Enviro Hypocrisy; They'd Prefer OPEC Oil

[Anonymous]

I haven't found the smoking gun yet, but groups like Environmental Defence must be on the payroll of really big oil(Saudi Aramco, Citgo etc).

If you need proof that Canadian environmentalists are working for the interests of our OPEC oil competitors, the fake outrage over the Line 9 pipeline reversal is Exhibit A.



Line 9 was a pipeline built in the 1970s, to take Alberta oil east to Ontario and Quebec. But over time the market changed, and imported oil became significantly cheaper. So the flow of the pipeline was reversed, to pump imported oil from the east to the west.



A pipeline built for Canadian ethical oil was soon full of foreign, conflict oil. There were no environmental protests when that switch was made.



Last week, the National Energy Board approved the re-reversal of the pipeline. Once again, western Canadian oil is cheaper than OPEC oil – up to $25/barrel cheaper. So the pipeline company wants to do what the pipeline used to do, what it was originally built and approved to do.



Only now are the environmental activists complaining.



It's what scientists call a controlled experiment. Same pipeline. Same route. Same standards for what oil can go through it. The only thing that's different is where the oil comes from.



That's the variable. And that's why a safe, underground pipeline that has been studiously ignored by environmentalists for 38 years became their great obsession in 2013.



There were protests, petitions, lawn signs, music concerts, petitions, and endless complaints to the National Energy Board. That's fine – that's democracy. It's one of the differences between Canada and an oil dictatorship like Saudi Arabia.



But the lobbyists went far beyond just debate. Last year, a gang of 20 protesters broke into a pumping station along Line 9, ordered the employees there to leave, and went on a six-day crime spree, occupying the site, Oka-style. The chief organizer at the illegal protest was Elysia Petrone, who was an employee of Environmental Defence, a $3.8 million a year lobby firm that bizarrely has CRA charitable status. Environmental Defence's corporate logo was actually plastered all over the crime scene. (The first criminal, Trish Mills, was sentenced last fall; Petrone was never charged.)



I interviewed those Line 9 protesters. They knew nothing about it. Some of them thought the 36-year-old pipeline was being built from scratch. None of them knew it was operating with OPEC oil in it. One protester told me she preferred Saudi oil to Canadian oil, because Saudi oil was "sweet." None of them could explain why they had never protested against Saudi oil.



Even though Canada is a net exporter of oil, for historical and logistical reasons, we still import about half of the oil that we consume. In Quebec, it's about 90%. The province that is so worried about a secular charter, burns sharia oil in its cars.



And that sharia oil is brought to Canada by tanker ships – disgorging their oil in Maine to be piped up to Montreal. Or even sailing right up the Saint Lawrence River.



That's another curiosity, isn't it? Anti-oilsands lobbyists attack the oilsands themselves. They attack oilsands pipelines. And they attack tanker ships that would take the oilsands oil to Asian markets – calling them an intolerable risk of an oil spill.



But every day, 54% of Canada's oil is imported by tanker ship. Funny enough, Environmental Defence has never protested that.



Lemme guess: It's because those OPEC tankers are "sweet"?

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/03/07/outrage-over-once-ignored-pipeline">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/03/07/o ... d-pipeline">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/03/07/outrage-over-once-ignored-pipeline

[Anonymous]

Here's a pragmatic, non-ideological look at energy and the oilsands from Graham Hicks.

Much as I dislike the term "social licence" - with "sustainability" the two most overused words in the language - it's an apt description for attitudinal changes happening within our still-controversial oilsands.



Sensible environmentalism appears to be gaining an upper hand. When the lone Green Party MLA in the B.C. Legislature endorses the oilsands upgrader/refinery proposal in Prince Rupert as a pragmatic compromise, you know the times are changing.



There's recognition by most Canadian environmental watchdogs that cost-effective, cleaned up fossil fuels will still be needed in this century as the global economy transitions to a mix of clean oil and other sustainable (yech, there's that word again!) energy sources.

The argument is not about shutting down the oilsands, it's anxiety about the pace of production, about the cumulative environmental impact of doubling production from two million barrels per day (mbpd) now to 4.5 mbpd by 2025.



It's slowly dawning on big energy companies, those who think in the billions, that "social licence" is now compulsory.



Proceeding on any mega-project, or pipeline, without general societal approval is a fool's game that'll cost shareholders far more than simply playing within the environmental rules and then some.



It's about balancing beautiful, unspoiled boreal forest wilderness with the economic benefits of oil development within that forest. It's about extracting natural resources throughout Alberta without turning the entire countryside into an energy-sector junkyard.



Turning "bad" social licence into "good" social licence:



The Fort McKay Meti/Aboriginal settlement north of Fort McMurray long ago figured out how to profit from oilsands development. But part of the deal was preservation of Fort McKay's "vacation" reserve further north. Moose Lake is unspoiled boreal forest at its best.



But then an oil company announced plans to exploit nearby oilsands. Negotiations had turned into lawsuits when a deal was struck, an undisclosed deal, that McKay Lake leadership says answers their Moose Lake environmental concerns, has a financial component and offers business opportunities.



Good. The more deals struck between energy companies and Canadian aboriginals, as symbolic guardians of our wilderness, the more reassuring it is. If the natives are satisfied, we can be satisfied.



Creating social licence through environmental clean-up:



Syncrude is a year away from firing up a $1.9 billion piece of new technology to clean up those frightful oil-tailings ponds that can be seen from space. A massive centrifuge (think the spin cycle in your washing machine) will separate the bad stuff (fine clay tailings) so water can be recycled or returned to nature without being held for 50 years.



Squandering social licence:



With two other major tailings reduction projects, Syncrude is considered the only company at present meeting the Alberta Energy Regulator's Directive 074, mandating a slow but steady tailings pond reduction. Warning to other oilsands producers. If Directive 074 is not met ... you'll rouse the environmental beast no end.



And if no action is taken to lessen the leaching from tailings ponds into the Athabasca River, as has now been proven by bias-free Environment Canada tests, there will be hell to pay.



How do we persuade others of the rightness of our cause (the anti-pipeline folks, Europe's dirty oil fixation) if we fail to act quickly at home?



Excellent social licence:



New technology is so good for the greening of the oilsands. The latest oilsands mining plants are producing bitumen no longer needing upgrading ... which is huge for both the environment and shareholder wallets. Dozens of other environment and cost-saving new technologies are moving from prototypes to commercial use. Remember, this is an industry in its infancy!



Burning social licence:



Why in heaven's name wouldn't Baytex Energy have fixed serious stink and health issues from operations near Peace River with easily installed existing technology, rather than letting the whole issue come down to a regulatory hearing?



Keeping social licence:



We've come a long way. When NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair, Green Party MLAs and the enviro-conscious Parkland Institute all endorse the oilsands (with reservations), the ground is definitely shifting under our feet.



Other than the Keystone XL and Northern Gateway pipelines, opposition to the oilsands has slowly dialled down.



Keep creating social licence, energy companies and regulators. Don't do anything dumb to burn up what social licence we now have.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/02/27/hicks-on-biz-oilsands-development-showing-hard-won-social-licence">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/02/27/h ... al-licence">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/02/27/hicks-on-biz-oilsands-development-showing-hard-won-social-licence

[cc]

Clearly the only alternative to N American sources is terror oil. Many enviro creeps in effect are advocating for sending money to known enemies only to then be used against us (financing of islamist influenced schools, mosques, legal jihad against our society).



Then there's the hypocritical "I want fuel for my selfish use. It's OK if produced in others backyards, but "NOT in MY backyard" !!!

[Anonymous]

I haven't found the smoking gun yet, but groups like Environmental Defence must be on the payroll of really big oil(Saudi Aramco, Citgo etc).

If you need proof that Canadian environmentalists are working for the interests of our OPEC oil competitors, the fake outrage over the Line 9 pipeline reversal is Exhibit A.



Line 9 was a pipeline built in the 1970s, to take Alberta oil east to Ontario and Quebec. But over time the market changed, and imported oil became significantly cheaper. So the flow of the pipeline was reversed, to pump imported oil from the east to the west.



A pipeline built for Canadian ethical oil was soon full of foreign, conflict oil. There were no environmental protests when that switch was made.



Last week, the National Energy Board approved the re-reversal of the pipeline. Once again, western Canadian oil is cheaper than OPEC oil – up to $25/barrel cheaper. So the pipeline company wants to do what the pipeline used to do, what it was originally built and approved to do.



Only now are the environmental activists complaining.



It's what scientists call a controlled experiment. Same pipeline. Same route. Same standards for what oil can go through it. The only thing that's different is where the oil comes from.



That's the variable. And that's why a safe, underground pipeline that has been studiously ignored by environmentalists for 38 years became their great obsession in 2013.



There were protests, petitions, lawn signs, music concerts, petitions, and endless complaints to the National Energy Board. That's fine – that's democracy. It's one of the differences between Canada and an oil dictatorship like Saudi Arabia.



But the lobbyists went far beyond just debate. Last year, a gang of 20 protesters broke into a pumping station along Line 9, ordered the employees there to leave, and went on a six-day crime spree, occupying the site, Oka-style. The chief organizer at the illegal protest was Elysia Petrone, who was an employee of Environmental Defence, a $3.8 million a year lobby firm that bizarrely has CRA charitable status. Environmental Defence's corporate logo was actually plastered all over the crime scene. (The first criminal, Trish Mills, was sentenced last fall; Petrone was never charged.)



I interviewed those Line 9 protesters. They knew nothing about it. Some of them thought the 36-year-old pipeline was being built from scratch. None of them knew it was operating with OPEC oil in it. One protester told me she preferred Saudi oil to Canadian oil, because Saudi oil was "sweet." None of them could explain why they had never protested against Saudi oil.



Even though Canada is a net exporter of oil, for historical and logistical reasons, we still import about half of the oil that we consume. In Quebec, it's about 90%. The province that is so worried about a secular charter, burns sharia oil in its cars.



And that sharia oil is brought to Canada by tanker ships – disgorging their oil in Maine to be piped up to Montreal. Or even sailing right up the Saint Lawrence River.



That's another curiosity, isn't it? Anti-oilsands lobbyists attack the oilsands themselves. They attack oilsands pipelines. And they attack tanker ships that would take the oilsands oil to Asian markets – calling them an intolerable risk of an oil spill.



But every day, 54% of Canada's oil is imported by tanker ship. Funny enough, Environmental Defence has never protested that.



Lemme guess: It's because those OPEC tankers are "sweet"?

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/03/07/outrage-over-once-ignored-pipeline">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/03/07/o ... d-pipeline">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/03/07/outrage-over-once-ignored-pipeline

I never knew Canada imported so much oil.

 :o

[Hornung]

Yeah it is funny that people don't know that guar gum is used in fracking. It is also used in ice cream and in toothpaste as well.



Guar gum: it's in ice cream, toothpaste, and hydro-fracking

Nov. 29 2012

When you lick an ice cream cone, eat a grilled-cheese sandwich or brush your teeth, chances are you're consuming a ubiquitous ingredient called guar gum. It's a thickening agent whose profile has recently received a boost thanks to the energy industry, which is using it to unlock previously untappable oil and gas deposits.



In a process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, thickened water (hence the use of guar) is pumped into energy-rich rock formations to create cracks, which allows oil and gas to escape. Fracking technology dates back to the 1940s, but it has only recently become a big part of oil and gas extraction because of the shale gas boom.



So how big is it? One estimate suggests that a typical oil well consumes roughly 4,000 kilograms of guar, putting pressure on the world's guar resources, about 80 per cent of which are in India. That pressure sent the price soaring–it touched $28,000 (U.S.) a metric ton in 2012, up twelvefold in a single year.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le5798060/

[Anonymous]

Yeah it is funny that people don't know that guar gum is used in fracking. It is also used in ice cream and in toothpaste as well.



Guar gum: it's in ice cream, toothpaste, and hydro-fracking

Nov. 29 2012

When you lick an ice cream cone, eat a grilled-cheese sandwich or brush your teeth, chances are you're consuming a ubiquitous ingredient called guar gum. It's a thickening agent whose profile has recently received a boost thanks to the energy industry, which is using it to unlock previously untappable oil and gas deposits.



In a process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, thickened water (hence the use of guar) is pumped into energy-rich rock formations to create cracks, which allows oil and gas to escape. Fracking technology dates back to the 1940s, but it has only recently become a big part of oil and gas extraction because of the shale gas boom.



So how big is it? One estimate suggests that a typical oil well consumes roughly 4,000 kilograms of guar, putting pressure on the world's guar resources, about 80 per cent of which are in India. That pressure sent the price soaring–it touched $28,000 (U.S.) a metric ton in 2012, up twelvefold in a single year.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le5798060/

I am going to brush my teeth with guar gum.