Quote: Originally Posted by ironsides
But still the lakes continue to grow. Those dams will not last forever. I don't support getting oil from the oil sands using present technology, water is to precious to waste extracting oil.
So... The settling ponds will last even less time than the dams.
Extraction techniques for the conventional supply use lots of water as well. Take a look at the operations in and around Bakersfield in California. If you are this concerned, you will definitely want to shut-in all operation in that heavy field... Here's a golden opportunity to do what's right. Unlike the majority of the conventional oil projects, the water that is used by the oil sands operators is recycled over and over from the tailing ponds.
The destruction of the environment relative to the development of communities and urban sprawl represent a more vast destruction of the environment and on a basis that is more permanent relative to the oil sands.
You might want to learn about the reality of the oil sands operations prior to swallowing the eco-pap that results from the massive green-washing that is going on.
Quote: Originally Posted by ironsides
One alternative is using the oil we now have both on & off shore, South Eastern U.S. as well as California and Texas have massive reserves. Oilsands can wait, water is more important than oil. In the U.S. Colorado, North Dakota and even California do not have to support each others economy separately, we are one country with all 50 states supporting the one. Here the goverment (everyone) cleans up major environmental disasters or bury those to big to clean up forever. It is time to stop thinking about today and start thinking about tomorrow. The ducks (and other animals) are only the barometer of what is happening. Without fresh water we all die. Can't believe that I just said that because I do not consider myself a environmentalist, but facts are facts.
The USA relies on foreign oil to maintain and drive their economy. The only real areas that remain for development in the continental USA that are currently undeveloped and have sufficient volumes are located in highly sensitive lands, National Parks and offshore targets in Alaska.
Your State department has been changing their tune recently regarding "dirty oil" (whatever the hell dirty is). Regardless, in the last year, there has been a big push on building a pipeline to Canada's West coast to supply the Asian markets. Every time that the State department rattled their sabre, the project got fast tracked a little more.... You'll notice that the US feds have been conspicuously silent about "dirty oil" in the last while. The message here is that your federal government understands that they will be depending on oil sands oil to run their economy. The last thing that they want is to be forced to compete in a price war with China and India for access to the stable long-term supply.
The reality is this. If you don't want the consequences associated with oil/gas consumption: Stop using it.... support the development of alternatives and minimize your consumption until such time that your society can fully ween themselves off of oil.
That's a very tall order
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy
Nice piece of Suncor Public Relations. Have you got any independent and reliable studies that can back that up?
I posted some links to pictures of the enviro destruction associated with hydro, nuclear and wind power... I'm a little curious, where is your outrage and condemnation of those terrible, horrible industries?
Am I right in believing that your scorn is reserved exclusively for the oil/gas industry?
Is the value of those dead animals killed by those alternative energy generation techniques considered less than the ducks that died on the ponds?