U.S. ambassador in Alberta to learn about oilsands

[Johnnny]

CANOE Money - News: U.S. ambassador in Alberta to learn about oilsands

CALGARY - The new U.S. ambassador to Canada is in Alberta to learn more about oilsands.
David Jacobson is scheduled to talk Wednesday to industry experts and tour the oilsands region.
Jacobson, speaking during a stop in Calgary today, says he's already been told about the role the oilsands play in Alberta's economy.
He also says he understands the need to strike a balance between the economy and the environment.
He will provide a detailed report on oilsands production to officials in Washington.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who met earlier this month with Jacobson, said the two agreed to keep the lines of communication open on a range of issues, including the economy, border security and continental energy issues.

it seems the American ambassador is more concerned about the environment then harper is : /

 

[TenPenny]

That's an idiotic conclusion. My coffee cup is on my desk, does that mean there's soup in the kitchen?

 

[Kakato]

CANOE Money - News: U.S. ambassador in Alberta to learn about oilsands


it seems the American ambassador is more concerned about the environment then harper is : /

Our environmental laws,rules and regs are some of the toughest in the world so maybe find another reason for your harper hate fest.

 

[#juan]

I hope they can come to some kind of reasonable aggreement. Right now the tar sands is an ecological disaster that polutes more that a lot of countries. The Americans want the oil now but do they want to pay for the clean up later?

 

[Johnnny]

meh the conservatives i dont trust them and thats all im going to say about it. call it a hate fest..

And they dont take the environment seriously

 

[Kakato]

meh the conservatives i dont trust them and thats all im going to say about it. call it a hate fest..

And they dont take the environment seriously

That must be why i have to fill out ten permits before you can even touch the ground with a shovel,want to use some water? sorry,thats about a weeks worth of permits.

You obviously dont know much about our environmental rules and regs.
I dont see them relaxing at all either.

 

[Kakato]

I hope they can come to some kind of reasonable aggreement. Right now the tar sands is an ecological disaster that polutes more that a lot of countries. The Americans want the oil now but do they want to pay for the clean up later?

They have to pay reclamation bonds just like all the other investors in the oilsands,in most cases the land is put back better then it was found.

 

[Johnnny]

yea you have to fill out 100000 permits to dig a hole, but from what i read about the oil sands the big companies just cut big cheques to ignore environemntal damage and those permits you talk about get handed to them...

 

[karrie]

it seems the American ambassador is more concerned about the environment then harper is : /

Or more concerned with appearances.... 'Look, we toured it. We've actually been there and seen with our own eyes, that it's all okay. Now will you stop complaining?'

 

[Johnnny]

Oilsands damage is ignored

Getting oil from Alberta's oilsands involves a heavy cost in terms of destruction of forest habitat, use of water, dangers of air pollution and acid rain, and production of greenhouse gases.
One example: Oilsands companies currently use 20 billion litres of groundwater a year to get the bitumen out of the ground and process it. They are licensed to use 75 billion litres a year, and as more projects come onstream, groundwater use will escalate.
Yet as Brooymans points out, the Alberta government doesn't have a good inventory of the province's groundwater -- where it is and how much is down there. Surely it's reckless to proceed with commitments to oilsands companies without having a clear understanding of the precious water resource we're giving to them

thats the information im using and will continue to go off of. And i will summarize with this. The provincial government isnt doing a good job. but harpers in charge so im looking at him to be leading...

 

[Kakato]

yea you have to fill out 100000 permits to dig a hole, but from what i read about the oil sands the big companies just cut big cheques to ignore environemntal damage and those permits you talk about get handed to them...

No,they dont just get handed to them.
There are rules and regs that HAVE to be followed and most outfits go above and beyond meeting or exceeding them.When I was inspecting for Encanna there was the govt. rules to follow and then there is their rules which are far more stringent then the governments.
And the guy handing out the permits is the guy that is going to get the fine if things arent done right.

Farmers on the other hand are mostly exempt and are far worse polluters then the oilsands because they are exempt.

 

[Johnnny]

look in Sudbury they follow the rules but when you go to some of the areas lone wolf pointed out or check it out well, lets just say it isnt government regulated...

And thats where i stand, you have points and the articles and people i talk too who have been out there have there points.

 

[Tonington]

They have to pay reclamation bonds just like all the other investors in the oilsands,in most cases the land is put back better then it was found.

I'm curious, how do you make land better than nature did?

 

[Kakato]

Oilsands damage is ignored

thats the information im using and will continue to go off of. And i will summarize with this. The provincial government isnt doing a good job. but harpers in charge so im looking at him to be leading...

The oilsands are mainly still just another strip mine,anyone whos worked in one knows it's not rocket science.
The reclamation Shell has done is nothing short of excellent,when I worked for them in 82 they were continually winning the jade award in BC for their reclamation.

Now if you want to see horrible reclamation then I suggest you look ate Estevan Saskatchewans open pit mines after their done with them.
I could find you lots of other examples of bad environmental practices that for some reason get ignored because they arent in Alberta.
Anyone who thinks shell doesnt care about the environment hasnt ever worked for them.Their rules,policies and procedures are way tougher then the govt.

 

[DurkaDurka]

I'm curious, how do you make land better than nature did?

Put up a walmart. :roll:

 

[Kakato]

I'm curious, how do you make land better than nature did?

They make grass grow where none would before because of the bitumen,thats forage for the animals for one.These days you cant displace any animals,fish,birds etc. and if even one inch of land is made unusable then one inch of land somewhere else will be made useable.if a creek is to be moved,another with the same flow will be created somewhere else.

At least in Alberta,B.C. and the N.W.T. its like that.
Im not sure about the other provinces.
Habitats have to be replaced and nesting birds have to be left in place untill they fledge out.

 

[kryptic]

I'm curious, how do you make land better than nature did?

Well I can help answer that, since I do/did it on a daily basis (hey its slow right now).

Anyways, top soil has a tendency to get run off hills and into valleys making it 2 inches thick on top and 2 feet thick in the valley... so on the reclamation I put it back far more evenly. If there is small old trees on the ground and you run them over and chew them up with your tracks its just like adding an organic mulch to the soil, then with replanting of trees, they have a fresh start with lots of nutrients. Just like nature, but faster is all.

They may be small things, but it kinda shows you how it can be a bit better anyways.

Some of us do care.

 

[karrie]

I'm curious, how do you make land better than nature did?

lol... well, as hubby said this morning... 'you gotta get SOMEone to clean up that damn nasty oil spill. Can't just leave all that oil sitting there to possibly contaminate the ground water.'

 

[Kakato]

Well I can help answer that, since I do/did it on a daily basis (hey its slow right now).

Anyways, top soil has a tendency to get run off hills and into valleys making it 2 inches thick on top and 2 feet thick in the valley... so on the reclamation I put it back far more evenly. If there is small old trees on the ground and you run them over and chew them up with your tracks its just like adding an organic mulch to the soil, then with replanting of trees, they have a fresh start with lots of nutrients. Just like nature, but faster is all.

They may be small things, but it kinda shows you how it can be a bit better anyways.

Some of us do care.

You got her bud.I just finished a gig with altalink planting 85 foot poles on the side of the mountains.We allways go back and see how its doing and grass is usually back in a week.
That seems to be the consensus among operators,contractors and everyone now,do a good job,make it look nice or better if possible.Things have changed a lot since 1978 when I started working.

 

[Tonington]

They make grass grow where none would before because of the bitumen,thats forage for the animals for one.These days you cant displace any animals,fish,birds etc. and if even one inch of land is made unusable then one inch of land somewhere else will be made useable.if a creek is to be moved,another with the same flow will be created somewhere else.

So, when the land is reclaimed, you're replacing a mixed forest with grass, and this is supposed to be better? You've reduced the biodiversity, and this is supposed to be better? You've displaced the food webs in the area, and changed the habitat, and you expect the same food webs to be re-established, and actually better than before?

This does not compute.