INTER-BASIN WATER TRANSFER AND ITS ROLE IN MODERN SOCIETY: A NON-TECHNICAL AND TECHNICAL REVIEW

by Simon Dagher

Department of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics McGill University, Montreal

April, 2012

A 15-CREDIT PROJECT SUBMITTED TO MCGILL UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULLFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGINEERING

ABSTRACT
Inter-basin water transfer (IBWT) is the practice of moving or exporting bulk water volumes between adjacent or distant water-basins. It is currently being applied to hydro-projects, irrigation and for local municipal water supply. There is concern that IBWT projects may go up a level of magnitude in terms of scale and importance, to the point where entire States or regions may depend on it. The issue from a philosophical perspective addresses the commoditization of water in the context of IBWT. A historical, legal, economic, institutional and political discussion addresses the difficulties that the Canadian governments face to effectively protect its fresh water resources from exportation. Three case studies are also explored. Following this is a feasibility study from an engineering perspective. Canadian water resources are scrutinized to identify potential water extraction locations. Three proposals are described: exporting water using pressurized pipelines into the water-stressed Ogallala aquifer of the Southern-States; reversing river flows to supplement the Great Lakes Basin; and using trans-oceanic water tankers for exportation. Each proposal is rated depending on their potential environmental impacts, namely hydrologic disruptions, greenhouse emissions, social impacts, and by their potential costs and benefits. It was found that the pipeline proposal was the most beneficial of the three options, yet all three would not be economically or environmentally feasible.

Key Words: Inter-basin water transfer, IBWT, water exportation, water supply, water law.

RSUM
To be translated

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am extremely appreciative for the involvement of my supervisor, Professor Susan Gaskin. The continued support and assistance made this project possible. Thank you to the professionals that accepted to lend their thoughts and ideas in an interview: Professor Murray Clamen, Chris Wood, Dr. K.J.A. Grant and Dr. Hugo Tremblay. I would like to thank Deena Yanofsky of the geography library for help in accessing important data. Thanks to my friends and family who have supported me throughout.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................... i RSUM......................................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................ iii TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Inter-basin water transfers in modern society ..................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project overview ................................................................................................................................. 4 CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................................................................... 5 IBWT and Society ...................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 What are the trends in the global water supply? ............................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Global Water Issues ..................................................................................................................... 5 2.1.2 Preparing and responding to global water scarcity ................................................................... 11 2.2 Philosophical nature of the issue ...................................................................................................... 11 2.2.1 Wasted water ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.2.2 Justified environmental impacts ................................................................................................ 12 2.2.3 Canadian water: abundance or surplus? ................................................................................... 14 2.2.4 Valuing versus commoditising water ......................................................................................... 15 2.3 Water transfers and exports in Canadian society ............................................................................. 17 2.3.1 Timeline: Inter-basin water transfer and Water Policy in Canada............................................. 18 2.3.2 Early days of Canadian water policy & boundary water commissions: 1900 to 1950s ............. 18 2.3.3 The ambitious era: late 1950s to 1970. ..................................................................................... 19 2.3.4 The free-trade era: late 1980s to 1999 ...................................................................................... 22 2.3.5 The Federal Strategy: 1999 to early 2000s ................................................................................ 24 2.3.6 Current situation and difficulties ............................................................................................... 26 Part 3: Case studies ..................................................................................................................................... 30 iv

3.1 Australian case study: Kimberley to Perth ............................................................................................ 31 3.1.1 Political perspective: a complete study by Australian water authorities ...................................... 34 Transport methods ............................................................................................................................. 35 3.1.2 Pipeline method ............................................................................................................................. 35 Source variants.................................................................................................................................... 35 Routes variants ................................................................................................................................... 36 Other considerations .......................................................................................................................... 38 3.1.3 Oceanic transport method ............................................................................................................. 40 Source options .................................................................................................................................... 40 Conveyance method ........................................................................................................................... 41 Results from GWA (2006) study .......................................................................................................... 42 Conflicting Perspectives ...................................................................................................................... 42 3.2 Qubec's northern water: Eastmain-1-A, Sarcelle powerhouses and Rupert River diversions............ 44 Project Description.............................................................................................................................. 45 3.2.1 The Required Environmental Impact Statement ........................................................................... 45 Controversies ...................................................................................................................................... 46 Cree Opposition .................................................................................................................................. 47 3.2.2 Engineering Aspects ....................................................................................................................... 48 Variants ............................................................................................................................................... 49 Hydraulic structures ............................................................................................................................ 50 3.3 Colorado Big-Thompson project ........................................................................................................... 54 3.3.1 A working water market ................................................................................................................ 55 CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................................................................................. 57 Water Transfer Proposals ........................................................................................................................... 57 4.1 Methodology......................................................................................................................................... 57 Step 1 - Extraction zone .......................................................................................................................... 57 Step 2 - Consumptions Zone ................................................................................................................... 58 Step 3 - Conveyance Method .................................................................................................................. 60 Step 5 - Refining the options............................................................................................................... 61 Step 6 - Evaluation of Impacts, Inhibitors and Benefits .......................................................................... 61 (1) expected environmental impacts .................................................................................................. 62 (2) socio/economic inhibitors ............................................................................................................. 64 v

(3) expected gains ............................................................................................................................... 65 4.2 Results ................................................................................................................................................... 65 4.2.1 Pipeline Proposals .......................................................................................................................... 66 Source: Laird and Nelson rivers .......................................................................................................... 66 Destination: Consumption Sites.......................................................................................................... 67 Conveyance: Pipelines ........................................................................................................................ 69 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................................ 72 4.2.2 Proposal 2: Augmenting the Great Lakes by river reversal............................................................ 73 Destination: Supplementing the Great Lakes Reservoir ..................................................................... 76 4.2.3 Proposal 3: International Exportation through Tanker Ships ........................................................ 77 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................................ 78 Source and Destination ....................................................................................................................... 78 4.3 Evaluation and discussion ..................................................................................................................... 81 4.3.1 Environmental Impacts .................................................................................................................. 82 4.3.2 Socio/Economic Inhibitors ............................................................................................................. 83 4.3.3 Expected Gains ............................................................................................................................... 84 4.3.4 Comparison .................................................................................................................................... 84 CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................................................................. 86 5.1 Future Studies ................................................................................................................................... 86 5.2 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 87 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 89 APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................................................. 93 APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................................................. 94 APPENDIX C ................................................................................................................................................. 96 APPENDIX D............................................................................................................................................... 105

vi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Visual representation of increase in scale ...................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 Typical google maps screenshot of Quebec wetland landscape (Coordinates 49.497162,74.613274) .................................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 3 North American watershed map. The thick black line roughly separates where water resources are mostly free-running .............................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 4 source (Water Corporation, 2005) ................................................................................................ 33 Figure 5 Traditional supply versus new options for Perth region ............................................................... 34 Figure 6 Elevation profile of pipeline .......................................................................................................... 37 Figure 7 Source point variants .................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 8 Mooring facility loads the cargo vessel (GWA, 2006) ................................................................... 41 Figure 9 Floating water bags (GWA, 2006) ................................................................................................. 41 Figure 10 Plan view of C-1 dam (HQ, 2004) ................................................................................................ 51 Figure 11 Cross section of typical dyke showing fill constituents (HQ, 2004) ............................................ 52 Figure 12 Liard River source ........................................................................................................................ 66 Figure 13 Nelson River source .................................................................................................................... 67 Figure 14 Satelite image of conveyance path ............................................................................................. 70 Figure 15 Elevation profile of Liard River .................................................................................................... 71 Figure 16 Elevation profile of Nelson River ................................................................................................ 71 Figure 17 Plan view of Albany proposal ...................................................................................................... 74 Figure 18 Albany river elevation diagram. .................................................................................................. 75 Figure 19 Section 3 of Albany proposal ...................................................................................................... 75 Figure 20 Section 10 of Albany proposal .................................................................................................... 75 Figure 21 Source site for tanker exportation .............................................................................................. 79 Figure 22 Conveyance path of Koksoak and Churchill propals ................................................................... 80 Figure 23 Conveyance path of Skeena proposal ......................................................................................... 80 Figure 24 Comparing results in each of the three aspects ......................................................................... 85

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Summary and purpose of Case studies .......................................................................................... 31 Table 2 Categories for expected environmental impacts ........................................................................... 62 Table 3 Categories for socio/economic inhibitors ...................................................................................... 64 Table 4 Categories for expected gains ........................................................................................................ 65 Table 5 Tanker ship details ......................................................................................................................... 81 Table 6 Environmental Impacts .................................................................................................................. 82 Table 7 Costs and Inhibitors ....................................................................................................................... 83 Table 8 Gains ............................................................................................................................................... 84

viii

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Inter-basin water transfer (IBWT) is the practice of moving bulk water volumes between adjacent or distant water-basins. This is typically done to augment the available water resources in an area of scarcity, by introducing water from an area of surplus. For centuries, if not millennia, man has been transferring water by diverting and reworking natural watercourses. This has enabled water demanding human settlements in places that have always been dry. These transfers have been done typically using a small scale application of collection, conveyance, and discharge technology.

What started with ancient aqueducts and the force of gravity has evolved to incorporate new technologies powered by pumps and turbines. Water today is moved with cargo ships, dams and river diversions, or through, pipelines and canals. Today, this technology has a wide range of applications; from artificially irrigating dry plains, to use in augmenting reservoirs in hydroelectricity projects.

There is concern that IBWT projects may go up a level of magnitude in terms of scale and importance. As many governing bodies are starting to feel the pressure of water scarcity issues, many experts (Ghassemi & White, 2007; Pierre Gingras, 2010; Lasserre, 2005; Barlow, 2007) are anticipating that IBWT will, for the first time, be regarded as a possible method to ensure a steady water supply for large regions. In other words, it is expected that the conventional and usual practice of moving water between adjacent small river-basins will potentially grow to a practice of moving much larger volumes, at greater distances. These transfers can occur between the largest oceanic watersheds in order to satisfy the demand of large region and their municipalities, industries and farms. If it is done between countries it can be referred to as water exportation. Thus, IBWT could soon be integrated within the

water supply strategy of entire provinces or states, if not countries. Figure 1 shows the anticipated increase in scale.

Figure 1 Visual representation of increase in scale

At the present moment, large scale oceanic watershed transfers are not being used in either Canada's or the United States strategy for water supply; nor has water been exported in appreciable amounts between the two countries. Four lines of reasoning can be used to explain why. (1) There is a lack of practical feasibility: water is very heavy thus transporting it over long distances would be very energy demanding (Wood, 2011; Grant, 2011). Factor in losses due to leaks and the cost of new infrastructure requirements, and it is easy to argue that it just will not make economic sense. (2) Traditional alternatives are still seen as the better and cheaper option. 3) The anticipated and unpredictable environmental impacts, especially in more remote areas, could not be justified in a modern water supply strategy. (4) Finally, considering the various environmental protection legislation, trade laws, and general politics, governments simply won't let it happen. (Richer, 2007; Wood, 2011; Tremblay, 2011).

Despite these four compelling reasons, the controversial idea of large-scale IBWT, and water exportation has cropped up numerous times in news stories (Jolicoeur, 2010; Morgan, 2010; Maich 2005). On one side, we see some engineers still pushing for it (Kierans, 2012; Olechnowicz, 2010; Pierre Gingras, 2010), on the other we see environmentalists warning us of its looming threat. Perhaps this can be explained by considering the development of new technologies and possibilities, combined with pressing global water scarcity issues. As these two factors increase in amplitude, and it is hard to argue that they will not, the first and second reason that go against IBWT, which can be summed up as the lack of economic feasibility, might reach a tipping point where they will no longer resist water transfers, rather they will demand it. Inter-basin water transfers in modern society The question thus becomes: in our world of changing climate, shifting demographics, relentless economies, and damaged eco-systems, can and should long distance water transfer play a role in water supply within society for the next generations?

Historically, from politicians, the public, and of course those involved in environmental protection, the answer has been a resounding no. This sentiment, harboured by Canadians for a few generations now, is echoed across the globe, as long distance water transfer is increasingly being pushed as a possible alternative for a steady water supply (Ghassemi & White, 2007).

For how long can this no be defended? When it comes to the environmental cause, the unfortunate reality is that sometimes a no, even when coming from an entity that seemingly has a lot of mass, power or credibility, can become nothing more than a thinning barrier against the momentum of technological change and development. There are countless examples where certain forces, usually of an economic or politically origin, have trumped any sort of long-term preservation commitment.

1.1 Project overview

So far in the literature, inter-basin water transfer in North America has been discussed and argued against mostly from a non-technical standpoint. Humanitarians, environmentalists, journalists, and geographers have contributed to this cause; yet not much is heard from those who are ultimately responsible for actually conceptualizing and building the physical structures needed: the engineers. Thus, this project will take it a step further and begin the discussion as to why, from an engineering and technological standpoint, it is not an appropriate long-term solution.

To this effect, the second chapter of this project discusses the non-technical aspects. It is based on interviews and an extensive literature review. The idea of potentially turning water into a profitable commodity brings up wide philosophical questions of how we define natural water, and how we place value on it. Very few people would disagree that water is a human right. This implies that governments should be committed to ensuring access to clean water and sanitation. Yet, do we live in an economic era where in order to fulfill these long-term commitments, economic imperatives must be the driving factor for the means to that end? The issue from a philosophical, historical, legal, macro-economic, institutional and political perspective will be discussed.

The third chapter explores a few relevant case studies. Apart from introducing the reader to various real-world water transfer projects and proposals, the end goal is to produce a list of lessons learnt that could be applied to the next chapter.

This brings us to the fourth chapter of this project, which serves to take-on the question with an unbiased approach; specifically from the engineering and technological side. After assessing the expanse of water resources geographically throughout North America, and identifying where water flows in abundance versus where it will be scarce, several hypothetical proposals and options will be prepared. This will include the types of hydraulic structures needed, as well as paths and methods of conveyance. 4

Following this is a systematic and qualitative evaluation of the potential environmental impacts, social implications, obstacles and gains of each proposal. A discussion will follow to suggest their lack of feasibility. The project will then conclude with suggestions for future work and a wrap up of the ideas presented.

CHAPTER 2
IBWT and Society 2.1 What are the trends in the global water supply?
Inter-basin water transfer (IBWT) is an extreme and massively impactful water supply method. To accept the idea of including such a controversial technology in a discussion of future global water supply, the reader must have an appreciation of the problems we currently facing and are set to face. As such, we begin by presenting statistics and trends from the literature concerning global water scarcity issues, and how they can relate to IBWT.

2.1.1 Global Water Issues From Maude Barlow's book, Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle Over the Right to Water (Barlow, 2007), a global image of the momentum of water issues is thoroughly described.

At this stage the world is facing a water crisis due to pollution, climate change and a surging population growth of such magnitude that close to 2 billion people are now living in water stressed regions of the world. Further, unless we change our ways, by the year 2025, two thirds of the world's population will face water scarcity. The global population tripled in the mid-20th century, but water consumption went up a sevenfold. By 2050, after we add another 3 billion to the population, humans will need an 80% increase in water supplies just to feed ourselves. No one knows where this water is going to come from. 5

Other statistics are given; they include:

Two fifths of the world's people lack access to proper sanitation, which has led to massive outbreaks of waterborne diseases.

Half of the world's hospital beds are occupied by people with an easily preventable waterborne disease Contaminated water is implicated in 80 percent of all sickness and disease worldwide Every eight seconds, a child dies from drinking dirty water.

Barlow stresses that water shortages are not limited to developing nations. Australia, a highly developed country, is also one of the driest countries on Earth and is facing major shortages. Problems like reduced rainfalls; increases in salinity and desertification; and unsustainable river drains have compounded the issue.

In Barlow's book (2007), we find many chapters to be mostly concerned with the commoditization of water resources, and the struggle between the traditional methods of publicly sharing water, versus the for-profit privatization of water distribution. She has identified the involvement of the largest corporations, world banks, and international institutions like the UN and WTO in making water a commodity to be sold on an open market.

The basic argument is that with privatized water, the priority will stretch away from wateras a human right, to wateronly for those who pay. She continues by calling upon and encouraging the opposing side of this issue: environmentalists, rights activists, farmers, grassroots communities and other groups; encouraging them to push for more global water justice.

With respect to this project, the commercial market forces which Barlow has brought up, plays a crucial role in the pressure needed for large, continental scale engineering projects, such as IBWT, to take off.

No doubt those with an active role in environmental protection and preservation, from individuals to collective organizations, will have a say in what happens. Yet, history can give an indication of what is to come when economics, profits, and markets are stimulated and involved. Sometimes the more noble or long-term solution takes a backseat to what is going to make fast money, or what is going to make a politician more popular.

We can take Barlow's grim vision of a corporate controlled water supply world a step further: those who control water distribution with an aim for profit by any means will accordingly look for the cheapest supply. If the cheapest alternative becomes IBWT; what will be there to stop them?

***

Dry spring: the coming water crisis of North America, a book written by Chris Wood (Wood, 2008), is another popular book on the water crisis, with a special focus on North America.

It's a problem of distribution, both geographic and temporal. Water is available in the wrong place, or the wrong occasion, with the wrong form for economic convenience. There is either too much water or too little, but seldom water in amounts Goldilocks would call "just right." Abundance flows where few of us choose to live; supplies are tight where we flock. (Wood, 2008)

If there was to be a compelling reason for inter-basin water transfer, it would to address this issue. IBWT essentially serves to hold and spread around the water in-land. It serves to compensate for the differences between dry and wet places, and dry and wet seasons.

Wood makes it clear that the problem of water distribution has always been around, yet it is to become more acute from the damage we have done to the environment, and especially with climate change. However, Wood does seem to be optimistic, urging us to build resiliency.

*We must+ equip ourselves for the widest conceivable range of future conditions with strategies and investments that perform well in high water and low, as well as during wild swings between the two. (Wood, 2008). Wood acknowledges that the United States and Canada have taken certain measures to moderate its uses of all resources, particularly water. In the last 20 years, despite population increases, water consumption has remained more or less even or at least on par with economic development. Yet, we still do consume too much and much can still be done to decrease our consumption before we push for an increase in supply. A good example mentioned would be to patch up and restore outdated and leaky water supply infrastructure which loses a lot of water before it ever reaches taps.

Diving very deep into this is beyond the scope of this project, as we will focus on what to do in the pessimistic case that conservation is not enough and therefore we will need to add available water. This is a realistic scenario given trends in urban migration and farming practices, and due to the threat of climate change. Given this, it seems worthwhile to study how or if, IBWT can be designed keeping sustainable developments and ecosystem preservation at heart.

***

Next, we have the book Water Resources and Development by Clive Agnew and Philip Woodhouse (Agnew & Woodhouse, 2011). It too has a thorough breakdown and discussion of the inequality of water distribution across the world, but more specifically it presents the situation for North America. Most relevant to this, he makes the clear distinction between water that is withdrawn from a fossil source and water from a renewable source.

Figure 2 shows a random satellite image of Quebec, a few hours north of Montreal. The whole province, and practically all of Canada, seems to be similarly dotted with wetlands, lakes, ponds and rivers. Yet, the majority of this freshwater has been there for millions of years. Most of it was deposited during the

recession of the last glaciation. The Great Lakes for example, carved out and left behind by massive glaciers, have only one percent of their volume renewed with inflows from streams and rivers and outflows through the St. Lawrence towards the Gulf. The United-States greatest aquifer that span across eight states was similarly created.

Figure 2 Typical google maps screenshot of Quebec wetland landscape (Coordinates 49.497162,-74.613274)

Therefore, when it is said that we are running out of water it is not implying the hydrologic cycle will suddenly cease. It is because we are tapping the anciently deposited aquifers, wetlands, and lakes that do not get replenished at speeds comparable to our pumping rates. This activity is plainly not sustainable and is already demonstrated by the plethora of dried-up lakes and halted rivers across the globe, and groundwater pumps going dry.

Another point Agnew & Woodhouse (2011) makes is that the availability of water across the globe is not only governed by geographic distributions of water and precipitation rates. Many factors, most of which depend on how developed the particular country is, will affect the public availability of water. Consider the energy rich and water poor countries of the Middle East. These places are able to (at least temporarily) spend exorbitant amounts on desalinating water creating artificial water reserves. Longterm thinking developed countries can invest in preserving and maintaining natural flows of water contributing to their water security strategy. Conversely, the lack of clean water in poorer countries often has to do more with political corruption and inefficiencies, and less with the geographic availability of freshwater sources.

***

To understand the worrisome consequences of these water issues, we can study the book Plan B: rescuing a planet under stress and a civilization in trouble by Lester R. Brown (Brown, 2003). In it he describes the two factors that will most affect food production (which has the greatest direct impact on human well-being): rising temperatures and falling water tables. This is best exemplified by China, a place that has seen unprecedented agricultural activity where water tables are falling at alarming rates.

Brown (2003) identifies food production as the most vulnerable economic sector to water issues. Needless to say, if food output cannot keep up with demand, prices will rise and food will become a national security issue. In other worlds, everything is linked to water from food production to energy security and civil stability.

***

The long and short of the messages in these books is that we are running out of water. Of course this is a very vague and general statement, and as stated in the beginning of this section, is repeated very often. From the World Water Council in 2010:

While the worlds population tripled in the twentieth century, the use of renewable water resources has grown sixfold. Within the next 50 years, the world population will increase by another 40 to 50 percent. This population growthcoupled with industrialization and urbanization-- will result in an increasing demand for water with serious consequences on the environment (World Water Council, 2010):.

How will individual nations and their water supply agencies respond to these challenges?

10

2.1.2 Preparing and responding to global water scarcity In response to this reality, Ghassemi and White (2007) make a good point: the "water profession has been repeating ad nauseaum for the last four decades that business as usual is not an option, but they continue to behave as if there is no other option." Policy makers, scientists, and engineers are all using current and historical data and methods in their efforts to ensure a steady water supply. There is no need to abandon traditional ways of supplying and conserving water, but now is the time to re-evaluate our strategy and prepare ourselves for new challenges.

This project serves this need; to open up the dialogue to an unconventional water supply strategy. There is little doubt that massive scale water transfer projects are unrealistic at the time being. However those most affected by water scarcity issues will eventually face desperate times. If Canada, a place rightly considered as having an abundant supply, is to defend and protect its water resources, all angles have to be studied and all proposals and options need to be considered and debated.

2.2 Philosophical nature of the issue

2.2.1 Wasted water The idea behind inter-basin water transfer is to stop, store and divert freshwater that is on its way into the ocean. If left to its natural course, freshwater would be lost as it mixes with saltwater in the many deltas, bays and gulfs of estuary and coastal regions. It is about increasing and holding in the available freshwater that would be otherwise be wasted into seawater.

The questions that present themselves are as follows: Is it really wasted? Does water on its way to the ocean belong to us as a commodity to be used in our ever increasing urban centers and agricultural fields? Or does free running freshwater belong to the ecosystems, even as it dumps into the sea?

11

Therein lays the controversy and sensitivity towards considering water as a commodity or a resource. Water has vital a role in the ecosystem, whereas all other resources either have a lesser (timber) or a non-existent role (minerals, petrol). If we exhaust our nickel reserves, our only concern will be to think of another way to strengthen steel. If we run low on clean water, the consequences are far more disastrous.

2.2.2 Justified environmental impacts IBWT involves removing water from its natural course. Thus, the environmental question is of the importance of maintaining natural discharge rates along rivers and at the mouth of rivers. Assessing the environments sensitivity to change should be done case-by-case. Given the typical biodiversity and activity of major rivers especially at estuaries, we should not undermine the importance of preservation (Linton, 2002).

IBWT will have environmental impacts starting with changes to the hydrologic regime, followed by impacts on the local climate, ecosystem and finally biologic activity (Linton, 2002; Sasseville & Abdessalem, 2005). Therefore, in light of this and the uncertainties as to its severity, some professionals say we should take the precautionary approach: unless you can prove that this amount of water is not needed, the prudent thing is to not do it. (Clamen, 2011).

Conversely, some experts warn against having an automatic and dogmatic predisposition towards engineering projects simply because they remove water and because the impacts are uncertain and unavoidable. *The prevalent problem, especially in the developed world+ is the knee-jerk reactions of certain activist groups, that large-scale water development is no longer necessary, and that water requirements of the future can be taken care of by small scale projects like rain-water harvesting and local wells. It is difficult to have sympathy for such dogmatic views. (Ghassemi & White, 2007). Ghassemi & White (2007) stress that one size does not fit all; it is important to judge each case by site12

specific conditions. The two alternatives, small and big, may co-existit is not an either/or proposition. They conclude that it is important to move the question way from whether large projects involving dams, diversions and pumps should be built, to how these can be done economically, safely, and within social and environmental acceptability.

In the foreword of Leau du Nord (Pierre Gingras, 2010), M.K. Gagnon is also vocal against this knee-jerk reaction towards engineering projects like IBWT. He expresses that water, once used, continues to exist and asks if it comes back not polluted, what does it bother if it spends time in another step? The sentiment is that untapped freshwater will end up mixing into unusable salt water anyway; we might as well use it for our economic benefit. A similar sentiment was expressed by Kazimir Olechnowicz, the president of the Canadian civil engineering giant CIMA+ during a Radio-Canada news interview (Olechnowicz, 2010).

This issue can be addressed using a utilitarian perspective. If we are to push for water as a universal human right, we must accept some of the measures taken to supply it. Supplying water inevitably has environmental impacts. For example, tapping fossil groundwater can cause ground subsidence. Similarly, lakes often receive very little replenishment; they are therefore not appropriate to supply increasing demands. There are impacts associated with dams such as sediment halting and river regime changes. Desalination plants emit greenhouse gases and other pollutants (Wood, 2008). Given this inevitability, and burgeoning populations, out of the many options and scenarios, we should attempt to measure and establish which option has the least cumulative environmental impacts relative to the reliability of the supply.

Compared to conventional methods, we can allocate to IBWT a few advantages. First, there would reductions in the number of local impacts, as the impacts would be concentrated away to where there are only sparse populations. The impacts can be better managed and controlled given their consolidated 13

nature. Of course this is hypothetical, and the best course of action can only be truly found using site specific data and environmental conditions. The question is of scale, both spatial and temporal (Lasserre, 2005). How big of an impact is too big of an impact? How can we measure this and give proper value to water in the ecosystem? With respect to IBWT, what is the maximum flow that we can sustainably remove from a river?

There are scientific and objective ways of answering these questions. Within an environmental impact assessment, the minimum flows to protect certain fish species or to enable a minimum floodplain can be measured. There are also hydraulic structures that can be used to mitigate the impacts such as weirs or engineered river bedding that serve to maintain desired water levels, velocities, turbulence and other hydraulic characteristics (as described in the Rupert River case study).

2.2.3 Canadian water: abundance or surplus? Activists (Barlow 2007; Quinn, 2007; Linton, 2002) like to bring up the question does Canada really have a surplus of water? in their arguments. From (Quinn, 2007):

There is a widespread misconception in both countries that Canada is much wealthier in freshwater resources than its closest neighbour... The myth of Canadas abundance of water also reflects a tendency of our human-centric society to reduce water needs to per capita availability, as though no other forms of life or ecological needs mattered. In truth, the Canadian and American shares of global renewable freshwater are not much different, at roughly 7% and 6.5%, respectively. This is not out of line, considering that Canada is slightly larger than the United States.

Although these facts are true, one cannot deny the implications that the per-capita usage of water in Canada is drastically lower than in the United States (discounting Alaska). Canada has 0.5% of the

14

worlds population, with 7-9% of renewable water resources depending on estimates (Sasseville & Abdessalem, 2005). The appropriate way to assess the relative abundance is to consider the availability of free-running renewable water resources. This is the water in rivers discharging away from populations. It flows naturally into northern seas and oceans. The stock of water that is available for export can be considered as the quantity that can be spared from these rivers. Consider figure 3: the area north of the thicker black line is roughly where water mostly runs free towards the north (barring some industrial and hydropower activity). South of this line is amidst human population and thus inappropriate for exportation. The majority of the Canadian population lives south of the black line.

Environmentalists and engineers may vastly disagree on what quantity, if any, can be considered a surplus. However, with the vast unpopulated reaches of the north, Canada can be considered as having a huge abundance of pristine water flowing out relative to the United-States or most other countries. Whether it can be labeled as surplus or to spare is tough to answer, just as difficult as whether water is ever wasted. Again, the best way to circumvent these subjective definitions is to have objective studies that propose reasonable
Figure 3 North American watershed map. The thick black line roughly separates where water resources are mostly free-running

compromises for all stakeholders and those interested. These will be discussed specific to the proposals in chapter 4.

2.2.4 Valuing versus commoditising water Water is a notoriously complex resource relative to others because of its free-flowing nature. Quantities and qualities are variable over time and space (Johns, 2008). Nevertheless, the question of the nature

15

and value of water resources is discussed by many authors (Johns, 2008; Wood 2008; Wood, 2011, Barlow, 2007). This is in response to the emergence of water in an international economy, where it can be controlled and traded and is valuable as a commodity on a free-market. Activists such as Barlow and Wood deplore focusing on liquid water itself as a commodity, while ignoring its other indirect and elusive roles in economic production. From the interview with Chris Wood (Wood, 2011):

What thoughtful people need to do is recognize that water has economic value. Some of that is in its nature as water. Some is in the products we can make that others with less water cannot (embedded/virtual water). Some is in the ecoservices that water enables (this value may be very large indeed, just poorly assessed). We need to be able to recognize all of these and have adult conversations about them all, and about the potential they each have to improve Canadians quality of life, without going into brain-lock around the idea of commodifying water.

In other words, it is meaningless to get lost in semantics. The pursuit of long-term quality of life and environmental sustainability is what is important. Water is not valuable to Canadians only because of some arbitrary heritage that we want to protect or some association of water with life (Agnew & Woodhouse, 2011). It is valuable because of the ecoservices, or the ecological productivity provided by water in the natural landscape. It is in our best interest, especially for future generations, to protect and manage correctly the natural water systems that provide ecoservices. The difficult part is assessing if an engineered intervention that generates income by removing water, such as restricting flow for an IBWT project, is worth more than the associated losses in ecoservices produced. To environmentalists the automatic intuition is that, in the long-run, it rarely ever is; the problem is convincing by clear proof to the ones driving development, namely politicians and business people.

16

2.3 Water transfers and exports in Canadian society

The idea of inter-basin water transfer, when done within national boundaries, has resulted in public opposition and controversy. This was seen numerous times over with the river flow disturbances and inundations required to build and operate giant hydro-facilities in Northern Quebec.

Moving water across an international boundary becomes a whole other story in terms of controversy. There are many implications beyond concerns for environmental impacts. Canadians have always regarded water as their heritage (Barlow, 2007); relegating water as just another commodity would result in public outcry, despite proclaimed economic benefits at the international stage. As a result of this, the government's reaction in the form of the legal, political and economic institutions to either protect or take advantage of Canadian water warrants considerable attention.

Water law and politics can get somewhat complicated. To the experts, there is much open for interpretation and for debate (Johns, 2005; Tremblay, 2011; Grant, 2008). When it comes to bulk water transfers, what environmentalists are continuously pushing for is the certainty that, within the layered and complicated web of laws and agreements, there exist concrete provisions for environmental protection. In other words, have those designated to regulate the use of Canadian water resources, be it the individual province or the federal government, set up the required legal foundation to counter bulk water transfers, if it ever becomes economically feasible?

As the literature consistently shows, as well as according to a few of the interviews conducted, the answer is: first, it is complicated as it depends on many factors; but ultimately no, there are many difficulties and obstacles that have left Canadian water resources vulnerable. The best way to explain and present how this came to be is to look at the historical context. Following this is a discussion of the current situation and the difficulties Canadians will face in protecting their water.

17

2.3.1 Timeline: Inter-basin water transfer and Water Policy in Canada The story of Canadian water politics is a long and drawn out one. Many issues and conflicts have progressively mandated, shaped and matured Canadas water laws, policies, public institutions, and international agreements. They include conflicts between the multiple users of a watershed, the establishment of property rights, protection of northern aboriginal communities, public health, hygiene, sanitation and the right to clean water. Increasingly, provisions have been made for the protection of water resources, navigation routes, fisheries, and the natural environment. Finally, in modern times, there has been much discourse relating to the potential for water as a commodity and as an economic good; both as virtual water through the export of goods, or through bulk water exports. Of course the story of Canadas water policy is and will be ongoing; more-so now with the advent of technologies, increased environmental awareness, climate change, and unprecedented new economic opportunities.

The next section deals with the emergence and evolution of laws, agreements, and institutions that can be applied specifically to inter-basin bulk water transfer in Canada. These are presented chronologically in four observable and distinct time periods. The first era deals with the origins of water policy in Canada. The second era comprises the technological boom of the ambitious early 1960s; complete with dramatic speeches by Pres. Kennedy and magnificent plans for humanity to tame the natural world on a continental scale. Then we have the free-trade development era of the late 1970s to late 1990s. Finally we have the most recent era, which goes until present day. This is a time of both increasing environmental awareness and protection and an emergence of global water scarcity issues.

2.3.2 Early days of Canadian water policy & boundary water commissions: 1900 to 1950s The International Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 was the first institution between Canada and the United States to deal with water conflicts arising from shared watersheds and water bodies. It dealt with conflicts in both quantity and quality of water (International Joint Commission, 2011). This treaty

18

"delineated the rights and obligations of the United States and Canada with respect to the protection of natural levels and flows of their shared boundary waters. (Grant, 2008).

This established the international joint commission (IJC), which active even today has the role of enforcing the treaty. *The IJC+ must follow the Treaty as they try to prevent or resolve disputes. They must act impartially, in reviewing problems and deciding on issues, rather than representing the views of their respective governments. (International Joint Commission, 2012).

Grant (2008) identifies that the treaty, as well as the influence of the IJC, was to be used as an instrument for environmental protection. It gave vetoes to each federal government and to the panel of IJC commissioners collectively over any proposed diversion in boundary waters that would substantially affect water levels on the other side of the international border.(Grant, 2008). It should be said however, that initially the main intention to preserve water levels was to ensure navigation routes through the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. Grant (2008) identifies that the treaty is not fully applicable to bulk transfers of a grander scale as discussed in this project.

2.3.3 The ambitious era: late 1950s to 1970. The 1950s saw unprecedented economic and demographic expansions, along with the introduction of the American dream and a high standard of living. Infrastructure capable of supporting this activity was outdated and simply not enough. As such, these decades saw the accelerated development of industrial technologies. These pushed for the quick construction of large-scale transportation networks, large power plants, industrial farmland, urban dwellings, and modernized water distribution and wastewater collection networks. Ambitious ways to tame, control and master natures most important, yet evasive resource would quickly surface and gain political momentum.

19

Starting from Kennedys political term on to the late 1960s, there have been at least 10 high profile IBWT schemes proposed. Two are perhaps the most notorious and prolific for similar reasons: the NAWAPA and GRAND schemes.

NAWAPA Gargantuan engineering projects defined this era as countries competed and showed off their developments. At the time, the US Army corps of engineers envisioned the first, now infamous, largescale water transfer project of North America. It was called the North American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA). In terms of scale, it was comparable to the undertakings of NASA, and of nuclear power developments of that era. The main design firm responsible for the conception and promotion of the project was Parson Co. which to date was famously responsible for miraculously developing the arid parts of California into a bustling green agricultural paradise (LaRouche, 1988).

On a map, NAWAPA is rather easy to describe. Surface water from scarcely populated northern areas, namely Alaska, the Yukon Territory and British Columbia would be dammed and collected. Subsequently water would be conveyed down towards the more populated western and central parts of the United States. Upon completion, (which was estimated to take 30 years) 4 700 MCS (meters cubed per second) of freshwater would be delivered (Watkins, n.d.). This flow would stretch across the continent with a discharge reaching as far as East as Lake Superior. This would provide supplementation to the heavily withdrawn Great Lakes basin.

In terms engineering elements, it would require 369 separate constructed sections spanning the continent, making it an undertaking of unforeseen complexity. The project would require large hydroelectric plants to generate the energy needed to divert the water up into the Rocky Mountain trench. Water would move down from there in a network of lined canals and tunnels taking advantage of naturally occurring rifts and valleys of the mountain range. 20

The promotional video (Parsons Co., 1964) describes the points where the flow would need to cross the saw-tooth Mountain range of Western United States. It would require a tunnel 24 meters in diameter (which is about the width of a six standard highway lanes) and 800 kilometers in length. Clearly this was no small undertaking, if one was to imagine the kind of power required to pressurize such a massive pipe in just this one section.

The proposed benefits across North America were demonstrated to be nothing short of astonishing. The promotional video from the 1960s (Parsons Co., 1964) describes how the sectors of water supply, power, flood control, agriculture, seaway transportation, and recreation would directly benefit. The lower states would enjoy a doubling of their water supply; and a large amount of economically valuable hydroelectricity would be generated on down sloping sections. Politically, this project would contribute to the United States clout as a nation fully harnessing and taming nature, something which could be shown proudly on the world stage.

In terms of impacts, not much was identified or considered. This was during an era before environmental impacts became crucial to new projects. Yet, some importance to maintaining environmental stability was expressed: only 20% of the surplus water in the collection area was said to be needed for this project to provide the promised supply and benefits (Parsons Co., 1964). In fact, much of the environmental effects were actually described as positive and beneficial. For example, states such as Utah would be able cease consuming discharge from the Colorado River. Even in the 1960s, this river was showing signs of stress such as an increase in mineral content. The promotional video showed scenes of lush green agricultural planes, claiming that these images would be possible only with a new supply of fresh clean water.

Just as fast as this proposal popped up onto a political platform, it fell out from the United-States development priorities. There was a lot of opposition, and perhaps more than anything else, it collapsed 21

under its own weight: the astronomical costs and multiple decade timescale needed, made it in intimidating and risky undertaking to fund and start (Grant, 2008).

GRAND Compared to NAWAPA, the GRAND (Great Recycling And Northern Development) scheme of the 1960s proposed by Newfoundland engineer Tom Kierans was at a more realistic scale, albeit still at a scale large enough to be seen from space. Kierans proposed to block off the James Bay from the Hudson Bay, using a dike spanning across the junction. This would allow freshwater to accumulate via the many rivers that dump into the James-Bay perimeter; while saltwater would slowly drain out. Eventually, this enclosure would turn into a large freshwater lake.

Now armed with a massive freshwater reservoir, more populated areas of the South could benefit from a new inflow. It would require a large network of pumps, canals and reversed rivers; these naturally requiring large energy demands, as well as environmental impacts.

To this day, this project remains in incubation with its designer still optimistic of its inception (Wood, 2008; Clamen, 2011). Yet, the author of Dry Spring, Chris Wood, does not believe it will see the light of day. Even enthusiastic engineers deride both blueprints for re-plumbing the continents as extreme examples of hubristic overreach. (Wood, 2008). With a $100 billion price tag, this is of no surprise.

2.3.4 The free-trade era: late 1980s to 1999 During the late 1980s, increasing environmental awareness was to compete for the attention of politicians with talks of international commercial trade agreements. As such, the issue of bulk water exports was an on and off hot issue for Canadian politicians. For the first time, water was being characterised as a potential commodity, while international organisations established it as a human right (United Nations, 2010).

22

Under the new free-trade conditions, we find a few examples in North America of tensions caused by water exportation. They differed from the projects of the previous era, in that they were of a much lesser scale, less sophisticated and more realistic (Grant, 2008). The proponents were enterprises; while governments played the role of moderator. Therefore, rather than being shut down for being technically and economically infeasible, they were shut down for political reasons.

One example highlighted by a few sources (Grant, 2008; Wood, 2008) occurred in 1991. Sun Belt Water Inc. of Santa Monica, California was the winner of a bid to supply a small American town with BritishColumbian freshwater through containerships. The deal was promptly halted by a provincial moratorium on water exports. Both Sun Belt Water Inc. and the Canadian company responsible for the supply end, Snowcap Waters of Fanny Bay, attempted to sue the federal government. Citing the investments section (specifically article 1105) of the NAFTA agreement, Sun Belt claimed they were being treated unfairly; yet since no other Canadian company had been granted the green light or an advantage for such an endeavor, the federal government dismissed the claim (Grant, 2008).

In light of this, Canadian federal reports began calling out for legislation that would clearly and permanently establish water resources as being protected from exportation. Grant (2008) has identified and discussed a few of these policies, bills and reports. Ultimately, they would be scrapped or not fully implemented, despite the Canadian government explicitly stating they were against large-scale diversions . From (Grant, 2008): Any law banning the commercial export of this water good to United States, would run afoul of the trade deals. The worry was that under the newly enacted FTA, and eventually NAFTA, water could become a commodity, which would make Canadians lose sovereignty over its water resources (Grant, 2008).

Another example widely cited happened in 1998 (Grant, 2008; Wood, 2008). This time, a consortium known as Nova Group was granted access to draw up to 10 000 cubic meters of water per day (0.12 23

MCS) from Lake superior for exports by ship to Asia. Permits were issued by the Ontario Ministry of the environment. This project was halted due to a large public outcry from both the Canadian and American side of Lake Superior.

Legally, the project went against policy as there were constraints on water exports from the Great Lakes basin; not to mention "the granting of such a permit by the province of Ontario ran counter to principles of conservation and cooperation management set out in joint Province-State declarations such as the Great Lakes Charter, a non-binding agreement drawn up in 1985 between the provinces and states of the Great Lakes basin aimed at protecting their shared water resources. (Grant, 2008).

2.3.5 The Federal Strategy: 1999 to early 2000s The 90s saw a handful of tanker ship proposals. Even considering their sum running continuously year round, they could not significantly have an effect on water levels of the Great Lakes or of coastal rivers. Yet, the Canadian government was adamant in its position to restrict these exports. Allowing those few would set a precedent, perhaps a disastrous one. Once a few companies would be allowed to ship water, any other could not be denied (Barlow, 2007; Heinmiller, 2003). The problem could be amplified even more once international companies decide to get their share, while legally being protected by international trade rules.

Meanwhile, an obstacle to enforcing this position was a shift in the federal governments position on water trade. Prior to the introduction of free trade, the federal government attempted to deal with water exports through the imposition of uniform national standards. After free trade, however, harmonization efforts became more decentralized as federal power over export controls diminished, but provincial powers over water-taking remained untouched. (Heinmiller, 2003). This phenomenon of shared jurisdiction is described in detail in Heinmiller (2003) and it is presented in the next section as one of the difficulties for a political embargo. 24

Nevertheless, with their goals and the obstacles in sight, Heinmiller (2003), as well as Grant (2008) recognized the Canadian governments strategy of prohibiting bulk water removals. By framing *it+ as an environmental management issue [in the Federal Strategy], the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade hoped to avoid trade challenges since an outright ban on water exports was contrary to trade rules of the GATT and, subsequently, the NAFTA. (Grant, 2008).

With this, in 1999, the Canadian federal government decided to push towards making water unlike other natural resources subject to trade laws, such as lumber or minerals. As long as the water was underground, or in surface water, it was considered safe from trade obligations. The logic underlying this approach is that water in its natural state in rivers or lakes, for example is not considered a good or a product and is not subject to international trade rules (Grant, 2008). Thus, the act specifically tried to regulate water withdrawals, rather than water trade. (Heinmiller, 2003).

Grant (2008) continues this discussion by detailing the three elements of the 1999 federal strategy:

1) Proposed amendments to the International Boundaries Waters Treaty Act: Signed in 2001, this made sure to stipulate that bulk water removals would conflict with the initial intentions of 1909 treaty. Both the Canadian and the American government should be committed to maintaining natural levels of shared water bodies. The Council of Canadians however warns that this amendment applies only to boundary waters and not groundwater or surface waters, and provides no protection for the rivers of Canadas north (Council of Canadians, 2007). 2) A proposed Canada-wide accord on bulk water removals by each individual Province: Heinmiller (2003) describes the many difficulties incurred when it came for the harmonization of the Canadian government's plan to ban bulk water transfer within the laws of each individual province. 3) Referring the issue to the IJC

25

This led to a document in 2000 (International Joint Commission, 2000). In it, the IJC provided important recommendations to protect water. They also addressed the worries of the free-trade agreements, but only specific to the Great Lakes basin (Grant, 2008).

2.3.6 Current situation and difficulties Large-scale water diversions have the potential to threaten Canada's sovereignty from the large and relentless economic empire of the United States. Canadians do not want to be in the position where they must perpetually submit their natural resources, water being the most precious of them, lest they face huge penalties and the souring of other important trade relationships.

Thus the question becomes: today, does the Canadian government protect its water? It is clear that the Great Lakes area is well protected, but what about the rivers that flow away from populations? The Canadian government has plainly stated that they do not intend on opening up trade negotiations (Richer, 2007), yet Maude Barlow (Barlow, 2007) clearly does not believe this to be entirely true. She expresses her concern by calling it a myth that Canadians believe their government will protect natural water.

The following section explains some of the difficulties that exist in recent times to can explain the ongoing struggle towards conclusively preventing large-scale water transfers.

Difficulty 1: Jurisdiction The article Harmonization through emulation: Canadian federalism and water export policy by Timothy Heinmiller (Heinmiller, 2003) has an in-depth analysis of the difficulties incurred by the decentralized federal government to harmonize and standardize water policy throughout the Canadian provinces and territories. Other sources also address jurisdictional conflict for policy enactments and enforcement (Tremblay, 2011; Grant, 2008, Johns, 2008b).

26

It all stems from the fact that the original Canadian Constitution did not clearly delineate and divide powers to decide on water issues; especially that of a water export application (Heinmiller, 2003; Grant, 2008). The provinces are responsible for their water resources, while the federal government is responsible for international trade. Johns (2008b) adds that jurisdictional complexity is also related to the physical nature of water resources... the multi-jurisdictional scale and fugitive or transitory nature of water and its many interrelated uses make it hard to fit neatly within well-defined categories of property rights.

The fragmented nature of policies and their ambiguities have become a rather notorious problem in Canadian water politics. Heinmiller (2003) highlights one example, section 109 in the Constitution act of 1867 in which provinces can cite for proprietary rights over all publicly owned lands, and resources. This has given the provinces the needed authority to sell their water. However, according to the much more recent international trade agreements, it is the federal government that should oversee and deal with large-scale trading between countries. Also, as Heinmiller (2003) highlights, the federal government has jurisdiction over issues on navigation and inland fisheries. This has resulted in delays and deferring of actual concrete measures to deal with the complexities of water exportation.

Although each province currently has laws that counter bulk water removals exportation, Quinn (2007) expresses that there is little indications that these institutions are permanent or air-tight.

Difficulty 2: Northern versus shared water It is well documented that there have been suitable initiatives and institutions created to protect and manage cooperatively the boundary water between Canada and the United States (Quinn, 2007; Clamen, 2011). It is also well known that these shared waters are not particularly abundant. They supply water to a majority of the Canadian population, as well as major portion on the American side; while water levels have been anything but perfectly stable (Quinn, 2007; Wood, 2008; Grant, 2011). 27

As expressed before, there is abundant water that flows north into the Arctic; therefore northern watercourses are considered the most vulnerable to water transfers.

The Rupert River and Eastmain powerhouse case study discussed in the next chapter is a prime example where northern water had its direction reversed, despite being an expensive undertaking. It still happened even with vocalized concern among aboriginal communities. Therefore we can conclude that the largest barrier between exploiting northern water, and protected it, ultimately comes down to basic economics and practical feasibility, and not public opposition, political power or institutions.

Difficulty 3: trade agreements As described, the late 1980s saw the emergence and development of free-trade agreements. Perhaps more than anything else, with the introduction of the FTA and then NAFTA which superseded it, came the reduction in influence of the federal government (Heinmiller, 2003). With respect to IBWT, under NAFTA, the Canadian governments (both federal and provincial) are restricted from imposing export controls on water goods unless there is a serious emergency that can justify such a restriction. (Heinmiller, 2003). Also, any type of profit making venture for water exportation must be open to investors in all three countries. In other words, profit from our water cannot be forced to remain here (Barlow, 2007). This could be seen as unfair; given it is the Canadian environment that is being degraded. Authors have expressed concern regarding proportionality requirements, and the difficulties it could generate when environmental concerns would call for reductions in exports (Grant, 2008; Barlow, 2007; Heiniller, 2003).

Difficultys 4: pressure from economic development sectors Even with the active approach of the Canadian federal government or to resist water transfers, the literature warns of the pressure from economic development sectors (Barlow, 2007). For example, water export may soon become one of the issues, joining energy, on the agenda of the Security and 28

Prosperity Partnership (SPP), a trilateral initiative to increase the economic integration of Canada, the United States and Mexico (Quinn, 2007). If all three North American countries were to aggressively adopt this type of planned economic development, it would be of no surprise that water sharing could be a top priority for all three countries. Canada might be anxious to put something of value on the table: its large freshwater supply.

Difficulty 5: Consequences of banning, and compromised alternatives Many researchers criticize the Canadian federal government for not being very clear about water exports when given the chance. Heimiller (2003) and Grant (2008) both discuss how the Canada water act of 1970 could have, but failed to addressed directly water exports through a permanent ban. Since the ambitious projects of the 1960s, there has been a call from both the Canadian public and environmentalists urging for a national ban on water exports once and for all (Heinmiller, 2003).

Sasseville & Abdessalem (2005) argues that it is the sheer grandeur of the issue that is inhibiting political decisiveness. Moving water across a geopolitical landscape is a very complex question that brings up many economic, social and environmental difficulties and unknowns for politicians. They therefore do not want to touch it as the implications and the uncertainties are too large. Envisioning bulk water exportation means to think on a timescale of decades. Most politicians are empowered for no more than a few years.

Given that our laws can change, and that amendments and exceptions can be added, an outright ban might not be the most effective way of preventing water exportations. Maintaining a constant study of the practical and environmental nature of the issue, while consistently showing the infeasibility, destructive potential, and unpopularity of this technology, is the best course of action.

29

The bottom line Although the various difficulties are presented as distinct, they are very much interconnected. For example, the establishment of trade agreements caused much of the jurisdictional conflicts; and jurisdictional conflicts have provided an excuse for the government to delay and defer bans, or otherwise deal with the water export issue.

With all this, it is obviously important to finally answer the simple question: with respect to the various constitutions, institutions, trade agreements, policies, and other forms of control, are international bulk water transfers possible? This bottom line is perfectly described in Grant (2008):

While some Canadian businesspeople see trade in bulk water as a source of untapped wealth and a potential growth industry for the 21st century, many others view it as a looming environmental catastrophe and a major threat to Canadian sovereignty. Current federal and provincial policies in Canada have stymied the bulk water export business thus far, but it remains a prospective new economic user of Canadian water, clearly challenging the institutionalized status quo.

In other words, despite every obstacle in the way of bulk water transfer, such as current public opposition, political sentiments, and even the obvious practical feasibility of such projects, we cannot fully remove off the table the idea of international water transfers.

Part 3: Case studies

This part describes a few key case studies of both proposed and operational IBWT projects. Table 1 summarizes the key features of each case, and the main purpose of studying it.

30

Table 1 Summary and purpose of Case studies

Case study Australian case study: Kimberley to Perth

nature Proposed schemes to supply expected increases in municipal demands

Transfer method pipeline, canal, tanker

Purpose - Discusses the process a government should take to thoroughly assess the feasibility of a IBWT proposal. - There are also lessons learned from design specification of water resource sourcing, pipeline design, hydraulic structures, environmental impacts and cost analysis - Design and arrangement of hydraulic structures, and river works specific to Northern Quebec landscapes. -Requirements for Environmental Impact Statements in Quebec.

Qubec's northern water: Eastmain-1-A & Sarcelle powerhouses and Rupert River diversions Colorado Big Thompson Newly operational for hydroelectricity Diversions, flooding

- Example of the socio-political climate and consequences of a large water project in Canada. - Example of a functional cap-and-trade system of water resource allocation.

Operational for municipal and irrigation supply

Canal, tunnels, pumps

3.1 Australian case study: Kimberley to Perth

Water resource allocation in Australia is strictly managed to protect fragile ecosystems that rely on what little water exists in the deserts and grasslands. Australia is a considerably dry continent that will only get dryer. It has unevenly distributed precipitation and runoff. Most of the freshwater is contained in 5 coastal drainage areas. The amount of water that is available has been diligently measured (5.2E9 m3/year for surface water and 6.3E9 m3/year for groundwater) and water authorities are set on not surpassing these amounts for 31

supply (Ghassemi & White, 2007). From environmental standpoint this will prevent impacts from water resource exhaustion, but it necessitates some kind of urgent response from water authorities to find other ways to maintain water security. The obvious first action is to take active measures to reduce consumption. Yet, there might very well come a point where demand will exceed the potential of the traditional supply, despite all measures that could be taken to curb demand.

As a case study, the metropolitan area of Perth on the South-Western coast will be focused on. It has an estimated population of 1.7 million and rising (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2010). The urban area is located in a dry-temperate climate zone. Supplying this growing population with water has been problematic, and it is becoming especially worrisome with perceived and anticipated impacts of climate change combined with increases in consumption (Ghassemi & White, 2007). This prediction is shown graphically (Figure 4, prepared by Water Corporation), where the yearly breakdown of the various supply methods is superimposed on the trend for expected demand. Note the gradual divergence between supply and demand starting in 2017, where supply authorities will either be forced to tap into non-sustainable supplies, or try non-traditional means, such as IBWT or desalination. Both are not desirable. Both are high energy consumers, are expensive to set up and operate. Both will generate environmental impacts. Both will cause controversy and opposition.

32

Figure 4 source (Water Corporation, 2005)

The Australian government is aware of this, thus they have conceded to studying and comparing the non-traditional and controversial options against the traditional ones (GWA, 2006; Water Corporation, 2005). That way, when the time comes to make decisions and to take active steps, all options would be weighed in terms of the least possible environmental impact and economic costs. Figure 5 shows conceptually what is being scaled.

33

Figure 5 Traditional supply versus new options for Perth region

3.1.1 Political perspective: a complete study by Australian water authorities

The idea of transporting water down to Perth from Kimberley began to garner public attention in the late 1980s (Keating, 2006). The concept was straight forward: transfer water to Perth from NorthWestern Australia, specifically in the Kimberley water catchment, which is a water rich area with a tropical-savannah climate and minimal population. Beginning in 2004, the state government of Western Australia assembled an expert and professional panel to assess the financial and technical feasibility of transporting water from Kimberley. According to water authorities (GWA, 2006):

The composition of the panel brought together a wealth of expertise in the areas of: economics, engineering, environment and water expertise. The panel was well balanced and while protecting its independence was focused on the task at hand as per the terms of reference... While the technical and financial viability of each option was a central focus of the Panels terms of

34

reference, equally important was the Panels evaluation of social and environmental impacts. The Panel therefore sought consultancy reports on these impacts, and also consulted with the community in Kimberley.

Indeed, this is a good example of a government taking their water resource situation seriously. The argument here is that the Canadian government, as well as the provincial governments, should follow suit. It is not enough to just outright ban water exports; there should be accompanying technical, engineering, and ecological based studies, that include socio-economic considerations, to back up and justify these institutional restrictions.

Transport methods Three proposed methods to transfer water over the long distance from Kimberley to Perth were proposed: an underground pipeline, a lined canal, and oceanic transport (via tanker ships or towed water bags). The pipeline and tanker will be discussed as they were the most realistic and applicable to the proposals of chapter 4 of this project.

3.1.2 Pipeline method

Source variants Over the years, many sites have been considered as potential source points (locations where water would be extracted for transfers). The 2004-2006 study (GWA, 2006) considers both the Fitzroy and Ord river basins. Due to its relatively high flow rates and southern location, the Fitzroy River was found to be preferable.

Preliminary studies revealed both seasonal and yearly high variations of the Fitzroy Rivers discharge. Therefore a significant amount of engineered intervention would be required to stabilize flows, given the importance of having a reliable and consistent flow out of the source. Large volumes of water would

35

have to be stored by using either a dam reservoir, or an off-stream contained reservoir. This has led to numerous variants, in terms of the location of hydraulic structures, extraction methods and storage facility types.

Routes variants In addition to the source point, the conveyance path options have also been discussed thoroughly. This paper will focus on the most recent: the two variants presented in the 2004-2006 study (GWA, 2006; Water Corporation, 2004). The first route is an in-land direct path, which starts at the William barrage and follows the Great Northern highway for 1900 kilometers. The second follows the Kalgoorlie and the G&AWS natural gas pipeline . It was found that the advantages of building along a pre-existing pipeline, which would leverage a certain amounts of pre-existing infrastructure and vegetation clearage, did not outweigh the cost of a substantially longer (500km) conveyance path. As such, the first option was chosen.

The design criteria were as follows:

Required yearly discharge would start at 100 billion liters per year (3.2 (MCS)meters cubed per second), and increase to 300 billion liters (9.5 MCS). This matches the forecasted deficit of water supply.

The study was to be done over a 50 year life cycle.

The pipe diameters were to be between 400mm to 1800mm in diameter.

The pipe material options were traditional high-pressure steel, high-pressure rubber ring jointed ductile iron piping, plastic piping, or concrete piping (Water Corporation, 2004). The maximum

36

allowable pressure in the pipeline was not specified, nor was the available pumping capability, but it is assumed that these constraints were considered when designing the proposal.

The results of the study found that the optimal diameter of the pipeline to be 1400mm, and the material would be traditional high-pressure steel with the concrete lining. The other options for material were not chosen due to concerns of the high pressures involved, and the lack of large-scale examples that show reliability or price competitiveness.

To overcome the change in elevation, four hydraulic pumping stations would be required along the route. This is illustrated by the hydraulic grade line in the elevation profile graph (figure 6). In terms of energy use, this scheme would require 100 MW at the Fitzroy source, and 30 MW for each pumping station along the route.

Figure 6 Elevation profile of pipeline

The pipeline would terminate at the Canning Dam in Westdale, 80 kilometers south east of Perth. This is the current reservoir that services the Perth region.

37

Other considerations Water quality: Ensuring a clean supply at the end is a crucial design element. Prior to being injected into the pipelines, the flow would be subjected to screening, sedimentation and granular media filtration (GWA, 2006). This would remove solid particles and colloids. To prevent contaminations from pathogens, the water would be disinfected. Given the length of the pipeline and concerns for the potential for pathogenic growth, some kind of booster chlorination treatment could be required at a midpoint of the pipeline.

Power supply: Various options for supplying power to the pumping stations and treatment plants are described in (Ghassemi & White, 2007). The options would be to (1) use the power generated from the already built infrastructure servicing the Perth metropolitan area, (2) use individual diesel fuel stations, (3) use tidal power from the Kimberley region, or (4) use solar power stations. In terms of minimized costs, it was found that the best alternative would be to use pre-existing power plants.

Aboriginal heritage: In their analysis of the proposal, Water Corporation (2004) express that a major stumbling block and politically sensitive issue would be that of aboriginal heritage. Although it would be temporary in most cases, the construction process has the potential of going through a number of aboriginal sites of significant importance. These include settlements, native land title claims, watercourses used by aboriginals, and protected undisturbed areas.

Economic activity along pipeline: A possible benefit of using a traversing pipeline would be to build several intermediate extraction points for various domestic, industrial, or agricultural uses. It was found that due to the exorbitant increases in infrastructure costs, it would not be economically feasible. (Water Corporation, 2004)

38

Social impacts: Land access issues for transportation, increases in traffic in smaller roads, and community severance are significant negative impacts of the construction process (thus only short-term problems). According to Water Corporation (2004), the majority of these issues are able to be mitigated through planning and good management and are unlikely to be of significant impact.

Environmental impacts: Listed by Water Corporation (2004) are the most foreseeable and significant environmental impacts:

1. Energy expenditure and greenhouse gas emissions.

Emissions and energy expenditure would come mainly from operating the energy intensive pumps. Also significant is the energy required for fabricating the steel pipes, and for transporting all the material. Pumping would require an estimated 14 Wh per liter. Comparatively, desalination uses 5 Wh per liter. If powered by natural gas power plants, CO2 emissions would approach 2.5 mT per year. Options to curb carbon emissions include carbon sequestration and solar energy; both of which under present and projected technology are not economical or feasible.

2. Impacts on the discharge of the Fitzroy River source.

Water Corporation (2004) insists that a thorough assessment of the hydrological system of the river is required. It is currently unregulated and as such a minimum environmental flow, to sustain the regions ecology, river regime, floodplain, and water quality has not been established.

3. Environmental impacts of constructing storage dams and containers.

A storage dam requires the flooding of a large area. Land use for a walled storage facility is similar. Impacts include threats to local species, habitat loss, and conflicts with aboriginal heritage sites.

4. Environmental impacts of pipeline length. 39

The construction phase would require a 30 m wide cleared surface. Soil disturbances, loss of vegetation and habitat destruction would be expected. Also, the movement of vehicles and machinery for construction could risk spreading undesirable plants and species along the pipeline route. These impacts could be considered as temporary, and measures such minimizing erosion, sedimentation, and contaminations should be taken.

The study concludes that The majority of biodiversity impacts, apart from those affected by the environmental flow of the Fitzroy, are likely to be mitigated through environmental management plans, construction management and rehabilitation work. (Water Corporation, 2004).

3.1.3 Oceanic transport method

Source options Both the Ord and the Fitzroy Rivers were considered variants for the water source (see figure 7). In the end, the Ord River was chosen, despite the Fitzroys advantage of a shorter transport path down to Perth. By utilizing the already established infrastructure, which is chiefly a storage dam (GWA, 2006), significant savings in initial capital could be had.

Figure 7 Source point variants

40

From the barrage near the town of Kununurra, a 162km pressurized pipeline would be build to feed a basic water treatment plant (similar treatment as the pipeline scheme). An additional underwater pipeline, (47km in length, optimally designed with epoxy coated welded steel given the expensive nature of underwater piping), would connect to a single-point mooring loading facility (figure 8).

Conveyance method Two options were considered to transport water around the coast. The first would use oceanic supertankers commonly employed in the largest oil shipments. New vessels were considered for the analysis, with a price tag of 215 million CAD$ each.

Similarly to the pipeline scheme, the volume of

Figure 8 Mooring facility loads the cargo vessel (GWA, 2006)

shipped water would gradually increase over time. As described by GWA (2006): At a practical maximum average speed of 15 knots (about 30 km/hour), it would require at least four ships of 500,000 dead-weight tonnes operating on a continual 14-day delivery cycle to deliver 50 GL/year (1.6 MCS). Fourteen of the same tankers would be needed to deliver 200 GL/year (6.3 MCS).

The second transport option would be to pull floating water bags. Large tug boats would be used for towing (see figure 9). This option was considered difficult to analyze given the lack of case experience of using them, especially

Figure 9 Floating water bags (GWA, 2006)

41

at the required scale of several hundred GL per year over a 5 decade timeline. A rudimentary assessment found this option to be substantially less cost effective, yet a scenario using 0.5GL bags was included in the final economic analysis. GWA (2006) expressed that more research and development of this technology is required.

Results from GWA (2006) study It the end, given the expected rise in water demand, it was found that the lowest cost option would be to supply water using oceanic supertankers. The cost would come to $6.70 per meter cubed, which is about five times the cost of desalination. Appendix A has a table taken from GWA (2006) summarizing the comparison results, as well as various other notes.

The conclusions of the GWA (2006) report was that inter-basin water was infeasible on many fronts; cost and energy consumption (both initial and operational) being the most deterring. Other deterring factors included the risks and unknowns associated with the options, environmental impacts (especially green-house gas emissions due to the high energy requirements), and social impacts.

Conflicting Perspectives Many researchers beyond those that actually conducted this particular study, argued against longdistance water transfers given the potential environmental devastation and due to a lack of economic feasibility. However, upon conducting extensive research of the various ideas and proposals to divert water in Western Australia, it became apparent that the options, estimates, and the final numbers and conclusions are hardly unchallengeable. Indeed, results depend largely on who is conducting the study, what are their interests, where they have sourced their data, and what their predictions and assumptions are.

42

Some members of the public are especially pushing for water transfers. A pertinent example would be of the pressure from Michael Derry, a business consultant that has many years dealing with the oil industry and specifically shipping large volumes of liquid (Derry, n.d.). Granted, this person has a business bias and much to gain from such an undertaking (as is a common reoccurrence from professionals who push for IBWT projects), his voice should nevertheless be heard.

Derrys website applauds Australian government to take the issue of water transfers seriously. Indeed, the proper steps were taken: the government assembled a competent committee which carried out a thorough investigation through data acquisition and analysis. Yet, Derry does not agree with the conclusions drawn from the comparison of technologies and water supply methods.

We are concerned that the Committee was given no role by the Government to challenge or investigate the key information and assumptions given to it by the Water Corporation. These facts were taken as fixed and had a crucial bearing on the Committee's final report. Consequently a reader of the report gets the mistaken impression that comparing a dollar assessment of one option in the report against the dollar assessment of another one gives a correct and accurate assessment of the costs. (Derry, n.d.)

This is indeed a strong argument and it reflects the complexity of the issue. The standard method of comparing dollar costs can hardly be the most definitive or exhaustive to reach conclusions. Indeed costs are not "an exact science" as Derry puts it. Derry continues by arguing that, had he done the cost assessment himself, the concluding costs could be vastly reduced given his professional experience and interest in keeping costs minimized. He lists many factors which could substantially reduce the cost: using used ships, considering a better extraction point, being less strict with regulations compared to oil shipments, and slowing the boat speed to maximize energy efficiency. Equally, Derry (n.d.) highlights

43

numerous errors in the cost assessment, energy consumption, and of the environmental impacts of implementing desalination plants.

This underlines the complexity of comparing large-scale technologies. It should further solidify the concession and urgency towards studying the issue across many angles. It also suggests the value of contracting many different organizations to conduct studies, to ensure the issue may be comprehensively and conclusively be evaluated.

3.2 Qubec's northern water: Eastmain-1-A, Sarcelle powerhouses and Rupert River diversions
For the past 50 years, Hydro-Qubec has been very active harvesting the energy that flows east to west into the Bay James, in the form of river flow. Its focus on that part of Quebec is reasonable; the perimeter of the James Bay receives discharge from many high flow rivers that extend out radially.

The challenge, however, is that the infrastructure and capital costs needed to build a Hydro facility is extremely large, especially when it occurs so far from human populations where materials and labor is more easily attained. Furthermore, the water that flows west is not carried by a single large river; rather a collection of small and medium rivers find their way into the bay.

The task has been thus: dam up a few of the larger rivers; collect and pool the water together through a system of diversions, canals, and controlled floodplains; direct the water, now in a larger volume, towards a larger reservoir; and finally discharge this water into a series of hydropower harnessing turbines at a rate that matches the demand for energy. This therefore qualifies as a inter-basin water transfer, as the water from one or a few river basins is prevented from flowing towards its natural outlet, and is rather diverted into another basin. As such, a typical Hydro-Qubec project entails 3 zones: (1) a

44

damned and diverted upstream zone, (2) a downstream zone of reduced flow, and (3) lakes and rivers with its volumes and flow increased.

Project Description The Eastmain powerhouse and Rupert diversion project is typical in this schematic sense, but atypical in its grandeur, use of technology and measures needed for environmental preservation. The plan was to divert the flow of the Rupert River, north into the Eastmain reservoir. The flow would work its way up, first through two new powerhouses (the Eastmain-1-A, and Sarcelle), then towards the pre-existing reservoirs and turbines further north (LaGrande complex). The potential net energy production was estimated at 8.5 TWh (HQ, 2004).

3.2.1 The Required Environmental Impact Statement

In 2002, agreements were signed between Hydro-Qubec and the Crees of Quebec (the first Nation group settled in the James Bay region). The Crees consented to the construction and operation of the project, given a commitment from Hydro-Qubec to ensure that the project was fully subject to applicable environmental legislation. This was to protect the environment and aboriginal communities by ensuring that mitigation and remedial efforts would be taken. In addition, the Cree communities were promised economic and community benefits (HQ, 2004).

In early 2004, Hydro-Qubec published a voluminous environmental impact statement (EIS) (HQ, 2004). Presented to both the Qubec Minister of the environment, as required by the Qubec Environment Quality Act; and a federal review panel (Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada , Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency), as required by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

45

The EIS document as well as the whole project review and assessment process was set to prove that the project was profitable under market conditions, environmentally acceptable, and well received by local communities (HQ, 2004). It also made efforts to include native community involvement. Systematic inclusion of the Crees in conducting surveys of the various environmental components, thus ensured that Cree traditional knowledge was taken into account in establishing procedures for sampling and field data collection and analysis (HQ, 2004).

The evaluation and assessment process of the EIS includes a review and submission of recommendations by the Environmental and Social Impact Review Committee (COMEX); public participation through consultations and hearings; and granting of permits issued by the described governing bodies. This process and conclusions are found in detail in the COMEX (2006) report.

Controversies Most of the above information was provided directly from the Hydro-Qubec side of the project; which naturally presents the project with a certain amount of one-sided bias. Several sources have shined light on the other side of the issue. In 2006, news outlets (Bonspiel, 2006; CBC, 2006 ). and Northern community blogs (Northern Waterways, 2006) were reporting dissatisfaction from Cree Nations about delayed completion of the environmental impact statement, as required in the COMEX procedure, as well as disapproval for commencement of the construction phase. There was also a news report concerning the Nunavut communities living across the Hudsons bay (CBC, 2006). They were concerned with water quality issues that would arise from increases in fresh water being dumped at unnatural levels into the Hudsons Bay. In addition, in 2007 NPR wrote a piece describing the unfortunate consequences of dams and reservoirs in such a life bustling river (Mann, 2004).

On top of forced community uprooting and losses of forest land, there was much cause for concern. The Quebec government had clearly stated issues of water quality: Bioaccumulation of mercury is part of 46

the negative impacts of the Eastmain-1-A Powerhouse and Rupert Diversion project. The project will cause mercury increases in the fish in six areas. This would lead to fish consumption limitations (MMDEP, n.d.).

The project also sparked controversy over the use of Hydro-Power in general. Whether hydro-electricity can be considered a renewable energy source is still up for debate. Some studies have shown that GHG emissions of hydro reservoirs can surprisingly exceed that of similar power output coal burning plants (Montreal Environment, 2011). Hydro-Qubec is aware of this concern of some of the negative stigma associated with hydro-power, and has thus partaken on some public-relations effort in order to de-bunk some of the so-called myths (for example, see www.hydroforthefuture.com).

Cree Opposition In 2006, Three Cree tribes claimed they never gave their consent to Hydro-Qubec, and were set to oppose the development after tallying community votes (Bonspiel, 2006; Northern Waterways, 2006). They were not claiming to go against the Paix-des-Braves treaty; they merely felt that their voices were not being heard and that there was a lack of open communication towards the projects proponents (Bonspiel, 2006).

After explaining how his tribe was mislead into thinking Hydro-Qubec still had not gotten the approvals for the diversions, Waskaganish Chief Robert Weistche expressed his distress: This is cultural genocide on First Nations people and the governments are aware of that. Why do we have such high rates of social problems like drugs and drinking? The suicide rate went up after the project went through in Chisasibi [referring to a Cree community that was affected by the diversions of the La Grande project], and were going to be subject to the same thing later on down the road. (Bonspiel, 2006)

47

When discussing the frustrations felt by native community leaders, one example can be shown that a firm stance with aggressive and public activism can affect a big decision. In the early 1990s, the GreatWhale project came to a halt after a series of effective public relations stunts led by Cree communities (Mercier & Ritchot, 1997). Weistche felt that his tribe was not given the opportunity to react in such a way this time around (although some smaller protests were organized) (Bonspiel, 2006).

When you uproot people from their birthplace, from where they used to gather, from where they raised their family and tell them they have to move because the land is going to wash away and erode; youre bound to have something happen inside that person *reffering to suicide rates, depression and alcoholism of the Cree Nation+. (Bonspiel, 2006).

Finally, Weistche expresses how it is inappropriate to assume that Native peoples would be satisfied by monetary remuneration in exchange for submission of their surrounding environment. The rivers, the land; the reality is that it is part of who we are. They cannot separate the land from the Cree, that is who we are. (Bonspiel, 2006).

3.2.2 Engineering Aspects

The many engineering interventions and design criteria required to divert the Rupert River and to contain it in the Rupert Diversion Bays are very relevant to the undertakings of this project on interbasin water transfers. They describe the methods for choosing the best variant, the types of hydraulic structures and their design, as well as environmental protection and mitigation efforts required. The end result is a detailed plan to best train or control a river and to retain a floodplain; specific to northern regions of Quebec. This knowledge can be extended and applied, with reasonable assumptions to other parts of Canada; especially in the other regions of the Canadian Shield, which wraps around the Hudson Bay.

48

Variants By the late 1990s, Hydro-Qubec engineers saw the hydro-power potential of the Rupert River basin and began preliminary studies and the evaluation of variants (HQ, 2004). As for other hydro projects, this involved obtaining and considering the following information:

Topography & bathymetry: where is the natural terrain, and existence of hills and valleys, favorable for water level increases? Where are land gradients favorable for flow conveyance? What will be the extent of the requirements for dikes, spurs and levees to contain rising waters? How wide and high must dams be constructed?

Geology: How much excavation is required, and how and what is the hardness of the soil and bedrock? What are other geological features of importance, such as the direction and steepness of fractures? Is seismic activity an issue? Is fill material, required for dams, dikes and other structures, available nearby?

Hydrology: How does seasonal variability of precipitation and stream flow effect the reliability of the variants?

Environment: How much flow can be harnessed, and how much has to be allocated to the environment? What are the sensitive species? How will altered environments affect the surrounding region?

Climate: In northern environments, hydraulic structures have requirements for proper ice cover formation to minimize frazil ice that may interfere with inlet structures. As such, temperatures fluctuations have to be accounted for, and the design of hydraulic elements must account for minimum flow velocities.

Described in the EIS (HQ, 2004), this analysis resulted in various variants at the different steps. There where options as to where the Rupert River should be dammed off, how the floodplain could be

49

arranged, where diversion corridors should be placed, where the powerhouses could be located, and whether a system of canals or a underground tunnel should be used to bypass a section of especially mountainous terrain.

The process of comparing each variant at each step is thoroughly described in the EIS. Pertinent to this project are not these details, rather it is important to note the general advantages and drawbacks that were considered and their relative importance.

Advantages: This project serves to produce hydro-electricity. Therefore, the variants are weighted on their potential to provide reliable flow in hydro-power harnessing reservoirs; while minimizing the need for costly hydraulic structures and environmental protection efforts.

Drawbacks: The most obvious drawbacks are the direct environmental impacts, which is mainly the total flooded area. Flooded areas have impacts on land and aquatic wildlife, as well as Cree hunting. Specifically, much attention is paid on the potential for flooding of category II land, which are designated native hunting and fishing areas. Also, while one area is flooded, another has reduced flow. This has impacts on habitats as well, especially on fish breeding grounds. There are also notable impacts on navigation, fishing and recreation.

Hydraulic structures Retaining structures (dams and dykes): Rivers that discharge into the East coast of the James-Bay flow naturally westwards due to down sloping terrain. To overcome the natural slope, dams are used to rise water levels, which permits water to pool and eventually spill northwards (hence a northward diversion), without the use of head-inducing pumping stations. These are strategically placed so that the diverted flow takes the shortest route to the Eastmain reservoir and its powerhouses; they are also placed far enough downstream that they collect enough built-up flow of the watersheds tributary area.

50

The main dam, Rupert C-1, (figure 10 shows a plan view) retains an average of 637 MCS (meters cubed per second) which represents 73% of the total flow of the Rupert water shed. It is a rock filled dam, lying on a solid bedrock foundation.

Figure 10 Plan view of C-1 dam (HQ, 2004)

The three other dams comparatively do not hold back much flow initially; they are used as barriers to the other Westward paths to contain the artificially rising water levels.

Other retaining structures, such as the large Dikes, but also smaller spurs and levees play a similar role. Rather than blocking off flowing streams, they serve to create an artificial Valley to contain the rising water level. Using a topographic map, the engineers can predict how wide of a floodplain can be expected for given water heights. In some places, especially where there exists a flatter terrain, a Dyke is needed to contain the floodplain, else the area flooded would be too high, or water levels would not sufficiently increase.

51

The availability of construction materials, especially concrete and steel, is a limiting factor in dam and dike design for northern Quebec. Together dams are very large structures; the biggest one for this project reaches 50 m high and is close to 400 m wide. Dikes are not as high, but they are very numerous (74 in total) and can be several hundred meters wide. Together, dams and dykes will need 5.3 million m3 of fill material. As such, a geologic survey of the area has provided Hydro-Qubec with many sites in the vicinity that could provide for material for the structures. The material is mostly granular: till, sand, and gravel, and coarser material needed for a riprap covering. Figure 11 shows the cross-section for a typical dike.

Figure 11 Cross section of typical dyke showing fill constituents (HQ, 2004)

Release Structures: The release structure (also called outlet work) for the main dam works to both allow for spring flood water to be quickly and safely discharged downstream, and to systematically regulate the normal discharge of the dam. For dam C-1, a gate was designed on the left side. Using the hydraulic gate opening, the flow is controlled and released depending on how much is allotted for feeding the Eastmain reservoir at a given time (the maximum is designed for 800 MCS). The EIS (HQ, 2004) describes the gate as a conventional concrete structure with steel armoring and reinforce lots. An electrical line supplies power for the hoist and the heating system.

52

The other dams have a tunnel type release system. The gate is placed on the upstream side to prevent high-pressure situations in the tunnel when water levels are high.

Powerhouses: several powerhouses and related structures are described thoroughly in the environmental impact statement. Much attention is paid to flow rates and surface velocities, considering the high latitude and potential for problems due to ice formations.

Weirs: flow rates downstream of the dams on the Rupert River will be heavily reduced. Measures to ensure adequate water levels along the river reach are necessary to protect what is remaining of the rivers aquatic habitat, especially for fish migration. A system of 8 weirs in series was positioned, along with a few dikes to maintain a narrow and deep river cross-section.

Canals: Canals where typically designated in sections of flatter terrain. This occurs where flooding would be too wide, and containment with dikes on both sides would not be economical. They were also used to traverse obstacles in the terrain such as hills. They have the advantage of improving hydraulic conditions, especially controlling head losses incurred when conveying water.

Transfer Tunnels: when building canals become uneconomical, a transfer tunnel can be used. At one point, excavating a canal through particularly rough terrain was found to be too expensive; therefore a tunnel was designed to go under this terrain. Using a specially designed weir, the flow into the tunnel is managed. The tunnel is designed to convey between 100 and 800 MCS, all while being completely submerged to prevent instabilities caused by cavitations when air at varying pressures gets entrained into the tunnel. The optimal design of the tunnels cross-section dimension and longitudinal profile and geometry were calculated with sophisticated hydraulic modeling software.

Other structures: Many other engineering structures and other considerations significant to the Rupert River and Eastmain 1-A project, described in the EIS, or by Hydro-Qubec elsewhere, are worth 53

mentioning, but go beyond the necessary scope of how to divert and transfer bulk water. These include new transmission lines; access roads and bridges; temporary work camps; measures for a safe, clean, and efficient construction phase; native community resettlements; forest clearing and management; excavation of borrow pits and quarries for materials; stabilizing riverbanks near vulnerable areas; fish ladder requirements; and in-depth details of powerhouse components like turbines, substations and control structures.

3.3 Colorado Big-Thompson project

Completed in the late 1940s, the Colorado Big-Thompson project is a trans-mountainous inter-basin water diversion project implemented to supply water to the North-Eastern side of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado. The original application was mainly for irrigation purposes. Yet, since then it has also supplied water needs for emerging municipalities and industrial activity. The system was built and is operated by the The Bureau of Reclamation, a federal department (Bureau of Reclamation, n.d.).

From an engineering standpoint, the project is rather impressive and remarkable for its time, in its grand scale, use of technology, and ease of regulation. As the source, the Eastern, upstream region of the Colorado River was dammed to form a reservoir lake. From there, a 13 mile long underground canal was dug through the Continental divide, into a system of smaller reservoirs, diversion canals, and pipelines; which eventually supplement the flow to natural streams of the larger South Platte River. In terms of hydraulic structures, there are hydropower harnessing turbines, as well as various substations and pumping plants (Bureau of Reclamation, n.d.).

54

3.3.1 A working water market

The Colorado Big-Thompson project can be studied as a relevant, North American example of a gradually established and equilibrated water market. The system can be seen as akin in structure to a cap-and-trade system of carbon emissions (Wood, 2011): the amount of discharge out of a source is "capped"; users within the system are allotted a fixed and fair share; users can subsequently allow and trade away whatever reserve they do not expect to need. The end result is that the total allowable emissions, or in the case of the Big-Thompson project, the total yearly environmentally allowed flow consumption, is never surpassed. The trade and exchange of shares is made easy on either short-term or permanent agreements. There is trade between farmers and municipalities (Wood, 2008).

This case study, brought up in Dry Spring; and again mentioned in an interview with Wood (2011), is pertinent because it serves to ease down some of the commonly held anxieties associated with marketdriven water trading. This project exists in stark contrast with most other areas in the United-States, where local trading of water rights could have some economic potential, yet they are halted for political and legal reasons. According to Wood (2008):

Permitted transfers of water out of farming to urban use have been rare [in other parts of the United-States]. Several factors stand in the way. The ambiguity of farmers legal rights to sell the water theyve been using leaves many afraid that if they try to sell it, governments will revoke their title. A complex state water law, with elements of both prior appropriation and riparian systems, further complicate sales between properties, as do multiple states and federal oversight agencies that must sign off on large transactions.

Wood (2008) continues by introducing the Colorado big Thompson project as a more seamless market in bulk water that has operated in northern Colorado for 5 decades.

55

In Dry Spring and in a e-mail interview, Wood highlights the lessons learned from this working experiment in harnessing the power of market choice (Wood, 2008). Some of the key lessons include: o

That water markets don't arise spontaneously and, hence, are at low risk of breaking out of any regulatory cage to unexpectedly engulf every drop of the planet supply.

Water rights does not necessarily translate to ownership of water, rather it is more of a right to use it, such as a rental agreement.

o o

Transaction costs must remain low and easily executable In successfully operated water markets, the sharing of water can be considered fair; i.e. wealthy corporations do not have considerable advantages over others, and that's they cannot just let loose and cause uninhibited environmental devastation.

Permission to trade privately in water rights can coexist in perfect harmony with the public protection of water in the environments. Indeed, it must.

Wood (2008) highlights the advantage of the natural and freely moving momentum of free markets: Where these conditions exist, markets have advantages that will become increasingly desirable as the weather changes. In growing food, which is the human activity that uses by far the largest amounts of water, markets direct water to the most efficient, productive users. They do this automatically, flexibly and free of governments slow-moving, politicized hand.

56

CHAPTER 4 Water Transfer Proposals

Using the information gained in the previous two chapters, we can begin contemplating where and how water transfers could occur in Canada. A few potential projects will be proposed, with some developmental details given for each. Following this, a qualitative assessment and comparison of each proposal will be made which will lead to general conclusions about the potential of IBWT in Canada.

4.1 Methodology
Step 1 - Extraction zone
The first task is to identify potential water extraction sites. Canada is dotted with thousands of lakes including some of the biggest in the world. It also has a considerable amount of water stored in aquifers and glaciers. Yet, rivers are chosen as the preferred extraction source, as a constant, reliable and renewable flow is required for sustained exportation.

Therefore, the first step is to identify Canadas largest rivers by discharge rates. 44 major rivers (classified as those that reach a saltwater outlet) and their larger tributaries have been identified. These can be seen in Appendix B which shows a map, prepared by Atlas Canada, that illustrates the magnitude of average flow rates (as represented by the thickness of the red arrow).

Not all of these major rivers would be suitable for extraction. Some are already heavily withdrawn by the surrounding populations, while some are not ideally located or directed. To narrow down the selection to the most appropriate rivers, the following extraction criteria was considered: How significant is the mean discharge? How wide is the drainage area? An average flow rate of about 500 m3/sec was a good minimum discharge standard. 57

What are the competing uses? Is the river protected? Rivers that are heavily used for irrigation, industry, municipal water supply, fisheries or hydropower use may be seen as inappropriate. This is especially true if an upstream diversion/extraction would compromise available flow for other downstream users.

Where does the River flow? Rivers that flow into the United States are inappropriate. Where can the discharge be extracted? Is there available land with a suitable topography for a flooded reservoir? Is the land a protected area?

All things considered, the most significant trade-off is accumulated tributary area, versus how far north the suitable extraction point would be. For most rivers, there is a trade-off between available flow and conveyance distance: the further north you go, the longer is the conveyance distance, yet more flow is available (seeing how rivers accumulate flow downstream as the drainage basin widens, and thus have their greatest discharge at the mouth).

Step 2 - Consumptions Zone

The next step is to identify the potential importers. These are places with water scarcity issues where the local supply of freshwater may not be sufficient to satisfy demands.

Although it is true that some places in Canada water have had their share of water, especially in the irrigation intensive areas of the Prairie provinces, and in some of the more densely populated places of the East, only international destinations were considered.

Southern United-States

For the purposes of this project, it is important to properly evaluate where in the United-States there would be the most probability for water importation. These are locations of stressed or depleted water reserves; or where there is a lack of precipitation or fresh streams to supply water. It is also where

58

demands for water are relatively high, such as in highly artificially irrigated areas, or near large population centers. Future predictions are also important. They include changes in population, demand, and the effects of climate change.

It is important to note that, as of this writing, no official declaration or intention to buy Canadian water has been expressed by any State government (Wood, 2008). For example, a 2012 report by the Texas Water Development board presents the sobering realities of the potential water crisis in Texas (Texas, 2012). It urges conservation and water management strategies, and suggests the use of technologies such as desalination, water reuse, and improved storage. It does not mention importing water as a viable or beneficial option.

However, as described in the introduction, there are numerous similar States set to face a potentially severe water crisis. Thus, when major droughts do hit, pressure to receive Canadian water may begin to precipitate. At the moment, water stressed states are aware of their predicament, and the obvious best course of action has been to promote water efficiency and conservation, and to implement some small/local technologies. Yet, if that does not prove to be enough in the coming decades, then the argument is that some regions may consider implementing much more drastic technologies in times of desperation.

Great-Lake Supplementation

A possible application of IBWT, is to supplement the Great Lakes reservoir. This would involve properly metering the discharge in order to sell withdrawal credits to the users that rely on the supplemented lakes for their water supply. This would also work to mitigate the costs associated with high fluctuations of water levels in the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. Of course this would have numerous social, legal and practical ramifications.

59

World

A similar, but less elaborate study could be conducted for the major countries that may receive Canadian water through oceanic tanker shipments. Across the Pacific Ocean to the West there are water stressed nations of Asia, and to the East across the Atlantic, there is Europe and the Middle East.

Step 3 - Conveyance Method

The conveyance method describes how the extraction and consumption zones can be linked. Three different transfer methods are considered: exportation by pressurised pipeline, engineered river works, and oceanic tanker ship containers.

For pipeline transfers

In addition to total pipe length, the most important factor when deciding on the optimal path between the extraction zone and the consumption zone is topography. As stressed before, water is very heavy and moving it up gradients is very intense in terms of energy requirements and infrastructure needed.

Engineered river works

Engineered river works can be defined as interventions that change the travel direction of a river. A river can have its flow reverse in direction, which would take advantage of the naturally present channel (Pierre Gingras, 2010). Other diversions can force water to flood from one river-basin to another, as in the Rupert River case study. Typical engineering works include damming, controlled flooding and channelization. They can employ head inducing pumping stations (these are essentially hydroelectricity turbines operating in reverse), tunnels, short canals, excavations, landscape changes, or river bed alterations. Topography is also a key factor; overcoming an up gradient is an engineering challenge, as is containing a floodplain in unfavourable natural terrain. In sections where the elevation change is

60

downhill, there may be hydro-electricity harnessing potential. Electricity generated could go into offsetting the energy requirements of the uphill segments.

Oceanic tanker ship transfer

For tanker ship transfer the main criterion is total travel distance; thus the main deterrent will be energy requirements and the potential for enormous greenhouse gas emissions. Step 5 - Refining the options The next step is to refine the chosen proposals. A location and layout for extraction is suggested, along with the arrangement of the required hydraulic structures. A time-dependant withdrawal rate is suggested. It is given considering the balance between the fraction that must be allocated to the environment and the profitability of the project. For river data (monthly discharge and stage), environment Canadas HYDAT data base was used.

Step 6 - Evaluation of Impacts, Inhibitors and Benefits

The final step is to conduct a systematic evaluation and comparison of the proposals. To do this, we weight both the negative (or inhibiting) aspects of each proposal and the positive or (supportive aspects). For the negative there are (1) the expected environmental impacts and (2) the socio/economic inhibitors. For the positive there is (3) expected gains. Each of these three aspects is sub-divided into several categories. Each of these categories will be allotted a weighing factor in terms of absolute importance. Next, each proposal will be given a specific evaluative rating for each category. This will be done on a scale of 0 to 10 (0 being negligible or insignificant, 4 being a serious consideration, 7 being very significant and unjustifiable, and 10 having potentially disastrous effects.) The rating for each proposal is then multiplied by the weighing factor of the given category, which is subsequently summed

61

up to get an overall score for each of the three aspects. This numerical result is then used to compare the proposals and to provide a rudimentary evaluation of the feasibility of each proposal. (1) expected environmental impacts The environmental impacts of these projects will be described and rated in nine categories (table 2, categories 1 to 8). This analysis is done in a qualitative manner, using the information provided by the hydraulic analysis, land cover maps, comparisons to the applicable case studies described, and by the typical observed and documented effects of each modification element or hydraulic structure of the proposal.
Table 2 Categories for expected environmental impacts

Name

Weight

Description This is a general evaluation of the impacts that can expected on the function of the supply river. This done considering the various hydraulic structures and river engineered works. For example, dams and diversions will result in changes to geomorphologic activity (sediment transport, erosion/deposition, floodplain morphology changes). Also, induced floodplain and reservoirs may cause issues with bed degradation and erosion (Hey, 1996). Exactly how much of a rivers flow should be allocated to the natural environment, and how much could be extracted out of the basin for human use? As previously described, this can only be effectively answered with site specific data of the rivers characteristics, habitats/sensitive species, and interacting natural systems. Of special interest would be the rivers estuary environment and wetlands (Linton, 2002). For this consideration, a project that uses less of a proportion of the discharge can be considered more favorable to one that uses more; especially if they exist within similar natural environments. An important distinction should be made between flow allocation in terms of the average discharge, and of the peak flood flow. Average discharge is important for the sustained maintenance of ecosystems of the habitat, while flooding events and disturbances are important for cyclic freshening of 62

Change of river regime and disruption of river function

Considerations of minimum environmental flow allocation and upstream flow reduction

Reduction and changes to 0.75 riparian flooding events

the riparian zone, for colonization of species, and for carbon and nutrient cycling (Petts & Calow, 1996). Therefore, an important consideration is to evaluate how the project may affect peak flows and peak stage levels. Land disturbances and reduction in landscape quality We can assess the decrease in landscape quality, both permanent and temporary, with the addition of hydraulic structures, infrastructure and the laying pipelines. This can reduce the available land for wildlife, farming and forests (Linton, 2002). Also, materials needed for the fill material in dams, dikes and weirs will impact landscapes. Given the above four categories we can assess the severity of the impacts on habitats. Petts & Calow,(1996) has described this saying that the Interactions between flow and biota are complex and highly sensitive to river regulation and abstraction. As such, the major phenomenons that are influenced by flow and flooding events include impacts on sensitive environmental domains for the habitat and spawning of aquatic species communities. It has been observed that organisms are sensitive to velocities, depths, substrate, water temperatures, and quality/constitution of flowing water (Petts & Calow, 1996). Many sources have identified the inherent risk of moving water over long distances: introducing invasive species (fish, invertebrates, plants, parasites, algae, bacteria, and viruses) in environments without natural predators (Linton, 2002; Wood, 2008). Although this risk can be reduced or eliminated with treatment at the source, it still should be considered. Changing the boundaries of a waterbody, such as with flooding or flow reductions can effect water quality. One especially problematic example is the release of soil deposited mercury. Also, we note water temperature effects of reservoirs (Linton, 2002). In general, we also consider the potential impacts of temporary activity during the construction phase, and the permanent operation of turbines, pumps and other machinery that can leak contaminants such as hydrocarbons. We can evaluate the severity of produced green house gasses by the operation of machinery to supply power for pumps, turbines, tankers. We also can incorporate the emissions (CO2 and methane) from decaying vegetation due to artificial reservoirs. In addition, clearing of forests for reservoirs or pipeline paths are associated with the loss of carbon sinks.

Impacts on habitat and individual species disruption

1.5

Introduction of non-native and invasive species

1.5

water quality issues

0.6

greenhouse gas emissions

63

(2) socio/economic inhibitors Next we have the social and economic elements. This includes the social impacts, political obstacles, public acceptance and qualitative rating of costs, both capital and operational (see table 3, categories 9 to 13).
Table 3 Categories for socio/economic inhibitors

Name

Weight

Description and source of information This evaluates the cost to set up the project: construction of hydraulic structures, pipelines, machinery, power supply infrastructure, shipping fleet, and other infrastructure. Also important are the costs associated with environmental impact management and mitigation. Given the effort required to convey the water (both in terms of distance travelled and elevation increases) we can evaluate the energy and operating costs. Other operating costs would be extraction and water treatment. This evaluates the impacts felt by those directly affect by the projects. This will be mostly aboriginal communities living in Northern regions. This is evaluated given the reach and severity of the described environmental impacts (mostly landscape changes, river impacts, habitat loss, and water quality). This can describe the amount of effort that would be required to manage political and legal resistance and obstacles. It also incorporates the effort needed to form the various treaties, agreements, and contracts. We evaluate the publics (those not directly affected by the project) expected resistance to the large scale water exportation.

Capital costs

10

Energy expenditures and operational costs

11

Social impacts (especially on aboriginal communities)

1.25

12

Political obstacles

13

Public Resistance

64

(3) expected gains Concluding the analysis is a rating of the beneficial elements, such as the economic gains, reliability of the supply, and the mitigated impacts of the alternative supply methods.
Table 4 Categories for expected gains

# 9

Name Economic gains Reliability of supply and water security gained Mitigated and reduced environmental impacts of the alternative supply strategy

Weight 4

Description and source of information This is an evaluation of the main revenue stream: sold meters cubed of water. Also considered is hydroelectric potential This evaluates how reliable, stable, and predictable the supply would be, and as such, how secure the regions water security would become relative to their current and anticipated situation. Based on the options of the given destination site, implementing IBWT will prevent and mitigate the current and alternative measures and technologies that would have been used to supply the increasing demands. This thus evaluates some of the environmental impacts that would be prevented due to IBWT.

10

11

4.2 Results
Considering the extraction criteria, eleven possible extraction points were found, of which five possible extraction scenarios were most suitable and where thus further analysed:

Two for large pipeline project: The Liard River (a headwater of the Mackensie river), and the Nelson River is found to have the most potential for extraction and conveyance by means of a pipeline towards water stressed parts of the United-States.

One for water reversal and diversions down to supplement the Great Lakes. This is a river reversal proposal of the Albany River.

65

Three for exportation by cargo boat shipments: These are sites that discharge into the Atlantic and Pacific, away from populations. Possible destinations would be Asiatic countries to the West, and Middle-Eastern countries to the East.

4.2.1 Pipeline Proposals

Source: Laird and Nelson rivers The Mackensie river, Canadas largest river, and a few of its larger tributaries, as well as the Nelson river, were found to have the most potential for extraction and conveyance by means of a pipeline towards water-stressed parts of the United-States. Of the many tributaries, the Liard River was chosen with an extraction point near to where it joins the Mackensie. For the Nelson River of North-Eastern Manitoba, a point just upstream of its Hudsons Bay estuary was chosen for the extraction site.

This assessment was found in terms of practical feasibility considering their locations, surrounding land cover and available discharge rates were appropriate. Figure 12 (Liard River) and figure 13 (Nelson River) shows the geographic location and plan view layout of the extraction site.

Figure 12 Liard River source

66

Figure 13 Nelson River source

Similar in design to Rupert River C-1 dam, using a till and gravel filled dam is most feasible given the material availability of the areas. The Nelson dam would be 95m wide and 3150m long. Considering higher storage requirements of the Liard (due to higher seasonal variability of the Liard) The Liard dam would be 105m wide and 1400 meters long. Destination: Consumption Sites Recently, a comprehensive study released by a consortium of American universities and organizations with environmental interests was published (Roy et. al., 2012). It provides "means to identify areas where, under climate change scenarios, water resources are at greater risk than under historical climate conditions. The researchers have combined a wealth of data, and model predictions to form a year 2050 water supply sustainability risk index, which prescribes for each American county the predicted severity of water issues, such as drought, they are set to face. This risk is based on the ratio between future water withdrawals, both renewable and non-renewable, and the available precipitation. The larger the fraction of available precipitation that is used to meet human needs, the greater is the risk when available precipitation decreases *due to climate change+.

67

Data used for the paper included the 2005 water use survey conducted by the USGS, which classifies water use throughout the various sectors. This was then combined with water demand and supply projections based on population growth and changes in demographic and economic forces. Finally a collection of the most recent and reliable global climate models (GMC) were used to provide "plausible, physically-based estimates of the climate response to changes in composition of boundary conditions and increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Among other things these models account for are variations and expected changes in temperature and precipitation throughout the United States.

Given the predictions, two areas stand out for pipeline destinations. One would work to replenish the Ogallala aquifer, and one would yield extra discharge for the Colorado River watershed. Given geographic and topographic considerations, the Ogallala Aquifer was chosen as a preferable destination. Ogallala Aquifer The Ogallala, also known as the High Plains Aquifer, is the most extensive and important groundwater source in the United-States. Stretching across 8 States, it accounts for 30% of all ground water extracted in the US (Dennehy, 2000). The land above, known as Americas breadbasket, is used to produce high yields of mono-crops such as corn, wheat and cotton.

Much of the water that originated in the Ogallala aquifer can be considered fossil, in that this huge aquifer receives minimal infiltration given the aridity of the area. Thus, water levels have been declining (USGS, 2000).

The area above Northern Texas, known as the Panhandle of Texas is of particular interest as it has both much to lose in-terms of economic importance of the area (Texas, 2012), as well as the a very severe risk of water scarcity (Roy et.al., 2012). The population there is expected to increase by 80% in 2060, while the demand for water is expected to increase at a lesser rate by 20% (Texas, 2012), mostly from

68

municipal usage. Water extractions for agriculture are expected to decrease, as the State will increase efficiencies of irrigation practice by necessity as groundwater becomes more scarce and expensive. Conveyance: Pipelines Considering a reliability and durability assessment done for the Perth case study, both options would use high strength steel pipes to convey the water. The pipes diameters would have to be considerably bigger to accommodate substantially larger flow rates that vary between 400 to 1200 MCS (meters cubed per second). The chosen diameter would have to be 3000mm (with 5 running in parallel). To bury this pipeline would require a trench of around 20 meters.

The path was chosen minimizing the distance considering the terrain, obstacles (such as metropolitan areas, protected areas and native reserves). Figure 14 shows the plan view of the optimal path for both pipelines.

69

Figure 14 Satelite image of conveyance path

Similar to the Perth case study, we can design for head increases at each pumping station of 375 meters. Pressure head will decrease due to friction losses at a rate of 0.667 meters per kilometers of pipe. As such, the Nelson proposal would require 7 pumping stations to travel the 2550 km with a net elevation increase of 925 meters. The Liard proposal requires 8 stations over 3300 km, also up 925 meters. See

70

figure 15 and 16 for elevation profile (chainage) diagrams.

1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Chainage (km) 2500

Elevation (m)

Ground elevation Pressurized pipe hydraulic gradeline 3000 3500

Figure 15 Elevation profile of Liard River

1200 1100 1000 900 Elevation (m) 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 500 1000 1500 Chainage Km 2000 2500 Ground elevation

Figure 16 Elevation profile of Nelson River

71

Hydrology STELLA (version 9.1.3), a stocks and flow environmental modelling program, was used to transiently assess the hydrology of both pipelines. Appendix C-11 shows the model interface. It consists of a reservoir, with an inflow of the natural river discharge (monthly discharge data for the years 2000 to 2009, using HYDAT). Outflow was defined as the allotted discharge out of the reservoir released by the spillway. The exported flow was set to 400 MCS during the fall and winter, with a gradual increase to 1200 MCS which would correspond to both increased demand for spring irrigation, and to increased available flow from the spring floods. The allotted discharge rate out of the reservoir was set a function of the stored volume in the reservoir. This allows for stored volumes to correspond well will supply and demands.

To estimate the expected reservoir stage variations, stage discharge functions where calculated by pairing discharge to river levels data from Hydat.

Liard

Appendix C-1 shows the yearly fluctuations of the natural discharge, the flow exported and the flow allowed out of the reservoir. With the export rate of 400 to 1200 MCS, we note that the expected average discharge peak in June is reduced by 450 MCS. The minimum flow in the winter decreases by about 20% There is also an expected stage spring peak decrease by 0.8 meters (appendix C-2). Water stored in reservoir will fluctuate yearly between 9800 m^3 and 14300 m3 (appendix C-3). After 15 years, appendix C-4 and C-5 shows the cumulative volumes of inflows and outflows.

Nelson

The Nelson River does not experience such high seasonal variations in flow. Nevertheless, the same export rate schedule was modeled. There is approximately 10% decrease in the flow, with some 72

discharge peak discharge rates dropping between 500 to 1200 MCS (appendix C-6). The decrease in stage peaks is observed in figure appendix C-7. Reservoir volumes fluctuate between 3200 m3 and 6400m3 (appendix C-8). Appendix C-9 shows the fraction of the total flow exported.

4.2.2 Proposal 2: Augmenting the Great Lakes by river reversal

Of the many rivers that discharge into the James bay, the Albany river was chosen due to its high flow rates (especially spring floods), and its relative lack of other uses, such as for the generation of hydroelectricity.

Figure 17 shows a plan view of the proposal. Originally, the river flowed northwards beginning at point 14, where, in 1947 the flow was dammed and diverted southwards into Lake Superior (Ghassemi & White, 2007). The object of this proposal is thus to increase the length of the river reserved back into Lake Superior.

73

Figure 17 Plan view of Albany proposal

As one would imagine, flowing water against gradient without using pressurized pipes is not particularly easy. It would involve a series of 11 flooded pools, with hydraulic turbines supplying the necessary increase in head at the junction points. Figure 18, the profile diagram, shows the gradual and stepwise increase in elevation of the river.

Figures 19 and 20 show a sample plan view of a few pools. Where the natural topography is sloped to contain the flow, the area is allowed to flood; where the terrain is too flat, dykes of pilled material would be needed as embankments to contain the pools. A balance was found between having to use 74

expensive dyke walls, and minimizing the flooded area. Appendix D summarizes each of 15 sections key features as well as some pertinent notes. In summary, this proposal would require 9,1 km of dams, 87.7 km of dyke walls, a flooded area of 321 km2.

350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 200 400 600 800

Original elevation of river surface Flooded elevation of river surface

Figure 18 Albany river elevation diagram.

Figure 19 Section 3 of Albany proposal

Figure 20 Section 10 of Albany proposal

75

Destination: Supplementing the Great Lakes Reservoir In terms of managing a supplementation of the Great Lakes, the idea is straight-forward: given the release structure for discharge water can be controlled, the Ontario government could sell water rights. For example if a farm, industry, company or municipality that draws water out of Lake Superior wanted to draw more water than they are allowed (according to current provisions of Great Lakes water usage legislation), they could sponsor the release of more water from the Albany reservoir. If a user pays, more water is released. There may even be potential for a canal or pipeline to convey water out to new, and distant users stemming from the Great Lakes. In theory, water levels should be maintained as a balance is kept between quantities extracted and quantities introduced.

In the interviews, this idea was proposed to the experts to see what the procedure would be for implementation and if they found it to be realistic and feasible on the legal, economic, and managerial levels. Needless to say, the responses were extremely doubtful and skeptical about its potential. Here were a few of the mentioned issues:

Legal hurdles: Any proposal to transfer water into the Great Lakes would be subject to a number of legal hurdles... the jurisdictional issues are daunting describes Grant (2011). There would have to be the involvement and agreements of federal and provincial governments on the supply side, as well as the First Nation communities. Once water reaches Lake Superior, it would be subject the Boundary Waters Treaty, which establishes a mutual obligation between Canada and the U.S. to protect the natural levels and flows of shared waters. The International Joint Commission would also be involved. All in all, the amount of legal hurdles to set up the system would be extremely complicated, and once running, maintaining such a system without conflicts would be equally problematic.

76

Difficulties in predicting and measuring stocks, levels, flows, impacts etc. There would be scaling issues as it is already difficult to predict and manage local water supply, let alone trying to predict the effects of bulk incoming flows from one new source. Indeed this would contribute to the legal complications.

Oversimplification of the water-balance: the idea that one can simply keep the complicated and giant system of the Great Lakes by a simple equation (change of water volume equals inflow minus outflow) is flawed. A new inflow can affect evapotranspiration rates, discharge rates out of the St-Lawrence, recharge, and even the areas climate. As Hugo (2011) expresses, If you pour water into such a huge inland sea; and you ask for the guy on the other side to pay for it I don't know, it seems a bit difficult.

Economically infeasible: The overall sentiment is that it may be technologically feasible, but most probably uneconomical and it would cause significant social and environmental impacts. It may as well cause more problems that it would solve. This was essentially a unanimous sentiment across all interviewees. Of course, this is based on their previous experiences; the argument still stands that conditions will change and future (or perhaps distance future) prices or opportunities may open possibilities and remove obstacles.

4.2.3 Proposal 3: International Exportation through Tanker Ships

Many large rivers discharge into the Atlantic or the Pacific Ocean. Of these, three were identified as having sufficient flow, a favourable location and a lack of competing users. On the West side, there is the Skeena river of Northern British-Columbia. To East, there is the Koksoak river of the Ungava Bay, and Labradors Churchill river. These coastal rivers were chosen as probable sites to fill supertankers with water ready for international exportation.

77

Hydrology An extensive hydrologic analysis using a STELLA simulation was omitted. This was considered appropriate as the most significant consideration involving costs and impacts would be limited to the conveyance distance. This was found to be feasible given that, even at an exaggerated exportation rate of 10 times that of the Australian case study (63 MCS, with 40 ships running continuously), the percentage of the average discharge removed would not surpass 4% at worst. Source and Destination Similar to the Australian study, this proposal would require underground pipelines to an offshore mooring facility. Figure 21 shows an image of the arrangement for the Skeena, Koksoak and Churchill extraction site, complete with a extraction inlets, a treatment plant and mooring station.

78

Figure 21 Source site for tanker exportation

As for the destinations, researching most details went beyond the scope of the study. This included exactly which country would most likely demand imported water, which port would receive it, and how

79

it could be transported, diffused and used inland. Given the commonly identified water issues of these regions, the areas of North Africa, Middle-East, Japan and China were chosen; with their closest coastal points as the destinations. Figure 22 and 23 shows a satellite image of the shortest conveyance path. Table 5 summarizes the pertinent information: tanker conveyance length, time of 1-way travel (if the boats were to travel at 15 knots), length of underground and underwater piping requirements.

Figure 22 Conveyance path of Koksoak and Churchill propals

Figure 23 Conveyance path of Skeena proposal

80

Table 5 Tanker ship details

Distance to (km): discharge Strait of (MCS) Gibraltar Churchhill Koksoak 1620 2420 4800 5000

Skeena

Japan 1760 6700

Distance to Pipeline length (km) (km): 1 way West1 way underground underwater transit Asia/North transit (days) Africa (days) 6.5 8000 to 11 209 2 8500km 7 8750 to 12.5 8 6 9250km China 9.5 9100 12.5 27 34.7

4.3 Evaluation and discussion

As described in step 6 of the methodology, the 3 proposals were evaluated and compared. It is important to reiterate at this point that the numbers are drawn from comparisons of multitude of sources (which include the case studies mentioned and several others, studies on the impacts of river engineering, information from land-use maps, as well as educated judgment). As such the results are qualitative in nature, even though the results are numerical. As will be expressed in the future studies section, there is the possibility for a more quantitative or objective analysis. Nevertheless, tables 6 through 9 shows the results of the evaluation.

81

4.3.1 Environmental Impacts

Table 6

Category

Pipeline weighing rating factor Points

river reversals rating points

tanker ship rating points

1.Change of river regime and disruption of river function 2.minimum flow allocation and upstream flow reduction 3.Reduction and changes to riparian flooding events 4.Land disturbances and reduction in landscape quality 5.Impacts on habitat and individual species disruption 6.Introduction of non-native and invasive species 7.water quality issues 8.greenhouse gas emissions Sum

18

27

14

0.75

5.25

2.25

1.5

7.5

10.5

1.5

7.5

12

0.6 2

6 7

3.6 14 69.6

7 8

4.2 16 93.95

8 8

4.8 16 57.05

Given the amount of land flooded, and the expected impacts of completely disregarding the natural flow direction, the river reversal proposal of the Albany River was allocated the most severe impacts. The impacts are numerous and unjustifiable: operating numerous turbines, pooling water, halting sediment discharge, decreasing by a half the up-stream flow, large flooded areas, large hydraulic structures with exorbitant fill material needs; all this in one of the most active and important wetlands in Canada.

Although not as severe, the other two proposals would incur significant impacts. Evaluation for greenhouse gas emissions where done by considering the Australian case study, and were found to be 82

heavy for all three proposals. With a non-stop fleet of 40 ships, there would be great concern for water quality issues from fuel spills with the ocean option.

4.3.2 Socio/Economic Inhibitors

Table 7

Pipeline weighing factor rating 1.5 7

river reversals

tanker ship

Category 1.Capital costs 2.Energy expenditures and operational costs 3.Social impacts (especially on aboriginal communities) 4.Political obstacles 5.Public acceptance Sum

Points 10.5

rating points 10 15

rating 3

points 4.5

1.5

10.5

0.75 0.75 0.5

6 8 8

4.5 6 4 34

7 8 7

5.25 6 3.5 40.25

5 9 9

3.75 6.75 4.5 28.5

With 11 giant turbines and almost 100 kilometers of hydraulic structures, setting up the Albany proposal would cost incredible amounts in capital. Costs could be comparable to Quebecs larger, multi-turbine and reservoir hydroelectricity projects, with costs in the tens of billions. Pipeline schemes would be also costly to set up; thousands of kilometers of dredged pipelines with very large diameters.

All three would incur severe obstacles in terms of politics and public acceptance. The tanker ship option was considered to be the most improbable, given past resistance to tanker exports and the idea of exporting precious Canadian northern water to Asia or the Middle-East.

83

4.3.3 Expected Gains

Table 8

Pipeline weighing factor rating 2 7

river reversals

tanker ship

Category 6.Economic gains 7.Reliability of supply and water security gained 8.Mitigated and reduced environmental impacts of the alternative supply strategy Sum

Points 14

rating points 7 14

rating 2

points 4

7 27

6 24

6 17

Given the substantially lower conveyance potential of a fleet of supertankers (in the range of 10 to 60 MCS, versus over 200 MCS for pipelines or diversions), the potential gains of this proposal is lowest. Reliability evaluation was based on considerations done by the Australian case study. All three impacts do have the potential to contribute to offsetting the impacts that would be had if the imported water was not available.

4.3.4 Comparison
Multiplying the rating by the weighing factor for each category and summing these points together yields a performance evaluation in each of the three aspects. Figure 24 illustrates the results.

84

40 20 0 Environmental -20 -40 -60 -80 -100

Figure 24 Comparing results in each of the three aspects

pipeline (Liard or Nelson) Costs & Obsticles Gains River Reversal (Albany) Tanker Exportation (Skeena, Churchill, or Ungava)

As expected, the Albany proposal would be the most impactful and would be subject to the most obstacles. Also the tanker exportation performance would both have the least impacts, but also a weak gain. It was then determined that the pipeline option had the most favourable balance of impacts to gains.

All in all though, it was found that all three proposals would incur extremely significant environmental and social impacts. Although practically and technologically possible, economically, none was thought to be feasible. It is important to repeat once more that the evaluation was qualitative and that these results are valid as such. A more thorough quantitative assessment and discussion would be expected to further solidify these results and eliminate the subjective and judgemental elements of this preliminary study. Ideas to proceed with this are discussed in the next section, future studies.

85

CHAPTER 5
5.1 Future Studies
One of the general objectives of this study was to motivate and open dialogue about IBWT and to provide a simple and broad picture in terms of a few possible scenarios. As such, the scope was kept as wide as possible, which consequently did not permit thorough and robust detailing of each proposal or of other possible options. The following is few suggestions to take the research further:

More exhaustive analysis of both potential extraction and consumption sites. Given the thousands of fresh water sources of Canada, the possibilities for IBWT are enormous. Also extremely numerous are the potential importing locations that will only increase with scarcity issues. This project was centered on the most probable large projects, yet there could be considerations for smaller and more local export schemes.

More robust refinement of hydraulic structure design, conveyance details, construction phase details, hydrologic analysis, supply-demand predictions, risk analysis, etc. The amount of details given for each proposal was considered sufficient for preliminary discussion, yet it really was minimal given the size and breadth of the proposals, the numerous elements and structures and the different stakeholders. There really could be incredible amount of details added that goes into formulating and describing a proposal or plan at such scales.

Specific analysis of environmental impacts. The most significant constraint to fully investigating the environmental impacts was the availability of data. A more in-depth analysis would have taken careful considerations of fish habitat and impacts on reproduction, impacts on riparian zone, impacts on estuaries, and a more quantitative evaluation of GHG emissions. Extensive temporal and spacial field measurements, which include a thorough assessment of the sites ecology, sensitive species and their reproduction habits, should be accounted for. 86

Measured cost analysis (for each proposal, estimate the initial capital and cost per meter cubed exported), energy analysis (kWhr need per meter cubed) and GHG analysis (tonnes CO2 emitted per meters cubed). In terms of a quantitative comparison, generating numerical estimations of cost and energy requirements within acceptable certainty, would have obviously added much tangible value to the comparison of the proposal.

In-depth analysis of value of water: Much is still needed in the study of properly allocating the value of water in ecoservices. This allows for better comparison of options.

Incorporating alternative traditional options, the business as usual option, and/or other new technologies into the comparison. In the Australian case study, the proposals were compared to the option of desalination. As such, better conclusions could be drawn about the feasibility of IBWT given the other alternatives.

5.2 Conclusion
A reoccurring theme of this project was the idea of value. Many times over the importance of measuring and properly allocating this notion of value to fresh water was stressed in interviews and in the literature review. If there is one thing that was deeply gained in appreciation as a result of researching this project, it would be that of the vastness, richness, splendour and preciousness of Northern Canadas water resources. Indeed it holds great value. By contemplating various maps; by discovering its highest flowing rivers, wetlands and ponds that infinitely dot the landscape; by scouring images of un-touched nature; by learning about the inner-workings of the ecology, and its resilient aquatic and land biota that wonderfully defy and strive in the harsh colds of high latitudes; one can truly see all that we have to lose and protect as much as we have to gain.

87

The result of this project was that large scale inter-basin water transfer is infeasible at the time being on many fronts. Despite this result, it was made clear that this type of research should be ongoing, and should continuously incorporate new developments in technologies, changes in prices of energy and water, and changes in climate and the environment. In the end, I hope that this project and projects like it will continue this type of discussion and study.

As Canadians endowed with a richness of freshwater, it is imperative that we become masters of this massive resource. We must keep the core value of water in the focus: its value in ecoservices, exactly where it is and how it flows. Yet, at the same Canadian should not become complacent and ignorant of what is happening internationally with all the problems of intensifying water scarcity and changes in climate. Canada should thus be a nation both defined by the ability to leverage precious water resources internationally, while at the same time being known as a nation well versed in water conservation and water justice.

88

REFERENCES
Ghassemi, F., & White, I. (2007). Inter-basin water transfer: Case studies from australia , us, canada, china and india. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Pierre Gingras, F. (2010). L'eau du nord: Un projet raliste, durable et rentable pour exploiter l'or bleu du qubec. Saint-Sauveur, QC: Marcel Broquet diteur. Lasserre, F. (2005). Les projets de transferts massifs continentaux en amrique du nord: La fin de l're des dinosaurs?. In F. Lasserre (Ed.), Transferts massifs d'eau Sainte-Foy, QC: Presse de l'universit du Qubec. Barlow, M. (2007). Blue covenant: The global water crisis and the coming battle for the right to water. Totonto, ON: McClelland & Steward Ltd. Wood, C. (2011, September 7). Interview by S. Dagher [E-mail Interview]. Tremblay, H. (2011, September 2). Interview by S. Dagher [Web Based Phone Recording]. Richer, E. Environment Canada, (2007). News release: Canada has no intention of negotiating bulk water exports . Retrieved from Environment Canada Media Relations website: http://www.ec.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=714D9AAE-1&news=B362E955-305B-49FB-BA8BAD6292238387 Jolicoeur, M. (2010, October 10). Exploitation de leau: les spcialistes rclament une vision. Les Affaires. Retrieved from http://www.lesaffaires.com/secteurs-d-activite/environnement/exploitation-de-leau-les-specialistes-de-l-eau-reclament-une-vision/519819/1 Morgan, G. (2010, June 13). Throw cold water on bulk-water export opposition. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/throw-cold-water-on-bulkwater-export-opposition/article1602692/ Maich, S. (2005, November 24). America is thirsty. Maclean's. Retrieved from http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20051128_116618_116618 Kierans, M. (2012, February 12). Tom Kierans: Visionary/engineer and man with a plan to save the Ogallala aquifer about to enter 100th year. CNN ireport. Retrieved from http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-743991 Wood, C. (2008). Dry spring: The coming water crisis of North America. Vancouver, BC: Raincoast Books. Agnew , C., & Woodhouse, P. (2011). Water resources and development. New York, NY: Routledge. Brown, L. R. (2003). Plan B: Rescuing a plant under stress and a civilization in trouble. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 89

World Water Council. (2010). Water crisis. Retrieved from http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/index.php?id=25 Linton, J. (2002). Canada on tap: The environmental implications of water exports. Commissioned by The Council of Canadians Blue Planet Project. Sasseville, J., & Abdessalem, Y. (2005). La rationalit des transfers massifs d'eaux douces. In Transferts massifs d'eau. Sainte-Foy, QC: Presse de l'universit du Qubec. Clamen, M. (2011, November 22). Interview by S. Dagher [Web Based Recording]. Olechnowicz, K. (2010, October 25). Interview by G. Fillion [Web Based News Recording]. Tirer profit de notre eau?. Radio-Canada: carnets d'conomie, Montreal, QC. , Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_rmGDdKEJ0 Quinn, F. (2007). Water diversion, exports, and canada u.s. relations: A brief history. Canadian Water Issues Council, Retrieved from Johns, C. (2008a). Introduction. In M. Sproule-Jones, C. Johns & T. Heinmiller (Eds.), Canadian Water Politics: Conflicts and Institutions Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen's University Press. Grant, J. K. (2008). Against the flow: Institutions and canada's water-export debate. In M. Sproule-Jones, C. Johns & T. Heinmiller (Eds.), Canadian Water Politics: Conflicts and InstitutionsMontreal, QC: McGill-Queen. International Joint Commission. (2011). Treaties and agreements. Retrieved from http://www.ijc.org/rel/agree/water.html International Joint Commission. (2012). Who we are. Retrieved from http://www.ijc.org/en/background/ijc_cmi_nature.htm LaRouche, L. H. (1988, January). The outline of NAWAPA. Retrieved from http://www.schillerinstitute.org/economy/phys_econ/phys_econ_nawapa_1983.html Watkins, T. (n.d.). The North-American water and power alliance (NAWAPA). San Jos State University Department of Economics, Retrieved from http://www.applet-magic.com/NAWAPA.htm Parsons Co. (1964). Ralph M. Parsons Company promotional video for NAWAPA . [Promotional Video]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTissXa48yg United Nations. (2010, July 28). General assembly declares access to clean water and sanitation is a human right. UN News Center. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=35456&Cr=SANITATION Heinmiller, B. T. (2003). Harmonization through emulation: Canadian federalism and water export policy. Canadian Public Administration, 46(4), 495513.

90

Council of Canadians. (2007). Bulk water exports: A timeline. Retrieved from website: http://www.canadians.org/water/issues/policy/timeline.html International Joint Commission. (2000). Protection of waters of the Great Lakes: Final report to the government of Canada and the United-States. Washington D.C. and Ottawa ON: International Joint Commission. Johns, C. (2008b). Institutions for water resource management in canada. In M. Sproule-Jones, C. Johns & T. Heinmiller (Eds.), Canadian Water Politics: Conflicts and Institutions Montreal, QC: McGillQueen's University Press. Government of Western Australia (GWA) (2006). Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley: An independent review. Perth, Australia: Department of the Premier and Cabinet. Keating, R. (2006, February 24). Kimberley water plans 'all viable'. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/water/stories/s1577478.htm Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Regional population growth, australia, 2009-10. Retrieved from Australian Bureau of Statistics website: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/3218.0~2009-10~Main Features~Western Australia?OpenDocument Water Corporation. (2005). Integrated water supply scheme source development plan: Planning horizon 2005-2050. Leederville, Autralia: Water Corporation. Water Corporation. (2004). Kimberley pipeline project: sustainability review. Leederville, Autralia: Water Corporation Derry, M. (n.d.). Derry tankering plan overview. Retrieved from http://www.australianwaterresources.com/derrytankeringplan.htm Hydro-Qubec (HQ). Presented to the Qubec Minister of the Environment. (2004). Eastmain-1-a powerhouse and Rupert diversion: Environmental impact statement, chapter 1. Montreal, QC: Hydro-Qubec Productions. Provincial Review Commitee (COMEX). Qubec Minister of the Environment. (2006). Eastmain-1-a powerhouse and Rupert diversion hydropower project. Qubec, QC: Provincial Review Committee to the Administrator of Chapter 22 of the James Bay and Northern Qubec Agreement. Northern Waterways. (2006, December 17). Cree Opposition to Rupert River Diversion Project in Northern Quebec [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://northernwaterways.com/blog/?p=25 Bonspiel, S. (2006, October 20). Three communities to vote on EM 1-a: Nemaska, Waskaganish, Chisasibi look to halt Rupert diversion. Nation and Beesum Communications. Retrieved from http://www.beesum-communications.com/nation/archive/13-24/3com.html

91

Montreal Environment. (2011). La Romaine mega-dam sparks controversy. Montreal Environment. Retrieved from http://www.montrealenvironment.ca/la-romaine-mega-dam-sparks-controversy/ Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks (MDDEP), Government of Quebec. (n.d.). Eastmain 1-a and Rupert River diversion hydropower project: Mercury and health. Retrieved from website: http://www.mddep.gouv.qc.ca/evaluations/eastmain-rupert/rapportcomexen/mercury.htm CBC. (2006, October 24). Nunavut raises concerns about Rupert River hydro project. CBS News North. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/story/2006/10/24/rupert-electric.html Mann, B. (2008, July 14). Hydro-electric project to reshape wilderness. NPR. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92514989 Mercier, G., & Ritchot, G. (1997). La Baie-James: Les dessous d'une rencontre que la bureaucratie n'avait pas prvue. Cahiers de Gographie du Qubec, 41(113), 137-169. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior. (n.d.). Colorado-Big Thompson project. Reclamation. Texas. (2012). Water for Texas 2012: State water plan. Austin, TX: Texas Water Development Board. Hey, R. D. (1996). Environmentally sensitive river engineering. In G. Petts & P. Calow (Eds.), River Restoration (pp. 80-105). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd. Petts, G. E., & Calow, P. (1996). The nature of rivers. In G. Petts & P. Calow (Eds.), River Restoration (pp. 1-6). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd. S.B. Roy, L. Chen, E.H. Girvetz, E.P. Maurer, W.B. Mills, and T.M. Grieb. (2012) Projecting Water Withdrawal and Supply for Future Decades in the U.S. under Climate Change Scenarios. Environmental Science & Technology, 46 (5), 2545-2556 Dennehy, K. F. USGS, (2000). High-Plains regional ground-water study: U.S. geological survey fact sheet. USGS (FS-091-00)

92

APPENDIX A

Appendix A results from GWA (2006)

93

APPENDIX B

94

95

APPENDIX C Appendix C- 1 Liard hydrology

Appendix C- 2 Liard stage

96

Appendix C- 3 Liard reservoir

Appendix C- 4 Liard 15 year results

97

Appendix C- 5 Laird results

Appendix C- 6

98

Appendix C- 7 Nelson stage

Appendix C- 8 Nelson reservoir

1: reservoir 1: 5500

1:

4000 1 1 1

1: Page 1

2500 0.00 45.00 90.00 Months Untitled 135.00 180.00 5:17 PM Tue, Mar 13, 2012

99

Appendix C- 9 Nelson final rresult

1: total water exported 1: 2: 3: 650000 2: total water discharged 3: total discharge

1: 2: 3:

325000

1: 2: 3:

Page 1 Untitled

5:21 PM Tue, Mar 13, 2012

Appendix C- 10 Liard and Nelson STELLA interface

100

Appendix C- 11 Albany interface

101

Appendix C- 12 Albany hydrology

102

Appendix C- 13 Albany reservoir

1: reservoir 1: 11000

1 1 1 1: 8000 1

1: Page 1

5000 0.00 45.00 90.00 Months Untitled 135.00 180.00 5:44 PM Tue, Mar 13, 2012

Appendix C- 14 Albany stage

1: normal stage upstream 1: 2: 7 5 2: altered stage upstream

1 1: 2: 4 3 2 1 2 2

1 1: 2: Page 1 2 2 0.00 2 1 45.00 90.00 Months Untitled 135.00 180.00 5:45 PM Tue, Mar 13, 2012

103

Appendix C- 15 Albany results

104

APPENDIX D
hydraulic structures dams Section elev start elev end change in elev Chainage from James bay 274 flooded area length max height max width (disregarding cofferdams) (elevated channel) dyke length max height max width canals length notes

74

74

74

96

22

380

182

4200

29

107.6

Reduced flow section. Possibility of weirs and rock blankets to maintain water level and hydraulic conditions Well controlled spillway gate needed. Significant flooded surface area. 4100 Flat terrain in these reaches necessitates long built up dikes embankments to contain flow

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

96 117 139 160 181 203 224 245 267 279 290 300

117 139 160 181 203 224 245 267 279 290 300 309

21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 12 11 11 9

399 419 438 462 477 488 498 515 543 547 553 570

8 18 22 24 15 7 9 24 8 0 1 5 -

876 200 213 100 1480 673 26 1300 59 29 27

27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 19 18 15

100.8 100.8 100.8 100.8 100.8 100.8 100.8 100.8 73.6 70.2 60

9700 6300 35400 28200 7900 8.5 7 200

23 23 23 23 23 23 23 12

104.1 104.1 104.1 104.1 104.1 104.1 104.1 57.9

72

Chipmen Lake (flat surface water) Use of pre-existing dam. Retrofitting to accommodate extra flow may be necessary. Well controlled spillway gate needed Measures to accommodate increased flow 4172

15 SUMS

309

183

-126

716

0 321

9183

87715.9

105