Jennifer ORMSTON REPORTER ext. 203 jormston@waterloochronicle.ca Peter WINKLER PUBLISHER Bob VRBANAC EDITOR ext. 229 editorial@ waterloochronicle.ca sports @waterloochronicle.ca 8 + WATERLOO CHRONICLE + Wednesday, June 6, 2007 EDITORIAL Gerry MATTICE ext. 230 RETAIL SALES MANAGER ADVERTISING sales @waterloochronicle.ca SALES REPRESENTATIVES Norma CYCA ext. 223 neyca@ waterloochronicle.ca bpihura@ waterloochronicle.ca Carly GIBBS ext, 222 cgibbs @ waterloochronicle.ca Alicia DE BOER ext. 202 adeboer@ waterloochronicle.ca Bill PIHURA ext. 228 CLASSIFIED $19â€"895â€"5230 CIRCULATION 519â€"886â€"2830 ext. 213 Canadian Publications Mail Sales Publication Agreement Number 40050478 ber ASSN 0832â€" 3410 International Standard Serial Num Audited Circulation: 31,292 The Waterloo Chromicle is published each Wednesday by Metroland Media Group Ltd ONTARIO PRESS COUNCIL The Waterloo Chromcle is a member of The Ontario Press Council, which considers complaints against memâ€" ber newspapers Any complaint about news. opinions advertising or conduct should first he taken to the new spaper . Unresolved complaints can be brought to: Ontario Press Council, 2 Carltan Street, Suite 1706, Toronto, ON . MSB 133 COPYRIGHT The contents of this newspaper are protected by copyright and may be used only for personal nonâ€"commer cial purposes. All other rights are reserved and commercial use is proâ€" hibited. To make any use of this matenial you must first obtain the permission of the owner of the copyâ€" right. For further information conâ€" tact Andres Bailey, Editor, Waterloo Chronicle, 279 Weber St. N.. Suite 20. Waterloo, Ontario N2J 3H8 LETTERS POLICY Letters to the editor must contain the wniter‘s full name, signature, address and telephone number. Addresses and telephone numbers are used only for verification purposes and will not be published. Names will not be withâ€" held. We reserve the right to edit, conâ€" dense or reject any contribution for brevity or legal purposes. Letiers may be submitied by fax 10 $19â€"886â€"9383 or by email to editorial@water loochromicle ca or by mail or delivâ€" ered to Waterloo Chromicle, 279 Weber St. N.. Suite 20. Waterloo, Ontano N2J 38 WATERLOO CHRONICLE 279 Weber St. N., Suite 20 Waterloo, Ontania N2J 3H8 $19â€"886â€"2830 Fax: 519â€"886â€"9383 www waterloochronicle.ca EMAIL editonal @ waterloochronicle ca FAX $19â€"886â€"9i%1 votsr, ./ Getting the lead out Water, and the protection of our water sources, has become the defining issue for our society because if we don‘t have confidence in this basic necessity of life, what confidence can we have in other services provided by the government? f all the things that are tested for in our water supâ€" ply, you would think that measuring for lead would be a noâ€"brainer. Especially after the Walkerton water tragedy. Everyâ€" body in the province has become hyper vigilant to what‘s in our water supply, and what comes through the taps. That‘s why it came as a surprise that the Ministry of the Environment has suddenly raised the alarm about lead levels in our water. If there was something to be alarmed about maybe it should have been checked for sooner rather than waiting for adverse results from other centres like London. The test for lead itself has raised some questions. Experts argue it‘s better to test for lead levels after water has been sitting in the pipes for a couple of hours. But the Ministry of the Environment‘s guidelines say that testing should occur after the taps have been run. Well, maybe it‘s time for the ministry to change those guidelines. Most of us take water out of the tap after it‘s been sitting for a while, not after we‘ve run it for five minâ€" utes. That‘s a truer measure of the lead levels in the water our children would be drinking first thing in the momâ€" ing, and perhaps it‘s the same measure that the ministry should be using. _ It‘s time to Ect to the bottom of what‘s coming out of our taps when it comes to lead. And that starts with effecâ€" Hopeï¬]'lly it‘s not another case of the province shirkâ€" ing its responsibility. We remember what happened to the last provincial government who made that mistake. PREDATOR VIEWPOLINT Conservation worth the cost Tle unofficial start of summer came last week with smog days and the beginning of the now annual lawnâ€"watering ban. That got me thinking about conservation and the cost associated with cutting back on things like electricity and water. Last week Waterloo counâ€" cil approved its new water and wastewater rates for 2007. Waterloo managed to find some cost savings in the wastewater charge when it was discovered that the region‘s metering, at the Waterloo wasteâ€"treatment plant, was registering more discharge than was actually flowing through the pipes. That mistake saved Waterioo water users $1 milâ€" lion, and was applied to this year‘s wastewater rates. But the overall waterâ€"rate charge is going up this year. And it was one of the reasons for the increase that caught my attention. A decline in water use last year has Waterloo Region, which supplies local drinking water, citing the drop in demand for this year‘s increase. A major capital project to upgrade water infrastructure is also a culâ€" prit, but it was interesting to see conservation as an added Bill Garibaldi, Waterloo‘s manager of water services, told me last month that increased water fees is one of the conundrums that comes with conservation. That‘s because the water supply CHRON and distribution system is still set up to handle peak volumes, and if water sales are down the difference must be made up. The water keeps running, and has to be there when needed. So it‘s shortâ€" term pain for some longâ€" And it seems that local water users are supporting that message of conservaâ€" tion. The public‘s buyâ€"in even has some hopeful that we won‘t need a pipeline to Lake Erie to solve our longâ€" term water needs. Last year the lawnâ€"waterâ€" ing restrictions were credited with reducing the peak sumâ€" mer dernand for water by at least 20â€"million litres a day. Summer is obviously the seaâ€" son that puts the most strain on the water system, but compliance led to an 8.5 per cent reduction in the overall water used. How can we assume that most people are supporting BOB VRBANAC PREY watering restrictions? Well, since 2005 there have only been five residents and busiâ€" nesses formally charged with violating the ban. There have been 504 warnings, but out of a municipality of almast 500,000, that‘s less than a tenth of a percent. There are other local examples of people acceptâ€" ing the cost of conservation. like a new project launched by Conestoga mall in Waterâ€" loo. You can just imagine how much electricity a regional mall uses in a day, especially a hot one like last week when its climateâ€"controlled comâ€" fort was put to the test. And you would think that the mall operators would look for cheaper ways of powering the airâ€"conditioning, lights and cash registers. But no. Instead the mall has signed on with Bullfrog Power, a leading Canadian supplier of pure green elecâ€" tricity, to provide 30 percent of its electricity requirements for the mall‘s common areas. Why would someone pay more? It‘s a fallacy that peoâ€" ple won‘t pay a premium for electricity. As long as they‘re doing something good for the environment, it‘s part of the social cost they‘re willing to pay for a healthy society. And who wouldn‘t be willâ€" ing to pay for air that doesn‘t choke you, or clean water when you need it. A lot of people have â€" suffered through the alternative, and they‘re not buying it anyâ€"