Viewpoint pubs.acs.org/est
Environmental and Health Impacts of Canada’s Bitumen Industry: In Search of Answers Kevin Timoney* Treeline Ecological Research, 21551 Township Road 520, Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada T8E 1E3 northern Alberta are experiencing decades-long trends of declining discharge, relevant, preindustrial “baseline” discharges do not exist for many rivers, including the major water source for the region, the lower Athabasca River. Regional water scarcity may come to threaten ecosystems and society and development of bitumen resources. The consideration of in-stream flow needs was out of date and superficial. The RSC did not consider the current water management framework and the potential biological implications of withdrawing water at times of low discharge, nor did it incorporate the federal scientific evaluation of the water management framework3 that concluded that the climate change analysis underestimated changes in minimum flows and that water withdrawals under certain low flow conditions would result in fish habitat losses and in loss of productive capacity of the lower Athabasca River. It was imprudent for the RSC to conclude that the viability of the Athabasca River ecosystem is not threatened by industrial water withdrawals. The RSC report was in error when it stated issues of seepage could be clarified if results from annual environmental assessment reporting were made publicly available. Annual environmental assessment reports have been publicly available itumen production and processing in Alberta, Canada has for years, many of which are posted online. Those reports become the world’s largest energy project. The western contain data on seepage rates, water chemistry, emissions, and Canadian sedimentary basin contains 43% of the global exceedances that would have added materially to the quality of bitumen reserve; Canadian production is projected to reach the RSC review. three million barrels/day by 2020 and five million barrels/day Effects of tailings ponds on wildlife received inadequate by 2030. Increasing concern about the benefits and risks of attention. There was no review of relevant scientific literature. bitumen exploitation has led to a sustained and often strident The presence of extensive tailings ponds along an internationdebate that has garnered international attention. As a ally significant bird migration corridor has long been known to 1 consequence, the Royal Society of Canada (RSC) assembled pose threats to migratory and resident birds. Although the RSC a panel “to review and assess available evidence bearing on report as a whole touched on the issue of habitat loss, little these issues and identify knowledge gaps to provide Canadians effort was made to quantify the effect on wildlife populations. with a scientific perspective...” The RSC praised its report as Uncritical acceptance of Regional Aquatic Monitoring “without a doubt the most comprehensive evidence-based Program (RAMP) findings, given the documented inability of assessment of the full spectrum of major environmental and RAMP to assess change,4 undermined the credibility of the health impacts of Canada’s oil sands industry that has been RSC report. The RSC report downplayed the significance of made available to the public to date”. tailings seepage and ignored important information such as data Upon study of the RSC report, and discussions with other on groundwater contaminant plumes. Tailings seepage is a large scientists, it became evident that a scientific review of the report and complex problem whose significance cannot be dismissed was warranted. This viewpoint summarizes a critical review of because of uncertainties. the water quality and quantity section of the RSC report. The The consideration of downstream effects was marred by misdetailed scientific review is available.2 reporting or misunderstanding of various studies and a failure The RSC report provided a simplistic and incomplete to review relevant information. Use of outdated discharge data treatment of how industrial activities may impact the aquatic undermined the discussion of water quantity and water quality environment. Impacts omitted or reviewed inadequately issues. A more complete evaluation of industrial emissions included licensed discharges to water, air, and land; leaks and spills of bitumen, oil, wastewater, and other compounds; and Received: February 7, 2012 habitat disturbance and loss. The problem of declining river Accepted: February 10, 2012 Published: February 24, 2012 flows was inadequately addressed. Because many rivers in
B
© 2012 American Chemical Society
2496
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es300513u | Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 2496−2497
Environmental Science & Technology
Viewpoint
would have improved the breadth and utility of the RSC assessment. The literature review on surface water quality, impacts on aquatic organisms and fisheries, and potential pathways to human exposure was superficial. The paucity of information on the impacts of chemicals on the biota was noteworthy. Dismissal of downstream public health concerns was not justified given the superficial treatment of the data and the considerable remaining unknowns such as the need to quantify total exposure to contaminants and to explain the increased rates of cancers and other diseases in the downstream community of Fort Chipewyan. The report’s skepticism about contamination was not based on a thorough or careful analysis. In spite of the report’s defects, some sections were covered well. The report presented a survey of some relevant literature and contributed to the discussion of environmental management. Discussion of the disposal of wastewater was informative and rightly emphasized the uncertain viability of using end pit lakes. Naphthenic acid issues were well covered. Recommendations for more studies to address lingering concerns and unknowns were justified. The major strengths of the RSC report were its identification of information gaps and the need for better monitoring and for studies to address concerns and unknowns. The RSC report was prepared under time constraints “in a remarkably short period of time”.1 It is therefore understandable that the report tended to be superficial and in some areas relied upon out of date information. Various subjects seemed to lie outside the expertise of the authors such as environmental chemistry, hydrology, sedimentology, surficial materials, statistics, and wildlife ecology. In recognition of the complex issues, the RSC would have been wise to release a draft report for wider review. Given the persistent acrimonious debate about the impacts of bitumen exploitation, especially about issues of water use and water pollution, it is unclear why the RSC published its report before ensuring its accuracy and comprehensiveness. Issues of bitumen development have global environmental and public health relevance that deserve careful attention. A more circumspect and comprehensive study is therefore needed.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*Phone/fax: 780-922-3741; e-mail:
[email protected]. Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Environmental and Health Impacts of Canada’s Oil Sands Industry; Royal Society of Canada: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2010. (2) The full critical review of the RSC report. http://www.treelineecological.ca (accessed February 5, 2012). Click on the tab: In the Public Interest. (3) Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Science Evaluation of Instream Flow Needs (IFN) for the Lower Athabasca River, Science Advisory Report 2010/055; Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2010. (4) Ayles, G. B.; Dubé M.; Rosenberg, D. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP), Scientific Peer Review of the Five Year Report (1997−2001); Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program: Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada, 2004.
2497
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es300513u | Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 2496−2497
