A member of the politically appointed group looking at how water is use to recover oil said rural Albertans still have time to sway the final report to the provincial government.
Mary Griffiths, co-chair of the minister’s advisory committee on water use practice and policy, said she is disappointed with the draft report on the use of water for injection and enhanced oil recovery.
“It’s so important to get the message out to the rural community to make them aware they can make a difference if we get enough of a response,” said Griffiths, an environmental policy analyst with the Pembina Institute, an independent environmental think-tank.
Read Also
Interest in biological crop inputs continues to grow
It was only a few years ago that interest in alternative methods such as biologicals to boost a crop’s nutrient…
Griffiths believes that with strong input from rural Albertans by the May 31 deadline, she can convince her committee colleagues to strengthen the recommendations and require oil and gas companies to reduce or eliminate their use of water for oil recovery.
With only a month left for public consultation, Griffiths has written an open letter to Albertans asking for their immediate support.
“If I get enough people writing in, it would help strengthen the argument that people, rural people especially, have about water use,” she said.
The committee, appointed by Alberta Environment minister Lorne Taylor last year, was part of the provincial water strategy, Water for Life. The committee reviewed data and activities that remove water from the natural hydrological cycle and held meetings through the winter seeking opinions on the issues.
During the public meetings Griffiths heard about the need to end or reduce the amount of water used in enhanced oil recovery. She said she signed off on the preliminary report only because of the promise of a public consultation process.
“Right from the beginning in the Water for Life strategy, in every public meeting, people were raising the concerns about ground water.
“It does indicate it is a major concern,” said Griffiths, who wants the final report to include a timetable for a reduction in water use or to ask companies to begin looking for alternatives to water.
The draft recommendations do not require companies to look for alternatives before applying to use surface water for oilfield injection, nor do they require the elimination of use of fresh water for oilfield injection, said Griffiths in her open letter.
She said she understands that her co-chairs, David Trew of Alberta Environment and David Pryce with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, are concerned about the economic impact if there was a total ban on the oil industry’s use of water, but she still feels the need to press for deadlines.
“I’m very disappointed with the preliminary recommendations,” she said.
Pryce said he was pleased with the information in the preliminary recommendations because many people learned how the oil and gas industry works and about its use of water.
“It was a really a good educational piece and it allowed us to conclude that we are fairly well regulated,” said Pryce, who added companies have been striving to reduce the amount of ground water they use in the recovery of oil and gas.
“It’s clear we have been doing a lot historically to reduce our water use and there are still opportunities to reduce it,” said Price.
Albertans can read the draft report and respond to the questionnaire by logging on to the government website at waterforlife.gov.ab.ca.
