Wetland Loss and Degradation: The Hidden Costs of Ethical Oil Photo: Peter Essick Rebecca Rooney 1,2, Suzanne Bayley 2, Dustin Raab 2 1 Dept Biology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada 2 Dept of Biological Sci, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada rrooney@ualberta.ca
Ethical oil Ezra Levant (2010) Ethical oil: the case for Canada s oil sands Political oppression Human rights Canada vs. OPEC How to prioritize human and environmental ethical factors? Oil companies operating in Alberta are the same ones in China and the middle east. What are the costs?
Wetlands in the oil sands area Rooney, Bayley, and Schindler (2012) PNAS, 109: 4933-4937. Boreal Plain 475,000 ha is mineable 99% leased ~170,000 ha approved (10)
Oil sands accessed by strip mining Edward Burtynsky
Google Earth Image 0.33 and 0.63 m 2 of land 1m 3 of oil produced 12 km 49,700,000 m 3 produced in 2010 > 16.4 km 2
Data from Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resources Development Public liability Uncertainty of reclamation success The area of disturbed land that still needs to be reclaimed
Lots of peatland Little upland Little open water Pre-mining, the region is 62% peatland Suncor 2010
No peatland Mainly upland End pit lakes and stream network Suncor 2010
Wetland loss 1) Peatland dominated landscape will be replaced with a few, subsaline, shallow open water marshes. Photo: Suzanne Bayley 2004
Reclaimed forest It will take time for trees to mature
Constructed riparian area
Constructed marsh
4 mines provided comparable baseline and closure habitat area numbers Horizon Muskeg River Jackpine 1 Kearl 42% of land approved for mining
Wetland loss: mainly peatland Scale Description up: ~30,000 ha of peatland destroyed Total Pre Total Post Net change (ha) (ha) (ha) (%) Upland forest 39114 54587 15473 40 Shrubland 524 82-442 -84 Bog 5179 1320-3859 -75 ~4000 ha of marsh created ~5500 ha of riparian shrubland created Fen 13238 4683-8555 -65 Gramminoid marsh 878 2595 1717 196 Swamp 13054 9795-3259 -25 Shallow open water 456 94-362 -79 Lake 2059 5702 3643 177 Riparian shrubland 1 2327 2326 232600 Littoral zone 0 230 230 infinite Disturbance 6658 395-6263 -94 But, no operational scale evidence that reclamation efforts will succeed. What is the cost? Peatland (bog & fen) 18417 6003-12414 -67
Biodiversity: > 300 plant species Photo: Dave Locky 2004
Habitat for species at risk Carbon storage Water storage Reclaimed Natural Traditional use Bog Cranberry
Integrated risk assessment for Boreal Caribou Environment Canada (2011) Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 102 pp.
Reclamation and wetland degradation 2) The shallow open water marshes built for reclamation do not resemble natural shallow open water marshes Physical and chemical environment Plant community
OIL SANDS MINING PROCESS PEAT SURFICIAL DEPOSITS MARINE CLAYS OIL SANDS 19 of 40
Difficulties in wetland construction Water quality Salt Metals Hydrocarbons
Reclamation wetlands Small (1-20 ha) Elevated salinity (~ 1000 μs/cm) Shallow open water wetlands 3 vegetation zones Emergent (EM) Open water (OW) Wet meadow (WM)
63 wetlands 38 REF 12 Phys. 13 Tailings Reference Physically disturbed Similar range in salinity, surface area, depth, and turbidity. Tailings contaminated Ref sites ranged north and south / east and west of the reclamation wetlands.
E.g., same range of salinity Total dissolved solids (g/l) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Tailings contaminated Physically disturbed Reference Order 16 April 2012 Dr. Rebecca Rooney 23
1) Environmental stress? Usually abiotic Usually biotic Stress Response Driver Stress Stress Response
Are reclamation wetlands under greater stress? 52 environmental variables Ordination to summarize PC 2 Scores 6 4 2 0-2 -4 Na Conductivity Cations Anions TDS NH4 + TDN TN TP -6-8 -6-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 PC 1 Scores Rooney and Bayley (2010) Ecol. Indic., 10: 1174-1183 Just need 8 Water Sediment Physical Cont. Cations TN % water Max depth Secchi/Total Amplitude % oil Cl -
Stress Score Stress scores of all wetlands 18 16 Kruskal-Wallis with non-parametric multiple comparisons test REF < OS reference < OS process affected, at α = 0.05 14 12 10 8 6 4 Wetland Name Reference Physically disturbed Tailings contaminated
2) Biological response? Salinity Nutrient limitation Mining Turbidity Depth Slope Hydrocarbons Response?
Chara Myriophyllum No spp. R. cirrhosa P. pusillus C. demersum U. macrorhiza Total Oil sands wetlands have different SAV Categorical test of independence 74% of all Reference wetlands REF 2 2 2 1 3 24 4 38 OSREF 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 12 OSPA 5 1 1 4 2 0 0 13 Total 9 13 3 5 5 24 4 63 χ 2 = 67.75, d.f. = 12, p < 0.00001 Rooney and Bayley (2011) Ecol. Engineering, 37: 569-579
Carex atherodes, Scutellaria galericulata Carex aquatilis Hordeum jubatum, Sonchus spp. Total Oil sands wetlands have different wet meadow plants Reference 76% of REF Reclaimed sedge REF 19 3 3 25 OSREF 2 5 2 9 OSPA 0 5 6 11 Disturbed/saline Total 21 13 11 45 Dustin Raab (2010) MSc. thesis
Index of Biotic Integrity: submersed aquatic veg (SAV) Rooney and Bayley (2012) Env. Monit. Assess., 184: 749-761 16 April 2012 Dr. Rebecca Rooney 30
1. Select biotic metrics Measure Variables % C. demersum Diversity % Alkali tolerant 60 initial candidate metrics 11 significantly related to stress scores (α < 0.05) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0-20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 120 100 80 60 40 20 0-20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Low Stress Gradient High
2. Minimize redundancy 5 nonredundant (Pearson r 0.6)
SAV IBI Score 3. Verify: SAV IBI scores by wetland type 450 400 350 Reference < 12 ANOVA: F 2,59 = 34.7, p < 0.00001 300 250 200 150 Constructed > 160 100 50 0 R 2 = 0.51 P < 0.000001 5 10 15 20 Stress Score Reference Physically disturbed Tailings contaminated
WM IBI Score IBI: wet meadow vegetation 500 400 300 200 100 Reference Component metrics Robel height (Biomass) Vegetation zone width Mean C value Relative diversity exotic spp. Relative diversity halophytes Raab and Bayley (2012) Ecol. Indic., 15: 43-51 0 Constructed -100-200 R 2 = 0.50 P < 0.000001 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 Reference Stress Score Physically disturbed Tailings contaminated
Higher stress, lower health Salinity Nutrient limitation SAV Mining Turbidity Depth Slope Wet meadow Hydrocarbons
Summary Oil sands mining causes massive loss of peatland ~30,000 ha peatland destruction already approved Functions and values of pealtand
Summary continued Reclamation not restoration Replace peatlands with much less shallow open water marsh Different functions and values Reclamation marshes are not healthy Elevated environmental stress Different plant communities Lower biotic integrity
Conclusions Development charges ahead of reclamation creating 61,000 ha of reclamation debt 65% of land in the area was wetland Peatland is destroyed Replacement wetlands are different in type and of inferior quality Concern that reclamation plans may not be achievable Improved reclamation practices are needed
Co-authors: Dr. S. Bayley, D. Raab Acknowledgements Collaborators: Dr. L. Foote, Dr. J. Ciborowski, Dr. R. Vinebrook, Dr. H. Proctor, Dr. J.C. Cahill, C. Nielsen, D. Fabijan, & M. Bolding Many field and lab assistants