To the editor:
Water: What’s It Good For? March 7 Capital News.
The gist of [the Close-up feature] is that Kelowna and its wide neighbourhood is running into serious water problems, with the volume and quality of water needed for the ever growing population.
As the article informs us, the collective of the local water authorities have been pondering the problem for a year and half, producing a 300-page tome of a report that Kevin Parnell, the author of this article, calls a “booklet.”
The key argument of this “booklet” boils down to two issues: 1. Kelowna and company, which wastes a lot of money on a variety of frivolous projects, does not have sufficient funds to provide the residents here with quality water in the future, by constructing a water treatment plant. 2. It is deemed cheaper to drill artesian wells to provide such, at the cost of $400 million.
My questions, which the article did not answer, would be: 1. How much would a water treatment facility for the Kelowna centered region cost? 2. How long is the ground water expected to last? 3. What is the estimated population size the wells are to serve?
4. However long the shot may be, what would happen if the ground water became contaminated? 5. Has anyone considered limiting the population influx into the valley, just as Banff did?
As far as I am concerned, the aquifer should be reserved for real emergencies, which are bound to arise with the changing climate, and the flow in the relevant streams should be regulated, to prevent any needless losses, for, indeed, we cannot live without water; especially not in an already arid area such as here.