Advertisement 1

Letter to the Editor: The precautionary principle and three questions about Xinyi

Article content

As a retired public health professional, the precautionary principle – “err on the side of caution” – is important to me. I am writing to share three of my many concerns regarding the proposed glass manufacturing facility in Stratford.

Advertisement 2
Story continues below
Article content

Is Xinyi fully aware of the extreme hardness of our water and the impact that may have on their machinery? In the Dec 3, 2020, Xinyi presentation and questions and answers, the question was raised regarding, “How many times is the water recycled”? The response was “until the minerals concentrate.”

What if the minerals are already so concentrated the company has to use new fresh water constantly, and can’t reuse it? That may inflate the projected water usage. One of the responses from Xinyi on the city’s website states: “If the mineral content of water supply at Stratford is low…,” which leads me to believe they are not fully aware of our water hardness and the havoc it can wreak on equipment.

Article content

Is city council fully aware of the greenhouse gas emissions that will result from the Xinyi Glass factory? It is clear from the “Land Use Compatibility – Air Quality” report dated Sep 26, 2019, on the city’s website that: “In support of an approval under section 9 of the (Environmental Protection Act), two technical supporting studies must be prepared: Emission Summary and Dispersion Modelling (ESDM) report and Acoustic Assessment Report (AAR). The ESDM Report documents all air emission sources at the facility and provides the results of the dispersion modelling assessment. The ESDM Report must demonstrate that the predicted impacts due to emissions from the facility comply with the applicable standards and guidelines at the property line and beyond.”
A noise feasibility study has been completed, dated Sept. 26, 2019, but the air emissions report has yet to be completed. This is crucial information for residents and city council before any informed decision can be made.

Advertisement 3
Story continues below
Article content

Is city council including a requirement for Xinyi to pay for the costs of decommissioning the site when the equipment is outdated and Xinyi ceases production in Stratford, or will Stratford be left with another Cooper-style debacle to deal with? We have been told the lifespan of the factory is approximately 15 years and that one rebuild is planned. So what happens to the site in 30 years if Xinyi walks away? Will the taxpayers be saddled with the costs of removing the equipment and cleaning up the site?

I would greatly appreciate responses to these questions. Please know that I also share the concerns ardently expressed by many of my fellow citizens regarding the loss of prime agricultural land, the issuance of an MZO that bypasses the public planning processes, and the secrecy of these negotiations, which has severely impacted my trust in our elected officials.

Respectfully,

C. MacDougall
Stratford

Article content
Comments
You must be logged in to join the discussion or read more comments.
Join the Conversation

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.

Latest National Stories
    News Near Tillsonburg
      This Week in Flyers