Some People Think It’s Just Dirt

Article Link

Link to article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/globe-to/foodstock-back-to-the-farm-but-with-knives-in-hand/article2201954/page1/

Issue Summary

The area of Melancthon has been informed in March 2011 that the company who has been buying up the areas’ farmland, will be developing the land into a quarry to extract the precious Amabel dolostone aggregate which lies way below the water table underneath. The Highland Companies (an American backed entity) is intent on transforming 765 hectares of Ontario’s best potato farmland into one of the largest limestone quarries on the continent. The rock is particularly valuable in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) because of the increasing demand for high-quality aggregate, which is used to build highways and other infrastructure. According to a report published last year (http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Aggregates/Publication/287375.html), Ontario consumed 164 million tonnes of aggregate per year, and is expecting to hit 186 million tonnes over next 20 years. The report asked for the industry to seek out new sources of aggregate within 75 km of the GTA, although much of the land encircling the city is protected by Green Belt Status (http://www.niagara-gta.com/pdf/FactSheet2GreenbeltPlan2.pdf) or Niagara Escarpment (http://www.escarpment.org/home/index.php). Melancthon, however, is 116km out of the GTA and therefore is not protected by either of these statues. The company says it would like to sell 90% of the extracted rock to customers in the GTA. Projections show that more than 600 million litres of water will have to be pumped from the cavity each day to keep the work surface dry. Experts continue to study the implications for local rivers, cold-water fisheries and Southern Ontario’s water supply. Company principal, John Scherer, said the company has a big commitment to farming and as the land is emptied of limestone aggregate through the excavation of about 930 of 2630 hectares over the next 50-100 years, it will be returned to agricultural use. The company would spread soil at the bottom of the pit, though keeping it dry will need continual pumping, and 85% of the company’s holdings will continue as active farmland over the long term.

Analysis

Although there is a possibility to boost the local economy as the aggregate will not be leaving Ontario, there are many environmental factors to consider and now is the time to consider them; before we are dealing with the repercussions and irreversible environmental degradations. The precautionary principle would be great to consider at this time because society has to weigh the trade off between the benefits of either option (quarry or no quarry) and the expected costs of each option. The provincial government of Ontario took an unprecedented first step in the right direction of demanding an Environmental Assessment Review of the proposal. No quarry in Ontario has ever had to undergo a review, and luckily this could take years to complete. (http://66.212.167.146/MelancthonMegaQuarry/pdf/OPB_letter_18-Apr-2011.pdf) The area in question not only houses precious aggregate, but also is a major groundwater source. The company would have to pump 600 million litres of water out of the site a day to keep the working surface dry enough to continue as scheduled. Pollution is the result of the profit motive. How much are we willing to pollute, and is the gain even worth it? We are not just talking about agriculture now. Clean, freshwater is diminishing faster than it can be recharged to the water table where we pump for irrigation and day-to-day living. The quarry will not only damage highly nutrient rich soils from generations of potato farming, but also the one resource that is extremely essential and essentially non-renewable in terms of the quantities we require. The provincial government taking the first initiative and demanding an Environmental Assessment Review is a step in the right direction.

Prof's Comments

The article is now protected material at the Globe and Mail, so I could not read it. You have linked some other material, which is good. However, you use very few class concepts in your analysis. One way to look at it would be to consider the demand for aggregate against the marginal private cost and marginal social cost. The impact on groundwater would likely not be something that the firm has to pay. The approval process seems to be one where government decides if the risk of damage is small enough to allow the project to go ahead. What are the equity implications? Are those adversely affected going to be compensated? ...

6/10