Thanks again for the post from @Pietrowislon and @lauramyers the latter I know from many opportunities to engage with Protect Alberta’s Rockies and Headwaters https://www.facebook.com/share/g/168PfgAL1G/?mibextid=wwXIfr and for the evidence from the Obed Spill into the Athabasca River so much evidence from the catastrophes of the mining industry in the past. I have attached research as Erik Fisher asks for it. The receptionist does not know what cumulative effects are and never heard of the joint panel review on Grassy Mountain. Not all are university educated but hopefully they would have some questions about this. https://cape.ca/tailings-ponds-health-impacts/ Evidence he is not aware of this ‘and poses a grave’ danger to his constituents; Century-long records reveal slight, ecoregion-localized changes in Athabasca River flows Stewart B. Rood,* Geoff W. Stupple and Karen M. Gill here
A quote “considerable scientific study and the implementation of an extensive environmental monitoring programme, this river has become a sentinel system to investigate cumulative hydrological and ecological impacts from climate change and human industrial activities in northern North America. However, particularly, because of the limited hydro- logic record for the Athabasca River near Fort McMurray and the oil-sands deposits, the prior studies have largely been restricted to recent decades or up to a half-century.” P29 in Hydrological processes (2015). Sent him a scathing letter request to confirm he would confirm his conviction to being a “leader in clean energy production, both in conventional and diversified energy…” Mr. Garth Roswell by saying that your concerns are that;
In standing for real environmental advocacy, it was important to me to see firsthand the plans for the Northback Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Going ahead with mining in this circumstance will make the environment there cleaner, by removing waste and stopping contaminants from being leached into the water.” You are taking a misinformed step that would be detrimental to our lives. Thanks for sharing this information regarding the sentinel river Athabasca River.
The type of mining on the Athabasca is completely different to what's being proposed at Grassy. One is tar sands as a massive scale, one is a small open pit coal mine. Comparing their emissions is like saying you should drive a small car because of the emissions of an A380.
It's clear that you don't know what you're talking about and citing one or two articles is not science, or debate.
Thanks for sharing you are wonderful with your own words here is an example historical extraction from the oil sands which caused tailings ponds to leak, which was the reason for the spill but according to some other information you are withholding it is almost “nonexistent.” The correct spelling by the way.
Well this man comes across as a someone who uses words well he just hasn’t got a clue what they mean. And if he does know what they mean then he’s a flat out liar. Isn’t it funny how the Right in Canada and the USA have become the Liars Party. That seems to be the only thing that ever comes out of their mouths.
And this man is a freaking moron. Hell, one of the mines in BC has spent millions of dollars over the years to stop selenium polluting the surrounding waters, using every latest method that pops up. The now shuttered mine is still leaking!
No, you are misinformed. Grassy Mountain was clearly rejected two years by the AER. Brian Jean interfered in what was supposed to be an independent process. All the UCP MLA's have been told to direct any constituents with concerns about coal mining to Brian Jean's office. How do I know? I phoned them and was told where to go (fairly rudely by one receptionist). Rowswell is clearly misinformed about the ability of mining companies to mitigate or reverse pollution from mining in the air and water, their ability to contain polluted water and the damage to soil, as well as the quantities of water they require (from the watershed that feeds semi-arid southern Alberta) that would then not be available for irrigation ($14 billion agri-food industry), First Nations and municipalities. I could send him, and you, reams of documentation but then you would have to read it.
Come out to Pincher Creek Saturday morning 6-9, Seeds café if you'd rather hear it from the locals. CBC Daybreak will be chatting with local guests, ranchers, a Pikaani Nation member, artists...
I would love to see the reams of documents that shows Grasy mountain using so much water that it would not be available for irrigation.
People say coal mines will take water away from Alberta farmers and threaten the province’s $14 billion agri-food industry. But that doesn’t hold up when you look at the numbers.
Take the Grassy Mountain project, for example. In its last application, It applied for 600,000 cubic metres of water per year. Sounds like a lot — until you realize Alberta’s irrigation sector uses over 2 trillion litres of water annually. That’s more than 3,000 times what the mine asked for.
Plus, mines can’t just take water whenever they want. Alberta has a strict licensing system. Farmers and other senior users get first rights, and mines have to prove their use won’t harm the system. In many cases, the water used at mines is recycled or treated and returned to the watershed.
So yes, water is a serious issue in southern Alberta. But the idea that a mine like Grassy would dry up the farms? That’s just not backed by the facts.
Some reading to give an idea of just how much water we have. Water for coal is consumptive; it doesn't get treated and re-used like municipal water. Nor does irrigation water- it leaves the area in the form of produce- a much better deal for the economy than water going into cheap coal.
The Palliser’s Triangle covering southern Alberta and Saskatchewan is the driest region of Canada and was once thought uninhabitable. Modern engineering has turned this region into Canada’s bread basket, contributing $1.3 billion annually to the Canadian gross domestic product. This engineering, however, is heavily reliant on water supply.
The agriculture industry in Alberta is responsible for around 45 per cent of Alberta’s overall water use. A staggering 70 per cent of the water in the Saskatchewan River basin is allocated to agriculture.
Despite growing water efficiencies, agricultural users still remove water from the system for longer periods of time than municipal or residential users, resulting in a greater impact on the environment. Indeed, factoring in per-capita use across all sectors shoots the litres of water used per day across Canada up from 220 to more than 400 litres.
These are unsustainable levels of water use and Alberta in particular is challenged by diminishing water supply and increasing
Water is treated but not returned to a watershed. Not sure if you are interested in backing that up since they need to make it official or are you implying this is the way it is. Apparently you are the same person who thinks this is a beautiful picture (an open pit coal mine) on your FB page and you love clean water and air. You have been flagged for how many times you have received a request to stop your bullying.
It’s always telling when political opponents resort to emotional outbursts instead of arguments. The rant above is a prime example—full of outrage, contradictions, and vague accusations, but completely devoid of substance. It claims Rowswell is uninformed yet provides no examples of what he’s supposedly ignorant about. It suggests that even if he is informed, he must be “muzzled” by his party, implying that no one could possibly hold his views in good faith. And naturally, it concludes that if he had any integrity, he would step down. Because, apparently, integrity now means agreeing with the person writing the rant.
The irony is hard to miss. If all politicians who hold a different opinion should resign, then only those who lack integrity would remain in office. That’s an interesting standard to set. It’s also an easy way to avoid the hard work of engaging with opposing viewpoints. Why debate when you can just dismiss?
Instead of presenting a counterargument, the message calls for a “phone blitz” to harass Rowswell’s office. That’s not engagement, that’s just noise. The whole thing reads like an exercise in projection—accusing politicians of being uninformed while refusing to offer anything resembling a fact-based critique.
And of course, no weak political rant is complete without the obligatory “drinking the Kool-Aid” insult. Because if you can’t be bothered to articulate why someone is wrong, just throw in a cliché and call it a day. If there’s a real issue with Rowswell’s position, make the case. Otherwise, this is just another example of how unserious political discourse has become.
The resource extraction industry in Alberta, be it oil and gas, heavy oil mining or coal mining do not have a great reputation for being environmentally conscious or very good at reclamation or remediation.
The largest toxic spill to that time into a North American river occurred in 2013 when an abandoned coal tailings containmment pond failed and sent millions of litres of toxic materials into the Athabasca River.
An event like that in the Saskatchewan river basin would be catastrophic for the water supply of Prairie towns and irrigation districts in Southern Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Down stream of the 2013 Obed spill the Athabasca is not used for irrigation and the Basin has a much smaller population than the South Saskatchewan.
That said, rare cancers at a higher than normal rate in humans and also deformed fish have been found around Ft Chip.
Toxic leaks from oilsand containment ponds have gone unreported for long periods of time.
The number and cost to remediate orphan and abandoned wells is said to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
Fracking has caused the destruction of many potable groundwater sources.
The subsurface of Alberta has been "carpet bombed" by fracking.
Earthquakes are common.
The cost of the eventual cleanup of the aforementioned oilsand containment ponds is astronomical.
The Lougheed Alberta Progressive Conservative government, in its wisdom, brought in the Eastern Slopes policy which restricted Coal mining and other resource extraction noting the aridity of the basin and the fact that major cities' water supply would be affected.
The UCP government tried to reverse that policy with the present Minister of Energy even writing a letter in opposition to the change in policy.
He has since has a complete change of heart for some reason.
A cynic might suspect for financial reasons.
There are no known reliable containment or remedial measures for selenium and other heavy metal contaminants otherwise they would have been used in the Elk River coaling areas by Teck Resources across the mountains in BC.
The people of the Saskatchewan River Basin do not need or want to risk having polluting coal mining in the headwaters of their water supply irrespective of the flim flam arguments of resource engineers who are here today and gone tomorrow like "dead beat dads" leaving orphan wells and leaking containment ponds.
The 2013 Obed Mountain coal mine spill was widely hyped as an environmental disaster, but long-term effects have been non-existant. While the initial release of coal slurry caused short-term water contamination and increased sediment levels, water quality returned to normal within weeks, and aquatic life showed little lasting impact. Concerns over sediment contamination were addressed through stabilization and remediation efforts, and ongoing monitoring has found no significant long-term harm. In the end, the spill was more of a regulatory and political issue than an enduring environmental catastrophe.
The Grassy Mountain project did not have tailings facilities in its previous plan, as the water from the coal plant was dried and co-dumped with waste a far better outcome.
Elk Valley Resources has implemented selenium reduction technologies, notably Saturated Rock Fill (SRF), which has demonstrated up to 92% selenium removal in treated water. While selenium continues to be transported downstream over 575 km, a 2023 study did not observe selenium levels that pose a risk to aquatic life. Despite increased selenium concentrations in some areas, no measured ecological effects have been reported. This highlights that while exceedance levels may trigger concern, they remain well below thresholds where actual harm occurs. Ongoing monitoring confirms that mitigation efforts are working, and no measurable impacts to aquatic life have been documented.
Stop hyperventilating - do some research (not the CBC, not the Narwhal) and understand Selenium.
The AER's mandate is to provide for the efficient, safe, orderly and environmentally responsible development of energy resources in Alberta through the regulation of energy resource activities in accordance with energy resource enactments and the regulations.
Despite the common myth, the 1976 Coal Development Policy was never a conservation policy — it was a coal development policy. It divided land into categories to manage where and how coal projects could move forward, aiming to balance development with other land uses, not stop it. REDA (the Responsible Energy Development Act) reinforces that the AER’s job is to regulate development, not make or interpret policy. It follows the government’s direction. So both the 1976 Policy and REDA are about enabling responsible resource development — not blocking it.
Even the NDP confirmed that open pit mining could be done on Cat 2 Land.
Do you have any ideas on how the AER could work better at ensuring successful outcomes?
Who is paying me? My shares in oil, gas, coal (met), uranium, gold, silver, but my lithium shares have taken a beating.
We need mining, why can't we work together to ensure it's done well?
Good luck with those shares as oil and gas companies and mining industries are getting sued. Well how well do you work out these days when you have no idea if the coal and buck stops at your door? Perhaps we can work together to stop these mines and whether or not you want to pick a fight with me you can guarantee I won’t be told by your coal fired enthusiastic dust cloud brain I don’t know what I am talking about https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/alberta-first-nation-province-court-oilsands-cleanup
Thanks again for the post from @Pietrowislon and @lauramyers the latter I know from many opportunities to engage with Protect Alberta’s Rockies and Headwaters https://www.facebook.com/share/g/168PfgAL1G/?mibextid=wwXIfr and for the evidence from the Obed Spill into the Athabasca River so much evidence from the catastrophes of the mining industry in the past. I have attached research as Erik Fisher asks for it. The receptionist does not know what cumulative effects are and never heard of the joint panel review on Grassy Mountain. Not all are university educated but hopefully they would have some questions about this. https://cape.ca/tailings-ponds-health-impacts/ Evidence he is not aware of this ‘and poses a grave’ danger to his constituents; Century-long records reveal slight, ecoregion-localized changes in Athabasca River flows Stewart B. Rood,* Geoff W. Stupple and Karen M. Gill here
https://scholar.ulethbridge.ca/sites/default/files/rood/files/rood_et_al_2015_athabasca.pdf?m=1569600981
A quote “considerable scientific study and the implementation of an extensive environmental monitoring programme, this river has become a sentinel system to investigate cumulative hydrological and ecological impacts from climate change and human industrial activities in northern North America. However, particularly, because of the limited hydro- logic record for the Athabasca River near Fort McMurray and the oil-sands deposits, the prior studies have largely been restricted to recent decades or up to a half-century.” P29 in Hydrological processes (2015). Sent him a scathing letter request to confirm he would confirm his conviction to being a “leader in clean energy production, both in conventional and diversified energy…” Mr. Garth Roswell by saying that your concerns are that;
In standing for real environmental advocacy, it was important to me to see firsthand the plans for the Northback Grassy Mountain Coal Project. Going ahead with mining in this circumstance will make the environment there cleaner, by removing waste and stopping contaminants from being leached into the water.” You are taking a misinformed step that would be detrimental to our lives. Thanks for sharing this information regarding the sentinel river Athabasca River.
The type of mining on the Athabasca is completely different to what's being proposed at Grassy. One is tar sands as a massive scale, one is a small open pit coal mine. Comparing their emissions is like saying you should drive a small car because of the emissions of an A380.
It's clear that you don't know what you're talking about and citing one or two articles is not science, or debate.
So signs of corruption is what you are talking about you spoke about the OBED spill from the coal mine as “non-existant” correction on your speaking of not knowing what you are talking about you can’t spell. Here is the evidence https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-athabasca-fort-chipewyan-files-lawsuit-accusing-alberta-of-ignoring/
Thanks for sharing you are wonderful with your own words here is an example historical extraction from the oil sands which caused tailings ponds to leak, which was the reason for the spill but according to some other information you are withholding it is almost “nonexistent.” The correct spelling by the way.
I sent a blazing letter of dissent. He should step down. He's not even close to doing his due diligence.
Well this man comes across as a someone who uses words well he just hasn’t got a clue what they mean. And if he does know what they mean then he’s a flat out liar. Isn’t it funny how the Right in Canada and the USA have become the Liars Party. That seems to be the only thing that ever comes out of their mouths.
And this man is a freaking moron. Hell, one of the mines in BC has spent millions of dollars over the years to stop selenium polluting the surrounding waters, using every latest method that pops up. The now shuttered mine is still leaking!
So if someone says something, and they don't know what the words mean, they can't be a liar?
Somehow that makes sense.
No, you are misinformed. Grassy Mountain was clearly rejected two years by the AER. Brian Jean interfered in what was supposed to be an independent process. All the UCP MLA's have been told to direct any constituents with concerns about coal mining to Brian Jean's office. How do I know? I phoned them and was told where to go (fairly rudely by one receptionist). Rowswell is clearly misinformed about the ability of mining companies to mitigate or reverse pollution from mining in the air and water, their ability to contain polluted water and the damage to soil, as well as the quantities of water they require (from the watershed that feeds semi-arid southern Alberta) that would then not be available for irrigation ($14 billion agri-food industry), First Nations and municipalities. I could send him, and you, reams of documentation but then you would have to read it.
Come out to Pincher Creek Saturday morning 6-9, Seeds café if you'd rather hear it from the locals. CBC Daybreak will be chatting with local guests, ranchers, a Pikaani Nation member, artists...
I would love to see the reams of documents that shows Grasy mountain using so much water that it would not be available for irrigation.
People say coal mines will take water away from Alberta farmers and threaten the province’s $14 billion agri-food industry. But that doesn’t hold up when you look at the numbers.
Take the Grassy Mountain project, for example. In its last application, It applied for 600,000 cubic metres of water per year. Sounds like a lot — until you realize Alberta’s irrigation sector uses over 2 trillion litres of water annually. That’s more than 3,000 times what the mine asked for.
Plus, mines can’t just take water whenever they want. Alberta has a strict licensing system. Farmers and other senior users get first rights, and mines have to prove their use won’t harm the system. In many cases, the water used at mines is recycled or treated and returned to the watershed.
So yes, water is a serious issue in southern Alberta. But the idea that a mine like Grassy would dry up the farms? That’s just not backed by the facts.
Some reading to give an idea of just how much water we have. Water for coal is consumptive; it doesn't get treated and re-used like municipal water. Nor does irrigation water- it leaves the area in the form of produce- a much better deal for the economy than water going into cheap coal.
The Palliser’s Triangle covering southern Alberta and Saskatchewan is the driest region of Canada and was once thought uninhabitable. Modern engineering has turned this region into Canada’s bread basket, contributing $1.3 billion annually to the Canadian gross domestic product. This engineering, however, is heavily reliant on water supply.
The agriculture industry in Alberta is responsible for around 45 per cent of Alberta’s overall water use. A staggering 70 per cent of the water in the Saskatchewan River basin is allocated to agriculture.
Despite growing water efficiencies, agricultural users still remove water from the system for longer periods of time than municipal or residential users, resulting in a greater impact on the environment. Indeed, factoring in per-capita use across all sectors shoots the litres of water used per day across Canada up from 220 to more than 400 litres.
These are unsustainable levels of water use and Alberta in particular is challenged by diminishing water supply and increasing
https://smartwatermagazine.com/blogs/tricia-stadnyk/canadas-water-governance-and-management-systems-threaten-countrys-water-supplydrought.https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/in-this-drought-year-alberta-s-water-allocation-is-under-the-microscope-here-s-what-the-data-says-1.7133575
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-government-water-use-coal-oldman-reservoir-1.5826994
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-tailings-pond-at-a-coal-mine-in-the-Alberta-Rockies-Credit-Alberta-Energy-Regulator_fig1_323931472
Water is treated but not returned to a watershed. Not sure if you are interested in backing that up since they need to make it official or are you implying this is the way it is. Apparently you are the same person who thinks this is a beautiful picture (an open pit coal mine) on your FB page and you love clean water and air. You have been flagged for how many times you have received a request to stop your bullying.
It’s always telling when political opponents resort to emotional outbursts instead of arguments. The rant above is a prime example—full of outrage, contradictions, and vague accusations, but completely devoid of substance. It claims Rowswell is uninformed yet provides no examples of what he’s supposedly ignorant about. It suggests that even if he is informed, he must be “muzzled” by his party, implying that no one could possibly hold his views in good faith. And naturally, it concludes that if he had any integrity, he would step down. Because, apparently, integrity now means agreeing with the person writing the rant.
The irony is hard to miss. If all politicians who hold a different opinion should resign, then only those who lack integrity would remain in office. That’s an interesting standard to set. It’s also an easy way to avoid the hard work of engaging with opposing viewpoints. Why debate when you can just dismiss?
Instead of presenting a counterargument, the message calls for a “phone blitz” to harass Rowswell’s office. That’s not engagement, that’s just noise. The whole thing reads like an exercise in projection—accusing politicians of being uninformed while refusing to offer anything resembling a fact-based critique.
And of course, no weak political rant is complete without the obligatory “drinking the Kool-Aid” insult. Because if you can’t be bothered to articulate why someone is wrong, just throw in a cliché and call it a day. If there’s a real issue with Rowswell’s position, make the case. Otherwise, this is just another example of how unserious political discourse has become.
The resource extraction industry in Alberta, be it oil and gas, heavy oil mining or coal mining do not have a great reputation for being environmentally conscious or very good at reclamation or remediation.
The largest toxic spill to that time into a North American river occurred in 2013 when an abandoned coal tailings containmment pond failed and sent millions of litres of toxic materials into the Athabasca River.
An event like that in the Saskatchewan river basin would be catastrophic for the water supply of Prairie towns and irrigation districts in Southern Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Down stream of the 2013 Obed spill the Athabasca is not used for irrigation and the Basin has a much smaller population than the South Saskatchewan.
That said, rare cancers at a higher than normal rate in humans and also deformed fish have been found around Ft Chip.
Toxic leaks from oilsand containment ponds have gone unreported for long periods of time.
The number and cost to remediate orphan and abandoned wells is said to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
Fracking has caused the destruction of many potable groundwater sources.
The subsurface of Alberta has been "carpet bombed" by fracking.
Earthquakes are common.
The cost of the eventual cleanup of the aforementioned oilsand containment ponds is astronomical.
The Lougheed Alberta Progressive Conservative government, in its wisdom, brought in the Eastern Slopes policy which restricted Coal mining and other resource extraction noting the aridity of the basin and the fact that major cities' water supply would be affected.
The UCP government tried to reverse that policy with the present Minister of Energy even writing a letter in opposition to the change in policy.
He has since has a complete change of heart for some reason.
A cynic might suspect for financial reasons.
There are no known reliable containment or remedial measures for selenium and other heavy metal contaminants otherwise they would have been used in the Elk River coaling areas by Teck Resources across the mountains in BC.
The people of the Saskatchewan River Basin do not need or want to risk having polluting coal mining in the headwaters of their water supply irrespective of the flim flam arguments of resource engineers who are here today and gone tomorrow like "dead beat dads" leaving orphan wells and leaking containment ponds.
The 2013 Obed Mountain coal mine spill was widely hyped as an environmental disaster, but long-term effects have been non-existant. While the initial release of coal slurry caused short-term water contamination and increased sediment levels, water quality returned to normal within weeks, and aquatic life showed little lasting impact. Concerns over sediment contamination were addressed through stabilization and remediation efforts, and ongoing monitoring has found no significant long-term harm. In the end, the spill was more of a regulatory and political issue than an enduring environmental catastrophe.
The Grassy Mountain project did not have tailings facilities in its previous plan, as the water from the coal plant was dried and co-dumped with waste a far better outcome.
Elk Valley Resources has implemented selenium reduction technologies, notably Saturated Rock Fill (SRF), which has demonstrated up to 92% selenium removal in treated water. While selenium continues to be transported downstream over 575 km, a 2023 study did not observe selenium levels that pose a risk to aquatic life. Despite increased selenium concentrations in some areas, no measured ecological effects have been reported. This highlights that while exceedance levels may trigger concern, they remain well below thresholds where actual harm occurs. Ongoing monitoring confirms that mitigation efforts are working, and no measurable impacts to aquatic life have been documented.
Stop hyperventilating - do some research (not the CBC, not the Narwhal) and understand Selenium.
If industry controls the environmental monitoring process and colludes with government then industry is going to present the results it requires.
The AER has changed its name several times over the years, in one case because of spying on citizens opposing a project.
Who is paying you Erik?
The AER's mandate is to provide for the efficient, safe, orderly and environmentally responsible development of energy resources in Alberta through the regulation of energy resource activities in accordance with energy resource enactments and the regulations.
Despite the common myth, the 1976 Coal Development Policy was never a conservation policy — it was a coal development policy. It divided land into categories to manage where and how coal projects could move forward, aiming to balance development with other land uses, not stop it. REDA (the Responsible Energy Development Act) reinforces that the AER’s job is to regulate development, not make or interpret policy. It follows the government’s direction. So both the 1976 Policy and REDA are about enabling responsible resource development — not blocking it.
Even the NDP confirmed that open pit mining could be done on Cat 2 Land.
Do you have any ideas on how the AER could work better at ensuring successful outcomes?
Who is paying me? My shares in oil, gas, coal (met), uranium, gold, silver, but my lithium shares have taken a beating.
We need mining, why can't we work together to ensure it's done well?
Good luck with those shares as oil and gas companies and mining industries are getting sued. Well how well do you work out these days when you have no idea if the coal and buck stops at your door? Perhaps we can work together to stop these mines and whether or not you want to pick a fight with me you can guarantee I won’t be told by your coal fired enthusiastic dust cloud brain I don’t know what I am talking about https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/alberta-first-nation-province-court-oilsands-cleanup
We can easily stop these mines.
Stop using oil, coal, and gas.