Full text of "The Case against the rain : a report on acid precipitation and Ontario programs for remedial action.. --"

See other formats

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

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

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

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.

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 ——

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

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

CRIE
We 7

i.
vs) ERE

16 FL:

14 RE "
Dm oe
| Rees

| EME

+—_+—_+—_+—_+—+-

ae + + + eek + ER —|

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

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

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

Utilities {

Emissions (10° Mg/Year)

0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1975

Source: “Acid Precipitation: An Emission Perspective” CTS-07165-1, Environmental Protection Dept., Ontario Hydro

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The Case against the rain : a report on acid precipitation and Ontario programs for remedial action.. --"

See other formats