The following special reports are
- published as unnumbered reports (not a part of our report series), or
- distributed (but not published by us) as a courtesy to Albertans.
For pricing information on print, electronic, historical, and subscription products, please visit our Products and Services Catalogue.
Find more AER reports through our Reports page.
|Control Effectiveness Assessment of Solvent Injection Processes (2018) [PDF]
Risk Assessment of Solvent Injection Processes (2018) [PDF]
|Over the past decade, operators in Alberta’s oil sands have invested in new, innovative technologies to limit their impact on the environment. One of those technologies, solvent-assisted steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD), uses solvents such as lighter hydrocarbons to recover bitumen. The AER assessed the risks of solvent-assisted SAGD technology and our requirements for managing these risks to ensure that the public and environment are protected at all times.|
|Duvernay Reserves & Resources Report [PDF](updated March 2017)
- charts and ZIP files
- report brochure [PDF]
|The Duvernay Formation is emerging as Alberta’s foremost unconventional shale resource. The formation covers 20 per cent of Alberta and is divided into two geological plays: Duvernay Fox Creek in the northwest and Duvernay Innisfail in the southeast.
Given its close proximity to the Canadian oil sands, the liquids-rich areas of the Duvernay are well positioned for growth. Increasing our knowledge of both the geology and engineering aspects of the formation will help all stakeholders manage development risks.
This report—an assessment of the resource intended to accurately and transparently present its reserves—is intended to inform decision making regarding future resource activity and guide regulation and policy development.
|We conduct annual public opinion research to measure our progress in increasing awareness and confidence among Albertans, indigenous peoples, and other stakeholder groups. The quantitative research data we collect is used to help us create a baseline measure, track our progress, and track key areas of concern to indigenous peoples and our stakeholders. This executive summary presents an overview of our annual survey results.|
Plains Midstream Canada Audit Report (2014) [PDF]
Follow-Up to the 2014 Plains Midstream Canada Audit (2018) [PDF]
|In July 2013, we issued an order to Plains Midstream Canada (PMC) under section 22 of the Oil and Gas Conservation Act in response to a series of pipeline incidents and AER compliance assurance activities between January 2011 and July 2013. In this order, we committed to conducting an audit of PMC’s various management, oversight, and reporting programs. The 2014 report contains the audit findings.
In 2018, we reviewed the progress made by PMC in addressing any outstanding criteria identified in the audit. The results are presented in the follow-up report.
|Primrose Flow to Surface Causation Report (2014) [PDF]||This report provides an explanation on what was the cause of flow to surface at the Canadian Natural Resources Limited Primrose sites.|
|Identification of Enhanced Oil Recovery Potential in Alberta – Phase Two Final Report (2012) [PDF]||Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) occurs when complex extraction techniques are used to increase the amount of oil recoverable from a reservoir. We commissioned a third-party, two-phase study to identify the potential for EOR in Alberta. This report summarizes the Phase 2 results.|
|Identification of Enhanced Oil Recovery Potential in Alberta – Phase One Final Report (2011) [PDF]||Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) occurs when complex extraction techniques are used to increase the amount of oil recoverable from a reservoir. We commissioned a third-party, two-phase study to identify the potential for EOR in Alberta. This report summarizes the Phase 1 results.|
|Regulatory Action in Alberta’s Oil Sands (2011) [PDF]||This PowerPoint presentation provides an overview of how we regulate the oil sands. It was developed for an American audience and originally presented in Washington, D.C., in May 2011.|
|Review of the Battle Lake Watershed Development Planning Pilot Project (2011) [PDF]||In response to concerns brought to the AER by stakeholders in the Battle Lake watershed about the effects of oil and gas development on the lake, a multistakeholder committee was struck in January 2006 to implement a pilot project to address development in the watershed. In December 2011, the committee produced a report of the pilot project, including seven recommendations. The report found here summarizes the findings of a multistakeholder working group set up to evaluate the pilot project results.|
|Safe Excavation Near Pipelines (2010) [PDF]||This brochure outlines requirements for landowners and industry to safely excavate near pipelines.|
|Review of Commingling from the Ardley Coal Zone in Development Entity No. 1 (2010) [PDF]||In 2006, we committed reviewing commingled coalbed methane (CBM) production from the Ardley coals within Development Entity (DE) No. 1 to verify that commingling the relatively shallow Ardley coals with other deeper gas zones in DE No. 1 was not affecting groundwater. This review covers Ardley CBM development and production within DE No. 1 from its implementation in October 2006 through September 2009.|
|Total E&P Canada Ltd. Surface Steam Release of May 18, 2006 (2010) [PDF]||This report provides our review and analysis of the May 2006 steam release incident at Total’s Joslyn Creek commercial steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) operation.|
|Public Safety Sour Gas Standing Committee’s Outcomes and Recommendations (2008) [PDF]||In June 2004, we issued Bulletin 2004-08 introducing the Recommended Practices for Sour Gas Development Planning and Proliferation Assessment. A two-year trial (2004–2006) for applications involving sour gas in the immediate vicinity of residents followed the publication of the bulletin. The trial’s intent was to determine if industry would voluntarily use the recommended practices and satisfy the intent of a number of recommendations put forth by the Public Safety and Sour Gas Committee. This final report from the Assessment’s Oversight Committee summarizes the trial’s outcomes and recommendations.|
|Public Safety Sour Gas Standing Committee’s Public Safety and Sour Gas Final Report (2007) [PDF]||In January 2000, a multistakeholder advisory committee was formed to review the regulatory system for sour gas as it relates to public health and safety. The committee published a report in December 2000 listing 87 recommendations for improving regulatory processes and the understanding of sour gas based on the received feedback. This report describes all the actions taken or implemented by the AER and other agencies to improve the regulatory processes and understanding of sour gas.|
|Total E&P Canada Ltd. Summary of Investigations into the Joslyn Steam Release (2007) [PDF]||Total’s investigation report into the May 2006 steam release at its Joslyn Creek SAGD operation.|
|Protocol for Increased Coordination Between the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and Health Agencies in Alberta (2007) [PDF]||In 2000, we formed the Provincial Advisory Committee on Public Safety and Sour Gas (PSSG) to review the regulatory system as it relates to public health and safety. PSSG participants expressed concern about the lack of coordination among the various agencies involved with sour gas development in the province. In response, the committee recommended the development of a Protocol for Increased Coordination Between the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (now the AER) and health agencies (Alberta Health and Wellness and the regional health authorities) in Alberta.
The committee guided the trial implementation of two of the three objectives within the protocol during a two-year period (2004–2006). This report describes the outcomes of the trial implementation and outlines recommendations to assist with the implementation of the full protocol on an ongoing basis.
|A Recommended Practice for the Negotiation of Processing Fees (2005) [PDF]||This Joint Industry Task Force Report prepared by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the Gas Processing Association Canada, the Petroleum Joint Venture Association, and the Small Explorers and Producers Association of Canada outlines the recommended practice for the negotiation of processing plant fees.|