Residents call for public hearings on controversial wind-to-hydrogen project

Residents of the island’s west coast are calling for public hearings before the province makes a final decision on a controversial proposed wind-to-hydrogen megaproject that would be the first of its kind in North America.

The proposed Port au Port-Stephenville Wind Power and Hydrogen Generation Project—also known as Project Nujio’qonik—is making its way through the province’s environmental assessment process. But residents and onlookers have serious concerns.

The project’s proponent, World Energy GH2 (WEGH2), submitted its more than 4,000 page environmental impact statement (EIS) last summer. Residents had just eight weeks to read the document, conduct their own research, and submit their comments to the province’s department of environment and climate change. At the end of October, Environment Minister Bernard Davis informed the company that it was required to make amendments to its EIS.

The government did not make the public submissions or its full list of concerns with WEGH2’s EIS available to the public. However, The Independent obtained more than 1,400 pages of public submissions through access to information legislation.

The documents show a significant amount of opposition to, and support for, the project. But the reasons on each side are very different. Most of those either opposed to or concerned about Project Nujio’qonik fear for the project’s potential or likely impacts on land and water, wildlife, traditional ways of life, and the social impacts on local communities. A number of submissions also show dismay at the “impracticable” task of accessing and reviewing WEGH2’s impact statement, as one person put it.

The majority of submissions in favour of the project speak to the region’s need for good jobs, a familiar refrain when it comes to industrial development in the province.

Province won’t disclose specific concerns

In his first EIS decision letter to WEGH2, Davis offered a “non-exhaustive list of areas that require additional information” from the company. They include water use and monitoring, baseline data and information, assessment of potential environmental and cumulative effects, mitigation and monitoring plans, and emergency response and contingency plans.”

The government has not made its full and detailed list of concerns public, effectively preventing the public from knowing where it could be focusing its attention as it awaits the company’s next submission.

But several of the public submissions note that there are many areas of concern, and therefore the whole EIS should be subjected to a public review.

“I implore upon you the importance of appointing a Public Review Board for this project,” one submission dated Aug. 25, 2023 reads. “Many aspects of this project are ‘unknowns’, too many to outline in this brief request. If the project proceeds, you are asking your fellow citizens to step into that unknown void.

“The entire public needs much more time and a fair public hearing, otherwise this government will be making a huge mistake; impacting the lives of our children.”

In October, Grenfell assistant professor Camille Ouellette-Dallaire said it’s important the government to be diligent with Project Nujio’qonik because it’s the first project of its kind in the province, and other proponents aren’t far behind with their project bids on other parts of the island.

“We need the government to set high standard so that there are a limited number of negative impact to community and a maximum benefit for the communities. And that is in the hand of the government. It is not something that we would expect proponents to do on their own, right?” she told berrygrounds. “They all are there for making their profit, and by making profit we know that this means reducing certain benefits, right? But the government should be strong and demand that we have–and we find–ways to mitigate negative impacts to a maximum. And when I talk about negative impact, I think in this case really impacts on social services, impacts on women, and impacts on the biodiversity of the area are really critical.

“This shouldn’t be just the profit of a handful of people,” she said.

Section 63 of Newfoundland and Labrador’s Environmental Protection Act states: “Where the minister believes there is a strong public interest in an undertaking for which an environmental impact statement is required, the Lieutenant-Governor in Council may, on the advice of the minister, order public hearings and appoint an environmental assessment board for the purpose of conducting public hearings relating to the environmental assessment of the undertaking.”

The department of environment and climate change did not respond to The Independent’s request for a comprehensive list of government’s concerns with WEGH2’s EIS, nor did it respond to our question as to whether Davis is considering public hearings.

Project delays

In December, company CEO Sean Leet told Reuters that World Energy GH2 would not be able to start exporting green hydrogen to Germany, as per Canada’s non-binding 2022 agreement with the European country, until 2027. That’s two years later than originally planned.

“The offtakers are not going to be ready to accept product within 2025, actually not until 2027,” Leet said. For its part, Germany still has to build much of the infrastructure necessary to engage Canadian producers.

Whether the project delays mean more time for public involvement in the environmental assessment process, one public submission to government says WEGH2’s “desired timeline or commitments to export to Germany are of no consequences or relevance when compared to the need for a fair opportunity for the public to comment on this proposal.

“This proposal will affect the lives of thousands of Newfoundlanders/Labradorians and alter our land, we deserve an adequate amount of time to review the documents.”

Letters of support omit EIS

Almost all of the submissions that express support for the project neglect to address the environmental impact statement, which is the intended purpose of the public input period. Instead, they focus on the region’s need for jobs.

While most of the names on public submissions are redacted, a letter from Jasen Benwah, Port au Port ward councillor for Qalipu First Nation, indicates World Energy GH2 has made specific commitments to the local Mi’kmaw community.

In his submission on behalf of Benoit First Nation–a Mi’kmaw band on the Port au Port Peninsula that is not recognized by the federal government–Benwah says “we have a confirmation of written assurances of the following: using the smallest footprint possible; electrical lines buried in roads; tower pads covered, seeded with grasses; sides of roadways seeded with local wild berries; all trash removed from traditional lands; annual residential cutouts cleared and reseeded; valleys undisturbed; continual stewardship of the traditional lands in partnership with Mi’kmaq organizations; free and unrestricted access by residents after construction.”

Benwah told The Independent that the assurances are written into a memorandum of understanding between the company and Benoit First Nation, but that the document is not being made public. He said independent oversight is “built into the wording” of the MOU.

In his letter, Benwah also says the project will create a “domino effect of economic development for our future generations.”

Benwah’s letter is one of many in the public submissions that express an economic need for the project.

The ‘salvation of rural Newfoundland’

One letter that appears to have been written by someone from College of the North Atlantic’s “Center for Heavy Equipment & Transportation Technology” in Stephenville, says: “We cannot afford not to have this project move forward and most people of the area feel the same way.” Another letter, signed by someone from the Marine Institute’s Safety and Emergency Response Training Centre in Stephenville, says the project “is a chance for people to stay in their home town area and have meaningful employment. This is a win, win situation.”

Another submission reads, “I think this is a great opportunity for local people to be able to stay home and work instead of having to go away.” Yet another says, “The jobs and spin-off from this project [are] desperately needed [in] our area.” And another reads: “These projects, I feel, will be the salvation of rural Newfoundland. Approve these projects ASAP!”

Almost all of the submissions that express support for the project neglect to address the environmental impact statement, which is the intended purpose of the public input period. The few that do mention the EIS place trust in the company to act in the public’s best interests.

“This is a huge opportunity for this dying community, a real stable economic opportunity for all of us here on the west coast that has little to no opportunity,” one submission reads. “This project [is] a massive influx of new money for the province as a whole and will attract health care professionals and other things that we desperately need.”

The same submission goes on to say: “I’ve read the project proposal and the EA assessment and I’m confident all steps are being taken to complete this project in the most efficient environmentally manner possible.”

A repeat of Muskrat Falls?

Notably, many of the letters expressing concerns about the project do not call on the province to reject WEGH2’s proposal. They simply ask for a fair and rigorous process.

“The project will be of economic value but I feel the price paid by the environment is far too costly,” one submission reads. “Because of the sheer magnitude and scope of this project and the potential enormous damage it will likely do [to] the environment, I feel that the most rigorous examination should be taken before allowing it to proceed.”

One submission offers a list of reasons why the Liberal government should appoint an assessment board to conduct public hearings. Among them is a fear that Project Nujio’qonik “will repeat the patterns of the Muskrat Falls project.” The author points out that the Muskrat Falls inquiry’s 2020 report concluded the government was “predetermined that the project would proceed,” and that “in acting as it did,” the government “failed in its duty to ensure that the best interests of the province’s residents were safeguarded.”

“It would be far better to have public hearings now than wait until the damage has been done and then have a Commission of Inquiry,” they write.

“It is incumbent that every effort be made to fully address the shortcomings of the [environmental impact statement],” another submission reads. “Inadequacies that can only be effectively addressed via the holding of Government public hearings to fully address the concerns of citizens and to ensure that everyone has an equal say with regards to a project that will have a long lasting permanent effect on their livelihood, families, traditional way of life, the environment and faith in our Government.”

Read or download the full response to our access to information request