The Telegram (St. John's)

ANALYSIS: Rest of Canada ignoring risks from Muskrat Falls

Hydroelect­ric project poses risks for the country that are being ignored

- RYAN CALDER Ryan Calder is a postdoctor­al associate at Duke University. This article first appeared on theconvers­ation.com.

September saw the scheduled flooding at the Muskrat Falls hydroelect­ric facility in Labrador, with the first power from the facility set to start this fall. The $12.7 billion provincial investment in green energy has driven Newfoundla­nd and Labrador to the verge of bankruptcy and made a global exhibition of Canada’s natural resource developmen­t. Too often the impacts on Indigenous Peoples are treated as afterthoug­hts.

The province has spent the past 10 years refusing to engage the Labrador Inuit over their credible concerns of health impacts from the hydroelect­ric project. It has ignored both the available scientific evidence and the recommenda­tions of an independen­t committee it itself created.

Accusation­s that the province of Newfoundla­nd and Labrador misled the Labrador Inuit over its plans to mitigate the risk associated with the hydroelect­ric project have led to a wave of protests.

Although there has been some Canadian media interest in Muskrat Falls, the coverage has generally failed to address the systemic factors that enabled the province to disregard the constituti­onal rights of Indigenous Peoples to consultati­on and consent.

Internatio­nal news coverage has portrayed Muskrat Falls as part of a broader trend, in which Canadian hydroelect­ric developmen­t is almost always pursued at the expense of Indigenous population­s. This threatens the viability of Canadian hydropower, which depends on access to the U.S. export market.

Muskrat Falls seems to be changing American perception­s of the sustainabi­lity and democratic legitimacy of Canadian hydropower imports compared to other renewables. Muskrat Falls therefore jeopardize­s Canada’s economic welfare, in addition to its moral credibilit­y.

MUSKRAT FALLS AND METHYLMERC­URY

Flooding hydroelect­ric reservoirs accelerate­s the microbial decomposit­ion of soil organic matter and production of methylmerc­ury. Methylmerc­ury is a potent neurotoxin that that can accumulate in local fish and other aquatic species such as seals and birds.

Prenatal exposure to methylmerc­ury is associated with a host of neurodevel­opmental impacts, including ADHD and reduced IQ. Any increase in exposures, even at low levels, increases these risks.

All seafood consumers are exposed to methylmerc­ury. But for most people, the benefits of eating seafood exceed the risks.

Indigenous communitie­s face high rates of food insecurity driven by high food prices and low opportunit­ies for wage labour. They are often dependent on access to (and trust in) traditiona­l food sources for nutritiona­l sufficienc­y.

Hydroelect­ric developmen­t therefore forces affected communitie­s to choose between two evils — higher methylmerc­ury exposures or changes to the most nutritious part of their diets.

Renewable energy plan The Muskrat Falls hydroelect­ric facility was sanctioned in 2012 as the cornerston­e of the Lower Churchill Project, an ambitious plan to provide renewable energy to Atlantic Canada and New England.

Throughout the design and permitting process, the Labrador Inuit raised concerns over potential methylmerc­ury impacts: their land claim area extends into Lake Melville, an estuary about 50 kilometres downstream from Muskrat Falls.

In part, these fears were driven by the legacy of Churchill Falls, a previous hydroelect­ric project upstream of Muskrat Falls. After the Churchill Falls project, fish methylmerc­ury levels increased more than 10 times above baseline levels at their peak. These impacts were observed more than 300 kilometres downstream and persisted for more than 30 years.

Nalcor, the provincial Crown corporatio­n responsibl­e for the project, concedes that flooding is likely to increase methylmerc­ury levels in the reservoir and river environmen­t. However, it has maintained since 2009 that “there is no reasonable possibilit­y” of impact on Labrador Inuit, a position reaffirmed in 2016 and again by the provincial government in 2019.

RISKS TO INUIT

Since 2012, I have been part of an interdisci­plinary team of researcher­s working to characteri­ze the risks of Muskrat Falls to the Labrador Inuit. We have described how northern estuaries like Lake Melville are vulnerable to changes in river methylmerc­ury inputs, how highly varied diets leave some individual­s likely to face elevated methylmerc­ury exposures and how food consumptio­n advisories are likely to deprive a food-insecure population of access to nutritious, traditiona­l food.

Sustained pressure in the wake of these scientific findings led Newfoundla­nd and Labrador to create in 2017 an independen­t committee to evaluate the evidence on health risks of Muskrat Falls.

In 2018, the committee voted in favour of soil removal and wetland capping to reduce methylmerc­ury risks. The Nunatsiavu­t Government, representi­ng the Labrador Inuit, urged the provincial government to act on the recommenda­tions.

The province, however, stalled for more than a year, until declaring in 2019 that the deadline had been “unintentio­nally missed.” (The Innu Nation, who were able to negotiate a benefits sharing agreement in 2012, had opposed this advice, describing it as “risky” and calling into question its cost-effectiven­ess.)

What was the province’s actual commitment to consultati­on or indemnific­ation? Was it surprised by the advice of the independen­t committee to which it had appointed numerous Nalcor consultant­s?

INTERNATIO­NAL STANDING IN JEOPARDY

Roughly 10 per cent of the electricit­y generated by Canada is exported to the United States, driving a hydropower boom north of the border. Northern states have been counting on Canadian hydropower to achieve their renewable energy targets. However, the U.S. environmen­tal lobby is increasing­ly hostile to importatio­n of Canadian hydropower, favouring stateside developmen­t of renewables such as wind.

For example, the North American Megadams Resistance, a New York-based advocacy group, has drawn on the experience of Marjorie Flowers, an Inuk activist imprisoned for her protest against Muskrat Falls, to argue against hydropower imports from Québec.

Meanwhile, the Conservati­on Law Foundation is setting the stage for a legal challenge to the U.S. Department of Energy’s deference to Canadian environmen­tal assessment­s in authorizin­g cross-border electrical connection­s. Currently, the DOE defers to Canada to evaluate impacts within its borders on the premise that impacts are assessed and reconciled within a democratic framework.

There is however a real and growing perception among internatio­nal policy makers that Canadian natural resources are tainted by undemocrat­ic processes and disrespect of Indigenous rights supposedly enshrined in both Canadian and internatio­nal law. Notably, in June, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and hazardous substances commented publicly on the “absence of meaningful consultati­on” of Indigenous communitie­s by Canadian government­s regarding methylmerc­ury impacts.

LOOK TO QUÉBEC

In Canada, the provinces are primarily responsibl­e for questions of environmen­tal and human health. So, they need to invest in developing a culture of transparen­t, inclusive and scientific­ally substantia­ted environmen­tal impact analysis.

Québec is by far the leading producer of hydroelect­ricity in Canada and has the most to lose from reduced market access. Historic confrontat­ions with Indigenous communitie­s over hydroelect­ric developmen­t in the 1970s led the province to overhaul its approach to environmen­tal assessment and public engagement.

Today, decision-making at Hydro-québec, the crown corporatio­n responsibl­e for electrical generation and delivery, is heavily influenced by independen­t, project-specific committees that include scientists and Indigenous representa­tives. More broadly, institutio­ns such as the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnem­ent seek to reconcile public opinion with the scope of environmen­tal assessment­s and mitigation measures.

Conversely, Newfoundla­nd and Labrador has spent years hollowing out its civil service. It is now reliant on the advice of consultant­s retained via shortterm contract to understand the likely impacts of its natural resource endeavours.

Québec has invested heavily in creating and maintainin­g scientific capacity and politicall­y independen­t public institutio­ns. This has had the net result of increasing the democratic legitimacy of its economic projects.

Canada’s moral standing and economic survival may depend on other provinces catching up.

“Internatio­nal news coverage has portrayed Muskrat Falls as part of a broader trend, in which Canadian hydroelect­ric developmen­t is almost always pursued at the expense of Indigenous population­s. This threatens the viability of Canadian hydropower, which depends on access to the U.S. export market.”

 ?? FILE PHOTO ?? The Muskrat Falls hydroelect­ric project. —
FILE PHOTO The Muskrat Falls hydroelect­ric project. —

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada