Analysis: Oilsands poisoning groundwater

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Analysis: Oilsands poisoning groundwater - Nova Scotia News - TheChronicleHerald.ca

EDMONTON (CP) — The toxic tailings ponds from Alberta’s oilsands mines leak enough contaminated water into the region’s aquifers every day to almost fill five Olympic-sized swimming pools, according to a new analysis by two environmental groups.

And if all the oilsands projects now on the books are constructed, that contamination could grow nearly sevenfold and potentially leave a massive legacy of poisoned groundwater.

"This is one of the ominous parts of this," said Matt Price of Environmental Defence, who authored the report being released Tuesday. "It could very well take a generation for this stuff to show up. And by that time, you can’t stop it."

But the director of oilsands environmental management for the Alberta government said the report makes several mistaken assumptions.

Oilsands tailings are created as hot water is used to separate bitumen from the sand and clay that holds it.

Between 2,000 and 2,500 litres of tailings are produced for every barrel of bitumen. Tailings ponds now cover about 130 square kilometres in the Fort McMurray area.

Those "ponds" are held in place by earthen dikes. Most of the leakage is captured by ditches, barriers or wells, but some water still escapes.

Price and analysts from the environmental think-tank Pembina Consulting collected data from oilsands companies themselves on how much water they expect is leaking from their tailings ponds.

The total was just over 11 million litres a day. Over the course of a year, that’s enough water to fill the Toronto Skydome 2 1/2 times. The tailings are known to be harmful, containing chemicals that are both toxic and carcinogenic. Studies have shown that wetlands irrigated with tailings water suffer increased mortality for birds and slower growth for plants. Last April, about 500 ducks died when they landed on one of the ponds.

But Preston McEachern of Alberta Environment says that most of the seepage from tailings ponds goes into aquifers so deep that they themselves are contaminated by flowing through the oilsands.

"It’s dirty water, just like process-affected water in tailings ponds," he said.

Well seems like Someone in the NDP were on the ball when it came to halting further development to the oil sands until proper environmental protection measures were made.
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Well in these times of economic uncertainty, we have to forgo some of the luxuries that we were once accustomed to...drinking water and wildlife obviously should have to take a back seat to the crucial importance of keeping the oil flowing.
 

Said1

Hubba Hubba
Apr 18, 2005
5,336
66
48
51
Das Kapital
Considering the life expectancy of industrial civilization is coming to a close, I'm gonna learn how to make candles and chop wood. Water might be problem, though. :(
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Don't feel bad. You lived a full life and it's not to late to turn your life over to God.

Maybe it's time to set the record straight and see if those deathbed conversions really work...

Of course dying of thirst is preceded by delusions and vivid hallucinations...how could I be sure that it is really the almighty I'm asking forgiveness from and not some image conjured from my subconscious...

Dammit where's a ****ing priest when I need one!!
 

Said1

Hubba Hubba
Apr 18, 2005
5,336
66
48
51
Das Kapital
Maybe it's time to set the record straight and see if those deathbed conversions really work...

Of course dying of thirst is preceded by delusions and vivid hallucinations...how could I be sure that it is really the almighty I'm asking forgiveness from and not some image conjured from my subconscious...

Dammit where's a ****ing priest when I need one!!

Is it the Buddhists who say you're supposed to ignore the visions of Christ etc while mediating during extended periods of self-deprivation?
 

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Considering the life expectancy of industrial civilization is coming to a close, I'm gonna learn how to make candles and chop wood. Water might be problem, though. :(

Hmmm. Life without a IPhone, big screen plasma TV and my laptop!!!!

yikes.

I gotta get out more...:-(
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Apparently it's all downhill from here (2008) . Sorry.

You do know that things can be done to prevent this contamination of the lands/waters and it doesn't have to be a *shrugs* "Well it was fun.... I'm off to go lemming myself now."

I don't suppose anybody has any suggestions on what should be done in regards to the original topic or is this just going to continue into a useless banter about things that really don't relate?
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
I don't suppose anybody has any suggestions on what should be done in regards to the original topic or is this just going to continue into a useless banter about things that really don't relate?

Well I'm sure it could digress a little further...:lol:

But if you want a response to the OP then so be it...

I think that what you said is the correct course of action, a moratorium on further oil sands development until the environmental impact can be properly studied and solutions provided...

The oilmen need to be reigned in before the damage is irreparable...
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Oil Sands poisoning the ground water

Among other things like the Athabaska River. They have dozens of these huge poisonous lakes that they call tailing ponds. Ducks land on them and die. Guess what....The poison is seeping out the bottom of these ponds and getting into the ground water.. It is also poisoning the river and the river delta. The tar sands are a disgusting mess that is driven by the oil industry's greed.
 

Said1

Hubba Hubba
Apr 18, 2005
5,336
66
48
51
Das Kapital
You do know that things can be done to prevent this contamination of the lands/waters and it doesn't have to be a *shrugs* "Well it was fun.... I'm off to go lemming myself now."

I don't suppose anybody has any suggestions on what should be done in regards to the original topic or is this just going to continue into a useless banter about things that really don't relate?


I think the inevitable process of deindustrialisation is very relevant, given the nature of the topic, wouldn't you?

What did you suggest, aside from the obvious 'lemming like' answer?
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Among other things like the Athabaska River. They have dozens of these huge poisonous lakes that they call tailing ponds. Ducks land on them and die. Guess what....The poison is seeping out the bottom of these ponds and getting into the ground water.. It is also poisoning the river and the river delta. The tar sands are a disgusting mess that is driven by the oil industry's greed.

Agreed and when they apparently attempted to push aside concerns by explaining the Tailing Ponds are:

..... held in place by earthen dikes. Most of the leakage is captured by ditches, barriers or wells, but some water still escapes.

Not just that little snippet of "Some water still escapes" but Earth, no matter how much you compress or compact it, it isn't like plastic or concrete and the contamination will eventually and gradually spread like a giant sponge..... and sponges only hold so much and don't really hold liquid all that well.... eventually it will release what it can not hold.

Not to mention rains and other weather conditions that may spread that contamination beyond those ponds, which they claim is already happening.

I'm not about to say this because I'm a jerk, but I am glad that I don't live near the oil sands.

And what good will all that profit and money do when in the long run you'll end up spending more for your own health and the environment around you due to years of allowing this to continue?

Besides the hazzards listed in the above report, what do they know about the direct effects on the humans who work around these areas all the time?

If there isn't any real protection for the environment from the oil sands, then what can we expect for protection towards the humans who work and live around them?
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
I think the inevitable process of deindustrialisation is very relevant, given the nature of the topic, wouldn't you?

What did you suggest, aside from the obvious 'lemming like' answer?

I don't believe it has to come down to deindustrialization, but rather hang onto all existing development, companies and jobs for the oil sands, but stop making the problem worse by expanding for the time being until the existing companies and development can be retro-fitted in a way that can secure the environment around the oil sands and assure the safety and health of those who work there.

Once everything is optimized and made as safe as possible for humans and nature alike.... then goto town and haul all the oil you want.

But of course I would rather us just stop using fossil fuels altogether, but I am also realistic and know that's a long stretch.
 

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
I think the inevitable process of deindustrialisation is very relevant, given the nature of the topic, wouldn't you?

What did you suggest, aside from the obvious 'lemming like' answer?

Alternative energy sources. It's just that basic. Societies reliance on oil has been highlighted as a problem since the OPEC embargo in the '70's and if you are familiar with the The Hubbert peak theory (also known as peak oil), it has been known for quite some time. It posits that future petroleum production (whether for individual oil wells, entire oil fields, whole countries, or worldwide production) will eventually peak and then decline at a similar rate to the rate of increase before the peak as these reserves are exhausted. It also suggests a method to calculate the timing of this peak, based on past production rates, the observed peak of past discovery rates, and proven oil reserves. The peak of oil discoveries was in 1965, and oil production per year has surpassed oil discoveries every year since 1980.

So if we have known that source oil (being non-renewable) is decling, why hasn't there been a massive effort towards, wind, solar, water (tides), etc. Because as one poster pointed out "we are lemmings"

We twend to wait until the last possible moment to look up and exclaim, s--t, what do we do now?

Huge gov't incentive to alternative sources would seem to be the immediate answer in order to reduce our dependance 10 yrs down the road
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
Okay, so I keep coming back to playing devil's advocate over this stuff. part of the reason why is, I loathe the idea that almost all of our fish is contaminated with pesticides, the chemicals which comprise non-stick coatings, and a host of other crap. I hate the fact that we have a continent of plastic forming in the ocean. I hate that vehicle fumes, household chemicals, and living near gas stations, are killing off a large number of our youth through assorted cancers. We are STEEPED in chemicals and toxins, and people just keep buying more... spraying them on their lawns, their couches, their kids. And they don't think twice about it because it's marketed, and it's spread out where they can't see it.

But the oil sands... oh, we can see the oil sands. The impact of the oil sands happens all in one convenient place, and looks like pure devastation. I hate the oil sands.

With that being said though, is there any truth to what the oil companies claim? If you live near the oil sands, and your water runs THROUGH oil sand on a daily basis (keep in mind, they didn't put the stuff there, and all they're adding to it is steam), is it contaminating your ground water supply?
 

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Okay, so I keep coming back to playing devil's advocate over this stuff. part of the reason why is, I loathe the idea that almost all of our fish is contaminated with pesticides, the chemicals which comprise non-stick coatings, and a host of other crap. I hate the fact that we have a continent of plastic forming in the ocean. I hate that vehicle fumes, household chemicals, and living near gas stations, are killing off a large number of our youth through assorted cancers. We are STEEPED in chemicals and toxins, and people just keep buying more... spraying them on their lawns, their couches, their kids. And they don't think twice about it because it's marketed, and it's spread out where they can't see it.

But the oil sands... oh, we can see the oil sands. The impact of the oil sands happens all in one convenient place, and looks like pure devastation. I hate the oil sands.

With that being said though, is there any truth to what the oil companies claim? If you live near the oil sands, and your water runs THROUGH oil sand on a daily basis (keep in mind, they didn't put the stuff there, and all they're adding to it is steam), is it contaminating your ground water supply?


Oil in oil sansds that are in the natural environ are trapped there and there is very little leaching. Once process, the oil contamination becomes a suspended particulate in the water (typically storage ponds, fills and abandoned mines) and is prone to a much greater degree of seepage into groundwater.

Efforts have been made to recycle the the tailings (effluent), drain the water into a recycling facility (much like sewage treatement plants) and then bury the leftover sludge. It's better trhan what they are currently doing, but still not great