A recent article in the Virginian-Pilot has Vivian Paige and the folks at VB Dems all concerned about a fly-ash golf course that has been built off of Centerville Turnpike. Vivian states that the article raises more questions than it answers and demands that someone look into the matter further. VB Dems, not surprisingly, blames U.S. Rep. Thelma Drake (who wasn’t in office when the project was approved by Chesapeake City Council (9-0) and doesn’t represent this district).
However, quite frankly, the only Hampton Roads blogger who really should be imminently concerned about this particular project is, well, me. I live less than a mile from the golf course.
I’m not a sadist. I do, indeed, like to drink clean water and hope that I am not cutting years off my life just through that simple act of consumption (I’m cutting years enough off as it is with my other habits).
However, in reading this article, I am struck by the tone.
Robert McCabe, the Pilot reporter, has covered Chesapeake for years and, at least among some, he is persona non grata due to his perceived bias.
In this particular article, his conveniently placed quotes and liberal use of context create a perception in the article that the golf course was built, frankly, not on the level.
If I am reading this article correctly, McCabe says that because this is a golf course and not a landfill, then certain regulations did not have to be followed.
First, he insinuates tests should be done…
- Within six months after earthmovers started work on the site, the developers were supposed to begin twice-a-year groundwater tests to make sure drinking water would be safe for golfers.
State officials confirm there has been no such testing on the site, though there is no running water to test – only bottled water is available for patrons.
Uh, hello. No water…no tests!
Fly ash and water should not mix and are supposed to be separated by at least 2 feet, according to state regulations. Yet, the lakes cut into the course are not installed with liners.
O.k. Are they supposed to be? And, what would be the cost to install the liners? And, how much is this a concern for leeching?
Later, he brought his concerns to City Hall, where he was assured the project was sound, he said.
Throughout, Holley said he understood that some testing was on going to ensure the integrity of the water supply.
“I was under the assumption that there were going to be on-site monitors,” he said.
Mayor William E. Ward, before the council vote, asked Max Bartholomew, a Dominion executive, to confirm the safety of the venture, asking “if there are any environmental concerns we should be aware of.”
“No, sir,” Bartholomew told the council. “We at Dominion Power are fully in compliance with all the federal and state regulations. We do periodic testing, and we monitor the fly ash.”
Is there anything that says that they’re not in full compliance? What is the periodic testing required? Do they monitor the ash?
Power companies are anxious to find alternatives to placing fly ash in industrial landfills. It’s widely used as a material for road construction and concrete. They are working as partners with the EPA to find more such “beneficial uses.”
As of 2006, about 125 million tons of “coal-combustion byproducts,” including fly ash, were produced nationwide, of which about 43 percent was used in commercial applications, according to the American Coal Ash Association Web site. The EPA hopes to push that figure to 50 percent in 2011. Dominion produces nearly half of its power from coal burning.
Indeed, road construction and concrete are beneficial uses…and the EPA has found that this stuff can be used in 50% commercial applications. Unless someone has suddenly decided that the EPA no longer has credibility (in which case, let’s do away with it because it’s not doing its job), then this stuff isn’t as dangerous as some chicken-littles might make it out to be.
The reality is this article creates a whole lot of concern, but does very little to deliver in actual information.
The article doesn’t state how much it takes to contaminate ground water.
The article doesn’t state what amount/periodicity of testing or even where testing should be conducted.
The article doesn’t state what actions possibly need to be taken, if at all.
We’re left wondering, as citizens and readers of what’s next?
The closest we get is that law suits have been filed in other communities. Well, that’s just great. Is there one planned in Chesapeake? If so, why? What’s the justification?
In other words, all the practical things a citizen really needs to know about the ramifications of the story — you know, those things that are useful from “news” — are nowhere to be found in this bit of “journalism.”
Seriously, read the entire article and tell me what’s the next step? What is trying to be conveyed?
Even the title of the article demonstrates ambiguity when it talks about “potential” health risks.
To me, it seems like a journalist just yelled “fire!” when he’s not even sure fire exists.
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. 
Loading ...
“However, quite frankly, the only Hampton Roads blogger who really should be imminently concerned about this particular project is, well, me. I live less than a mile from the golf course.”
Actually, you’re not the only one. I live further than a mile from the golf course, but not by a whole lot. And, for the record… I’m not worried either.
Howdy, neighbor!
Hey, neighbor! Nice to meet you.