Carbon emissions, eh? How are they measured? PPM? By volume? Weight? Nano grams? Can’t see them. If ya did they would have particulates? Harder to measure on a windy day? Who does the measuring? Feds? Province? Municipal? Greenies? Foes? Monitors on top of a chimney or smoke stack? Does one need a university degree to measure “carbon emissions?” Is it all hypothetical? Night school course on “How to measure emissions? Specific answers please. Thanks. I like that word emissions. When you don’t get it at night it is called “nocturnal omission” If you’re not getting any all it is called “Emission Impossible.” (apologies to Tom Cruise). I’m an “Emission Technician”. Wow! What a job. Is there a car allowance? Would beat anything offered by Wallymart or Home Depot, I bet.

I suport the natives involved in this organization. I do not support the natives doing illegal blockades (actually anyone).

” …… allows them to be powered by natural gas, and not electricity as is mandated in Australia and Norway.”

Electricity is not exactly clean unless it is generated by clean sources of energy.

According to the link below, here is how Australia produces electricity.

National Electricity Market (NEM)

In 2012-13 the National Electricity Market was 48.4 GWe producing 204.5 TWh,

1. 53% of this from black coal,
2. 29% from brown coal,
3. 7% from gas CCGT,
4. 10% from hydro and
5. 4% from wind.

There were about 50 large dispatchable generators (100-750 MWe each), and they provided about 95% of the capacity.

So much for clean electricity.

Do your research, Smithers so-called scientists.

I suspect Norway has a much higher hydro generated electricity source.

BTW, where is Australia’s solar energy source? A prime country for that.

With the OIL & GAS industry running ottawa I am not surprised by this little piece o-news.

Signs that a carbon emitting industry has taken over your government:

1. Immediately renege on, and opt out of the Koyoto Protocol;

2. Gut all environmental laws as they relate to pipeline expansion, LNG and Tars Sands operations.

3. Fire over 900 scientists, and muzzle the remaining environmental scientists from media comment.

4. Directly promote pipeline expansion (Enbridge & Keystone) despite huge opposition.

5. Get the Prime Minister to advocate the sale and use of high carbon emitting Canadian OIL & Gas to the world.

As for gus and his comments on Norway, I wish you would get more informed about what is really happening with our OIL & GAS sector and how multi-national corporations are running the show and not us as a country.

Here read this:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/canada-competes/what-norway-did-with-its-oil-and-we-didnt/article11959362/

I do not know if you are making a joke, Harbinger, but for those who may not know, it is actually quite simple.

Calculate the fuel input into a process and, based on the knowledge of the chemical composition and the % of carbon, one can calculate how much CO2 must be produced.

So measure input, and calculate output.

People #1 …

98% of electricity in Norway is produced by Hydro. They appear to have 1,166 hydropower stations.

We are talking about electricity production, not total fuel use. As with other countries, they drive cars and heat homes and run industries also, for which fossil fuels are still used.

Isn’t BC already one of the cleanest hydro producers in Canada? Government just trying to hold the bar high for clean energy.

Kyoto … parties with binding protocols are Australia as well as most of the western European countries. The rest are out or might as well be out.

Australia has a “reduction” commitment of +8% (an allowed increase under the protocol, and Norway has an allowed increase of 1%.

Canada had a planned reduction of 6%, but under the Harper government reneged on that.

It is interesting that there is a debate in Washington State that they should not be allowing a coal port to be built in Bellingham to export North Dakota coal to other countries since they would be aiding other countries to produce CO2 emissions. Their argument is to use it at home with cleaner burning standards and possible Carbon sequestering.

Hmm… yup just checked the news article title and it contains the words “concerns over LNG emissions..”.

I think we can safely assume those emissions would be carbon gas based emissions. And here w are yet again talking out of the sides of our mouths on the international stage.

http://www.citynews.ca/2013/09/25/obama-urged-to-nix-pipeline-regardless-of-canadas-climate-vows/

Yes believe it or not folks Harper is vowing a reduction in Alberta Tar Sand’s carbon emissions if the US approves the Keystone XL pipeline! Now some of us who are familiar with simple math may ask; Just a minute… if the Keystone pipeline is approved won’t the Alberta Tars Sands have to expand and produce more oil? Won’t that expansion increase carbon emissions rather than reduce them?

The answer to those questions are obvious, which is why we (Canada) are looking more and more like the fools internationally.

As if we have not been embarrassed enough by a UN shunning and insult from Portugal…

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2012/06/20120618-183553.html

Yup it’s official folks; we have “a nobody” leading our country! Canada is becoming an international embarrassment, our once sterling reputation is now being tarnished by Harper and his BIG OIL & GAS buddies.

Measure input, calculate output? Wow! First thing that comes to mind with the advent of Al gore’s invention of the Internet is the old adage, “garbage in, garbage out”. But then again it is nice to see (or is it?) that so called “climate models” are a tad bit inaccurate?

“…. why we (Canada) are looking more and more like the fools internationally.”

Maybe we are looking like fools, but we are honest fools, unlike Australia which has not removed itself from the protocol but have an allowed increase.

The whole thing is a sham from the beginning as far as what is possible at this time. All we can do is try our best.

Better an honest broker than a lying broker.

Okay, let us just say that some people are not scientists, right Harbinger.

Bet you also do not believe in that little note on gas pumps that the volume pumped is corrected to a specific temperature.

How about thermometers, Harbinger? Do you believe they register the correct temperature? Do you care? ;-)

4% wind? Maybe some one should lobby our ninnies in city hall to have them with our tax dollars partly finance a wind turbine on Cranbrook Hill. Or at least do an expensive study. If it was built that would the equivalent of taking 8 cars of the road here in PG. The $17 million dollar Is the hot water pipe down George Street saving the world? A dozen wind turbines around Hooterville would and could make some or a lot of waterfowl on the endangered species list. Could happen.

How about that cellphone decal on gas pumps? Here is my cellphone, here is a gallon of gas. Show me.

Gus, I agree. Scientist and eco-techs, and all the tree huggers want to have their input, but the bottom line is, we need to sell our resources to maintain our lifestyle.

Believe me, if we were not able to sell our resources to the world, and just to the states, we will reel back 40 years and we really wouldn’t be able to have scientists, eco tech, or a social safety net that holds the tree huggers.

I would choose the LNG to run the plants over a hydro dam. At least we can keep the rivers flowing.

Hmm… Oil bad, Natural Gas bad, LNG bad, Hydro bad… what’s left? Don’t say solar and wind.

Cell phone decal on gas pumps? Snopes.com. (gas pump cellphone)

This uh, Northwest Institute: Kathleen Ruff director; wacko (ex human rights commission), bunch of lawyers who just happen to do a lot of hourly for first nations, and a bunch of ‘ecologists’.
At the year end 2011 (last filing) 100% of their funding, $300,000 came from outside Canada… Another Rockefeller family puppet organization.

Solar panels contain toxic ingredients and wind turbines kill birds, it’s all bad….heh

Hmm… the use of solar and wing power technologies has increased 900% worldwide since 2007. Even the USA has doubled it’s wind energy production over the last year.

http://www.worldwatch.org/growth-global-solar-and-wind-energy-continues-outpace-other-technologies-0

If they do turn down the Keystone XL Pipeline, maybe we know why now. Obama and the US government promised greener and more sustainable energy policies… Harper and his OIL & GAS buddies refuse to listen!

While the rest of the world embraces clean green energy, Canada champions the most dirty form of oil on the face of this planet… Tar Sands Oil. How backwards is that?

JBio states; “Solar panels contain toxic ingredients and wind turbines kill birds, it’s all bad….heh”.

Hmm.. but carbon intensive fossil fuels are killing the entire planet… hmm.. which is worse? Care to choose JBio?

There are still some people who believe that the energy, food, water. air and resources needs of in excess of 7 (seven) billion (b, not m) human beings do not have an adverse impact on the whole planet.

Time to make a global decision of what priority of inevitably necessary sacrifices the global community is willing to agree on in order have a planet which is inhabitable.

CO2 emissions by humans less than 1% of total GHG. No science has ever proven if C02 causes warming or if it does by how much dispute hundreds of billions spent on research.

Austrralia’s new government dropped their carbon tax and disbanded departments related to the warming scam.

I wonder how much research money UNBC brings in riding the coat tailed of the warming scam?

No warming for over 17 years. Computer models did not see that coming. This whole warming scam is based on models not real world unadjusted data.

Sorry, but solar panels and wind farms won’t even come close to meeting the world’s demand for energy any time soon. Looks like we’ll have to keep relying on those ‘bad’ sources for some time.

I would suggest that the USA, the European Union, Africa, and other parts of the world are true International Embarrassments.

Canada is only the Bat Boy in the Big World Game.

Too often Canadians give the impression that we have some sort of **prestige** on the world stage. Sorry not so. We are nothing more than a flea on an Elephants ass.

It matters little who is our Prime Minister, because most of them have been fools or knaves, sliding down banisters, giving the finger to citizens,. Selling out our resources to multi nationals, and generally not being very intelligent.

Harper is the closest thing we have had to a real Prime Minister in many many years, however we are not smart enough to know the difference between a good or bad Prime Minister, because most of the information we get comes from, TV, Comics, or biased newspaper articles.

This Country is at the mercy of our trading partners. We do not have the ability to compete on the world stage, mainly because of the high cost of all our social programs, and of course the high cost of labour etc; Soooooo. We need the US, China, and other Countries to take our natural resouces to keep us afloat. Without these Countries, and especially the good old USA we would be dead in the water.

We as Canadians are great when is comes to spewing BS, however in the real world we make a very small mark.

The US Environmental Protection Agency states; “Greenhouse gases trap heat and make the planet warmer. Human activities are responsible for almost all of the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere over the last 150 years.[1] The largest source of greenhouse gas emissions from human activities in the United States is from burning fossil fuels for electricity, heat, and transportation.”

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/sources.html

They go on to state the amount of GHG emissions the US is contributing to the atmosphere by industry sector. Have a read seamutt… oh that’s right the US EPA is in a global wile conspiracy, long with main stream media, to propagate a global warming and GHG emission fairy tale tight seamutt?

Tin foil hat deniers always uncovering massive worldwide conspiracies… LOL

Well, one volcano eruption in Iceland contributed more pollution than man kind has done since the industrial revolution.

Where is Mankind going. What is going to happen. Well, I believe that there will be mass death in third world countries, and the have countries will loose the middle class. Our world population will peak at somewhere between 10 -12 billion, and then things will go sideways, where one will not be able to afford food, oil and water.

The general health of 95% of the population will be compromised due to starvation and a simple plague will reduce our world population down to 5 billion people. Than what would happen, our economy will collapse on itself, since consumption is reduced and expansion of market places will be near impossible.

The social movement will occur around the world where population control is implemented universally. Human health is under one world governing program.

People #1 – That was my point, the weak argument of why we rely on fossil fuels for energy. No energy source is perfect but some are a hell of a lot better then others. Yes the cost of solar/wind/tidal/geothermal is higher and they are not as efficient but how bad do have to screw up the environment before we move from the cheapest and easiest to the more environmentally conscious and sustainable sources?
The problem simply of course comes back to the worlds strongest economies are driven by fossil fuels (directly or indirectly). In BC we don’t burn much coal but we mine the hell out of it and sell it overseas for others to burn….adds a lot to our BC economy. You have to sell something to make money…..the argument goes round and round.

He spoke states; “Well, one volcano in Iceland contributes more pollution than man kind has since the industrial revolution.”

Science begs to differ with your opinion He spoke!

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php

In this link you will find the following bold statement;

“Do the Earth’s volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? Research findings indicate that the answer to this frequently asked question is a clear and unequivocal, “No.” Human activities, responsible for a projected 35 billion metric tons (gigatons) of CO2 emissions in 2010 (Friedlingstein et al., 2010), release an amount of CO2 that dwarfs the annual CO2 emissions of all the world’s degassing subaerial and submarine volcanoes (Gerlach, 2011).”

Thanks for your statement, I researched it and “learned” something today. I prefer to research first before I publicly state my opinions for fear of being wrong and eventually not being taken seriously in my future comments. Some times I make mistakes, but the majority of the time, when I come to a considered opinion, it is usually supported by facts.

At JBio; “yes the cost of solar/wind/tidal/geothermal is higher and they are not as efficient..”

I agree, the initial cost and outlay of investment is quite high, but over their lifetime it will be far less expensive than fossil fuels.

How much does sunlight cost as a source of energy, who owns it? How much does wind cost, or tidal currents, or geothermal energy sources cost, who owns them?

The answer is no one, no corporation or company owns sunlight, no corporation or company can own the wind… and those “free” sources of energy scares the cr*p out of BIL OIL & GAS Corporations.

Imagine that, energy sources that are free and can’t be owned by fossil fuel corporations which directly threaten their livelihood / source of income, what’s more these free energy sources that cannot be owned, are good for our environment… we simply can’t have that now can we?

People#1, time to come back from fantasy island. Your hypothetical energy utopia doesn’t currently exist. In the quest for green power, ontario and soon BC will face massive cost increases. This will impact your government check which you obviously rely on. Palpou nailed the Kyoto fiasco. How refreshing as a Canadian to have Harper stop the Kyoto charade and call a spade a spade.

If we switch over to green energy do we stop selling the other stuff? If we did we would all be poor……our other exports wouldn’t keep us afloat….2×4’s, Wheat, fish and Bieber…..lol.

Some people simply will not stand for the last comment I made, while it make sense, it will not put more money into someone’s pocket who invests significant amounts of their own money into fossil fuel companies on the open market… right dow7500?

Can’t make money off it, no sense using it right dow7500? When you get too many people like dow7500 running the show, who are only interested in a quick buck, our children’s future and our planet’s future suffers. When we talk about “free” energy sources that can’t be owned, this is very upsetting for someone like dow7500, who probably invests heavily in the OIL & GAS industry.

Anyway, back to supportable facts and science… did you know that Tar Sands Oil has the worst return on energy return on energy invested of all the world’s oil supply? You probably already heard this well know fact.

But did you know wind energy far surpasses Tar Sands Oil on the ratio of energy return on energy invested? Remember energy invested into getting energy out is an expense (cost). Thusly, wind energy is a far more efficient energy source than tar sands energy!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EROI_-_Ratio_of_Energy_Returned_on_Energy_Invested_-_USA.svg

Time to de-vest in your dirty oil and gas sector stocks, there is no “future” in them!

Actually JBio, if Canada changed it’s energy policy like the US has, there would be more than enough jobs offset in the green energy field.

Manufacturing of solar panels and windmills, installation, ongoing maintenance, heck that’s just Canada, lets be worldwide exporters of green energy infrastructures to other countries, lots of jobs if we manage it right!

What’s more… if we do it right we can make a future for our kids, their kids and this planet! I am proud to go on record in stating my position, why? Because it’s the direction we need to go, it’s the right direction!

People#1
Oh I agree it’s the direction we NEED to go. Eventually we will be forced that way….I don’t see intelligence winning and us actually making that choice……we need to be forced into it.

When have we ever managed anything right??? We don’t believe in value added….ship everything away RAW and buy it back at a premium.

Sure lets be worldwide exporters of green energy to other countries……which ones? The ones that use green energy are much further along then we are….they make their own. To make big money with those products we would have sell to the nations with the largest industrial output (energy used) like China…..who could make the products for a fraction of the price we could make them for anyways. The only thing currently we can make money off of is whatever China doesn’t have and can’t make itself (huge population and cheap labour always wins, especially as a society who wants what’s cheapest…walmart, dollar stores etc).

“if Canada changed it’s energy policy like the US has, there would be more than enough jobs offset in the green energy field”

So why is the rate of unemployment still higher in the USA than Canada?.

“The general health of 95% of the population will be compromised due to starvation and a simple plague will reduce our world population down to 5 billion people.

Than what would happen, our economy will collapse on itself, since consumption is reduced and expansion of market places will be near impossible.

========================================
All we have to do is pretend there is a war, or have an actual war of destroying all the substandard housing and other infrastructure and move into the housing and infrastructure which will be priced much lower and salaries will be much lower, etc ….. so, in effect, everything will stay relatively the same, except that quality will increase.

Then we start the cycle of regeneration over at a slower pace since less is required.

There will be an immediate shock, but the shock will likely not be that immediate.

Remember, western Europe has done quite well in the past 50 years with a very slow population increase in most countries. They are experts at that by now. So can we be.

People#1

this one of your sources of miss information http://joannenova.com.au/2013/09/david-suzuki-bombs-on-qa-knows-nothing-about-the-climate/

What is the ratio of natural C02 to Mann caused?

C02 only makes a fraction of 1% of GHG

Germanys economy almost went bust pursuing green energy and because of their misguided shut down of their nuclear power are building coal fired power plants as fast as they can.

Unreliable wind power cannot generate more than 20% of a grids total power otherwise the grid will go unstable.

How come an oil company gets fined for the accidental death of ducks but wind farms can get permits allowing them to kill eagles and other birds with their bird mincers.

Some of your world renowned scientists predicted the Arctic would be ice free this summer, not even close. Actually making a remarkable recovery after winds and currents caused the ice in some areas to move out of the arctic.

What is your computer made out of?

Green economy here is a note for ya, Pajamas Media has received a leaked internal assessment produced by Spain’s Zapatero administration. The assessment confirms the key charges previously made by non-governmental Spanish experts in a damning report exposing the catastrophic economic failure of Spain’s “green economy” initiatives.
On eight separate occasions, President Barack Obama has referred to the “green economy” policies enacted by Spain as being the model for what he envisioned for America.
Later came the revelation that Obama administration senior Energy Department official Cathy Zoi — someone with serious publicized conflict of interest issues — demanded an urgent U.S. response to the damaging report from the non-governmental Spanish experts so as to protect the Obama administration’s plans.
Most recently, U.S. senators have introduced the vehicle for replicating Spain’s unfolding economic meltdown here, in the form of the “American Power Act.”
But today’s leaked document reveals that even the socialist Spanish government now acknowledges the ruinous effects of green economic policy.

Did you know a wind farm only produces about 30% of its name plate rating over a year but coal, nuclear, hydro produce over 90%

Did you know that countries that invested heavily in wind power also install natural gas fired generators to back up wind power for when the wind don’t blow.

You are living in a utopia. China is heavily researching thorium nuclear power besides building conventional nuclear as fast as they can.

Hey what do you think of Gore’s hundreds of millions?

Oh do you know why warmers don’t debate, read about Suzuki above.

Say gus, for such a prolific poster of comments on this site, who frequently provides links to support your various / numerous areas of expertise,… why haven’t you once provided a link to support your position and assertions on the subject of this debate?

Here let me show you how a proper rebuttal is made to someone’s else’s assertions in a debate.

gus states; “So why is the rate of unemployment still higher in the USA than Canada?.” .. in reference to my comment about “If Canada changed its energy policies like the US there would be more than enough jobs being offset in the green energy field”

gus you do realize that the USA’s entire energy sector contributes only 1% of the USA’s GDP. Why would you even think that a oil and gas sector in the US that is so tiny in comparison to other sectors would have such a large impact on that country’s overall employment rates?

“It is definitely a positive for the economy, but one can overstate how much of a positive,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) Oil and gas production account for about 1 percent of gross domestic product, and will have a limited impact on the country’s unemployment, he said. *Bloomberg.com

Nuclear is the energy of the future, China and India get it.

Come on gus… step up to the plate, you are beginning to disappoint…

I post frequently on a “few” subjects that I am very familiar and very passionate about. My interests are in this area and those who have been around a while know that one of my first comment debates on this discussion board was on the subject of BIG OIL.

I have noticed you are a prolific commenter on a vast number of topics that come up on this news blog site. Perhaps we should refer to you as a “jack of all trades but a master of none”?

People1 here is some reading for you on the EPA, I have lots more

http://washingtonexaminer.com/op-ed-epas-carbon-regs-not-based-on-sound-science/article/2516956

“I post frequently on a “few” subjects that I am very familiar and very passionate about.”

Yep and clouds your reason. Do you understand the scientific method Peaple1?

Just where do you get your sources of information

Bang on seamutt.

People#1, your ignorance of reality is bizarre. The idea that green jobs will fuel our economy has been dis-proven in every jurisdiction that was stupid enough to believe it. I am all for efficient and the lowest environmental impact power possible. But perpetuating the green myth that all we need is windmills and solar panels to generate power and employment has been an abysmal failure.

By the way, wind is free, but the turbines are owned by companies trying to profit. Same as oil and gas, same as electric car companies. Your idea that I am pro oil because i may own oil stocks is a immature and blatantly unformed opinion.

I am a capitalist and am willing to make money from any venture that has the potential to be profitable. If that is wind turbines, so be it. But utopian ideals that are only remotely feasible due to massive government subsidies will always end badly for everyone.

Grow up people#1. This is an adult topic.

Ummmm…..this is “Opinion 250”, not “Dow7500’s Opinion 250”

“The idea that green jobs will fuel our economy has been dis-proven in every jurisdiction that was stupid enough to believe it.”

So tell me what those jurisdiction might be.

The idea that ANY single job category will fuel our economy is stupid.

Our economy at the moment is certainly fueled by energy, as people predicted many decades ago. One of these days the continuing prediction that it will be fueled by access to fresh water may also come true, who knows.

Green jobs are actually jobs that are primarily in the energy sector which includes exploration, extraction, refining & state change, transportation, conversion to final use in transportation and manufacturing, etc.

People are spending lots of money to improve ways of accessing oil and gas, “improving” oil and gas to bring it to market, finding ways to transport oil and gas more safely, recovering lands polluted by oil and gas, final design and manufacturing of tools we use in everyday life from airplanes to housing to manufacturing ,etc.

A job which designs improved car engines and airplane engines and lighter weight vehicles, etc. etc. are ALL green jobs. They are all SMART jobs, CLEAN jobs, etc.

Canada is known for its extraction because we have the raw products …. other countries which do not have those resources use their brains to figure out how to use less energy for more productivity.

This stuff is not as simple as you make it out to be. You want to make this an adult topic DOW7500, you have as much thinking to do as People#1 to get to that level of understanding!! ;-)

gov: “Ummmm…..this is “Opinion 250”

Umm, no it’s not and hasn’t been for quite some time. It’s 250News.

What is news is a matter of opinion ….. ;-)

What is a ‘green economy’? Seems like everyone has a differing *opinion* on what that even means.

Umm… I think the rest of you should know why dow7500 is acting like he has his underwear tied up in a knot… it’s because it is in a manner of speaking.

When dow7500 invests in OIL & GAS stocks, the value of those stocks are partly determined by “in-ground resources” or oil and gas reserves owned by the company.

It is vitally important that those companies be able to extract those reserves, produce it, and bring it to markets. So what if the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline and the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines are abandoned?

Can’t have over valued stocks in oil companies with “reserves” in the Alberta Tar Sands ground that they cannot access because the ability to ship, and thus produce those reserves, are severely limited. What will that do to the price of those oil company stocks? How much will their investors lose?

If the Keystone XL Pipeline is refused by the US government, all eyes will be on the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. And if that goes nowhere the the federal government (BIG OIL) is working on a plan B to transport that oil by train to our pristine BC Coast. The stakes are in the billions of dollars, how much and how hard an OIL & GAS lackey federal government is willing to push depends on the resistance I would guess, for money who cares about a few protestor’s lives hey dow7500?

For those that want to learn more about Oil and Gas Company valuation, reserves and production read this Oil & Gas Financial Journal article.

http://www.ogfj.com/articles/print/volume-9/issue-2/features/part-1-oil-and-gas-company.html

Why is People#1 so hard on Oil & Gas? They’re pretty much responsible directly and indirectly for our current standard of living and way of life.

250 NEWS
How observant of me
Thanks JB

The green myth of “green jobs” refers to jobs in the solar and wind areas gus. Oil companies have been improving exploitation techniques for decades. Same for car companies yet they were never referred to as “green jobs”. As for which jurisdictions have learned the hard way about the “green shift” try Ontario .The industry is a failure, the cost of power is exploding and the job losses in the rest of the economy have dwarfed the purported benefits.
Look at Spain, Germany all the money pissed away in the states supporting now bankrupt solar companies(solyndra)and electric car makers. Is that adult enough for ya,gus or should I dumb it down. You may want to get informed on the issues as supposed to semantics on definitions.

Peaple#1 why has Buffet invested heavily in railroads. You seem to be having a hard time refuting anyone here. Blind bias I guess.

On the right the land is being prepared for tar sands extraction. All the trees and vegetation has been removed, but that is not the end of removing “overburden”. Up to 20 meters of top soil must be removed as well to get to the oil sands.

In other words every single living thing that lays on top of those oil sands must be removed, this is not clear cut logging folks, that’s small potatoes when it comes to oil sands extraction.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=qo81-k3bbgy9oM&tbnid=XzM0uz1sLeh6DM:&ved=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stopthenorthamericanunion.com%2FNewsletters%2F100311.html&ei=mXFDUtSuI8KhigLCuYGQBA&psig=AFQjCNHHWJcCKdBBu_ERCFjFOEGLGN6yDQ&ust=1380238105627223

Wow what everyone of considers “nature: must be removed, this includes lakes and swamps and peat moss thousands of years in the making… and BIG OIL’s response? We restore it all. Sure, without nowhere near the bio-diversity the area once had.

Take a good long look at this next picture because this is potentially what an entire area the size of England and Wales will look like in Alberta.

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://brightgreenscotland.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/TarSandsDestruction.jpg&imgrefurl=http://brightgreenscotland.org/index.php/2012/02/fuel-quality-directive-vote-today-uk-government-green-or-mean/&h=333&w=500&sz=175&tbnid=pdOjmAvRDUcB3M:&tbnh=120&tbnw=180&zoom=1&usg=__NlpTJpSIdOSUOfSBxbVi3fJWC0U=&docid=u_PLtkG5bIxccM&sa=X&ei=hnFDUtO8JIa5igKKuYDoAw&ved=0CDAQ9QEwAQ

That is the immediate consequences of tar sands oil expansion, when this topic appears next on 250 NEWS, I will comment on the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline being the needle an oil addicted China needs to expand it’s economy… it’s all about money folks… forget everything else including our children’s and planet’s future!

Peaple what kind of impact does windfarms and solar farms have on the affected ecology?

Seamutt; I wish we were as advanced as India when it comes to installing solar panels over irrigation canals to prevent water evaporation, but we are far from something as “advanced” and “forward thinking” as what is taking place in the picture and article I am posting:

http://gigaom.com/2012/04/23/a-solar-canal-rises-in-india/

Not a chance of this happening in Canada with BIG OIL / Harper running the show!!!

from Peoples article:
“The state, which encourages solar energy installation by guaranteeing premium prices for the solar electricity”

Sounds alot like our IPPs doesnt it? Oh but this is ok because its solar – got it.

The size of England and Wales people#1?? Exaggeration has always been the hallmark of the greens. Don’t let facts get in the way.

The oilsands have been producing sense the 70″s, all be it at much lower levels. Now its the poster child for the green movement. China decimates their environment, not a peep. Nigerian oil production that is nowhere near our environmental standards, whatever. The fact the us Coal industry and power production spew exponentially more carbon the fort mac, no problem. The hypocrisy of the greens and the likes of Robert Redford is off the charts.

Come on people refute something. Describe your lifestyle?

Aren’t you getting tired of being wrong dow7500? The physical size of the Alberta Tar Sands is 142,200 square km.

The size of England is only 130,439 square km. Here hope this credible source helps you figure your facts out!

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Europe/United-Kingdom-LOCATION-SIZE-AND-EXTENT.html

Nice high road approach dow7500, point out a couple of other countries like China and Nigeria that have very poor environmental records to justify our own worse record. As a citizen of Canada I expect our country to aspire to higher environmental standards than those other countries, just as much as I expect our country to have higher “Human Rights” standards than both of those countries you mentioned.

Your approach dow7500 seems to be; lets point out the “lowest common denominator” and aspire to that level. Wow… just wow!

“Oil companies have been improving exploitation techniques for decades”

Bit of a Freudian slip there isn’t it, DOW7500??? … LOL

“The green myth of “green jobs” refers to jobs in the solar and wind areas gus”

So if you use that definition, go ahead. You will be arguing with yourself and you will be missing a large part of the economy.

There are many parts of the world which are better off than we are, yet have no natural resources, other than the resources of brains and muscles.

Where does the machinery for the oil fields come from? Where does the steel for the pipelines come from? Where does the equipment to push gas and oil through the pipelines and monitor its movement and properties come from? I can go on and on.

Many people focus on leakage from pipelines and refineries. I focus on money leakage from the infrastructure needed to extract the resources both for products and services.

The benefactors of the resources we send out of this country, both the initial movement and the end uses are not primarily Canadians, but people in other countries.

If that were not the case, then Alberta would not be operating deficit economies time after time.

Canada has regulated oil and gas development which needs some improvement. The granola munchers don’t realize where commodities for the green energy industry comes from. The mining methods used in getting these commodities makes our oil and gas industry look pretty good!

Gus, name some jurisdictions that have “no natural resources” and are better off than we are.

Exploitation was not “Freudian” o wise one. It’s a common term in the oil patch when describing the best production method for a certain field. Just underscores how little of the oil and gas business you really have a clue about.

Further more Gus, your nationalist approach to resource extraction died with the privatization of Petro Canada, CN, Air Canada, Potash, etc. It was obvious it didn’t work, yet somehow in your central planning comments, it is the road of the enlightened.

Canada’s privatization plans were mostly all failures designed more to line the pockets of Bay Street than for the national interest. Look at Lac Magantic and the rail car shortages in BC’s resource industry, the high airfare prices, and our hsotage situation with big oil.

Of course there are countries that do it without resources… look at South Korea, Singapore, Switzerland, and Israel to name a few.

People#1, the oilsands are not bigger than England. There may be claims that are bigger than England, but most certainly, the production foot print is tiny in comparison.

That would be like saying that northern BC is one open pit mine because most of it has mineral claims.

Peaple that is oil sands not tar sands. Oil sands the area of England and Wales, not near the size of exsisting mines. Oh nature produced the oil sands not man. You seem to be confused about that.

“Gus, name some jurisdictions that have “no natural resources” and are better off than we are.”

CIA factsbook – I like that source because it has a relatively constant measure applied to countries of the world.

First 10 GDP per capita (US$) plus primary income source(s)

1Qatar$103,900 2012 est.oil, gas, diversification from energy

2Liechtenstein$89,400 2009 est.financial services
3Bermuda$86,000 2011 est.financial services

4Macau$82,400 2011 est.world class gaming centre
5Luxembourg$81,100 2012 est.manufacturing and financial services

6Monaco$70,700 2011tourist, gaming, banking
7Singapore$61,400 2012 est.electronics, IT, pharmaceuticals, financial services
8Jersey$57,000 2005 est.financial services, agriculture, tourism

9Norway$55,900 2012 est.oil, gas, forests, minerals, large state sector employment

10Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas)$55,400 2002 est.fish licenses and tourism

Number and 8 are fossil energy based …. most others are service and goods based.

Next 10

11Brunei$55,300 2012 est.oil and gas

12Isle of Man$53,800 2007 est.high tech and financial services, tourism

13Hong Kong$52,300 2012 est.trade – goods and services and re-exports

14United States$50,700 2012 est.diversified high tech – medicine, computer & aerospace technology

15United Arab Emirates$49,800 2012 est.recent diversification to 30% oil and gas
16Switzerland$46,200 2012 est.financial services and high tech manufacturing

17Guernsey$44,600 2005financial services, tourism
18Cayman Islands$43,800 2004 est.tourism, financial services

19Canada$43,400 2012 est.similar to USA with large exports of resources and manufacturing to USA
20Australia$43,300 2012 est.resources to Asia and large service sector

=======================
four of those have large resource sectors. The USA has the added advantage of having a large internal market with Canada having access to that large market

================================
So, 6 of the top 20 have “natural” resources, including energy, while the rest have “natural” resources based on human brains …….. SMART economies.

BTW, Norway is doing so well with its energy resources primarily because, unlike Canada the “nationalist approach to resource extraction” did not die. Thus the money did not go to Bermuda, the Caymans etc. but staid in Norway for the benefit of the people in whose country the resources were found ….. weird concept, I know ….. ;-)

The next 10

21 Austria $ 43,100 2012 est.

22 Gibraltar $ 43,000 2006 est.

23 Netherlands $ 42,900 2012 est.

24 Ireland $ 42,600 2012 est.

25 British Virgin Islands $ 42,300 2010 est.

26 Sweden $ 41,900 2012 est.

27 Kuwait $ 40,500 2012 est.

28 Iceland $ 39,900 2012 est.

29 Germany $ 39,700 2012 est.

30 Taiwan $ 39,400 2012 est.

Oh, in case you did not know, Ireland and Kuwait are the ones with the fossil fuels.

So, eight out of 30 have substantial fossil fuels …. the rest make their money from the fossils who like to golf and fish for swordfish.

If GDP per capita is your metric, than you are correct. I would submit that including Macau and the offshore banking jurisdictions situated on a small island are irrelevant comparisons to the Canadian situation. Further, there are very few of these countries that I would remotely consider over Canada. But that’s just me and hardly scientific.