The Multinational Glencore, owner of the Horne foundry in Rouyn-Noranda, concerned many citizens when she announced that she no longer wanted to reach the Quebec standard for the concentration of arsenic in the air of 3 nanograms per cubic meter.
Glencore asks the Government of Quebec to let her exploit her long -term copper foundry with a standard of 15 nanograms per cubic meter (NG/M3), revealed the company to our colleague Jean-Thomas Léveillé last month1. In 2023, the company said he wanted to “achieve the objectives” set by Quebec.
Glencore even challenges the works of public health in Quebec.
Let’s look at this more closely complex file, by analyzing the facts.
What Quebec requires
Since 2011, the legal limit of concentration of arsenic in the air in Quebec has been 3 ng/m3 (this is an annual average).
In theory, the standard applies everywhere in Quebec. In practice, around 100 existing industrial projects, including the Horne foundry, have an authorization from the Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks to exceed this threshold.
During its latest authorization, granted in 2023, Quebec forced the Horne foundry to significantly reduce its arsenic emissions in the air: the maximum annual threshold of arsenic in the air was to go gradually from 65 ng/m3 en 2023 à 15 ng/m3 In 2027. By December 2027, Glencore must also file a plan to reach the Quebec standard of 3 ng/m3 (There is no schedule to reach the standard).
The company was leaving from far away. The concentration of arsenic in the air in the Notre-Dame district in Rouyn-Noranda was 134 ng/m3 a 2015, 73 ng/m3 EN 2022 EN 39 NG/M3 In 2024.
Glencore now finds the standard of 3 ng/m3 too severe. It is actually strict. The European Union suggests a target of 6 ng/m3. The United States has no national standard.
“This is a standard that is adopted in order to limit the risks of lung cancer,” explains Maryse Bouchard, environmental health professor at the National Institute of Scientific Research (INRS).
That said, Quebec ideally does not want to force factories and a copper foundry to close. In Rouyn-Noranda, a city of 43,000 inhabitants, the Horne Foundry employs 908 people. To protect the population, the government therefore establishes a level of risk that it considers acceptable near factories.
When it comes to potentially carcinogenic matters, a risk considered to be acceptable in the West, by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in particular, is usually 1 additional case of cancer per 100,000 people2, 3, 4.
For copper foundries in the United States, EPA estimates that the acceptable risk level is three times higher, 3 cases of lung cancer per 100,000 people5.
According to the Inspq, for the Notre-Dame district, very close to the Horne foundry in Rouyn-Noranda6 :
- A concentration of arsenic in the air respecting the Quebec standard of 3 ng/m3 would generate 1.8 cases of lung cancer per 100,000 people exposed for 70 years (total prospective risk of arsenic, cadmium and nickel);
- An arsenic level in the air of 5 ng/m3 would generate 2 cases of lung cancer per 100,000 people;
- a rate of 15 ng/m3 would generate 3 cases of lung cancer per 100,000 people, the level of risk considered as acceptable for copper foundries by EPA;
- a rate of less than 15 ng/m3 would also protect children from the effects of arsenic on their cognitive development.
The risk is lower in other sectors of the city, further from the foundry.
What GLENCore requires
Before investing 300 million, Glencore wants to obtain the assurance that Quebec will authorize it in the long term to issue 15 NG/M3and will not ask him to respect the standard of 3 ng/m3.
“Fifteen nanograms per cubic meter, it is a security situation for the community. We are involved in improving the environment, but it is technically impossible to go up to 3 NG/M3 “, Said Vincent Plant, managing director for the copper sector in North America in Glencore in interview.
In March 2023, Glencore seemed more optimistic: “We are going to put all the efforts, people are mobilized and we want to achieve the objectives,” said Marie-Élise Viger, Director of the Environment of Glencore7.
To challenge the Quebec standard, Glencore relies on a September 2022 report ordered to an American expert, Christopher Martin, professor at the University of Virginia-Western University. Glencore had presented this same report in Quebec in 2022.
Mr. Martin believes, among other things, that Quebec should have measured the rate of arsenic in the urine of citizens, not in their nails. Maryse Bouchard is strongly disagreed with the conclusions of this report.
Many studies conclude that [la mesure de l’arsenic dans les ongles] is an excellent biomarker of the chronic exhibition.
Maryse Bouchard, environmental health teacher at INRS
GLENCORE underlines that the arsenic rate in the air without the activities of the HORNE Foundry was estimated at 4.1 ng/m3 in 2022 by the Ministry of the Environment. In this context, it is impossible to respect the standard of 3 ng/m3estimates the company. Quebec, however, judges that the concentration of arsenic excluding the activities of the foundry is probably lower currently due to the “measures of mitigation put in place” since 2023.
Glencore also notes that Quebec requires that the concentration of arsenic be measured where it is the highest (in the “legal station” located in the parking of the foundry), while the European Union suggests to measure it where the population lives in general. It is true that the arsenic rate in the air is higher near the factory than elsewhere in Rouyn-Noranda. In 2024, it was 39.1 ng/m3 in the parking of the foundry, of 7.8 ng/m3 at the Glencore arena (the Huskies’ home) and 5.3 ng/m3 at the town hall.
Is there a crossing route?
In order to escape a stricter standard, Glencore takes up arguments that date from 2022. However, the study of the Inspq which supports the decision of public health and the Ministry of the Environment in 2023 is solid and detailed. It is based on 10 other studies of credible organizations, including three environmental protection agencies in the United States, Health Canada and the World Health Organization.
By contesting public health work, Glencore does not help the debate and does not serve his cause.
Beyond these considerations, should we allow Glencore to be imposed on a standard of 15 ng/m3 forever ? It seems difficult to me. A threshold of 15 ng/m3 In the long term, it is too high, we are too close to the acceptable threshold defined by EPA. Better to apply the precautionary principle and target lower.
Must GLENCORE absolutely reach 3 ng/m3 In five years? It is the heart of the current debate.
When you look at the figures and the reports of experts closer, which seems to me the most important is to pass as quickly as possible below the European threshold of 6 NG/M3.
À 5 ng/m3the rate of lung cancer attributable to arsenic in the air is 2 cases per 100,000 people. At 3 ng/m3this is 1.8 cases.
In short, it is more important to go from 15 to 6 ng/m3 quickly only to go from 6 to 3 ng/m3. Especially if we consider that the concentration of arsenic in the Notre-Dame district has been a dangerously high level for decades.
In addition, the rate of arsenic in the air without the activities of the foundry is evaluated somewhere between 2 and 4.1 ng/m3. Can we really demand reach 3 ng/m3 under these conditions?
My suggestion for Quebec: require a decrease at a concentration of arsenic in the air between 3 and 6 ng/m3 Within five years. Taking into account the circumstances and expert opinions, it seems to me that this level of risk is acceptable.
1. Read the article “The Horne Foundry refuses to respect the provincial limit”
2. Consult a Carex Canada study on the excess risk estimate of cancer throughout life (in English)
3. Consult a survey on current Health Canada practices in terms of cancer risk assessment
4. Consult a chapter on the assessment of risk and dangers of the United States environmental protection agency (in English)
5. Consult a decision of the United States environmental protection agency (in English)
6. Consult a risk assessment report from the Quebec National Public Health Institute
7. Read the article “Quebec ignores the needs of the residents he wants to move”
What do you think? Take part in the dialogue
