Northern assets can be built to tolerate thawing ground, but only if the ground condition is instrumented and adjusted for across the asset life rather than fixed at design stage.
In May 2026 the federal government conditionally approved up to $50 million for planning and preconstruction on the Grays Bay Road and Port project in Nunavut: a deepwater Arctic port and a 230 kilometre all-season road, referred to the Major Projects Office two months earlier. An all-season road is the hardest thing to build on permafrost, because unlike a winter road it cannot be abandoned each spring when the ground stops cooperating. It has to hold. That is the design problem the North now presents at scale, and it is one most existing northern assets were not designed for. Permafrost engineering differs from most geotechnical work because the ground is the variable, not just the load sitting on it. Design in the North historically assumed permafrost stayed frozen and mechanically stable for the life of an asset. That assumption has a shelf life now. Environment and Climate Change Canada put Canada’s warming at twice the global average and the Arctic at three times that rate, and ground that was stable through decades of monitoring records is showing settlement, thaw slumping and reduced bearing capacity. Modelling published in 2023 projects that under a moderate emissions scenario 29% of roads and 11% of buildings across the Arctic states will be affected by permafrost degradation, rising to 44% and 17% under a high emissions path. The Northwest Territories Association of Communities put the annual cost of thaw impacts on territorial infrastructure at $51 million as far back as 2017.
A slow-moving problem would be manageable. This one is arriving at the same moment as the capital. The May 2026 announcement committed more than $55 million across two projects, including $5 million to pilot a low-emissions alternative to diesel mine heating at B2Gold’s Nunavut operation. Behind it sits the Critical Minerals Infrastructure Fund, which carries up to $1.5 billion and covers up to 75% of eligible costs for Arctic, northern and Indigenous-led projects, a deliberately asymmetric ratio that exists because southern investment arithmetic does not survive contact with a six-week sealift window. The practical consequence is that more roads, camps and processing facilities are being engineered for permafrost right now than in most of the country’s mining history, at exactly the point when the ground has become the least predictable input in the design.
| B2Gold’s Goose Mine shows what that means on the ground. The site sits in the Back River Gold District, 520 kilometres northeast of Yellowknife, with no road connection to any community in Nunavut or to the rest of Canada. Everything arrives one of two ways. An annual sealift runs from Salaberry-de-Valleyfield, Quebec to a marine laydown area on Bathurst Inlet, a 12 to 13 day voyage into an open-water window of five to six weeks. The 2024 sealift moved 123,000 cubic metres of dry cargo and roughly 85 million litres of Arctic-grade diesel across ten ships and a barge. That cargo then sits at the laydown area until the ground freezes hard enough to carry a 163 kilometre winter ice road, which the operator builds fresh each season and ran between February and April. The 2025 campaign hauled over 4,000 loads and 80 million litres of fuel across it. The camp was expanded to more than 600 beds in May 2024. Every one of those beds, and every phase of construction and operation behind them, is scheduled against a road that exists only while the ground stays frozen. Frozen ground is not a constraint applied on top of that design. It is the design. The obvious objection is cost. Adaptive foundations, thermosyphons and permanent instrumentation add capital at the point in a project where capital is scarcest, and the capital case is usually written against a mine life shorter than the thaw horizon. That reasoning holds right up until the first differential settlement under a fuel tank or a process building, at which point the remediation is unbudgeted, the access window to do it is six weeks wide, and every part has to come up the ice road. In the North the ratio between designed-in cost and retrofit cost is not the one southern experience trains people to expect. What actually changes in the design is narrower than it sounds. Three things. Ground temperature and active layer depth are instrumented and read across the asset life, not characterised once during investigation. Design criteria are set as ranges carrying explicit uncertainty rather than as fixed values, which is the risk-based approach Canadian practice has been moving toward and which most northern design still does not reflect. And foundations are specified so they can be adjusted: shimmable, re-levellable, thermally managed. None of this is novel engineering. It is a decision about whether the ground is treated as a fixed input or a monitored one, and it is made at concept stage or not at all. The physics do not change with the size of the project. Only the margin for error does. A major gold mine and a twelve-person exploration camp face the same ground behaviour; the mine can absorb a design that was wrong and the camp cannot. Which means the firms with the least capacity to carry a retrofit are the ones for whom this decision is most consequential, and they are usually the ones making it fastest. |
Contact Our Team.
We would love to hear more about you and the project that you have in mind.
“Our team is invested in helping communities thrive by finding real-world engineering solutions for the most extreme climates.”
Arash Yazdani, CED, FEC, QP, P.Eng.
Chief Technical Officer
arash.yazdani@priengineering.com