Skip to main content

In an ongoing tussle over the Kitimat Airshed Study, lawyers representing two women in an Environmental Appeal Board case have asked that agency to force the province to turn over the study or explain its claim of cabinet privilege.

The study, which the province commissioned last year to weigh the impact of industrial emissions on the Kitimat Airshed, has yet to be publicly released, even though some groups interested in its conclusions – including the District of Kitimat – had expected to see it before the end of June.

Now, the report is the subject of a tug-of-war between the province and appellants in the EAB case, which concerns sulphur dioxide emissions from the Rio Tinto Alcan smelter in Kitimat. The province says it received a draft of the Kitimat Airshed Report in March and that it is "now part of discussions around cleanest LNG requirements" and will be released later this year. For now, however, the government says the report is being discussed by cabinet and subject to Crown privilege.

Story continues below advertisement

Emily Toews and Elisabeth Stannus – the appellants in the EAB case – would like to see the report now, maintaining it would provide the most up-to-date information about industrial emissions in Kitimat.

The two women, both Kitimat residents, have asked the EAB to overturn a 2013 decision that authorized increased sulphur dioxide emissions from Rio Tinto Alcan's Kitimat smelter.

The smelter, which began operating in 1954, is undergoing a $3.3-billion upgrade that will boost smelting capacity and cut emissions of some pollutants, but increase the amount of sulphur dioxide coming from the facility by more than 50 per cent.

Ms. Toews and Ms Stannus are concerned about the potential health and environmental impacts of the increased sulphur dioxide emissions and, as part of their case, have been trying to obtain the Kitimat Airshed Study. In recent correspondence with the women's lawyers, the province said the report was subject to Crown privilege.

On Friday, lawyers for the two women filed an application seeking to have the EAB require the province to hand over the report.

Current information before the EAB "suggests that the Kitimat Airshed Study is the most current, complete and possibly 'best' evidence as to several of the facts and issues central to this appeal," the application states.

The lawyers for Ms. Toews and Ms. Stannus want the EAB to compel the province to release the study or require the government to elaborate on its claim of privilege "in a legally sufficient manner so that the Appellants may be able to assess and, if necessary, file a legal challenge to the validity of this claim."

Story continues below advertisement

An EAB representative was not immediately available to comment on the application.

Currently, Kitmat only has one big industrial facility, the Rio Tinto Alcan smelter. A former methanol plant closed in 2005 and a paper mill closed in 2010. But there are proposals for several LNG facilities in the region.

An EAB hearing related to the Rio Tinto Alcan permit is scheduled for October. Rio Tinto Alcan has said that, on a per-ton basis, the new smelter will produce the same amount of sulphur dioxide as the old one and that a host of other, harmful emissions – including greenhouse gases – will be reduced as a result of new, more efficient technology.

The company also says its research found increased sulphur dioxide emissions would have minor potential impacts on soils, water, vegetation and human health and that any such impacts would be "manageable."

On the health front, "studies show [sulphur dioxide] from Kitimat Modernization Project will not cause respiratory diseases in healthy people, but there may be a less than one per cent increase in restricted airway events for those with existing conditions such as asthma or COPD," a company brochure states.

The company could install a scrubber to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions but has chosen not to, citing the limited projected impact of increased S02 emissions and the potential challenges involved with disposing of "scrubbed" sulphur dioxide.

Story continues below advertisement

"After looking at the comprehensive scientific studies that were conducted based on air-modelling technique and historical data, the impact of releasing our S02 into the air through a high stack was determined to be limited," Rio Tinto Alcan spokeswoman Colleen Nyce said in a June e-mail to The Globe and Mail. "Therefore, Rio Tinto Alcan made the decision to not install a wet scrubber for the S02."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

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:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • 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. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

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.
Cannabis pro newsletter