June 2012
DC ends its legal action
Submitted by Doug Anderson on June 22, 2012 - 12:00amWith considerable regret DurhamCLEAR is ending its legal action against the garbage incinerator in Courtice. The hearing which had been scheduled for July 17 will not take place.
While we were fairly confident we could win the appeal on security of costs and move on, the legal process was dragging on so slowly that the incinerator would be built before we ever got a decision on the main motion. Although judges are supposed to be immune to such arguments, it was a growing concern whether a judge would turn back a $300 million project which was substantially completed.
The other issue weighing us down was money. Our dinner/dance fundraiser last month at the Rickard complex raised several thousand dollars - but not enough to cover outstanding legal bills.
Money is really tight in the current economic environment, and with the incinerator under construction, it is getting increasingly difficult to motivate people to dig into their pockets.
Councillors bury their heads in the sand
Submitted by Doug Anderson on June 8, 2012 - 10:49pmThe June 6th Regional Council meeting was a disappointment.
In spite of clear evidence that waste volumes were declining, councillors chose to attack the messengers rather than deal with the problem.
On the agenda was a motion for a debenture, the bulk of which would go to paying for the incinerator. Staff were painting this as urgent but delegations from Linda Gasser and Louis Bertrand pointed out that interest rates have been stable for a long period and were likely to stay low for a long period, hence, no urgency.
The prevailing opinion among councillors ever since Chair Anderson signed the contract with Covanta was that breaking the contract would be hpelessly expensive and they regularly asked for more definitive costs. They were always stonewalled.
However, as it turns out, the costs are all spelled out in the contract in easy to read English. Below is Article 25 of the contract which clearly states that Region can cancel at any time for any reason.
Article 27 then goes on to spell out the terms.
The costs would be basically the amount of money already spent. As the payment schedule is front end loaded, those costs would likely be less than what has already been paid which is currently $50 million - a bargain compared with spending $280 million finishing a facility that could only operate by burning potentially recyclable waste.
There are no penalty clauses. Nevertheless, councillors wanted to believe that the contract contained poison pills and over-the-top penalties ... and voted accordingly.
Councillors showed an inability to look at a legal document for what it actually said, even when shown them on a 10 ft high screen and provided in advance by email. Instead they preferred to believe the self-serving position of staff.
Why the incinerator is doomed to be an albatross
Submitted by Doug Anderson on June 5, 2012 - 11:30pmA chart was released by the Works Department at the March Waste Management Advisory Committee (WMAC) meeting which revealed that waste volumes have actually been declining for the last 5+ years and that the Region is already de-emphasizing recycling in order to ensure that there will be sufficient waste to run the incinerator when it fires up in 2014.
Total waste per capita has dropped 14% in 5 years.
- 2006 408 Kg
- 2011 353 Kg
Here is a graph derived from the Region's numbers compared with the numbers in the Deloitte Business Plan prepared for Council in 2008. This business plan (like all business plans) was intended to show Council that the incinerator made good economic sense.
However 4 years later it is clear from the graph that their projections were way off and the rosy predictions of 70% diversion by 2022 were but a pipe dream.
Diversion in 2011 was only 53% while the Deloitte Business Plan projected 60% for last year. The Golder report commissioned by Durham Council in 2009 mapped out in detail with costing how Durham could have achieved 63.7% lasat year.
While it is difficult to draw long term conclusions from 5 years of numbers (2006-11), if you draw a line forward from the real (blue) points to 2022, you find a waste gap of about 150,000 tonnes.
The problem is that the Region has signed a contract to supply a minimum of 100,000 tonnes to the incinerator.
Because Durham has limited itself to only 2 waste options (recycle/compost and burn), if total waste is dropping then a larger and larger percentage will end up in the incinerator and less in the recycle stream. This is exactly opposite to the commitments made during the EA that the incinerator would 'drive' recycling and 'never' cut into it.
We didn't believe them then and we don't believe them now.
Successful Fundraiser
Submitted by Doug Anderson on June 3, 2012 - 12:00amOn Saturday, May 26, DurhamCLEAR held a successful Dinner/Dance at the Garnet Rickard Complex. Approximately 100 enthusiastic supporters attended.
The event was a zero-waste event - designed as a demonstration that zero-waste was achievable - everything was reusable, recyclable or compostable.
The low ecological impact theme was carried forward by our keynote speaker, Mike Schreiner, leader of the Green Party of Ontario, who came to Bowmanville by GO Train in order to keep his carbon footprint to a minimum.
Volunteers were an essential part of our success. Tracy Leadbetter organized the kitchen and serving and was assisted by: Kitchen: Keri Davey, Michelle Payne, Jeff Mariani, Tracey Ali, Donna Moriarty, Franca de Kever; Servers: Riley Kettner, Keith Mayhew-Hammond, Tracey Ali, Nicole Cabral, Morgaine van Loon. Emerald Hawkley helped out with the table dressing.
Libby Racansky helped greet people as they arrived and checked their names off. Bert Kortekaas, Pam Callus, Jim Osborne, Kim Neal and Susann Anderson also contributed in various capacities.
Music was provided by guitarist Alfie Latanski, and Hubertus de Kever was the DJ.
Corporate donations were received from