This page contains annotated news stories and press releases with commentary about land reform and the democratic process in British Columbia. Our comments are shown in red.
Report tries to steer U.S. from Canada's 'dirty oil'
While PM calls us 'clean energy superpower,' critics say oil sands production is toxic
Jun 05, 2008Montreal Gazette
By Mike De Souza and David Akin
Environmental activists are warning U.S. lawmakers and consumers that the Canadian oil sands sector is an environmental disaster that is poisoning U.S. refineries.
"The environmental costs of tar sand development are staggering," says a report made public yesterday by the Environmental Integrity Project, a Washington group, in the latest salvo in a pitched public relations battle over western Canada's resource riches.
The report, Tar Sands: Feeding U.S. Refinery Expansions with Dirty Fuel, warned that much of the oil being processed in the United States would soon get dirtier since most refineries were being expanded to handle oil from western Canada and meet Americans' growing appetite for fossil fuels.
"As the rising price of oil has made extraction from Canadian tar sands profitable, U.S. oil refinery expansions to process the
extra-heavy sour crude from tar sands have come to dominate the refinery landscape," the analysis says.
It notes that more than two-thirds of the expansion of U.S. refining capacity is being tailored to handle the dirtier crude oil from Alberta, as opposed to conventional oil.
The analysis also estimates tar sands capacity in the U.S. will increase by 1.9 million barrels per day, while the cleaner conventional oil refining will decrease by about 300,000 barrels per day.
The study is the latest in a series of reports targeting U.S. decision-makers to convince them to turn away from what environmental groups call "dirty oil" from Canada.
It says oil sands production results in the release of harmful pollutants such as sulphur dioxide, hydrogen sulphide, sulphuric acid mist and nitrogen oxide, as well as toxic metals such as lead and nickel compounds.
The report also suggests the "more intensive" process of refining oil sand "may also produce more greenhouse gas."
"I think Americans are just beginning to learn what the tar sands are," said Matt Price, a climate and energy policy expert from Environmental Defence in Canada, who contributed to the report. "You are not really achieving energy security (since) by exploiting tar sands oil, you are actually putting in danger your life support system, which is the climate."
But policy-makers and oil companies are fighting back, doing their best to convince an international audience that Canada is a "green energy superpower" and is responsibly managing oilsands development.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper carried that same message to an international audience last week in London.
"Canada intends to be not just an energy superpower, but also a clean energy superpower," Harper told a meeting of the Canada-United Kingdom Chamber of Commerce. And Harper singled out the oil sands, saying his government has taken a "get tough" stance on oil sands developers.
"Our targets (for emissions reductions) in the oilsands go beyond the standards for other industries," Harper said.
In late April, Alberta's deputy premier Ron Stevens travelled to Washington to take that message directly to members of Congress and U.S. investors.
But green groups and political opponents of the Conservative governments in Ottawa and Edmonton say international investors and policy-makers are not getting the whole story.
They say the Harper government's emissions targets will not bring about absolute reductions in emissions, but only reductions in the relative emissions per each barrel of oil produced.
So, even though per-barrel pollution might be decreasing, overall greenhouse gas pollution from the oil sands is estimated to triple over the next decade, according to the latest estimates from Environment Canada.
A small First Nation band in northern Alberta has launched legal action against the Alberta government over continuing oil sands development in the region.
The Chipewyan Prairie First Nation alleges it was not properly consulted when oil sands leases were acquired in its territory.
The band alleges in its claim the company's projects are located in the "bread basket" of traditional lands that have supplied fish, game and other resources for generations of native people.
The oil sands projects will also come under the eye of the federal government this month. The House of Commons Environment Committee has agreed to proceed with a request from Quebec Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia that the committee undertake a study of the impact of oilsands development on the future of Canada's freshwater supplies.
"The environmental costs of tar sand development are staggering," says a report made public yesterday by the Environmental Integrity Project, a Washington group, in the latest salvo in a pitched public relations battle over western Canada's resource riches.
The report, Tar Sands: Feeding U.S. Refinery Expansions with Dirty Fuel, warned that much of the oil being processed in the United States would soon get dirtier since most refineries were being expanded to handle oil from western Canada and meet Americans' growing appetite for fossil fuels.
"As the rising price of oil has made extraction from Canadian tar sands profitable, U.S. oil refinery expansions to process the
extra-heavy sour crude from tar sands have come to dominate the refinery landscape," the analysis says.
It notes that more than two-thirds of the expansion of U.S. refining capacity is being tailored to handle the dirtier crude oil from Alberta, as opposed to conventional oil.
The analysis also estimates tar sands capacity in the U.S. will increase by 1.9 million barrels per day, while the cleaner conventional oil refining will decrease by about 300,000 barrels per day.
The study is the latest in a series of reports targeting U.S. decision-makers to convince them to turn away from what environmental groups call "dirty oil" from Canada.
It says oil sands production results in the release of harmful pollutants such as sulphur dioxide, hydrogen sulphide, sulphuric acid mist and nitrogen oxide, as well as toxic metals such as lead and nickel compounds.
The report also suggests the "more intensive" process of refining oil sand "may also produce more greenhouse gas."
"I think Americans are just beginning to learn what the tar sands are," said Matt Price, a climate and energy policy expert from Environmental Defence in Canada, who contributed to the report. "You are not really achieving energy security (since) by exploiting tar sands oil, you are actually putting in danger your life support system, which is the climate."
But policy-makers and oil companies are fighting back, doing their best to convince an international audience that Canada is a "green energy superpower" and is responsibly managing oilsands development.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper carried that same message to an international audience last week in London.
"Canada intends to be not just an energy superpower, but also a clean energy superpower," Harper told a meeting of the Canada-United Kingdom Chamber of Commerce. And Harper singled out the oil sands, saying his government has taken a "get tough" stance on oil sands developers.
"Our targets (for emissions reductions) in the oilsands go beyond the standards for other industries," Harper said.
In late April, Alberta's deputy premier Ron Stevens travelled to Washington to take that message directly to members of Congress and U.S. investors.
But green groups and political opponents of the Conservative governments in Ottawa and Edmonton say international investors and policy-makers are not getting the whole story.
They say the Harper government's emissions targets will not bring about absolute reductions in emissions, but only reductions in the relative emissions per each barrel of oil produced.
So, even though per-barrel pollution might be decreasing, overall greenhouse gas pollution from the oil sands is estimated to triple over the next decade, according to the latest estimates from Environment Canada.
A small First Nation band in northern Alberta has launched legal action against the Alberta government over continuing oil sands development in the region.
The Chipewyan Prairie First Nation alleges it was not properly consulted when oil sands leases were acquired in its territory.
The band alleges in its claim the company's projects are located in the "bread basket" of traditional lands that have supplied fish, game and other resources for generations of native people.
The oil sands projects will also come under the eye of the federal government this month. The House of Commons Environment Committee has agreed to proceed with a request from Quebec Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia that the committee undertake a study of the impact of oilsands development on the future of Canada's freshwater supplies.
