Excited Delirium

Stories about Excited Delirium, the Shock Economy and a little fiction here and there.

Category Archives: tar sands

MayDay 2011: Alternatives for Conservatives (repost)

For most of us, there should be no doubt that the Conservative Party of Canada is broken and represents everything that’s wrong in the world:

  • Poor fiscal management
  • Broken promises
  • Corruption and contempt for Parliament
  • Ignoring your beliefs and value system

Take heart if you’re a small-c conservative and you’re looking for someone that’s not a crook or someone that’s willing to spin any lie just to grab your vote!  There are many alternatives out there.

Seriously.  Here are just a few:

The Green Party (Site)

I fully admit that this (and all summaries below) is a very superficial summary, but the Green Party represents some of the following basic principles:

  • Let the market do what the market does best
  • No deficit
  • Lower taxes on personal income
  • Proportional representation
  • Taxes on waste

In essence, they feel to me like a libertarian party, but with a shade of green.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

Don’t believe the mainstream media: the Green Party of Canada is not a ‘lefty’ party ‘full of hippies’.  The Canadian Greens put the market in front of most of their policies and most of their platform has a vibe of ‘white collar’ politics.  While they’re very popular with young voters, most seniors tend to vote Green because they want to stay ‘mainstream’ while also staying faithful to small-c conservative values.

Libertarian Party (Site)

The Libertarians are strong believers that the government should not be in our lives in any way, shape or form.  The less government, the better.

The resulting promise of less government is lower taxes, reduced waste and less frustration for those who simply want to get on with their lives.

If you’re not familiar with the Libertarians, a very famous one is Ron Paul in the US.  Ron Paul is a Republican from Texas, but doesn’t believe in the largesse of government that has been brought about by all parties, including those of a conservative bent.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

Libertarians attract those that have had enough with promises, regardless of how much (or little) they will cost.

To see if you’re a Libertarian, try their Canadian quiz.  You may be surprised just how closely you’re aligned with their beliefs!

Canadian Action Party (Site)

One of the central planks of the Canadian Action Party is their demand that we get rid of the Bank of Canada.

While most of their other policies rank towards the left of the spectrum, this one puts them squarely in the middle of Libertarian territory, as Ron Paul has been an advocate of abolition of the Federal Reserve and deficit financing for many years.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

To be honest, I’m not so sure there’s a good answer to this question, but if there’s not a Libertarian or Green candidate in your riding, these may prove to be a good alternative.

Another reason why you would consider them: like the old Reform folks, they’re very supportive of an Elected Senate. Unlike the NDP – which would do away with the Senate altogether – the Canadian Action Party would fill the gap left when the Reform Party was vapourized in 2003.

Christian Heritage Party of Canada (Site)

I’ll go on record and remind everyone that I’m not a fan of the Christian Heritage Party (CHP), but I am a fan of democracy and it’s certainly their right to be out there soliciting votes.

The CHP is the only party to my knowledge that asserts its religious affiliation (Judeo-Christian) in the general public and is a viable option for all of those people that have been supporting the Conservative Party of Canada but who have yet to see progress made on issues like abortion, same-sex marriages and so on.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

If you used to be an Alliance member or simply want to see more overt religion in the policy-making that happens in this country, this is the party for you.

Since the ‘Unite the Right’ campaign washed all of these stronger theological discussions under the table, you’ve been struggling to find a voice with mainstream parties and you’re more than happy to support those that ACTUALLY reflect your value systems and who don’t pretend to reflect them just to grab a vote.

Pirate Party of Canada (Site)

The Pirate Party of Canada got its start when our government began to crack down on people that were using file-sharing and copyrighted materials for personal use.

They reflect the popular Pirate Party in Europe that actually won a number of seats in

There aren’t many candidates in this election, but the party is growing and we expect them to add candidates as the campaign progresses towards May 2.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

While the PPC may be seen as a single-issue party, they have a Libertarian bent that’s very refreshing, particularly if you’re young and you believe in openness, transparency and the elimination of copyright regulations that favour big companies and cost consumers billions each year.

Progressive Canadian Party (once the Progressive Conservatives) (Site)

The Progressive Canadian Party (PCP) is what remains from the aftermath of the Unite the Right campaign in 2003 that saw Stephen Harper consolidate and take control of the following parties:

  • Conservatives
  • Reform Party of Canada
  • Alliance Party

Or … CRAP as an acronym.  Sorry … my anti-Conservative bias is showing :)

Why would a conservative vote for them?

Any ‘Red Tory’ would be proud to vote for the Progressive Canadian Party, as they continue to reflect the softer side that the Conservatives lost when Stephen Harper took the reins of the CPC.

Most of the memes related to ‘family’ and religion are absent from the guiding principles of the party.  Instead they focus on unique concepts like sustainability, ’100 mile diets’, education, health care with some injection of private business and so on.

United Party of Canada (Site)

The United Party of Canada (UPC) is another recent response to the last election where dark-blue Conservatives ran rough over basic principles related to balance, equity and fairness.

Most of their policies reflect this response, including the following directions:

Why would a conservative vote for them?

The party is described as being centrist and would appeal to those ‘Red Tories’ that don’t have a Progressive Canadian candidate running in their riding.

Western Block Party (Site)

The Western Block Party offers those west of Ontario to consolidate their vote and influence into something more tangible, much like the Bloc Quebecois has in the past with Quebec.

The greatest challenge with the WBP is that the founder was the lawyer that represented Ernst Zundel, famous Holocaust denier.  Unfortunately, this taints the party somewhat, but if they are able to focus on the primacy of the West, they’ll be able to attract votes from Albertans, Manitobans, BCers and those from Saskatchewan.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

Despite the potential to be seen as a separatist or racist party, conservatives in the West that feel ‘left out’ by their party (including the Conservative Party of Canada) and who don’t believe that Quebec should be pulling all of the strings when it comes to politics will find a home here.

Online Party of Canada (Site)

While the Online Party of Canada is relatively new, there’s a possibility that they may gain momentum – even in this election – because of some of their unique policy platform ideas.

Why would a conservative vote for them?

Even though they’re a relatively ‘fresh’ party, they have potential to attract a lot of conservatives that want Canada to advance as a republic as opposed to a commonwealth country.

CONCLUSION

If you’re a small-c conservative, don’t feel overwhelmed, ignored or lost when it comes to going to the polls on May 2.

THERE ARE OPTIONS and it’s up to you to exercise your right to vote those options.

Of course, if I’ve missed any alternatives, please post them in comments below.

MayDay 2011: Tar Sands, Energy & Oil Subsidies

Canada wastes several billion PER YEAR subsidizing the creation, expansion and mechanization of the Tar Sands in Alberta, all so that we can export billions more in Dirty Oil to the United States.

It’s a failed strategy when it comes to energy development, storage and transfer in this country.

It must change.

Any government other than a Stephen Harper Government (TM) would eliminate these subsidies.

I’m not alone with this opinion on this industry.  The New York Times Editorial ran a post on how Americans need to say “No” to the Tar Sands.  The original text of this article is pasted below.

So far, only the Green Party and the NDP have come out swinging against the Tar Sands, while the Liberals show luke-warm support for change in this area.

The dreaded ‘Carbon Tax’ policy announcement will never be made before May 2 by anyone, with the exception of Stephen Harper, who will bitch endlessly about how the Liberals and the NDP will bring about a tax on oil in the future if you vote for them.

While Stephen Harper continues with his platform of FEAR FOR CANADA, we need to elect a government that will put an end to the shame that Canadians feel when it comes to this outdated mode of energy production.

Later this year, the State Department will decide whether to approve construction of a 1,700-mile oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast called Keystone XL. The underground 36-inch pipeline, built by TransCanada, would link the tar sands fields of northern Alberta to Texas refineries and begin operating in 2013. The department should say no.

State is involved because the pipeline would cross an international boundary. Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton first said she was “inclined” to support it, but has lately sounded more neutral. An environmental assessment carried out by her department last year was sharply criticized by the Environmental Protection Agency for understating the project’s many risks. The department has since undertaken another environmental review that will soon be released for public comment. It needs to be thorough and impartial.

Advocates of the Keystone XL, which include the Canadian government, the oil industry and its allies in Congress, argue that a steady supply of oil from a friendly neighbor is the answer to rising oil prices and turmoil in the Middle East. But the Energy Department says the pipeline would have a minimal effect on prices, and there is already sufficient pipeline capacity to double United States imports from Canada.

The environmental risks, for both countries, are enormous. The first step in the process is to strip-mine huge chunks of Alberta’s boreal forest. The oil, a tar-like substance called bitumen, is then extracted with steam or hot water, which in turn is produced by burning natural gas. The E.P.A. estimates that the greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands oil — even without counting the destruction of forests that sequester carbon — are 82 percent greater than those produced by conventional crude oil.

The project poses a major threat to water supplies on both sides of the border. Turning two tons of tar sand into a barrel of oil requires four times as much water as producing a barrel of conventional oil. Operations in Alberta have already created 65 square miles of toxic holding ponds, which kill migrating birds and pollute downstream watersheds, a serious matter for native communities.

In the United States, the biggest potential problem is pipeline leaks. The Keystone XL would carry bitumen — which is more corrosive than crude oil — thinned with other petroleum condensates and then pumped at high pressure and at a temperature of more than 150 degrees through the pipeline.

Last July, an older bitumen pipeline in Michigan spilled 800,000 gallons of the stuff into the Kalamazoo River. A new TransCanada pipeline that began carrying diluted bitumen last year has already had nine spills.

The Keystone XL would cut diagonally across Montana and the Nebraska Sand Hills — a delicate region of porous, sandy soils — to northern Kansas before heading south to the Gulf. It would also cross the Ogallala Aquifer, a shallow underground reservoir of enormous importance for agriculture that also provides drinking water for two million people. A pipeline leaking diluted bitumen into groundwater could have disastrous consequences.

For this reason, Senators Mike Johanns and Ben Nelson of Nebraska have vigorously opposed the planned route of the Keystone XL. Still, political pressure to win swift approval has been building in Congress. Moving ahead would be a huge error. From all of the evidence, Keystone XL is not only environmentally risky, it is unnecessary.

MayDay 2011: Is Stephen Harper A Zombie or Vampire?

This is the most vital question vexing all Canadians as we approach Election Day on May 2.

Is Stephen Harper a Zombie or is he a Vampire?

(OK … maybe just some).

Let’s consider the two possibilities.

The Case for Zombie

Zombies are defined as fictional undead monster or a person in an entranced state believed to be controlled by a bokor or wizard.

Here’s more from Wikipedia:

Zombie fiction … usually describes a breakdown of civilization occurring when most of the population become flesh-eating zombies – a zombie apocalypse. The monsters are usually hungry for human flesh, often specifically brains. Sometimes they are victims of a fictional pandemic illness causing the dead to reanimate or the living to behave this way, but often no cause is given in the story

One might think Stephen Harper is a zombie given the monotonous repetition of the ‘stable economy’, ‘lower taxes’, ‘must give corporate giveaways’, ‘fear the coalition’ memes that he constantly repeats, but the reality is that this is because the Conservatives don’t actually have a platform.  They use catch phrases like ‘tough on crime’ because it’s good marketing, not because it will translate to millions of Canadian captives ripe for the picking (of brains) in newly minted prison cells.

We typically see zombies roaming the streets in a post-apocalypse seeking food (brains).  The G20 summit might be a close second to this environment, but Stephen Harper was nowhere to be seen.

One might argue that Stephen Harper is under the influence of a number of ‘wizards’, including Lockheed-Martin lobbyists, Charles McVety, Tom Flanagan or others, but he still seems to exert some level of control over his own thoughts.

When you think of the potential cause for the state of delirium that he seems to be under, one might argue that he is a victim of his own massive inoculation program a few years back sponsored by Glaxo-Smith Kline, where Canadian taxpayers paid hundreds of millions of dollars for a vaccine to cure a seemingly fake virus (H1N1) that was all the rage with the media at the time.  This vaccine could have gone awry and disturbed whatever valuable chemical balance might have remained in the man’s system.

Finally, one could make a very convincing argument that he would love nothing more than chowing down on Michael Ignatieff’s big juicy, Harvard-trained brains.  Unfortunately, Michael Ignatieff has also exhibited zombie-like threats with his ‘Rise up’ performance.  Was he too trying to tap into the armies of undead to bring his party back to life?

I sit in the ‘no’ side of whether or not Stephen Harper is a zombie mainly because zombies were born out of post-modern opposition to ‘going along with the masses’.  Symbolically, they represent consumers and out-of-control followers that have no mind of their own, but Stephen Harper does seem to possess a light of awareness.

The Case for Vampire

Is Stephen Harper a vampire?  Let’s explore the idea.

Vampires are defined loosely as follows:

mythological or folkloric beings who subsist by feeding on the life essence (generally in the form of blood) of living creatures, regardless of whether they are undead or a living person.

… Bram Stoker’s Dracula drew on earlier mythologies of werewolves and similar legendary demons and “was to voice the anxieties of an age”, and the “fears of late Victorian patriarchy“.

More importantly, they possess a number of traits that are sure indicators of vampirism:

  • Revulsion to garlic.  Has anyone seen Steve eat a shawarma?  Those things are LOADED with garlic!
  • Revulsion to day time / light.  I’ve seen him on the campaign trail, but I haven’t seen him outdoors recently.
  • Paleness of skin.  Well, that would be a clincher if we knew the other items were true.
  • Immortality.  We know that Stephen Harper was raised in Toronto before moving to Calgary and we’ve never seen any pictures of him when he was a child.  Where did he live before Toronto and why was he never a child?  Interesting …

But let’s think seriously about this.

It’s very unlikely that Stephen Harper is a vampire.

Vampires are the anti-thesis of religious bodies and were manifestations brought to life in the 1800s by Bram Stoker as the ultimate anti-religious doctrine and as a backlash to the religious hysteria that was controlling the Victorian Age.

But hold on a second!  I’m going to loop back on this part of the debate.

There’s nothing more profound than the proverbial ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing’.  Perhaps Stephen Harper is only pretending to be a religious zealot pretending to be a stand-up normal citizen so that he can convert legions of willing (and blood-filled) Christians because they may have arteries filled with the purest and meekest of blood.

His aversion to actually addressing topics of extreme religious nature including abortion and state-funded colleges for friends may also give us clues as to his ultimate design.

Unfortunately, this may not ring true, as many of the folk who frequent places like Tim Horton’s to load up on carbs, lard and coffee are also potentially poisoning their pure and unadulterated bodies.  Pure is not the first word that comes to mind, although ‘tasty’ might.

I’ll suggest ‘maybe’ for vampire and will change my opinion when I see him chow into a big garlic sandwich.

Something Else?

So else could Stephen Harper be if he’s not a Vampire or Zombie?

Perhaps he’s some hideous hybrid of the two or something worse that might have evolved from a Tar Sands tailing pond disaster that spewed from the north and found its way down into the riding of Calgary West?  Does the Bow Valley River even mingle with the Assiniboine, one of the most polluted rivers in the world thanks to the Tar Sands?

We also know that Stephen Harper (or at least his writers) is a huge fan of the Emperor from the Star Wars series:

Perhaps we’ve all been mislead by the Dark Side of the Force (in other words, political polls, the media and so-called pundits) and Stephen Harper wants to rule Canada like Emperor Palpatine.  It would explain a lot, but the biggest question is ‘why’?  Canada represents about 0.5% of the world’s population, so surely this would be seen as folly?  It’s like running the minnow farm in an ocean filled with sharks.  Ambition of this kind could only be folly.  Sheer folly.
Perhaps he’s just a pawn in the game, like Darth Vader:

We all know that the Emperor manipulated Anikin / Darth Vader into believing that his big shiny Death Star would earn him a few planets and sleeping rights with Ewoks.  Maybe this explains Steve’s fetish with kittens?

Time will tell, voters.  Time will tell.

There are many mysteries that we really don’t want to solve on May 2.

If Stephen Harper gets his true majority on May 2, we’ll quickly discover the real Stephen Harper.

(Let’s not, OK?)

MayDay 2011: Alice Klein of NOW Toronto Encourages Us to Shake Off Cliches

Alice Klein wrote a piece in NOW Toronto this past week encouraging all of us to accept the fact that in this election, the stakes are extremely high and that the game has definitely changed.

She reminds us that it’s not about voting your passion, but voting for that party that will unseat the Conservative government and push them out of as many ridings as possible.

She’s behind Project Democracy, but there are other projects as well (copied from the Project Democracy site):

  • Avaaz The campaigning community bringing people-powered politics to decision-making worldwide
  • Lead Now Brings generations of Canadians together to take action for our future and hold politicians accountable.
  • Swing 33 Donate strategically in 33 ridings to defeat Harper.
  • Pair Vote – Vote Swapping Support your preferred party while also stopping Harper
  • Catch 22 Campaign A grassroots effort to help defeat the Conservative government in 22 key ridings.
  • The Environment is my Voting Issue Facebook Group An action-oriented Facebook group aimed at holding politicians accountable for their votes on environment issues.
  • Department of Culture A community of Canadian artists, arts professionals and cultural workers concerned about ensuring the social and cultural health and prosperity of our nation in the face of a Federal Government that is aggressively undermining Canadian values.
  • Fair Vote Canada – On August 1, 2000, a group of concerned citizens formed Fair Vote Canada (FVC) with the aim of building a nationwide campaign for voting system reform. We envisioned FVC as a multi-partisan, citizen-based campaign bringing together people from all parts of the country, all walks of life and all points on the political spectrum. Today FVC has members in all provinces and approximately 20 local and regional chapters.

Project Democracy is exciting because it focuses on helping voters get up to date polling data related to their riding.  In many ‘strategic voting’ ridings, the past favours the Liberals, but since the Liberals are sliding in the polls, should we really be electing someone from the past or someone from the future?  I’ve signed up for their email to get riding updates, so I’ll post more information as it comes to my in-basket.

Finally, I can’t repeat this often enough:  you can contact pretty much any riding and help them with calls, even if you’re not from that area.  Human voices are substantially more valuable to campaigners as opposed to those awful ‘robo-calls’ and they remind voters that this is an election about the future of all people in Canada.  Of course, consider your riding and the ridings that are immediately around you as opposed to those that are across the continent!

MayDay 2011: At Least Someone Will Make Money Off The Tar Sands

The EU announced earlier this week that it will begin to price Canadian oil from the Tar Sands ‘differently’ than other energy products and sources.

In effect, the EU is putting a tariff on our oil since we’re not willing to control and take responsibility for this issue ourselves.

This is great news for the EU though:  they’ll be making billions off our oil.

And we don’t under a Conservative regime.

What an awesome plan!  What’s next?  Letting someone sell our water for a profit?

Power: Creating Financial Slaves for Oil Barons

Through the 1960s and into recent times, Ontarians have been cajoled into making bad decisions when it comes to our energy options.  We had nuclear rammed down our collective throats by over-zealous and naive politicians that thought 25,000 years of radioactive half-life was OK.

The trade-off was a dynamically growing and robust economy that was a hydro pig known as the Car Industry.

Well, that industry has collapsed, but we’re still all shaking our collective heads wondering at the ‘debt servicing charges’ that appear on our monthly bills.

Forty or fifty years ago, the nuke industry got a fat pay cheque and wicked-assed party and we’re paying the tab.  And we’ll keep paying it for decades to come until power generation is transferred to people and not corporations.

Today (thanks to a blog article from Buckdog) I read that Saskatchewan is poised to make the same ridiculously stupid decision to allow nukes for the sake of creation of ‘cheap’ power.  This time, however, it’s not intended for the the manufacturing base of the province.

No … it’s to subsidize the extraction of dirty oil for decades to come.

Talk about stupid.

When are people going to learn?

Why don’t they take the $20 or $30 billion that the industry is probably skulking around looking for and dump it into something that will propel them forward in the renewable space (like R&D, investment in infrastructure, etc)?

Ava-Tar Sands

This …

AvatarTruck

Or this …

TarSandsTruck

Would you believe that the Tar Sands in Alberta could pose a greater environmental risk than the drilling rigs off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico?

Certainly, if you have time to read this 96 page report from this Ceres-commissioned report authored by RiskMetrics Group.

A brief review of the document was provided on the Ceres website, including the following observations:

  • Alberta’s oil sands are already the world’s largest energy project—with $200 billion in funds committed from the world’s leading oil producers, including BP, ExxonMobil and Shell.  However, these producers face numerous environmental, production and distribution challenges that will grow as the oil sands industry pushes to boost production amid tighter regulations and resource constraints
  • Oil sands companies in Alberta are already producing 1.3 million barrels a day, and their goal is to triple production by 2030.
  • Ceres president Mindy Lubber:  “The energy-and water-intensive nature of oil sands, combined with climate change regulations, permitting obstacles and other challenges, are a recipe for diminishing revenues and returns if not properly managed.”
  • Investors have already filed shareholder resolutions on the oil sands topic with Royal Dutch Shell, ExxonMobil, BP and ConocoPhillips. The Shell resolution will be voted on at tomorrow’s annual corporate meeting in London.  ExxonMobil’s shareholder resolution is up for a vote on May 26.
  • While just over half of U.S. oil comes from overseas countries like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, the fastest growing source is from two North American regions – the Gulf of Mexico and Canada’s vast oil sands region. Oil production from these two areas has grown to three million barrels a day in recent years, supplying more than 15 percent of total U.S. oil needs.
  • Long-term risks from development in Canada’s oil sands region are arguably greater. Many of these risks stem from already-high financial costs and the environmental impacts of transforming highly viscous bitumen into synthetic crude oil – a process that requires vast amounts of energy and water.
  • “Investors need to question whether this is a wise use of resources,” says Doug Cogan, a report co-author and director of climate risk management for RiskMetrics Group.  “The oil sands process takes natural gas—the cleanest-burning and lowest-carbon fossil fuel—to turn one of the dirtiest and highest-carbon fuels into a saleable product.  Large volumes of freshwater are also consumed in the process, and end up in toxic tailings ponds.  It’s like the Gulf of Mexico spill, but playing out in slow motion.  From a climate and ecological perspective, we’re really no better off.”
  • “This report makes clear that oil sands companies must do more to analyze the far-reaching risks from current and future production in Alberta,” said Jack Ehnes, chief executive officer of the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS), the nation’s second largest public pension fund. “With nearly $1.9 billion invested in the equity securities of BP, Shell, Exxon and ConocoPhillips combined, we have quite of teachers’ money at stake here. We need to ensure these companies are properly recognizing and managing oil sand risks.”

Among the report’s key findings:

Shrinking profit margin: The costs of producing oil sands – already the world’s most expensive source of new oil -  are rising and will continue to do so due to the onset of carbon pricing, higher input commodity prices, and rising costs for water treatment and land reclamation. As a result, global oil prices will need to remain high – possibly approaching $100 per barrel – to ensure a competitive rate of return on $120 billion in planned expansion projects. Oil sand operators must also be mindful that if global oil prices get too high, between $120 and $150 a barrel, it will likely reduce global oil demand and shift markets in favor of alternative fuels.

Vulnerability to changes in U.S. Markets: Presently, the vast majority of of the 1.3 million barrels being produced every day flows to the United States. Long-term access to this market is jeopardized, however, by emerging low-carbon fuel standards in the U.S. that will require a lower carbon intensity in transportation fuels. These fuel standards, already adopted in California, will put carbon-intensive oil sands fuel at a distinct disadvantage because oil sands output will likely have to be mixed with next-generation biofuels that are not yet being produced on a commercial scale.

Other Distribution Obstacles: Transporting expanded oil sands production west to China and other Asian markets is another alternative. However, there is strong opposition to building pipelines to Canada’s West Coast from Aboriginal communities who have significant rights under the Canadian constitution.

Water and Other Resource Constraints: Oil sands production is highly water intensive, with up to four barrels of freshwater consumed for every barrel of oil produced from surface mining extraction. Water withdrawals from the Athabasca River watershed are already restricted during winter months to protect fish habitat. If oil sands production volume grows according to companies’ estimates, some oil sands mining operations could exceed their wintertime allowances as early as 2014, causing possible production interruptions. Climate change may also exacerbate this situation; glaciers feeding into the Athabasca River watershed are already shrinking.

Growing Land Reclamation Costs/Liability: After 40 years of production, no oil sand companies have yet fully reclaimed the extensive tailings ponds used for holding polluted wastewater. This is because the fine tailings in these ponds take decades to settle out. These tailing ponds, already covering an area the size of Washington D.C., pose risks of contaminating adjoining lands and water resources, and present health problems in downstream communities. Alberta’s Directive 74 requires oil sands miners to speed up remediation of existing ponds – an order that creates especially large liabilities for the industry’s legacy miners such as Suncor and Syncrude.

The report specifically recommends that oil sands producers:

  • Review the lasting impact of their proposed development plans and pursue more pro-active, incremental strategies to manage environmental and social risks;
  • Provide guidance for assumed oil, natural gas and carbon prices in future production forecasts.
  • Do a better job of articulating to community groups and other stakeholders their strategies for land use planning, water management and carbon mitigation;
  • Disclose information from these more detailed evaluations to investors;
  • Develop stronger ties with the U.S. biofuels industry both for speeding up development of advanced biofuel capacity and sharing existing infrastructure, such as oil sands pipelines that already feed into the U.S. Midwest.

“All oil is getting dirtier and harder to produce,” said Bob Walker, vice president of sustainability at Northwest and Ethical Investment in Canada. “With Chinese investment and demand set to grow outside the U.S., oil sands production is likely to grow. Investors need to be aware of the environmental and social risks and engage oil sands companies to improve disclosure, operational performance and to make technological investments to reduce environmental and social impacts.”

“We recognize that oil companies will continue to invest in the oil sands,” continued Lubber, “but they shouldn’t do so blindly. Investors need assurances that the risks outlined in this report are being taken into account.  This includes the fact that carbon will be regulated, that water will be increasingly scarce, that tailings ponds need to be cleaned up, and that doing all this will be expensive. Companies need to build solutions in up front or they shouldn’t be building these projects at all.”

The full report is available at http://www.ceres.org/oilsandsreport and http://riskmetrics.com

About Ceres
Ceres is leading coalition of investors, environmental groups and other public interest groups working with companies to address sustainability challenges such as climate change. Ceres also directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk, a network of 90 institutional investors with $10 trillion of collective assets focused on the business impacts of climate change.

About RiskMetrics Group
RiskMetrics is a leading provider of risk management and corporate governance services.  Its ESG Analytics Group analyzes cutting edge issues like climate change, water and ecosystem services that support the global economy.

Why Prorogue Canadian Democracy? For the Oil

Late in the evening on December 30th, one thing survived Stephen’s Harpooning of Canadian democracy:  oil.

That’s right.  While the rest of us were being distracted about losing our ability to have even a moderate sense of democracy in this country, the Harper-crites were busy ramming through an approval on the Mackenzie Pipeline.

And then I realized:  the prorogue moment was a very risky smoke screen on the part of the Cons in order to ensure that it was business as usual for Big Oil.

Is this even legal since everything was shut down at the same time by ‘Tsar-per’?

Original story from the New York Times:

Canadian Board Approves Western Gas Pipeline

By CLIFFORD KRAUSS

Published: December 31, 2009

HOUSTON — A long-delayed natural gas pipeline in Western Canada, which has the potential to provide significant amounts of energy to North America, has cleared a crucial hurdle by receiving the endorsement of a Canadian government review panel.

The $15.4 billion Mackenzie Valley project, which involves Royal Dutch Shell, Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips, would connect natural gas fields in the Arctic with the rest of Canada and potentially with the United States.

Some Indian communities and environmental groups have called the 750-mile pipeline a threat to local species and native cultures and have expressed concern about the greenhouse emissions created if the gas is used to heat and upgrade Tar Sands into usable fuels. Greenhouse emissions from oil sands are substantially higher than from conventional oil and gas production.

But the joint review panel, after five years of study, concluded late Wednesday that the project “would deliver valuable and lasting overall benefits and avoid significant adverse environmental impacts.” It continued, “The project itself, as long-term infrastructure, provides a key basis for future economic development.”

The National Energy Board and federal cabinet still need to approve the project, but they are expected to follow the recommendations of the review panel. The board is scheduled to hold hearings in April.

If the project is approved, the oil companies would then have to decide whether to build the pipeline, given the current low gas prices, the prospects for competing gas fields in western Canada and the uncertainty of financial support from the Canadian government. Furthermore, a competing and also delayed gas pipeline project in Alaska might overtake the Canadian project.

“If the oil companies think prices are firming on gas, they will go ahead with this,” said Donald Hertzmark, a consultant who advises energy companies on international projects. “It could still be important for the United States and Canada, especially if gas takes off as a transportation fuel or if environmental issues slow down or derail the development of shale gas resources.”

The oil companies originally filed applications for the project in 2004, and hoped to begin operations five years later. But the review panel took longer than expected to complete its study. Now gas industry experts say operations could start in 2014 at the earliest.

The review panel, which assessed the environmental and socioeconomic impacts, concluded that the pipeline would not harm fish in the Mackenzie River. But it called for regional planning to protect many species including polar bears, caribou and beluga whales.

It also recommended that the gas be used to replace coal-fired electrical generation to control greenhouse gas emissions that have been linked to global warming and climate change.

The three gas fields that the pipeline would connect have reserves that are estimated at six trillion cubic feet — an amount equal to more than two years of total Canadian consumption of gas. The pipeline would initially supply about one billion cubic feet a day, which could be expanded after future offshore and onshore drilling.

The United States Energy Department has projected that Canadian annual gas consumption will increase from 3.3 trillion cubic feet in 2006 to 4.7 trillion cubic feet in 2030, largely because of the expanding needs of the oil sands industry.

Production in Canada’s conventional natural gas fields have been in decline, along with exports to the United States.

2009 Zeroes

Lists bring a sense of order to the world.

More importantly, I look at lists like filters.  They help me (and hopefully others that read this list and my Heroes list) identify what I think the most relevant activities / people / events in 2009 were.  They help separate all of the noise that’s going on around us and get us right down to the fundamentals of who was naughty and who was nice during the last year.

Anyways, here goes (and apologies for the growing list):

#22:  Scouts Canada

2009 was the first year that my son could enroll with Scouts Canada as a Beaver.

Having grown up with Scouts myself, I couldn’t wait.  I was looking forward to reliving my own youth through my son’s eyes.

This was not going to happen.

Scouts Canada has failed to adapt with the times.

At the very basic level of the Beavers, they decided to ‘teach’ the young kids about soldiers, marching, using guns and even encouraging them to engage in gun play (with fake guns, of course) where they would chase each other and ‘shoot’ at each other in mock games.

To top it all off, it was on the night before Rememberance Day.  I was disgusted and complained to the local leader, only to get a response that it was OK and that gun play is fun and harmless when done right.

I was furious and took my complaint to a local administrator, but was shut down and told to take it up with my local leader, even though I had forwarded the email from the local leader.

Scouts Canada faces extinction if it cannot adapt with the times.  In the grand scheme of things, this was a small issue, but what happens when religion and the Queen enter the weekly running dialogue and series of chants that my son ‘must’ learn in order to ‘get the most’ from this institution?

What also bothers me is the constant ‘tithing’ or requests for donations that we receive every week.  We already paid $150 for the year so that my son could run around a church basement.  Yes, there are things that they provide without asking for more money, but we’re donating a loonie or toonie with every session, bumping up the annual commitment to something more like $250.  There are also the endless fundraisers (Apple Day, Popcorn sales), all of which make me wonder why Scouts Canada needs so much damn money.  I’d rather give this money to charity.

I now attend every meeting, but will not renew my son’s membership in 2010.

Also, I’m looking for a new group that my whole family can participate with.  I’d like to join something that acknowledges and explores world cultures without being religious, but more importantly, something that we can join where we learn some basic outdoors skills while also learning how to be responsible about them.

Suggestions?

#21:  Darlington Spill

The tritium spill at Darlingon in December 2009 was glossed over by the OPG, Ontario’s government and the general media in an unbelievable wave of simplicity.

We have been told that there’s nothing wrong, but should we believe this?

This story was a small glimpse into the hazards related to the nuclear industry.

Please never install another nuke again.  To be honest, I don’t care, but the future of our planet depends on not being so stupid.

#20:  Religious Zealots (especially as Political Advisors)

The Toronto Star finally did a tell-all about how people like Charles McVety are effectively controlling policy direction in the Prime Minister’s office.  We need more exploration of a similar and more intense nature.  We need all Canadians to understand how these people are shaping policy for their own profit and gain, with little regard for the population at large.

No Apologies blog offered a little more detail on the subject.

These issues have reawakened the desire of all Canadians to separate Church and State.

It’s time.

#19:  Don Cherry

Canada’s hockey ‘Don’ is a frustrating ‘tour de force’ that perpetuates two things in this country:

  1. ‘Support the troops’ flag waving that we just don’t need.
  2. Hockey violence.

I support our troops just as much as I support our doctors, public policy analysts, our nurses, road workers, and the millions of other people in Canada that provide public services to all of us all the while having deficit cuts and public inquiries hanging over their heads.

And hockey violence?  I will never enlist my son with hockey so long as nothing is done to curtail hockey violence in Canada.  Don Cherry could do something about given his stature as a Canadian commentator with Hockey Night in Canada, but he doesn’t.

Why?

#18:  The Nobel Peace Prize Committee

Barack Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize like I deserve an award for being the first male to give birth.  Giving someone an award for something that they promise to do or might do is not the same as rewarding action.  The likelihood of this happening, however, is marginal.  I think even Obama knows this.

Therefore, the decision to give him the Peace Prize in 2009 is one made in error.  Until the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are actually ended and the hundreds of US military installations around the world are untangled from the rubric of local affairs, I’ll insist that the man get the award.

Until then, find someone who is actually doing peaceful things.

#17:  Asian Carp

Asian carp – a voracious and destructive breed of fish – threaten to invade the Great Lakes within the next few months to few years and this will spell disaster for the natural environment of these water systems.

The Toronto Star covered the issue recently.

The history:

Asian carp were first brought to Arkansas in 1963 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which wanted a natural way to control aquatic weeds, reducing the need for chemicals. Fish farms brought more carp to function as pond cleaners.

The fish started to escape as early as 1966, according to a Fish and Wildlife Service history. The Asian carp were spread by Mississippi River floods in the 1990s.

Once released, the insatiable fish quickly conquered local rivers and headed north to spawn and eat. Asian carp now dominate many parts of major rivers, including the Mississippi, Tennessee, Missouri, Ohio, Columbia and Platte rivers. A survey in an offshoot of the Mississippi River near St. Louis found 97% of the fish were Asian carp.

The other sad part of this story:  the Asian Carp represent just one of the more than 150 invasive species to occupy the Great Lakes since the beginning of the 20th century.

#16:  The CBC

Yes, the CBC most certainly deserves a unique mention in this year’s list, mainly because the management has done everything it can to grind ‘the mother ship’ into the ground, buy American programming, and regurgitate all of the PR and spin that comes from various spin doctors.

I think they also deserve to be singled out since they made the exceptionally poor decision to join the hordes of corporate shills behind the ‘LocalTVMatters’ campaign.  Not only is CBC extremely lacking in local content, but their support gives a level of authenticity to the campaign that it otherwise lacks.

To top it all off, they (through CBC Radio) continue to produce the most abhorrent piece of propaghanda known as Afghanada.  It is the bottom of the content barrel and even Goebbels would be proud.

#15:  IOC / VANOC

When I was a kid, the Olympics meant a lot to me.  It was a brief moment in time when all of the world stopped to cheer on the youngest, strongest, fastest and most talented athletes that we could offer to amateur competition.

Today, the Olympics represent nothing more than a big drain on public coffers, a massive never-ending advertisement, support for repressive  regimes (has anyone seen reforms from China yet?) and, worst yet, near-Fascist in the control of information that will come from the Games as they’re played out in February of 2010.  And I haven’t even begun to touch the issues related to native land claims.

The latest casualty of censorship and control was the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, which refuses to ‘mime’ their performance for the grand opening.  Good for them.

I, for one, will not spend a minute watching the Games.

#14:  Rupert Murdoch

In 2009, Mr. Murdoch of News Corp and Fox News fame essentially told Google to go screw itself and that all content produced by his companies would be hidden from search engines.

While thinking ‘hey, that would be a good thing, right?’ I also wondered if Mr. Murdoch had read the stock pages recently of his own Wall Street Journal for the list price of Google?

#13:  The IMF and World Bank

2008 ended in near-complete financial anarchy.  The economies of the world were barely pulled together only because the world’s largest economies and treasuries responded to the clarion call of a number of international institutions, particularly the World Bank and IMF, to generate a massive and unprecedented level of spend from public coffers.

I believe the action taken to encourage economic stability was misdirected in the form of incredibly large bailouts for companies and activities that needed them least of all (the banks and car manufacturers).

The short-term result was unprecedented deficits of all western governments.

The longer-term result:  we will see 2010 and beyond be years of incredible slashing and burning of all public institutions.

I predict that anything that we hold dear in Canada – health care, the CBC, a legal system, etc – will be put on the block by Jim Flaherty.  The entire array of government-owned property will be sold off at fire-sale prices to finance a fraction of the inappropriate spending on home renovations and tax-free savings accounts for the rich and roads for the mob.  In fact, this story will prove to be a scandal of much larger proportion in 2010 than the Ad Scam was, assuming someone has the stones to do something about it.

#12:  Dalton McGuinty and Gleb Campbell

The HST will sow the seeds of ruin for both Dalton McGuinty and Glen Campbell.  It is Harris downloading at its best and will help the Cons shine while the rest of the country gets mired in political wrangling and the perception that it’s the provincial leaders brining about a tax increase.

Both of these men got screwed by the Cons, but we’re all going to get screwed by downloading.

Thanks for nothing, gents!

#11:  Elizabeth May

“Where’s my home?”

Elizabeth May has run in 4 jurisdictions (London North-Centre, Central Nova, possibly Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, and in the next election, the Saanich-Gulf Islands in BC) since being elected leader of the Green Party and she needs to settle down.

Of course, I like Elizabeth.  I like her broad knowledge base and ability to cite specific details in relation to environmental issues, legislative challenges and other elements related to her party’s platform.  I like her the fact that she seems approachable.

In fact, I think that the Greens should still consider some way to partner with the NDP (despite vast political and ideological viewpoints) and find a way to minimize the destruction that both parties bring to each other at the benefit of the Cons.  If they do, it will guarantee that either May or Layton will be top-ranked as Heroes in 2010.

And those are the only reasons why she didn’t get graduated to the Top 10 list of curmudgeons in 2009.

#10:  Michaelle Jean

In 2009, Canada’s Governor General proved that the office was redundant and an insult to Canadians.  Stephen Harper leveraged the office of the Governor General to prorogue, or effectively cancel the notion of democracy in Canada.

The situation proved that Canada is nothing more than a blob on a map for monarchists to do with as they please.

Thanks for another year of Conservative dictatorship, Michaelle!  Thanks.

#9:  Alberta’s Tar Sands

I don’t think I’m going to say much about the Tar Sands with the exception of this:  Ed Stelmach is right in that we all have Tar Sands muck on our hands.  As long as we accept transfers from the Wild Rose state province, we all have to accept responsibility.

#8:  10 Percenters

It used to be that Parliamentarians tried to communicate the wonderful things that they did in the House of Commons using what are called ‘10 Percenters‘.  These mass mailings could go to households in other ridings – at no cost to the politician sending them – so long as the distribution did not exceed 10 percent of the households in their own constituency.

This ‘perk’ has proven to be a complete sham and is being abused by every single federal political party in Canada to spread malicious BS about anyone else that is a Parliamentarian.

Will 2010 be the end of the 10 Percenter?  Let’s hope so.

#7:  The CRTC

During 2009, the CRTC proved to Canadians that it doesn’t have a purpose.

Whether it was rules and regs about Net Neutrality, licensing and copyright issues or policies related to broadcast television, they clearly demonstrated that they are not connected with Canadians, but with the monopoly institutions that lobby the CRTC day and night.

Canadians are being lead to believe that we need things like CanCon or rules related to content programming for our broadcasters.  Unfortunately, neither of these or other rules have done little to benefit Canadian artists.

If you feel the same way about the CRTC, call for its demise and support DissolvetheCRTC.ca.

#6:  H1N1 ‘Hysteriosis’

The insanity that surrounded H1N1 vaccinations, the clinics, the media and people that were threatening violence if they didn’t get their shots was beyond obscene.  All of the actors involved did nothing less than depreciate the human experience in 2009 and they should be ashamed.

2009′s H1N1 mania exceeded the insanity we saw with 2000′s Y2K.  It was a mess that was compounded by the media’s inability to apply scrutiny to an awful situation.  Moreover, several company did their best to act in their own interest and not with that of the public.  It opens up the likelihood that any federal party that promises a public medical research institution will gain credibility with a wide array of Canadians that don’t believe companies should profit from hysteria.

The hidden story with the H1N1 fiasco:  it highlighted the ways in which certain privatization zealots would attack Canada’s revered health system.  Because private institutions were given medication ahead of public flu shot clinics, many wealthy and powerful Canadians will do their best to continue to get front-of-the-line access like they might at a Lexus dealership.

#5:  Canadian Broadcasters

Read this article.  It will change your life.  Save Local TV, but for what?

The dark side to the whole Canadian broadcast story the past decade or so has been the limitless, reckless overspending – especially by CTV – in order to attain total dominance in the marketplace. CTV has owned the Canadian Top-20 nationally the past decade with its deep line-up of American hits – American Idol, the CSIs, The Amazing Race, Desperate Housewives, Grey’s Anatomy, the list goes on and on.

During – and, really, because of – that drive to dominance, the cost of importing American shows skyrocketed. Still, it seemed, no price was too high to keep a potential hit away from arch rival Canwest Global.

…

Now CTV wants you to cover their losses after recklessly overspending on the rights to the Olympic Games. The CTV-Rogers consortium paid a record $153 million U.S. when you include the rights to 2012. It was, some estimate, about $50 million more than CBC was prepared to bid at the time.

Times have changed. The companies that used to race to sponsor Olympic TV – mainly car companies and banks – got in ahead of the broadcasters for bailouts. The grand plan by CTV and Rogers to charge the highest ad rates in Olympic history ran smack into a stiff recession.

So now they’re going for the gold by asking Canadians – also hard-hit by the recession – to reach into their pockets and help them cover their losses.

If overspending was an Olympic event, CTV would win the gold, Global the silver, City the bronze. Don’t get taken for another ride in the KITT car, Canada. Let the buyers beware.

Now … go out and give some money to the folks with Net Neutrality.

Along with the need to abolish the CRTC, we all need to send a signal to our politicians and broadcasters that we’re really not interested in watered-down pablum from the US.

Canadians can produce good content, but you have to let us go.

#4:  Jim Flaherty

When this man talks, I have to turn off the radio or TV (although I have to admit that I don’t watch TV much anymore).

I’m left with a single question:  did the people in Oshawa not learn their lesson when Flaherty was Michael Harris’ axe-man in the 1990s?

Shortly after Parliament was dissolved for the holidays, ‘Diamond Jim’ crouched over the collective fire pits of millions of Canadians and took a dump on their Christmas by threatening unprecedented cutbacks in public programs in order to finance the growing deficit.  This was most likely a tactic done to appease the Conservative base but also avoid any real public scrutiny in the House of Commons.  Bold move, Jim.  Bold move.

What’s next?  Stealing presents from under the tree and ‘taking burned out lightbulbs to repair them there and bring them back here’?  When’s the moment when you and Max ride to the top of Mount Crumpet to discover that your heart is three sizes too small?  Is there anything that will make your heart grow to normal proportions?

Probably not.

#3:  Christie Blatchford

I’ll give her this:  blogging in Canada wouldn’t have taken on the relevance that it has in just the last few weeks if Christie Blatchford hadn’t trashed Richard Colvin the way she did.

Her unfortunate acts against Colvin have not only ruined his character, but they’ve damaged the reputation of the Globe and Mail to a point where I believe there will be an internal riot that will ultimately destroy one of Canada’s most influential media institutions.

In fact, I would argue that her acts of bias have pushed the Globe into irrelevance, much like Rupert Murdoch has pushed Fox into a world of ‘Faux News’.

Congratulations!

#2:  Stephen Harper

I’m honestly not sure where to start.

Stephen Harper spent 2009 being at the centre of Canada’s rapid descent into last place with pretty much everything on this planet unless, of course, you’re talking about the world’s worst and we’re at the top.

The great thing about Steve is that he’s helped the world of bloggers develop a broad new lexicon to describe him and the Conservatives:

  • “Harpooned” – anything that gets in Steve’s way gets Harpooned (democracy, Parliament, environment, etc).
  • “Slippery Steve” – to date, nothing has stuck to Steve, but give it time.  You can’t be mired in so much shit and not stink.
  • “Harpocrisy” – the constant state of saying one thing and doing another (example:  destroying the Liberals for their efforts to bring a carbon tax to Canada and then suggesting it might happen here simply because the US might want us to).

#1:  Jack Layton

That’s right.  I’ve saved Jack Layton for the very end.  We all know that Stephen Harper is the most manipulative politician since Macchiavelli himself, and that Michael Ignatieff will continue to lead his party sideways for the rest of 2010 and beyond.

However, Jack Layton deserves the #1 spot for zeroes in 2009 for one simple reason:  he helped the Conservatives retain their hold on power in Canada.  I think Jack is the ‘friend’ that Stephen is singing about here.

I love the man, but the NDP made a single bad choice in the fall of 2009 by not stepping in to defeat the Conservatives when they could have.

Of course, an election wouldn’t have helped us collectively avoid our shameful disgrace in Copenhagen.  However, we could have opened up the books on the Afghanistan detainee issue.  We might have even been able to get what Jack wanted (EI reforms) if we simply pushed the Cons over the edge and brought on a new election in Canada.

That’s right:  I would have welcomed an election in Canada again so that I could celebrate the fact that I live in a democracy and not in a tempestuous brine of political swill that swallows my sense of pride and dignity when I say I’m Canadian.

Maybe you’ll be reading this Jack and you’ll get the message that if you don’t want to lead, please step out of the way because there are lots of Canadians who believe our country is more than just about political aggrandizement and power grabs.

And if you’re reading this Jack, please take a note from your ‘friend’ and start thinking ahead 4 or 5 steps like Stephen Harper does.  I don’t like the man, but I’ll give him this:  he and the rest of the Cons are exceptional strategists.  If you’re ever going to bring the NDP to power, you have to start thinking ahead instead of having knee-jerk reactions to various ‘turdblossoms’ that the Cons hurl at you because it’s exactly what they want you to do while they work behind the scenes on dismantling this country.

Another consideration (which I mentioned above) is that Jack needs to talk with the Greens.  Together, they could come to rule this country if they work out some way to cast aside differences and stop chipping away at each other’s base.  If they do, it will surely be an exceptional action worth noting in 2010.

In fact, I believe the future of our depends on it.

Conclusions

I’m sorry about writing such a massive list.  However, after several days of effort and a lot of thought, I’m happy with my list, but I know that I missed a thousand examples of people being small, petty and miserable in 2009.

Please share your thoughts about who deserves the crown as a zero in 2009.  I look forward to it!

P.S.  I expect to have my list of ’2009 Heroes’ polished and published within the next few days.

Harpooned: Canadian Taxpayers

In an interview with the CTV (does he ever talk with the CBC?), Stephen Harper has indicated that he will not rule out a carbon tax, simply because he’d be more than happy to drop his pants for the US (again).  This is a complete 180 from his original position that destroyed the Dion Liberals in the 2008.

Brilliant.  Sycophantic slippery Steve has lied to us again.

In fact, we’re all about to be ‘Harpooned’, much like Baby Boomers and other savers were Harpooned when the Conservatives killed the value of Income Trusts back in 2006.

We’re all going to eat the cost of carbon capture and carbon sequestration all so that the companies in Alberta can continue to belch out unprecedented volumes of crap.

Yay!  I can’t wait until the next election.  Please Santa.  Please bring me an election for Christmas :)