New report slams oil sands
BP process in Whiting called 'destructive'
May 20, 2010
BY GITTE LAASBY,
When BP Whiting starts processing more Canadian oil sands, residents near the refinery will experience more pollution and health effects from it, according to a new report by a coalition of environmental groups.
"Research has shown increased pollution in communities around refineries. Tar sands contain more sulfur, nitrogen oxides and metals, including mercury and arsenic," said Kenny Bruno, campaign director with Corporate Ethics International. "All of which are harmful to human health."
Sulfur is what smells like rotten eggs.
The old fight between oil companies and environmentalists over oil sands -- the sandy bitumen that BP will process more of at the Whiting refinery -- is being revived in the wake of BP's oil spill in the Gulf. The oil industry sees an opportunity to push tar sands. Environmentalists see the opposite.
In a "Tar Sands Invasion" report released this week, four environmental groups called tar sands the "largest and most destructive project on earth," saying it contributes to acid rain; causes three times the global warming pollution of conventional oil; leads to loss of boreal forests in Canada, which is migratory bird habitat; and that the 10,000 miles of pipelines that will transport the Canadian tar sands have the potential to leak and cause oil spills.
"Pipelines bring a danger of oil spills to America's agricultural heartland, while pollution from refineries would threaten local communities and the Great Lakes. All of these environmental consequences are unnecessary because, due to declining demand and improving energy efficiency, the United States does not need tar sands oil," the report said.
BP spokesman Scott Dean could not be reached for comment.
The oil industry generally touts tar sands as a way to improve national security because it makes the country less reliant on foreign oil.
"Tar sands do not enhance energy security simply because they come from a friendly neighbor. Continued reliance on oil empowers all countries that are major oil exporters, including Saudi Arabia and Iran," the report said. "The best investments in energy security are investments in alternatives to oil."
Industry says use of renewable energy sources are only increasing at a pace to meet increased energy demand, not cover existing demand.
Environmentalists say tar sands oil is too expensive and there isn't enough of it.
According to the Energy Information Administration under the U.S. Department of Energy, the United States will require 9 percent more energy in 2030 than in 2007. EIA numbers from 2009 said oil demand was 39.4 percent of our energy use in 2007 and is projected to be 33.5 percent in 2030. Biomass and renewables are expected to increase from 4.1 percent in 2007 to 10.7 percent in 2030.
According to the report, energy efficiency measures would reduce oil demand by four million barrels per day by 2020 and 10 million barrels daily by 2030.
