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

In fact, the unicity model has been instrumental in preventing the levels of sprawl that could have occured.

I'd like to see you elaborate more on this, since the unicity model is currently subsidizing sprawl.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by SebC

I'd like to see you elaborate more on this, since the unicity model is currently subsidizing sprawl.

The unicity model means that tax money stays with the host municipality, rather than to a parasite community, allowing the downtown and central core to be supported and well funded. The central planning body can also control the size of developments and implement rules to keep "sprawl" manageable. (Calgary now has some of the smallest SDH lots in North America) It also means the main city remains large and powerful enough to keep the smaller communities at bay.

A great counter example is Detroit, where the host city is too small and weak to sustain itself, and the metro area is dotted with literally dozens of "cities" the size of Tuscany, Edgemont, Woodbine and Evergreen (or smaller) that use Detroit's downtown, but send none of the money to the core. The result is a rotten core, and dozens of well funded neighborhoods around it.

People desire living in single detached houses with large lots. If Calgary didn't provide them, Airdrie, Cochrane or Okotoks would. Instead of having a few hundred thousand people paying tax to Calgary and working in Calgary, you'd have a few hundred thousand people paying tax to Okotoks/Airdrie/Rockyview County and working in Calgary, using services they aren't paying into.

So while the unicity model subsidizes the suburban somewhat (to what extent is highly debatable), its a far better option than allowing suburbs and exurbs to strip the tax base and grow without any restraint.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Having spent the past 3 years in Ontario, I can tell you that if they're the benchmark for recycling, Alberta is so far ahead, its staggering.

I'm not sure that I would entirely agree.

When I lived in Kenora ON (pop. 10,000), we had curbside recycling as far back 1991.

When I lived in Lethbridge AB (pop. 80,000) as recently as 2005, we'd have to pack our backpacks full of recycling trash every weekend and catch the bus to one of a few recycling depots (I only knew of 2).

I also don't think having to return empties to the Beer Store is a big deal. There are Beer Stores everywhere and it cuts out the middle man and saves energy that way.

[Devils'Advocate]

I don't know why Halifax is always on the front lines of waste reduction, but I remember standing in front of Halifax City Council back in '94 demanding green bins. Now when you walk through the malls the garbage receptacles all have 4 bags - paper recyclables, glass/plastic recyclables, compostables and true garbage.

I soooooo wish Ontario was anywhere near as far along as Halifax is.

To sorta get us back on topic, it *DID* take Halifax decades to stop dumping its raw sewage into the harbour. Which is something these guys being cut were supposed to be monitoring (sewage dumping). Another article is here:
http://www.vancouversun.com/technolo...341/story.html

[HPLovecraft]

Albertuh! #### yeah!

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I also don't think having to return empties to the Beer Store is a big deal. There are Beer Stores everywhere and it cuts out the middle man and saves energy that way.

I didn't mind returning empties to the Beer Store, they were conveniently located. My issue was they only accepted beer bottles, and sometimes alcohol bottles, but only those that were sold in Canada. They refused to accept American bottles and cans. Living in Windsor that was a pretty big deal.

So what often happened is if people who didn't live at a building with recycling bins had parties (which were a lot of people), a lot of bottles and cans went into the trash.

I know the bottle depots in Calgary have no care whatsoever where the cans and bottles come from, as I've returned many bottles and cans from the United States here without question.