GOLDBORO — In an era when major energy projects often trigger ideological flashpoints, public reaction to Nova Sustainable Fuels’ proposed renewable energy park in Guysborough County ranged from broadly supportive to sharply critical in the weeks leading up to its provincial environmental assessment approval last month.
A review by The Journal of the public comments record submitted to the province shows that while most responses focused on technical and procedural matters to bolster the project, a smaller number of submissions raised pointed objections to the scope, sequencing and potential.
The public comments record comprises 37 submissions, including 18 technical reviews from provincial and federal government departments and agencies, six submissions from named organizations, and 13 anonymous public comments.
Following a seven-week review, Nova Sustainable Fuels received conditional environmental assessment approval on Dec. 18 for the first phase of the project, with the province attaching 34 terms and conditions to the decision. The approval cleared the project’s initial environmental assessment, allowing it to proceed to further regulatory and permitting stages.
As proposed, the first phase would involve the construction and operation of a fuel production facility in Goldboro producing sustainable aviation fuel and renewable methanol for export markets. The project would rely on biomass and renewable electricity and include associated freshwater pipelines and supporting infrastructure on a mix of Crown and private land.
The minister’s decision did not authorize construction to begin and requires additional approvals, studies and monitoring plans before construction can commence, likely in 2028.
Keen critiques
According to public records, some of the keenest critiques came from non-governmental organizations such as the New Harbour River Restoration Association – troubled by the potential of harm to its watershed – and the Guysborough County Inshore Fishermen’s Association (GCIFA), as well as from two Mi’kmaq consultation and advocacy organizations.
In its evaluation, the GCIFA declared that it was “disappointed few details exist regarding the design and construction related activities of the marine terminal,” calling it “a crucial piece of the project’s infrastructure” that “should be included” in the Environmental Assessment Registration Document (EARD) documents.
The association added, “Too many unknowns about this project. We do not feel this project is EARD ready. There are significant studies still outstanding,” and requested mitigation measures tied to marine traffic during active fishing seasons, stating, “Shipping traffic coming in and out of Goldboro will disrupt our inshore fisheries. We request mitigation and restrictions on shipping traffic during our inshore fishery’s sensitive timings.”
In its submission, the Maritime Aboriginal Peoples Council said the Native Council of Nova Scotia is “generally supportive of projects, works, activities and undertakings which do not significantly alter, destroy, impact, or affect the sustainable natural life ecosystems with their multitude of in-situ biodiversity.”
But, the submission continued, “This project is being constructed solely for the fuel to be shipped to overseas markets, offering no tangible benefit to the community of Mi’kmaq/Aboriginal Peoples residing in their traditional, unceded territories.”
It added that the renewable energy generated “will not be distributed to the Nova Scotia power grid” and instead will be connected to the Nova Sustainable Fuels energy park, concluding that, “This discussion of significant destruction of living habitats for the financial gain of one company is contrary to our shared values and not something our community is prepared to endorse as currently proposed.”
In its remarks, Kwilmu’kw Maw-Klusuaqn (KMK), the Mi’kmaq consultation body for Nova Scotia, noted that the Environmental Assessment Registration Document identified several species found within the project area, including Atlantic salmon, American eel and Mainland moose, all of which it said are significant to the Mi’kmaq. KMK wrote that it expects Nova Scotia Environment and Climate Change to ensure that these species “will not be impacted by this proposed project” and that Mi’kmaq rights protected under Section 35 of the Constitution “can continue to be exercised.”
The submission also raised concerns about cumulative development pressures in the region, stating that “continued cumulative development including wind energy projects, forestry, mining, agriculture, and road construction risk long-term and potentially irreversible impacts,” and recommended that a cumulative impact study be completed for Guysborough County.
Praise and pushback
In anonymous public submissions, some expressed strong support for the project’s potential economic benefits and its role in advancing sustainable fuels, while others raised concerns about freshwater use, environmental impacts and long-term risks to wildlife and local ecosystems.
A smaller number argued the project should not proceed at all, citing fears of irreversible environmental damage and questioning whether the promised jobs justified those risks.
In an interview with The Journal conducted just days before the public environmental assessment decision, Nova Sustainable Fuels project director Andrew Parsons said the company expected close scrutiny as the project moves into subsequent approval stages.
“As the environmental assessment process plays out, we’ve spent the past two years doing all our field work and science studies to make sure we can describe the project to the full extent that we can in terms of its environmental implications,” Parsons said. “Typically, in these EA processes, you either receive a decision for more information, a decision to move to a different type of process, or an approval with conditions. We don’t know what those conditions will be until we receive them.”
Parsons said much of the work ahead will focus on meeting those conditions and continuing environmental studies, noting that approval of the first phase does not represent a final green light.
“It’s a long development process,” he said. “We don’t have all the answers to everything today but, as we develop them, we want to make sure people have proper information to understand what we’re proposing to do.”
Addressing public concern, Parsons said the company’s approach is to focus on transparency and information rather than debate.
“The number one thing we can do, and continue to do, is to present the facts and information we have so that people don’t have to speculate about what if, or what’s going to happen here,” he said. “Whenever we communicate to the public, we want to make sure it’s on a fact basis.”
He added that Nova Sustainable Fuels has established a community liaison committee and plans to continue public engagement as the project advances through additional regulatory stages.
“We really want to be open and transparent,” Parsons said. “It’s not unexpected that there will be concerns, and our job is to hear those concerns and be as forthright and truthful as possible as the process continues.”
