Home arrow In the News arrow Where's Environment Canada on Dioxins?
Main Menu
Home
Take Action!
Search
About Us
In the News
The Crofton Mill
Air Pollutants
Contact Us
Links
Press Centre
Documents and Reports
CACG Newsletter
Letters
Pulp Pollution Primer
RWDI Peer Review
Senes Peer Review
Regulations?
Jacques Whitford Study
Air Quality Reports
Paprican Study on Dioxins
Interbeing and Paper
Risk Assessment
Transcripts
Best Technology for P&P:EC
Where's Environment Canada on Dioxins? PDF Print E-mail
 Crofton mill watchers want federal government on board for testing

By Peter Rusland
Cowichan News Leader Pictorial
Jun 13 2007

Local environmentalists are puzzled about why Environment Canada won’t lead a pilot project using new German technology to study stack data about toxic dioxin and furan emissions at Crofton pulp mill.

Members of the Crofton Airshed Citizens’ Group and Reach For Unbleached say a tentative proposal for the study was written in February with input from the mill, B.C. environment ministry, and Environment Canada that dictates the national standards for the two toxins.


CACG — which formed in reaction to a now-abandoned 2004 mill proposal to burn coal and tires — is ready to put $80,000 into the study. It could yield continuous, precise sampling about dioxins and furans rather than an annual stack test.

“We’re not talking about changes to (provincial) permit but a different type of monitoring,” says Airshed’s Elizabeth White.

That data could help measure pollutants from other Canadian pulp mills and incinerators.

But Environment Canada is stalling, she said.

“If we go ahead without Environment Canada’s participation in the study, no matter what emerges, they wouldn’t accept it.

“But if Environment Canada takes the lead they can make sure the study’s designed the way they want it.”

Environment Canada’s Richard Holt says studying mill emissions is the B.C. environment ministry’s job as permit issuer.

“We can’t test for dioxins at the mill. If the stakeholders, including the mill and MOE, are interested in doing something we’re listening,” he says.

“We want to ensure if there’s an (Airshed) investment, it leads to better understanding or reduced dioxin emissions.

“We haven’t said we’re not willing to participate, we’re just waiting for the detailed proposal.”

But that proposal now needs help and verification elements from the feds, explains said RFU’s Delores Broten.

“It’s either bureaucratic bafflegab or we as citizens don’t understand what’s needed.

“If Environment Canada was interested, it would do a partnership and test the equipment to see if it works.

“There’s a deck load of incineration proposals across the country and Environment Canada should be interested in getting a tight grip on dioxin emissions.”

Mill vice-president Don McKendrick hints the more dioxin data, the better.

“It’s worth perusing to understand it.

“I can’t comment about Environment Canada. I don’t know if it’s the best technology but we’re willing to be a party at the table and give it a trial process.”
< Prev   Next >

This site donated by Charles Buchwald