Local opinions differ on offshore wind legislation

GUYSBOROUGH — Virtually no one who spends any time considering the pros and cons of offshore wind development in eastern Canada’s ocean waters underestimates the significance of federal legislation designed to regulate the emerging industry.

But, local opinions are divided on whether the “act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act” is the one to do it.

Bill C-49 – now winding its way through the Senate Standing Committee on Energy and the Environment and Natural Resources – is either a poorly worded document that’s largely cut and pasted from previous legislation, ill-suited to deal with the complexities of a completely new and unfamiliar industry; or it’s a much-needed, appropriate and useful start to a larger, longer conversation. It depends on who’s offering the opinion.

Setting the groundwork

“Bill C-49 is simply enabling legislation to establish the regulatory guidelines to govern offshore wind development in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland,” MODG’s Director of Economic Development Gordon MacDonald told The Journal in an email last week.

“This legislation has been developed jointly by the Government of Canada and the provinces [of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador]. Upon passage in the Senate of Canada, both provinces are expected to introduce mirror legislation within their respective [jurisdictions] – not one word will be different.”

What that ensures, he said, is consistency and the involvement of all the parties concerned.

“Upon passage of Bill C-49, the Province of Nova Scotia has plans to seek interest in seabed land leases for up to five gigawatts of offshore wind energy by 2030. Following the award of seabed leases, proponents begin the process of conducting the detailed work to submit an application for an environmental permit approval. This impact assessment process is likely to take upwards of three years. The actual development of an offshore wind project may take up to ten years. Federal and provincial regulatory authorities – such as Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Transport Canada and the Nova Scotia Department of Environment – will all play a role in assuring both the protection of, and compensation for, any negative impacts.”

Unintentional harms?

Fair enough, said Ginny Boudreau, manager of the Canso-based Guysborough County Inshore Fisherman’s Association, which represents 147 commercial inshore, small boat and fixed-gear fishermen, and as many as 450 direct jobs. But, without significant modifications now – before it’s enacted – she indicated that Bill C-49 could unintentionally jeopardize the livelihoods of local fishers and their families anyway.

“All of us, including the fishing industry, want to have access to green energy,” she told The Journal in an interview in late June. “But, this is going to take away jobs if it’s not done properly. Because of the time constraints, they have taken a piece of legislation that was developed over a considerable amount of time, after much discussion and consultation, [for oil and gas] and amended it to fit a whole other industry. Except, it doesn’t fit, and it doesn’t make sense.”

Specifically, she argued, the legislation does not address “mitigation and compensation protection” for fishers – who could face hundreds of offshore turbines and transmission infrastructure, and may even lose access to commercially vital fishing grounds compared with “one oil well... It’s not comparable when you’re looking at 200, 150 or even 20 wind turbines.”

What’s more, she said, the potential impact on jobs could go well beyond the water.

“There are the 440 direct jobs [at sea], but that’s before we hit the wharf and get unloaded, get to our buyer, get fuel and get maintenance. That’s before we buy our electronics and our supplies; before we pay our trucker and our pound operators, or anybody on the processing side. Where there’s a loss of access, there’s a loss of revenue, income and community; our coastal communities are 100 per cent dependent on the fishing industry... These regulations should be addressing [all] that now.”

Prioritizing local fishers

MacDonald, however, asserted that the health of the East Coast fishery was and continues to be a prerequisite for a sound, offshore wind regulatory regime, and Bill C-49, as it’s configured, does nothing to undermine that.

“The MODG council has always been supportive of our local fishing industry,” he said. “In fact, when the Province of Nova Scotia considered permitting wind development within the inner bays, our council went on the public record as being strongly opposed to this approach. Within a week, Premier [Tim] Houston announced that any proposed development within the inner bays, such as Chedabucto Bay, was being paused.”

Moreover, he noted, “All wind development proposed is well beyond the lucrative local inshore lobster fishery. In fact, the area of greatest focus for offshore wind development is on the Scotian Shelf, in the same area of historic natural gas development activity. In the 1990s, that area, along with the corridor to landfall at Goldboro, was chosen specifically to minimize impacts on fishing activity.”

Climate change goals

MODG resident Marsha Plant – a member of the Green Nova Scotia First advocacy group and a vocal critic of plans by EverWind Fuels to build as many as 400 onshore wind turbines here and in the neighbouring Municipality of the District of St. Mary’s, mainly to support hydrogen exports to Europe – also worries about Bill C-49.

“To me, the offshore wind leases are a part of the same scenario,” she told The Journal in an email last month. “The reasons to move forward are not to electrify Nova Scotia – not because it’s good for the climate – but to produce hydrogen for profit... I fear if deployed without due diligence, the marine environment and the fisheries will be at risk by governments that have manipulated the ‘system’ to their own ends.”

MacDonald says the duality is not as simple – or as black and white – as it sometimes appears.

“For Nova Scotia to achieve its climate change goals – 80 per cent renewable by 2030 and net-zero by 2035 – we will need to first address how we produce our electricity,” he said. “Coal is to be phased out by 2030. Regardless of the path we take, our cost of electricity will continue to increase. Wind is interruptible, so we will still need base load.

“There are few options available to Nova Scotia – other than importing. Hydrogen/ammonia is one of those options. However, to be viable, it must be produced at scale. No private sector company is going to invest based solely on the Nova Scotia market. Onshore wind development is crucial to creating the scale necessary to attract offshore wind – one will simply not work without the other. Onshore wind helps to get to the scale necessary to develop a sustainable local generation and transmission system and produce non-interruptible, reliable energy for the future.”

Agreement on need for legislation

For all of this, Boudreau said, “This is a brand new industry. We’re not saying we don’t need a bill; we need a bill. We definitely need legislation. We need a tool. And, maybe this is the tool; but, it’s not properly developed and they need to go back and spend more time on it.”

On June 13, MacDonald joined a delegation of Nova Scotia officials – led by provincial Natural Resources and Renewables (NRR) Minister Tory Rushton – to the Senate Standing Committee on Energy and the Environment and Natural Resources to push for the bill’s speedy passage.

“Any delay will have a compounding negative impact on investment in the Nova Scotia renewables sector,” he told The Journal in an email at the time. “[Wind energy] developers cannot risk multi-billion capital investments in the absence of regulatory processes and predictability. Bill C-49 is just the first step in creating that pathway.”

For now, Bill C-49 continues through the parliamentary process.

Alec Bruce, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Guysborough Journal