Hannah Hoag

Tag: science

  • River metals linked to tar sand extraction

    River metals linked to tar sand extraction

    Researchers find that pollutants in Canada’s Athabasca River are not from natural sources.

    Oil-mining operations in Canada’s main tar sands region are releasing a range of heavy and toxic metals — including mercury, arsenic and lead — into a nearby river and its watershed, according to a new study.

    Research published online yesterday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that 13 elements classified as priority pollutants (PPEs) by the US Environmental Protection Agency were found in the Athabasca River in the province of Alberta1. Seven of these were present at high enough concentrations to put aquatic life at risk. The findings are also of concern to human health.

    Almost all of Alberta’s known oil reserves — 172 billion barrels — are found within tar sands. The provincial government expects that oil production will increase from about 1.3 million barrels per day to 3 million barrels per day by 2018.

    Tar sands mining and upgrading — the process of extracting fuel from the mix of petroleum and sand or clay — produces sand, water, fine clays and minerals that are contained within tailing ponds.

    A team led by ecologist David Schindler of the University of Alberta in Edmonton set out to test the government and oil industry’s claims that the concentrations of elements in the Athabasca River and its tributaries were from natural sources and not tar sands development.

    The team took samples of surface water from the waterways upstream of the tar sands region and compared them with samples taken within the region — both upstream and downstream of mining projects. The researchers also looked at snow samples from many of the same areas towards the end of winter to look for airborne sources of PPEs, which would be discharged to surface waters when the snow melted.

    → Keep on reading at Nature

    Image courtesy of NormanEinstein and Wikimedia Commons.

  • Canada picks site for Arctic Research Station

    Canada picks site for Arctic Research Station

    Cambridge Bay location offers a wealth of opportunities for studying the far north.

    After months of deliberation, the Canadian government has chosen Cambridge Bay — a hamlet midway along the Northwest Passage in the country’s far north — as the site for a world-class Arctic research station.

    Once built, the station will house scientists all year round, giving them a modern space to study Arctic issues, including climate change and natural resources. It will host conference facilities and laboratories for research on marine biology and geophysics, provide ecologists with the space to do long-term ecological monitoring in aquaria and greenhouses, and give researchers in the health and social sciences a base for their studies.

    “It’s a very exciting and long-awaited announcement,” says Warwick Vincent, director of the Centre for Northern Studies at Laval University in Quebec City, who was part of the committee consulted by the government during the selection process.

    The proposal for the Canadian research station was first sketched out in 2007 and a shortlist of sites was released in 2009. A Can$2-million (US$1.9-million) feasibility study for the proposed station established its functions, preliminary costs and construction schedule and involved an analysis of three possible locations: Pond Inlet, Resolute Bay and Cambridge Bay, all in the northern territory of Nunavut.

    Details about the new facility’s size or overall cost have yet to be released by the government, but sources suggest that it will be completed some time in 2017 at a cost of about Can$200 million.

    → Read more at the Nature website

    → Also found in WorldChanging’s Arctic Round-up (September 3)

  • Sewer studies based on leaky science

    Sewer studies based on leaky science

    Questionable sampling techniques have led to murky conclusions about the contents of waste water.

    Chemicals flushing into sewer systems have been in the news for years. From opiates and hormones to heart medications, studies have detected a range of pollutants. Tests of sewage from hospitals have uncovered antibiotics, and investigations of sewage systems have exposed widespread illicit drug use in cities worldwide.

    But now a group of water-management scientists claim that some of these studies may be making exaggerated claims, producing dramatic variation in concentration estimates or not detecting substances because of fundamental flaws in sampling protocols.

    Christoph Ort, an environmental engineer at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, and his colleagues looked at 87 peer-reviewed journal articles that investigated the fate of pharmaceuticals, illicit drugs and personal-care products such as cosmetics. The articles quantified the concentrations or fluxes of these compounds based on samples taken from sewers.

    :: Continue reading at Nature News ::

    Image courtesy of Andrew Emond at Under Montreal.

  • Canadian science minister under fire

    Comments on evolution spark fierce criticism.

    It’s been a rough month for Canada’s minister of science and technology. Gary Goodyear, who was appointed to the new position in October 2008, has been roundly criticized in the media for an outburst during a meeting with a university teachers’ group and for his comments on evolution.

    Some Canadian researchers say the criticism is unreasonable, but others say it suggests that Goodyear, a chiropractor by training, is not in tune with the community whose portfolio he oversees.

    :: Keep reading in Nature ::

  • Canadian research infrastructure receives support, but will it last?

    Investment in infrastructure typically brings to mind hard-hat projects such as the construction of highways. But to keep science on the fast track, focused funding of research infrastructure is necessary. Following this logic, in December the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) announced it would award C$45.5 million ($35.9 million) to specific Canadian research projects. The investment will support more than 250 projects, including those in the health field, by providing equipment to attract and retain researchers to Canadian institutions.

    The money will be distributed through two channels: the Leaders Opportunity Fund, which allows institutions to invest in research equipment for new or existing faculty, and the Infrastructure Operating Fund, a smaller accompanying program that covers a portion of the operating and maintenance costs of CFI-supported infrastructure projects.

    “We’re really pleased,” says Peter Lewis, vice dean of research at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Medicine. “It’s been quite catalytic to get researchers to work together on projects that they might not have been able to otherwise.”

    :: continue reading in Nature Medicine :: (subscription required)