You're Journeying on an Airplane...

Now, look out the window. Know that, although the people below may see a dismal day, the sun is always shining. Always. You just have to know where to look.

Via Flickr - Gexydaf

Have an incredible day!

Series: A Critique of Common Justifications for Alberta's Oil Sands

[This post is the second in a 5 part series, which looks at the main economic, social, and environmental justifications for Alberta's Oil Sands. The final post in this series will discuss select renewable energy sources, along with the feasibility of implementation in Alberta. Click for Justification 1]

Argument 2: Reclamation - Full Restoration of Land that Oil Sands Projects Disturb

Current regulations mean that “developers are required to restore oil sands mining sites to at least the equivalent of their previous biological productivity, which means the region as a whole forms an ecosystem landscape at least as healthy and productive as that which existed before development”. (Alberta Innovates)

Suncor recently reclaimed 220 hectares of land, however wildlife is sparse and full reclamation is known to be many decades away. The idea that full reclamation even exists is still hotly debated; David Suzuki has said there is little to no chance of reclamation. The First Nations people who are affected agree. "We don't know if it will support life or what chemicals are still soaked into the soil, and at the end of the day this land will be a fundamentally different landscape than the diverse ecosystem that was here before Suncor began its destructive operations," stated George Poltras, former Chief of Mikisew First Nation, who live downstream of the oil sands.

Furthermore, the environmental impacts go much further than just the direct area that the oil sands projects disturb. The operations pollute in 11 major ways (Timoney and Lee 2009), including:

• Permitted (licensed) discharges to air and land
• Seepage from tailings ponds
• Evaporation from tailings ponds
• Leaks from pipelines
• Major spills of bitumen, oil, and wastewater
• Tar sands dust
• Ancillary activities such as transporting, construction of mines, ponds, roads, pipelines, facilities, and dewatering practices

Because of this activity, watersheds in the area suffer greatly. An independent peer-reviewed scientific study has shown that the oil sands are in fact poisoning the Athabasca river.

In addition, capital collected for reclamation security funding for just the direct area affected is overwhelming inadequate. Pembina has projected that the security contains enough funding to provide each hectare of land with $11 964. Reclamation activities will, based on current data, cost upwards of $220 000 per hectare. The balance of the funding could end up in the hands of Albertan taxpayers, each resident could be liable for $4300 to $6300. The Royal Society found that “current practices for obtaining financial security for reclamation liability leave Albertans vulnerable to major financial risks.”

Click here for more information. And please comment below if you have questions, comments of ideas.

Series: A Critique of Common Justifications for Alberta's Oil Sands

[This post is the first of a 5 part series, which looks at the main economic, social, and environmental justifications for Alberta's Oil Sands. The final post in the series will discuss select renewable energy sources, along with the feasibility of implementation in Alberta]

Humanities addiction to oil has become a global crisis, as energy needs continue to skyrocket. Because of this, Alberta’s oil sands are being touted as a ‘bright light’ for the province. Although industry and government alike have been criticized for ignoring the true costs of the operation, they continue to maintain that the oil sands are an economic necessity. This series will look at the main economic, social and environmental justifications for the oil sands, and present alternative views.

Argument 1: The Oil Sands Provide a Stable and Growing Economy for Alberta and Canada

Industry touts that there are currently 456 000 direct and indirect jobs created by the oil sands, while more are being created every day. (OSDG, an industry funded association)

The figure implies that in the:

• Short-term: Alberta’s economy will no doubt enjoy the economic benefits that oil is providing, in the form of jobs and injected capital. 
• Long-term: The number of jobs that rely on the presence of oil will become detrimental to the economy. Guaranteed oil exhaustion will put hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs into peril. This is only natural, as structuring an entire economy around a finite resource only invites an eventual collapse in the system.

The global economy will be severely affected by the projected energy crisis. As we saw in 2008, globalization means all countries are deeply linked to the economic health of the global network.

“As demand grows in the next decade, we will not have the oil production capacity we will need to meet demand. Supply will then have to ration demand, and prices will skyrocket – with the likely outcome of bringing the world’s economy to its knees.” explains John Hess, chairman of Hess, a large, international energy company based in the United States.

Furthermore, Alberta's tourism industry has been targeted because of the oil sands. In 2010, Corporate Ethics International launched a billboard campaign that encouraged Americans to rethink visiting the province, which would block valuable tourism dollars from multiplying through Alberta’s economy. The message of the campaign was simple, Michael Marx of CEI stated that he wanted “Alberta and Canada to quit interfering in our efforts in the United States to end our addiction to oil and transition to a clean energy economy.”

Even Barack Obama maintains that renewable energy sources will be the economic power house of the future; he claimed that "the country that figures out how to make cheaper energy that's also clean, that country is going to win the economic competition of the future.”

Please comment below if you have questions, comments or ideas.

Buddhist Wisdom

If a man lives a pure life nothing can destroy him;
If he has conquered greed nothing can limit his freedom.

-Buddhist Saying

Via Flickr - Nir Sinay

Great Bear Rainforest threatened by Northern Gateway Pipeline Proposal

You may have heard about the Northern Gateway Pipeline in recent news, but sometimes it's hard to know the full scope of what's going on if you only get tidbits. Here's a brief synopsis of what Enbridge is planning and what's at stake.

The pipeline would be a $5.5 billion dollar project that would see 525 000 L of oil  per day taken from Alberta to the northern coastline of British Columbia. The proposal would cross over 1000 lakes, streams and other waterways before coming to a halt in the Great Bear Rainforest. Then around 200 tankers would come to the region to transport oil to Asia or California.

Enbridge has applied for permission to the federal government to go ahead with this venture, but first it has to go by a panel of experts who will look it over.

Pembina, a reputable policy research group that focuses on climate change and energy, doesn't agree with the project [and for more than just environmental reasons]. They say, among other things, that Enbridge is missing crucial pieces in their application (like that there are no long-term contracts from shippers).

Part of what is at stake

Source

Anyway, in plain language, Enbridge says that they wouldn't have proposed the project if they didn't believe they could do it without damaging the environment. They're going to do a lot of new things, and there are different regulations in place this time, etc.

Once again, these energy officials are citing policy, not reality.

And the reality is that from 1999 - 2009 Enbridge was responsible for 713 oil spills. (Polaris Institute) You might remember one of their more recent screw-ups: the Kalamazoo oil spill back in July 2010, when over 800 000 gallons of oil made their way into the river.

The Great Bear Rainforest

Source

This issue is no doubt super controversial; it has received more comments than any other project of its kind in federal history.

For more information, or to take action go to savethegreatbear.org.