Summary
The main dangers created by a hydro-electric generating station are for a person in the water:
- Getting drawn-in to the water intake, and held underwater at the intake’s “trash racks”.
- Losing buoyancy due to the turbulence and aeration of the water exiting the tailrace.
As you can see for yourself by reading the most-recent letter from the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (the MECP, that has the responsibility to protect human life), they don’t respond to these concerns. Instead this evasive letter makes unrelated comments about boating and a vague statement about Diver’s Point (do they mean people can safely stand on it, or people can safely Scuba dive from it – which would become stupidly dangerous).
The proponent refuses to respond in any detail about the extreme dangers their proposed Bala station would create.
As detailed below, the proposed Bala station would make the water dangerous even for people outside of the safety booms. This would be a deceptive booby trap, and should not be allowed by the MECP.
The facts are:
The water flow through hydro-electric generating stations much smaller than the proposed Bala station have caused drownings both upstream and downstream.
- So the danger is real.
The calculation used by both Transport Canada and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry shows that due to the dangers created by the proposed Bala station, the upstream safety boom should be relocated farther upstream.
- So the public would not be adequately protected from the dangers created.
While the large orange or yellow floats of a safety boom are good for visibility, the Coroner for an upstream drowning noted that these actually contribute to the danger as they can tip a boat and are difficult for a person in the water to hold on to.
- So the public would not be adequately protected from the dangers created.
The MNRF installed buoys upstream of the Bala north channel to provide additional warning, but these – and warning signs – are of no benefit to people using the upstream boat rental docks or someone using the upstream municipal docks whose motor stalls, or is blown by the wind, or carried by the current downstream to the safety boom.
- So the public would not be adequately protected from the dangers created
Historical water flow data shows that the proposed Bala station would operate at full capacity 96 m³/s an average of 21 days each summer, so safety at a flow of 96 m³/s does need to be considered.
The proponent’s own information (the coloured areas in our composite graphic) shows that at this full capacity flow, someone would be carried the 55 m from the upstream safety boom to the proposed Bala station’s intake in 45 seconds, in this time, nothing could be done to save them, as the proposed Bala station would not have a local Operator and apparently would not have a publicly-accessible emergency stop button.
Visiting more than 32 similarly-sized hydro-electric generating stations shows that they are not built in the middle of a popular in-water recreational area.
- So the proposed Bala station would be unprecedented, the public safety measures are inadequate, so the project would be a deadly booby trap.
The proponent’s own information also shows they would cause the velocity of the water outside of their proposed downstream safety boom to be several times more than the 0.5 m/s which Transport Canada says is safe for canoes and kayaks.
- So being outside of the proposed downstream safety boom would be dangerous, as people fall off stand-up paddleboards and inflatable rafts, and this should not be deadly in a navigable waterway, in front of public and private docks.
The Council of the Township of Muskoka Lakes has done what they can by unanimously passing a Resolution requesting the MECP not permit this dangerous facility to operate. We look forward to the MECP fulfilling this request and their mandate of protecting human life.