Environment Committee on May 13th, 2009

[John D. Wright]

We think it has applicability throughout most of the in situ region. Certainly, in any conventional sandstone that is sustainable with the SAGD operation, our technology will work. Our technology will work in a number of places that do not have a current technology application, and that actually increases the footprint that our technology can be applied to.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

If you're the only ones using that technology, is it because it's more costly?

[John D. Wright]

We're the only ones using it because we're the owners of it. We're experimenting with it to prove that it works. I think any new technology has an evolutionary phase. It goes through three stages: first of all, it's laughed at; second, it's violently opposed; finally, it's accepted as common knowledge by everyone.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Is it like a pilot project?

[John D. Wright]

It was like a pilot project, but we've now moved to the commercial stage, and I think people have stopped laughing.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Duncan, go ahead please.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm curious about this term “recycled water”. Does that mean it's a closed-loop system? Do you withdraw the water once and that's it--you don't have to withdraw any further water?

[Michel Scott]

At our operation, when we talk about 95% recycled, we are drawing some new water, but to the tune of 5%, and we're disposing of the water we can't use any more down deeper--below the formation, in fact. There's a new stream, but it represents only 5%; the rest keeps moving around.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

What volume of water is that 5% per year?

[Michel Scott]

For us, for example, at a 35,000-barrel-a-day project, that would be essentially.... If it's 20,000 cubic metres that we circulate every day, it'd be 1,000 cubic metres, or 6,000 barrels.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Is that per...?

[Michel Scott]

It's per day.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

So it's still a substantial amount.

There's a lot of talk in Alberta about moving toward cumulative impact assessments. When you apply for an expansion or for any new projects into the future, are the projects actually obliged to take into account the cumulative impacts of all other operations and future operations? Is that a regulatory requirement?

[Chris Fordham]

Yes, it is a regulatory requirement. The EIA process is a cumulative assessment of air, land, water, and socio-economic impacts.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

How far into the future is the projection for water use?

[Chris Fordham]

In the future case in an EIA, you would have to include everything that is known or thought about, essentially.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

No. I'm asking if you have to project 20 or 40 years from now, as the tar sands operations continue to expand.

[Chris Fordham]

It would be for at least the life of your project, but probably there aren't any new projects known beyond that time anyway.

You saw Mr. Lunn's presentation, which was specific to water. That is a projection of water needs for everything we know of today.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That's into the future.

[Chris Fordham]

Yes, it's a projection into the future.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Okay, thanks.

You've spoken about a lot of evolving technologies and so forth, but there's always that qualifier, “subject to affordability”. Are companies actually required to use the best available technology, and are the projects grandfathered?

[Chris Fordham]

The first part asked whether we are required to use the best available technology. Yes, we are. That is part of most of the applications. We have to demonstrate why we believe it's the best available technology.

What was the second part, again?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Are the projects grandfathered? In other words, as technology improves, we hear about all this evolving wonderful technology. Is there a requirement that, as it advances, it must be deployed in all the projects?

[Chris Fordham]

It depends on the application. In some instances the answer is yes. For major capital pieces of equipment, it is generally not a requirement, but certainly at a capital turnover it would be expected that they would be replaced with the best available technology of the day.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

What would the time span be for capital turnover?