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.
Clean speech a cozy cloak for dirty eco business
May 17, 2008
By Linda Deibel
"It ain't easy being green," Kermit the Frog of Sesame Street used to sing, using a line that surely fits Alberta Deputy Premier Ron Stevens. In Washington recently, he was Alberta's Mr. Green, the point person for a lobby mission to convince U.S. lawmakers the Alberta oil sands are environmentally friendly. Thus, he argued, they should be exempt from pending legislation to restrict the import of dirty oil into the United States.
Everything was looking good. He sat with Hollywood stars and political heavyweights at the annual press gallery dinner and wrapped up efforts on Capitol Hill by handing out glossy, 20-page information booklets with a message from Conservative Premier Ed Stelmach. Stevens even blogged about his trip, writing: "Alberta is proving to the world you can produce energy in an environmentally responsible way."
Then, whoops! Mother Nature intervened. Before he left Washington, 500 mallards died in a toxic tailings pond belonging to major oil sands player, Syncrude Canada. As the story hit international news wires, Alberta's message morphed.
In 2008, some 20 years into real public environmental awareness, everybody wants to be green, wrapped tightly in ecological correctness. Sometimes claims are justified, but when pretense is suspected, it's called greenwashing.
It's hard to argue with bitumen-coated ducks. Alberta Liberal environment critic David Swann labelled the province's $25 million oil sands blitz as greenwashing. He calls the oil sands one of the world's highest carbon emitters and told The Canadian Press: "Hiding and denying (the facts) and paying for a greenwashing campaign is simply going to inflame more people."
Stevens's Washington campaign fizzled. In an interview, he blamed criticism of the oil sands on the "curse-of-oil crowd – those people who don't believe in oil as a source of energy, and no amount of discussion will change their minds."
It's the other way around, insists Bruce Cox, executive director of Greenpeace Canada: a government that won't change its mind. Cox sees intransigent ministers who refuse to accept the evidence of environmental disaster that's right before their eyes.
"There's no end to the examples of greenwashing nowadays," said Cox. "Big industry wrote the book on marketing and, when they found out the public cared about the environment, they were going to market to that."
He often finds ad campaigns laughable. "There's a full-court press in the nuclear industry to sell itself as clean and green," he said. The ads "obscure the fact of arsenic runoff (in uranium mining) or of the generations who will be coping with the problem of radioactive nuclear waste."
As well, Cox thinks greenwashing makes people cynical and hurts companies that have embraced living green, like McDonald's Corp., which has partnered with Greenpeace and the Rainforest Alliance, and no longer supports logging in the Amazon to clear land to grow canola for cattle feed.
Of course, there's a good side to greenwashing, say activists.
It's a measure of public concern for the environment, and it opens the door to spoof ads. Every year, the Toronto Environmental Alliance hands out Ecobunk awards, chosen from submissions. In 2007 military hardware provider BAE Systems won for an ad showing a tank and proclaiming: "We all have a duty of care to ensure that from cradle to grave, products are being used appropriately and do not do lasting harm."
Online, environmentalists love to take the mickey out of supposed greenwashers. In the YouTube video Kleenex Gets Punk'd, activists slip themselves into an advertising shoot at Chicago's Wrigley Field in which people are encouraged to tell their life stories while reaching for tissues. These protesters push tears into their eyes as they talk about the loss of old-growth forests.
Alberta didn't take the hit for the ducks alone, sharing blame with Syncrude. The company's response, however, showed savvy and awareness of the public mood. Media relations director Alain Moore added his apology to that made by Syncrude president and CEO Tom Katinas in full-page newspaper ads. Moore quickly responded to questions, even if the "we-will-do-better" answer didn't offer specifics.
The province also displayed a certain sophistication. It may not seem monumental, but when else has Premier Stelmach insisted an apology was not enough from a big corporation? "You can apologize," he said to Syncrude last week, "but we will continue to investigate."
Still, environmentalists worry an investigation may prove to be a convenient way of avoiding real change. Simon Dyer, a biologist and head of the Pembina Institute's oil sands project, faults the federal and provincial governments, as well as Syncrude, for not "rolling up their sleeves and finding new ways to improve oil sands production, rather than lobbying for an exemption in Washington."
The problem is the rate of production and companies that, for the most part, aren't using best technology available. Oil sands facts are mind-boggling. For every barrel of oil, four tonnes of earth are moved. Already, leases have been granted on 65,000 square kilometres of Alberta land without environmental review, according to Dyer. Moreover, he says Alberta can't afford to lose the 1 million square metres of water from the Athabasca River used daily in oil sands production.
"They're dealing with symptoms and not the root cause," said Dyer. "The thing is, our polling shows Albertans have real concerns about the oil industry and its rate of growth, and a strong desire for environmental protection."
Final advice comes from Mark Winfield, a York University environmental studies professor: "You've got to take every company case by case," he said. "Has there been a change in behaviour, or is it just PR strategy? You've got to look behind the green tinsel."
Everything was looking good. He sat with Hollywood stars and political heavyweights at the annual press gallery dinner and wrapped up efforts on Capitol Hill by handing out glossy, 20-page information booklets with a message from Conservative Premier Ed Stelmach. Stevens even blogged about his trip, writing: "Alberta is proving to the world you can produce energy in an environmentally responsible way."
Then, whoops! Mother Nature intervened. Before he left Washington, 500 mallards died in a toxic tailings pond belonging to major oil sands player, Syncrude Canada. As the story hit international news wires, Alberta's message morphed.
In 2008, some 20 years into real public environmental awareness, everybody wants to be green, wrapped tightly in ecological correctness. Sometimes claims are justified, but when pretense is suspected, it's called greenwashing.
It's hard to argue with bitumen-coated ducks. Alberta Liberal environment critic David Swann labelled the province's $25 million oil sands blitz as greenwashing. He calls the oil sands one of the world's highest carbon emitters and told The Canadian Press: "Hiding and denying (the facts) and paying for a greenwashing campaign is simply going to inflame more people."
Stevens's Washington campaign fizzled. In an interview, he blamed criticism of the oil sands on the "curse-of-oil crowd – those people who don't believe in oil as a source of energy, and no amount of discussion will change their minds."
It's the other way around, insists Bruce Cox, executive director of Greenpeace Canada: a government that won't change its mind. Cox sees intransigent ministers who refuse to accept the evidence of environmental disaster that's right before their eyes.
"There's no end to the examples of greenwashing nowadays," said Cox. "Big industry wrote the book on marketing and, when they found out the public cared about the environment, they were going to market to that."
He often finds ad campaigns laughable. "There's a full-court press in the nuclear industry to sell itself as clean and green," he said. The ads "obscure the fact of arsenic runoff (in uranium mining) or of the generations who will be coping with the problem of radioactive nuclear waste."
As well, Cox thinks greenwashing makes people cynical and hurts companies that have embraced living green, like McDonald's Corp., which has partnered with Greenpeace and the Rainforest Alliance, and no longer supports logging in the Amazon to clear land to grow canola for cattle feed.
Of course, there's a good side to greenwashing, say activists.
It's a measure of public concern for the environment, and it opens the door to spoof ads. Every year, the Toronto Environmental Alliance hands out Ecobunk awards, chosen from submissions. In 2007 military hardware provider BAE Systems won for an ad showing a tank and proclaiming: "We all have a duty of care to ensure that from cradle to grave, products are being used appropriately and do not do lasting harm."
Online, environmentalists love to take the mickey out of supposed greenwashers. In the YouTube video Kleenex Gets Punk'd, activists slip themselves into an advertising shoot at Chicago's Wrigley Field in which people are encouraged to tell their life stories while reaching for tissues. These protesters push tears into their eyes as they talk about the loss of old-growth forests.
Alberta didn't take the hit for the ducks alone, sharing blame with Syncrude. The company's response, however, showed savvy and awareness of the public mood. Media relations director Alain Moore added his apology to that made by Syncrude president and CEO Tom Katinas in full-page newspaper ads. Moore quickly responded to questions, even if the "we-will-do-better" answer didn't offer specifics.
The province also displayed a certain sophistication. It may not seem monumental, but when else has Premier Stelmach insisted an apology was not enough from a big corporation? "You can apologize," he said to Syncrude last week, "but we will continue to investigate."
Still, environmentalists worry an investigation may prove to be a convenient way of avoiding real change. Simon Dyer, a biologist and head of the Pembina Institute's oil sands project, faults the federal and provincial governments, as well as Syncrude, for not "rolling up their sleeves and finding new ways to improve oil sands production, rather than lobbying for an exemption in Washington."
The problem is the rate of production and companies that, for the most part, aren't using best technology available. Oil sands facts are mind-boggling. For every barrel of oil, four tonnes of earth are moved. Already, leases have been granted on 65,000 square kilometres of Alberta land without environmental review, according to Dyer. Moreover, he says Alberta can't afford to lose the 1 million square metres of water from the Athabasca River used daily in oil sands production.
"They're dealing with symptoms and not the root cause," said Dyer. "The thing is, our polling shows Albertans have real concerns about the oil industry and its rate of growth, and a strong desire for environmental protection."
Final advice comes from Mark Winfield, a York University environmental studies professor: "You've got to take every company case by case," he said. "Has there been a change in behaviour, or is it just PR strategy? You've got to look behind the green tinsel."
