 Iqaluit residents asked to report fuel odour in drinking waterEnvironmental | 203145 hits | Oct 12 7:39 am | Posted by: DrCaleb  The City of Iqaluit is investigating concerns from residents about reports of a fuel odour in the drinking water. In a news release sent over the weekend, the city said it continues to investigate, test and monitor the drinking water daily.Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
City staff found evidence of fuel contamination in the city's water supply
A state of emergency has been declared in Iqaluit after city staff found evidence of fuel contamination in the city's treated water supply. The water is unsafe to drink, even if filtered or boiled, according to the municipality.
In an interview with Nunatsiaq News Tuesday, Mayor Kenny Bell said every part of town was affected, whether water is delivered by pipes or by trucks.
"It's everything. Any treated water," he told the paper.
The city has more than 7,000 residents, all of whom will now need access to alternative sources of water.
Tap water can still be used for laundry, cleaning and showers, the Nunavut health department said in a news release, but it should not be used for bathing by pregnant women, or newborns and infants, and it should not be used to mix infant formula.
"We suspect there is some type of petroleum product that has entered the water system," chief administrative officer Amy Elgersma told council Tuesday evening.
She said staff had located "concentrated odours" in the water treatment plant. It's sent samples for testing and expects results in five business days.
The advisory not to drink the water was issued because this is a situation where boiling the water will not make it safe, Elgersma said.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/iq ... -1.6208466
What I'm wondering, though, is how and when there'll be long-term capacity to not only lift advisories but keep them lifted. Non-Native water utilities like Edmonton's EPCOR have a lot of institutional knowledge and experience in things like keeping their distribution systems clean, repairing broken infrastructure (e.g. water main breaks) and ensuring water's available almost any time you need it.
How much of that type of knowledge and experience exists in reserve communities? And I'm not blaming the Natives for this at all-it's yet another shitty part of the legacy of residential schools, underfunding and federal bureaucratic micromanagement. It's one reason I agree with Native advocates who say that Native nations should have their own province-like land bases and constitutional power over things like education and infrastructure. They'd obviously put a lot of effort into building that capacity to manage water services themselves, and probably handle it more efficiently.
What a fucked up time we live in.
-J.
$700 million dollars for an election that no one wanted,
You really are a parrot of conservative talking points.
but no money for the capital of Nunavut to have clean drinking water that everyone needs.
What a fucked up time we live in.
-J.
Again, not the problem. Currently they are looking for cracks in the holding tanks that may be a result of the soil sliding downhill due to climate change. The contamination is only in one holding tank.
Nunavut had clean drinking water, but they are also experiencing many problems due to the changing climate. But you just knee jerk and rely on TDS, rather than blame the actual problem that you don't have the time to address as a real problem.
-J.
Doc the argument point of the election costs isn�t really about the cost but the priority. Yes elections cost money no matter when they happen. But to put ahead of all the other things that could have been spent on is the problem. Yes they are in charge but the priority list is skewed. To me it reads like buying electronics for a kid that needs food. I�m sure not everyone sees it that way but I do.
That is the point I was trying to make (in a roundabout way), but you nailed it much better than I could.
When the so-called 'leader' of our country focuses more on vanity projects or ego-driven elections more than the plight of his own people, it shows a huge disconnect between the politicians and the people who they are supposed to work for - namely, US.
-J.
Doc the argument point of the election costs isn�t really about the cost but the priority. Yes elections cost money no matter when they happen. But to put ahead of all the other things that could have been spent on is the problem. Yes they are in charge but the priority list is skewed. To me it reads like buying electronics for a kid that needs food. I�m sure not everyone sees it that way but I do.
Good analogy and I get your point. I think I tried to make that point previously as well.
Hopefully they can determine how the water got contaminated to begin with and then take the necessary steps to ensure future safety.
Hopefully they can determine how the water got contaminated to begin with and then take the necessary steps to ensure future safety.
And also make sure that it happens again, especially in this day and age.
-J.