Environment Committee on March 5th, 2009

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I certainly appreciate the witnesses appearing here today.

I want to set the table a little bit. My questions will have a lot to do with reclamation and what happens afterwards, because I think focusing on the cleanup is very important. This is in relation to water.

When applications are received--I'm talking about an application for a pit mine or whatever the case might be, even if it's in situ--all of those applications must come with plans about how the company doing the exploration or the mining plans to reclaim and basically restore the landscape to its natural state. Is that correct?

[A witness]

Yes.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Would that also be correct if there were any alteration of streams and any alteration of fish habitat? We've talked about HADD, which obviously triggers DFO's involvement. All of those things are taken care of in the application process should a HADD be triggered for a stream or creek diversion. Is that correct?

[Ginny Flood]

We try to do the compensation plans to offset any impacts. Then we monitor to make sure there is an effectiveness so that our compensation plans are actually doing what we thought they would do. We work very closely with the companies to make sure that's happening.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Okay.

I think one of the challenges the companies face up there when it comes to tailings ponds.... The whole strategy has been that the water, the sand, and everything that comes out of the extraction process once the oil is removed goes to the tailings ponds. The whole idea there is that the solids settle out over time and the water evaporates off, and that will allow some form of reclamation.

My understanding is that there are some projects, according to some plans, that were slated for reclamation in the very near future. I'm just wondering what the status of those reclamation projects is, where they're moving along, and what any of the technologies are that are helping with the reclamation of these tailings ponds.

[Dr. Kim Kasperski]

I can speak to that. First, with the tailings ponds, the water does not evaporate. The water that is recovered as the solids settle is recycled back to the process. That provides a huge fraction of the water used in the process.

As for reclamation that is ongoing, Suncor is currently reclaiming pond 1, their very first pond, the one you see in all the photos. It's right next to the Athabasca River. They're using many methods to solidify that material. In some methods, they're actually pumping out the clay slurry, which is the intractable part of the oil sands tailings. They're using a bunch of other methods to solidify that surface. Once it's solidified, they will put the overburden back on and plant it. They are projecting to have that done by next year. Whether that happens.... That will be the first tailings pond that will be reclaimed. I don't know where they are in their process, but that is the target, I was told.

With respect to other reclamation, there was a tailings treatment process that was introduced, called the consolidated treatment process, and that's a way of getting a rapid solid surface. It's faster than just leaving the tailings as they are. Again, Suncor has filled two ponds with this consolidated treatment process. The water is pumped off to be recycled, and that leaves behind a solid surface.

They did have difficulties with the process, so not all areas of the pond are as solid as they need to be in order to drive a Cat on them, for example, without it sinking, but other areas are. Those are the ponds they're aiming at. They're almost full now. The soft areas will be ameliorated somehow, and I'm not sure how, but the other areas will be reclaimed.

[Kevin Stringer]

Just to answer that, again, the mines are only about 20% of the area, but the challenge with the mines is that they produce for a long, long period of time, in the range of 40 years. This is a challenge, so reclamation is an issue.

That said, of the 530 square kilometres that have been disturbed so far, about 65 square kilometres are under active reclamation. The fact that they haven't been certified as reclaimed means that the company is still hanging on to them. Some of that stuff is now forested land again.

So there is important work under way to do that, but the land issue does remain a significant one for us. I think Dr. Kasperski's lab is actually involved in dry stackable tailings.

You may have spoken to that.

[Dr. Kim Kasperski]

Yes.

[Kevin Stringer]

These are a hugely important piece going forward. We believe that the technological improvements that we, the companies, Alberta, and others are working on are what will make the difference in terms of improving the environmental performance over the longer term.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Stringer.

We now must go to Mr. Ouellet.

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

Mr. Burgess, I am still unclear as to what circumstances will trigger an environmental impact assessment. I know you undertake such reviews on hydro power generating stations. It is all very foggy in my mind.

I am going to give you a concrete example and I would like to know if you are going to undertake an environmental impact study. Sweet crude from oil sands is carried to the United States in a pipeline under exclusive federal jurisdiction that crosses the province of Quebec. Construction of a huge pumping station is to start in 2010.

Are there sufficient issues there to trigger an impact review?

[Steve Burgess]

Mr. Chairman, I am not familiar with this specific project but if this pipeline is under federal jurisdiction and if it crosses streams, thus risking to impact fish habitat or navigation, this would be enough to trigger an environmental assessment by the National Energy Board, for example.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Stringer, you are aware of the investments that will soon be made. As you said, they might be delayed by 18 months, but certainly not by 18 years, obviously. How many nuclear power stations would it take to replace the natural gas that is presently being used in the oil sands? I heard the figure of 14. Is this correct?

[Kevin Stringer]

I don't know the answer to the question, if there would be such a thing. What I can say, and I'll take the opportunity to answer the previous question, is that outside energy sources, external energy sources, account for between 10% and 20% of the energy produced, the energy content in the final product. So it is significant, and that's on the question the other member of the committee was asking, but it does speak to this as well.

There are experiments now on a number of different approaches, and I'll ask Dr. Kasperski, who may know these better than I, to discuss these in terms of alternatives to natural gas use in the in situ. There is--

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

Excuse me, Mr. Stringer, but I am only allowed five minutes. You said you did not know. I will therefore put my question to Mr. Burgess.

Everybody knows there will be nuclear generating stations. The figure of 14 is being mentioned, but even if there were only two, is it your intention to launch impact assessments of those projects?

We know that we are still unable to control tritium in those nuclear power plants and that it will affect fish. This would obviously affect First Nations and other people, but it seems this is not viewed as important. Is it your intention to undertake an environmental assessment of nuclear power plants?

[Steve Burgess]

Yes. Nuclear power plants are regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The federal government will make a decision about those nuclear plants and assessments will take place. In Ontario, several nuclear plant projects are undergoing assessments, including at Bruce, Darlington and elsewhere.

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

When I visited the oil sands in Alberta, all the companies told us that six barrels of water were required to extract one barrel of oil and that this amount could not be reduced. They can't seem to find new ways of doing things.

You said there were other ways of reducing the amount of water required. But the companies told us that is was impossible to reduce this amount.

Where is the technology going?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Please reply briefly because this question has already been answered.

[Dr. Kim Kasperski]

There is water lost due to the settled solids and tailings, speaking specifically about mining issues. The way to reduce that water use is by developing what they call dry stackable tailings. So by treating the tailings immediately to produce a dry solid, we recover twice the amount of water, so the actual loss of water is reduced from four barrels to two barrels per barrel of bitumen produced. That's the main technology that's been developed to address surface mining water use.

As for in situ, they're already down around one, in response to my previous question looking at improved water efficiency, solvent-assisted in situ methods, and so on.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll go now to Mr. Braid.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Let me begin by thanking the witnesses for their participation today and their very thorough presentations.

Mr. Stringer, I would like to start with your presentation. I noted with interest that over 40% of the jobs created from the oil sands occur outside of Alberta. I'm particularly interested in those that are based in Ontario and Quebec. I want to ask if you can elaborate a little on the nature of those jobs.

I presume those are 2007 numbers, and I wonder if you can provide some analysis on what impact, if any, the economic downturn has had on the jobs outside of Alberta.

[Kevin Stringer]

I believe those are 2007 numbers. Whether it stays at the 41% level with the economic downturn is a very good question. I think it may not stay at that percentage with the downturn. In Ontario and Quebec, we're talking about manufacturing jobs and jobs in steel. There are enormous capital costs for the oil sands for those types of things. We would also speak to pipelines and projects that go from Alberta, across Saskatchewan, Manitoba, etc., and even into the U.S. So those are the types of jobs we're talking about.

Whether they will continue to be in the range of 40% with the economic downturn is a good question. My sense is no, but I'd like to take a look at that. It's something we will be looking at.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you very much.

On the water recycling use, according to your presentation it has improved by 75% to 90%. You cited one example where the percentage of water recycled was actually 95%. Could you elaborate a little on that specific example and tell us what makes it unique in terms of its improved water recycling?

[Kevin Stringer]

I believe this one involves Imperial Oil at their Cold Lake operation. They're using saline and brackish water. They say they've found a way to get down to 0.5 barrels of water per barrel of oil. That's an in situ operation. So improvements have been made in the total amount. It's largely in situ, as my colleague pointed out, where the water numbers are low.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you very much.

There are only certain cases where there are joint federal and provincial environmental assessments. I wonder if you can provide an example or two of joint assessments.