With all the tact of a clown at a funeral, Canada's elites are swinging into action to defend the tar sands. At exactly the moment in history when we should be switching to alternatives to fossil fuels, and quickly, the Canadian government, which in my opinion works hand in glove with the oil industry, is doubling down on the worst of them -- the tar sands.
This campaign pushing dirty fuels wavers between messages. There's the almost environmental one: "We're going to stand by and watch the industry very hard," even though they are also firing the watchers. There's the security one: "Yes it's dirty, but you are addicted to it, and we'll do our best to keep it that way." And there's even a twisted play to ethics: "At least we're nicer than those other bastards." (Sorry Mom, not my word).
Underneath all those messages, though, is a total refusal to take any responsibility for the fact that burning fossil fuels is actively undermining our life support systems, and that exploiting the tar sands is just going to make things worse. The Canadian government walked away from Canada's international climate commitments, a move endorsed entirely by the members of Alberta government -- Canada's Texas -- and talks a big game while doing nothing to rein in exploding tar sands emissions.
Meanwhile, climate-related natural disasters mount around the globe, flooding great swaths of some countries, starving millions through drought, and endangering more through more frequent and more powerful storms and tornadoes.
The Canadian reputation as "nice guys" who once led the world in sending peacekeepers into conflict zones to reduce harm is taking a massive beating as the government does the bidding of those who would profit from frying the planet rather than doing the bidding of those who could create new green jobs by tapping into Canada's massive potential for renewable energy.
As a result, tar sands boosters find themselves fighting on multiple fronts against those who have more of a conscience. Just "sign the bloody order" on Keystone they say. (Again Mom, their words, not mine). Or, steamroll the significant opposition to the proposed tar sands Gateway pipeline across B.C. by unilaterally declaring it to be in the "national interest." Or, lobby the heck out of the Europeans to not pass a decent low carbon fuel standard. Or, lobby Canadian provinces who may not be as enthusiastic about the tar sands.
And, it's only set to get worse. The tar sands industry, like the Once-ler in The Lorax, is figgering on biggering and biggering and biggering. Not just double, and not just triple, but to quadruple in size to six million barrels a day, which would devastate Northern Alberta while releasing ever greater amounts of carbon into an atmosphere that already can't take it.
Being tone deaf, how do you think the Canadian elites will react to ever greater opposition due to ever greater tar sands damage? Right now they choose to rationalize it to themselves -- those opposed are misinformed, or haven't considered the trade-offs properly, or should really care more about evil coal, or of course, are just a bunch of... [insert insulting label here].
But, I suspect just as George W. Bush could not keep "reality-based" politics away from his door indefinitely, so it will go with the tar sands. At some point soon it will simply be indefensible to keep approving major projects that release ever greater amounts of carbon into the air as if that has no consequences. At some point soon I suspect the Canadian people will no longer put up with being seen as the abusive relatives that nobody else wants to invite over for supper.
The good news/sad news part of this is that it doesn't have to be this way. Canada really does have huge renewable energy potential in wind, solar, geothermal, and efficiency (by virtue of being so inefficient). This is good news, obviously, as there are viable alternatives to the tar sands. It's sad, though, since the tar lobby just doesn't want to go there, despite the scientific imperative to do so. Despite the imperative to do so on behalf of our kids.
So for now, they lobby their little hearts out, pushing dirty oil to anyone who will listen. Our job is to continue to hold up a mirror to their actions, to appeal to their better selves. After all, they are still Canadians, and deep down, Canadians do still want to do the right thing.
Sen. Elaine McCoy: What Role Should the Canadian Oil Sands Play in the World Energy Mix?
Oil Sands to Raise Emissions, Canadian Report Says
Corrosiveness of oil sands crude an unproven science
Will Oil from Canada's Keystone XL Pipeline Go to US or China?
Rooftop solar, offshore wind and waste bio char bio fuels can supply all the energy the world needs, many times over first world comfort levels, 24/7, forever, clean and safe. Negative carbon and land, cheaper than the fossils and nukes.
Why are we wasting our time on fossil and nukes? Money to buy politicians. Money to buy out the green tech, to undercut prices at a loss till the green companies die. Money to convince the dupes that green cant work, and fossil and nukes are the only way forward.
Solar pv rooftops are the cheapest electricity for millions of Americans and billions of people world wide. Same for offshore wind and waste bio fuels.
Solar is CHEAP! 1-3$ per watt installed. 75 cents/Wp for the panels with 100 year life times, 1-2 cents per KWH. http://www.sunelec.com/
http://solar.gwu.edu/Research/EnergyPolicy_Zweibel2010.pdf Great article about price of solar now 3$/W installed. last 100 years, 1-2 cents pwer KWH after the first 20 years and the loan is paid off.
http://www.plancanada.com/biochar_basics.pdf
2$ per watt bio char energy plant. 150 Gt/y waste bio mass, 100 GW electricity
add to that it eliminates dumping.
Wind is already cheaper too.
http://web.sunybroome.edu/~dixon_a/FOXNews_com%20-%20Chernobyl%20A%20Living%20Disaster.htm”
Your link is non functional..
and here is someone that actually lives in the area.. that writes a blog..
http://myoilsands.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/insert-bird-pun-here-oil-sands-and-wildlife/
BTW, This was in response to your comment" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/20-years-after-meltdown-life-returns-to-chernobyl-472842.html
Methinks a bunch of people need take a pill on the tarsands and chill."
Are you stoned, or deliberately confusing Chernobyl with the oil sands?
"As to destroying paradise...
Lets just take a peek at another place that is outgrowing mankinds hand on it in just 20 years... "
Are you processing this correctly..?
Well... lets just make sure.
I am talking about how Chernobyl is recovering from a NUCLEAR MELTDOWN which .. to most sane thinking minds.. would be comparable to the tar sands imprint on the planet. In just 25 YEARS this is how the earth is taking it back... and my previous link describes the animals that are now rehabilitating the area.
http://acidcow.com/pics/16330-chernobyl-today-52-pics.html
Last February, a boat docked in Miami and offloaded 3 cars and a truck carrying hydrogen gas cylinders.
Those 3 cars were Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric vehicles manufactured by Mercedes-Benz who have a reputation for well engineered vehicles.
They drove west, along the Gulf Coast, up the West Coast to Vancouver and then boarded a boat. Those 3 POLLUTION FREE CARS drove the Continents of North America, Europe, Asia and Australia without failure.
This technology is a go but the OIL CARTEL, who controls the service station lots, WILL NOT INSTALL HYDROGEN GAS PUMPS on them to let the Hydrogen Economy get underway.
Here is one of those fuel cell cars nosing into an oil field jack make its point: http://fuelcellsworks.com/news/2011/03/07/mercedes-benz-f-cell-world-drive-in-north-america-leg-8-from-san-antonio-to-phoenix/ .
Just split the WATER MOLECULE into hydrogen and oxygen atoms and then let them reform across a fuel cell membrane causes a release of electrical energy that can be drawn off as an electric current which then runs an electric motor.
Bloom Energy is having no trouble selling megawatt pollution free Fuel Cell Energy servers to these Corporate clients: http://bloomenergy.com/customers/ .
So don't protest the government, protest the OIL CARTEL and their controllers at The Pratt House (NY) instead to get to the core of the problem.
They did hey..?
They managed to drive 1600 kilometers without needing one of those nasty oil cartel hydrogen gas pumps...
I wonder how they managed that...
I imagine the reason I keep hearing the same anti-Oilsands nonsense told and retold is so the environmentalist doesn't have a middle of the night experience.
Just like the churchgoer who fears ever having to come face to face with evolution , the greenie will never discuss silviculture and growth rates when discussing logging and never discuss rehabilitation when railing against the OilSands .
Keep up the preaching and sleep well .
Oil sands are what twice or more the CO2 per Quad? While rooftop solar offshore wind and waste bio char are all cheaper, and together, carbon and land negative, forever, 24/7 clean and safe.
Wake up. It's you that are under the spell of Fox and the conservatives.
And bio char might be energy positive.. but you still have to burn it first.
Unless they can devise a way to use geo thermal or solar to burn it.. ALL of it.. it's still using fossil fuels to be created. Yes.. it sequesters co2 and it's dynamite great for the soil.. but I just don't see it as a viable alternative to the tar sands.
Where are the stats to back up your claims..?
As to destroying paradise...
Lets just take a peek at another place that is outgrowing mankinds hand on it in just 20 years...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/20-years-after-meltdown-life-returns-to-chernobyl-472842.html
Methinks a bunch of people need take a pill on the tarsands and chill.
http://web.sunybroome.edu/~dixon_a/FOXNews_com%20-%20Chernobyl%20A%20Living%20Disaster.htm
We all know how that is working. The oil companies are making record profits, all the while collecting huge government subsidies, and still we tax them less and less each year and then as an extra kick in the face we have to pay for the clean up of the toxic messes which you say are nothing. 50 years and all will be well, right?
Except that you know nothing about which you speak. Right now there are hundreds of square kilometers of dug up earth that would rival the moon in their lack of any life and dotted amongst this are toxic waste water pits that will never support any life and in fact kill a large amount of wildlife and leak into our rivers and cause sky high cancer rates in downstream communities.
Did you write your leaders to protest..? I know I did.
And yes... in 50 years.. the earth will reclaim the oilsands sites.
This article offers nothing, just a rehash of the same talking points offered up by all the others who know nothing about oil sands, Alberta, Canada and the energy industry. The only thing they really get is the hyperbole required to raise funds to pay their salaries so they can keep preaching to us to evolve to some mystical future that isn't even itching daddy's pants
Canada and the world can get all the energy they need 24/7 forever clean safe, cheaper than nukes, clean coal, and oil wars, oil sands from
Rooftop solar pv, offshore wind and waste bio fuels.
I hope that some day, we can be completely free of the need for fossil fuels, but now is obviously not that time - they aren't ready for the big time. Believe me though, nothing will make me happier than when the Saudis and their ilk in the Middle East, become completely irrelevant.
Look, today's conservatives and GOP are not Eisenhower,. These new Conservative GOP go back to the Burke anti democracy and republic folks. Look it up.,
The founders were Locke liberals fighting against the Burke conservative 1000 richest families controlling the British multinational Empire.
You didn't know?
If you insist on using the term conservative, which was originally meant to conserve the good old days before democracy, you had better specify Ike Conservative, otherwise, you are a Tory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tory#American_Revolution
Wonder how long we'll be 'just friends' once the crunch comes. Question is, which comes first, oil extinction, or global extinction?
And really..? Does he expect solar and wind to develop over night..? But maybe he'd like to build a sail car and use that. Or stand outside in the winter trying to catch some rays to heat himself.
Fringe leftoid reasoning.
Those of us who believe that the oil in the 'Tar Sands' should be left where it is realise the impact of curtailing our dependency on it.
However, evidence for the following is pretty convincing:
1) Climate change due to human activity is impacting the planet's ecology and environment (costing governments--aka citizens--billions of dollars to mitigate).
2) We reached global Peak Oil around 2005 (as a finite resource, we have passed the half-way mark in the amount of oil--one of the reasons for recent price spikes is the increasing difficulty of getting oil).
3) Global growth for the past couple of decades has been primarily due to a Ponzi-like credit 'bubble' that appears to be beginning to crumble.
So, what do we do? Rather than further degrade the Canadian environment by exploiting the Tar Sands in order to enrich a few shareholders or CEOs (who are just going to export the oil to either the U.S. or China), why not leave it in the ground as a resource of very last resort and begin making a concerted effort to prepare our country for a post-carbon world?
2. We have no idea how much oil is left on the planet. Anyone that claims otherwise needs to stop for a moment and think about all the parts of the world we haven't even looked at yet.
3. And that relates to the tar sands issue how..?
What do we do..? We carry on.
And please.. degrade the Canadian environment... ?? eyes rolling.
The tar sands are like a barely discernible pimple on the face of Canada. When they stop mining for bitumen in that area... in 50 years you won't even know it was there.
In the meantime.. we are letting the FREE MARKET - that novel con principle- develop the green industry to it's greatest good because we don't have governments in there mucking it up..
So ... how bout we just run with the going thing.. with an eye to move to green for the future.
Unless of course.. there's some leftoid switch you guys aren't telling about that's going to wean us all off oil in 2 years or something like you seem to be suggesting we do..?
This article is just more stupid brain dead slagging of the tar sands where HE doesn't offer a solution.
"I can take you to a house that has had gothermal for heating and airconditioning for forty years. One was put in around the corner from me about ten years ago. If oil costs included the health costs, the war costs and the subsidies were removed then I expect a lot moree people would be using public transit. Where I live urban sprawl (subsidized) makes better transit expensive. And you have to believe me when i say the houses aren't very well built and don't have particularly good insulation."
That's my point. People get all righteous and want to shut the tar sands down.. but they do literally nothing in their personal lives to reduce THEIR dependance on oil. It's the old hypocritical side step.
". I could go on but you know you know best."
I know best about what? Your doing what I've been saying we need to do this whole thread.