Vale Inco's emissions plan doesn't impress residents

Oct 24, 2008- 3:26 PM

By:

Posted by Sudbury Northern Life Reporter Bill Bradley

Vale Inco is asking the Ontario government for relief on its nickel emissions levels.

But that did not sit well with some residents at a public information meeting at the Italian Club Thursday night.

The event was hosted by the company to inform residents about how they project having difficulty meeting Regulation 419, established by the Ontario government in 2005.

“Through the regulation, the province has set newer or more stringent air quality standards,” said Ed Cocchiarella, manager of the environment, Ontario Operations of Vale Inco.

Vale Inco emissions standards video“Our measured results at monitoring stations around the perimeter of the smelter complex show we are in compliance with the standard on nickel approximately 98 per cent of the time,” said Cocchiarella.

That is because the company has embarked on an ambitious emissions reduction program over the years, resulting in a 90 per cent reduction in SO2 emissions since 1970.

When the Fluid Bed Roaster (FRB) plant was commissioned, SO2 emissions were reduced below the 2007 limit of 175 kilotonnes. Between 2005 and 2015 another reduction to 66 kilotonnes is expected, he noted.

“Out of 870 samples over the last five years, 15 were above the standard set by the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE),” he said.

The problem for Vale Inco arises over the fact the province wants the company to update their air dispersal models to give regulators a better picture of the impact of their industrial emissions.

The model calculates mathematical, theoretical concentration values to predict the impact of all emissions from the smelter on an hour to hour basis for each day of the five year period at approximately 5,000 points around the smelter. It includes sensitive locations like hospitals, schools and day cares.

“The regulation requires all sources to be considered, including road dust. This has caused a shift in our priorities and plans as we develop methods of reducing road dust,” he said.

For the smelter, the new standards take place in 2010. The company indicates that it is seeking an alternative standard for only one chemical, nickel.

“Our modelling, as required under the regulation, indicates that nickel emissions from our Copper Cliff Smelter could exceed the nickel standard when it takes effect in 2010,” he noted.

The new standard for nickel averaged over a 24 hour period is two micrograms per metre cubed of nickel daily. The company is seeking instead a standard of 15 micrograms per metre cubed of nickel daily.

That higher value did not sit well with a number of residents.

Stuart Cryer felt the company has made a lot of money recently, and should be able to afford the technology necessary to meet the limits.

“The Sudbury Soil Study has brought forth quite a bit of data relating to metal contamination. It is now the right of the community to address these issues,” he said.

But Cocchiarella said it is taking time to figure where the worst problems are and how to remedy them. He said the company has recently paved 6.5 km of roads in order to reduce emissions arising from dust and initiated the FRB project as part of its overall strategy to be environmentally and economically viable.

Nursing student Tiffany Furlong said it is well known that metals such as nickel are carcinogens and that every effort should be made to reduce emissions as much as possible.

Allison Reed, from New Sudbury, said she already experiences health effects from  contaminants and has had herself tested for copper levels.

“Some people like me in the community can be very sensitive to chemicals in our immediate environment,” said Reed.

Homer Seguin, retired health and safety activist for 50 years, said he felt the meeting was too structured and not enough public participation was encouraged.

Catherine Grant, from the Air Standards and Risk Management Technology Standards Section of MOE, said the government wanted to make the process initiated by the company transparent.

Residents were encouraged to fill out questionaires at the meeting and to comment when the application is posted on the MOE's EBR posting.

Further information on the alternative standards process can be received by calling 416-327-6600 or the local MOE office at 705-564-3212.

Read More: Home > Sudbury News

Reader's Feedback

Editor’s Note:

NorthernLife.ca may contain content submitted by readers, usually in the form of article comments. All reader comments and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of NorthernLife.ca. The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that NorthernLife.ca has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to NorthernLife.ca to report any objectionable content by using the "report abuse" link found in the comments section of this web site.

13 Comments

  • Awwwwwwwwwwwww....

  • Gotta love that Phallic Superstack!

  • Whatcha your paranoia and deflection is exactly what''s wrong. Revisionist thinking doesn''t solve anything. First off, Walkerton was a direct result of the Keoble brothers being unqualified to run the place. They admitted to falsifying records and not having the proper degrees. The government had zero to do with that. An enquiry recommended that stronger regulations were a good thing - everywhere. Just like safe driving is a good thing. But preventing fraud starts at the person. As for the Listeria "crisis" with Maple Leaf foods? It was not as a result of poor regulation. Again, it boiled down to human error. Dozens of other plants continue to run just fine. With current regulation. What''s the excuse for them? Of course, the unqualified Monday Morning Quarterbacks in the media are using Listeria to attack (what else is new) Harper and Harris. There are regulations in place for emissions. The companies are moving toward targets. But you can''t force a goal that cannot be reached because the know-how doesn''t exist. Then point the finger at scare stories that have nothing to do with SO2. Yes, innovation happens.But we are not in the Jetsons'' age yet. Keyto is a perfect example of environmentalism gone nuts. 90 percent of the world doesn''t understand its stifling and impossible goals. And the greenies just blindly say, implement it. Blind to the massive job losses, and crippling punishments on corporations for impossible targets that can''t be met. And the unfair advantages to overseas nations that are exempt. Give the Chicken Little and big business conspiracy theories a rest. We are moving forward. But change takes time and we need to be accommodating.

  • So what about the government? Harper''s plan is suppose to be in place by what 2050? It''s pressure from the automakers/big oil/etc.....that if they''re forced to implement these changes (too quickly) JOBS will be lsot.........

  • Oh MAT I''ve seen you fair share of whining and demanding in this forum. Are you suggesting that less regulation and less gov control will help INCO continue in it''s pursuit of stricter enviro controls? Remember Walkerton and the Listeria crisis, both brought on by greater self regulation and less gov regulation/control. The environment needs government intervention. Corporations will NEVER be mindful of their enviro impacts of their own accord. The only time private interests care about what they do to the environment is if the pollution they cause interrupts their bottom line. Then they typically move to tap a different area’s resource. Many examples of this all over the world. Vale is doing well, and continues to work towards a healthier environment for us, but it is our health, and we want the best environment available so that we can maintain our health.

  • The eviro-nuts continue to demand regulations and have no solutions. Inco has cut its S02 over 90 percent since the ''70''s. They continue to implement the latest technology and want to be a good corporate citizen. But nothing will satisfy the greenies. The complainers and greenies have it easy. Just whine and demand a level of compliance. It''s easy to legislate. Much harder to invent. If the shoe were on the other foot, and they were demanded to reduce their home furnace output or face huge fines and a shutdown, what would they do? Especially after investing in a new furnace and scaling back heating, without any new technology they''d be screwed. But it''s far easier to just tell the city''s largest employer to meet a goal or else. Newsflash folks! Sudbury has been a mining town for almost 200 years. Those that can''t stand the sight of the Superstack or have reactions to the process, should look elsewhere to live. Its the same as complaining about the smell of fertilzer and living in a farm community. Or the traffic congestion at Young and Dundas because you live in a Toronto condominium. Instead of falling for the green paranoia, and blaming Inco and Falco for our prosperity, how about finding solutions? Give your heads a shake.

  • what i would like to see to make this reporting unbiased... Is INCO currently making steps to try to reach the target? It takes time to put things in place, perhaps the development and implementation of the technology is going to take a little longer than expected and INCO saw that, so they voice their concerns now instead of at the last minute? i know for a fact inco is the single largest polluter in the area. but you also need to look at far they have come in reducing emissions since smelting started. you all bash INCO but you seem to forget there would be no Sudbury without it. You don''t like inco and the money they induce into the Sudbury economy, then move.

  • And yet I can''t have a fire in my back yard.

  • I agree. And with the recewnt ''Financial Crisis'' going on, hopefully itll happen sooner. I believe Inco is a huuuge contributer to pollution, and i wish that i didnt live so close to the horrible thing that i look at everyday as i open my window.

  • No doubt Inco will get what it wants! The number of people with serious health issues in Sudbury as a result of the emissions from Inco must be very high. Of course there will be those who say that it''s a price you have to pay for the employment they provide but with the money they have made over the years surely they can use some of their profits to make things safer for the people of Sudbury. It is disgusting the way these big companies get away with things but of course as we all know money talks. Maybe it''s a high price to pay, your health or being able to buy your expensive housing and the toys that go along with!!

  • I can see where Vale Inco is coming from, there was some good points put forth at the meeting, however Nickel is still carcinogenic & can cause other health problems so it should be reduced as soon as possible. If Vale Inco cannot meet the emissions standards for 2010 then I personally feel they should be taxed until they can comply. I guess this is where the Green Party tax shift would of come into effect.

  • If the new standard for nickel averaged over a 24 hour period is supposed to be two micrograms per metre cubed starting in 2010, what is the current standard? It would be nice to be able to put their 15 micrograms into context.

  • Maybe residents would be happier if Vale just closed operations in Sudbury. Maybe we''ll see in a matter of months.

FacebookTwitterRSSVideophotoNewsletterMobile