Better Solutions for Halifax's Wastewater Woes

leaking pipe infiltrating a water source.

"Water water everywhere and not a single drop to drink"  is a phrase coined from a poem "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" by Samuel Taylor Coleridge. The poem is about sailors who are stuck at sea.  I feel like those sailors.  We have financial issues in our municipality, an solutions all around us.So why aren't we using them?

Since the Halifax Regional Municipality's  announcement to go forward with the trunking of sewage from Timberlea to the sewage treatment plant in Downtown Halifax, I feel like a sailor cut adrift in a rubber dingy.  I had sent out distress calls as far back as 2001 that our wastewater/sewage treatment was in peril which needed a "true fix", the localized treatment otherwise known as decentralized treatment.

After a few google searches, I had found wastewater solutions that could be utilized for hard to service lots, development outside of the serviced area for both residential and commercial buildings.  I requested during a Regional Council meeting on the topic of future wastewater solutions, but it fell on deaf ears.  No alternatives were brought forward in the years to come, nor were they brought forward during the Original Regional Plan.  I did revive the discussion during my time on the Regional Plan +5 Review, but my time was cut short.

Over the past 2 weeks I have had several discussions with qualified wastewater engineers regarding the issues with Halifax's sewage problem.
All have stated the same points which I will summarize:

"Sewage treatment should be as close to the source as possible.  All pipes leak at some point from either age, installation failure, or the shifting of the earth. This high possibility of leaks can be mitigated by having shorter runs of pipe."

 "If there is pipe failure the effluent or sewage infiltrates the groundwater, and can cause contamination to lakes, waterways, or well/water sources or flooding of dwellings."

I decided to "interview" one Engineer who has just introduced a new wastewater solution to Nova Scotia to hear his thoughts on the "Timberlea Trunk" or as it is now being called "Chain of Lakes Trail".

J. Micheal O'Connor is  a practising Engineer for over 30 years and is the Principal Engineer for Matrix Consulting Inc. who are now the sole distributors of Aquarobic International in Nova Scotia and the Maritimes.  I posed a few questions to him, and here is the Transcript of our conversation.

DMS: As an Engineer,does the trunking of sewage from Timberlea to the Downtown make sense ?"

JMO: No. There are viable solutions that could be implemented which make more sense.         Decentralizing or treating sewage close to it's origin is the ideal solution.  Burying miles of pipe, constructing lift stations and/or pumping stations to keep the sewage moving works but is a waste of money these days. 

 Treating sewage at the source or as close to the source is not new to the world of wastewater solutions.The company that I represent, Aquarobic International, was established in 1974. It is a NSF 40 Standard system approved by the Department of Environment of Nova Scotia last Fall.  Although it was designed in Canada, it has been used in hard to service areas in the United States but is now available in Atlantic Canada.

DMS: "So how would this system work in this case of  the Brunello Development?

JMO: Well, instead of  trunking sewage 25.2 km to a wastewater treatment facility on the Halifax Peninsula, the wastewater could be treated in the area as Aquarobic has the capacity to treat up to 1,000 homes.  It can also be utilized as an "add-on" to existing plants.  The technology does not use any chemicals as it uses aeration technology and a  "Timed Sequenced Batch Reactor".
The aeration speeds up the natural decay of the sewage by 1000 times and is faster than the normal septic process. 

I recommend a series of Aquarobics units in series that would do the same job or better for the 25kms of piping instead of adding to the load on the already overwhelmed scotia sq location treatment plant. And the Aquarobics system would be a fraction of that expansion cost. Also for the larger units ( 10,000 USG range ) we don't use french drains. There are many options.

Basically it releases the treated effluent into a dispersion area in small batches so that it can be absorbed into Mother Earth.  Typically, with a septic field there is no hold on the amount of influent being released, that's when you see soggy waterlogged areas of lawns.  With Aquarobic, this doesn't occur with any size of the units.   

DMS: What about the pipes and necessary land for such a product?

JMO:  The units are all underground so the land surrounding the units can be landscaped and utilized.  As for piping, the length of the required pipes would be significantly reduced!  If you are treating a subdivision for example, it could be yards away from the treatment unit as opposed to 25.2km.

DMS: So this is a less expensive method of treatment, non obstructive to the landscape, uses no chemicals, but has not been considered as a "solution"?

JMO: Unfortunately, you are correct.  

The other issue that relates to this is who is paying for new infrastructure for developments in general.  I think we all now the answer to this.  It relates to the "Capital Cost Contributions" or CCC's as they are known.
CCC is the deal between a developer and the Municipality when a development is planned within the physical boundaries of the Municipality. Defined by CG Acres in a 2006 study:

"An infrastructure Charge is a specific dollar value per lot or  per acre that a municipality imposes on a developer to finance the off ­site capital costs associated with new  development.” 

 CCC’s Include:

•  New Growth Related Capital Costs  
•  Construction, engineering, interest, land, surveying, professional studies

CCC’s Do NOT include:

•  Operations & Maintenance
•  Replacement ß Rehabilitation/renewal  
•  Costs that result from past growth

What is the rationale for the Municipality supplying funds for new development?

"Developers reap an economic benefit from their  activities, and part of that benefit accrues from public infrastructure”

New Tools for New Times, A Sourcebook for the Financing, Funding and Delivery of Urban 

Infrastructure, Canada West Foundation, 2006

In other words municipalities are supplementing the new infrastructure which is draining the municipal coffers which should be used for maintenance of existing infrastructure and allowing developers to make a substantial profit by using funds from the taxpayers therefore municipalities defer the required maintenance on the existing infrastructure in established neighbourhoods. Failures are bound to occur, but at the rate HRM has been?   How many times have we heard in the past 5 years of watermain breaks, sinkholes opening up on city streets?  Too many in my opinion.

After reading several articles from the C.D. Howe Institute by Harry Kitchen and Enid Slack (2 economists based in Toronto) I pressured Regional Council to request a study on Capital Cost Contributions.

The recommendations are stuck in the quagmire of the Centre Plan and the Regional Plan +5.  Will this ever see land?  Like the poor sailors stuck in the doldrums...  the need for CCC reform is in a dingy...  being circled by sharks.