THE CASE AGAINST THE RAIN
Ontario
THE CASE AGAINST THE RAIN
A Report on Acidic Precipitation and Ontario Programs for Remedial Action
October 1980
Reprint with supplementary insert — Summer 1982
This report has been reprinted with some revisions and supplements added to outline major Environment Ontario activities and strategies during 1981-82. Government Regu- lation requiring Ontario Hydro to reduce emissions, intro- duced in 1981, is also outlined in a supplement.
The reprinted information is accurate for the period and sources indicated. New data on emission levels and reports on studies now underway concerning the impact of acid rain will be detailed when a new edition of this report is pub- lished early in 1983.
Up-Date: Activities and Strategies, 1981-82 page A Regulation to Reduce Ontario Hydro Emissions page G Major Submissions by Ontario to the U.S. EPA page 24 Ministry Hon. Keith C. Norton, Q.C. Minister of the
Gerard J.M. Raymond Environment Deputy Minister Ontario
& x
D
UPDATE:
Environment Ontario’s Abatement Activities and Strategies, 1981-82*
... One of our major activities is a comprehensive program to cope with the threat of acidic precipitation Two years ago, the ministry spent just over half a million dollars on this program. In the current fiscal year (1981/82), our ministry proposes to spend $7.0 million on scientific investigation, legal activities and abatement strategies to deal with the long range trans- port of air pollutants.
These activities have raised public awareness to the point that “Acid Rain” has become a household word Virtually every branch in my ministry is involved in the complex research effort required to determine sources, deposition, effects, more effective abatement actions and to present our case in the International Forum. | will take a few minutes to outline the ministry's activities in this field.
Monitoring Networks
Two networks of monitoring stations were set up in 1980 to measure wet and dry deposition and to identify sources of acid rain. In 1981, these networks were expanded to include 60 locations. These monitoring stations play a vital role in our ongoing research to determine the quantity, acidic concentrations and effects of acid rain, snow, and dry particulate matter falling throughout the province.
By combining these deposition data with information derived from ministry studies focused mainly on our most sensitive areas — the Muskoka/Haliburton and Sudbury regions — our scientists are able to extra- polate their findings on lake deterioration rates to the entire province. (see text — pg. 8).
The monitoring program also identities the directions from which the pollution comes from numerous North American sources.
Modelling of LRTAP (Long Range Transport of Air Pollutants)
We are well aware that the long distance transport of sulphur and nitrogen compounds emitted into the atmosphere is closely related to the acidic precipitation phenomenon. Carried over great distances, these emis- sions frequently can undergo transformation to acidic compounds which are eventually deposited in rain or snow.
*Excerpts from the Hon. Keith C. Norton’s statement to The Standing Committee on Resources Development, Ontario Legislature-— Ministry Estimates, 1981/82 (December 1, 1981).
The Ministry’s Air Resources Branch has developed a mathematical model which is used to estimate total deposition of sulphur throughout the province. The model has been designed to determine the contribution of pollutants to acidity over the sensitive lake areas in Ontario from both Canadian and American sources. Its results have been verified using measured values of sulphur in precipitation obtained from the monitoring networks in both countries
Effects My ministry has been studying the effects of acidic deposition on aquatic ecosystems for several years Most of this work is centred at our research facility at Dorset and has received worldwide attention. The results will assist the ministry in determining appro- priate abatement programs
To date, approximately 3,000 lakes throughout the province have been tested for acid sensitivity. The results of this ongoing survey are being reported regularly to the public. Our first survey report was published last May, and an up-dated summary of acid sensitivity surveys from more than 2,500 of these lakes will be released shortly
This year, the ministry initiated a joint project with the Ministry of Natural Resources to test the feasilbity of neutralizing lakes by “liming”. We firmly believe
Environment Minister Keith Norton and Senator Mel Frederick (right) from Minnesota, member of one of the U.S delegations that toured Ontario areas affected by acid rain discuss the problem that worries both jurisdictions
Mr. Norton was appointed Minister of the Environment in April, 1981 following the retirement of Dr Harry C. Parrott
that reduction of emissions at source is the most effec- tive long range program to protect the environment. However, until the effects of long term abatement programs take place, this program will determine the extent to which sensitive lakes can be protected.
Acidic precipitation also has the potential to cause serious and widespread damage to terrestrial eco- systems in areas where the soils and bedrock cannot “buffer” or neutralize the acid. Large areas of Eastern Canada lack this buffering capability and as a result, detrimental effects to soils and vegetation could result (see text — pg. 21)...
So far these effects have been largely observed only experimentally. We have not oberved direct damages to crops or forests in Ontario under the currently measured rates of acidic deposition. The circumstantial evidence in other countries, notably Sweden and Germany, suggests that it is only a matter of time before such effects will become apparent.
Last year, more than 1,000 soil samples were collected from 100 stations to provide data on back- ground conditions. Vegetation samples were also collected. Repeat surveys and additional samples are being collected on a regular basis so that trends in terrestrial ecosystem changes can be identified.
Economic Impact
It is readily apparent from this brief description of effects, that many of Ontario’s natural resources are at risk, or threatened, from the known and potential effects of acidic deposition. But what does this mean to the eight-and-a-half million residents of this province? These resources are the basis for a significant proportion of Ontario’s economy.
Tourism, for example, ranks second only to auto- mobiles and auto parts, as this province’s major source of foreign exchange. Aquatic based tourism, which is most vulnerable to the effects of acid rain, generated over a billion dollars in direct and indirect expenditures in 1980 alone. Forestry and agriculture constitute a significant part of Gross Provincial Product. Each of these economic activities generates jobs and income which are important to the province as a whole and represent even greater proportions of the economic base in certain regions. The damage to our waters, soils, forests and wildlife will be felt in economic terms throughout the province if this insidious pollution should persist.
To determine the extent of the potential economic effects, my ministry is undertaking a series of studies. An important objective is to provide procedures for estimating the economic consequences of acidic precipitation as new data and more knowledge about the physical effects become available... .
For resources where markets exist, such as forestry and agriculture, the methodology is reasonably straightforward. For activities such as sportsfishing or the desire for a clean and healthy environment, much of the ministry’s work is pioneering. These studies will permit us to determine more clearly what we and others will gain by controlling acid rain, and even more important, what we shall be losing if we do not.
Federal/Provincial Co-operation There is ongoing liaison, co-operation and consultation among my ministry, the federal government, and our
sister provinces, on the issue of acid rain.
Since the Memorandum of Intent between Canada and the United States was signed in 1980, this ministry has been a very active participant in the various Work Groups established to examine the problem and to propose various abatement strategies. The data compiled by these groups will form the basis for negotiation towards a bilateral. agreement between the two countries to control long range transport of air pollutants.
To achieve this goal, both the federal and provincial governments are pooling resources and research find- ings and reporting ori effects, economic impact and abatement costs and strategies. | am proud to say that Ontario is a major contributor to this project.
Since signing the Memorandum of Intent, several other activities have been undertaken in our efforts to move quickly towards a solution and to maintain momentum.
Legal Initiatives/Interventions in U.S. Courts and Tribunals
In March, 1981, the ministry commenced a series of legal initiatives which involved interventions in pro- ceedings before the United States Courts and the Envi- ronmental Protection Agency.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was peti- tioned by several mid-western states to permit increases in the emission limits of 20 coal burning power plants. Most of these states, located in the Ohio Valley, have been identified as major contributors to the acidic deposition problem in Ontario.
In response to this proposal, the ministry was per- mitted to present its case in Washington in support of New York and Pennsylvania which also opposed the proposed relaxation in standards.
In its submissions on March 12th and on March 27th, Ontario urged the Environmental Protection Agency to disapprove proposed revisions to State Implementation Plans which would lead to increases in allowable sulphur dioxide emissions. Noting that several of the plants were already exceeding current limits, Ontario also urged EPA to vigorously enforce the existing standards. We urged EPA to make a break with its tra- ditional approach of considering only local effects and individual sources and proposed that EPA evaluate the cumulative effect of the revisions on Ontario and take into account evidence of long range transport.
In making its case, Ontario relied on rights conferred by accords and specifically the Memorandum of Intent which committed the parties to “promote vigorous enforcement of existing laws and regulations... in a way which is responsive to the problems of trans- boundary air pollution”. Ontario also relied on general principles of international law established by the deci- sion of the Arbitral Tribunal in the Trail Smelter case in British Columbia during the 1930’s. Ontario further took the position that Section 115 of the Clean Air Act dealing with international pollution had been activated by a ruling on January 16, 1981 by the then Administra- tor of the Environmental Protection Agency, Douglas Costle.
On March 17th, the State of Ohio and two power companies in the State commenced proceedings in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to set aside the Costle ruling on which
ae od
OS
Ontario relied in support of its legal position. Since EPA regarded the Costle ruling as a press release only and without legal status, Ontario moved to intervene to ensure the ruling was not set aside or its status undermined in the proceedings. Ontario eventually reached an agreement with EPA to the effect that the petitions would be dismissed without the court giving reasons. This agreement was opposed by the power companies involved.
On October 9, 1981, in a judgment which took into account Ontario’s motions for leave to intervene and the stipulation between Ontario and EPA, the Court dismissed all of the petitions on the ground that they sought review of action which is not sufficiently advanced for judicial decision at this time. We there- fore achieved our objective in this litigation, which was to preserve the legal status of the Costle ruling and to ensure that this status was not impaired by these pro- ceedings.
Basic Issues Ontario has also participated in proceedings and hearings under Section 126 of the U.S. Clean Air Act dealing with interstate pollution. Ontario intervened in support of petitions filed by New York and Pennsyl- vania. As the narrow scope of these hearings did not promote full consideration of long range transport problems, Ontario petitioned the EPA on May 28th to expand the scope of the hearings to consider interna- tional transport of pollutants. At the outset of the hearings which took place in Washington on June 19th, Ontario’s petition was refused by EPA. Nevertheless, on that day, over a period of several hours, Ontario presented scientific evidence through a series of witnesses. At this hearing, Ontario urged EPA to reconsider such basic issues as:
(a) multiple vs. single point sources;
(b) longer range, as well as short range
transport; (c) the connection between primary and secondary pollutants; and
(d) transboundary pollution.
This hearing was a new departure for the EPA in that for the first time it addressed the question of aggregate impact from a number of pollution sources. These Section 126 proceedings are still before EPA and it is unlikely that a decision will be reached before next year.
Finally, on October 7th in Indiana, Ontario petitioned the Air Pollution Control Board of the State of Indiana to oppose an increase in SO, emissions requested by the Clifty Creek generating station.
In summary, therefore, we have been involved in legal interventions of an unprecedented kind. These actions have allowed us to work together with other affected jurisdictions such as New York and Pennsyl- vania and through these activities we have generated important support among the U.S. media and the public.
Unfortunately, the EPA considered the State Imple- mentation Plan relaxations without waiting for the outcome of the interstate proceedings involving, in part, the same sources. In its decision on two plants at Cleveland made in late July, EPA refused to accept the arguments of Ontario, New York and Pennsylvania that long range transport and modelling should be taken
into account in reaching its decision. EPA further took the position that in the context of an amendment to a State Implementation Plan, Section 115 of the Clean Air Act, does not require EPA to consider trans- boundary air pollution in approving an SO, relaxation
EPA also takes the position that the United States has honoured the intent of the Memorandum by con- trolling its SO, emissions “to the extent allowed by the provisions of domestic law’. By the same token, the relaxation at issue at the state level in the Indiana case was granted to the company concerned.
We will continue to take our case to the American people and to American courts and administrative tri- bunals if necessary. Ontario is totally committed to winning the fight against acid rain.
U.S. Forums/On-Site Briefings
In addition to these legal interventions, senior officials of my ministry and myself have appeared before the environmental committee of the U.S. Senate, at hearings held in Albany, N.Y. We have also appeared before U.S. state task forces on acid rain and at numerous university and environmental forums in the United States during the past year to persuade our American neighbours to look at the broad aspects of the acid rain problem before any decisions are made by the U.S. Administration to relax emission levels
In addition to these direct presentations in U.S forums, my ministry, in co-operation with our federal Department of External Affairs and Environment Canada, sponsored five on-site briefings on the problem of acidic precipitation for influential American groups during the past summer and fall. Two briefings involved Congressional aides from Washington; one was held for representatives of the print media from major U.S. daily newspapers and wire services; one for legislative and senatorial representatives from the states of Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, New York and Connecticut, and one for the California Select Committee on Acid Rain
Included in the briefings were presentations on Canadian and Ontario programs and policy, scientific evidence on long-range transport from source to receptor, an overflight of the Sudbury area and the en- dangered region, an information exchange with the local residents in the Muskoka-Haliburton area, and technical presentations on water effects, toxicity studies and terrestrial effects...
We are convinced that all of these communication activities have done much to awaken the American public, including the news media and US. legislators, to the acute problem of acid rain and its cumulative damage to our natural environment and resources.
“The Bubble Concept” In all of our interventions and appearances at hearings, and in our discussions with our U.S. guests on the tours we conducted, we have made it clear that the environ- mental problem of acid rain is not a Canada versus the United States issue. Rather, we have stressed that it is a North American problem, in fact a global phenomenon, which we on this continent can only solve by action to control the sources of emission in both countries.
By this we do not mean that each separate source be dealt with in an across-the-board, uniform way. Our
approach is what is called “The Bubble Concept” by which regions or systems are identified and required to make an overall reduction in emissions in order to bring the total emission level for that region to an established, acceptable level. The methods of achieving reductions, region by region, would be left to the appropriate authorities in concert with the operators responsible for the emissions
Another important point to consider is our support of the use of local resources to provide local, social and economic benefit. We strongly believe, however, that this application of resources should not be allowed to inflict environmental damage on other jurisdictions.
This philosophy implies that the long range transport of pollutants, and not just the local impact of emis- sions, must be considered and that appropriate control and abatement measures be implemented in order to protect both local and distant areas.
A simple example of our position is our attitude toward the swing in the United States to the increased use of high sulphur coal. We are not saying, “Don't burn high sulphur coal.” We are saying that this type of coal can be burned cleanly if various technologies are applied in order to reduce emissions of SO, and nitric oxides. 7
Ontario’s Abatement Program
Much has been said and written recently about
Ontario’s abatement program, giving the impression
that Ontario has just reached a threshold of abatement
activity. This is not the case. Ontario can point to sub- stantial reductions in our SO, emissions:
e During the ten-year period, 1970 to 1980, total emissions of sulphur dioxide in Ontario were reduced by approximately 50 per cent, or from 1970 levels of approximately 3.8 million tons to 1.86 million tons last year.
e The Falconbridge smelter in Sudbury now removes 82 per cent of the sulphur in its ores; . The new control order and regulation on Inco's
smelter and iron ore recovery plant in Sudbury requires the company not to exceed an operating level of 803,000 tons per year by 1983. This represents approximately a 70 per cent reduction from historical levels of emissions.
e Another part of environment Ontario’s abate- ment program for the Inco and Falconbridge smelting operations in Sudbury has entailed the establishment of an Ontario-Canada Task Force to investigate all air pollution abatement tech- nology options with the objective of reducing emissions to lowest possible levels. This task force report is expected to be ready sometime next spring.
e Ontario Hydro’s coal-fired generating stations, which account for the second largest source of SO, in the province, are required by regulation to reduce these emissions by 43 per cent by 1990, regardless of electrical demand. (Parenthetically, | might note that Hydro’s emissions would nearly double today if the current energy produced by nuclear production were to be produced by coal- fired plants)
e The regulations on Inco and Hydro deal with 70 per cent of Ontario’s 1980 emissions of SO.
° Finally, Ontario’s newest smelter, operated by Texas Gulf in Timmins (now Kidd Creek Mines Ltd.) has a sulphuric acid plant which removes over 97 per cent of the SO, from the zinc smelter, thus reducing SO, emissions to about nine tons per day rather than the 368 tons per day which would otherwise have been emitted. This year, the company has built a new copper smelter with a double contact acid plant designed to reduce SO, by more than 99 per cent. These emissions will be about four tons per day, as against 400 tons without the acid plant. This is one outstanding example of a company which has met Ontario’s standards for pollution controls in new manufacturing facilities.
These measures represent major actions by Ontario which will cause a drastic reduction in our contribution to the acid rain problem. It has been made abundantly clear from the beginning that these are first steps which have been taken well in advance of those taken to date by any other jurisdiction. We are currently assessing our other significant sources that contribute to acid rain with a view to developing control programs to further reduce emissions.
We will do our part to meet whatever requirements are established by the international agreement which is currently under negotiation.
We anticipate major efforts by our federal govern- ment to generate a similar initiative from our U.S. neighbours. Without similar response we cannot win the fight against acid rain because total abatement in Ontario would not save Ontario's ecosystem... .
Together, Canada and the U.S. have made a good start in cleaning up the Great Lakes if | may use a parallel challenge and response. Ontario’s contribution has been, and continues to be, significant.
What's needed now is a similar accord with respect to air quality. The federal government can count not only on Ontario’s fullest support, but also on our stubborn insistence that we need an effective international agreement, as soon as possible.
Ministry Estimates 1982/83 — A.P.1.0.S.
Activities*
Since 1979, when the Acidic Precipitation in Ontario Study (A.PI.O.S.) was established to investigate the phenomenon we call acid rain and the long-range transport of air pollutants, a complex research program has been developed to determine sources, deposition, effects, and feasible abatement actions. From a budget of almost $7.0 million in fiscal year 1981/82, we estimate that $9.0 million will be spent in 1982/83 to meet growing research and program requirements.
While the majority of this budget is devoted to research and investigative activities, a portion will be spent supporting Ontario‘ efforts to persuade U.S. administrators and environmental officials to consider the transboundary and long-term factors involved in airborne pollution and the threat of acid rain to the environment shared by the two countries.
The overall mandate of the Acidic Precipitation Study is to protect Ontario’s environment from the detrimental effects of acid precipitation and of other air pollutants which are subject to long range transport.
*Statement by Honourable Keith C. Norton to The Standing Committee on Resources Development, May 1982
—
Lu DS ———— eee
At this time, | would like to bring you up-to-date on our program and major research activities for 1982/83.
1) Atmospheric Processes Studies
During 1981/82 Ministry of the Environment scientists developed and validated a statistical model for estimating the total deposition of sulphur throughout the province. In fiscal year 1982/83, this model will be expanded to include oxides of nitrogen (NO,).
Staff at the Ministry anticipate that both an accurate assessment of current SO» and NOx emissions in the province and an updated inventory of SO; emitters of 100 tons per day and greater will be available this year for eastern North America. A preliminary inventory of NOx emitters in eastern North America will be com- pleted as well.
Few people today doubt the effects of acid precipitation on our aquatic ecosystems. However, there are still many “doubting Thomases” on the sub- ject of the long-range transport and deposition of air pollutants. For this reason, considerable effort will be expended over the next year in developing and validating more sophisticated Long Range Transport models.
The monthly and event deposition monitoring net- works which we expanded in 1981/82, will continue routine sampling of wet and dry deposition, airborne Particulate matter and gaseous sulphur and nitrogen.
The cumulative or monthly network will assist in determining acid loadings in various areas in Ontario; whereas the event or daily networks will assist in link- ing specific emission sources to receptor areas. At a limited number of sites, we will begin monitoring other airborne pollutants such as dissolved SO», mercury and organics.
Much has been written and much is known about sulphur dioxide and its effects on the environment. As part of our ongoing research on the effects of airborne pollutants and the long-range transport of these pollu- tants, the Air Resources branch of the Ministry will consider the levels and impact of oxidants in Ontario. We are considering the sources, transport, ground-level concentrations, relationship to nitrogen oxide and hydrocarbon emissions, control strategies, costs of con- trol and environmental damage estimates associated with oxidants. It is anticipated that a preliminary report will be available later this year.
2) Aquatic Effects Studies
| have already made reference to the skepticism sur- rounding long range transport of air pollutants. | believe sincerely that | would be hardpressed to find more than a handful of skeptics concerning the impact of acid rain on our aquatic ecosystems.
Thousands of lakes and streams are in jeopardy to- day from the effects of acid rain. The fish populations and the viable tourist and recreational economics which depend on them are being severely stressed.
In 1982/83, work will continue at our calibrated watersheds in the Muskoka-Haliburton area. Detailed limnological studies will continue on 8 lakes and 32 watersheds in order to develop and refine models that predict the impacts of atmospheric deposition on various chemical parameters.
In addition, intensive, integrated watershed studies
will be conducted in northeastern and northwestern Ontario
This year, as in past years, intensive studies will be carried out during spring and fall run-off to determine the impact of these “shock” loadings on selected lakes and streams.
Fishery resources are dwindling in affected lakes due to subtle shifts in age class distributions. Since the effects of acid rain on fisheries are known to be subtle, emphasis is being placed on sublethal physiological responses. One such set of experiments will involve the determination of the sublethal response of fish species during pH/aluminum stress on respiration and metabolism.
Field experiments will be conducted during 1982/83 to evaluate the effects of spring run-off and acidic pulses on embryo-larval development and growth of indigenous fish species. As well, work will continue on toxicity thresholds (including metals uptake) for various indigenous fish species.
In May, 1981, the Ministry released its first survey on the acid sensitivity of lakes in Ontario. Since that time, further sampling of additional lakes has taken place and the Ministry has released updated information of our lake sampling activities. Lake sampling will con- tinue during 1982/83.
The Ministry of the Environment is working closely with many branches of government in many jurisdic- tions. In Ontario, we are working now on an integrated, intensive water quality and fish population study with the Ministry of Natural Resources. A select number of lakes in the Algonquin Park area will be used in this study.
3) Terrestrial Effects
Concern is mounting over the potential for damage to our terrestrial ecosystems caused by acid precipita- tion. In response to this concern, Ministry scientists are attempting to determine the present status and sen- sitivity of soils and vegetation to acid deposition.
Experimental studies with simulated acid rain on various species of vegetation are continuing. Baseline surveys of vegetation and soils will be conducted to establish the status for chemical constituents so that future changes caused by atmospheric deposition can be detected.
In addition to liming experiments being carried out in affected lakes, in northeastern Ontario we will be conducting experiments on tree seedling plots in an attempt to determine whether the addition of lime to forests can effectively be used in forest plantings to offset acidic precipitation.
4) Socio-Economic Investigations
Ontario’s citizens are aware of the acid rain issue and the need for a resolution to this serious threat to our environment. Our extensive research program into this problem includes a socio-economic component. In fiscal year 1980/81, three major economic studies were initiated and are now receiving extensive peer review. The work in this area is pioneering, hence there is a necessary focus on methodological development.
These studies include an assessment of the implica- tions of acid rain on tourism and recreation, a survey of the values and perceptions people hold for environ-
mental resources threatened by acid rain and examina- tions of the effects on other sectors including forests, agriculture, buildings and commercial fisheries. The methods developed in these studies can be used to update estimates of effects as well as to develop and evaluate policies.
My Ministry is planning to release an overview or synthesis report in September of this year to present the technical information collected in our studies as well as explain the methodologies.
It remains difficult to demonstrate a relationship between acid rain and human health, and to date no North American effects have been described scien- tifically. There is, however, increasing concern here and abroad that the acidification of water supplies could result in increased concentrations of various metals from rock, soil or plumbing and that this might result in adverse health effects.
My Ministry is planning an overview study of possi- ble health effects related to acid deposition which we propose to launch this year.
Ontario has taken major steps to reduce its contribu- tion to the acid rain problem.
Inco, generally acknowledged to be the largest single point source of sulphur emissions in North America, had cut emissions by about one half during the 70’s. In May 1980, knowing that tougher controls were needed, the Ontario Government ordered Inco to cut back a further 25 per cent by the end of 1982.
The Falconbridge smelter in Sudbury now removes 82 per cent of the sulphur in its ores.
Ontario Hydro, whose coal-fired plants together form the second largest source of SO; in the province, is now under government regulation to reduce emissions by approximately 43 per cent from current average levels by 1990. Hydro is required to meet the estab- lished emission limits regardless of any increase in domestic power demand or in export of power.
Finally, Ontario’s newest smelter, at the Kidd Creek Mine in Timmins, has a sulphuric acid plant which removes over 97 per cent of the SO; from the zinc smelter, thus reducing SO; emissions to about nine tons per day rather than the 368 tons per day which would otherwise have been emitted. This year, Kidd Creek has built a new copper smelter with a double contact acid plant designed to reduce SO; by more than 99 per cent. These emissions will be about four ton per day, as against 400 tons without the acid plant.
Our goal is to reach the level of emissions our environment can tolerate without suffering.
The Government of Ontario formed the Ontario/ Canada Task Force to investigate emissions in the Greater Sudbury Area. This Task Force, will identify and enumerate the environmental, economic and social consequences of alternative air pollution abatement programs for both Inco and Falconbridge; develop abatement cost functions; determine the economic im- pact of abatement on the two companies and the com- munity; evaluate the consequences of alternative enforcement policies; and compare abatement costs with expected benefits of abatement programs.
In addition, my staff is exploring possible abatement action on other sources
The foregoing is a brief synopsis of Ontario’s activity on a scientific level in trying to come to grips with acid rain. Our research is telling us clearly that something
must be done and we have mounted a major effort to see that action is taken both in Ontario and elsewhere.
5) Federal/Provincial Co-ordination
The Ontario Government has the day-to-day authori- ty for setting and enforcing pollution standards. Our problem would, therefore, be minimal if acid rain were a local rather than an international problem. Because of the international scope of the problem, Ontario has been working very closely with the federal government and other provincial governments to examine the prob- lem and to propose various abatement strategies. At our most recent negotiations in Washington, D.C. (February 24, 1982) Canada put forward a proposal which calls for a 50% reduction in current acid gas emissions in both the United States and Canada. Ontario is on record as endorsing this position. We are prepared, if the United States agrees to this percentage reduction, to sit down with our federal government and the provinces concerned to negotiate further reductions from Ontario sources as part of Canada’s overall commitment.
Without a commitment from the United States similar to the one Canada is prepared to make, we can- not win the fight against acid rain. We anticipate a resumption of negotiations in June of this year. In the interim, the working groups established under the Memorandum of Intent and in which Ontario is an active participant, will continue to provide information which will assist in the preparation of a bilateral agree- ment to address the problem of the long-range transport of air pollutants.
6) Legal Initiatives/Interventions
Ontario is totally committed to winning the fight against acid rain. Staff of the Ministry’s Legal Services Branch will continue, during 1982/83, to assess the effectiveness of available legal instruments in regulat- ing acid gas emitters. In addition, on-going reviews of current Regulations and Control Orders for sources of SO; and NOx will take place in conjunction with current research on best available abatement technologies.
In 1981, 4 interventions were filed in the United States. On January 4, 1982, the Province of Ontario submitted a consolidation of testimony presented by Ontario at the hearing in Washington, D.C. on June 19, 1981 to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, this submission incorporated information which brought up-to-date all evidence which Ontario had offered in respect of the proceedings before the EPA.
Ontario is extremely concerned about the continued relaxation of State Implementation Plans under Section 110 of the Environmental Protection Act, and con- sideration will be given to intervening, as appropriate.
As well, we will be monitoring legal developments in the United States as they affect Ontario and Ontario’s position on the long-range transport of air pollutants.
ERRATUM: Page 7 — “Major SO> and NOx Emitting Areas” — geographical area #10 should read “East Missouri”, not “East Montana”
Index IMPACT OF ACID RAIN
Worldwide Concern Concern and Effects in Ontario Transboundary Pollution
CHEMISTRY
Fundamental Chemistry Acidic Precipitation —the pH Parameter
DEFINING THE PROBLEM
Canada-U.S. Research Consultation Group
Origin and Amounts of Emissions — SOz2 and NOx Meteorological Factors
Ontario Atmospheric Deposition Studies Pinpointing the Sources
U.S. Power Generation
Ontario Hydro and INCO Ltd. Abatement
ONTARIO’s ACTION TOWARD SOLUTIONS
Environment Ontario’s Air Monitoring Program Ontario’s Commitment and Strategy
Page
ND ND =
ND © © © NN DD
_
Interim and Ultimate Solutions — Socio-Economic Implications 15
AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL ACTIVITIES
Nature of Aquatic Effects e Aquatic Studies in Ontario e Cumulative Aquatic Effects
e Aquatic Life Analyzed e Liming of Lakes
Terrestrial Effects and Studies
e Vegetation, Soils, Forest, Building Structures Health Implications Federal/Provincial Scientific Activities
Appendix ‘‘A” ¢ Abstracts of Ministry Field Reports on Precipitation in Muskoka/Haliburton and
Sudbury areas
24
Index to Figures/IIlustrations Page Figure 1. North American Areas Containing Lakes Sensitive to Acid Precipitation 1 Figure 2. Ontario Terrain with Lakes Susceptible to Acid Precipitation Figure 3. Scale of the pH Acidic Parameter Figure 4. Magnitude and Distribution of Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) Emissions in Eastern North America 4 Figure 5. Magnitude and Distribution of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Emissions in Eastern North America Figure 6. Regions affected by acid rain —Growth 1956, 1976 Figure 7. Important Summer Storm Trajectories over SOz2 and NOx Emitting Areas 7 Figure 8. Important Winter Storm Trajectories over SO2 and NOx Emitting Areas 7 Figure 9. Locations of Ontario’s Acid Rain Monitoring Sites 8 Figure 10. Relative Importance of 1974-75 Utility Emissions by Region: U.S.A., Canada, Ontario 10 Figure 11. Historical Trends in USA Emissions— SO2 and NOx 10 Figure 12. Future USA Emissions— SO2 and NOx 11 Figure 13. Ontario Hydro Gross Generation— 1950-1990 12 Figure 14. Ontario Hydro SO2 and NOx Emissions by Fossil Fuel Plants— 1979 13 Figure 15. Illustration of a Weir in a Calibrated Watershed 17 Figure 16. Graph illustrating ‘Spring pH Depression” Harp Lake, Muskoka, Ontario 18 Figure 17. Illustration of Terrestrial/Lake Effects 21
IMPACT OF ACID RAIN
The phenomenon of acidic precipitation,commonly known as acid rain, is acknowledged by scientists and governments to be one of the most pressing environ- mental issues facing widespread areas of North America, Europe and Scandinavia.
Research attributes most of the acid rain in North America, and elsewhere, to pollution resulting from emissions of oxides of sulphur and nitrogen. This acid pollution is formed by a complex series of chemical and physical processes. The chemistry is only partially understood at present, but essentially the problem begins when sulphur and nitrogen compounds are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of man’s industrial activities and his use of modern trans- portation vehicles.
The sulphur and nitrogen emissions originate chiefly from the combustion of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, from power generating plants, ore smelting, petro- leum refining, industrial furnaces and from vehicles of all kinds.
Acid rain evolves through a cycle of four consecutive stages — sulphur and nitrogen emissions, long-range atmospheric transport, transformation of chemical properties, and, finally, fallout of these pollutants to earth through either precipitation or dry deposition.
Sulphur and nitrogen compounds, emitted primarily in the form of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), are transported by winds and air currents at high and low altitudes. Meteorological conditions can carry these pollutants hundreds to thousands of miles from their point of emission, allow- ing time for chemical transformation to acids. They return to earth eventually in the form of ‘wet deposi- tion” (acidified rain or snow) —or as ‘‘dry deposition” (particulate matter or gases)—on soil, forests, vegeta- tion and water.
This fallout of destructive acid rain, acidic snow, or in lesser degree dry particulate matter, results from long-range transport of air pollutants affecting many regions of the world. Frequently, the areas which produce pollution are unaffected by it, either because its fallout is far away, or the local lakes and soils are well buffered with alkaline bedrock or chemistry.
Scientists know acidic precipitation is having severe ecological effects on the natural environment, particu- larly lakes, rivers and fisheries, man-made structures and buildings, and fear long-range effects on forests and other vegetation.
Worldwide Impact and Concern
The chief and immediate concern about acid rain is that it ultimately affects aquatic life in lakes and water- sheds which have quartzite or granite based geology, rather than limestone bedrock. These lakes and rivers are sensitive to acidity because they have very little “buffering’’* or neutralizing capabilities.
This condition is evident in many of the lakes in Canada’s Precambrian Shield, including the Muskoka and Haliburton lakes and many others in northern
*’ Buffering” is the ability to neutralize or stabilize free hydrogen ion input, or acidity, and is usually present in regions where limestone or alkaline soil chemistry is prevalent.
resort regions, where little natural limestone exists.
Since the mid-50s, hundreds of such lakes in eastern North America (FIG. 1), Scandinavia and parts of west- ern Europe which have little buffering ability have become so acidic they can no longer support fish and aquatic life. Ontario Government scientists have docu- mented that there are some 120 lakes in the Province, mostly centred around Sudbury, which are fishless because highly acidic conditions have inhibited repro- duction. Well over 200 lakes in the Adirondack moun- tains of New York State, and hundreds in southern Norway and Sweden have been found to be suffering from a similar plight.
FIG. 1 North American Areas Containing Lakes Sensitive to Acid Precipitation
ei |
Source: James N. Galloway and Ellis B. Cowling, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association 28, no. 3 (March 1978)
In addition, it has been found that many well buffered lakes can lose an entire year’s hatch of valuable sports fish due to the acidic shock effect of spring run-off, when the pollutant-laden winter accumulation of snow suddenly melts into waterways. Heavy rain episodes can also cause the same acidic shock effect.
While many of the aquatic effects of acid rain have been documented, data related to other possible impacts are just beginning to be compiled. There is considerable evidence to support the premise that if the current trend to increased acidity continues, the growth of forests and crops may be adversely affected
Concern and Effects in Ontario
While the acidic condition of Scandinavian lakes and those of the Adirondack mountains have been known for several decades, the scope of the vulnerability of Canadian lakes far removed from industrial activity were recognized much more recently.
Scientists estimate that, if 1980 levels of acid loadings remain constant or increase over the next 10 to 20 years, Ontario could lose much or all of the aquatic life in tens of thousands of susceptible lakes unless effec- tive abatement measures are taken (FIG. 2). A major program is well underway in Ontario to identify the current state of susceptible lakes (see ‘Aquatic Studies in Ontario”, page 17).
Thousands of lakes in Quebec, and the Atlantic Provinces are also susceptible, and many are already afflicted or threatened since they lie in the path of acid emissions from the interior of the continent.
The severity of the situation in Ontario, and the need for quick abatement action, results from the increase in acidity of precipitation over the past several dec- ades. Acid rain has increased to the point where the
FIG. 2 Lake Acid Sensitivity in Ontario as Predicted by Bedrock Composition
Legend Lake Sensitivity
EH — high
NN — moderate
— variable
— low
— Weighted mean pH ot precipitation, annual
average 1979
(Gibson, 1981)
This map is intended only as a general regional guide to sensitivity of lakes to acid precipitation. Surficial geology, hydrologic setting and man’s influences in many cases will control lakes acid sensitivity. Isopleths indicate an- nual mean pH of acidic precipitation.
No
average pH of rainfall for that part of Ontario lying south of the 50th parallel (roughly in line with the “continental divide”) is less than 5.0. Many regions of the Province regularly receive rain of pH 4.0 to 4.5. (see “the pH Parameter”, page 3)
The nature of aquatic and terrestrial effects of acidic precipitation, as well as studies and abatement meas- ures being undertaken by the Ontario government are described in detail on page 17. Implications on human health are described on page 22.
Transboundary Pollution
Long-range air transport of pollutants and acidic pre- cipitation are closely related. Prolonged transport of sulphur and nitrogen compounds allows time for the chemica! and physical conversion from sulpnur dioxide and nitrogen oxides into acidic compounds.
Prevailing weather conditions in eastern North America foster the large-scale movement of pollutants within both Canada and the United States as well as across their border, so that the movement of pollutants are regional issues.
Ontario has played a major role in bringing the phenomenon of acid rain, and its transboundary effects, into public focus.
Ontario Environment Minister Harry Parrott stated in 1978 that: ‘’This movement of pollution across national boundaries means that an effective long-term solution can only be developed if all jurisdictions work together. There is little doubt that the acid rain impact in Ontario would not be reduced significantly even if all Ontario’s emission sources are eliminated. This underlines the great importance to Ontario of a United States and Canada accord”.
Because of transboundary pollution, the acid rain situation creates numerous national and international regulatory problems in that the air pollution standards can differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Therefore lax standards can allow pollutants to have a direct impact on the natural resources of another jurisdic- tion. Canada and the United States are consequently exploring ways to integrate and co-ordinate their scien- tific and regulatory programs, and to reach a formal accord for abatement action.
A first major step toward negotiation of a treaty between the two countries was taken in Washington on August 5, 1980 when Canadian Environment Minister John Roberts and U.S. Secretary of State Edmund Muskie signed a memorandum of intent to curb acid rain and resolve international air pollution problems. The agreement establishes five work groups to lay the foundation for anair quality treaty to be negotiated by 1982, which will demand vigorous enforcement of anti- pollution standards.
Fundamental Chemistry
Not all the acid in rain comes from pollution; “clean” or normal” rain is slightly acidic due to adsorption of small amounts of natural atmos- pheric carbon dioxide which, when dissolved in water, forms a weak acid, carbonic acid, similar to that found in soda water or carbonated soft drinks. Rain is also affected by natural sources of air pollution such as forest fires and volcanos.
However, “acid rain” in northeast-
ern North America is frequently many times more acidic than normal rain because of sulphur and nitro- gen emissions from man’s activities. Sulphates are believed to cause about two-thirds of the acidity in precipitation and nitrates responsi-
Acid Rain— the pH Parameter
Scientists gauge the acidity or alka- linity of a solution by a parameter called the pH, which is a logarithmic measure of the hydrogen ion con- centration on a scale ranging from 0 to 14 (FIG. 3). On the pH scale, a chemically neutral solution has a value of 7, which is midway on the scale. The greater the acidity, the lower the pH value. A change of one pH unit downward implies a tenfold change in the hydrogen ion concen- tration, or a tenfold increase in acidity; a change of twoisa hundredfold. If for example, a pH is
acidic than a pH of 5.
4, itis 10 times more acidic than a pH of 5; apH of 3is a hundredfold more
ble for about one-third, throughout most of Ontario.
The rate of the conversion reac- tion of oxides into acids, and exactly how acids are formed in the atmos- phere during long-range transport, is still an area of intensive research. There are several complicated pathways or mechanisms by which oxidation can occur. Which path is taken is dependent upon numerous factors such as the concentration of heavy metals in airborne particulate matter, the intensity of sunlight, humidity and the amount of ammonia present. For example, airborne particulate metals such as manganese and iron Catalize or speed-up the conversion of sulphur dioxide to its oxidation products, sulphuric acid and sulphates.
Due to the carbon dioxide natu- rally present in the atmosphere, the pH of normal or ‘’clean rain” in eastern North America is about 5.6.
In areas of southern Ontario, such
as the Muskoka and the Kawartha Lakes, the pH of the rain is often found to be 4.5 to 4.0 range, meaning that the rain is many times as acidic as that of ‘clean rain”. Aquatic life in susceptible lakes is considered to be vulnerable when the pH level of the lake lies in the range of 5.5 to 5.0.
There is widespread concern that if these acidic concentrations are sustained over long periods, serious detrimental effects will be experi- enced by aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and these acidic effects will remain for years, or possibly become irreversible.
FIG. 3
The pH Acidic Parameter Dur | 12.4— Lime (calcium hydroxide) | 11.0— Ammonia (NH3)
2 10.5— Milk of Magnesia
2 8.0-8.5— The Great Lakes (annual mean)
= 8.3— Sea Water < —-8.2— Baking Soda | 74 Human Blood
+ 7.0— Neutral— Distilled Water
5.6— “Clean” or Normal Rain ——
| 5.0— Carrots | 2 42— Tomatoes z © 4.0-4.2— AnnualmeanpHofrainin ¢ < Muskoka/Haliburton area a mn 0 Apples 2 | 2.2— Vinegar | | Lemon Juice | | i]
The process by which acids are deposited through rain or snow is called “‘wet deposition’’. Another atmospheric process, known as ‘dry deposition’’, is the process by which particles such as fly ash, or gases such as sulphur dioxide or nitric oxide are deposited, or adsorbed onto surfaces. While these particles or gases are not always in an acidic state prior to deposition, it is known that they can be converted into acids after contacting water in the form of rain, dew, or fog following deposi- tion. The precise mechanisms by which dry deposition takes place, and its effect on soils, forests, crops and buildings, are not adequately understood. Much research is being undertaken to clarify the overall acid deposition problem.
Giant smoke stacks are major precursors of acid rain, Causing transboundary pollution
FIG. 4
Magnitude and Distribution of Sulphur Dioxide (SO,) Emissions
CAES
nn messes
Fe
sous ee CN eee
aes oo @
LEGEND
>10,000 1000.1- 10,000 “2 100.1- 1000.0 10 -100.0 | <10 (ANNUAL EMISSIONS IN g/s) 200 0
200 400
Kilometres
nt fl ote A i OM D ey ey ID ON. 2 tok ey A) ee OT oy) +
CT ONCE
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Eastern North America — Major SO, Emitting Areas
Geographical Area 1. East and West Pittsburg; Ohio
Grams/Second
Lower and Central Ohio 9. Indianapolis, Indiana 23,507.3 River Valley; W Virginia 5,586 River Valley; W. Virginia 10. Mobile, S. Alabama 23,352.5 2. Sudbury, Ontario 43,617 (Clarksburg) 33,863.8 11. Chicago, Illinois 22,173.7 3 W Kentucky; Louisville 6. East and West Cincinna 12. Western Kentucky 21,281.2 S Indiana 41,46 Northern Kentucky 33,514.4 13. Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec 16,336 0 4 Toledo, Ohio; Detroit New York: New Jersey 29,868 1 Michigan 40,11 West Illir East Missc 29.5149 Geographical Area jefined as 160 km. x 160 km. grid square Source: U.S. emission rates from the SURE || data base are 1977-78 emission rates for point sources, and 1973-77 emission rates for area ources. Canadian data \ Environment Canada are estimated 1978 emission rates for major SO; point sources, and 1974 emission rates
FIG. 5
Magnitude and Distribution of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NO,)
| ee A oa
SELCERSS
RE
CRIE We 7
31
i. vs) ERE
16 FL:
DM
14 RE " Dm oe | Rees
| EME
+—_+—_+—_+—_+—+-
ae + + + eek + ER —|
pt
a en es se ee Ee 4
—- 4
LEGEND ++
tt —_—
[LE Le LE PE La | >10,000 sl 1000.1- 10,000 JE
BES} 100.1-10000 —}}|—
pore |
EEE 10-100.0 ————
<10 SS SS | (ame) (ised Ve ue ema (ANNUAL EMISSIONS IN g/s) | |
1 200 ie) 200 400 C= =
+ a ES UE ES EN OS ES PA ODA Sy ES ES US, € Kilometres + EC à + — + +» 4+. 4+. ++ 4. —_4+- + —_+—_+—__+- —
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
fay 15 16
One 2a 5.6. 7
Geographical Area
8910 1101213114
Eastern North America — Major NO, Emitting Areas
Grams/Second
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
1. New York; New Jersey 52,024 1 6 Ves
2. Chicago, Illinois 30,867.0 54
3. Toledo, Ohio; Detroit, Michigar 25,303.9 / Sc 16
4. East and West Pittsburgh 8. Easth le 8
Upper and Central Ohio River Valley 23,132 9
5. Cincinnati, Ohio; Northern Kentucky 6,536 10 Geographical Area is defined as 160 km. x 160 grid square Source: U.S. emission rates from the SURE II d re S ates for es 1973-77 er on rates area sources. Canadian nment C e 5 e © t source 1974 em rate
data from Enviro for other point and S
area Sources
DEFINING THE PROBLEM Canada-U.S. Research Group
The Canada-United States Research Consultation Group on the Long-Range Transport of Air Pollutants (LRTAP) was established in 1978 by the two govern- ments to co-ordinate research studies and programs, and to expedite the exchange of scientific information.
A preliminary report, by the Group, issued in Octo- ber 1979, points out that adverse effects from pollut- ants transported over long distances result from the accumulation of material deposited over a long period at low concentrations, and the synergistic or additive effects of acombination of materials. This is in contrast to local pollution situations where damage, or effects on health and comfort, result usually from elevated ambient air concentrations during an ‘‘air pollution episode” over a limited time period. Conventional air quality standards therefore are not designed for these more subtle and cumulative long-term effects.
Origin and Amounts of Emissions*
The Group’s recent report gives 1975 estimates of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emission for the two countries, along with maps showing the geograph- ical distribution of emissions. (FIGS. 4and 5)
The report is concerned basically with eastern North America, which embraces the industrial heartlands of both countries, wherein lie most of the aquatic ecosys- tems which are vulnerable to acidic precipitation. For example, three-quarters of the total Canadian emis- sions of SO2 and two-thirds of total Canadian emis- sions of NOx are east of the Manitoba/Saskatchewan border.
Annual sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions were estimated at 5.5 million tons in Canada and 28.5 million tons in the United States. It was projected that there would be modest SO2 increases by the end of the century, despite abatement measures. However, this projection could change in light of the U.S. govern- ment’s decision to convert major utilities from oil and gas to coal without adequate abatement equipment.
Annual nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions were estimated at 2.1 million tons in Canada and 24.4 million tons in the United States. Substantial increases in these emissions are expected if consumption of fossil fuels continues to increase, particularly in the United States with its larger population.
Trends in these emission rates indicate that nitrogen oxides will contribute increasingly to the acidity of precipitation. Available pollution abatement methods and technology could reduce total SO2 emissions. New technology to reduce NOx emissions from stationary sources is currently being developed. *
The report concludes that approximately 2/3 of the sulphur emitted into the atmosphere of eastern North America is deposited there, with the remainder leaving the atmosphere of the region, primarily to the east. In eastern Canada about 2/3 of that deposited falls in precipitation, and the remainder during dry periods.
No attempt was made to attribute deposition or effects, at specific sites to specific sources, since con- clusions were largely obtained from atmospheric mod- elling. The actual measurement of depositon is of great importance and will be addressed in future reports. Studies are underway to develop a better scientific understanding of the atmospheric behaviour of both nitrogen and sulphur compounds.
*all tonnage throughout report in ‘‘standard”’ or short tons.
FIG.6 Regions affected by acid rain
*see Research Summary “Controlling Nitrogen Oxides”, U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development (EPA-600/8-80-004), published February 1980.
1955-56 Isopleths showing Annual Average pH for Precipitation in Eastern North America (modified from Likens et al, 1979).
1975-76
Meteorological Factors
Prevailing wind and weather patterns are the over- riding factors in determining the extent of transboun- dary pollution between the United States and Canada. For this reason both countries are refining predictive meteorological modelling techniques to better link and assess the source and receptor aspects of the problem.
The Canada-U.S. Research Group’s report states that the net flux of sulphur is from south to north across the Canadian border. On an annual average basis, about three to four times as much sulphur moves across the boundary from the United States to eastern Canada as in the opposite direction. The report states that sul- phur flux from U. S. sources to eastern Canada air space is comparable to total Canadian emissions in volume—about 5.5 million tons. (FIGS. 7 and 8)
The estimates in the report are based largely on atmospheric modelling, a science being upgraded con- stantly in design and accuracy. Meanwhile, field monitoring equipment and instruments to measure
and analyze the specific local concentration of acid rain have been established throughout the eastern conti- nent to enable pinpointing of pollution sources.
The monitoring, research and computer modelling work being carried out by both countries is especially relevant to abatement programs for stationary sulphur sources of emissions.
With the exception of power generation and indus- trial combustion, the major sources of nitrogen oxides are related to transportation vehicles and are therefore more difficult to control, except through internal combustion design and regulatory mechanisms.
When an inventory of point or area sources is coupled with meteorological data and with deposition fields and monitored effects, information is obtained which can be applied to abatement strategies. It can be determined what sources have an effect on a specific sensitive area and the share each source contributes to that effect. It can then be determined, which sensitive areas will benefit from abatement at any of these sources.
Eastern North America— Major SO, and NO, Emitting Areas
Geographical Area Grams/Second
1. East and West Pittsburg; 5. Chicago, Illinois 53,040.7 10. East Montana: West Illinois 41,298.8 Upper and Central Ohio 6. Cincinnati, Ohio; North 11. Indianapolis, Indiana 30,202.9 River Valley 98,718.7 Kentucky 50,051.0 12. Western Kentucky 25,849.3
2. New York; New Jersey 81,892.2 7. Cleveland, Ohio; West 13. Mobile; South Alabama 24,138.5
3. Toledo, Ohio; Detroit, Pennsylvania 47,997.7 14. Toronto, Ontario 18,584.7 Michigan 65,421.6 8. Sudbury, Ontario 43,9153 15. Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec 16,402.2
4. Western Kentucky; South 9. Lower and Central Ohio. River 16. Southern Louisiana 14,596 8 Indiana 53,623.7 Valley; Clarksburg, Virginia 42,401.3
Important Storm Trajectories over Major SO, and NO, Emitting Areas
FIG.7 SUMMER
IY Zi SN
WN
ATLANTIC OCEAN
Geographical Area is defined as 160 km. x 160 km. grid square
FIG.8 WINTER
Manitoba
ATLANTIC OCEAN
Source: U.S. emission rates from the SURE || data base are 1977-78 emission rates for point sources, and 1973-77 emission rates for area sources Canadian data are from Environment Canada are estimated 1978 emission rates for major SO, point sources, and 1974 emission rates for other point and area sources. Storm trajectories by J. Kurtz, meteorological scientist, Environment Ontario, based on 40 years of data, U.S. Weather Bureau
ntario Atmospheric FIG. 9 edits Le Le Locations of Ontario’s Acid Rain Deposition Studies
Monitoring Sites* Two new and enlarged networks of monitoring stations to measure fallout and to identify sources of acid rain were set up at 45 locations throughout the Province in the spring of 1980. (FIG. 9)
These monitoring stations will play a vital role in Ontario’s ongoing research to determine the quantity, acidic concentrations and impact of acid rain and snow, as well as dry particulate matter, falling in both the sensitive areas and other parts of the Province. The program will also identify more clearly the relative contributions of this pollution from numerous conti- nental sources. The monitoring networks, known as Environment Ontario’s ‘’Atmospheric Deposition Studies’’, are one of the numerous scientific investiga- tions taking place under the overall Acid Precipitation in Ontario Study (APIOS).
This deposition monitoring program supplements Ontario’s existing Province-wide network of more than 1,400 instruments which comprise the Air pollution Index and Alert System, enabling Environment Ontario to control air pollution by enforcing reduction of emissions of SO2 and particulate matter (page 14).
The two new monitoring networks are complemen- tary but yield different information. One is designed as a ‘‘true event’ network sampling precipitation and particulate matter on a daily weather basis. The other is a‘‘cumulative’’ network sampling precipitation and particulate matter on a monthly basis. Both are designed to collect wet and dry deposition. All samples collected are analyzed at the Ministry’s Toronto labora- ‘Cumulative Sites —monitored monthly tories using special equipment required to detect low
Areas Not Susceptible
=] Areas Susceptible
a à 1. Attawapiscat 13. Lively 26. Shallow Lake levels of airborne contaminants. D IMocsonces 1ABuNaen 27 Milton 3. Pickle Lake 15. Killarney 28. Palmerston shy, 44 , 4. Ear Falls 16. McKellar 29. Golden Lake Daily Event’ Network 5. Experimental Lakes Area* 17. Dorset 30. Pt. Stanley The ‘event’ network is located in the vicinities of 6. Nakina 18. Whitney 31. Alvinston London, Dorset and Kingston, with each centre having . 7. Moonbeam 19. Wilberforce 32. Wilkesport five collection or monitoring sites clustered within a 8. Gowganda 20. Kaladar 33. Merlin radius of 50 to 100 kilometres. The Dorset location was 9. Ramsey 21. Smiths Falls 34. Colchester chosen because of the major acid rain studies already 10. Hanmer 22. Dalhousie Mills 35. Waterloo in progress there. The London and Kingston areas were 11. Bear Island 23. Campbellford Note chosen to provide information on the contribution to 12. Mattawa 24. Uxbridge *Proposed sites local acidic deposition from major northeastern conti- 25. Dorion
nental sources.
dé . ” This network utilizes highly sensitive equipment at Cumulative Monthly Network
each of its 15 monitoring sites for the sampling of The “cumulative” network consists of 30 sites, ranging atmospheric pollutants. The instrumentation is specif- in location from the Windsor area northwest to the ically designed to sample particulates and gaseous Kenora region and northeast to James Bay, southward sulphur and nitrogen compounds for 24-hour periods. down the Ottawa River, and westward to sites scat- The daily data generated from monitoring and sam- tered throughout south central Ontario. pling at these centres, when coupled with relevant Each of these monitoring stations is equipped with meteorological data, such as surface and upper level automatically operated ‘’double bucket’ collectors to weather observations, can aid in the identification of measure the accumulated ‘“‘wet” and “dry” deposition, the major continental sources contributing to acidic with samples collected monthly for laboratory analysis. precipitation in Ontario. The necessary meteorological In addition, 20 of these stations are equipped with data are obtained by the Ministry directly through a instrumentation to collect monthly samples of par- computer link with the Atmospheric Environment Ser- ticulate sulphate, nitrate, ammonium and gaseous SO2 vice of Environment Canada. in their immediate vicinity.
Together, the two monitoring networks enable sci- entists ua needed information on the range, extent and strength of acidic precipitation in all regions of the Province.
By applying all of these data to information gleaned from Ministry studies focused mainly in the Muskoka/ Haliburton and Sudbury regions — areas which are environmentally vulnerable, Environment Ontario expects to be able to extrapolate its current and anticipated scientific findings on lake deterioration rates due to acid rain input to widely scattered regions ofthe entire Province.
Pinpointing the Sources
The utility and industrial sectors responsible for major emissions of SOz2 and NOx in each country were pinpointed by the Canada-U.S. Group’s October 1979 report. These pollution sectors and their estimated emission quantities point up the different mix of pollu- tion sources in each country, and also indicate where abatement action must be taken.
SO: Emissions
Utilities, or power generating plants, account for the largest single share of man-made SOz emissions in the United States, —roughly two-thirds, amounting to 18.6 million tons annually. This compares to a total of only 0.7 million tons of SOz emissions from utilities in Canada. Ontario utilities account for less than 0.5 million of this amount.
The non-ferrous smelting sector accounts for the largest SO2 emissions in Canada, 2.4 million tons, or over 40 per cent of the Canadian total. Similar smelting operations in the U.S. account for 2.8 million tons. Ontario accounts for about half of the Canadian smelt- ing total, the major source being the nickel mining and smelting complex in the Sudbury area.
NOx Emissions
About half of the nitrogen oxide emissions in North America are due to transportation-related sources — cars, trucks, trains and airplanes. Power generation and other combustion sources contribute the other half.
In the United States, power generating plants account for roughly one-third of all nitrogen oxide emissions, or 6.8 million tons, compared with only 0.2 million tons in Canada per annum, indicative of the higher ration of hydro and nuclear generating Capacity in Canada as compared to coal in the U.S. Nearly 20 per cent of total Canadian NOx utility emissions, or 0.06 million tons, are attributed to Ontario power
generation. NOx emissions from non-ferrous smelting are neg- ligible in both countries.
U.S. Power Generation
The U.S.-Canada Research Consultation Group reports that the highest density of sulphur dioxide emissions is in the upper Ohio Valley (eastern Ohio, northern West Virginia and western Pennsylvania) where a number of large power plants burn high sulphur coal with little control of their sulphur emissions. (FIG. 10)
United States sulphur emissions from the utility sector have nearly quadrupled over the past 25 years. (FIG. 11)
With the announced program of a substantial increase in the use of coal as a source of energy in the United States, there is a need to reduce SOz and NOx emissions from both existing power plants and the projected 300 new plants to be built in the U.S. during the ‘80s and ‘90s.
Legislation passed in 1972 in the United States required new power plants burning coal to install emission controls for all new plants built after 1975. In 1979, further legislation was passed to require scrub- bing and emission control even on low sulphur fuels. But existing power plants are not subject to the same requirements. The need for major action to control emissions from these older plants was stated in an address by Environmental Protection Agency Adminis- trator Douglas M. Costle to the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners meeting in Atlanta, Ga. in December 1979.
In an address to the Air Pollution Control Association in Montreal in June, 1980 Mr. Costle stated:
“We all know that many of our older industrial plants — particularly power plants — are either minimally control- led or not controlled at all. New plants are being built clean. Indeed, if we could afford to wait 30 to 40 years, emissions would inevitably drop as old plants are replaced by new. It should be clear to anyone that, environmentally, we cannot afford to wait that long. Today, retirement schedules on older plants are being stretched out, not shortened. In the meantime, the industrial base continues to grow and, with it, the amount of acid deposition.”
The U.S. EPA's air pollution projections indicate nitrogen oxide emissions in that country will increase by approximately 50 per cent by the year 2000. Cur- rently, U.S. NOx emissions nearly equal SOz emis- sions, and are expected to surpass SOz emissions. (FIG. 12)
Major Man-Made Sources of SO, and NO, (million of short tons per annum)’
Sulphur Emissions (SO,)
Electrical Utilities
U.S. Can.
18.6 0.7 19.3
Electrical Utilities U.S Can.
6.8 0.2 7.0
Other-Mainly Industrial U.S Can. U.S. Can 2.8 2.4 TA 2.4 5.2 9.5
Non-Ferrous Smelters
Transportation Other Combustion US. Can. U.S Can 10.9 ies! 6.7 0.6
12.2 Tires)
*Source of Estimates (1975): Canada-U.S. Research Consultation Group Report October 1979
9
FIG. 10 Relative Importance of 1974-1975 Utility Emissions by Region
SO, 70 NO, Particulates 60 © 2 50 2 5 40 ao [ao an — © — 25730 Sil S n D 20 > 5 10 0 wes pea ees, ee be E USA EPA EPA EPA EPA CANADA ONTARIO
REG Il REG Ill REG VI REG V
Source: “Acid Precipitation: An Emission Perspective" CTS-07165-1, Environmental Protection Dept., Ontario Hydro
FIG. 11 Historical Trends in USA Emissions
SO,
Others { NO,
Particulates
30
Utilities {
20
10
Emissions (10° Mg/Year)
0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1975
Source: “Acid Precipitation: An Emission Perspective” CTS-07165-1, Environmental Protection Dept., Ontario Hydro
10
Burning coal produces more NOx than burning oil or gas. An EPA research report, published February 1980, estimates that by 1985 stationary sources of NOx will account for 70 per cent of U.S. man-made NOx emissions — an exceedingly large increase over Current stationary sources — which EPA attributes to the grow- ing trend toward using coal for electrical generating stations and industrial boilers.
U.S. President Carter’s proposed $10 billion plan to help electric utilities which currently burn oil or gas convert to other fuels, principally coal, will exacerbate the acid rain problem in New England and eastern Canada. Under the President's proposal, the govern- ment would provide $3.6 billion in grants over 10 years to help 80 specifically designated power plants to convert to coal; another $6 billion to aid utilities to reduce their oil and gas use; and the remaining $400 million to help reduce emissions that contribute to acid rain.
Because of the potential for transboundary damage, Canada opposes conversion to coal-fired utility plants which are exempt from U.S. federal regulations. From Ontario’s point of view, these conversions would com- pound the problem of acid rain associated with the grandfather clause in the U.S. Clean Air Act, which protects existing plants from the provision of the Act. The conversion of these older U.S. utilities to coal is anticipated to increase total U.S. SO2 emissions by 16 per cent.
Ontario Premier William G. Davis speaking in Dallas, Texas on April 8, 1980, addressed this issue firmly:
FIG. 12 Future USA Emissions
SO, NO Range of
Estimates 30
D oO
Emissions (10°Mg/Year) o
1975
1985
“We do not believe massive additional reliance on coal, using old technology, is an acceptable option to help electric utilities reduce their use of oil and natural gas. Consequently, we are frankly alarmed by the decision... of your federal government to pro- ceed with legislation to facilitate the conversion to coal of 107 electric utility plants, * without adequate environmental protection.
The ‘acid rain’ this program would produce will seriously aggravate one of the most grave and indis- putable environmental challenges on our continent.
Without seeking to impose our domestic laws or methods of operation on other jurisdictions, we would nevertheless suggest that the United States should consider diversifying its energy supply sys- tems to a greater extent, seeking alternative energy sources which in total will have a less severe impact on the environment than a continued reliance on fossil-fuelled generation, which apparently includes massive conversion to coal.
Extensive representations have been made to your national government and others will be made to express our concern
Most of the plants specifically targeted for conver- sion are in the northeast and represent an immense environmental risk to literally thousands of Canadian lakes and rivers.”
“The projected 107 electric utility plants to receive U.S. federal aid for conversion to coal was reduced to 80.
x Particulates
1995
1990
Source: “Acid Precipitation: An Emission Perspective” CTS-07165-1, Environmental Protection Dept.,Ontario Hydro,
based on US DOE computer predictions, October 1979
11
Ontario Hydro and INCO Abatement Programs
Ontario Hydro utilities produce electrical power for the Province utilizing nuclear and fossil fuels and hydralic energy in roughly equal proportion, with each accounting for about one-third ot total power produc- tion. (FIG. 13)
Since 1970, the generation of electricity from coal in the Province has increased substantially and this has led to an increase in SOz, as well as NOx emissions, from Ontario Hydro facilities. These increased emis- sions are expected to peak in 1981-82, then to decline as nuclear fuel provides an increasing portion of Ontario Hydro’s total energy supply. Current com- bined SOz and NOx emissions from Ontario Hydro facilities total 0.5 million tons. In 1979, these emissions accounted for about 30 per cent of Ontario emissions of SOz2 and 20 per cent of NOx emissions. (FIG. 14)
Hydro’s output of SO2 per kilowatt hour from coal production has decreased steadily over the past decade as a result of cleaner fuels and more efficient operation.
A strong factor in controlling SO2 emissions is
FIG. 13 Ontario Hydro Gross Generation-1950-1990
Gross Generation (10° GWh)
1950 1960
Ontario Hydro’s established practice of demanding washed coal from all suppliers. This measure alone reduces sulphur levels by 15 to 20 per cent. Another general policy is Hydro’s encouragement of the use of low sulphur fuels, and the blending of Western Canada bituminous coal supplies which are low in sulphur content, with U.S. supplies to reduce SO2 emissions. In addition, most of Hydro’s coal burning plants oper- ate under Environment Ontario control programs related to local air quality and the prevention of air pollution episodes under the provincial government's Air Pollution Index (API) and Alert Program.
There are other options for electricity generation — alternative energy sources such as nuclear plants, greater hydro capacity generated through a national power grid, garbage as a fuel additive or supplement, solar energy and wind power. Ontario is investigating the potential for using garbage to replace up to 40 per cent of the fuel now used in cement kilns, and the Ministry of Energy is looking at further possible appli- cations of this energy source.
These options are not available for ore smelting Operations, though hydrometallurgy and other advanced abatement technologies are available.
Forecast
Actual
1970 1980 1990
Source: “Acid Precipitation: An Emission Perspective” CTS-07165-1, Environmental Protection Dept., Ontario Hydro
FIG. 14 Ontario Hydro SO, and NO,
Emissions for 1979
Fossil Fuel
Stations SO,(Mg/Year) NO,*(Mg/Year) Windsor 31 10 Thunder Bay 10,033 1,059 R.L. Hearn 10,191 4,291
Lakeview 91,347 13,785 Lambton 160,249 12,864 Nanticoke 155,078 28,650 Lennox 10,012 992 TOTALS 436,941 61,651
(480,000) * * (68,000) * *
“NO, Expressed as NO ** Short Tons/Year 1980: Predicted Levels will be down slightly
Non-Ferrous Smelting — Sudbury
INCO Limited, the world’s largest nickel producer, which mines ore with heavy sulphur content at its Sudbury mining and smelting complex, is the con-
' tinent’s largest single source of SOz2 emissions. It accounted for 3.9 per cent (1.32 million short tons) of total North American emissions in 1975, according to the Canada-U.S. Research Group’s report.
Since INCO’s emissions of NOx are negligible, the company accounted for 2.2 per cent of the total com- bined Canada and U.S. emissions of SO2 and NOx, the major percursors of acid rain.
INCO has cut its total SO2 production in its Sudbury operations by over 40 per cent since 1969 by the production of sulphuric acid. This reduction, coupled with “‘superstack” dispersion since 1972, has produced substantial air quality improvement in the local Sud- bury area, which at that time was the primary objective.
From the outset, the tall stack approach was iden- tified as an interim pollution control measure and not as a final step in abatement at the company’s Sudbury facilities.
As a first planned step aimed at reducing current SO2 emissions in the Province, Environment Ontario Minis- ter Harry Parrott announced on May 1, 1980 the gov- ernment's intention to establish new control measures on INCO. The proposed program would bring about a reduction of INCO’s emissions of SO2 from the level of 3,600 tons permitted in a former Control Order to 2,500 as a first step, and 1,950 tons per day during 1983. The new order also instructs the company to complete a study by December 1981 as to how it will reduce emissions to the lowest possible level after 1982.
Another part of Environment Ontario’s abatement program for this Sudbury smelting complex entailed the establishment of an Ontario-Canada Task Force to investigate all air pollution abatement technical options, as well as the socio-economic implications, for both INCO and Falconbridge Nickel Mines, with the objective of reducing emissions to minimal levels. The working committee of this joint Task Force includes representatives from Ontario and federal environment ministries, the Ontario Ministry of Natu- ral Resources, the federal Department of Energy, Mines and Resources and non-government scientific representatives.
Three reports compiled by Environment Ontario, released May 27, 1980, which provide recent field analyses of acidic precipitation affecting the Muskoka- Haliburton and Sudbury areas of the Province, have been referred to this Task Force. The studies are significant in evaluating the emission effects of the Sudbury smelting complex on the immediate Sudbury area as well as on the Muskoka-Haliburton lakes, and underline the need for international abatement to deal with the long-range transport of contaminants.
Abstracts of the three reports and their findings are outlined in Appendix “A” (page 24).
Environment Ontario staff collect containers from automatically operated double bucket’ collector designed to collect wet and dry deposition
of acidic pollutants. Samples at over 30 sites across the Province are
collected monthly for laboratory analysis
ONTARIO’S ACTION TOWARD SOLUTIONS
Environment Ontario’s Air Monitoring Program
Since 1968, Ontario’s Environment agency has been responsible for monitoring the air of the Province, for identifying sources of undesirable emissions and for reducing those emissions to preserve environmental quality. The Ministry is also responsible for ensuring that potential emissions from new sources are ade- quately controlled before industrial, utility or mining operations begin.
The Ontario Government began the establishment of a Province-wide network of air quality monitoring instruments in 1968, which has been expanded over the years. The network now consists of more than 1,400 instruments which measure 30 contaminants, including SOz and NOx. This network coupled with special mobile monitoring units have provided Envi- ronment Ontario with the capability to measure most of the chemicals present in the atmosphere in trace amounts. The monitoring system has thus enabled the Ministry to chart its progress in controlling air pollu- tion.
Under the Ministry's program of air pollution con- trol, industry in the Province has spent or committed more that $1 billion for air pollution abatement. This has resulted in great improvement in the air quality of Ontario cities.
Since 1970, SO2 levels in downtown Toronto have been reduced by approximately 90 per cent — from an average of 0.071 ppm to 0.008 ppm in 1979. Carbon monoxide decreased from an average of 2.5 ppm in 1970 to 1.5 ppm in 1979, a 40 per cent improvement. Suspended particulate levels have dropped 50 per cent in Toronto, and have been lowered in most communi- ties by 50 per cent and more.
The air quality improvement was achieved mainly by the abatement of emissions, for example SO2 emis- sions in Metro Toronto were decreased from 227,000 tons in 1972 to 153,000 tons in 1978.
In other industrial centres in Ontario, such as Hamil- ton, Windsor, London, Ottawa and Cornwall, SO2 levels have been reduced from 30 to more than 60 per cent.
Across the Province, community-oriented abatement has reduced SOz2 loadings from almost 3 million tons in 1972 to 2.2 million tons in 1977* —a reduction of 27 per cent despite increased population and industrial
“In 1979, SO2 loadings were reduced to an estimated 1.65 million tons, to show a decrease of over 40 per cent since 1972. However, the 1977 tigure is used because INCO limited, Ontario’s largest single source of SO2 emissions, was shut down tor the period July 17 to August 27, 1978, and later closed by an 8'/2-month labour strike trom September 15, 1978 through June 4, 1979. Since production resumed in June 1979 INCO has kept emissions to approximately 2,600 tons per day (0.95 million tons per annum) mainly due to reduced market demand. The Falconbridge nickel smelter was also shut down between July 1 and August 21, 1978. For data during these periods, see Appendix ‘A’ — reports compiled by Environment Ontario providing field analysis studies of acidic precipitation in the Sudbury and Muskoka/Haliburton areas.
14
growth. This is a straight reduction of total SOz produc- tion, completely apart from localized improvements resulting from higher stacks and wider dilution.
This successful reduction of pollutants is also a consequence of Ontario’s practice of requiring regu- latory approvals for each industry planning to build or expand.
Nitrogen oxide emissions from automobiles have also been reduced. The control of nitrogen oxides from automotive sources was introduced by the Cana- dian government in 1973. These controls have reduced emissions from individual vehicles by approximately 30 per cent (from 4.5 grams/mile to 3 grams/mile). How- ever, the gradual reduction achieved by new cars with control devices replacing older cars, was offset to an extent by an increase in the number of vehicles. Therefore, the overall reduction in nitrogen oxides emissions from 1973 to 1979 was 11 per cent (from 175,000 tons/year in 1973 to 155,000 tons/year in 1979).
Also, Metro Toronto’s public transportation system which serves more than one-quarter of the population of the Province, is largely electrically operated by streetcars, subway trains and trolley buses which do not pollute the air.
Environment Ontario has been dealing with SOz and NOx as pollutants in their own right, concerned with their local and community effects. It did not at first deal with them as constituents of acidic precipitation — acid rain which is now defined as a long-term and long- range problem with effects on a continental, even global scale. Tha accumulation of SO2 and NOx cause damage even though conventional air quality criteria are not exceeded.
The severity of the problem of acid rain in Ontario became apparent when Environment Ontario, working with the Ministries of Housing and Natural Resources, began to monitor the impact of cottage development on lakes in the Muskoka/Haliburton resort areas in 1975, in the context of the Lakeshore Capacity Studies. While examining material imput to the lakes from all sources, including the atmospheric contribution, it was discovered that atmospheric input on average was much more acidic than anticipated.
Ontario’s Commitment and Strategy
Ontario in the fiscal year 1980-81 appropriated approximately $5 million for acid rain projects through its ministries and agencies.
Environment Ontario, the lead ministry, required approximately $3.5 million for its 1980-81 program.
In the fiscal year ending March 31, 1980, Environ- ment Ontario spent $2 million in research activities to determine acidic deposition and to develop abatement strategy.
Ontario scientific projects and studies are outlined in the sections entitled ‘Aquatic and Terrestrial Effects and Studies” (pages 17-22).
Ontario’s commitment and strategy to hasten abate- ment action and to help reach a formal accord for U.S.-Canadian co-ordinated policy was outlined by Environment Ontario Minister Harry Parrott at a meet- ing with Canadian and U.S. environment ministers and officials on January 18, 1980.
“In Ontario, we have undertaken measures to pro- vide the Ontario Government with knowledge which it must have to develop a sound abatement strategy:
— We are continuing to identify and assess acid loadings in those Ontario lakes most suscepti- ble to acidification.
— We are refining our predictive modelling techni- ques to better assess the social and economic effects of various control strategies.
— We are actively considering possible interim remedial measures which can be employed to protect the sensitive lakes.
We believe — with others — that we must develop and then employ reliable control technology on both existing and new sources, initially, where the great- est environmental benefits will result. While seeking this better technology, other options presently being considered include a combination of the following:
(1) low sulphur coal
(2) hydrometallurgy
(3) coal gasification
(4) coal scrubbing — reducing the sulphur by wash- in
(5) acid plants — removing SO2 and converting it to sulphuric acid for various uses.”
Dr. Parrott stated that both countries recognize that the problem on either side is different and that con- trols will have to be made specific to the types of sources on either side. This results from a different mix of problems in each country requiring different solu- tions.
“Acid rain, already at levels of widespread concern
and destruction, appears to our experts to remain
rampant, unless we initiate more immediate abate- ment action.
lam convinced, if we are to seriously address the problem of acid rain, that all jurisdictions must be willing to assess emissions from existing plants, many of which were built at a time when governments, industry and the public were less knowledgeable and concerned about environmental matters. We must also assess legislation which may perpetuate the problem through grandfather clauses which exempt existing sources and penalize new projects which may be more environmentally secure.
If we are to keep on schedule with the crucial period ofabatement which must take place overthe next ten years — and I am now concerned about saving thousands of Ontario lakes which are vulnerable — our international abatement measures must focus on attacking existing sources of pollution as well as research and future prevention.
It is imperative that the United States and Canada reach an accord on what is to be done. But such an accord must be negotiated on the basis of strength from both sides. We in Ontario aim for an interna- tional agreement soon. But this agreement must be flexible enough to take advantage of new knowledge resulting from research as it evolves. This is espe- cially true in the area of new abatement technology.
Recognizing that we both operate under different constitutional and administrative structures, and that there is a different mix of problems in each country, the solutions will of necessity be different in each country. Whatever strategies are adopted to achieve our common goal, they must be rigorously enforced by each jurisdiction in a consistent manner.
| again emphasize that Ontario is prepared to enforce the necessary controls in concert with con- trol measures in other jurisdictions. And we are also prepared to act singly and in advance of other juris- dictions in the fight against acid rain.”
Interim and Ultimate Solutions — Socio-Economic Implications
Resolution of the problems caused by acidic precipi- tation poses a certain dilemma to society. On the one hand, there are risks that actions taken will be too late or insufficient. On the other, there is the risk that actions taken in haste will be unduly costly, disruptive to the economy, or ineffective.
There are no verified estimates of either the mag- nitude of the damages and effects caused by acidic precipitation, or the costs of abatement of sources inside or outside the Province.
For these reasons, Dr. Parrott cautioned that while Ontario is moving ahead to take interim abatement action so that no crucial time is lost, it must first be determined that costly long-term abatement actions can be effective.
“In the long-term we must weigh the efficiency of
various abatement methods against the actual prob-
lem. The cost of such abatement runs into billions of
dollars, and cannot be entered into lightly, without
firm evidence that they will successfully perform.”
Ontario is refining its predictive modelling and deposition studies to properly assess the economic and social effects of various control strategies. At the same time, attention is being given to the development of new and more efficient control technology.
In order to develop estimates of the benefits to be derived from abatement actions, as well as the costs of the control programs, the Province has established an Acid Precipitation Socio-Economic Impact Committee whose members represent the Ontario Ministries of Environment (lead ministry), Natural Resources, Indus- try and Tourism, Energy, Agriculture and Food, and Treasury and Economics.
One of the fundamental economic questions con- cerns how much manpower, money and effort should be devoted to combating acid precipitation. Some individuals argue that governments and those who cause the pollution should stop it at any cost. How- ever, individuals and society at large obtain essential benefits from power plants, smelting operations, fac- tories and transportation vehicles, all of which are the precursors of acid rain. If people wish to retain the benefits and amenities provided by these products and activities, and at the same time preserve the environ- ment, they may have to accept higher prices for them.
Realistic Levels of Abatement
While total abatement of sources would solve the problem, it must be accepted that North American society will be using large amounts of fossil fuels for many years to come, despite the newer options of nuclear plants, solar energy and wind power. It must also be accepted that it is most unlikely that technology could reduce emissions of sulphur and nitrogen oxides to zero. Therefore, the abatement programs applied to new and existing sources must define some specific amount which can be realistically achieved by technol- ogy and be effective in protecting the environment. We must determine in quantitative terms how much acid loading the environment can safely withstand so that the minimum levels of abatement can be defined.
There are tremendous technological and economic differences between the attainment of 50 per cent abatement of sources and 80 per cent, 90 per cent or 95 per cent. Research is needed to define what abatement level is needed.
Consequently, the studies to determine the effects of atmospheric deposition on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems in Ontario are designed to determine the extent of problems in the Province, and the rates of change of water quality and other effects which are needed to design and support the abatement program.
One important issue under study by the Socio- Economic Impact Committee is tourism and sports fishing, important industries to Ontario and Canada. While expenditures for products and services associ- ated with tourist activities do not directly measure the value of the benefits of reducing acid precipitation, these expenditures are important to regional econ- omies. Failure to curtain acidic precipitation could severly affect tourism related to sports fishing.
While most of the costs of the various abatement or rehabilitation programs can be expressed in dollars,
In July 1980, 2,000 cottagers attended Environment Ontario's biggest ever open house at the Ministry’s field laboratory near Dorset, to tour the laboratory,
many of the social and environmental consequences of these activities can only be measured in intangible physical units or in dollar value estimates which are often open to dispute. Nevertheless, a systematic com- pilation of the relevant social and environmental con- sequences of each feasible abatement or rehabilitation program will be of great help in deciding what needs to be allocated to the problem.
Equity and the Distribution of Costs and Benefits
Another important economic issue concerns the distri- bution of the effects of acid rain and of the costs and benefits of its control. Questions of equity will have to be resolved through negotiations among provinces, states and federal governments. It is necessary for the negotiators to have clear information about the various options and about the magnitudes of the costs and benefits involved.
Finally, wide ranging public consultation and debate will be constructive and necessary to political decision-making. It is as important for the public to be informed on this issue as it is for governments to generate and disseminate the relevant information.
A May 1980 report on acid rain by the LRTAP Control Strategies Program Office of Environment Canada con- cludes with the statement:
“At present, the direct evidence required to ascer- tain unequivocally that the North American ecosys- tem is being severely damaged by the long-range transport of air pollution and acidic precipitation is not available and may not be for several years. Effects are cumulative and elusive, but to wait long enough to obtain, say, a clearly demonstrated effect could mean that a stage of site degradation has been reached that would be impossible to reverse.”
view field equipment and question scientists about the effects of acid rain in lakes of the Muskoka/Haliburton region
16
AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES
Aquatic Studies in Ontario
Current aquatic studies in Ontario are designed to determine the extent of problems in the Province, and the rate of change of water quality, information vitally needed to design and support the abatement program.
Aquatic studies begin by measuring as accurately as possible all of the materials being deposited in each particular watershed from the atmosphere. A variety of collectors are used to obtain this information. Some are designed to collect only rainfall and have a mois- ture sensitive control device which opens the lid of the collector only while it is raining. Other collectors are open at all times so they collect both rain and any material that settles from the air —so-called ‘‘dry deposition’’. Still other collectors are designed to measure snowfall. In all cases the total amount of water, acids, minerals, and other materials that are being deposited are measured. In total, about 20 constituents are measured in rain and snowfall.
Meteorological data are collected to assist in cal- culating evaporation rates, to determine seasonal pre- cipitation, prevailing winds, and to trace storm trajec- tories and origin.
All of the streams entering and leaving the study lakes are fitted with weirs. The amount of water flow- ing is continuously recorded as it goes through the calibrated notch. Water samples are collected fre- quently for chemical analysis. This system, whereby all inputs and outputs are carefully and precisely quan- tified, is called a ‘‘calibrated watershed’ .(FIG. 15)
FIG. 15 Fitted Weir in Calibrated Watershed.
Aweiris fitted into streams which enter or leave study lakes to continuously record the amount of water flowing through the calibrated notch. The system is known as a “calibrated watershed
Environment Ontario scientist collects water weir on a Haliburton stream. Hut on bank is k stilling well” which houses a water |
sample tron
nown as a
measure stream tlow on a continuous basis
Weir Notch
Computers are used to combine the water flow and chemical data to measure the amounts of acids and other materials entering and leaving the lakes. The influence of the trees and soils on the chemical com- position of the water is made evident by comparing the runoff water quality to the rain and snow quality. | Direct measurements are made on the chemical nature of the soils. This process is called “materials budget- ing’ and the information indicates whether or not water quality is changing and how fast, what kinds of changes are taking place and what is likely to result from trends in both the near and long-term future.
The study lakes automatically become the monitors of the effectiveness of the abatement programs as acid loadings are reduced.
Cumulative Aquatic Effects
The amount of acid falling as acid rain is quite small with each rainfall, but its cumulative long-term effects, as well as its ‘‘shock’’ effects on aquatic life at the time of spring runoff, are what concern scientists.
In areas with alkaline soils or limestone deposits, such as the Great Lakes, total loading of acid rain on an annual basis does not pose a problem since the acid can be safely neutralized for indefinite periods. Though these lakes are not threatened as whole bodies, aquatic life in the nearshore spawning areas and tributary streams, which are much shallower, can be severely affected in the spring by the ‘’shock” loading of acidic snow as it melts — “spring run- off’’.(FIG. 16) This condition applies, for example, to the nearshore spawning areas and streams of Lake Huron, even though the lake has an annual mean alkaline pH of about 8.2.
Stilling Well
FIG. 16 “Spring pH Depression” of a Stream
Graph illustrating “spring pH depression” in one of the six inflowing streams to Harp Lake, a study lake in Muskoka. As the spring runoff increases the amount of water, the acidic melted snow causes the stream pH to drop, producing severe chemical “shock” effects on aquatic life
15.0
10.0
5.0
Discharge (103m? day !)
6.50
5150
25 10 15 March
20 25 15 April May
As the acid rain is neutralized, some soil and rock have time to be neutralized so a “pulse” of acidic water
material is dissolved. If the acid rain lands on lime- stone, the runoff will contain calcium sulphate and calcium nitrate — both quite harmless substances.
Precambrian rock can slowly neutralize acid rain but instead of calcium, it releases aluminum, manganese, iron, and other metals which can build up to concen- trations which are toxic to fish and other forms of aquatic life.
In areas of Precambrian rock and little soil cover, which is the situation in much of northern Ontario, there is not enough buffering capacity to neutralize even small amounts of acid falling on the soil. As a result, the runoff water is acidic.
The effect shows up at different times in streams entering the same lake because the process of acidifi- cation of runoff is quite irregular. For example, a light acid rain may be fully neutralized while the runoff during a heavy rain on the same watershed will not
18
will move down the stream and into the lake. The stream will have normal pH values shortly after the surge of water passes. But the aquatic organisms living in the stream will have been subjected to a very severe chemical shock.
Acids falling in snow accumulate during the winter. When the snow melts there is a relatively sudden release of a large amount of acids in the runoff. The soils are usually frozen and there is very little chance for the acids to be neutralized. The result is a phenomenon known as the ‘spring pH depression”.
For periods of several weeks streams can become very acidic. Their flows combine with melting snow and ice on the lake itself, and acidify the entire surface layer of the lake. As the lake water mixes and is brought into contact with sediments, the acid can be eventually neutralized and the lake can have normal pH values by June or July.
Some aquatic organisms— such as recently hatched spawn or offspring (known as “fish fry’’) of sports fish (e.g. trout, bass and pickerel) —cannot survive the shock of exposure to acid water, or acidic water containing high concentrations of metals. Conse- quently, in both acid stressed lakes and fully acidified lakes there is a major disruption, or complete destruc- tion, of the biological community.
The spring pH depression is the most damaging feature of an acid stressed lake but the severity varies from year to year according to spring weather condi- tions.
Large fish can generally survive so that dead fish are rarely seen floating in the lakes. Fish fry of sensitive species may by killed one year but have a high survival rate the next. Therefore, the fish populations in acid stressed lakes are characterized by the absence of fish of certain ages, with older and younger fish being present. Mercury concentrations may also increase in the fish which do survive. As the lake and watershed are more and more damaged by acid rain, the spring pH depression is consistently severe. The fry of the sensitive species will be killed every year so that the existing population dies out from old age and preda- tion. Several decades may pass from the onset of some damage to the fishery until its eventual demise.
If acid rain continues, all of the readily available neutralizing capacity of the rocks, soils and sediments may be consumed and the streams and lakes become acidic all year long. It can take many decades for a lake to become fully acidified.
When a lake becomes so acidic that the pH is below 5.0 at all times of the year, few fish species or other aquatic life survive.
It is reasonable to assume that an acidic lake will eventually recover if the acid loadings are eliminated or reduced to very low levels. The time required for this is not known. In Precambrian areas, only the surface of the rocks interact with rainfall and runoff so that new surface material is constantly being exposed by weathering. If the acidic loadings are removed the new material will establish the same pH in the runoff as prevailed before acidic precipitation occurred. Return to normal conditions will certainly take a period of years but no accurate estimates can be given. If a lake has been acidic long enough for most aquatic organisms to die, restocking would be needed.
Research and analysis are carried out at Environment Ontario's main laboratory in Rexdale, one of the most sophisticated in North America
Aquatic Life Analyzed
Since the main concern about acid rain at this time is its effect on aquatic life, very detailed measurements must be made of the algae, zooplankton and fish within the study lakes. The absolute numbers and species of zooplankton are counted and their stomach contents microscopically examined in Environment Ontario laboratories to determine what they eat. This information may be critical in attempts to modify fisheries management schemes to assist fish popula- tions in coping with the problem. Even if the water quality is acceptable to some species of fish, a serious disruption of the food chain could pose problems for the fish.
Trap nets are placed in the study lakes to capture the fish alive. Every fish is measured, weighed and species and sex recorded. A coded tag is put on each fish released back to the water. When the netting process is repeated at a later time, the numbers of tags reco- vered can be used to accurately determine the total numbers of all species of fish present in the lake. Thousands of fish must be handled in this painstaking and time-consuming procedure but it is the only way that subtle changes in the fish population can be observed.
All chemical and biological results are combined to produce estimates of present damage to the ecosys- tem, to establish the reasons for any observed changes and, most important to construct graphs indicating likely changes in the future, and to determine the minimum reduction in acid inputs required to protect the environment.
There are six lakes currently under this extensive study in the Muskoka-Haliburton area. There are an additional 15 lakes receiving slightly less intensive work. In future, additional study lakes will be added for specific purposes.
A temporary field laboratory has been operated for several years near Dorset, Ontario, and has been replaced by a permanent lake study facility which serves as the Province’s headquarters to co-ordinate and integrate all LRTAP field studies.
The study lakes have been selected in one of the most sensitive areas to be affected by acid loadings. A large part of the information gathered from these studies can be extrapolated, or extended, to other susceptible lakes which may be affected to a lesser and/or slower degree than the main study area.
It is known that the alkalinity of the lake water is the single most important factor in determining a lake’s sensitivity, or its ability to neutralize acidic inputs. While the intensive lake studies are under way, alkalin- ity data are being collected on a large number of lakes across the Province.
The Province has about 250,000 lakes. Even if estimates of alkalinity are made in several thousand lakes, there will still be other thousands of lakes for which data will not be available. However, results from the study lakes will indicate what damage to expect for any given lake measured for alkalinity. Therefore, reasonably accurate estimates can be made of total damage in the lakes when only a small amount of chemical and geological data are available.
Liming of Lakes
Acid rain damages aquatic life in lakes and streams only in areas where there are very little capacity in the soils and rock to neutralize the acid. Could not a neutralizing material be added to the lakes and streams for at least the time it takes for the abatement program to take effect?
The major method of artificial maintenance of sus- ceptible water bodies has been to add slaked lime and/or limestone to affected lakes, in an attempt to restore their buffering capacity. This process of adding a neutralizing agent is called “liming”.
The amount of lime or limestone needed is generally about 50 Ibs. per surface acre per year, which means that several tons of material are needed for even small lakes.
Biological Effects on Fish of Low pH Waters pH Effect
6.5 Continued exposure results in significant reduc- orless tions in egg hatchability and growth in brook trout.— Menendez, 1976
Coupled with high CO, concentrations pH's below 6.0 can adversely affect certain trout species. —Lloyd and Jordan, 1964
Rainbow trout do not occur. Small populations of relatively few fish species found. Fathead minnow spawning reduced. Molluscs rare.
— EPA, 1972
Declines in a salmonid fishery can be expected.—/ensen and Snekvik, 1972
Very restricted fish populations but not lethal unless CO; is high. May be lethal to eggs and larvae. Prevents spawning of fathead minnow. Lethal to some mayflies. Bacterial species diver- sity reduced.—FPA, 1972, Scheider et al, 1975 Tolerable lower limit for most fish. — Doudoroff and Katz, 1950, McKee and Wolf, 1963
No viable fishery can be maintained. Lethal to eggs and fry of salmonids. Benthic fauna restricted. — FPA, 1972
Flagfish reproduction inhibited and general activity of adults reduced.—FPA, 1972
Fish population limited—only a few species survive (pike). Flora restricted. — EPA, 1972. —Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Extensive Monitoring of Lakes in the Greater Sudbury Area 1974-76, Ministry of the Environment (Ontario), 1978, p. 20. References shown in italic.
6.0
4.5
4.0-4.5
20
Since 1973, four acidified lakes in the Sudbury region have been limed by Environment Ontario as part of the Ministry’s Sudbury Environmental Study. Located about ten miles from the INCO superstack, three of the lakes were small (less than 200 acres) and were fully acidic with elevated concentrations of metals, particularly copper and nickel. The lime and limestone additions were successful in returning the pH to normal values. However, while the metal concentrations decreased (they precipitate from solution at near neutral pH), they still remained at levels toxic to fish. Fish are very susceptible to water chemistry changes, and neutraliza- tion was not by itself sufficient to make the lakes suitable for aquatic life. Fortunately, the concentrations of copper and nickel are a problem only in a small number of lakes within a few miles of Sudbury.
The fourth study lake was 750 acres, located about 20 miles north of Sudbury. The pH was depressed but the lake still had some fish and heavy metal concentra- tions were low. The pH was restored to normal over a two-year period of time, using a total of nearly 120 tons of powdered lime and limestone. Indications are that the treatment was successful in restoration of the fishery.
New York and Sweden are also conducting liming pro- grams and, again, indications are that fish in some acid sensitive lakes can be protected by this technique.
One positive initial observation, in both Ontario and Sweden, is that the mercury concentrations in fish do not increase if the lake has been limed even though the acidic precipitation and acidic runoff from the water- shed both continue. This is a particularly important finding in protecting a lake which provides sports fishing. The results of work to date are making biolog- ists more optimistic about liming programs.
Ontario is currently conducting a five year experi- mental lake liming program to determine the chemical and biological effects of adding limestone to acid- stressed lakes. Such lakes are subject to low pH condi- tions during snow-melt and following heavy rainfall but for most of the year the water quality is acceptable for fish and other aquatic life. These lakes still have a very complex food chain. Treating a lake with limestone doesn’t return it to its ‘original’ condition. Though the treated lakes will be more suitable for aquatic life than if left untreated, the water quality will be different from what it was before the combination of acid rain and limestone was applied. Scientists want to see how the complex food chain reacts to the new water quality conditions.
It is possible that a liming program could be used to protect important fisheries or lakes of particular histori- cal or economic importance. While “liming” may have its place as a remedy to solve a short-term local acid rain problem, and could be a measure for “buying time”, it does not by itself offer a general solution because of the difficulties of treating the large areas of Canada affected by acid rain.
Terrestrial Effects and Studies
Acidic precipitation has the potential to cause serious widespread effects on terrestrial ecosystems in certain areas of the world, such as eastern Canada (including Ontario), the northeastern U.S. and southern Sweden and Norway.
Such effects have been observed mainly under labo- ratory conditions and at pH levels, or acidic concentra- tions, well below those generally observed in the field.
In experiments using simulated acidic precipitation, a number of adverse effects have been produced in soils and vegetation. The adverse soil effects include the leaching of basic cations such as magnesium and calcium; the mobilization, or release, of soil-bound metals such as aluminum and iron; and changes in biological activity such as nitrification. In vegetation, the adverse effects observed include leaf cuticular, or surface erosion; lesions on the leaves; leaching of nutrients and reduced nitrogen-fixation. With vegeta- tion, a paradox sometimes occurs whereby the nit- rogenous portion of acidic precipitation can act as a fertilizer and stimulate plant growth.
The adverse effects observed as a result of experi- mental exposures of soil or vegetation to acidic precip- itation are difficult to extrapolate to nature. At present, there is no direct proof that any significant terrestrial
FIG.17 Illustration of Terrestrial/Lake Effects
Precipitation
effects are occurring in nature under the influence of currently-measured regional inputs of acidic sub- stances in precipitation. The concentrations of the solutions used in the laboratory experiments are usu- ally more acidic than those measured in normally- occurring precipitation.
With respect to forest productivity, it is possible that excessive leaching of nutrients from the soil could result in impoverished tree growth, which would therefore be harmful to Canada’s competitive forest industry. However, studies to date in Ontario have not established that tree growth has been impaired, and any threat of this nature would appear to be long-term.
Reductions in forest growth have been reported in certain parts of southern Sweden, but it is difficult to attribute these lossess to acidic precipitation alone. Other environmental variables such as climate, a change of land use, site, tree age, genotype, competi- tion from other plant species can obscure the effects caused by acidic precipitation.
Nutrient recycling is a constant natural process. The leaching of bases from forest soils is compensated for by leaf fall and root weathering of bedrock. These and other factors make it difficult to detect the effects of acidic precipitation on forests, and there is little histor- ical data on which to base current research studies.
Precipitation
Nutrients >
Organic Layer -
Mineral Layer
Impervious Bedrock
In agricultural areas, effects from acidic precipitation are not expected to pose as great a potential problem generally as in forestry, because of the continual addi- tion of lime and fertilizers to soil in the practice of more intensive crop management.
Finally, while it may not be entirely possible to document the effects of acidic precipitation on vegeta- tion in the field because of their subtle nature, severe effects have been documented in laboratory research. Because of the potential long-term threat that acidic precipitation poses to terrestrial ecosystems, including Ontario’s vital forest industry, a program of monitor- ing, surveillance and experimentation is under way in the Province.
Terrestrial Studies
Ontario studies on terrestrial effects include:
— Determining the present status, or baseline data of soil throughout Ontario. These data will pro- vide ‘‘point-in-time’”’, or baseline measurements of physical and chemical characteristics of soils in various regions of Ontario to compare with future testing for any trends which may develop.
— Determining the most vulnerable soils to acidic precipitation and their location in Ontario.
— Determining the influence of terrestrial systems on incoming acidic precipitation and altering the rain’s chemical characteristics during drainage through watersheds to receiving rivers and lakes.
— Determining the short-term experimental effects on soils and vegetation, utilizing severe acid load- ings to reduce the time span for effects to occur; and determining the long-term effects which may occur on natural forest systems.
— Determining protective or remedial measures for the most sensitive terrestrial areas.
Buildings and Structures
There is clear evidence that acidic precipitation in this century has been responsible for the sudden rate of deterioration of ancient buildings, landmarks and statuary which are a part of man’s cultural heritage. Examples are the Pantheon in Athens, St. Mark’s Square in Venice and landmarks in other European capitals. Increased pollution is also hastening the deterioration of modern metal and masonry structures of all kinds, as well as painted surfaces.
A current study of aging tombstones in war veterans’ cemeteries throughout the U.S. will help scientists reach a better understanding of acid rain effects on stone monuments and statuary.
Health Implications
It remains difficult to demonstrate a relationship between acid rain and human health, and up to 1980 no effects generally have been scientifically described.
Epidemiological studies have shown a relationship between the severity of health effects and the degree of air pollution as measured by concentrations of suspended particulate matter, especially sulphates and sulphur dioxide in industrial and urban settings.
It is widely known that “air pollution episodes” in the past, in other parts of the world, have caused an
22
increase in human illness and mortality for people with respiratory problems. During these episodes, meter- ological conditions caused stagnation of several days duration with consequent build-up of amos pete pollutants such as found in smog over some large industrial cities.
In Ontario, the Air Pollution Index (API) developed by the Air Resources Branch of Environment Ontario, is used as a basis for action in an alert system to control or prevent an air pollution episode which could cause health effects.
It has been suggested that the acidification of water supplies could result in increased concentrations of various metals from rock, soil or plumbing and that this might result in adverse health effects. This is unlikely to occur where water quality is controlled in treatment plants according to established standards.
With respect to drinking water in summer cottages, itis recommended that after any period of non-use, the water be run for several minutes to flush out any excess metal concentration.
Federal/Provincial Scientific Activities
For detailed information on current Federal/Provincial Scientific Activities, and working group programs con- tact: \
The Co-ordinator
Acidic Precipitation in Ontario Study (APIOS) Resources Division,
Ontario Ministry of the Environment
or
Information Services Branch Ontario Ministry of the Environment at 135 St. Clair Ave. West Toronto, Ontario MA4V 1P5 Available to scientists... “A Bibliography: The Long-Range Transport of Air Pollutants and Acidic Precipitation”
Prepared jointly by the Ontario Ministry of the Envi- ronment and Atmospheric Environment Service, Envi- ronment Canada, this 95-page technical bibliography which lists scientific papers on LRTAP under authors’ name and subject is available at $5 and may be obtained by mail with a cheque made payable to one of the following:
“Treasurer of Ontario”
with request addressed to:
Publications Centre, Ministry of Government Services,
5th floor, 880 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario M7A 1N8 or
“Receiver General of Canada”
with request addressed to:
LRTAP Program Office,
Atmospheric Environment Services, Environment Canada,
4905 Dufferin Street, Downsview, Ontario M3H 514
The bibliography may also be obtained at the Ontario Government Bookstore, 880 Bay Street, Toronto.
Ontario Hydro to reduce SO» and NOx Emissions to Meet Requirements of Environment Ontario Regulation
As well as action to decrease sulphur dioxide emis- sions from INCO Limited, the Ontario government has required by Regulation that Ontario Hydro substantially reduce emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO;) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) from its coal-fired electric generating plants.
Ontario Hydro is second only to INCO Limited, as the largest source of SO; within the Province and is the largest industrial source of NOx. Its coal-fired sta- tions (see pages 12 and 13) produce about 20 per cent of total emissions of these two pollutants in the Prov- ince, but are not large producers compared with similar sources in the United States.*
The Regulation limits total emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides to 450,000 metric tonnes beginning in 1985, dropping to 300,000 metric tonnes by 1990. At the same time, emissions of sulphur dioxide may not exceed 390,000 metric tonnes by 1985, and 260,000 metric tonnes by 1990 — a sulphur dioxide reduction of 43% from current levels. The power company is required to meet the established emission limits regardless of any increase in power demand or export of power.
In order to comply with the total emission reduc- tion requirements, Ontario Hydro is considering tak- ing such actions as the installation of two 500 megawatt scrubbers, advancing the schedule for nuclear generated electricity, purchasing more low sulphur coal, making greater use of coal washing, and installing low NOx burners on its coal-fired stations.
In addition, Environment Ontario has examined Hydro’s operating system and found that its efficiency based dispatch system of generating power is for all practical purposes synonymous with a “Least Emis- sions Dispatch System (L.E.D.S.)’. Under Hydro's cur- rent efficiency based dispatch system, nuclear power and water generation will create the cleanest and cheapest power, and the generation of power from fossil fuels will occur on a peak load basis.
The L.E.D.S. philosophy dictates that a utility generates power from its “cleanest” plants first, and its “dirtiest” plants last. This ensures that plants with pollution control equipment are utilized fully, and not allowed to stand idle.
This program places Ontario Hydro in the forefront of acid rain pollution control in North America. Since Ontario’s future expansion of electrical power will not involve any new fossil-fueled power generation, the abatement program is concerned only with existing coal-fired plants. Hydro’s plants already meet all ground level ambient air requirements.
Northeastern United States and Ontario
Electrical power utilities account for the major share of acidic emissions from the United States
With the substantial increase in the use of coal as an energy source in the United States, and the pro- jected increases in SO; and NOx emissions in the U.S between now and the year 2000, controls are vital to the protection of our environment in Eastern Canada and the Northeastern United States. This point is made vividly by a 1980 EPA report**. It states that because of tall stacks and prevailing weather condi- tions, Canada receives from the U.S. two to four times as much SO;, and 11 times as much NOx as the US. gets from Canada.
Environment Ontario contends that one of the weaknesses of the U.S. situation is that US. regula- tions require only new utility plants to achieve an acceptable degree of cleanliness in sulphur dioxide emissions and only to meet local ambient air require- ments. Existing U.S. legislation is, therefore, not geared to solving the acid rain problem inherent in long range transport.
Further, unlike Ontario, many existing plants in the U.S. are failing to meet existing state and federal standards and utilities are now seeking government permission to relax their pollution controls even more
While Ontario can provide leadership in tackling its own costly abatement program, its efforts to reduce acid rain will be of little consequence unless our neighbors to the south follow our lead.
To delay means inevitable — perhaps irreversible — damage to the natural environments of Ontario, Canada and the United States.
*In 1980, Ohio’s 13 largest thermal power plants, alone, emitted more SO; (2.0 million tons) into the atmosphere we share than all of Ontario’s sources combined (1.9 million tons), including INCO Limited in Sudbury.
**“Acid Rain”, US/EPA Office of Research and Development, July 1980, Report number
EPA 600/9-79-036.
POWER PLANTS. SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DATA AS COMPUTED BY ENVIRONMENT
ONTARIO
JULY 1982
TOP 50 COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA RANKED ACCORDING TO TOTAL SO2 EMISSIONS IN 1980*
t ESTIMATED SO) EMISSION
4980 RANKING OF STATES AND ONTARIO ACCORDING TO SO? EMISSIONS FROM : . 4 L é
RANK PLANT STATE COUNTRY THOUSANDS OF METRIC TONS/YEAR 1 GAVIN OHIO USA 362.9 2 CUMBERLAND TENNESSEE USA 325.2 3 PARADISE KENTUCKY USA 314.5 4 GIBSON STATION — INDIANA USA 2753 5 CLIFTY CREEK INDIANA USA 261.4 6 BALDWIN ILLINOIS USA 235.2 7 BOWEN GEORGIA USA 227.6 8 MUSKINGUM OHIO USA 221.9 9 LABADIE MISSOURI USA 213.2
10 MONROE MICHIGAN USA 212.3
11 HARRISON WEST VIRGINIA USA 195.9
12 WANSLEY GEORGIA USA 1919
13 CONESVILLE OHIO USA 189.0
14 KINCAID ILLINOIS USA 186.4
15 CONEMAUGH PENNSYLVANIA USA 186.1
16 KYGER CREEK OHIO USA 183.5
17 MADRID MISSOURI USA 180.9
18 HOMER CITY PENNSYLVANIA USA 167.3 y
19 HATFIELD PENNSYLVANIA USA 155.4
20 MITCHELL WEST VIRGINIA USA 154.8
21 GASTON ALABAMA USA 1517
22 LAMBTON ONTARIO CANADA 150.0
23 MONTROSE MISSOURI USA 146.5
24 NANTICOKE ONTARIO CANADA 1440
25 EASTLAKE OHIO USA 1401
26 BIG BEND FLORIDA USA 139.6
27 COFFEEN ILLINOIS USA 1892
28 KAMMER WEST VIRGINIA USA 135.6
29 KEYSTONE PENNSYLVANIA USA 1291
30 BRUNNER ISLAND PENNSYLVANIA USA 1261
31 GALLATIN TENNESSEE USA 1243
32 SAMMIS OHIO USA 1243
33 HILL MISSOURI USA 123.6
34 JOHNSONVILLE TENNESSEE USA 122.8
35 COLBERT ALABAMA USA 1148
36 CARDINAL OHIO USA 112.5
37 CAYUGA INDIANA USA 1047
38 STUART OHIO USA 103.3
39 MONTOUR PENNSYLVANIA USA 99.4
40 YATES GEORGIA USA 979
41 AMOS WEST VIRGINIA USA 95.4
42 PETERSBURG INDIANA USA 94.7
t
i 43 SHAWNEE KENTUCKY USA 94.0 44 JOPPA ILLINOIS USA 90.4 45 TANNERS CREEK INDIANA USA 90.1
46 FT. MARTIN WEST VIRGINIA USA 86.8 47 SIOUX MISSOURI USA 84.6 48 MILL CREEK KENTUCKY USA 84.4
49 MORGANTOWN MARYLAND USA 83.7 50 MT. STORM WEST VIRGINIA USA 83.3
*POWER PLANTS WERE CONSIDERED FROM ONTARIO AND 32 EASTERN U.S. STATES.
THE STATISTICS ARE FROM ONTARIO HYDRO AND THE U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
THE ANALYSIS WAS PERFORMED BY THE ONTARIO MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, AIR RESOURCES BRANCH
H
1980 ranking of states and Ontario according to SO: emissions from power plants. Source: U.S. Department of Energy and data as computed by Environment Ontario.
ONTARIO
ARKANSAS NORTH
28 CAROLINA
LOUISIANA
29 JULY,1982 FLORIDA
Increased energy use entails bigger sulphur emissions*
The world-wide use of energy increased greatly during the period from the end of the Second World War up to the beginning of the 1970s. Oil became the predominant fuel input. Table 1 shows what the situation is like today (based on official statistics from 1978). The combustion of coal and oil accounts for close on four- fifths of the sulphur emissions in the world (Table 2)
_... The rapid rise in energy costs that followed upon the oil crisis in 1973 will probably lead to more efficient
energy use. . Oil will slowly lose its dominant position and will be replaced by coal, gas, nuclear power and, in time, renewable sources of energy. Since sulphur is present only in coal and oil it is the future consumption of these fuels that has the most decisive bearing on the acidification of our environment.
The likelihood is that up to the end of this century the aggregate consumption of coal and oil will not alter enough to make any material difference to the sulphur emissions. Special measures are therefore called for on the discharge side if these emissions are to be reduced.
TABLE Az Consumption of fossil fuels and other energy (nuclear, hydro, etc.) in various areas in 1978 Converted to corresponding quantity of oil = megatonne oil equivalents (M toe)
Fuel consumption, M toe
Total
Solid Liquid fossil Area fuels fuels Gas fuels North- western Europe 183 383 143 709 Southern Europe 83 311 49 443 Eastern Europe 228 101 59 388 USSR 334 410 290 1034 North America 378 956 499 1833
Total energy toe turn- per Others over head : 76 785 43 57 500 25 8 396 43 111 1145 45 212 2045 8.5
TABLE 2 Emissions of sulphur dioxide in various areas in 1978, expressed in millions of tonnes of sulphur (Mton S) per year, kilograms of sulphur per tonne of fossil fuels (as oil) and grams of sulphur per megajoule of fossil
fuels Sulphur emissions Total Industrial sulphur kg S Tonnes Combusion kg S processes emissions per S Area Mton S/year per toe gS/MJ Mton S/year Mton S/year head per km2 North- western Europe 5.3 725 018 TA 64 35 52 Southern Europe 50 des 0.27 20 8.0 30 27 Eastern Europe 5.3 13.6 0.32 1.0 6.3 57 6.2 USSR 98 95 0.23 2.5 123 47 0.6 North America 12.3 6.7 0.16 310) 16.2 67 0.8
*Extract from “Acidification Today and Tomorrow’, a Swedish study prepared for the 1982 Stockholm Conference on the Acidification of the Environment, Swedish Ministry of Agriculture. (page 208-9)
Atmospheric Studies Environment Ontario atmospheric studies have shown that a large proportion of the precipitation in Ontario is generally associated with moist air masses that originate in the Gulf of Mexico. With transport over industrial- ized eastern United States, the air becomes laden with acid bearing compounds. Precipitation due to warm fronts and that from convective cloud associated with this air mass is acidic on arrival to the province. (see figure below)
Back trajectory analyses is a name given to a proce- dure by which air parcels are followed backward in time to determine the origin and track that the air
MISSOURI
TYPICAL STORM
INDIANA
ALABAM
Y] 7 / GEORGIA Hi
parcels have taken. Data from precipitation collectors operated at Dorset in one of Ontario’s sensitive areas (Muskoka-Haliburton) over almost a three year period (August 1976-April 1979), showed that about 75% of the precipitation events and moreover, approximately 80% of the wet acidic deposition at this site, were associated with air masses arriving from the south and southwest. Comparitively a small percentage of the loadings came from the north and northwest where major Ontario sources are located. It was also found that the acidity of precipitation related to southerly air masses was more than twice as great as that of precipi- tation from the north.
NEW HAMPSHIRE VERMONT
ASSACHUSETTS | RHODE ISLAND À CONNECTICUT PENNSYLVANIA / Y / My /
/ NEW JERSEY MARYLAND NA
DELAWARE
WEST VIRGINIA
VIRGINIA
WARM FRONT
» CAROLINA
\
SOUTH CAROLINA
Figure of typical storm track across central United States into Ontario Dotted areas represent precipitation associated with this typical storm track.
Appendix “A”
Three Environment Ontario reports concerning field analyses of precipitation (both rain and snow) falling in the Muskoka-Haliburton and Sudbury areas, released May 27, 1980.
1. “Acidic Precipitation in South-Central Ontario: Analysis of Source Regions Using Air Parcel Trajectories”.
Based on field monitoring of rain and snow from 1976 to 1979, this study indicates that 90 per cent of the precipitation come from sources to the south of the Muskoka-Haliburton areas, and 10 per cent from sources to the north of these areas. Northerly sources account for roughly 9 per cent of the acid, 7 per cent of the sulphate and 8 per cent of nitrates. The sources to the south and southwest contribute 80 per cent of the acid, 75 per cent of the sulphate, and 65 per cent of the nitrate. The remaining 11 per cent acid, 18 per cent sulphate and 27 per cent nitrate come from the south- east.
2. “Bulk Deposition in the Sudbury and Muskoka- Haliburton Areas of Ontario During the Shutdown of INCO Ltd. in Sudbury”.
This bulk deposition study compared measurements of all atmospheric fallout both wet and dry. Field studies
were carried out both before and during the pro- longed nine-month shutdown of INCO Ltd.’s Sudbury operations in 1978. It was found that acid loadings to the lakes did not show any marked change in the Sudbury or Muskoka-Haliburton areas during the INCO shutdown. In effect, the conclusion drawn is that long-range transport of pollutants from a southerly direction has a major impact on the Muskoka- Haliburton area. The Sudbury smelter complex has a major effect on copper and nickel deposition close to Sudbury and minimal effect on acid loadings near Sudbury. Nevertheless, the acid loadings from the superstack no doubt have their effects on other parts of eastern Canada and the United States.
3. “An Analysis of the Impact of INCO Emissions on Precipitation Quality in the Sudbury Area”.
This study confirms the contribution of INCO’s summer season emissions to the total wet deposition in the Sudbury area, depending on the weather system passing through the area. For acids, sulphur anda number of trace metals, the INCO contribution in this area is about 10 per cent of the total during warm fronts, and twice that amount during cold fronts. About 40 per cent of copper and nickel deposition in the Sudbury area can be attributed to INCO Ltd. regardless of the weather.
Major Submissions by Ontario to the U.S. EPA and States
A Submission to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Opposing Relaxation of SO), limits in State Implementation plans and urging enforcement. March 12, 1981. Expanded March 27, 1981. Toronto,
Ontario: the Ministry of the Environment, 1981.
A Submission to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Interstate Pollution Abatement: December 1981, Docket No. A-81-09. Ministry of the Environment (Ontario Government Bookstore,
880 Bay St. Toronto, M7A 1N8 — $15.00)
Presentation to the Air Pollution Control Board of the State of Indiana in Opposition to the Indiana- Kentucky Electric Generating Station Petition to Operate with an Increase in its Sulphur Dioxide Emis- sions to 7.52 pounds of SO per million BTUs of heat input. Toronto, Ontario: Ministry of the Environ-
ment, 1981.
Presentation to the Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission in Opposition to the Detroit Edison request to delay bringing its Monroe power plant into compliance with the state of Michigan “1% of equivalent sulphur in fuel” rule. Monroe, Michigan. June 30, 1982. Toronto, Ontario: the Ministry of the
Environment, 1982.
Director: R.J. Frewin Editorial Coordinator: A. J. Raymond
Ontario Technical Acidic Precipation In Ontario Advisors: Study (APIOS) Group Design: Farquharson & Associates
Produced by: Information Services Branch Ministry of the Environment