Show Notes
In light of the closing of the Alberta Water Council—as we learned from Jay White—and the 2026 Global Water Bankruptcy report—courtesy of Bob Sandford—now is a great time to revisit Engineer J. Bruce Smedley’s recommendation to form a public water agency. This conversation from August 2024 centers on Alberta’s escalating water crisis, framed by drought conditions, failing infrastructure, and inadequate government planning and oversight. I outline recent drought impacts, including four southern Alberta communities that had to have water trucked in, and highlights the auditor general’s findings: modelling is limited to parts of the province, most basins lack conservation objectives, there is weak monitoring of water pressure and risk triggers, and enforcement of water licenses and compliance is ineffective. Bruce stress that current models assume “water in equals water out” and ignore losses from heat and evapotranspiration, and that surface water analysis is largely missing, with monitoring focused on rivers and streams rather than the full hydrological picture. We also connect Alberta’s decisions to downstream regions, noting that Alberta is effectively “the taps” for Saskatchewan and Manitoba,—not the Mississippi basin (oops!)—so local choices have far-reaching consequences. Against this backdrop, Bruce presents his proposal for an integrated water resource preservation and restoration agency that is public, independent, apolitical, interdisciplinary, intercultural, and accountable. Bruce’s Water Agency Framework * Terms of Reference: coherent initiative of social planning with an interdisciplinary approach to managing water basin resources and their uses to identify and satisfy water resource stability and sustainability sufficient to secure ecological, social, and human subsistence indefinitely given resource conflicts, external disruptions, and climate change. * Scope of work: to include intake, withdrawal and loss of every drop of surface water, groundwater, aquifer, relative to watershed management including; flood control, tourism, hydropower, fisheries, water quality, navigation, sand and gravel extraction, and riverbank enhancement, erosion, relocation, etc. * Adequate data collection and information consistent with the scope and modeling requirements. * Scenario modeling and analysis including climate change, extreme weather, financial and institutional risk. * Government and public response, input, and real time communication and information. * Forecast modeling consistent with sustaining food, health, safety, ecosystem, and biomass sustainability. * Agency accountability that ensures system integrity and optimized investment decisions, allocation of capital resources, time horizons, and project implementation and operations. * Communication to inform public awareness. disaster readiness, and ensure contingency plans are available for rapid disaster response, food and water security, as well as communicate cost, liability, and inherent risk in real time, consistent with global weather fluctuations of hours, days, and weeks. * Government and industry funding, staffing, scheduling, and accountability. His letter calls for a 10,000‑foot, river‑basin‑wide perspective that considers future water supply under climate change, glacier loss, and increasingly extreme and erratic weather, rather than just current allocations. He argues that no one is currently modelling entire basins or systematically integrating rainfall, aquifers, usage, and ecosystem needs across agriculture, urban, recreational, and wildlife uses. The proposed agency’s terms of reference include tracking intake, withdrawal, and loss of every drop of water from mountain precipitation through snow and ice fields to river flows, recognizing that only about 25% of falling moisture becomes usable river water. It would use complex systems modelling and advances in mathematics and AI to run scenario analyses, identify failure points, and guide long‑term, provin
More from The Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy
This Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy conversation is an urgent discussion about a proposed AI data centre project in Calgary, Alberta, with guests Sarah Yurchevich of Alberta Data Centre Watch and Nick Tsergas of Stop the Data Centre. The immediate concern is a rezoning application filed by Stantec Consulting on August 13th, 2026, seeking to change land use in northeast Calgary to accommodate data centres and associated power generation, with a public engagement deadline the day of the recording. I emphasize that 68 data centre projects are currently tracked in Alberta, with approximately [40] in planning stages. Sarah warns that once zoning changes are approved, future opportunities for public input narrow significantly. Nick explains how citizens can easily voice concerns through https://calgary.stopthedatacentre.ca/council, which provides a tool to email city council with either a pre-written template or personalized message, noting that individualized letters carry more weight but template submissions still help demonstrate numbers. Both guests stress early public engagement and monitoring of municipal zoning processes. Sarah encourages non-experts to participate by asking questions of elected officials and sharing the file number widely, while Nick describes how Stop the Data Centre connects activists across cities, offers updates via newsletter, and now accepts donations to support legal challenges when administrative channels fail. Jenny mentions unverified reports that the broader Meta project may impact 350 wetlands without changes to the Environmental Protection Act aiming accommodate them. Also remember to take action for the Alberta Wilderness Association today! Call you MLA, MP and Environment Ministers to list these concerns regarding proposed changes to EPEA and EIA, respectively: 1. Mandatory EIA list: Proposal to exclude expansion of already operational facilities, remove red tape on smaller projects or projects where standardized requirements are deemed sufficient, for example power plants under 10 MW. This would directly allow the EETP 920 MW project to avoid full EIA by phasing / expansion loophole. This must not be removed. 2. Wetlands and Water Act linkage to EPEA: Alberta is simultaneously proposing to remove Water Act approvals for temporary and seasonal wetlands on private cropland — same prairie pothole wetlands that recharge Beverly Channel Aquifer >20 m thick connecting Redwater River Natural Area OC 454/71-13 (159.63 Ac) and Redwater Provincial Recreation Area — Sandhills 5,498 Ac Twp 57 Rge 20-21 to the EETP site. Removing EPEA oversight compounds loss. 3. Cumulative effects — Industrial Heartland: The Canada-Alberta Co-operation Agreement April 2, 2026 aims for one project one review but must not reduce ecological integrity. EETP data centre sits in Designated Industrial Zone with existing air, water, noise impacts — needs full cumulative assessment, not streamlined codes of practice. 4. Public participation: 9 days is insufficient. I request: * Confirmation my submission is logged before Oct 30 deadline * 60-day extension for public and Indigenous consultation * Public release of all proposed Activities Designation Regulation changes * Retention of mandatory EIA for energy projects >100 MW, data centres >100 acres, and any project within 20 km of UNESCO Biosphere or Provincial Natural Area 5. Stronger protections needed: Not just illegal dumping fines ($10k-$100k individuals, $100k-$1M corporations), but also protection of species at risk habitat, wetlands of all classes including ephemeral, seasonal, temporary, and environmental reserves under MGA. Thank you, Sherry Heschuk for your guidance!
Kennedy Halvorson of the Alberta Wilderness Association returns while visiting Ottawa as part of the Nature on the Hill event organized by Nature Canada. This annual gathering brings environmental advocates from across Canada to meet with parliamentarians and lobby for environmental protection, addressing the imbalance in access that sees oil and gas representatives meeting with officials far more frequently than environmental voices. Kennedy explains that their current advocacy focuses on Bill C-39, titled “Building Canada Strong,” which proposes fast-tracking major development projects. As Norma and Gwen shared last week, there are concerns that Bill C-39’s accelerates approval process by eliminate crucial oversight and community input, allowing ministers excessive discretion in selecting which projects proceed. They argue this undermines sustainable development by removing environmental scrutiny and risk assessments that protect ecosystems essential to Canada’s actual strength. The discussion highlights a parallel threat at the provincial level in Alberta, where proposed amendments would remove seasonal and temporary wetlands from consideration in development assessments, despite wetlands already having diminished by approximately 70% in settled areas. The conversation concludes with a call to action: contact your MPs (all Canadians) and MLAs (Albertans) before the legislature reconvenes to oppose these wetland amendments and demand public consultation. Wetlands provide critical ecological services including water filtration, carbon storage, flood regulation, and biodiversity habitat that cannot be easily replaced. Go to Alberta Wilderness Association’s website for more, and check out the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) and Yellowstone to Yukon (Y2Y) for additional resources for engagement on environmental issues. https://www.albertawilderness.ca/act-now/we-need-wetlands/ https://www.albertawilderness.ca/send-a-letter-demand-better-protections-for-wetlands/
Gwen Muskwa is the Treaty Relations Director for Treaty 8, having worked with the organization for 29 years. She describes her work as honouring the legacy of elders who taught her everything she knows, with a focus on ensuring treaties are respected, honoured, and upheld. Norma Large is from the Saddle Lake Creek Nation in Treaty 6 territory, currently living in Treaty 7 territory in Calgary. She explains she has spent approximately 30 years doing advocacy work to address inequities between First Nations and non-First Nations peoples, and sees the current referendum moment as an opportunity for change. Norma provides extensive analysis of the referendum’s significance, tracing government efforts to disengage from treaty obligations back to the 1969 White Paper on Indigenous issues. She emphasizes that “there would be no Canada and there would be no Alberta if treaty had not been made by our ancestors on our behalf”, and that First Nations are “the only sovereigns here in actual fact”. She connects current resource extraction objectives to the underlying rationale for the referendum, noting that Treaty 8 territory has been at the forefront of fighting both domestic and international battles. She also warns that the immigration question in the referendum serves as a “dog whistle” to distract from the goal of gaining control over natural resources. Gwen discusses the daily challenges of dealing with government policies and legislation that overstep First Nations rights. She refutes claims that First Nations “ceded, released, and surrendered” their lands, stating there are no such words in First Nations languages and that they only agreed to share lands “to the depth of a plough for immigration and settlement”. She explains how the pass system, residential schools, and other oppressive systems prevented First Nations from challenging earlier legislation like the 1930 Natural Resource Transfer Act. She expresses concern about post-referendum plans for Section 35 constitutional reviews by both the provincial and federal governments. Both Gwen and Norma elaborate on the sacred nature of treaties as international instruments made with the Imperial Crown of Great Britain and Ireland, not Canada or Alberta. Norma describes the pipe ceremony and smudge that accompanied treaty-making as creating “an invisible jurisdiction” as binding as a judge’s gavel, lasting “forever in perpetuity for as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the waters flow”. Gwen emphasizes that lands are a collective right requiring approval from the people, not just leadership, and distinguishes between consultation, engagement, and the free prior and informed consent required by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Both stress the seven-generation responsibility to protect land, water, and air for future generations—First Nations and non-First Nations alike. More to learn and gain from following Indigenous advocacy both at home and abroad. Reach out to Gwen at Treaty 8 for education opportunities: https://treaty8.org/about/education/. Note: Norma said Bill C-69 but meant C-39.
Tami Smith and Linda Walker are the hosts of “This Is B******t,” a podcast born out of AB Resistance, which focuses on analyzing legislation and political developments in Alberta. Tami is a retired teacher who works with AB Resistance, writes newsletters, and conducts research, while Linda brings an American perspective from having grown up in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where she witnessed the decline of public education and the rise of televangelist movements that she sees parallels with in Alberta. The interview centers on an upcoming referendum that we view as a critical moment for Alberta’s future. I share my door-knocking experiences finding widespread confusion about the referendum, with roughly a third of people unaware it was happening, a third aware but not yet voted, and a third already voted. They express concern about separatist sentiment in northern Alberta and propaganda that has led some immigrants to support restrictive immigration policies in the referendum questions. Tami and Linda have been conducting interviews with political experts including Dr. Bratt, Dr. Parks, and Dr. Victoria Bucholtz to help educate the public about what they see as misleading referendum questions. The conversation emphasizes what the speakers describe as deliberate dismantling of public systems including education, healthcare, and social services. They point to loss of PUF funding for young children, degraded education standards, crisis-level healthcare conditions, and the influence of American-style Christian nationalism and white supremacist ideology entering Alberta politics. We frame the referendum as an opportunity for Albertans to reject US political influence and protect Canadian values of universal healthcare, truth and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and international law. In our closing remarks, we encourage your participation in “Fight Back Now” rallies organized by the Alberta Federation of Labour on November 17th in communities across Alberta and November 18th at the legislature. Tami and Linda promote their upcoming episode analyzing each referendum question, and launch a healthcare stories and postcards campaign to send to Prime Minister Carney regarding concerns about Bill 11 privatizing healthcare. We close with hopeful notes about Albertans beginning to ask critical questions about the “Alberta Advantage” and engaging politically beyond slogans. Follow “This is B******t” on YouTube
Morrow County Oregon’s Barrett Dash, farmer, environmentalist and community leader joins me to discuss why and how to dodge big data as Morrow County’s AI data centre assault began in the 1990s. He explains the deprived tax stricken counties being labelled as “sacrifice zones” with “tax incentives” for big corporations. He fights and educates in four different ways at the moment. He encourages your participation and support as do I! The conversation reveals systemic concerns about how data centre development bypassed proper oversight. Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) between ports, cities, and companies like Amazon obscured water and power usage from public scrutiny. Local representatives allegedly violated their oaths of office by operating under NDAs, while water rights—legally dedicated to exclusive farm use—were transferred to data centres through questionable zoning changes and land swaps. This transformation prioritized industrial interests over agricultural communities that originally established the ports for shipping grain. Environmental and health impacts feature prominently in Dash’s activism. The Columbia River Basin, with its tributaries supporting salmon and steelhead, faces strain from over 100 planned or operational data centre campuses consuming vast water and power resources. Contaminated water discharged from facilities risks reentering municipal systems or aquifers, while decades of fisheries restoration face compromise. Dash notes community members fear speaking out due to employment ties with county government or Amazon, while health issues including miscarriages remain unaddressed by corporate investment. Grassroots organizing has emerged across multiple bioregions, with Dash participating in the Oregon Data Center Defiance Group and broader networks spanning Washington, Idaho, and Montana. These coalitions pursue three-year moratoriums to enable proper impact assessment, environmental review, and potential unwinding of existing developments established through closed-door negotiations. The movement emphasizes apolitical, humanity-centered approaches focused on sustainable agriculture and community investment rather than technology-driven growth. Barrett’s community: * Join his rural movement for the people: https://www.oregonrural.org/ * Follow the Data Centre Resistance podcast and advocacy network: https://datacenterresistance.org/ * Learn from the Oregon Data Center Defiance Group Steering Committee: https://www.damdatacenters.org/ * Collaborate at http://grassrootsdatacentercoaltion.org/