Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!
Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
Alberta Oil Sands Most Destructive Project on Earth: Report
desmogblog.com — Among other problems, oil sands mining is licensed to use twice the amount of fresh water that the entire city of Calgary uses in a year. At least 90% of that water ends up in tailing ponds so toxic that propane cannons are used to keep ducks from landing in them.
socialpyramid- 1247 diggs
- digg it
- rtknox00, on 02/19/2008, -12/+67but BP said it was fine.......
- tastypaste, on 02/19/2008, -3/+29And their logo redesign is so naturey-looking. They've got to be pro-environment with a logo like that, right?
- Arcesius, on 02/19/2008, -5/+4They're new commercials piss me off. I hope to god no one is actually convinced by those... although I'm afraid some probably are :(
- evil-doer, on 02/19/2008, -4/+14Their
- galanz, on 02/19/2008, -0/+13BP's not in the oil sands.
They sold off their heavy oil projects to CNRL back in 99.- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3Thats true, although rumours abound that one of the large multinationals is going to buy CNRL because of their oilsands upgrader project, and the fact that soon there will be new regulations in place limiting foreign ownership of oilsands projects.
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -1/+0they may not currently be in the oilsands but the 11.7 billion dollar deal they have with husky for half their share in the oilsands will soon change that.
- sporg, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1....
- synthpop, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2BP says: "no water? let them drink oil. hmm...sweet, refreshing oil..."
- Xondar, on 02/20/2008, -0/+2There is no BP in Canada.
- shauncullen, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1That's not true, they are very big here, especially into methane and natural gas in remote areas.
- zunkus, on 02/19/2008, -28/+11I guess us neighbors to the south have rubbed off on them. That's really sad.
- MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -6/+16Ever been to Alberta? It's like Alabama with snow. They didn't need any prodding from us in the states.
- slicky803, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Explain this. I'm Calgarian, and I've never been to Alabama. All I know about it is uh, inbreeding stereotypes.
- MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -1/+6The idea is that they're backwards hicks who have no problem with taking short-sighted environment-destroying measures to ensure short-term growth. That's been my experience with both Alabama and Alberta (though I've only been to each place twice). It's a generalization, but it's allowed because this is the Internet.
- slicky803, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Explain this. I'm Calgarian, and I've never been to Alabama. All I know about it is uh, inbreeding stereotypes.
- m3mn0n, on 02/19/2008, -3/+17We're like Texas with snow.
And personally, I'm going to call on others in my city to double their water usage so our cash cow doesn't look so bad.- Bittermanscolon, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1Will that work?
- johnnycyberpunk, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1More than rubbed off - US imports most of its oil and crude oil products from Canada. It would be stupid for them to stop mining.
- MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -6/+16Ever been to Alberta? It's like Alabama with snow. They didn't need any prodding from us in the states.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -60/+190The oils sands actually REMOVE oil from the soil, thats the point the arctic in the oil sands area had always been impossible to live in because the land is A Frozen solid and B Toxic. The oil sands actually remove the oil from the land and clean the sand and then reclaim the land. It's like the Exxon Valdez only on a massive clean up scale.
# Oil sands mining is licensed to use twice the amount of fresh water that the entire city of Calgary uses in a year. - yes and it's recycled,
# At least 90% of the fresh water used in the oil sands ends up in ends up in tailing ponds so toxic that propane cannons are used to keep ducks from landing in them. - yes, what the tailing pond are bi products from the soil, salts, minerals, that you don't want ducks landing on or drinking, it's like salty mud, but it's not unnatural they recycle the water from the ponds it drys up and they bury in where they found it.
http://www.nrcan-rncan.gc.ca/com/elements/issues/2 ...
Processing the oil sands uses enough natural gas in a day to heat 3 million homes in Canada. - Yes this is true, but we don't need the gas and we do need the oil, nuclear is also an option.
http://www.energyab.com/nuclear_energy/index.html
The toxic tailing ponds are considered one of the largest human-made structures in the world. The ponds span 50 square kilometers and can be seen from space. - so? Most dam created lakes can be seen from space, this is no different, they dam it, recycle the water, what would you like them to do?
Producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands produces three times more greenhouse gas emissions than a barrel of conventional oil.
The oil sands operations are the fastest growing source of heat-trapping greenhouse gas in Canada. By 2020 the oil sands will release twice the amount produced currently by all the cars and trucks in Canada. - Yes but actually we are working on that, and I mean we as an Albertan, I have nothing to actually do with the oil sands.
But this one is really cool, the Canadian and Alberta Governments are running projects right now that force CO2 deep into the earth where it pushes the oil from the oil sands up locking the CO2 into the earth, so in the end the oil sand could be not the problem but the solution the CO2. Plus they continue to reduce their "footprint" using carbon sequestration.
http://www.oilweek.com/news.asp?ID=13902
Don't let these people scare you, come to Alberta if you don't believe me we are probably the most naturally beautiful area in North America, and we intend to keep it that way.- MarkusGarvey, on 02/19/2008, -57/+19yea...open pit strip mining should be great for the environment!...and huge toxic ponds full of tailings should be a boon to fisherman!...//s
- garf83, on 02/19/2008, -6/+11Fisherman... in Alberta?
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -1/+9We have thousands of great fishing lakes actually.
- oderdigg, on 02/19/2008, -3/+4You're one major idiot if you think there is no fishing in Alberta. Look at a map you ***** tard.
- garf83, on 02/19/2008, -6/+11Fisherman... in Alberta?
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -27/+54Did you even read what i wrote? Yes it's strip mining with FULL return to the original environment after it's done MINUS the oil in the ground, Could you supply me with a list of plants and animals that prefer the taste of oil in the ground?
- greenlight2001, on 02/19/2008, -22/+9I don't trust you.
- iticu, on 02/19/2008, -5/+6-.-
- GreenGrassyNoel, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3The statements made were researched and referenced. Can you do better?
- greenlight2001, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3I don't trust you.
- CedEx, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1Trust no one, and do the research yourself.
- chemdiva, on 02/19/2008, -9/+33you do realize that even though the industries have been promising reclamation since they started not a single hectare has been certified as reclaimed. The only land (a very very small percentage) that has been reclaimed had non-native trees planted with the intent that they be cut down for the wood. Also, you are very mistaken about returning to the "original environment" - no one is even suggesting this anymore, the plans are to reclaim it to be habitable, but most plans now include a giant man-made lake or things like that.
- keithnlarsen, on 02/19/2008, -2/+6I don't want to let the oil industry off the hook, cause they still have a ways to go to clean up operations, and we still need to keep on top of them, however, the way you word your response is definitely intended to be misleading, while still being technically true I suppose. I don't know what you mean by "certified as reclaimed" but I've actually been to Suncor, and Syncrude. I have actually personally witnessed mining operations, and have seen and touched the reclaimed land. I agree it is not exactly "original". They intentionally add more hills and valleys than original, creating more wetlands for a diverse ecosystem. I've also heard of plans to create large hills, and even a ski hill, kind of cool in my opinion. The reclaimed land is actually quite beautiful... And whats this about "giant man-made lakes" what are you talking about? I've seen ponds, but nothing big enough to even put a boat in.... stick to the facts lady. And maybe, just maybe, actually go visit the place before passing judgment.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -5/+5You understand that most of the oil sands projects are only 5 to 10 years old, we are just in the first phase of the building it's not even up to full capacity yet right? Do you expect them to reclaim the land before it's been mined?
Actually there is land begin repaired and is repaired, its just the certified land is taken very seriously and must show long term sustainability before it's certified. So even though the land is reclaimed it takes more years to certify.
http://environment.alberta.ca/3.html - chemdiva, on 02/19/2008, -1/+5For keithnlarsen and railer, i do actually go up to fort mcmurray very regularly, and have for the past four years. I have even had a chance to visit fort chip, which was amazing. I live here in Alberta, i drive a car, i know that i use oil & gas, and i can agree that the oilsands development has had some very positive effects. But I don't think that means i have to turn a blind eye to the negative effects: the environmental degredation (or social pressures) that have been the result of off the fast pace of development.
I think we owe it to ourselves to be critical and ask that oilsands development impact is limited as much as possible (while still making money of course). I encourage people to learn more about the oilsands and especially to read the reports commissioned by CEMA (available at cemaonline.ca) - these reports in combination with the critiques from environmental defense and the pembina institute should offer as close as you can get to an objective view.
- MarkusGarvey, on 02/19/2008, -14/+3did you notice my sarcasm tag...(//s)...
- idconvict, on 02/19/2008, -4/+14saying something stupid and unfunny then putting //s does not make it funny
- MarkusGarvey, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2it was meant to be sarcastic....not funny....lighten up * idconvict...
- greenlight2001, on 02/19/2008, -22/+9I don't trust you.
- dinostabOMG, on 02/19/2008, -15/+24That all sounds pretty good... but none of your sources is neutral and independent. Can you show us anything like that? It's hard to believe such vested interests.
- Gromdul, on 02/19/2008, -5/+31This article is neither independent or neutral.
- dinostabOMG, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3That doesn't mean the project's justification doesn't have to be.
- thall, on 02/19/2008, -4/+11The article gives us one side of the story, those links give us the other side, making things more neutral!
- dinostabOMG, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3But their claims are conflicting, which doesn't clarify anything. That's not neutrality, that's confusion.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -9/+13I'm sorry my sources are biased because there the guys actually doing it? You understand why this story is out right now is because we are having an election and the information the desmogblog stole is from a group vocal against the PC Party right?
- Ecowarrior, on 02/19/2008, -6/+4No but I'm thinking you are a pretty good Astroturfer
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -9/+5wow go figure environmentalist found another word to denigrate another's ideas and thoughts. I once read Martin Luther King jr.'s I have a dream speech to a racist you know what he said to me "I'm thinking you got a pretty smart ***** there."
For some reason you remind me of him. - dinostabOMG, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4If they're the guys doing it, they certainly have a vested interest. Which is why we need independent verification of their claims. Capisce?
- Gromdul, on 02/19/2008, -5/+31This article is neither independent or neutral.
- Trister0, on 02/19/2008, -12/+36Great! There you go ruining our histeria with those fact things. We can't be outraged if you keep ruining it.
this is digg so... /sarcasm- ilikemonkeys1, on 02/19/2008, -10/+5I just moved to BC and people here hate Alberta!!! They just have such a bad attitude to my family! Everyone is just jealous of how Alberta will be supplying the majority of the world their oil (probably not but we do have a lot in the sands). Personally I think Alberta is a great place to love and I miss the place so much! ALBERTA FOR LIFE!!!
- Rikkochet, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Uh, no, we hate Ontario, and to a lesser degree, Quebec.
We like Alberta but we're consistently jealous of their economy that exceeds ours and by their lack of sales tax.- ilikemonkeys1, on 02/20/2008, -2/+0Yeah, got the jealousy thing a lot at school from my teachers. They always complain about how wealthy we are. But I do absolutely HATE Quebec!!! I don't necessarily hate all the people. I just hate the problems they cause with the rest of Canada. Ontario controls so much and they think that they are the center of the universe. For example, my stepmother was talking to someone in Ontario and she was talking about how cold Calgary was at the time. The woman from Ontario said "Oh, it's those blasted chinook's!" Chinook's?!?! You moron!!! Chinooks give us our warm weather!!! People in Ontario are almost as bad as Americans sometimes.
- Derekstar, on 02/21/2008, -0/+1In all fairness, you can't blame somebody thousands of miles away for confusing the influences on your local weather. I don't see how your example proves that Ontario thinks they are the centre of the Universe.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -5/+5You know the joke Albertans tell about BC right? for those who don't know BC has a bit of a drug problem. There's the joke:
So I was driving in BC last week and I got pulled over by a cop, he asked me "Sir, do you have any drugs in this vehicle?" I told him no, so he then looks and me and says "Want Some?"
- ProfessorLX, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4funny you should say that, im from bc and have numerous friends in millwrighting that went to the oil sands and mcmurray to make some money, most returned as soon as their first contract was up, scared to death of the meth addicted and high albertans running the equipment around them.
- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1It's just a cute joke, I by no means think, everyone in BC a pot head, but ProfessorLX, I've herd that too.
- Rikkochet, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Uh, no, we hate Ontario, and to a lesser degree, Quebec.
- ilikemonkeys1, on 02/19/2008, -10/+5I just moved to BC and people here hate Alberta!!! They just have such a bad attitude to my family! Everyone is just jealous of how Alberta will be supplying the majority of the world their oil (probably not but we do have a lot in the sands). Personally I think Alberta is a great place to love and I miss the place so much! ALBERTA FOR LIFE!!!
- jkizzle, on 02/19/2008, -14/+16Yeah, I am sure you intend to keep it beautiful the way it is.... I believe they said the same thing in my home state of kentucky and neighboring west virginia, where they blow mountains apart, push them into the river valley, ruin natural mountain ecosystems, destroy freshwater, and completely change the natural landscape for coal. Ever heard of the the great smoky mountains? They are fast on their way to becoming the great smoggy flatlands from all the coal processing plants, flattened mountains and giant trucks.
- oldhick, on 02/19/2008, -4/+6Hmm.. Strangely enough I make trips to W. VA and Kentucky every year or two on the motorcycle to go camping and haven't run into any of these ruined places. Still plenty of beautiful mountains to enjoy.
- Xondar, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Good thing Alberta is mostly prairie then eh?
- LeCollectif, on 02/19/2008, -20/+10Alberta's not really that beautiful. In fact, Calgary's a cesspool, and I wouldn't dare venture into a hole like Edmonton. Everyone drives SUVs or trucks, regardless of if they need them or not, and the population in general is overwhelmingly right-leaning. Sure, you do have the entrance to the rockies and Lake Louise and all that stuff. But there isn't much of it on the AB side. British Colombia, on the other hand, is absolutely stunning all the way through.
- gkwillie, on 02/19/2008, -2/+11You are right. No part of B.C. could be considered ugly, especially not the slum areas of North Vancouver
None of these provencial parks could be considered beautiful either
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alberta_provi ...
and Banff National park is definitely a *****, the UNESCO world heritage site ***** hole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Rocky_Mounta ...
Nobody considers Montana beautiful either.- Recidivus, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5If you think North Vancouver is bad, you don't want to see the Lower East Side...
- farfromsubtl, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3Sitting one block from Main and Hastings right now. It's not as bad as people say... but it IS bad.
- bphicke, on 02/19/2008, -9/+4"the population in general is overwhelmingly right-leaning."
How nice, you broke up all your insults and hate with a compliment. - uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -7/+8Sounds like your problem is with our politics more than anything. Get a job hippie.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -5/+3"Since initiating a curbside recycling program in 1988, Edmonton has become a global leader in effective urban waste management. Through recycling, reuse and composting programs, the City diverts close to 60% of residential waste from landill. The goal is to divert 90% by 2012. Edmonton, a global leader in waste reduction. "
Your city do that?
http://www.edmonton.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PT ...
- gkwillie, on 02/19/2008, -2/+11You are right. No part of B.C. could be considered ugly, especially not the slum areas of North Vancouver
- amonthei, on 02/19/2008, -11/+2You really need to buy the following and learn how to piece together a good argument. It sounds like you may have some knowledge of all of this, you just don't know how to communicate it well.
http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?c ...- MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2That may be spam, but at least its relevant :-
- Densetsu, on 02/19/2008, -14/+8Speaking as an Albertan who's lived here his entire life... how the hell are we a beautiful area? It's all freakin' trees and/or prairies. There's a few small areas that are decent... Edmonton's river valley, for one... but most of rural Alberta is boring as hell.
It gets better around Jasper, but that's just a minuscule amount of the Rocky Mountains that we managed to steal from BC. There's a reason I go there every summer on my vacations...- BigW, on 02/19/2008, -0/+16Prairies, in my opinion are very beautiful places too. Natural beauty comes in many different flavors.
- farfromsubtl, on 02/19/2008, -3/+3Unless you have to spend 14+ hours driving through nothing BUT prairie.
- bphicke, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3You need to toss come crack houses and homeless shelters in there to liven things up a bit. Then it wouldn't be so boring.
- m3mn0n, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4I think the mountain view from Calgary before or after a sunset/sunrise is amazingly beautiful. Same with the open plains. The peaks of mountains. The wilderness up north. And etc.
Any place besides a core urban centre has a lot of beauty in terms of nature. Calgary is no Bora Bora, but there is very nice things about our city, too.- scottschiller, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Yeah, and -40C in the winter too! I lived out in Calgary for six years, and don't really miss it.
While Alberta has its moments, BC is truly, as the license plates say, beautiful.
- scottschiller, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Yeah, and -40C in the winter too! I lived out in Calgary for six years, and don't really miss it.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -0/+12I've been here 40 years, I suggest you drive out to those prairies, in the fall, find a small hill, or if you go to the badlands stop there and watch the sun set for hours and you will actually see every color in the universe. After that look up and look at the billions of stars in the galaxy and the thin white strip called the milky way galaxy. If you're not a little impressed by the greatness of it all, well you're dead inside.
- BigW, on 02/19/2008, -0/+16Prairies, in my opinion are very beautiful places too. Natural beauty comes in many different flavors.
- iamnos, on 02/19/2008, -8/+15The oils sands actually REMOVE oil from the soil, thats the point the arctic in the oil sands area had always been impossible to live in because the land is A Frozen solid and B Toxic.
What?
Where did you get that from? There have been communities in that area, and farther north. It has nothing to do with being in the Arctic. You know there are cities much farther north than the tar sands right? And as far as nothing being able to live there, most of that area was forest and muskeg. I wonder how mcuh greenhouse gas those forests WERE removing before strip mining cleared them out. Oh, and they're not being replaced. There's no regulations forcing the oil companies to replace the forests once they're done with an area. Read up on it a bit before you go making wild claims:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Tar_Sands#E ...- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -4/+4muskeg trees grow slowly and not very large in the end - having worked in muskeg previously none of the trees is more than 8-10 feet tall. Trees that remove carbon from the atmosphere are fast-growing new trees, not old slow ones like in the muskeg. Your argument is flawed.
There are also incredible regulations requiring the re-forestation of these areas. Guess that doesn't mesh with your pre-conceived opinion about it though, so make sure you ignore it.- iamnos, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Please show me these regulations. Read the wikipedia article. They only have to make it farmable, which is much different than reforresting the area.
- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Yes because wikipedia is much better than working in the industry, reading the regulations, and knowing tons of consultants who know the regulations inside and out, and know what has to be done in the end.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -4/+4no wikipedia is slanted and lies (shock i know), there are hundreds of laws for the environment in Alberta. Again your sources are so wrong it's laughable "make it farmable" seriously? It's muskeg that frozen solid 10 months of the year!! Making it farmable is actually impossible! Funny though, I have to call some my first nations buddies and tell then that after the oil companies are done they have to make the land farmable! We'll all have a good laugh!
oh here are the regulations: enjoy
http://environment.alberta.ca/3.html- iamnos, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3You'll have to provice a better link than that. I want to see where, in the agreements with the oil companies, they have to reforrest the land.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -4/+2You asked for regulations, I gave you laws and regulations hundreds, read them. it's tundra, you can't reforest it. Now i have to find specific legislation with specific wording, you know what wipe your own ass. I don't have time.
- iamnos, on 02/20/2008, -1/+2It was NOT tundra before, it was boreal forest. We're talking about the area around Ft. McMurray right?
- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -2/+1Well both,
http://www.suncor.com/default.aspx?ID=2163
and yes there are law in place to make sure this is done
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1One more thing here is the temperature for Fort McMurray:
http://www3.gov.ab.ca/env/water/GWSW/quantity/lear ...
- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -4/+4muskeg trees grow slowly and not very large in the end - having worked in muskeg previously none of the trees is more than 8-10 feet tall. Trees that remove carbon from the atmosphere are fast-growing new trees, not old slow ones like in the muskeg. Your argument is flawed.
- zigspective, on 02/19/2008, -19/+34Railer is a perfect example of an Albertan denier. They like the improvements to the economy (and hey who wouldn't, there's basically no such thing as a minimum wage job there anymore) so they come up with lots of excuses on why it's a good thing to rip the oil out as fast as possible with little concern for the future. That said most of the people I encounter on the subject are at least mildly concerned about the effects, I would say the overall feeling is uneasy, but right now both the Alberta provincial government and the federal government is run by people who would put making profit over the environment and peoples' welfare any day.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -9/+6I don't think the world is ending, I personally think mankind is overall good. Yes everyone working in a province so wealthy we don't need a minimum wage make us evil some how?
And of course your "feelings" should be taken into account and that's why I backed it up with facts. Do you personally know anyone up there? I do a nice lesbian couple, they think the air is in Fort McMurray is great and most residents up there are more concerned with the lack of a good highway system which really is killing people, and the cost of goods sold, pollution is way down on the list.
Does it rain toxic waste everyday in your world? Might I suggest you stop watching doom and gloom news media and go out side, come to Fort McMurray for a holiday, in the summer though, Global Warming is not there yet trust me.- YogiWanKenobi, on 02/19/2008, -5/+1"I do a nice lesbian couple"
Pics, or it didn't happen - uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -4/+2Hahahah yeah the people in Fort McMurray, who have just had an incredibly cold (almost record-setting) winter, would argue the global warming thing.
- bizarrocanuck, on 02/19/2008, -4/+5Global warming is not there yet? I don't think you quite understand what GLOBAL warming means.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2 YogiWanKenobi - sorry these arn't porno lesbians, they are just a nice couple, but big big girls, no pictures.
I'm just saying it's nut freezing cold in winter, visit in summer, it's still cold but not as bad.
http://www3.gov.ab.ca/env/water/GWSW/quantity/lear ... - burningmanstan, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Actually in my world (northeast US) the rain is still pretty toxic due to the low pH and mercury content. It looks like it will be toxic in "your world" too soon enough.
http://www.ec.gc.ca/acidrain/new.html
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/20 ...
- YogiWanKenobi, on 02/19/2008, -5/+1"I do a nice lesbian couple"
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -9/+6I don't think the world is ending, I personally think mankind is overall good. Yes everyone working in a province so wealthy we don't need a minimum wage make us evil some how?
- Locnar, on 02/19/2008, -11/+11That is some great responses to something most of us don't know much about.. There factual and to the point.. Most people just see oil, water supply and poison and draw there own conclusions..
Nice job Railer's.. I actually learned something today! - LilBoyLuver, on 02/19/2008, -8/+17@iamnos, Railer is not saying that people have not been able to live near there but plants and animals. I think that most of you completely ignored the excellent argument that Railer gave in defense of this article.
@amonthei, What the hell was that about? Railer presented factual arguments to all of the articles major points and backed it up with sources. Did you want a PowerPoint with fancy slide transitions?- dbarefoot, on 02/19/2008, -1/+6I, for one, would have preferred more than one unbiased source. Plus, he misrepresents that source. He says that the water is recycled, yet the article he links to says: "Although much of this water can be recycled, a significant portion — 30 percen...is lost, in the remaining sand and in the mud-like tailings."
- ta10n, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3powerpoint or it didn't happen?
- paulsuckow, on 02/19/2008, -3/+11i don't see anyone else mentioning the main reason not to mine shales and oil sands, and that is its massive contribution to anthropogenic global warming.
- Zippo, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Thanks for clearing this up. I know a lot of Newfies working in Fort McMurray.
- roodammy44, on 02/19/2008, -5/+12It's still retarded.
Humankind should be *reducing* carbon output, not increasing the amount to take it out of the ground and then burning more.
Solar and wind should be the technologies to invest in. Why not coat the deserts of nevada with solar arrays?
Burying massive amounts of CO2 worries me. What happens if there's an earthquake and it leaks 10 years after it's buried? Instant global warming?- shoover, on 02/19/2008, -2/+4That's like saying 'what if there is an earthquake in 10 years and all the oil leaks up to the surface!'...
Typical braindead response.- roodammy44, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1Oil doesn't usually float around in the upper atmosphere
- LUElinks, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1Ever heard of the Ring of Fire?
- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2They don't mean "make a big pocket of gas underground and pump Co2 into it" they mean "bury Co2 heavy compounds back into the ground where they dug them up". An earthquake would not cause a release of co2.
- cjsedwards, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2They already pump gas into wells to increase the pressure and as a result the amount of oil they can get out. Why not use CO2 and kill 2 birds with one stone? I don't see what's wrong with that...
- shoover, on 02/19/2008, -2/+4That's like saying 'what if there is an earthquake in 10 years and all the oil leaks up to the surface!'...
- JP42, on 02/19/2008, -4/+22I live in Alberta and yes parts of it might fit your description of "the most naturally beautiful area in North America". Other parts such as those near strip mining operations used to have beautiful forests, plains and animals, and are now giant open pits where we extract the oil sands. Or they're parts that have an oil pump on them with a few holding ponds with dead birds all around.
Your notion that we're extracting the toxins from the ground and cleaning the earth and putting it back is just ridiculous. The oil was in the ground not on top of it. Things were living in and on the perfectly good top soil that was on top of the oil sand. We're now stripping all the top soil off, extracting the oil from the buried sand, taking out SOME of the oil, and concentrating the rest in huge holding ponds where it becomes runoff or concentrated seepage which goes into rivers and lakes. It then kills the animals that used to live on the land that were previously able to drink the water.
Then you say we put it back and replace everything like it was. Here's a quote from wikipedia:
"The open-pit mining of the Athabasca oils sands destroys the boreal forest and muskeg, as well as changing the natural landscape. The Alberta government does not require companies to restore the land to "original condition" but only to "equivalent land capability". This means that the ability of the land to support various land uses after reclamation is similar to what existed, but that the individual land uses will not necessarily be identical.[25] Since the government considers agricultural land to be equivalent to forest land, oil sands companies have reclaimed mined land to use as pasture for buffalo, rather than restoring it to the original boreal forest and muskeg.[citation needed]"- ta10n, on 02/19/2008, -1/+9Citing something from wikipedia and ending with [citation needed] makes for a very weak looking argument.
- iggee85, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7Yeah, I have to agree that the idea that they're doing nature a favour by cleaning the soil is pretty ridiculous since you have to essentially destroy whole ecosystems above before you can get to the oil below. Also trivializing the water usage by saying it's being recycled is dishonest as you're still removing water from Alberta's natural water cycle. Watch this news report ( http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/environments ... ) which features David Schindler's view on the tar sands ( http://www.biology.ualberta.ca/faculty/david_schin ... )
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -6/+4"destroy whole ecosystems" - no they strip a section, take out the oil, fill it in, then move on. it's like trying to cut one strip of your lawn everyday over 2 weeks by time your done, it will look like you've actually done nothing.
- ovarated, on 02/20/2008, -0/+2no, its not. its like stripping the entire surface of your yard, digging up 6 feet of dirt. filling it with toxic water and letting it sit there for 50 years hoping that somehow it cleans itself up.
- ovarated, on 02/20/2008, -1/+5@ railer, are you serious? "strip a section"? do you have any idea what you're talking about? have you seen a "section"? you seem to think that they just go on in there, lift a layer of dirt from a little patch of land, "clean" up the soil to remove the oil, and put the ground back. seriously dude, you're so out of touch with what is going on up here its hilarious (yes, i live in fort mcmurray).
the tailing ponds dont just dry up, they will be there for many, many years. your kids and probably your kids' kids will be able to come here and still see the ponds that are here today. - Railer, on 02/20/2008, -2/+1I yes I've seen tailing ponds, do you know what a taliing pond is? Those cannons are cool!
http://www.suncor.com/default.aspx?ID=607
yes the life span of the tailing pond is long, the ones up there probably a century, but they will be gone eventually
and strip mine takes out a BIG strip in the order of thousands of acres compared to the size they are working on it's small.
http://www.suncor.com/default.aspx?ID=2163
I think you are the one who is out of touch, these things happen over decades and although you may not be able to understand that it's just a fact, i NEVER said it was instant, as a matter of fact I have through ALL my posts said it takes a long time.- sunamc, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1@Railer: I like your understanding of 'ecosystem'.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -6/+4"destroy whole ecosystems" - no they strip a section, take out the oil, fill it in, then move on. it's like trying to cut one strip of your lawn everyday over 2 weeks by time your done, it will look like you've actually done nothing.
- iggee85, on 02/19/2008, -3/+9Good points but why doesn't Alberta invest heavily in nuclear power using oil money so that in the future they can export electricity instead of oil. Canada's the worlds biggest uranium producer and has uranium mines in Saskatchewan, next door to Alberta. You guys have no provincial debt and are swimming in cash, generally you're right-wingers so there should be less opposition to nuclear power. So what's the holdup?
Here in Quebec, we invested $20 billion into hydro power plants which we are continually improving and as a result we now export a huge chunk of our electricity. The environmental impacts are minimal considering the power generated and the available alternatives. And because of the cheaper electricity rates we also attract companies that are in energy-intensive industries.
Also consider that most of the oil produced in Alberta gets exported to the US and that most of the demand for expansion is due to pressure from US companies. So I don't think it's fair that Canada should see it's carbon emissions go up significantly mainly to feed the oil-hungry beast that is the USA.- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -2/+4Oddly enough because environmentalists won't let us.
- sporg, on 02/20/2008, -2/+2Thank Ged for that! The last thing we need is more poorly managed nuclear plants with highly radioactive waste piling up in holding pools because there is no where to dispose of the stuff. Not to mention the nice radioactive tailings that blow around in the wind near uranium mines. Neither of these energy sources are acceptable.
- sunamc, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1No.
- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -1/+3Yes nuclear power is completely evil for example:
Lithuania 80% Nuclear Power - All Dead
France 78% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Slovakia 40% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Belgium 55% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Bulgaria 35% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Slovakia 55% Nuclear Power - All Dead
South Korea 40% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Sweden 50% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Switzerland 40% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Slovenia 40% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Ukraine 50% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Japan 25% Nuclear Power - All Dead and Godzilla!
Germany 30% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Finland 20% Nuclear Power - All Dead
Yes Europe is flying ahead in nuclear technology and Luddites like sporg here continue to believe that nuclear power is some how dangerous despite every fact being against them.
Chernobyl UN Death statistics 50, that's right 50 deaths in like 3 decades! Wow! More people died in traffic accidents in the US while you were reading this post!- sporg, on 02/21/2008, -1/+3The problems have nothing to do with deaths caused directly by nuclear power plant accidents. The problems come from the fact that the waste left over including the plant itself must eventually be disposed of as highly radioactive waste. Currently there is NO WHERE to put any of the waste that is already stockpiled in holding pools around the country. I have not seen any area where they will be able to put a nuclear waste dump without resistance from local populations. Yucca mountain is completely stalled and lacks funding to proceed. What exactly do you propose we do with the waste? Where are the containers that will hold the stuff for the thousands or millions of years required to render it safe? They don't exist because we lack the technology to produce such a container.
The only reason you blindly support nuclear technology is because you know very little about it. Now please carry your middle aged obese self back to your cubicle prison and STFU.
- sporg, on 02/21/2008, -1/+3The problems have nothing to do with deaths caused directly by nuclear power plant accidents. The problems come from the fact that the waste left over including the plant itself must eventually be disposed of as highly radioactive waste. Currently there is NO WHERE to put any of the waste that is already stockpiled in holding pools around the country. I have not seen any area where they will be able to put a nuclear waste dump without resistance from local populations. Yucca mountain is completely stalled and lacks funding to proceed. What exactly do you propose we do with the waste? Where are the containers that will hold the stuff for the thousands or millions of years required to render it safe? They don't exist because we lack the technology to produce such a container.
- sporg, on 02/20/2008, -2/+2Thank Ged for that! The last thing we need is more poorly managed nuclear plants with highly radioactive waste piling up in holding pools because there is no where to dispose of the stuff. Not to mention the nice radioactive tailings that blow around in the wind near uranium mines. Neither of these energy sources are acceptable.
- sporg, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2http://mosafeenergy.org/Content/content/view/64/37 ...
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -2/+4Oddly enough because environmentalists won't let us.
- sporg, on 02/19/2008, -3/+16Railer I don't see how you can defend huge ponds of toxic waste open to the air and your claims that the process helps the environment are suspect. You give references to websites which are heavily influenced if not directly controlled by the oil industry. Please show me some information from an independant source that backs up your claims.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -8/+3dude these are the guys doing the work vs a us website who have never laid foot in Alberta, and data taken from a article that is by people against the current government, during an election year. IF you think only my side is biased give your head a shake.
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2People assume all companies are evil. Especially oil companies.
For instance, many people have no idea the advances that some of the energy companies are making in the coal industry, especially in regards to cleaning up emissions. No doubt, there are a few bad apples out there, but bad news is sensational news and these are the headlines people see, so they apply that to every company.
People love to bitch about companies that do what is necessary to provide us with stuff like electricity and gasoline, but they're damned sure not going to give up their McDonald's, HDTV's, and other modern conveniences.- zombiecake, on 02/20/2008, -1/+2You'd be surprised how much *some* people would be willing to give up, to stop the things that Exxon and Shell do in South and Central America, Africa, and other places. They are thieves and murderers who support militaristic regimes so that areas they profit in will stay unstable. And it is the biggest companies that are the biggest violators - not just in oil, but in all areas. Lets not even get started with Coke...
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2People assume all companies are evil. Especially oil companies.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -8/+3dude these are the guys doing the work vs a us website who have never laid foot in Alberta, and data taken from a article that is by people against the current government, during an election year. IF you think only my side is biased give your head a shake.
- sporg, on 02/19/2008, -3/+11 Basically the comapnies are mining the oil sands non stop 24 hours and they have "promised" to return the land to original condition at some point in the future but absolutely ZERO cleanup or recycling of water has happened thus far. It took me all of five minutes to find that out.
It is doubtful that they will ever undertake cleanup measures in any significant way. Much easier to make millions while they can then dump the project when it becomes less profitable and leave the cleanup for the government and citzens to pay for.
The massive ponds of accumulated toxic stew have already been leaking into the ground water. I would like to see a detailed list of exactly what chemicals and in what concentrations make up those tailing pools. I dont see that data published on the Canada Energy website.- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -3/+1Suncor is doing it right now, I'm sure if you send them a nice email they'll take out on a tour of the reclaimed areas.
http://www.suncor.com/default.aspx?ID=2163
But I doubt you will do this because seeing reclamation by oil companies first hand would so shake up your little "oil companies are evil" world view I doubt you could handle it.
- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -3/+1Suncor is doing it right now, I'm sure if you send them a nice email they'll take out on a tour of the reclaimed areas.
- nickrct, on 02/19/2008, -4/+15Before you listen to Railer. Look closely at his profile. Over 60 stories submitted...most following these themes. Global Warming is Fake, Science is Bogus, Left wing nuts try to restrict corporate activities. 'Railer' = anagram for 'Re: Liar'
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Not that I agree with the types of things you're saying that railer espouses, but I hear so much knee-jerk, uninformed, reactionary tripe from the environmentalist crowd that sometimes I do welcome people willing to make a little noise for the other side of the argument (and there is almost never NOT another side to an argument). Like, it's not that I think global warming is fake, but that it's unavoidable and we'd be stupid to put all our resources into trying to stop it (in other words, trying to control the climate) and none into trying to actually survive it. Or maybe we should be putting some of our resources into both, and some into another, more pressing issue.
Environmentalists get so wrapped up in their "save the Earth" cause that they're willing to jump into anything without fully educating themselves first, and they get these blinders where they're unable to see the whole picture because they choose not to. They begin to attack any corporation that does anything, often while ironically continuing to enjoy the benefits of modern civilization that these corporations have given us. Their environmental message becomes a message of anti-corporatism wrapped in a falsehood that does more to damage the cause of true environmentalism than actually helping anything, and this is why the co-founder of Greenpeace left the organization.
When I read the title and summary of this article, it reeked of sensationalism. - Railer, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Yes I'm glad to see any open mind in the environmental side. Feel free to slander me some more, as for lies, I back up all my information with verifiable links, look who the denier really is. These are not my ideas or my facts, after reading both side I simply believe GW is a natural phenomenon.
- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -5/+1By the way you can tell you've hit on a person who no longer has any basis left in reality when you start use anagrams to "find words" to back up your facts.
- sporg, on 02/20/2008, -1/+4I discovered that Railer is just a ten year old kid with a computer. Ignore him.
- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -5/+1LOL I wish! I'm a 40+ year old computer programmer and instructor in a post secondary institution, from Alberta. 10 year old kid, you made me smile. I think you might be a 10 year old kid, but trust me I have shorts older then that.
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Not that I agree with the types of things you're saying that railer espouses, but I hear so much knee-jerk, uninformed, reactionary tripe from the environmentalist crowd that sometimes I do welcome people willing to make a little noise for the other side of the argument (and there is almost never NOT another side to an argument). Like, it's not that I think global warming is fake, but that it's unavoidable and we'd be stupid to put all our resources into trying to stop it (in other words, trying to control the climate) and none into trying to actually survive it. Or maybe we should be putting some of our resources into both, and some into another, more pressing issue.
- sawurmomonline, on 02/19/2008, -5/+2***** calgarians don't have "fresh" water... They are too poor and retarded OILERS RULE!1!11!!1!111!!!!1111!!!11!1!1
- jimmiss, on 02/19/2008, -3/+10Fake. This guy is paid by someone. Yeah they take the oil out of the sands. Then they put it in the air and water.
- Railer, on 02/19/2008, -2/+2I am paid by an educational institution, I teach UML,ASP.NET, and Logic and Design at a degree level, I have nothing to do with the oil industry.
- frikadunse, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4"Don't let these people scare you, come to Alberta if you don't believe me we are probably the most naturally beautiful area in North America, and we intend to keep it that way."
You are doing a fine job there young man! Way to "keep it beautiful":
http://www.research.uottawa.ca/perspectives/images ...
taken from this article: http://www.research.uottawa.ca/perspectives/10195- Railer, on 02/20/2008, -0/+1yes because a few acres of land that is being currently used ruins everything, roads now are evil? You're just sad.
- MarkusGarvey, on 02/19/2008, -57/+19yea...open pit strip mining should be great for the environment!...and huge toxic ponds full of tailings should be a boon to fisherman!...//s
- didgital, on 02/19/2008, -22/+11Environmental Defense is awesome. I proudly donate to them every year.
- khail250, on 02/19/2008, -5/+45propane cannon?? wtf
- DeFex, on 02/19/2008, -2/+19Hank Hill sells them.
- MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3I wish the barrel wasn't so narrow.
Urethra. Heh.
- MacEnvy, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3I wish the barrel wasn't so narrow.
- ssmith2k3, on 02/19/2008, -0/+8i didnt know either so i looked it up. i think it's some kind of device that blasts noise periodically to frighten birds.
- omelette, on 02/19/2008, -1/+6You are correct, but I dugg up the "WTF" not because I didn't know what a propane cannon was, but because the article uses their presence as some kind of "proof" of how bad things are. Even if things ARE horrible, noting the presence of a scarecrow in no way helps the argument in this situation. For one, I could put one in my yard if I wanted, it doesn't automatically make my yard polluted. Even worse for the article's position is that it could possibly be turned to show the "polluters" care about the environment. I'm not inclined to pick sides on this one but with debate points like this, the article isn't doing much to help their cause.
- khail250, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1dugg for your very long, thought out comment
- hansonc, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2If you consider that "long" it's time to get away from the computer and read a book.
- khail250, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1No, i consider that "hard"
- khail250, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1dugg for your very long, thought out comment
- megadan76, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Ahh darn, I was picturing some sort of crazy flame thrower shooting out over the ponds every once and a while to scare the ducks away.
- omelette, on 02/19/2008, -1/+6You are correct, but I dugg up the "WTF" not because I didn't know what a propane cannon was, but because the article uses their presence as some kind of "proof" of how bad things are. Even if things ARE horrible, noting the presence of a scarecrow in no way helps the argument in this situation. For one, I could put one in my yard if I wanted, it doesn't automatically make my yard polluted. Even worse for the article's position is that it could possibly be turned to show the "polluters" care about the environment. I'm not inclined to pick sides on this one but with debate points like this, the article isn't doing much to help their cause.
- levitron, on 02/19/2008, -0/+11Uses propane to make a big bang at set intervals. Obviously you've never been to a farm...
- MacGyver2210, on 02/19/2008, -2/+8I LIVE on a farm and I've never frickin' heard of this until now. Sounds like fun though.
- levitron, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Used on fruit farms, mostly, to scare the birds away from the berries. The models we used couldn't fire anything but sound.
- MacGyver2210, on 02/19/2008, -2/+8I LIVE on a farm and I've never frickin' heard of this until now. Sounds like fun though.
- atbnet, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2They had one on Dirty Jobs last week used for the same purpose to keep birds out of an artificial salt lake.
- khail250, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1they kept trying to make their own salty chips?
- time4wrk, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1http://www.suttonag.com/Zon.html
- DeFex, on 02/19/2008, -2/+19Hank Hill sells them.
- kelly, on 02/19/2008, -22/+35Waiting for a digg user to find a way to blame America or Christians for this as well.
- chrissandvick, on 02/19/2008, -5/+4Americans donate more money to environmental organizations than any other country in the world (WAG but probably true) and Christianity is increasingly being used to hold "Nature" as sacred in its own right. See it's all our fault.
- sdizier, on 02/19/2008, -15/+21You do know that Canada IS IN America, Right?
- Otto, on 02/19/2008, -8/+6Buried for being pedantic.
- jgzman, on 02/19/2008, -2/+13Dugg for being pedantic.
- oderdigg, on 02/19/2008, -10/+4Canada is not IN America. Canada is within the boundaries of the American Continent. Not sure what the relevance to this article is. Buried.
- GhostyBoy, on 02/19/2008, -4/+6Digg me down! I don't even know what pedantic means!
- vortexgenerator, on 02/19/2008, -1/+8(adj) : like a pedant, overly concerned with formal rules and trivial points of learning; being showy of one’s knowledge, often in a boring manner
- alkajazz, on 02/19/2008, -9/+9Oh come off that faith card *****. You act like your being repressed.
- kelly, on 02/19/2008, -11/+1We're not being repressed?
- apetrie, on 02/19/2008, -2/+10No, you're not. If you believe that American Christians are anything but the ones doing the majority of the repressing then you need to wake up. Learn the difference between persecution and backlash. If you feel there is a lot of negativity directed towards your group, perhaps you should research the reasons for it instead of feeling sorry for yourself and telling yourself you're innocent. That being said, this discussion has nothing to do with this article and you should be ashamed of yourself for hijacking it to feed your misguided martyr complex. Get over yourself, not everything is about you.
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Backlash? That's ridiculous! They hate us because we're good people!
/sarcasm, I'm not even Christian anymore.
- kelly, on 02/19/2008, -11/+1We're not being repressed?
- boxlight, on 02/19/2008, -27/+42Typical reactionary crap from environmental fanatics.
- neognostic, on 02/19/2008, -12/+15I suggest that you go buy the reclaimed land and live on it then.
- Otto, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7Perhaps after it's been reclaimed, you would too.
Cleanup programs are often messy. - nastajus, on 02/19/2008, -7/+4If it's not in my backyard, then it's not my problem. That's the mentality that buried you. I tried digging you up, but failed.
- Otto, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7Perhaps after it's been reclaimed, you would too.
- ICSU, on 02/19/2008, -2/+4I hope that was sarcasm.
- neognostic, on 02/19/2008, -12/+15I suggest that you go buy the reclaimed land and live on it then.
- LtCarter47, on 02/19/2008, -1/+26And the page has to be that wide because....?
- EarlOfLade, on 02/19/2008, -2/+13It saves ... ummm trees?
- EarlOfLade, on 02/19/2008, -2/+13It saves ... ummm trees?
- rmeyers, on 02/19/2008, -8/+35Canada has some of the toughest environmental laws, so before they are even allowed to start digging, they have to have a plan to show how it will be cleaned up. Reclamation has become one of the largest sectors of oil companies.
- iamnos, on 02/19/2008, -10/+16Natural resources are handled provincially, not federally. And Alberta (and Ralph Klein) have been heavily criticized on the lack of requirements for cleanup.
- cjsedwards, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Klein isn't the premier anymore.
- Speed, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1But Stelmach hasn't done *****.
- iamnos, on 02/20/2008, -0/+2But he was when most of the agreements were put in place.
- thatbirdguy, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Not entirely true. Before undergoing a new project, an environmental impact assessment must be done and approved - for most projects this is regulated provincially, however there are several triggers to a federal EIA under CEAA (the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act). A project such as the oil sands would certainly be covered under CEAA, and such an EIA would require post-construction clean up and monitoring plans.
- cjsedwards, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Klein isn't the premier anymore.
- chemdiva, on 02/19/2008, -3/+7They have to have a plan, but so far there's been no penalties for follow through. And i would actually guess that California has the toughest environmental laws, but that may just be because i am not familiar with European laws. And iamnos is right - environment is a provincial responsibility, the federal government is somewhat limited in when and how it can step in.
- DarkSaturn, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Canada has tough environmental laws because for the 30 years prior standard practice was for huge-multinational to extract 90% of easily removed natural resource, sell it to smaller national company who pulls another few percent out, who then sells it to some tiny little company who goes bankrupt leaving the mess for the government to clean up. So they end up required to put aside a percentage of the reclamation money each year in a secure account, which the industry has has their lawyers fighting each chance they get.
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1yes it has, and yet the government has yet to issue a single reclamation certificate stating the land has been reclaimed to acceptable standards.
- iamnos, on 02/19/2008, -10/+16Natural resources are handled provincially, not federally. And Alberta (and Ralph Klein) have been heavily criticized on the lack of requirements for cleanup.
- martoq, on 02/19/2008, -19/+7Canada, how exactly did Bush and those ignorant Americans cause this one?
- IHaveIssues, on 02/19/2008, -3/+4They didn't because it's not true. Buried as inaccurate.
- zigspective, on 02/19/2008, -5/+8Who said we were blaming? Though there is striking similarity between both being completely ***** over by a conservative government.
- girlpirate, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3 figures, Americans hear the word "oil" and automatically think of themselves
- Chahrlie5, on 02/19/2008, -22/+37People complain about oil prices yet they don't want us to find more oil, instead they just bitch.
Grow a ***** pair already.- sweetholymosiah, on 02/19/2008, -14/+11You, sir, are the coward who cannot see past his own immediate gain. Surely you can see that intensive use of fossil fuels is not sustainable. Should you decide to have a family, how are you going to argue your point to your grandchildren? Canada may seem huge and empty, but the world is a finite place.
- Chahrlie5, on 02/19/2008, -8/+6Because I don't buy into all the ***** that makes me a coward? I think you, sir, are a quivering apologist who is the very reason for our higher prices and lower standing in the world stage, yet are so beset on not allowing for anything to be done to lower prices or to make us stronger. Drill for oil off our own coast with platforms that haven't cause major environmental disaster? Nope, just because your lot is scared for no reason to back up such claims. Look for oil in Alaska, nope it'll kill too many Caribou, never mind their population has been exploding irregardless of oil lines built high off the ground to let them pass.
Spare me your fear mongering *****, it's been going on for generations and we're still thriving and doing fine. - oldhick, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3Come on now... While a pending fuel crisis is a problem and solutions need to be found, we can't just halt the world all at once, remove every fossil fuel consuming device, start the world back up and expect everyone not to notice. The reality is (whether you choose to believe it or not) that we will be forced to live with fossil fuels for sometime while alternatives are worked out. Finding and using alternative sources of fossil fuels is a completely reasonable idea.
- Chahrlie5, on 02/19/2008, -8/+6Because I don't buy into all the ***** that makes me a coward? I think you, sir, are a quivering apologist who is the very reason for our higher prices and lower standing in the world stage, yet are so beset on not allowing for anything to be done to lower prices or to make us stronger. Drill for oil off our own coast with platforms that haven't cause major environmental disaster? Nope, just because your lot is scared for no reason to back up such claims. Look for oil in Alaska, nope it'll kill too many Caribou, never mind their population has been exploding irregardless of oil lines built high off the ground to let them pass.
- liquidpele, on 02/19/2008, -12/+5I complain about oil prices because I have an SUV. I have an SUV because it's damn convenient, but now gas cuts into my budget too much so I'm saving up for a plug-in hybrid. ***** oil - I just want to be able to drive. But I do think my right to drive ends where large scale destruction begins.
- oderdigg, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Boo-*****-hoo.
- Rikkochet, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7What is more convenient about an SUV than any other vehicle? Are you really tall and don't like to stoop to get in and out of your car?
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to break your post down to point out how absolutely ridiculous EVERYTHING you said is.
"I complain about oil prices because I have an SUV. I have an SUV because it's damn convenient, but now gas cuts into my budget too much..."
Well then I guess it's not so damn convenient then, is it? You don't need an SUV. You want one. Why do you feel entitled to convenience without paying for it? 'I made a dumb decision, and now that dumb decision is biting me in the ass! I'm pissed!' Do you expect sympathy or something?
"so I'm saving up for a plug-in hybrid."
...which still uses gasoline.
"***** oil - I just want to be able to drive."
If you want to drive, then you have to pay for the costs of associated with driving. That's like saying '***** fixing my car, I just want to drive. I shouldn't have to pay for maintenance! It's expensive!' Not to mention all the non-petroleum products oil is used to make, including your damn plug-in hybrid.
"But I do think my right to drive ends where large scale destruction begins."
Well now that's the dumbest thing of all. You have a "right" to drive? Is this delineated in the Constitution? Were you given this right as a product of being born? Driving is a privilege and a choice. There is no such thing as a "right to drive."
- sweetholymosiah, on 02/19/2008, -14/+11You, sir, are the coward who cannot see past his own immediate gain. Surely you can see that intensive use of fossil fuels is not sustainable. Should you decide to have a family, how are you going to argue your point to your grandchildren? Canada may seem huge and empty, but the world is a finite place.
- DeadlyAlpaca, on 02/19/2008, -7/+18I'm heading up to work in the oil sands in May for 8 months. Don't worry guys, I'll let them know you aren't happy with the current state of things.
- johnnycyberpunk, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2Send pictures of the propane cannons!
- dasbush, on 02/19/2008, -5/+29Can't wait for Saskatchewan to get in the mix, they have just about as much oil as Alberta! Canadian economy == win;
- gabrielsond, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5it will be starting soon now that SK has a conservative government and needs to keep its economy growing...
- LiquidRAM, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Canola oil doesn't count.
- Klaus777, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Oilsands Quest Inc.= smart investment.
- cjsedwards, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2And since SK said they aren't increasing their royalty rates, they will be getting a lot of interest from the oil barons
- slicky803, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3No they don't. the WCSB shows most of the reserves in Alberta, including the three biggest oilsands fields: Peace River, Athabasca, and Cold Lake. Some resources are in SK and MB, but not nearly as much as AB.
- gabrielsond, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5it will be starting soon now that SK has a conservative government and needs to keep its economy growing...
- JasonCox, on 02/19/2008, -1/+10Dugg because I just saw propane cannons on Dirty Jobs.
- chemdiva, on 02/19/2008, -2/+5For people that want to feel they're getting a balanced story the Cumulative Environmental Management Association has almost all their reports up on their website (at http://cemaonline.ca/) - CEMA is a group of government, industry, environmental groups and first nations... though it's usually accused of being an industry mouth, so if you read the environmental defense report... and then read some CEMA reports, you will have a really good idea of what the real picture is. You might be surprised at how much of the hyperbole in the environmental defense report is actually very well substantiated.
- ecstaticist, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3If it is well-supported and researched, is it still considered hyperbole?
- chemdiva, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Well..... as a researcher, i tend to feel that anything written with any amount of emotion or flair, or that proposes conclusions that are at all speculative, is hyperbole... but that may just be my issue. When i edit stuff for my boss i am constantly deleting "really" and "very" and pretty much any adverb i come across. In fact, i almost deleted "constantly" from that sentence. It's no wonder no one listens to scientists, we tend not to be a compelling lot.
- ecstaticist, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3If it is well-supported and researched, is it still considered hyperbole?
- Gromdul, on 02/19/2008, -3/+14Worst website design ever. OK maybe "ever" is a bit extreme. Running Firefox on this iMac, the website was hard coded to be so wide that I could not view the entire width of it in a maximized window.
- graemee, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2And it's the iPhone version.
- pedo, on 02/19/2008, -4/+15buried because i had to scroll horizontally (and my screen res is 1280x1024)
- Darrelc, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4***** design. Im on 1680x1050 and stil had to scroll a bit.
- MrSidnet, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Buried from the line "and can be seen from space."
My house can be seen from space. That fat man across the street can be seen from space. Although, I think he's rather toxic.
- sweetholymosiah, on 02/19/2008, -17/+11I am astounded by the ignorance across Canada about climate change, and the need to change our resource use patterns. Bangladesh is going to drown, and all you care about is whether or not your SUV was a wise investment for the next 5 years.
- graemee, on 02/19/2008, -5/+5You're making me care even less.
- Chahrlie5, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Bangladeshis drown because they built their city on flood plains. It has ***** all to do with someone driving their SUV.
- girlpirate, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Its not ignorance, its apathy.
- jole, on 02/19/2008, -15/+8Proud Albertan, but ashamed of our oil sand operations.
- chubbybubba, on 02/19/2008, -13/+4"The oil sands operations are the fastest growing source of heat-trapping greenhouse gas in Canada. By 2020 the oil sands will release twice the amount produced currently by all the cars and trucks in Canada."
Twice! Damn! Canada must be stopped! I thought Canadians were really environmentally aware. This is the greatest Hypocrisy I have ever heard of!- Weip, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Canada is environmentally aware, Alberta isn't.
- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3yes the rest of canada has "revenue blindness" in that they love the money they get from the Oil industry, but then behind our backs they call it bad. Alberta is the biggest per-capita contributor to canada's government coffers, but we get treated like the red headed stepchild. Good thing its "way out west, where the cowboys live" so they can call it backwater and redneck.
- Weip, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Canada is environmentally aware, Alberta isn't.
- illycoffee, on 02/19/2008, -9/+22"Producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands produces three times more greenhouse gas emissions than a barrel of conventional oil."
Very deceiving line -- 3 x Very Little = Very Little- uberchaoslord, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4Agreed, because oil isn't that tough to get out of the ground anyway.
- jgzman, on 02/19/2008, -2/+8[very little] x 3.23 million a day = [quite a bit]
- TrevorPace, on 02/19/2008, -3/+1Ummm...that doesn't change the fact that you are still producing way to make green house gases.
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2And what are you doing when you are exhaling then?
- jgzman, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Surviving.
- rarson, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2And what are you doing when you are exhaling then?
- DarkSaturn, on 02/19/2008, -1/+4They are also using 2-4.5 barrels of fresh water for every barrel of oil (depending on which report you believe), and a pile of natural gas. The go-ahead of all these oil-sands projects has nothing to do with new technology allowing them to get to the oil, it has to do with oil being in the $100 range a barrel. I've lived in Alberta my whole life, growing up in Hinton, watching as it's Coal economy collapsed (2 of the 3 coal mines have shut down, the last is running at far less capacity than before), watching as Cheviot mine was forced through by the Alberta government (despite the federal government twice shutting the project down because of the environmental impact [Cheviot is right on the Jasper Park boundary]. When the coal mines went down the town took a huge hit (didn't kill it, there is a huge 1950's era pulp mill in Hinton as well), there where all these guys(many of which hadn't graduated highschool) working coal jobs making 60-70 grand a year, who lost their jobs and had nothing because they had morgages on their house, they leased their truck, they leased their skidoo, they leased their boat, they leased their quads. Most of those families ended up moving to Ft. Mac to continue the cycle. In the last Alberta boom there was a major infrastructure legacy, new highways, hospitals and schools. With this latest one there is very little to show for it. It's practically heresy to suggest we would be better off slowing down the extraction of natural resources here. The price of oil isn't going anywhere but up, bring of the taxes and tariffs on the industries, slow down the development, and instead of pilfering all this boon in a couple generations make it last a while.
- chrissandvick, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I've heard "the price of oil isn't going anywhere but up" more than once in my life. Then *pop* prices fall, the boom goes bust until the next time. When you adjust for inflation the price for oil is LESS than it was during the oil crises in the late seventies. Oil was only going up forever then too.
- 262a, on 02/19/2008, -6/+7I sell trucks to the rig pigs that work up there, and, its great when some 19 year old kid comes in and plunks down $60k for a new diesel. Go Alberta Economy!
- danarama, on 02/19/2008, -3/+5i think this mentality to make money killing the environment then spend all of it on something else just as destructive is stupidity incarnate. greed feeds greed....and the fat oil exects love it
- kennethsteven1, on 02/19/2008, -8/+4When his kids have to deal with the whole mess in the future, they will realize the REAL COST of your ignorance, and won't buy a truck from your kids. You are selfish, but you likely don't care. Go Alberta environmental RAPISTS!!! EXPLOIT THAT LAND , BUT GOOD!
- 262a, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1NICE! i love it!
- everfresh59, on 02/19/2008, -13/+8And yet Albertans won't say jack s#&t because they get tax breaks and working at the local dougnut shop pays 30k a year..... Money!!!
"Money, its a crime.
Share it fairly but dont take a slice of my pie.
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today.
But if you ask for a raise its no surprise that theyre
Giving none away."
- Pink Floyd - Radical5, on 02/19/2008, -12/+10Why don't we start switching into alternative energy sources instead of using oil?
- Paul1245, on 02/19/2008, -5/+3Dugg down for the painfully obvious comment. Where have you been for the last 5 years?
- Radical5, on 02/19/2008, -1/+5What I mean is why spend more money on getting more oil rather than investing it into alternative energy sources instead?
- cjsedwards, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4Because they can make a ***** of money off the oil-sands, and they are. It is the reason Alberta has no sales tax and is debt free. It would be hard to argue to take that away...
- ashchristopher, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1I would argue fiscal responsibility plays a huge role in being debt free.
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -1/+0I would argue cutting social programs and making the province little more than a capitalist free state with no government intervention plays the largest role in being debt free.
- ashchristopher, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1I would argue fiscal responsibility plays a huge role in being debt free.
- quiggibub, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3Alternative energy is hella-expensive to produce in the quantities we need it in. Hydrogen isn't as effecient as you'd think. It takes alot of energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen if you want it done cleanly. The only other source for hydrogen comes from hydrocarbons. Growing corn for ethanol is a terrible idea from an environmental standpoint. All that corn needs fertilizers and pesticides, which will eventually contaminate the groundwater. Solar power isn't practical in many areas due to cloud cover and the obscene start up costs.
- EthylAdded, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Wood! Wood is the alternate energy source of the future! It grows on trees!
- FordSVT1, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1"We" are, numb-nuts. *****, you'd think switching over to solar, wind, water, and more nuclear should only take a couple of years the way some people talk. Where the ***** have you been?
- Paul1245, on 02/19/2008, -5/+3Dugg down for the painfully obvious comment. Where have you been for the last 5 years?
- CrazedLeper, on 02/19/2008, -11/+3"“. . .But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time for the dead to be judged, and to give [their] reward to your slaves the prophets and to the holy ones and to those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth. . .” RE 11:18
How could anyone have envisioned this two thousand years ago *and* managed to have the words preserved until now? Scoff all you like but "coincidence" is not an answer.- Paul1245, on 02/19/2008, -4/+2Dugg down for being an ignorant bible thumper.
- CrazedLeper, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1In what way did I display ignorance? Was I factually incorrect on some point? Is the air and water clean where you live? Last I heard there was a floating patch of garbage 2x the size of Texas floating in the Pacific Ocean. Species are going extinct faster than Neverlution can adapt (because it never could). Children are committing rape and murder. Random mass shootings are becoming commonplace. We can hardly be shocked when 18 people were shot in a school last week.
Divorce is over 50%. Greed is rampant, the government is a fear mongering force for evil that fakes terror attacks against it's own people. Priests molest children as a matter of policy. HOW AM I IGNORANT?! IN WHAT WAY WAS I WRONG?! You are in denial because you like the world like this. Don't complain if you are the next victim.
- CrazedLeper, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1In what way did I display ignorance? Was I factually incorrect on some point? Is the air and water clean where you live? Last I heard there was a floating patch of garbage 2x the size of Texas floating in the Pacific Ocean. Species are going extinct faster than Neverlution can adapt (because it never could). Children are committing rape and murder. Random mass shootings are becoming commonplace. We can hardly be shocked when 18 people were shot in a school last week.
- WRXFiles, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7I'm sorry, is that quote in some way connected to the subject of this post?
- CrazedLeper, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1Yes, and it's rather obvious, too. Feel free to bury your head in the sand, however. That's sure to make everything ok.
- Coffeedemon, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3Envisioned that the natural course of humanity was to grow in numbers and regional conflicts over resources would probably be duplicated on a larger more national scale in the future? Anyone intelligent enough to be able to read and write in that day could put that together.
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2Ok first of all, to all of you that didn't make the *attempted* connection, the key to his post was the last bit.. " and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth" But that begs the question.. What does "ruining the earth" even mean? Morally? Environmentally? A religious person would argue that rap music is "ruining the earth". Al Gore would be fine with the rap but loses sleep over Exxon claiming that THEY are the scourge of the planet..
And this is exactly why sooo many churches exist.. Every religious text is so vague, anyone can make it mean whatever they want it to..- CrazedLeper, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1"But that begs the question.. What does "ruining the earth" even mean? Morally? Environmentally?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------->
Has a stone been left unturned? In what way has the earth not been ruined? Don't kids shoot their classmates now? That never happened thousands of years ago. How 'bout nuclear bombs? Is that "ruin"? Is the air polluted over your city? How 'bout the water? Land?
It was not vague; you just want it to be wrong so you can be right.- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I can't argue with someone who actually believes this planet is "ruined"... in ANY way. I think by in large everything is quite peachy. I'll admit there's a handful of wack job leaders out there but I'd argue that the BILLIONS of regular joes just living their life and not bothering anyone else are a much better gauge. And is where I live polluted?? You tell me:
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=of ...
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I can't argue with someone who actually believes this planet is "ruined"... in ANY way. I think by in large everything is quite peachy. I'll admit there's a handful of wack job leaders out there but I'd argue that the BILLIONS of regular joes just living their life and not bothering anyone else are a much better gauge. And is where I live polluted?? You tell me:
- CrazedLeper, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1"But that begs the question.. What does "ruining the earth" even mean? Morally? Environmentally?"
- Paul1245, on 02/19/2008, -4/+2Dugg down for being an ignorant bible thumper.
- 4j4x, on 02/19/2008, -4/+3Another report (not as wide!)
http://www.greenlivingonline.com/Energy/cp-4978/ - luxxu, on 02/19/2008, -7/+25silly fanatics. i work for a big bad oil company in calgary.
do you know that for 3 years before a site has even started construction, MASSIVE environmental studies are undertaken? did you know the multibillion dollar well sites have been suspended because it would involve uprooting ONE little family of protected wildlife?
environmental regulation here is NUTS. reclamation is BY FAR the biggest department.- dood, on 02/19/2008, -3/+7Well, as long as they do studies before they destroy the environment, I guess it's OK. That's a load off my mind.
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4I just wrote some smart ass reply, basically assuming you were as stupid as they come but you know what.. I'd rather know why you said that. Maybe you caught something I missed.. So Seriously, without being a douche about it, please explain. Why do you think it doesn't matter they do massive impact reports before they begin a project?
- argaen21, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Maybe because the people who do the studies are paid by oil companies to lie?
- dood, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I could study something for years or decades, only to have the entire study simply ignored. Studies alone will not put me at ease.
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Ok I get what you meant and that does actually make a lot of sense. You're pretty much saying who cares how many years and how much money they spend on studies.. You would need to know how strictly they enforce the findings of those studies before you buy into the supposed security they provide to the environment. Good point.
I've always assumed the enforcement was fairly strict.. And I've seen plenty of cases where projects were suspended before they could continue because of loose standards. I just hope that goes for Canadian law as well. And thanks for the completely douche free response.
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -0/+2Ok I get what you meant and that does actually make a lot of sense. You're pretty much saying who cares how many years and how much money they spend on studies.. You would need to know how strictly they enforce the findings of those studies before you buy into the supposed security they provide to the environment. Good point.
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4I just wrote some smart ass reply, basically assuming you were as stupid as they come but you know what.. I'd rather know why you said that. Maybe you caught something I missed.. So Seriously, without being a douche about it, please explain. Why do you think it doesn't matter they do massive impact reports before they begin a project?
- dood, on 02/19/2008, -3/+7Well, as long as they do studies before they destroy the environment, I guess it's OK. That's a load off my mind.
- steveiskfc, on 02/19/2008, -5/+6And with 1.7 trillion estimates barrels, I have a feeling its gonna be real tough to change the industry's direction.
- GoneSouth, on 02/19/2008, -5/+12Report fails to mention that the afflicted area is millions of square miles of permafrost and swampland that's 40 below most of the winter and infested with mosquitos during the 2 months of summer. Nobody would live there if it weren't for the oil.
- TrevorPace, on 02/19/2008, -1/+6...just because people don't live there doesn't mean animals don't...
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1I'm sure the Cree and Dene people who have had their water polluted, their lands destroyed and their overall health decline from rare cancers and disease disagree with you.
- FordSVT1, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1Half the people who work on oil rigs are natives, I'm sure they rather happy making 100,000 a year instead of drinking themselves to death. Get a clue.
- angrycat, on 02/19/2008, -14/+9Proud Albertan, and only because of the $$$ the oil sands brings me. This place is a depressing flat ass prairie in the summer and even more depressing arctic tundra in the winter. Might as well make use of it somehow.
- danarama, on 02/19/2008, -6/+4I wouldn't be proud of that money.
- purplehaze420, on 02/19/2008, -1/+7Dude, depressing flat ass prarie? Drive a few hours you've got beautiful mountains... And get off your ass in the "depressing arctic tundra" and go skiing in some of the best terrain in North America...
- utahnkid, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2Haha yeah exactly.. Drive a few hours AWAY and you'll find beautiful mountains. Drive a few more and you can check out the grand canyon! Jeez that place has EVERYthing!
- cjsedwards, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Hey if this global warming thing happens, that tundra will warm up and suddenly the frozen wasteland that is most of canada will be useful! Why are we against this?
- danarama, on 02/19/2008, -4/+2yeah digg me down when alberta is 10 times worse then ponds in Cape Breton...Calgary will be infested with mutant albertan rednecks in no time.
- steveiskfc, on 02/19/2008, -3/+3And with 1.7 trillion estimated barrels, its gonna be real tough to change the industry's direction.
- Weip, on 02/19/2008, -13/+5Alberta, you are the shame of Canada! Oh yeah you are making a lot of money, but you are destroying the earth!!
- KingMoses, on 02/19/2008, -3/+4I like topics like this; it shows me who all the whiny anti-Albertan hippies I want to block are.
- spancho, on 02/19/2008, -3/+1dugg for the propane cannons.
- nickert0n, on 02/19/2008, -11/+4Tax breaks for dough nut shops? Are you ***** kidding me? I make 46800 a year, I am an Edmontonian (Capital of Alberta for all you AmeriCONS) and I only recive 69% of my cheque after taxes plus a downtown appartment that I am renting is 1600 bonees so dont be like Oh Easy Albertans I cant look around anymore and find anyone thats from here, Locusts ass leaches flock to my province like hungry beggers, Shut down the oil sand production here we dont want it, we dont want you.
- teh_techie, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4What the hell are you trying to say?.. I stopped reading after the first line of nonsense...
- girlpirate, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3poor you who can afford to live in a downtown apartment. poor you who has to share YOUR province with people trying to make a living. I've been to Alberta so I'll let you in on a secret. Once the money goes the people will go. Alberta doesnt have as much beauty as Albertans like to claim. Im sure thats why y'all have such nice personalities.
- danarama, on 02/19/2008, -5/+5Canadian's response "Who cares Alberta is ***** loaded"
- nugx, on 02/19/2008, -3/+5The State of Indiana has seen it fit to allow its BP Refineries to process this nasty sludge in order to provide the midwest with oil, and to dump all this new, excess waste into the shared waters of Lake Michigan and the greater Great Lakes. Go Corporate Personhood!
- bishopknight, on 02/19/2008, -7/+6Its pretty obvious that its terribly inefficient to mine out. So why would they extract it? Because we're terribly close to maxing out production for demand. Its called Peak Oil.
Go watch "A Crude Awakening", "The End of Suburbia", or "Crude Impact" or go to www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net- sgtpppr, on 02/19/2008, -3/+3Live in fear!! It's the only way!!
- Logicexe, on 02/19/2008, -1/+1And of course that completely invalidates the entire peak oil theory. Obviously if something is scary it can't possibly be correct, right? Right?
- haroldk, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2Why would they extract it?
Well, it could be because of peak oil. Or, it could be that the Alberta Oil Sands deposit is one of the largest in the World.
http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/OurBusiness/oilsands.a ...
Second only to the Saudi Arabia reserves, Alberta's oil sands deposits were described by Time Magazine as "Canada's greatest buried energy treasure,"
- sgtpppr, on 02/19/2008, -3/+3Live in fear!! It's the only way!!
- thadiggler, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3Actual Report (In PDF):
http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/reports/pdf/Tar ... - canyoodiggit, on 02/19/2008, -5/+4I tried to post this months ago on another digg about how canada is trying to kill the electric car and it got taken off the comments for some reason. Ill try again and everyone needs to watch this documentary on just how ridiculous these oil sands are... http://www.vbs.tv/player.php?bctid=987199110&bccl= ...
- yeti22, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Maybe you should try submitting that link as an article instead of hijacking the comment threads. People tend not to appreciate the hijacking, and you'll get a fairer estimate of whether anyone is interested.
- canyoodiggit, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Fairly new to digg and didn't intend to "hijack" anything. Just trying to spread some info but thanks for the advice.
- yeti22, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Maybe you should try submitting that link as an article instead of hijacking the comment threads. People tend not to appreciate the hijacking, and you'll get a fairer estimate of whether anyone is interested.
- northrock007, on 02/19/2008, -6/+17I was born here (in Calgary) and this province is not going to allow anything to get in the way of industry. Growth at at any cost. The guys downtown with Porsche, BMWs etc and huge houses don't care about what the issues are. Greed full ahead! I am ashamed of what is happening. It is ugly, irreversible and growing fast.
Unlike other prairie provinces Alberta is situated right against the Rockies and really is one of the more interesting and beautiful places to visit (in the summertime). But up North it's looking like a lunar landscape....- Haxnn, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Damn those greedy downtown guys with big houses and fast cars. We need more poor unemployed people who appreciate the issues and then we can all sit around and sing songs all day.
- northrock007, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4Why should an accountant with a basic education made $300-$400K per year because he works for an oil company? This is quite common these days and it's just stupid when you see how it's being spent. Not to mention the retention perks, etc. Guess who's paying that bill - YOU!
Calgary could be just as economically successful if we invested in a truly simple, innovative, consistent and clear alternative energy strategy - before someone else from Asia does. The opportunity and resources are here. We definitely have the R&D funds!
Greed seems to cause people here to forget about thinking. Remember the Internet boom-bust? Have you ever worked for these companies? They consist of individual employees who chase a wage - there's no check or balance or people with a vested interest in the long term implications of their actions. Just regulations to lobby around. Government - hello? Motivated by votes...
Calgary is growing fast - no schools, no medical, no roads, no houses. Quality of life? I'm considering a move to Arizona before it gets worse. My Mother was sent home last week with Pneumonia - the staff said "these days friends and family members need to step up and take over". WTF! - I don't have any medical training! So much for universal health!
Recall I said this impact is irreversible.
Someone please tell me why any of this is good; then I'll rip you a new one.
- northrock007, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4Why should an accountant with a basic education made $300-$400K per year because he works for an oil company? This is quite common these days and it's just stupid when you see how it's being spent. Not to mention the retention perks, etc. Guess who's paying that bill - YOU!
- defwheezer, on 02/19/2008, -3/+3Greed is a powerful motivator indeed- just look at the rabid comments in this thread!
Chief export of the USofA (besides weapons, of course) is the Culture of Greed: "Give me MORE$$$ and FTW!" /s
- Haxnn, on 02/19/2008, -6/+2Damn those greedy downtown guys with big houses and fast cars. We need more poor unemployed people who appreciate the issues and then we can all sit around and sing songs all day.
- haroldk, on 02/19/2008, -7/+10Now, removing the oil (an environmental cleanup) is unacceptable.
If you have a problem with extracting the oil, you must eliminate your petrochemical foot print NOW!
Stop using plastic NOW.
Stop driving NOW! Sell your car NOW!
Otherwise, quit complaining about "problems" you are contributing to.- HomerS1, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3While we are at it,
Stop using your gas furnace NOW (nasty green house gasses)
And stop using your air conditioner in the summer (damn dirty coal, or toxic waste nuke power) - angrycat, on 02/19/2008, -0/+5I bet you typed that out on a keyboard made from plastic.
- Logicexe, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4See kids, this is what we call a Tu Quoque fallacy.
- HomerS1, on 02/19/2008, -2/+3While we are at it,
- cohortq, on 02/19/2008, -0/+4Wow I actually a good chunk of my money in this stuff. This gives me something to ask about at the next investors conference call.
- Speed, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1"Wow I actually a good chunk of my money in this stuff"
Have you heard of these things called verbs? They help to make sentences more understandable.
- Speed, on 02/19/2008, -2/+1"Wow I actually a good chunk of my money in this stuff"
- kgrandia, on 02/19/2008, -1/+3The screen width has been fixed, it was due to a commentor with a WAY too long url.
- amightywind, on 02/19/2008, -11/+7I live in Minnesota where much of our oil is imported from Canada. The Canadians are reliable suppliers. They also have a reputation of being environmentally aware. I hope they don't cave to the tree huggers whose weird future view would have us all live in huts smoking dope. Oil sands development is a 'good thing'.
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2"Canadians" may have a reputation for being environmentally aware. Unfortunately all the companies operating in the oil sands aren't canadian, they're conglomerates of huge oil multinationals like BP, Shell, Imperial, ExxonValdez, and many more. They have a pretty firm grip on the policymakers of Alberta and have made it the texas of canada, including the right wing wackos and disregard for the average citizen.
- amightywind, on 02/20/2008, -1/+1Oil extraction from the sands is expensive. It requires substantial investment, more than any state run oil company could provide. Venezuela fell into that trap. Their production and profits are dropping. For that oil access the companies pay Alberta a large royalty. Everyone wins. I get cheap gas for my SUV and solid oil company stock appreciation and dividends!
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2"Canadians" may have a reputation for being environmentally aware. Unfortunately all the companies operating in the oil sands aren't canadian, they're conglomerates of huge oil multinationals like BP, Shell, Imperial, ExxonValdez, and many more. They have a pretty firm grip on the policymakers of Alberta and have made it the texas of canada, including the right wing wackos and disregard for the average citizen.
- tmspecial, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2Maybe we should sell real estate to people like Al Bundy (from Married with Children) who invested in property next to Lake Chicamocomico.
- GhostyBoy, on 02/19/2008, -10/+7Alright hippies, let's look at the upside here. Oil is big business in Alberta, but it's a relatively legitimate business. No one is *dying* over the oil in Alberta.
- Bittermanscolon, on 02/19/2008, -4/+2Fort Chipewyan has a 30% higher Cancer rate than any Southern Alberta city/town. They eat local fish and they're DYING BECAUSE OF IT. Maybe you should rethink your comment.
- craftyshrew, on 02/19/2008, -3/+6Dugg for AB...And since Railer summed up everything I wanted to say. I would only add my frustration with certain environmental groups who hold up innovations like nuclear power. Adding nuclear would reduce emissions and dependance on natural gas to fuel the oil extraction process. It seems environmentalists aren't willing to make any trade-offs...this makes it hard to make progress.
- Evicted, on 02/19/2008, -3/+2Nuclear power is not a trade off. The extraction and refining process of uranium is just as environmentally destructive as oil extraction and releases just as much greenhouse gas, not to mention the tons of radioactive material produced
- 1AirMilePt, on 02/19/2008, -7/+12honestly, i did not read the article but every time i hear what goes on there pisses me off. i saw a couple of comments "how will Canada blame the US this time?" i do not wish to blame anybody, just state some facts that i learned when i watched a report on SRC (the french CBC), last year on alberta's tar sands.
theses facts may have changed, i do not know, they date of last year.
facts: all the oil produced is destined for the USA.
there are 1,000,000 barrels of oil produced each day. they want this number to grow to 5,000,000.
alberta's tar sands territory is similar to the size of the florida state.
they call alberta the texas of the north.
they use cannons every 15 minutes or so (i can't remember if it was 5, 10 or 15), not just to scare away birds, but all the animals wishing to come drink in ponds/lakes polluted by the operation.
/facts
***** your economy, there is more to this. don't call me a hippie, it's just nonsense. whether it's for the US or for anybody else, it's just crazy. - TeamInsane72, on 02/19/2008, -10/+6Buried for inaccuracies.
- Thuktun, on 02/19/2008, -1/+2It might be helpful if you documented said inaccuracies, or linked to something that did. Simply saying "inaccurate" isn't much help to those who would like to know more.
- Grislee, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Welcome to Little Texas.
The money in Ft McMurray is pretty much destroying the middle class lifestyle in Alberta.
canyoodiggit put up a link.. I'm going to do it again...
http://www.vbs.tv/player.php?bctid=987199110&bccl= ...
check this out.- offspring06, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1Inflation in Alberta is out of control. You have to make a lot of money just to live in that Province.
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
