babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

The Oilsands - Not so bad after all?

polly bee
Offline
Joined: Jul 14 2010

Quote:
  In a report to be released Wednesday, a seven-member panel from the Royal Society of Canada says there's "no credible evidence" that contaminants from the oilsands are boosting cancer levels in downstream communities.

It also says the Athabasca River isn't currently threatened by industrial water use.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/12/15/oilsands-scientists.html

 

As much as it would be nice to be able to believe them, I am having trouble doing so.


Comments

scott
Offline
Joined: May 20 2001

There is "no credible evidence" because there is no credible water quality monitoring program. There has been a federal water monitoring station on the Athabasca river downstream from the tar sands development for over 20 years, but they do not test for hydrocarbons or heavy metals, the very contaminants that the tar sands are suspected of affecting downstream communities with.

If you don't look, you won't find.

from the link above:

Quote:
Water monitoring of the oilsands is of a lower standard than that used for forestry and the data from the program isn't made public.

"There are valid concerns about the structure of [the monitoring program] that need to be addressed regarding the appropriateness of the data collected, public access to data, independent scientific oversight and verification of results."

...

The report also scolds Ottawa for failing to enforce federal legislation over the oilsands.

"Despite many clear areas of valid federal interest, the profile of relevant federal agencies has been low."

 

 


polly bee
Offline
Joined: Jul 14 2010

And yet CBC is announcing every half hour that the oilsands are "less toxic" than previously thought.  Frown


remind
Offline
Joined: Jun 25 2004

The CBC needs to be gone....


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

remind wrote:

The CBC needs to be gone....

Yeah, that'll ensure we get nothing but the truth from the media.

 


remind
Offline
Joined: Jun 25 2004

Don't care about that, care about my money going to pay the wages of those who are complicit in lying to us and who are part of the hostilities against equity and equality.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Your money is paying Stephen Harper's wages. I'd cut him off before I abolish publicly-funded broadcasting.

 


remind
Offline
Joined: Jun 25 2004

Cutting him off is not going to happen, or change a thing.

For example, some people are too busy trying to promote his partner in crime Ignatieff and the Liberals, and tearing down those who would make the CBC a credible national voice for ALL  Canadians, so it would be the same damn thing in  a change to a Liberal government.

Proof? 

CBC has been the same all along, propaganda agents for either the CONS, or the other CONs, the "Liberals". And we have stupidedly pay for our own brain washing for the last 3 decades.

The CBC has no credibility and they have not for a long time. There is no point to their existence,  other than a publically paid for proaganda arm. Just like our military are actually mercenaries, paid for by us, for corporate interests in Afghanistan, the CBC exists just to have us pay for continued corporate pleasure and indoctrination.

They are NOT a 'national broadcaster', they are a propaganda clearing house.

 


Policywonk
Offline
Joined: Feb 6 2005

remind wrote:

Cutting him off is not going to happen, or change a thing.

For example, some people are too busy trying to promote his partner in crime Ignatieff and the Liberals, and tearing down those who would make the CBC a credible national voice for ALL  Canadians, so it would be the same damn thing in  a change to a Liberal government.

Proof? 

CBC has been the same all along, propaganda agents for either the CONS, or the other CONs, the "Liberals". And we have stupidedly pay for our own brain washing for the last 3 decades.

The CBC has no credibility and they have not for a long time. There is no point to their existence,  other than a publically paid for proaganda arm. Just like our military are actually mercenaries, paid for by us, for corporate interests in Afghanistan, the CBC exists just to have us pay for continued corporate pleasure and indoctrination.

They are NOT a 'national broadcaster', they are a propaganda clearing house.

 

CBC was reporting this morning on Pembina's response. It was on radio, but not the web site.

http://www.pembina.org/media-release/2141


mybabble
Offline
Joined: Jun 22 2008

There is a newer report out, "Oil-sands more damaging than thought".


Policywonk
Offline
Joined: Feb 6 2005

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/12/21/oilsands-pollution-report.html

Kind of hard to make conclusions without a proper monitoring system in place.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

That is understood in the PMO.  Like the census.


polly bee
Offline
Joined: Jul 14 2010

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2010/12/22/alberta-suncor-oilsand...

 

Oooh.  $200,000.  That will certainly teach them.  Undecided


Hurtin Albertan
Offline
Joined: Nov 19 2010

That's my old home town, just came back home from about ten days up there for the holidays visiting family.

Dad had a good point he mentioned in one conversation, he wondered what it would be like if by a chance of geography Fort McMurray was located downstream of all the oil sands plants instead of being upstream like it is.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments