Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Fisherbob]

Looks to me Chris that we enjoy all the products of life here but we want some one else to clean up our waste. Perhaps if we were allowed the permission by self appointed environmentalists to have the ability to better refine our own waste here at home there would be far less of it flowing down our rivers and streams.

[troutbreath]

Spreading the message of L Ron again Bawb? People throwing garbage around don't care if we "refine " their social misfit tendencies. give yer head shake

[shuswapsteve]

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/toxic-waste-facility-could-risk-catastrophe-fraser-stolo-advisor

But the safety measures are not enough to convince those who are alarmed by the idea of hazardous waste being housed within the floodplain of the lower Fraser, and opposition to the project appears to be growing. More than 20 groups representing 120,000 people have voiced their concern over the proposed location of the plant, noting the hazards of floods, earthquakes, or fires— or even trucks carrying hazardous waste to the plant going through a guardrail on the Vedder Bridge.

I thought the protest was all about the proximity of the facility to the Fraser River.  Now it includes the risk of trucks carrying hazardous waste to the facility going off the road into the Vedder River.  I guess that is a possibility, but so is a commercial airliner crashing into the facility, the derailment of a train carrying hazardous materials along the same area or a semi-trailer unit carrying hazardous materials (materials already allowed to travel on our roadways, but environmentalists don’t notice the transportation of hazardous goods decals attached to the truck) going off the highway on any number of stream crossings.  The first one is the most unlikely to happen, but the other two are not.  How would Crey rate the risks of these other potential catastrophes?

Secondly, how else is the waste supposed to get from the source to the recycling facility if not by road or even rail?  How do we avoid having it moved across bridges?  I mean if the current proposed site is rejected then this hazardous material will have to travel to another location, by road or rail, potentially crossing streams that drain directly into a major river like the Fraser.  These critics apparently don't dispute the need for this recycling facility, but they don’t want it in their backyard and they are providing no alternative location.  According to critics there are many alternative locations, but they are not saying where.  What they really want to say is “Don’t dump your garbage here.  Go away and locate somewhere else in the province”, but that wouldn’t be very “environmentally correct”.  Meanwhile, “the garbage is being dumped here” as most CFL bulbs are disposed of in landfills or illegally off the side of some Forest Service Road.

[troutbreath]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/trail-battery-recycling-fire-leaves-questions-1.805780


We send batteries to this place. So do lots of companies.

[shuswapsteve]

The facility near Trail is one of hundreds of hazardous recycling facilities in the country.  Companies also send a lot of materials to these places which deal with a variety of hazardous waste:

http://www.hazwastebc.com/receiver-processor-list/

[Fisherbob]

The facility near Trail is one of hundreds of hazardous recycling facilities in the country.  Companies also send a lot of materials to these places which deal with a variety of hazardous waste:

http://www.hazwastebc.com/receiver-processor-list/

Good to know. Thanks for the link Steve.

[chris gadsden]

http://www.theprogress.com/news/296233591.html

[Dave]

http://www.theprogress.com/news/296233591.html

Sounds like a responsible plan from Aevitas.  Hopefully it will appease the NIMBY' ers.

[shuswapsteve]

That's great to hold more consultations before conducting a more technical review by the province.  That sounds pretty reasonable; however, I doubt critics of the facility will be using this opportunity to learn more about it.  In my opinion, they have made up their minds and will just use the consultation period to discredit the company. Critics just want the province to agree with them - it's not about trying to find out more.  Meanwhile, people like Mr. Angelo are silent on what other sites this company can locate and those CFL bulbs that could be recycled safely will continue to go into landfills and into ditches along forest service roads impacting the environment.

[chris gadsden]

That's great to hold more consultations before conducting a more technical review by the province.  That sounds pretty reasonable; however, I doubt critics of the facility will be using this opportunity to learn more about it.  In my opinion, they have made up their minds and will just use the consultation period to discredit the company. Critics just want the province to agree with them - it's not about trying to find out more.  Meanwhile, people like Mr. Angelo are silent on what other sites this company can locate and those CFL bulbs that could be recycled safely will continue to go into landfills and into ditches along forest service roads impacting the environment.

This is a site suggested by one organization.  "5340 & 5390 192nd Street, Surrey. 16.85 acres, heavy industrial land with rail, 400m off a dangerous goods truck route, over a hill & 9km away from the Fraser."

[Dave]

What organization?

[chris gadsden]

What organization?

Water Wealth

[chris gadsden]

Is this now the beginning of the end of this plant in this location on the banks of the Fraser, what a terrible place for it to be.

Our waterways and the environment is under so many acttacks these days, glad I am not one that attempts to justify what we are now seeing.

[Dave]

Water Wealth

Have the good people from Water Wealth passed on this information to Aevita's? If so, what were their comments?

[chris gadsden]

Have the good people from Water Wealth passed on this information to Aevita's? If so, what were their comments?

When and if they have the public meeting here I am sure it will be suggested, hope you come and talk about what a good idea it is to have it in the suggested location in Chilliwack. Maybe SS, and the other PPAG will come too. We can then see who we are dealing with. Saying that I think they like to remain hidden behind their computer screens.