Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Matt Price

GET UPDATES FROM Matt Price
 

Brad Wall's Acid (Rain) Trip

Posted: 01/04/12 07:36 PM ET

Let's face it, Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall has the gifted politician's gene, the one that allows him to mouth platitudes that fall flat from other politicians, and make them sound meaningful to the listener.

This is why he's seen as one of the most effective pro-tar sands boosters, despite the fact he's using the same questionable talking points as Team Harper or Team Alberta. He just delivers them better, so that they don't seem so questionable. Indeed, media rarely seem to press him on the facts.

But why does he do it in the first place?

Yes, there are tar sands lying under Saskatchewan too, waiting to be exploited, but much smaller deposits than in Alberta, and the interested company is now in creditor protection.

Yet, at this point, the only thing the tar sands have contributed to Saskatchewan is acid rain. That's right, the scourge of Canadian lakes in the 1980s is making a comeback, this time out West. Alberta (Canada's biggest polluter) already injects a huge dose of acid forming NOx and SOx into the Eastward bound weather systems, and with every tar sands operation approved -- almost weekly -- this dose rises, sending more acid rain over the border.

And Brad Wall is doing absolutely nothing to stop it. On the contrary, he's out stumping in the U.S. for increased tar sands growth, which will lead to even more acid rain falling on Saskatchewan. Does he get questioned on it? No.

So, why the strange acid trip?

It may be that Saskatchewan is already neck deep in dirty fossil fuels, even without adding tar sands. A little known fact is that on a per capita basis, Saskatchewan is actually worse than even Alberta in terms of greenhouse gas pollution produced in-province. When Brad Wall won office, he threw out Saskatchewan's climate targets and warned Ottawa not to do anything either. Boosting the tar sands, even if they are mostly in Alberta, could be seen as expanding the circle of dirtiness so that Wall has some allies in pollution.

This doesn't explain though why Wall, or other politicians with young families for that matter, seem to care so little about the future. It really does seem like some kind of manic bender that you hope they will come out of and start behaving more responsibly.

To get to that day, it could be that Saskatchewan's First Nations will have to help bring an end to the acid trip. A B.C. judge recently certified a class action lawsuit on behalf of First Nations claiming losses to their traditional fishing activities from salmon farms. Northern Saskatchewan First Nations have similar arguments to bring to bear as acid rain falls on their traditional fishing and hunting areas in increasing amounts.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 22
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:16 PM on 01/10/2012
Yes, extracting oil from the tar sands produces more pollution than pumping light crude out of the ground. But easy oil, easily accessible crude, is being rapidly depleted. That is why we have offshore drilling and tar sands extraction - not so easy oil. The simple reason for this is there is a demand for it. For some reason we like to be warm in the winter, light our homes in the evening, and move ourselves about surrounded by a ton of steel, all of which take energy.

Vilifying oil production from tar sands might be more credible if there was any viable alternative being put forward. Solar, wind, geothermal, tidal power and conservation can all contribute, but (except for conservation) they are very costly and fall far short of meeting the demand for energy. Furthermore, for transportation, there is no alternative to gasoline and diesel in terms of energy density.

There is a non-polluting alternative, nuclear energy. Beyond that there is a nuclear technology, as yet undeveloped, that can mitigate most of the problems currently associated with nuclear energy, the liquid salt thorium breeder reactor. Unfortunately deploying this, even if we had a viable design today, will take decades. Time is a-wasting! Oil, both easy oil and not so easy oil, IS going to run out. It might be nice to have something else in place when that happens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
russell merifield
03:06 PM on 01/10/2012
Good analysis of problem. The problem is things like the ethical oil campaign etc try to avoid the issue you raise. What is true and the companies developing tar sands do admit this, is that you will never be as clean as Libya but you can improve. Canadians should argue for do minimal possible dammage
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Skookum1
truth can't be bought, but lies sure can be sold..
10:00 PM on 01/09/2012
Shouldn't Harper and the Tories be complaining that Wall is in the US seeking support from "foreign special interests" and foreign money? Oh ya - he's on THEIR side, so it doesn't matter that he's stumping foreigners....funny it did when Ignatieff's time in the US was called into question though huh?
03:56 PM on 01/09/2012
First....It's already estimated that the oil sands deposits in Saskatchewan are larger than whats in Alberta.
Second....Try reasoning with politicians in a language they understand. Every time you use the term "tar sands", your voice gets more quiet in their ears.
Why should you have to do that? Because they run for office, get elected and run things...you don't.
07:50 AM on 01/10/2012
First, the oilsands in Sask are not even close to the size of oilsands in Alberta in terms of land area of oil in place. Second get your facts straight before you spew propaganda if you want people to take you seriously

http://wbpc.ca/assets/docs/Dancsok.pdf

http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/sask-carbon-copy-report.pdf
09:40 AM on 01/10/2012
Spew propaganda?...Are you serious? The point about the reserves each province would have is hardly relevant to the point I was making about the authors comments which was using the term "tarsands" instead of "oilsands" and how using the former allows less mileage in the eyes and ears of politicians.

By the way, the first link you sent was undated. The second link was a report written with an NDP socialist slant and even that report admits in the first paragraph that the actual reserves in Saskatchewan are really unknown.
Two of the oil companies that have the largest interests in oil sands production in Canada are not yet finished exploration and can't say for certain what reserves wil be.
03:48 PM on 01/09/2012
As always, right wing Conservative politicians could care less about the environment, or the well-being and safety of Canadians trying to live there.
07:56 PM on 01/09/2012
If that were true, then Canadians would never had elected a majority Conservative Government..

In the real world , having a job is more important than excessive fibrilation over questionable environmental issues.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Donnerskinde
I used to be a people person,till people ruined it
01:17 PM on 01/10/2012
well thats great, however, when your air is unbreathable, and your water undrinkable, your going to be shouting at the top of you lungs why didn't anyone warn me.

Inm addition the Majority government, was not voted for by the majority of canadians. so the majority of people who voted, disagree with conservative policies.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Creox
Life is too important to take seriously.
01:45 PM on 01/09/2012
This is the paradox of our culture. We systematically destroy the very environment and landbase we need to survive into the future. You know that Brad Wall loves his family and wants them to have a bright future so...what gives. They are just cogs in the wheel and are owned primarily by a monster known as the corporation. It is this entity that needs to be tamed if we are to live into the 22nd century.