Re: “McLoughlin Point too small for sewage plant,” March 19.
Donald Roughley hit the nail on the head when he wrote about the lack of cost control and the escalating costs associated with the current sewage plan.
I disagree, however, that siting this plant on Department of National Defence lands would solve all of our problems. The primary siting requirement for a massive, centralized system should be how large the buffer is between the site and human beings.
It should be one kilometre minimum, given the toxic, industrial nature of the operation. This would rule out DND lands. The existing outfalls should not be the primary criteria for building this boondoggle.
The problem from the beginning is that the location of live human beings has never factored into the decision-making. The existing location of the outfalls has guided this misguided project from Day 1.
The urban area is built up and this necessitates a different approach to sewage treatment for the region. The Capital Regional District is the perfect setting for a distributed, decentralized approach to sewage treatment as is advocated by the Sewage Treatment Action Group and the RITE Plan model.
This approach would see the creation of a number of small, discrete plants scattered throughout the region. This approach would mean an 18-kilometre pipeline to Hartland would not be necessary. This approach could possibly save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
Colwood’s desire to leave the current plan and set up its own system with a higher level of treatment is the way of the future.
Beth Burton-Krahn
Esquimalt
