On Sunday I received a media release from local advocacy group Save Georgian Bay, who are asking why 4CDTC Meaford is suitable for pumped storage, when it had been deemed unsuitable as a site for the military’s Arctic Over-the-Horizon Radar.
“Save Georgian Bay is calling on the Department of National Defence (DND) and federal decision-makers to explain why the Meaford Tank Range is considered unsuitable for critical national defence infrastructure — yet is being treated as acceptable for TC Energy’s proposed $7-billion-plus pumped storage mega-project,” said Save Georgian Bay in the media release. “According to DND’s own Arctic Over-the-Horizon Radar (A-OTHR) site selection criteria, Meaford was eliminated early due to environmental sensitivity, challenging terrain, and its critical role as a high-tempo military training facility. DND states these conditions “significantly challenge” the ability to meet operational requirements — a clear indication that 4CDTC Meaford cannot support major built infrastructure due to environmental sensitivity (contaminants and species at risk), the potential for operational disruption, and questionable geology.”
It’s a fair question, and one of many questions that we all hope to find answers to as the impact assessment process unfolds.
It’s important to note that the agreement reached between proponent TC Energy and the DND in July 2021 was “subject to conditions and regulatory approval, allowing for the development of a transformative 1,000-megawatt clean energy storage project on federal lands.” The DND is conducting an impact assessment of their own as part of the IAAC process.
In the years since the pumped storage proposal was first introduced in 2019, I have expressed my own reservations about using military bases for corporate profit.
In August 2021 I wrote an editorial entitled What if Amazon Wanted to Set Up Shop at CFB Trenton? In that editorial I wrote that, “For Canada to open up its military bases to corporations troubles me deeply.”
I am well aware that Canadian military bases have been used for corporate projects in the past, so the proposal in Meaford is not unique, but it still bothers me. That said, I always try to maintain some perspective when it comes to issues such as this, and as I noted in that August 2021 editorial, “I think it is worth noting that though a green light has been activated, there is a long road to travel with many lights ahead that will have to also turn green in order for the project to move forward.”
Use of the military base was not the only concern I expressed back in 2021.
“While I might not share many of the environmental concerns expressed by many (it might be unfashionable, but I personally have some faith in our established processes, like environmental impact studies), I do have concerns about how this small municipality would handle the enormous influx of both workers and heavy equipment. In short, I think it would be a multi-year nightmare. We have all seen the impact of a relatively minor amount of development in this municipality this summer. Large transport trucks and heavy equipment have been moving in and out of town, holding up traffic and causing frustration. Now imagine the volume of transport trucks and heavy equipment required to dig out a 394-acre reservoir and the construction of the facility’s infrastructure,” I wrote in 2021. “Frustration and inconvenience are certainly not enough to fully oppose any project, and though I have already expressed that there is value to be found in pumped storage, what bothers me most, and it has bothered me from the very beginning, is that I really don’t like the precedent that would be set by opening up our military bases for corporations to set up shop and earn outrageous profits. Because let’s not forget, TC Energy is not proposing this project out of the good of its corporate heart, they are looking forward to a big payday from this project. That is what corporations do.”
In that editorial I asked what might be next? “What if Amazon wanted to set up shop at CFB Trenton. Perhaps Amazon might see logistical advantages to building an enormous distribution centre on the Trenton base where there are conveniently air strips for cargo, and very close proximity to major highways. Would we all be okay with Amazon using our most important air base in order to earn huge profits? I think many would be opposed, and they wouldn’t need environmental scares, or fears of disasters to convince people that it just doesn’t feel right.”
As I have written before, while I have my concerns about the use of our military bases by corporations, and while the DND’s agreement with TC Energy is subject to conditions, I have considered it to be a battle already lost, though I know that final decisions are still a long way off.
In their weekend media release, Save Georgian Bay is calling upon the DND to explain why the Meaford base was rejected for A-OTHR but remains under consideration for the pumped storage project, and they are calling upon federal agencies to “apply environmental and operational criteria consistently across all proposals.”
Save Georgian Bay would also like to see Meaford’s council “demand clarity on why the radar was deemed incompatible with the base, while the pumped storage project—requiring massive earthworks, in-water (Georgian Bay) construction, and massive intakes that cause fish mortality—is still being entertained.”
While it has been more than six years, we are still very much at the beginning when it comes to the pumped storage proposal. After this initial round of public commenting, there are many studies to be conducted, and down the road IAAC will assess the potential negative impacts of the project, which will bring about another round of public commenting before any decisions are made.
There is still a very long road ahead as we are now in the early stages of a multi-year impact assessment process. The public commenting period, which ends on April 6, still has more than a week remaining. As of Tuesday morning when I write this column there have been more than 80 comments submitted on the IAAC website. You can read through those comments, and submit your own by visiting: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/evaluations/proj/89803/contributions
