Friday, April 8, 1994 - North Shore News - 3

Booming population pushes Lower Mainland water supplies to the limit

THE GREATER Vancouver
Regional District (GVRD) is
currently secking public input
into decisions that will affect
Greater Vancouver’s three
watersheds and the drinking
water supply for the entire
Lower Mainland area.

By Kevin Gillies
Contributing Writer

The two main issues are the
GVRD's water storage capacity,
and proposed changes in water
treatment.

3 Expanding storage capacity:

The GVRD’s waier storage
capacity must be expanded primari-
ly {o service the Lower Mainland’s
growing population.

Three watersheds service the
Lower Mainland — Capilano,
Seymour and Coquitlam.

Coquitlam is the largest of the
three,

Because B.C. Hydro has rights
to. 75% of the Coquitlam reservoir’s
water, the GVRD must purchase
the water it uses from the reservoir.

The GVRD’s water storage
capacity has not been upgraded in
30 years. At its current capacity,
and with the current population

growth, upgrading will be needed
in the next 10 years,

Building # new, higher Seymour
Dam or negotiating with B.C.
Hydro for more water from the
Coquitlam watershed are the two
main options being considered by
the GVRD.

Because the
Seymour dam does not
meet current seismic
standards, seismic
upgrading must be con-
sidered.

The cost of a new,
larger dam would be
approximately $90 mil-
lion; upgrading the
existing dam to mect
seismic | standards
would cost $18 mil-
lion.

SB Secondary water
treatment: :

In its insert in the March 27
North Shore News, the GVRD
claimed that Vancouver's water
supply does not consistently meet
government standards and is the
“only major cenire in Canada that
does not meet all aspects of the
Canadian Drinking Water Quality
Guidelines.” ;

Only chiorine is currently added
tu Lower Mainland weter. :

NEWS photo Paul McGrath

THE ONE that didn't get away. Lonsdale Quay’s Salmon
Shop owner Kosta Zogaris shows off this 370 Ib. (167 kg)
grouper that was caught in Florida. Zogaris says
-groupers, big and small, are good to eat.

4 . E. :
READERS VOICE

CALL US:

983-2208

Are you concerned about the building of
monster houses in your neighborhood?

Ursula Pritchie

West Vancouver (40 years)

Yes, because we feel monster hous-
es change the face of the whole
neighborhood and the character of
the area we’ve lived in so long.

The GVRD plans te add an
additional disinfectant to local
drinking water §o bring it up to
national xvater quality standards,

Primary disinfection is done at
the source — in the reservoir itself,
Secondary treatment sterilizes
water that is flowing through the

6@ Byproducts of chlorine and

chloramine...have produced cancer

in lab animals. 99

distribution system.

The options for the secondary
treatment in the distribution system,
as offered by the GVRD, are more
chlorine, the addition of chloramine
(a chemical combination of chlo-
rine and ammonia) of using ozone
as a primary disinfectant and chlo-
rine as a secondary disinfectant.

Local medical health officers
support the addition of chloramine.

A letter to the GVRD from met-
ropolitan medical health officers
states that, “since chloramination
appears to-give the best-tasting
water, will adequately provide gocd
disinfection, will meet the (guide-
lines for disinfection byproducts)
and will delay or reduce the need
for filtration, the Medical Health
Officers unanimously support chlo-
ramination as the future secondary
disinfection process for the
GVRD.” .

Chlorine creates solid byprod-
ucts that would have to be filtered
out.

An environmental impact study
found that while both chlorine and
chloramine are lethal to fish, “chlo-
ramine: is of greater concern
because it lasts longer.”

Disinfectant use poses hazards

In fact, the GVRD insert said
chloramination had “one to 20
times more (environmental risk)
than rechlorination. Department of
Fisheries prosecution potential is
high as some fish kills will
undoubtedly occur.”

On the other hand, adding more
chlorine will give
water a “chlorinous”
taste.

Byproducts of
chlorine and chio-
ramine produced in
drinking water reser-
voirs have produced
cancer in lab animals.
Chleramine, the
GVRD said, produces
lower levels of disin-
fectant byproducts
than chlorine.

The GVRD insert
said Health Canada maintains that

the risk of waterborne disease, ©

resulting from untreated water, is
much greater than the “very small”
risk of cancer associated with chlo-
rination.

The cost uf implementing a
chlorine secondary treatment sys-
tem would be between $40 million
and $50 million, according to the
GYRD. .

Annual operation costs would
run up to $5 million.

Implementation costs for a chlo-
ramine systera would be up to $2
million.

Annual eperating costs would
range between $500,000 - and
$600,000, respectively.

The chlorine system would take
eight to 10 years to complete and
would involve SO to 60 rechlorina-
tion stations versus three years to
build three chloraminatica stations.

Ozone could be used for primary -

disinfection but because the sub-
stance is only effective for a short
time, chlorine wouid also be needed
as a secondary treatment.

Using ozone as the primary dis-
infectant would cost approximately
$410 million.

rere vr

' North Vancouver District

CHLORAMINE AND chlorine, chemicals
being considered by the Greater Vancouver
Regional District (GVRD) to disinfect the
Lower Mainland’s drinking water, have great
potential to damage the health of humans and
marine life.

By Kevin Gillies
Contributing Writer

Chloramine is a combination of chlorine and ammo-
nia. Both chlorine and chloramine are gases that are fil-
tered through water to sterilize it.

Chloramine’s advantages are its effectiveness, inex-
pensiveness and the fact that it produces less chloror-
ganics — solids that are chemical combinations of
chlorine and organic matter such as decomposing vege-
tation — than straight chlorine. Both, however, can be
health hazards,

Chiororganics have produced cancer in lab animals.

Chloramine’s disadvantages are its toxicity‘ to

marine organisms, including fish, and the length:of

time it takes to break down in the environment.

In 1989 and 1990, accidental discharges of mono-
chloramine-sierilized ¢rinking water into Fergus Creek
resulted in massive fish kills and charges being laid
against the municipality of Surrey. to oo,

The water had been treated with chlorarnine because
of low water pressure in the system at Surrey. --

The spills killed 1,500 and 3,000 fish, respectively.

Lee Niki of the federal Department of Fisheries and
Oceans’ Habitat Management Unit said the second
incident killed all marine life in a six-kilometre (3.7
mile) stretch of the creek, :

The court transcript stated that Surrey’s subsequent ::
“contingency response program ... would seem to have’:
little effectiveness agains! an unforeseen rupture such
as occurred in this case given the extremely low levels
at which chloramine is toxic.” 7

Surrey was subsequently found guilty of knowing; o
the water’s toxicity and fined $8,000.

FEW RESIDENTS can define exactly what a monster house is, but almost

every homeowner in North Vancouver District (NVD) or West Vancouver
seems to know a monster house when they see one. Recent proposed
bylaw amendments to control monster-house construction in NVD has
renewed the heated debate over whether new houses should take up most

of their lots and block the views from other neighborhood homes... .

Christine Huntley Hugh Leggatt
Yes, I'm most concerned. They ure
just an abomination to the ambience

and our sense of neighborhood. causes Concerns.

North Vancouver District
We don’t care who lives in these
monster houses. It’s their size that

Bruce Trutt

North Vancouver District

Yes, I’m concerned about the
change that monster houses will
make to the neighborhood.

| THIS WEEK’S QUESTION:
What is your choice for a drinking water disinfectant and why?

y