Wow, that is a very impressive set of credentials, Marie. I am suitably impressed, but it must be hell signing documents. :)
Seriously, Marie is right. There should NOT be any more contribution to bowl pollution, on inversion days we already have the brown smudge typical to much larger cities like LA and greater Vancouver. About fifteen or sixteen years ago, I was up at Pilot mountain on a (Ithought) clear day, glanced over toward the city, and was surprized to see the brown pall suspended over the bowl. My point is, we already have a serious particulate problem in town, why add anything to it? One tonne maybe, but it all adds up. Last time I noticed, we were still spreading sand and gravel on the ice in the winter, and we all know how much dust that contributes to our air in the late winter and spring. As for locating the plant far out of town, sorry Marie, that idea would be a non starter. The entire point of locating it downtown is to take advantage of the steam generated to heat water/glycol for building heating. For that purpose, it must be nearby.
One way to have the plant to burn the waste wood though, and have it well out of town is to generate electricity with the steam. I know that B.C. Hydro is in the market to buy power from independent producers, so there will surely be a market for more power. Heck, they might even throw in and pay for some of it.
It is my belief that the technology exists to allow the burning of waste wood with zero airborne emissions, using a wet scrbber process. That would certainly be more expensive, but look at the benefit to our lungs. it is indeed time for we the public to stand up and say NIMBY!
metalman.

This is a busy woman who took the time to write about air pollution in the bowl. I am glad that Opinion 250 picked it up.

Now, how about the apathy of the citizens? I wonder if anyone will pick it up and run with it? We communicate back and forth with one another but nothing ever seems to happen. There must be an organizer somewhere in our great town.

Just tell the kids to suck it up. Tell them some "back in my day" stories about living in PG when the Beehive Burners were in full operation. Explain to them that the diseases they get from our air is an acceptable tradeoff for the great paying mill job that daddy has. Teach them that it's the "smell and taste of money" and that there is nothing we can do about it if we still want the City to exist.

Kids and doctors these days. Propoganda like this will be the death of our community.

She's right!
And it has gone on for far too many years!
If mayor and city council won't deal with it,then get a new mayor and city council!

Maybe the city can buy one of them big windmill thingys and use the power of burning waste wood to run this windmill as a fan and blow the crap outa the bowl and head it to Alberta or Prince Rupert. Whatever works.

I agree, I too, have had enough particulates dispursed into our airshed. I live and work in the bowl and am coughing and wheezing by the time I arrive at work. Can't really get away from it when I live in it. I still don't get why our city leaders continue to push this project ahead, inspite of public resistance. I believe it will cost many of them their jobs at election time. Chester

Does anyone remember Dr. Robert Dykes? He wrote a book about Prince George's poor air back in 1987-89. Dr. Dykes was well tuned and educated on PG and it's deadly air. I think it was titled "Coming up For Air" He put the pressure on the city and governing parties of the day to reduce the air polution. Dr, Dyke's fight brought in the air advisory reports and the movement to "B" Hive burners become a thing of the past.It's good to see someone pick up the ball and start running with it! I use a puffer while at home here in PG howver, when i am in Alberta working i don't use it. I am in good shape work out daily. So many people that live here use puffers. I hope DR.Hay can continue Dr Dyke's vision on clean air in PG.

I would like to thank Dr. Hay and all of the other health care workers in Prince George for choosing to put up with our poor air quality and living here and looking after us.

We all know there is a critical shortage of health care workers in this country and these folks could get a job anywhere they want to go.

In the next 25 years the percentage of the population over the age of 65 is going to double (to about 25% of the population). This will put a lot more pressure on our health care system. That coupled with the fact that many of our health care workers are also in the babyboom generation and are going to be retiring en masse soon, means it is going to be very challenging for cities and towns in this country to attract a full complement of health care workers in the future.

I am sure our bad air quality has scared off some health care workers from moving to Prince George.

I think most of us clearly remember the letter a UNBC medical student wrote to a local newspaper a few years ago, in which she and her classmates expressed a real concern about the quality of the air in Prince George.

I too am disappointed in our politicians for choosing to build this energy plant downtown.

As I posted on this site a few weeks ago, there is an old saying that if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you must do is stop digging.

The reason that the City wants this project is simple. They will get 7 to 8 Million dollars from other levels of Government to build it because they can show that there is some **Green Value** to the project. All levels of Government want to be seen as **Going Green**. This project is the best the City could do to get their hands on this money so that they can give out contracts and continue to be **Big Time Spenders**

These buildings are already heated by Hydro, Natural Gas, or both, and we certainly do not need a 3rd way to heat them. The savings between what we have now and what we will get with the water idea if done properly by an independent firm who factured in all the costs including the Millions from other levels of Government would be nil. We would get no return on investment for years, and of course we would get years of pollution while we waited for these nebulous returns.

If the City was serious about heating these buildings with water, they would have approached the Pulp Mills to supply them with whatever amount of water they needed. They have already proven they can pipe hot water from the Pulp Mills to the river to melt ice, so it wouldn’t be a major problem to pipe hot water across the BC Rail Rail bridge from the Pulp Mills and then along the railway right of way adjacent to the old BC Hydro buildings, thence across the CN Rail bridge to first Avenue, and **Walla** hot water to heat their buildings at a significant savings over their proposal. They should be able to get some money for the piping and to pay for the water because this would be a far better ***Green Solution*** than their present plan, however it would mean less contracts etc; which mean less opportunities to display their **Big Shottism** to local contractors etc;

This project has to be stopped in its tracks and I agree that we need a leader to step forward and carry the ball to City Hall. This could mean a continuation of the group that was against the Backpacker project. They apparently have 700 pissed off people so that’s a good start. I would be more than willing to stand up with a protest sign in front of City Hall, contribute some money to the cause for coffee and donuts, and if it comes down to it contribute more money to **Sue** City Hall , which I think may have to be done just to get their attention;

The question now is who will be the Leader and how many citizens will actually get off their collective asses and join this group to get the job done??

To metal man,
in most of the European cities with biomass plants they are situated outside o city airsheds with the hot water pipes running underground to heat the buildings.
PG city already has blue prints on the table for more modules to be added to this first plant, all to be located in the downtown core,eighty five yards from Sacred Heart school and the Millar additon inhabitants.
The ultimate aim is to generate electricity and sell it to the grid, to make more money for the city. How many more tons of particulates will then result from these added on modules?
The city will be using a 600,000 dollars electrostatic precipitator in the plant, but it will not scrub clean all of the particulates, which will be belched into our already heavily polluted airshed.In addition, carbon monoxide and nitric oxide will be discharged( but the plant will be CO2 neutral.!..i.e.a greenhouse gas product.)
In 1960 the City Council went against all of the best medical advice regarding the placement of the current pulp mills where they are today. As we all know, the mills are amongst the worst particulate emitters into our airshed.But back then in the 60's we did not really know the dangers posed by particulates or by cigarette smoking .....now we have a zero tolerance for cigarette smoking almost everywhere,because of the concerns about health hazards of sceond hand smoke,yet the City blithely and nonchalantly talks about this plant actually being good for us, as they say it will reduce our green house gases. Green house gases are important, but they will not kill us as quickly as fine (2.5) particulates into the airshed. We know the dangers posed by particulates causing internal oxidative stress/permenant damage ,for people with chronic heart or lungs problems and the dangers posed to children and pregnant mothers,and for all of us.......we cannot and must not ignore this pollution to go ahead.We cannot allow the city to push ahead with the same old, same old arguments about economics,jobs etc etc.

It is time for a new generation of inhabitants of Prince George to change the old order,a generation who will demand the healing our airshed even at the slow pace of one ton of particulates at a time.
We can do this is we so choose.
Marie Hay
Marie Hay

Foo738 said: "We communicate back and forth with one another but nothing ever seems to happen. There must be an organizer somewhere in our great town."

The following have weighed in on this topic and appear to back up Dr. Hay's opinion:
1. metalman
2. NMG
3. Andyfreeze
4. Harbinger
5. Chester
6. getajob
7. charles
8. Palopu

and I will include myself as the 11th (including Dr. Hay and Foo738)

We have PACHA who have not weighed in on this as yet to a great degree.

So, how are we going to get this started and when? City Hall simply does not get it. Even if this were the cleanest plant in all of Canada the "optics" of this are so bad it is unbelievable that anyone in their right mind would push for this.

Where is the City Manager on this? He is supposed to have a background in improving the environment. Where is the new manager of IPG on this? He needs to promote the city as being a progressive place for people to want to move to.

I have noticed that when I go out of town I stop coughing and when I come back I start up again. Is it an allergy to my pets or something in the house, or something in the air? I do not know. Maybe I am in denial and the air is starting to get to me also.

Who wants to meet somewhere? Maybe Ben can act as organizer to keep people here anonymous for those who are concerned about that. Maybe we should call PACHA and ask them to organize it.......

We could all put on our Halloween costumes .... ;-)

What about starting some kind of a petition asking our politicians to put a halt to this Community Energy Plant?

Some technologically minded person could post a suitably worded petition on a web site (perhaps opinion250.com), and the rest of us could go to this web site and print this petition.

I think such a petition would do quite well. It could be taken to our places of work, play, the hospital, doctors' offices, UNBC, our friends and neighbors etc, etc.

My biggest concern about this Community Energy Plant is it makes our poor air quality even worse. My secondary concern is I think this kind of money could be better spent in this city, like fixing the staggering number of potholes on our city streets.

I'm with owl.

I moved out of town a while back and the coughing for me stopped then to. Not a cold type cough...more of a itchy throat that you need to clear.

Ben's only one man. He can only do so much.

Both the Federal and Provincial governments rushed in and gave this ill conceived project blessings and grants.

It is one of the pet projects of the Mayor (I have heard him muse about it for years) and if we just go by past experiences no scientific argument will change his mind.

A petition signed by all physicians and health care officials in Prince George and delivered to the governments and the Canadian media may make a difference.

A petition signed by thousands of *ordinary* citizens will probably have no impact whatsoever. Once City Hall has made up its mind about something we are usually in trouble.

The petition to remove fluoride from our drinking water was signed by many hundreds of concerned citizens but it was totally ignored.

Prince George is one of the very few places that still *medicates* our daily water with this poisonous substance and went to great length to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to install brand new fluoridation systems when there was no need to do so.

Many cities (Kitimat recently) have gone fluoride free - Prince George still forces its citizens to buy bottled water if they object to mass *medication.*

owl said:

"We have PACHA who have not weighed in on this as yet to a great degree."

PACHA is people.... and PACHA is always looking for new and active, concerned members.

Membership is inexpensive. More information is available at :

www.pachapg.ca

COUNT ME IN OWL... not only will this plant emit fine particulate but also massive ammounts of moisture. On a cold day this will add heavily to the fog situation in downtown. This is the worst idea our city admin. has ever concieved. All that this so called "green project" will do is make our polititions feel warm and fuzzy inside, while the rest of us will pay-pay-pay.

Elaine... Is it possible for you to e-mail this article and all of the comments to every counciller and the mayor. I don't remember the last time that there was such opposition to a city project as there is to this one. Maybee "250" should conduct a simple yes - no poll on this.
Thanks..giterdun (with one "t")

Thinking of "organizers".
There is PACHA but where do people sign up not everyone has a computer.
Who was the doctor who organized the big health rally a few years ago? That was successful.
The only other organizer I can think of and they are excellent on research and team work is the North Nechako group fighting the asphalt plant.
Is it time to team together!!!!

I live in the country to escape not just the noise pollution, but yes the air pollution to.

If i spend a few hours in town doing shopping i can barely breath when I leave.

Good write up Dr. Hay. I agree 100%

ps.I am trying really hard to not make any bad jokes about hay fever, or the dust that comes out of hay for my horse, which is a lot i may add.

This was the announcement from the provincial government on January 31, 2008:
“The BC Bioenergy Strategy lays the framework for us to convert more waste into clean energy, helping to ensure we meet future energy demands,” said Campbell. “There is an abundance of bioenergy opportunities, such as using biomass created out of the mountain pine beetle outbreak that can stimulate investment and economic diversification while producing clean energy.”

http://www.energyplan.gov.bc.ca/bioenergy/PDF/2008OTP0017-000129.pdf

On January 24, 2008, the BC Ministry of Environment issued an Invitation To Quote on the following Background Preparation Report:
Introduction and Background
The combustion of wood is carbon (greenhouse gas) neutral as long as the wood is sustainability harvested. Thus, there are obvious benefits to promoting use of this resource to generate energy. However, from an air contaminant point of view, wood combustion can lead to releases of significant amounts of particulate matter (especially PM10 and PM2.5). The most significant health risks to air quality posed by wood combustion are associated with the fine particulates, in particular “inhalable” particulates < 10 μm in diameter and “respirable” particulates < 2.5 μm in diameter.

Purpose and Task
The purpose of this contract is to investigate biomass combustion practices and produce a background report for government agency policy development. Supporting research will focus solely on sources with a rated capacity greater than 0.1 MW, (excluding residential units and wood fired hydronic heaters).

The contractor will review biomass combustion practices from feedstock preparation to emission discharge and prepare a report that:

• Compares air emission performance for various biomass combustion technologies (based on recent
stack sampling data and other relevant sources); feedstocks; and after treatment for various rated sizes or capacities (greater than 0.1 MW) and for a variety of applications (e.g. heating; power generation; cogeneration; greenhouse heating);

• Includes an assessment of information from other jurisdictions particularly information made available by the Ministry of Environment;

• Indicates the expected emissions from all biomass combustion / gasification systems and practices, in use, in demonstration or in R&D domestically and internationally, including consideration for various
feedstocks and exhaust gas after treatment options. For each, note the key characteristics which would
affect the decision to choose that option, including:
• Application
• Emissions reduction potential (the following pollutants should be taken into consideration: criteria air contaminants (CACs), greenhouse gases (GHGs), and toxic air contaminants (notably dioxins, furans and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)).
• Capital expenditure;
• Cost recovery;
• Operating cost;
• Feedstock availability and reliability;
• Ancillary benefits (fuel savings, operational efficiencies, maintenance savings); and
• Lifecycle considerations on air or other environmental media - include discussion of any considerations unique to Canada or regions of Canada.

• Provides a comparison of air emissions from current biomass combustion and control technologies, with non-biomass technologies (such as natural gas and oil combustion).

• Indicates achievable emission levels for logical size categories (i.e. megawatts output) for biomass
combustion units.

• Includes, for comparative purposes, relevant currently used or business-as-usual non-biomass
technologies and best-available non-biomass technologies. For each, include the same key
characteristics noted above. For example, include expected emissions using best practices and
technologies using natural gas as a fuel for various applications.

By March 1, 2008, the contactor will produce a draft report for initial review by the Ministry. The report is to detail all sources of information investigated with enough information to easily track down the source (web link, report, individual contact person, etc.) and is to lay out the sources of information used to arrive at logical end conclusions. The contractor will produce one (1) final electronic (i.e. MS_WORD) and six (6) hardcopy reports in English by March 31, 2008.

It appears that on the one hand the political arm of government is announcing a move to Biomass use, calling it CLEAN ENERGY, while the administrative arm of government does not have the technical knowledge about what that would mean in practice, specifically with respect to CLEAN ENERGY from the point of view of human health.

The one side of government, not surprisingly, does not know what the other side is doing. And our health is at stake. And, of course, anyone who objects is painted as being NEGATIVE and OBSTRUCTIONIST.

Info for foo738 who said:
"There is PACHA but where do people sign up not everyone has a computer."

and others who know people without computer access.

This membership information appears on the
People's Action Committee for Healthy Air....... ( PACHA) web site:
____________________________________

How To Become A Member:

Brochures with Membership Application forms are available at:


Ave Maria's Specialties, 1638 20th Avenue
Mother Maria's Market, Bon Voyage Plaza, 115-4488 West Hwy 16
Download a pdf form by clicking here
Fill it out and mail the application form, along with payment, to the address shown on the bottom of the form, or hand delivering it to one of the store locations. If you wish to pay by credit card, payment can be made at the stores.

Membership Fee

The cost of membership has been set at $5 per person or by donation to PACHA.
PACHA is a Not-for- Profit Society and does not provide charitable receipts at this time.

Contact Regarding Membership Questions

If you have any questions about the Society and membership in it, please send us an e-mail.

_______________________________________

Norm1 ... does PACHA have a position on the proposed plant downtown?

To Dr. Marie Hay; Thank you for the information, vis a vi locating such a plant away from the bowl. With respect, my comment about the idea being a non starter was not, in my opinion, rashly spoken. I merely considered the economics of the design, supply and installation of an insulated underground (twin) pipeline travelling many miles. Without even considering the construction costs though, I shudder to think about the energy required to pump a fluid medium two ways, over many miles and with significant elevation changes. I realize this is already done with oil pipelines, but I think we all realize that it can't be done inexpensively. Apart from that, I am definitely FOR any solution to pollution. I lived in P.G. for many years, for the last twelve or so well out of town, but still working daily in the bowl, I have not smoked for over 27 years, and notice the (lack of) air quality when I come into town in the morning, especially if I have not been to town for a few days. What I am attempting to illustrate is that this problem is real, and City Hall has to get with it, recognize that their citizens are unhappy with this plan.
metalman.

I don't see it, smell it, hear it, it's called "head in the sand syndrome"

I just went to the site and noticed that there is nothing about the proposed development on the site under "current issues".

I wonder how long an issue must be brewing, before it becomes a "current issue"?

Also, there is a blog with two posts on it since November. Maybe we should all start by going there and posting as well.

We have a choice, go with an existing group, or go it alone.

If existing group, then the North Nechako one has a proven record in their neck of the woods. I suspect they are concerned about that area and will be overtaxed if they take on the city at large, or Miller area. I think each region will likely have to take care of itself. Perhaps PACHA needs to become a single resource to assist such local groups. I wonder if they have thought that through yet.

May I add another comment which I posted on 250 before: The conversion of wood burning stoves in the surrounding area is supposed to remove an amount of particulates at least equal to what the new planned plant will add to the airshed.

That would depend on several factors.

Number one is: Will enough wood stoves in fact be converted - and if not, then what?

Number two: Any so-called *canceling out* will not apply during the entire summer when wood stoves are not in use for heating!

Number three: After a number of wood burning stoves have been converted (there is no guarantee that ANY will be!) the effect of the new added particulate emissions will still be year round without any counter balancing for several months of the year.

Number four: In order for any efforts by authorities to have any credibility any import of any new sources must be prohibited and all resources (money) allotted to cleaning up all sources (including wood stoves) which already exist.

This project is an affront to all those who are concerned about the effect of fine particulate emissions on the health of residents.

It's ill-conceived and unnecessary because of the location that was chosen.

Therefore, it will most likely proceed as planned.

This "burner" has been discussed for a few years and experts have told the City that it should not be built in the bowl. But they will not listen.

As for Palopu idea of using the hot water from the pulp mills, lets do it. I know that studies have been done that states that the energy from the pulp mills and Husky could heat every home in the bowl, supply hydro for everyone in Prince George and we still could have massive green houses to produce fruit & vegetable. This has been done for years in other countries using Canadian technology. Why not here? One of the engineers stated that the reason nothing has been done is that there has been no incentives (money from Governments?).

So let us really be green and use the money for the plant to really clean up the pollution form existing industries by converting the polllution into heat & energy. That way no lost jobs but cleaner air.

Well Dr Hay have you ever stired up a hornets nest. Lets just hope that the posts on this site put there pencil to where their mouth is. I tried a while back to get a ratepayers association going but all I did get were two phone calls. So the best of luck with this new anger.

I have said this before that all the different groups in the City need to unite and get Council going in our direction. Our health is probably the most important issue for us to take a stand but there are many others that need attention. My feeling is that those Council are out of control and needs some direction.

Im sure that Ben would give us all the support that we need in the form of publicity. All we need to do is ask. I have become jaded when it comes to asking the public for support but lets hope the the picture will now change .

As a point of interest PASCHA did recently question Council on the effects of the air shed by the one ton emissions that would be produced by the heating project.

Thanks Dr Hay.

Cheers

Actually,Palopu's idea of using the hot water from the mills is not that far fetched.
When I was kid growing up in Powell River,the entire townsite,apartments,hospital,stores,etc.were all heated with hot water from the mill.
It was done in many places at one time.
It could be done again on a limited scale, and makes a lot more sense than building a waste wood facility in downtown PG.!
I still can't believe that they are even considering doing that????
Somebody needs their collective heads examined!

Do you think the fact that PG got labelled as "a gritty little mill town" a few years back kinda stunted our population growth? This November, I hope people won't be voting in another ho hum election . We need all new councillors and a new mayor. No name recognition this time. New faces, new bums on the chairs in city council and make them accountable to us. One more thing. They all must know how percentages work. Nudge nudge, wink wink.

If it must proceed, then a better scrubber perhaps? I do not know enough (or anything really!) about the scrubber they say is included, but 'wet' scrubbers are definitely available, I have checked since my last post. The one website I checked claims up to 99.97% efficiency (you have to watch the wording, they do not make a claim as to particle size in microns, and we do not know the size of particle that is caught at the stated efficiency) Point being that high efficiency scrubbing is available, is it included? Harbinger, are you suggesting we replace council with a bunch of street persons? Wait, that might work!

We have already been given the annual tonnage of emissions of fine particulates that the new plant will put out into the air downtown.

No mention is made about how much scrubbing will be done and therefore I believe that their figure is the final one - the one they are *happy* with.

November can't come too soon.

Street persons? Anyone with an IQ and an ear to what most of the public wants,and needs. Those are the people who should be elected. No more borrowing money til we get lower taxes. That might take a while. And one more thing that irks me to no end. When the candidates go public at a forum, let them talk, rant, and say how they feel about running a "gritty little mill town" better than the incumbents have. I remember when at a meeting of candidates running for city council, they got 90 seconds to introduce them selves and then sat down. Their names were put in hat. Questions from the audience were put in another hat. You had 60 seconds with which to answer the question to the best of your ability. One question in particular was "How do you feel about global warming?". What the h-ll does that have to do with being just a rung on a ladder ,while suggesting input to the council about taxation and filling potholes? And then there is the old boys club, where all the incumbents were on a first name basis with the movers and shakers in this town. I could go on......

"No more borrowing money til we get lower taxes."

I think that should say: "No more borrowing money. Raise our taxes to provide the services we need and allow us to vote on the services we want."