Along with Toronto’s waste, will oil and gas drilling/frac’ing waste across southern Ontario be hauled to York1’s new dump in Dresden? I bet York1 and Doug Ford and his gov’t will never be honest about what toxic waste will be hauled there. The only way to protect the community’s drinking water, health and property values is to prevent York1’s Dresden dump.
A collection of Dresden Voices is included below.
The Threat of Landfill Leachate to Drinking Water in the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers
A Project of the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers Leachate Collaborative
Industrial waste is not gone from our rivers. It’s just hidden.
The “Leachate Loophole” is a set of regulatory gaps that allow the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers to be polluted by landfill leachate – the toxic liquid that is created as water percolates through landfills.
The Leachate Loophole involves multiple environmental laws, including those that cover solid waste, surface water, and drinking water. Modern landfills must take extensive measures to contain leachate in order to protect neighboring groundwater and streams. Yet, once this leachate is collected, it is common practice to send it to municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) for disposal. WWTPs are not required to remove the harmful substances that are present in leachate, and they are not equipped to do so, even where they discharge into drinking water sources. The burden to remove harmful chemicals is placed on the drinking water treatment plants that draw from these waters, whose operators may not be aware that neighboring WWTPs are accepting leachate.
To represent the big picture, this report focuses on the portions of the Mohawk River and Hudson River Estuary that are used as drinking water supplies: the Mohawk River east of Schenectady, the Hudson River near the mouth of the Mohawk River, and the Hudson River from New Baltimore to Poughkeepsie. Our geographical focus also includes the section of the Hudson River Estuary between Troy and New Baltimore. Even though drinking water isn’t drawn directly from this area, the waters are all connected.
In this area, approximately 368,000 people drink water that is drawn from the Hudson and Mohawk rivers or from groundwater that is directly influenced by this surface water. This includes groups that disproportionately experience environmental harms.
Landfill leachate is a complex and variable mix that may contain heavy metals, pesticides, and synthetic chemicals used in industrial processes, manufacturing, and consumer goods, especially plastics. Exposure to these substances contributes to a wide range of diseases and health harms, including cancer, immune problems, and developmental effects due to their interference with a wide range of biological systems and processes. The burden of exposure is not distributed evenly, and is compounded by other economic and social stressors to increase health impacts.
Toxic chemicals are ubiquitous in the waste already present in landfills, so they will be present in leachate for the foreseeable future, and they are on track to continue being introduced into landfills in the years to come.
Here’s an example of how the Leachate Loophole works.
03 / 03
1 Colonie Landfill
The Colonie Landfill is an actively operating, municipal landfill that receives over 300,000 tons of waste each year. This includes household trash, as well as industrial waste, incinerator ash, construction and demolition debris, petroleum contaminated soil, and wastewater treatment plant sludge.
2 Mohawk View Wastewater Treatment Plant
Leachate from the Colonie Landfill is sent to the Mohawk View Wastewater Treatment Plant, operated by the Town of Colonie. The wastewater treatment plant accepts about 10,000,000 gallons of leachate per year from the Colonie Landfill. The wastewater treatment plant is equipped to treat human waste, not toxic leachate.
3 Cohoes Drinking Water Intake
About five miles downstream from the Mohawk View Wastewater Treatment Plant, the City of Cohoes draws water from the Mohawk River to provide drinking water to 17,000 people. The drinking water treatment plant bears the cost and responsibility of producing safe drinking water.
The Leachate Loophole involves multiple environmental laws, including those that cover solid waste, surface water, and drinking water.
At the Landfill: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), actively operating landfills are required to collect landfill leachate to prevent pollution of groundwater or surface water around the landfill site. Landfill operators must regularly test for dozens of contaminants in leachate, groundwater, and surface water near the facility, to ensure that leachate is well contained. If the landfill discharges this leachate directly from the site, it is required to remove up to 14 contaminants. Many landfills constructed prior to RCRA lack liners to collect leachate, and have been closed and capped to reduce leachate production. Some of these closed landfills have leachate collection systems.
At the Wastewater Treatment Plant: Clean Water Act
The standard practice is for landfills to dispose of leachate at municipal WWTPs. The leachate may be transported by truck or by pipe. Landfills are not required to perform any treatment of leachate before sending it to a WWTP. Following the Clean Water Act (CWA), WWTP treatment requirements are set out in operating permits under the State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES). These permits are used to limit pollutants that are conventionally found in human waste. SPDES permits rarely include the synthetic chemicals found in leachate, which WWTPs are not designed or equipped to remove.
At the Drinking Water Treatment Plant: Safe Drinking Water Act
Under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), drinking water treatment plants are required to meet concentration limits for approximately 90 contaminants, however the WWTPs that discharge into the rivers that supply this water are not required to monitor or remove these same contaminants from their effluent.
Because of the Leachate Loophole, approximately 89 million gallons of landfill leachate are dumped every year into the Mohawk and Hudson Rivers. …
Ontario has a gas well problem and it’s getting bigger, An investigation by The Narwhal revealed Ontario can’t afford to plug its old gas wells and isn’t collecting enough from companies to ensure future well-capping costs don’t also fall to the taxpayer by Matt McIntosh, Sept. 10, 2025, The Narwhal
Oil and gas wells are found throughout southern Ontario. Safely decommissioning them is a costly process that falls to operators or landowners — or the province.
In the early evening of Aug. 26, 2021, an explosion rocked the small town of Wheatley, Ont. Hydrogen sulfide gas had ignited after leaking from a gas well long-buried under a building in the town’s core.
The event saw more than 60 households and 30-odd businesses in the area evacuated. Twenty people were injured. Unfortunately, it was only a symptom of a larger problem.
Ontario is home to tens of thousands of old oil and gas wells. Many were dug before regulations existed for properly plugging and abandoning inactive wells. They can leak gases into the atmosphere including highly flammable and poisonous hydrogen sulfide and planet-warming methane, posing risks to human health and safety and contributing to greenhouse gas pollution.
Properly remediating these wells is an expensive process, and the Ontario government doesn’t have enough funds to cover the cost.
Moreover, new wells continue to be drilled, and the security deposit required by the Ontario government isn’t near enough to cover the cost of remediation, should it fall to the province. It’s so disproportionate to the cost that one industry consultant suggested the deposit should either be increased or abandoned altogether — to “communicate to the public the reality of the situation.” That advice came to light in a series of documents accessed by The Narwhal through freedom of information legislation.
Here’s what you need to know about Ontario’s old oil and gas well problem, and where new wells and carbon storage fit into the complicated puzzle.
There are tens of thousands of old wells in Ontario and many are still unaccounted for in public records
Southern Ontario was the early epicentre of what became Canada’s national petroleum industry, with commercial drilling for oil and natural gas beginning in the late 1800s.
A geospatial Ontario map shows the sites of oil and gas wells across the southwestern part of the province — from quiet rural areas to the bottom of Lake Erie and even in busy urban centres like downtown Toronto.
According to a report by the journal Geoscience Canada, 10,000 wells are estimated to have been operating in Ontario by the early 1900s — but records only exist for 1,500. By 1970, 50,000 wells had been drilled, but the province only has records for 27,000.
Given these statistics, the Geoscience report authors concluded “there may be tens of thousands of unrecorded or lost wells in southwestern Ontario.”
Capping wells is expensive, and Ontario doesn’t have the funds to do so
Some of Ontario’s old wells were properly plugged once they became inactive, but others were dug before proper plugging standards existed. The inadequate materials used to fill and cap them degrade over time and can allow fluids to surface and leak. The cost to fix this problem is significant.
Landowners and municipalities shoulder the financial responsibility of properly capping orphan wells, which are inactive wells that have no known operator. It’s an enormous bill. The Ministry of Natural Resources maintains an abandoned works program to financially support well-capping, and the program has spent $29.5 million to date to cap 415 wells — at an average cost of $71,084 per well.
In June 2023, an additional $7.5 million was allocated to support municipalities over three years in risk and emergency preparedness related to old wells. The funds are part of a wider $23.6-million provincial strategy to identify and plug old oil and gas wells.
But at an average cost of $71,000 to plug one well, it would cost more than $700 million to plug 10,000 sites, and that’s just a portion of the known wells in the province.
Robert Sharon, director of infrastructure services for the municipality of Leamington, near Wheatley, told The Narwhal, “The funding the [Ministry of Natural Resources] receives to do this work is nowhere near adequate given the magnitude of the problem.”
Oil and gas companies’ security deposits do not cover the actual cost of remediation
For new wells being drilled, oil and gas companies pay a security deposit that can be used should remediation fall to the province — because the company has gone into insolvency, or walked away for other reasons. But documents obtained through freedom of information legislation suggest current securities are nowhere near enough to cover capping costs or additional hazards. The government currently requires between $3,000 and $10,000 in security for wells drilled on land, depending on the depth, and $15,000 for underwater wells.
In an October 2023 email to a provincial oil and gas working group, one industry advisor noted, “The public is led to believe the security will look after the wells and site remediation. This is simply not the case. If an operator declares bankruptcy, there is generally not enough security to properly deal with abandonment.”
Days later, the working group discussed a since-passed regulation that has removed exemptions and a cap on cumulative securities for operators with multiple oil and gas wells. Meeting minutes show Ministry of Natural Resources staff expressed the rationale was to “prevent further issues to what we currently have with orphaned wells in the province, [and] to ensure operators have sufficient funds to plug wells.”
An industry advisor suggested the province drop gas well securities entirely, given the actual cost
In communications with the oil and gas working group, the industry advisor suggested that, given the high cost of properly remediating wells, the province should either raise the amount required for security deposits or scrap securities altogether.
They said the latter option would “save administrative costs for the industry and for the regulator and also communicate to the public the reality of the situation.”
“I think that most operators are responsible. Compliance with the regulatory requirements should be adequate to ensure operations are conducted safely and in an environmentally responsible manner. As the security amounts that exist are totally inadequate, these security requirements should be eliminated as they create extra red tape for minimal gains.”
In my experience, most operators are liars and irresponsible, working hard to avoid clean-up, no matter how many billions of dollars in profits they rape out, and our regulators and govts across Canada know and enable it.
As of Aug. 28, 2025, financial securities had not been raised or eliminated.
Proposed underground carbon storage could increase the risk of gas leaks
The same regulation that removed exemptions and caps on securities for new wells also allowed for testing around carbon storage, which is new to Ontario. The process for carbon storage sees carbon emissions, like those produced when fossil fuels are burned, captured and compressed into liquid form so they can be injected into caverns in the ground, rather than released into the atmosphere. Those caverns often come in the form of depleted oil and gas wells and saline aquifers.
As the government heads back into session in October, second reading will continue on Bill 27, the Resource Management and Safety Act, which would actually allow carbon storage to go forward in Ontario at a commercial scale — meaning greenhouse gas producers can inject and store carbon undergroundIt’s impossible to permanently store CO2 underground, all wells leak eventually no matter what phony guidelines industry writes up for gov’ts, notably corrosive, life-threatening CO2 injected into heavily leaking our gas carpet bombed Ontario. Besides, Carbon Capture is just an industry scam to steal money from the citizenry and sneak it into pockets of the polluting rich., following guidelines developed by the province.
Critics, including opposition MPs in Ontario, have noted the risk of leaks where carbon is injected, particularly in areas with an abundance of old — and unknown — wells that create pathways to the surface.
— Compiled by Paloma Pacheco
Enbridge investors to get billions as gas giant expands into small-town Ontario by John Woodside, Oct 9, 2025, National Observer
Enbridge’s monopoly on Ontario’s gas network is helping the energy giant generate massive profits, executives told shareholders in quarterly calls this year.
“In Ontario, we have the opportunity to earn, to over-earn, rather … and we’re certainly targeting to do that,” said Michele Harradence, president of gas distribution and storage, in May.
With a monopoly on the province’s gas distribution, cold weather that encourages people and businesses to crank the heat up and a provincial government that supports Enbridge’s vision, the Calgary-based company is feeling very confident, Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel said during the same investor call.
“I’m really pleased with both the premier of Ontario, Premier Ford; and the minister of energy … about their commitment to gas,” Ebel said. “The government’s policy is to provide access to gas, to the maximum possibility to Ontario consumers and businesses. And that’s a really important signal.”
That was in May, and at the company’s next quarterly update to investors in August, Ebel said the company was planning to return $40 billion to $45 billion to shareholders over the next five years, driven by gas network expansions across the continent.
Among the company’s expansion plans are major investments in LNG exports in the US Gulf Coast, Western Canada and into homes and businesses in Ontario and some US states.
Ebel said he was “excited about the long-term growth” in its utilities business, which is supporting the huge shareholder payouts.
Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel recently told investors he was very pleased with Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s policy to provide “gas, to the maximum possibility.” The comments come as the energy giant plans to fork billions back to shareholders.
In the first half of this year, Enbridge made $1.3 billion from Ontario ratepayers — roughly $300 million, or 27.5 per cent, more than the first half of 2024.
The soaring profits are helped by a rate hike Enbridge secured in 2024, which the company said was necessary to pay for its multi-billion dollar expansion into more communities.
Kent Elson, a lawyer representing the non-profit Environmental Defence who tracks Enbridge’s regulatory proceedings at the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), said the company does what it’s given incentive to do — which is a problem given that burning fossil fuels must be phased out to address climate breakdown.
Enbridge is “specifically citing customer growth as one of the reasons their profits are so high, and if they’re earning profits from connecting so many customers, it’s no surprise they try as hard as they can to expand the gas network,” he said.
This business model is at odds with an independent study produced for the Ontario government by consulting firm Dunsky Energy + Climate Advisors and ESMIA (Energy Super Modelers and International Analysts), which found achieving net-zero by 2050 would bring economic benefits, but to achieve those emission reductions will require significant action. Pursuing “rapid” electrification of buildings is a “no-regret” action that should be supported immediately, the report states.
The lifespan of new pipelines can stretch more than 60 years, meaning they could still be in operation well into the 2080s, completely undermining the country’s net-zero by 2050 target.
“We can’t be using gas at that point,” Elson said. “So these are risky, poor investments from a financial perspective, and from an environmental perspective, they are disastrous.”
Those risks were the central issue before the Ontario regulator as Enbridge sought approval for its rate hike and gas network expansion. That application was fought over by lawyers at the regulatory board throughout 2023. As it was being debated, the company was accused of lying to customers, and a key study it used to justify the gas expansion was criticized by experts as faulty. Eventually, the OEB determined Enbridge’s plan would increase the risk of stranded assets and saddle ratepayers with the cost.
The pipeline giant was all but defeated, until Ford kneecapped the independent regulator last year by passing legislation that gave the provincial government authority to override the OEB in Enbridge’s favour.
Since then, Enbridge has continued its push into Ontario towns and cities.
Municipal battlegrounds
Using the new Civic Searchlight tool, a searchable data base built by Canada’s National Observer, which scours municipal meetings to document what councillors are discussing, we discovered that since April, at least 85 municipalities across Ontario have debated Enbridge’s expansion plans and what to do about it.
For instance, two years ago, Kawartha Lakes became a battleground between Enbridge and environmentalists after the OEB ordered a pause on the Bobcaygeon expansion project, which would have seen 25 kilometres of new pipelines built to connect homes to the gas network. The company urged residents to write to the regulator with their disappointment, and the city’s mayor, Doug Elmslie, wrote to the regulator to say residents were “missing out on an opportunity.”
In September, city councillors debated whether or not to charge Enbridge a fee for reviewing right-of-way applications for its pipeline. “We can’t prohibit them from using our right-of-way,” said Juan Roass, Kawartha Lakes director of engineering and corporate assets, but to address budget concerns, the community could charge the multi-billion dollar company to review its plans.
“My concern is, if we do this [is] are we jeopardizing future expansion?” said Elmslie. “Is it possible that Enbridge … [will] be loath to expand their services if we go this route?”
In other towns, such as Ramara, Southgate, Bradford and Georgina, councils spoke in favour of Enbridge, but not all municipalities are in favour of a gas expansion.
Last year, Hamilton, Whitby and Kingston all passed motions endorsing the OEB’s initial ruling against Enbridge, which noted that gas must be phased out and heat pumps are already more efficient and cheaper over the long term.
Kingston city councillor, Brandon Tozzo, said the city was trying its best to pull off an energy transition and is “dealing with a government that is just not there, and seems to be almost captured by industry.”
Death spiral
The conversations about how to connect more communities to gas stands in stark defiance of climate science and economic analyses, which is clear that fossil fuels must be phased out.
Burning fossil fuels to heat buildings is one of Canada’s toughest challenges in the race to decarbonize, causing more greenhouse gas emissions than power generation or agriculture. In Ontario, buildings are the third-largest source of planet-warming pollution, responsible for a quarter of the province’s total.
Last year, the Canadian Climate Institute found that between 2013 and 2022, on average, Ontario saw 43,600 new customers added to the gas network per year.
By connecting more customers to gas, Enbridge is accomplishing two goals. The first is simply more ratepayers to profit from. The second is fighting a “death spiral,” which was discussed at its rate hike hearings, and refers to the risk that as customers leave the gas network in favour of energy efficient options like heat pumps, the pool of customers to pay for its gas system shrinks, forcing higher rates on remaining customers, that in turn, encourages more people to ditch gas.
“Left unchecked, customer defection could significantly accelerate a rise in gas rates,” the Canadian Climate Institute found, adding that investors are beginning to recognize the potential long-term risk of lower gas demand affecting the company’s financial performance. “That perception of increased risk could translate to higher debt costs for gas utilities, resulting in rate increases and the potential for further customer defection.”
Enbridge did not return a request for comment by deadline about how it was managing the stranded asset risk.
***
Dresden (red dot) is one hell of a long drive from Toronto where York1 will be hauling the garbage:
The Independent @PetroliaIndie:
‘If it can happen here, it can happen in anyone’s backyard’ Human Chain in Dresden protests dump revival and Bill 5
People lined Irish School Road and St. George Street in Dresden Sunday as part of a Human Chain. They were protesting York1 Environmental’s plan to revive the Dresden dump and the province decision to renege on a promise for a full Environmental Assessment of the project.
‘If it can happen here, it can happen in anyone’s backyard’ by Sydney Goodreau, August 11, 2025, The Independent
Hundreds of people – some from as far as Port Glasgow, Grande Pointe, and Dutton – formed a human chain in protest of the proposed York1 landfill saying if the provincial government can allow York1 to redevelop an old dump without an Environmental Assessment, it can happen anywhere.
Angie Richards was one of the organizers of the event where several hundred people lined Irish School Road and St. George Street Sunday. Several local farmers supported the human chain by parking farm equipment in the field across from the proposed site.
“I’m very well known for my passion for children and our farmland, so I thought this was the biggest thing we could do to show our opposition,” says Richard. “We’re doing it for our kids. That is why we wanted to start here and go through town past both of our schools to show that they need protection, and our water needs protection…I hope our kids and our people see that what we’re fighting for is important. We have to continue pushing through without stopping.”
In 2024, York1’s plans for a construction and soil waste recycling facility and 20-acre landfill came to light. The Mississauga company had filed its plans with the Environmental Compliance Approval branch of the Ministry of the Environment.
Residents were shocked and began protesting. Within months, Premier Doug Ford’s government had agreed to force the project to go through an Environmental Assessment – the strictest approval process the province has.
But in April, the Ford government introduced Bill 5. Part of the bill allowed the York1 process to move ahead, without that Environmental Assessment. Since the bill passed in early June, community groups, environmental organizations and politicians have been urging the province to reverse course. The need to reverse Bill 5 was a refrained echoed Sunday by everyone from First Nation Leaders, union representatives and citizens from across southern Ontario.
“It is an attack on the lands and the waters, and we stand in solidarity with this community and all communities who are opposing Bill 5. We stand in solidarity with the First Nations in their opposition to Bill 5 and its attack on their sovereignty and treaty rights,” said Lyle Gall, the Southwest District representative of the Canada Employment and Immigration Union.
Residents line St. George Street in Dresden, protesting York1’s project at the Dresden dump.
Norma Shortt, a Sarnia native, joined the human chain because she believes what the government and York1 are doing is wrong: “They need to do an environmental assessment and listen to the people in the area.”
Anne Morrisey drove from Dutton to protest because, she said, “If it hits this small community, it’ll hit ours eventually down the road.”
Dave Willson and Sheri Northcott live directly across from the proposed York1 facility. They gladly joined the protest. “We’re here to support getting rid of Bill 5. We’re here to support the community and the community is here to support us. We need landfills, don’t get me wrong, but not this close to town. That’s why I want to stop it. Hopefully, the elected officials that we put in office…do something.”
“All around here, it’s always been blue,” says Willson referring to the riding’s history of voting Progressive Conservative. “But now everybody’s seeing red and it’s not the Liberals we’re seeing. We’re pissed. If it can happen here, it can happen in anyone’s backyard.”
Richards encourages Dresden residents saying “Don’t give up. Just because the bill is passed doesn’t mean we can’t have it repealled.” Richards wants to get an injunction on the property to stop York1’s progress and turn the fight into a legal battle.
“An environmental study was already ordered. So if that were to be put in place, we wouldn’t even have to worry about this stuff because it wouldn’t pass. That is why Bill 5 needs to be repealled,” Richards says.
“We need to unite everyone together to work together in solidarity and unity to save our land, our water, our air, and our children’s health and safety.”
@aegg527.bsky.social:
Anyone fed up with Dug Fraud yet? Ontarians are being robbed blind
@redsnoopy69:
Reminder: Doug Ford is rewarding his friends with your tax dollars…
***
Emails to Jessica Ernst from Dresden residents trying to protect their community from York1 – Toronto’s garbage
| Subject: Dresden |
| From: Luanne Deline |
| Date: 2025-09-19, 1:20 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Dear Jessica,
I grew up in Dresden, a small, close knit agricultural community built on generations of hard work, resilience, and heart. Here, families have farmed the land for centuries. We raise our children to respect the earth, to care for their neighbours, and to give back, whether it’s volunteering with the local fire department, coaching, supporting local events, or simply showing up when someone is in need.
This isn’t just a town, it’s our home. It’s where we’ve built our lives, where we know every face at the grocery store, and local hockey rink. Our children have spent their childhoods running freely through the fields, making memories going for combine rides with their Parents and Grandparents. Exploring Mollys creek, watching frogs, turtles, bald eagles, and catching minnows while building memories with their friends. This is more than just land, it’s part of their upbringing. It’s their classroom, their playground, their sanctuary. But now, everything we love about Dresden is under threat.
A new massive dump is being forced on us, blindsided with no transparency on a wetland just 800 meters from our homes our waterways, beside our children’s schools, and the aquifer that nourishes everything we grow and drink. Six thousand tonnes of garbage, trucked in every single day from the GTA, will barrel down our rural roads that were built for tractors and rural school buses, not transport trucks. It’s not just a dump. It’s a direct attack on everything this town stands for.
It puts our family farms at risk. It endangers Molly’s Creek and the
Sydenham River, lifelines for our environment and our way of life. It
ignores the concerns of Indigenous communities, including those on nearby Walpole Island, whose voices should have mattered from the beginning. And it threatens 33 endangered species that also call this place home.
There has been no environmental assessment. No consultation with those of us who live here. No plan to protect our children, our health, our safety, our land, local businesses, or our future. As a critical care nurse for more than 35 years, I understand the health consequences of environmental neglect and their long term effects. And this ..what they are doing to Dresden..isn’t just neglect. It’s ENVIRONMENTAL ABUSE!
And what’s even harder to accept is that Dresdens' calls for help are being ignored. We’ve reached out to Premier Doug Ford, asking him to come to Dresden..to see where this dump is being pushed on us, to understand how close it is to our homes, our farms, and our schools. But he won’t come. He hasn’t responded. It’s unbelievable. How can anyone make decisions about a place they’ve never even stepped foot in? We’re asking to be seen, to be heard and we’re being met with silence. Ford says he’s done with U.S. trash but his plan is to dump it on Dresden. We’re not the province’s trash can!
But in the face of this threat, our community has come together like we always do. Angie Mills-Richards had a vision for something simple yet profound with a human chain. Alongside Jodi-Lynn Janess and myself, we helped support her vision. Families, farmers, friends, and neighbours stood shoulder to shoulder along the town line, arms linked in defiance, in love, and in unity. That day, we didn’t just show how close this dump is to our homes. We showed how deeply we are connected to each other, our children, our land, and to this place we refuse to give up on.
If this new dump goes ahead, we don’t just lose valuable farmland. We lose our identity. We lose our safety. We lose our way of life. But we will not go quietly. We will fight for our children, for our health, for our water, for our farms, and for the generations yet to come.
DON’T mistake our small town roots for lack of awareness.
Because Dresden deserves better.
We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our
children.
With Hope,
Luanne Deline
| Subject: StandForDresden |
| From: tyson mclennan |
| Date: 2025-09-20, 1:25 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Hi my name is Tyson McLennan , I am a 26 year old entrepreneur from Dresden.
I am emailing my opinion/thoughts on the landfill discussion.
I grew up outside of Dresden , my whole life this has been a quiet , small , hard working town. It’s made me who I am, I believe introducing a landfill is not a good idea, to our future youth, my future, my friends & bribers future as this is create many complications.
I own and operate a new business in town called TM Auto Solutions, I started this to create a sustainable future for my family. I hear people talking about moving if this dump occurs, if the people leave how will a small town business survive? There’s many more issues with this dump including our environment. The Sydenham river is a huge factor and I should not have to explain it, as the people have.
Our voices all matter to this issue, it’s going to affect not only my self , but many others. There’s many business in town that this large company/idea could potentially cause harm to in the long run.
There is also have many concerns about our road safety . For 1, Chatham Kent can barly keep up to our road maintenance now, we currently have to much traffic that our roads are not rated for. I have had to replace MANY parts in short amounts of time due to our roads in the country being so bad from transports/tracors. Now add hundreds of thousands tons more to that per year….annd who’s paying for it? The people.
All the farming equipment/machinery along with the tomato harvest/conagra , that navigates our roads daily will result in many more accidents and deaths. Look at the statistics on drivers , it’s horrible. Most of the drivers will be from different environments and will not understand or respect our large farming community.
Our children and school buses will be in more harm , why ad another problem? We do not want it.
I hope my voice is heard, I have many more thoughts and opinions but I think our community will make up for that!
Sincerely Tyson McLennan / TM Auto Solutions
| Subject: Concerns re dump traffic |
| From: Andrea Sayers |
| Date: 2025-09-17, 5:37 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
I’m sure people have thought of this. So apologies for duplication
Is there any studies on traffic flow currently with the farm machinery moving around the area. Is there aerial footage counting cars/machinery/busses. The municipality conducts such studies all the time when deciding where things go and such, that is just common sense when new facilities come to an area or are built.
And fixing roads from increased traffic is on the municipality? And
building infrastructure around the dump is on the municipality too?
Downloading costs to the taxpayer for a service industry that the people didn’t ask for, use or want. Seems to me the only benefactor is the dump.
I’m not sure what York 1 will pay to Chatham in taxes but it won’t makeup or the health and well being of the community. Because that is priceless.
Thanks for reading my rant.
| Subject: Dresden dump |
| From: Karen Liberty |
| Date: 2025-09-18, 7:47 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
A couple of thoughts regarding York1 and their plans to bring a new landfill to Dresden. Make no mistake- this is a new landfill. Not an existing one.
The fact that they are allowed to build such a thing in the middle of the richest farmland in the country where tomatoes, corn, soybeans grow; right beside a creek that leads directly to a river; right beside a thriving town with residents mere feet from the planned dump- this allowance is a travesty.
We are a community that takes care of our town, our land, our residents. Why should we lose our land and our properties and our health because Toronto can’t do the same.
The impact on our environment is going to be devastating. And no one cares. Doug Ford doesn’t care. Steve Pinsonneault doesn’t care. And York 1 sure doesn’t care.
But we care. And so we fight.
I own property directly behind the dump site. Property that my husband and I bought 33 years ago and have worked tirelessly and constantly to improve so that we can enjoy all our days here. Peaceful. Quiet. Country living where we can hear the crickets and coyotes at night, and see the deer in the mornings. That is a choice that we made. Clean, safe water. Stars at night.
Until the dump arrives.
Now that choice is being taken away from us by a greedy, slimy company and a Premier of Ontario with the same attributes.
Noisy, dirty, toxic. No more clean water. Noise pollution all day long. Garbage on our land. Rodents attracted by the garbage. Wildlife run off by the noise and the smell and the deadly water. No clean water to drink. Diseases due to living in close proximity to a dump. Semi trucks tearing down our little country roads all day long.
And does anyone in the government care? No. Does anyone at York 1 care? No. They are making their money so they don’t care. Doug Ford is getting his kickbacks so he doesn’t care. Steve Pinsonneault doesn’t care. I’m not sure how he shows his face in this municipality given the way he has deserted his constituents. He obviously has no pride in himself.
Why does a for profit company from Toronto have the power to devalue my property? Property we have worked hard for. Now it is worth substantially less - all so York 1 can make money.
Why does York 1 have the power to ruin our wonderful town and our environment? How is that right?
Take care of your own garbage, Toronto and York 1 and leave us alone.
Karen Liberty
| Subject: Protect Dresden! |
| From: “Carol B.” |
| Date: 2025-09-17, 2:54 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
This proposed dump right up tight to a small farming community and the Sydenham River is truly a step backward in protecting human health & our waterways. The toxic materials from the mega dump will most certainly, at some point, reach the Sydenham via Molly's Creek and from there all the way to Lake Erie. So many people depend on the Great Lakes for so many things!
Shame on our elected officials for not representing us and allowing this to happen. (Kayaking the river with the garbage will not be the same!)
Thanks for the ear!!
| Subject: Please no dump! |
| From: Fran Martin |
| Date: 2025-09-17, 6:22 a.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
To Whom It May Concern,
Our town is so special in so many ways. We have growing families moving to Dresden to raise their families and to retire here. We have positive things moving here right now and we don’t need anything negative. It is not even smart to put a dump so close to town and using our good fertile soil for garbage. Why are we being subject where there is tons of land with no population that they can take their garbage? Better yet like to the more advanced countries that have developed waste disposal right in the middle of their cities to get rid of waste produce. Don’t we have anyone clever enough in Canada to develop what other countries already have. The people have spoken, no dump near Dresden, aren’t we still a democratic country?
A Concerned Citizen of beautiful Dresden Ontario Canada
Fran Martin
| Subject: No Dump |
| From: Emily Sawatzky |
| Date: 2025-09-17, 1:56 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Ms. Ernst,
Attached is my reasoning for no to the Dresden dump.
Thank you for working hard to stop it.
Thanks again,
Carlin
Aged 10
No Dump
The dump should not happen because it will pollute the
Sydenham River. I have smelled a dump before, it smells worse
than I could imagine. Many people may leave Dresden for fresh air.
The dump would completely ruin these items I like to do: fishing
with my grandpa in the Sydenham, taking a walk to the cemetery,
kayaking in the Sydenham, Etc. And a lot of animals will die from
the garbage, they may ingest it. You can see that the dump plan is
terrible.
I don’t want this to be Dresden!
| Subject: Save the Sydenham |
| From: mary ann Bedell |
| Date: 2025-09-16, 8:15 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Hello Jessica, I am a resident close to Dresden and I live along the Sydenham. I am concerned about the dump causing harmful effects to all the wildlife that habitat in and out of the water. There are 2 pairs of eagles, deer, turkeys, 2 herons, wood ducks, pair buffleheads and many turtles and owls, and many rodents that the Sydenham is their home. I hope my children and grandchildren can be safe living in Dresden as I have lived along the Sydenham River all my life of 62 years. Thank you for taking your time to recognize the fight to Save The Sydenham.
Mary Ann Bedell
| Subject: No to the dump in Dresden! |
| From: Emily Sawatzky |
| Date: 2025-09-16, 7:38 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Ms. Ernst,
Thanks very much for helping Dresden with their fight against York1's dump in Dresden, ON.
While writing ERO's I assumed would fall on dead ears, I crafted this
little poem and posted it as a comment. I know that's not what they were looking for, but I didn't/don't care.
My children don't want a dump because they don't want their quiet bike rides on the gravel road they live on to be eradicated by re-routed garbage wagons when neighboring roads get closed for repair due to the increased volume they can't handle.
My children don't want a dump because trips uptown at lunch don't need to include real-life Crossy Road, in which their lives are at risk, due to the sheer volume of trucks, or other traffic trying to avoid the volume of trucks.
My children don't want a dump because when they visit their grandparents, they don't want to stare out a patio door at a hill of someone else's garbage.
So maybe thinking about the next generation and their children would be a good idea.
NO TO THE DRESDEN DUMP
I don't know if this is what you're looking for, but if it will help, use it.
Thank you,
Emily Sawatzky.
| From: Cassie Dawson |
| Date: 2025-09-16, 5:13 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Hi Jessica,
Here is an email I previously sent to York1. This has and continues to cause me and my family significant anxiety everyday and we so appreciate any light you can shine on the issue.
Thanks so much,
Cassie
Dear York1 Environmental Waste Solutions,
I hope this message finds you well.
I am reaching out as a concerned parent and resident of Dresden, Ontario regarding your proposed project to resume landfill operations and expand waste processing at 29831 Irish School Road. I fully respect the important role companies like yours play in managing Ontario’s waste responsibly. I also understand the growing need for new waste solutions across the province.
However, I kindly ask you to consider the serious concerns families like mine have about the location of this particular project. The proposed landfill would be less than one kilometre from our town and only about 700 metres from two of our local schools — including where my six-year-old daughter attends.
As a parent, my first priority will always be the health and safety of my child. The idea of having a large-scale facility processing materials such as asbestos and contaminated soils so close to where she learns and plays fills me with fear. No parent should have to worry daily about whether the air their child breathes or the water they drink could be unsafe.
I truly believe there are better and safer locations for this kind of project — locations that would not place the health of young families and entire communities at risk. We are not against development or waste management improvements. We are simply asking for a project of this size and nature to be placed somewhere that does not immediately threaten the health of vulnerable populations.
Please, I ask you from the bottom of my heart, take a moment to imagine your own children or grandchildren living next to a site like this. Our community deserves the same consideration and protection.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to the voices of the people who will be most impacted. We are counting on your sense of responsibility and compassion as you move forward.
Sincerely,
C. Dawson
Dresden, Ontario
| Subject: Dresden landfill |
| From: Toni Coleman |
| Date: 2025-09-16, 4:45 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Just want to say that I am not in favour of York 1 trying to open/start a landfill here just outside Dresden On. This is a small community with 2 schools on the main drag. We have a very fragile eco system surrounding Dresden with Molly's Creek that drains into the Sydenham that heads out to St. Clair River. Pollutants from said landfill will destroy that eco system not just in Dresden but the surrounding areas. Dresden is a busy farming community with a cannery in town with many farmers bringing their tomatoes to that cannery. Traffic is very heavy in the spring and fall with farmers moving farm equipment and harvesting their crops. We don't need 700 transports on our roads at any time of the year! That is totally unacceptable!
Toni Coleman, a Dresden resident for over 50 years!
| Subject: Opposition to York 1 Landfill |
| From: Scotty Deline |
| Date: 2025-09-16, 4:12 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Dear Jessica
As a concerned citizen of Dresden, I am writing to express my strong
opposition to the proposed York1 landfill. Our community deserves long-term solutions that protect our health, environment, and quality of life, and this project does not meet that standard.
My concerns include:
1. Environmental Risk: Landfills pose threats of groundwater contamination, air pollution, and long-lasting soil impacts. Dresden and the surrounding Dawn-Euphemia area rely heavily on clean water and healthy farmland, and this project puts those at risk.
2. Agricultural Impact: Our community depends on agriculture as an economic driver. A landfill so close to prime farmland could harm both crop production and the reputation of our region as a producer of safe, high-quality food.
3. Health and Safety: Increased truck traffic, noise, and dust from a landfill site will affect the daily lives of residents. Long-term exposure to landfill gases and waste-related pollutants is also a serious health concern.
4. Community Well-Being: Dresden and surrounding areas are proud of being close-knit, safe, and welcoming. Approving this landfill would damage our town’s growth potential, discourage investment, and reduce property values.
In short, I do not want to see Dresden and its residents bear the risks of a landfill project that will only benefit outside interests. I strongly urge you to oppose this proposal and protect the well-being of our community, environment, and future generations.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Scotty Deline
Dresden, Ontario
| Subject: York 1 dump |
| From: Susan Piacek |
| Date: 2025-09-16, 4:06 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Hi
I would like to comment on the situation for the Dresden Dump.
The site is not appropriate for a large dump like York 1 wants. It is beside a creek leading into the Sydenham River The ground is sandy loam which drains water fast. Sombra clay would make a better basin for dumps as is just down the road.
It is too close to a town (3km) where our teens go to highschool on that side of town.
It is very good vegetable ground and we grow lots of tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, onions, sweet corn, pumpkins, peas, green beans, Brussel sprouts, cabbage, squash, navy beans, field corn, soybeans and wheat
Just because it was a wood dispenser doesn’t make it right for asbestos concrete and organic matter.
The laws need to open up so an old wood dispensary cannot be bought for a garbage dump.
Common sense needs to intervene to change this terrible decision by the Ford government.
Thank you
Susan and Richard Piacek
...
Dresden Ontario
| Subject: York 1 |
| From: Cheryl McDonald |
| Date: 2025-09-12, 8:47 a.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
The geographical argument about the waste having damaging environmental effects at the proposed site should be considered. This extends to the impacts of transporting the waste on the community’s roads as well. Is it fair to have a healthy agricultural community bear the burden of waste from larger populated areas?
| Subject: Thank You for Amplifying Dresden’s Voice |
| From: Wendy V |
| Date: 2025-09-09, 7:40 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Dear Jessica,
I want to sincerely thank you for your interest in Dresden and for giving our community the opportunity to share our thoughts and what matters most to us. Your decision to create a Dresden page featuring our voices means so much, especially as we continue our fight against the proposed York1 landfill.
Dresden is more than just a town to me...it’s been home to my family for 35 years. My husband and I bought our home here, raised our three sons in the same house, and built our lives around the strength and spirit of this community. About 27 years ago, we almost left, but our love for Dresden kept us here. Looking back now, I am so grateful we stayed.
Over the years, my family has grown along with the town. My husband started his business downtown about 19 years ago and has built strong ties with his clients and fellow business owners. I spent more than a decade volunteering with Dresden Minor Soccer, helping to keep the program alive so children could learn teamwork and friendships, and teens could grow through coaching and refereeing. It’s wonderful to see how the program has grown, with strong support from local businesses.
Dresden is also known for its vibrant sports culture, especially hockey, where many of our Jr. Kings have gone on to professional levels, including the NHL. Beyond sports, we are proud of our thriving farming community, Conagra’s tomato processing facility, and the unforgettable sound of tomato wagons rolling through town in late summer. Dresden Raceway has drawn visitors for 150 years of harness racing, and the Josiah Henson Museum of African-Canadian History (formerly Uncle Tom’s Cabin) keeps our rich heritage alive.
I continue to volunteer my time with Dresden Shines, the Night Markets, and Kinsmen events, among other things, because community spirit runs deep here. While there is much to celebrate in Dresden, there is also much at stake. I am deeply concerned that the proposed landfill will harm our waterways, ecosystems, and endangered species, while also creating health and safety risks for our families, especially the children attending the two schools just down the road. These risks extend beyond Dresden, affecting Wallaceburg and Walpole Island.
But what inspires me most is that Dresden is full of people who care deeply about their home, just as I do. Together, we will continue to raise our voices and stand up for what is right for our town, our families, and our future.
Thank you again, Jessica, for amplifying our story. Your support means the world to us.
Warm regards,
Wendy Vercauteren
| Subject: Recycling |
| From: Nicole Coles |
| Date: 2025-09-10, 5:06 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
I am a concerned resident of Dresden.
They have stated constantly on social media about how the property is a recycling facility and how they plan to reuse and recycle construction materials.
I have asked more than once how they plan to recycle asbestos. No answers.
As pointed out multiple times, the location is not good. They need somewhere that won’t have such a negative impact on a community, the environment, species, water, air, etc.
The traffic will have a huge impact on our economy, local businesses and events plus the safety aspect of our residents, especially the students.
There may be a need in our province for a facility of this type but not at the risk of a community.
Nicole Coles
| Subject: Dresden dump |
| From: Jen Summers |
| Date: 2025-09-09, 11:00 a.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Here are some photos of my kids signs, my kids, and the Sydenham river frozen and not frozen.
Gorgeous vital habitat for many species, and peaceful healing and rest for humans. York1 and Doug Ford must not be permitted to contaminate it via this monstrous dump for Toronto residents.
Wowzo! I’d love to skate on that beauty ice and have it in my community!
Subject: Dresden Families Fighting for Clean Water, Land, and Our Future |
| From: Jodi Janess |
| Date: 2025-09-08, 11:50 a.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
In the small town of Dresden, Ontario, ordinary people are being forced into an extraordinary fight. At the center of it all is the proposed York 1 Landfill, an extreme expansion that threatens the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we work so hard to protect, the previous permit for a landfill on the property was for 75 tonnes, the expansion includes 365,000 tonnes per year, Doug Ford including this expansion in Bill 5 which was a direct betrayal to our town, Dresden had fought for an environmental assessment of the site which was were awarded, but was then disregarded once the project was added to the controversial Bill 5.
This fight is deeply personal. Families here have poured their lives into building homes, raising children, and caring for the land. My own property is the result of years of sacrifice and work. It is more than soil and walls it is the place I dreamed of, built up, and cared for with fruit trees and a summer garden, a place to run my family heating and cooling business and a place for my family to enjoy the outdoors, clean air, our own chickens and quail, now I am being told that a corporation, backed by the Ford government, can put all of it at risk.
The landfill sits over a vital aquifer that provides water to residents. This same aquifer and nearby waterways flow directly into Bekejwanong Territory called Walpole Island, a place where the Chief has made it clear, they do not want leachate dumped into their river, nor their aquifer disturbed. The Ford government has ignored these wishes, continuing a long pattern of environmental racism that sacrifices Indigenous communities for corporate profit.
Dresden is known as a historical Black community, this town was home to the famous Josiah Henson, known as a safe place in history where people escaped slavery, a place where the descendants of the Underground Railroad still reside today.
The damage would not stop at our wells. The wetlands on and near the landfill site are home to a rare nesting woodcock population and provide critical habitat for turtles and many wildlife and endangered species. The rivers that flow past Dresden are full of fish, part of our shared heritage of fishing, food, and family traditions. To poison or degrade these waters is to erase a piece of who we are.
This is not a fair fight. On one side a small rural town, Indigenous communities, and families who just want clean water, clean air, and healthy land. On the other a large corporation and the Ontario government, willing to gamble with our lives and heritage for profit and convenience.
Our story of Dresden is the story where ordinary people fight to protect what matters most against governments and corporations that treat them as expendable. If they can risk our aquifer, our farmland, and our children’s future here, they can do it anywhere.
We are not asking for anything extraordinary. We are asking for clean air, safe water, and respect for the land that sustains us all. Dresden will not give up.
Jodi-Lynn Janess
Small Town Girl, Mom, Wife, Musician, Business Owner, Advocate
| Subject: Dresden Landfill |
| From: Brennen Richmond |
| Date: 2025-09-07, 1:25 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
We need to protect our town and the environment from being exploited by loopholes in our laws. The proposed landfill is in a bad location and will be harmful to both the town and environment and the citizens need support!
We understand the need for landfills somewhere, however less than a
kilometer from a town centre is completely unacceptable and they are only doing it out of convenience without considering or mitigating obvious environmental risks. To see the beautiful down filled with garbage trucks, mud, and certain pollution would be devastating and completely avoidable.
| Subject: Voices against Dresden Dump |
| From: Shirley Gelinas |
| Date: 2025-08-24, 6:59 p.m. |
| To: email hidden; JavaScript is required |
Hello Jessica, I saw on Facebook that you are looking at stories related to the Dresden Dump. I currently live in London Ontario but grew up on a farm just outside of Dresden. What Ford’s government is doing is deeply disturbing. This may sound extreme, however, I view Bill 5 as a form of biological warfare, even though Ford seems to have no care or clue of the mess he is creating.
‘We are not backing down’: Human chain protests Dresden-area landfill plan, Ontario’s Bill 5, Opponents of a proposed Dresden landfill and recycling project dotted the side of the road in a peaceful protest Sunday afternoon by Trevor Terfloth, Aug 10, 2025, The Chatham Daily News
Protesters are shown near the entrance to a proposed landfill site just north of Dresden on Irish School Road on Sunday. (Trevor Terfloth/The Daily News)
Opponents of a proposed Dresden landfill and recycling project dotted the side of the road in a peaceful protest Sunday afternoon.
Participants young and old, many holding signs, stretched from the site’s entrance on Irish School Road to the sidewalk in front of Lambton-Kent Composite school on St. George Street North.
More than 300 people were seen as the event began, with more joining as the protest went on. Some were close enough to hold hands in certain sections.
Angela Richards, a protest organizers and landowner neughbouring the proposed project site, said the aim was to physically show how close the site is to downtown Dresden and the Sydenham River.
“This rally has relit the fire that we are not backing down,” she said.
Participants hold hands in front of Lambton-Kent Composite school during Sunday’s protest. (Trevor Terfloth/The Daily News)
There has been significant public opposition to York1 Environmental Waste Solutions’ plan to create an eight-hectare landfill on a 14-hectare site at 29831 Irish School Rd., less than a kilometre from Dresden.
The plan includes developing a regenerative recycling facility that would run 7 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday to Saturday, for non-hazardous construction and demolition waste, and unprocessed soils.
Project critics cite potential environmental concerns, from air quality to leachate contaminating nearby Molly’s Creek, which drains into the Sydenham and could affect Wallaceburg and Walpole Island First Nation.
Initially, Ontario’s Environment Ministry ordered a comprehensive environmental assessment (EA) for the York 1 project. But the recently passed Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, specifically rescinded that EA order.
Sunday’s protest didn’t block traffic, but Chatham-Kent police diverted vehicles where possible. There were many honks of support from passing drivers.
Richards was pleased to see young people involved, noting this issue “means the world to them” and their future.
Walpole Chief Leela Thomas was also on hand, saying First Nation members have been “very vocal on this from the beginning” about their concerns.
She believes public pressure can still make a difference.
“We just have to keep up the messaging,” she said.
— with files from Ellwood Shreve
York1 landfill proposal raises groundwater, gas concerns with MOE by Heather Wright, March 6, 2024, The Independent
The Ministry of the Environment voiced concerns about groundwater quality and methane gas in a review of York1 Environmental Waste Solution’s plan to revive the dormant Dresden Dump.
That information comes from documents about the proposal to build a new landfill on the Irish School Site released by the ministry to The Independent this week.
York1 has caused a stir in both Dresden and Lambton County with its plans to revive the site one kilometre north of Dresden and south of the Lambton County border.
The plan calls for up to 6,000 tonnes of waste – construction materials, soil, residential waste and even hazardous waste – to come to the landfill nestled among houses along the former Highway 21.
That could generate traffic of up to 700 trucks daily according to York1’s separate proposal on the recycling centre posted to the Environmental Registry of Ontario Jan. 31.
York1 filed a separate proposal for the landfill portion of the project.
According to the detailed documents submitted to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, the company plans to build a new 20 acre landfill on the north east side of the property.
The landfill will be a “minimum 30 meters” from the property boundary and 100 meters from the nearest waterbody – Molly’s Creek.
York1 Environmental Waste Solutions’ map of the proposed landfill site on Irish School Road which was included in their proposal to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.
A diagram shows the proposed landfill on the edge of the property with an access road and berm separating it from the edge of the property. It takes up about 40 per cent of the property and is about 200 to 250 meters from Irish School Road.
Another 40 per cent of the property to the south will be used for soil processing.
A series of four storm water ponds are proposed to catch rainfall and divert it from the landfill area.
York1 says the system will filter out any silt and contaminates before draining into Molly Creek.I do not believe the system willThe company says the stormwater ponds should be monitored twice a year; the ministry believes it should be at least four times a year.
In March 2021, the ministry voiced concerns about the groundwater in the area and asked York1 to do a detailed hydrological study.
Bruce Harman, an engineer with the ministry, reviewed the document. He agrees with York1’s conclusion that “the landfill – past and present – should not alter the ground water or surrounding wells” but he voices concerns about naturally occurring methane which could pose problems for up to 24 homeowners with wells in the region.1. “Should is an escape hatch word, loved by polluters. Of course the dump “should” not contaminate the land, air, water, and community, but it assuredly will. “Shoulds” and Doug Ford are useless at protecting vital resources needed for life. 2. Is it “naturally” occurring methane or is it the oil and gas industry’s leaking migrating methane? Reportedly, there is also leaking methane at the location of the York1 dump, which makes it an ultra stupid location for massive tonnes of toxic waste.
Slides above from Ernst presentations
“The owner/operator should also ensure that future planned activity for the expanding landfill site will not alter the accumulation or flow migration of the naturally occurring gases at depth that may become a concern for the neighbour properties (water wells) located at least 500 meters from the property.
“The sampling and analysis of water from the domestic water wells located on residential properties, as a minimum, immediately adjacent to the southwestern landfill property boundary should occur as permitted by the water well owners, given the reported flow direction of the contact aquifer is from beneath the landfill property in a southwest direction toward these properties.
“Sampling of all domestic water wells in the vicinity may be more prudent given there are so many water wells in close proximity to the landfill and the groundwater flow direction has yet to be confirmed with additional monitoring events,” writes Harman.
In an interview with The Independent, George Kirchmair, vice president of York1, said building the new, engineered landfill would protect the area’s ground water.Sorry George, I don’t believe you, and I don’t believe you believe yourself. The dump and especially the 700 daily trucks will pollute the air, land, water and communities impacted. Pollution from such a monstrous dump does not stay put, it spreads far.
“In addition to the existing clay, there’s two impermeable layers that don’t let any seepage go through. So, what we’re proposing is a million times better than what’s existing right now. There’s just buried waste that has no controls now. We would put in a landfill that’s engineered…the leachate is all collected; nothing gets out.”Wow! A million times better than existing! “Engineered” even! “The leachate is “all” collected. Liar liar VP York1! You lie as shittily as Doug Ford – with zero imagination or integrity.
Your words smell like big fat money-grubbing propaganda to me. Frac’ers like Encana/Ovintiv shoved the same “water won’t get polluted” propaganda on my community, and many others in North America, the same “impermeable layer” lie as you are boasting. If methane is migrating in the area, there is no “impermeable” layer.
Dear York1, Stop your greedy insanity, keep toxic Toronto garbage in Toronto, it’s already heavily polluted! And, best, go find a location that does not have any methane migration which will assuredly cause leachate to pollute the groundwater and presents a serious explosive risk.
York1’s proposal also says “the nature and quantity of landfill gas generated at the site is not likely to be a significant concern” because of the clay around the site and the nature of the waste being accepted.The clay won’t help much. It won’t stop the many harms from the incessant truck traffic and toxic waste blowing off those trucks, or the noise, or the air pollution, and the clay certainly doesn’t protect the Dresden community from York1’s patronizing upper management’s insulting arrogant lies and boasts.
It appears from the correspondence included in the information provided by the ministry, York1has not satisfied officials concerns yet. A Dec. 18, 2023 letter from the ministry says “A number of items are still outstanding including but not limited to a survey of the residential wells in the vicinity of the site. Additional Hydrogeological work is required, however that additional work will be completed on an ongoing basis.”
Harman also raises the issue of a water well on the landfill property which was decommissioned. In his report, Harman says while it was capped off, some of the well casing may still be in the ground. He’s concerned that could be a pathway for leachate to get into the groundwater in the future. That, he says will need to be fixed.
Even if it is fixed, it will not stop leachate polluting the area’s groundwater. All wells leak eventually, notably older wells, and most especially repaired older wells in an area with methane migration, leaking corrosive sour gas, and especially not if CO2 is injected.
How will York1 prevent “forever chemicals” from contaminating their dump, storm overflow ponds, ground and surface water and resident water wells?
And what about York1’s endless toxic trash-filled trucks leaking and spilling along the way?
The ministry also questioned the depth of the clay in the area where the landfill is to be built. MOE wants to know how much of the clay has been removed, specifically the area of the future planned landfilling operations.
“My understanding is the previous tile works were very shallow in nature. So, we haven’t found any areas of deep fill that shows the claim has been scoped out to deep depth,” says Kirchmair.
The company’s survey show three pockets of past landfilling activity on the property, including one which is on the St. Clair Region Conservation Area flood zone. Those areas will be dug up and moved to the new landfill where Kirchmair says “there has been no excavated clay.”
York1, in its proposal, says “Due to a lack of municipal infrastructure to support leachate management, the site will operate with a leachate lagoon with the support of hauling trucks to remove sediment.” It adds the company will focus on reducing the leachate generated by draining stormwater into ponds surrounding the landfill.I expect the leachate will not be appropriately managed. Human pollution caused climate change is causing massive sudden dumps of rain in short spells of time which will cause Toronto’s toxic garbage at Dresden to flood into the water ways in a matter of hours, and into groundwater eventually.
York1 flagged dust control as one of the larger issues neighbours will face with the proposed landfill.Of course the company flagged the least of the community’s concerns!
Kirchmair says much of the landfilled material will be excess soil which cannot be recycled. That could mean some dust control problems. York1 says among other things, the roads surrounding the landfill will be paved to keep the dust down in the region.
Who pays for that? More importantly, who pays for the upkeep of those paved roads destroyed quickly by 700 heavy truck loads a day?
Clay and paved roads will not reduce the toxic deadly microplastic pollution released from the truck tires, which the community will be forced to breath, every day and night and which will pollute the water ways and eventually the oceans:
@mateosfo 2023:
Particles from car tires likely make up 78% of the microplastics in the ocean.
What’s the solution?
“Reduction of kilometers driven”
https://www.systemiq.earth/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/BreakingThePlasticWave_MainReport.pdf
The outline of the landfill expansion project was listed on the Environmental Registry of Ontario Feb. 26. The public can comment on the landfill proposal until April 11.
FAST FACTS OF YORK1’S LANDFILL PROPOSAL
- 20 acre landfill to be built on the northwest part of the property
- 30 meters from the property boundary
- Surrounded by an 80 foot berm
- Four stormwater holding pondsI am sure they will be insufficient given climate change causing massive sudden dumps of rain
- A lagoon leachate collection systemif there is a collection system, it’ll leak
- Operation of landfill equipment will not be undertaken prior to one hour before and no later than two hours after the approved hours of operation
- Surface water and ground water to be monitored twice a yearIn my professional opinion, this is grossly insufficient, likely intentionally so – the company does not want data to get in the way of their profit-raping the good citizens and kids of Dresden.
- Residential well water monitoring once a yeareven more insufficient
- Leachate to be collected in a pond to evaporate naturally with deadly residue to blow on the winds into the lungs of residents? What a shit plan with remainder pumped out and taken to an licensed liquid industrial waste disposal facility or will be treated on site and then taken to a municipal waste water facility.
- Dust will be reduced by paving landfill roads, dust suppressant, and planting vegetationBut not eliminated and toxic tire microplastics will not be mitigated at all by pavement. Paving is grossly ineffective, will not mitigate much of the dust or the tire and diesel pollution, and will extremely expensive – the company and Doug Ford will most likely force taxpayers to pay for it, mostly to reduce wear and tear on the trucks and truckers, not to reduce harms in community homes, schools and lungs of residents, livestock, pets, wildlife, oceans, etc. Dust suppressants can be toxic, depending on what it used – if it’s frac waste water, it’s definitely toxic.
- Odour issues to be dealt with by removing source of odour, adding more cover to landfill and use of de-odourizers?? To add more toxicity to an already toxic enterprise? Super stupid mitigation which will not work. Adequate appropriate mitigation would be to move the dump to an area away from vital water ways, communities and farms! Let Toronto breath their own waste
- Landfill staff will be trained to detect hazardous waste and would be authorized to turn it away at the gateRoaring laughter! No diligent human can detect intentionally hidden or covered hazardous waste, never mind ordinary dump workers. Besides, even if they were able to detect it with their eyes, ears, fingers, and tongues, the damage will have already been done to those living along the roads used by the waste trucks hauling toxic loads from Toronto. The only safe way to keep deadly toxic waste out of this dump and off the roads to Dresden, is to keep Toronto’s garbage in Toronto or in the yard of Doug Ford’s cottage.
