Water use the big concern in oilsands developments, native leader says

Edmonton Journal, Nov 8, 2006, FORT MCMURRAY -- Water, not oil, is the big concern for many native people intervening at regulatory hearings for Imperial Oil's Kearl project, the environmental manager of the Deninu Kue First Nation said Tuesday.
"What you guys are discussing here is crazy talk," Patrick Simon told a panel of representatives from the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.
Water is far more precious than oil, insisted Simon, who said a litre of bottled water costs about $2 while a litre of gasoline is below $1.
He said it's unreasonable that water is being sacrificed so that energy companies can continue to develop the crude resources in northern Alberta.
The Dene people, he said, are worried about the growing demand for water withdrawal from the Athabasca River, and question whether the water in the rivers around the oilsands development is safe for drinking.
Mark Little, oilsands development manager of Kearl, assured Simon that the project's impact on air, water and land are negligible.
But Little also said that on average the project will draw more than one billion cubic metres of water from the Athabasca River for approximately 50 years.
While other interveners are still negotiating with Imperial , the Mikisew Cree band has reached partial agreement. However, it still wants the company to reduce water withdrawals, especially during low flow months in the winter.
Imperial is working with other operators on a shared storage capacity during low flow seasons but no details can be released yet about the negotiations, said Imperial spokeswoman Kim Fox.
The Kearl project would tap up to 4.6 billion barrels of crude.
Imperial and ExxonMobil are behind the proposal to build the project, which could cost up to $7 billion and employ 2,000 people.
On Monday, Richard Secord of the Oil Sands Environmental Coalition claimed that just an extra cent spent on each barrel of bitumen produced could make the Kearl project carbon-neutral.
But Secord said that's not likely to happen, accusing the company of not having a "progressive" greenhouse gas management plan.
Little disagreed, saying the company does "recognize that the accumulation of greenhouse gases may prove to be a significant issue."