Syncrude is Guilty

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/syncrude-guilty-in-ducks-trial/article1618384/

A judge has found oil sands giant Syncrude Canada Ltd. guilty of a pair of environmental charges stemming from the deaths of 1,606 birds two years ago. Provincial Court Judge Ken Tjosvold ruled Friday that Syncrude was indeed responsible for its tailings pond where the ducks were found, and it “did not deploy the [bird] deterrents early enough and quickly enough” around the 12-square-kilometre pond, which contained toxic, oily bitumen byproduct.

Mr. White [the lawyer acting for Syncrude] will recommend his clients appeal because he believes the “judgment is incorrect,” arguing that to find the company guilty when its tailings pond was provincially licensed could effectively make all such ponds illegal.

It is to be hoped that Mr White is correct and that this ruling has serious repercussions for resource extraction industries.  (However, had Syncrude taken steps to prevent ducks from landing on its ponds, it wouldn't have been found guilty. ) June 25, 2010 may be identifiable later as the day where the tide turned against polluters - the day where they became responsible for their "externalities."  How can it be profitable to extract resources if taxpayers are left with the bills for cleanup of horrible messes?  It shouldn't be....

Ruling Expected in The Case of the Dead Ducks

No - I haven't found an undiscovered  Agatha Christie manuscript secreted in Grandmother's trunk.  The Globe and Mail contains an excellent article on Syncrude and those ducks that perished in their tailings pond. 

More than two years after 1,606 dead ducks were first found in a northern Alberta industrial tailings pond, a judge is scheduled to rule Friday afternoon on whether the deaths amounted to a violation of provincial or federal law.

A guilty verdict would be a major victory for environmentalists, long critical of Alberta's oil sands. But energy giant Syncrude Canada Ltd., which has been operating in the oil sands for over 30 years, warns such a verdict would effectively make tailings ponds – which are essential in the refining of Alberta's oil sands bitumen – illegal, bringing the economically vital industry to a standstill.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/prairies/ruling-expected-in-syncrude-duck-trial/article1617402/?cmpid=rss1

In other words, tar sands miners are worried that the costs of their "externalities" may be brought home to them. 

Syncrude and Those Dead Ducks

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/court-hears-final-arguments-in-syncrude-trial/article1566630/

A lawyer for Syncrude says charges faced by the oil sands giant over 1,600 dead ducks on its tailing pond are a cheap shot and a gross overreaction by prosecutors.....  If Syncrude is found guilty, then the ground will have shifted for every company in Alberta, Mr. White argued....Crown prosecutors, in their final arguments, have said the case is clear: Syncrude is mandated to take steps to keep birds off the tailings ponds and didn't do it.  Court has heard that Syncrude staff assigned to get air cannons and scarecrows deployed on the pond were two weeks behind schedule that spring and didn't get going until mid-April. Even when they did, the seven-member team couldn't do much. Their boats were out of service and they had one truck to deliver all the equipment. They managed to get eight cannons around the pond compared with 130 the year before.

If Syncrude is found guilty, then the ground will have shifted for every company in Alberta.  Precisely, Mr White, precisely.   The ducks aside, what happens to those toxic tailing ponds in the long term?

More on Those Dead Ducks

http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100421/edm_syncrude_100421/20100421/?hub=EdmontonHome

Documents obtained by CTV News show oil giant Syncrude knew several birds had been landing on its tailings ponds before more than 1,600 ducks were found coated in bitumen.  This comes as a series of employee interviews were entered as evidence at the company trial.  The documents show details from interviews conducted with about 20 Syncrude employees.  And on one page, an e-mail was shown suggesting the company knew about the waterfowl landing on the tailings ponds before the May 2008 incident.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Shortfall+bird+protection+deliberate+Syncrude/2941727/story.html

Senior Syncrude officials couldn't tell federal and provincial investigators why resources for the company's waterfowl protection plan declined in the years prior to the 2008, when more than 1,600 ducks died on a tailings pond.  Court documents show Alberta Environment investigator Sean Harris raised the issue with Syncrude managers a month after the ducks died, asking why the number of scare cannons being deployed to deter waterfowl dropped from 150 in 2001 to 67 in 2007. He also noted the number of deployed effigies or scarecrows dropped from 100 in 2001 to 27 in 2007.

Perhaps Syncrude needed to pinch pennies and decided not to worry about a few dead ducks.  (The Oil Sands Project reported earnings of only $ 737 million for the year ended 2007.)  They may regret their parsimony now that the chickens of bad publicity are coming home to roost. 

Those Dead Ducks

A few dead ducks in Syncrude's tailings ponds don't matter: after all, hunters kill millions of ducks per annum.   And wind power kills birds - so it must be OK that ducks drown in toxic goo.  Why are we wasting money on a trial?  We are only damaging the reputation - and that reputation was carefully built  too - of a great Canadian energy company - and perhaps the entire industry.  This isn't my opinion - it is that of Gwyn Morgan's in the Monday, April 19th business section of the Globe and Mail.  On page B7 to be exact.

I hope his eyes are brown!  Syncrude is on trial as prosecutors allege that the company broke the law.  Remember those stupid kids who sluiced ducks out of season and posted their hilarious video on You Tube?  They were charged  with killing migratory birds - and convicted.  Afterwards, one of them said:

"What happened was severe," he added. "A few ducks were killed and that's tragic. But this has been getting coast to coast and international coverage when endangered species are being killed everywhere, all over the planet." http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2009/08/11/sask-youtube-duck-hunter-convicted-observations.html

Sounds rather like the arguments Mr Gwyn Morgan used.  Yes, we killed a few ducks - but other people do worse things.  I hope Syncrude's lawyers have better arguments than that to present in court.  Is he suggesting that , since trials are expensive, that we shouldn't charge and try alleged child abusers?  After all, worse things have happened - look at the Holocaust! 

I think Mr Morgan is  spinning on behalf of tar sands producers and their carefully built reputation.   I'm sure he is worried about the effects on the industry if Syndcrude is convicted - and is therfore attempting to build support for the industry.   However, suggesting that Syncrude and the industry should be exempt from the rule of law seems a tad excessive to me.

Syncrude Goes to Court

Call me naive: I'm  wondering why Syncrude is fighting federal and provincial charges in the case of the dead ducks in their tailings pond.  Syncrude has apologized in public for the  1600 duck deaths.  So why isn't Syncrude taking its legal fees and putting its money into measures to prevent this from happening again? 
Not only that, their public relations staff could announce that Syncrude fully accepts responsibility amd os saving taxpayers the cost of a full trial. The answer, of course, is that the issue at stake is bigger than a one time incident. 
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2010/03/01/edmonton-syncrude-trial-dead-ducks.html

Speaking outside the courthouse Monday, Sierra Club Prairie director Lindsay Telfer said the case goes far beyond the ducks, and the "tailings ponds themselves are on trial.  I think that this incident specifically showed the world just how toxic the tailings ponds are," she said. "We know now that the waters have killed 1,600 ducks, we know that those waters are leaking into the Athabasca [River] and we know downstream communities have significant health problems."  Environmentalists and observers from the oil industry are watching the trial closely because it could set a precedent for tailings-pond operators.

And there you have it: tar sands producers are worried this case will set a legal precedent.  They fear they will be forced to take responsibility for their despoilation of the commons.  And if Syncrude loses, might tar sand producers also be forced to account for their emission of greenhouse gases?

 Watch for this case to go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada if Syncrude loses.