Louis Shalako
According to Sarnia-Lambton Member of the Legislative
Assembly of Ontario, The Right Honourable Mr.
Robert Bailey, he would cancel the Otter
Creek wind farm due to groundwater contamination.
No word on how he would
crack down on agricultural runoff, which leads to algae bloom affecting
millions.
Letter
to the Editor, July 21/16:
“I ran a water treatment
company for nearly 25 years. I found it absurd when an article published in the
Sarnia Observer had a few disgruntled individuals attempting to tie earthquakes
and windmills to turbidity in well water.
Peter Epp then wrote an editorial (Absurdities Abound, 14 July) that appears to be based entirely on this article. He is a wordsmith, not a water well expert. Good editorials are written by good wordsmiths who have done their homework! He totally missed the real problem, which is that poor water wells produce bad water.
A quick call to the local offices of The Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change and the Health Unit would have flagged the real issue: water quality.
What I believe I see in the original article tells me that these ‘problem wells’ are likely shallow dug or GUDI wells (Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water). They are known to be problematic. If an earthquake in Quebec causes turbidity, you have a problem! Get your water tested! The health unit will provide you with directions and materials for bacterial testing. It is free.
Water quality can be a real issue in rural areas. Water quality is important. I am saddened when this real issue is diminished by individuals with hidden agendas. The editorial’s headline is correct. It’s absurd to imply that earthquakes or windmills are causing bad water.
I, for one, am tired of the anti-wind energy neo-Luddites’ fear mongering. They accuse windmills of causing what, at times, seems to be half the world’s problems.”
Dean de Jong
Plympton-Wyoming (a largely agricultural area of Lambton County).
Peter Epp then wrote an editorial (Absurdities Abound, 14 July) that appears to be based entirely on this article. He is a wordsmith, not a water well expert. Good editorials are written by good wordsmiths who have done their homework! He totally missed the real problem, which is that poor water wells produce bad water.
A quick call to the local offices of The Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change and the Health Unit would have flagged the real issue: water quality.
What I believe I see in the original article tells me that these ‘problem wells’ are likely shallow dug or GUDI wells (Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water). They are known to be problematic. If an earthquake in Quebec causes turbidity, you have a problem! Get your water tested! The health unit will provide you with directions and materials for bacterial testing. It is free.
Water quality can be a real issue in rural areas. Water quality is important. I am saddened when this real issue is diminished by individuals with hidden agendas. The editorial’s headline is correct. It’s absurd to imply that earthquakes or windmills are causing bad water.
I, for one, am tired of the anti-wind energy neo-Luddites’ fear mongering. They accuse windmills of causing what, at times, seems to be half the world’s problems.”
Dean de Jong
Plympton-Wyoming (a largely agricultural area of Lambton County).
 |
| The site, outlined in purple. |
That part of southwestern
Ontario (the Otter Creek site) is low, it's flat, and the water table lies
quite close to the surface. It has been extensively deforested and is intensely
farmed using backwards technologies. Groundwater problems are the result of terrain,
soil type and a hundred and fifty years of bad environmental practices.
In other words, it is the
classic GUDI area, i.e., 'groundwater under direct influence' of surface water.
What is even more important to understanding the hydro-geology of the area is
that it is farm country and staunchly Conservative.
Wind farms have only come
in during the last fifteen years, under a Liberal government.
If it had been their own
idea, then that of course would be different.
The
terrain.
The elevation of Lake St. Clair is 175 metres. The
elevation of Chatham, Ontario, is 198 metres, at a distance of roughly twenty
kilometres due east of Lake St. Clair. That isn't much of a gradient for runoff
to begin with, and such a flat, treeless plain with minimal elevation above
lake levels, is already prone to flooding. That is
less than ten metres of drop for every kilometre of distance. It's practically
indiscernible. Wallaceburg flooded this spring, and it is at risk of flooding virtually every spring.
There are rivers coming down from London and environs,
as well as the rather flat Lambton County to the north. So, in periods of
extreme rainfall, or heavy snow-melt, much of that water soaks down, rather
than draining to the lake. Any sensible mind can see how this would be a major
cause of well-water turbidity, considering the heavy agricultural use and lack
of forest cover and natural wetlands. There are no hedgerows or windbreaks,
familiar from the Delhi and Norfolk area, which, with sandy soil and
deforestation in previous centuries, suffered extensive soil loss and had to be
rehabilitated at great time and expense.
Interestingly, if farmers
have taken up the practice of using all fields, in other words not (just for example) a
four-field, three cash-crop and one cover-crop rotation, but in fact planting
all fields with cash crops, each and every year, they are taking out an
estimated twenty-five percent of fodder or grass cover, which resists soil
erosion and holds water closer to the surface (slowing down surface runoff). It takes up a good rain and turns it into
vegetation quite quickly, (mostly in the growing season). The difference
between that and corn, is that there is no bare soil exposed, and
little in terms of fertilizers and pest control agents to be sucked down into
the water table.
In winter, a field of
grass will still hold more water, and more topsoil, than a field of plowed dirt.
Rain or snow-melt quickly runs off into ditches and tile drains, taking a
measurable portion of soil with it—along with all those pesky chemicals.
So, if they're not
leaving anything fallow these days—this may be a contributor to the problem.
Leaving a quarter of
available land in clover for a full season of course takes out one quarter
of the potential revenue. Not leaving fallow ground is not an advance in farming
technique. It may be an advance in revenue generation, in the short term. Long
term, it assumes a constant diet of fertilizers and other chemical agents. This
is going to affect water quality, not just downstream in Lake St. Clair and
Lake Erie, but also right there in your own wells.
So, why would Mr. Bailey, who has access to all the facts and a responsibility to know and to comprehend them, make such a bone-headed assertion?
He wants their votes. He wants yours too, my suggestion is that we don't give it to him.
END
Louis has all kinds of books and stories available from Smashwords.
Thank you for reading.
