“Every time history repeats itself the price goes up.”

Surviving Progress presents the story of human advancement as awe-inspiring and double-edged. It reveals the grave risk of running the 21st century’s software — our know-how — on the ancient hardware of our primate brain which hasn’t been upgraded in 50,000 years. With rich imagery and immersive soundtrack, filmmakers Mathieu Roy and Harold Crooks launch us on journey to contemplate our evolution from cave-dwellers to space explorers.

Ronald Wright, whose best-seller, “A Short History Of Progress” inspired this film, reveals how civilizations are repeatedly destroyed by “progress traps” — alluring technologies serve immediate needs, but ransom the future. With intersecting stories from a Chinese car-driving club, a Wall Street insider who exposes an out-of-control, environmentally rapacious financial elite, and eco-cops defending a scorched Amazon, the film lays stark evidence before us. In the past, we could use up a region’s resources and move on. But if today’s global civilization collapses from over-consumption, that’s it. We have no back-up planet.

The first red flags started coming up during Dragons’ Den episode 5 aired on Oct. 12. The last segment contained a ‘pitch’ by a young Canadian entrepreneur who developed a waterless car washing product. Yes, tested and true, GoClean allows you to clean your car without using water. What’s even more interesting (if washing your car with no water is not enough!) is that the company has teamed up with African Well Fund which receives funds from the purchase of the product (each purchase provides fresh drinking water for 21 days).

This partnership was too much for Kevin O’Leary, who, without much further ado launched:

“Why? Why don’t you wait to be profitable, then you can give to the baby whales? [...]I find that absolutely offensive. The DNA of a business is to make profit for its shareholders[...]If I were to invest in you, you are stealing money from me. I decide what charities get my money, not you.” (you can watch the whole exchange here – episode 5 at 35min in).

It is certainly disappointing to see that when faced with climate change, urban pollution and increased resource scarcity, some business gurus have not yet made ‘Triple bottom line‘ part of their vocabulary and modus operandi. More disappointing is the fact that young entrepreneurs’ eco-ideas can be so blatantly bullied to conform to outdated and dangerous business models that have caused the environmental crisis we are faced with today. Fortunately, the rest of the Dragons crew supported with cash and moral outrage the young innovator and that gives at least some hope that more eco-conscious investors are out there.

And since we are on the topic of Kevin O’Leary, he managed to anger a couple of hundred viewers this week when he called Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author Chris Hedges “a left-wing nutbar”. The name calling took place during the Lang & O’Leary Exchange which focused on the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Such was the public wrath that the CBC ombudsman had to write up a lengthy quasi-apology on behalf of Mr. O’Leary. Hopefully such lack of professionalism, while it may be acceptable in the boardroom, will not creep into our public broadcasters’ programming.

The exhibition took months to prepare including washing hundreds of plastic bottles and digging into the Center’s recycling twice a week to gather the materials that make up the installation: 13,750 bottles and 12 rolls of double-sided tape were used to build the pond; 6,080 plastic water bottles were put together to form the waterfalls; 5,000 square feet of cardboard boxes make the tree trunks; 1,600 square feet of cardboard boxes were used to make the 70-foot high tree raises from Sainte-Catherine Level up to the 5th Floor; and dozens of can pops and ice-cream buckets make up the lilies and other flowers.

Entrevue “Fragile”, de Roadsworth et Brian Armstrong from Projekroom on Vimeo.

Linking nature and man-made structures “the elements that make up this installation are reassembled into a clumsy semblance of their original forms, a poignant reminder of both the fragility and irrevocable loss of a natural and original state.”

• Total investment of $1.625 billion of which

• $1.191 billion in infrastructure development
• $382 million in expenditures to cover essentially social measures, in particular housing, health, the reduction of transportation costs, and education
• $52 million over the entire period to cover the implementation by the Société du Plan Nord and initiatives to solicit foreign investors

• $500 million in equity investment with an overall investment of $2.1 billion for overall implementation

The first five years will create 20,000 jobs per year which are expected to be sustained over the 25 year life time of the Plan Nord. The social measures include the construction of 500 housing units in Nunavik in addition to the already planned 340 units; strengthening the training and education infrastructure and services in the northern regions covered by the Plan; an investment of $65 million in the development, retention and attraction of manpower; strengthening the health and social services to meet the needs of the population influx in the region; and measures for the ‘preservation of the living culture’ of the north which includes the production of a “documentary series on the Plan Nord”.

Natural resource development
Some critics have observed that even though it lists specific priorities in each sector, in terms of concrete planned resource development projects the new action plan only identifies the ones already underway, especially in the mining sector, leaving a sense of uncertainty in respect to upcoming projects in this sector.  The recent opposition to the shale gas industry has focused attention to the Mining Law which has been criticized by prominent environmental organizations and community groups. As the proposed implementation of Bill 79 to amend the Mining Law was repelled last year, last week, the government introduced a new bill – Bill 14 – to amend the Mining Law which includes an increase in set-aside funds to cover 100% of the costs of mine rehabilitation (previously set at 70%) and some measures to increase local participation in the implementation of mining projects by way of excluding urban and outfitting zones from exploration and exploitation.

The official opposition – Quebec Solidaire and Pati Quebecois – have attacked the plan, especially in what concerns the mining sector. Amir Khadir (Quebec Solidaire) estimates that even though royalty rates have been increased from 12% to 16%, this measure remains only a budgetary initiative with no legal clout (Bill 14 does not make any changes to the royalty regime) estimating that in the past decade the government has only touched 1.5% of the total profits of mining industry in the province. The PQ has demanded an increased public participation in the decision making. The new bill limits participation to acquiring a written consent from the private land owner within a 60 day deadline and notifying the municipality 90 days before starting exploration works. In addition, although the PQ welcomes the mandatory public consultation measures it is worried that the task is left to the mining companies.

In the energy sector the figures have remained the same – an additional 3500MW – nevertheless the plan specifies that 3000MW will be hydro, 300MW wind and 200MW of “other resources.” This breakdown will probably incite renewed criticisms in light of the already controversial Romaine project.

Aboriginal communities
The most interesting development is the increased participation of First Nations and Inuit in the development of the plan itself by way of consultation tables (see the chart below) as well as in its implementation, including representation on the Société du Plan Nord and other particular socioeconomic measures included in each sector.

Consultation framework

Cree Grand Chief, Matthew Coon Come, praised the plan as a “new era. We have gone from an era of a policy of exclusion to an era of a policy of inclusion.” However the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador, Ghislain Picard, refused to participate in the unveiling ceremony protesting the failure of the government to ratify the Approche Commune with the Innu. He maintains that:

“The Government of Quebec has not only the obligation to take into account the rights of all First Nations affected by the Plan Nord, but it also has the responsibility to engage in true dialogue with all First Nations in Quebec, including subjects like wealth-sharing, co-management and royalties. I am still waiting for a phone call from Jean Charest.”

The Algonquin communities of the Abitibi region are still excluded from the Plan Nord as they reside just below the parallel 49 territorial limit. Indeed, for the nations that have not yet signed an agreement the implementation of the Plan Nord presents many challenges as they do not have a legal framework within which their interests can be protected – no recognized territorial or resource use rights.

Development model in question
Amir Khadir has accused the government of pursuing an outdated 19th century development model characterising it as “colonial” in its intent and substance. As other critics, M. Khadir calls for a long-term truly sustainable development model that engages local communities beyond “mere consultation”, applies cutting edge technologies, avoids destructive approaches such as open pit mining (such as the case of Malartic), in addition to meagre financial returns to society.  The “pillage” of the province’s resources to “the profit of multinationals” is, according to M. Khadir, unacceptable.

Although his view might seem extreme, especially considering the important and much needed economic development in these regions, M. Khadir might be in line with recent international paradigm change. On May 14, three days after the public announcement of the Plan Nord, the UN Environmental Programme published the first in a series of reports geared towards assessing the emergence of the Green Economy – Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth. Decoupling is defined as “using less resources per unit of economic output and reducing the environmental impact of any resources that are used or economic activities that are undertaken.” (UNDP, 2011: 8). Since resource consumption is “a reliable companion” of economic prosperity which makes “nearly all mainstream and development models” ignore resource constraints, worldwide resource use is expected to triple by 2050. “Over-exploitation, climate change, pollution, land-use change, and loss of biodiversity” point to an unstable world in the next few decades. The Panel argues that in order to avoid ecological, economic and social collapse, per capita resource use needs to be scaled down to 5 or 6 tons/year.

We are reminded that each Canadian uses an average of 25 tons of resources per year (mineral, agricultural, water, etc).  Tightening the belt may not only be needed during an economic recession, it’s becoming a necessity for the long-term survival of our society. Whether the Plan Nord will move the province into further ecological and social jeopardy or towards the Green Economy depends on the willingness of the decision makers to implement innovative strategic approaches. The civil society has an equal responsibility to improve well-being and social equity while reducing environmental risks.

• Urbanization
• Sanitation and Pollution
• Governance and management
• Investment and Finance
• Environmental Impact and Climate Change

As one in 2 people in the world spend their lives in an urban center and 95% of the urban population growth is projected to take place in the developing world, managing fresh water resources is becoming a priority for governments (UN Water, 2011). For cities the challenge of maintaining and improving infrastructure and public water utilities is increasing as 1 out of 4 residents (789 million) live without access to sanitation facilities and 1 in 6 (894 million) don’t have access to safe freshwater. We are appropriating 56% of all accessible freshwater of which 70% is used in irrigation, 22% is used by industries and 8% for domestic use.  But access is only half the story. The pollution of this source of life exacerbates the challenge faced by urban centers and increases the strain on entire river basins. Every year 2 million tons of human waste are disposed in water courses and an additional 70% of industrial waste in the developing world is dumped untreated into waters (UN Water, 2006).

The main UN sponsored event took place in Cape Town, South Africa. The international conference held on the 22nd was highlighted by three main panels: Connecting Cape Town to the World which brought together water experts, professionals and suppliers to discuss the “challenges and opportunities of water and urbanization”. The second panel focused on governance and policy and included mayors, representatives of development banks, and international organizations working with local governments. The conference closed with a High-Level Panel which resumed the recommendations put forward throughout the day. An exhibition and fair running from march 20 to 22nd showcased “key international as well a national organizations and companies presenting their activities on Water and Urbanization.”

In Montreal WWD was celebrated at the NDG Ecocartier with a water-themed workshop (6575 Somerled, #206 from 7-9PM), a photo exhibition of Oxfam-Quebec’s projects in developing countries (Eaton’s Center), and a presentation of Montreal Action H2O to the Post Graduate Student Society of McGill environment committee (at Thomson House restaurant 3560 McTavish, at 6PM). In Quebec City organisers of the Quinzaine de l’eau stretched out the activities for 2 weeks to mark the 2nd International day without bottled water (Development and Peace) and WWD.

For more information on water related stats visit the UN World Water Assessment Programme
For everything you need to know about water see UN Water and here for the WWD events and past campaigns

Watch the Message by the UN Deputy Secretary-General

While the battle against DuPont and the phasing out of PFOA is still ongoing in the US, a group of McGill management students are planning an anti-Teflon campaign in the Montreal area. They got involved in this issue as part of a “social context of business” class at university. “Through all of the research that we have done on this issue, we have grown to feel very strongly about it. The public needs to be aware of the health and environmental risks that this substance poses” says Anna Roumiantseva, the campaign organizer. “The main points of our campaign are to get the public aware of the health and environmental effects of using Teflon, and to reduce their exposure to it. Therefore, our number one goal is to get as much media exposure as possible. Also, we feel that when consumers dine out, they should have the option of choosing restaurants that do not use Teflon cookware: an option that is currently unavailable since there is no way of knowing what kind of cookware is being used. As such, our number two goal is to get an official “Teflon-free” label approved, which restaurants can display signaling that they are a health-conscious and environmentally-friendly zone. We are hoping to start on the municipal level, and then expand the campaign nationally in the future.”

Similar to other fluorochemicals, PFOA, is widely used and found almost everywhere. It never breaks down in the environment and is toxic to humans when exposed. The specific health concern related to its use in cookware is that at temperatures staring at around 202.2°C (396°F) PFOA is released as a gas. This outgassing can cause “polymer fume flu,” also known as “Teflon flu,” in humans. The symptoms are similar to regular flu, such as chills, headache, fever and nausea. Because of this similarity most people mistake it for the regular flu. Nevertheless, exposure to PFOA can cause birth defects in humans. EPA studies confirmed that 90% of Americans have PFOA in their bloodstream.

Apart from PFOA, Teflon off-gassing studies show that at the temperatures of conventional kitchen appliances, Teflon chemicals break apart to form the following particulates and gases:

• Two chemicals linked to cancer or tumors in laboratory studies (PFOA and TFE)
• Two chemicals that are potent global warming gases (PFB and CF4)
• Two chemical warfare agents (PFIB and MFA)
• A chemical analog of WWII nerve gas phosgene (COF2)
• At least two chemicals that have widely contaminated the world (PFOA and TFA), one currently undergoing a rigorous safety review at the EPA
• Four gaseous chemicals and some components of the particulate matter that are highly persistent environmental pollutants, that likely never break down in the environment (TFA, PFOA, CF4, PFB, and the perfluorinated particulate alkanes)
• Four chemicals that are considered highly toxic relative to most other industrial chemicals (PFIB, MFA, COF2, HF).

The first class action lawsuit on behalf of 50,000 residents was in West Virginia. It alleged that the Ohio River had been polluted by the chemical used at the DuPont plant, causing birth defects and other health hazards. In 2004 DuPont settled out of court paying $16.5 million in damages but admitted no liability. A larger lawsuit that is still ongoing was filed in 2006 by two New Jersey residents on behalf of the residents near the Chambers Works plant in Salem County for “intentional, knowing, reckless, and negligent acts and omissions of DuPont in connection with the contamination of human drinking water supplies.” This suit follows a petition filed in 2003 with the EPA by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) that alleges DuPont covered up a 1980s study that was never published and which found tumors in lab rats linked to PFOA. The suit claims that DuPont had a duty to warn consumers of the dangers of Teflon but failed to do so. The allegations were already being investigated by EPA in 2005 and since 2004 various cases have been brought to the courts. They have been consolidated by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multi-district Litigation and transferred to Iowa. Although a specific financial value has not been specified it is estimated that, if successful, the suit could cost DuPont some $5 billion in damages for approximately 10 million people.

DuPont continues to argue against the allegations stating on its website: “Based on an evaluation of human health and toxicology studies, DuPont concludes that PFOA exposure does not pose a cancer risk or any health risk to the general public. There is no significant potential for exposure to PFOA from using products made with DuPont materials, hence, there is no risk to consumers.” Indeed, in June this year, the federal court in Des Moines dismissed 22 consolidated suits stating that “individual issues differing among the plaintiffs would each require their own inquiry, making the suits improper”.

While over 70% of cookware contains a non-stick coating, Roumiantseva points out that there are many substitutes already used and preferred by many chefs such as copper, cast iron and stainless steel cookware that pose no health problems. Using Teflon-free labeling can also be argued to give businesses a “competitive advantage when it comes to the environmentally and health conscious consumers. We also hope to target grocery and department stores in the future and urge them to carry more alternatives to Teflon, if not boycott Teflon altogether. If the public is more aware of the dangers of Teflon, there will be a bigger push for its regulation from the authorities.”

Avec Energie is a natural evolution for Fondation Rivieres, which was born at the turn of the new millennium when private small dams threatened the sustainability of Quebec’s rivers. At the time, two of the founding members, Alain Saladzius and Anne-Marie Saint Cerny, uncovered and made public several irregularities regarding contracting, authorizations, operation and even money laundering schemes of the private small dam industry. In 1995 they were promptly brought to court on defamation charges, known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP), totaling some 3 million dollars. The charges were eventually dropped after the promoters received a formal public apology form Mr. Saladzius and Mrs. Saint Cerny. Their actions nevertheless changed the course of the small dam industry in Quebec by first prompting a governmental inquiry into the industry’s practices (the Doyon Commission) which led the government to revise its small dam program and include specific public participation measures.

Watch Anne-Marie Saint-Cerny’s testimony on SLAPP here

In 2001, Mr. Saladzius, launched the Adopt a River Campaign and recruited well known personalities, such as Paul Piché and Roy Dupuis, to the cause. In total, 60 personalities signed the “Declaration of opposition to the construction of new small dams in Quebec” After an intense campaign in various regions in Quebec and a manifestation in front of Hydro-Quebec’s headquarters (that the utility and the government ignored) Mr. Saladzius extended his support to Mikael Rioux who was protesting the building of a small dam on the Trois-Pistoles river. Unable to gain any response from the government, Mikael begun a 45-day protest on site, perched on a platform above the river. During the ceremony for the Medal of Bravery that he was awarded for saving a father and his two sons from drowning, Mikael  made an impassionate speech for the preservation of Quebec’s rivers. In 2002, Mr. Saladzius’ and Mikael’s actions bear fruit when Bernard Laundry announces the cancellation of the majority of small dams and a moratorium on their future development.

Watch the Trois-Pistoles save the river campaign video here

In 2006, the Foundation joins forces with three Cree communities in the James Bay against the construction of the Rupert River Diversion project. During this campaign they uncover a wind energy proposal from the multinational Siemens that was presented to the provincial government in 2005 and which was turned down and hidden form the public. In 2008, the Foundation undertakes a white-water river protest on the Romaine River in the company of Roy Dupuis, the Journal de Montreal and Alex Shoumatoff, a journalist with Vanity Fair. In this case they expose behind-closed-doors deals between Hydro-Quebec and municipalities, as well as exceptionally well funded PR firms ($20 million) hired to sway local public perception of the project.

Launched this week, the Avec Energy Campaign aims to rally citizens and put pressure on the government to abate the latest push for more dams in Quebec. Aware and concerned of the recent economic downturn the Foundation is promoting green energy alternatives to hydro projects. With the help of 11 personalities, such as Roy Dupuis, Paul Piché, Yann Perreau, Celine Bonnier, and Christian Bégin, they have produced a series of video messages backed by significant research for the average consumer. Citizens are encouraged to engage the government and Hydro-Quebec in a debate over energy policy by sending pointed messages to their elected officials. They can also learn how to be energy savvy and implement green energy alternatives.

Check out the campaign at www.avecenergie.com

Essentially the idea has its roots in Robert Bourassa’s 1995 book Power from the North. Bourassa, the architect of the James Bay hydroelectric complex, had proposed at the time the sealing off of the James Bay and its subsequent transformation into the ‘largest man-made’ fresh water lake whose water would have been transferred to the Great Lakes through a series of canals, pumping stations, and hydroelectric stations. To give him credit, in the same book, Bourassa envisioned Quebec as the world’s leader in hydrogen industry that would have changed forever the course of the energy history.

Although costly and technically unfeasible, the Grand Canal project has recently inspired the MEI position paper on bulk-water exports titled Northern Waters: a realistic, sustainable and profitable plan to exploit Quebec’s blue gold. The scheme involves ‘capturing’ the flood waters of three northern Quebec rivers: the Broadback, Waswanipi and Nottaway (or Bell). The water will then be transferred towards the Ottawa River valley though a network of pumping stations and will eventually find its way into the St. Laurence. One of the most enticing aspects of the project is the 14 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity produced by the pumping stations and already exiting hydroelectric installations in the Ottawa River valley. This energy corresponds to almost double of the Romaine dam complex (8TWh) currently under construction in the North Shore. The second financial benefit is the possibility of selling bulk-water to Ontario and the US. As stated in the brief the excess water can be used either to regulate the levels of the St. Laurence and increase the volume in the Great Lakes, or to sell it to the US by diverting it into the Chicago Canal and the Mississippi River.

Proposed project

If competed by 2022 the project would cost close to $15 billion. The revenues from the electricity produced would amount to about $2 billion annually and the bulk-water annual revenues could reach about $20 billion (calculated at $0.85/cubic meter). Holding 3% of the world’s fresh water resources, Quebec has the most valuable resource at its fingertips and is no surprise that in times of economic instability projects such as this resurface.

The MEI contends that the project will have minimal environmental impact as it would use the ‘natural flood waters’ and would create a reservoir area of ‘only’ 1100 km square, or the total area of the Hong Kong island. Comparatively the Romaine hydroelectric project will flood about 280 km square and the Rupert project close to 350 km square. But apart from the probable environmental impacts, the MEI proposition has most importantly touched one of the most contentious issues of the 21st century: bulk-water exports and the commodification of a valuable non-renewable resource essential to life.

According to current Canadian legislation bulk-water exports are banned. Although the legislation cannot force a province to adhere strictly to this stance, the 1999 strategy prohibits bulk water removals from major drainage basins in Canada, whether for domestic or export purposes. In 2001, the federal government introduced amendments to the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act (IBWTA) that prohibit the removal of large quantities of water from Canadian boundary waters, principally the Great Lakes, and is presently working with the northern territories to develop a similar strategy for the northern water resources.

Nevertheless Canada’s stance on bulk-water exports and its water conservation legislation are still threatened by NAFTA. According to the Council of Canadians because NAFTA defines water as a “service” and an “investment” it leaves us vulnerable to thirsty foreign investors, increases water insecurity and desertification, and possibly our environmental sovereignty. Since NAFTA prohibits the restriction on trade, it invalidates any federal or provincial legislation that bans bulk-water exports. Chapter 11 can limit the implementation of the provincial legislative regime regarding foreign investors that already have water exploitation rights. This means that even if the provincial government has passed Bill 27 – An Act to affirm the collective nature of water resources and provide for increased water resource protection, legally recognizing water as a common resource vital for life, a foreign company can bypass it and further possibly bring legal action against the province if trade restrictions are imposed.

Although no provinces have yet actualized any bulk-water projects and their economic feasibility is still questionable, by setting such precedent, Quebec runs the risk of causing significant water scarcity in the province and endangering our water security in the long-term.

Interesting sources:
Latest documentary of privatisation of water – Blue Gold: World Water Wars (2009)
Another documentary available free on googlevideos – A World Without Water (2006)