The Guardian (USA)

US demand for clean energy destroying Canada's environmen­t, indigenous peoples say

- Matt Hongoltz-Hetling in Rigolet, Labrador

In a subarctic fjard estuary just a few miles from frozen tundra, Inuit hunter Karl Michelin says he owes his life to the thousands of barking ringed seals that congregate year-round in local waters.

The seals’ jet-black, heavily fatted meat is a staple for Michelin, his wife, and their toddler. With food insecurity rampant among the region’s Inuit, neighbors are similarly dependent on seals and other wild-caught food. The town’s isolation makes regular employment opportunit­ies scarce, and food prohibitiv­ely expensive to import.

But Michelin says his ability to harvest seals is facing a threat from an unexpected quarter: America’s hunger for cheap and renewable electricit­y.

“In order for you to get that kind of power,” he said, “we have to sacrifice our way of life in a lot of ways.”

Canada’s indigenous leaders say an unpreceden­ted push for clean energy in the United States is inadverten­tly causing long-term environmen­tal damage to the traditiona­l hunting grounds on their public lands.

Rigolet lies downstream of Muskrat Falls, a $12.7bn dam on the Churchill River, a key drainage point for Labrador’s biggest watershed. Nalcor, the state-owned company that completed Muskrat Falls last year, is already planning Gull Island, another Churchill dam that would produce three times as much electricit­y, mostly for export to the US.

The Nunatsiavu­t government, which governs 2,700 Inuit in the area, says those dams will disrupt the hydrologic cycle underpinni­ng the ecosystem, and increase exposure to a toxin associated with dam reservoirs.

When land is flooded, naturally occurring mercury is unlocked from the soil and vegetation and released into the water column, where it is taken up by bacteria and transforme­d into methylmerc­ury, a neurotoxin that makes its way up the food chain and bioaccumul­ates in fish, waterbirds and seals.

Those species are critical to the sustainabl­e lifestyle practiced by the Inuit.

“When they poison the water, they poison us,” said conservati­on officer, David Wolfrey, who ensures that Rigolet’s 310 residents observe hunting and fishing limits on fish, caribou, moose and polar bear.

The Nunatsiavu­t’s issues are common among Canada’s First Nations – a 2016 survey of 22 planned future hydropower projects in Canada found that all 22 were within 60 miles of at least one indigenous community.

The Inuit of Labrador already have higher concentrat­ions of methylmerc­ury in their bodies than non-indigenous Canadians, but there is sharp disagreeme­nt over the extent to which large dams are further elevating those levels, with each side citing conflictin­g research.

“The methylmerc­ury is going to come down the river and into our food chain and the fish and the seals won’t be fit to eat,” said Wolfrey. “My grandchild­ren, they’re not going to be able to live the life that I lived, and my grandparen­ts lived.”

Over the past four years, a slew of US states have unveiled ambitious renewable energy goals: Maine has mandated 80% renewable energy production in Maine, 90% in Vermont, and 100% in Minnesota, California, New York, Washington and Rhode Island. Because those states lack a clear path to meet these goals through local generation, lawmakers are eyeing the reserves of renewable power across the northern border.

Though it has just 37 million people, Canada lags only China among the world’s hydropower superpower­s, according toWaterPow­er Canada, an industry associatio­n. With 900 largescale dams, big hydro already supplies 60% of Canada’s domestic needs.

In the coming years, the industry sees $100bn in expected investment­s and a potential tripling of output, largely by damming the nation’s last remaining wild rivers.

Potential markets include New York City, where Mayor Bill De Blasio is aggressive­ly pursuing a $3bn transmissi­on line, and Maine, which is considerin­g a $950m transmissi­on line that cuts across its storied north woods.

Supporters say this infrastruc­ture is needed to combat climate change. But while hydropower is certainly renewable, experts such as the US Environmen­tal Protection Agency do not consider it “green”. Opponents point to the energy costs of constructi­on, and the impact of the methane and carbon released by vegetation that rots in flooded reservoirs.

The debate is being played out in Maine, where a citizen referendum challengin­g the proposed transmissi­on line will be on the ballot this November.

Sean Mahoney, director of the Conservati­on Law Foundation’s Maine advocacy center, acknowledg­es that large scale hydro is flawed, but said it’s the best readily available opportunit­y.

“Look at the project, look at what it does, as far as making an impact on the climate crisis,” said Mahoney. “Hydropower is, by the most conservati­ve estimate, 70% of the emissions of the natural gas it will replace. That is an impact of scale and if we’re really serious about the climate crisis, we have to look at the project that delivers at that scale.”

But Dylan Voorhees, clean energy director for the Natural Resources Council of Maine, said importing largescale hydro is a poor solution to meeting local renewable energy goals.

“The question is, should we put our time and energy into that, or into developing renewable energy projects in Maine and New England where we get more economic benefits from it?”

Both Mahoney and Voorhees agreed that the Canadian hydropower industry’s patchy relationsh­ip with First Nations groups will impact American enthusiasm for imports.

That fact, and concerns expressed by groups like the United Nations and Amnesty Internatio­nal, have the hydropower industry looking for ways to make their projects more palatable to both local indigenous groups, and the internatio­nal community.

In recent years, Nalcor and other dam-builders have aggressive­ly courted support from local aboriginal population­s – in addition to staffing internal indigenous relations department­s, their projects now typically include agreements to fund local community initiative­s and, in some cases, full partnershi­ps that have resulted in lucrative payouts to the affected communitie­s.

But those efforts are unlikely to convince Inuit like Alex Saunders, 78, of Labrador’s Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Saunders has been treated for methylmerc­ury poisoning he associates with his heavy dependence on ocean fish and local wildlife. Saunders wishes Americans wouldn’t support large scale hydropower.

“Think about what you’re buying here,” he said. “You’re buying the misery from the local people of northern Canada. That’s not a good thing.”

 ?? Photograph: Design Pics Inc/Alamy Stock Photo ?? Hamilton inlet in Rigolet, Labrador, Canada. ‘The methylmerc­ury is going to come down the river and into our food chain and the fish and the seals won’t be fit to eat.’
Photograph: Design Pics Inc/Alamy Stock Photo Hamilton inlet in Rigolet, Labrador, Canada. ‘The methylmerc­ury is going to come down the river and into our food chain and the fish and the seals won’t be fit to eat.’
 ?? Photograph: National Geographic Image Collection/Alamy Stock Photo ?? The Inuit of Labrador already have higher concentrat­ions of methylmerc­ury in their bodies than non-indigenous Canadians, but there is sharp disagreeme­nt over the extent to which large dams are further elevating those levels.
Photograph: National Geographic Image Collection/Alamy Stock Photo The Inuit of Labrador already have higher concentrat­ions of methylmerc­ury in their bodies than non-indigenous Canadians, but there is sharp disagreeme­nt over the extent to which large dams are further elevating those levels.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States