U.S. ambassador in Alberta to learn about oilsands

[Kakato]

What was the impact of DDT?

Evidence?

Anyone who disturbs the ground in Alberta has to have a level 2 ground disturbance certificate except farmers,thats the law.
If you like I can scan all my piles of Albertas acts and regulations,or you can ask anyone with a GD ticket.
Its common knowledge to anyone in Alberta who moves the earth.
Because farmers dont need permits they arent monitored as heavy for non compliance.

 

[Kakato]

To make it easy for you to understand here is an example: take a piece of wood and throw it in the ocean or on the ground. come back 20 years later and see how much is left. Now take some plastic and perform the same procedure.
Here's another, take 40,000,000 liters of wood and let it spill into the ocean and see what happens. Now take 40,000,000 liters of oil and spill it into the ocean and see what happens. That was the Exxon Valdez spill.

Ya,the oilsands are to blame for the exxon Valdez and plastic in the ocean:roll:

 

[AnnaG]

Anyone who disturbs the ground in Alberta has to have a level 2 ground disturbance certificate except farmers,thats the law.
If you like I can scan all my piles of Albertas acts and regulations,or you can ask anyone with a GD ticket.
Its common knowledge to anyone in Alberta who moves the earth.
Because farmers dont need permits they arent monitored as heavy for non compliance.

What's the impact of DDT?
Good for the farmers, because I'd say their actions have had a lot less bad impact on ecologies than oil has.

 

[AnnaG]

Ya,the oilsands are to blame for the exxon Valdez and plastic in the ocean:roll:

That's not what I said, so quit trying to twist things to suit your view.

You asked if I could show how oil is worse than wood products and farming, remember?

 

[Tonington]

Thats right and it's such a small thing but some will condem the oilsands if one single organism is killed.
The proof is in the pictures,the boreal forests and grasslands that have been reclaimed are doing just fine.

What!? First of all, mycorrhizal communities are not made up of one species.

The proof is in the pictures? That explains some of the ridiculous things you've said.

I will explain to you why pictures don't say everything is fine. The boreal trees produce energy for themselves, and other creatures in the forest through photosynthesis. The primary producers (plants/bacteria who create their own food from sunlight and soil/atmosphere inputs) produce sugars. Everyone knows that. Very few people know the full pathway. You don't find phosphate in any of the simplified photosynthesis reactions. But all animals require phosphate to convert sugars to energy, and plants require phosphate to create sugars from carbon dioxide and water.

The mycorrhiza in the soil helps trees obtain the mineral nutrients they need. Inorganic phosphate is poorly absorbed by plant roots. The surface area is not conducive to efficient diffusion of the phosphate ion. So, the mycorrhizal community helps facilitate this. In return, they have access to the carbohydrates that they helped the plant produce from inorganic nutrients. The study you linked to shows that the soil is poor compared to undisturbed soil as far as nutrient availability goes, and with even fewer of these fungi, that exacerbates the problem.

This is a symbiotic relationship. The base of the food webs is dependent on the nutrients this symbiotic relationship provides. Your pictures may show a tree growing in the ground, but it doesn't say anything about reduced nutrient levels inthe forest. It doesn't say anything about the carrying capacity of the new ecosystem.

I said this to you very early on in this thread, without nutrient fluxes, and species richness, your pictures are just hand waiving.

The study you just linked shows that in fact the nutrient fluxes are not returned to their natural state. The ecosystems are poor in comparison.

 

[#juan]

Oil Corporations have recently tried to rebrand tar sands into “oil sands”. Tar sands is a better name, simply because even after the process of tar sand extraction, separation, ‘upgrading’, shipping, refining, and selling it as a petroleum product is completed at no stage throughout is it a regular “oil”, but once upgraded it is a synthetic oil. It becomes through this long process developed into a synthetic crude oil which can be expensively converted into a petroleum or other oil-based derivative of energy. Tar is used to seal your roof and similar structures in the world today; tar sands that ooze right onto the surface were used by local indigenous nations many centuries ago to patch their canoes and prevent leaks.

 

[Kakato]

Oil Corporations have recently tried to rebrand tar sands into “oil sands”. Tar sands is a better name, simply because even after the process of tar sand extraction, separation, ‘upgrading’, shipping, refining, and selling it as a petroleum product is completed at no stage throughout is it a regular “oil”, but once upgraded it is a synthetic oil. It becomes through this long process developed into a synthetic crude oil which can be expensively converted into a petroleum or other oil-based derivative of energy. Tar is used to seal your roof and similar structures in the world today; tar sands that ooze right onto the surface were used by local indigenous nations many centuries ago to patch their canoes and prevent leaks.

Man,you are ignorant. Theres no tar in the oilsands.

Oil Sands, Oilsands or Tarsands?

The hydrocarbon mixtures found in northern Alberta have historically been referred to as tar, pitch or asphalt.

Oil sands, oilsands or tarsands?​

However, 'oil sands' (two words) is now used most often to describe the naturally occurring bitumen deposits. This helps distinguish it from the other terms like tar sands, which are associated with distilled or man-made products, such as the mixtures used to pave roads.
Oil sands is an accurate term because bitumen, a heavy petroleum product is mixed with the sand. It makes sense to describe the resource as oil sands because oil is what is finally derived from the bitumen.

 

[gerryh]

Still ignoring the facts presented to dispute your claims and just nitpicking over definitions I see.

 

[Kakato]

What's the impact of DDT?
Good for the farmers, because I'd say their actions have had a lot less bad impact on ecologies than oil has.

Most peeps remember the affect in the 70's or saw it like I did.
First the gophers were poisoned,then the birds of prey died from eating the gophers and up the food chain it went.
The eagles,hawks and other birds of prey have just started coming back about 5 years ago.
In the late 70's you would be lucky to see an eagle a day,now their all over the place.

I see farmers spraying human **** on their fields still,try that in the patch and see what happens.

 

[Kakato]

Still ignoring the facts presented to dispute your claims and just nitpicking over definitions I see.

Hard to explain anything to a person that cant tell the difference between an open pit mine and a well.

 

[AnnaG]

Tar Sands Basics

 

[gerryh]

Hard to explain anything to a person that cant tell the difference between an open pit mine and a well.

"I" pointed out how in the opening of the study that YOU suppied how it gave lie to your claims. Tonnington delved deeper into the study and pointed out how it gave lie to your claims, yet you ignore statements from the study that YOU supplied. It is YOU that has the problem understanding the implications. From your responses it is obvious that it is YOU that doesn't understand, either wilfully or through your inability to understand the science. Which is it? Are you willfully ignoring the facts or do you not understand the science?

 

[Kakato]

Tar Sands Basics

Sorry but theres no tar in the oilsands.
Wiki it if you want,tar is manmade.

 

[AnnaG]

Most peeps remember the affect in the 70's or saw it like I did.
First the gophers were poisoned,then the birds of prey died from eating the gophers and up the food chain it went.
The eagles,hawks and other birds of prey have just started coming back about 5 years ago.
In the late 70's you would be lucky to see an eagle a day,now their all over the place.

Yeah, and oil spills still affect areas decades l;ater too. So how are they any better than DDT? Are we still using DDT? Are we still using petroleum products?

I see farmers spraying human **** on their fields still,try that in the patch and see what happens.

If humans don't eat poisons, human shyte is no more harmful to environments as any other feces.

 

[Kakato]

"I" pointed out how in the opening of the study that YOU suppied how it gave lie to your claims. Tonnington delved deeper into the study and pointed out how it gave lie to your claims, yet you ignore statements from the study that YOU supplied. It is YOU that has the problem understanding the implications. From your responses it is obvious that it is YOU that doesn't understand, either wilfully or through your inability to understand the science. Which is it? Are you willfully ignoring the facts or do you not understand the science?

I look at the end product,nice lush forest growing,thick grass.
Compared to some of the sites i have been on the last 30 years I would give them an A+ for reclamation.

 

[AnnaG]

Hard to explain anything to a person that cant tell the difference between an open pit mine and a well.

I said the effect is the same, not the process. Idiot. The effect is to take something buried in the ground out.

 

[AnnaG]

Sorry but theres no tar in the oilsands.
Wiki it if you want,tar is manmade.

It wasn't from wiki and you'd have noticed that if you'd even clicked it. But, whatever. This is simple minded nitpicking about definitions, not discussion.

 

[Spade]

Yes they were planning on useing nukes,glad that didnt fly and they are oilsands,not tarsands.
Tar is a man made mixture so anyone who uses that term instead of the c
orrect one is allready showing bias or just plain ignorance.

Geez, I've never heard of the Labria Oil Pits.

Euphemisms I've learnt to love.

Nuisance grounds instead of Garbage dumps.
Madams instead of Old hookers
Seniors instead of the Aged
Visiting the queen instead of Going to the crapper.
Oil sands instead of Tar sands

 

[AnnaG]

I look at the end product,nice lush forest growing,thick grass.
Compared to some of the sites i have been on the last 30 years I would give them an A+ for reclamation.

Yeah well, you've shown your qualifications for science. Your A+ is about a D to a scientist.
As far as appearances goes, I could show you a picture of a cedar with root rot and a pic of a cedar without root rot and you wouldn't know the difference unless someone told you.
A cat with a blown engine looks pretty much the same as a cat with a good engine.

 

[Kakato]

Yeah well, you've shown your qualifications for science. Your A+ is about a D to a scientist.
As far as appearances goes, I could show you a picture of a cedar with root rot and a pic of a cedar without root rot and you wouldn't know the difference unless someone told you.
A cat with a blown engine looks pretty much the same as a cat with a good engine.

Thats right,I know nothing about cedars so I wouldnt bother commenting on it.

We had a few cat engines blow up north,guess you have never seen one thats been ventilated with the pistons sticking out the side of the block.