Leave the text-only version and return to the original page view.
This Annex provides examples of projects where climate change considerations have been incorporated into the EA process, either at the federal or provincial levels. The Annex outlines how each of these project EAs addressed the general steps outlined in Section 2. These case studies seek to illustrate how climate change considerations were incorporated into the EA, and do not seek to assess either the effectiveness of the assessment or the project outcomes.
In 2001, Fording Coal Limited proposed the development of a 1000 MW coal-fired power generating station and associated coal mine near Brooks, Alberta. This project required an environmental assessment under both federal and provincial legislation and a joint review was commenced under the 1999 Canada-Alberta Agreement for Environmental Assessment Cooperation, with Alberta assuming the lead.
Alberta considered the order of magnitude of anticipated emissions from this project, the nature of the project and emissions from similar activities before deciding to assess GHG emissions as part of the project's EA.
The terms of reference issued by Alberta for this project required the proponent to address the incremental loading of GHG to the atmosphere as a result of the project. The proponent was asked to identify the sources and quantities of GHG emissions associated with the project, as well as the intensity of GHG emissions per unit of energy produced. Other requirements included: comparing emissions intensity to industry and technology performance (i.e. best available technology); addressing risk management, and considering phased action for continuous improvement and timing. Relative to continuous improvement, the proponent was also asked to describe how flexibility was accounted for in the plant design and layout to accommodate potential modifications that may be required by any future change in standards, limits and guidelines. While relevant to long-term management of GHG, this part of the terms of reference related to future changes in standards for any parameters.
The terms of reference for this assessment asked the proponent to discuss the impact of the plant emissions and Fording's overall project and corporate GHG management plans, including plans for the use of offsets or other innovative approaches, with reference to the objectives set out in Alberta's Strategy for Action on Climate Change (1998) and relevant national initiatives (including the Voluntary Challenge and Registry program). The proponent was also asked to identify any emission minimization processes or programs that it plans to employ.
In addition, the proponent was asked to comment on the adaptability of the project in the event that the region's climate changed significantly, and to identify implications that possible climate change might have for the sustainability of the project. The intent was to have the proponent approach the issue as a simple situation analysis. For instance, if the climate was to change by the approximate amount that generally available scenarios indicate as possible, would there be any implications for the project? The proponent was not expected to do climate modeling.
It was expected that reporting would be required for gross emissions, net emissions, and gross and net emission intensities. Emission offsets would also be reported and verified as real and measurable by an independent third party.
The Northumberland Crossing project, which involved the construction of a 13-km fixed link from Prince Edward Island to New Brunswick, was assessed federally under the Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP). The assessment considered the potential impacts of climate change on the project and was completed in 1993.
The Northumberland Crossing Review Panel examined how atmospheric conditions, geological factors and marine conditions might affect the project.
Specific sensitivities identified included a potential decrease in regional ocean temperatures and resulting formation of thicker ice, as a result of increased outflow of Arctic meltwater and/or more frequent occurrence of Arctic air masses in the winter.
The likelihood of these changes was assessed by the initiating department. Mathematical models were used to observe the possible effects of long-term sea level rise on the project.
The panel determined that a safety factor would be required to ensure that the maximum tolerable ice-out delay was not exceeded in the event of significant climatic shifts. Based on the results of mathematical models (see Step 3), the structure was designed to withstand all marine conditions (salt, ice, sediment, etc), including a one-meter sea level rise, and a 100-year tidal current.
The review panel recommended that effects monitoring be established as an ongoing commitment to monitor both the impact of the project on the environment, and the impact of the environment (including climate change) on the project. The panel also recommended that a general environmental monitoring program be put in place. These recommendations were not adopted by the responsible authority in the final approval.
In 1997, the Government of British Columbia explored the potential climate change impacts on the proposed 150 mw hydro-electric Keenleyside Power Plant as part of its EA of the project.
In order to determine the project's sensitivities to climate change, the EA practitioner requested that the proponent provide an analysis of the effects of climate change on the power plant.
The proponent assessed the likelihood of climate parameters being affected by climate change by considering existing information and scenarios developed by Neitzel et al. and Snover. However, while these results suggested that climate change would result in warmer, wetter winters and warmer, drier summers, there was little consensus among the scientific community at that time (1997) regarding the potential significance of impacts in the Pacific Northwest.
The EA examined the risks associated with climate change impacts on aquatic systems, resources and transmission lines. The risk assessment determined that, because the Arrow Lakes are large and deep, increased flooding, runoff and sediment input would not have any effect on the project (and might in fact benefit it). It was also determined that anticipated changes to the spring snowpack (due to higher freezing levels and refill to the reservoir) were unlikely to be significantly affected by climate change. Risks associated with changing icing conditions, higher summer temperatures, elevated risk of fire and increased snowfall were also evaluated with regard to the transmission line.
Mitigation measures were considered in the design of the project. For example, adjusting tensions in the transmission line were designed to accommodate a temperature rise. In addition, potential effects from increased snowpack and faster runoff were offset by protecting riparian zones, road and crossing designs. These mitigation measures are consistent with the level of certainty of available climate change forecasts, as well as the risk of project effects.
The Diavik Diamond Mine, located in the Northwest Territories, was assessed by federal comprehensive study in 1999. The assessment considered both the potential contribution of the project to climate change and the potential impact of climate change on the project.
Scoping for GHG considerations was done both by the proponent and by Environment Canada in the early stages of the assessment. Given the relative size of the potential emissions from the project from a regional perspective (approximately 9% of combined Yukon and NWT emissions), further consideration of emissions was given in the EA.
The identified sensitivities of the project to specific climate parameters were related to the structural integrity of the mine's kimberlite containment dam which relied extensively on permafrost in the initial project proposal.
In its EA overview and environmental effects reports, the proponent identified specific sources of emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide associated with the project.
The likelihood of changes in key climate parameters (i.e., permafrost) was considered through the use of general circulation models and thermal modeling. This modeling work was done by Environment Canada. These models predict significant warming at high latitudes, including the NWT, over the next century, with consequent potential impacts on the containment dam.
Both Environment Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories recommended measures to reduce emissions from the project, through energy efficiency and energy reduction measures, as well as the use of alternative energy sources. Diavik Diamonds Mine Inc. agreed to register with the Voluntary Challenge and Registry Program, as part of its commitment to reduce emissions of GHG, and also agreed to consider the use of wind power on site.
While no immediate concern for permafrost was identified, it was recommended that special attention be directed to the permeability and stability of containment dams, emergency spillway and rock cap proposed for closure. It was also recommended that Diavik rely on geomembrane structures, rather than frozen core dams. A number of design modifications were made to the project on the basis of this assessment.
While general follow-up was suggested for the overall environmental effects of the project, no specific follow-up program was required for GHGs and climate change.
| Page |
|---|
| Introduction |
| 1.0 Context |
| 2.0 Incorporating Climate Change Considerations in Environmental Assesment |
| 3.0 Conclusion |
| Glossary of Terms |
| Annex A: Proposed Worksheets for Potential Use by EA Practitioners |
| Annex B: Sources of Information for Practitioners |
| Annex C: Case Studies of Canadian Approaches |
