This week should be a game changing opportunity for re-framing the oil sands narrative in the minds of some of the most powerful political personalities in the United States of America. The meeting this Thursday with Nancy Pelosi the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, arguably the most powerful woman in America, could be and should be a game changer for Alberta and our oil sands to be understood in a broader and deeper context than merely "dirty oil"
The credible case for oil sands cannot be made by pushing the investment agenda or the jobs advantages. There is so much more to the potential than those concerns, vital as they are. There is a need to have an integrated conversation about the oil sands in terms of environmental elements of land, water and air impacts. There is a need to talk about health and habitat implications and mitigation. There is a need to talk about science and technology advances and its potential elements for a cleaner future for oil sands development.
There is a need to do all of this to dispel the mythology of dirty oil but not in the context of it not being so bad when you consider it in comparison with the British Petroleum Gulf of Mexico disaster. Being better apple in a bad barrel is not good enough for Albertans. We Albertans want to be proud of the oil sands as well as being able to prosper from them. Being the best of a bad lot is not good enough.
That said I do feel there is a need to compare the so-called "dirty oil" from the Alberta oil sands with the "blood oil" from the other US sources. Considering the Presidential level false pretense of weapons of mass destruction to justify an invasion of Iraq and the waste and blood that deception created I wonder is we don't need a broader definition of "dirty oil." The American government is guilty of creating really dirty oil that involves supporting war, terror, death and corruption, both aboard and domestically.. I hope someone is prepared to point that out to Speaker Pelosi this week. We need to frame the responsible development of the oil sands as a way out of that political, moral and ethical quagmire for the Americans.
The Iraq war was really about deceit, political hubris and securing an oil supply for the United States. It was not about freedom and democracy for Iraqi citizens as the ultra conservative rhetoric out of the White House would want us to believe. The George Bush political pantomime of the "Mission Accomplished" performance n the on the deck of an aircraft carrier shows the depth of the political posturing that regime was prepared to resort to in order to sustain its hold on power. Anyone see a parallel to the current Harper regime in Canada?
The terrorism fostered by the funding of extremist religious fundamentalist enabled by the Bush-Regime friendly royal family of Saudi Arabia is another aspect of "dirty oil" to my mind. Then look at the social costs in civilian deaths and the political corruption in Venezuela and you can add more granularity to the picture of "dirty oil." There are many more examples of blood oil as dirty oil in the world that are as least partly due to past American foreign and energy policies.
None of this justifies Albertans being complacent about insisting that the oil sands be developed in a much more environmentally and socially responsible way. But to lecture Alberta about our "dirty oil" and to allow the BP blowout to happen and to invade and support corrupt regimes around the globe in exchange for domestic fossil fuel supply is hypercritical in the extreme.
The opportunity to provide a more integrated and honest narrative about the potential of the oil sands as an energy resources to the American market has to be clearly and persuasively presented. If anyone making these points needs notes to make these points one should wonder if they are not sufficiently akin and aligned with the core values of Albertans around our oil sand development.
The point is to be realistic about our challenges in responsible oil sands development. Pelosi has to hear and the Premier has to make the point that the oil sands are a viable transitional energy alternative that can relieve the human costs of corruption, death and terror resulting from these other truly dirty oil situations the American people find themselves supporting..
This does not let Albertans off the ownership hook to assure the world we can develop this enormously important resource in a responsible and sustainable way with wisdom and integrity. It is significant that this meeting with Speaker Pelosi is happening in Ottawa with the Premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan plus key Influentials invited too, like Marlo Raynolds of the highly respected Pembina Institute. (BTW Marlo is a Friday night presenter along with me at RebootAlberta 3.0 in Edmonton Nov 5-6) There will be a balance of perspectives on the oil sands available to Speaker Pelosi for sure and it is a credit to her that balance is happening.
It is more than a little disturbing to note that this meeting with Pelosi was not announced by Premier Stelmach's office. As Graham Thomson notes in his recent column, the Alberta public would not have known about it likely until after the fact if not for the fact others were invited and announced they were going.
This lack of public disclosure that our Premier is attending this meeting looks to me like a lapse of accountability and transparency by our government - and it is disturbing. We Albertans own the oil sands. We have a right to know what is going on in relation to them What is our government doing in meeting the stewardship responsibility of our resources, especially the controversial oil sands, is our public business.
The elected representatives are not the absolute rulers over the development of our oil sands. They are merely our proxy holders as owners. They are elected to represent our best interests. They owe us a duty to prove to us that they are serving those ends. They should be conducting themselves in the service of our best interests openly and honestly and with integrity. Citizens of Alberta have to start acting like owners of their natural resources and not merely employees for the industry tenants. The industry tenants need to earn our respect to sustain any social licenses to exploit our natural resources for the benefit of shareholders and citizens. Our governments need to learn some humility as servant leaders and be dissuaded from assuming they are entitled to govern without being accountable, transparent and honest with the voter.
To not disclose this meeting as part of the regular release of the weekly schedule of the Premier is an indication of a personal and institutional character flaw. It is not good enough and further erodes the public confidence in the capacity and truthfulness of this government.
There are times when confidentiality is required. On those occasions we owners still need to know why it is required and be able to trust the integrity of those entrusted to act on our behalf in such confidential circumstances. That is not the case now in terms of being informed as to why s discussion must be confidential or can we trust the integrity and accountability of our representatives who are involved in such confidential discussions.
Any of secret meetings held behind closed doors by our government proxy holders are inevitably with self-serving parties. That is why they are a serious source of citizen suspicion. There is that there is more back room self-interested collusion going and that is totally inappropriate. There is plenty of evidence that the current government of Alberta has at best lost the benefit of the doubt that they are to be trusted and believed. To not disclose the Premier-Pelosi meeting unnecessarily adds to the suspicion and distrust.
Democracy is founded on trust and confidence of the citizenry towards those to whom we delegate authority over us to make decisions on our behalf as informed engaged voters in meaningful elections. I know that is a fiction in Alberta and too many other dissolving democracies. The Pelosi meeting was a perfect opportunity for our government to show they are worthy of our trust and to justify our confidence in dealing on our behalf with the American mis-perceptions about "dirty oil."
The way this high-level policy event has been handled so far shows that the default of the powers that bee is towards political posturing and secrecy. That is trumping the greater duty to govern with a sense of stewardship and sustainability with integrity, accountability, honesty and transparency. Instead they have just reinforced our worst suspicions about how poorly we are governed instead of redeeming themselves by a gesture towards restoring public trust and confidence. I don't hold any hope that the Wildrose Alliance Party would be any better if not worse given their secretive and significant financial reliance on the Calgary based energy sector now.
As thoughtful and responsible Albertans we have to get past our defeatist attitude and insist upon or create another viable political alternative. To stay in a torpor means the future choices will be between an exclusively market driven govern philosophy or a reactionary social conservative option. Both are too restrictive to meet our potential and responsibility to aspire be more than the best place in the world to becoming the best place for the world. That is the preferred future for the Alberta I want to achieve.
If you want a progressive political culture in the Next Alberta register now for RebootAlberta 3.0 at www.rebootalberta.org
Showing posts with label Dirty Oil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dirty Oil. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Are We on the Verge of Ecological Disaster?
This link is from a Harvard publication and was brought to my attention through Ruben Nelson of Foresight Canada. Ruben is one of the Reboot Alberta "Weavers" - the integrated whole-systems thinkers who help me try and make sense of the energy and angst behind the Reboot Alberta citizens movement.
Ruben's note was a reference to a piece in yesterdays New York Times by Thomas Homer-Dixon entitled "Disaster at the Top of the World." I hesitate to add the New York Times link due to copyright concerns.
There is a great danger that Alberta will be very vilified by geopolitical propaganda forces like the Corporate Ethics "Rethink Alberta" advertising campaign against tourism to our province due to oil sands development. They, amongst others, have decided to target the oil sands as "dirty oil" and push perceptions that Albertans are not doing enough to respond to the environmental charges being laid against us. Well quite frankly we are not doing enough. But that is a far cry from doing nothing about the environmental and habitat consequences of oil sands development either. The problem is our actions speak softer than our words and too much of what we say is done in expensive glossy and untrusted paid-advertising counter-attack campaigns.
We need to do more, better, smarter, faster and with more authenticity integrity, honesty, accountability, transparency and demonstrate the on-going and extended efforts towards environmental stewardship of Albertans. Only that way will be counter the criticism and return to being proud as owners of how this vital and necessary resource is being developed.
Albertans already know this from some values research we have recently completed. For example the research that shows over 75% of Albertans think an integrated approach to protecting wildlife habitat, doing science based reclamation. ecological monitoring and more concern for water and greenhouse gases is what we need to use as values to guide and drive oil sands development. Acting with wisdom on these concerns starts to put Alberta in the preferred future spot of being the best for the world and not merely getting irresponsibly rich as we are been seen by many outside Alberta these days.
There is work being done but it is not what is being talked about in response to the criticism. Jobs and investments are important but they are the givens in the oil sands game. We already have more of them than we can handle responsibly. Yes they might dry up if commodity prices drop but we have no control over market prices and besides there is enough work and investment in the hopper now that will lasts us long into the future. Time for the narrative to more on to the real issues of concern to Albertans about oil sands developments about environment and habitat protection and reclamation planning and performance.
Ruben has some hard-edged observations in his e-mail to me as to why there is a need for public pressure to do the right thing and that this cannot be left to governments and industry alone. He said that "...business will not act as a sector - it is too tied up in short-term self interest, and democratic governments will not act until there is an obvious mega-disaster among their own citizens."
As citizens and owners of the oil sands Albertans have to start taking responsibility for how they are developed. If you want a progressive political culture in the Next Alberta register now for RebootAlberta 3.0 at www.rebootalberta.org
Ruben's note was a reference to a piece in yesterdays New York Times by Thomas Homer-Dixon entitled "Disaster at the Top of the World." I hesitate to add the New York Times link due to copyright concerns.
There is a great danger that Alberta will be very vilified by geopolitical propaganda forces like the Corporate Ethics "Rethink Alberta" advertising campaign against tourism to our province due to oil sands development. They, amongst others, have decided to target the oil sands as "dirty oil" and push perceptions that Albertans are not doing enough to respond to the environmental charges being laid against us. Well quite frankly we are not doing enough. But that is a far cry from doing nothing about the environmental and habitat consequences of oil sands development either. The problem is our actions speak softer than our words and too much of what we say is done in expensive glossy and untrusted paid-advertising counter-attack campaigns.
We need to do more, better, smarter, faster and with more authenticity integrity, honesty, accountability, transparency and demonstrate the on-going and extended efforts towards environmental stewardship of Albertans. Only that way will be counter the criticism and return to being proud as owners of how this vital and necessary resource is being developed.
Albertans already know this from some values research we have recently completed. For example the research that shows over 75% of Albertans think an integrated approach to protecting wildlife habitat, doing science based reclamation. ecological monitoring and more concern for water and greenhouse gases is what we need to use as values to guide and drive oil sands development. Acting with wisdom on these concerns starts to put Alberta in the preferred future spot of being the best for the world and not merely getting irresponsibly rich as we are been seen by many outside Alberta these days.
There is work being done but it is not what is being talked about in response to the criticism. Jobs and investments are important but they are the givens in the oil sands game. We already have more of them than we can handle responsibly. Yes they might dry up if commodity prices drop but we have no control over market prices and besides there is enough work and investment in the hopper now that will lasts us long into the future. Time for the narrative to more on to the real issues of concern to Albertans about oil sands developments about environment and habitat protection and reclamation planning and performance.
Ruben has some hard-edged observations in his e-mail to me as to why there is a need for public pressure to do the right thing and that this cannot be left to governments and industry alone. He said that "...business will not act as a sector - it is too tied up in short-term self interest, and democratic governments will not act until there is an obvious mega-disaster among their own citizens."
As citizens and owners of the oil sands Albertans have to start taking responsibility for how they are developed. If you want a progressive political culture in the Next Alberta register now for RebootAlberta 3.0 at www.rebootalberta.org
Monday, July 05, 2010
Who Can Albertans Trust to Tell the Truth About Oil Sands?
The Quest for Truth in the Oil Sands is the title of the Todd Hirsch op-ed in today’s Globe and Mail. It captures much of the angst Albertans are feeling as citizens and the owners of the oilsands. We know this from some of the values surveying we have been doing with Albertans in the last few years and more extensively in 2010. This survey was commissioned by OSRIN, the Oil Sands Research and Information Network out of the University of Alberta.
The subtext of Todd’s piece asks if the oil sands are an “economic bonanza” or an “environmental apolalypse.” There is so much spin and self-serving selection of fact that everyone know that the whole truth is not being told. Who can we trust and believe about what is happening in our oil sands these days? In Alberta today 89% of us believe the oil sands are either extremely important or very important to our future prosperity. Any government or industry that risks betraying our trust on oil sands development will face serious consequences from the voter and the public.
Progress is being made on the environmental front and a more rational approach to the pace and purpose of development is happening now too. There is more of a long term integrated view that is becoming the normative oil sands development model. This is in stark contract to the “damn the consequences” lets make a quick buck attitude that was so common in black gold rush of the recent past.
That said the facts are that conservation, habitat, air, water and reclamation concerns dominate the minds and values of Albertan around oilsands development. There is a sense that not enough is being done in these areas of concern to convince Albertans that our government or our industry tenants “get it” about how we want this resource developed.
The politics and policy approaches to oil sands development are still mired in mendacity, mediocrity and even the mundane. We are giving the resources away as we trade reasonable royalty rates in exchange for short term jobs or to appease industry threats that investment will dry up. Our environmental laws are not as good as we tout and our enforcement has been lack lustre. That is true notwithstanding the recent successful Syndrude prosecution of 1600 migrating ducks who drowned in tailings ponds due to corporate negligence.
Corporate and government communications efforts are focused mostly on PR positioning and not about sincere efforts at communicating and solving the problems. There are efforts being made and progress is being achieved but we don’t seem to hear or even believe those stories and when we do we sense they are mostly self-serving. We get snippets of stories but it seems the culture of spin is so pervasive that we just can’t bring ourselves to trust any good news about the oil sands. It is truly sad that the level of skepticism and cynicism about the oil sands is so endemic in Alberta and beyond these days.
Even the recent effort by the Alberta government to score a media coup with the Premier’s Letter to the Editor in the Washington Post has some interesting twists and turns. I applaud the efforts of the Premier to get out there and start telling the Alberta oil sands story in a broader context. Unfortunately the Washington Post Editor did not see the newsworthy merit of the letter saying it was more about “Canada Day than anything new.” So the province bought the newpaper space to promote their message instead. Even a cursory read of the Premier’s letter shows how wrong that “Canada Day” perception was about the content and context of the Permier’s letter. Still such a newspaper ad looks like the kind of boiler-plate damage control apologizing advertising we always see from businesses that screw up. Earned media is more believable than purchasing advertising space as a way to get a messgage out any day. But you still gotta do what you gotta do to try and communicate I guess.
I really applaud the Premier’s points about the safe, secure, reliable energy supply from the Alberta oil sands to the States – and the fact we are the largest suplier of oil to the Americans. That is a critical fact that is not well understood or appreciated by the Americans...and their ignorance is largely our fault.
As for GHG and other environmental issues, they are critical concerns but they need some context, like the Premier’s “letter” provided. If the entire value chain costs of oil sands development is considered and compared to entire value chain of other oil sources like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Nigeria, Angola and Algeria then the dirty oil tag on Alberta’s oil sands is not justified. All fossil fuels are dirty to varying degrees but to focus only on certain aspects of the oil sands in isolation and to ignore the greater political, environmental, human and social costs of other jurisdictions is a lobbying tactic that needs to be challenged.
Alberta is one of the few oil energy providers that have a democracy, the rule of law and stable currency and government. In addition there is only casual corruption in our culture compared to the rampant corruption in other supplier nations. You don’t have to worry about staff being kidnapped for ransom and you should not ignore the costs in human life in the internal conflicts in many other energy provider jurisdictions. Those costs are nonexistant in Alberta. I suggest the oil sands are by comparison is actually “cleaner,” than the sources form these other jurisdictions, all things considered. I may be right in that contention but that is still not good enough and Albertans know that too.
Getting back to Todd’s point about who are we to believe in the Babel about oil sands, there is a need for the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to be discussed in the public realm. We have to stop the focus on issues management, message framing and media massaging that thrives on reporting conflict and not about construtively informing the public and helping us get a handle on the issues and the implications.
Our recently complete conjoint research survey tracked 8 crucial values Albertans have around the development of the oil sands as the owners of the resource. The insight we gained adds to the dilemma and disconsternation of the government and the industry as they continue to be tone deaf over what Albertans really want attended to in the development of their oil sands.
Safe secure reliable supply to the American market is a given. No “atta boys” for stating the obvious. Technology as a means to overcome environmantal and other abuses is not seen as the only a valid mitigation strategy we need to use to overcome harmful affects of oil sands development. It is acknowledged by Albertans that technological solutions are the responsible and reasonable thing to do but not the only asnwer to the concerns. No “atta boys” for doing the obvious here either.
The rationalization of the pace of development that does not cause boom and bust cycles is also now to be expected of intelligent investors and our industry tenants. We need to be sure only those who deserve their social licence to operate in Alberta are given the responsibilty and opportunity to exploit this public resource. The pull out threats from some elements in the energy industry (not all) and the rapid retreat by the provincial government in response to the reasonable and rational royalty regime is the epitome of fear and collusion against the public interest. That kind of intimidation by the tenants has to stop too.
None of the actions by government or industry on royalties has been seen to be in the greater public interest, either long term or short term. Misleading messaging and school-yard style bullying was the rule of the day around royalties. And all it did was show Albertans who really runs the province...and they do so all too often behind closed doors. Not approprite behaviour in any way.
So I think Todd has struck a nerve and hit a nail on the head at the same time with his op-ed. So who can we trust and believe in the noise around oil sands development? Albertans have to believe in someone and trust that someone is serving the public interest. We are mature and wise enough as people to know there are real issues and they are complicated. We know we can handle bad news. It seems that is pretty much all we get now about our oil sands development anyway. I would like to call for more carity and comprehensive information to the public instead of the over-simplified pap we get now in the oil sands messaging. We need and deserve that kind of comprehensive candour. It needs to come from the province and the companies that are in the business of developing our oil sands.
In the meantime governments, as our proxy holders of our oil sands interests, and the energy industry, as our tenants, had better start thinking about public perceptions of their worthiness to govern and to justify a social license to operate with our public assets.
Safe to say, Albertans are not amused. In fact, we are tired of being bemused and abused by the PR machines and machinations of government and industry around oil sands development. We need a reason to believe and trust government and industry aroudn oil sands issues. We must have some serious evidence of their integrity, honesty, accountability, transparency, environmental end economic stewardship around oil sands development. The stakes are too important for all concerned. Failure is not an option for oil sands development for Albertan. However, failure is an option for government and energy companies if public opinion and perceptions continue to distrust and disbelieve them.
The subtext of Todd’s piece asks if the oil sands are an “economic bonanza” or an “environmental apolalypse.” There is so much spin and self-serving selection of fact that everyone know that the whole truth is not being told. Who can we trust and believe about what is happening in our oil sands these days? In Alberta today 89% of us believe the oil sands are either extremely important or very important to our future prosperity. Any government or industry that risks betraying our trust on oil sands development will face serious consequences from the voter and the public.
Progress is being made on the environmental front and a more rational approach to the pace and purpose of development is happening now too. There is more of a long term integrated view that is becoming the normative oil sands development model. This is in stark contract to the “damn the consequences” lets make a quick buck attitude that was so common in black gold rush of the recent past.
That said the facts are that conservation, habitat, air, water and reclamation concerns dominate the minds and values of Albertan around oilsands development. There is a sense that not enough is being done in these areas of concern to convince Albertans that our government or our industry tenants “get it” about how we want this resource developed.
The politics and policy approaches to oil sands development are still mired in mendacity, mediocrity and even the mundane. We are giving the resources away as we trade reasonable royalty rates in exchange for short term jobs or to appease industry threats that investment will dry up. Our environmental laws are not as good as we tout and our enforcement has been lack lustre. That is true notwithstanding the recent successful Syndrude prosecution of 1600 migrating ducks who drowned in tailings ponds due to corporate negligence.
Corporate and government communications efforts are focused mostly on PR positioning and not about sincere efforts at communicating and solving the problems. There are efforts being made and progress is being achieved but we don’t seem to hear or even believe those stories and when we do we sense they are mostly self-serving. We get snippets of stories but it seems the culture of spin is so pervasive that we just can’t bring ourselves to trust any good news about the oil sands. It is truly sad that the level of skepticism and cynicism about the oil sands is so endemic in Alberta and beyond these days.
Even the recent effort by the Alberta government to score a media coup with the Premier’s Letter to the Editor in the Washington Post has some interesting twists and turns. I applaud the efforts of the Premier to get out there and start telling the Alberta oil sands story in a broader context. Unfortunately the Washington Post Editor did not see the newsworthy merit of the letter saying it was more about “Canada Day than anything new.” So the province bought the newpaper space to promote their message instead. Even a cursory read of the Premier’s letter shows how wrong that “Canada Day” perception was about the content and context of the Permier’s letter. Still such a newspaper ad looks like the kind of boiler-plate damage control apologizing advertising we always see from businesses that screw up. Earned media is more believable than purchasing advertising space as a way to get a messgage out any day. But you still gotta do what you gotta do to try and communicate I guess.
I really applaud the Premier’s points about the safe, secure, reliable energy supply from the Alberta oil sands to the States – and the fact we are the largest suplier of oil to the Americans. That is a critical fact that is not well understood or appreciated by the Americans...and their ignorance is largely our fault.
As for GHG and other environmental issues, they are critical concerns but they need some context, like the Premier’s “letter” provided. If the entire value chain costs of oil sands development is considered and compared to entire value chain of other oil sources like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Nigeria, Angola and Algeria then the dirty oil tag on Alberta’s oil sands is not justified. All fossil fuels are dirty to varying degrees but to focus only on certain aspects of the oil sands in isolation and to ignore the greater political, environmental, human and social costs of other jurisdictions is a lobbying tactic that needs to be challenged.
Alberta is one of the few oil energy providers that have a democracy, the rule of law and stable currency and government. In addition there is only casual corruption in our culture compared to the rampant corruption in other supplier nations. You don’t have to worry about staff being kidnapped for ransom and you should not ignore the costs in human life in the internal conflicts in many other energy provider jurisdictions. Those costs are nonexistant in Alberta. I suggest the oil sands are by comparison is actually “cleaner,” than the sources form these other jurisdictions, all things considered. I may be right in that contention but that is still not good enough and Albertans know that too.
Getting back to Todd’s point about who are we to believe in the Babel about oil sands, there is a need for the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to be discussed in the public realm. We have to stop the focus on issues management, message framing and media massaging that thrives on reporting conflict and not about construtively informing the public and helping us get a handle on the issues and the implications.
Our recently complete conjoint research survey tracked 8 crucial values Albertans have around the development of the oil sands as the owners of the resource. The insight we gained adds to the dilemma and disconsternation of the government and the industry as they continue to be tone deaf over what Albertans really want attended to in the development of their oil sands.
Safe secure reliable supply to the American market is a given. No “atta boys” for stating the obvious. Technology as a means to overcome environmantal and other abuses is not seen as the only a valid mitigation strategy we need to use to overcome harmful affects of oil sands development. It is acknowledged by Albertans that technological solutions are the responsible and reasonable thing to do but not the only asnwer to the concerns. No “atta boys” for doing the obvious here either.
The rationalization of the pace of development that does not cause boom and bust cycles is also now to be expected of intelligent investors and our industry tenants. We need to be sure only those who deserve their social licence to operate in Alberta are given the responsibilty and opportunity to exploit this public resource. The pull out threats from some elements in the energy industry (not all) and the rapid retreat by the provincial government in response to the reasonable and rational royalty regime is the epitome of fear and collusion against the public interest. That kind of intimidation by the tenants has to stop too.
None of the actions by government or industry on royalties has been seen to be in the greater public interest, either long term or short term. Misleading messaging and school-yard style bullying was the rule of the day around royalties. And all it did was show Albertans who really runs the province...and they do so all too often behind closed doors. Not approprite behaviour in any way.
So I think Todd has struck a nerve and hit a nail on the head at the same time with his op-ed. So who can we trust and believe in the noise around oil sands development? Albertans have to believe in someone and trust that someone is serving the public interest. We are mature and wise enough as people to know there are real issues and they are complicated. We know we can handle bad news. It seems that is pretty much all we get now about our oil sands development anyway. I would like to call for more carity and comprehensive information to the public instead of the over-simplified pap we get now in the oil sands messaging. We need and deserve that kind of comprehensive candour. It needs to come from the province and the companies that are in the business of developing our oil sands.
In the meantime governments, as our proxy holders of our oil sands interests, and the energy industry, as our tenants, had better start thinking about public perceptions of their worthiness to govern and to justify a social license to operate with our public assets.
Safe to say, Albertans are not amused. In fact, we are tired of being bemused and abused by the PR machines and machinations of government and industry around oil sands development. We need a reason to believe and trust government and industry aroudn oil sands issues. We must have some serious evidence of their integrity, honesty, accountability, transparency, environmental end economic stewardship around oil sands development. The stakes are too important for all concerned. Failure is not an option for oil sands development for Albertan. However, failure is an option for government and energy companies if public opinion and perceptions continue to distrust and disbelieve them.
Monday, February 15, 2010
How Dare Jean Charest Suck and Blow on Alberta's Oilsands
Prime Minister of Quebec Jean Charest is high quality politician and an staunch Federalist. He is someone I admire and have met a few times. He is a leader that I value very much in his Quebec role in Canadian politics. What I can't fathom is his duplicitous political posturing over the oilsands.
He has a responsibility in Quebec and every right to "go it alone" on emissions control standards for Quebec. Environment is a shared Fed-Prov constitutional responsibility. Minister Prentice has to learn to adapt and realize he can't dictate provincial policy from Ottawa.
But Mr. Charest must learn to adapt and not dictate to others as well. He has no right to dictate to Alberta as to what we should be doing in the relationship of our energy based economy. His uninformed interference on how we meet our ecological responsibilities or what impacts we will allow on our societal well-being from rapid and poorly planned growth in the past is our business, not his. Albertans are well aware of the blessinsg and the burdens of the oilsands. We Albertans are very engaged in dealing with the consequences as well as the opportunitity and stewardship responsibility of our oil sands.
There is lots of history that shows Quebec is hardly an environmental poster boy. It has a history of allowing destructive forestry practices to go on for far too long. It has shown a breathtaking lack of concern for sewage treatment and condoned dumping raw sewage into the St Lawrence for decades. But I digress and risk engaging in the same rhetoric I bemoan from Mr. Charest.
What burns me about Mr. Charest is the anti-Alberta rhetoric coupled with the recent advertising campaign and political push by the Quebec government to subsidize local business to come on a trade mission to exploit the business opportunities of our oil sands. This Quebec government program encourages Quebec business to take come to Alberta in late March and learn how to advantage of the opportunities that the oil sands offers. Isn't that running the risk that Quebec will be seen as adding to the "problem" and not become part of the solution as they too move in to exploit the so-called dirty oil in Alberta?
As a Canadian and as an Albertan, I welcome Quebec businesses to our province to find oil sands business opportunity. I enthusiastically encourage Quebec businesses to come to Alberta and seek out oil sands based opportunities. I applaud that these are opportunities enabled by Alberta that they can take home and use to benefit my fellow Canadians living in Quebec.
I also ask those same Quebec business people to push their own provincial politicians to eliminate the isolationist and protectionist policies in Quebec. That province adheres to that protectionist stance to the point that it often makes interprovincial trade with Quebec harder than international trade with other nations. I live in a province that encourages and creates interprovincial trade opporunities. The best recent example is the TILMA trade agreement with B.C. Look it up and learn from this example of regional co-operation. With these trade linkages between Alberta and B.C. we have created an market with the population of Quebec and a GDP about 50% larger than Quebec.
What burns me is the concurrent finger pointing, myopic political rhetoric and self-serving sanctimony inherent in the posturing of the Quebec Prime Minister over the Alberta oilsands. These are not core character elements in the Jean Charest personality that I know. Still he has consistently spouted inaccurate public statements decrying an alleged disproportionate amount global damage he deems to be caused by Alberta's oilsands. And he does this at the same time he is subsidizing Quebec business to jump on the economic gravytrain of the oilsands. That is hard to reconcile logically and morally - never mind politically. It is not the sutff of nation building that I have come to depend on over the years from Mr. Charest.
Oilsands are a dirty business but it is not nearly as bad as its opponents pretend it to be. Its environmenal future is destined to be significantly better as we move forward from open pit to about 80% SAGD extraction. With new cleaner technologies, reduced GHG emissions and lower water use we are making significant progress as the demand for oil sands sourced energy grows. SAGD, like conventional oil and gas extraction, will still destroy and fragment significant amounts of wildlife habitat. That habitat destruction can be alleviated and mitigaged with an accelerated reclamation approach coupled with a conservation and biodiversity offsets policy to ensure equivalent habitat protection in other parts of the province. (Full disclosure - I am working on establishing a policy on conservation and biodiversity offsets in Alberta).
On a well-to-wheels, full-cost accounting of equivalent conventional oil sources, including lives lost, defense spending and the funding of global instability caused by the US sourcing of Middle East oil, the Alberta oilsands come out as an economic, ecolgical, social and political bargain...all things considered. That full-cost accounting approach does not reduce the ecological stewardship responsibility of Albertans one iota. It does show why the oil sands are a preferred, reliable, safe and stable energy source and put the oil sands issues in a more comprehensive and proper perspective.
As an Albertan I welcome the Quebec businesses to Alberta and encourage them to learn how they can gain economically from the oilsands development. I also hope that they spend some time learning what Alberta industry and government is doing to reduce the ecological impacts and mitigate the other damages inherent in this development.
I encourage them to ensure whatever oil sands business opportunites they undertake that they do so with a serious commitment to sustainable ecological and responsible economic principles. I hope the Quebec business people will come and bring some new and practical ideas to help Albertans serve the ecological stewardship efforts around reducing the impact of oilsands deveopment. That is a responsibility they might also bear. It presents another way for them to benefit as they come to cash in on the oilsands business opportunities.
We Albertans are far from perfect stewards of our oil sands development. We are aware of our stewardship duty and we are on the right track towards meeting it. We have to pick up our game and the pace of our environmental play for sure. That said, we are far from the irresponsible philistines that many would like label us when it comes to our oilsands development.
I hope the Quebec business people spend some time while in Alberta to learn more about the reality and not just the rhetoric around oilsands development. I hope they take the business opportunities and their new found and informed reality of the oilsands back to Quebec. I hope they have the opportunity to debrief their politicians. I hope they can help to temper and teach Mr. Charest a thing or two about the reality of the oilsands. Constructive criticism is always welcomed by Albertans. Destructive self-serving rhetoric is not.
Might I also suggest a business opportunity of my own around oil sands development? To those from Quebec and elsewhere, who are planning to find some new business in Alberta. I encourage them, to read the book "Green Oil" before they come. It was written by my business partner Satya Das. It serves well as an owners manual for Albertans on how to better develop the oilsands but also as an instruction manual for others to help them undersantd what this oil sands resource is all about.
BTW, you can go online at Green Oil and download it. That way you can save some trees and reduce your own carbon footprint in the process. There is an interesting online conversation happening on the Green Oil book site too. I encourage you to join in and share your thoughts and ideas on the oil sands too.
He has a responsibility in Quebec and every right to "go it alone" on emissions control standards for Quebec. Environment is a shared Fed-Prov constitutional responsibility. Minister Prentice has to learn to adapt and realize he can't dictate provincial policy from Ottawa.
But Mr. Charest must learn to adapt and not dictate to others as well. He has no right to dictate to Alberta as to what we should be doing in the relationship of our energy based economy. His uninformed interference on how we meet our ecological responsibilities or what impacts we will allow on our societal well-being from rapid and poorly planned growth in the past is our business, not his. Albertans are well aware of the blessinsg and the burdens of the oilsands. We Albertans are very engaged in dealing with the consequences as well as the opportunitity and stewardship responsibility of our oil sands.
There is lots of history that shows Quebec is hardly an environmental poster boy. It has a history of allowing destructive forestry practices to go on for far too long. It has shown a breathtaking lack of concern for sewage treatment and condoned dumping raw sewage into the St Lawrence for decades. But I digress and risk engaging in the same rhetoric I bemoan from Mr. Charest.
What burns me about Mr. Charest is the anti-Alberta rhetoric coupled with the recent advertising campaign and political push by the Quebec government to subsidize local business to come on a trade mission to exploit the business opportunities of our oil sands. This Quebec government program encourages Quebec business to take come to Alberta in late March and learn how to advantage of the opportunities that the oil sands offers. Isn't that running the risk that Quebec will be seen as adding to the "problem" and not become part of the solution as they too move in to exploit the so-called dirty oil in Alberta?
As a Canadian and as an Albertan, I welcome Quebec businesses to our province to find oil sands business opportunity. I enthusiastically encourage Quebec businesses to come to Alberta and seek out oil sands based opportunities. I applaud that these are opportunities enabled by Alberta that they can take home and use to benefit my fellow Canadians living in Quebec.
I also ask those same Quebec business people to push their own provincial politicians to eliminate the isolationist and protectionist policies in Quebec. That province adheres to that protectionist stance to the point that it often makes interprovincial trade with Quebec harder than international trade with other nations. I live in a province that encourages and creates interprovincial trade opporunities. The best recent example is the TILMA trade agreement with B.C. Look it up and learn from this example of regional co-operation. With these trade linkages between Alberta and B.C. we have created an market with the population of Quebec and a GDP about 50% larger than Quebec.
What burns me is the concurrent finger pointing, myopic political rhetoric and self-serving sanctimony inherent in the posturing of the Quebec Prime Minister over the Alberta oilsands. These are not core character elements in the Jean Charest personality that I know. Still he has consistently spouted inaccurate public statements decrying an alleged disproportionate amount global damage he deems to be caused by Alberta's oilsands. And he does this at the same time he is subsidizing Quebec business to jump on the economic gravytrain of the oilsands. That is hard to reconcile logically and morally - never mind politically. It is not the sutff of nation building that I have come to depend on over the years from Mr. Charest.
Oilsands are a dirty business but it is not nearly as bad as its opponents pretend it to be. Its environmenal future is destined to be significantly better as we move forward from open pit to about 80% SAGD extraction. With new cleaner technologies, reduced GHG emissions and lower water use we are making significant progress as the demand for oil sands sourced energy grows. SAGD, like conventional oil and gas extraction, will still destroy and fragment significant amounts of wildlife habitat. That habitat destruction can be alleviated and mitigaged with an accelerated reclamation approach coupled with a conservation and biodiversity offsets policy to ensure equivalent habitat protection in other parts of the province. (Full disclosure - I am working on establishing a policy on conservation and biodiversity offsets in Alberta).
On a well-to-wheels, full-cost accounting of equivalent conventional oil sources, including lives lost, defense spending and the funding of global instability caused by the US sourcing of Middle East oil, the Alberta oilsands come out as an economic, ecolgical, social and political bargain...all things considered. That full-cost accounting approach does not reduce the ecological stewardship responsibility of Albertans one iota. It does show why the oil sands are a preferred, reliable, safe and stable energy source and put the oil sands issues in a more comprehensive and proper perspective.
As an Albertan I welcome the Quebec businesses to Alberta and encourage them to learn how they can gain economically from the oilsands development. I also hope that they spend some time learning what Alberta industry and government is doing to reduce the ecological impacts and mitigate the other damages inherent in this development.
I encourage them to ensure whatever oil sands business opportunites they undertake that they do so with a serious commitment to sustainable ecological and responsible economic principles. I hope the Quebec business people will come and bring some new and practical ideas to help Albertans serve the ecological stewardship efforts around reducing the impact of oilsands deveopment. That is a responsibility they might also bear. It presents another way for them to benefit as they come to cash in on the oilsands business opportunities.
We Albertans are far from perfect stewards of our oil sands development. We are aware of our stewardship duty and we are on the right track towards meeting it. We have to pick up our game and the pace of our environmental play for sure. That said, we are far from the irresponsible philistines that many would like label us when it comes to our oilsands development.
I hope the Quebec business people spend some time while in Alberta to learn more about the reality and not just the rhetoric around oilsands development. I hope they take the business opportunities and their new found and informed reality of the oilsands back to Quebec. I hope they have the opportunity to debrief their politicians. I hope they can help to temper and teach Mr. Charest a thing or two about the reality of the oilsands. Constructive criticism is always welcomed by Albertans. Destructive self-serving rhetoric is not.
Might I also suggest a business opportunity of my own around oil sands development? To those from Quebec and elsewhere, who are planning to find some new business in Alberta. I encourage them, to read the book "Green Oil" before they come. It was written by my business partner Satya Das. It serves well as an owners manual for Albertans on how to better develop the oilsands but also as an instruction manual for others to help them undersantd what this oil sands resource is all about.
BTW, you can go online at Green Oil and download it. That way you can save some trees and reduce your own carbon footprint in the process. There is an interesting online conversation happening on the Green Oil book site too. I encourage you to join in and share your thoughts and ideas on the oil sands too.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Satya Das Talks With Dr. McEachren on Water and Oil Sands
Here is a series of of a conversation between Satya Das of Cambridge Strategies Inc. Dr. Preston McEachren is a water science specialist with Alberta Environment.
Dr. McEachren explains the facts about water and tailing ponds from the oil sands. He describes in some detail the context and complications about dealing with oil sands tailing ponds.
Cambridge Strategies is working to have the public better understand the current state of the oil sands and what needs to be done to make the development of the oil sands more responsible and sustainable. Looking forward to your comments.
Part One: Introduction to Tailings http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQrf61prQ5c&feature=channel_page
Part Two: Leaking and Leaching Issues http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd-8QMlWwl4&feature=PlayList&p=D0005B0F252D0AD6&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=5
Part Three: On active reclamation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQoQWMulUmk&feature=related
Part Four: Emerging Technologies on Tailing Ponds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI_ov0LlRIk&feature=related
Dr. McEachren explains the facts about water and tailing ponds from the oil sands. He describes in some detail the context and complications about dealing with oil sands tailing ponds.
Cambridge Strategies is working to have the public better understand the current state of the oil sands and what needs to be done to make the development of the oil sands more responsible and sustainable. Looking forward to your comments.
Part One: Introduction to Tailings http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQrf61prQ5c&feature=channel_page
Part Two: Leaking and Leaching Issues http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd-8QMlWwl4&feature=PlayList&p=D0005B0F252D0AD6&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=5
Part Three: On active reclamation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQoQWMulUmk&feature=related
Part Four: Emerging Technologies on Tailing Ponds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI_ov0LlRIk&feature=related
Thursday, June 26, 2008
ERCB Gets Tough on Tailing Ponds - 500 Ducks Did Not Die in Vain.
One of the most difficult issues to deal with in oil sands mining is what to do with the tailing ponds left over after the oil is extracted from the sands. There is an obligation on industry to reclaim these ponds that contain water, sand, oil and some heavy metals. It seems as though the water in these ponds neither evaporates nor dissipates and it may be that the sand molecules are so fine the water just keeps “attached.” If these toxic tailing ponds ever escape into the Athabasca River, the damage to all life forms in, on and along the waterway will be devastating.
Well the Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board as started to step up on the issue of resolving the tailing pond issues. They has issued a draft directive demanding the clean-up on these waste reservoirs needs to start and the old voluntary approach for industry to respond to this obligation to reclaim these ponds to an equivalent land use to the original status is about to end.
The Discrete Choice Modeling survey Cambridge Strategies did last October/November of some 3400 Albertans showed that oil sand water usage and reclamation issues were the third and forth ranked critical value drivers for Albertans around responsible and sustainable oil sands development. The top ranked issues by far were preserving wildlife habitat and greenhouse gas capture.
New technologies have been tried to solve the waste water tailings pond problems with various degrees of success. The result of no easy solution to the tailing ponds has been a default to deferral and delay in addressing the problem. Looks like the days were reclamation delays are going to be tolerated are numbered, given the ERCB Draft Directive Backgrounder they issued today.
This directive, if acted upon, will be one of the most encouraging initiatives undertaken by the regulator in recent years. It will go a long way to dealing with the damaging international image of dirty oil from the Alberta oil sands too. Most of the reaction resulting in framing dirty oil sands has been around GHG and that is a legitimate concern. However, reclamation, water usage and wildlife habitat are very critical negative consequences of oil sands extraction too.
They are concerns that need to be added to the menu of dirty oil sands issues that need to be fix and not just manage with PR and advertising campaigns.
Today’s ERCB draft directive starts the shift in consciousness from tailing pond indifference to forcing a difference towards oil sands extraction that reduces fresh water usage, reduced stored waste water volumes and starts to get serious about tailing pond reclamation to return them to a useful landscape purpose once again.
Kudos to the ERCB for getting serious and for dealing aggressively with this potentially dangerous and devastating environmental catastrophe. It is long past due. Now we citizens have to monitor the final determination and implementation of this regulatory directive and ensure the ERCB doesn’t get knocked off the policy puck.
Well the Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board as started to step up on the issue of resolving the tailing pond issues. They has issued a draft directive demanding the clean-up on these waste reservoirs needs to start and the old voluntary approach for industry to respond to this obligation to reclaim these ponds to an equivalent land use to the original status is about to end.
The Discrete Choice Modeling survey Cambridge Strategies did last October/November of some 3400 Albertans showed that oil sand water usage and reclamation issues were the third and forth ranked critical value drivers for Albertans around responsible and sustainable oil sands development. The top ranked issues by far were preserving wildlife habitat and greenhouse gas capture.
New technologies have been tried to solve the waste water tailings pond problems with various degrees of success. The result of no easy solution to the tailing ponds has been a default to deferral and delay in addressing the problem. Looks like the days were reclamation delays are going to be tolerated are numbered, given the ERCB Draft Directive Backgrounder they issued today.
This directive, if acted upon, will be one of the most encouraging initiatives undertaken by the regulator in recent years. It will go a long way to dealing with the damaging international image of dirty oil from the Alberta oil sands too. Most of the reaction resulting in framing dirty oil sands has been around GHG and that is a legitimate concern. However, reclamation, water usage and wildlife habitat are very critical negative consequences of oil sands extraction too.
They are concerns that need to be added to the menu of dirty oil sands issues that need to be fix and not just manage with PR and advertising campaigns.
Today’s ERCB draft directive starts the shift in consciousness from tailing pond indifference to forcing a difference towards oil sands extraction that reduces fresh water usage, reduced stored waste water volumes and starts to get serious about tailing pond reclamation to return them to a useful landscape purpose once again.
Kudos to the ERCB for getting serious and for dealing aggressively with this potentially dangerous and devastating environmental catastrophe. It is long past due. Now we citizens have to monitor the final determination and implementation of this regulatory directive and ensure the ERCB doesn’t get knocked off the policy puck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)