Economics versus environment

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 10/07/2023 (829 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It’s a classic battle between the economy and the environment.

Alberta-based Sio Silica wants to create hundreds of jobs and generate untold millions of dollars in tax revenue by establishing a large silica mine and processing facility in the RM of Springfield, just north of Winnipeg. The sand found there is a critical element in solar panels, batteries and semiconductors, commodities that are crucial for the production of green energy.

However, the quality of the sand, the economic spin-offs and the progressive end-uses cannot erase myriad concerns over the impact this project will have on the environment.

The technology needed to extract underground silica deposits is untested for this purpose. The process of drilling shafts and pumping air into silica deposits will breach two critically important aquifers, a major concern given how dependent Springfield and surrounding communities are on well water. The extraction process will also leave enormous underground cavities that some geological experts fear could become unstable.

Which priority will win out — the economy, or the environment? The only person who knows for sure is Environment Minister Kevin Klein, upon whose desk this thorny issue has landed. Klein will find no easy answers going forward.

The Clean Environment Commission’s (CEC) recent report on the Sio Silica proposal, released late last month, has only served to amplify the dilemmas surrounding this project.

The CEC can only make recommendations on a project; the environmental licence itself is issued by the minister. Still, the CEC did not hold back on its concerns.

Largely confirming concerns that expressed by Springfield residents, environmentalists and intervenors in CEC hearings, the commission determined that as it stands, the project is not worthy of a licence. However, it did suggest a path to approval could be found if Sio Silica can strengthen environmental safeguards.

The company’s response to this challenge was quite disconcerting. Rather than accepting the CEC report as a setback — which it most definitely was — the company issued a statement which said it was “pleased to move forward with our project as it progresses to the next steps with the Environmental Approvals Branch.”

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Dan Lett | Not for Attribution

Tuesdays

A weekly look at politics close to home and around the world.

Sign up for Dan Lett | Not for Attribution

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

This is a fairly stunning statement that suggest Sio Silica doesn’t think the CEC report is impactful. It further suggests the Environmental Approvals Branch (EAB), an office within Mr. Klein’s portfolio, will consider licensing this project as is. That would be an enormous mistake.

Mr. Klein’s response was equally concerning. He has promised the concerns in the CEC report will themselves be subject to a technical advisory review, which is unprecedented. The EAB typically does its work before a project goes to the CEC and the minister has not explained why he’s focusing his efforts on reviewing the CEC report, and not on working with Sio Silica to address environmental concerns.

It’s more evidence supporting fears that the Progressive Conservative government is determined to license the Springfield silica mine, regardless of environmental concerns. Until Klein better defines this next stage of technical scrutiny, and reveals whether the proponent will be asked to strengthen its environmental assurances, it will be difficult to tell what the PC government’s agenda is for this project.

All that said, there is one more thing to consider: given the timing of the Oct. 3 provincial election, it is extremely unlikely Klein or his government will make a decision before Manitobans go to the polls. He should know, however, that kicking this can down the road does not change one indisputable fact.

The silica mine, in its current form, cannot go forward.