Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oilsands gain a dirty name (Canada: #1 foreign oil supplier to U.S.)
Financial Post - Canada ^ | Tuesday, June 12, 2007 | Claudia Cattaneo

Posted on 06/13/2007 12:53:16 PM PDT by GMMAC

Oilsands gain a dirty name

Claudia Cattaneo, Financial Post
Published: Tuesday, June 12, 2007


Forget Canada's image as a source of secure energy to the United States.

That was a couple of years ago, when the flavours of the day south of the border were indignation over soaring gasoline prices, while dependence on Middle East oil was the root of all evil, including the war in Iraq.

Now that Hollywood actors are buying carbon offsets to feel even better about their air-conditioned mansions and private jets, Canada is held in contempt for being the source of the dirtiest oil on the planet -- the oilsands.

It's an image that is ramping up quickly, pumped by politicians such as Al Gore, who has criticized oilsands developers for tearing up four tonnes of landscape for every barrel of oil produced, and by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a champion of low-carbon fuel standards aimed at cutting imports from places like Alberta.

In recent days, it has been stoked even further by U.S. groups including the Freedom from Oil Coalition and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

They appear to have suddenly caught on to the fact that Canada is the major foreign oil supplier to the United States, and that this is a bad thing.

"Tar sands oil, unlike even conventional oil, is much, much dirtier," said Mike Hudema, a former Albertan who is now the San Francisco-based director of the Freedom from Oil Coalition, in an interview.

He was one of the organizers of a training camp in Alberta last week for activists eager to participate in acts of civil disobedience against oilsands projects.

"You are talking about three times the amount of energy for a barrel of oil in the tar sands compared to any other barrel on earth," said Mr. Hudema, who doesn't own a car but flew to Canada.

"You are talking about all of these greenhouse gas emissions. Pretty much any place you can pick would be better than the tar sands."

He also believes Canada is fuelling the U.S.'s oil addiction, and that growth in oilsands production is the reason the country is failing to meet its Kyoto Protocol obligations.

The Natural Resources Defense Council jumped into the fray yesterday, with a dire report, warning policy makers in Washington and Ottawa about pushing unconventional oil sources such as the oilsands.

"There is no question we need to reduce our dependence on oil, but this is the worst possible way to go about it," said energy analyst Deron Lovaas, referring to the oilsands, oil shale and liquid coal.

Council spokeswoman Susan Casey-Lefkowitz lamented to reporters last week in advance of the report that the oilsands are putting Alberta on the map for many Americans "in a horrible way."

The group also slammed the Alberta and federal governments for apparently laying out an "aggressive new package of tax breaks, subsidies and discount royalties to ramp up extraction even more."

If that's true it would be news to the oil and gas sector. The only recent change removing a break has been the elimination of the accelerated capital cost allowance in the February federal budget.

All in all, it's an offensive image that Canadians must nip in the bud, before Americans get too cozy blaming us for their environmental failures, while ignoring other inconvenient truths:

-that if it weren't for Canada's oil, Americans would have to depend even more on Venezuela, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia to fuel their tanks, while waiting -- and waiting -- for other sources such as biofuels and wind power to save the day;

-that Canada's oilsands business is doing more than most American motorists to reduce its carbon footprint;

-that Canada's oilsands industry is growing because that's what Americans have asked for;

-that light, sweet oil is a vanishing energy source worldwide;

-that Canada's oil is sold to the United States at market prices without strings; and

-that Americans, the top consumers of energy in the world, are hardly in a position to lecture Canadians on the environment or to criticize how Canadians make a living.

The image of Canada a source of dirty energy shouldn't come as a surprise, given U.S. propensity to take Canada's energy for granted.

Meanwhile, Canada and the energy sector may want to dust off those plans for an oil pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. Coast aimed at opening new markets in Asia for Canada's oil. Those plans were postponed last year in favour of building more oil pipelines to the United States. Now, Asian markets are suddenly looking more secure.

cccattaneo@nationalpost.com

© National Post 2007


TOPICS: Canada; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alberta; canada; crudeoil; energy; environonsense; oilsands; tarsands
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last
While not caring for the article's - in some places - general anti-American tone, it's certainly not untruthful & amounts to valid criticism of the U.S. enviro left.
1 posted on 06/13/2007 12:53:19 PM PDT by GMMAC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fanfan; Pikamax; Former Proud Canadian; Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; Ryle; ...

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

2 posted on 06/13/2007 12:54:45 PM PDT by GMMAC (Discover Canada governed by Conservatives: www.CanadianAlly.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

They really, really don’t want to solve the energy crisis. Then what would they do?


3 posted on 06/13/2007 12:55:57 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

I can’t think of many things stupider than trying to perform civil disobedience at an oilsands project in Alberta.

I mean, outside of being conned into believing carbon footprint offsets.


4 posted on 06/13/2007 12:57:58 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
"They really, really don’t want to solve the energy crisis. Then what would they do?"

YOU should die, and they wish to live in caves.

5 posted on 06/13/2007 12:58:37 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (the Prophet said, If (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him. - HADITH Sahih Bukhari [4:52:260])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

Oilsands/Oilshale are the US’, Canada’s and Israel’s strategic energy assets of the future. They are a blessing.


6 posted on 06/13/2007 12:59:06 PM PDT by SolidWood (3,184 terrorists killed since January 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC
amounts to valid criticism of the U.S. enviro left

They're the ones that made extracting from the oil sands practical, by making the less-expensive domestic supplies in the U.S. off-limits.

My favorite line: "Pretty much any place you can pick would be better than the tar sands"

Well, Mike, who's responsible for making all the other places that would have been better inaccessible? Take a look in the mirror, then look up the phrase "unintended consequences".
7 posted on 06/13/2007 12:59:27 PM PDT by chrisser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Yeah. Plenty of oil left in California but good luck getting a rig in anywhere.


8 posted on 06/13/2007 1:02:54 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC
"Tar sands oil, unlike even conventional oil, is much, much dirtier," said Mike Hudema, a former Albertan the only liberal in Alberta, who is now the San Francisco-based director of the Freedom from Oil Coalition, in an interview.

That needed fixin'.

9 posted on 06/13/2007 1:07:40 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC
Mike Hudema, a former Albertan who is now the San Francisco-based director of the Freedom from Oil Coalition

Stupid FOCer Alert!

10 posted on 06/13/2007 1:26:16 PM PDT by kanawa (Don't go where you're looking, look where you're going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC
Canada: #1 foreign oil supplier to U.S.

Thank yooooou Edmonton!
11 posted on 06/13/2007 1:29:49 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (Political "protests" are nothing more than mass whining)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

I’m sure this article was good for a few laughs over a few brewskis at the Peter Pond Hotel in Ft Mac!


12 posted on 06/13/2007 1:38:27 PM PDT by headsonpikes (Genocide is the highest sacrament of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

I’m heading out to Fort McMurray in < 3 weeks.
Looking forward to visiting the tar sands project and taking some photos.


13 posted on 06/13/2007 1:48:39 PM PDT by kanawa (Don't go where you're looking, look where you're going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC
Hollywood is the scourge upon the the earth, not oilsands.

As long as the extraction areas are restored, I think the oilsands project is an exciting development for Canada.

I hope to get up there myself and see it.

14 posted on 06/13/2007 1:50:10 PM PDT by happygrl (Dunderhead for HONOR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kanawa
taking some photos.

Please share with those of us on Canada's ping lists !

15 posted on 06/13/2007 1:52:29 PM PDT by happygrl (Dunderhead for HONOR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

A few nuclear power plants would make the tar sands a “clean” source of oil.


16 posted on 06/13/2007 1:54:29 PM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

yep and they can get the uranium right next door in Saskatchewan...


17 posted on 06/13/2007 2:06:59 PM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: happygrl

As long as the extraction areas are restored, I think the oilsands project is an exciting development for Canada.

Canadian Laws require fastidious restoration and reforestation


18 posted on 06/13/2007 2:08:48 PM PDT by ulm1 (How many Muslim extremists will it take to destroy America? NONE.Libs will do it all by themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
Funny you should mention ...



"Canada is the world's leading uranium producer, accounting for a third of global production and 15% of global reserves.
Australia is the next largest producer, with one quarter of global production and 27% of global reserves.
"

19 posted on 06/13/2007 2:09:41 PM PDT by GMMAC (Discover Canada governed by Conservatives: www.CanadianAlly.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC

bump


20 posted on 06/13/2007 2:15:25 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson