It is clear that the proponent’s current proposal (“Alternative 1A”) would:
- Be more difficult, and cost more, to build
- Would require a temporary construction bridge over the north falls, construction materials would need to be stored farther away, site excavation and hauling more difficult
- Produce less power
- Because of the constricted intake, which also has more bends
- Cost more to operate
- Maintenance access, driveway access, and intake gate implementation would be more difficult, transformer location and ventilation more difficult
- Impinge on riparian rights and right of navigation
- For at least the three private property owners and for the Township of Muskoka Lakes dock, just downstream
- Create massive dangers to the public
- Due to the long-time and very popular in-water recreation within 50′ both upstream and downstream
So if it would cost more to build and operate, produce less power, and have operational risks, why did this happen.
Firstly, the proponent simply would not actually provide answers to the public’s fair and relevant questions, so the Township of Muskoka Lakes could not proceed with land lease negotiations, so the proponent could not proceed with their proposed Option 2. As the proponent chose to not answer the questions, presumably they knew the public would not like the answers.
As to why such an unworkable proposal is now being considered, it appears the government’s attitude is “if you want to build such a ridiculous thing, we’ll rubber-stamp the approval”.
Finally, the Ontario Liberal government’s process is backwards in that they first select an “Applicant of Record” and the government then considers they have an obligation to approve whatever the proponent then proposes, even if it is then found that there are environmental or other problems. The government apparently feels they have a committment that once a proponent starts spending money on environmental assessment and other design and approval work, the proposed project must be approved, both so:
- The government has no liability for money spent by the proponent (which would be wasted if approvals are not granted).
- That private developers will continue to finance and build generating stations in the future.
The end result is that the environmental assessment process becomes a meaningless farce. So here we are, with a proponent trying to build something that shouldn’t be built.