Other Manitoba and Saskatchewan Developments

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

February 16, 2024
MANITOBA GOVERNMENT ANNOUNCES VIVIAN SAND PROPOSAL WILL NOT MOVE FORWARD

– – –
Serious Environmental Concerns Outweigh Uncertain Economic Benefit: Kinew

The Manitoba government has decided to not issue an environmental licence for the Vivian sand extraction project in the Rural Municipality of Springfield, Premier Wab Kinew and Environment and Climate Change Minister Tracy Schmidt announced today.

“Our government will always put the health and safety of Manitobans first, and this includes ensuring communities have safe, clean drinking water,” said Kinew. “After taking the time and doing our due diligence, our government has come to the decision that the risks of this proposal outweigh any potential benefits.”

The decision made by Schmidt was based on the information and data provided by experts including the report done by the Clean Environment Commission (CEC) as well as consultation with impacted communities and First Nations, noted Kinew. The CEC report identified a number of serious environmental concerns about this project, which would have extracted sand through aquifers that provide drinking water to 100,000 Manitobans, said the premier.

“We have a responsibility to ensure we are not endangering Manitobans’ drinking water,” said Schmidt. “This proposal failed to adequately consider long-term impacts including potential aquifer collapse. That’s why we made the decision to not issue a license for the Vivian sand extraction project.”

The CEC also heard from hundreds of Manitobans voicing their opposition to this project including the community of Springfield, local leaders, scientists and environmental advocacy groups, noted the minister.

https://news.gov.mb.ca/news/?archive=&item=62000

Originally Posted by pspeid

I've been thinking about the history of this proposed project. I remember it was first announced with big, big, BIG potential for the province, and I was quite enthused with the idea. Money's going to flow in to our coffers, no more "Mr. Have-Not", etc. etc. etc. It almost seemed too good to be true; finally Manitoba had a resource that would make it rich, end there's lots of it. Then it was reported that there were concerns about water quality for, maybe, a few hundred people. Complainers who couldn't see the "big picture" I thought. Then the company started to throw around some threats about the consequences if the project wasn't green lighted. Weird. Why play hardball if the proposal was so good? THEN the election, and the attempt by the outgoing government to sneak in the approval while in caretaker mode. The more I heard about the project, the fishier it smelled. Now that it hasn't been approved, I feel we dodged a bullet. FactaNV made a good point. the profits most likely would have ended up in the pockets of the Alberta company running the operation, and any mess left behind would have been ours.

Thank you for your kind words. I am of proud Ukrainian farmer stock from Springfield. We still have the farm and it's been run by our family for 7 generations. I love the land and the woods, streams and fields that surrounded our farm. When I learned about this project I was in the same boat, I thought it'd be great, lots of new money and jobs for our RM. But I soon learned they planned on using an unproven technique that would drill through two aquifers, potentially contaminating both aquifers and that doing so could and probably would introduce shale particulate (and the arsenic and lead that go with it) into the second, cleaner aquifer. Nevermind their plan to install tailings ponds uphill of the Brokenhead River and the sinkholes that were expected to ravage the Vivian area by drilling a thousand plus wells.

It became an easy choice for me at that point. The water and nature of SE MB was not worth making Albertans rich, especially with corporate AB's record of leaving the public holding the remediation bag when shit goes wrong. They also tried green washing their company by changing their name and saying the silica was for solar glass. Originally, it was supposed to be for fracking...lovely people at Sio Silica, who have lied to and condescended the locals since the start. I'm glad our province values people over profit unlike our neighbours to the West, especially with the possible destruction of 100,000+ people's water supply on the line.

Sorry for the wall of text all, I love my land and the people I grew up around. When I can afford it, I intend to move back to the farm and raise my children how I was raised and the fact these jokers seemed to have zero problem jeopardizing our water and environment really rubbed me the wrong way.

[pspeid]

Here's Dan Let's editorial comments in the Free press on the Sio Silica issue. A bit more cynical, but generally approving of the final outcome:


Kinew deftly draws line in Manitoba’s shifting silica sands
Dan Lett
By: Dan Lett
Posted: 2:20 PM CST Friday, Feb. 16, 2024




At the start of the year, it seemed like Manitoba’s NDP government was destined to approve two major sand-mining operations. Six weeks later, one is approved and the other is, for all intents and purposes, dead.

What, you may ask, changed over the last six weeks?

Welcome to the constantly shifting world of Manitoba silica politics. A world that took some wild turns over the course of this week.


Premier Wab Kinew announced Friday that his government would not issue a licence for the Sio Silica mining project in southeastern Manitoba. The project, and its largely untested method of pumping high-quality silica sand from pockets beneath two critical aquifers, triggered both environmental and political controversies.

Kinew said Sio Silica was unable to prove that irreparable damage would not be done to the aquifers. As a result, there was no way forward to a licence, he added.

His declaration resonated positively with a small audience gathered in a community centre in Anola, a community in the Rural Municipality of Springfield east of Winnipeg that is ground zero in the region Sio Silica wanted to mine. Each time he said a license would not be issued, there was hearty applause from relieved activists and local residents in attendance.

However, Kinew also repeatedly noted the refusal to issue a license for Sio Silica does not mean the new NDP government was opposed to the mining of precious minerals such as silica. As evidence, Kinew pointed to another decision announced earlier in the week to license the Canadian Premium Sands mine on the Hollow Water First Nation.

Local residents still have some concerns about the CPS project, located 200 kilometres north on the eastern shores of Lake Winnipeg. However, as a more conventional open-pit operation, it does not present the same environmental or geological concerns. It also includes a processing plant in Selkirk to make solar panel glass.

“We are prepared to develop mining opportunities when it’s done right,” Kinew said several times.

Exploiting the contrast between the decision to approve CPS but deny Sio Silica is a deft bit of political wrangling on Kinew’s part.

Companies involved in extracting Manitoba minerals and other natural resources were, no doubt, watching carefully to see if the NDP government was going to err on the side of opponents. Rejecting both projects would have fuelled concerns the NDP were overcompensating to curry favour with the environmental lobby.

In that context, engineering two announcements in the same week — one project approved, another denied — helps Kinew maintain some measure of credibility with the business community.

The more important question to ask at this point is, when did Kinew and his political strategists realized that approving the first would insulate them from criticism for rejecting the second?

It did not always seem as if it would be thus.

In December, the news broke that following last fall’s provincial election, a former Tory cabinet minister, Jeff Wharton, tried to get some of his cabinet colleagues to approve a licence for Sio Silica before the NDP government officially took power. Influencing outgoing members of cabinet to make a big decision like that during the transition is considered very poor form.

Kinew clearly loved the scandal that Wharton had authored, but was careful to say that it would not impact his government’s decision on Sio Silica’s licence. In fact, Kinew made it sound as if the Sio Silica proposal was not a matter of if, but when.

And then, Environment Minister Tracy Schmidt strongly implied her government was going to issue a licence despite the concerns expressed by the Clean Environment Commission.

The CEC strongly recommended additional planning and long-term impact assessments before a licence was issued. Schmidt, rather remarkably, implied those concerns could be addressed after a licence was issued.

“There are eight recommendations in the CEC report,” Schmidt told the Free Press. “One of them was for a legal opinion, that work is done. One is that the minister set up… a monitoring committee. We’re certainly committed to doing that should the licence be issued. But the remaining six recommendations are all ones that we would envision, should the licence be issued, those would be baked into the environmental licence.”

Schmidt’s comments sparked significant concern among environmentalists and community activists opposing Sio Silica’s proposal.

At some point — and it’s not clear exactly when — someone had the political smarts to realize the CPS-Hollow Water project was the NDP government’s “get out jail free card” on Sio Silica. Or, maybe the government just got lucky.


The original comments made by Kinew and Schmidt could be viewed as the utterances of two seemingly talented politicians who are still learning to manage the enormous burdens that come with governing.

Putting aside Friday’s decision to deny Sio Silica a licence, there was no good excuse for Kinew and Schmidt’s cryptic comments suggesting the controversial subterranean silica project was primed for approval. Other than they are still growing into their new jobs.

As it stands, the Sio Silica project did not deserve to be approved. That means, regardless of how it got there, the NDP made the right decision.

And if they’re lucky, nobody will remember or care how the government got there.

[Justanothermember]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Thank you for your kind words. I am of proud Ukrainian farmer stock from Springfield. We still have the farm and it's been run by our family for 7 generations. I love the land and the woods, streams and fields that surrounded our farm. When I learned about this project I was in the same boat, I thought it'd be great, lots of new money and jobs for our RM. But I soon learned they planned on using an unproven technique that would drill through two aquifers, potentially contaminating both aquifers and that doing so could and probably would introduce shale particulate (and the arsenic and lead that go with it) into the second, cleaner aquifer. Nevermind their plan to install tailings ponds uphill of the Brokenhead River and the sinkholes that were expected to ravage the Vivian area by drilling a thousand plus wells.

It became an easy choice for me at that point. The water and nature of SE MB was not worth making Albertans rich, especially with corporate AB's record of leaving the public holding the remediation bag when shit goes wrong. They also tried green washing their company by changing their name and saying the silica was for solar glass. Originally, it was supposed to be for fracking...lovely people at Sio Silica, who have lied to and condescended the locals since the start. I'm glad our province values people over profit unlike our neighbours to the West, especially with the possible destruction of 100,000+ people's water supply on the line.

Sorry for the wall of text all, I love my land and the people I grew up around. When I can afford it, I intend to move back to the farm and raise my children how I was raised and the fact these jokers seemed to have zero problem jeopardizing our water and environment really rubbed me the wrong way.

Fully agree.

What scares me though, is that this decision could be reversed as soon as a Tory govt is elected. I mean, Heather and Co were basically ready to rubber stamp this thing and proceed full steam ahead, regardless of the environmental and human health risks.

[Justanothermember]

Having said that, I am all for economic development and growth. I long for the day this province can find a means towards economic prosperity. However I'm just not willing to be a guinea pig for new, unproven technology that runs a mammoth risk in destroying people's health and the natural environment. Let these Alberta phat cats test this technology in their own back yard, in their own people (I really don't mean that but the frustration in myself makes me angrily facetious).

In all seriousness, Sio, prove to us that your technology presents an extremely low human health and environmental risk. The onus is on YOU to bare that proof. If the evidence shows just that, THEN come and talk to us. Otherwise, stay away.

[pspeid]

^^ I fully agree with the above two comments. I was recently thinking that Sio Silica still owns the rights to mine the silica sand, and no company is going to allow anything as trivial as local government rulings get in the way of eventually making some potentially big bucks.

Part of me hopes we don't see the resurgence of the PCs for a while, but as much as I think their policies and their world outlook that spawned them stinks, democracy needs an effective opposition to keep governments in line, even the ones I currently like.

I was looking at the Sio Silica websites, and they like to boast about how environmentally progressive they are. What I'd like to see is some kind of thorough media investigation into their claims and practices. Summarize the scientific reports the NDP cites, compare them to company claims, contrast the Sio Silica operation with the Hollow Water/Selkirk decision.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by pspeid

^^ I fully agree with the above two comments. I was recently thinking that Sio Silica still owns the rights to mine the silica sand

Exactly, this isn't going away. I don't think people understand the magnitude of this silica deposit. It's 13 billion tons of Silica. It's potentially the largest and purest silica deposit in the WORLD. The largest other mine I could find was a 1.5 billion ton deposit. Sio is 10x that.

In the interim, Sio was only pulling 540 million tons.

Silica pricing is vague, but $50-80/ton seems to be the minimum.

At $50/ton
-That's a total resource value of $650 billion. Over half a TRILLION.
-And the 540 million tons they wanted to extract is worth $27 billion.

These are MASSIVE numbers. And that's at $50/ton. If rapid computerization and rapid solar demand drive up the price of silica, that value goes even higher. So ya, it's definitely not going away.

[1ajs]

wonder if theres any deposts in the north?

[FactaNV]

If this province was smart we'd take a quarter for ever dollar extracted (if a safe way is discovered) and start a sovereign wealth fund. Cost of doing business.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

If this province was smart we'd take a quarter for ever dollar extracted (if a safe way is discovered) and start a sovereign wealth fund. Cost of doing business.

Yes FactaNV you're onto something in emulating the Norwegians.

I dug into MB's mining tax structure. It's basically 10-17% of profit, with some weird bulk payouts at the $50m and $100m profit milestones.

The problem with this, is profit can easily be buried. And mines are risky so they don't always turn profit. So a mine could pull tons of resources, operate at breakeven, and gov't makes nothing in tax revenue. Additionally, the tiered rates discourage expansion.

As you mention, a proper royalty structure would make more sense here. Paid off the TOP line revenue at a fixed percent. NOT profit, and NOT tiered. I'm unsure what that percentage would be to correlate with similar current profit tax structures.

But this way future mines discount the value of their reserves right off the top, by paying gov first. They're also not punished for increasing production like with tiered tax rates. Ramp up. Build. The more you make the more you keep, and the more the gov makes in return. Everyone wins.

This way you're literally paying for the resource you take. Not your ability to extract it.

[FactaNV]

As an aside to the current conversation, I was in Steinbach for a mini roadie today - holy shit have they built a ton of apartments. Also two large projects with the hospital and the new event centre. Nice to see smaller cities getting some love.

Also, is anyone else tracking some NGOs and the RM of Piney are chairing a study into intercity transit in SE MB? It's been funded by other interested RMs. Wouldn't that be cool.

[1ajs]

First Nation buys bus depot, plans to revitalize northern bus service to Brandon
Wuskwi Sipihk First Nation to renovate, reopen bus depot in southwestern Manitoba's largest city

Chelsea Kemp · CBC News · Posted: Mar 15, 2024 5:00 AM CDT | Last Updated: March 15

A Manitoba First Nation wants to make southwestern Manitoba's biggest city more accessible for northern communities by reopening Brandon's bus depot.

Wuskwi Sipihk First Nation, located about 375 kilometres north of Brandon, purchased the former Greyhoud bus depot about a year ago and is now completing renovations. The depot, located at Sixth Street and Roser Avenue, was originally closed and put up for sale in 2017.

Chief Elwood Zastre said buying the depot is an opportunity for the First Nation's economic expansion and it will ensure northerners have easier transportation to the urban centre.

"We do a lot of our medical appointments there and if we didn't have a place for our people to get a ride on the bus it would be very difficult," Zastre said. "It's going to benefit a lot of people."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...ning-1.7144104

[FactaNV]

Less about the opposition, more about the subject - holy crap. $120,000,000 new pharmaceutical factory with a 1000 jobs in rural MB? That doesn't come along often. My one concern I share is if would have adverse effects on Birds Hill Park. https://www.google.com/amp/s/globaln...-facility/amp/

[Biff]

I watched their video. I'm sure it was 100% created by AI. Seems like a long shot to me, but I would be happy to be wrong.

[Winnipeg Grump]

Originally Posted by FactaNV

Less about the opposition, more about the subject - holy crap. $120,000,000 new pharmaceutical factory with a 1000 jobs in rural MB? That doesn't come along often. My one concern I share is if would have adverse effects on Birds Hill Park. https://www.google.com/amp/s/globaln...-facility/amp/

I'm not entirely clear what you're worried about. This is the type of facility they're talking about. There won't be 300 trucks a day rolling in and out of there like there is at all of those quarries that are literally next door.



And before someone says "Well then, why not build it in Winnipeg?" I dunno, cause their land acquisition cost will be halved at this site, maybe?

[pspeid]

If the pharmaceutical production facility is as good as they make it sound I'm all for it, but of course it could be some gilding the lily on the part of Mittall. We'll have to wait for more information, which is something I wish the locals would have done before sounding the NIMBY alarms.

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by Winnipeg Grump

I'm not entirely clear what you're worried about. This is the type of facility they're talking about. There won't be 300 trucks a day rolling in and out of there like there is at all of those quarries that are literally next door.



And before someone says "Well then, why not build it in Winnipeg?" I dunno, cause their land acquisition cost will be halved at this site, maybe?

Wastewater treatment from the chemical processes, that's my only concern. Nothing to do with local traffic, it's a highway, it's designed for high traffic haha.

[wags_in_the_peg]

What a weird location, cheap land but no businesses nearby, you think they would want to locate closer to Selkirk or Winnipeg. And that AI generated video is brutal...

[FactaNV]

Originally Posted by wags_in_the_peg

What a weird location, cheap land but no businesses nearby, you think they would want to locate closer to Selkirk or Winnipeg. And that AI generated video is brutal...

If I recall, St. Clements has some of the lowest property taxes/mill rates in the Winnipeg Metropolitan Area. However, don't quote me on that.