Regardless of where this thing is proposed, the Millar Addtion group (MACC) has it right - it does not belong in the bowl or in the PG airshed. Whether it is here or there, we still all get to breathe it.

The offset plan proposed by the city (reducing number of woodstoves) is a joke as this exchange is already a provincial-wide initiative - it is nothing new. Plus it is not a guaranteed thing (it is a voluntary exchange), so how could the city possibly say they will offset emissions with a voluntary program.

Everybody needs to come out on March 31 to support councillor Munoz to disallow this beast from being built ANYWHERE in the airshed. We need less particulate not more.

The facility would be great up at the University. The University has a hot water heat system at present, that could easily tap into this system. The Northern Sports Centre could easily be added to the system as well. Run the hot water pipes with a slight radiator under the street heading down from the University and you solve the snow clearing issues and then run the pipes to the CN Centre and the pool. The air dispersion factor and height of the University grounds are ideal, compared to being down in the valley. Downtown would continue to heat as it does at present, but real greenhouse savings would be found without adding to the troubled bowl airshed.

When Phase 2 happens and they want to generate electricity, the University is on two different major power grids that could be tapped into as well.

It is the Phase 2 part that the city is not telling people about. That will increase the particle matter much more than the one tonne additional load at present.

Plus there is lots of research opportunities for this to benefit the University as well !

Could someone please post a list of locations where this petition can be signed.

"Millar Addiction Citizens coalition spokesman, John Rex, says the location change won't stop his group's efforts. This is not a NIMBY (not in my back yard) scenario. This is about the Prince George air-shed, it is a Prince George issue"

Agree completely!!! Why is it so hard for PG City Council to simply abandon this project altogether and instead focus on REDUCING the levels of particulate in the City? I don't want additional bad air and I don't want "offsetting" measures. I want material IMPROVEMENTS in the air shed and we won't get there by skirting the issues and being scared to undertake REAL initiatives for improvement.

IT IS UNACCEPTABLE ANYWHERE IN THE CITY! What is so hard to understand about that???

Go geo-thermal in the downtown! If you don't know what geo-thermal is do a little Google research!

Oh, I forget, you didn't Google for the Amphibex either!

By the way, this is 2008 not 1908!

Over and out!

I recollect some councillor who didn't run in our last municipal election, no name but his initials were CD suggested a public campground in the Cottonwood Park vicinity. On a flood plain, no less. Combination floodplain, campground and thermal plant together. Only in Prince George. What a town!!

"The net loss in fine particulate would be achieved by reducing the number of wood stoves in the Millar Addition"

Has anyone taken a count of the number of households that have wood "stoves" in the Millar addition, the extent to which they are being used and the quality of the furnace.

Can anyone provide that number with a breakdown to furnace, stoves, and fireplaces, since they are quite different in frequency of use as well as emission output.

It is a small area. It should not take too much to gather that information to a reasonable degree of accuracy, say 5 to 10%.

This November, during the election, you will hear how councillors cooperate and work with each other.

In practice, the way it works is "I'll vote for your bad idea if you vote for my bad idea."

What our council calls "working together" the average citizen would call "being burdened by stupidity."

This issue is the perfect example of that. Somehow our councillors are unable to back away from a flawed concept and think a tactical change (location) is the answer.

No, it's the strategic issue - air quality - that the same old, same old prove again and again they don't understand.

But to change the results in November, we will have to change the process by which we decide who we'll vote for. Or else we'll just have more of the same.

"a public campground in the Cottonwood Park vicinity."

Thast has been on the "drawing" board ever since they removed the public campground from 18th avenue accross from the exhibition to make way for the soccer fields and the pool.

That was before anyone realized we were near or at the top of the list of poor air quality cities in BC and Canada and before anyone was as concerned about floods in this city to the extent we are now. That was when Klein was still mining gravel from the confluence of the rivers and the salmon were still making it up steam.

Ah, those were the innocent 1980's and 90's when we were still floating down the river on rafts of all descriptions on the August long weekend and polluting the river with wooden ducks ... LOL ...

I am surprised that no one with power engineering experience has commented here. Among other industrial processes, power engineers operate industrial boilers. I, for one, have operated hog-burning boilers for years. To remove the particulate requires an electostatic precipitator. These devices do not operate trouble-free. When they break down, you immediately stop burning hog fuel and switch to an alternate fuel, usually natural gas. We all know the cost of natural gas today.

When speaking of combustion of any hydrocarbon fuel, burned at 100% efficiency, it emits carbon dioxide and water vapour as byproducts of that combustion. Will the Liberal's carbon tax apply?

Since this is a taxpayer funded project, it should be scrapped at this point, for the following reasons:

1. The noise is coming from politicians and bureaucrats, only one of which I am aware, has any knowledge of power engineering.
2. The fibre supply could be very limited with the present downturn we see in the forest industry. Decreased supply and higher demand relates to higher prices for fuel.
3. The trucking costs for hog fuel will increase due to the increased cost of diesel fuel plus the Liberal's carbon tax due in July.
4. If the plan is to also generate electricity, using steam-driven turbines, the cost is in the millions just for the turbine and the generator, without pricing in all the auxiliary equipment required.
5. Considering the present state of the Prince George airshed, particularly in the "bowl", no industrial fuel burning processes should be located there.
6. The removal of the particulate from the emissions of a hog burning boiler amounts to thousands of pounds of extremely fine ash every day. This requires some area to dispose of this waste. Where will this be?

I hope I have given some insight into the reality of what this industrial process involves. There is so much more to say but I have gone on long enough for now. I hope these few facts will generate some comments relating to the criticism of this poorly thought out project.

As I said before. This issue is about spending money, giving out contracts, and increasing the number of staff and management at City Hall.

We dont need a perceived savings in heating costs to Government buildings which already have Hydro or Natural Gas.


The only people pushing this idea is the Mayor, Radloff, and a few city personel. These guys are out of line. No one else in Prince George (Except certain contractors) wants this thing.

If the project was moved outside the City Limits then they wouldnt get the $5 Million from the Prov-Feds. If they move it to far from the Government Buildings it becomes even less of a viable operation.

This City spends most of its time trying to get money from the Prov-Feds and then comes up with stupid ideas to spend the money on. Problem is the taxpayers are stuck for the additional costs for 20-30 years into the future.

It will be pretty hard for Pretty Boy Kinsley, and Rodney Radlof, and others to say no to this 5 Million, so expect a big fight.

Yeah Harbinger that was my first thought when I read River Road was 'What if it floods??'

The Millar Addiction?

I agree anywhere in the bowl is unacceptable. To add on to Honestjoe, what are all these proposed co-gen's going to do when the beetle kill runs out? What heat
value is there in dead wood? If they really are stuck for a new location on River Road, just wait a few months & take over the soon to be abandoned Winton Global site.

I was afraid of this. The other site is around Lakeland Mills as I understand it. It is just another bad site in the bowl area for the airshed.

My gosh, Millar Addition is upset so we will just move it to another location in the bowl. Those residents won't object; they won't be as organized as the Millar Addition.

Pitting one part of the City against another promotes poor community spirit. It is good to read the comments WE DON'T WANT IT ANYWHERE IN THE BOWL.

I wish administration would stop harrassing and adding stress to the residents of this City. We have enough stress already with the air pollution and noise.

Put us first for a change!

Honestjoe makes some good points. I too have power engineering experience. Both wood burning and natural gas burning generate carbon dioxide. So switching from gas to wood fuel does not reduce emissions it increases them. There are two existing wood heating systems on River Road each much larger than the proposed city system- Lakeland Mills and Winton Global- and neither one has an electrostatic precipitator. So before building a new wood burner maybe have a look at the existing ones.

Petitions can be signed at
Zoe's Java House
1251 4th Avenue
Between Quebec and Dominion. There will be more locations soon.
For more information keep checking our new website www.maccpg.org

Hey owl.. I heard a rumour quite a while ago that it was a couple of non-forward looking dimwits at city hall who decided to get rid of the campground near the multiplex. Got any dirt on this?

Look on the bright side. The trucks taking this hog fuel to be burnt at 5th and Scotia will be paying a carbon tax for their fuel. Any consolation? I thought not.

While it is great that they are considering moving it out of the downtown core, this does not address the primary issue of the fact that it is adding particulate to the already compromised airshed of the bowl. Also, how will this impact the users of Cottonwood Island Park?

Let's all show up at the meeting at City Hall on March 31st to show the city how many of us care enough to get involved in this issue.

The 18th avenue campground used to be sold out most of the summer, and it was located in a gravel pit right next to a municipal garbage dump that for years was an eye-sore.

With that kind of success in the 18th ave location, then I see no reason why PG couldn't do very well turning Fish Trap Island into a municipal campground.

The channel around it could be cleaned up for a float tube beach like channel as PG's only safe place to swim along the river in the city (less people drowning).

The cottonwoods’ and huge fir and spruce trees in there could really show off the big tree to a tourist.

The air is much cleaner up river than the cottonwood island location right across from the pulp mills and oil refinery (not the smell we want to leave tourists with).

Fish Trap Island is located on a bus route (for day shoppers) as well as ideally located central to Moores Meadow, and Wilson Park and the Edgewood terrace for walking and hiking trails.

Also it's in a good safe neighbourhood, its on the river, the passenger trains could stop right at the campground, and the pit between Fish Trap Island and Wilson Park could be converted to hold music festivals and other events that draw in tourists.

IMHO

I like the idea of the energy system possibly being located at UNBC, but not sure about the impact of phase2. I'm not that worried about the burning of wood (no mercury at least) if its in the right location, as burning wood is nothing like what the pulp mills and oil refinery are doing... which is my real concern for air pollution. I think the idea of a community back-up heating system run by wood waste is good if it were not for the air pollution.

I think one has to be careful about what Councilor Debora Munoz is really up to in regard to being the caretaker of Prince George's welfare. The case in point is that farmer in Saskatchewan that thought his retatrded daughter was better off put out of her misery. The retarded air in PG has become the rational Councilor Debora Munoz will use to kill off Prince George. Councilor Debora Munoz is against pulp mills, refineries, cars, trucks, industrial development, road sanding, trains, planes, sawmills, secondary wood mills and anything else that moves or is the life blood of Prince George. Councilor Debora Munoz is one to watch out for as this single mindedness will put a knife through the heart of Prince George. I'd advice people to calm down and think before panicing and going stumbling blindly after Councilor Deb.

Not fair Yama. Councillor Munoz is far from a "single issue candidate". This is a term the great power behind the throne uses when a political candidate is really concerned about the WHOLE development of the City. Thus affecting the populace into not voting for that candidate. It is the beginning of a nasty "smear" campaign and not designed to help effect change.

I wonder if the plan for providing fuel for this pollution system involve the dinky toys used for the beetle kill?

"I wish administration would stop harrassing and adding stress to the residents of this City."

Now THAT is a very interesting statement. We consider and condemn harassment and bullying at work and school and other places where we congregate and interact with others.

That government in a democratic society is in a position to harass and does it, is a very good point.

Just think of this for instance.

The City will use taxpayer money to build a case for controversial projects such as this plant which they wish to create. The money is spent on "experts" who will tell the City's side of the story.

To get a second opinion, such as an opposing opinion, an individual or group has to come up with private funds to do so. I think that for controversial projects, such funding should be available from the same source as the funding which supports the city adminsitration's and politician's point of view.

"Also, how will this impact the users of Cottonwood Island Park?"

The prevailing winds are from the south, so joggers using the now non-existing heritage trail, can enjoy some additional aromas in the air.

"Councilor Debora Munoz is against pulp mills, refineries, cars, trucks, industrial development, road sanding, trains, planes, sawmills, secondary wood mills and anything else that moves or is the life blood of Prince George"

I am with Councillor Munoz. To phrase it in that fashion is completely wrong and you know it.

As they say, everything in its place. There is a place for all those things. All those things exist in other cities as well. Those are, as you say, livelyhood of cities.

But cities grow and things change. With more information and larger populations in most urban areas land uses are altered to accommodate that change.

If you like to lie in your own shit, then go ahead. Most people don't. Most people are smart enough to realize what goes on and opt for putting things in the right place.

What's with you and Munoz anyway? She must really have taken a slice off your back at some time.

What's with you and Munoz anyway? She must really have taken a slice off your back at some time.

Yama loves shit. He/she is a great defender of the status quo.

All of you people that have great ideas about this albatross being dumped in our midst I hope you all make it to council meeting on March 31st

Cheers

I don't normally double post things, but I think I will anyway.

You know, I read the articles and opinions here as regularly as my time permits. The one constant I have noticed seems to be that, generally we are dissatisfied with how PG, and the world around us is evolving. We complain, we sign petitions, we go to meetings and voice our opinions, but, we really don’t offer up any viable alternatives. I haven’t seen many here.. Why, maybe because we don’t want to get slammed for not supporting our local Economy, lets face it, Biomass energy in PG = loggers back to work. Is it the right thing to do?,, how can it be? Emitting any sort of exhaust into an already infamous air shed is just plain stupid. But, Do you really think a petition is going to change the minds of the powers that be,, (See: Biomass energy in PG=loggers back to work) not likely.

So, what can we do? Well, we could make alternative public suggestions with out being worried about how we will be received,, or Compensated.

OK, here’s free one (and yup,, I’m probably going to regret making it).

We are currently building bridges (Simon Fraser Twinning, Camron Street, supposedly in the near future), those bridges require supports embedded in the river beds, those rivers flow past those supports constantly, what if you build Venturies into those supports, mount a turbine in the venturi, attach a generator to the turbine, etc.,,. I will let you imagine the rest.

I’m not saying it’s “Cost Effective”Idea, I’m not saying there isn’t some engineering hurtles that would need to be addressed,,,, Is it viable?? I don’t know,, But it is a zero emissions “green” alternative,, And I’m only one person!

You really do have to wonder why city council would go against the status quo on this.
Somebody wants this assinine project just a little too much... and that should make people nervous.
The ONLY fair way to deal with it is by referendum, and I would guess it WOULD go down in flames,so that is unlikely to happen.
Prince George Council really does need a reality check, and I have a sneaking suspicion they are going to get one in the very near future!
So what gives?
Why do they want this so badly?
What's missing?

I don't normally double post things, but I think I will anyway.

You know, I read the articles and opinions here as regularly as my time permits. The one constant I have noticed seems to be that, generally we are dissatisfied with how PG, and the world around us is evolving. We complain, we sign petitions, we go to meetings and voice our opinions, but, we really don’t offer up any viable alternatives. I haven’t seen many here.. Why, maybe because we don’t want to get slammed for not supporting our local Economy, lets face it, Biomass energy in PG = loggers back to work. Is it the right thing to do?,, how can it be? Emitting any sort of exhaust into an already infamous air shed is just plain stupid. But, Do you really think a petition is going to change the minds of the powers that be,, (See: Biomass energy in PG=loggers back to work) not likely.

So, what can we do? Well, we could make alternative public suggestions with out being worried about how we will be received,, or Compensated.

OK, here’s free one (and yup,, I’m probably going to regret making it).

We are currently building bridges (Simon Fraser Twinning, Camron Street, supposedly in the near future), those bridges require supports embedded in the river beds, those rivers flow past those supports constantly, what if you build Venturies into those supports, mount a turbine in the venturi, attach a generator to the turbine, etc.,,. I will let you imagine the rest.

I’m not saying it’s “Cost Effective”Idea, I’m not saying there isn’t some engineering hurtles that would need to be addressed,,,, Is it viable?? I don’t know,, But it is a zero emissions “green” alternative,, And I’m only one person!

Referendums? Hey pal, get real. The only people in Canada who have referendums are the Frenchies in Kebec. Again and again. I think they are called neverendums. It ain't gonna happen.

Pickin' on Councilor Deb? Sure, why not, they all get their turn.

Status quo, and layin' in your own shit? I call the air retarded in the Bowl, you call it shitty. Close enough.

Anyway I think the no more development in the Bowl may be something to watch, but I'm reading lots of interest in driving the existing mills etc, out of the Bowl. Be careful because those investments have only one question, and that is - is PG where we want to be? Is there still a case for these investments to be here?

We don't have any chicken farms in PG anymore, because technology and other factors moved them all south. The industries we have in PG made PG, and those industries can un-make PG overnight. Any review of their asset location in todays world economy would be bad news for PG. PG is only as interesting to investors as we make it. In Quebec the governments pay investors to set up shop, PG doesn't have enough money to compete for investors and build their plants here instead of Vancouver. Look after the investments we have and look for more is the way to go.

So sure I'm concerned Councilor Deb will end up doing more harm than good. Don't encourage her. This town will never be another Vancouver, and in our population market there is a direct ratio between clean air and the local economy. The best solution for PG is for the complainers to move out of the Bowl and leave the industrial jobs alone. Downtown has died and been given to the bums already. Nothing is going to change that fact.

Time to turn down the suck and turn up the giver!

Yama, that is just plain silly!!!

If people move out of the bowl, that creates a slum. Slums create crime. Your idea of residents moving out of the bowl hardly merits a response.

Industry and residents can live happily if they are each in their own place and respect one another.

We have two rivers crowded by industry, a natural setting that is under valued. They are scenic and could be a great tourist attraction. Tourists bring money and value and provide jobs and support stores and give the local people a sense of pride in their surroundings.

"Look after the investments we have and look for more is the way to go."

Any reasonable investor who does not just sit there and keep the money in investments and crosses hos or her fingers watches those investments and sees when it is time to sell, when it is time to buy some more of the same, and when it is time to move on to another investment.

In my point of view, if I was thinking of investing money to upgrade any plant on River Road, or investing in any brand new plant in downtown I would hope that my kids would go to the courts to have me declared legally incompetent and take over my assets so that I do not go broke.

We just had a brand new plant built on the southern edge of the BCR. That plant is spewing out 350 TONNES of the shit. It replaced a plant that had been further south by 2 km that the ministry thought for 10 whole years was putting out 50 TONNES.

That plant produces those environmentally friendly pellets that look like elongated rat turds that everyone calls "biomass", you know, the stuff that is so good for us. Well, it might be good for bean counters who count CO2 like the doctors count good cholesterol and bad cholesterol. The problem for the population here is that we are getting the bad cholesterol.

What do that plant and the proposed plant have in common other than they both put shit into the air?

They are both NEW plants. Both could/can be built somewhere else if the fathers and mothers of this great city had their shit in shape. But they don't. 10 years ago the mayor said he was working on a site outside of town. Where is it? Zurowski says they have sites out of town much more recently. Where are they?

We need transparency in governemnt; we nned an MoE that is able to do their job. We need forward thinkers who know how to keep investment here and how to bring new investment in.

If anyone thinks that plants along the river are going to invest one more dime in that location, you really need to get your kids to declare you legally incompetent. The sooner the city and the province understands that, the more of a chance we have of keeping some of those plants in the community in a new home outside of the airshed.

YDPC, you participate in those forestry forums. You have seen the downturn figures in the feedstocks which will be and are already hitting us. There is movement and there will continue to be movement in the industry.

Prince George and the province can either get with it and support new plants in improved locations or it can lie dead and watch movement out of here. It will look just like the Pensylvania steel towns did 30 and 40 years ago.

You got to realize when your time has come and build on new opportunities. Those who don't are doomed to follow the likes of Pedocah.

. He lied.to do with each other?

I guess it helps to proofread one's message before posting it.... :-)

"You got to realize when your time has come and build on new opportunities"

Agree 100% owl. Dear God I hope that we have some people running for office this year that can do just that. The status quo approach of this City is slowly but surely killing us and people just can't see it, or perhaps they just refuse to admit it.

Abandoning the downtown is not a realistic option.

It's quite realistic to simply tighten air emission standards - industry must rise to the challenge - and disallow the establishment of new sources of pollution in the downtown.

No new SMOKE STACKS in the downtown, not even on River Road.

Clean the streets, require property owners to maintain their properties to better standards. Knock down old rat traps. Repair the potholed streets and sidewalks. Keep them clean. Install better lighting. Do to Victoria Street what was done with Third Avenue.

Create a plaza in front of City Hall, with a bandstand and fountain, extensive flower beds and proper lighting. Rejuvenate George Street, which is a sad mess, dirty and neglected as it is to the new appearance of Third Avenue.

Etc, etc.

It's not rocket science. Why is there no problem borrowing money for all kinds of other projects and no determination to finally do the proper thing to the downtown?

Puzzled.

Owl:" We just had a brand new plant built on the southern edge of the BCR. That plant is spewing out 350 TONNES of the shit. "

Please elaborate on the nature of the "shit" - I seriously doubt that it is 350 tonnes of fine particulate matter!

If it is indeed then those who made the decisions to approve of the plant should be.......well, I refrain from saying what treatment I would recommend chosen from those freely used at Gitmo.

;-)

"The best solution for PG is for the complainers to move out of the Bowl and leave the industrial jobs alone. Downtown has died and been given to the bums already. Nothing is going to change that fact."

Yama I respectfully disagree. The best way to improve the situation is to have people live in these areas, they are more likely to be invested in the outcome when they are directly affected. Just have a look at the current state of our downtown core, many of these run-down properties are owned by out of towners who couldn't care less about the state of them. Most of these businesses don`t even bother to pressure wash the spit off the sidewalks in front of their entrances. The Millar Addition residents should be commended for their efforts at taking action and participating in the decisions that affect them (and all of us who access the downtown). The entire city benefits one way or another from forestry industry. It is in everyone's best interest to come up with solutions to attract industry as well as use the best technology available to reduce health impacts. Also, why not look at the real taxpayer costs of your solutions of moving outside of the bowl- consider the costs of infractures needed for new developments as well as the increased costs of expanded municipal services, snowclearing, garbage removal, weed control, parks maintance and on it goes.... let`s quit complaining and talk about solutions.

Okay, it's official, the City of Prince George is completely and totally incapable of making any kind of rational decision! I would like to know what the difference is in moving the site to River Road from 1st ave?? Give me a break, there isn't one! I would like to see tax money be spent on fixing up downtown, not making it even uglier! I wonder if places like Kelowna worry so much about "wasting" tax payers $$$ on beautifying their city? I doubt it. The best solution for this hair brained idea is to throw it in the trash. Don't waste $$$ building this OR, lets move downtown to say, hmmmm... College Heights -away from industry and give the current downtown to industry 100%. River Road should be park, not industry anyway, what a shameful waste of potential beauty! I really don't understand why PG is designed the way it is - such a waste of big potential. I just shake me head in disbelief.

Okay, it's official, the City of Prince George is completely and totally incapable of making any kind of rational decision! I would like to know what the difference is in moving the site to River Road from 1st ave?? Give me a break, there isn't one! I would like to see tax money be spent on fixing up downtown, not making it even uglier! I wonder if places like Kelowna worry so much about "wasting" tax payers $$$ on beautifying their city? I doubt it. The best solution for this hair brained idea is to throw it in the trash. Don't waste $$$ building this OR, lets move downtown to say, hmmmm... College Heights -away from industry and give the current downtown to industry 100%. River Road should be park, not industry anyway, what a shameful waste of potential beauty! I really don't understand why PG is designed the way it is - such a waste of big potential. I just shake me head in disbelief.

In Vancouver, Central Heat Distribution Ltd. runs a network of underground distribution pipes heating more than 100 buildings in the downtown core, including B.C. Place, General Motors Place, the library, and major hotels.

Here is some info for those who are interested.

Steam plume from the Central Heating Plant in Vancouver
http://flickr.com/photos/10115399@N02/1988081943

The plant rooftop and stacks as seen from the Dunsmuir or Georgia viaduct.

http://flickr.com/photos/squeakymarmot/195671490

Read about it on this site and click through to the Google map link on the bottom to view an aerial photo of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Heat_Distribution

This is the national Pollution Inventory info on the plant.
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/querysite/facility_substance_summary_e.cfm?opt_npri_id=0000007819&opt_report_year=2006

So, 58 tonnes of Carbon Monoxide, 175 tonnes of Nitrogen oxides, and 1.3 tonnes of PM2.5 particulates. So, the PM is in the order of what the plant in PG is expected to produce. The others we do not know.

For those who wish to find out more about district energy in Canada, I suggest you start with this site

www.cdea.ca/pdf/church2-cospp-cdea.pdf

We have several issues all converging with the proposed plant:

1. Does it make sense to provide a district energy system for the downtown of PG? What are the pros and what are the cons?

2. If it makes sense, which building will be hooked up initially and which potentially? Will the energy requirements make a central plant viable and enough of an environmental difference.

3. How should the plant be energized? Fuel availability over time and expected cost fluctuation, as example

4. Finally, and only after all those parameters are laid out with some answers, comes the question of “where should the plant be located?”

5. After that comes the question of impact – neighbourhood, the bowl, the region, the province and the global impact with respect to GHG and vulnerable fuel sufficiency over the long term.

I would expect that some people might be in favour of a district energy system such as are available in other communities and countries. If so, maybe they should step outside the anti biomass downtown plant and step into a faction that will try to solve the problem of location, fuel source and financing the project.

As some on here so nicely say, if there is money to be made, then go for it. Notice that the plant in Vancouver is privately owned. I also noticed they pay a fee to the city for being able to operate.

BTW, here is a statement about their environmental policies from building operators:

http://www.oxfordproperties.com/corp/corporate/policy.htm

That company is audited by BOMA to meet those goals as best as they can.

What is the PG policy for their buildings and the city in general where they have the ability to effect change, who is auditing it, and where can I see a detailed audit report?

How polluted (if so) are our rivers as of March 23,2008? Anybody know?

Oh and Bridge what time on March 31?

If one looks at the proposed developments in Prince George for the next 10/20 years it is pretty obvious there is a move afoot to have people relocate from the Bowl to the Hillsides...This will of course turn the bowl into a slum.

Proposed Developments
(1) Fraser River Bench Lands
(2) University land development, plus 2 others in the same area.
(3) Major development abutting the land where the new golf course is to be built
(4) There are others, however we are looking a developing over 20,000 lots over the next 10/20 years,however the projection is the population will decrease over the same period of time. This tells me that many many people will head for the hills, and sell or rent their houses in the bowl, and we will end up with areas like the hood all over the City.


It is already happening.

It is odd that you mention it Owl, I was thinking about those Pensylvania steel towns also.

Our problem in PG is all the investments along side the rivers are getting old, (except the Husky has been upgraded) and past the best before date. Old and stale.

It's a given that soon those plants will not be worth the up keep anymore. Then what? PG will follow the same path as those Penn State cities into a slow painful death. It's just the way things are.

I bet the air in those Pensylvania steel towns is real clean these days.

I wonder how many tourists go there to see what a desperate town looks like?

An unchecked Councilor Deb will certainly leave us with clean air when she heads out of town in a few years.

Downtown is not going to change except for the worse. I use a barber on George Street and I hire a couple people every year that live on the streets down there. I give them money all winter and they work it off in the summer, so I keep in touch with what is going on. Most of the people moving in downtown you do not want to talk to. Downtown is well on the way to being just another slum operated by some dangerous people. Saying it isn't so doesn't change the way things are down there.

Diplomat ....

Here is the information I know about the pellet plant and its history. We know very little about the fractions below the total particulates since that was never defined in the original permit. In addition, the current permit just identifies particulate matter and is not broken down into fractions.

There are some assumptions that the consultants have made on what that will be. The estimate is that it is in the order of 80 tonnes for PM10 and 20 tonnes for PM2.5 from point stack sources and about half as much again from each of those from fugitive sources due to the nature of the plant operations. Fugitive sources are not covered by permit.

At no time did they ever have, or do they have now, anything in the way of the latest technology to scrub much of the particulates from their exhaust stacks.
Until the most recent permit, there was never any requirement to monitor actual emissions. The whole monitoring system was complaint driven. They are on Willow Cale Road where there is really no one to complain about anything.

So, until new owners wanted to scrap the old plant and build a new one, no one knew how much they were actually putting into the air.

Permits
February 1995 – 45 tonnes of PM per year

January 1997 – 20 tonnes per year

February 2000 – 60 tonnes per year

January 2002 – 43 tonnes per year

April 2007 – 340 tonnes per year. (this reflects what the old plant was actually putting out as a result of professional coming in to measure the output)

October 2007 – 188 tonnes per year. The Ministry did not require them to put in any precipitators, electrostatic or wet or whatever. They are supposed to have to improve by 2010. But, we all know what that means when push comes to shove.

This is the single largest point source emitter of PM in the BCR. This is a brand new plant. It is a plant built with the City’s knowledge. It is the plant which caused Debora to wonder how the City’s permitting department can allow such a thing to happen.

Of course, there are many who are patting themselves on the back, saying that the plant is now emitting half as much as the previous one. They are conveniently forgetting that the original plant was given a permit to operate at a 45 tonne level.

So, we have differences of opinion amongst those who are aware of these things that most people in the city really do not care about. Is this a 50% improvement? Yes, over an illegal situation for which there was never any fine. Over a situation which was initially allowed, it is a 350% increase.

So, we have a very interesting situation. A 1 tonne increase in PM2.5(and it may not even be that) close to a group that has gotten some great encouragement from the North Nechako who finally got fed up after 3+ decades of getting the shaft from the City was the thing that broke the camel’s back.

Does anyone ever wonder who is minding the store?

Several years ago when the city yards were moved from downtown, that land was to be sold to help pay for the new city yards. Now the city wants to build a hot water heating plant on the site that originally slated to be sold. Does the the new hot water heating plant absorb the cost of the land? I assume our mayor wants to forget about this issue.
As for building it at the university that is another no go. Years ago the university was given a pellet fired furnace that sat in storage. It took several years of trying to get rid of it and finally camp friendship took it off their hands for free.
Financially the hot water plant will be a disaster. Not even counting the several hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted in the last 6 years on this project how do you justify spending 8.3 million dollars to save $500,000.00 per year in natural gas costs. Given the fact the hog fuel will not be free, on going maintenance costs, and the supervision costs from city hall people, the plant will have a negative cash flow. Stop all this sillyness now, get rid of the people involved and spend the money saved on something useful like repairing the streets.
Addressing issues of burning wood at several plants in the city and their requirement of only having to meet the old level "A" of 230 mg/scm corrected to 8% oxygen is what should concern city council and how to get the emissions from these plants reduced to improve the air quality of Prince George.

"We are currently building bridges (Simon Fraser Twinning, Camron Street, supposedly in the near future), those bridges require supports embedded in the river beds, those rivers flow past those supports constantly, what if you build Venturies into those supports, mount a turbine in the venturi, attach a generator to the turbine, etc.,,. I will let you imagine the rest."

Wait a minute, didn't the river freeze?

Nevertheless, carbon taxes aside, we have immense clean hydro power available to us, yet instead of being Eco-friendly we sell that power( so called surplus) to the highest bidder for profit. Same with the natural gas resources that we were urged to adopt, sold and owned by the highest bidder. As far as I am concerned the carbon tax is illegal. The BC government is obligated to provide us with the best rate for the product that the tax and rate payers built in the first place. I'm miffed, so I'll battle my own heating war with a particulate spewing woodstove, an axe and a chainsaw. I won't be held hostage.

Re: Owl's statement about Vancouver's system- "So, 58 tonnes of Carbon Monoxide, 175 tonnes of Nitrogen oxides, and 1.3 tonnes of PM2.5 particulates. So, the PM is in the order of what the plant in PG is expected to produce." The Vancouver plant burns only natural gas not wood so it's emissions are low.

The particulate matter from the existing two wood fueled lumber kiln heating systems discharge over 100 tonnes per year of particulates. "Resident" points out the standard for these doesn't require any special controls.