U.S. ambassador in Alberta to learn about oilsands

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
Like I said, your statement was unambiguous, I have already requoted what you stated and no amount of wiggling on your part will change what you said, and what you stated was wrong.

As for your comment about the oilsands, that is rich considering it was YOU that brought up claims in BC not me.

As far as Cold Lake is concerned, the claim that no mining is going on imply's that there is no disernable environmental impact in the area. In-situ extraction has it's own "problems" with disruption of migratory and feeding patterns being just one because of the above ground piping, not to mention the use of freshwater (yes many operations are still using freshwater to create the steam needed).

As for your claim that Albertas reclamation laws are beyond reproach, BS, Alberta has a neat little loophole, land is NOT required to be put back the way it was, it is required to be put back to the original land use, which in the majority of areas, the land is designated agricultural land use. This in itself saves the oil company's one hell of alot of money.
Ive never seen a project where the land isnt put back as close as possible to natural,never once seen anyone use any loopholes and as anyone in the industry will tell you the animals dont care too much about wells or pipelines,they just go around them.
But your a furnace installer so I dont expect you to understand what we see out in the field.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Ive never seen a project where the land isnt put back as close as possible to natural,never once seen anyone use any loopholes and as anyone in the industry will tell you the animals dont care too much about wells or pipelines,they just go around them.
But your a furnace installer so I dont expect you to understand what we see out in the field.


and out of the hundreds of operations up here, how many have you actually had a hand in from start to finish?
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
What are the Tar Sands? A brief overview.

What are the Tar Sands? A brief overview.
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.
Lacking technology but seeing the potential, the government of Alberta started experimenting with extraction ideas in the 1920’s. Starting in the 1960’s, The Pew family-owned company Sun Oil began conducting research into how to extract the hydrocarbon energy in the tar sands and turn it into a mock oil. They then began “The Great Canadian Oil Sands Project” operating near Fort McMurray in 1967. The Great Canadian Oil Sands Project would later become a corporation now well-known as Suncor, after Sun Oil became today's Sunoco. Suncor bought all of the remaining Sunoco shares from the plants in Alberta in 1995, leaving Sunoco officially outside of Alberta's Tar Sands. Sunoco then could focus on setting up shop in the lower 48 states as the primary hub for refinement of this mock oil. Today, though “officially” not a part of the actual process in Alberta, Sunoco does vast amounts of the refining of the heavy synthetic crude from around Fort McMurray, in the Mid-West and soon to have massive new volumes of tar sand crude refined near Pennsylvania. The Pew family Charitable Trusts were originated and continue to run with money from Sunoco and the Pew Family. The Pew Foundations today flow funding through social and environmental organizations, continuing to protect their original investments to the tune of hundreds of millions a year through acting as a "drag anchor" on organizations they bankroll.
The Mention of those pipeline systems is only scratching the surface. Why? Energy is required in massive amounts to produce useable petrol. Energy in the massive amounts required (beyond the 0.6 billion cubic feet a day [bcfd] of natural gas currently consumed) can not even begin to be provided locally. That energy has many places it can come from. Almost all of them are untouched wilderness areas, or the construction of massive new nuclear plants across northern Alberta. Why all this energy? Because this is not simply “oil” we are talking about. We are talking about a high end product that serves to supplant oil, oil that is starting to run out around the globe.
What is common to both tar sand plants and regular oil fields is the construction of refineries, if old ones from dried up wells are not easily accessible. The same is true of delivery systems. What is not the case here is that the refineries are not typical, and there are several refining stages. First, huge chunks of earth weighing 200 tonnes are taken at a time. It takes four tonnes of earth to produce one measly barrel of synthetic crude. How this process works is roughly the world’s largest vats (slurries)—spinning, boiling and separating the “good” guck (bitumen) from the “bad” earth (overburden). That means every tree is cut and every lichen, bit of soil and more is dumped in useless “overburden” areas. All of the life at every stage is waste product, and dumped—enough to fill the largest sports stadium every two days. None of this has yet to be certified as reclaimed. It is the closest thing to walking on the surface of Mars one can experience.
I mentioned water. For each barrel of oil, along with four tonnes of earth, approximately four barrels of water are required. Permanently toxic tailings ponds now litter Alberta, visible from outer space. I’m not done. The process takes energy, usually relatively clean burning natural gas (composting caviar to grow weeds, in essence). This and other forms of energy used currently amount to enough greenhouse gas emissions for each single barrel to drive a standard vehicle roughly 300 kilometers. But you can’t drive on this petroleum yet— it is still just a heavy bitumen waiting to get transported to a refinery that can work with this particular toxic brew, creating mock crude out of it. Most of those are long distances away and the crude product you have now still won’t flow in a pipeline system. So you have to construct two massive pipeline systems. One to bring another toxic substance, called “diluent” (no, that is not a typo) which is akin to Kerosene. So that stuff has to be pulled out of the earth somewhere else and a system to bring it to Alberta must be constructed across massive swaths of land (or shipping lanes through the Pacific Ocean from countries such as Russia). Then the bitumen from the earth is mixed with the diluent and placed in new pipelines that ship to the ‘special’ refineries. You also need to find sources of the natural gas to pipe into Alberta. Or, to avoid that, one could build approximately 20 nuclear power plants to provide the steam and hydrogen needed to get up to a production level of 3 million barrels of oil every day (Gas pipelines can be reduced, not avoided; there is nowhere near enough energy in the region as is to maintain current levels of synthetic oil production and construct nuclear plants without new sources of energy to do so. Another way to put it: One will need to build pipelines into the region to supply the natural gas for energy necessary to build nuclear plants— reactors that are supposedly to prevent the reliance on natural gas.) All those pipes described, and yet still none mentioned to actually move the heavy crude to a refinery that can then produce a car-operating gasoline. In simple production each single barrel gives off an average of 80 kg’s of greenhouse gasses in production as a constant. Can you say “climate change on steroids”?
The biggest projects being proposed involve lands from Alaska, the Arctic Ocean along Alaska, Yukon and the Northwest Territories and possibly over the ocean itself, across northern British Columbia including a cancellation of an over thirty year shipping moratorium along the BC Coast and Inside Passage. This also includes taking the pipeline systems in southern and central Alberta and turning them around, in order to provide the massive amounts of energy needs for the voracious tar sands. The pipelines to get the oil to refineries in the US will also include (to name just a few) huge new pipelines to Illinois, Oklahoma, Texas, Ontario, Pennsylvania and Louisiana. These are only the announced ones; These plans do not equal the recently leaked joint American-Canadian government plans to push for as much as 5 million barrels of this “oil” every day. Do the math for water, greenhouse gas emissions, lost tonnes of earth and forests in all directions from Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico. We still haven’t got petroleum you can put in your car. This final total will see the consumption of 25% of the United States oil needs within less than a decade (currently, the US uses just over 20 mbpd of oil, that will go up to roughly 24 in a decade). This “plan” is because the planet is running out of oil globally, and the remaining easy oil is proving harder for the US Army to take directly from the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
North America has no plan nor do those in power seem to be looking for one for the peaking of oil globally. Instead, this is the “plan”, the single largest “gigaproject” in human history—without even the exception of the Pyramids of Egypt, Panama Canal, Great Wall of China and the Three Gorges Dam combined—a temporary plan to try to avoid peak oil, damn the costs. The costs are not merely more greenhouse gasses, but their rapidly accelerating ascension into the stratosphere. While the world clamours for less greenhouse gasses, the tar sands and other “alternate” sources of “oil” are the only option—and yet they are only a temporary placebo. The end of oil will come, likely in our near lifetimes. The question is: what kind of an earth will we be looking at, and will it be inhabitable? Perhaps humanity needs to see the two options honestly: accept peak oil, use remaining “easy oil” reserves to help make the painful transition out of petrol-led systems or reap climate change with a vengeance that will make Katrina look like an early fall rainshower.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Thats why tank farms allways have barriers and liners underneath for containment if that happens.They did what their supposed to do and contained the spill.
I guess you missed this part
Yet this “small spill” has resulted in a blanket of black oil over the entire facility and beyond the boundaries, covering trees and threatening wildlife.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Actually I can claim on yours if you dont do anything with it,keeps peeps from staking claims and sitting on them or reselling for profit.
You have to do some work on a claim to keep it or I can claim it myself.
Right.
But you were wrong that you can stake a claim anywhere you want. I may be female but I am not as stupid as you seem to think I am.
Right in your area,I could stake a gold claim anywhere if I wanted to and the laws were pretty lax there.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
Obviously not ducks....;-):roll:
I'm sure everyone but Greenpeace is over it by now,they will spend many months in court next year over this,they could get a $500,000 fine from the Alberta government and a $300,000 fine from the federal government.
They did plead not guilty and offered some proactive solutions to the problem but there's going to be a lengthy million dollar trial anyways because of the pressure from the enviromentalists to see some heads fly.
I hope they get a big fine myself.

One avid hunter could kill that many ducks in his lifetime hunting then were killed at the oilsands that day.
Yet the oilsands have pumped more then 200 billion into the Alberta economy or maybe more,those are old numbers.
We dont just ship to the states,Terracon in BC heats a lot of British Columbians homes with gas right from the oilsands.
Probably 80% of the people that bitch about the oilsands have them in their mutual funds and dont even know it.:lol:
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
I'm sure everyone but Greenpeace is over it by now,they will spend many months in court next year over this,they could get a $500,000 fine from the Alberta government and a $300,000 fine from the federal government.
They did plead not guilty and offered some proactive solutions to the problem but there's going to be a lengthy million dollar trial anyways because of the pressure from the enviromentalists to see some heads fly.
I hope they get a big fine myself.

One avid hunter could kill that many ducks in his lifetime hunting then were killed at the oilsands that day.
Yet the oilsands have pumped more then 200 billion into the Alberta economy or maybe more,those are old numbers.
We dont just ship to the states,Terracon in BC heats a lot of British Columbians homes with gas right from the oilsands.
Probably 80% of the people that bitch about the oilsands have them in their mutual funds and dont even know it.:lol:

You just don't understand. If the tar sands are mined responsibly and the natural habitat looked after, I see no problem. What is sad about this whole mess is that somehow it has become important for us to be the biggest supplier of oil to the U.S. no matter what it costs us. The oil companies don't give a damn what we are left with and neither does the U.S. government. The Alberta government will do anything to please the Americans no matter what damage we do to the local ecology. The tar sands could provide a nice income for Alberta for the next forty years or so, but not if we continue to rip the stuff out of the ground and sell the oil at fire sale prices to the Americans. We haven't even seen the real damage yet but we will soon. Will there even be an Athabasca river in ten or fifteen years? I doubt it.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
You just don't understand. If the tar sands are mined responsibly and the natural habitat looked after, I see no problem. What is sad about this whole mess is that somehow it has become important for us to be the biggest supplier of oil to the U.S. no matter what it costs us. The oil companies don't give a damn what we are left with and neither does the U.S. government. The Alberta government will do anything to please the Americans no matter what damage we do to the local ecology. The tar sands could provide a nice income for Alberta for the next forty years or so, but not if we continue to rip the stuff out of the ground and sell the oil at fire sale prices to the Americans. We haven't even seen the real damage yet but we will soon. Will there even be an Athabasca river in ten or fifteen years? I doubt it.
I'm pretty sure we will have alternate energy sources long before the oil runs out.
It's getting to the point where other countrys are buying up our energy juniors anyways,another huge sale yesterday to Japan I think.

If you read up on the athabasca you will see that water consumption is steadily decreasing and the percentages are all posted in my last 3 links.
It's also clean and monitored steadily.
I have faith in the govt. rules and regs and also some of the big outfits best practices which are far more stringent the the governments.
I have faith in the people doing the testing and the universitys that put so much effort into oilsands technology.Alberta will continue to break new ground in environmental technology and were allready the most sought after in the industry around the world because of it.

And anyone who works for Encanna,shell etc will tell you,there will be enviro guys watching you all the time no matter what your doing,it's job protection for them if they can find you pissing off a lease where you dont have a discharge permit for.
The environment is #1 priority now,it's pretty well stressed very plainly in all their manuals.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
I'm sure everyone but Greenpeace is over it by now,they will spend many months in court next year over this,they could get a $500,000 fine from the Alberta government and a $300,000 fine from the federal government.
They did plead not guilty and offered some proactive solutions to the problem but there's going to be a lengthy million dollar trial anyways because of the pressure from the enviromentalists to see some heads fly.
I hope they get a big fine myself.
Fines are a joke unless they are big enough. Like that outfit in the States that got fined $400K for something or other. The company makes $400K in about a week. It's a joke.

One avid hunter could kill that many ducks in his lifetime hunting then were killed at the oilsands that day.
Hunters eat ducks and don't leave a mess behind. They also only pluck off a few at a time as opposed to covering an entire herd with a substance that makes them inedible. There's a bit of a difference.
Yet the oilsands have pumped more then 200 billion into the Alberta economy or maybe more,those are old numbers.
Because of the human addiction. Right. How much addition to the economy will wind, geothermal, and solar energy supply without screwing up the planet?
We dont just ship to the states,Terracon in BC heats a lot of British Columbians homes with gas right from the oilsands.
Around here, electricity is about the same price as gas. It's a druthers issue.
Probably 80% of the people that bitch about the oilsands have them in their mutual funds and dont even know it.:lol:
Stats please. :)
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
It's also clean and monitored steadily.
Ah, the monitoring ... "the detection system didn’t notice the leak. According to Enbridge 4,000 barrels was “too small a spill” to register" = http://landkeepers.ca/images/uploads..._Pipelines.pdf
They'll "monitor" the thousands of kilometers of pipeline the same way I would imagine. But, 4000 barrels here or there is no big deal as long as it props up the economy.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
I dont have stats on your mutual funds,you'll have to check that fat report the bank sends you every month,thats the one that usually just gets shoved into the "later" file.

As an x bird hunter I wont even comment on the ducks,I know what hunters used to be like before ducks unlimited.

Fines,court time and tonnes of publicity are the last thing the oilsands operators want.

Alberta is an energy province,Sheerness and genessee which both produce power to be exported to BC.
The cowley wind farm project 30 miles south of me,soon to be Canadas biggest wind farm.
Ballard fuel cells has joined up with the oilsands and they also share technology to produce very clean burning gas.
Geothermal is being studied big time by the oilsands operators and the universities.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
Ah, the monitoring ... "the detection system didn’t notice the leak. According to Enbridge 4,000 barrels was “too small a spill” to register" = http://landkeepers.ca/images/uploads..._Pipelines.pdf
They'll "monitor" the thousands of kilometers of pipeline the same way I would imagine. But, 4000 barrels here or there is no big deal as long as it props up the economy.

More like a monitor malfunction,as soon as the pressure drops it should have shut down,it's a complex process but oil leaks are detected by pressure mainly,gas is pressure and air monitors.

Considering all the pipe in the ground (lots of it is old and should be decommisioned) I would say their track record is not bad and it can only improve.
They inherited a lot of these lines that were planted back in the 50's from takeovers and back then compliance wasnt as strict as today,if someone even scratched a pipe back then and planted it this was overlooked and will allways eventually fail before its supposed to be past it's lifespan.

When pipe is put in the ground now there will be a field rep from every single energy company that has a pipe close by and thats law according to the new pipeline act here,they watch the whole show,take pictures steady of installation and of the pipe before its covered,they are allways third party inspectors and responsible for any screw ups,they sign off on the work and can stop it any time,have peeps run off for non compliance or charged under the envrionmental act.
Their ass will be in court for no compliance if theres a screw up.

One thing every pipeline operator demands now is anywhere in Alberta you cant cross a pipeline with anything heavier then a pickup without a pipeline crossing which is a mound of dirt about 5 feet high over all the lines,like a mogul over every line so your not right on the line driving over it because some guys laying pipe back then obviously cheated on the depth.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
I dont have stats on your mutual funds,you'll have to check that fat report the bank sends you every month,thats the one that usually just gets shoved into the "later" file.
We don't use mutual funds.

As an x bird hunter I wont even comment on the ducks,I know what hunters used to be like before ducks unlimited.
So? You commented about duckhunting. I just replied and I don't give a hoot what it used to be like decades ago.

Fines,court time and tonnes of publicity are the last thing the oilsands operators want.
Well, yeah, I suspect that no-one goes looking to get fined. lmao

Alberta is an energy province,Sheerness and genessee which both produce power to be exported to BC.
I'm not quite sure what you said here, but I don't care if it goes to the moon.
The cowley wind farm project 30 miles south of me,soon to be Canadas biggest wind farm.
Fine by me. There is little impact from those, especially in comparison to hydro and fuel burning sources.
Ballard fuel cells has joined up with the oilsands and they also share technology to produce very clean burning gas.
More burning. Cool! :roll:
Geothermal is being studied big time by the oilsands operators and the universities.
It has been for a long time been studied by universities. Good.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
More like a monitor malfunction,as soon as the pressure drops it should have shut down,it's a complex process but oil leaks are detected by pressure mainly,gas is pressure and air monitors.
Exactly my point. Mistakes happen, accidents happen. If the stuff was left in the ground to seep at its own pace there would not be spills, mistakes, accidents, etc. that manage to spread the junk all over the planet. :D

Considering all the pipe in the ground (lots of it is old and should be decommisioned) I would say their track record is not bad and it can only improve.
They inherited a lot of these lines that were planted back in the 50's from takeovers and back then compliance wasnt as strict as today,if someone even scratched a pipe back then and planted it this was overlooked and will allways eventually fail before its supposed to be past it's lifespan.
Improvement sounds good to me.

When pipe is put in the ground now there will be a field rep from every single energy company that has a pipe close by and thats law according to the new pipeline act here,they watch the whole show,take pictures steady of installation and of the pipe before its covered,they are allways third party inspectors and responsible for any screw ups,they sign off on the work and can stop it any time,have peeps run off for non compliance or charged under the envrionmental act.
Their ass will be in court for no compliance if theres a screw up.

One thing every pipeline operator demands now is anywhere in Alberta you cant cross a pipeline with anything heavier then a pickup without a pipeline crossing which is a mound of dirt about 5 feet high over all the lines,like a mogul over every line so your not right on the line driving over it because some guys laying pipe back then obviously cheated on the depth.
Good.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
Exactly my point. Mistakes happen, accidents happen. If the stuff was left in the ground to seep at its own pace there would not be spills, mistakes, accidents, etc. that manage to spread the junk all over the planet. :D

Improvement sounds good to me.

Good.
If you left it there would be big time leeching into the Athabasca,it's coming out of the ground for a reason,it has no place to go.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
Bird hunting is bad mmmmk...

Cheney accidentally shoots hunting partner - The Boston Globe

lol

sorry, to serious in here

For sure,Anna's googling Ballard fuel cell technology right now and is going to come back with a detailed report,mark my words.;-)

Juans going to come back with either a long cut n paste that condtradicts everything he's said so far or an insult.
Engineers are like that,the iron ring and all that.;-)
Then I'll get chastised for being "off topic" by Anna which I am notorius for so live with it or put me on the ignore list.

It's all good bud,I be smiling.:lol: