Showing posts with label tarsands. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tarsands. Show all posts

Tar Sands Pipeline in Great Lakes Region Challenged by NWF

Enbridge has quietly secured approval from the US State Department to significantly increase its transport of Canadian tar sands into the Great Lakes region.

Enbridge will almost double the flow of tar sands oil transported in its Clipper Pipeline (aka Line 67).Enbridge's Clipper pipeline serves as the corridor between Alberta's tar sands and Line 6A.

The amount of heavy oil that will flow through the pipeline by 2015 is equivalent to the Keystone XL.

A document posted by the US Department of State on August 18, 2014 refers to the proposed Enbridge Energy, Line 67 Capacity Expansion Project (2013 NOI). In this request the document notes Enbridge's intention to operate its existing Line 67, "at the pipeline’s full design capacity..."

The document goes on to say,

"Since that time, Enbridge has amended and supplemented its November 2012 application. In June 2014, Enbridge informed the Department that Enbridge intends to increase pumping capacity outside of the Line 67 ‘‘border segment’’ (the portion of Line 67 from the Canadian border to the first main line shut-off valve, which is the segment that would be covered by a Presidential Permit), and to interconnect Line 67 with another Enbridge line (Line 3) on either side of the border segment. Enbridge is proceeding with certain elements of these plans. Enbridge submitted documents for public release in July 2014 which can be found at http:// www.state.gov/e/enr/applicant/ applicants/c55571.htm.

The June 16, 2014 Enbridge application reads as follows:

"[T]he annual average capacity of Line 67 in the United States be increased up to 570,000 bpd by mid-2014 (referred to as “Phase I”), and up to 800,000 bpd by mid-2015"

The NWF has challenged the legality of such a scheme indicating that:

"Federal law requires the State Department to approve any such change only if the following requirements have been met: (1) public notice and involvement, (2) a detailed environmental review, and (3) a national interest determination. This is the process governing review of the Keystone XL pipeline. But here, none of these requirements have been followed."

The NWF article expresses concern that such an increase would present significant spill risks to wildlife and people as well as increasing climate change causing emissions. There is a recent example to support these concerns. The BP Whiting refinery in Indiana spilled between 470 and 1228 gallons of oil into Lake Michigan on March 24, 2014.

In light of these concerns and legal irregularities the NWF makes the following demand:

"The State Department must immediately correct this illegal mistake and stop Enbridge from any tar sands expansion along the Alberta Clipper line until the law has been followed. A failure to do so violates both the law and President Obama’s commitment to ensure that tar sands pipeline projects not exacerbate the problem of climate change."

Related Articles
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Video - This is What a Corroded Underwater Tar Sands Pipeline Looks Like
Moving Bitumen by Rail Rather than Pipe will Lessen Tar Sands Expansion
Neil Young Rails Against the Tar Sands and the Harper Government
The Tar Sands Have Higher Emissions Profiles than Previously Thought
Increases in Tar Sands Production Will Lock-in the Worst Impacts of Climate Change
The Tar Sands and IEA's Three Climate Change Scenarios
Video - The Tar Sands Wastes and Pollutes Vast Quantities of Water
Scientists and Activists Hold US Press Conference on Conservatives' Tar Sands Agenda
Canadian Energy Espionage in Support of the Tar Sands
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower

Event - Tar Sands Free North East in Montreal

A tour to stop the tar sands organized will be in Montreal on Sunday January 26th at 2 PM. This tour of powerful speakers from the front lines of the tar sands fight that will be making its way through New England in late January and early February. This tour has been created by 350 Maine, working in collaboration with numerous organizations across the region to build a united front against tar sands expansion.

The tour will explore the human and environmental costs of the tar sands. It will confront the raw realities and pull back the curtain on tar sands destruction and build the movement for action in the Northeast.

The Keystone XL pipeline has generated a great deal of opposition. However, the threat of tar sands oil being transported along existing and new pipelines in the northeast -- including the Portland-Montreal and Enbridge pipelines, and the proposed Energy East -- is also a very real and present danger.

On the tour are several speakers who will provide their unique perspectives on the Canadian source of tar sands oil in Alberta at different stops along the way. Here are some of the speakers:

Eriel Deranger - of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation.
Garth Lenz - an international award winning environmental photojournalist, whose work has been featured in National Geographic.

There will also be a discussion about how you can get involved in the growing Tar Sands Free North East campaign to stop tar sands expansion in our communities.

Related Articles
Moving Bitumen by Rail Rather than Pipe will Lessen Tar Sands Expansion
Neil Young Rails Against the Tar Sands and the Harper Government
The Tar Sands Have Higher Emissions Profiles than Previously Thought
Increases in Tar Sands Production Will Lock-in the Worst Impacts of Climate Change
The Tar Sands and IEA's Three Climate Change Scenarios
Video - The Tar Sands Wastes and Pollutes Vast Quantities of Water
Scientists and Activists Hold US Press Conference on Conservatives' Tar Sands Agenda
Canadian Energy Espionage in Support of the Tar Sands
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower

Neil Young Rails Against the Tar Sands and the Harper Government

Canadian rock icon Neil Young has come out with his strongest statements yet against Alberta's tar sands. He has previously described the tar sands as, “a devastating environmental catastrophe.” Now he is laying the blame squarely on Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and asking people to see beyond the federal government's misinformation and embrace an understanding informed by science.

Young's statements come as he and Diana Krall are embarking on a concert tour to raise funds for the Athabaska Chipewyan First Nation's (ACFN) legal fight against the expansion of the Athabasca tar sands. The ACFN are seeking controlled development and stricter regulations for oil companies. The four-city Honour the Treaties tour started on Sunday January 12 at Toronto’s Massey Hall. Other dates include Winnipeg on Jan. 16, Regina on Jan. 17 and Calgary on Jan. 19.

The tar sands make Canada a dirty energy superpower and our national shame of ignoring the rights and health of indigenous people is unconscionable. The tar sands is the dirtiest form of energy on earth and make Canada a leading contributor to climate change. Harper has already acknowledged that Canada will not meet its greenhouse gas (GHG) pledges and if we continue to exploit the tar sands we will reach climate tipping points which will bring life as we know it to an end for all people everywhere on earth. Harper has often cited the economic opportunities associated with the tar sands, however, this is short term thinking and Harper fails to appreciate that there is no economy on a dead planet.

Young said that Canadians are being misled by the Harper government. Canada is destroying the ancestral lands of indigenous people and making them sick. He further stated that contrary to the government's claims the land used for oil sands exploitation is not being reclaimed. He urged Canadians to "rise up," so that we can unseat Harper and his Conservatives. He also showed his support for renewable sources of energy.

Here is a summary of Young's recent statements as published by Global News.

It’s the greediest, most destructive and disrespectful demonstration of something run amok that you can ever see...There is no way to describe it. It’s truly a disaster.

Get a grip and understand what is really happening...It is hypocritical, some of the things that are being said by the leaders of this country. It’s embarrassing as a Canadian to have to listen to some of this stuff. It’s all marketing, it’s all big money.

This oil is all going to China. It’s not for Canada. It’s not for the United States. It’s not ours. It belongs to the oil companies and Canada’s government is behind making this happen.

There is no reclamation. There’s not one reclamation site that’s truly a tar sands site...It’s like turning the moon into Eden. It’s not going to work. It’s just not there anymore. It’s been destroyed. People don’t realize what it looks like. It’s worse than anything you can imagine. We made a deal with these people [Athabaska Chipewyan First Nation]. We are breaking our promise. We are killing these people,” he said. “The blood of these people will be on modern Canada’s hands.

These people are not going to sit back and let the modern Canada roll over them… and they’re not saying it, but they’re feeling it...You can’t do this. Canada cannot just walk over everyone.

I described it [Fort McMurry, Alberta] as Hiroshima, which was basically pretty mellow compared to what was really going on up there...I still stand by what was said about Fort McMurray and the way it looks. Not because the houses in Fort McMurray look like Hiroshima but because Fort McMurray stands for disease that these First Nations people are getting.

We have a huge problem with science and the understanding of it. Science cannot be ignored as inconvenient, and that’s what today’s leaders are doing.

Don’t accept that there’s no other way. Let’s develop a way out of this. Let’s have ingenuity. Let’s figure out a way. People have ideas. There are many solutions we don’t understand that are alternatives to what we’re doing. We need to look ahead and develop renewable resources and technologies to move forward and produce energy.

We have the chance to change the speed of change. It’s important to think about the future for everybody else and try to look forward and try to come up with alternatives to a dirty future based on fossil fuels. Develop a way out. There’s a door that could open into the sunshine.

What everybody should do is try to get some information out of this and look inside themselves and try to make their own decisions for themselves as Canadians. I can’t tell you what to do...For sure you can vote but people should maybe start thinking about the future.

I want my grandchildren to grow up and look up and see a blue sky, and I don’t see that today in Canada.

Related Articles
The Tar Sands Have Higher Emissions Profiles than Previously Thought
Increases in Tar Sands Production Will Lock-in the Worst Impacts of Climate Change
The Tar Sands and IEA's Three Climate Change Scenarios
Video - The Tar Sands Wastes and Pollutes Vast Quantities of Water
Scientists and Activists Hold US Press Conference on Conservatives' Tar Sands Agenda
Canadian Energy Espionage in Support of the Tar Sands
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
How the Hell did Enbridge get on the DJSI?
Canadian Conservative's Support for Dirty Energy
Action to Defend Canada's West Coast from Big Oil
Enbridge withdraws from Canada's Carbon Capture Farce
Canadian Conservatives Slash Environmental Assessment
Canadian Prime Minister Dismisses Resistance to the Northern Gateway Pipeline
Federal Provincial Energy Conference Sponsored by Big Oil
Tar Sands Day of Action in Washington DC
President Obama and the Fate of the Keystone XL Pipeline
NRDC November 6 Protest Against the Keystone XL in Washington DC
Nebraska's Special Session to Stop the Keystone XL Pipeline
South Dakota Wants Additional Protections Against Spills from the Keystone XL Pipeline
Safety Measures for the Keystone XL Rejected by Environmentalists in Nebraska
State Department Hearings for the Keystone XL Pipeline
Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline Protest
Cornell University Questions the Economic Benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline
Keystone XL Protest Ends in Washington
Oil Spills Add to Concerns about the Keystone XL Pipeline
Nobel Prize Laureates Oppose Keystone XL Pipeline
Religious Leaders Join the Protest Against Keystone XL Pipeline
US Protests Against the Tar Sands Oil
Canada on Track to be a Dirty Energy Superpower
Bill McKibben and other Protestors Jailed for their Opposition to the Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline
Video: NASA's Leading Climatologist Addresses Crowd Before he was Arrested at the Keystone XL Tar Sands Protest in Washington

Video - The Tar Sands Wastes and Pollutes Vast Quantities of Water

The Tar Sands Have Higher Emissions Profiles than Previously Thought

It is widely known that the tar sands are the most destructive sources of greenhouse gases on the planet. Te European Commission has determined that on a well to wheels basis, tar sands emissions are 23 percent worse than fuel from conventional crude. According to two new reports they may be even more harmful than previously thought.

The first report is titled Petroleum Coke: The Coal Hiding in the Tar Sands indicates that previous assessments of the environmental impacts fail to account for a high-carbon byproduct of the refining process. The other study was conducted by the Pembina Institute and it is titled The Climate Implications of the Proposed Keystone XL Oilsands Pipeline.

This study shows how the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would accelerate expansion of the tar sands and significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Tar sands contains bitumen which is 24 percent more carbon rich than conventional light oil. It is removed and converted during the refining process into a solid fuel called petroleum coke or “petcoke,” which is not factored into the emissions assessments. Petcoke yields on average 53.6 percent more CO2 than a ton of coal.

Petcoke is one of the cheapest and dirtiest fuels on the market selling at 25 percent less than coal. Petcoke is commonly mixed in with coal as the low price provides a powerful market incentives. This also makes it harder for cleaner forms of energy to compete in an open marketplace.

US refineries produced more than 61.5 million tons of petcoke in 2011, most of which is exported. Petcoke is also used in coal plants. When petcoke is factored into the Keystone XL equation, it emits 13 percent more CO2 than indicated by the U.S. State Department's assessment. The petcoke produced from the Keystone XL pipeline would fuel 5 coal plants and produce 16.6 million metric tons of CO2 each year.

In response to these two reports, Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry A. Waxman made the following statement: “The new reports show that TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline is the key that will unlock the tar sands. If the pipeline is approved, the world will face millions more tons of carbon pollution each year for decades to come. After Hurricane Sandy, devastating drought, unprecedented wildfires and the warmest year on record in the United States, we know that climate change is happening now, we have to fight it now, and we must say no to this pollution pipeline now.”

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Increases in Tar Sands Production Will Lock-in the Worst Impacts of Climate Change
The Tar Sands and IEA's Three Climate Change Scenarios
Scientists and Activists Hold US Press Conference on Conservatives' Tar Sands Agenda
Canadian Energy Espionage in Support of the Tar Sands
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canadian Conservative's Support for Dirty Energy
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower

Increased Tar Sands Production Will Lock-in the Worst Impacts of Global Warming

If the Canadian government succeeds in significantly increasing tar sands production capacity it will be impossible to keep global temperatures below the upper threshold limit of 2 C. By 2020, the industry could have over 110 million barrels per day (bpd) of production capacity in place. This is over 22 million bpd more than International Energy Agency (IEA) models say we should be using if we are to reduce the risk of warming the planet more than 2 degrees C.

The tar sands are at the center of climate change causing emissions. This is because they are the dirtiest source of energy on the planet, add to that plans to radically increase production and we have a confluence of factors that will destroy any chance we have of staying within the 2 degree threshold.

Current tar sands production capacity is 2.28 million bpd, however, over 750,000 bpd is currently under construction, all of which should be operational by 2015. The Alberta government has already approved a further 2.22 million bpd of tar sands production that is not yet under construction. If those projects are built production capacity would be over 5.25 million bpd.

The Harper government has indicated that they would like to triple production bringing us to 6.84 bpd. This would ensure that we surpass the IEA’s 2 degree model by nearly three times. The tar sands industry has over 7.1 million bpd of projects proposed and under construction. The oil industry also has another 4.15 million bpd of projects that are either currently undergoing regulatory review or have been announced but not yet submitted for approval. Together this adds up to over 9.38 million bpd.

According to the IEA, we must keep tar sands production below 3.3 million bpd if we are to stay within the 2 degrees C upper threshold.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
The Tar Sands Have Higher Emissions Profiles than Previously Thought
The Tar Sands and IEA's Three Climate Change Scenarios
Scientists and Activists Hold US Press Conference on Conservatives' Tar Sands Agenda
Canadian Energy Espionage in Support of the Tar Sands
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canadian Conservative's Support for Dirty Energy
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower

The Tar Sands and IEA's Three Climate Change Scenarios

The IEA has forecast temperature increases in 3 different emissions scenarios which include tar sands oil. These scenarios are contained in the IEA’s 2010 edition of the World Energy Outlook (WEO).

Here is a brief review of each of the three scenarios and the amount of tar sands oil factored into each.

The first scenario is titled “Current Policies Scenario.” In this scenario greenhouse gas emissions would cause average global temperatures to increase by 6 degrees C by the end of the century leading to, “massive climatic change and irreparable damage to the planet”. In this scenario the IEA has tar sands production are at 4.6 million barrels per day (bpd).

The second scenario is titled the “New Policies Scenario”, the IEA applies the targets discussed at the Copenhagen climate conference in 2009. It estimates that under this scenario we would see a 3.5-4 degree C average global temperature increase. warmer planet. In this scenario the IEA has tar sands production at 4.2 million bpd.

The third is titled the “450 Scenario”, atmospheric carbon is kept at or below the level of 450 parts per million. According to this scenario, we would have a 50 50 chance of keeping global average temperatures below the 2 degree threshold. In this scenario tar sands production tops out at 3.3 million bpd.

If Canada's Conservative government succeeds in their efforts to ramp up tar sands production we will surpass the upper threshold of 2 degrees C by almost three times.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
The Tar Sands Have Higher Emissions Profiles than Previously Thought
Increases in Tar Sands Production Will Lock-in the Worst Impacts of Climate Change
Scientists and Activists Hold US Press Conference on Conservatives' Tar Sands Agenda
Canadian Energy Espionage in Support of the Tar Sands
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower

Canadian Conservatives Cut Research Funding but Spend on Fossil Fuel Pipeline

The ruling Canadian Conservative party has cut $148 million for research while spending roughly the same amount of tax dollars to support the Northern Gateway Pipeline project.

Under President Barack Obama the US has invested billions in scientific research and education while Harper's Conservative government has slashed research funding. The Canadian government has cut funding to the three agencies that support basic research at Canadian universities.

Federal Green MP Elizabeth May has said that her party has gained access to documents showing that the federal government is using $120 million in Canadian tax dollars to support the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline.

According to May the pipeline research is being carried out off the north coast, where Enbridge hopes to run oil tankers as part of its proposed Northern Gateway project.

"The fact that the federal government is using our tax dollars to back stop Enbridge's failure is shocking,” May said. She further argued that such research should be funded by Enbridge not the Canadian government. 

The money is being spent to in an effort to sway the current provincial government in B.C. which officially opposes the Northern Gateway pipeline project due to environmental concerns.

"We cannot support the proposal as it stands," said B.C. Premier Christy Clark. "The thing about the Green Party and my party is this: we take a clear position and we stick with it."

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Taxpayers Money to Promote Fossil Fuels Brought to you by Canada's Ruling Federal Conservatives
Canadian Implications of President Obama`s Climate Action Plan
The Fate of the Keystone XL in the Wake of President Obama's Climate Action Plan
Canadian Environment Minister: "Fossil Awards are Worn with Honour"
Video - When is Canada's Environment Minister Going to Listen to Experts on Climate Change
Video - Calling on Canadian Environment Minister to Apologize for Denying Climate Change and its Impacts
Melting Canadian Glaciers
Top 10 Canadian Extreme Weather Stories of 2012
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Canada's Ruling Conservatives Take Another Swipe at Environmental Protections
Canada is Banking on Carbon Capture to Offset Tar Sands
Enbridge withdraws from Canada's Carbon Capture Farce
Canada at Odds with US and China on Climate Change
Report Urges Canada's Federal Conservatives to Regulate Oil and Gas Sector to Meet GHG Targets
Canadian Conservative Minister Attacks Climate Scientist
Canada Withdraws from UN Efforts to Combat Desertification
Canada Pulls out of Kyoto
Canada is an Environmental Pariah at Rio+20
Canada's Ruling Conservatives are Trying to Silence American Scientists
Canada's Ruling Conservatives Muzzle Scientists
Canadian Conservatives Silence Opposition to the Northern Gateway Oil Pipeline
Canadian Conservatives Admit to Killing Environmental Dissent
Conservative Budget Guts the Environment
Canadian Government Spending on Dirty Projects
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
Canada has the Dirtiest Oil on Earth (Video)
How the Hell did Enbridge get on the DJSI?

Neil Young Compares Canada's Tar Sands to Hiroshima

Canadian music legend Neil Young recently compared the tar sands in Fort McMurray, Alberta to Hiroshima, the site of the first atomic bomb drop in August 1945. According to the Globe and Mail report, Young shared his concerns about the environmental impacts of the tar sands with those in attendance at an event for the National Farmers Union in Washington, D.C.

"The fact is, Fort McMurray looks like Hiroshima, Fort McMurray is a wasteland. The Indians up there and the native peoples are dying. The fuels all over -- the fumes everywhere -- you can smell it when you get to town. The closest place to Fort McMurray that is doing the tarsands work is 25 to 30 miles out of town and you can taste it when you get to Fort McMurray. People are sick. People are dying of cancer because of this. All the First Nations people up there are threatened by this."

Young also said he recently visited Alberta where "much of the oil comes from, much of the oil that we're using here, which they call ethical oil because it's not from Saudi Arabia or some country that may be at war with us."

Young also said carbon emissions are causing extreme weather which is affecting farmers. "It's climate chaos," Young said. "This is a direct result of CO2, unless you don't believe me and 99 per cent of the scientists. It's a truth, these things are happening because there's science behind them. It's real.

"I'm ready to take the flag, nobody paid me to come here," he added. "I'm here because I really see this, this is a disaster. We have a very very big problem, the CO2 is going to get to be a huge issue in the next couple of years."

Young further attributed blame squarely at the feed of big oil companies singling out their misinformation when it comes to alternative fuels like ethanol,

"Who are these people who are telling us how dirty and how ethanol is not green?" he said. "I think it is the oil companies and the only thing about their product that is green is the money that goes into campaigns that pays for our representatives. We have to hold these people to task. They're our people, they're our representatives. Please don't let them forget who they work for."

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Video - Neil Young Compares Alberta's Tar Sands to Hiroshima
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canadian Conservative's Support for Dirty Energy
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
Action to Defend Canada's West Coast from Big Oil
Canadian Prime Minister Dismisses Resistance to the Northern Gateway Pipeline
Federal Provincial Energy Conference Sponsored by Big Oil
President Obama and the Fate of the Keystone XL Pipeline
Cornell University Questions the Economic Benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline
Oil Spills Add to Concerns about the Keystone XL Pipeline
Nobel Prize Laureates Oppose Keystone XL Pipeline

Breaking News - Keystone XL Pipeline on the Ropes: Conflict of Interest Revealed in the State's EIS

On Friday August 2nd, the State Department made a statement that may signal the end of the Keystone XL pipeline. The State Department is now questioning the veracity of the findings of a favorable review of the Keystone XL completed last year. According to diverse sources the consultant (Environmental Resources Management or ERM) that produced the report has been paid by TransCanada, the pipeline developer. ERM is also reported to have close ties with the American Petroleum Institute, an oil industry lobby with financial ties to TransCanada.

The proposed Keystone XL would ferry diluted bitumen from Alberta's tar sands to US Gulf Coast refineries. Because the pipeline crosses international borders, the project requires State Department approval. Questions about the impartiality of the State Department environmental impact statement (EIS) will likely delay the final verdict on the pipeline and may very well kill it altogether.

The US Environmental Protection Agency slammed the State Department's original report for grossly misrepresenting the environmental threats posed by the pipeline.

The reports of the conflict of interest were unearthed by Brad Johnson in a Grist post which revealed that ERM was paid by TransCanada. Another report by DeSmogBlog revealed that ERM is a dues-paying member of the American Petroleum Institute.

As reported by Zack Coleman at The Hill, these findings were confirmed by State Department spokesman Doug Welty.

The Keystone XL looks as though it may finally succumb to a barrage of blows. First the pipeline was hit by President's blatant rebuff of the projects job benefits, then from an oil leak in Alberta's tar sands, and now from the State Department's acknowledgement of conflict of interest.

While it appears that TransCanada's American dream may be coming to an end, we would do well to remember that in both 2011 and 2012 the Keystone XL seemed to be dead, yet managed to revive. It remains to be seen whether the pipeline can recover from this most recent blow.

Even if this pipeline does die, TransCanada's hydrocarbon hydra has already found a new pipeline pathway to ferry its dirty dilbit to world markets.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
The Fate of the Keystone XL Pipeline in the Wake of President Obama's Georgetown University Speech
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
EPA Slams State Department on the Keystone XL
Obama Says the Number of Keystone XL Jobs are "Negligible
Obama Rebuffs the Keystone XL's Economic and Jobs Benefits
Unions Oppose the Keystone XL in the Jobs vs. Environment Debate Cornell University Questions the Economic Benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline
American Employment: Keystone XL vs Green Jobs 
A New State Department Environmental Impact Assessment Clears the Keystone XL Pipeline
Obama to Expedite the Keystone XL Pipeline 
The DoD's Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap (CCAR) Excludes Keystone XL
The Center for Biological Diversity CREDO and Friends of the Earth Slam Keystone Reversal
Bill McKibben on Obama's Keystone XL Reversal
Indigenous People and Students Protest Obama's Reversal on Keystone XL
Republicans Vow to Continue Push for Keystone
Obama Cancels the Keystone XL Pipeline Project
Republicans Use Blackmail to Gain Support for the Keystone XL Pipeline
President Obama Stops Keystone XL Pipeline

Obama Says the Number of Keystone XL Jobs are "Negligible"

President Obama gave further indications that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline may not win his support. On Tuesday July 30, Obama said for the second time in a week that as far as jobs are concerned the Keystone project is not worth much.

As reported in The Hill, the President told attendees at Amazon.com’s Chattanooga, Tenn., distribution facility, “Putting all your eggs in the basket of an oil pipeline that may only create about 50 permanent jobs, and wasting the country’s time by taking something like 40 meaningless votes to repeal ObamaCare isn’t a jobs plan.” 

The comments were part of a speech in which the President reviewed his economic plan. Obama's remarks clearly targeted Republicans who continue to try to tout the pipeline as an important part of a national jobs plan.

The President's claim that the Keystone XL will only provide a very limited number of jobs was reiterated earlier this week by the State Department which said the project would have a “negligible” impact on the US employment picture.

Obama continues to advocate for jobs in clean energy and resist calls from the House to cut government support for renewables.

“Now is the time to double down on renewables, and biofuels, and electric vehicles, and the research that will shift our cars and trucks off oil for good,” Obama said.

While environmentalists are lauding the President for his stance on clean energy employment they continue to decry his support for jobs from fracking for natural gas. 

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Keystone XL Pipeline on the Ropes: Conflict of Interest Revealed in the State's EIS
Obama Rebuffs the Keystone XL's Economic and Jobs Benefits
New Tar Sands Pipeline Goes East to Follow the Path of Least Resistance
The Fate of the Keystone XL Pipeline in the Wake of President Obama's Georgetown University Speech
Unions Oppose the Keystone XL in the Jobs vs. Environment Debate
EPA Slams State Department on the Keystone XL
Cornell University Questions the Economic Benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline
American Employment: Keystone XL vs Green Jobs
A New State Department Environmental Impact Assessment Clears the Keystone XL Pipeline
Republicans Vow to Continue Push for Keystone

Breaking News - New Tar Sands Pipeline Goes East to Follow the Path of Least Resistance

It would appear that TransCanada is pursuing the path of least resistance in the announcement of yet another pipeline. Unlike the Keystone XL and the Northern Gateway, TransCanada is expecting far less opposition to the proposed Energy East Pipeline project that would ferry tar sands oil from Alberta to New Brunswick.

On Thursday August 1, 2013, TransCanada President and CEO Russ Girling announced the new Energy East Pipeline during a news conference in Calgary, Alberta. The planned $12 billion oil pipeline will ship Western Canada's tar sands crude to refiners on its east coast. From there it will be shipped to markets around the world.

This new pipeline is a signal that resistance to the Keystone XL and the Northern Gateway are succeeding and TransCanada may is seeking alternatives. The Energy East Pipeline announcement also comes as American energy needs are increasingly being met by natural gas from fracking.

TransCanada plans to convert 3,000 kilometres of the company’s main natural gas pipeline to carry the oil. It will also construct another 1,400 kilometres of new pipeline, mostly in Quebec and New Brunswick. About 70 pumping stations will have to be built along the pipeline to move the oil. The supply of natural gas reaching the East is not expected to be impacted by the conversion. The completion date to reach Quebec refineries is 2017, and New Brunswick a year later in 2018.

To reach international markets, Irving Oil said it plans to build a $300-million marine oil terminal in Saint John, N.B. and another as yet undetermined marine terminal will be build in Quebec. A big new oil hub will also have to be built somewhere in southeastern Saskatchewan.

Trying to appear impartial Canadian Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver lifted a line from Obama's approach to oversight on the Keystone XL “Our government will only allow energy projects to proceed if they are proven safe for Canadians after an independent, science-based environmental and regulatory review,” the minister said.

From the ruling Conservative's past record on the tar sands, oil pipelines and fossil fuels in general we can expect an expedited and cursory regulatory review from the federal government. In an email, Oliver showed his support for the project saying that the pipeline would enhance the country’s energy security and reduce its reliance on foreign crude.

It is widely understood that the primary way we can address climate change is to curtail our use of fossil fuels. To make matters worse, tar sands oil is some of the most greenhouse gas intensive oil on earth. The pipeline will help double oil production in the west from 3 million barrels a day to more than 6 million barrels a day by 2030.

The Energy East Pipeline will transport more than 1 million barrels of crude eastward per day.

TransCanada is counting on the fact that there is less organized opposition in the East. However, the Council of Canadians have vowed to start a national campaign to stop the pipeline.

“While there has been a lot of talk about Atlantic energy security, this crude will actually go to the highest bidder. India, China, Europe and the U.S. are in line,” said Maude Barlow the council’s national chairperson.

Girling himself acknowledged that the market will decide where the oil ends up. No matter where it goes more tar sands oil will only increase emissions and make it harder to combat climate change. In addition increased tanker traffic will threaten the east coast of North America.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Obama Refutes the Keystone XL's Economic and Jobs Benefits
The Fate of the Keystone XL Pipeline in the Wake of President Obama's Georgetown University Speech
EPA Slams State Department on the Keystone XL 
BC Opposes the Northern Gateway Pipeline 
Canadian Conservatives Silence Opposition to the Northern Gateway Oil Pipeline
Canadian Prime Minister Dismisses Environmental Review of Northern Gateway Pipeline 
Canada on Track to be a Dirty Energy Superpower
Burning Fossil Fuels and Staying Within the 2 Degree Limit 
The Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Oil Spills Add to Concerns about the Keystone XL Pipeline
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta

On June 27, an oil spill occurred at Canadian Natural Resources Limited's (CNRL) Primrose operations 75km east of Lac la Biche. The spill happened on the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range (CLAWR). DeSmog.ca reported a release of bitumen emulsion, which is a mixture of heavy tar sands crude and water from oil production.

According to a press release from the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) neither the company nor the government are certain of the volume of emulsion spilled.

It is hard to gain access to the site, and the Huffington Post reports that even the Beaver Lake Cree have been denied access to the land which is located on their traditional territory. Sources that did gain access to the site said that the damage of the spill is much worse than the company, government or media are reporting. The damage was described as "black puddles" or "black spots" coming up in different areas.

An employee on site confirmed that the tar sands emulsion seeping from the ground is not a pipeline spill. It is troubling that, industry and government do not know what the spill is. What is known is that there is a lot of oil and they do not know how to stop it.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation
Canadian Conservative's Support for Dirty Energy
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
Canadian Conservatives Slash Environmental Assessment
Canadian Prime Minister Dismisses Resistance to the Northern Gateway Pipeline
Cornell University Questions the Economic Benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline
Bill McKibben and other Protestors Jailed for their Opposition to the Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline
Video: NASA's Leading Climatologist Addresses Crowd Before he was Arrested at the Keystone XL Tar Sands Protest in Washington

Tar Sands Reality Check Counters Misinformation

On May 16, 2013, TarSandsRealityCheck.com (TSRC) was Launched in Canada, Europe and the US. TSRC provides reliable information on the Alberta tar sands.  This site is meant to counter misinformation from the Canadian government and oil sands lobbyists. The peer reviewed science provided on this site addresses topical issues like the Keystone XL pipeline in North America and the Fuel Quality Directive in Europe.

TSRC is designed for the public, media, politicians and the environmental community and includes groups like Environmental Defence Canada, Equiterre, Forest Ethics Advocacy, Greenpeace Canada, Natural Resources Defense Council (US), 350.org, Sierra Club U.S., and Transport and Environment (Europe).

The launch of TSRC coincides with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's trip to New York where he tried to sell the Keystone XL to the Council of Foreign Relations. In addition to Harper's pro tar sands pitch, the Canadian government has launched a new website which tries to put a positive spin on Alberta's fossil fuel industry.

The federal Conservatives were elected based on their economic promises. Now Canadians are realizing that not only are they failing to deliver on the economy, they are jeopardizing Canada's economic future. Harper's Conservatives have savaged Canada's environmental safeguards and turned the nation into a pariah state by abandoning Kyoto and global agreements on desertification. Worst of all, under Harper's leadership Canada's emissions profile continues to increase while much of the rest of is beginning to get serious about emissions reduction. 

TSRC has a number of distinguished contributors including world renowned economists, scientists and academics.

“With so much misinformation floating around, much of it intentionally misleading, it’s time for a tar sands reality check,” said Dr. Thomas Homer-Dixon from the University of Waterloo. “Every Canadian should read these facts and know the truth about the industry’s impacts.”

The Canadian government is spending $16.5 million of tax payers money to influence public opinion by selling tar sands oil. TSRC may not have the resources of the Canadian government or the fossil fuel industry but what they do have is the truth. TSRC clearly explains tar sands science as it pertains to the climate and the economy. It also deals with the tar sands impacts on flora, fauna, land, air and water.

“The Canadian and Albertan governments, along with industry, are inundating Europe with their pro-tar sands lobby campaign,” said Laura Buffet of Transport and Environment in Europe. “This website gives us a one stop shop for accurate and peer-reviewed data that we can point to decision makers who are overwhelmed by the industry spin.”

TSRC offers peer reviewed science that goes beyond the glossy sales pitches offered by a government seemingly desperate for petrodollars.

“No glossy brochures or green-washed billboards can change the fact that the pollution in the tar sands continues to soar,” said Hannah McKinnon of Environmental Defence Canada. “It is time for a reality check. The oil industry needs to invest in reducing carbon emissions instead of more empty PR spin.”

The Harper government and the fossil fuel industry puts short term economic gain above human health and in the process they are imperiling the future of the entire globe.  Once lauded for its economic performance, the federal Conservatives are now seeing thier luster fade as the naked truth is exposed.  It is time for people to see this government for what it is, a mouthpiece for the petroleum industry.

To learn more go to TarSandsRealityCheck .

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Video - The Tar Sands Give Canada the Worst Climate Record in the Western World
Canadian Conservative's Support for Dirty Energy
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
Canadian Conservatives Slash Environmental Assessment
Canadian Prime Minister Dismisses Resistance to the Northern Gateway Pipeline
Cornell University Questions the Economic Benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline
Oil Spills Add to Concerns about the Keystone XL Pipeline
Bill McKibben and other Protestors Jailed for their Opposition to the Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline
Video: NASA's Leading Climatologist Addresses Crowd Before he was Arrested at the Keystone XL Tar Sands Protest in Washington

Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands

One of Canada’s top economists is traveling to Europe to warn them about the environmental impacts of the tar sands. Simon Fraser economist Dr. Mark Jaccard has worked with governments in Canada and the US to fashion climate policies. He suggested that the emissions reduction efforts by governments around the world will make it increasingly difficult to find markets for Canadian crude derived from tar sands.

He is also warning that current efforts to expand Canada's tar sands could leave billions of dollars in stranded assets, including pipelines like TransCanada Corp.’s proposed Keystone XL

Dr. Jaccard will travel to Europe with former NASA scientist James Hansen to jointly urge governments to pass a measure that describes Canada's tar sands as dirty and imposes a tax. They will visit Brussels, Berlin, Paris and London, and will address parliamentary committees of the British parliament and the EU parliament.

Dr. Jaccard called the Harper government “hypocritical” in claiming to want to keep global temperatures from increasing by more than 2 degrees while pursuing expansion of one of the most carbon-intensive sources of fuel in the world.

Dr. Jaccard was among 12 scientists and researchers who sent a letter to the Canadian Natural Resources Minister questioning his commitment to tackling climate change and urging him to back-off plans to expand the countries exploitation of the tar sands.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Canadian Implications of President Obama`s Climate Action Plan 
The Fate of the Keystone XL in the Wake of President Obama's Climate Action Plan
Canadian Environment Minister: "Fossil Awards are Worn with Honour"
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Canada at Odds with US and China on Climate Change
Report Urges Canada's Federal Conservatives to Regulate Oil and Gas Sector to Meet GHG Targets
Canadian Government Spending on Dirty Projects
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
Canada has the Dirtiest Oil on Earth (Video)

Climate Scientists' Urge Canadian Minister to Back-off Expanded Fossil Fuel Production

Twelve climate scientists and energy experts sent a letter to Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver questioning his commitment to combating climate change. The letter also urged him to reduce the country's production of fossil fuels and increase support for cleaner sources of energy.

Dear Minister Oliver,

As climate scientists, economists and policy experts who have devoted our careers to understanding the climate and energy systems, we share your view that “climate change is a very serious issue.”

But some of your recent comments give us significant cause for concern. In short, we are not convinced that your advocacy in support of new pipelines and expanded fossil fuel production takes climate change into account in a meaningful way.

Avoiding dangerous climate change will require significantly reducing our reliance on fossil fuels and making a transition to cleaner energy.

The infrastructure we build today will shape future choices about energy. If we invest in expanding fossil fuel production, we risk locking ourselves in to a high carbon pathway that increases greenhouse gas emissions for years and decades to come.

The International Energy Agency’s (IEA) “450 scenario” looks at the implications of policy choices designed to give the world a fair chance of avoiding 2°C of global warming. In that scenario, world oil demand is projected to peak this decade and fall to 10 per cent below current levels over the coming decades. The IEA concludes that, absent significant deployment of carbon capture and storage, over two-thirds of the world’s current fossil fuel reserves cannot be commercialized.

Other experts have reached similar conclusions.

We are at a critical moment. In the words of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, “each additional ton of greenhouse gases emitted commits us to further change and greater risks.” The longer we delay the transition to low-carbon economy, the more drastic, disruptive and costly that transition will be. The implication is clear: the responsibility for preventing dangerous climate change rests with today’s policymakers.

The IEA also warns of the consequences of our current path. If governments do little to address emissions, energy demand will continue to grow rapidly and will continue to be met mostly with fossil fuels – a scenario that the Agency estimates could likely lead to 3.6°C of global warming.

Yet it is this very dangerous pathway – not the “450 scenario” linked to avoiding 2°C of global warming – that you seem to be advocating when promoting Canadian fossil fuel development at home and abroad.

If we truly wish to have a “serious debate” about climate change and energy in this country, as you have rightly called for, we must start by acknowledging that our choices about fossil fuel infrastructure carry significant consequences for today’s and future generations.

We urge you to make the greenhouse gas impacts of new fossil fuel infrastructure a central consideration in your government’s decision-making and advocacy activities concerning Canada’s natural resources.

We would be very happy to provide you with a full briefing on recent scientific findings on climate change and energy development.

Thank you for your consideration of these important matters.

Sincerely,

J.P. Bruce, OC, FRSC; James Byrne, Professor, Geography, University of Lethbridge; Simon Donner, Assistant Professor, Geography, University of British Columbia; J.R. Drummond, FRSC Professor, Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University; Mark Jaccard, FRSC, Professor, Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University; David Keith, Professor, Applied Physics, Public Policy, Harvard University; Damon Matthews, Associate Professor, Geography, Planning and Environment, Concordia University; Gordon McBean, CM, FRSC Professor, Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Western University; David Sauchyn, Professor, Prairie Adaptation Research Collaborative, University of Regina; John Smol, FRSC Professor, Canada Research Chair in Environmental Change, Queen’s University; John M.R. Stone, Adjunct Research Professor, Geography and Environment, Carleton University; Kirsten Zickfeld, Assistant Professor, Geography, Simon Fraser University Minister.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
Canadian Implications of President Obama`s Climate Action Plan 
The Fate of the Keystone XL in the Wake of President Obama's Climate Action Plan
Canadian Environment Minister: "Fossil Awards are Worn with Honour"
Leading Canadian Economist to Tell Europeans about the Climate Impacts of the Tar Sands
Canada to Fight EU Proposal Labeling Tar Sands as Dirty
Canada at Odds with US and China on Climate Change
Report Urges Canada's Federal Conservatives to Regulate Oil and Gas Sector to Meet GHG Targets
Canada is an Environmental Pariah at Rio+20
Canadian Government Spending on Dirty Projects
Canada is a Dirty Energy Superpower
Canada has the Dirtiest Oil on Earth (Video)