Dear Editor,
I suspect the Pumped Storage Advisory Committee convincing Meaford Council to pursue baseline water testing on properties that have nothing to do with the TCE Pumped Storage Proposal won’t have quite the effect they were hoping for.
The image of someone pointing both barrels at their own feet and pulling the trigger comes to mind.
In business or academia, anyone wanting to initiate a study is required to explain why the study is needed. The “Why” of the study. A statement of what will be done is next. The “What” of the study. In the hope that expected “Findings” of value are discovered. The key question is always “What will you do with the data collected?” Or perhaps, “What do you expect to find that matters?”
The normal rules of conduct don’t seem to apply to certain members of the Meaford Pumped Storage Advisory Committee and Deputy Mayor Shirley Keaveney. They skipped Why, missed What, skipped right over What will you do with the data collected? And went straight into “Who’s paying?”
Nothing in your November 12 coverage of Council’s approval to perform water testing far removed from where the proposed Meaford Pumped Storage Proposal construction would happen hints at a coherent reason why someone would ask for that. Or why it was approved. Absolutely nothing on what will be done with the data collected. There seemed to be zero interest on Council for asking three very obvious questions.
Why would we do that and what would it help prove? What happens after?
Q: How does it have anything to do with the TCE project at all?
A: It doesn’t. This is a pointless exercise begging for a reason to exist.
Suppose this work was to go ahead? And they find the farms, homes, and cottages from the 22nd Sideroad to the Base Boundary are infused with “carcinogens, heavy metals and toxins, including but not limited to: PFAS, dioxins, furan”?
Suppose they find nothing? Either way, they’ve accomplished absolutely nothing relevant to any project located on the Base.
Besides, what would come next? What will Meaford Council DO with this information?
I suppose TC Energy will just keep doing the same environmental work they are required to do. In the places they are required to do it in. They will prepare the piles and piles of information they have to prepare to do these two things:
1) Explain to the Federal and Provincial Governments what they found – BUT ONLY WHERE THEY PROPOSE TO BUILD. The Base and Georgian Bay in front of the Base.
2) Convince the Federal and Provincial Governments, DND, and SON that they have identified their risk items and have a valid plan to deal with those risks. TCE’s and DND’s own risks. The REAL Project risks. The risks associated with the land and water involved in building a safe facility. Meaford, Owen Sound, SON, and Grey County support the plan only if these conditions are met (along with other economic ones).
Now, if TCE finds that SGB members’ septic systems have already introduced PFAS chemicals to Georgian Bay? They’ll report that too. TCE’s baseline testing the water before lifting the first shovel full of dirt.
TCE won’t need to explain the PFAS in some Save Georgian Bay member’s well or septic tank. (Septic systems leak PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) into the surrounding soil and groundwater. Because many common household products contain PFAS and conventional septic systems aren’t designed to break these chemicals down.) TCE isn’t responsible for what’s on some SGB member’s farm either. Because if you find heavy metal contamination (lead, arsenic) on your farm? In Meaford? Blame your grandpa. (After a gradual phasing out leading to official restrictions and bans, the use of lead arsenate on Ontario apple orchards continued at a reduced level until at least 1975 in Ontario.) Grandpa’s fault if you have furan too. (Furan compounds associated with certain pesticides and herbicides were common in agriculture. Runoff from chemically treated fields carried these substances into the ground and subsequently the groundwater.) Farms – and any homes close to the farm – may show dioxin contaminated soil and groundwater – from multiple sources. Even if the farm is no longer active. (Historical use of sewage sludge (biosolids) as fertilizer introduced dioxins to land and water. Use of pentachlorophenol (PCP)-treated wood in animal housing, paints, and sealants in farm structures also caused contamination.)
The key takeaway is, if your property is found to be polluted with “carcinogens, heavy metals and toxins, including but not limited to: PFAS, dioxins, furan”? In Meaford, you should first consider that you, Grandpa, or your neighbor’s ancestors were very, very, involved.
Also? That’s YOUR problem.
Because good luck proving otherwise. You have no idea what went on here 100 years ago. And that toxic stuff lasts forever.
So, what will Meaford Council do with the unnecessary data this irrelevant project will collect?
They will have to turn over newfound contamination data to Grey Bruce Public Health. Of course. It’s a risk to public health. GBPH can condemn wells and order them to be capped. Maybe condemn septic systems and require them to be replaced as well. Property owners will pay all their own costs. No doubt they’ll be grateful to PSAC, SGB, and Council for identifying their problems. (Feet? Say hello to the trigger…)
If the PSAC and Meaford Council imagine this will somehow involve TCE, they are mistaken. And if they think this unrelated exercise will change TCE’s responsibilities? Then PSAC and Meaford Council are dreaming.
This was a completely pointless, goal-free request. It shouldn’t have been considered, let alone approved.
Remind me again?
What was accomplished here? Why is Meaford Council pandering to loony demands again?
Bruce Mason, Meaford
