The results of a new study linking hydraulic fracturing or fracking to induced earthquakes in B.C. and Alberta is reason to immediately halt the controversial extraction technique from being used in gas fields in B.C. according to Andrew Weaver, leader of the B.C. Green Party and MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head.   “I am calling on both the government and the official opposition to join me in supporting a moratorium on horizontal fracking in British Columbia,” Weaver said in a statement released Tuesday. “Other jurisdictions, like Quebec, New York, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, have already suspended the practice and B.C. should follow suit.”   The study found a direct link between fracking and earthquakes in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin over the last 25 years. The group studied more than 12,000 wells and seismic events larger than magnitude 3.0.   The new research, published in Seismological Research Letters on Tuesday by a group of Canadian researchers, concludes that 90 per cent of seismic activity in the region was the direct result of fracking operations.

Due to the massive amount of fracking sites in operation, this amounts to under one per cent of wells triggering earthquakes. 

While researchers acknowledge the figure is small, “it is important for us to realize that indeed hydraulic fracturing can induce earthquakes," Honn Kao, a research scientist with the Geological Survey of Canada and one of 13 co-authors of a study, told the CBC.   "But the evidence so far indicates there are other factors that may be important in this process as well, so that we cannot blame all the hydraulic fracturing operations for inducing big earthquakes," he said.   Previous research has determined a relationship between earthquakes and wastewater injection sites used to dispose of the sometimes millions of gallons of contaminated water produced at frack sites. But this is the first study to identify a definitive link between the process of fracking itself and induced seismic activity.   An earthquake measuring between 4.2 and 4.8 on the Richter scale rocked the town of Fox Creek, Alberta, in January of this year, raising concerns that increased seismic activity in the region is due to local fracking operations. The quake resulted in the closure of a fracking operation.   "It's critical that we get to a complete scientific understanding of the issue," David Eaton, a University of Calgary geophysicist and a co-author of the study, told the CBC.   Fracking, a high-pressure drilling process, poses a significant threat to underground sources of drinking water, which are inadequately mapped in Canada.   In a high-profile case currently before the Supreme Court of Canada, Alberta landowner Jessia Ernst is arguing fracking contaminated her water supply eight years ago and that poor regulation surrounding the process left her without adequate protection.     According to Weaver, these kinds of situations should not be occurring.   “I am calling for a moratorium on horizontal fracturing in B.C. until we establish scientific certainty on the risks it poses,” he said.   “Earthquakes, groundwater contamination, fresh water use, sour gas leaks, environmental degradation and terrain modification, are all concerning side effects of fracking and they warrant comprehensive and cumulative scientific review.”    There are significant fracking operations in northeastern B.C. and a recent study by the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission found that between August 2013 and October 2014 fracking operations triggered 231 earthquakes.   The report noted 38 earthquakes were caused by wastewater injection and 193 seismic events were the result of fracking operations in the area.   The B.C. government, which is intent on building an liquefied natural gas (LNG) export industry in B.C., has thrown its support behind the province’s growing gas industry.   There are hundreds of new wells drilled every year in B.C., Weaver cautioned.

“Now we have the scientific evidence showing a clear link between fracking and earthquakes, but we really have no idea what the risks of this increased seismic activity amount to. We are flying blind,” Weaver said.   “The BC Green Party has consistently called for a moratorium on fracking in our province,” he said. “To continue to allow horizontal fracking in B.C. is irresponsible in light of mounting evidence.”

Image: Province of B.C. via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

A study conducted by researchers at the University of Toronto has found that air pollution emissions released by oilsands operations in Alberta are likely two to three times higher than previously estimated.

The study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a peer-reviewed U.S. journal, modeled levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) released by oilsands bitumen extraction. PAHs are toxic air pollutants released by the burning of fossil fuels, and can be highly carcinogenic.

"When dealing with chemicals that have such great potential to harm people and animals, it is absolutely vital that we truly understand how, and how much they are being released into the environment," said Abha Parajulee, co-author of the report, in a press release.

The researchers found PAH estimates "in environmental impact assessments conducted to approve developments in the Athabasca oil sands region are likely too low."

The study raises concerns about the accuracy of government-conducted environmental impact assessments on the oilsands, following the recent U.S. State Department report on Keystone XL, which claimed that the pipeline would have little environmental impact.

"If you use these officially reported emissions for the oil sands area you get an emissions density that is lower than just about anywhere else in the world," study co-author Frank Wania said. Wania is professor in the department of physical and environmental sciences at the University of Toronto.

Corporate estimates for oilsands pollution were "inadequate and incomplete," said Wania, insisting that a "complete and accurate account of the emissions" would be required before it is possible to "make a meaningful assessment of the environmental impact and of the risk to human health."

Previous government-approved estimates for PAH emissions from the oilsands, which fall within regulatory levels, do not take into account indirect pathways for the pollutant to enter the atmosphere, including evaporation from tailing ponds.

The researchers said that their model's predictions are consistent with actual PAH measurements taken near the Athabasca oilsands region by academic scientists and Environment Canada, which are much higher than reported industry estimates.

The researchers' model also factored in PAHs released by transport and storage of waste materials in oilsands production.

"Tailing ponds are not the end of the journey for the pollutants they contain. PAHs are highly volatile, meaning they escape into the air much more than many people think," Parajulee said.

"It was shocking to me to understand that current environmental impact assessments do not take [the volatility of PAHs] into account at all," said Jonathan Martin, an associate professor in the department of environmental toxicology at the University of Alberta, who reviewed the study before its publication.

"It just shows how little we know," Martin said. He added that PAH measurements need to be taken above tailing ponds to confirm the research model's projections, which would require corporate permission.

Wania said that Environment Canada has shown interest in the report's findings, and has agreed to fund further research.

"We are not at the world-class level to really be championing that," said Andrew Read, a researcher with Pembina Institute, and a member of the joint oilsands monitoring program. Read expressed doubt that there was adequate funding to properly monitor oilsands emissions.

"There is a concern there that we are not doing the effective monitoring that is necessary to really understand the full impact on the environment," Read said.

The results of the University of Toronto-funded study were published Monday.

Image Credit: Kris Krug

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

According to a new study to be released today the risks associated with the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline are significantly higher than presented by the company in its project reporting. The study, conducted by Simon Fraser University's School of Resource and Environmental Management, found that in three categories – tanker transport, marine terminal facilities, and pipelines – oil spill predictions based on an international oil spill model (the US Oil Spill Risk Analysis, OSRA) are vastly greater than those based on Enbridge estimates.

In the category of tanker transport, the analysis predicted British Columbians can expect to see one oil spill every 10 years. Enbridge estimated such spills would only occur once every 250 years.

According to Enbridge, pipeline spills are only expected to occur 25 times over a 50-year span. The new analysis predicts 776 pipeline spills over the same period – 31 times more frequently.

According to the Globe and Mail's Mike Hume, Enbridge "has long maintained that all aspects of the project will be done to the highest safety standards in the world. Last year Enbridge promised to spend an additional $500-million on extra measures to increase the wall thickness of the pipeline, to install dual leak detection systems and to increase the number of remotely operated isolation valves."

But according to Dr. Tom Gunton, director of the School of Resource and Environmental Management at SFU, Enbridge's risk forecast "has been done in a very deficient way." He told the Globe and Mail the federally appointed Joint Review Panel (JRP) is poorly equipped to understand the risks associated with the Northern Gateway project.

"The problem is the panel does not have [complete] evidence before them on the likelihood of an oil spill. And the evidence they do have from Enbridge has serious deficiencies in methodology. So it's impossible for the JRP to make an informed, evidence-based decision," he said.

The Polaris Institute found that Enbridge was responsible for more than 800 spills between 1999 and 2010, with a total of more than 6.8 million gallons of oil released.

From the Polaris Institute report Out on the Tar Sands Mainline, page 53.

That's not including Enbridge's disastrous 2010 pipeline rupture in Michigan that released more than 1 million gallons of tar sands diluted bitumen into a tributary of the Kalamazoo River, creating the most expensive onshore oil cleanup in the petroleum industry's history. The price tag for that ongoing cleanup is currently estimated at a whopping $1 billion.

Last fall during a public hearing in Prince George, BC, Enbridge was unable to provide evidence for what the company claims will be its 'world-class' spill prevention and response program for the Northern Gateway. When pressed for details, company officials admitted they will have no land-based spill-prevention plan until six months before the proposed pipeline would being operation.

The pipeline, set to cross more than 770 watercourses, will travel over 1,172 kilometres of land before reaching tidal waters in Kitimat, BC.

At the time of the public hearing, BC Environment Minister Terry Lake said Enbridge's testimony was "long on promises, but short on solid evidence and action to date."

"The company needs to show British Columbians that they have practical solutions to the environmental risks and concerns that have been raised. So far, they have not done that."

Today's study from SFU shows that those risks have yet to be fully explored and clearly require independent, third-party analysis.

Yet, because of the restrictions placed on the JRP's review of the Northern Gateway project, this new research – which casts doubt on Enbridge's ability to provide sound estimates related to the proposed project – will not be considered as evidence in the hearings.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Canada's tar sands are one of 14 energy megaprojects that are "in direct conflict with a livable climate."

According to a new report released today by Greenpeace, the fossil fuel industry has plans for 14 new coal, oil and gas projects that will dangerously increase global warming emissions at a time when massive widespread reductions are necessary to avoid catastrophic climate change. In conjunction these projects make it very likely global temperature rise will increase beyond the 2 degrees Celsius threshold established by the international community to levels as high as 4 or even 6 degrees.

"The disasters the world is experiencing now are happening at a time when the average global temperature has increased by 0.8 degrees Celsius, and they are just a taste of our future if greenhouse gas emissions continue to balloon," the report states.

The report, "The Point of No Return: The Massive Climate Threats We Must Avoid," [PDF] emphasizes the urgent need to move beyond dirty energy if we are to avert catastrophic global warming and includes research provided by Ecofys, a consulting firm specializing in sustainable energy and climate policy.

The research focuses on 14 megaprojects slated to produce as much new carbon dioxide emissions in 2020 alone as the United States produces in an entire year. Together these projects would add 300 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent into the atmosphere by 2050, through the "extraction, production and burning of 49,600 million tonnes of coal, 29,400 billion cubic metres of natural gas and 260,000 million barrels of oil." By 2020, these projects would increase global CO2 emissions by 20 percent, placing the world on the path of a 5 or 6 degree Celsius temperature rise.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), global emissions increased by 5 percent in 2010 and 3 percent in 2011, right on track for a 5 or 6 degree long term warming. What will guarantee that level of warming is the continued construction of dirty energy projects. What could mitigate the dangerously high temperature rise is the halt of such projects in the next five years.

The Filthy Fourteen

The world's largest and dirtiest energy projects include coal production in Australia, China, the U.S., and Indonesia, oil production in Canada's tar sands, the Arctic, Brazil, the Gulf of Mexico, Iraq, and Venezuela's tar sands, and gas production in the U.S., Kazakhstan, Africa, and the Caspian Sea.

The Impacts

Ecofys estimates that a business-as-usual approach to energy production would entail "a clear scenario for climate disaster with a 5-6 degree celsius increase in average global temperature." An alternative scenario would involve a carbon budget designed to keep the global average temperature increase below 2 degrees.

"To stay within this carbon budget," according to Ecofys, "cumulative emissions between 2010 and 2050 cannot exceed 1,050 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent (Gt CO2e), and global emissions need to start decreasing at the very latest by 2016." Cumulative emissions associated with the 14 megaprojects are estimated to be 2,340Gt CO2e, far beyond the acceptable rate if any progress is to be made to avoid "climate chaos."

The report states "the problem is that investment in energy infrastructure for fossil fuels locks the world into using coal, oil and gas for decades. The IEA estimates that 590 Gt CO2 is already locked in by existing fossil fuel-dependent infrastructure, and building new coal, oil and gas based infrastructure must stop by 2017 to avoid locking in more emissions than can be emitted without overshooting 2 degrees celsius warming."

"After that, the only way to stay below 2 degrees celsius warming is to shut down the many new coal, oil and gas power plants and the new coal mines and oil operations that could be operating, making the task of meeting the target hugely expensive and politically difficult."

The 14 projects would bind us to new carbon intensive investments, further entrenching the problem of fossil fuel reliance within the global economy. The solution, as recommended by Ecofys, is to make a quick and committed switch to clean energy projects which would "provide almost one third of the reduction needed to have a 75 percent chance of avoiding climate chaos."

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.