Few European citizens are aware that their governments are in the midst of negotiating an ambitious trade deal that could boost Europe’s involvement in the world’s most destructive project – the Canadian tar sands.
Tar Sands
- Thread starter Canbyte
- Start date
Madagascar is worse by a long shot and that is a SHELL game going directly into the tanks of the EU.
I just googled "world's most destructive project" and the first thing that showed up was:
Alberta Tar Sands: The World?s Most Destructive Project
Alberta Tar Sands: The World?s Most Destructive Project
I find it kinda funny how we rally to one battle cry while we create a whole other catastrophic environmental event in our wake. Now if you don't mind, I've got some batteries to throw into the lake. :canada:
New bitumen processing and extraction technologies promise to be less destructive.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2907
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2907
Last edited:
Upcoming Events
Event
Title:"STOP TransCanada-Don't Mess With TEXAS!" Protest Meeting/Media EventWhen:02.01.2011 09.00 h - 11.00 h Where:Winnsboro Center for the Arts - Winnsboro Category:Special Events Description
WHAT: STOP TransCanada Protest Meeting/Media Event: Suzanne Goldenburg, U. S. & Canada Environmental Correspondent with The GUARDIAN (U.K.-global readership of 37 million readers/month) is traveling from Washington, D.C. to report on STOP & East Texans’ protest of TransCanada’s Keystone Pipeline. East Texas is officially on the global radar!
Suzanne will interview Landowners, STOP & Allied Experts, Activists & Citizens; and report on OUR OPPOSITION. All Regional TV, Radio and Press have been contacted to cover this historical event.
WHEN: TUESDAY, FEB. 1, 2011 at 9:00 am-Please arrive earlier if possible, & signs are welcome! Song sheets for ‘The Tar Sands Song’ (protest song) will be distributed for a peaceful ‘singing protest’. Petitions to Secretary Clinton, Advisor to Pres. Obama on his upcoming Presidential Permit decision, will be available.
WHERE: Winnsboro Center of the Arts, 11th and Market Streets, across from Train Depot, Winnsboro, TX. Protest Meeting/Media Event will be held indoors due to winter weather forecast. This is a ‘rain or shine’ event.
WHY: This is EVERY Texans’ opportunity to show their opposition to the greedy, land-stealing, anti-environment, foreign-owned TransCanada Pipeline (China, etc.) & receive global media coverage. Texans must make our voices heard during the short public comment phase. We will gather in UNITY and large numbers.
This is not about partisan politics-we all need & deserve clean air, water, land & rights to our land. TransCanada’s foreign investors want to take your land & carelessly destroy your valuable natural resources. Let’s protest & prevent their attack on Americans and Texans-- for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren….Please make this your priority early Tuesday morning and join us.
LET’S GIVE EM’ SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT: TRANSCANADA---DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS!
No matter how hard greens bitch and whine or no matter how many farmers get over run by "eminent domain" there will soon be ANOTHER 1,000,000 BBL Per DAY coming out of the "tar sands" through the Keystone Pipeline.
Ever heard of it?
Canada Bullying The European Union Over Tar Sands, Threatening To Scuttle Trade Agreement
Canada is using Alberta’s dirty tar sands as an excuse to bully the European Union (EU) into watering down its climate change policies, leaving the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) in serious doubt.
This brewing transatlantic dispute over the tar sands stems from the likelihood that the EU could officially block the sale of Alberta oil in Europe given its high carbon content.
The European Commission is reportedly “readying its defenses for a legal fight with Canada.”
According to Reuters:
What worries European leaders is the mounting body of evidence which shows that tar sands oil has a carbon footprint somewhere between 23% [pdf] and 82% [pdf] higher than regular dirty European and US oil.
A deepening reliance on dirty energy sources also contradicts progressive EU policies, mainly: efforts to reduce carbon emissions by 20-30% below 1990 levels by 2020; and a new Fuel Quality Directive [pdf] which is being updated to require a reduction in the carbon content of transport fuels by 6% below 2010 levels by 2020. Additionally, recently released European Commission data shows that aggressive climate change objectives are achievable, ‘cost effective’ and will promote economic growth across Europe.
EU leaders like Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard and Britain’s Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne are speaking out for immediate and significant action to reduce global warming pollution.
There are many groups that oppose the CETA, and probably even more groups that oppose the tar sands. The fact that Canadian negotiators are prepared to cancel negotiations over the Alberta tar sands shows that dirty energy lobbying efforts are not effective and that strong climate change policies are winning out in Europe. With mounting evidence showing that the tar sands are not an ethical project and that drilling for this oil is extremely destructive to the environment and climate, European leaders should both feel emboldened to stand up to fossil fuel lobby threats and to increase their commitments towards stronger carbon reduction goals.
Canada is using Alberta’s dirty tar sands as an excuse to bully the European Union (EU) into watering down its climate change policies, leaving the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) in serious doubt.
This brewing transatlantic dispute over the tar sands stems from the likelihood that the EU could officially block the sale of Alberta oil in Europe given its high carbon content.
The European Commission is reportedly “readying its defenses for a legal fight with Canada.”
According to Reuters:
Last year, the EU appeared to be backing down on tar sands, but sources say negotiators for the 27-member bloc are becoming bolder as their scientific evidence becomes more robust.
“We are saying 'be careful', because Canada will not hesitate to take us to the WTO, so we have to have something rock-solid,” said an EU official.
Briefing notes prepared for EU Climate Change Commissioner Connie Hedegaard discussing European climate change goals and the CETA attest to Canada’s firm opposition to any European tar sands definition which negatively characterizes Alberta’s so-called ‘ethical oil’:“We are saying 'be careful', because Canada will not hesitate to take us to the WTO, so we have to have something rock-solid,” said an EU official.
“Canada has been lobbying the Commission and member states intensively to avoid a separate default value for fuel derived from tar sands.”
Although Europe receives very little of Alberta’s dirty oil at present, Greenpeace reports that exports are on the rise [pdf] (and particularly via US ports which may soon receive much more dirty oil from the Keystone XL project).
What worries European leaders is the mounting body of evidence which shows that tar sands oil has a carbon footprint somewhere between 23% [pdf] and 82% [pdf] higher than regular dirty European and US oil.
A deepening reliance on dirty energy sources also contradicts progressive EU policies, mainly: efforts to reduce carbon emissions by 20-30% below 1990 levels by 2020; and a new Fuel Quality Directive [pdf] which is being updated to require a reduction in the carbon content of transport fuels by 6% below 2010 levels by 2020. Additionally, recently released European Commission data shows that aggressive climate change objectives are achievable, ‘cost effective’ and will promote economic growth across Europe.
EU leaders like Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard and Britain’s Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne are speaking out for immediate and significant action to reduce global warming pollution.
There are many groups that oppose the CETA, and probably even more groups that oppose the tar sands. The fact that Canadian negotiators are prepared to cancel negotiations over the Alberta tar sands shows that dirty energy lobbying efforts are not effective and that strong climate change policies are winning out in Europe. With mounting evidence showing that the tar sands are not an ethical project and that drilling for this oil is extremely destructive to the environment and climate, European leaders should both feel emboldened to stand up to fossil fuel lobby threats and to increase their commitments towards stronger carbon reduction goals.
Madagascar Oil brings tar sands project to London market
The arrival of Madagascar Oil on the Aim market today allows investors to buy into what are likely to be among the dirtiest oil sands projects – benefiting from the lowest tax rates – anywhere in the world.
Oil has been seeping through the ground in the impoverished and politically unstable African island, which rebuffed another attempted coup this month, for centuries. But Madagascar has never before produced oil in commercial quantities. Until now the oil sands were considered uneconomical, moreover companies were put off by the risks involved in doing business there.
Higher oil prices make the projects viable and the government is desperate to get production going, possibly as early as next year. It is ready to entice Madagascar Oil and its French partner Total with an extremely generous tax regime. Operators are being offered 99% of the revenue for the first 10 years while they recoup their costs, with just 1% for the government. Platform, a campaign group that monitors oil companies' activities around the world, said the offer was "unheard of".
An area of 29,500 sq km covers five main oil sands blocks. Extracting the fuel is controversial because it uses far more energy and water than more conventional production processes.
The most advanced project is Tsimiroro – owned and operated by Madagascar Oil – holding a "best estimate" of almost 1bn barrels. It could produce 90,000 barrels a day for 30-40 years and breaks even at just under $50 a barrel. The larger field, Bemolanga, holds a best estimate of just under 1.2bn barrels of oil, and could produce a much larger amount, although costs are higher. Operated by Total, with Madagascar Oil holding a 40% stake, they would have to spend about $9bn (£5.7bn) to build the upgraders and other facilities to get production started.
Madagascar Oil's stock market valuation of £183m is more typical of small oil explorers than a company holding such quantities of proven reserves. Madagascar Oil's chief executive, Laurie Hunter, described the company as "an execution, not an exploration, play".
It's unlikely to be plain sailing. The World Bank ranks Madagascar as 138th out of 193 countries in its "ease of doing business" ranking. Corruption is rife and the country is unstable. The government came to power in a military-backed coup last spring, which overthrew the democratically elected leader.
The companies have negotiated an extremely attractive deal. At Tsimiroro, after the first 10 years taking 99% of the revenue, Madagascar Oil is being offered 80% during the second decade, with the government taking 20%, followed by a 70%-30% split the following decade and so on.
For a country ranked 170th poorest out of 182 by the International Monetary Fund, these revenues will be much needed, but Mika Minio-Paluello from the democratic and environmental campaign group Platform said the government's take should be much higher. "Oil companies go into these kinds of chaotic situations and negotiate immensely profitable terms. It's understandable that companies want to protect their investment but this goes much further and Madagascar could be stuck with these contracts for decades."
Environmental regulations are also unlikely to be onerous in an island famed for its biodiversity. The Voahary Gasy, an alliance of Madagascan environmental groups, complains that the government has released very little information. But the first projects are likely to use up more energy than the world's only other existing oil sands projects, in Alberta in Canada.
The Tsimiroro project will use an "in-situ" method, which involves injecting vast amounts of steam into the ground to heat up the oil and allow it to surface. According to industry estimates, to extract five barrels of oil at Tsimiroro will burn up one barrel of oil, although any excess electricity produced to generate steam could be used at the other project. According to the Pembina Institute, an environmental group, for every barrel of oil used in similar oil projects in Alberta, about 5.5 barrels of oil are produced on average.
The Bemolanga field, one of the world's largest untapped oil sands fields, could also be more energy - and carbon - intensive than equivalent projects in Alberta. The project would use open-cast mining to dig out the oily sand and rock. Because the material's bitumen content is lower at 5.5% – compared with 11% in Alberta – it would be harder to separate. However, it is thought that a higher proportion of the oil in Bemolanga could be recovered than in Alberta, so this would reduce the comparative energy intensity.
In Canada, the federal government has threatened to force companies to use carbon capture and storage (CCS) to reduce emissions, although it's not clear if this will ever become law. Hunter said Madagascar has "a very attentive environmental regulator" but admits: "Requirements to use CCS at some time in the future has not come up in conversation. The Madagascar government is very keen to get on with production with the fields."
The arrival of Madagascar Oil on the Aim market today allows investors to buy into what are likely to be among the dirtiest oil sands projects – benefiting from the lowest tax rates – anywhere in the world.
Oil has been seeping through the ground in the impoverished and politically unstable African island, which rebuffed another attempted coup this month, for centuries. But Madagascar has never before produced oil in commercial quantities. Until now the oil sands were considered uneconomical, moreover companies were put off by the risks involved in doing business there.
Higher oil prices make the projects viable and the government is desperate to get production going, possibly as early as next year. It is ready to entice Madagascar Oil and its French partner Total with an extremely generous tax regime. Operators are being offered 99% of the revenue for the first 10 years while they recoup their costs, with just 1% for the government. Platform, a campaign group that monitors oil companies' activities around the world, said the offer was "unheard of".
An area of 29,500 sq km covers five main oil sands blocks. Extracting the fuel is controversial because it uses far more energy and water than more conventional production processes.
The most advanced project is Tsimiroro – owned and operated by Madagascar Oil – holding a "best estimate" of almost 1bn barrels. It could produce 90,000 barrels a day for 30-40 years and breaks even at just under $50 a barrel. The larger field, Bemolanga, holds a best estimate of just under 1.2bn barrels of oil, and could produce a much larger amount, although costs are higher. Operated by Total, with Madagascar Oil holding a 40% stake, they would have to spend about $9bn (£5.7bn) to build the upgraders and other facilities to get production started.
Madagascar Oil's stock market valuation of £183m is more typical of small oil explorers than a company holding such quantities of proven reserves. Madagascar Oil's chief executive, Laurie Hunter, described the company as "an execution, not an exploration, play".
It's unlikely to be plain sailing. The World Bank ranks Madagascar as 138th out of 193 countries in its "ease of doing business" ranking. Corruption is rife and the country is unstable. The government came to power in a military-backed coup last spring, which overthrew the democratically elected leader.
The companies have negotiated an extremely attractive deal. At Tsimiroro, after the first 10 years taking 99% of the revenue, Madagascar Oil is being offered 80% during the second decade, with the government taking 20%, followed by a 70%-30% split the following decade and so on.
For a country ranked 170th poorest out of 182 by the International Monetary Fund, these revenues will be much needed, but Mika Minio-Paluello from the democratic and environmental campaign group Platform said the government's take should be much higher. "Oil companies go into these kinds of chaotic situations and negotiate immensely profitable terms. It's understandable that companies want to protect their investment but this goes much further and Madagascar could be stuck with these contracts for decades."
Environmental regulations are also unlikely to be onerous in an island famed for its biodiversity. The Voahary Gasy, an alliance of Madagascan environmental groups, complains that the government has released very little information. But the first projects are likely to use up more energy than the world's only other existing oil sands projects, in Alberta in Canada.
The Tsimiroro project will use an "in-situ" method, which involves injecting vast amounts of steam into the ground to heat up the oil and allow it to surface. According to industry estimates, to extract five barrels of oil at Tsimiroro will burn up one barrel of oil, although any excess electricity produced to generate steam could be used at the other project. According to the Pembina Institute, an environmental group, for every barrel of oil used in similar oil projects in Alberta, about 5.5 barrels of oil are produced on average.
The Bemolanga field, one of the world's largest untapped oil sands fields, could also be more energy - and carbon - intensive than equivalent projects in Alberta. The project would use open-cast mining to dig out the oily sand and rock. Because the material's bitumen content is lower at 5.5% – compared with 11% in Alberta – it would be harder to separate. However, it is thought that a higher proportion of the oil in Bemolanga could be recovered than in Alberta, so this would reduce the comparative energy intensity.
In Canada, the federal government has threatened to force companies to use carbon capture and storage (CCS) to reduce emissions, although it's not clear if this will ever become law. Hunter said Madagascar has "a very attentive environmental regulator" but admits: "Requirements to use CCS at some time in the future has not come up in conversation. The Madagascar government is very keen to get on with production with the fields."
I say let 'em nix the plan... There would be a huge economic benefit to building the refinery somewhere in Western Canada and then shipping the finished product to Texas... I've heard that the Obama admin is looking at forcing the approvals through specifically to take advantage of the billions in investment dollars that would be injected into the States.
It's all done but the crying. See my thread on http://forums.canadiancontent.net/b...peline-project-bitumen-super.html#post1387208
Another year and a half and CO-OP Regina will be on the pipes with even more upgraded heavy crude to send to Chicago and Minneapolis and beyond.
It's time we upped the well head royalties?
My water bill is going up 20% because they need the water at the upgrader.
Some of that increased royalties should support research to manage this resource better, reducing/limiting the destructive impact.
Yeah like CO2 injection into old oil feilds using the CO2 as a solvent to exract even more oil? How about a damn good fracing?
Or Saudi Arabia, Algeria?
Iraq:
2 million barrels of oil per day times 5 years equals approximate total oil extracted from Iraq since the 2003 invasion.
Total oil extracted divided by approximate 500,000 dead Iraqis equals "barrels of oil per dead Iraqi."
How far does your car go per dead Iraqi?
Iraq:
2 million barrels of oil per day times 5 years equals approximate total oil extracted from Iraq since the 2003 invasion.
Total oil extracted divided by approximate 500,000 dead Iraqis equals "barrels of oil per dead Iraqi."
How far does your car go per dead Iraqi?
Last edited: