Overview: Sherritt International Corporation proposes to build Canada's First Commercial Coal Gasification Plant south of the Village of Ryley, a project which has a forty year time frame from start to completion. The long-term environmental effects of this project will impact the area for an even longer period of time. Within Sherritt International's proposed framework, the effected land base will be strip mined of its coal base, this coal converted into an hydrogen based energy source which can be utilized throughout the local and world economies. Environmental Impact: With Sherritt International Corporation's proposed framework, the effected land base will be strip mined, drastically changing this rural Alberta landscape. Strip mining in itself is a very intrusive acquisition technique, albeit cheaper for Sherritt compared to other methods, to obtain the coal which lies below the land's surface. Strip mining involves removing all vegetation and plant matter, trees, bush and so forth from the landscape, removing the top soil to access the coal seam, then replacing the effected areas with the previously removed soil. My concern is the environmental impact this process has on the flora and fauna of the area. Given the extensive time frame for this project, Sherritt will effectively make the area inhabitable for animal life for that period of time. The land base will be able to reclaimed, re-forested over the course of the coal project, but at what cost to the local environment? Estimates indicate that it would be a seventy to one hundred year time frame to get the area back to its current natural state. Another issue is the effect the proposed plant will have on the environment and land adjacent to the facility. There are various creeks and streams that feed off-site wetlands around the facility. No where in the Sherritt study have I seen any consideration for such an impact. It appears that Sherritt is focusing on the land owners directly effected by the project, less concerned about those in the surrounding areas. One creek in particular, flows out of the project area, into the Vermillion River and into the North Saskatchewan River, effecting various wetlands along its course. Another environmental issue, although somewhat trivial in nature, is the noise pollution and the higher traffic volumes that such a facility will generate. Landowners in the area with which I have discussed the proposed facility, indicate that one of the main reasons that they are living in the area is for the quality of life the area affords and feel that if this plant is constructed, the value of living in the area would greatly diminish. Some have indicated a possible relocation to get out of the Beaver County proposed industrial zone. A final concern which I have with this project is the relatively new and untested technology utilized in converting coal to the hydrogen based Syngas. As outlined in Sherritt International Corporation's web page, this plant, if built, will be the first commercial plant of its kind in Canada. Whenever new technology is introduced, not possessing a proven track record with years of study, I get a little concerned. Sherritt International has made claims of how the plant will be operated in an environmentally sound manner, minimizing the risks involved with the day to day operations of this plant. I am curious as to how Sherritt International can make such claims given their own admission that the technology and procedures of the plant is untested, new technology. Once the Syngas plant is in place, all the unforseen and unpredictable problems will be of no consequence to all parties concerned. The plant will be there and local citizens will have to deal with any problems that arise. A risk, quite frankly, local and provincial governments should not be willing to take without concrete operational records, before the development of the plant is commenced. It becomes a chicken and the egg scenario in that the plant should not be developed unless data from a working plant is analyzed for all foreseeable risk elements, yet a plant cannot be analyzed unless one is built. My question is, why should Beaver County be the testing ground for multi-national business interests? Financial Loss / Gain for the Ryley Area: Sherritt Gordon projects that the Coal operation will generate 1000 jobs during the construction and 300 permanent jobs once the project is up and running, for the next 40 years. My concern with most mega projects of this caliber, is that main selling feature used by big business is of sustainable, long-term economic growth for the area. One does not have look any farther than the Ryley Hazardous Waste Facility or the Beaverhill Landfill in Ryley to see how realistic such promises are by these multi-national corporations. I recall in the mid 1980's when the Hazardous Waste Facility was first proposed, how the provincial and local governments made promises of employment, economic development, population gains that would be generated from having such a facility placed in the Ryley area. In the twenty five years since this waste facility was proposed and then built, the Village of Ryley has seen a population decrease from 524 to individuals in 1985 to 458 individuals in 2006 (Statistics Canada), a drop of 12.6 percent. This drop would be even more substantial if not for the current booming economy and lack of affordable housing in the Edmonton area. In the past couple of years, a moderate inflow of people from this major urban center have migrated to Ryley in search of affordable living accommodations. The number of businesses in Ryley has been in a steady decline since the mid- eighties, losing businesses Ryley Motors, Ryley Variety Store, Ryley Food Mart (across from Lisa's Market), all of which employed various numbers of employees and stimulated the local economy. In the early 1990's a regional landfill was placed in the just outside the Village of Ryley. Again, provincial and local governments not learning from past errors in respect to the hazardous waste facility, placed one of the largest garbage dumps in North America within a mile of the village central core. In both facilities, labor intensive, low paying employment opportunities were given to local citizens. The majority of employment opportunities requiring higher post secondary education were given to individuals not from the local area. To multiply the effect of this disparity, a high proportion of these middle to upper management employees opted to not live in the village, opting to reside in Tofield, Sherwood Park, Edmonton or other surrounding areas. This resulted in their employment income not being spent in the local economy, thus limiting economic growth in the area. After reviewing the past twenty years of economic impact that the hazardous waste facility and the garbage dump has had on the growth and development of the Village of Ryley, it is clear that costs, both environmentally and financially, have substantially out weighed any benefits generated. Moral / Ethical Implications: Over the past twenty years since graduating from Ryley School, I have had the opportunity to travel extensively throughout Europe and Canada, seeing first hand how economic progress can stimulate local economies without being detrimental to environment. It is perplexing when I consider my home town and the decisions the local government has made over this time period. It appears that the Village of Ryley and Beaver County have assumed all the risk, taken upon themselves, all the down side in their big business decisions, while multi-national corporations have reaped all the benefits. I am curious whether the citizens and local governments will step up and adjust their short term thinking to a more long term, viable decision making process. One just has to look as far as Tofield, Alberta, to see a community with the right focus and mandate. Over the same period as previously reviewed in my Village of Ryley study, Tofield's population has increased from 1545 individuals in 1985 to 1876 individuals in 2006, an increase of 21.4 percent. Numerous new businesses have been developed during this time period in Tofield as well. It seems that when ever a development of any description that is of benefit to business and the local citizens, the Town of Tofield is excellent prototype as to the direction the Village of Ryley should be focused on. Tofield currently has a RCMP Detachment, Hospital, Airport, thriving population, car dealerships, sports arena.... the examples are endless. It almost appears when a proposed project of any value of merit is tabled, the local Tofield government is at the forefront of positive economic development. When undesirable industry is on the radar, the local government officials of the Village of Ryley and Beaver County step up and jump at opportunities before assessing the long term implications of their decisions. Conclusion: I currently own land in the Ryley area, not directly or indirectly effected by the businesses decisions made by the Village of Ryley over the past twenty years. My long-term agenda was too purchase more agricultural land in the area, developing a farming operation and retiring on the farm owned by my family for over forty years. Some of my neighbors have been blinded by the financial gains promised by Sherritt in the acquisition of their farmland, some these individuals have owned their farm land for generations, yet are willing to sell their property for meager financial gains. The main reason for this editorial is to get a dialogue developing between local citizens, whether or not they are of the same mind set as me. Hopefully local land owners will stand up and voice their opinions, realizing that the environment should not be sacrificed for short-term financial gains. Unfortunately, history shows that past business decisions by local governments have not generated proposed financial rewards as promised, negatively effecting the area with minimal, positive outcomes. Local politicians will come and go, the true stewards of the land are those who make lifelong commitments to the area and subsequently, these individuals, I believe, will have the foresight to want what is in the best for the area. Mr. Glenn A. Jensen VE6DKK@HOTMAIL.COM