Oil sands admits PR failure

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090108.woilsands0108/BNStory/energy/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20090108.woilsands0108 Canada's oilsands industry admits it has “dropped the ball” in engaging with the public about the environmental effects of its developments, the head of the sector's largest lobby group said Thursday in revealing the results of a major public outreach campaign. “I think that the ground has been taken away from us in many respects by campaigns by environmental groups and others,” Dave Collyer, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, told a news conference. Collyer was joined by Imperial Oil Ltd. (TSX:IMO) chief executive Bruce March and Oil Sands Developers Group president Don Thompson in announcing the findings of a CAPP poll. The industry has not been upfront enough, said Thompson, whose group communicates between companies, the government and local stakeholders about oilsands development. “We've allowed others to take the agenda from us,” he said. While the industry may have failed on the communications front, Collyer said he stands by the industry's environmental performance. “We've dropped the ball on getting our message out and communicating. We have not dropped the ball on environmental performance as an industry,” he said. The poll, which surveyed 425 people in both Edmonton and Toronto in June, sought to find out more about Canadians' perceptions of the oilsands industry, which has been encountering mounting criticism from environmentalists. The poll was done in conjunction with an online forum called Canada's Oil Sands: A Different Conversation, which garnered thousands of responses from the public. About 46 per cent of respondents believed oilsands companies have not done a good job in balancing the environment and the economy, while 22 per cent think the industry has achieved that balance. The industry's impact on fresh water supply was cited as the biggest area of concern, followed by the impact on wildlife and habitat. The industry garnered worldwide infamy early last year, when it was revealed that 500 ducks had died in a toxic tailings pond at Syncrude Canada Ltd.'s site near Fort McMurray, Alta. Many communities in the area are also concerned that companies are drawing too much fresh water from the Athabasca river, which is needed to separate the sticky bitumen from sand and clay. And there are worries toxic chemicals from the oilsands plants are finding their way into the food chain, jeopardizing the health of aboriginal communities downstream of the developments. Oilsands developments require a great deal of energy and emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, the gas attributed to climate change. The industry says it has made progress in reducing its water use and has been working on improving technology used in its tailings ponds. Many in the sector have backed carbon capture and sequestration technology as a means to prevent carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere by storing it underground. However, there has been debate over whether taxpayers or industry should foot the bill. Half of the respondents said they do not believe what oil and gas executives say in the media, compared with 13 per cent who do believe what they say. But the survey also said 63 per cent of respondents believe Canada benefits from oilsands development and 64 per cent said the oilsands are important to providing a secure supply of Canada's future oil needs. The poll, which was done by “academic researchers,” has a margin of error of 4.8 per cent, 19 times out of 20. Lindsay Telfer of the Sierra Club said the polling by CAPP reinforces the messages her environmental group has been trying to get out, but that she would like to see the industry and government move beyond “rhetoric.” “I think there are some very significant and very real concerns that Canadians have on how the oilsands have been proceeding and it's not just a perception issue,” she said. Greenpeace campaigner Mike Hudema said the world is turning away from Alberta's “dirty oil,” with the European Union and U.S. states recently imposing low-carbon fuel standards. “The markets have spoken, it's the industry that's not listening,” Hudema said. Collyer said the industry is also trying to spread its message south of the border, with President-Elect Barack Obama expected to take a tougher stance on greenhouse gas emissions than his predecessor, George W. Bush. “We'll be very active in Washington and in various states that influence policy in the U.S. over the next several months,” he said. Imperial's March added that oilsands companies produce energy that is desperately needed in the global economy, but that many people simply do not understand that dynamic. “It looks easy when you see the price of gasoline 40 feet in the air,” he said. “People count on this so much in their lives, but they simply don't understand how it gets done and they don't understand the complexity.” A private prosecution was launched Wednesday against Syncrude, in which Imperial holds a 25 per cent stake, over the duck deaths. The company has also fought environmentalists in court over its $8-billion Kearl oilsands development. March said he has no fear that future court battles will hinder Imperial's oilsands activities. “Frankly, that's a part of the business and the world we live in and I'd expect that to continue,” he said. (The Canadian Press)

What Obama says about energy supplies ... Dion already said!

"In a few weeks, when Obama's new energy plan is revealed, it will likely include some very damaging information regarding fossil fuel reserves.

http://www.angelnexus.com/o/web/10434

On November 12, 2008, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released its World Energy Outlook.

This is the world's most authoritative source of global energy trends that provides energy projections to 2030.

In this report, the IEA stated in very clear terms that renewable energy will soon become the second largest source of electricity.

Why?

Because the day that report came out, the IEA officially confirmed that every fossil fuel resource we rely on today will simply not be able to keep pace with demand.

That's right. Every fossil fuel resource.

And there's plenty of objective, peer-reviewed data to back up the IEA's findings too.

Gee ... it looks like the much maligned Stephane Dion was right!

Alta. aboriginals file court challenge to province's oilsands leasing system

2 hours ago

EDMONTON — An aboriginal band has threatened the very basis of Alberta's oilsands industry by filing a court challenge to the province's system of granting land tenure.

A notice filed Wednesday in Edmonton Court of Queen's Bench by the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation claims that a series of oilsands permits the provincial government sold to Shell Canada and other companies are invalid.

Selling off rights to explore the land without consulting area aboriginals breached the Crown's duty to consult, say legal documents prepared by the First Nation.

"(Alberta) breached the duty to consult the (Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation) by failing to consult the ACFN, adequately or at all, prior to granting the challenged tenures," the document reads.

The First Nation is asking the court to either quash the permits or order the companies to stop further development until consultation has occurred.

"It's a big question," said Monique Ross, a researcher at the University of Calgary's Institute of Resource Law. "(The government) would have to revisit the way they deal with the industry."

The Alberta government has long argued that, because no actual development occurs when an exploration permit is sold, no consultation is necessary. Alberta Energy regulations specifically state that consultation does not take place before such rights are granted.

But the notice argues that when permits are sold, companies are obliged to begin work on them within a certain time or risk losing them.

"One of the goals of Alberta's oilsands tenure system is to ensure that oilsands tenures are in the hands of those who are committed to developing them," the notice says.

"Because oilsands tenures confer upon the company the exclusive rights to win, work, recover and remove the oilsands deposits, government decision-makers are effectively compelled to authorize the tenure holder to exercise those rights.

"The challenged tenures represent critical strategic planning decisions taken in contemplation of and to facilitate activities which adversely affect the treaty rights of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation. Accordingly, (Alberta) was charged with a duty to consult with the ACFN prior to issuing the challenged tenures."

The tenures were sold in 2007 and 2006 to Shell Canada, Standard Land Company, Saskatoon Assets Inc. and Canadian Coastal Resources. All are within 20 kilometres of the band's reserve.

Ross points out that the Supreme Court has compelled British Columbia to consult with area aboriginal groups in advance of allocating forestry tenure.

"The principle is that governments have to make themselves aware of the existence of rights and how those rights may be impacted by the allocation of mineral rights," she said.

"It's not enough to consult at the stage when forestry activities are occurring. You have to consult at the stage of reallocations.

"It's at that stage when key decisions are being taken in anticipation of actual decisions on the ground."

The First Nation points out that the land in question is extensively hunted, trapped and fished by the members of the band.

"Parts of our traditional lands have been completely changed by industry," writes Chief Allan Adam in an affidavit.

"These lands were once hunting and trapping grounds, but now they are covered by oil and gas wells and blanketed by seismic lines roads and pipelines."

Adam said the band is particularly concerned about an area near the reserve called the Richardson backcountry, which is important for both hunting and spiritual practices. He wrote the provincial government has repeatedly granted oilsands exploration permits in the area despite the band's concerns.

"It is deeply troubling to our First Nation that Alberta has granted these tenures within our traditional lands and set the stage for exploration and potentially massive oilsands production without any consultation with our First Nation before the grants of tenure."

A preliminary date for the first hearing on the motion has been set for Jan. 13 in Edmonton.

Oil Sands will pollute Great Lakes report warns

Massive refinery expansions for processing crude threaten to wipe out clean-up progress around world's largest body of fresh water

By MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT

Wednesday, October 8, 2008 Page 4

ENVIRONMENT REPORTER

The environmental impacts of Alberta's oil sands will not be restricted to Western Canada, researchers say, but will extend thousands of kilometres away to the Great Lakes, threatening water and air quality around the world's largest body of fresh water.

In a new report, the University of Toronto's Munk Centre says the massive refinery expansions needed to process tar sands crude, and the new pipeline networks for transporting the fuel, amount to a "pollution delivery system" connecting Alberta to the Great Lakes region of Canada and the U.S.

It warns that the refineries will be using the Great Lakes "as a cheap supply" source for their copious water needs and the area's air "as a pollution dump."

The report, which is being released today at a conference at the university, says that as many as 17 major refinery expansions around the lakes are being considered for turning the tar-like Alberta bitumen into gasoline and other petroleum products. While not all will be undertaken, enough of them will be to have a regional environmental impact.

Proposed pipeline and refinery projects around the lakes are expected to lead to total investments of more than $31-billion (U.S.) by 2015, spending similar in scale to expenditures at many oil sands projects. For this reason, the report says the various projects, when taken together, threaten to "wipe out many of the pollution control gains" achieved around the lakes since the 1970s.

The massive expenditures are needed because typical refineries can't process heavy crude derived from tar sands without costly upgrades.

"This expansion promises to bring with it an exponential increase in pollution, discharges into waterways including the Great Lakes, destruction of wetlands, toxic air emissions, acid rain, and huge increases in greenhouse gas emissions," it says.

Most of the projected spending is on the U.S. side of the lakes. Only one major refinery project has been announced for the Canadian side, but that expansion, at a Shell refinery in Sarnia, was put on hold in July because of surging costs.

However, two big Canadian companies, TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. with its Keystone project, and Enbridge Inc., with its Alberta Clipper project, are vying to build pipelines to bring crude from the tar sands to U.S. refineries around the lakes.

The report says the environmental effects in Alberta from tar sands development - from dying ducks caught in tailings ponds to massive carbon dioxide emissions - are well known, but the implications for the Great Lakes "are less well-understood and less extensively explored."

Policy makers around the lakes, in both Canada and the U.S., are largely unaware that the tar sands will lead to massive industrial development in their region, and consequently have no strategy to minimize the environmental impacts, it says.

Some of the harshest criticism is for the Ontario government, which it characterizes as "remarkably unengaged" over how tar sands oil will affect the province and "doesn't seem to even be asking the key questions, let alone contemplating the possible policy answers."

There has been one major dispute in the U.S. over a tar sands-related refinery expansion, at a British Petroleum facility at Whiting, Ind. The company proposed a $3-billion refinery modernization that would raise discharges of two pollutants by about 35 per cent and 54 per cent respectively. But it backed down and pledged not to increase the pollutants after a public outcry.

The 54-page report, called How the Oil Sands Got To The Great Lakes Basin, is being issued by the Munk Centre's program on water issues.

Among its recommendations is a call for refineries to offset all of the additional carbon dioxide emissions they produce because of the difficulty of processing oil sands crude.

These emissions are estimated at 2.3 million tonnes a year, or about the same amount as produced by about 500,000 typically driven cars. Another recommendation is to require all refinery expansions to meet California's strict air-pollution standards, the toughest in North America.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/freeheadlines/LAC/20081008/LAKES08/national/National