Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Enderdu Frequently Asked Questions

Why do you always say “Jeff Cavanagh’s Enerdu project”?

Here is one of the documents that clearly shows Jeff Cavanagh as the principle in Enerdu: Enerdu – Jeff Cavanagh NUANS  link

Q: Does Enerdu won the riverbed they want to build on?

It is clear from emails obtained using the Freedom of Information (FOI) act that the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) questions the Enerdu ownership of the property they plan to build on (see Pages_from_2012-09_2013-07_Enerdu_MNR_FOI_combined_A-2013-00056_re_Ownership and FOI_A0201174_hilighted ). MNR indicates that Enerdu must deal with the issue through both a Quit Claims process and the Disposition of Crown Land, in order to obtain ownership of the riverbed that Enerdu needs for this project to proceed.

In other words – according to the MNR email – Enerdu does not own the riverbed.

Note that throughout the FOI email thread, the acronym LRIA stands for Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act.

Where would the new proposed powerhouse be built?

The new powerhouse will extend 15 m (~50 ft)  wide into the river from the side of the existing powerhouse, taking up almost one third of the width of the river between the existing Enerdu building and the Barley Mow. See the 3D drawings to see what it might look like.

How much of the river width would the proposed new power house take?

It depends on the exact question that you are asking. Both 28% and 33% are correct answers. “One-third of river” is a close enough answer for either question.

The distance between the existing powerhouse and the Barley Mow will be reduced by about 28%. The width of the river channel at its narrowest point (between the new intake weir and the pub patio) will be reduced by 33 %.

Did the Flashboard levels get raised, and if so when?

There are public statements from Harry Barr (of Barr Lumber, Pakenham) and Brian Gallagher (past MRPC General Manager) in Rob Newton’s documentary “Opposite Banks” (2013), where they talk about a board height that was several inches shorter than those used since about 2000. A few years after the height was raised, the Maple swamp die-off started. See the MVFN report for further information on the Resources page.

What we were promised vs. what we got with MRPC

Pictures from the past…


How big will the new proposed powerhouse be?

Bigger than the Barley Mow, two stories high.

Why will the river be closed off in this area?


How big would the weir proposed be?


Why are they wanting to hoe ram and blast the river bed?


Why do you think the proposed power plant be noisy?


They say the proposed powerhouse be clad in stone – why does the MRW not think so?