Such damage control is very important to undertake, especially when sea-changes in public opinion are underway as they are. Many of the "inconvenient spew" of this articles "talking points" are ridiculous. The suggestion that "Americans" have asked for tarsands to be ramped up would convince me if I thought that the average American knew where the Tarsands even were, let alone that he or she wants more from them.
This is, bottom line, proof we are getting somewhere. Let's keep moving; where we are coming from holds nothing.
--M
Oilsands gain a dirty name
Claudia Cattaneo, Financial Post
Published: Tuesday, June 12, 2007
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columnists/story.html?id=00b0c95d-384...
Forget Canada's image as a source of secure energy to the United States.
That was a couple of years ago, when the flavours of the day south of the border were indignation over soaring gasoline prices, while dependence on Middle East oil was the root of all evil, including the war in Iraq.
Now that Hollywood actors are buying carbon offsets to feel even better about their air-conditioned mansions and private jets, Canada is held in contempt for being the source of the dirtiest oil on the planet -- the oilsands.
It's an image that is ramping up quickly, pumped by politicians such as Al Gore, who has criticized oilsands developers for tearing up four tonnes of landscape for every barrel of oil produced, and by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a champion of low-carbon fuel standards aimed at cutting imports from places like Alberta.
In recent days, it has been stoked even further by U.S. groups including the Freedom from Oil Coalition and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
They appear to have suddenly caught on to the fact that Canada is the major foreign oil supplier to the United States, and that this is a bad thing.
"Tar sands oil, unlike even conventional oil, is much, much dirtier," said Mike Hudema, a former Albertan who is now the San Francisco-based director of the Freedom from Oil Coalition, in an interview.
He was one of the organizers of a training camp in Alberta last week for activists eager to participate in acts of civil disobedience against oilsands projects.
"You are talking about three times the amount of energy for a barrel of oil in the tar sands compared to any other barrel on earth," said Mr. Hudema, who doesn't own a car but flew to Canada.
"You are talking about all of these greenhouse gas emissions. Pretty much any place you can pick would be better than the tar sands."
He also believes Canada is fuelling the U.S.'s oil addiction, and that growth in oilsands production is the reason the country is failing to meet its Kyoto Protocol obligations.
The Natural Resources Defense Council jumped into the fray yesterday, with a dire report, warning policy makers in Washington and Ottawa about pushing unconventional oil sources such as the oilsands.
"There is no question we need to reduce our dependence on oil, but this is the worst possible way to go about it," said energy analyst Deron Lovaas, referring to the oilsands, oil shale and liquid coal.
Council spokeswoman Susan Casey-Lefkowitz lamented to reporters last week in advance of the report that the oilsands are putting Alberta on the map for many Americans "in a horrible way."
The group also slammed the Alberta and federal governments for apparently laying out an "aggressive new package of tax breaks, subsidies and discount royalties to ramp up extraction even more."
If that's true it would be news to the oil and gas sector. The only recent change removing a break has been the elimination of the accelerated capital cost allowance in the February federal budget.
All in all, it's an offensive image that Canadians must nip in the bud, before Americans get too cozy blaming us for their environmental failures, while ignoring other inconvenient truths:
-that if it weren't for Canada's oil, Americans would have to depend even more on Venezuela, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia to fuel their tanks, while waiting -- and waiting -- for other sources such as biofuels and wind power to save the day;
-that Canada's oilsands business is doing more than most American motorists to reduce its carbon footprint;
-that Canada's oilsands industry is growing because that's what Americans have asked for;
-that light, sweet oil is a vanishing energy source worldwide;
-that Canada's oil is sold to the United States at market prices without strings; and
-that Americans, the top consumers of energy in the world, are hardly in a position to lecture Canadians on the environment or to criticize how Canadians make a living.
The image of Canada a source of dirty energy shouldn't come as a surprise, given U.S. propensity to take Canada's energy for granted.
Meanwhile, Canada and the energy sector may want to dust off those plans for an oil pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. Coast aimed at opening new markets in Asia for Canada's oil. Those plans were postponed last year in favour of building more oil pipelines to the United States. Now, Asian markets are suddenly looking more secure.
© National Post 2007
