Base metals smelters and refineries, and zinc plants: final performance report

On April 29, 2006, the Government of Canada published a pollution prevention planning notice (PDF) targeting specific toxic substances released from base metals smelters and refineries, and zinc plants. It applied to 11 facilities located in British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick.

Summary

The implementation of P2 plans resulted in a reduction in emissions of targeted toxic substances from the base year of 2005 and most factors to consider listed in the notice were met.

From 2005 to 2018, the sector reported the following results^{Footnote 1} :

• Eight out of 9 facilities and 7 out 9 facilities respectively met the 2008 and the 2015 targets for sulphur dioxide for a total reduction of 79% (526,939 t)
• All 9 facilities and 8 out 9 facilities respectively met the 2008 and the 2015 targets for particulate matter for a total reduction of 76% (5,669 t)
• The facility that was subject to the 2008 target for dioxins and furans met it for a total reduction of 69% (0.739 g I-TEQ)
• The facility that was subject to the 2008 target for mercury met it for a total reduction of 88% (1,486 kg)
• A total reduction of 54% (38 t) for arsenic
• A total reduction of 89% (28 t) for cadmium
• A total reduction of 46% (80 t) for lead
• A total reduction of 79% (251 t) for nickel

Overall sector results 2005 to 2018

The following sections provide an overview of results at the sector level. Emission trends of some toxic substances are presented from 2005 to 2018.

Overall, from 2005 to 2018, the sector reported the following reductions:

• 79% (526,939 t) for SO₂
• 76% (5,669 t) for PM
• 88% (1,486 kg) for mercury
• 69% (0.739 g I-TEQ) for dioxins and furans

The charts below indicate the trends of emissions from 2005 to 2018 for these specified toxic substances, which are presented in the notice, released by the sector. There were no sector targets for these substances.

Legend: The following legend is associated with each of the charts found in this section. Vertical purple bars indicate the reported annual emissions for each toxic substance for the sector, orange horizontal lines indicate the sum of total facility 2008 targets and blue horizontal lines indicate the sum of total facility 2015 targets for the particular substance. For each of the mercury and dioxins and furans, the 2008 target applied to a single facility. 

Chart 1: Sulphur dioxide (tons/year) 79% sector reduction (526,939 t)

Chart 2: Particulate matter (tons/year) 76% sector reduction (5,669 t)

Chart 3: Mercury (kilograms/year) 88% sector reduction (1,486 kg)

Chart 4: Dioxins and furans (grams I-TEQ) 69% sector reduction (0.739 g I-TEQ)

In addition, from 2005 to 2018, reported metal releases not subject to any targets under the notice (arsenic, cadmium, lead and nickel) were decreased by the sector as follows:

• 54% (38 t) for arsenic
• 89% (28 t) for cadmium
• 46% (80 t) for lead
• 79% (251 t) for nickel 

Chart 5: Cadmium (tons/year): No targets, 89% sector reduction (28 t)

Chart 6: Arsenic (tons/year): No targets, 54% sector reduction (38 t)

Chart 7: Lead(tons/year): No targets, 46% sector reduction (80 t)

Chart 8: Nickel (tons/year): No targets, 79% sector reduction (251 t)

Community Air Quality Protection Program

Each facility from the sector implemented a Community Air Quality Protection Program (CAPP) to prevent exceedances of air quality objectives in communities surrounding the facility. Monitoring stations have been installed in the vicinity of individual facilities and provide automated and real-time data on air quality. In addition for most facilities, the requirement to have a CAPP has been integrated with their provincial environmental programs.

Environmental code of practice

The 11 facilities as a whole fully implemented more than 80% of applicable recommendations, on average and were in conformance with the code. Some recommended actions are required to be maintained on an ongoing basis (in other words, can never be “fully implemented”).

Environmental performance guideline for mercury

The notice required facilities to consider the CCME 2000 Canada-wide Standards for Mercury Emissions (PDF), which specifies that existing facilities should achieve an environmental source performance (atmospheric emissions) guideline of 2 grams of mercury per tonne of total production of finished metals. As of December 2018, this standard was met by all 11 facilities.

Reducing total emissions of metals

The sector achieved the notice requirement related to reducing total releases for metals of arsenic, cadmium, lead, nickel and mercury from 1988 levels by 80% as of 2008 and by 90% beyond 2008, as set out in recommendation no. 1 of the base metals smelting sector Strategic Options Report. Total reductions of 86%, 90% and 93% for the sector were achieved in 2008, 2015 and 2018 respectively compared to 1988 level emissions.

Facility results

The following section provides an overview of results by the eleven individual facilities subject to the notice^{Footnote 2} . Achievement of the targets and emission trends of some toxic substances for individual facilities are presented from 2005-2018.

Achievement of the targets

As of December 31, 2018, the status of achieving the 2008 and 2015 emissions targets by the facilities is as follows:

•  8 out of 9 facilities^{Footnote 3}  and 7 out 9 facilities respectively met the 2008 and the 2015 targets for SO₂
• All 9 facilities and 8 out of 9 facilities respectively met the 2008 and the 2015 targets for PM
• The one facility subject to the 2008 mercury target met it
• The one facility subject to the 2008 dioxins and furans target met it

The status of achieving the 2008 and 2015 emissions targets by each facility is indicated in the table below.

Emission trends

Emission trends for sulphur dioxide, total particulate matter and total metals (arsenic, cadmium, lead, nickel, mercury) for 9 of the 11 facilities are provided as indicated in the charts below. The other 2 facilities are not presented because they are low emitters of sulphur dioxide, total particulate matter and total metals.

Sulphur dioxide emissions

All 9 facilities reduced their sulfur dioxide emissions compared to 2005 level emissions.

Chart 9: emission trend for sulphur dioxide

Total particulate emissions

Seven out of 9 facilities reduced their PM emissions while 2 facilities increased their emissions respectively by 24% and 34% compared to 2005 level emissions but still met their 2008 and 2015 PM targets.

Chart 10: emission trend for particulate matter

Total metals emissions

Total emissions of metals (arsenic, cadmium, lead, nickel, mercury) were reduced by 7 facilities but two facilities increased their total metal emissions when compared to 2005 levels as shown in the chart below.

Chart 11: emission trend for total metals

Pollution prevention actions

Pollution prevention focuses on avoiding the creation of pollutants rather than trying to manage them after they have been created. As a factor to consider in preparing their P2 plans, facilities were asked to give priority to pollution prevention methods such as ”Equipment or process modifications” “good operating practices or training”, “material or feedstock substitution”, etc.

Facilities were also required to consider the use of pollution control methods to manage the pollution generated during the industrial process.

In their Declarations of preparation, facilities indicated that 92% of the actions they planned to undertake were pollution prevention activities, while 8% were pollution control activities. The most frequently cited pollution prevention activities were: “Equipment or process modification” (38%) and ”Good operating practices or training” (21%).

Similarly, in their Declarations of implementation facilities indicated that pollution prevention activities represented 87% of their actions, while 13% of their actions were pollution controls methods.

The pollution prevention and pollution control methods reported by facilities changed during the implementation period although “Equipment or process modifications” remained the most frequently cited method. An example of equipment or process modification is Vale Sudbury’s Clean Atmospheric Emissions Reduction project to reduce SO₂ and particulate emissions.

Custom feed purchasing, or applying limits on the concentration of metals in secondary feed materials, was cited by some facilities as an example of good operating practices and purchasing techniques. Another example of good operating practices was paving or wetting unpaved roads on-site in order to reduce fugitive PM emissions.

Replacing or upgrading pollution control equipment such as electrostatic precipitators allowed greater capture of PM at some facilities. In some cases the captured PM could be recycled back into the process (on-site recovery and reuse).

Conclusion

The 2006 pollution prevention notice met its objective and resulted in a reduction in emissions of targeted toxic substances from the base year of 2005. Facilities implemented both pollution prevention and pollution control methods to achieve results. Factors to consider from the Notice like the recommended practices of the Code of Practice and the development of a Community Air Quality Protection Program were taken into consideration by each facility in order to meet the risk management objective. Facilities that were subject to the 2008 and 2015 targets for targeted substances largely achieved them:

• Eight out of 9 facilities and 7 out of 9 facilities respectively met the 2008 and the 2015 targets for sulphur dioxide
• All the 9 facilities and 8 out 9 facilities respectively met the 2008 and the 2015 targets for particulate matter
• The facility that was subject to the 2008 target for mercury met it
• The facility that was subject to the 2008 target for dioxins and furans met it

Next steps

By December 31, 2018 the P2 notice was fully implemented. On January 5, 2018, performance agreements between ECCC and base metals facilities were published and are in effect until 2025. The purpose of these agreements is to achieve and maintain the base-level industrial emissions requirements (BLIERs) for emissions of SO₂ and PM. In addition, facilities are to make continual improvement, where reasonably feasible, with respect to further reducing emissions of SO₂ and PM, reduce emissions of metals and fugitive PM, and continue to implement the applicable recommendations in the code of practice.

Background

Canada’s base metals smelting (BMS) sector includes producers of zinc, copper, lead, nickel and cobalt. The notice applied to 11 facilities as indicated in the table below.

These facilities release substances specified on the List of Toxic Substances (Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999).

Assessment of these releases led to the conclusion that they enter the environment in quantity, concentration or conditions that can have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or biological diversity, and that constitute a danger to human health or life in Canada.

Toxic substances contained in those releases include SO₂, PM of less than 10 microns (PM₁₀), PM containing metals released from copper smelters and zinc plants, mercury, dioxins and furans, lead, inorganic arsenic compounds, inorganic cadmium compounds, and oxidic, sulphidic and soluble inorganic nickel compounds.

Each facility within the sector was required to file:

• an initial declaration of preparation, confirming that they have prepared and are implementing a P2 plan in accordance with the notice
• interim annual reports to indicate the progress they have made implementing their P2 plan
• a final declaration of implementation, confirming that they have implemented their plan and reporting on the actions and results they have achieved

The facilities subject to the notice had to fully implement their plans by December 31, 2015.

When preparing and implementing their P2 plans, facilities were required to take into consideration factors which included:

• the risk management objective which is the application of best available techniques for pollution prevention and control to avoid or minimize the creation and release of pollutants and waste and to reduce the overall risk to the environment or human health
• the achievement of annual emissions targets via the development and implementation of a smelter emissions reduction program to prevent and control emissions, taking into account the achievement of annual air releases limit targets beginning in 2008 and 2015 as presented in the table below
• the recommended practices that are contained in the 2006 Environmental code of practice for base metals smelters and refineries
• the reduction of total emissions of metals by reducing total releases of metals at the sector level from 1988 levels by 80% as of 2008 and by 90% beyond 2008, as set out in the first recommendation of the Base Metals Smelting Sector Strategic Options Report
• The development and implementation of a CAPP to prevent exceedances of air quality objectives in communities surrounding the facilities
• the achievement of the environmental performance guideline for mercury as set out in the 2000 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Canada-wide Standards for Mercury Emissions (PDF).

The notice included facility-specific annual sulphur dioxide (SO₂) and particulate matter (PM) targets for 9 facilities for 2008 and 2015. In addition, 1 facility was subject to a 2008 target for mercury, and another facility was subject to a 2008 target for dioxins and furans. 2 low-emission facilities were not subject to targets for SO₂, PM, mercury or dioxins and furans. The notice also recommended each facility to develop and implement a CAPP that mainly included monitoring of ambient air, modeling, prediction and prevention of exceedances of ambient air objectives and measurements, estimates and reporting of air emissions from process sources.