UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA
Environmental Considerations Early in the Tenure Process for BC Energy Development
ADMN 598 Advanced Management Report School of Public Administration Submitted by: Fiona MacRaild
April 27, 2010
This Policy Report is a mapping of expert opinions in the BC Public Service with regard to the current effectiveness of land use planning, early industry reconnaissance activities, siting decisions and tenure application processes. It explores possible ways in which environmental considerations can play a more valuable role in these early decision-making processes. The Report is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Public Administration.
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...3 1. INTRODUCTION...6 2. BACKGROUND...8 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...19 4. LITERATURE REVIEW...24
5. OPINION RESEARCH SURVEY...28
6. OPINION RESEARCH INTERVIEWS...37
7. CONCLUSIONS...40
8. RECOMMENDATIONS...45
9. REFERENCES...48
10. APPENDICES...51
Appendix 1 - Tenure Sale Process Flowchart for Oil and Gas...52
Appendix 2 - Tenure/Permit Types Associated with IPP Projects...53
Appendix 3 - Script for Initial Contact...58
Appendix 4 - Letter of Information for Implied Consent (survey participants)... 59
Appendix 5 - Participant Consent Form (for interviewees)...63
Appendix 6 - Survey Statistics...67
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Objectives
The purpose of this report is to research, analyze and report on the concerns and opinions of the tenure and environmental experts in the BC Public Service with regard to
identifying opportunities for environmental considerations early in the tenure1 process for energy development.
The key research question that this report focused on is: Can we further the Province's stated commitment to environmental values by improving the way in which environmental concerns are considered early in the tenure process for BC energy projects?
Methodology
To fulfill this research objective the research first reviewed jurisdictional processes, both within and beyond BC, that have attempted to place environmental values ahead of energy potential in the siting of land tenure for energy exploration and development. Then, a broad survey was distributed to identify the policy problem areas to
approximately 40 tenure and environmental experts at the BC Ministries of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (EMPR), Agriculture and Lands (MAL) and Environment (MOE).
Finally, six individual interviews (2 participants from each Ministry) were conducted to discuss possible solutions and recommendations to this problem, as they perceive it. Key Findings
Literature Review
In reviewing the tenure systems for waterpower and wind power throughout the United States (US), there were two key characteristics of this kind of energy development that every jurisdiction tried to grapple with: a “blank canvas” of planning and tenure systems, and the evolving knowledge and management of environmental impacts as they become known.
Whereas the review of tenure systems for oil and gas throughout Canada and the United States revealed two unique characteristics of this kind of energy development: the financial stakes are very high for both industry and government, and as resource 1 For the purpose of this report, "tenure" is broadly defined as exclusive, time‐limited (3‐10 years usually) Crown land rights. The rights are conditional and obligate the lessee to conduct work, pay rent and/or royalties on production.. The rights may be for surface area only, include rights to all depths under a specific area or just to certain geological formations..
exploration and development covers a greater and greater percentage of the land base, identifying, measuring and mitigating for cumulative effects is superceding a
conventional system that is defined by project-by-project approvals. Opinion Research Survey
The overall focus of the survey was to explore the opinions of tenure and environmental experts within the BC Public Service as to where they feel there are problems with the early decision-making processes of energy development.
Clearly the top concern amongst the Province's tenure and environmental experts is management of the overall cumulative impacts of energy development. This concern indicates that the experts feel the Province may be developing energy either too fast, in too fragmented a way, or both. The key message was that the Province needs to bring the strategic planning of these developments "up a notch", to a provincial-level strategy for energy development.
Opinion Research Interviews
There were two areas where all interviewees agreed BC has done a fairly good job: land use planning and available land data.
For land use planning, it was unanimously felt that the most significant benefit to come from this huge government investment over the last 20 years or so is the culture and expectation of stakeholders working together in a process of compromise to find common ground, not necessarily the end product of more and more completed plans.
As for natural resource data, interviewees pointed out that we have what we need for a comprehensive cumulative effects management system; we just lack the political direction and framework.
There was clear messaging that the problem lies not in more land use planning or more land data, but in pulling together what we have and using it more effectively. Ideas like routine information-sharing between tenure decision-makers and environmental experts, continuing to develop a culture of people working together to find compromises and solutions, providing a framework so the data we have can measure and manage
cumulative impacts – these are the ideas that will propel us into the next level of natural resource management.
Conclusions
The overall weakness of the tenure systems for BC’s energy development is its orientation to individual projects. Environmental impacts are considered on a case by case, proposal by proposal basis but there is a need to stand back a bit and look at the
cumulative impacts of many projects and determine if there is too much pressure on the land base. In the case of accelerated activity, a mechanism is needed to consider
environmental impacts at a much larger scale and have a metric to measure the cumulative effects of all the activities.
Many of the opinions expressed in the survey and in the interviews are good ideas but are impractical, if not impossible, to implement because the needed resources are just not there given the current fiscal restraints facing the Province. This exposes an inherent flaw in the research design. It is not enough to just analyze the opinions and make inferences from them to support recommendations for improvements in the way in which
environmental concerns are considered early in the tenure process for BC energy projects. The opinions need to be considered in the light of BC’s economic realities and other global influences, such as shrinking bureaucratic capacity for systems management and a growing public awareness and concern for protecting ecological capital, before they can be shaped into recommendations.
The most interesting idea (and the most obvious one) is the cause and effect relationship that links the concern with cumulative effects with the pace of development. The experts involved in this research project agree that currently we do not seem to have a balanced approach. The perception from those who know the reality the best, is that the pace of energy development is happening too fast to give the Province time to measure and determine mitigation strategies for cumulative effects on the land base.
Recommendations
There are three overall recommendations, but they reflect a paradigm shift from current and historical principles that underpin the tenure systems for energy development in BC. 1. Apply a specific and pre-determined time paradigm to resource coordination, coordination of authorizations and land use planning. Set a maximum limit of land use activity not just over a defined spatial system but over a defined timeframe as well. In other words, adopt a “phased approach” to energy development.
2. Apply a policy framework shift toward multiple points of decision-making. It lowers the risks and the tensions for all stakeholders involved, because it increases the meaningfulness of dialogue and genuinely motivates finding common objectives. 3. Shift all aspects of energy development, both in tenure systems and environmental assessments, up a level to consider cumulative impacts on the land base from all activities. Ten years ago it may have been adequate to consider energy development on a project-by-project basis, but that is no longer a sufficient framework for decision-making.
1. INTRODUCTION
The government of British Columbia (Province) has actively held up as one of its Great Goals (British Columbia, Premier's Office, 2006) to lead the world in sustainable environmental management, with the best air and water quality, and the best fisheries management, bar none. At the same time the Province's commitment to economic growth is stated in another of the Great Goals; to create more jobs per capita than anywhere else in Canada. Energy exploration and development, in a province rich in natural resources, is a key part of that commitment to economic growth.
However, the interface of energy development with environmental values, particularly leading up to siting decisions, has had as a primary driver the energy-producing potential of available lands. This leaves environmental mitigation strategies as important but secondary considerations. This interface of values has created considerable friction between the Province, industry and citizens. For example:
• Among other demonstrations of protest, 300 people marched in Fernie
(population is roughly 5,000) to protest British Petroleum’s proposed coalbed methane project in the Crowsnest Coalfield in south east BC (April 2008), the pressure of cumulative protests eventually resulted in a promise from the March 2010 British Columbia (BC) Throne Speech of a ban on oil and gas development in this area
• Protesters organized an internet campaign event (“10,000 Voices”) through Twitter, Facebook and e-mail, demanding a moratorium on private hydro power projects, to influence politicians during the May 2009 provincial election
• 900 people protested the proposed Glacier/Howser Independent Power Production (IPP) project in Kaslo in June 2009
The protests reflect concerns that energy development projects, even those involving renewable energy sources, can impose considerable damage to river ecosystems, roads and power lines, interfere with important wilderness areas, and also, in the case of Independent Power Producers (IPPs), undermine public control over power supply. Yet interest in BC’s rich potential for energy development has been increasing year after year because of new technologies that access previously inaccessible sources, such as subsurface natural gas, and a surge of investment interest in renewable energy sources. As industry explores for these resources, they are venturing into land bases and
communities that are unaccustomed to energy exploration techniques and processes. Quite reasonably, these communities are concerned about the compromise of sensitive landscapes and the cost to environmental values.
The purpose of this report is to research, analyze and report on the concerns and opinions of the tenure and environmental experts in the BC Public Service with regard to
identifying opportunities for environmental considerations early in the tenure2 process for energy development. To fulfill this research objective the research first reviewed
jurisdictional processes, both within and beyond BC, that have attempted to place environmental values ahead of energy potential in the siting of land tenure for energy exploration and development. Then, a broad survey was distributed to identify the policy problem areas to approximately 40 tenure and environmental experts at the BC Ministries of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (EMPR), Agriculture and Lands (MAL) and Environment (MOE). Finally, six individual interviews (2 participants from each
Ministry) were conducted to discuss possible solutions and recommendations to this problem, as they perceive it.
The key research question that this report focused on is: Can we further the Province's stated commitment to environmental values by improving the way in which environmental concerns are considered early in the tenure process for BC energy projects?
The results of this study, once the Examination Panel at the School of Public
Administration at the University of Victoria has accepted them, will be shared with others in the following ways:
• An electronic copy of the report and a 12-slide PowerPoint deck on the Executive Summary of the report will be made available to all participants
• Both a hard copy and electronic copy of the report, and a 12-slide PowerPoint deck on the Executive Summary, will be provided to interested Assistant Deputy Ministers of MOE, EMPR and MAL
2 For the purpose of this report, "tenure" is broadly defined as spatially defined, time‐limited Crown land
rights to explore for and exploit natural resources for commercial purposes.
2. BACKGROUND
This section provides a discussion of two examples that illustrate where BC energy development is perceived as having a significant negative effect on species and ecosystems of conservation concern. It will also describe the client, the scope of the research, a summarized history of land use planning in BC as well as explanations of tenures in BC and the regulatory framework under which they are issued in BC.
2.1 The Problem: Two Examples
2.1.1. Shale gas development in the northeast
The story of the Horn River Basin has been one of the Province’s highest profile examples of this problem, with many of the participants of this research project using it as a specific example (in their comments throughout the survey and during interviews) where the Province's economic priorities were perceived by many to take precedence over all other values.
With the development of new horizontal drilling technology, previously inaccessible natural gas trapped in tight and shale rocks can now be exploited. The Province received record-breaking tenures sales revenue of $2.4 billion in the 2008-09 fiscal year alone (British Columbia, EMPR, 2008). For relative comparison, the previous fiscal year saw a record-breaking $1.2 billion - half of the revenues of 2008/09. Yet, tension continues to mount between the tenure holders and the Province as these time-limited development projects are experiencing significant delays because of wildlife and water concerns that were not formally considered before tenure was issued.
There are a number of contributing factors that could not have been anticipated by anyone, such as impacts of climate changes that have left the caribou populations in this area considerably compromised (Batycki, 2005) and the sudden price hike of oil and gas in 2008 that caused a land rush of bids from companies eager to secure tenure in this new shale gas development.
However, there may have been a few factors the Province could have considered in this land rush of sales. For example, lessons could have been learned from Texas as they are ahead of BC in this relatively new shale gas development and have had similar
experiences, particularly with too much land being sold at once and the enormous environmental challenge associated with the short-term water use required for fracturing this tight rock (Theodori, 2008). Instead of holding off on issuing tenures until concerns like these could be researched and compensated for in the planning and management of this new resources, the Province went forward with tenure issuance on very large tracts of
land, trusting that the regulatory framework that was established for conventional resources would be sufficient to address any unanticipated environmental concerns. 2.1.2. Independent Power Production
A further example is the rapidly expanding number of Independent Power Producers (IPPs) who are proposing run-of-the-river projects on the river systems of BC and electricity from wind farms. This is an interesting juxtaposition of values, as these are considered truly renewable sources of energy yet their perceived cumulative impacts on sensitive wildlife, fisheries and special landscapes has prompted significant negative resistance and criticism from environmental organizations and the general public.
Despite their being a “clean, renewable” energy source, there have been political calls for a moratorium on Independent Power Producers. Once generating, they do not produce much in the way greenhouse gas emissions, but their siting, in generally pristine wilderness, has citizens increasingly upset with the environmental impacts of roads, infrastructure, hydro lines and diverted waters from the rivers.
The dialogue of these protests is not about mitigating the impacts and compensating for them. Citizens want energy development to focus more on avoiding the environmental impacts in the first place. These protests cause expensive delays for generally
conscientious proponents who are meeting, and in some cases exceeding, stated
government tenure expectations. The perceived area of weakness, from both an energy development point of view as well as an environmental point of view, is in the Crown land tenure regimes (West Coast Environmental Law, 2009). The perception is that tenure is being granted without due concern for overall cumulative environmental impacts, that those environmental considerations that are measured are done so in an inconsistent way, that there is no formal process to eliminate or defer inappropriate sites for energy development, and that costs of acquiring tenure are generally too low.
2.2 Client
The client for this report is Ms. Linda Bates, currently the Manager of Legislative and Strategic Support at MAL and most recently Acting Director of Business Development Branch at EMPR. Throughout 2009 she led the development of the terms of reference for an overall Mitigation Policy for BC that will establish a common cross-government environmental mitigation philosophy and approach. With her advice and guidance, this report was designed to be a complement to that work. The research was intended to offer recommendations based on the insights gained with regard to the general strengths and weaknesses of environmental considerations in early stages of tenure.
The Mitigation Policy is one of a number of initiatives that the Province is undertaking to encourage collaborative efforts among energy producers (both in the oil and gas sector, as well as the IPP sector) to reduce their environmental footprint and collectively achieve a higher standard of environmental outcomes. The concept is loosely based on the United State's federal Fish and Wildlife Service Mitigation Policy that was established in 1981 and revised in 1993. Overarching mitigation policies like this are designed to provide guidance to government staff in providing consistent recommendations to protect
environmental resources by identifying resource categories, defining designation criteria and defining a mitigation goal for each resource category. It also helps energy producers anticipate those consistent recommendations and incorporate them into the early stages of the planning process (United States, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993).
2.3 Scope of Research
The type of tenures that this report focuses on is oil and gas tenures and IPP tenures because, by and large, they are regarded as the most controversial tenures. Although the research would have been made easier by concentrating on one system or the other (as they are quite different) there was a perception amongst the research supervisor and the client that there would be considerable benefit in comparing their strengths and
weaknesses.
In general terms, the oil and gas tenure system is a complex, comprehensive system that has been tried, tested and modified over many decades to achieve a balance of rights and responsibilities. The province is divided into a grid system with thresholds of activity in each “block”. The primary driver in the issuance of these tenures is a monthly auction sale of sealed bids to achieve the highest possible price for each parcel for the Crown. On the other hand, the IPP tenure system is purported by government to be more streamlined (even though it involves a higher number of regulatory agencies; see Appendix 2). It is based on individual applications and is described as a relatively modern system that attempts to accommodate current issues such as increased consultation requirements and increasingly thorough environmental reviews. Focusing on the earliest pre-tenure stages, as opposed to other stages of the tenure process (both formal and informal) carries with it the assumption that pro-active planning, with regard to the siting of energy projects, gives the highest chance of
avoidance of negative environmental impacts, not just mitigation of environmental trade-offs. Exploring expert opinions about this area of high potential was felt to be the most effective way of providing relevant and practical recommendations to improve the system of tenure issuance for better environmental considerations for energy exploration and development.
This research is limited to the opinions of tenure and environmental experts within the BC Public Service for this initial research stage of problem identification and preliminary recommendations. Any subsequent research that may follow from this report (further studies or implementation strategies for the recommendations) will undoubtedly consult a broad range of stakeholders, both internal and external to government.
2.4 A Brief History of Land Use Planning in BC3
Over 20 years ago, in 1987, the Brundtland Commission report (“Our Common Future”) recommended that 12% of any given jurisdiction in BC should be protected, which is the same as the standard set by the United Nations. This came as a result of increasing environmental and economic pressures during the 1970s and 1980s, particularly in
regards to forestry, and set a cultural framework for BC to plan for land use. Over 95% of BC’s over 95 million hectares is publicly owned (“Crown land”) which is almost the same size as all of France and Germany combined. This was a significant undertaking for a relatively small population and government (in 2009, BC claimed a population of about 4.4 million – about 20% less than the population of Greater Toronto).
In 1991, the Commission on Resources and Environment (CORE) was created to develop a provincial land use strategy and to undertake regional land use planning. The primary purpose of this Commission was to build consensus amongst diverse perspectives and stakeholders and, during 1992 and 1994, it set up four regional planning tables across BC. Finding consensus proved more challenging than expected and CORE withdrew from the process of finding full consensus and finished the regional plans themselves. In 1995, a smaller scale of planning under the new Land Use Coordination Office (LUCO) replaced CORE. One of the primary purposes of their new Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMPs) was the restated goal of protecting 12% of a jurisdiction’s land base, established back in 1987.
In 2001, LUCO was eliminated and LRMP’s were placed under the direction of the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management. With the change in government in 2001, the focus shifted from achieving full consensus to working through a collaborative consultation, still seeking agreement, but within a defined timeframe. LRMP working groups consisted of individuals, First Nations, industry, interest groups, local
governments, and a variety of provincial government staff acting as technical advisors. 3 Almost the entirety of the facts presented in this section can be attributed to an article on the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada website called “British Columbia • Protected Areas • Lands and Regulations • Issues & Advocacy”, data accurate as of April 2008 [www.pdac.ca/pdac/advocacy/land‐use/pa‐bc.html]. These facts have been cross‐referenced with much Government of BC data sources and appear to be accurate.
In 2004, the responsibility of land use planning through the use of LRMPs was moved to the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands as part of the new Integrated Land Management Bureau (ILMB).
As of 2007, 24 land use plans had been completed and approved, two plan areas were underway, two were under consideration and two had not been started.
Theoretically, the eventual completion of the LRMP planning process will establish which lands are permanently protected and which lands are open to development in BC. Now, with the Province’s constrained resources to invest and a very large land base still to cover, the focus will likely only be on areas where economic drivers demonstrate a need to complete plans, which are usually done at an even finer scale than LRMPs, called the “sustainable resource management planning” process (SRMPs).
2.5 A Brief Explanation of Tenure in BC
In Canada, there is no federal body to administer a unified energy policy. Instead, there are a number of federal departments within Canada’s Ministry of Natural Resources that help co-ordinate with provincial and non-governmental authorities to promote issue-specific best practices for energy development.
Provincial governments have jurisdiction over the energy resources in their respective territories, with the exception of those located on federal lands and in offshore areas, which are managed federally. Provincial jurisdiction includes resources management within provincial boundaries, intra-provincial trade and commerce and intra-provincial environmental impacts.
2.5.1 Oil and Gas Tenure Rights4
B.C. manages oil and gas rights in a similar way as other western provinces. The private sector explores for, develops, and produces oil and gas through tenure agreements with the province. These agreements give time-restricted, conditional rights to specific areas, and may include rights to all depths, or may be restricted to certain geological formations. The province has not included subsurface rights in most land grants issued after 1891. As a result, the surface owners of property in BC rarely own underlying oil and gas rights, except in areas of early settlement such as Vancouver Island and the Fraser Valley.
4 The facts in this section are almost entirely from the “Oil and Gas Rights” webpage on the Oil and Gas
Titles, BC Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources website [www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Titles/OGTitles/Pages/PNGRightsinBC.aspx]
Typically, oil and gas tenure agreements are for three to 10 years and can be renewed or extended. They require exploration or development and they call for payment of rents and royalties to the Province. The province owns most of the oil and gas rights in BC, with small percentages privately owned or held by the federal government.
Three types of agreements are used in BC:
• Permits, carrying a time-limited obligation to conduct exploration;
• Drilling licences, conveying the exclusive right for permission to drill oil and gas wells in a defined area; and,
• Leases, allowing production, in addition to providing exclusive drilling rights. Permits and drilling licences are generally for larger tracts of land but parts of permits and drilling licences may be converted to smaller, long term leases if all obligations have been met. The remainders of the rights revert back to the province. Also, if the tenure holder does not meet the tenure commitments, all rights revert to the province.
The monthly public competitions for oil and gas rights, also called petroleum and natural gas rights (PNG rights) are held in the same manner as those in the other western
provinces. Prior to issuing tenures for oil and gas rights in the monthly competition, an oil and gas tenure review process is conducted. Proposed tenures are referred to other government ministries, regional districts, municipalities, First Nations and environmental organizations for comments. This review provides for early identification of access constraints and potential land use conflicts, including environmental concerns regarding ecosystems and wildlife. Comments received may be included as caveats in the Notice of Public Tender and later form part of the tenure document if tenure is issued.
Although provincial tenure agreements contain obligations to conduct exploratory or development work, the approval to carry out the work is not included. Each activity, such as a geophysical survey or drilling a well, must have specific approval from the Oil and Gas Commission. The Oil and Gas Commission is a Crown corporation responsible for regulating the exploration, development, production and pipeline transportation of oil and gas in British Columbia. Although the Commission considers the caveats on the tenure agreement, it also conducts an additional review process to identify any additional environmental sensitivities or access issues, before approving any on-the-ground activities.
2.5.2 IPP Tenure (Water Power and Wind Power)5
Like oil and gas rights in BC, when a proponent wants to develop a waterpower or wind power project, they apply for rights through tenure agreements with the province. These agreements give time-restricted, conditional rights to specific areas. As these types of energy development tenures are relatively new to BC, the government has tried to make the IPP tenure process address current concerns, such as streamlining the process for proponents and expanding the scope of environmental and consultation requirements beyond what is typical of the PNG tenure process.
For example, when a proponent wants to develop a waterpower project, they apply for both a water license and a Crown land license, which grants them the right to construct their projects on Crown land and to use the water subject to the terms and conditions specified in the license. Similar to oil and gas tenure reviews, before any tenure is granted, the project application is made available to agencies, local governments, First Nations and special interest groups for feedback, including environmental concerns. This feedback is used by the permitting agencies when considering whether to approve the application and in setting conditions for any approvals. This process is similar to the reviews and caveats for PNG tenures but is usually over a longer period of time to allow for expanded consultations and environmental assessments.
Typically, water licenses are for longer fixed terms than oil and gas due to the longer lifecycles of hydroelectric projects (40-year licences), after which the license holder needs to re-apply for a new water license. Additionally, power producers must pay water rental fees to use the water.
The Province went to considerable lengths to provide process guidance to applicants with forms and specific information for filing an application for a water licence, Crown land tenure, or other types of tenure (see Appendix 2). These are readily available on the Internet, in the IPP Guidebook (includes 9 comprehensive appendices to help applicants) or from BC Ministry of Environment regional offices.
Approving an IPP application for permit usually involves a comprehensive provincial environmental assessment (also a separate federal environmental assessment if the project is on federal lands or exceeds size thresholds). Depending on scope, size and location, there could be up to 11 provincial approvals, and involving up to six federal departments, to approve a typical waterpower IPP permit.
There are a number of public criticisms about the ultimate impact and effectiveness of the environmental assessments and consultation opportunities. These are refuted by the
5 The facts presented in this section are almost entirely from a press release by the Province, “FACTS ON
Province (and Canada) with public disclosure of the rigor of the assessments and
transparent processes that allow the public to monitor the progress of an assessment. The processes themselves – on paper – are indeed thorough.
However, there is another consistent criticism, about the pace of IPP developments that remains an interesting one. For example, as of January 7, 2009 there were 145 active waterpower licences covering 151 points of diversion on river systems. There were 621 licence applications waiting for approval, potentially affecting over 750 points on river systems in BC. These statistics just represent waterpower but there are 15 other types of renewable energy sources (wind, biomass, geothermal, current, etc.).
The argument that the pace of IPP development may not be giving the Province adequate time to measure cumulative environmental impacts seems valid, at least at face value. To illustrate the concern, the following map shows only the southwest area of BC and the surge of interest in IPP development (as of June 2009):
2.6 Regulatory Framework 2.6.1 Oil and Gas
Typical business cycle for oil and gas producers6:
BC permitting/tenure cycle for oil and gas production:
Primary Role of EMPR: to adjudicate the monthly auction of permits, drilling licences and leases (and, on occasion, the approval and issuance of Orders in Council for
applications made through special Request for Proposals by the Province) and to ensure compliance with tenure maintenance requirements. The primary legislation that governs EMPR's role is the Petroleum and Natural Gas Act and its associated regulations (N.B. for a more detailed flowchart of the tenure disposition process for oil and gas, see Appendix 1).
Primary Role of the OGC: to approve the siting and technical operations of wells, they enforce compliance on all regulatory requirements for activities, and to issue Certificates of Restoration/Compliance. The primary legislation that governs OGC's role is the new Oil and Gas Activities Act (still to be brought into force by regulation).
Both EMPR and OGC rely on other government agencies, local governments and First Nations to identify environmental concerns during their formal review periods before issuance of tenure or permitting of activity.
6 This diagram of the oil and gas regulatory framework is based on a similar diagram designed by Linda Bates as the author of a confidential internal government document, Best Coalbed Practices in North America: Regulatory and Non‐Regulatory Options (2008) and is used by permission. Initiation Evaluation (no drilling) Evaluation (drilling) Feasibility (drilling) Production Abandonment Pretenure: ‐ planning, reconnaissance, siting decision Exploratory Tenure: Permit (rare), Drilling Licences (most common) or Lease (long‐term); once drilling activity begins, all permitting, enforcement and compliance done by the Oil and Gas Commission (OGC) Production Tenure: If not already a lease, permits and Drilling Licences must be converted to leases; annual fees for tenure maintenance; all permitting, enforcement and compliance done by the OGC Well Authorizations: OGC Monitoring and Compliance: OGC
2.6.2 Independent Power Production7
Typical IPP project development sequence (British Columbia, ILMB, 2008, 35):
Technical Aspects Commercial Aspects Permitting/Tenure
Aspects 7 For an expanded explanation of the types of tenure involved in an IPP project, please refer to Appendix 2. Site Identification and Concept Definition Application Submission and Acceptance Concept Evaluation Project Feasibility Feasibility Evaluation Dialogue and Project Definition Preliminary Evaluation Preliminary Design Preliminary Project Description/ Terms of Reference BC Hydro Bid Submission Energy Purchase Agreement Award with BC Hydro Financial Close Construction Contract Award Development Plan/ EA Application Submission Initial Project Approvals Detailed Design Construction Testing/Commissioning Monitoring & Maintenance Equipment Procurement Final Project Approvals Approval to Operate Monitoring Operation Final Design
A description of the provincial environmental assessment application/submission process8, which is the key opportunity for environmental considerations for IPP tenure applications:
8 The image is taken directly from the BC Environmental Assessment website <
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research involved three distinct phases. The first phase was a literature review of jurisdictional processes (both within and beyond BC) that have attempted to place environmental values ahead of energy potential in the siting of land tenure for energy exploration and development. The second phase was a broad survey to identify the policy problem(s), distributed to approximately 40 tenure and environmental experts at EMPR, MAL and MOE. The final phase was six qualitative opinion interviews based on the survey findings, general reactions to the research topics and possible approaches and ideas for the report's recommendations.
3.1 Sampling
The approach to sampling was that of saturation to ensure that, amongst the participants, the same names were being recommended again and again. Starting with a list of about 30 colleagues the researcher worked with at EMPR and MOE9 who were known to be experts in these two fields, the researcher contacted them by email and telephone to briefly describe the research, asked about their interest in participating, and then asked if they knew of others who would be interested (see Appendix 3 - Script for Initial Contact). The response was quite enthusiastic and 40 participants expressed a willingness to do the survey. Most of these participants had more than one colleague who had recommended them. In summary, 62 people were asked to participate, 40 expressed a commitment to participate, 36 started the survey and 32 completed it.
The research project also required a Human Ethics Board Application for Ethics Approval for Human Participant Research. It was approved as a “minimal risk” project with no power-over relationships involved or inconveniences to the participants.
A key challenge of the research was that it was over the summer months10 when many of the participants had planned their holidays. To mitigate this challenge, casual phone calls and emails were made by the researcher about a month before the survey was distributed and key participants were asked about their availability and the dates of the survey distribution and interviews were planned to accommodate scheduling challenges as much as possible. 9 The researcher is currently (since December 2008) the Manager of Division Initiatives for Environmental Stewardship Division and Parks and Protected Areas Division at the Ministry of Environment. Previous to this, she was the Senior Policy Advisor for Oil and Gas Titles Branch at the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources. 10 The researcher was allowed an 8‐week Education Leave from June 15‐August 15, 2009 to complete this report.
3.2 Literature Review
Generally, there is limited value to conducting a literature review of early decision-making in tenure processes. As each jurisdiction is unique in its historical evolution of natural resource development and land systems, so naturally, the tenure processes have also developed uniquely. The assumptions that lie behind the balancing of rights and responsibilities are distinctive to each government authority. The literature reviews focused on areas with economic similarities to BC and were North American.
Another limiting factor to the literature review was the dynamic state of policies in many jurisdictions as they grapple to find the best way to balance energy development needs with increasingly aware and concerned public determined to protect valuable
environmental assets. Policy development has lagged behind the surge of interest in developing renewable energy sources. Although oil and gas resources are not new, the policies that require them to follow higher environmental standards and achieve an increasing degree of social license to operate certainly are. As such, the literature review was only able to take a snapshot in time for British Columbia and other jurisdictions, or select specific approaches that are generally regarded as having successful outcomes. To ensure the literature review was solidly relevant to the report, the researcher looked to project advisors and colleagues for sources they had come across in their professional work. The review of literature mostly focused on the topics covered in the survey and interviews, that is the environmental concerns and how they fit into the early stages of tenure issuance for oil and gas, waterpower and wind power.
3.3 Survey
The survey was designed using an online survey tool (Survey Monkey11) and after an introductory page that reminded participants of the projects objectives, scope and confidentiality assurances, the survey then asked participants to confirm the type of tenure and their experience level with that tenure (see Appendix 6). The survey was divided into the following web pages, with a set of questions on each web page concerning that particular issue/theme:
Part 1: General Environmental Concerns
There were issues to choose from and an opportunity to list any other top-of-mind environmental concerns.
11
Part 2: Land Use Planning
The questions asked about the strategic focus of scarce resources, mechanisms to manage the pace of development, access to adequate environmental data, mechanisms to manage cumulative effects and mechanisms to keep plans flexible and updated.
Part 3: Early Reconnaissance by Industry
The questions asked about energy data sources that industry proponents consult, possible information-sharing opportunities with the publishers of the energy data and mechanisms that might ensure environmental considerations happen at this early stage of planning. Part 4: Siting Decisions
The questions asked about effective tools to ensure environmental considerations happen before siting choice, when an environmental risk assessment should happen, who should be responsible for the cost, what standards should apply, how to determine relative environmental risks, whether or not communities should have an increased voice in siting decisions and whether cumulative effects are, or should be, considered at this stage. Part 5: Tenure Application Mechanisms
The questions asked to rank the current tenure tools available in the potential to increase environmental considerations, what tools were best for managing long-term flexibility for unanticipated environmental impacts and when it is appropriate to use informal tenure tools like advice and guidance documents.
Two days before the stated deadline, the researcher sent reminders to those who had confirmed involvement and that she had sent the link to, and also contacted those who had been recommended by colleagues but had not replied with explicit confirmation of participation. Sure enough, there were a number of participants who were pleased to "get in under the wire" as they had just been too busy to send a confirmation.
3.4 Interviews
Interview questions were designed so that, as much as possible, the interviewee could direct the discussion to issues that were of most concern. The rationale for this was that this method would allow for an expanded conversation about a topic of key concern without going over the pre-arranged 30-60 minute time allowance given to the interview. The interviewee was sent the preliminary results from the survey and the Consent for
Participation12 (as the Letter of Information for Implied Consent13 that was sent with the survey was not adequate for the interviews). The interviewer prompted the discussion with the following questions, when it was appropriate:
1. Would you like me to take five minutes and give a high-level review of the survey results before we begin?
2. How did you feel your general understanding compared to the questions in the survey? What topics did you know little about? What topics did you know a lot about?
3. What were your primary emotional responses to the questions in the survey? What, if anything, caused the feeling of concern to rise in you?
4. Compared to where we should be, how does the current state of the following areas of early tenure decision-making rate for you [rate as low, medium or high]:
• land use planning
• influencing early industry reconnaissance • siting decisions
• tenure application processes
5. With regard to making the recommendations of this report practical, do you have advice, recommendations; ideas that struck you while you were doing the survey?
3.5 Handling the Research Findings
Once the original deadline (and the second deadline) were passed, all surveys were printed out individually and divided into the sector (oil and gas, waterpower or wind power) that each participant indicated at the start of the survey. Then, within each sector’s grouping, the surveys were organized by the years that the participant had spent working in that field. This was done to weigh the opinions by experience, but not do it too clinically, as this was a summarizing option of SurveyMonkey.
For example, if there was someone who indicated that they had 10 or more years in their field yet had comments in other parts of the survey that were extreme in emotion rather than logic, then the credibility weighting of those opinions could be modified. The opposite adjustment would be true for someone, although new to their field, which may
12 Appendix 5 ‐ Consent for Participation (for interviewees) 13
have very insightful and measured opinions. All the completed surveys were read once through, given the ordering described above, to give the researcher a sense of
consistency, problems with outliers, or overarching themes.
Each section of the survey was then treated as a separate topic (i.e. early land use planning, early reconnaissance by proponents, siting decisions, etc) and the researcher went through each completed survey to tally results and identify themes in open-ended questions within each topic. Tables were composed to illustrate findings or each question and a summary of outstanding areas of commonality were identified, as were particularly interesting and thoughtful commentaries.
These preliminary research findings were all compiled into a summary document of the whole survey (7 pages in total) and this was sent to the six interviewees in preparation for the interviews. The researcher, when commencing the interviews, asked each interviewee if they would like a verbal summary of the findings (almost all asked for this when offered).
The interviews were recorded by hand-written notes by the researcher and later reviewed and summarized for themes and discrete ideas. Each discrete key idea or thought was summarized and categorized by the survey topic it most related to: land use planning, early industry reconnaissance, siting decisions or tenure tools. The comments from interviewees were often more general in their intent than these categories, but the
categorization helped to compare and contrast for validation purposes (the summary table of this comparison can be found on p.39).
4. LITERATURE REVIEW
Generally, there is limited value to conducting a literature review of early decision-making in tenure processes as each jurisdiction is unique in its historical evolution of natural resource development and land systems. Another limiting factor to the literature review was the dynamic state of policies in many jurisdictions as they grapple to find the best way the balance energy development needs with increasingly aware and concerned public determined to protect valuable environmental assets.
4.1 Waterpower and Wind Power
In reviewing the tenure systems for waterpower and wind power throughout Canada and the United States (US), there were two key characteristics of this kind of energy
development that every jurisdiction tried to grapple with: a “blank canvas” of planning and tenure systems, and the evolving knowledge and management of environmental impacts as they become known.
4.1.1 Achieving Economic Prosperity
At a state level, a regional level, a national level, and a transboundary level, the US has tried to deal with the issue of proactively planning for renewable energy development and expansion by trying different methods of zoning: some might use a red/yellow/green designation where others overlay competing values and direct energy development to very specific sites. The objective is directing companies to environmentally low-impact sites to accelerate the development with as few barriers as possible.
As an example, one of the most impressive planning initiatives to date to expedite the development of renewable energy resources is the Western Renewable Energy Zones. Eleven states, two provinces and areas in Mexico have been working on establishing systems of reliable information that will help them determine cost-effective and environmentally sensitive zones for energy projects and the transmission plans for delivering them (Western Governor’s Wildlife Council, 2009).
As an example of highly directed development, Wyoming found that when they went to zone those areas with high potential for wind resources, they could overlay their maps of wind potential with maps of protected areas (actual and proposed), ecoregional
conservation plans, known areas with birds of prey, bat habitat, grouse habitat, wildlife ranges and corridors, other sensitive habitats and historic sites and trails (including visual management corridors) and still there were key sites and transmission lines that could be developed with little environmental impacts (Molvar, 2008).
4.1.2 Achieving Social Responsibility
One of the biggest hurdles to wind and waterpower is the conventional opposition to establishing new regional transmission systems to connect facilities, often in very rural places, to the markets they serve. Although, by 2008, over 28 states had implemented renewable portfolio standards (i.e. a certain percentage of new power had to be from renewable sources), there remained an absence of a national approach to a transmission plan. States were on their own to find ways to cooperate in an interstate framework for transmission so expansion of renewable energy could happen at a practical level. Whether state-led initiatives like Texas or California, or more regional initiatives, the lessons that emerged centered on creating social licence. Initiatives needed to create meaningful dialogue processes, identify the specific flow of benefits and outcomes for the state and the region, and link landscape science to land use planning of zones where transmission solutions have the lowest environmental impacts (Schumacher et.al. 2009) Similarly, when the National (US) Wind Coordinating Committee put out its handbook on permitting because of the surge in wind development, the focus on meaningful public involvement dominated the process guidelines. It was recognized that, in the case of wind development, generation facilities tend to be intrusive” rather than
“land-intensive”, meaning they could expand over a very large area and have broad influence but the mostly undisturbed land was available for other compatible uses. The public needed time to understand, discuss and comment on the advantages and disadvantages of proposals (NWCC, 1998).
4.1.3 Achieving Environmental Sustainability
Government needs to take time to conscientiously analyze the impacts of new forms of renewable energy. In 2005 the US Government Accountability Office found an
interesting gap in how six states were regulating wind power development: facility impacts on wildlife varied considerably, there were notable gaps in the research literature and few studies addressed mitigation. Although there were general laws that protected wildlife, there were no prosecutorial action taken when unanticipated impacts happened. Instead governments were responding with “softer” tools of guidelines and encouraged companies to take mitigation steps to avoid future harm (Government of US, GOA, 2005). Although it is difficult to determine cumulative effects of a new industry on wildlife and ecosystems, it is much more difficult to undo certain harms if a strong regulatory framework is not in place, understood and enforced.
With new kinds of energy sources, it is impossible to predict comprehensively what the impacts will be environmentally. In Northern Michigan they found that shadow flickering from the rotating blades of wind turbines was becoming a health and safety threat to both residents and wildlife. They need time to slow down development, conduct the necessary
research (such as a shadow calculator as is done on Danish wind sites) and then mitigate with setbacks and other strategies (RISO, 1999).
Even when planning systems are in place, factors can change such as the acceleration of development. California found efforts to mitigate environmental impacts from
development, although well intentioned, were ad hoc and had little ability to deal with cumulative effects. They found that standing back and looking at planning at a regional landscape-level approach helped them develop effective restoration plans (Zedler, 1996).
4.2 Oil and Gas
In reviewing the tenure systems for oil and gas throughout Canada and the United States, there were two key characteristics of this kind of energy development that every
jurisdiction tried to grapple with: the financial stakes are very high for both industry and government, and as resource exploration and development covers a greater and greater percentage of the land base, identifying, measuring and mitigating for cumulative effects is superceding a conventional system that is defined by project-by-project approvals. 4.2.1 Achieving Economic Prosperity
Balancing cost risk is the key decision-making factor for businesses that embark on new ventures. Being able to provide a balanced system of rights and responsibilities is key to successful energy development; giving as much information as possible about the responsibilities involved in obtaining development right before they commit to the investment.
One of the most significant benefits of the Mitigation Policy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service is its predictability for industry (Government of US, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993). Private developers can anticipate well-established recommendations and
incorporate mitigation measures into the early stages of the planning process.
Alternatively, if the cost risk is too high they have information to defend not developing in a certain area, which is almost as important a cost factor and early proactive planning. 4.2.2 Achieving Social Responsibility
Although it seems a rather obvious point, social licence is based on early relationship building and buy-in with stakeholders. The principle of “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” is especially applicable to achieving positive public perception. One of the more interesting studies done on public perception of the oil and gas industry was done in two Barnett Shale counties in Texas (Barnett Shale natural gas play is a similar shale rock formation as what has recently been discovered in the northeast of BC). The longer a natural gas industry stays in an area, the more negative the public perceptions of
the industry become. Further to that correlation, the strongest and most consistent factor associated with that growing negativity is the industry’s ownership of rights and tenure, not necessarily their activities on the ground (Theodori, 2008).
4.2.3 Achieving Environmental Sustainability
Alberta, a jurisdiction known for its intense oil and gas development, has recently acknowledged the need to transition to a cumulative effects management system. What’s interesting about this transition is that, while they understood the principles of cumulative effects measurements and mitigation strategies, they had to “stand down” to let the regulatory framework of land use planning catch up and provide the context within which the Environmental Cumulative Effects Management Act could be established
(Government of Alberta, 2009).
The American Water Resource Association found in 1995 that the most efficient way of managing for impacts or predicting desirable conditions to plan towards, was to step back and apply a watershed analysis to ecosystem management. Some western states are using this framework, coupling management objectives to landscape capacities as a way of proactively mitigating for cumulative effects on the land base (Montgomery et.al., 1995).
5. OPINION RESEARCH SURVEY
The overall focus of the survey was to explore the opinions of tenure and environmental experts within the BC Public Service as to where they feel there are problems with the early decision-making processes of energy development.
5.1 Overview of the Survey
The survey was not intended to be an in-depth analysis of the different stages that happen before a formal submission/application for tenure. Rather, it was a light-touch look at each stage with plenty of opportunities throughout the entire survey to add more comments. Not wanting to presuppose where the experts would point to with regard to perceived problems, the survey wanted to cover each stage from planning to tenure application without asking participants to spend more than 20-30 minutes of their valuable time. For a statistical summary of the survey answers, please refer to Appendix 6.
Of the 36 survey participants who started the survey, 32 completed it. Twenty percent of applicants indicated they had over ten years experience in their field and more than 40% had over three years experience in their field. The survey findings can be assumed to have a medium-to-strong weight of credibility due to the high completion rate
(particularly in light of so many open-ended questions in the survey) and years of service in the areas of expertise identified.
There was a fairly balanced distribution of participants from all three ministries as well as an almost even balance of environmental expertise and tenure expertise (53% indicated being “environmental experts” whereas 47% indicated being “tenure experts”). This was quite important as there were some whose role it is to facilitate energy projects and others who's primarily role is to recommend caution, avoidance and mitigation of impacts. Although the participants were asked their personal opinions, the drivers behind their work can be assumed to have some bearing on their personal positions.
In order to divide the survey findings into different types of tenures, or in the event the findings showed a particular tenure type as having a distinct problem area, participants had to select only one type of tenure (oil and gas, water power or wind power). This also reflected a balanced representation overall, with 40% of participants who filled out the survey in relation to oil and gas tenures, 35% for water power tenures and 25% for wind power tenures.
When a question elicited a high number of comments, all the comments were reduced to their basic idea, grouped together by similarity where it was appropriate and then mapped
(see Appendix 6) to measure the weight of the idea from the frequency of it being mentioned. It was felt that outlier comments might be just as valuable as frequently-mentioned ideas, so all comments, even if only one person spoke to them, were included.
5.2 Findings
5.2.1 Summary of General Environmental Concerns
Considering that the participants deal with energy development on a day-to-day basis and are acutely aware of its realities, the misperceptions about it and, collectively, are
possibly the group with the most accurate overall knowledge in this field, their top-of- mind concerns were of utmost interest to the research. Their concerns would set a strong context for the recommendations.
Cumulative effects management came out clearly as the top environmental concern amongst participants, with over 85% of participants selecting this answer choice. The next three highest ranking issues were the volume of IPP applications, water resources needed for the fracturing of shale rock and the impacts on caribou populations, with 25-35% of participants choosing one or more of these answers.
There were 32 additional comments14 under this section of the survey (ten of them further comments about cumulative effects being a top concern, particularly from participants with more than 10 years experience in their field) that reflected an almost complete overlap of the issues covered in the survey, making the survey solidly relevant to the general environmental concerns of the participants.
What is interesting about the comments regarding cumulative effects it that they clearly reflected the opinion that it is the supporting infrastructure of roads, hydro lines that cause the environmental footprint, not the cumulative effects of too many projects per se. The concerns articulated that this is where there are disconnects in environmental
considerations. The perception is that the government mostly focuses tenure decisions on the primary tenures for energy exploration (which, when it is issued, carries with it the assumption of other supporting tenures/rights of ways being granted), but the public discourse from citizens and environmental groups are focused on the environmental impacts of the supporting infrastructure as well as the primary energy production site. 5.2.2 Summary of Land Use Planning Answers
Although not technically a part of the early decision-making process for individual energy projects (except in the initial decision of where not to develop), land use planning
14
is the first stage when a broad range of stakeholders come together to consider the theoretical impacts of energy development and where this development should, and should not, be focused.
A majority of participants felt land use planning was not focusing time and money in areas of highest risk, did not have the means to control the pace of development, nor did they feel cumulative effects were considered in land use planning. There was an
interesting comment that clarified that, although pace of development is addressed through variance clauses in LUPs, they do not consider all land uses and their impacts on the land together. Another interesting comment pointed out that, with regard to LUPs being flexible and being kept up to date, the Oil and Gas Commission (OGC) was a more effective agent in its role of accommodating competing land use, more so than the land use planning process itself (at least in the case of oil and gas development).
There was general uncertainty whether land use plans utilized Calls for Proposals to focus energy development or if the environmental information that informed these land use plans was easy to access or understand.
However, additional comments provided were almost all constructive criticisms of land use planning. The comments were detailed enough, and covered a wide range of LUP issues, that the assumption could be made that participants feel there is much room for improvement, and perhaps, the inference is that the process is worth the effort to improve it. What was interesting was that there was no one area of improvement that garnered more criticism than another, an indication, if interpreted on a positive note, that there is no glaring deficiency, even if the overall process could use some improvement.
5.2.3 Summary of Early Industry Reconnaissance Answers
This part of the survey looked at the data sources that energy producers (“proponents”) research in order to determine where the general area of potential energy resource is. For example, oil and gas proponents would look to geological atlases, publicly available seismic reports, etc. IPP proponents would look at available water table data, river flow data or, in the case of wind projects, available wind flow data. Proponents invest considerably in researching and determining where potential energy is.
Mostly the government leaves this research to industry proponents. The only exception to this hands-off attitude toward early industry reconnaissance with regard to areas of energy potential is Calls for Proposals (also called Requests for Proposals). This happens when the government has preliminary scientific information about the energy potential of a large area (for example, oil and gas resources in the Nechako Basin/Cariboo region), or is trying to incent energy producers toward a new kind of development (for example, BC Hydro's Call for Clean Energy). The intent for these Calls for Proposals is to let the industry invest in higher-risk exploration activities, reduce the financial risk to
proponents by making the tenure agreements easier to procure and let the Province increase in its general understanding of the resource. The long-term objective of this increased knowledge is to publish it, encourage further energy development, and ultimately revenues to the Province.
Therefore, the survey questions steered clear of the issues of pre-tenure exploration costs and the effectiveness of Calls for Proposals. Instead, it asked about opportunities to make environmental considerations easier for a proponent at this stage and the possible
mechanisms to encourage environmental considerations at this stage of generalized energy locating. The findings were inconclusive with regard to the issue of information sharing with publishers of energy data. However, the comments on the issue of
motivators for proponents revealed two strong trends.
Clearly the dominant trend is to create a financial motivator for proponents to do early environmental reconnaissance: either by making it an application requirement or requiring that the proponent be responsible for submitting on-going cumulative effect monitoring reports, therefore ensuring they are motivated to choose an area with the lowest risk at the front-end of the project.
A secondary trend that emerges is the expectation of relationship building between the proponent and the local community, or First Nation. Fostering local buy-in for a project requires early, frequent and transparent communication. It also requires that the majority of stakeholders feel – at the conceptual stage - that the siting is appropriate and the financial compensations are fair before government gets involved in a formal way. 5.2.4 Summary of Siting Decisions Answers
This part of the survey examined the actual siting decision that determines the spatially defined area for requested tenure. The key issue of this stage of decision-making is where exactly an energy project should be as opposed to the general area where energy potential is determined to be high. To further explain the tension that exists around this issue, the following two quotes are from two high profile examples of First Nation protests. Although they relate to mining proposals (a type of energy development not covered in this research), a careful examination of these statements of opposition show a frustration that a range of alternative sites were not seriously considered by proponents.
The three Nations [Takla, Tsay Keh Dene and Kwadacha Nations] gathered again in January 2007 to affirm their unanimous opposition to using Amazay [Duncan Lake] as a tailings dump, no matter what compensation Northgate offered. While Northgate maintains that there is no economically feasible alternative for tailings
disposal, the Tse Keh Nay wonder why there is not even a consideration of other options. (Corbin, 2007)15
This final element, the construction of a TIA [Tailings Impoundment Area] for the Prosperity Project, entails the complete and permanent destruction of Teztan Biny/Fish Lake and portions of its connecting streams and water bodies, including
portions of Fish Creek (“Teztan Biny”). Representatives of Taseko have stated that the Prosperity Project requires the destruction of Teztan Biny and that, from Taseko’s perspective; there is no viable alternative16 for the Prosperity Project to
proceed (Supreme Court of BC, 2009).
The key argument for sites that are chosen by proponents is their economic feasibility. This, of course, becomes a poor argument if costs were to be attributed to the delays caused by protests and extra efforts at meaningful consultation and social licence. It might be less expensive to consider a number of alternative sites at the beginning of this stage of decision-making.
The survey found that there was strong agreement amongst participants on four points: • that proponents are solely responsible for the costs incurred in environmental risk
assessments;
• that those assessments should be done before a final siting choice;
• that these assessments should be a requirement for tenure application; and, • that the rationale for refusal should be expanded to include a maximum tenure
saturation point in a region.
Survey comments reflected that, individually, projects should require proportional environmental considerations relative to their risk. The point made was that when you require the same due diligence of early environmental consideration – which carries with it a significant cost risk to proponents – it should be relative to the risk level of the type of project, the environmental footprint it could have and/or the historical performance in environmental considerations of the proponent themselves.
Interestingly there was almost a 50/50 split of opinion on the issue of whether local governments should have a stronger voice in determining the siting decisions of energy projects. At first, it was thought that participants who identified themselves as “tenure experts” or who had many years in their field might strongly represent the 50% who do not think local government should have a stronger voice. However, closer examination of
15 text underlined by author 16
