After hearing about the news story which aired on GlobalTV (I believe) which all but came right out and said that the Covanta / Green Island Energy power plant project is finished here in Gold River, I decided to ask Mayor Anderson for more information.
If you read the Resident Spotlight this week, you’ll know that he touched on this subject a bit, and stated that the news reports were inaccurate, and that he encourages Gold River residents to ask Council for correct and up to date information.
Here is what Craig told me today:
“After talking with Thomas Lyons this past Tuesday he said, and I quote, ‘Covanta is committed to having a power project in Gold River and fully expect to win the Request for Proposal from Metro Vancouver.’ “
Mayor Anderson also stated that Council will be meeting with Covanta / Green Island Energy on Tuesday January 26th to be fully updated and briefed.
lets just hope that metro vancouver realises just how much of a valuble resource they will be letting go and they decide to keep it for themselves…that would be such a shame……
As has already been stated (but it bears repeating) – the Lower Mainland airshed cannot sustain any further emissions of any kind. They desperately need a reduction in the air contaminants already present there. Thus, another waste-to-energy facility in their area is simply not an option. Here, however, we have no smog and our air quality is excellent. We have the natural air filters growing all around us to ensure that that doesn’t change. We have major advantages over the Lower Mainland in terms of our ability to accommodate Covanta’s energy production facility.
Here is some interesting info involving Covanta’s current WTEF in Burnaby and its environmental controls and emission standards. It’s worth a careful look.
http://www.metrovancouver.org/about/publications/Publications/WasteEnergyFactsheet.pdf
Thanks for bringing this thread back.
Just curious to know if GIEsupport (or anyone else) could provide us with some numbers about the effectiveness of trees providing a “natural way of reducing emissions”.
I’m not sure if I totally buy this idea. In it’s simplest terms, trees “breathe” in C02 which through photosynthesis will form sugars, etc which help trees grow. They then expel oxygen back into the atmosphere for the rest of us to breathe.
I’m curious to learn a few things:
1). What percentage of the emissions will be C02?
2). How fast will those C02 emissions be absorbed by the trees growing in the area?
3). What are the effects on trees of the other emission particulates?
Vic, instead of me telling you that kind of stuff I’ll give you a website that I’ve looked over a few times to answer my own quetions about it, because lets be honest we’ve all had questions about the whole project from time to time. Although this is a good piece of info, its not the whole picture. Need to take part it the dicussions of GIE and the council of Gold River to get all the information we can. http://www.covantaholding.com/site/about/environmental.html. I found it extremly helpfull.
To Jim, PB, and all others opposed to the Gold River Power project. One fact nobody will dispute is that garbage, from its’ origins, through its’ uses and re-uses, and finally to its’ disposal, is one of the most important issues facing our society today. It is crucial that peoples’ attitudes change with regards to recycling and household consumption. Governments must be lobbied to implement changes in packaging, reduce harmful emissions, and protect the environment. Corporations, backed by sound environmental science and research must be given incentives (profit) to come up with technology that brings us closer to a “zero-waste” society. Like any other global issue, however, one must appreciate that these changes do not happen over night. At risk of getting philosophical on you, I must encourage you to view the solution to our global garbage dilemma as a “process” that will take some years to rectify. Processes of this magnitude can only evolve once all aspects; social, environmental, economic, political, cultural etc. come together. What may seem a simple answer; “just stop producing so much garbage” is unfortunately naive and out of touch with the real world. Enough ranting.
The bottom line is – there are two methods of processing solid waste on the table for metro Vancouver. Either continuing with Cache Creek landfill, or employing in or out-of-region waste-to-energy technology like that proposed by Covanta/GIE. Both of these methods, as outlined by Metros’ Solid Waste Planning Committee, will function as part of a larger initiative of educating the public and moving to 70% diversion from the refuse stream by 2015. THERE ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO METRO VANCOUVER IN THE SHORT TERM! I don’t know if you’ve been to Vancouver lately but it’s not getting any smaller. As the debate carries on, trucks continue to move up the Fraser Valley to the landfill. Do you not see how there are short and long term views to this problem? Do you have a solution that can be implemented Vancouver-wide tomorrow that would effectively eliminate the need for garbage pickup? If so, I’m sure it can be arranged to skip your house during the coming months and you can fill us in on what you’re doing with your stuff. The world wants to know!
Unlike Vancouverites, who have gotten the concept of waste-to-energy thrust upon them in the last year, Gold River has had 9 years to wrap our minds around it and check into the technology. Covanta/GIE has explained their process on their website and in public forums and has addressed the publics concerns on many aspects of the project. I, and many other residents have gone further and researched the process and studies done on this technology and its’ effects since its’ inception in Europe in the early 70s. One theme that consistently arises is the WTE is considered far superior to landfills with regards to detrimental effects to the environment (for reasons outlined by AJ). If we are to believe the bulk of the scientific evidence available then I propose that WTE is the preferred method for dealing with the problem……today. Remember, – we need solutions that can be implemented in the short term. Less diesel spewing trucks barreling up the canyon, less harmful methane gas wafting into the sky, less leaching of toxins into the ground water and rivers. View waste to energy as the first progressive move towards a greener society. Nothing is static. Things are always changing. Since the first WTE plants were introduced in Europe, technology has advanced light years in burning efficiency and emission controls. Like most technologies, processes have to be constantly improving if the holders of those technologies want to remain in business. Not only will technology improve as we move forward, but the inputs to the process will change for the better as well. As recycling and re-using efforts improve, and packaging materials change, there will be fewer harmful materials in the post recycled refuse stream that enters the burners. Less in…..less out. We take yet another step along the continuum towards a greener future. Follow me so far?
Jim, you seem to have a real fear of a corporation coming in and “raping and pillaging” the community – all for the sake of making money. Well, yes-corporations certainly do make money….at least successful ones do. However, we must be careful not to be hypocritical with regards to profitable corporations. Do you have an RRSP portfolio? You may want to check it – chances are you have a few of these despicable entities contributing to your retirement. Even your paycheques are likely signed by a profit-driven business unless of course you work in the public sector – and we all know the government REALLY makes money off the profitable corporations. Did you know that without corporate interest in this area Gold River would not exist? I hate to tell you Jim, but corporations make the world go round. The good news is – communities and corporations enter into mutually beneficial partnerships all the time. On the topic of corporations, let’s talk about tourism initiatives proposed by PB. If you look at the make-up of tourism as suggested in Victoria, Whistler, and Tofino guess what you’ll find…yup! Corporate resorts making profits – but instead of paying a competitive wage, local workers will be picking pubes out of pillow cases in a resort for minimum wage. I don’t think that’s where we want to go…..do you? Small communities like ours rely on a strong corporate tax base to survive. A thriving business will bring in more families which will in turn increase the residential tax base as well. The municipality can then reinvest in infrastructure and amenities for the public and tourists alike. I strongly believe that a stronger village with more services will see an increase in tourism as a welcome by-product.
Back to our garbage dilemma and the question “Why should we be burning Vancouver’s garbage?” Let’s look at first at the choices facing the people of Vancouver. If the price of construction of one of these plants is 750 million, who’s going to pay for it? Right…. Taxpayers! Vancouver probably doesn’t have that kind of money kicking around so they likely will be financing the construction of the plants. All of a sudden, the overall cost of the project amortized over 40 years (or whatever the useful life of the plant is) has ballooned to over a billion dollars right off the hop. If Vancouver is serious about reaching a near zero-waste situation over the next 50 years as is stated on their website, then a further problem remains as to what to do with these plants if there’s nothing to put into them? What a waste of taxpayers dollars no? Like we need more of that crap. Let’s now look at the alternative of sending refuse to Gold River. The real estate is a lot cheaper but the plant cost is the same 750 million. Who pays for it – Covanta/GIE. Do they have that kind of money or do they finance it. – Who cares! Vancouver enters into an agreement to ship garbage out at a similar cost to what is incurred right now. No white elephant for taxpayers, no debt, and not so much as a whiff of hot air has entered the sensitive Fraser Valley air shed. So what about poor Gold River? In 50 years, Covanta/GIE has realized a return on their investment after successful business cycle. They may find an alternative fuel source to keep producing power for the grid or they may decide to move on. In the meantime, Gold River has prospered for another couple of generations and the community will continue to diversify its economic future.
I’m not sure by what means you are able to support your family here in Gold River but I hope you see how fortunate you are as many have has to move away from their homes in search of work. Chances are, if you have entered the community post pulp mill days, your residence was probably occupied by someone who had no intention of moving away from their home. You may have even been one of the fortunate ones to purchase your home for a song due to the mill shut down.
I have called Gold River my home for 36 years. There are many multi-generational families like mine that work, live, and play in this community. I guarantee you nobody cares more about Gold Rivers’ environment than its original residents. Don’t for a minute think that the residents would prostitute their pristine home for the sake of a few jobs. That being said, the economic benefits to this community would allow families to thrive and live in the place they love. We will welcome new families into the community to experience the “jewel” that is Gold River. The rivers will remain clean; the trees will not be stunted, who knows? – We might even get more sport fishers stopping for gas and groceries on their way through town. I respect your opinions to the contrary although I whole heartedly disagree. Dialogue is good as it reflects different points of view and is needed to force change. Unfortunately, if you refuse to look at the bigger picture and limit your mind to baseless assumption, you will soon be dismissed. I respect Gold River as a working community that has been rooted in forestry for some 50 years. I am also excited that Gold River has a new economic horizon anchored by green technology that is a positive step in the “process” of solving our global garbage problem.
Grant Hutchinson
Just read the environmental statement from the weblink posted by GIEsupport.
Here’s one from BP (the same company that is having issues off the coast of Louisianna right now):
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9032745&contentId=7059975
In that link the last paragraph reads. “In our routine operations, we strive to minimize the impact we have on the environment by identifying risks during the project set-up and using technology to reduce or remedy any impacts.”
Just some food for thought…
Do you foresee the potential for an environmental disaster on par with that failed oil rig in the proposed GIE/Covanta project, Vic? We’re considering two entirely different industries of course, but I think I can see the point you’re seeking to make here. Obviously, we can’t just take the company’s word for it in relation to the effectiveness of their environmental controls. Governmental agencies directly responsible for environmental oversight could be contacted and relevant reports/analyses requested. That’s the next step in researching operations like this. The original plan for the Gold River operation, I should note, involved converting the burnable garbage to RDF for more efficient combustion and minimizing residue even further.
By the way, Grant…great comment there above. You said alot of things that needed to be said and I, for one, appreciate the sincerity and deep appreciation for this community and its potential expressed in your post.
wow grant that is the best response i could have ever hoped for….well done…thank you….
Yes Grant, prefect. Deffinatly said all the things that needed to be said.
Well said Grant…I think you have left PB speechless!
John,
That was my point exactly. All major resource companies have similar environmental policies. Whether they are followed in practice is another issue.
There definately needs to be a STRONG government oversight when it comes to environmental matters and enforcing regulations. However, as we’ve seen in recent months, the BC Government is slashing many enforcement positions within the resource ministries.
I don’t foresee any major environmental “disasters” with Covanta’s proposal, however, I would like to see them held accountable to all of their environmental standards that they said they would achieve. How that will be monitored and enforced given all of the recent government cutbacks is a topic for another discussion…
Wow Grant…never knew you had it in you! Actually I lie, I’ve known you for over 20 yrs and I knew you had it in you. I hope Gold River gets the plant for many reasons. I have been reading all the news on the garbage problems since I live in the Lower Mainland. And I have my own Environmental Guy (Ithink you might know him
) here at home who can clarify things that I have questions on. He thinks it will be a great thing for Gold River. And he would even consider applying for the job of Environmental manager. Who else other than a GR boy would you trust to protect your air quality and environment?
You’re still all whistling in the wind, the fact is that Metro Vancouver has serious plans about reducing waste and what’s left will be used here not sent to the Island=as per my earlier post on the matter.
Where does this leave the company’s proposal?
Well it’s worth the paper it’s written on-but that won’t stop them small town Folks from b!thcing and tearing @ each other-what else do they have to do up there in the bush?
And once it finally becomes clear that there will never be a garbage burning plant you can start blaming each other instead of the Flim Flam artists who have all with your knickers in a twist.
Maybe if you speak softly to Victoria they’ll send you their garbage…
Wow! Barilko, I guess you are the type who can’t stand seeing people with a little hope for something better for their community (I think as a Maple Leafs fan you might understand optimism). Burner or no burner you won’t find me b!tching and tearing at anyone, we leave that to the big city folk. I guess we’re to simple and gullible out here in the sticks to understand the ways of the big city.
This is forum for ideas and intelligent discussion lets try to stay in those guidelines (see other above posts for examples of intelligent discussion)
I’m still trying to learn a few things about Covanta’s proposed project in GR. I’ve put out a few questions & thoughts that I feel need to be considered from an environmental perspective, now I’d like to examine the economics of the project.
How many permanent full time workers will this project employ after the plant is fully operational? (not counting construction jobs since those jobs are only temporary in nature)
Of those full time jobs, how many will require workers with specialized skill sets? (as opposed to general labour)
How much tax revenue does the Village expect to receive?
Where will the power that is generated go? How much power, if any, will be used locally (Vancouver Island)?
I find your comments and observations both laughable and tragic, Bill. The fact that you think any WTEF facility would ever meet with public approval in the Lower Mainland area due to the serious air quality issues already present (and the fact that the public has effectively blocked other power-generating facilities like the Sumas natural gas power plant) reduces the credibility of your comments rather drastically. Quite frankly – you’re a dreamer. Covanta currently owns seven WTEF plants recently purchased from Veolia Environment, the Burnaby incinerator being one of them. The Gold River project is a front-runner as a garbage solution for Metro Vancouver. The January issue of BC Business Magazine had some excellent information in this regard. Here is a link to that article: http://www.bcbusinessonline.ca/bcb/top-stories/2010/01/06/garbage-burn
Read, learn, contribute well-informed comments – and receive a little respect instead of scorn for a change.
Clarification on that last comment above: Covanta owns 40 WTEFs world-wide, at present. They recently purchased 7 from Veolia Environment (per the info in the BC Business article). Just thought I’d make that small correction.
Here’s some interesting articles.
http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/05/03/in-covanta-struggle-utility-workers-go-global/
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Environment/2009/08/28/CorvantaFined/
Vic, these questions you ask can be answered with the Gold Rover Power fact sheet made available by Covanta Energy at the Village Office front desk. Please do not hesitate to stop me on the street or come to a Council meeting to ask questions.
Craig,
Any possibility of posting that fact sheet here? or short of that posting the pertinent information from that fact sheet.
I didn’t know something like that existed. Thanks.
any chance of getting a fact sheet that’s not quite pro gie/covanta?…..can we get some negetive facts public?……
Jim, The sheet I’m refering to will answer the questions that Vic had put forward at 8:37 am May 13/10. The Village tax system is based on assessment and this question can only be answered after the 1st full year of operation but I would venture to say that it would be significantly higher that the current $28,000.00.
As for your question, any one can dig up pro vs. con on any subject. The ultimate test is with the Ministry of Enviroment and the permits that have been issued to GIE/Covanta to operate this facility. I will get the fact sheet to the site moderator and it will be up to her as to wether or not this information is available here.
Craig – feel free to send me the fact sheet and I’ll put it up.
I picked up a link to the following anti-incineration web site from one of my news feeds and thought some might be interested in the links there:
http://zerowastebc.org/category/media-items
thanks jerry
Good site Jerry.
besides the fact that we need jobs here would anyone like to comment on the site that jerry posted?….looks like quite the argument to NOT have this facility here…also, what is the incentive to reduce waste in general if the company needs the waste as fuel?…no garbage= no fuel= no power plant…isnt producing more waste to fuel energy production going backwards in time therefore the WRONG direction?…ppl in gold river may not knowingly or intentionally want to wreck their own backyard, but the mirage of so called prosperity may cloud their judgement….as was directed toward me in an earlier post “ignorance is bliss”…..think of all the time wasted while waiting for the great saviour to come save the town….the only thing that has been incinerated is time and that my friends is the greatest waste of all….
Craig…what exactly do you mean?, when you say ” The ultimate test is with the Ministry of Environment and the permits that have been issued to GIE/Covanta to operate this facility.”
Jim, you keep taking about the enviroment and the controls. The Province issued permits to run 2 45 mw boilers to create energy and they will be monitoring their permits. I don’t think everyone in town considers GIE/Covanta our saviors,I certainly don’t but Muchalat Industries controls the only heavy industry land within our community and are proceeding how they feel is best for their company. While it is nice they have deceided to set up shop in Gold River I have told them many times that Council does not consider them the goose that laid the golden egg. Their contribution to our tax base is most welcome. In 1999 when the pulp mill closed down taking 82% of our tax base with them the Council of the tax in accordance with an agreement with the Province reduced our services and increased taxex so that we would be sustainable and we have achieved that goal.This new increase to our tax base(hopefully) will help us restore some of those service levels and make repairs to our 45 year old infrastructure as well as create oppourtunities for our residents, merchants and newcomers to be comfortable here. I really wish you’d come and talk to me in person so I can hoefully answer all your questions.
will do craig
“Hoefully” Craig?
If memory serves me, I think it can also be mentioned that the new proposal is cleaner than the original one that was permitted.
Jim,obviously, there are opposing views on waste to energy and it’s up to us to sort through the myriad of opinions and assumptions out there and come up with some truth. I found the most reliable source for such info is either direct science done on the subject, or to follow the track record of actual plants in Europe to see if there are any identifiable environmental or health related problems associated with them in the last 20 years. I’m sure zerowaste.org is a noble organization with good intentions but I tend to be skeptical when they don’t provide scientific evidence to back up their claims. The following is a list of links that support wte as a viable and sustainable method for dealing with garbage. A very informative website is the Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Planning website. Of particular interest are the video presentations by Bettina Kamuk – a European perspective. And professor Jim Bridges who paints quite a different picture of emissions from wte.
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/solidwaste/planning/Pages/Resources.aspx
Here are some more interesting links in support of wte.
http://www.allbusiness.com/environment-natural-resources/pollution-environmental/5966673-1.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/science/earth/13trash.html
http://www.slideshare.net/whitehouse/waste-to-energy-fact-sheet
One link of particular interest is from a Columbia University professor
http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/cape_cod.pdf
A great search engine for all things energy is Columbia University Earth Engineering Dept. website You can search this site for many aspects of WTE technology.
http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/homepage/?&func=advSearch
One of the main arguments that seems to be out there is that somehow everyone will completely abandon recycling and composting initiatives in favor of “feeding the beast”. Metro Vancouver has, as part of their mandate in the Solid Waste Plan, taken on a huge initiative to divert 70% of its’ solid waste from the refuse stream by increased recycling and composting. If you don’t believe me – here is another link to a 32 page pdf outlining Vancouvers’ Zero Waste Challenge.
http://www.metrovancouver.org/about/publications/Publications/ZWCManagementPlanMarch2009.pdf
The effectiveness of these types of programs relies, and always has relied, on us as individuals. We make decisions every day on what and how much enters the landfill or wte facility by how we consume, recycle, and reuse. The buck stops here. Just as Covanta/GIE will not be the “saviour” of our town, nor will governments be able to make garbage go away with sweeping legislation or “1984″-like control over peoples’ disposal habits.It’s up to each household to make a commitment to move closer to zero-waste by improving our own habits.
Besides, if the plant is located in Gold River, what could possibly be the motivation for Vancouver to discourage solid waste diversion through increased recycling, composting, and resusing? They will be paying a tipping fee for every tonne of refuse sent to either Cache Creek or here so I would think they would want to reduce those overall fees by reducing the amount they produce. Am I wrong on this? Anyway – hope you find the above links helpful…..or not. If we all keep doing our due diligence – the answers will come.
Grant Hutchinson
Zero waste is not something that will be achieved without considerably less consumption and a much smaller population. It will take a lot of time for that to happen in any humane fashion, and meanwhile we have to deal with what “waste” we do generate. Waste really meaning stuff that we pile up faster than it can be recycled. As we approach “zero waste” through reduced consumption that will also mean demand for energy will be dropping and there will be no reason to create more “waste” to fuel plants to provide unneeded energy. In any event, producing energy through recycling, which is what we will do here, is probably better than drilling more gas and oil wells or digging more coal, and certainly better than flooding the agricultural land in the Peace River Valley or screwing up the fishery in the inlets along the coast.
What we really need to be sure of is that the by-products of burning the fuel are not toxic and released into the environment. There should be Draconian penalties if that happens. The BP oil spill is making a good case for an end to the practice of limited liability.
As an aside, I think that there is still an ongoing investigation into a wind farm east of the village.
Grant: the best way to deal with people’s disposal habits is to make unavailable in the first place the stuff that is disposed of. We could start with an end to plastic bottles and excessive packaging. I can remember when almost all beverages including milk came in returnable, refillable bottles. Going back to that would move the cost of waste from the environment back to the pockets of the consumer and probably create more jobs in the process.
On the topic of energy, though not about WTE, this Toronto Star article might be of interest:
http://www.thestar.com/business/cleanbreak/article/809649–hamilton-geothermal-could-meet-canada-s-power-needs
Jerry, thanks for the link to info about geothermal. Very interesting concept and technology. Lets hope the powers that be put some serious resources to developing it further in this country.
Grant, I have to wonder what the side effects of messing with the subsurface to any great extent will be. Our safest path in the long run is probably to reduce energy use. Of course one certainly has good cause to be envious of Klamath Falls:
http://blog.oregonlive.com/pdxgreen/2010/03/klamath_falls_serves_as_model.html
thanks grant and jerry very much for your insite….yes jerry i too remember a time when there werent nearly as many plastics used…ive said for many years that our use of plastics has to be reduced immensely…milk used to get delivered to your door in glass bottles, ppl used to grow their own veggies and fruit, ppl actually put ingridients together for a meal they didnt have to read the packaging to find out what they are lol..(it makes me laugh nowadays that meals come in a box for convenience but by the time you read all those chemicals and ingredients on every box how much time have you really saved lol)in some respects society was way better off and the saying if it aint broke dont fix it comes to mind….nothing was broken it is all about money and convenience now, and i realize we can never go back, BUT, some of the old processes,packaging,and ways our great grand parents, grand parents, and parents used to use and live with were perfectly fine and didnt need to be changed and i think finally some ppl in the world are starting realize this and will/are reverting back to the ways of old…..my point being i dont want to be 80 years old living in gold river trying to explain to my grandchildren why they ever built this “green” energy plant
ive known and know ppl who have been using geothermal for many years now…deffinately something i support
Sorry about my spelling mistakes, I was sitting in a parking lot on a mini computer waiting for my meeting time.
not directly related but still of interest
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Pollution+worries+halt+power+project/3037259/story.html
Not directly about WTE, but a good article on the entire problem of energy development in the province:
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/05/17/FinancingCleanEnergy/
As someone who has operated a recycling business for 10 years and has a post-secondary education in environmental issues – I can 100% put my support behind WTE. Zero waste / 100% recycling is a great concept, but at the current moment in North America is a utopian fantasy. A closed WTE gasification system (see EnEco.ca) would be my first option for waste. The state of the art mass-burn incinerator with energy recovery like the one proposed for Gold River is a close second. In the years I ran my recycling company all the contaminated recycling and non-recyclable waste was hauled to the Montenay (now Covanta) incinerator in Burnaby. I hope Covanta wins the garbage bid for Vancouver. I will not have to take the ferry to haul to the Burnaby plant anymore.
Hello Everyone, I am Tyrone, President of Nootka Hydro and holder of the water license application for Ahaminqas Creek IPP. Sorry for the late reply, I was passed along a link to this discussion.
Jim, I just wanted to advise you that our proposed project will not affect any fish or fish habitat. There are natural fish barriers present in the creek and the water will be returned upstream of the fish barrier.
sure thing tyrone, youre trying to tell me that puting something un-natural in a natural environment isnt going to affect it?, sorry if i dont believe that for 1 second, whats next? the Gold river?, oh wait we’ll have to wait until DFO kills off all the salmon and steelhead first, whatever
Jim,
Run of river (ROR) projects as a whole have very small environmental footprints. In fact compared to other IPP’s our project has one of the lowest. We will be constructing no new powerlines. Most of the roads being used are existing, and the penstock route is along a planned logging road (the only new road being constructed). We will not be altering the water chemistry in any way. The creek does not support fish where the project is planned. Does the project have an environmental footprint; yes. Does it affect fish or fish habitat, no. You can easily confirm this on our water license application.
I am sorry but I am not up to speed on the concerns/plans of the Gold River and/or the DFO.
This is open to everyone:
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns!
Tyrone
tyrone can u provide a link to said application and/or some sort of diagram of how everything works?..btw my comment about the gold and dfo was a sarcastic one, but not too far off base, the gold river is one of the last truly wild steelhead rivers in the world and anything created on it’s tributaries should be scrutinized to the nth degree, not to mention that the creek flows into the gold river pretty much at the mouth of the river, also of note is the privitization of canadian water to foreign companies, is nootka hydro a canadian company?, what are the benefits to the the local economy because of this project?, will our hydro rates come down?, as far as i am aware hyro rates are expected to increase by 50% within the next 5 yrs
http://www.ecojustice.ca/blog/b.c.2019s-water-to-be-sold-to-the-highest-bidder
http://www.ecojustice.ca/blog/b.c.-residents-back-stronger-water-protections-survey