July 29, 2009 by admin.

Just a couple of minutes ago, a television reporter, accompanied by a camera man, showed up at our door and wanted to interview me regarding yesterday’s NRCB decision in favour of HAZCO’s application for the construction of a sulphur processing and shipping facility just 3 km east of Bruderheim and 6 km NE from the Town of Lamont.

By the way, the Edmonton Journal article on the NRCB decision (Jul. 29, 2009, bottom of page B3) gave incorrect distances to Bruderheim (2 km) and Lamont (10 km) from the HAZCO sulphur facility, but that reflects no more than the shoddy journalism that we have become accustomed to on this issue over the years.

Shoddy journalism is not necessarily the only reason why I refused to be interviewed on camera, but the CBC reporter was obviously inadequately informed to be able to perform an interview.  I explained that I had been working quite hard over the years on the HAZCO sulphur issue, that it appears that for all intents and purposes the Friends of Lamont County had given a fair and accurate presentation of the evidence at the NRCB hearing in April, and that on the balance of the evidence the decision should have gone against the HAZCO application.  However, now the decision has been made, and the development will most likely go forward.

There is nothing more I wish to do on the issue.   One heart attack is enough for me.

Aside from that, the CBC reporter was ill prepared to conduct an objective and informed interview.  She knew virtually nothing about the issues at stake and had obviously not made much of an effort to educate herself.  I did not ask her whether she had read the NRCB decision, but it appeared that she had not read it nor that she ever heard of or looked for the website in support of the Friends of Lamont County, at http://www.folc.ca. Nor did she even ask who I was or what my involvement in the discussion over the years had been.  Even though I gave her a number of leads that should have been part of an in-depth interview, it seemed that she was looking for nothing more than an opinion survey spiced up with sound bites.

I did tell her that I was not opposed to a sulphur processing and shipping facility, provided that it would be located a minimum of ten to 15 miles away from populated areas or population centres.  She did not ask what I base my preference on.  That illustrated to me that she did not have a clue as to how critical the distance of such a sulphur facility from residential properties is, and how much of a risk the facility poses to Bruderheim and area.

If you are a concerned resident of Lamont County, you may wish to refresh your memory on that.  Check the following links:

• Proposed Waste-Sulphur-Storage and -Handling Facility
• Environmental Impact of SulphurHealth-Impact of Sulphur
• Sulphur Poisoning
• Sulphur Fires

When the NRCB decision on the HAZCO sulphur facility will now be approved by the provincial cabinet, it will be nothing more than one of the first steps that will lead to a general exodus of residents, such as that which has been in progress in Strathcona County and led to the depopulation of the Industrial Heartland there over an interval of about 30 years.

Instead of promoting the thriving of rural life in the County of Lamont, the imposition of the creation of the Lamont-County portion of the Alberta Industrial Heartland and the licensing of oil-industry-waste processing facilities such as the construction and operation of the HAZCO sulphur facility will be the death of rural life and agricultural industry in the vicinity of Bruderheim.

Bruderheim and surroundings will gradually come to be seen no longer as an oasis in the vicinity of the petrochemical industrial area of Alberta (the largest such area in the world) but will come to be seen as being threatened by being at the centre of waste-processing facilities associated with Alberta’s petrochemical industry.

The only thing to do that is left to me and the members of my family is to make sure not ever to cast our votes for any party or political entities who made that happen.

Let’s hope that, when the music stops and the dance is over, there will be enough money to repair the damages.  It appears that the NRCB decision will not make certain of that.

Posted in Community & Industry, Hazco | Print | 2 Comments »

April 13, 2009 by admin.

The Edmonton Journal
Edmonton,Alberta,Canada
April 13, 2009

Bruderheim families voice safety concerns over ‘dangerous’ plan
By Andrea Sands,

…Area homeowners are also worried that train cars carrying sulphur to and from the plant may derail. Debbie Bishop, a lawyer for FOLC, said residents don’t … (Full Story)

________________
Note by folc.ca: The article identified above discusses the concerns of FOLC (Friends of Lamont County) that county residents in the vicinity of a proposed sulphur-forming, -storage and -shipping facility to be built less than two miles east of the Town have, if the Natural Resource Conservation Board (NRCB) gives HAZCO permission to build the sulphur plant and storage facility at the intended location.

The sulphur storage will have a capacity of up to 90,000 tonnes.  That is the carrying capacity of approximately six sulphur unit-trains of a hundred cars each and six times the amount of sulphur that burned in the disastrous sulphur fire that harmed thousands of residents at the town of Macassar, South Africa, in 1995.  Macassar was located at a somewhat greater distance from that sulphur fire than Bruderheim is located in relation to the proposedHAZCO sulphur plant.

The NRCB hearing will be held during an estimated four-day interval at the Lakeview Inn & Suites, 10115 - 88 Ave, Fort Saskatchewan.  The hearing will begin at 9:00 a.m., April 14, 2009.

The NRCB hearing is crucial to the future of the people who live in Lamont County.  What is at stake is essentially whether Lamont County — at the very least the areas that have been rezoned Heavy Industrial, and the areas adjacent to them — will within the space of a few years become as devoid of residences as is the Industrial Heartland in Strathcona County.

HAZCO’s sulphur facility poses a threat to residents within a large radius from its location (including the residents of Bruderheim and Lamont).  That is what is at stake at the NRCB hearing beginning on Tuesday.

It is in the best interest of every single resident of our county to attend.  It is especially in the interest of the residents of Bruderheim and Lamont to attend.

A good number of concerns by Lamont-County residents have not yet been addressed satisfactorily.  It is our health, our lives and our wellbeing that is at stake.

Make sure you are there!

 Lakeview Inn & Suites

10115 - 88 Ave, Fort Saskatchewan,

April 14, 2009, 9:00 a.m.

The details of the concerns by FOLC can be looked up at this link.

More information about sulphur fires is accessible at folc.ca.

Posted in Energy Purchases, Fines & Penalties, Hazco, Sulphur-Related Construction Costs, Hydrogen-Sulphide, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

April 11, 2009 by admin.

The NRCB hearing of HAZCO’s application for the construction of a sulphur-forming, -storage and -shipping facility between Bruderheim and Lamont (less than two miles east of Bruderheim, SE of the junction of Highway 45 and Range Road 2002) will begin April 14, 2009 and last an estimated four days.

The location for the hearing: Lakeview Inn & Suites, 10115 - 88 Ave, Fort Saskatchewan

The start of the hearing: 9:00 a.m., April 14, 2009

Here is an important note by FOLC’s lawyer, Richard Secord, dated April 08, 2009:

…We heard back from the Board this afternoon and we have been given 2 hours to present our direct evidence.

Best regards,

Richard C. Secord, B.A., LLM

Barrister & Solicitor

The NRCB hearing is crucial to the future of the people who live in Lamont County.  What is at stake is essentially whether Lamont County — at the very least the areas that have been rezoned Heavy Industrial, and the areas adjacent to them — will within the space of a few years become as devoid of residences as is the Industrial Heartland in Strathcona County.

HAZCO’s sulphur facility poses a threat to residents within a large radius from its location (including the residents of Bruderheim and Lamont).  That is what is at stake at the NRCB hearing beginning on Tuesday.

It is in the best interest of every single resident of our county to attend.  It is especially in the interest of the residents of Bruderheim and Lamont to attend.

A good number of concerns by Lamont-County residents have not yet been addressed satisfactorily.  It is our health, our lives and our wellbeing that is at stake.

Make sure you are there!

 Lakeview Inn & Suites

10115 - 88 Ave, Fort Saskatchewan,

April 14, 2009, 9:00 a.m.

Posted in Community & Industry, Pollution: Health Issues, Hazco | Print | 1 Comment »

January 27, 2009 by admin.

Today’s Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) pre-hearing conference, in relation to HAZCO’s proposed sulphur facility between Bruderheim and Lamont, took place at the Lamont Recreation Centre.  It was well attended by Lamont County residents and other interested parties.

The NRCB pre-hearing conference set out to identify the following:

1. a discussion of the major issues to be examined at the hearing;

2. the appropriate scope and jurisdiction of the review;

3. the location for a hearing, the appropriate timing of a hearing (the NRCB believes March 17, 2009 may be an appropriate hearing commencement date), and deadlines for filing hearing submissions;

4. a discussion of procedures to be followed at the hearing;

5. requests for advance intervener funding, and

6. other matters

(Source: Notice of Pre-Hearing Conference - December 3, 2008 at NRCB website)

The NRCB panel chairman stated that a hearing location closer to or containing a business center (e. g.: with facilities for copying, printing and Internet access) will be more appropriate and suggested therefore that the NRCB hearing of the HAZCO application will take place in Fort Saskatchewan, beginning with April 9, 2009 being a proposed date for HAZCO to respond to interveners’ submissions, and with April 14, 2009 being the likely date on which the NRCB hearing will commence.

The NRCB identified all of the submissions that had been made and received prior to the pre-hearing conference.  Those are shown in the following list, and each can be accessed by clicking on a given entry in that list.

1. Lamont Health Care Centre

That submission states:

The Board of Management has once again debated the proposed development of a sulphur plant AST/HAZCO Environmental Services.  While it is not opposed to industrial development, it is of the opinion that such a plant will not be advantageous to our community, and therefore this application should be denied.

The reasons for that position are contained in the document accessible at the preceding link.

2. Lamont County

1. Part 1 - Letter to NRCB

That letter informs the NRCB that Lamont County is continuing its review of the application by HAZCO, that the county has concerns, and that HAZCO’s application has been rejected by the County’s development authority, the Municipal Planning Commission (MPC), as per the decision attached to the letter.

2. Part 2 - Letter to Hazco

In that letter, the Lamont County informs HAZCO that, against “the backdrop” of the MPC’s decision to reject HAZCO’s application, “Lamont County continues to review the application information submitted by Hazco Environmental Services Ltd. (the proponent) to the NRCB,” but that the County continues to have several outstanding concerns…”, which concerns are then explained in more detail and discussed in the remainder of the letter, i. e.:

1. Risk Management and Emergency Response;
2. Ongoing Operational Impacts;
3. Cumulative Effects, and
4. Ongoing Compliance and Reclamation.

3. Part 3 - Municipal Planning Commission documents

Notice (dated April 12, 2006) of Decision (dated April 11, 2006) of Municipal Planning Commission, informing HAZCO that its application has been denied, with the reasons for that decision being attached  (contained in the set of documents accessible via the preceding link)

3. Town of Bruderheim

Excerpt from that letter:

….we feel it necessary to share the following issues with the Natural Resources Conservation Board for the pre-hearing conference taking place on January 27, 2009.

1. The concern is for the health and safety of the residents of the Town of Bruderheim. The proposed facility will be processing sulfur and its byproducts. Although the “Worst Case Scenario” information indicates that during an explosion residents may not be immediately exposed to lethal qualities of sulfur and its byproducts, we are concerned about the long term health risks associated with an explosion and its after effects.
2. Further, we are concerned about any long term health risks that our residents may be exposed to due to improper storage and handling of sulfur and its byproducts.

The Town of Bruderheim does not want to present itself or its residents as being anti-industry or anti-business; however, our objective is to protect the quality of life for our residents and our community.

4. Leslie Jans

Leslie Jans expressed concerns that, as she stated in that letter, “have not changed since this all started”, namely concerns about: Air Quality and Public Health; Increased traffic on an already busy and overcrowded highway; Reduction of Property Values, and The Risk of Fires.

In particular to her fourth concern, Leslie Jans stated, “We also have two members of the Lamont Fire Department in our family, let alone all of the other volunteer Firefighters in our community. Risk their lives/health for a facility that employs 16 people and feeds a conglomerate giant?

5. Friends of Lamont County (FOLC) The following list (taken from the documents listed at the preceding link) will lead to documents that provide the basis of the submission by FOLC.

1. FOLC - Tab 1 Contacts List
2. FOLC - Tab 2 Appendix to Screening Report
3. FOLC - Tab 3 Maps
4. FOLC - Tab 4 Dr. Hyne CV
5. FOLC - Tab 5 Dr. Hyne Budget
6. FOLC - Tab 6 Dr. Batterman CV
7. FOLC - Tab 7 Dr. Batterman Budget
8. FOLC - Tab 8 Dr. Coppock CV
9. FOLC - Tab 9 Dr. Coppock Budget
10. FOLC - Tab 10 Mr. Gettel CV
11. FOLC - Tab 11 Mr. Gettel Budget
12. FOLC - Tab 12 Mr. Picard CV
13. FOLC - Tab 13 Mr. Picard Budget
14. FOLC - Tab 14 Mr. Farquharson CV
15. FOLC - Tab 15 Mr. Farquaharson Budget
16. FOLC - Tab 16 Secord and Chipiuk CVs
17. FOLC - Tab 17 Legal Counsel Budget
18. FOLC - Tab 18 AUC Rule 009
19. FOLC - Tab 19 NRCB IFAAC Application Form

Mr. Secord, the lawyer acting for FOLC, presented an outline of concerns by members of FOLC at the NRCB pre-hearing conference, pointing out that sulphur processing, storage and shipping is not risk-free, that indeed sulphur-related incidents have led on some occasions to the evacuation of thousands of people, to the loss of health and lives of many, and to much damage to property, especially considerable damage to agricultural crops and life stock.

He used as an example an outline of the circumstances and consequences of a disastrous sulphur fire near Cape Town, South Africa.  That fire, produced many thousands of tonnes of sulphur dioxide gas that was blown by strong winds towards a nearby town at a distance that was greater than that separating Bruderheim and Lamont from the site of the proposed HAZCO sulphur facility.

Moreover, Mr. Secord pointed out that the sulphur storage pile that had caught on fire in South Africa in 1995 was considerably smaller in size than the sulphur storage pile envisioned by HAZCO to be in place for Phase I of their proposed facility.  HAZCO proposes that Phase I of their proposed project will require a storage pile that would be as large as 45,000 tonnes of sulphur prills, while Phase II would increase the size of the storage pile to as much as 90,000 tonnes.

Hazco’s lawyer voiced concerns over Mr. Secord’s estimate of the costs required for his involvement and over the costs of the expert witnesses that are slated to provide input at the upcoming NRCB hearing, stating in essence that the expert witnesses have overlapping fields of expertise and, moreover, have histories of having testified in the past on sulphur issues related to sulphur-forming processes that are being used by HAZCO’s competitors, for which reason it would be overkill to spend so much money (in the order of $200,000) on evidence that is already well-covered by HAZCO’s Environmental Impact Assessment study.

Mr. Secord responded by stating that, if one were to listen to HAZCO’s lawyer’s advice, it would perhaps be much better to have no NRCB hearing at all.  However, given that HAZCO had about seven years to work on what they are presenting now, it would only be reasonable to give those who oppose HAZCO’s application a little time and resources to have their say.

The pros and cons of that discussion at today’s NRCB pre-hearing conference are (as is everything that was presented and discussed) to be contained in full in a transcript at the NRCB website, most likely to be listed at Alberta Sulphur Terminals Ltd./Hazco Environmental Services - Sulphur Forming and Shipping Facility.

HAZCO wanted it to be known that some members of FOLC had written (apparently after the Jan. 21, 2009 deadline for submissions) to the NRCB and that those people had expressed concerns that are not in line with the submission filed by FOLC.

Mr. Kennedy of the NRCB identified just before the closing of the NRCB pre-hearing conference that letters by two or three additional individuals had been received late and just on the morning of the day of the pre-hearing conference

None of those letters are contained as of today in the NRCB’s list of pre-hearing submissions.

The decision by the NRCB in consequence of today’s prehearing conference will be made in writing and is supposed to be posted to their website.

Posted in Explosions & Fires, Community & Industry, Pollution: Health Issues, Emission Incidents & Issues, Hazco, Sulphur-Dioxide | Print | No Comments »

January 23, 2009 by admin.

Your attendance is needed!

This is for anyone who is concerned about the possible consequences and risks posed by the proposed sulphur-forming, -storage and -shipping facility intended to be built by Alberta Sulphur Terminals Ltd. (HAZCO) 2.2 km east from Bruderheim and NW from Lamont, at the junction of Highway 45 and Range Road 202.

The Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) will be holding a pre-hearing conference regarding HAZCO’s application to construct and operate a sulphur-forming and -shipping facility.  A plan for a buffer storage pile that will be out in the open, exposed to the elements and is intended to contain up to 100,000 tonnes of formed sulphur prills is part of HAZCO’s proposal.

NRCB Pre-Hearing Conference

Date and Time:    January 27, 2009 at 10 a.m.
Location:            Lamont Hall / Recreation Centre
4848 - 49th Street, Lamont, Alberta

You do not need to make a presentation, but your presence at the pre-hearing conference will have an impact.  It will help even more if you forward this message to your friends and neighbours before the NRCB pre-hearing conference takes place.

Print this message and pass it on to those of your friends who don’t have e-mail or Internet access.

Information on the consequences of some sulphur fires and other sulphur-related incidents throughout the world and Alberta is accessible through the following links:

• http://folc.ca/sulphur_storage/fires.htm
• http://folc.ca/sulphur_storage/evacuations.htm
• http://lce.folc.ca/category/explosions-fires/

(Note: The websites indicated by the preceding links are not affiliated with The Friends of Lamont County (FOLC), but they do support the work done by FOLC.

Looking forward to seeing you at the NRCB pre-hearing conference,

Walter and Ruth Schneider

Posted in Explosions & Fires, Community & Industry, Pollution: Health Issues, Hazco, Sulphur Logistics, Sulphur-Dioxide | Print | No Comments »

October 31, 2008 by admin.

Zamma [sic] City evacuated
By KEVIN CRUSH, Sun Media

2008 08 15

Zama City had to be evacuated after a fire at a sulphur plant Friday.

Fire broke out in a front end loader at the Apache Gas plant about 20 km south of the town at 1 p.m.

The loader was on top of a sulphur block at the time and when crews tried to get it off the block itself caught on fire.

The burning block produced hydrogen sulfide gas, which is deadly if inhaled, and sulfur dioxide which is also harmful….(Full Story)
________________
Note by folc.ca: There was a correction by officials, namely that the gas of concern was not hydrogen sulphide but that only sulphur dioxide (a product of the combustion of sulphur) was involved.

It seems that another item of information in the story requires correction. That is that the location of the sulphur-block that was on fire appears to be about exactly 15 km south-west of Zama City.

The evacuation of the residents of Zama City is of great interest to residents in Lamont County, especially to those in the vicinity of the proposed sulphur-forming facility intended to be constructed south-east of the intersection of Highway 45 and Range Road 202, 1.5 miles from the eastern border of the town of Bruderheim and 3.5 miles from the western border of the Town of Lamont.

Sulphur fires do happen. As shown in the webpages at folc.ca, they happen fairly often, and they can be and are started by front-end loaders used to handle sulphur.

AlthoughFront-end loaders feature prominently in HAZCO’s plans for their proposed sulphur-forming and shipping facility east of Bruderheim. Evacuations of residents in the vicinity of sulphur fires are a fact of life.  As per the article identified above, Mackenzie County Reeve Greg Newman stated, “With the limited access in and out of there and the potential for a major fire on the sulphur block, there was some concern,” and “I’d like to think we’re prepared for just about everything. We expect these kinds of things and we have the resources to prepare for them.”

That is in stark contrast to comparable expectations and the availability of resources to prepare for them in Lamont County.  HAZCO were repeatedly asked for details of evacuation plans in case of sulphur fires at their proposed plant. Other than to initially refusing to admit that sulphur fires at their sulphur facility could even happen or now claiming that it is extremely unlikely that they would ever pose a danger to nearby residents, as of now we have not seen any plans by HAZCO as to what will be done to evacuate and temporarily house the thousands of residents in the vicinity that would be put at risk through fires at their proposed sulphur facility.

Posted in Community & Industry, Explosions & Fires, Emission Incidents & Issues, Hazco, Sulphur-Dioxide | Print | No Comments »

January 3, 2008 by admin.

Lamont Leader, 2007 12 11, p. 3

BY CATHY WEETMAN

Note by folc.ca: Cathy Weetman’s article is posted here with the permission of the Lamont Leader. The fact that the permission was granted does not imply in any way that the Lamont Leader is partial in its reporting of issues relating to industrial development in Lamont County. Any perception of conflict between Hazco’s statements (as reported in the Lamont Leader article) and the appended comments by folc.ca is a result of differences between Hazco’s assertions and folc.ca’s clarifications but does not reflect any bias by the Lamont Leader.

A delegation of four representatives from Hazco were in attendance at the November 27 Lamont Town Council meeting to address concerns raised by councillors over the company’s proposed sulphur processing terminal to be built east of Bruderheim.

Rob Mann, Director of Sulphur Services, Sylvia Holowach, Project Administrator, Andrew Timlick, Business Development, Sulphur Services, Gordon Johnson, with Worley, Parsons Comex, stayed for an hour to answer questions from council about the time line for the proposed project, how large the stack of sulphur pastilles would be, traffic congestion on Highway 15, air monitoring and emergency response by the local fire departments in case of a fire.

Mann reported HAZCO has now completed the Environmental Impact Assessment study and it is now under technical review. From there, the Natural Resources Conservation Board takes over the review, and if the project is approved at that stage, a public hearing will take place. The time-line from now until the public hearing and final approval will be at least a year, he added.

Mann was asked how much truck traffic would be added to the already congested Highway 15. He responded that initially, there would be 40 trucks making round trips daily to and from the site that would be using both Highways 15 and 45. [Emphasis by folc.ca; see also appended comment #1 –WHS]

Another concern brought up by council was the height of the stockpiled sulphur pastilles as opposed to the height of the windscreen. Council was told that the majority of dust would be coming from machinery working at the base of the stockpile [emphasis by folc.ca; see also appended comment #2], and due to the type of sulphur processing equipment, the formed pastilles are much firmer and less likely to crumble than those processed a few years ago. [Emphasis by folc.ca; see also appended comment #3. –WHS]

“The older processes of forming the pastilles made them more susceptible to the wind blowing and causing dust,” noted Mann. [Emphasis by folc.ca; see also appended comment # 2 –WHS]

As to whether local emergency response organizations such as the Bruderheim and Lamont fire departments would need to assist HAZCO with on-site fires, Mann replied that it would depend on the size of the fire. A Level 1 fire could be handled by personnel on site, while a Level 2 fire would require the assistance of a local fire department. In a worse case scenario, a Level 3 fire would require the assistance of NR Care if the plant personnel and fire departments are unable to extinguish the fire. Local fire departments would not require special equipment or training when handling a fire. [Emphasis by folc.ca; see also appended comment #4 –WHS]

_________
Comments by folc.ca

1. “Initially” is an important key word here. What counts is not so much the initial traffic volume but what the volume of truck traffic will eventually be. Given the volume of sulphur to be formed into pastilles according to Hazco’s intentions, the truck traffic volume would soon intensify to two and more times than what Hazco stated it will initially be. Hazco is fully aware of what the trend in the increase of the traffic volume will be.
2. The hardness of the formed sulphur whose “…formed pastilles are much firmer and less likely to crumble than those processed a few years ago.” Regardless of the forming process used, solidified sulphur has a hardness of 2, about as hard as a fingernail but is brittle and prone to cracking, crumbling and pulverization if put under pressure, such as by a vehicle tire. Robert Mann failed to identify the forming process and locations used that produced much softer pastilles in the past, while the process intended to be used by Hazco will employ forming machines of a type that have been in use by Shell’s Shantz Sulphur Facility for 20 years or more.
3. The sulphur dust to be generated in Lamont County will be due to a major difference between the sulphur-handling process at Shantz and that proposed by Hazco. At Shantz, the whole handling process is by means of a totally enclosed conveyor belt system and large storage silos, while Hazco’s proposal calls for open storage piles and transfer from their sulphur pile to the train-loading facility by means of front-end loaders.
4. Fire fighting, fire-crew readiness and risks. Standards for procedures used in fighting sulphur fires call for a minimum of two fire-fighters wearing self-contained breathing apparatus, with a minimum of a further two fire-fighters that are also equipped with self-contained breathing apparatus standing by in case the active fire-fighters require to be rescued. To my knowledge, so far no agreements are in place as to local fire teams becoming involved in fighting sulphur fires at the proposed Hazco sulphur facility if that should be necessary and desired. (Check the consequences of a recent sulphur fire in Calgary: Huge Fine Handed to Calgary Sulphur Processor.) When I mentioned Hazco’s assertion that “Local fire departments would not require special equipment or training when handling a fire,” to the fire chief of one of our local volunteer fire departments, his comment was: “If that’s they way they feel, let Hazco fight their fires by themselves.”
   No one should blame him for that attitude. After all, his crew consists of our relatives, neighbours and friends who would be risking their lives in potentially dangerous situations whose danger Hazco insisted all along is non-existent.

Posted in Community & Industry, Explosions & Fires, Emission Incidents & Issues, Hazco, Sulphur-Dioxide | Print | No Comments »

October 19, 2007 by admin.

Canadian Occupational Health & Safety News
October 15, 2007

Alberta oil sands fire forces mass evacuation of facility

FORT MCMURRAY (Canadian OH&S News) — More than a thousand workers from an Alberta-based energy company were sent home following an early morning oil sands fire at a facility 25 kilometres north of Fort McMurray earlier this month.

The fire began in a drum of Suncor Energy Inc’s Millennium Coker Unit (a key processing unit in an oil sands upgrader) at around 6 am on October 2, states a press release issued by the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB). It took approximately 45 minutes to extinguish the fire, adds Josh Stewart, spokesman for Alberta Environment…. (Full Story)

[Update by folc.ca - 2007 11 08: The link no longer functions. Moreover, the website of OHSCanada contains not a single reference to Suncor, a fire at Suncor or any evacuations there that can be accessed through either an Internet search or through OHS’ search facility at their website. That is outright Orwellian editing of recorded history.

Fortunately, the full article from which the quoted paragraphs were excerpted is still available on the Internet at a few other websites that, unlike the OHS article, are fully archived at the Internet Archive.

Unlike the recorded history of the society that George Orwell wrote about in “1984“, any incident thought worth recording by anyone is impossible to erase now, for as long as total control and censorship of the Internet is not handed over to our governments.]

Stories and comments on Suncor coker fire

Comment by folc.ca: Why should anyone in Lamont County care about the Suncor fire?

The Suncor site is 25 km away from Fort McMurray. The Oct. 2 Suncor fire caused the evacuation of more than a thousand workers. How many thousands of people would have had to be evacuated if the fire would not have been 25 km but only two 2 km away from Fort McMurray, the distance between Bruderheim and the proposed HAZCO waste-sulphur storage and handling site?

The evacuation zone identified in the emergency response measures proposed by HAZCO includes neither Bruderheim nor Lamont. Its boundaries extend no farther than 1.5 km away from the proposed HAZCO site.

HAZCO insists that explosions and fires involving sulphur fires and the release of massive volumes of sulphur dioxide produced by such fires are not a threat to the residents of Lamont County. However, as the record of such incidents at http://folc.ca shows, and as is also shown in the category Explosions and Fires at this blog, sulphur fires and even sulphur-storage, -forming and -handling fires happen, happen frequently and happen even in Alberta. Such fires caused evacuations, and at times loss of health and of lives for miles around.

HAZCOS’ proposed sulphur-forming and -shipping facility must not be permitted to be constructed in a location close to areas with high population density. That still leaves the question as to whether the risk of having such a facility is tolerable even in areas with low population density.

Is the acceptance of risk to health and lives a calculated one and a matter of degree? If so, then how many lives constitute too many lives?

The location of Shell’s Shantz sulphur-storage, -forming and -shipping facility was picked because it is more than 40km away from the Natural Gas processing and desulphurization facility at Caroline, so as to remove the risk to Caroline residents that sulphur-storage, -forming and -shipping poses.

If a 40km distance between a sulphur facility and the residents of nearby communities was deemed safe then, how come that HAZCO now insists on lowering that standard to a small fraction (2km) of what it was when a permit was granted for the construction of Shell’s Shantz facility?

In case you wonder about whose sulphur will be handled by HAZCO, the majority, if not all, of that sulphur is being, and will be, produced and owned by Shell.

Posted in Explosions & Fires, Community & Industry, Emission Incidents & Issues, Hazco, Sulphur Logistics, Sulphur-Dioxide | Print | No Comments »

August 28, 2007 by admin.

Foreign Policy Association — Central Asia

Kazakhstan vs. ENI: Showdown

….in general oil majors operating in Kazakhstan are dealing with some seemingly unresolvable problems. We don’t like sulfur in our fuels, for instance; sour gas creates more pollution and is harder to refine. When that sulfur is extracted out, it goes into a world market that is supply-glutted. Many of the environmental violations for oil in Kazakhstan have to do with a sulfur that nobody wants, causes pollution, and that oil companies would be more than happy to get rid of at almost any low price you could name….(Full Story)
_______________
Right, and how will HAZCO make money on the sulphur it alleges it will produce in Bruderheim for the world market?

As to “any low price you could name”, oil companies operating in Alberta gave about $10 for each tonne of sulphur that anyone took off their hands in the second half of 2001, and they gave their sulphur away for nothing in the summer of 2007.

Right now the plant-gate price of sulphur is $40 a tonne, far short of recovering the cost of production or of shipping it to Vancouver and loading it there for export.

Nevertheless, even though there is no money to be made by the Canadian economy for exporting sulphur, sulphur processors, shippers and handlers get paid and make money.

Guess out of whose wallet that money comes. — folc.ca

Posted in Community & Industry, Emission Incidents & Issues, Hazco, World Sulphur Glut, Sulphur Logistics | Print | No Comments »

May 7, 2007 by admin.

Edmonton Journal; Page A18 Opinion
(Original source-location)

Residents need protection from stockpiles of this flammable byproduct of oilsands processing

BY DENNIS MASCHMEYER
and BARRY EASTWOOD
(Full Story)

Posted in Explosions & Fires, Community & Industry, Pollution: Health Issues, Hazco, World Sulphur Glut, Sulphur-Dioxide | Print | No Comments »