News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

activeday:

"However, 4 of the 10 sites were within sensitive river valleys which several Councillors and Environmentalists wanted ...."

Based on the City's Own Powerpoint slide - what was it that the councillors did or said that possibly kept the dumps out of their ridings? Why weren't all councillors permitted to raise similar concerns about their ridings? If environmentalists can stop in one location, what is it about Downsview that makes it "okay"
Click to expand...

Like you yourself have quoted - "sensitive river valleys" - I don't recall Downsview being near any of them. And why should environmentalist raise it as a major concern when it really isn't one? Besides, the presentation also noted that sites differs in their ability to mediate and filter pollutants - one where the snow melt ends up directly into the waterway isn't a good candidate for filtering for obvious reasons.

Agreed - but then after the report, the city isn't following it's own guidelines:

"Landscaping around sites to improve visual buffering" - based on the Downsview location - the landscaping is "sad", if nothing else. If you are going to do the report, and pick a site, at least follow through on your recommendations .....

As a minimum:

a/ Put the correct "floor" under the snow to avoid ground contamination.
b/ Put the right "visual buffers" around the site.
c/ Let the public know what you are doing.
Click to expand...

The city is under no legal obligation to follow its' own guidelines - especially in face of competing priorities. And quite frankly, I don't think the problem is so serious that it demands a "visual barrier" - it would be nice, but make no mistake, this doesn't even come close to being a major form of visual pollution.

AoD
 
" one where the snow melt ends up directly into the waterway isn't a good candidate for filtering for obvious reasons ..."

What are the obvious reasons? That going into the ground is "okay", but going into a water supply is "not okay".
Both, are _not okay_

The river in that area is "The Don" - it's a big one.

Respectuflly, you are wrong , but I realize the focus of this board is ( let's say ) slanted towards a particular political agenda, so it's a bit like telling people that banning water bottles may not be such a good idea.

I know, it's okay to criticize my opinions but it's not good when it's reciprocal.

Oh well.
 
Last edited:
activeday said:
" one where the snow melt ends up directly into the waterway isn't a good candidate for filtering for obvious reasons ..."

What are the obvious reasons? That going into the ground is "okay", but going into a water supply is "not okay".
Both, are _not okay_
Click to expand...


You are aware that copper, iron, lead and salt came from the ground?
 
Hydrogen said:
You are aware that copper, iron, lead and salt came from the ground?
Click to expand...
Oh that reminds me of a funny one. I worked on a site once, on the US Gulf coast, where the contaminant of concern was salt. From old salt piles. The water was flowing in the ground toward a canal, connected to the ocean (within a mile or two). And the EPA was insisting that a lot of money be spent to contain the groundwater contamination - to stop this salt getting into the ocean.

My god they are a bit nuts down there. I mean they may be a decade or two ahead of us environmentally - but there's often no common sense applied.
 
Last edited:
activeday:

What are the obvious reasons? That going into the ground is "okay", but going into a water supply is "not okay".
Click to expand...

The soil have natural filtration capacity - and the ability of it to deal with pollutants has to do with (on top of many othe factors) dwell time. Meltwater in the soil at a site near a river is not going to stay in one place for long - not to mention the obvious harm of this water entering into the body of water have very obvious impacts on the ecology of the river.

And just so you know, the site in question is at, if not outside the edge of the Don watershed (feel free to visit TRCA and pull up their maps if please be) - hardly right beside the river or any of its' tributaries.

Respectuflly, you are wrong
Click to expand...

Consider the amount of information you conveniently neglected to present, I will take it under advisement.

Hydrogen:

You are aware that copper, iron, lead and salt came from the ground?
Click to expand...

Doesn't mean any of these minerals is a good thing to have entering the ground in a concentrated form necessarily.

AoD
 
Snow dumps could go to 'cool' use

From the Metro Ottawa:

Those mountains of snow melting at dumps around the city might be good for something after all.

The city is examining the possibility of using a cost-effective "cold energy" snow cooling system to replace air conditioning in its largest cooled building at 100 Constellation Cres.

Robert Vaillancourt, the city's manager of design and construction for buildings and parks, said the economics of the technology would not make it feasible for most buildings in the city.

The city's study would determine what technologies already on the marketplace could be applied to reduce the cooling costs.

"That is where the snow dumps become of interest," he said. "They represent a huge resource of cold energy."

The largest limitation on using snow dumps are that they are usually placed far from the users and taking cold energy from snow dumps requires a huge storage space.

Mostly likely, he said the city's pilot project would use "ice ball technology" that would use spears of snow mixed with a "secret ingredient liquid" that would enable it to freeze at temperatures above zero, so it freezes at night and cools during the day.

Dr. Fred Michel, director of the Institute of Environmental Science at Carleton University, said the technology is still in its early stages.

He said North America is trailing the rest of the world. The most prominent use of the technology is in Sweden, where a hospital is using it for comfort cooling.
Click to expand...

A bit like how the 4° lake water is heated to 12° by air conditioning Toronto's downtown buildings, before it is pumped to your tap.
 
toThe water from the downtown deep water cooling system ends up coming out of your tap? Really? I understood that it went back into the lake.

The water filtration plants that provide tap water for us are in other parts of the city; namely by East Point Park in eastern Scarberia, by Colonel Samuel Smith Park in Long Branchy Etobicoke, one on Centre Island, and the most famous one at the east end of The Beach at the Elsinore Brewery/RC Harris Plant. (Have they finished its expansion yet? I'd love to see its grounds landscaped again...)

42
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
i42:



Yup - see http://www.enwave.com/dlwc.php
I think the quality of the water also saw and improvement since the pipeline for deep water goes much further from mainland.

AoD
Click to expand...

you can notice the improvement in water taste and smell. before the new pipe, water used to smell and taste like dirt sometimes. IIRC, the dirt attribute probably came from algae booms in the summer. IMO, the water is more healthier now because less organic matter in the water reduces carcinogens created in the treatment process (chlorine + organic matter = carcinogens IIRC)
 
Here's a visual of the groundwater travel time that it takes to reach a surface stream, and exit the ground.

I've marked the approximate location of Downsview Park with a red dot. It's in the 100-500 year zone.
I'm not saying that dumping in general is good because of the long span of time that it takes for for the contaminants to reach the actual surface waters, but rather to provide some more information of the area.
The dump at Downsview can also be termed a 'pulse' source, which allows all the contaminants to disperse much more than if it were a continuous source, ie a factory.

picture.php
 
Reading Enwave's site, the water circulating through the buildings to cool them does not end up in taps. The new deep intake pipes do however bring water into the Island Filtration plant which ends up in our taps. That 4°C deep lake water cools the closed-loop air-conditioning water through heat exchange before heading into our taps. The stuff running through the buildings just keeps recirculating.

42
 
Andomano: thanks for that! Actual data! Very refreshing.

Activeday: your characterization of this forum as being "slanted towards a particular political agenda" holds no water, as there is a vast range of opinion presented on Urban Toronto. By in large, the majority of those responding to your posts are simply not in agreement with your argument, and please note, a number of like-minded respondents does not a cabal nor a conspiracy make: they are simply like-minded individuals.

Also please note that your having started this thread does not make you the owner of the thread, nor the arbiter of discussion points. First posts provide the basis for discussion only; they do not lay out the basis for the adoption by the readers and participants of all points as laid out in that first post. In other words, nobody here must agree with any or all components of your argument. If they exist, those who agree with you will surely climb on board and bolster your words with theirs, just as those who disagree with your points are making their opinions clear. There is no logical reason to suspect that those looking in on this thread and leaving without posting are tacitly in agreement with you: the forum simply does not work that way.

42
 
i42:

Reading Enwave's site, the water circulating through the buildings to cool them does not end up in taps. The new deep intake pipes do however bring water into the Island Filtration plant which ends up in our taps. That 4°C deep lake water cools the closed-loop air-conditioning water through heat exchange before heading into our taps. The stuff running through the buildings just keeps recirculating.
Click to expand...

Oops, my mistake - I thought you said water taken for cooling purposes is dumped back into the lake.

AoD
 
andomano said:
Here's a visual of the groundwater travel time that it takes to reach a surface stream, and exit the ground.

I've marked the approximate location of Downsview Park with a red dot. It's in the 100-500 year zone.
I'm not saying that dumping in general is good because of the long span of time that it takes for for the contaminants to reach the actual surface waters, but rather to provide some more information of the area.
The dump at Downsview can also be termed a 'pulse' source, which allows all the contaminants to disperse much more than if it were a continuous source, ie a factory.

picture.php
Click to expand...

Am I missing something? I can't see the photo...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top