Expediency and environmental protection: Nova Scotia can have both

Breadcrumb Trail Links

Halifax OpinionOpinion

Article content

Nova Scotia claims that it is modernizing its environmental assessment (EA) process so that it supports sustainable development while protecting the environment.

While mandatory public consultation is to be extended by several days, the level of scrutiny in the EA process of proposed initiatives such as large biomass, biogas and small modular reactors (SMRs) is much reduced by reclassifying them from Class 2 to Class 1 and exempting small biomass from the process altogether.

Article content

The government claims that these steps aim to enhance accessibility and align with its climate commitments – phasing out coal by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Critics argue the changes prioritize speed over accountability and risk greenwashing unsustainable industries.

Criticisms and risks

The proposed provincial EA reforms face added skepticism in light of other recent controversial policy decisions: the province’s failure to enact coastal protection legislation, its recommendations for housing developments near sensitive environmentally areas (Sandy Lake) and the lifting of bans on fracking and uranium mining.

The Ecology Action Centre (EAC) highlights persistent transparency gaps: ministers need not disclose decision rationales and public input remains a “void” despite extended consultation periods.

Article content

Biomass burning emits more carbon dioxide than fossil fuels and threatens Nova Scotia’s already imperiled forests. Biogas, while derived from organic wastes and therefore not a ‘fossil’ gas per se, creates similar environmental pollutants as ordinary natural gas fuel and any unburned gas that escapes contains methane, a long-lived greenhouse gas.

More alarming is the inclusion of natural gas-fired “reliability generators” in the fast-tracked category (Class 1). By greenlighting these technologies under the guise of “clean energy,” the government risks legitimizing industries that directly undermine its climate promises.

These projects, justified as backup for intermittent renewables, could lock the province into fossil fuel dependency for decades.

Regarding SMRs, I personally support nuclear power since it does not produce any greenhouse gases and wastes are well-managed, as long as they do not divert investment from renewables like wind and solar, which is unlikely in the near future due to cost concerns with SMRs and the fact that there are currently no operational SMRS in the world currently (although Ontario has just approved the construction of one at its Pickering nuclear site).

Article content

To make things worse, the recent lifting of bans on fracking and uranium mining – questionably framed as economic opportunities – exposes a stark misalignment with the Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act which mandates emissions reductions and Indigenous reconciliation.

Fracking, which appears not to be economically viable judging by the rate of bankruptcies in western areas of North America in last few years, releases large amounts of toxic wastewater and methane, a potent greenhouse gas and is known to cause earth tremors in some localities.

Instead of relying on large greenhouse gas emitters such as natural gas, biomass energy and biogas to achieve the province’s climate change targets, Nova Scotia should ramp up its efforts in the interim to replace all forms of ‘fossil’ power (not just coal) by accelerating the capacity of renewables: solar and wind power and geothermal, and by purchasing surplus nuclear power from New Brunswick and hydropower from Newfoundland and Labrador.

Article content

Uranium mining has the potential for an accidental breach of tailings dams and consequent releases of radioactive and hazardous wastes into nearby watersheds. Canada is the world’s second largest producer of uranium (predominantly in northern Saskatchewan).

With a guaranteed supply and the prospect of provincial trade barriers coming down, I would ask the premier why he thinks Nova Scotia should accept the environmental risk of this activity in the province?

Fairer, more efficient EA process

True sustainability is not about approving every project faster; it is about approving ‘the right projects’ with care.

Currently, over 99 per cent of proposed projects are ultimately approved, which seems highly unrealistic to even the most pro-development interests. How do we improve the entire approval process? Policies and practices related to development of natural resources need to be reviewed with regard to long-term sustainability, financially and environmentally.

Article content

We need to make a paradigm shift in the EA process itself to make it more transparent and efficient. The first step in the process is conducting sectoral or multi-sectoral strategic EAs in order to guide overall planning efforts especially with regard to any cumulative effects that may be triggered by the proposed project or activity.

Specifically, the province should completely ban any proposed highly climate-contradictory projects or activities which are inconsistent with its overall goal of a building a long-lasting, green economy that is powered by renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and tidal.

As such, it should restore its ban on fracking and any other proposed industry or activity which is a large greenhouse gas emitter. It should also restore its ban on uranium mining and any other proposed industry or activity with the potential for large releases of persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic chemicals into the environment.

Article content

These should be excluded up front before the EA process before it kicks in. Similarly, environmentally benign projects with a demonstrated history of minor impacts should also be approved up front, for example, erosion and sedimentation control works. EAs should be reserved for projects with likely effects that can be moderated with the appropriate targeted mitigation. A panel of independent subject matter experts including indigenous leaders would be relied upon to make the final determinations and resolve any controversies over project status.

The current EA reporting process is not balanced as it typically results in overly brief (Class 1) or dense multi-volume reports that are difficult to navigate and overly technical (Class 2). There is an urgent need for a concise, straightforward and transparent reporting format that could be applied to all applications which are not pre-approved or excluded up front.

Article content

Use of a methodological framework for focused EAs such as one that I developed for a proposed offshore petroleum project (federal EA) several years ago, would gain the province greater credibility and acceptance by proponents, regulators, stakeholders and the general public: by providing more background and substance to the EA reports rather than providing over-simplified summaries of impacts as the new policy proposes (Class 1) and by shortening times lines for preparation and review (and costs) by discontinuing the current unwieldy assessment process (Class 2).

A side benefit of the above reforms might be that controversial class designations for provincial EAs would become redundant and therefore no longer be required, another step towards clarity and efficiency which should appeal to all involved in the EA process.

Article content

In my opinion, this novel and enlightened approach to environmental assessment will make the process more efficient and perhaps more importantly will add to its credibility. In this way, the province can channel investments towards zero greenhouse gas emitting forms of energy such as wind, solar, geothermal, tidal and nuclear in the form of SMRs, “clean energy” producers that offer durable jobs without mortgaging our ecological future.

Transparency cannot be an afterthought rather a requisite of environmental assessment. Ministers must be required to publish detailed rationales for project approvals (and rejection), including how legislation, policy and public input related to climate and ecosystem impacts informed their decisions.

The province’s DEI and Netukulimk obligations should be enforceable, not aspirational, a shift that would empower Indigenous communities to challenge projects violating their rights.

Article content

Potential benefits

While accelerating “clean energy” projects is laudable, Nova Scotia’s reforms risk the appearance at least, of prioritizing expediency over rigorous environmental governance.

By fast-tracking contested technologies and undercutting transparency, the province risks eroding public trust and perpetuating unsustainable practices. A truly robust EA process would integrate independent reviews, enforce accountability for public input and exclude industries that contradict climate objectives.

Without these measures which promote a balanced approach to assessment, the policy risks becoming a tool for greenwashing rather than genuine ecological stewardship. I am sure that this is not what the Premier meant when he proclaimed that Nova Scotia will become a “clean energy” powerhouse.

Geoffrey Hurley is a retired environmental consultant who specializes in resource management. He can be reached at hurleyenvironment@gmail.com.

Article content

Share this article in your social network