CALGARY/OTTAWA - A key water-use permit allowing construction of Imperial Oil Ltd's (IMO.TO: Quote, Profile, Research) C$8 billion ($7.8 billion) Kearl oil sands project in northern Alberta could be reissued as soon as Friday, a spokesman for the company said.
Canada's federal cabinet quietly blessed the project last month, announcing the decision only on an obscure website, a move that surprised environmentalists concerned about Kearl's massive greenhouse gas emissions.
"This was a shock to us, to see this," said Simon Dyer, director, oil sands, at the Pembina Institute environmental group. "It's unfortunate...It's not going to help the industry and it's not going to help Canada's reputation."
The project, which was derailed in March after environmental groups challenged its approval, could be back on track as soon as Friday. That's when a 30-day waiting period following the issue of a revised environmental approval expires.
"The earliest the permit could be (issued) is tomorrow," said Gordon Wong, a spokesman for Imperial, Canada's biggest integrated oil firm. But he said Imperial had no concrete information on when, or if, Canada's fisheries department would reissue the permit.
Phil Jenkins, a spokesman for Fisheries and Oceans Canada, said in an e-mail that the department has not yet decided if, or when, it will issue the key permit.
"There is still no final decision on the Kearl Fisheries Act authorization," he wrote.
The 300,000 barrel a day Kearl development is one of about C$100 billion in projects on the books or under construction to exploit the oil sands deposits of northern Alberta, which contain the largest oil reserves outside the Middle East.
However, the developments emit large amounts of greenhouse gases and, in the case of mining projects, tear up the region's boreal forest and store toxic wastes in tailing ponds.
The projects have come under increasing scrutiny from environmental groups in Canada and the United States. Environmentalists won a key battle back in March when a court agreed that the panel assessing Kearl's environmental impact had failed to adequately explain why it had approved Imperial's plan to manage greenhouse gas emissions from the project.
The court rescinded the approval until the panel added more details, nullifying a federal water-use permit and halting construction at the site near Fort McMurray, Alberta.
That decision was unsuccessfully appealed by Imperial last month but the panel rewrote the environmental approval.
Canada's federal cabinet approved the revised environmental assessment report for the project on May 15, without publicity, one day after Imperial lost its appeal, a decision that has raised the ire of environmental groups.
"This shows they are not serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands projects," said Stephen Hazell, executive director of Sierra Club Canada. "They had an opportunity to impose conditions on the construction of the Kearl project... Why let Imperial Oil off the hook?"
Opposition figures also attacked the federal cabinet's quick approval of the rewritten environmental clearance. Jack Layton, head of the federal New Democratic Party, blasted the move as he told reporters the project will emit 3.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually, the equivalent of 800,000 cars.
"We consider that the way this was all done and approved -- in secret, stealthily -- without consultation is a disgrace," Layton said.
He called for the government to hold off issuing the water permit until it imposed a cap on Kearl's greenhouse gas emissions.
Wong was unable to say if the quick reissue of the water permit would allow the company to keep to its construction schedule. Kearl was expected to begin producing by 2011, but Imperial had warned that the court-imposed halt could delay the project.
Imperial is 70-percent owned by Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM.N: Quote, Profile, Research). Exxon is also a partner in the planned project.
Imperial shares rose C$2.03 to C$59.64 on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Thursday. The shares have climbed 19 percent in the past 12 months.
($1=$1.02 Canadian)
Canada's federal cabinet quietly blessed the project last month, announcing the decision only on an obscure website, a move that surprised environmentalists concerned about Kearl's massive greenhouse gas emissions.
"This was a shock to us, to see this," said Simon Dyer, director, oil sands, at the Pembina Institute environmental group. "It's unfortunate...It's not going to help the industry and it's not going to help Canada's reputation."
The project, which was derailed in March after environmental groups challenged its approval, could be back on track as soon as Friday. That's when a 30-day waiting period following the issue of a revised environmental approval expires.
"The earliest the permit could be (issued) is tomorrow," said Gordon Wong, a spokesman for Imperial, Canada's biggest integrated oil firm. But he said Imperial had no concrete information on when, or if, Canada's fisheries department would reissue the permit.
Phil Jenkins, a spokesman for Fisheries and Oceans Canada, said in an e-mail that the department has not yet decided if, or when, it will issue the key permit.
"There is still no final decision on the Kearl Fisheries Act authorization," he wrote.
The 300,000 barrel a day Kearl development is one of about C$100 billion in projects on the books or under construction to exploit the oil sands deposits of northern Alberta, which contain the largest oil reserves outside the Middle East.
However, the developments emit large amounts of greenhouse gases and, in the case of mining projects, tear up the region's boreal forest and store toxic wastes in tailing ponds.
The projects have come under increasing scrutiny from environmental groups in Canada and the United States. Environmentalists won a key battle back in March when a court agreed that the panel assessing Kearl's environmental impact had failed to adequately explain why it had approved Imperial's plan to manage greenhouse gas emissions from the project.
The court rescinded the approval until the panel added more details, nullifying a federal water-use permit and halting construction at the site near Fort McMurray, Alberta.
That decision was unsuccessfully appealed by Imperial last month but the panel rewrote the environmental approval.
Canada's federal cabinet approved the revised environmental assessment report for the project on May 15, without publicity, one day after Imperial lost its appeal, a decision that has raised the ire of environmental groups.
"This shows they are not serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands projects," said Stephen Hazell, executive director of Sierra Club Canada. "They had an opportunity to impose conditions on the construction of the Kearl project... Why let Imperial Oil off the hook?"
Opposition figures also attacked the federal cabinet's quick approval of the rewritten environmental clearance. Jack Layton, head of the federal New Democratic Party, blasted the move as he told reporters the project will emit 3.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually, the equivalent of 800,000 cars.
"We consider that the way this was all done and approved -- in secret, stealthily -- without consultation is a disgrace," Layton said.
He called for the government to hold off issuing the water permit until it imposed a cap on Kearl's greenhouse gas emissions.
Wong was unable to say if the quick reissue of the water permit would allow the company to keep to its construction schedule. Kearl was expected to begin producing by 2011, but Imperial had warned that the court-imposed halt could delay the project.
Imperial is 70-percent owned by Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM.N: Quote, Profile, Research). Exxon is also a partner in the planned project.
Imperial shares rose C$2.03 to C$59.64 on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Thursday. The shares have climbed 19 percent in the past 12 months.
($1=$1.02 Canadian)
