 |
| The greatest energy source known to mankind |
Canada's response? MORE posturing. "We'll build a pipeline to the west coast in British Columbia and sell the oil to China and other Asian markets instead". China would love it, regardless of the cesspool of pollution it will leave in Northern Canada.
The reciprocal American response? Crocodile tears. "Oh, we hope you wouldn't do that".
Why?
Canadians and Americans both know that the Athabasca Oil Sands projects are the biggest source of pollution in North America. No refineries will be built in Canada.
The Keystone oil pipeline, which will pipe dirty crude oil all the way from the Athabasca tar sands to Texas refineries is already being built. Imagine that.
At Incoming Bytes we have no illusion that the multi-billion-dollar pipeline will 'terminate' at the 'border'. Let us be realistic. Canada already supplies some 2 million barrels of oil per day to American markets.
Where does that leave the 'decision' ? The fact is, it's parked in 'limbo' while the political benefits are being coolly calculated; Canada's |Prime |Minister Stephen Harper will benefit politically by "saving" the Keystone pipeline, getting the 'delay' reversed, and |President Barack Obama will benefit by playing the political game of satisfying environmental critics, while simultaneously delaying development of the Bakken. Everybody wins by playing the game--except the native population of Athabasca.
Clearly approving the pipeline 'in the next few days' at least, is not a beneficial political decision. The United States of America has it's own Bakken oil deposits which are untouched--and hold more oil than Saudi Arabia, and more oil than Athabasca.
Why has the Bakken not been developed? The fact is, nobody in the USA wants to appear responsible for developing an unprecedented environmental mess in the United States. It is much more attractive to well-heeled NIMBY's to leave a cesspool of permanent pollution in Northern Canada instead.
How simple. The Keystone delay won't hurt the historical Canadian/American relationship for long --a calculated deception, with the economy in such tough straits, we estimate a reversal in a few weeks, or maybe a month or two. January sounds about right. Everybody gets a big political Christmas present when the 'decision' is somehow magically reversed. Joy to the world and all that.
I guess they just don't get it. Nobody has the moral right to create an irreversible ecological disaster, regardless of where it is.
Meantime, the same politicians in North America are collectively missing out on the greatest opportunity the world has ever seen; -the opportunity to develop clean, endless, alternative energy --which already exists. Look up.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Very interesting Raymond. Canada supplies 2 million barrels of oil per day you say ... good grief, where does all that oil keep coming from?
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way ... thank you so much for the biggert font. Now THIS is a blog I can read LOL
Conny, re. the font, you're welcome, it is a lot easier to read isn't it. ":)
ReplyDeleteThe oil deposits in western Canada are huge--seemingly endless. Of course they are not sustainable--and that's why the move to the dirty oil of Athabasca. The tar sands are also huge, perceived by the petroleum industry to be "endless". Simple propaganda to justify making a huge profit exporting it to the US.
What IS endless--and permanent-- is the horrific environmental disaster they are creating.
Even though Pres. Obama's decision to wait on this decision has been criticized as politically motivated, and it may very well be, IMO this is a project that needs more thoughtful evaluation. Certainly for Canadians and Americans living in the states where the pipeline will pass. Why is it that everyone knows the world needs alternative fuel sources, but when our current administration tries to invest in research, they are showerd with criticism for wasting money. Sheesh!
ReplyDeleteDiane,this project DOES need a lot of thoughtful evaluation. Creating a permanent, horrific environmental mess is inexcusable, regardless of money, politics, or potential customer.
ReplyDeleteThe criticism the administration gets for "wasting money" on alternative energy research is nothing but the 'opposition' a.k.a. "big petroleum corporations" trying to discourage ANY alternative to dirty oil. The whole scenario is about manipulation, power, and political gamesmanship--without logic, and without merit. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Republicans do NOT want money spent on alternative energy sources. They clearly support little but the oil sector and will do so until they "realize" that there is ALSO HUGE profit in new alternative energy technology.