1/🧵 What the players are saying about the 5.3 million litre spill and the year-long leak at @ImperialOil's Kearl oil sands plant.
Bottom line: Regulatory failure by @AER_news, company affects @ACFN_KaiTaile people AND the industry's future.
2/The place to start is my thread explaining what leaked, when it leaked, when the spill occurred (the spill happened 9 mths after the leak), and how the AER and Imperial responded.
twitter.com/politicalham/status/1632047433323778048
3/Listen to my interview w/former AER senior toxicologist Mandy Olsgard, who wrote a detailed case study of Kearl tailings pond management.
With that information as background, let's review who said what.
share.transistor.fm/s/88c5d136
4/Premier @ABDanielleSmith, Env Min @sonyasavage (March 3 press release) were "briefed in the last 24 hours."
Prof @andrew_leach: if Smith, Savage "aren't aware of a tailings leak at Kearl for months, someone needs to be fired. In the next 24 hrs."
alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=86664A3CF806F-EB6A-80ED-D8031FFB58C660A4
5/March 3 release: "...remediation is underway, and no contaminated water has entered into the water system or affected human health or wildlife."
AFCN Chief Alan Adam vigorously disagreed:
6/He provided evidence that Smith, Savage got it wrong:
"ACFN surveyed the area and has photos of the remediation area with no fence around it, as well as 3 moose within 100 meters of an ongoing leak."
Photo: animal tracks right up to leaked wastewater.
7/"Photos of pools of affected water, provided by Imperial, make clear that affected water has soaked through the porous ground."
"Process effected water seeping outside Imperials lease area."
8/"Process effected water pooling on the surface."
9/Imperial Oil is minimizing the severity of the leaks.
*System operated as designed
*No indication that the seepage travelled outside the Kearl property
*No recognition that animals were near the seepage
Nothing to see here, folks, move along.
From a March press release:
10/The AER environmental protection order (EPO) says the seepage "exceeded" guidelines for "constituents including but not limited to dissolved iron, total arsenic, F2 hydrocarbons, sulphate, total sulphide."
You can see why Chief Adam is concerned.
12/Olsgard interview:
"...when we read the EPO, it's shocking that the AER says that at this time there are no impacts to the environment. We haven't seen that supplemental report. So all we have is the EPO saying that these 5 chemicals are over safe thresholds...
13/"...but then we don't have any information to verify that there's no impacts to any aquatic receptors."
In other words, we have to take the AER's word that waterbodies weren't affected.
She clearly doesn't trust the regulator's word.
14/Nor did Imperial mention that its remediation activities only addressed on-site seepage, not off-site. From the EPO:
"...the timelines for off-site actions would not allow for the work to be completed before spring freshet."
15/Since my interview w/Olsgard, a number of professionals who currently work in oil sands regulatory matters, or have in the recent past, have reached out to me.
None will speak on-the-record.
Why?
Because they fear reprisals from industry, AER, and/or their colleagues.
16/All acknowledge that the oil sands regulatory regime is deeply flawed.
Common theme is that AER is a "captured" regulator (working in industry's interests, not the public's interest).
I'll be reporting on regulatory capture in the AB O&G issue in the near future. Stay tuned.
17/An important takeaway: the Kearl leak/spill, the AER's response, Imperial's response, ABGov's response, are all BUSINESS AS USUAL.
Olsgard says, protecting profits is the #1 concern, jobs is #2, and the environment is #3 or lower.
The system is deeply flawed.
18/When a spill occurs, this is the process:
*Close ranks, control messaging, manipulate media
*Minimize impact by cherry picking info, data etc
*Assure public, locals that everything is under control
*Apologize for issues that can't be minimized
*Promise to do better
19/Controlling narrative is everything.
Eventually, the story is exhausted and peters out in the media.
Eventually, the public moves on to the next crises.
Eventually, the status quo prevails.
Industry, aided by the AER, is all about maintaining a very profitable status quo.
20/Related stories I'll be pursuing:
1. What is CANGov's role in regulating the oil sands and what can they do to help reform the system? Or, are they a big part of the problem?
2. Where does the @albertaNDP stand on this issue? It was govt from 2015 to 2019. Not much changed.
21/If @RachelNotley becomes premier in May, will she commit to significant reform of the AER?
3. Why regulatory reform is critical to the long-term future of the Alberta oil sands.
energi.media/markham-on-energy/where-is-the-leadership-blueprint-for-a-21st-century-canadian-oil-gas-sector/
22/A final thought:
The criticisms above are not an argument for ending bitumen extraction.
As my column in the previous tweet argues, the oil sands COULD have a future into the 22nd century providing bitumen for advanced materials manufacturing.
23/But only if bitumen extraction is cleaned up:
*Net-zero emissions long before 2050
*Full protection of the environment
*A transparent regulatory regime that truly protects the public interest
Business as usual, the status quo, is not acceptable.