Evidence of meeting #28 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:20 a.m.
Vice-President, University Research and Professor of Biology, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
That's correct. And if I'm reviewing an EIA there's always the assumption that the modelling prediction will be met, but I look for plans B and C and ask, “So if this doesn't happen according to plan, what are you going to do about it?”
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Excellent.
I would like to ask Dr. Barker to interpret something for me, if I may. In his written presentation there is a statement regarding “investigating the potential for process-affected groundwater to leach toxic trace metals from the sand aquifers and so mobilize the metals towards surface water bodies”. He further says, “To date, while metals such as iron and manganese appear to be mobilized, the toxic trace metals, including arsenic, do not appear to be enhanced in the plumes”.
So your studies have indicated that toxic trace metals are not transported by groundwater to surface water in the areas you've studied. Am I getting that right, or is it something else?
10:20 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
I think that's partly correct. The other aspect is there's a possibility that some of the trace metals may exist in the aquifer itself and are taken out of the aquifer, put into water, and delivered to the surface water. We haven't seen evidence of that occurring either.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Dr. Dixon's report says that reproductive studies on the Athabasca River and tributaries have provided important baseline information.
When was that baseline arrived at?
10:20 a.m.
Vice-President, University Research and Professor of Biology, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
That work was published in 2003. I think it was done in 2001.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If I don't use my full amount of time, I'll be deferring some to Mr. Calkins.
Welcome to our witnesses. We are currently studying the oil sands and their impact on water.
We've talked quite a bit about water quality today. We haven't talked very much about changes to the topography. We did a flyover as a committee. Those of us who were there actually participated in a flyover, and we got to see some of the reclamation work that has commenced. We are told--although they have yet to quantify for us how much--that the pace of reclamation will be increasing over the short term.
But even with reclaimed land, if you will, and with reclaiming the tailings ponds, for example, there are changes to the topography. The wetlands are not in the location that they were. You're changing the physical geography with these tailings ponds--stacking.
What impact does changing the topography have on the movement of water in the basin?
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
The movement of water, to a large extent, for groundwater at least, is controlled by the topography, so the shallow groundwater flow is, in large part, controlled by the topography. By engineering the topography, you have the opportunity to have some control, at least, over those flows. So it becomes not just a challenge but an opportunity to try to reform the landscape in a way that leads to successful reclamation.
10:25 a.m.
Vice-President, University Research and Professor of Biology, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Is there a risk perhaps that water within the basin will move out too quickly to be captured? Is that something that—
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
Certainly those are the risks that challenge the reclamation people. Letting that water move out by erosion has to be prevented. There are a number of issues in reclamation involving that topography that will impact water. And water does impact the topography as well. That interchange, I think, is now well recognized among the people practising the reclamation. That's not necessarily fully recognized, but I think they're now looking at water management as part of the reclamation management.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
With regard to the concept of compensation lakes or compensation wetlands, they won't be located where original lakes or wetlands have existed. What does that do to the relationship with respect to surface water and groundwater? What kinds of changes can we anticipate from that?
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
Certainly, it changes it. I guess I would put it another way. I would ask whether there are certain benefits to engineering certain types of change. For example, the groundwater research was undertaken in the hopes that remediation of the toxicity would occur during groundwater flow. If that had been borne out, then you might encourage more groundwater flow and less surface water flow in the reclaimed landscape.
I look at it more as an opportunity--since you have to re-engineer the landscape--to try to re-engineer a landscape that functions as well as you can make it.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm saying that we have to—
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
Well, I don't know. We haven't seen it yet. We have to re-engineer. We have no choice. You have options in re-engineering. I look at it that way. It's not comparing yourself against nature, other than in the mandated way. I don't think there's any inclination of restoring the landscape.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Okay.
I'd like to give the last minute to Mr. Calkins, if I could.
Thank you.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
Thank you, Mr. Watson.
I would just like to ask a question.
The Canadian Water Network is anxious to play a role in the recommendation that you provided, Dr. Barker, insofar as the symposium goes. Could you just elaborate for us what you--and perhaps Dr. Dixon as well--would envision that looking like? Would it be something that would meet every two years? Where would you meet?
It's a very good recommendation. I would just like some visionary elaboration on that. The recommendation, hopefully, will show up in the report. It'll be vague enough that somebody can use it to do what they need to do. But I would like, for the record, some testimony, from your knowledge, because I'm sure you participate in numerous forums and sharing of information. Could you just elaborate for the committee what either of you would envision this looking like?
10:25 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
Although it's in the early stages, we would imagine an annual workshop in Alberta, of one to two days, at which research would be presented in some organized fashion. There would be quite a few poster displays so graduate students could expose their research to people. The workshop would be supported by the companies, Alberta Environment, the Alberta Research Council, the Canadian Water Network, and anybody else who thought it was a good idea.
There would be an attempt to collect at least some ideas, from new tailing strategies, surficial reclamation interests, and water treatment options through to hydrogeology, hydrology, and aquatics. It's very difficult to organize such a broad meeting and have information exchanged in a day and a half, let's say. So it's a real challenge. But that was our view of what we needed. We needed to talk to the engineers and ecologists, or at least have them in the same meeting room for a day so we could bump into them at coffee, if nothing else.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
10:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Thank you, Chair.
A number of the questions I had have already been asked and answered.
I want to thank you for being here. This has been very enlightening. As has been shared, we took the trip. I've learned over the years that firsthand experience on the site is really edifying. It helps us to understand. It was good to hear that you'd been there many times yourself.
In my past life, I was on city council for about 14 years. Often we would go out to see the site. In the area around us we had some very large mounds of gravel that were removed, and then the area was reclaimed. The end result was an improvement on what was there before. You now have very productive agricultural land where previously it was great mounds of gravel. As you suggest, there are opportunities to improve.
One hurdle we dealt with in local government was the company that would maybe mine that resource. There was not adequate security to make sure it was reclaimed adequately.
My first question focuses on reclamation. Dr. Barker, I think you mentioned that if it's not designed properly, if it's not functioning properly, the province may not want it back. What guarantees are there that the work will be completed and that there will be security to make sure it's done properly and meets the province's standards?
10:30 a.m.
Professor, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
If the companies are operating, there is some guarantee that they still have cashflow that can be directed to the reclamation. My sense, and I'm not an expert on reclamation, is that we're moving away from an immediate and sudden handover—it's mine today and yours tomorrow—to a view that there might be some ongoing care. Perhaps we can do the reclamation better if we don't depend on handing it over completely. Rather, we depend on handing it over with some ongoing maintenance, let's call it. I like that idea. I'm not an engineer. I don't believe that engineers solve things perfectly. So I can imagine that there would be some additional costs.
We're not experts in bonding and things like that. Gravel extractors often have to post bonds. The industry, at the moment, as I understand it, doesn't post bonds.
It's an area of policy that I think people face, and I guess, as Dr. Dixon said, it's a matter of demonstrating these remediations before we can develop confidence that they can actually be carried out.
10:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Further to that, when we did our flyover, we saw some areas that were reclaimed. We have vegetation growing. They are not ponds. Are there reclaimed areas that you think have been done well?
