by SUSAN MANN
A Grey County citizens’ organization plans to appeal the Ontario Ministry of Environment’s approvals concerning the construction of a biosolids to liquid fertilizer manufacturing facility in a business park near Dundalk.
James Cooke, spokesman of Southgate Public Interest Research Group, says he hasn’t yet reviewed the environment ministry compliance approvals for the Lystek International Inc. facility. But while some people have said the approvals are an indication the location of Lystek’s facility is okay, “it is not,” he says.
Lystek is currently in the midst of building its Southgate Organic Material Recovery Centre in the Township of Southgate’s Eco Industrial Park, located southwest of Dundalk, to turn municipal, farm and food processing biosolids into a fertilizer product. Kevin Litwiller, Lystek business development director, says they found out Oct. 9 their air, noise, waste plus storm and surface water environmental compliance approvals were granted.
“We will defend ourselves vigorously” if the approvals are appealed, Litwiller says.
Kate Jordan, environment ministry spokesperson, says conditions were included in the approvals to respond to input the ministry heard from the community. For example, Lystek needs to develop a groundwater protection plan, use alternate truck routes from the ones proposed by the company, and establish a public advisory committee.
Jordan says the ministry did a comprehensive review of the company’s applications and “we are satisfied they can meet all our standards and ministry approval requirements. We do support facilities like this that divert waste from landfills and that process waste.”
In the ministry’s review, “we ensured the application was based on sound science and that they demonstrated compliance with ministry requirements,” she says.
Cooke says the ministry’s granting the approvals doesn’t alleviate SPIRG’s concerns about biosolids, frequently referred to as sludge, being spread on land. No one can really know what’s in the biosolids the company will process because provincial regulations only require testing for 20 chemicals and heavy metals; “the rest isn’t tested,” he says.
He says there are representatives from Six Nations who will lead the appeal. But Lonny Bomberry, director of lands and resources for the Six Nations elected council says it isn’t the council that’s leading the appeal. The elected council doesn’t have a position yet on the Lystek project “because I haven’t formally taken it to them.”
Bomberry toured the Lystek site as a representative of council and says personally he thinks it’s a great project. “It presents no danger whatsoever to the Grand River,” he says. “There isn’t a wetland located within a mile from there unless you consider the township’s lagoon system a wetland.”
Litwiller says all the material they’re using to manufacture their fertilizer is non-hazardous because it has to meet environment ministry guidelines “in order for us to even accept it at our processing plant.” Lystek will also test its incoming source material to ensure it complies with ministry guidelines.
He adds that the facility’s development has been a more than year-long process that’s culminated in this month’s Superior Court decision to reject SPIRG’s challenge of the municipality granting a building permit to Lystek and the environment ministry issuing compliance approvals.
Any costs the company incurs if SPIRG appeals will be added to Lystek’s request for reimbursement of lawyers’ fees and lost revenue in connection with the Superior Court ruling and another Superior Court decision earlier this year ordering SPIRG to remove its blockade of the roadway leading into the Eco park. The blockade had prevented the company from proceeding with the building’s construction.
Litwiller says the costs haven’t been finalized yet but they’re in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The company will be seeking to recover those costs from both the SPIRG organization and individuals within the group.
The facility will be completed by Christmas and be up and running by the beginning of 2013, he says. It’ll employ eight to 10 operational, administrative and management people plus four to five laboratory workers and scientists. BF
Comments
my thoughts are process your own waste in your own backyard, we dont want urban sludge spread on Grey county farm land. its not safe and it smellls horrible,not what rural ontario needs or wants, were not a dump site for city dwellers.
Sean McGivern
PFO
There are many myths surrounding wastewater and other organic biosolids. Here are some of the more popular myths and the corresponding facts, in relation to these myths.
Myth #1: Biosolids will spread disease through its application to land
Fact: Actually there have been no scientifically substantiated reports in Canada of illness caused by the use of stabilized biosolids. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a 40 CFR Rule that categorizes biosolids as Class A or B, depending on the level of pathogens in the material. In Class A biosolids, pathogens must be substantially reduced to non-detectable levels and therefore, have significantly reduced potential for vector attraction. In order to achieve Class A categorization, the Rule describes specific processes including heating, composting, digestion or increased pH that reduce pathogens to below detectable levels. The innovative patented Lystek Process is a proven method that produces a Class A quality product and ensures disease-causing organisms have been destroyed.
Myth #2: Biosolids application is risky for consumers and crops
Fact: One of the most credible sources of scientific backing - the US National Academy of Sciences reviewed current practices, public health concerns and regulator standards related to biosolids and concluded in a July 2002 report that "the use of these materials in the production of crops for human consumption when practiced in accordance with existing federal guidelines and regulations, presents negligible risk to the consumer, to crop production and to the environment.”
Myth #3: Governments have not yet figured out the potential risks behind biosolids
Fact: In parallel with many other valid scientific studies (including the National Academy of Sciences- see Myth #2), the US Environmental Protection Agency used various studies prior to issuing its 40 CFR Rule- “Standards for the Use and Disposal of Sewage Sludge”. This rule also undergoes a bi-annual review (see reports here). This Rule ensures only processes that lead to effective pathogen control are employed for quality assurance. In addition this rule strictly limits heavy metal content to ensure any potential risks are mitigated.
The award-winning Lystek Process generates fertilizer products registered with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and that meet the Class A quality standards set out by the US EPA.
Myth #4: Biosolids pose risks to ground and surface water
Fact: In addition to having Class A biosolids processed to the point that pathogens are destroyed (see Myth #1) - regulatory standards ensure that ground and surface water is not contaminated by appropriate land application guidelines.
Biosolids are applied at a rate that allows for crops to absorb nutrients as they grow- reducing the potential of nutrients ending up in ground or surface waters and causing eutrophication – a common side effect of chemical fertilizers.
Metals in biosolids are generally in a form that is hard to dissolve in water and tend to remain adsorbed to the soil particles in the area where they were applied.
Myth #5: Biosolids are only useful to a select few
Fact: Appropriately treated biosolids fill the gap for a renewable, nutrient-rich, organic-based fertilizer for many including:
• Municipalities
• Corporations
• Governments
Class A biosolids can even be bagged and marketed to the public for application to lawns and gardens.
It’s important that any end-consumer know the different classifications of biosolids to ensure they select safe, high-grade biosolids generated by a proven processing technology- such as the award-winning Lystek Process.
Neither the Canadian nor the US biosolids regulations are based on "sound science." In fact, the most recent National Academy of Sciences biosolids report warned that that the current policies are based on out-dated science and unreliable risk assessment models. This unpredictable contaminated waste or products made from this waste, permanently pollutes the soil and does not belong on the land where we grow our food or graze our animals. For more information about the risks to human health and the environment from sludge, visit www.sludgefacts.org
Caroline Snyder Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Rochester Institute of Technology
....and is not a microbiologist. She has no documented expertise in the discipline areas required to make qualified statements about biosolids. She has not conducted any in-depth technical or scientific analysis of the Lystek system. She is not Canadian and clearly has no expertise in the rigorous, regulatory review processes required to have a process such as Lystek deemed safe and healthy by such agencies as the Ministry of the Environment, the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs, the Grand River Conservation Authority and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. She suggests that she knows better, but has no qualifications or basis to do so. Real facts and science are not found on blog spots run by misguided activists, such as Caroline Snyder. Some accurate information can be found here, however: http://www.weao.org/biosolids-video
THEN BAG THIS BS AND SELL IT TO CONSUMERS IN TORONTO WHERE IT COMES FROM, DONT DUMP IT UP HERE GREY COUNTY WHERE I LIVE>
SEAN MCGIVERN
PFO
....Mr. McGivern. However, there are already over 25 (and counting) fully informed, educated farmers in Grey County that want this CFIA registered product. So, if you don't want or need it, no problem...there are plenty who do.
Cheers!
The team at Lystek
I don't have any idea who Lystek is, but any "team" which makes patronizing, and dismissive, comments like this, is definitely NOT any team I want to be on. I, too, am fully-informed, and educated, and to me, who I do business with, is more important than what they sell, and sorry, Lystek, you're not my kind of people.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Post new comment