And you think that's healthy for the environment?
Is it the drilling that is bad for the environment or the product?
As you are well aware I don't buy into the CO2 hooey BUT I want to be clear that I fully support clean air, water and soil.
There is a by-product of fossil fuels which we rarely hear mentioned which is truly something I'm concerned about and that is sulfur.
Sulfur is what seperates sweet crude (low sulfur content) heavy crude and oil sands bitumen (high sulfur content)
What is being done about sulfur content? Plenty but we just don't hear about it enough thanks to the overzealous marketing of CO2 as the biggest environmental culprit.
The current investment into desulfurization R&D is heavy. Upgrading which is a desulfurization process turns heavy crude and bitumen into a high grade low sulfur product.
Upgrading tech is making leaps and bounds to achieve a product that is of remarkably good quality.
Are the oil companies and Fed researchers doing it soley for environment purposes? To be honest the answer is yes and no. The sulfur extracted during upgrading is a very very valuable asset and is sold to offset the high cost of upgrading.
If enviro groups wanted to make a real impact they'd put sulfur first and foremost because the impacts of sulfur reduction are immediate and benefit all of us on this goofy planet today
Sulfur affects all of us in the here and now not through hypotheticals and potentials like CO2.
The sulfur issue is real.
A final note to the CO2 bandwagoneers who think we still live ni the 70s......SMARTEN THE **** UP!