Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly Updates[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Oil sands development is of national interest and has attracted significant international media attention. It is a clear example of the increasing environmental costs associated with unconventional oil production that emphasizes the urgent need to plan for the transition to a sustainable energy future. Given this overarching goal, what is required to ensure that current oil sands development proceeds responsibly? How can we limit its environmental impacts and optimizes its benefits to Canadians while making sure we meet our international obligations to reduce greenhouse gas pollution?
The manner in which the oil sands are developed includes issues of federal jurisdiction, such as greenhouse gas pollution, transboundary issues (acid rain and water quality and quantity), fisheries and impacts to species at risk. Despite this jurisdiction, oil sands development has largely proceeded with weak or limited involvement from the federal government. Oil sands development has expanded rapidly over the past decade with limited progress by the Government of Alberta in establishing environmental management systems to protect the regional environment.
Opposition to oil sands mismanagement continues to grow. In May 2009, the Northwest Territories Association of Communities, an umbrella group that represents all 33 communities in the Northwest Territories, passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on oil sands expansions until a transboundary water agreement between Alberta and the Northwest Territories has been completed. In 2008 three separate First Nations in northern Alberta filed legal challenges opposing oil sands development. All Treaty 6, 7 and 8 First Nations in Alberta have also called for a temporary halt to oil sands development until unresolved concerns are addressed. Further support for a moratorium on expansions has been voiced by the Alberta Federation of Labour and the ecumenical group KAIROS. Independent polling shows that Albertans and Canadians are concerned about the pace and scale of oil sands development and the weak environmental rules under which oil sands development is proceeding.
The petroleum industry has generally shown that it is unwilling to make changes voluntarily but it has also shown an immense capacity for innovation when improvements are mandated. The technological innovations needed to rehabilitate the reputation of the oil sands and address some of the most serious problems must be driven by regulations to limit greenhouse gas pollution, halt water withdrawals during low-flow periods and prohibit liquid tailings creation. Given that environmental management in Alberta has failed to keep pace with oil sands development, it is essential that new oil sands approvals be temporarily halted to give time to effectively implement the required policy solutions.
The Pembina Institute is a non-partisan, national sustainable energy think tank that has researched environmental impacts of Canada's oil sands for over a decade. Its mission is to advance sustainable energy solutions through innovative research, education, consulting and advocacy. To that end, the Pembina Institute has identified some of the most pressing challenges facing oil sands development and has proposed policy solutions.
Climate Change
The oil sands are the fastest growing source of new greenhouse gas pollution in Canada. Production of synthetic crude oil from the oil sands creates significantly more greenhouse gas pollution than conventional oil production. Although there is quite a wide variation, producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands is generally more than three times as greenhouse gas intensive as Canadian conventional oil production.
Canada is considered a laggard in dealing with greenhouse gas pollution, and we still do not have regulations in place to drive greenhouse gas reductions consistent with what the scientific consensus says are required. We urgently need regulations that require greenhouse gas reductions across all sectors of the economy and place an adequate price on this pollution.
Water
Oil sands mines are large consumers of freshwater from the Athabasca River. It takes two to four barrels of freshwater to extract and upgrade a single barrel of bitumen. Under the current federal-provincial water management framework for the Athabasca River, there is no provision for oil sands water withdrawals to be halted to protect fish habitat. The water management framework has a "traffic light" system to identify green, yellow and red zone flows, but red does not mean "stop" for water withdrawals. This framework demonstrates that maintaining water for the oil sands industry has precedence over protecting fisheries and habitat.
Without an ecological base flow (EBF) to halt water withdrawals during low-flow periods, we risk irreversible damage to the Athabasca watershed. A cost-effective option that could protect the Athabasca River is to require off-stream water storage facilities for use during low-flow periods. Increasing the recycle rate of water used--and water that currently ends up in tailings lakes--would also reduce the reliance on freshwater from the Athabasca River.
Tailings Waste
Tailings are the liquid waste product created by bitumen extraction in oil sands mines. Many observers consider them to be one of the biggest liabilities facing the oil sands industry. Tailings lakes now cover 130 [km.sup.2]--an area the size of Vancouver--and are growing rapidly. Tailings contain sand, silt, clay, water and a host of toxic compounds, including residual bitumen, naphthenic acids, phenolic compounds, ammonia-ammonium and metals. Tailings lakes seep their contents, but exactly what is seeping, how much is seeping and what ecosystem components are affected is uncertain. The environmental impact assessments submitted by operators contain several references to seepage contamination, and seepage is supposedly addressed by equipping ponds with technology to intercept seepage, but there is a lack of transparency about actual seepage rates and the effectiveness of this technology.
Current mining technologies generate a net volume of 1.5 barrels of mature fine liquid railings for every barrel of bitumen processed. Alternative extraction technologies are under investigation, but companies will not readily adopt technologies that shift more of the cost to the present day and have not been proven commercially unless regulations require them to do so. For this reason, it is essential that government prohibit granting new approvals for projects that propose to continue to create liquid tailings.
Land-Use Planning
The Government of Alberta has leased approximately 80,000 [km.sup.2] of land--an area the size of New Brunswick--for oil sands development. The leases are granted without any assessment of surface impacts or consultation with First Nations communities. A recent report from Environment Canada notes that all the threatened woodland caribou herds in northern Alberta are on the way to extirpation, largely because of the cumulative footprint of industrial development (including in situ oil sands development) within their ranges. Land-use planning is essential to identify which areas will be permanently conserved, and cumulative limits to oil sands development must be set. This requirement is consistent with recommendations made by the multi-stakeholder group set up by the governments of Canada and Alberta to improve oil sands management. The recommendations were to permanently protect 20 to 40 percent of northeastern Alberta from industrial development and to tightly constrain the total oil sands footprint. The Government of Alberta has not yet implemented these recommendations.
Reclamation
Although industry and government claim that reclamation will restore lands to their natural state, the evidence suggests otherwise. In over 40 years of oil sands development only 0.2 per cent of the disturbed mineable area has been certified as reclaimed. There are no binding reclamation timelines and it has not yet been demonstrated that tailings can be successfully reclaimed. There is a lack of transparency around reclamation performance and growing concerns that the modest security deposits companies pay to the government are inadequate to ensure that Canadians will be protected from having to pay for costly environmental liabilities in the future.
Facing the Challenge with Public Policy not Public Relations
The Pembina Institute is committed to meaningful discussions on how to improve environmental management in the oil sands, but we are concerned that government and industry communications do not always accurately portray the impacts and unresolved challenges associated with oil sands development. Despite some per-barrel improvements in impacts, the cumulative impacts of oil sands development continue to worsen. The absence of policies that set acceptable cumulative impact limits is a key missing element to oil sands environmental management. It is critical that we move past public relations rhetoric and "clear the air" regarding the growing impacts of oil sands development, such as greenhouse gas emissions and the production of liquid railings waste. Downplaying the impacts is an impediment to the improved management and clean up that is required.
Oil sands development has been mismanaged to date, and this mismanagement is tarnishing Canada's international reputation, deteriorating the environment and creating liabilities for future generations. Both the federal and Alberta governments must play a much more active role to ensure that cumulative limits and environmental rules to protect the environment are in place before further oil sands expansions proceed.
Simon Dyer is the Oil Sands Program director at the Pembina Institute. He is a registered professional biologist and has worked on land-use issues in western Canada since 1999. Over 20 Pembina Institute publications concerning oil sands environmental impacts and management are available for free download at www.oilsandswatch.org.
FEED