Federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault is catching flak from opposition MPs after Canada’s Impact Assessment Agency decided a massive thermal coal mine expansion in Alberta does not require a federal assessment.
The IAAC decided Coalspur Mines Ltd.’s proposed expansion of its open pit coal mine in west-central Alberta doesn’t require a federal impact assessment because the company has been “actively consulting with numerous Indigenous groups,” and there are other provincial and federal regulations to address any potential negative impacts.
NDP MP and environment critic Laurel Collins and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May panned Guilbeault’s decision to not use his ministerial powers to order an assessment.
“This is a shocking decision made by a government that tries to brand itself as a global climate leader,” Collins wrote in a letter to Guilbeault and Energy and Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, on Dec. 11.
The Liberals’ 2021 election platform promised to crack down on coal. This included phasing out unabated coal-fired electricity by 2030, ending thermal coal exports by 2030, and no longer approving new or expanded thermal coal mines. There is strong progress on phasing out coal-fired power generation — Alberta’s last coal power plant stopped operating in June — but Coalspur’s proposed expansion of the Vista coal mine would export thermal coal well past the Liberals’ 2030 deadline.
Collins' letter urged Guilbeault to “immediately reconsider this disastrous decision” and ensure the expansion undergoes a federal impact assessment.
She argued many potential problems posed by coal mine expansion fall under federal jurisdiction, including impacts to fish, fish habitat and species at risk. Both the large, open pit expansion and a smaller underground mine test impact the habitat of Athabasca rainbow trout and bull trout.
In 2021, when Wilkinson was environment minister, he designated the Vista expansions for impact assessments, but things have changed, Guilbeault told Canada’s National Observer in an interview.
Last fall, the Supreme Court decided that some parts of the Impact Assessment Act were unconstitutional, and the federal government made amendments to address the ruling. One of the changes removed the act’s ability to consider transboundary impacts like air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, a move roundly criticized by environmental lawyers and MPs including Collins and May.
“It was clear to us that if I was to designate it again, the company would likely sue and because of the Supreme Court ruling … the chances we would lose in courts were very high,” Guilbeault said.
Hermine Landry, Guilbeault’s press secretary, said based on the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling, it is evident federal designation of projects is only permissible where there is clear federal jurisdiction and no alternative mechanisms to address impacts.
The Vista project impacts are already covered by 11 existing provincial and federal regulations, including the federal Fisheries Act, Species at Risk Act, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and a provincial environmental assessment, to name a few, the IAAC told Canada’s National Observer in an emailed statement.
“On top of that, we have 10 [Indigenous] Nations who have interest in the project, who were telling us that us designating the project would violate their Section 35 rights under economic development, so it's a very different context than when Jonathan decided to designate it at the time,” Guilbeault said.
Located about 10 kilometres east of Hinton, Alberta, the Vista open-pit coal mine produces about six million tonnes of thermal coal per year, according to the company’s 2021 submission to the IAAC. Coalspur is pursuing two expansions to the existing mine. One would expand the current open-pit mine to increase coal production capacity by 4.5 million tonnes per year. The second proposed expansion is for a small underground mine in the same area to test whether the company could add a larger underground mine to its operations. The IAAC decided the open-pit expansion will not require a federal assessment, and the underground mine expansion is already underway.
“It is also worth noting that there is no viable business case for thermal coal, making it unlikely that this project will proceed,” Hermine Landry, Guilbeault’s press secretary, said in an emailed statement to Canada’s National Observer.
“We’re seeing that coal is in decline just about everywhere around the planet with the notable exception of China,” Guilbeault said. Since the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015, roughly three quarters of proposed new coal power plants were cancelled, he noted.
“Clearly, it is a declining energy source while we see renewables soaring all around the world,” Guilbeault said.
But thermal coal exports from and through Canada have been on the rise in recent years, Collins’ letter noted. May, Collins and many environmental groups say the lack of federal oversight on the Vista coal mine expansion casts serious doubt on the federal government’s willingness and ability to stop thermal coal exports by 2030.
The good news is, there is actually a government bill that, if passed, would ban thermal coal exports, May said in an interview with Canada’s National Observer on Dec. 12.
“It's been frustrating for me that no one talks about it being important,” she said.
Bill C-33 mainly deals with rail safety and port management. May was able to introduce an amendment, so it now requires the government to create regulations to prohibit thermal coal exports out of ports by Dec. 31, 2030.
The bill was about to go to a vote when CPC MP Andrew Scheer kicked off a months-long filibuster, keeping the House of Commons deadlocked in what feels to May like “an endless Mobius loop of Groundhog Day.”
Because C-33 is a government bill, “it's one of the bills that's at the top of the order paper to get passed,” if the filibuster ever ends, May said. Collins previously introduced a private member’s bill to ban thermal coal exports, but it has yet to move past first reading.
May thinks Collins’ bill has no chance of passing because it isn’t up for debate any time soon. The focus should be on getting C-33 through the Senate before the next election, May said.
“The good news is we will ban the export of thermal coal, as long as Bill C-33 gets through,” May said.
CPC MP Gérard Deltell, the party's environment critic, did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did Bloc Québécois MP and environment critic Monique Pauzé.
— with files from John Woodside
This article was originally published in Canada's National Observer.