Category Archives: Mining

Shades of Green: A $50 Million Message to Coal

Share

As heat records broke by the hundreds across the United States this summer, Michael Bloomberg braved the sweltering temperatures on a hot July morning, mounted a platform in front of the coal-fired GenOn power station in Alexandria, Virginia, and announced to those gathered that his charity, Bloomberg Philanthropies, was giving $50 million to the US Sierra Club to aid its Beyond Coal Campaign.

Bloomberg, mayor of New York, multi-billionaire and founder of his namesake philanthropy organization, was recognizing the “truly impressive” work of the Sierra Club in stopping the construction of at least 153 new coal-fired power stations in the US. The 91 plants that it was able to shut down since 2010 has prevented 114 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent from entering the atmosphere. The $50 million donation will be used to expand the Sierra Club’s efforts to phase out one-third of the existing coal-fired US power plants, to cut coal consumption for electricity by 30 percent by 2020, and to significantly reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and the plethora of toxic pollutants that cause widespread environmental and health damage – in the US alone, the annual human effect of burning coal is estimated at 13,000 premature deaths and health costs of $100 billion. None of these liabilities are weighed when computing the economic value of mining and burning coal.

But Bloomberg’s $50 million gift is more than a gesture of support for the Sierra Club and its ambitious objective of revoking “the social licence for burning coal”. It is a powerful indictment against coal itself, the censuring of a fossil fuel from the Industrial Revolution era that has become the single largest scourge of our planet’s environmental health. Its emissions comprise mercury, cadmium, lead and other neurotoxic heavy metals, together with acid-producing sulphur, radioactive elements, unhealthy particulates, dioxins, arsenic and over three times the weight of coal in carbon dioxide. (Assuming coal is about 90% carbon then, when burned, the 12 atomic mass units of each carbon atom combine with two oxygen atoms of 16 atomic mass units each to become the 44 atomic mass units of carbon dioxide. In a process that probably seems counter-intuitive to non-scientists, the dense 0.9 tonnes of carbon contained in each tonne of solid coal becomes 3.3 tonnes of gaseous carbon dioxide that is dispersed into the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas.)

Bloomberg’s gift of $50 million attaches weighty ethical considerations to both the burning of coal and the mining of coal. Indeed, coal mining is, itself, a massively polluting operation that taints air, water and land – just the initial effects of a process that is culminating in disturbing structural impacts to global climate and ocean acidity. So Bloomberg’s generosity has implications in the distant communities of Campbell River and the Comox Valley where coal mining has become topical and controversial.

How serious is this issue? At the level of principle, the issue is whether these two communities become part of the problem or the solution. Bloomberg’s $50 million gives moral weight to the solution side by helping to reduce the ills caused by coal in the US. Locally, conservation and environmental organizations, together with many other concerned citizens, are expending countless hours examining technical studies, evaluating the risks and warning about present and future damage. They are also challenging a political momentum that would rather acquiesce to a momentary temptation than consider the long-term perspective. Any concern about whether or not a mining corporation could provide enough “financial security to ensure waste water treatment from the [Quinsam] mine site will be treated in perpetuity…” (Courier Islander, Aug. 19/11) is completely unaware of the duration of “perpetuity” – the comment does, however, acknowledge the risk. Reasonable prudence would never consider subjecting future generations to such a persistent and onerous burden.

At the practical level, when Quinsam Coal cannot even manage its existing wastes, then the prospect of allowing further mining of an even more polluting grade of coal simply boggles any sense of social and environmental logic. And for what? On the positive side is a mere four additional years of local jobs. On the negative side is 1.7 million tonnes of dirty coal, 5.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, and the likelihood of perpetual acid seepage into a healthy, fish-bearing watershed that is a signature attraction of the Campbell River region. The balance is an unqualified “no” for more coal mining. And if any doubt remains, consider provincial authorities that have been both incapable and unwilling to enforce whatever meagre environmental regulations they might impose.The proposed Raven mine in the Comox Valley invites the same risks and hazards.

Coal mines have another shortcoming. They expose and release methane, a greenhouse gas that is about 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. The Raven mine is projected to exhaust 127,500 cubic meters of methane per day into the atmosphere. The Quinsam mine, depending on its relative size, would exhaust an equivalent amount. These emissions produce consequences that our planet can no longer absorb or ameliorate.

Michael Bloomberg is just one of many people who now grasp the disastrous implications of mining and burning coal. In his speech to the people who had gathered on that hot July morning in Alexandria, Virginia, he said we must “fight climate change and bring about our clean energy future.” By offering $50 million to this cause, he said, “I am doing my part to move our country Beyond Coal. Are you with me?”

“Are you with me?” is a clarion call that is now echoing around the planet, a moral imperative to anyone who cares about the health of our bodies and the well being of our oceans, rivers, lakes and air. Listen and it can be heard in even the communities of Campbell River and the Comox Valley. The future is now. And the time has come for us to become the change that we want to happen.

Share

First Nations Leaders Respond to Barabara Yaffe’s Provocative Column on BC Resource Projects

Share

Read this scathing response to a recent column by the Vancouver Sun’s Barbara Yaffe, titled “First Nations Need to Embrace Resource Projects” – from the Vice Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council and the Tribal Chief of the Tsilhqot’in National Government. (Aug 2, 2011)

 

Share

Are They Ganging up on the People and Environment?

Share

Just before I get down to business, I know that all environmentalists will be saddened that a former member of the group, Patrick Moore, allegedly got stiffed by a client for $120,000. I hate to sound like a “Johnny-come-lately” with good advice but, Pat, there are some professions where it’s wise to get your money up front.
 
Those who specialize in conspiracy theories – I’m a sometime member but inching closer to full membership – might wonder if the despoilers of our environment are ganging up on us. This thought came to me as someone representing yet another very worthy cause came to me asking for advice – this one was on the “smart meters” proposed by the bankrupt BC Hydro, which somehow has a billion plus rattling around in their jeans. This is interesting because the difference between this and a tax is invisible and the Campbell/Clark government hasn’t even bothered to go through the motions of putting it to a vote in the Legislature – in addition to removing oversight authority from the public’s supposed watchdog, The BC Utilities Commission (also stripped of authority over Site C Dam and private power projects).
 
The fish farm debate heats up, if that’s possible, as we learn the scientist who advised the provincial government – standing against all other fish biologists dealing with this subject – was practicing voodoo science. That’s not quite what a colleague said about Dick Beamish but one must infer it from what he did say as he dissociated himself from anything Beamish said or did.
 
We have Independent power being proved by the hour to be an environmental catastrophe as well as being fiscally mad as they drive BC Hydro over a financial cliff.
 
And what is the latest cost of the original $1 billion dollar Site”C” at now? Did I see $8 billion with independent estimates topping $10 billion all for power we won’t need but is deliciously placed to extract natural gas and “mine” the biggest polluter on the planet, the Tar Sands?
 
We still have the Fish Lake (Prosperity Mine – don’t you love the PR slant on that name) supported by Premier Clark.
 
We have a brand new environmental threat in what is called “fracking” where gas is “mined” horizontally with enormous amounts of water taken out of an already overburdened supply. We haven’t even considered the NAFTA ramifications.
 
We have Premier Clark, if not approving pipelines from the Tar Sands to Kitimat and greater capacity of the Kinder Morgan line to Burnaby certainly not disapproving even though the record of the companies involved is appalling. On the same subject, the Campbell/Clark government some years ago wrote the feds saying that they didn’t oppose large oil tankers plying the most spectacular and dangerous waters in the world. The Campbell/Clark crowd are utterly unfazed by the fact that spills on land and sea are not “risks” but mathematical certainties.
 
While all this is going on, the C/C government is paving farm land and threatening wildlife sanctuaries.
 
It’s hard not to sniff a corporate/government conspiracy, with the government thinking they can pile so much on us at one time we can’t get our acts together.
 
They are wrong.            
 

Share
The Raven Underground Coal Mine would be situated just 5 km from Fanny Bay Wharf (shown here) in Baynes Sound on Vancouver Island (photo: John Snyder)

Raven Coal Mine Proposal: Damien Gillis’ Letter

Share

As the window for public comments draws to a close in the first stage of the environmental review process for the proposed Raven Underground Coal Mine, nearly 2,000 comments have been submitted thus far from diverse individuals and organizations. Comments can still be sent by mail, so long as they are postmarked by no later than June 30, 2011. Here is Damien Gillis’ letter to the environmental assessment process.

——————————————————————————–

I was born and raised on Vancouver Island, not far north of Baynes Sound, the site of the proposed Raven Underground Coal Mine. I have a deep affection for the Island, its ecologies, and particularly for Fanny Bay Oysters.

I am also quite partial to Port Alberni, its wild salmon, and local natural wonders like the Somass River, Cathedral Grove and Cameron Lake.

Moreover, I am gravely concerned with a globalized economic system that sees us ship raw logs and dirty coal halfway around the the world in bunker diesel-powered ships, putting the Canadian manufacturing sector out of business while poorly-paid Asian workers labour in coal-fired plants, fashioning those Canadian raw materials into finished goods – then shipping them all the way back to us to stock the shelves at Walmart and Home Depot. It is a profoundly inefficient and unsustainable system that depends on abundant, cheap fossil fuels (including Canadian coal like that which would be pulled from under Baynes Sound were this project to go forth), carrying unacceptable ecological consequences and very few commensurate economic benefits for the people of BC. This Raven Mine is not only the epitome of a truly insane socio-economic system – but it would greatly help facilitate its advancement.

For all of these reasons, I am steadfastly opposed to the proposed Raven Underground Coal Mine proposal.

Since jobs and the economy are invariably the argument proffered by proponents of such projects, I feel I must specifically address this contention. The Raven project makes no sense economically for British Columbians, particularly in the communities directly affected by the project. The jobs offered pale in comparison to those threatened in the thriving local shellfish industry (600 jobs), tourism and retirement-orineted real estate, among other industries.

The associated truck traffic threatens the entire corridor from Fanny Bay to Port Alberni – including major tourism destinations in Combs, Cathedral Grove and Cameron and Sproat Lakes, not to mention Port Alberni’s world-famous salmon sport fishing industry. There is also the risk to the entire community of Port Alberni and surrounding ecosystems from the proposed 80,000 tonne coal storage facility at a new coal port to be built for the project. The mere notion of putting a coal storage facility in the midst of Canada’s most dangerous Tsunami zone is incomprehensible – especially in light of what we have all witnessed recently in Fukushima, Japan.

These aren’t whimsical what-ifs. These are serious questions that need to be fully accounted for in an honest and comprehensive risk assessment of the project. When when does so, it is clear that the risks absolutely dwarf the rewards from this project. Not, of course, for proponent Compliance Energy – but for the people of BC. And that is your one and only concern as public servants in reviewing this project. The Raven Mine is not, nor will it ever be with any amount of mitigation, an acceptable risk for the people and environment of this province and region.

In an era of climate change, peak oil, collapsing salmon stocks and ecologies, the Raven proposal would be taking us in precisely the wrong direction. We citizens have a duty to our fellow Canadians and our local ecosystems, but also to the world to do our part to ensure a more sustainable future for all. We are plainly not carrying our share of the load – and the Raven Coal Mine would only exacerbate that troubling trend.

You have heard from – at the time of this writing – some 1,800 individuals and organizations almost exclusively urging you to reject the Raven Underground Coal Mine proposal. The public will is clear and unmistakable on this matter.

I now add my voice to that chorus and hope that you will hear it loud and clear.

Sincerely,

Damien Gillis
Vancouver

Share
Raven Coal Mine meeting in Courtenay, May 30 - Photo by Carolyn Walton

Raven Coal Mine Hearings Draw Huge Public Opposition

Share

The controversial proposal for an a coal mine in Vancouver Island’s Baynes Sound – home to a thriving shellfish industry – saw large crowds turn out to voice their opposition at three separate public meetings last week. The joint federal and provincial environmental assessment hearings on Compliance Energy’s proposed Raven Underground Coal Mine drew some 1,500 citizens in Courtney, Port Alberni and Union Bay – the vast majority vocally opposed to the project.

“It’s obvious the public has deep concerns about the proposed coal mine and the approval process,” said CoalWatch Comox Valley president John Snyder after the final public meeting concluded in Union Bay Friday night, with over 450 people in attendance.

According to CoalWatch – which, along with Coal Free Alberni, has been leading the swelling public opposition to the project over the past year – Monday’s meeting at the Filberg Centre in Courtney saw nearly 600 people, while 400 attended the Port Alberni meeting on Thursday, with another 600 tuning in online.

The hall in Union Bay was so packed the fire marshal had to restrict access.

In all, a staggering 200 people spoke in opposition to the project, with only one in favour.

“Public opposition to the mine is overwhelming,” said Tria Donaldson, Pacific Coast Campaigner at the Wilderness Committee. “It’s time for the federal and provincial governments to listen to what people are saying. There is simply too much at risk for this proposal to proceed.”

CoalWatch’s John Snyder said people expressed a wide variety of objections to the mine.
 
“The proposed mine puts hundreds of jobs in the shellfish industry at risk, it threatens our drinking water, air quality, and road safety, and it does not conform the vision our communities have for the future,” he said. “That’s why it’s crucial for the government to establish an independent expert panel review with full public hearings before any further consideration is given to this proposal.”
 
Now that they’ve have spoken out loud and clear for themselves, we at The Common Sense Canadian are urging our readers around the province to show their support for the people and environment of Vancouver Island. Click here to submit your own comments to the environmental assessment process by June 27.

Share

Questions, opposition persists to coal mine overlooking Baynes Sound

Share

From the Comox Valley Record – May 31, 2011

by Scott Stanfield

Campbell Connor drew a round of applause by requesting a full expert
panel review, along with aquifer mapping and modelling, as the
environmental assessment phase of the proposed Raven underground coal
mine progresses.

The vice-president of CoalWatch Comox Valley — part of a
standing-room-only crowd that gathered Monday at the Filberg Centre for
the first in a  series of public hearings about the mine — said a
technical committee has compiled a list of “very serious gaps” in the
process after reviewing the draft Application Information Requirements
(AIR).

“The process we’re going through at this moment is less than that which we deserve,” Connor said.

“Overwhelmingly to date public comment has opposed the
mine in its entirety,” CoalWatch president John Snyder said. “We want to
be ensured that public opposition to the mine is noted in the official
record. No means no.”

Representatives from the BC Environmental Assessment
Office, Canada Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) and project
proponent Compliance Coal Corporation answered a barrage of questions
from the partisan crowd. Andrew Rollo of the CEAA drew a chorus of boos
when he said the project does not warrant referral to a panel review.

Compliance CEO John Tapics said full aquifer mapping is
being conducted. Early indications show no ill effects on groundwater,
added Tapics, who figures the amount of water used to wash the coal
would be about equal to a medium-sized hotel. Most of the water used in
the operation would be recycled, likely coming from a groundwater
source.

The mine is in the pre-application stage. The Raven
coal deposit covers about 3,100 hectares in Baynes Sound adjacent to
Buckley Bay. The coal is classified as high volatile A Bituminous, which
Compliance says is suitable for the metallurgical market. Tapics said a
feasibility study indicates the underground mine would leave a “small
surface footprint.”

Opponents say the mine poses a threat to air and water
quality, and to salmon habitats and the shellfish industry in Fanny Bay.
Polluting the Cowie Creek watershed is another concern, as is trucking
coal along the Inland Highway to Port Alberni. Tapics said about one
ship would leave the port each month.

Mike Morel, a biologist from Denman Island, suggests
the study area is too small and should include, at minimum, all Raven
streams and wetlands.

Rudy Friesen said coal burned overseas will produce
about two million tons of carbon dioxide a year while the Raven mine
operates.

Robert McDonald said coal gas methane would have an even greater impact on climate change and global warming.

“Climate change is the most pressing issue for my
generation,” said Victoria’s Cameron Gray, a member of the Wilderness
Committee. “How can you proceed in good faith knowing coal is the
dirtiest of industries?”

His question garnered a standing ovation and spurred chants of ‘No more coal.’

Rachel Shaw of the BC EAO said government, rather than
making pre-determinations, considers the science and public opinion
before making decisions.

“I absolutely oppose this mine,” Diana Schroeder said.
“Mr. Tapics, can you tell us how much mineral tax you will pay from the
net profits?”

Tapics said the corporation and workers will pay
“significant income tax” but no mineral tax will be paid because it is a
privately owned resource.

The mine is expected to operate 16 years, and produce
about 350 full-time jobs, 200 construction jobs and 400 to 500 spinoff
jobs. Tapics said the average mining salary is about $100,000 a year.

Government says B.C.’s $6-billion mining industry
helped power an economic recovery in 2010. Spurred by increased demand
from China, B.C. increased steel-making metallurgical coal production by
20 per cent to about 26 million tons last year.

Additional public hearings on Raven Coal will be held
Thursday at the Port Alberni Athletic Hall and Friday at the Union Bay
Community Club.

The public has until June 27 to comment on the draft AIR and Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines. Visit www.eao.gov.bc.ca.

Read original article

Share

A Coal Port in the Storm: Tsunami Risks for Raven Mine Storage Plan

Share

What does Port Alberni have in common with Fukushima, Japan – besides a love for fish? Two things, potentially.

First, according to experts from Emergency Management BC, Port Alberni is located in the heart of the most dangerous Tsunami zone in the country, making it prone to a catastrophe like the one we just witnessed across the Pacific. Second, if Compliance Energy gets its way, the town’s harbour will host a dirty energy facility right in the path of the big wave.

Compliance is the proponent for the Raven Underground Coal Mine, near Fanny Bay, on the opposite side of Vancouver Island. The company wishes to truck its coal from there to Port Alberni – passing through Cathedral Grove along the way – to a coal storage facility in the town’s port, before being loaded onto ships carrying the black gunk to China. This week, the first round of environmental assessment public meetings is taking place on the proposed mine and coal port. The first of these, last night in Courtenay, saw over 500 people turn out to deliver a resounding message to representatives of the Canadian and BC Environmental Assessment Offices, opposing the plan.

Unlike the six nuclear reactors at Fukushima, fatally damaged by the recent earthquake and Tsunami, Port Alberni would be home to an 80,000 tonne coal storage facility – with catastrophic economic, ecological and health consequences for the community and region the next time the big one hits.

In 1964, a massive Tsunami unleashed by an earthquake in Alaska swept over the town on the west coast of Vancouver Island, causing $10 million dollars of damage (in 1964 dollars). Historical records show it is not a question of “if” but “when” the next one will come. There will be more significant earthquakes along the Cascadia Subduction Zone and other tectonic hotspots in the Pacific Ocean – and when they occur, there is the distinct possibility of another Tsunami ploughing its way up Alberni Inlet and causing all manner of devastation.

If there is an 80,000 tonne coal container there, the consequences will be unimaginable. Alberni Inlet is home to, among other ecological treasures, one of Canada’s most prominent salmon rivers, the Somass, which has helped the town lay claim over the years to “Salmon Capital of the World” (a bone of contention with my home town of Campbell River, which used to make the same boast).

According to Coal-Free Alberni president Satcey Gaiga, “The coal would potentially be dispersed throughout 600 hectares based on how far the water would reach in our valley, according to our Provincial Emergency Program information…I can’t believe the Environmental Assessment Offices provincially and federally are even considering these preposterous plans, allowing [Compliance Energy] to continue to go through the environmental assessment process to do this: HOW DO YOU MITIGATE A TSUNAMI?”

Indeed, British Columbians must ask their provincial and federal bureaucrats and politicians, “Have we learned nothing from Fukushima and the nuclear waste continues pouring into our Pacific Ocean?”

The environmental assessment hearings resume this Thursday in Port Alberni for what promises to be a fiery round 2. Click here for a complete schedule.

The CEA Agency and the EAO accept public comments submitted by any of the following means:

  • By Email: raven@ceaa-acee.gc.ca
  • By Fax: 250-356-6448
  • By Mail:

Rachel Shaw, Project Assessment Manager
Environmental Assessment Office
PO Box 9426 Stn Prov Govt
Victoria BC V8W 9V1

Or

Andrew Rollo, Project Manager
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
320 – 757 West Hastings Street
Vancouver BC V6C 1A1

Click here electronic copy of the draft AIR/EIS Guidelines document and information regarding the environmental assessment process.

Share