Revealed: Canadian government spent millions on secret tar sands advocacy

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Did they just say 'tar sands' ?

OMG someone call the wahmbulance.


Revealed: Canadian government spent millions on secret tar sands advocacy

Canada’s Conservative government spent several million dollars on a tar sands advocacy fund as its push to export the oil faltered, documents reveal.

In its 2013 budget, the government invested $30 million over two years on public relations advertising and domestic and international “outreach activities” to promote Alberta’s tar sands.

The outreach activities, which cost $4.5 million and were never publicly disclosed, included efforts to “advance energy literacy amongst BC First Nations communities.”

The Harper government has been trying to ship tar sands to the British Columbia coast via two pipelines, Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan, which scores of First Nations communities have pledged to block because of environmental and economic concerns.

With Canada’s federal election in full swing, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been on the defensive over hisbackingof the tar sands, which have derailed the country’s emissions reduction targets and, since the crash of oil prices, destabilized its economy.

According to the government documents, other outreach activities included research to support Canadian lobbying against a European environmental measure that would have hampered tar sands exports. Canada has succeeded in delaying the measure - the EU Fuel Quality Directive - several times.

The government also partnered with the International Energy Agency to “advance knowledge” about unconventional fuels like fracked shale gas, which several Canadian provinces have passed moratoriums against.

The documents were included in a July 2014 policy binder that was prepared for the incoming Natural Resources Canada Deputy Minister and revealed through a freedom of information (FOI) request. Alongside its advocacy, the government spent $22 million on a previously reported advertising campaign to promote the tar sands in the United States, Europe and Asia.

Despite the documents saying evaluations showed the US-based advertising was successful, TransCanada is expecting US President Obama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline that would cross the United States.

The documents indicate the government was funding dozens of projects between 2014 and 2015 to engage Indigenous communities and advance “Canada’s reputation as a global energy leader.”

Natural Resources Canada declined, however, to explain to the Guardian what these projects were.

This weekend Harper and several Conservative politicians launched an attack on a New Democratic Party (NDP) candidate who suggested that the exploitation of Alberta’s deposits may need to be curbed for Canada to meet its climate targets.

Bank of England governor Mark Carney and other high-profile figures like the United Nations climate chief have warned that the “vast majority of [global] reserves are unburnable.”

Scientific studies show that 85 percent of the tar sands should stay in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change tipping points.

While the Harper government has staked its economic vision on the full development of the Alberta tar sands, a crash in oil prices created a budgetary crisis in early 2015 and contributed to a contraction of the Canadian economy, which many economists say is in a recession.

Harper’s critics have argued it would be more sound economics to support the clean energy sector, which already provides more employment in Canada than the oil sector. Investment in clean energy can provide 6 to 8 times more jobs than similar investment in the oil industry.

During Harper’s reign, the oil industry has gained unprecedented access to policy-making. Adopting reforms lobbied for by the oil industry, the Conservative government passed legislation dismantling a generation of environmental regulations to ensure resource projects could be more easily approved.

The Conservative government has also targeted environmental and Indigenous organizations with arbitrary audits, muzzled government scientists, slashed funding to its Environment department and reduced its capacity for climate change monitoring.

“The Harper government gutted environmental laws and destroyed public faith in the regulatory system in order to fast-track pipelines, then wasted $30 million of public money on a public relations campaign doomed to fail. They seem to think that if they spend enough money, they can fool all of the people all of the time but that kind of arrogance is a risky re-election strategy at a time of low oil prices and rising concern over climate change,” said Keith Stewart, a Greenpeace climate analyst, who obtained the documents through FOI.

The opposition NDP, which is close to the Conservatives in election polls, has drawn attention to the economic drawbacks of heavy reliance on the export of tar sands. Under the Harper government, surging oil prices and exports led to the rise of the Canadian dollar, which contributed to the hollowing out of Canadian manufacturing, including the lose of hundreds of thousands of jobs – a case of resource mismanagement that economists have labelled the Dutch Disease.

Bank of American Merrill Lynch released a report last year that backed up these arguments, pointing to the loss of Canada’s factory production and jobs as a “key symptom of Canada’s Dutch Disease.”


Revealed: Canadian government spent millions on secret tar sands advocacy | Environment | The Guardian
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,389
11,448
113
Low Earth Orbit
Bad math and even worse chronology....


What year was Harper elected?

From the mid-1980s to September 2003, the inflation adjusted price of a barrel of crude oil on NYMEX was generally under $25/barrel. Then, during 2004, the price rose above $40, and then $50. A series of events led the price to exceed $60 by August 11, 2005, leading to a record-speed hike that reached $75 by the middle of 2006. Prices then dropped back to $60/barrel by the early part of 2007 before rising steeply again to $92/barrel by October 2007, and $99.29/barrel for December futures in New York on November 21, 2007.[1] Throughout the first half of 2008, oil regularly reached record high prices.[2][3][4][5] Prices on June 27, 2008, touched $141.71/barrel, for August delivery in the New York Mercantile Exchange, amid Libya's threat to cut output, and OPEC's president predicted prices may reach $170 by the Northern summer.[6][7] The most recent price per barrel maximum of $147.02 was reached on July 11, 2008.[8] After falling below $100 in the late summer of 2008, prices rose again in late September. On September 22, oil rose over $25 to $130 before settling again to $120.92, marking a record one-day gain of $16.37. Electronic crude oil trading was temporarily halted by NYMEX when the daily price rise limit of $10 was reached, but the limit was reset seconds later and trading resumed.[9] By October 16, prices had fallen again to below $70, and on November 6 oil closed below $60.[10] Then in 2009, prices went slightly higher, although not to the extent of the 2005-2007 crisis, exceeding $100 in 2011 and most of 2012. Since late 2013 the oil price has fallen below the $100 mark, plummeting below the $50 mark one year later.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
G20 countries pay over $1,000 per citizen in fossil fuel subsidies

 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
We don't have subsidies.

The vast fossil fuel subsidies estimated by the IMF for 2015 include payments, tax breaks and cut-price fuel. But the largest part is the costs left unpaid by polluters and picked up by governments, including the heavy impacts of local air pollution and the floods, droughts and storms being driven by climate change.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
You know that tax credit Harper's giving on first time home buyers?

That's a subsidy.