Skip to main content

The largest and most precise study yet done on acid emissions from Alberta’s oilsands suggests they could eventually damage an area almost the size of Germany.

The study finds that in 2013 more than 330,000 square kilometres in northern Alberta and Saskatchewan absorbed acid deposits high enough to eventually damage life in rivers and lakes.

“This work is a warning,” said Paul Makar, an Environment Canada scientist and lead author on the paper published in the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

Story continues below advertisement

“If emissions continue at 2013 levels, there will be ecosystem damage over a very large area.”

Some industry players have invested heavily in recent years to reduce sulphur and nitrogen emissions, which lead to the acidification of water and soil. But it’s not clear whether overall oilsands emissions have fallen.

The research involved scientists at Environment Canada as well as their counterparts in Alberta and Saskatchewan and from Trent University in Peterborough, Ont.

Their work began with a study of 90,000 lakes to determine how different water bodies responded to acids and at what point they would no longer be able to buffer them. That data was used to create a map of carrying capacities across a large swath of the northern prairie provinces.

Previous studies used grids of 45 square kilometres. This one resolves to 2.5 square kilometres.

The team used the latest datasets and techniques — including satellite imagery — to model how 2013 emissions were likely to affect forests, rivers and lakes. Predictions were checked against measurements in the field and the model was then refined.

“If those emissions levels continue, there will be ecosystem damage for aquatic ecosystems over an area that’s about the size of Germany,” Makar said.

Story continues below advertisement

The study says if emissions continue at the level studied, tree growth would be stunted. Water plants would suffer from increased toxins. Fish and the bugs they prey on would get sick and reproduce less easily.

Although previous studies have suggested dust from plant operations would provide a buffer, Makar said that effect falls off well before the acidification does.

The study also shows some ecosystems are much more sensitive than others. A nearby lake could remain relatively healthy if it could buffer lots of acid, but the research suggests sensitive lakes could be affected as far east as Manitoba.

“There’s quite a far-reaching effect hundreds of kilometres downwind for ecosystems that are sensitive,” Makar said.

The paper’s conclusions rest on 2013 measurements. Syncrude and Suncor say they’ve substantially improved their performance since then — Syncrude installed a sulphur scrubber in 2014.

But production increases mean Suncor’s overall oilsands emissions — which also include some other chemicals — increased 20 per cent from 2013 to 2017.

Story continues below advertisement

Terry Abel of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers acknowledged sulphur has been an issue in the oilsands “as far back as I can remember.”

Abel said oilsands facilities scrub the vast majority of sulphur from their stacks and he cautioned the study remains a modelling exercise.

“It’s a prediction of what might be happening, not necessarily what is happening.”

Actual field data pointing to rising acid levels in waterways and soils remains inconclusive, Abel suggested.

“There are studies out there that say there are changes. There’s others that say changes are well within natural variability. Direct measurement is inconclusive as to whether there’s any significant change taking place.”

Abel said industry-funded, government-run monitoring programs are in place.

Story continues below advertisement

Makar said the paper can’t estimate the rate of acidification.

“This ecosystem is being pushed past its buffering capacity and it will eventually go. I don’t have the when.”

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies