Two weeks ago I visited Prince George to meet with a number of key stakeholders in the region. The purpose of my trip was threefold. First, on my way to Prince George I passed through Kelowna where I participated in a panel at the Western Silvicultural Contractors’ Association (WSCA) 35^th Annual Conference, Tradeshow & AGM. Second, I had accepted an invitation by Spruce City Wildlife Association to participate in a political panel at the University of Northern British Columbia on hunting and wildlife conservation. Third, I arranged meetings with local councilors and business leaders to learn more about the existing and potential future economic opportunities in region. I also gave a lecture on carbon pricing, clean energy and LNG in Dr. Kyrke Gaudreau‘s Carbon Neutrality ENVS498/NRES 798 class, and accepted an invitation from the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions at UNBC to give a public lecture on science and politics in the evening of Friday, February 5^th.

Before proceeding I’d like to point out how unusual the weather was. It got as high as 7°C while I was there and the 10mm of rain that fell during the 5th was enough to clear away much of the snow. While not a normal Prince George winter’s day, it was perfect weather for driving my rented Toyota Scion iQ which seemed a little out of place beside some of the picture cars in the area.

As you will see below, we have an incredible opportunity in British Columbia for continued innovation in our resource and tech sectors.

1: WSCA 35th Annual Conference

The Western Silvicultural Contractor’s Association is an organization that represents individuals and companies that serve as contractors for the Silvicuture Industry — an industry involved in the growing as cultivation of trees. As noted on their website, these individuals and companies:

“grow seedlings, plant trees, tend stands, brush plantations, fight wild fires, prepare planting sites, survey forest regeneration, burn slash piles and restore forest and range ecosystems.”

I participated in the plenary panel: Forestry Policy Panel to answer: What’s the Big Idea?  The guiding question was “What is the forestry goal in the post-mountain-beetle-increasingly-intense-wildfire-season-pending-climate-change-looming-timber-shortfall world we are heading into and where does silviculture fit into it?”

Independent Forester Bill Dumont from the Forest Practices Board, Ian Meier, Director, BC Wildfire Services, and Bob Fleet, VP, Environment & Forestry, Tolko Industries Ltd, joined me on the panel. The goal of the panel was to stimulate big picture challenges and opportunities within the forest sector in the years ahead.

The focus of my presentation was on the challenges and opportunities arising from global warming. The conversation initially focused on the increasing likelihood of extreme precipitation, larger-area wildfires, summer drought, extreme temperatures and what this might mean for forestry. I pointed out that the challenges of global warming will also lead to opportunities. But if we want to capitalize on these opportunities BC and Canada need to invest more heavily in research within the government and academic sectors.

In addition, I outlined potential opportunities for innovation within the forest sector that could arise through partnership between the forest sector and BC’s vibrant tech sector (see more below). To conclude, I recommended that those interested in this area consider reading the book by Stefan Heck and Matt Rogers entitled Resource Revolution: How to Capture the Biggest Business Opportunity in a Century.

All in all, it was a fascinating event and I was honoured to have the opportunity to serve on the same panel as the other panelists.

2: Spruce City Wildlife Association Symposium

As many who follow this blog will know, I have written extensively about wildlife conservation, habitat protection, hunting and the rights of resident hunters over the last year. One of the issues I have been concerned with is the allocation of hunting permits between guide outfitters and resident hunters. I’ve also spoken out strongly against trophy hunting and I’ve introduced two private member’s bills in an attempt to end this practice.

Over the last year I’ve engaged in countless on-line conversations with hunters, environmentalists and regular folk just seeking clarification as to the intent of my bills and blog posts. What has become abundantly clear to me is that concerned urban environmentalists and hunters share more commonalities than they do differences. First and foremost is that both groups are committed to supporting conservation.

Second, I have found that the overwhelming majority of people I have spoken with support a science-based, ecosystem-based approach to wildlife (and forestry/natural resource-based) management. In so doing we end up as a society grappling with ethical questions like is it justifiable to kill one animal in the name of saving another? What if one of those animals is endangered? Predator management in certain cases is fundamental to wildlife management for it is unrealistic for us to think that humans have not disturbed the habitat in which the wildlife live. Some might argue that we should let nature take its course. I would respond that this would be inconsistent with a science-based, ecosystem-based approach to wildlife management as we have already disturbed all aspects of nature.

Third I have realized that the term “trophy hunting” has a different meaning to hunters compared to what is commonly understood in urban areas. For many, including me, trophy hunting means hunting exclusively for a trophy (head, skin or antlers) with no intention of packing out the meat to your home. Guide outfitters can offer foreigners the opportunity to come to BC and kill an animal. The meat could either be given away (or left to rot in the case of grizzlies) and all that the foreign hunter takes home is the trophy. It is this that the overwhelming majority of British Columbians, including resident hunters, abhor. But to many hunters, trophy hunting means hunting a trophy animal. It’s a bit like trophy fishing. The trophy fish is a big fish; it’s a keeper, not one you catch and release. Sure the antlers will come out, but so will the organic, free-range meat which will be used to feed a family for many, many months.

The purpose of the Spruce City Wildlife Association Symposium was to explore these issues more thoroughly with representatives from the four major political parties. Invitations went out at the end of November last year and I immediately accepted. Joining me on the panel were Katrine Conroy from the BC NDP, and Dan Brooks, Interim Leader of the BC Conservative Party. MLA Mike Morris (Prince George-Mackenzie) was also invited to attend but declined to do so just two days before the scheduled event. This was disappointing as he was in town on the day and no other Liberal MLA was dispatched to replace him either.

A number of the questions were given us in advance. These ranged from questions regarding grizzly bear hunting, to funding of wildlife management and restoration, to First Nation hunting rights. Neither Dan Brooks nor I prepared answers in advance. I was, however, disappointed to see Katrine Conroy read from prepared answers written and approved by the party. All in all it was clear to me that the audience was profoundly troubled with the direction British Columbia is heading both in terms of wildlife conservation and the rights of resident, versus foreign, hunters.

3: Technology and the Resource Sector in Prince George

During the morning I met with Oliver Ray, Executive Director of the North Central Local Government Association, Meghan Ginter, membership and events manager with the Prince George Chamber of Commerce and Prince George Councillor Jillian Merrick to learn more about the existing and potential future economic opportunities in region. We discussed how British Columbia could use our strategic advantage as a destination of choice to attract industry to BC in highly mobile sectors that have difficulty retaining employees in a competitive marketplace. In particular, we discussed the availability of our boundless renewable resources — energy, water and fibre — which could be used to attract industry that wants to brand itself as sustainable over its entire business cycle.

It’s just like what Washington has done. BMW announced an expansion to the Moses Lake carbon-fiber plant, which would see a tripling of its capacity. BMW uses the plant to produce carbon fiber ribbon employed in its i8 concept “sustainable car”.  There are two hundred 21^st century jobs from just this one investment alone. Oregon is also heading down this path. Google, a company that sees itself as a powerhouse of the 21^st century wants to ensure it has access to clean, renewable energy. Oregon was able to provide Google with price certainty and so the company invested $1.2 billion in the creation of a major data distribution centre in The Dalles. And that’s another eighty 21^st century jobs from another investment.

The cooler climate of Prince George, relative to other jurisdictions on the west coast, led me to ask if Prince George was exploring options like this. From our discussions, later reaffirmed when I met with Mayor Lyn Hall, Councillors Murray Krause, Garth Frizzell and district staff, it became clear to me that a barrier for this to occur is the lack of broadband redundancy in the region (see summary).

In our discussions I further emphasized that I believe it is critical that we bring the typically urban-based tech and typically rural-based resource sectors together. Innovation in technology will lead to more efficient and clever ways of operating in the mining and forestry industries. Earlier, Oliver Ray had also noted the importance and potential for the agricultural sector as well. And in addition to our natural resources, we would also have the potential to export innovation in the rapidly emerging knowledge-based economy. But once more, a barrier to building Prince George as a hub for natural resource/tech innovation is limited by the availability of broadband redundancy

Recently, for instance, I learned about the story of a BC-based technology innovator (Minesense Technologies Ltd.) partnering with a local mine to dramatically improve the efficiency and environmental footprint of their mining operations. Rather than hauling thousands of unnecessary tonnes of rock for processing, the new technology allowed the rocks to be scanned for ore content on site. This meant that prior to trucking, the company could determine if it was more cost-effective to simply put the rock to one side for use as fill later.

While in Prince George I was fortunate to be given a tour of the Carrier Lumber Ltd. Prince George mill by its president, Bill Kordyban. Carrier Lumber is a family owned business that was started by Bill’s father in 1951. It wasn’t until 1976 that the facility at Prince George was built. The Prince George mill currently employs around 300 people, with the majority of workers being members of United Steelworkers Local 1-424. Carrier is one of a number of mills in the Prince George area but what is remarkable about this particular enterprise is the fact that the company is diversified.

Carrier owns the Prince George Mill and another Mill in Saskatchewan. In addition, Carrier has its own fabrication shop situated in a 76,000 building a stone throw away from their Prince George mill. Being the largest fabrication shop in BC, the shop not only builds much of Carriers milling equipment, but it also builds for other industries in the area.  The 8000 acre Bar-K ranch with over 2000 head of cattle is also part of the Carrier group of holdings.

During the tour, Bill was quick to point out that the “thing about saw mills is that it’s all about flexibility”, and it was abundantly clear that Carrier lumber has figured out how to compete in highly competitive forest products sector. State of the art technologies are used throughout the mill in order to maximize recovery of wood products. Every bit of fibre in each and every log is used one way or another. Logs are maximized for lumber production with each resulting board being marked with a unique serial numbered. Hog fuel arising from stripping the logs of bark is shipped to Canfor for use as a biofuel. Wood chips end up being used for pulp and paper and sawdust is sent to Premier Pellet Ltd in Vanderhoof to be converted into wood pellets. And of course there is lumber, which is produced at a rate of about 300 boards a minute.

Like other mills in the area, there is growing concern that as government reduces the allowable cut in the near future due to pine stands devastated by the Mountain Pine Beetle beginning to run out, it is done so as to allow both family-owned and larger multinational mills to survive. In addition, as negotiations proceed between Canada and the US about extending the Softwood Lumber Agreement, there is ongoing trepidation within the forestry sector across all of Canada. Given the importance of forestry to our economy, it’s critical that government ensure that it does what it can to ensure this sector remains vibrant.

Innovation at the interface between technology and forestry not only extends to the production of lumber, but also to the value-added forest products sector as well. As Mayor Hall, Councillor Krause, and I set off to visit the Peaking Backup Energy Centre associated with the Prince George Downtown District Energy System, we stopped in to visit the award-winning Wood Innovation Design Centre (WIDC).

Completed on October 31, 2014, the WIDC is a six story building constructed entirely of wood, engineered wood and wood products. It is yet another marvellous example of innovation and creativity that arises when the resource and tech sectors are brought together. Upon entering the WIDC one is immediately greeted with the sweet aroma of wood and the stunning architecture. It would be an inspiring place to work and the University of Northern British Columbia obviously thinks so too.

The WIDC is the home of UNBC’s Master of Engineering in Integrated Wood Design program, with an objective “designed to enhance the students’ understanding of wood as a versatile and sustainable building component.” In fact, I had wanted to visit the WIDC for quite some time as I was first learned about the building while visiting the Structurlam manufacturing facility in Okanagan Falls, during my September 2015 visit to the Okanagan.

Structurlam is an outstanding example of a BC based business in the value-added forest sector. Their two main products Glulam and Crosslam are 100% engineered-wood laminations that can be used as replacements in building construction for steel and cement, respectively. Structurlam played a key role in supplying product for the building of the WIDC. For those on southern Vancouver Island or in the Vancouver region, you can see their beautifully engineered products in one of the buildings below. In addition, Structurlam is presently manufacturing panels for UBC’s 18-story Brock Commons Student Residence which when completed will be the world’s tallest wood building.

One of the things that impressed me during my tour of the Structurlam facility was their commitment to source  lumber from BC-based companies. During my visit last September, vast quantities of  ready-to-be-used lumber were on site. This lumber was used from Kaleshnikoff Lumber Co. Ltd., a family owned business located in Tarry’s BC (on Highway 3A between Castlegar and Nelson) that was started in the late 1930’s by the children of Doukhobour immigrants who came to Canada in 1911.

4: Clean Energy, Sustainability and Leadership in Prince George

Prince George is home to the University of Northern British Columbia which in 2007 branded itself as Canada’s Green University™. With a name like that, you can bet I was thrilled to visit the campus, give a lecture in a class and tour their bioenergy facility. In fact, in 2015, and for the fourth year in a row, UNBC was listed as one of the Top 100  Canada’s Greenest Employers. To say I was impressed would be an understatement.

UNBC was recently ranked #1 in primarily undergraduate category of the annual Maclean’s university rankings and it was clear to me that the university has worked hard to deserve this reputation. I was taken on a tour of the bioenergy facility by University of Victoria engineering graduate David Claus, Assistant Director of Facilities Management.

The bioenergy facility consists of a Nexterra Systems Corporation gasification system that became operational in May 2011. Powered entirely by wood waste (hog fuel) and housed in a LEED Platinum building, the bioenergy facility provides enough energy through its hot water distribution system to allow UNBC to reduce its consumption of fossil fuels for heating by 85%.

It’s not only UNBC that recognizes the potential to convert wood waste into heat. In fact, Prince George  has also introduced its own district energy system that connects buildings downtown with a bioenergy facility at the nearby and newly rebuilt Lakeland Sawmill. Heated water at the Lakeland facility is piped underground to the downtown Peaking Backup Energy Centre. There distributions pumps and backup natural gas heating boilers are housed.

We were given a tour of the Peaking Backup Energy Centre by Todd Angus, Engineering Assistant, Public Works/Utilities. There he explained the functioning of the both the main and peaking backup systems. What’s remarkable is that the the underground hot water pipes transfer heat to numerous buildings in the downtown core including City Hall, the Coliseum arena, the Civic Centre, the Four Seasons pool, the library, the newly constructed RCMP building, the Two Rivers Art Gallery and the WIDC. Not only is this district heating system considered carbon neutral, it is also more efficient. The hot water heat exchangers are 99.9% efficient compared to typical ~80% for natural gas boilers.

5: Summary

It became apparent from my visit to Prince George that the opportunities for the region are enormous. Real estate is still reasonably priced, the surrounding environment is picturesque, there’s a first rate university on site. Prince George is a hub for northern BC and on the rail line from the Port of Prince Rupert to Chicago, one of greatest, if not the greatest, rail distribution centres in North America.

So what is missing? Why would Google, for example, not jump at the idea of building a data distribution centre in Prince George? Why is there not a thriving and expanding hub of local technological innovation in partnership with the resource, forestry and agricultural sectors and capitalizing on the research expertise at UNBC? Why wouldn’t companies that are concerned about access to renewable energy, a skilled workforce and being able to attract and retain their workers not setup in Prince George? They’re located on the railway connecting Chicago’s North American rail distribution centre to Prince Rupert, a gateway to Asian markets.

The answer is simple. Broadband redundancy in the region precludes major investments in this area.

So what is broadband redundancy? The term broadband redundancy means that a community is not reliant upon a single high speed internet connect into their region. Prince George presently has a single high speed connection to the rest of North America via Vancouver. But if for some reason the line (between Prince George and Vancouver) goes down, Prince George is out of luck in terms of communicating at high speed with the rest of the world via the internet.

As you can see from the image to the left from BCNET, Kamloops has high speed internet connectivity to both Vancouver and Calgary. And so, if the Kamloops to Vancouver connection drops, redundancy is built in so high speed internet traffic can still go via Calgary. The fact that Kamloops has broadband redundancy is a a critical reason why TELUS recently built a $75 million data distribution centre there.

If government wants to stimulate the northern economy it should first stop throwing good money after bad ideas. I’ve been saying it for more than three years now, there will not be any significant development in LNG in BC anytime soon. The market is saturated; prices will remain low for many years; China already has more contracted supply than it actually need. China is now a seller in the marketplace. Add this to sanctions being lifted recently from the world’s largest natural gas reserve (Iran) and the proximity of the second largest reserve (Russia) to Asian markets with signed deals in place, and it should be clear that British Columbians have been misled by the government for quite some time about the future of LNG in this province.

In my view, perhaps the single biggest stimulus to the area would be for government ensure that broadband redundancy is introduced to Prince George. And this would not be very expensive. After a number of meetings it was clear that what was needed was timely investment to connect Prince George to Chetwynd via high speed broadband. At a cost of about 20,000$ to 25,000$ per kilometre, the 300km distance would cost between $6 million and $7.5 million to lay. Yet the potential benefits would be enormous.

So while I am calling on the government to show leadership in this area now and invest in this critical infrastructure, I can ensure people in the area that if I were premier, it would be one of my top priorities.

Today in the legislature I rose to probe the government’s efforts to preserve natural habitat for BC’s remaining healthy wood caribou herds.

Several additional herds are listed as threatened under Canada’s Species at Risk Act. As such, management actions have been required and subsequently taken. In the discussion reproduced below, the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations notes that the  government has already protected 2.2 million hectares of mountain caribou natural habitat from logging and road building.

I point out that these protected areas have enormous value for preserving British Columbia’s biodiversity, especially in light of ongoing global warming (which I recognized that a rather significant number of BC Liberal MLAs still struggle to believe is occurring). Yet these areas, a substantial fraction of which are old growth forest, also have enormous commercial value.

I wanted to know whether the Minister would commit to the continued protection of these forests even if the caribou herds — those herds which required forests to be protected under Canada’s Species at Risk Act in the first place — become extinct.

For example, there is a very real concern that when the Selkirk herd goes extinct, for example (there are only a dozen or so caribou left), vast areas of valuable, yet presently protected, old growth timber stands will be logged.

I was disappointed in the Minister’s response (which I reproduce below as well).

Please note: when I say “in opposition” in the text, I meant “opposite”. I was gesturing to the BC Liberal side of the house where there are a fair number of MLAs who still have a hard time accepting that the world is warming because of increasing greenhouse gases, despite the fact the scientific community has known this for decades.

Question

A. Weaver: It’s well understood within the scientific community that the loss of natural habitat due to human activities is the primary cause for the disappearing caribou herds in British Columbia. Deforested land provides grazing opportunities for ungulates like deer and moose, which move in along with their natural predators — like, for example, wolves and cougars. Caribou then become the bycatch of these predators.

Because the caribou were sparsely distributed to begin with, the herd simply cannot survive this increase in mortality. With so few mountain caribou left in the south Selkirk region and rapidly dwindling or extirpated northern caribou herds in the South Peace region, their future looks bleak.

My question is this. What is this government doing to ensure that the habitat for the remaining relatively healthy woodland caribou populations is protected in light of growing pressures from mining, natural gas and forestry sectors?

Answer

Hon. S. Thomson: As you know, the province has implemented mountain caribou recovery implementation plans. Oversight is provided on those plans by a progress board, a progress team, with a wide range of stakeholders and interests on those teams. They report out annually.

Since the plans were implemented or adopted, over 2.2 million hectares of habitat have been protected — 108,000 hectares in the south Selkirk area; 400,000 hectares in the Peace River.

We continue to work — with the input of scientists, biologists, the progress team — to monitor the implementation, to ensure that we continue to provide that habitat for this very, very important species here in British Columbia.

Supplementary Question

A. Weaver: My concern with this, of course, is that under the Species at Risk Act government must act to protect land when the caribou are threatened. My concern is for existing mountain herds that are not subject to species-at-risk legislation today because they are not threatened today.

You know, these protected lands also are incredibly important for biodiversity, especially in light of the ongoing global warming. I recognize that there are some in opposition who believe it’s not actually occurring despite overwhelming scientific evidence.

A lot of these protected areas for the existing caribou herds that are threatened are old-growth forests. They are only protected in light of the fact that they must protect them under the Species at Risk Act. My concern is this. Scientists will tell government that the south Selkirk herd will go extinct despite the government’s efforts. The government then no longer has to protect these forests under the species-at-risk legislation.

My question to the minister is this. Will the minister commit to the continued protection of these forests? Even if the caribou herds, those herds which required the forest to be protected in the first place under Canada’s Species at Risk Act…. Will they still be protected — because of the pressures that they will get from the forest industry for this valuable timber?

Answer

Hon. S. Thomson: Thank you for the supplementary question. Now 2.2 million hectares of land are protected under the implementation plans. As I said, we continue to work with the progress team to monitor that implementation, to report out annually on progress on the implementation plans.

As was mentioned, the herds are dispersed — 15 separate herds across British Columbia — so that why it’s important we continue to get the scientific and biologist advice in through the progress report and the range of stakeholders that are on the progress board report.

That’s why we’re also taking additional actions, particularly on the high-risk herds, to deal with what the member opposite talked about, imminent expiration of those herds. That’s why we’ve taken extraordinary steps in those specific herds to give the best chance that we can to ensure that we continue to protect and recover those herds. That’s where the focus of activity will continue to take place.

Video

Introduction

Earlier this week I published an account of my recent trip to the Kootenays where I visited a number of mining operations, and met with people in local communities. Mining is a key economic sector underpinning BC’s economy. The industry directly employs 10,720 British Columbians, contributes $8.5 billion to BC’s GDP and a further $511 million in tax revenues to provincial coffers. Numerous small communities throughout our province depend on mining for their survival.

While we have much to celebrate about British Columbia’s mining industry, there are also a number of challenges that must be taken seriously. The BC Government has a critical role to play in ensuring that the standards that regulate this industry are kept up to date, and that in addition to the economic benefits mining provides our province, its social and environmental impacts are being accounted for seriously.

To explore some of the challenges facing this industry – and to highlight some of the solutions that are readily available, I want to turn to two specific and related issues. First, I want to explore how mines manage their tailings ponds. I will specifically look at what we have learned since the Mount Polley tailings pond breach.

The second issue I will examine concerns the enforcement and regulatory functions of government and whether adequate funding is being provided by government to ensure that it is managing the environmental and social consequences of mining operations.

Impacts of the Tsilhqot’in decision

Before diving into these issues, I think it is first important to acknowledge that for the mining industry in BC to continue to succeed, and do so in way that is environmentally and socially responsible, the BC government must ensure it is addressing the requirements placed on it by the Tsilhqot’in decision. We are already seeing examples of how this decision may affect mining investment. It was announced earlier this week that the BC Government bought back 61 coal licences from a mining company in the Northwest of the province, in order to provide a longer window for the BC government to engage in more meaningful government-to-government negotiations with the Tahltan First Nation.

Whether or not this specific policy tool — the re-purchasing of mining licences — becomes commonly used by the BC government, the status quo of mining development is likely to change. The Tsilhqot’in decision made it clear that First Nations have significant say, if not an outright veto, over developments on their land. Last summer the Tsilhqot’in First Nation established new rules for mining development on their titled land. These rules require companies to minimize negative impacts and provide revenue sharing with the community.

Mining companies who wish to develop new mines in British Columbia will need to put an even greater focus on consulting, and ultimately addressing the concerns of not only the BC Government, but First Nations who may have inherent title rights to the land.

 Learning from Mount Polley

The mining industry in British Columbia was rocked last summer when the tailings pond at Mount Polley breached its impoundment dam, and released almost 25 million cubic meters of tailings and waste water into the Hazeltine Creek, and down into Quesnel Lake.

I wrote about this breach when it first happened, and after visiting the mine site and the surrounding communities, I explored in detail what had happened, and what some of the consequences were likely to be. Finally, in January of this year, the Independent Expert Engineering Investigation Review Panel published their report on the Mount Polley Breach. This Panel was empowered to investigate and report on the cause of the failure of the tailings pond facility that occurred on August 4^th, 2014 at the Mount Polley Mine. In addition, they were asked to provide recommendations regarding how such an incident could be avoided in the future. It is these recommendations that I will focus on.

The Mount Polley tailings pond breach has shattered public confidence in government and industry ability to adequately protect the natural environment during mining operations. Regaining public trust and confidence is perhaps the greatest challenge facing the mining industry. First Nations, the Alaskan Government and Environmental groups have all raised similar concerns. How industry and government collectively respond to the Mount Polley breach will be critical in rebuilding this trust. And an ongoing examination of how mines are managing their tailings and waste, as well as a  determination as to whether or not these reflect best practices, will almost certainly be one of key elements of moderating the concerns of British Columbians.

The Expert review panel touched on this point at the start of Section 9 of their report. Section 9 – entitled “Where Do We Go From Here” – explored how the BC mining industry can use best practices and best available technologies (BAT) to reduce failure rates to zero.

In the introduction to this section, the Panel rejected the concept of a “tolerable failure rate for tailings dams”, citing concerns that this would institutionalize failure. To quote from their report: “First Nations will not accept this, the public will not permit it, government will not allow it, and the mining industry will not survive it”.

A similar concern was voiced this week by Alaskan government, industry leaders and First Nations, who were in Victoria to meet with Minister’s regarding their concerns about the scale of development taking place in the British Columbia.

The tailings breach at Mount Polley was cited as having raised concerns about the potential impacts on the fishing industry in the region. The Alaskan delegation also felt that the review process in British Columbia was inadequate and not placing enough focus on potential cumulative impacts.

Interestingly both the Expert Review Panel and the group from Alaska pointed to the need to change the way that tailings are managed in this province.

The panel established three conditions that  addressed the instability that is created when mines use dual-purpose impoundments, storing both water and tailings. Best available technology would dictate that where possible these two waste products need to be stored in separate facilities that are specifically designed to prevent tailings releases. Critically, this panel also noted that economic considerations cannot be allowed to be the dominant factor in determining what is feasible – the costs of another accident far outweigh the implementation of best practices and technology.

Following the establishment of the Best-Available-Technology (BAT), the Expert Panel made the following recommendations:

• “For existing tailings impoundments: Constructing filtered tailings facilities on existing conventional impoundments poses several technical hurdles. Chief among them is undrained shear failure in the underlying saturated tailings, similar to what caused the Mount Polley incident. Attempting to retrofit existing conventional tailings impoundments is therefore not recommended, with reliance instead on best practices during their remaining active life.

• For new tailings facilities: BAT should be actively encouraged for new tailings facilities at existing and proposed mines. Safety attributes should be evaluated separately from economic considerations, and cost should not be the determining factor.

• For closure: BAT principles should be applied to closure of active impoundments so that they are progressively removed from the inventory by attrition. Where applicable, alternatives to water covers should be aggressively pursued.”

The BC Government has been somewhat responsive to this report. In mid-March they announced new interim rules for tailings ponds which would require companies seeking to build a mine in BC to include the best-available technologies for tailings facilities in their application. The Ministry of Mines are currently completing a review of mining regulations that will eventually establish the new way of doing business in BC.

However in response to calls from Canadian and American groups to end the use of water based storage facilities, the Minister of Energy and Mines suggested that the expert panel’s bottom line is about reducing water storage of mine waste where you can, and reducing the risk by increasing safety factors. This statement, I fear, betrays a lack of commitment to the true underlying issue highlighted in the report – that the status quo cannot continue and that we must throw out any notion of acceptable risks. I share the frustrations of these groups that we have failed to see an open and transparent commitment to the recommendations of the Expert Report.

This process cannot be taken lightly by government. The Mount Polley breach was devastating to the community of Likely, and even today uncertainty exists as to the full extent of the environmental, social and economic costs that are faced by residents. Evidence of this uncertainty can be found in a recently research paper in Geophysical Research Letters that points to the possibility of ongoing and long-term environmental impacts from the spill on aquatic life. At the very least, long term monitoring of water and sediments in Quesnel Lake will be important.

The solutions are there — they are contained in the path forward highlighted by the Expert Panel. British Columbians deserve government to ensure that it establishes a truly credible mining regime in British Columbia, one which commands the confidence of all those who would feel its impacts. It is only under such a regime, where companies are responsible for the environmental and social impacts of their developments, that mining can be truly successful in our province.

This brings us to the second related issue facing this industry – Government’s ability to regulate and enforce the standards they set for the industry.

Professional Reliance

In 2001 after the BC Liberals were elected to their first term, they began a comprehensive core review to cut the size of government. Premier Campbell asked all government departments to prepare scenarios as to what it would look like with 20%, 35% and 50% cuts to spending. As a direct consequence of government downsizing, technical expertise within the civil service became a casualty. Instead of having technical expertise in house, the government moved towards wide scale use of Professional Reliance in the permitting process. Under the Professional Reliance approach, the Ministry relies on the judgment and expertise of qualified experts hired by a project proponent.

What is particularly important to note is that in March 2014, the Office of the British Columbia Ombudsperson released a scathing report criticizing the Professional Reliance model with respect to streamside protection and enhancement areas. The report, entitled The Challenges of Using a Professional Reliance in Environmental Protection – British Columbia’s Riparian Areas Regulation made 25 recommendations, 24 of which the government agreed to accept.

My own personal view is that the government’s approach to follow the Professional Reliance model is fraught with difficulties. The role of the government is to protect the public interest. When government is making decisions solely based on a project proponent’s expert opinion, it is very troubling. Imagine a judge in a court of law only listening to the expert opinion on one side of a case (plaintiff or defendant) and not allowing expert opinion to be submitted from the opposing side.

There is no doubt that mining plays a very important role in our economy. Mining provides us with the basic elements with which we have built British Colombia into a prosperous and successful jurisdiction. However, the mining industries’ importance to our economy does not disconnect it from its responsibility to conduct itself in a way the is both environmentally and socially responsible. The Expert Review panels report made it clear that the status quo is no longer acceptable and that change is needed. However, for industry to embrace this change, the BC government needs to step up to the plate. The lack of funding for the compliance and enforcement sections of our resource and environment ministries is putting us at risk of another accident. Furthermore, if we expect the mining industry to take the Expert Review panel’s recommendations seriously, we also need to be convinced that government takes them seriously as well.

This week we celebrate mining in British Columbia. From May 3-9 events will be held across British Columbia to highlight the importance of mining to British Columbians.

B.C.’s mining industry is one of the pillars of our economy. In 2013, the year for which most recent data is available, the mining sector contributed $8.5 billion to BC’s GDP and employed 10,720 British Columbians. It further contributed $511 million in tax revenues to provincial coffers. Mining forms the backbone of many rural communities throughout the province, supplying us with the resources we need to enjoy the prosperity we are so fortunate to have in B.C.

Our mining industry continues to play a pivotal role in facilitating the transition to a 21^st century economy. For example, without metallurgical coal, we cannot manufacture steel. Without graphite, we cannot build lithium ion batteries.

It is for this reason that I travelled to the Kootenays in April to learn more about the opportunities and challenges facing our Mining Industry in B.C. What follows is a brief report on two tours I did while I was there.

Teck Resources Ltd Metallurgical Coal Operations

Employing roughly 7,960 people and contributing $6.5 billion in gross mining revenue, Teck Resources Ltd is Canada’s largest diversified resource company, with many of its assets in metallurgical coal mining. I reached out to Teck Resources because I believe it’s important to have a clear understanding of British Columbia’s coal industry.

Five of Teck Resources’ thirteen mines are located in the Elk Valley in the Kootenays where they extract metallurgical coal. While I was there, I had the opportunity to meet with representatives from Teck Resources and to tour their Coal Mountain operations.

Those who have read my previous coal-related posts know how important I believe it is to distinguish between thermal coal, which is used for coal-fired power plants, and metallurgical coal, which is used in the production of steel. Metallurgical coal is used to produce coke. This is done via heating the coal to very high temperatures (>1000°C) in the absence of oxygen. The resulting almost pure carbon is then mixed with iron ore to create the molten iron that is turned into steel.

Thermal coal, on the other hand, is the single biggest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the world. It is also the most widely available of all fossil fuels and we produce very little of it here in British Columbia. Thermal coal has smaller carbon content and higher moisture content that metallurgical coal thereby precluding its use in steel making.

The overwhelming majority of thermal coal that is shipped through British Columbia ports is sourced from the United States. That coal travels through B.C. ports because Washington, Oregon, and California have taken a stand to curb their own thermal coal exports. To quote from the governors of Oregon and Washington “We cannot seriously take the position in international and national policymaking that we are a leader in controlling greenhouse gas emissions without also examining how we will use and price the world’s largest proven coal reserves.” Here they were acknowledging that the United States has the largest reserves of thermal coal in the world (237,295 million tonnes) and that their domestic market is dropping as natural gas generation increases and more renewables are brought on stream.

Teck Resources produces metallurgical (not thermal) coal here in British Columbia. The fact is that metallurgical coal is essential for building everything from windmills to electric cars because without it, you cannot have steel. Teck Resources’ five metallurgical coal mines in the Elk Valley employ about 4,000 people and together contributed $140 million in taxes to the province in 2014. Touring Teck Resources’ Coal Mountain mining operation offered an excellent view into the scale and complexities of modern metallurgical coal mining in British Columbia. I was extremely impressed by steps Teck has taken to ensure their metallurgical coal operations were as environmentally sensitive as possible. These include their approaches to reclamation, greenhouse gas reductions, acquisition and preservation of parkland for future generations, and their state of the art water treatment operations that will commence in the Fall of this year.

Now, Teck Resources does not only produce metallurgical coal. They also own and operate Highland Valley Copper and the integrated zinc and lead smelting facility in Trail. If we actually include all of Teck Resources’ operations in our province, this one company accounted for 21% of all BC exports to China in 2013. That year Resources directly employed 7,650 full-time workers with an average salary of $100,000 per year. They are expanding their operations in British Columbia and presently there are 28 job openings within the company.

Eagle Graphite

Whereas Teck Resources is British Columbia’s largest mining company, many of B.C.’s junior mining companies are quite a bit smaller. Eagle Graphite Mine is one of them.

Located in the Slocan Valley, Eagle Graphite is one of only two flake graphite producers in North America and the only one in British Columbia. Graphite is an essential component of lithium ion batteries, which are used in electric vehicles. In fact, about 95% of a lithium battery is made up of graphite. About 50 kilograms of graphite is contained in an electric car, 10 kilograms in a hybrid vehicle and 1 kg in an electric bike. Laptops and mobile phones contain about 100 grams and 15 grams, respectively.

By the end of the decade, graphite demand for electric vehicles produced in North America is projected to increase substantially, far exceeding current supply. The team at Eagle Graphite has been working hard to take advantage of this projected supply gap by proving their reserves and developing methods to efficiently extract graphite from their quarry reserves. And one of the interesting tidbits I picked up on the tour was that golf course grade sand is the by-product of producing graphite!

Touring Eagle Graphite offered a helpful insight into the opportunities and challenges faced by smaller mining firms.

Summary

My brief trip to the Kootenays highlighted the diversity of resource opportunities that have been capitalized upon in the area. What impressed me most at the locations I visited were the steps taken by all companies involved to ensure sustainability of their industry for decades to come with minimal environmental footprint. Whether it be Teck Resource’s Elk Valley coal operations or their Trail smelter powered by the Waneta Dam, Eagle Graphite’s small operation, Canfor’s Elko Mill, or Columbia Power’s Waneta Expansion Project, everyone I met was beaming with pride at the work that they do, their safety records, and the care they take to ensure their operations are as clean and sustainable as possible. After all, these people are locals and the industrial operations are literally in their backyard.

Finally, a highlight of my trip truly had to be that I can now say triumphantly “I’ve been to Yahk and Back”.

Earlier today  the BC Government released its long awaited Independent Expert Engineering Investigation Review Panel Report on the Mount Polley Tailings Pond breach. This Panel was empowered to investigate and report on the cause of the failure of the tailings pond facility that occurred on August 4^th, 2014 at the Mount Polley Mine. In addition, they were asked to provide recommendations about how such an incident could be avoided in the future.

It’s important to note that while the panel was asked to point to the cause of the breach, it was restricted from assigning guilt or impeding two other ongoing investigations.

In their conclusions, the panel determined that the “dominant contribution” to the failure was the design of the tailings dam. The design failed to take into consideration key geological issues with the foundation. This was referred to by the panel as the “loading of the gun”. What “pulled the trigger”, and ultimately caused the breach, was the construction of a downstream slope at too steep an angle to account for the weakness in the tailings pond’s foundations. Essentially the wall of the tailings pond could not support the load being placed on it, and gave way without any warning.

This report’s contribution goes far beyond simply identifying the cause of this specific breach – it contains a number of important recommendations, which, if enacted, will go a long way towards improving the safety of how mines handle their tailings.

According to the expert panel, tailings pond technologies, such as those implemented at Mount Polley, have not fundamentally changed in the past one hundred years. Yet, alternatives to conventional tailings ponds exist and have been successfully implemented in other jurisdictions. The question is: why are these other technologies that have been shown to reduce the risk and impact of tailings failures not standard practice in B.C.?

Going forward, we need to do more than simply look at updating new standards of practice and technologies. We also need to explore how the technologies and practices that we have been using – and that were used at Mount Polley – were allowed to fall behind in the first place. One of the key lessons contained in this report is that a thorough safety analysis should come before a conversation about the economic viability of a mine. The government has announced that a number of new mines will be opening over the next few years. In my opinion, it’s critical that proposed new mines are developed within the the scope of recommendations contained in this report.

The Minister of Energy and Mines, Bill Bennett, has committed to a number of initial steps that will explore whether other tailings ponds are at risk of failing due to similar causes that led to the Mount Polley breach. However, there has not been enough clarity about the steps government is taking to look to address the underlying issues that have allowed BC’s mining practices and technology to fall behind best-practice standards.

One of the most important comments in the report is the statement that that in order to achieve zero failures, incremental changes will not be sufficient. This critically important report provides guidance to both government and industry as to how tailings should be safely handled now and into the future using 21st century technologies and practices. It’s imperative that both government and industry act upon all the recommendations of this report.

I will be writing further on this topic in the coming weeks.