Advertising

What in hell is the federal government advertising? 

The latest annual report on advertising by the federal government has been posted here. In the fiscal year of 2011-2012, the Harper government spent $78.5 million on advertising, which is actually the lowest total since the Conservatives formed government. http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/government-advertising/
 

The tar sands , among other things.   Pardon me - responsible resource development.

Natural Resources Canada ran extensive focus groups last summer to fine tune an ad campaign designed to convince Canadians of the industrial benefits and environmental stewardship of the energy sector — particularly the oilsands. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, meanwhile, is running its own campaign called "Responsible Canadian Energy" that plumbs the same themes. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/natural-resources-minister-aligned-priorities-with-pipeline-lobby-documents-195632671.html?device=mobile

 

One of the key concerns for the federal government in a multimillion-dollar Natural Resources advertising campaign was the negative publicity around the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, according to internal government documents.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/03/25/pol-northern-gateway-federal-ads.html?cmp=rss

Jesus - I don't even need to comment.  Could the right Honorable Stephen Harper be any cozier with the fossil fuel industry? I shouldn't ask rhetorical questions....

Tailings ponds from oilsands production are leaking and contaminating Alberta’s  groundwater, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver was told in an internal memo obtained by Postmedia News. The memo, released through access to information legislation, said that federal government scientists, including Quebec City-based research geoscientist Martine Savard, had discovered evidence of the contamination in new research that rejected longstanding claims that toxins in the region of the Athabasca River were coming from natural sources. “The studies have, for the first time, detected potentially harmful, mining-related organic acid contaminants in the groundwater outside a long-established out-of-pit tailings pond,” said the memo from deputy minister Serge Dupont, dated June 19, 2012.  http://o.canada.com/2013/02/17/oilsands-tailings-leaking-into-groundwater-joe-oliver-told-in-memo/

 

They didn't advertise that, did they?

Update: Perhaps they could advertise the following - maybe for speed of cleanup or speed of notifcation.....

Officials from Suncor Energy Inc. and Alberta Environment are scrambling to test for contaminants after the discovery Monday that industrial waste water from the oil sands giant’s base plant was leaking from a ruptured pipe into a pond close to the Athabasca River....People living and working downstream of the plant, including First Nations communities, have been notified of the release, Ms. Seetal added. Water in the outflow pond is already treated. But she didn’t have specific details about the content of the untreated industrial waste water, which is used in Suncor’s extraction and upgrading processes. 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/alberta-officials-test-for-contaminants-after-suncor-plant-leaks-waste-water/article10363390/

Crude Reality

Alberta's oilpatch is anxious to mine the tar sands and sell dilbit. It would be good for the economy, news media states.

Stymied by insufficient pipeline capacity, Alberta’s oil patch is facing problems in getting its product to market. The resulting glut has driven the price for Western Canadian Select oil more than $30 (U.S.) a barrel below that for West Texas Intermediate crude...However, a new report from RBC Economics says that oil patch investment will continue to provide a bright spot for the Canadian economy. It also argues that there is good reason to think that the spread between Western Canadian oil and West Texas crude will narrow in the years ahead.The report notes that swelling production from the oil patch has outpaced pipeline expansion, creating a bottleneck that will be tough to unplug without a direct southbound corridor (think Keystone XL) and an east-west pipeline (Saint John’s enormous oil refinery says hello). The good news is that the current $30-plus discount on every barrel of Canadian oil provides powerful motivation to build the needed pipelines. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/the-bright-side-of-canadas-weak-oil-prices/article8123055/

There's another crude reality out there, however.  It's discussed in Scientific American.

To avoid passing tipping points, such as initiation of the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, we need to limit the climate forcing severely. It's still possible to do that, if we phase down carbon emissions rapidly, but that means moving expeditiously to clean energies of the future," he explains. "Moving to tar sands, one of the dirtiest, most carbon-intensive fuels on the planet, is a step in exactly the opposite direction, indicating either that governments don't understand the situation or that they just don't give a damn."  http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=tar-sands-and-keystone-xl-pipeline-impact-on-global-warming

The reality of climate change has sunk in: ome very surprising sources  and institutions are worrying about the effects of climate change.

With energy-related carbon dioxide (CO₂) representing the majority of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the fight against climate change has become a defining factor for energy policy-making – but the implications are daunting. Meeting the emission goals currently pledged by countries under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) would still leave the world some 13.7 billion tonnes of CO₂ – or 60% – above the level needed to remain on track with the 2°C goal in 2035. Much additional investment will need to be directed towards lower- CO₂ technologies, on supply and end-use sides alike. The benefits that society would reap from these measures, beyond avoided climate impacts, would be of an equal if not larger magnitude than the cost to the energy sector. Meanwhile, energy policy-makers need to start thinking about the impact of committed climate change on the security of the energy sector . http://www.iea.org/topics/climatechange/

 The International Energy Association isn't exactly an environmental group!

A 4°C warmer world can, and must be, avoided – we need to hold warming below 2°C," said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim. "Lack of action on climate change threatens to make the world our children inherit a completely different world than we are living in today. Climate change is one of the single biggest challenges facing development, and we need to assume the moral responsibility to take action on behalf of future generations, especially the poorest.  http://climatechange.worldbank.org/

The World Bank hasn't had the environment on its mind either in the past.  Perhaps we should pay attention to climate scientists - and very conservative institutions such as the World Bank and the IEA.

The real crude reality is that either we quit burning fossil fuels or  kill off millions of people and ecosystems.

Oil and British Columbia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNN7h2teaCA
Not from the world of black humour:
"Enbridge Inc. faces a record $3.7-million US penalty for a 2010 Michigan oil spill that leaked more than 20,000 barrels of crude into a tributary of the Kalamazoo River. The U.S. pipeline regulator, in issuing the civil fine Monday, said its investigation uncovered two dozen violations related to the July 25 rupture on Enbridge's Line 6B near Marshall.  The fine is the largest ever proposed by the U.S. Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration."
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/energy-resources/Enbridge+with+fine+2010+Michigan+spill/6874631/story.html

Does this "record" fine matter to Enbridge?  In terms of money  -  well.....maybe.  And maybe not. In August 2011, a Calgary newspaper reported that:
"Enbridge, which is also one of Canada’s largest natural gas distributors, said Friday it earned $259 million or 35 cents a share, up from $138 million or 19 cents a share a year earlier. Revenues soared to just under $5 billion from $3.5 billion in the same period last year."
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1034999--enbridge-s-profits-rise-as-revenues-soar

Therefore, that "record" fine works out to 1.43 % on a quarter's profits.    What may be making excutives at Enbrridge cringe is the bad publicity resulting from the fine just as they are hoping to get approval for the Northern Gateway pipline  through British Columbia.  For example: 

"The evidence includes testimony from a senior Enbridge employee who suggests the energy company is ....  years away from achieving "world-class" safety standards." http://www.vancouversun.com/Enbridge+control+room+confusion+spurred+2010+spill+probe+alleges/6886497/story.html

Do we really want this pipleline through BC?  Do we really huge oil tankers on BC's coast?  If you don't,  please let your MP and your MLA know that you oppose oil tankers navigating BC's coastlines.

And please consider donating to the Dogwood Initiative at:
http://dogwoodinitiative.org/no-tankers/learn-more

Water Shortages in The Tar Sands

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/oil-sands-report-warns-of-investor-risk/article1571659/

Oil sands companies could soon run out of water and, in years to come, find themselves with a shrinking market for their product, according to grim new research.  Under current expansion plans, companies could run out of adequate winter water supplies as early as 2014, estimates the report, which was prepared for Boston-based investor and environmental advocacy group Ceres....“All of this should give investors pause as they consider anteing up for what has become a $200-billion bet,” said Douglas Kogan, director of climate risk management for research group Riskmetrics Group, which wrote the report. “There may be safer places to put their money, and certainly more environmentally sustainable ones.”

I predicted this: not the shrinking markets  -  the water shortages.  Check your RRSP and make sure you're not investing in the tar sands.  And nag your pension plan administrators regarding the issue.  Not only will you be environmentally responsible, you'll make more money investing elsewhere.  Where ??? Run proposed investments through my link titled "Corporate Environmental and Social Reports."

More Troubles for Tar Sands Oil Producers

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/us-carbon-rules-pose-hurdles-for-oil-sands/article1421521/

Dozens of states are moving ahead with regulations that would penalize more carbon-intensive fuels like those made from oil sands bitumen, and encourage the use of greener alternatives. The states are proceeding amid growing doubts about President Barack Obama's ability to get cap-and-trade legislation through Congress this year. Under proposed regulations, refiners and marketers would either have to reduce their reliance on oil sands and other heavy crudes, or buy credits from low-carbon energy producers. In either case, the value of the Alberta crude to its producers would fall.  California pioneered the low-carbon fuel standard with a plan that was condemned as discriminatory by the Alberta oil industry as well as federal and provincial governments. Now other regions are following California's lead, including 10 Midwestern states that together represent the oil sands' largest export market.

Perhaps climate activists should lobby individual states  and  point out the amount of natural gas and water  consumed in the production of tar sands oil.   Why not?  Disclosing the pillaging of old growth rain forest in Europe put pressure on  forestry companies in British Columbia.  The same sort of tactic might work on oil sand producers .... at the very least, more states would implement regulations similar to Califonia's.  This would slow down tar sand development in Canada - and slow down greenhouse gas emsissions.