legislation

by

TheStar: Conservative government shutting down northern Ontario world-class freshwater research facility

TheStar.com Conservative government shutting down northern Ontario world-class freshwater research facility

May 17, 2012

Allan Woods

OTTAWA—The Conservative government is shuttering a scientific “jewel” in northern Ontario that has put Canada at the forefront of global freshwater lake research, the Toronto Star has learned.

The federal fisheries department announced Thursday morning that it intends to close down the Experimental Lakes Area, a collection of 58 lakes near Kenora.

From acid rain to mercury levels to climate change and the effects of household phosphates on freshwater ecosystems, the open-air research facility has seen it all, and often been the site of world-leading breakthroughs in science.

“In our scientific community it’s an international jewel,” said Yves Prairie, a professor in the department of biology at Universite du Quebec a Montreal. “This is where some of the most significant advances in our science have occurred in the last 40 years.”

“For us, it’s completely incredible that the government would shut it down given the international stature that it has and the importance for the field.”

The word comes as federal lawmakers debate a controversial budget billthat eases rules on environmental assessments, removes protection for fish and wildlife and scraps agencies like the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, an independent panel struck to help Ottawa balance environmental protection with economic growth.

Before the Experimental Lakes Area was created, biologists studying freshwater lakes and ecosystems were forced to collect water in containers and truck it back to the lab for tests and experiments with less than reliable results.

After the Ontario government deeded the area to the federal government in the late 1960s, scientists were able to manipulate whole lakes to study some of the most pressing water issues of the day.

Since then, it has drawn some of the top scientists into freshwater ecosystems from Canada, the United States and around the world.

In announcing the closure, the government said such work is now better carried out by universities and non-governmental organizations.

“Their assertion that universities can do this sort of stuff is just absurd. They simply do not give, via any of their mechanisms, the kind of money needed to run a facility like that,” said David Schindler, a University of Alberta ecology professor who helped to set up the Experimental Lakes Area.

Continue reading →

by

Water Law: Public Trust May Be Fresh Approach to Protecting Great Lakes

By Keith Schneider
Via: Circle of Blue

January 17, 2012 WASHINGTON, D.C. — Maude Barlow, a 64-year-old author and activist from Ottawa, is chairperson of the Council of Canadians, one of that country’s most influential public interest organizations. She has spent a globally prominent career advocating for clean water, environmental protection, and fairer trade deals for the Great Lakes region.

James Olson, a 66-year-old attorney from Traverse City, Michigan, is an expert in American environmental law who challenged Nestle’s authority to bottle Michigan’s groundwater in a 2003 case that spurred an eight-state pact in 2008 to block big diversions of water from the Great Lakes.

Now the two advocates, driven by their shared allegiance to the security of the Great Lakes, have teamed up to develop and promote the biggest idea of their careers. They are intent on applying two ancient governing and legal principles — defining the Great Lakes as a shared “commons,” protected by the public trust doctrine — to reverse the deteriorating condition of the largest system of fresh surface water on earth.

On December 13, Barlow and Olson took a momentous first step toward their goal when they spent 75 minutes formally introducing the concept to the Canadian and American leaders of the International Joint Commission (IJC), a bilateral agency founded in 1909 to help manage the Great Lakes and other waters that cross the boundaries of the two countries. It was the first time that a framework for managing the Great Lakes as a commons had been presented at such a high government level in both nations.

“We were asking the IJC to show leadership, by promoting a new narrative for protecting the Great Lakes,” Barlow added. “They were gracious, warm, and receptive. There was no hostility and a great deal of interest in how it would work.”

Frank Bevacqua, the IJC spokesman, said the commissioners would not comment publicly on what they heard. “Our commissioners wish to have the opportunity to discuss the material presented by Barlow and Olson amongst themselves, before giving interviews on the subject,” he said.

The proposal from Barlow and Olson also attracted interest from water law experts outside of government. Paul Simmons — a water law specialist and partner at Somach, Simmons, and Dunn in Sacramento — said in an interview with Circle of Blue that, since a 1983 state Supreme Court case, California has required water suppliers and regulators to consider the public trust implications in decisions involving water allocations from rivers for such things as supplying drinking water or for wildlife conservation.

The biggest question in defining the Great Lakes as a commons subject to public trust principles is how to install such principles in real-world law and regulation, according to Simmons.

Read the rest of the article

by

TorStar: Ontario only province to get an ‘A’ for drinking water: Ecojustice report

via: Toronto Star Published Nov 15 2011
Colin Perkel for The Canadian Press

TORONTO—More than a decade after the Walkerton disaster, much of Canada’s tap water remains at risk from contamination despite initial progress in front-line monitoring and treatment, a new report concludes.

In its third such report released Tuesday, the environmental group Ecojustice warns that while some jurisdictions have stepped up water protection efforts in the past five years, most have not done enough.

In 2000, seven people died and 2,500 fell ill in Walkerton, Ont., when the town’s poorly monitored drinking water was contaminated with E. coli from farm runoff.

The tragedy prompted most provinces to review and revamp their drinking water laws with mixed results — but that burst of enthusiasm has faded in recent years, according to the report.

“In many places, the health of Canadians is still at risk,” the report concludes.

“The lack of recent progress also seems to indicate that the impetus for improved water protection, spurred by events like Walkerton, is on the wane.”

The report called “Waterproof 3” finds only Ontario among the provinces worthy of an A grade for its water protection efforts, while Alberta lags with a C-.

The federal government gets an F for a record that continues to worsen, the report states.

In particular, the report criticizes Ottawa for a lack of progress on the legislative front, poor water quality for First Nations, and budget cuts it says will hurt Environment Canada’s ability to monitor the situation.

“The federal government is failing in almost every aspect of water protection, even though it should be setting rigorous standards,” the report says.

For the first time, the report has expanded to include source-water protection efforts — the idea that the best way to provide safe tap water is to ensure the water does not get contaminated in the first place.

The findings are not encouraging.

“Full-fledged source-water protection — a critical first step in achieving safe drinking water systems — has been implemented to some degree in only seven of 13 provinces and territories,” the report states.

“(It) is notably lacking in industry-heavy areas where the risk of contamination is high.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read more

For more information, please contact:

Kimberly Shearon, communications coordinator | Ecojustice
604.685.5618 x 242 | 778.988.1530
kshearon@ecojustice.ca

Sutton Eaves, communications director | Ecojustice
778.829.3265
seaves@ecojustice.ca

by

EPA declares trichloroethylene (TCE), a “very hazardous mutagenic cancer-causing chemical” after 22 years of study.

Today EPA took an important step towards protecting the public and wildlife from trichloroethylene (TCE), a very hazardous mutagenic cancer-causing chemical that pollutes the nation’s water and air. TCE is also the culprit involved in the Woburn, MA cancer cluster of childhood leukemia cases (and the subject of the movie, “A Civil Action” starring John Travolta). EPA’s press release is here.

This much-delayed action is a triumph of science over special interest politics. The public won today. Here I tell the history of science-manipulation for this chemical, but for the political shenanigans see today’s blog of my colleague Daniel Rosenberg.

TCE is a chlorinated solvent used primarily for metal degreasing—most notably for jet parts—and is a widespread drinking water contaminant that is leaching from military bases and industrial sites throughout the country. In addition to cancer, TCE causes harmful effects to the central nervous system, kidney, liver, immune system, male reproductive system, and the developing fetus. The EPA has been trying to finalize its assessment of TCE for 22 years, making today’s announcement a long-overdue victory for health.

The last EPA assessment of TCE was 24 years ago, in 1987, classifying TCE as a “probable” human carcinogen (Group 2B). In 1989, the EPA started to update its TCE cancer assessment, but didn’t issue a draft for public and peer review for a dozen years, until 2001. The 2001 EPA draft for TCE calculated that the chemical was 5 to 65 times more toxic than previously estimated, and classified it as “highly likely” to cause human cancer. It identified children as a susceptible population, and noted that co-exposure to some other chemicals may augment the toxicity of TCE.

The 2001 draft also triggered a decade-long firestorm of criticism from the chemical industry, the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE), which together are responsible for about 750 TCE-contaminated dump sites in the nation.

Read the whole article from NRDC

Dianne Saxe of envirolaw says this opens Canada to potential litigation as well:

Yes, TCE is a carcinogen
by DIANNE SAXE on OCTOBER 3, 2011

After 22 years of study, and intense political maneuvering, the US Environmental Protection Agency has formally classified TCE (trichloroethene, also called trichloroethylene) as a carcinogen, as well as a non-cancer hazard to human health. The assessment is now a formal part of the the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database, a human health assessment program that evaluates the latest science on chemicals in the environment, and which has drawn considerable fire from industry. The new assessment may make it harder to cleanup TCE contaminated sites to acceptable levels, and may require changes in Canadian air, soil and water standards.

TCE is one of the most common man-made chemicals found in the environment. It is a volatile chemical and a widely used chlorinated solvent, especially from the 1930s to the 1970s. Frequently found at contaminated sites, TCE migrates easily from contaminated ground water and soil into the indoor air of overlying buildings. Since 1987, it has been classed as a “probable human carcinogen”, but it now turns out to have been dangerous at levels previously believed to be safe. In 2001, EPA calculated that the chemical was 5 to 65 times more toxic than previously estimated, and classified it as “highly likely” to cause human cancer, especially in children.This assessment has undergone several levels of peer review including, agency review, interagency review, public comment, external peer review by EPA’s Science Advisory Board in January 2011, and a scientific consultation review in 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences.

The new assessment may require regulators across Canada and the US to reassess generic criteria (for air, water and soil), risk assessments for sites contaminated with TCE, and limits on current industrial emissions. For example, until recently, Ontario allowed 50 ug/L of TCE in drinking water. According to the new assessment, that level was likely to cause cancer in about 1 in 10,000 people, possibly more in small children. Co-exposure to other chemicals can make TCE more dangerous to health.

The EPA plans to use the new TCE toxicity values in:

· Establishing cleanup methods at the 761 Superfund sites where TCE has been identified as a contaminant
· Understanding the risk from vapor intrusion as TCE vapors move from contaminated groundwater and soil into the indoor air of overlying buildings
· Revising EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Level for TCE as part of the carcinogenic volatile organic compounds group in drinking water
· Developing appropriate regulatory standards limiting the atmospheric emissions of TCE.

All of these changes will likely affect Canadian standards as well, since we typically follow the US lead.

by

FLOW Speaking Tour Underway Urging Policy Makers to Embrace Water Protection

WATERLOO – Wilfrid Laurier University is hosting  The Forum for Leadership on Water  (FLOW)’s “Northern Voices, Southern Choices: Water Policy Lessons for Canada” cross-country tour on October 25, 2011. During the event, Bob Sandford, a leading water expert, will discuss the need for significant water policy reform.

“The days when Canadians take an abundance of fresh water for granted are numbered,” warns Sandford, who is the EPCOR Chair of the Canadian Partnership Initiative in support of the United Nations “Water for Life” Decade.

“Increasing average temperatures, climate change impacts on weather patterns and extensive changes in land use are causing incalculable damage to public infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, and seriously impacting water quantity and quality.”

Sandford emphasizes that floods and water damage caused by climate change will cost governments billions of dollars and threaten economic growth unless significant water policy reform is adopted.

“Governments need a Canada-wide strategy that effectively addresses current and emerging threats to freshwater security,” said Sandford. “We have seen what elements of such a strategy could look like thanks to leadership from the Northwest Territories, but other jurisdictions have to act now.”

FLOW is a national collaborative of water experts that encourages government action to protect critical fresh water resources. The group’s cross-Canada tour, which began in early October and runs to the end of November, aims to demonstrate the need to better prepare for climate change, increase civic engagement and think more strategically about water management.

Deb MacLatchy, Laurier’s vice-president: academic and provost and an aquatic toxicologist, will open the Oct. 25 forum. The panel also includes Stephen Kakfwi, former Northwest Territories premier; David Livingstone, former director, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada; and Chris Burn, NSERC Northern Research Chair, Carleton University.

Laurier and the government of the Northwest Territories signed a 10-year partnership agreement in May, 2010 to collaborate on research and training on climate change and water resource protection. The partnership supports the goals of the NWT Water Stewardship Strategy to ensure that the water of the NWT “remains clean, abundant and productive for all time.”

Laurier hosts the Institute for Water Science and Cold Regions Research Centre – multi- disciplinary research institutes that focus on cold regions and water science research, including public policy and management.

The event takes place Thursday, Oct. 25 from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the Paul Martin Centre on Laurier’s Waterloo campus. FLOW’s tour is primarily funded by the RBC Blue Water Project.

Tour Cities and Dates

Robert W. Sandford, EPCOR Chair of the Canadian Partnership Initiative in support of United Nations “Water for Life” Decade, will be speaking at the following places:

Information about the tour dates will be listed as it becomes available.

Generic or specific questions about the tour can be directed to Nancy Goucher.

by

CNW: Climate Change Threatens Canada’s Water: Report

Coordinated Water Conservation Guidelines Needed To Protect Canada’s Water System

VANCOUVER, Oct. 4, 2011 /CNW/ – Federal, provincial and municipal governments should implement coordinated national and regional water conservation guidelines to address the detrimental impact climate change is having on Canada’s water system, according to a new report from ACT, Simon Fraser University’s Adaptation to Climate Change Team.

“The days when Canadians take an endless abundance of fresh water for granted are numbered,” warns Bob Sandford, lead author of ACT’s Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance report. “Increasing average temperatures, climate change impacts on weather patterns and extensive changes in land use are seriously affecting the way water moves through the hydrological cycle in many parts of Canada, which is seriously impacting water quantity and quality.”

“If Canada doesn’t become a water conservation society, water security in many parts of this country will be compromised.”

The report calls for a dramatic reform of water governance structures in Canada by all levels of government to meet the new challenges posed by a changing climate, and sets out twelve broad-based recommendations to help protect Canada’s fragile water supply.

Climate change is causing increased weather instability, leading to more frequent, deeper and persistent droughts as well as more intense rainfall and flooding across Canada resulting in greater property damage, higher insurance costs and a greater infrastructure maintenance and replacement deficit nationally.

Today, half of every dollar paid out by insurance companies is for water damage related to extreme weather events, which will continue to increase unless government and planners undertake the deep reforms necessary to manage water differently.

The growing economic impacts of climate change on Canada were confirmed by a national study released last week by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE). According to the NRTEE, the costs of climate change could range from $5 billion per year in 2020 to between $21 billion and $43 billion per year in 2050, depending on global greenhouse gas emissions and domestic economic and population growth.

“Canada is coping with climate change, not adapting,” says Sandford. “Our primary response to climate change has been focussed on reducing emissions. While such action is critical, it is inadequate by itself. Current and projected atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will result in continued climate change regardless of our success in reducing emissions. As well as cutting emissions, Canadians need to adapt to the current and anticipated effects of climate change, which requires more effective management of our precious water resources.”

Water policy in many parts of Canada has not kept pace with changing political, economic and climatic conditions. The last federal water policy was tabled in Parliament over two decades ago and has never been fully implemented. And today, less than 20 percent of Canada’s groundwater sources have been mapped.

One of the key challenges limiting effective water resource management in Canada is jurisdictional fragmentation, as legislative power over freshwater is divided between the federal government and the provinces, producing a complex regulatory web that spans First Nations, municipal, regional, provincial and federal orders of government. This has resulted in serious policy and information gaps contributing to a lack of legally enforceable water quality standards and contributing to the decline of surface and groundwater monitoring as well as water research in Canada.

The complexity, fragmentation and lack of coordination of water policies in Canada creates policies that are often inconsistent with respect to drinking water quality standards, ecosystem protection, allocation rights and climate change adaptation, the Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance report concludes.

“The reform of water governance structures in Canada is essential if we want to successfully manage and protect our water supplies and minimize climate-related impacts on our environment, our economy and our society,” says Sandford.

Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance Recommendations

The federal, provincial and municipal governments establish national and regional water conservation guidelines that values water appropriately and promotes its wise use and conservation;
Governments at all levels formally allocate water to meet nature’s needs and ensure its use is consistent with sustaining resilient and functioning ecological systems;
Strengthen and harmonize flood protection strategies nationally;
Government at all levels should formally support the design and sustainability of water supply and waste disposal infrastructure based on ecological principles and adaptation to a changing climate, with special attention to First Nations communities;
National and regional water monitoring needs to be improved to provide reliable, accessible, up-to-date information needed to effectively manage water in a changing climate;
The role of education in public understanding of the importance of water to our way of life in Canada should be recognized and formally supported;
Water must be recognized as a human right integral to security and health;
A collaborative water governance model should be supported to holistically managing watersheds;
Governments at all levels must recognize the importance of groundwater, understand and value its role in creating a sustainable future for Canada;
Develop coordinated long-term national strategies for sustainably managing water in the face of climate change;
The government of Canada, in association with provincial, territorial and Aboriginal governments, should fully articulate and actively promote a new Canadian water ethic; and
Create a non-statutory National Water Commission to advance policy reform and to champion the new Canadian Water ethic;

For the full report, please go to http://www.sfu.ca/act.

ABOUT ACT
ACT is a Simon Fraser University-based research program designed to address the fact that Canadians face major impacts of climate change such as violent storms, sea-level rise, water scarcity, energy challenges and health risks. A five-year series of six-month sessions on top-of-mind climate change issues, ACT brings leading experts from around the world together with industry, community and government decision-makers to explore the risks and generate recommendations for sustainable adaptation. Each session features multi-stakeholder conferences and public dialogues that raise awareness and study the problems posed as well as potential solutions. These events support a policy research and development process led by an expert working with a team of graduate researchers to develop policy options for sustainable adaptation to the impacts.

by

Winnipeg Sun to province: Make sewers election issue

Columnists | Opinion | Winnipeg Sun

BY TOM BRODBECK ,WINNIPEG SUN
MONDAY, JUNE 6, 2011

Over two-million litres of untreated sewage was discharged into the Assiniboine River last month over a five-day period.

It was the largest sewage overflow in Winnipeg since the city’s massive sewage spill in 2002.

That’s on top of 17 smaller spills that occurred this year between March and April.

It’s all due to Winnipeg’s outdated combined sewer system, which diverts raw sewage into our rivers every time it rains, during spring runoff and when pipes get clogged, like they did last month.

Despite that, there was nothing in the Selinger government’s master plan released last week to “save Lake Winnipeg” that deals with the city’s combined sewer problem.

In fact, it doesn’t even mention it.

I don’t get that.

On May 20, the city’s 311 service got an e-mail at 2:11 p.m. that reported a raw sewage discharge into Sturgeon Creek near Lonsdale Drive just west of Grace General Hospital.

Unfortunately, the 311 system broke down and raw sewage poured into the creek and river for nearly five days without the city responding to it. You might want to look into this one, Sam.

The wastewater collection branch wasn’t notified until Wednesday May 25 — following a long-weekend — and a crew was eventually dispatched that day.

They found a blockage of grease and rags in the sewer that caused raw sewage to build up and overflow into the creek.

It was a major screw-up — and a lot crap that went into our rivers and lakes.

“Lag time between notification and resolution due to oversight in internal protocol,” the city’s incident report says. “Response process reviewed and will be improved for future similar events.”

Let’s hope so.

But better than that, why doesn’t the provincial government take the lead on this and sit down with the city to hammer out a funding deal that would fix this problem over time?

Read the rest of the article

by

CUPE Fact Sheet: Water

Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Apr 14, 2011

The Harper Conservative government has neglected to protect and preserve Canada’s water resources

In the 2007 Throne Speech the Harper Conservatives announced that a National Water Strategy would be implemented to help clean up our major lakes and oceans and improve access to safe drinking water for First Nations. But the so-called strategy was really a patchwork of funding proposals which never resulted in a national plan that adequately invested in or protected our water resources and facilities.

There are still 49 First Nations communities with high risk water facilities and 114 communities are under a drinking water advisory. In 2010 the federal government committed only $330 million over two years to continue the First Nations Water and Wastewater Action Plan to improve access to safe drinking water on reserves. In 2011, there was no new money. Any strategy that denies access to safe, clean water to any community in this country is an abysmal failure regardless of gains made elsewhere.

In 2007, the government introduced a Building Canada Fund and $8 billion was directed toward infrastructure investment.  Municipal water and wastewater facilities received a portion of this cost shared funding but it merely scratched the surface of the $31 billion deficit.

In 2008, the Harper Conservative government added a P3 Fund to the Building Canada Fund. It explicitly promoted privatization. This $1.25-billion fund was a massive subsidy to promote the use of public-private partnerships in the procurement of public infrastructure by provincial, territorial, municipal and First Nations governments. A crown corporation, PPP Canada Inc., administered the fund and municipal proposals were actively solicited for a multitude of infrastructure projects including water and wastewater treatment. Several cities in Canada have since applied for funding for their drinking water facilities.

In 2010, new rules were passed by Environment Canada to improve the quality of wastewater being discharged into the country’s rivers and streams. Close to 1,000 water and wastewater facilities may have to upgrade their infrastructure at costs that are expected to exceed $20 billion. The federal government has been silent on where the funding for these upgrades will come from.

Despite the well documented danger of privatization, the choices of the Harper Conservative government over the past five years have intensified pressure on municipalities and First Nations communities to privatize financing, operations, management and/or maintenance of their water facilities. Pressure is being exerted because of underfunding and neglect, and by the federal government itself through PPPCanada Inc. who are looking to both promote public-private water and wastewater partnerships across the country.

The Facts

Canada’s water system is facing an unprecedented threat from the proposed Canada- European Union Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA). Negotiators are considering the inclusion of municipal drinking and wastewater services in an international trade agreement for the first time ever. The largest multinational water corporations are located in Europe and this agreement potentially opens up a market for Canada’s public water systems.

The conditions of our water systems and the inadequate response of our government render Canada vulnerable to the private sector provision of drinking water and sanitation services. In 2007, after years of aging, deterioration and neglect, there was an estimated $31 billion water infrastructure deficit in Canadian municipalities.

Municipalities also face a $20 billion dollar expense of upgrading our wastewater facilities to meet important federal wastewater regulations.

Water is increasingly being viewed by the private sector as a lucrative commodity, and as water scarcity becomes an issue in the US there has been increasing pressure over the past few years to consider exporting our water in bulk.

The impact of climate change on our watershed and water infrastructure is having serious impacts on both water quality and quantity and requires immediate action.  Precious water resources such as the Great Lakes and the area surrounding the Tar Sands are in need of protection, restoration and clean up.Unfortunately,Canada has a poor environmental record to date, ranking 46 out of 163 countries on the 2010 Environmental Performance Index (EPI)

Our next federal government must:

  • recognize that water is a human right and develop and fund a National Water Strategy based on this principal;
  • commit to a long term strategy to protect the public provision and control over our water.  Priority must be placed on consulting with First Nations communities and providing public funding for drinking water facilities;
  • establish a National Public Water Fund to finance water and wastewater upgrades to be cost-shared with provincial and municipal governments;
  • exempt water services from (delivery and treatment) from any commitments under Canada EU Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA).

Infrastructure spending for water and wastewater facilities is critical to help clean water supplies, conserve water and put municipal infrastructure in step with the new challenges posed by climate change.

by

G&M: Brewing a smarter water policy

Friday, April 22, 2011
Those 99 bottles of beer on the wall need a lot less H2O to produce than they used to

CRAIG SAUNDERS
Special to the Globe and Mail

In water-rich Canada, we tend to take this natural resource for granted. But water conservation, already a subject of vital importance in drier parts of the world, including much of Africa and the western United States, is becoming an issue of global concern. And as climate change concerns intensify, water conservation will become an ever bigger issue.

Because water systems consume huge amounts of energy for pumping and treatment, water conservation is directly linked to the carbon footprint of a company, city or household. Cutting water use means cutting energy use, and many companies are finding innovative ways to decrease the flow.

What’s on tap?

Next month, Labatt Breweries of Canada will be get a Water Efficiency Award from the Ontario Water Works Association, the industry association for drinking-water professionals. The Canadian brewing industry has made big strides in water conservation, and, over the past decade, Labatt’s brewery in London, Ont., has cut the amount of water it uses to make beer by half.

Brewing is a surprisingly water-intensive industry. There’s a lot of equipment and bottles that need to be washed, steam pours off during the brewing process, and water is also used for cooling. In 2003, for every bottle of beer produced, the brewery used the equivalent of more than seven bottles of water. Labatt cut that ratio dramatically, saving enough water to fill nearly 400 Olympic-sized swimming pools every year just at the brewery in London, where the company began its brewing tradition 164 years ago.

“It’s about controlling costs, but also about creating a better environment for us,” says Jeff Ryan, director of corporate affairs for Labatt Breweries of Canada. “If we don’t protect and save water, we might not be able to brew beer in London for another 164 years.”

One of the big changes came in 2008, when the brewery started re-using water in its bottle washing process. Instead of using fresh water from the city, it would use the water from the final rinse of one batch of bottles for the pre-rinse of the next batch. Along with improving sensors on the washers, this saved 86 million litres a year, the equivalent of 34 swimming pools.

….

Parched places

Companies and governments are going to have different reasons for conserving water in different regions, but the bottom line will always be a strong motivator. As pressure on water resources intensifies, the cost of water will go up, making conservation an even bigger priority.

In Ontario, the pressure largely comes from the cost of water infrastructure, such as pipes and treatment facilities. However, across the border in the Great Lakes states, supply is a bigger issue.

A huge volume of water is diverted from the Great Lakes into thirstier parts of the U.S., most famously through the Chicago Diversion, which began with a shipping canal in 1848 and today serves some 7 million people.

In 2008, a powerful new piece of legislation called the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Compact came into effect, ratified by Canada, the U.S., Ontario, Quebec and the eight states in the basin. It requires that water taken from the basin for use must be treated and returned to the basin, and also bans new water diversions. If a city straddling the basin’s border wants to grow, it will need to cut water use to free up supply.

By contrast, in the Prairies, climate change itself will make water scarcity an issue. According to The New Normal, an anthology of research about climate change and the Canadian Prairies published by the Canadian Plains Research Centre at the University of Regina, the region will not necessarily get drier. Instead, it will have more concentrated and intense bursts of rainfall between drought periods. As a result, the priority will be on improving the efficiency of reservoirs, covering irrigation canals to reduce evaporation, and conserving water in cities so reservoirs don’t run dry and crops don’t wither during droughts.

Whether it’s saving money, deferring infrastructure costs or simply making sure there’s enough water to go around, companies and governments are going to be increasingly challenged to find innovative ways to conserve water in years to come. In some cases it will require new technology. In others, it will be as simple as making it a priority to fix leaks or use a smaller spray nozzle.

Read the whole article

by

CD Howe: Threats to Groundwater Supplies in Canada Require Coordinated Response

Threats to Groundwater Supplies in Canada Require Coordinated Response: C.D. Howe Institute

TORONTO, Feb. 10 /CNW/

– Better oversight of Canada’s groundwater resources is required in the face of numerous challenges, according to a study released today by the C.D. Howe Institute.

In ” Protecting Groundwater: The Invisible and Vital Resource, ” James Bruce, recently chair of the Council of Canadian Academies Expert Panel on Groundwater, assesses present and emerging threats and makes recommendations for better groundwater management in Canada.
———————————-
Challenges for groundwater management, the author says, include energy issues, such as the uncertain impact of shale gas “fracking,” slow recharge rates of aquifers, agricultural intensification, and contamination. Canada has yet to experience large-scale over-exploitation of groundwater resources and its groundwater remains of good quality.

Bruce says the time is right, however, for establishing the legal, regulatory and management systems, along with the necessary monitoring provisions, to overcome the threats to groundwater.

Nearly 10 million Canadians, including about 80 percent of the rural population and many small- to medium-sized municipalities, rely on groundwater for their everyday needs. However, Canadians living in large cities and most policymakers tend to ignore groundwater and its management. This asymmetry of interests has resulted in fragmented knowledge of groundwater locations, their quantity, quality, and how groundwater supplies are changing over time in Canada.

Bruce says an effective groundwater management strategy would adhere to five major principles for sustainability. They are: protection from depletion; protection from contamination; ecosystem viability; allocation to maximize groundwater’s contribution to social and economic well-being; and the application of good governance.

Given the challenges that lie ahead, the author concludes, meaningful cooperation by three levels of government, as well as prices that better match the costs of delivering water and wastewater services, and an expansion in data collection efforts are required to sustainably manage Canada’s groundwater.

For the study go to: http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/Backgrounder_136.pdf

For further information:
James P. Bruce, Former Chair, Council of
Canadian Academies Expert Panel on
Groundwater;
Colin Busby, Senior Policy Analyst,

Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.