Environment Committee on March 30th, 2010

[Dr. David Schindler]

I would say that at the current rates of river flow and of seepage, it's probably a very small part of the overall picture, compared to the airborne and surface runoff problems we've documented. With respect to the tailings ponds, however, the scenario I dread would be a tailings pond rupture where several million litres might hit the river at once, particularly under ice.

There was one spill in 1982 of only.... I believe 50 million litres were released into the river, and because it was impossible to clean up under ice--and it still is impossible--that spill made it all the way to Lake Athabaska. If something the size of Mildred Lake were to breach the wall of that dike under winter conditions, I'm sure we'd see the effects of that spill all the way to Great Slave Lake and the McKenzie.

That's not unheard of. A year ago, I had some graduate students look for evidence of tailings ponds breaks and breaches of the walls in the last 20 years. They came up with 184 incidences around the world.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Dr. Schindler, in terms of naphthenic acids, which are in the tailings ponds, I believe.... Is that correct?

[Dr. David Schindler]

Yes, they are.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I've been told that naphthenic acids aren't regulated under CEPA, whereas they are regulated under EPA pollutants regulations. Do you know if that's correct?

[Dr. David Schindler]

I don't know for sure. I know that a few years ago that was correct. My colleagues in Environment Canada tell me that CEPA needs updating by adding many pollutants to the current list.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

You did say that the Athabaska or service water was being contaminated, not only through air but through water pollution from the oil sands, did you not? Did I understand correctly?

[Dr. David Schindler]

I did.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

What would the transmission mechanism be there?

[Dr. David Schindler]

It would be via water.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

It would be via water, but would it be surface leaks from the tailings ponds? You've mentioned that it's not really an issue through the groundwater, but would it be through leaks of the ponds, for example, around Beaver Creek in the Syncrude tailings pond, which was documented as a source of surface water contamination a couple years ago?

Is that what you are referring to?

[Dr. David Schindler]

I think most of it is reaching the river via the tributaries, many of which are mined right to the river banks or even destroyed. If I look at all of our evidence, it looks like the worst contamination occurs during the first few years after a watershed is exposed, and that's very common in watershed disturbance. Any chemical that's in the geological substrate increases dramatically once the surface biological layer is removed, and then the amount of contamination tails away with time.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you, Dr. Schindler.

I believe my time is up.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Your time has expired.

Mr. Armstrong, it's your turn in the five-minute round.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I want to thank all the presenters for their presentations today.

Ms. Farrell, I want to thank you for your presentation. My riding is on the east coast of Nova Scotia, and many of my constituents currently work in the Alberta oil industry.

I found intriguing in your presentation your comments on the appropriate geological conditions for carbon storage. I'm wondering, could east coast coal mines--and the east coast coal mines that have been closed--be appropriate geological sites for the storage of CO₂?

[Dawn Farrell]

I, myself, am not certain. My colleagues here say there is some capacity there. It would not be similar to what we have in Alberta, and you have to do specific studies for each site to really understand the geology. For example, on the west coast, we've done a study for our Centralia plant, and there is not a sufficient geological site there because of seismic issues. You have to go site by site and study by study to prove that up. But there is some capacity.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you.

If they were suitable for this type of operation, what potential economic benefit would there be? Also what type of safety and environmental concerns would you have in trying to open up something like that on the east coast?

[Dawn Farrell]

The way I look at the economic benefit is I think people tend to think about energy as what are the lowest-cost energy resources you have in your region that can enable you to deliver low-cost energy but make it environmentally effective. When you think about coal in Alberta, for example, it's a very low-cost resource. We have 300 years of supply that sits just under the prairie. If we can prove up CCS, we can take about 4,000 megawatts of coal plants and extend their lives for 15 or 20 years, and take out the impact of CO₂.

That gets the people of Alberta a resource that's more in the $80, $90 to $100 a megawatt hour range as compared to wind, which is in the $90 to $100 range. New hydro is now $125 to $145.

Earlier one of your panel members asked about nuclear. Our studies show that nuclear is in the $165 a megawatt hour range.

We try to look at each resource, look at the cost of that resource, and then look at the cost of mitigating the environmental impacts.

My husband is also from Nova Scotia, so I'm familiar with the concept of people coming from Nova Scotia to Alberta. From what I understand, when we look at the Nova Scotia region, you have some wind. We've got wind now in New Brunswick, and I know wind's being developed in Nova Scotia. My understanding is your coal is quite expensive there.

So I think what you'd have to look at is the cost of that coal relative to the cost of the CCS and put those together and compare them to other energy sources you have in the region, which could be wind, small hydro, and some gas-fired facilities. That's what I would look at.

In terms of safety, a tremendous body of work is now being gathered on the kind of work we're doing here in Alberta. You could get in touch with some of the geologists, the engineers who have been working on these projects. They could outline the kind of study that would have to happen to determine just how safe it would be in the various geological formations there.

I think all of that is very doable at this point.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you.

I just have one further question, Ms. Farrell. Do you have any current investment in geothermal energy derived from mine water?

[Dawn Farrell]

No. Our geothermal is invested in California and it's from heat that comes out of the ground. It's not mine water.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you.

My next question is for Dr. Gibbins. In a recent op-ed you called for the resurrection of a Canadian environmental agenda focused on building a conservation ethic.

Can you elaborate on how this stronger conservation ethic is compatible with an increased focus on oil sands development?

[Dr. Roger Gibbins]

Certainly the oil sands development will bring these into question. I think what your committee is looking at shows the point I was trying to make, and that is that there's a strong interest by Canadians in the environment they can touch, feel, and smell.

Water issues are therefore very important to Canadians. That's been shown time and again.

All I was trying to point out is that our attention to the larger, more abstract environmental challenges, global warming and wealth redistribution, have taken us off an environmental agenda that may be of more acute concern to Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Armstrong, your time has expired.

Monsieur Ouellet.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Farrell, I recently read in a federal government publication that 50% of the CO₂ emitted by the oil sands would be captured by 2030. Do you believe that is possible?

[Dawn Farrell]

I am not an expert at CO₂ recovery in the oil sands, so I could not comment on that. I do think it is feasible relative to the coal power plants in Alberta that we own that are in the Wabamun area.

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

I will put the same question to Mr. Thompson.

Do you think it will be possible to capture 50% of the CO₂ emitted by 2030?