"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Tuesday 12 August 2014

A Challenge for the Little Grey Cells

 Report IES14-036. on tonight's agenda is the history of  a plan for a snow treatment facility started with a budget of $250,000  under a  "Salt Management Plan" initiative in 2007.

It was soon after the Environmental Advisory Committee was appointed and the last Council
set it's path to Fame and Glory by  saving the world for future generations.

An environmental engineer was added to the payroll; "to identify environmental initiatives"

Every year at budget time, I asked what initiatives had been identified .

The budget  for the "snow disposal" project was doubled in 2009 to $500,000.

A consultant was retained for "site selection"and "environmental assessment " of a suitable location for "future snow storage."

The site currently being used  as a snow dump was identified as preferred.

 Hardly surprising. It had ben provided  to works by manager of parks, the man who knows most about potential sites in the town. Who would  likely be the source the consultant consulted in his
search for a suitable location and environmental suitability.

Lambert Willson Park permeable surface parking lot on the side of the Arboretum Ravine was
already The Valhalla of snow dumps.

"Snow Storage"  became "Snow Disposal" and a design for a "Treatment Facility " had been
completed ,I thought  at a cost of $168.000,  but currently reported at $135,000.

The report does not indicate date of  Council approval of a design for  a "Treatment Facility"

The last and final rationale offered for the treatment facility was "the dump is on the wellhead protection area"

But  it had  previously been given an environmental pass by the consultant.

I do not generally challenge engineering advice. But as I drove home that night from the committee meeting,the thought came in a blinding flash..... salt can't be removed from water.

I'm a slow thinker I guess . Later still it occurred that snow and salt do not co-exist.

If you have snow,you do not have salt. If you have salt, you do not have snow.

Further  discussion elicited the info salt wasn't the offender. Pathogens were.

Pathogens are dog excrement and windshield washer.

The budget had increased  twice by now.  To $750,000 and then  $850,000.

In September 2011  the project was  again deferred for a more detailed report from staff.

I was not a Councillor when the ravine was taken  by the town. It was obviously environmentally sensitive and not suitable for development

The  contract  to be awarded  to-night is for a road  and parking lot to be paved with asphalt, storm system installed beneath the parking lot with facility to separate oil and grit from melting snow.

The  project was approved by Council to be included in the  2014 budget without the report directed to be provided without further details.

Snow falls all over in winter. Probably ninety-five per cent is plowed onto boulevards. And there it sits frozen,until temperatures rise . Then it melts and disappears Without the help of salt.

Aurora's aquifer is deep. Separated from the surface by a massive  impermeable shield . Water in the aquifer has been carbon dated. It is fresh,clear and cold and thousandof years old. Oil and grit have
never in known history reached it's depth.


And to-night your council will be asked to spend almost $800,000. As an environmental initiative, to pave paradise and put up a parking lot.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

I know that you will not care, but the public needs to understand that you are wrong about snowmelt. You are not a chemist nor an enviromentalist.

http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2010/docs/a1/richmond.pdf

"Urban drainage in cold regions is dominated by snowmelt. Furthermore, 50% to
60% of the annual load of contaminants may be produced during the winter
months and stored in the snow pack created on site. Fugitive vehicle emissions,
worn brake pads, road salt, grit, and wearing of asphalt and concrete surfaces
from ploughs and freeze-thaw cycles cause elevated rates of chemical and
material accumulation in roadside snowpacks. The trapped pollutants are
released during seasonal melting, loading significant volumes of foreign material
into receiving waterways.

Environment Canada’s Road Salt Assessment Report indicated that increasing
concentrations of road salts in the environment pose great risks to aquatic
ecosystems and groundwater resources. High salt content reduces the ability of
metals to adsorb onto sediments, which is the primary method of metal
demobilization. Currently, alternatives to road salt, which is required to ensure
road safety, is rarely applied. Despite the magnitude of this problem, there is a
scarcity of treatment measures for salt-laden meltwater. The Transportation
Association of Canada recognized this challenge, stating that ‘there is no
practical or economical way of removing the chlorides [salt] found in snow’,
however this facility attempts to do just that!"

Anonymous said...


This project is a criminal act of ignorance and stupidity.

Anonymous said...

Base upon your investigations into this town's salt disposal site that is meant to treat pathogens I suggest consideration to a similar engineering exercise for the dog park.

Given that people and their pets use the dog park in the heat of summer it is possible that the engineering and construction could be substantially more.

Finally, given that the town has, I assume, been dumping for the past many years is there any documented evidence of environmental impact?

Anonymous said...

That thing has been talked to death. No justification has EVER been presented. There is no need for the blasted treatment except to make a few individuals feel good. The rest of us are going to have to pay for it.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, 10:23. The key word is in your last sentence.
" Attempts "
Why should we construct a costly facility that simply attempts ?

Anonymous said...

11:24

An attempt to remove salt from ground water is a lot better than doing nothing and not remove salt.

Anonymous said...

@15:20
That is ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

15:20
So you want to ok a pricey project to remove salt that does not remove salt ??????

Anonymous said...

What should we do with salt laden snow then genius?

Anonymous said...

8:46
It's over.

Anonymous said...

@11:21

For now...

Anonymous said...

8:46
It was just a smidgeon of the total snow collected by the town.

Anonymous said...

Frozen dead small pigeons, 15:07?