The federal government has just rejected a request for an environmental assessment of the Northvolt industrial megaproject, arguing that it is too late, since the destruction of wooded areas and wetlands on the site occupied by the Swedish company has already taken place. Despite this refusal, other major aspects of the project should require intervention from Ottawa in the matter.
“We are very disappointed with the decision and the reasons for the decision, which states that most of the work has already been done. Yes, the site has been razed, but there is no factory yet. This therefore raises several questions about the federal government’s ability to protect the environment,” summarizes Duty Isabelle Senécal, spokesperson for the Montreal branch of Mères au front, who submitted the request last June.
Three months later, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (AEIC) has just rejected the request, on behalf of the Minister of the Environment, Steven Guilbeault, who had explicitly mandated it to respond to the request. The decision, which uses technical language, states that the future battery factory cannot be “designated” within the meaning of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA), since “the essential exercise of the “concrete activity has begun.” It is specified that the LEI was “amended” last June, following a decision by the Supreme Court.
Concretely, adds the AEIC in its decision, “permanent work” linked to the construction of the factory financed by the government of Quebec was carried out, caused “a significant alteration of the landscape” and took place “over a long period”, i.e. from January to March 2024. The federal body cites as an example the “clearing of land [abattage et essouchage d’arbres] », “backfilling of wetlands” and “other site preparation work”, but without specifying which ones.
Would it have been relevant to carry out an assessment of the project’s impacts on natural environments, if it had been possible to do so before their destruction? The AEIC simply confirmed at the end of the day on Thursday the interpretation formulated in the written decision. The Minister, specifies the Agency, can however use his “discretionary” power to subject a project to an evaluation, in particular if “public concerns” justify a “designation”.
“Ecological benefits”
After having ruled out submitting the megaproject to the environmental procedure which applies to all major industrial projects in Quebec for several years, the Legault government in fact authorized Northvolt in January to cut down more than 8,000 trees, but also to destroy 130,000 m2 of wetlands on land with “high ecological value”, according to the opinion of its own experts.
These natural environments served as habitats for dozens of species, some of which are threatened and theoretically protected by federal laws. The felling of trees also had to be completed before spring, in order to comply with Canadian legislation which specifies that the destruction of nesting sites for migratory birds must be completed before their arrival. At least 142 species of birds frequented the site.
A few days after the approval of the destruction of natural environments, Steven Guilbeault affirmed that he was not worried about the consequences of Northvolt. He also maintained that the industrial megaproject would have “very significant ecological benefits for the entire country”.
“How can he not be concerned without having done an assessment? » says Isabelle Senécal today. “It is unacceptable that the largest industrial project in the history of Quebec escapes an environmental assessment. There are potential risks for the Richelieu River, which is a fragile ecosystem and a source of drinking water, there are impacts on biodiversity, there are issues for air quality, etc. »
“In the name of the energy transition, environmental protection seems very secondary to us in this issue, developed hastily,” adds the spokesperson for the Montreal branch of Mères au front.
She also deplores the environmental authorization process which means that Northvolt will obtain these “on a piecemeal basis”, without an overall examination of the potential impacts of the project. This is the case for the demand for pumping and discharging water into the Richelieu River. The company estimates its annual needs at more than 9 billion liters, which raises concerns among citizens in the region.
Federal jurisdiction
The federal government should, however, be called upon to intervene, and therefore to carry out an environmental assessment of this major component of the project, according to the general director of the Society for Nature and Parks of Quebec, Alain Branchaud. This aspect of the project is indeed under “federal jurisdiction”, he emphasizes, recalling that the Fisheries Act prohibits any discharge of contaminants into fish habitat and that the Species at Risk Act prohibits harm to the designated critical habitat of a species. In this case, it is the copper redhorse.
Mr. Branchaud also signed a letter sent this week to Quebec Minister of the Environment, Benoit Charette, by around thirty organizations. This is once again calling for an environmental review of the Northvolt project, in a context where the construction of the complex could be delayed by 12 to 18 months, according to available information.
Minister Charette, who has repeatedly rejected the idea of subjecting Northvolt to the evaluation procedure imposed on large industrial projects, once again affirmed this week that the Swedish company was not “favoured”.
If the project had been submitted to the procedure which would lead to an examination by the Office of Public Hearings on the Environment, the destruction of natural environments could not have taken place before a government decision taken following the recommendations made by the organism. “Were the wetlands and trees lost for nothing? » asks Mme Senécal, referring to Northvolt’s financial difficulties.
The company, for its part, promises to compensate for natural environments with the protection of another site of 30 to 50 hectares. A sum of 4.75 million was also paid for the loss of dozens of wetlands. This works out to approximately $34 per square meter.