Tar Sands Hell 2

107 posts / 0 new
Last post
Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture
Tar Sands Hell 2

Activists block tar sands mining operation to send message to Obama and Harper: Climate leaders don't buy tar sands

excerpt:

Fort McMurray, Canada - On the eve of the Harper-Obama meeting in Washington D.C., Greenpeace activists are locking down and blockading a giant dump truck and shovel at Shell's massive Albian Sands open-pit mine in northern Alberta to send the message that the tar sands are a global climate crime that must be stopped.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Another excerpt from the OP:

“Greenpeace has come here today, to the frontiers of climate destruction to block this giant mining operation and tell Harper and Obama meeting tomorrow that climate leaders don’t buy tar sands” said Mike Hudema, Greenpeace Canada climate and energy campaigner, from inside the blockade. “The tar sands are a devastating example of how our future will look unless urgent action is taken to protect the climate.”

Canada is now the number one exporter of oil to the US, most of which is dirty tar sands oil. The climate crimes of tar sands development—rising energy intensity, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and Boreal forest destruction—are leading the world to climate chaos.

The world’s oil addiction has turned the tar sands into the biggest industrial project on the planet, occupying an area the size of England. Tar sands GHG emissions, already nearing those of Norway, could soon more than triple to 140 million tonnes a year, as outlined in a Greenpeace report by award winning author Andrew Nikiforuk released this week. At that point they would equal or exceed those of Belgium, a county of 10 million. These numbers account only for the production of tar sands oil, and do not account for the massive additional GHG impact of burning the fuel.

Fidel

And there is more than meets the eye with respect to our crazy neoliberal trade deal, NAFTA. Using natural gas for refining tar sands creates problems concering Canada's NAFTA obligations. If Canada uses natural gas for refining tar sands, Canada will have much less gas available for export/siphoning off to the States. And at the same time, Canada cannot reduce natural gas exports to the U.S. unless we also reduce natural gas consumption within Canada. It's the dumbest trade deal in the history of the world.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I agree with and appreciate the actions of Greenpeace, and with your comments on NAFTA - but what PM in our lifetime is going to be courageous enough to do anything about either of these disasters?

martin dufresne

Jack!

George Victor

Boomer:

"I agree with and appreciate the actions of Greenpeace, and with your comments on NAFTA - but what PM in our lifetime is going to be courageous enough to do anything about either of these disasters?"

 

You and I are longer in the tooth than some, Boomer. But even given our "advancing" ages, if the question of the Tar Patch is not resolved in our "lifetime", it will mean that the world's nations are not able to resolve the question of limitations on our consumption of fossil fuels, and the grandkids will eventually hold us to account as representatives of a suicidal species.

 

With smartass remarks like the previous posting, "Jack", representing a fair portion of humanity, consumed with itself, you can see that we have an uphill struggle on our hands.

Fidel

martin dufresne wrote:

Jack!

 

Good answer, Marty. Unfortunately too many Canadians suffer from [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness]learned helplessness[/url]. And it was brought on the electorate by a string of stooges in Ottawa practicing planned and enforced impotence, or [url=http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2008/05/feeling_powerless_impai...

 

Just remember that impotence is good when it comes to democracy. Only the rich and influential and money speculating global elite can be powerful when pursuing their agendas outside the circle of control of democratically elected governments. Impotence is a state of mind for our stooges. It's not real.

George Victor

Aw shit Fidel. We ain't got a "lifetime".

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

George Victor wrote:
  With smartass remarks like the previous posting, "Jack", representing a fair portion of humanity, consumed with itself, you can see that we have an uphill struggle on our hands. 

Agreed.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Quote:
A new report from Greenpeace says oil production in Alberta's tar sands has made Canada into a "global carbon bully."

Little has been done to tackle climate change in Canada, and the federal government has actively tried to block international agreements and laws targeting climate change, says the report, called [url=http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/recent/tarsands_report]Dirty Oil: How The Tar Sands Are Fuelling the Global Climate Crisis.[/url]

Meanwhile, oilsands projects in northern Alberta are creating more greenhouse-gas emissions (GHGs) per year than several small European countries, and by 2020, will be more than what's produced by Austria or Ireland, the report says.

Continued growth in the oilsands will mean that by 2020, more carbon dioxide will be produced there than by all the volcanoes in the world put together, the report says.

"Canada is now one of the world's leading emitters of GHGs, and a global defender of dirty fuels," writes author Andrew Nikiforuk, an award-winning Calgary-based science writer who last year published [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/environmental-justice/tar-sands-hell#comment... Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of the Continent[/url].

Canada's emissions from greenhouse gases, which are linked to climate change, have increased by more than 26 per cent since 1990. Canada's goal is to reduce emissions by 20 per cent from 2006 levels by 2020, a target that environmental groups say falls far short of what Canada must do to combat climate change.

[url=http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Canada+becoming+global+carbon+bu... Gazette[/url]

 

[url=http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/canada/en/documents-and-links/publ... the report[/url] (.pdf - 2.1 MB)

 

[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/environmental-justice/tar-sands-hell]Link to first part of the present thread-chunk[/url]

Fidel

All we can do is wring our hands and maybe slap some revenue neutral carbon taxes on Canadians contributing a whopping 2% of global GHG emissions every year while guaranteeing the Yanks 60% of oil and gas production through NAFTA. I wasn't all that attached to polar bears, dozens of species of living things,  and some other people living near the sea anyway.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Frown

George Victor

No, Fidel.  That is "we ain't got a lifetime...TO FIX IT!  Don't take me for one of the pack of capitulators, please.  I have to look the grandaughter in the eye and smile. Don't you go all apocalyptic on us (just a little bit). Wink

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

[url=http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Battle+over+Alberta+oilsands+bei... over Alberta oilsands now being fought abroad[/url]
Activists targeting investors in Europe, clients in U. S.
by Richard Warnica, Edmonton Journal, October 11, 2009
[excerpts]

Quote:
Last week, near Le Havre, France, 30 activists scaled a security fence at the nation's largest oil refinery. Inside, they clambered up towers and unfurled banners. Their message, roughly translated, was this: Get out of the oilsands; Get out of Alberta.

The refinery's owner, Total S. A., has been considering a multibillion-dollar expansion of their oilsands holdings. The CEO of the company's Canadian division said in a published report last week a decision would come within months.

That Greenpeace targeted them at home, in France, was no aberration. It was, experts say, a signal of a growing trend: That the battle over oilsands development will now be fought as much abroad as it is in Alberta....

In Europe, where the public has largely accepted the reality of climate change, the oilsands are an occasional, if not prominent, political issue. But in the United States, where the domestic debate is focused on American legislation, even many climate activists are only peripherally aware of the oilsands.

"99.9 per cent of Americans are totally unaware," said Edward Maibach, a professor at George Mason University and director of the school's Centre for Climate Change Communication.

"Coverage has been light. Public awareness of it has been lighter," said Bud Ward, the editor of the Yale Forum on Climate Change and the Media....

Even among what Ward calls the "climate change literati," Alberta oil is a not top priority.

"The two big things that are really taking up attention are the climate talks in Copenhagen in December and the clean energy bill in the U. S. Congress," said Jonathan Hiske, a staff writer with Grist, a Seattle-based green issues magazine....

Rightly or wrongly, the European public is viewed as more receptive to the anti-oilsands message [than the USians] and the European oil giants more vulnerable to public pressure.

"I think what Greenpeace has started now is only the beginning of a bigger movement against the oilsands and the oil companies," said Claude Turmes, a Green Party member of the European Parliament from Luxembourg. Turmes said the Greens and other parties have been working on legislation that would prevent European companies from investing in the oilsands or from shipping oilsands fuel to Europe.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Emissions from tar sands seriously underestimated

 

excerpt:

 

Greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands operations are being significantly under-reported according to new research by Global Forest Watch Canada.

The report, 'Bitumen and Biocarbon', says oil companies and governments are not accounting for emissions from deforestation. It says that when boreal forest is destroyed for tar sands development, significant amounts of greenhouse gases are emitted.

'Governments and companies are working hard to downplay the impacts of tar sands operations, but it turns out that they don't even know the full extent of the problem,' said Christy Ferguson, Greenpeace climate and energy coordinator.

'What's worse, they're doing nothing to find out. Denial is not a climate strategy.

remind remind's picture

And where is Pembina on this?

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

remind wrote:

And where is Pembina on this?

I dunno - maybe someone else can answer this?

remind remind's picture

Why is Pembina left hoping?

George Victor

The academics are "coming out":

 

"Canadians need to have an independent expert assessment of the environmental and health impacts of the development of the Athabasca oil sands," the Royal Society of Canada argued this week, as it set up a panel that includes eight of the country's most respected geology, engineering, public health, zoology, economics and ecology researchers. A noted U.S. air-quality scientist will also sit on the panel.

 

Together, they will examine some of the most controversial accusations that have been levelled against industry: that it is damaging aquatic life; that it is causing elevated rates of cancer in nearby First Nations; that it produces green house gas-laden "dirty oil."

 

Industry has disputed each of these claims, and the battle between companies and critics has led to a confusing volley of statistics tailored to suit each side."

 

(Pembina Institute's Oct. 8 release:

Oct 8, 2009

Pembina Reacts: Governments of Alberta and Canada provide $865 million subsidy for carbon capture project

Media Contact: Amy Taylor [send email]

 

Amy Taylor, Director of Alberta Energy Solutions with the Pembina Institute, made the following statement in response to the announcement  that the governments of Alberta and Canada will provide an $865 million subsidy to Shell's Quest Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) project, covering 65 percent of the total cost:

"This is a very significant subsidy for one of the world's largest and most profitable oil companies, and the government needs to take steps to ensure that polluters soon start shouldering the full cost of CCS deployment.

 

"Canada urgently needs regulations that put a price on pollution high enough to compel polluters to invest their own money in the deployment of technologies like CCS. This will be a key test for the federal announcement on cap-and-trade expected in the coming weeks.

George Victor

I took that sentence out, hoping against hope that I was in time.  Not fast enough, so to explain...

I think that the Pembina Institute is playing the middle.  The operative word for that group is "sustainable".  I don't trust them. And I'm not holding my breath on the results of the Royal roundup of thinkers either.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Thanks for the info, George - that was fast!

Tigana Tigana's picture

Use for tar sands: Add politicians and feathers and stir.

George Victor

in another thread this morning remind wrote:

 

"That is what I mean FM, it is ALL about the money, Pew Charities is Suncor, and they are now funding several environmental groups in Canada, including Pembina."

 

 

FM: "That's fascinating. I didn't know that."

 

 

You've confirmed my fears (born of instinct) about Pembina, remind. Thanks again.

 

Tigana Tigana's picture

Canada is going to make a lot of enemies if it continues to mine the tar sands - and not just in the environmental sector. Oil from Canada helps fuel America's wars.

Fidel

So here is an outside opinion on Canada's US-friendly energy policies being dictated to us from corporate board rooms in the USA since Mulroney and Chretien's time in the sun:

[url=http://newsociety.com/blogs/index.php/2008/02/13/heinberg_on_nafta_and_c... on NAFTA and Canadian Oil and Gas Production[/url]

Quote:

Richard Heinberg, author of Peak Everything, The Oil Depletion Protocol, The Party's Over and Powerdown, has written a fascinating (and from a Canadian perspective somewhat frightening) analysis of Canada's fossil fuel export obligations to the US under NAFTA. It's yet another example of how Canadian politicians sold Canadian interests down the river under the terms of this "agreement" and over the protests of thousands of Canadian people.

This entry is reprinted with permission from Richard's blog.

Proportionality

There is a strange clause in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that applies to only one country-Canada. The clause states that Canada must continue to supply the same proportion of its oil and gas resources to the US in future years as it does now. That's rather a good deal for the US: it formalizes Canada's status as a resource satellite of its imperial hub to the south.

From a Canadian perspective there are some problems with the arrangement, though. First is the fact that Canada's production of natural gas and conventional oil is declining. Second is that Canada uses lots of oil and gas domestically: 70 percent of Canadians heat their homes with gas, and Canadians drive cars more and further than just about anyone else. The problem is likely to come first with natural gas; as production declines, there will come a point when there isn't enough to fill domestic needs and continue to export (roughly 60 percent of Canada's gas now goes to the US). .

That point is not decades in the future, it is fairly imminent.

 

Follow up:

 

Then there is the problem of Climate Change. Canada is committed by treaty to reducing domestic emissions of carbon dioxide. But most of Canada's emissions come not from consuming fossil fuels, but producing them-increasingly, from producing synthetic diesel fuel from the tar sands of Alberta. Even if Canadians decide to drive less and turn down their thermostats, those efforts will do little or nothing to change energy production rates (hence emissions rates), because any extra amounts of fuel produced but not used domestically will simply be exported south; in fact, they virtually must be by the terms of NAFTA.

What's afta NAFTA? Of course, some of the so-called environmentally concerned in this country missed the boat on FTA and NAFTA and are under the illusion that Ottawa has any desire to write made in Canada national energy policy. Neither the Tories or their defacto partners in coalition, the Liberals, are interested in in curbing CO2 emissions in Canada or controlling our own oil and gas production for the benefit of either Canadians or the environment.

 

 ETA: More from Heinberg on NAFTA:

 

Quote:

Richard's suggestion that Canada grow a backbone and reject the proportionality clause is an excellent one, but one that is highly unlikely to be taken up by the current administration. Which is more than a pity.

What's your perspective on this (Canadian or American)? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

 

Tigana Tigana's picture

Maude Barlow for PM.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

From [url=http://climateandcapitalism.com/?p=1231]Climate and Capitalism[/url]:

Quote:
A new study produced by The Co-operative Financial Services and WWF-UK debunks the idea, lauded by oil companies and the Canadian government, that carbon capture and storage (CCS) will significantly counter the high levels of greenhouse gases emitted in the production of oil from the Alberta tar sands.

The following is the Executive Summary of Carbon Capture and Storage in the Alberta Oil Sands - A Dangerous Myth. The full report is available online here. (.pdf 2 MB).....

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

And just last night on CBC's new "Power and Politics" show Jim Prentice was lauding the carbon capture technology that Canada (according to him) is going to be a leader in - although Prentice was applying the use of this technology only to coal-powered power plants.

Bubbles

This morning I have been doing my own version of CCS, raking the fallen tree leaves together and digging them under the soil in one of our gardens. Hopefully the carbon will stay there for ten years or so. Meanwhile our laying hens are digging for seeds and insects doing their part in carbon capture and release (CCR).

Bubbles

Boom Boom,

If you check CBC news you will see that Jim Prentice's Mackenzie pipeline got shot down by a Cabinet committee. That will probably also have an effect on the tar sands.

NDPP

Offsetting Resistance: The Effects of Foundation Funding from the Great Bear Rainforest to the Athabaska River

http://briarpatchmagazine.com/offsetting-resistance/

"A movement is building to shutdown the tar sands, one of the most destructive projects in human history. Decisions are being made about the strategies that will be used and the goals that will be pursued..

'We're at an important point," says report co-author Dru Oja Jay, 'Where we have to decide what kind of anti-tar sands movement we're going to build."

George Victor

But with oil companies using Canadian law to suppress activism, Greenpeace is reduced to this, received today:

"A few weeks ago, nearly 40 Greenpeace activists were arrested in the Alberta tar sands, including me. In our most ambitious campaign ever, we carried out a number of peaceful direct actions against the oil industry, sparking an international conversation about the tar sands.

We're facing thousands of dollars in fines, court costs, research and legal fees and a $1.5 million civil suit. We're committed to continue our fight for sane climate policies and an end to the destruction of Alberta's pristine wilderness but we need your help. With their deep pockets, the powerful oil interests have unleashed the full force of their legal teams upon us. I'm asking you to make a special donation TODAY, so we can continue to fight big oil and complacent governments."

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

The oil companies have unlimited funds - including subsidies from government - so they can just keep harrassing activists no end. That makes the Cons and Libs happy, because as destructive as these projects are, they nevertheless have the blessings of Harper and Iggy. I don't know what it's going to take to get these projects cleaned up, if ever.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

posted by a friend on my Facebook page:

 

Oil sands threaten our survival, Al Gore warns

 

excerpt:

 

"They have to tear up four tons of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts. But, you know, junkies find veins in their toes."

 

By one estimate, Canada's vast oil-sands petroleum reserves provide the country with 15 per cent of the world's oil supply, a share exceeded only by Saudi Arabia.

Displaced Alburtan

Bleh, one of the reasons I've left this shithole province behind.  Truck nutz being another

Quote:

In Europe, where the public has largely accepted the reality of climate change, the oilsands are an occasional, if not prominent, political issue. But in the United States, where the domestic debate is focused on American legislation, even many climate activists are only peripherally aware of the oilsands.

"99.9 per cent of Americans are totally unaware," said Edward Maibach, a professor at George Mason University and director of the school's Centre for Climate Change Communication.

 

Europe, as far as I've seen, is greatly unaware of the oil sands.  I've chatted with self proclaimed environmentalists that will decry the seal hunt as the end of the world...yet in my 4 months here I've yet to meet any European that is aware of what the sands are.  They are quite aware of the reality of climate change, but the oilsands are a hidden demon.  I'm incredibly dismayed by the absolute lack of knowledge of them here (UK currently, but Netherlands/Belgium/Northern France all had the same lack of knowledge).  Sadly, 30 French activists might be the extent of the French nation aware of the tar sands hell.  It's our battle Canada, we need to be louder.

George Victor

It won't be "French activists" that impose duties on Canadian goods shipped to Europe, if we don't get a handle on emissions. Quebec Premier Jean Charest said yesterday that "Europe is set to enforce aggressive emission cuts and is threatening to impose duties on imports from countries that don't follow suit" Rheal Seguin writes in the Globe.

John Drexhage, director for climate change and energy at the International Institute for Sustainable Development told the Globe "If Canada doesn't come in with any kind of target and doesn't agree to sign on, it is conceivable then that Canada would become vicitmized by this."

Charest said Quebec will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020; Ontario "plans to reduce emissions 15 percent below 1990 levels by 2020; B.C.s commitment would amount to 14 per cent. "Ottawa's intended target is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 by 3 per cent below 1990 levels."

(And yeah, over the years I never could find anything about the Canadian situation in the press over there, Of course, we really have to hunt to find out European doings. The Globe's man in Europe works at it.)

Displaced Alburtan

Correct GV...The new Belgian head of the EU appears to be set to impose such restrictions (which the UK newspapers decry as a crippling Imperial tax)...though I don't have much information on it besides how much the UK hates Belgian leaders...I have problems seeing why sanctions from the EU would influence oil companies that send everything south of the border anyway.

I do see canadian content from time to time...sadly, it's mostly the seal hunt...survival of the cutest...its from the bandwagon environmentalists...looking for some warm&fuzzy feeling to feel good about themselves as they continue to consume.  Travel has taught me the world doesn't give a shit.

 

 

Polly B Polly B's picture
George Victor

The Tar Patch folks are peeing themselves in anticipation of that "gateway" pipeline to a B.C. port to  take the heavy stuff to China. The capital is being assembled as we chatter. They are nervous about environmental curbs on the bitumen and need the reassurance of the China market where, of course, anything goes - 100 + coal miners at a shot...talk about not giving a shit. And the guy who helped the people after information on bad building practices that killed their kids in collapsing schools in Sezchuan...he's just been given three years.  But then, business is business, eh?

Fotheringay-Phipps

Seems the oil barons are now dragging our good name through the, er, tar

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/nov/30/canada-tar-sands-copenhagen-climate-deal

If a little or a lot more global humiliation will get us off this path to hell, then let the mud-slinging commence.

Bubbles

Until we nationalize the fossil fuel industry and start dismanteling it, not much will happen as far as CO2 reduction.

 

We have to see fossil fuel as a WMD. Let us face it, that is what it is, and take this WMD out of private hands. Give the current owners something like ten cents on the dollar. Only fair when considering the damage done.

 

It is very much a common public problem and until we take the cause out of private hands it is difficult to deal with it.

 

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Fotheringay-Phipps wrote:
Seems the oil barons are now dragging our good name through the, er, tar

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/nov/30/canada-tar-sands-copenhagen-climate-deal

 

If a little or a lot more global humiliation will get us off this path to hell, then let the mud-slinging commence.

 

excerpt:

 

The purpose of Canada's assault on the international talks is to protect this industry. This is not a poor nation. It does not depend for its economic survival on exploiting this resource. But the tar barons of Alberta have been able to hold the whole country to ransom. They have captured Canada's politics and are turning this lovely country into a cruel and thuggish place.

 

 

Wow! Doesn't pull any punches, does he?Surprised

George Victor

The globeandmail.com "debate" (Lomborg and Monbiot, May and "Lord" Lawson, is tonight at 7 p.m. 

At 1 p.m. this afternoon, Monbiot answers readers' questions (Lom had a go at eleven).

Yes, FP, I hope they force this bloody Calgary/Ottawa cabal to its knees.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Is any network carrying the debate tonight live on TV?

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Monbiot is on The Agenda at 8 pm - pass it on!

 

ETA: sorry, bad info. He's not on.Embarassed

scott scott's picture

He was on CBC Radio's The Current in a mini pre-debate dabate with Lomborg (link - 11Mb mp3) and then later on The Hour. The Hour was a pretty good interview. I haven't been able to find a clip of The Hour yet.

remind remind's picture

and how did the useless debate go?

scott scott's picture

Most of the comments I have heard are that the deniers got an ass kicking.Cool

George Victor

But the deniers have probably confirmed the resolve of the great middle that they should not be so concerned as to consider lifestyle changes, or anything horrible as that.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

From: IEN-Canadian Indigenous Tar Sands Campaign. (Facebook group)

  

April 19, 2010 at 6:50pm

 

Subject: Indigenous Environmental Network BP Brand Damage Campaign and European work mini report out

 

Hi All,

 
The Indigenous Environmental Network's BP brand damage campaign is escalating, as is our campaign to internationalize the struggle of Fort Chipewyan with Canada's Tar Sands in Europe! We have just completed a very intense week of heavy lifting at the BP AGM followed by a stint in Scotland to lay down some bricks for our work targeting Royal Bank of Scotland next week at their AGM. Please Share this video on your lists.....the good people at You and I films produced it. Currently, George Poitras, Former Chief of Mikisew Cree First Nations and I are stuck in London due to a massive global event you may have seen in media...Iceland Volcano.

also here are some links of press from the last week:

Sunday Herald: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;www.heraldscotland.com/news/transport-environment/rbs-in-battle-with-the-cree-first-nation-over-dirty-oil-development-project-on-tribal-lands-1.1021471

 

Wall Street Journal: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304510004575186021284818664.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;blogs.wsj.com/source/2010/04/15/bp-defeats-oil-sands-critics-but-controversy-wont-die/

Daily Mail: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1266322/Investor-backlash-BPs-Sunrise.html

The Guardian: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/15/bp-oil-sands-open-pit-mining

Toronto Star: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;www.thestar.com/business/article/796096--bp-brass-faces-rebellion-over-oilsands

For more info on IEN UK based work please check out our BP brand damage site: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;www.no-tar-sands.org

Here is link: http://www.facebook.com/l/5c8f4;www.youandifilms.com/2010/04/bloody-oil/

 

 

 

You and I Films
Bloody Oil

15th of April BP holds their AGM

George Poitras, member of Mikisew Cree indigenous First Nation talks about the issues of pollution and cancers suffered by many of the First Nations people as a result of the Oil companies action extractive industries.

"My people are dying, and we believe British companies are responsible. My community, Fort Chipewyan in Alberta, Canada, is situated at the heart of the vast toxic moonscape that is the tar sands development. We live in a beautiful area, but unfortunately, we find ourselves upstream from the largest fossil fuel development on earth. UK oil companies like BP, and banks like RBS, are extracting the dirtiest form of oil from our traditional lands, and we fear it is killing us." - George

BP has been prompted to disclose much information that has not been publicly available before. Tar sands has become a hot topic among the investment community and BP has been subject to a far higher level of investor scrutiny on the issue than ever before.

The shareholder resolution about BP's involvement in tar sands production was discussed and put to the vote at the oil major's AGM. Results presented by BP at the meeting show that almost 15% of voters either supported the resolution or abstained despite the board's recommendation to reject it. This is a significant expression of concern about the company's decision to invest in new tar sands projects.

In respect and peace,

Clayton Thomas-Muller-IEN Tar Sands Campaigner

outwest

GV wrote:

"...if the question of the Tar Patch is not resolved in our "lifetime", it will mean that the world's nations are not able to resolve the question of limitations on our consumption of fossil fuels, and the grandkids will eventually hold us to account as representatives of a suicidal species."

You also said you hope "the cabal" gets its a#& kicked.

With the weak, lily-livered, contentious, fractionalized, "won't talk to each other," petty partisan bickering that passes for mature discourse by the centre/left in this province (and the country, frankly)-- you can believe that #%&-kicking isn't going to happen any time soon, not until the self-serving, corrupt and/or myopic non-cooperative executives of these parties are kicked out on their a#&es, first.

I agree with what James Laxer said in a recent article; I'm now more disgusted with the centre/left parties [in this province] than I am with the right. Too bad their members don't have the courage to do their own thinking and force big changes to happen. In this province, ordinary party members at conventions seem to be led around like sheep by the nose without any regard for authentic dialogue and examination of any "frighteningly radical" new ideas about how to actually gain power except the old razz-mattazz- "a lot of elbow grease and door-knocking'll do it" ... and of course, the old refrain, "this time it will be different."  (Yawn.)

 

 

Pages

Topic locked