Week ending February 16th, 2024


Alberta: Have your say on Springbank Reservoir land use

Albertans are invited to shape how the Springbank Off-stream Reservoir is used when not full of water.

The Springbank Off-stream Reservoir is currently under construction west of Calgary to help protect Calgary and other downstream communities from future floods. The reservoir will be constructed as a dry reservoir, meaning that it will only store water in emergencies, not year-round. This means much of the land within the reservoir can be used for purposes other than flood management most of the time.

The Alberta government has created a draft land-use plan based on discussions with local community groups, First Nations and others. All Albertans are now able to provide input on this plan and share their thoughts on how they think this land should be used when the reservoir isn’t full of water.

“The Springbank Off-stream Reservoir is critical to protecting Calgary and other communities from future floods, but there are other uses too. This is a unique dam, and we want to hear your thoughts on how these lands should be used when not flooded. I look forward to hearing from Indigenous communities and all Albertans over the next four weeks.”

Rebecca Schulz, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas

In most years, the dry reservoir land will be available for purposes other than flood mitigation or related operational activities. Under the draft plan, First Nations would have priority access for the exercise of treaty rights and traditional uses and the public would have secondary access for uses such as non-motorized recreation activities when the reservoir is dry.

The Springbank Off-stream Reservoir land-use plan review will be open until March 17. After that, the government will review all the input Albertans have provided and develop a finalized plan to guide future land use in the reservoir, once complete.

Quick facts
  • Construction of the Springbank Off-stream Reservoir (SR1) began in spring 2022 and is expected to be complete in 2025.
  • The Government of Alberta is investing a total of $744 million to construct the SR1. The Government of Canada also contributed $168.5 million to the project.
Related information


Researchers demonstrate effective method for managing toxic mine waste

Abandoned mine waste may make ripples in the environment, leading to dead trees and ponds with no signs of aquatic life. This is the result of mine waste left in the environment that gets weathered by water and air. With exposure to the elements over time, the waste produces toxic substances such as arsenic and lead.

“It is a major environmental problem facing the mining industry in Canada and worldwide,” said Aria Zhang, who studied a method for covering mine tailings as part of her Master’s degree at the University of Waterloo. “Once these toxins are released, it’s difficult to control. It pollutes the soil and seeps into lakes and groundwater. It can threaten people’s drinking water supply, agricultural production, and the ecosystem.”

Under the supervision of professors David Blowes and Carol Ptacek, and hydrogeochemist Jeff Bain, Zhang assessed the effectiveness of a cover of layers of soil, sand, and gravel placed over mine waste near Timmins, Ontario in 2008.

The cover was intended to inhibit the chemical reaction that produces toxins and prevent them from leaching into the environment. However, there were concerns within the remediation industry about how effective covers would be in containing toxins from the waste — which was deposited on this site between 1968 and 1972.

“At old mine sites, metals like lead, arsenic, and copper have precipitated into unstable solids,” said Zhang. “It’s similar to limescale buildup in a kettle if there is hard water. They are sensitive to chemical changes, which means they could dissolve again under a cover and potentially get released into the environment.”

See also  Golder To Restore Inuvialuit Settlement Region for Imperial Oil

Using experimental techniques at the Canadian Light Source at the University of Saskatchewan and the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, Zhang and colleagues determined the remediation approach had been successful. They found that the cover did not destabilize toxic minerals at the site and was preventing more toxins from developing. Their findings were recently published in Applied Geochemistry.

“This cover is already applied at many mine sites, but because of this uncertainty about the chemistry there were some concerns,” said Zhang. “Now, we know better.”

The results provide useful information for decision makers and engineers as they plan future mine remediation efforts. “Our findings can be applied today. A lot of mining is happening and a lot of old mines are being remediated. As professionals design covers and select remediation methods to use, they can take our results into consideration.”

Zhang hopes their findings will benefit the environment and human health.

“Remediation is crucial in controlling the toxic metals in the mine waste from being released into the environment so that it doesn’t threaten the drinking water supply or cause health concerns. Those toxic metals are known to kill fish and cause cancer, so it’s very important to do something about it and to have confidence in the efficacy of your remediation method,” said Zhang.

This research is part of the TERRE-NET program, which spans six Canadian universities and funds interdisciplinary research on responsible mining practices.

Watch a video about this research



🌐 Alberta Acoustics, Noise & Vibration Society (AANViS) is embarking on a crucial expedition to shape the acoustic landscape of Alberta! As the president of the Alberta Acoustics and Vibration Society, Dan Clayton, invites you to be an integral part of the journey.

Express your interest, share your heartfelt input, or get involved by completing this online form: https://lnkd.in/eD_cPWpE or by reaching out to us at [email protected].

Discover the intricacies of Alberta’s noise and vibration challenges as we engage in deep discussions with municipalities. Uncover the gaps in current regulations and explore the need for a comprehensive Alberta Noise and Vibration Policy that goes beyond the ordinary.

AANViS believes in the power of collaboration. We’re calling on you to join us in refining and improving Alberta’s noise policies. Your heartfelt comments and valuable input will shape the foundation of our proposed regulations.

This video is also on YouTube here: https://lnkd.in/e9bTjbFn


Canada launches $1M Moon water purification challenge

(Source: ESEMag.com) As the Canadian Space Agency invites innovators to compete in the development of technologies that could remove contaminants found in Moon water, Western University is garnering attention for new research that shows how the Moon’s early crust contained more water than originally estimated. 

Dubbed The Aqualunar Challenge: Purifying Moon Water, the competition offers up to $1 million in grants that will be awarded in 2026 following successful concept design, proof of concept, and the development of a prototype. 

The grand prize winner also receives $400,000. 

The winning concept must focus on minimal energy consumption for the removal of contaminants found in water extracted from soil to produce usable water or propellant, while separating contaminants that could create byproducts to support human life on the Moon. 


“This new era of space exploration calls for development in many traditional fields of Canadian expertise, which opens up amazing opportunities for our innovators,” announced Francois-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry. “With initiatives like the Aqualunar Challenge, we are gearing up for humanity’s next step on the Moon and cementing Canada’s reputation as a valued partner in space while developing sustainable solutions for current challenges on Earth.” 

The Canadian Moon water challenge, in collaboration with the Privy Council Office’s Impact Canada, will run parallel to one organized by the United Kingdom Space Agency.  

While the innovations could help enable space missions, particularly as NASA continues its Artemis program, both agencies hope to eventually find applications for the Moon water purification technologies on Earth as well. 

Western University Moon Research 

Just days before the Canadian Space Agency launched the competition, Canada was making headlines for other Moon water news, after Western University postdoctoral fellow Tara Hayden said she had begun to piece together an unknown stage of lunar history.  

Hayden, currently working as a cosmochemist with renowned planetary geologist Gordon Osinski in Western’s department of Earth Sciences, says she discovered the water-bearing mineral apatite in the Moon’s early crust, and published her recent findings in the journal Nature Astronomy. 

“Lunar meteorites are revealing new, exciting parts of the Moon’s evolution and expanding our knowledge beyond the samples collected during the Apollo missions. As the new stage of lunar exploration begins, I am eager to see what we will learn from the lunar far side,” said Hayden in a statement from Western University. 

Hayden says that most of the opinions formed about the Moon being dry is based on samples from the 14 missions during the U.S. Apollo Program (1961-1972). But those samples are thought to only represent about 5% of the entire moon surface, said Hayden. 

“Until we get more samples back in the upcoming Artemis missions, the only other samples from the surface we have are meteorites,” she adds.  

The discovery of apatite in this rock type has allowed for the direct examination of this unknown stage in lunar evolution for the first time. 

Aqualunar Challenge Stages 

  • Stage 1- Concept Design: Challenge launched on January 17, 2024. Applications are open until April 8, 2024 at 11:59 pm Pacific Time. Teams will provide a detailed explanation of how their solution meets the Challenge objectives, Mission Scenario and judging criteria. 
  • Stage 2- Proof of Concept: Beginning in June of 2024, semi-finalists selected in Stage 1 will move on to Stage 2 of the Challenge, where they will begin developing the key components of their prototypes based on their concept design — equivalent to a technology readiness level 3 (TRL 3). Semi-finalists will be expected to submit video footage to demonstrate their system or components of their system and will provide a final report that outlines how their technology meets the judging criteria listed. 
  • Stage 3- Prototype Scaling: At this stage, selected finalists will have 10 months to integrate the components of their prototypes (minimum TRL 4). Finalists will demonstrate their systems and have their outputs tested and will be competing to be the Grand Prize Winner of the Challenge. 
  • Canadian Grand Prize Winner for the Aqualunar Challenge will be announced in Spring of 2026. 


Federal Court allows review of Crowsnest Pass coal mine that was denied by panel

(Source: Lethbridge News Now)

BLAIRMORE, AB – A Federal Court ruling Tuesday has thrown out a decision from federal Environmental Minister Steven Guilbeault denying a permit for an open-pit coal mine in the Alberta Rockies.

The ruling, which comes in response to two Alberta First Nations, will force Guilbeault to revisit the issue after consulting with the bands on the economic benefits of the proposed mine.

The company hoping to develop the mine, Benga Mining, also requested the decision be reviewed. It was denied.

The court ruled that the Piikani and Stoney First Nations never received a consultation opportunity they had been promised by the federal-provincial panel that reviewed Benga’s application.

In his ruling, Judge Richard Southcott said the joint federal-provincial review panel that examined the Grassy Mountain proposal near Crowsnest Pass didn’t live up to the consultation promises it made.

Southcott said the review panel released its report and delivered it to Guilbeault on June 17, 2021. In a news release that day, the panel promised that both First Nations would be consulted again before the minister delivered his decision.

However, about five weeks later, the panel issued a final report to the minister, stating that consultation was complete.

“This report stated that the (federal Impact Assessment) Agency considered the consultation process conducted to date to be reasonable and properly implemented, and that affected Indigenous communities were given sufficient opportunity to express their views and share concerns throughout the process,” Southcott wrote.

But he said that deprived the First Nations of the opportunity they had been promised to present arguments on the impact and benefit agreements they had reached with Benga.

“In my view, the representation in the news release supports the First Nation applicants’ position that they had a legitimate expectation that they would receive the benefit of further consultation before the decisions were made,” Southcott wrote.

“Once the news release gave rise to a legitimate expectation that such procedure would be followed, that procedure was required by the duty of fairness, and the First Nation applicants were entitled to take advantage of the opportunity.”

The ruling now obliges Guilbeault to rescind his earlier decision and revisit it after the promised consultation.

“The minister’s decision will be set aside and the matter referred back to the minister for redetermination following the required consultation,” the decision says.

The company, now known as Northback, earlier lost an attempt to seek judicial review from the Alberta Court of Appeal and was denied permission to take that request to the Supreme Court.

However, Northback is still attempting to develop a mine at Grassy Mountain and holds exploration permits for the area. It has applied to the Alberta Energy Regulator to develop the mine.

Although the provincial United Conservative government has imposed a moratorium on all coal development along that cherished landscape, Northback maintains that its application under the name Benga should allow it to be considered an “advanced project” and as such, exempt.

Douglas Rae, whose firm represented the Stoney Nakoda First Nation, said it’s not clear what happens next.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 13, 2024.


Ottawa dismisses Yukon First Nation’s concerns regarding Mount Nansen mine clean up

(Source: CBC News) The federal government is disputing claims made by a Yukon First Nation that work to clean up the Mount Nansen mine site is riddled with problems.

In a complaint filed to the Yukon Water Board last year, the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation (LSCFN) states its rights are being violated. 

The First Nation singles out the federally-funded company tasked with cleaning up the site — the Mount Nansen Remediation Limited Partnership — and also trains the dispute at the territorial and federal governments, which the First Nation says are “in breach of their treaty obligations.”

“Nearly a quarter-century after the Mount Nansen claims area closed, the surrounding waters remain polluted, undrinkable, and destructive rather than supportive of natural ecosystems, and the LSCFN citizens remain unable to meaningfully exercise their Aboriginal and treaty rights,” the complaint states.

The Mount Nansen mine, once called an “embarassment to Canada” by a Yukon judge, produced silver and gold in the 1990s. The company, Toronto-based BYG Resources, quickly went bankrupt and abandoned the mine, which was then foisted onto the federal government.

The First Nation is raising its concerns because, it says, the mine site has yet to be remediated, and is leaching heavy metals into the environment, infringing Indigenous rights. As well, Mount Nansen Remediation’s water licence expires in 2026.

The First Nation argues contamination in and around the site, about 45 kilometres west of Carmacks, Yukon, is increasing, more than 20 years after the mine was declared abandoned. It also states that work to keep the site stable is further harming the environment, hobbling reclamation and closure plans.

The application calls water treatment at the site “ineffective,” with only five contaminants —  including arsenic, zinc and ammonia —  treated of more than two dozen.

The First Nation also accuses the company of routinely breaching its water licence for, among other things, not adequately monitoring aquatic effects, meeting effluent standards and failing to report certain water quality results.

It wants the water board to amend the company’s water licence to require better monitoring and water treatment efforts. 

In a response submitted to the water board in December, the federal justice department states the remediation company is meeting the requirements of its water licence. It also says that the licence amendments the First Nation is calling for don’t apply to care and maintenance activities now underway, but remediation, which will require a different licence.

The federal government also states the First Nation’s concerns “reach well beyond” the project currently on site, and the corresponding licence. 

“The board does not have the jurisdiction on this application, or perhaps at all, to resolve those concerns,” the federal submission reads.

The First Nation wants compensation for losses, but the federal government dismisses that, saying there’s no legal basis for granting that. 

Jim Harrington, the director of the Mount Nansen Remediation, said the company is committed to working with the First Nation, and has been. 

According to reports on the company’s website, staff have met with LSCFN citizens a couple times last year, to, among other things, answer questions.

“The scale of the treatment system, the nature of the treatment system and the operation of that system is [sic] 100 per cent consistent with the licence we were given,” Harrington told CBC News. “It’s certainly not perfect, because it’s an interim process.” 

Asked how the company has been working with the First Nation exactly, he said that has included looking at adding provisions to the existing licence. 

“I don’t think activities themselves have been degrading the site. I think, if anything, they’ve been making the site better.

“Water was just being pumped directly into the creek before.”

The company has a remediation proposal now being screened by the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board. Harrington suspects it will take at least five years for the plan to be approved and improved by the decision bodies.

The water board declined to be interviewed by CBC News.

In an email to CBC News, Karen Clyde, the director of the board’s secretariat, said the board hasn’t seen a complaint like this before. That’s because the application leverages the First Nation’s modern treaty while pushing for a water licence amendment.

The water board secretariat has issued a tender to get a company to review the First Nation’s dispute. Bids close on Feb. 19. 

LSCFN, along with its lawyers, weren’t available for comment. Nor was the Yukon government. Ottawa referred CBC News to its water board submission.

The First Nation’s complaint to the water board says the Mount Nansen area traditionally served as a key hub for harvesting because the land was rich, providing sustenance to many people and animals for generations. Several parcels of the First Nation’s settlement are in the area. One is only 500 metres downstream of the site.

In an affidavit included in the complaint, elder Rosalie Brown describes the devastation wrought by the mine. 

Caribou and moose were once abundant. Ambling around was even the odd silvertip grizzly bear. Brown states she and her family used to drink straight from creeks, which she knew were clean because they were full of trout, grayling and other fish.

Then the major mine came along and polluted the water and those fish suffocated, Brown says.

“Now, often the only animals we see around there are dead animals … We must go hours away from Mount Nansen to look for food that is safe to eat … I will not gather medicines near those water bodies,” reads her affidavit.

In another affidavit, Eric Fairclough — the former chief of the First Nation and now the director of lands and resources — also states he no longer harvests from the land, fearing contamination.

“Today, I would not harvest either small or large game or gather berries within four to five miles [roughly six to seven kilometres] of the mining activity at Mount Nansen,” he states. 

“There are very few animals left to harvest. Most of the caribou and moose have left the area. The ones that remain are often unhealthy and unsafe to eat. I have family members who recently harvested a moose there and reported that its liver was compromised and degraded in a way that they had never seen before.”

Last year, the water board called a licence proceeding with all affected parties. The board also ordered the First Nation to file a response by Feb. 2. To date, one has yet to be submitted.


First Nation community, citizens’ groups launch court challenges to halt Chalk River radioactive waste dump

(Source: Ottawa Citizen)   The decision to construct a nuclear waste disposal facility at Chalk River is being met with fierce opposition from citizens’ groups citing environmental concerns and a court challenge from the Kebaowek First Nation alleging the government breached its duty to consult the Indigenous community.

Kebaowek First Nation, part of the Anishnabeg Algonquin Nation and one of nine communities that make up the Algonquin Nation in Quebec, filed a Federal Court application for a judicial review of the Jan. 9 decision by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, which authorized construction of the Chalk River “mound” at the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories site in Deep River, Ont.

The CNSC announced in January it would amend the operating licence of the Chalk River facility to authorize construction of a near-surface disposal facility (NSDF) at the site, designed to contain one million cubic metres of radioactive waste and located about one kilometre from the Ottawa River.

The proposed NSDF site is about 180 kilometres northwest of Ottawa and is located within Algonquin Nation traditional land, adjacent to Kebaowek’s title territory, according to the court filing.

In its application, filed in Federal Court last week, the Indigenous community asked the court to reject the CNSC authorization and to declare the agency “breached its duty to consult Kebaowek by failing to secure the First Nation’s free, prior and informed consent, and by carrying out consultations in a procedurally unfair way.”

A related application for judicial review was filed in Federal Court on Wednesday by representatives of citizens’ groups citing numerous environmental concerns over the facility, which is designed to last 550 years, a period far shorter than the half-life of the radioactive material it could contain, according to researchers with the opposition groups.

The citizens’ groups, including the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (CCNR) and the Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area (CCRCA), also sent a letter to Parliament last week urging the government to reverse the decision and to halt the NSDF project.

The Chalk River mound’s lifespan would consist of a three-year construction phase, a 50-year operation phase, a 30-year closure phase, a 300-year institutional control period and an indefinite post-institutional control period, according to court filings.

“During the closure phase, a cover would be placed on the mound, but prior to that, during the 50-year operation phase, rainwater could enter and allow radioactive materials to leach into the environment,” according to the application.

“In an attempt to mitigate this, the NSDF project includes a waste-water treatment plant that would release treated water either into the groundwater or directly into Perch Lake. Perch Lake drains into the Ottawa River. The mound is designed to last 550 years before it erodes and its contents are released into the environment.

Officials with the CNSC declined to comment, citing the legal challenges before the courts, and directed inquiries to the Justice Department.

In a prior statement to CTV News, the regulator said the purpose of the NSDF project “is to provide a permanent disposal solution for up to one million cubic metres of solid low-level radioactive waste, such as contaminated personal protective clothing and building materials.

“The majority of the waste to be placed in the NSDF is currently in storage at the Chalk River Laboratories site or will be generated from environmental remediation, decommissioning, and operational activities at the Chalk River Laboratories site.”

Approximately 10 per cent of the waste volume will come from other sites owned by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., according to the statement, “or from commercial sources such as Canadian hospitals and universities.”

Opposition groups, who have been fighting the plan since it was proposed in 2016, questioned the agency’s claims in phone interviews this week.

“It’s never really been completely clear what kinds of waste will be going in there, and, the more we learn, the more we say this is not the type of material that should be going in an above-ground mound,” CCRCA researcher Ole Hendrickson said.

“This is not just hospital mops and gloves and shoe covers. This is radioactive waste from the past 80 years of working with nuclear power and the kinds of waste that resulted cannot be left in an above-ground mound. The kinds of waste that come from 80 years of nuclear research is not appropriate for above-ground disposal.”

The application for judicial review last week was filed on procedural grounds, with the groups arguing the CNSC did not “meaningfully” address concerns raised during the public consultation phase.

One of those concerns cited the Canadian Nuclear Laboratory’s environmental impact statement, which “confirmed that the NSDF would expose members of the public to radiation doses that exceed the limits set by Canadian regulation and international standards,” according to the court filing. “Going above these limits will result in an increased risk of cancer and genetic defects to members of the public.”

In a statement, Kebaowek First Nation said the site “is a mere 1.1 kilometres away from the sacred Kichi Sibi (Ottawa River), on unceded Algonquin territory, which holds immense spiritual and cultural importance for the Algonquin people.”

In its application for judicial review, Kebaowek alleged the CNSC “failed to properly uphold its duty to consult, and as such has failed to uphold the constitutionally protected and inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples.”

In a media release announcing the NSDF project in January, the CNSC said it was “satisfied it had fulfilled its constitutional responsibility to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous rights in respect of its decision making on the NSDF project.”

At the time, the commission noted the site was on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin people and said the project “is protective of human health and the environment, including the Ottawa River, and that the proposed site is an acceptable and safe location for the NSDF Project.”


In its application, Kebaowek alleged the CNSC made a “critical error” by “sidestepping” issues addressed by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Canada’s support of UNDRIP through its United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.

“The risk of harm from the proposed NSDF is not only a First Nations issue, it also affects all individuals, animals, plants, and waters in the vicinity. We are doing this on behalf of our People and all Canadians who depend on the Ottawa River as their drinking water source,” Kebaowek Chief Lance Haymond said in a statement.

“The duty to consult was breached. We are going to the Federal Court to challenge the commission’s incorrect and unreasonable decision. The commission needed to carry out a procedurally fair consultation process informed by the UNDRIP, which it ultimately failed to do.”

In its January announcement, the CNSC said it gave “careful consideration” to all submissions and perspectives the agency received throughout the multi-year regulatory review process, which began in 2016.

“As a lifecycle regulator, the CNSC focuses on continuous engagement and consultation with Indigenous Nations before, during and after commission proceedings for CNSC activities,” the agency stated in its media release. “This includes, for example, collaboratively drafting rights impacts assessments with Indigenous Nations and communities, and consulting on mitigation measures to help minimize any potential impacts of the NSDF project.”



Upcoming Events


Canadian Brownfields Network conference issues call for abstracts

The Canadian Brownfields Network  (CBN) is issuing a call for abstracts for presentations at its 2024 national conference. The CBN is a knowledge-based national network of passionate and multi-disciplinary volunteers focused on uncovering, understanding and sharing brownfield barriers and solutions.

The 2024 CBN Annual Conference will be held on May 30 at Toronto Metropolitan University. The theme of this year’s conference is “Brownfields Here & Now” and will explore the challenges and opportunities with current brownfield redevelopment and remediation, including issues related to policy and legislation, balancing community priorities, standard of care, and climate resilience.

Abstracts are being accepted for the following themes.

Innovative Practices in Brownfield Restoration and Remediation

Shining examples of brownfield restoration with new breathtaking ideas that will revolutionize the way brownfield redevelopment is done.

For example:

  • Next generation sustainability goals for residential, reaching beyond net zero
  • Green remediation and Circular Economy for Brownfield redevelopment
  • Advanced Information Management with AI

Preventing Future Brownfields

Lessons learned, and practices implemented, from natural disasters and climate change mitigation.

For example:

  • Wildfire contamination cleanup
  • Building back better to avoid flood risk
  • Planning mitigation/remediation to withstand floods and climate change

The submission deadline is March 1st. Click here for full details.



MARCH 20-21, 2024 | Delta Saskatoon Downtown

Meet the Speakers

SustainTech 2024 is an environmental conference in Saskatchewan that brings together industry experts, academia, consultants, and regulators to share innovative ideas, technologies, and sustainable practices. The conference includes a half-day workshop, 24 technical sessions, two keynote speakers, and a regulatory session by the Ministry of Environment. Four dedicated breakout sessions will address legal best practices, brownfield sites, and remediation and vapor mitigation technologies. The conference offers an opportunity for professionals, researchers, and regulatory officials to stay updated on environmental advancements and foster connections to drive positive change.

There are 3 ticket options:

  • Member SustainTech – $400 (you will have the option to add on the workshop for $125 during the registration process)
  • Non-Member SustainTech – $500 (you will have the option to add on the workshop for $125 during the registration process)
  • Workshop Only – $200 Select this if you are not planning to attend SustainTech

We are thrilled to announce that SustainTech 2024 is set to welcome an exceptional group of technical speakers. This year, we’ll have four extended breakout sessions to provide you with more comprehensive and in-depth presentations.

Here are our confirmed speakers as of today:

  • A Hypothetical Approach to Terrestrial Population Level Ecological Risk Assessment           
    Presented by:     Karl Bresee, Intrinsik Corp.
  • Advanced AI and ML Strategies for Cost-Effective Environmental Liability Reduction in Resource Sectors
    Presented by:      Brandon Smith, Clear Site Solutions Inc.
  • Assessment of Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD) as a Corrective Action Management Option, Buffalo Narrows Fire Protection Base, Saskatchewan. Part 1. Development of the LNAPL Conceptual Site Model.            
    Presented by:     David Pritchard, CD P.Geol., Clifton Engineering Group.
  • Balancing Liability and Costs while Meeting Ever-changing Regulations for Landfills            
    Presented by:     Kerri Walker, Associated Environmental Consultants.
  • Firefighter Training Facility Restoration: PFAS source control and novel in-situ Remediation
    Presented by:     Korene Torney, SLR Consulting Canada Ltd.
  • Fostering Sustainable Remediation: Debunking Cold Climate Myths and Harnessing Bioremediation in Canada       
    Presented by:     B.J. Min, TRIUM Environmental Inc.
  • Identifying and Addressing False Petroleum Hydrocarbon Detections from Natural Organics
    Presented by:     Dwayne Bennett, ALS Global.
  • Impacted Site Transactions – Hurdles and Issues 
    Presented by:     Ryan Riess, R Squared Environmental Inc.
  • Low Probability Receptor – Overview and Net Environmental Benefit        
    Presented by:     Cory Kartz, Millennium EMS Solutions Limited.
  • Nelson River In-Water Remediation         
    Presented by:     Vanessa Krahn, Dillon Consulting Limited.
  • Not Your Standard Remediation: Application of On- Site Water Treatment via Reverse Osmosis
    Presented by:     Jeff Belecky, Millennium EMS Solutions Limited.
  • Occupational Health and Safety in Saskatchewan – Responding to Incidents and Understanding Due Dilgence          
    Presented by:     John Agioritis, MLT Aikins LLP.
  • Overview to the Proposed Amendments to the Federal Methane Regulations       
    Presented by:     Joey Woehleke, North Shore Environmental Consultants.
  • PFAS: Regulatory Advancements and Lessons Learned on Assessment, Delineation, and Data Interpretation           
    Presented by:     Nikki Hilker, SLR Consulting Canada Ltd.
  • Phytoremediation of Contaminated Sites: Adapting a Natural System to Meet Remedial Goals       
    Presented by:     Ron Gestler, Geosyntec Consultants.
  • Quality Assurance of Laboratory Results
    Presented by:     Jeff Zimmer, Saskatchewan Research Council.
  • Rapid Transition of Abandoned Oil & Gas Well: The Renuwell Story            
    Presented by:     Keith Hirsche, Renuwell Energy Solutions Inc.
  • Real-time IoT sensors and site-specific biostimulation: accelerating contaminated sites down the path to closure. 
    Presented by:     Steven Mamet, Environmental Material Science Inc.
  • Snakes And Turtles And Bats, Oh My! What Environmental Consultants Need To Know About Species At Risk          
    Presented by:     Anand Srivastava, Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP.
  • Sustainability implications of applying multiple site-specific salinity guideline methods to salt-affected sites            
    Presented by:     Eric Van Gaalen, Trace Associates Inc.
  • Techno-economic analysis of heat pump for clean heating in Saskatchewan          
    Presented by:     Adisorn Aroonwilas, University of Regina.
  • The Dirt on Developing Brownfields        
    Presented by:     Anand Srivastava, Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP.
  • There’s Been A Spill…Now What? Legal Requirements For Responding To A Spill   
    Presented by:     Anand Srivastava, Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP.
  • USASK Environmental Engineering Program – What the Environmental Industry Needs     
    Presented by:     Wonjae Chang, University of Saskatchewan.
  • Vapour Intrusion Demonstration              
    Presented by:     Darius Mali, Geosyntec Consultants Ltd.
  • Wastewater Plant Spill Cleanup 
    Presented by:     Gordon Will, Associated Environmental.
  • When a Claim Comes:  Strategies For Effective Outcomes
    Presented by:     Eric Mager, McDougall Gauley LLP.

For additional details, or to register visit: https://www.seima.sk.ca/sustaintech


ESAA Job Board

Check out the new improved ESAA Job Board.  Members can post ads for free.

Current Listings:
  • Intermediate Environmental Scientist, Arletta Environmental Consulting Corp
  • Intermediate Report Reviewer, North Shore Environmental Consultants Inc.
  • Environmental Professional / Project Manager, Ecoventure Inc.
  • Intermediate Environmental Professional- Assessment and Reclamation Group  – Triton Environmental Consultants
  • Environmental Co-op Student – Trace Associates Inc.
  • Environmental Student – Trace Associates Inc.
  • Junior Geoscientist – Trace Associates Inc.
  • Junior Environmental Scientist – Trace Associates Inc.
  • Technical Operations (Environmental) – Edmonton, Alberta – Nichols Environmental
  • Technical Operations (Environmental) – Calgary, Alberta – Nichols Environmental
  • Human Resources Generalist – Edmonton, Alberta – Nichols Environmental
  • Junior Environmental Consultant – North Shore Environmental Consultants Inc.


Subscriptions are free and open to members and non-members.

* indicates required
ESAA Newsletters
Email Format

Recent News