Sierra Club accuses Epcor of green washing
Epcor’s proposed solar farm in the river valley could well turn into a “marketing disaster,” the Sierra Club warned councillors Friday.
The city-owned utility is signing contracts for water treatment and utility operations across North America.
Epcor wants to look green, but that could backfire, local representative Charlie Richmond told council’s utility committee.
“Green at any cost is dangerous territory,” he said, pointing to other campaigns run by environmental non-governmental organizations that have successfully damaged a company’s brand.
“It’s known as a marketing reality,” Richmond said, suggesting Epcor’s solar farm here is green washing.
Epcor is proposing a 12-megawatt solar farm for a 23-hectare pasture located adjacent to the E.L. Smith water treatment plant in the western reaches of the river valley. It would supply all the power needs for the plant and sell the extra, roughly 30 per cent, into the grid.
But it would be built in Edmonton’s river valley parkland, one of the city ’s most valuable attributes, argued several public speakers, who urged councillors to push back against the plan.
Edmonton spent decades deindustrializing the river valley to remove factories, businesses and homes to create the natural park that exists now.
This is a good project, said environmental and solar advocates, but Edmonton should consider a land swap to let Epcor use land elsewhere and supply the equivalent electricity into the grid.
Alternatively, they said, the company should focus on a distributed model, putting solar panels on rooftops across the city.
Councillors said the decision on whether the land should be used for a solar farm or not will come at a public hearing.
“Nothing will go forward unless council votes to change the zoning,” said Coun. Ben Henderson.
But several councillors pushed Epcor to rework their business case and take into account the social impact of using river valley land for this purpose.
In the current business case, officials put zero financial value on the land because they own it already and aren’t using it.
Epcor officials argued it was cheapest to build the solar farm beside the treatment centre because buying land elsewhere and connecting to the grid would cost $5.7 million more.
“There’s not a measurable impact on wildlife,” said Craig Bonneville, Epcor director in charge of local water treatment, adding he hopes the project is not viewed as greenwashing.
Epcor changed the layout of the farm to ensure that it will stay 100 metres or more from the riverbank.
It doesn’t want to swap land because it may need to expand the water treatment plant in the future, Bonneville said.