If the benefits of further development are being calculated in dollars, the environmental and social costs must also be identified, measured and, wherever possible, costed.
Grand RiverKeeper Labrador is reserving in-depth comments on the renewed MOU between Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec to until we have had a chance to review the complete document. We have deep concerns that what lies within the details will not cover any of the environmental and climate concerns we have repeatedly asked to have covered.
We had reviewed the 2024 MOU and told the Independent Review Panel that it failed to address environmental factors. Grand RiverKeeper Labrador asked that the ecology of the Grand (Churchill) River and its 90,000 km watershed be assessed for short- and long-term cumulative impacts on wildlife, fish, and local people who rely on those resources. We also asked that the economic costs of disrupting Canada’s 7th largest river be included in any assessment of benefits. Dependent ecosystems will be harmed, and scientific studies show further development could increase methylmercury and other contaminants in the food chain, from the river and estuary into Labrador’s coastal regions and the Atlantic Ocean. Research also shows that shifting large river flows from summer freshets to heavier winter flows for electricity generation can affect the Atlantic Current, with implications for the northern hemisphere and global climate.
Premier Wakeham has said he believes the new MOU is better than the 2024 agreement. However, it still appears to focus only on the financial benefits for the province and Hydro-Québec, while saying nothing about the potential costs of environmental damage or whether those impacts can be mitigated. At several press events, Premier Wakeham has referred to mining and industry, including a U.S. company proposing to transport highly radioactive, uranium-bearing minerals across Labrador’s pristine interior. Yet he has not mentioned any benefits for Labrador’s coastal communities, such as access to cheaper power that could help grow local economies and reduce reliance on expensive, polluting diesel.
It also appears that greenhouse gas emissions from dams and reservoirs are not being counted, nor are emissions from diesel generators. To claim that these new projects are “clean and green,” as all proponents are doing, all emissions must be measured. We are not aware that this is happening. Newer, more accurate methods are available to measure emissions from reservoirs and dams, including drones equipped with lightweight laser spectrometers, or gas sensors, that can map emission plumes and calculate gas fluxes directly above water surfaces and across reservoirs. These drones can be operated safely from shore. Hydro-Québec and NL Hydro are, or should be, aware of this technology. Instead, they rely on G-RES, a model they know measures intermittent emissions at a single location and provides only broad averages or estimates. By contrast, newer technology can show actual emissions in real time. It is clear to us that the best available technology is not being used. Until it is, we ask the Premier, the Prime Minister, and Hydro-Québec to stop calling these hydro projects clean and green, because they are only estimating actual emissions.
While we are encouraged that there is consideration given to the wind farm, which, by the way, was proposed by the NunatuKavut Community Council years ago (1000 MW) but the provincial powers that be refused to even allow that proposal to go through environmental assessment. That project was a private investor and we could have had that much wind energy for the past 15 or 20 years except for the short-sightedness of those in power at the time.
We are saddened to hear that Gull Island is still on the table and will add further destruction of our River. We are also concerned that the original “half-baked” environmental assessment of the Gull Island project is now over 16 years old and we have amassed huge numbers of studies since that time on the negative impacts of mega hydro projects which were not known or not well known at the time.
Coastal communities appear to have been largely absent from public discussion so far. We understand that a project concept has been submitted to Major Projects (canada.ca/majorprojects) for northern Labrador entitled ‘Labrador Integrated Power Corridor’, it would be a Suspended Monorail carrying people, and power to replace diesel to the north coast of Labrador. A suspended electric monorail is better suited the rugged terrain north of Goose Bay, serve northern communities and mining sites, reduce the need for culverts, bridges, and snow clearing, and leave more of the pristine environment intact.
There is abundant literature that points to the damaging effects of megadams that further exacerbates the already global crises. GRK has been compiling a research database. The documents point to the facts that large hydro dams can; completely change whole ecosystems, wetlands, and riparian zones as well as disrupt wildlife, fisheries, and water systems. The research also show that reservoirs may emit significant greenhouse gases (especially methane)—sometimes comparable to fossil fuels. Many articles also point to evidence that dams may contribute to Arctic warming.
When will people, developers and politicians learn that there’s always a price to pay (and that the price comes with a huge dollar figure when natural capital is wrecked, destroyed or monumentally altered by interventions such as huge megadams and reservoirs?
Continuing down this path of river destruction is at the peril of all of us!
Our goal is to preserve and protect the water quality and the ecological integrity of the Grand (Churchill) River and its estuaries for present and future users and for posterity through actions of public awareness, monitoring, research, networking, intervention and habitat restoration. As such one of our key objectives is to bring awareness both locally and globally of the cumulative impacts associated with megadams that we become aware of through our research.
Views: 5