TIGblogs TIG | TIGblogs GROUP TIGBLOGS LOGIN SIGNUP
Adam MacIsaac's  Blog
Adam MacIsaac's Blog
« previous 5


Wildlife group complained years before ducks got stuck in Alta. oilsands waste
Related to country: Canada

Translations available in: English (original) | French | Spanish | Italian | German | Portuguese | Swedish | Russian | Dutch | Arabic

Syncrude says most of the birds too heavily coated with oil to survive

Wednesday, April 30, 2008 | 11:48 AM MT
CBC News

A wildlife group says it predicted problems years before hundreds of migrating ducks were found dead and dying this week in a pond of toxic residue at a Syncrude oilsands plant in northern Alberta.

"I'm surprised that it took this long to happen," said Glen Semenchuk, executive director of the Federation of Alberta Naturalists, late Tuesday.

The day before, about 500 ducks landed Monday on a tailings pond filled with waste from the oilsands operation at the Aurora North Site mine, north of Fort McMurray.

Most of the ducks were too heavily coated with oil and waste to survive, said a Syncrude spokesperson Wednesday. A few of the surviving ducks have been brought to a wildlife rescue agency in the Edmonton area.

Semenchuk said his group has been concerned for years that the ponds were along a major flyway for waterfowl and could attract birds.

Environment officials said the birds are "clearly heavily oiled" and not able to fly. Recovery operations are underway, but it's not known yet how many of the birds can be saved.

"We were assured by the government that as part of their licensing, they would ensure a deterrent program would be in place, and now we are seeing that deterrent program does have some flaws in it," Semenchuk said.
Syncrude taking situation seriously: spokesman

Mike Hudema, a spokesman for Greenpeace Canada, which has been lobbying for a moratorium on oilsands expansion, said Wednesday: "It's a very devastating tragedy."

Greenpeace said one of the most alarming factors is Syncrude failed to report the incident. Government officials said they only learned about it from an anonymous tip.

"How many other incidents like this have there been," said Hudema. "What about other spills, other incidents? Because industry shouldn't be reporting on itself. That's the government job and the government obviously fell asleep at the switch."

Syncrude said it uses air cannons and scarecrows to keep birds from landing on the kilometre-wide ponds from early spring to late fall. But bad weather had prevented crews from getting onto the ponds last week to set up the equipment in time.

"In our 30 years of operating history, we've never had something like this occur, so it's definitely very unusual and we are taking it very seriously," said Syncrude spokesman Alain Moore.

Syncrude said it is working closely with Alberta Fish and Wildlife, and Alberta Environment to co-ordinate recovery efforts.

Semenchuk said the incident highlights the problem with the tailings ponds, which are growing by millions of litres a day as oilsands development expands.

April 30, 2008 | 4:23 PM Comments  0 comments



Poor children main victims of climate change - U.N.
Translations available in: English (original) | French | Spanish | Italian | German | Portuguese | Swedish | Russian | Dutch | Arabic

Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:32am IST

By Jeremy Lovell

LONDON (Reuters) - Millions of the world's poorest children are among the principal victims of climate change caused by the rich developed world, a United Nations report said on Tuesday, calling for urgent action.

The UNICEF report "Our Climate, Our Children, Our Responsibility" measured action on targets set in the U.N. Millennium Development Goals, aimed at halving child poverty by 2015. It found failure on counts from health to survival, education and gender equality.

"It is clear that a failure to address climate change is a failure to protect children," said UNICEF UK director David Bull. "Those who have contributed least to climate change -- the world's poorest children -- are suffering the most."

The report said climate change could add 40,000-160,000 child deaths a year in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa through lower economic growth.

It also noted that if temperatures rose by two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, up to 200 million people globally would face hunger -- a figure that climbs to 550 million with a temperature rise of three degrees.

The UNICEF report said economic damage due to climate change would force parents to withdraw children from schools -- often the only place they are guaranteed at least one meal a day -- to fetch water and fuel instead.

Environmental changes wrought by climate change will also expand the range of deadly diseases such as malaria, which already kills 800,000 children a year and is now being seen in previously unaffected areas.

Scientists predict global average temperatures will rise by between 1.6 and 4.0 degrees Celsius this century due to carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels for power and transport, causing floods, famines, violent storms and droughts.

An international agreement is being sought on action to ensure temperatures do not rise more than 2.0 degrees.

INEVITABLE

But some environmentalists say a 2.0 degree rise is inevitable whatever action is taken now. That is partly because of the 30-year time lag in climate response to emitted carbon, and partly because nations like China, which opens a new coal-fired power station a week, cannot and will not stop burning carbon.

China, with vast coal reserves and an economy growing at 10 percent a year, is set to overtake the United States as the world's biggest carbon emitter.

Developing nations, under pressure to sign up to new curbs on carbon emissions at the end of next year, say there is no reason they should keep their people in poverty when the problem has been caused by the developed world.

"Rich countries' responsibility for the bulk of past emissions demands that we give our strong support," said Nicholas Stern, whose 2006 report on the economic implications of the climate crisis sparked international concern.

"Business-as-usual or delayed action would lead to the probability of much higher temperature increases which would catastrophically transform our planet," he wrote in a foreword to Tuesday's report.

"It will be the young and the poor and developing countries that will suffer earliest and hardest.

"We cannot allow this to happen."

© Thomson Reuters 2008 All rights reserved

April 30, 2008 | 8:15 AM Comments  0 comments



Alberta Fights 'Dirty Oil' Stigma
Related to country: Canada

Translations available in: English (original) | French | Spanish | Italian | German | Portuguese | Swedish | Russian | Dutch | Arabic

With $100 billion worth of bitumen projects on tap, the province is ready to battle environmental groups trying to turn public opinion against what they call 'dirty oil'

Renata D'Aliesio and Jason Fekete, Calgary Herald
Published: Saturday, April 26, 2008

Alberta's $100-billion bonanza to develop the Athabasca oilsands has fractured into a tale of two solitudes.

In the eyes of the provincial government, the massive projects will unlock a secure and environmentally sustainable source of energy for Canada and the world.

In the words of environmental activists, they are among the most destructive developments on the planet.

These two divergent views are increasingly clashing at home and abroad. What began as a minor annoyance to the Stelmach government has evolved into a full-blown battle over Alberta's oilsands image.

The latest salvo came Thursday as Premier Ed Stelmach addressed more than 1,000 party faithful at an annual fundraising dinner in Edmonton.

Amid the premier's boasts about a "New West" and Alberta's oilsands bounty, an unfurled Greenpeace banner read: "$telmach: the best Premier oil money can buy."

Today the battle shifts to Washington, D.C., where deputy premier Ron Stevens begins a five-day mission to bolster the oilsands brand.

Protesters in polar bear suits are gearing up, just as they did for the premier's visit to U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney in January.

"It's pretty much the dirtiest form of oil and the wrong answer to our energy addiction," says Steve Kretzmann of Washington-based Oil Change International.

"Given the way things are going (with climate change), we don't see that level of concern ebbing anytime soon."

The Alberta government is ramping up its effort, too. This week it was revealed the province will spend $25 million over three years on an advertising and marketing campaign to boost the Alberta "brand."

Stelmach vowed he won't let environmentalists hijack public perception of the province's oil.

The stakes for the province are high: $100 billion in national and international investment is flooding into the region, making it a strategic source of new global oil supply and a boon to the entire Canadian economy.

"That's why in the speech I talked about taking the message to other jurisdictions around the world, getting the message out," Stelmach said Thursday.

"I'm not going to leave it up to Greenpeace, Sierra Club or any of these other groups."

Stelmach even referenced the contentious East Coast seal hunt.

Despite federal and provincial government efforts to characterize the seal hunt as responsible and humane, images of clubbed and skinned seals have struck a chord around the world. Animal rights activists now have the ear of the European Union, which is contemplating a crippling ban on Canadian seal products.

A similar threat may loom for Alberta's oilsands as climate change concerns mount. For many environmentalists, the development's carbon footprint is too heavy, producing three times more greenhouse gases than a conventional barrel of oil.

"The tar sands are one of the world's largest environmental disasters and they are occurring right on this government's watch," Greenpeace's Mike Hudema yelled as two security guards escorted him out of the premier's dinner Thursday.

This sort of talk -- and the potential risk it carries -- has captured the attention of Canada's powerful oil lobby.

Brian Maynard, a vice-president with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, says the oilpatch is increasingly fielding concerns from the public about the oilsands' impact on the environment.

"Industry is taking this very seriously," Maynard says, "which is why we are trying to do a much better job of listening and responding to people's concerns because, yes, this does have the potential to significantly impact our business."

American policy experts agree

Alberta can't afford to ignore the anti-oilsands campaign.

They say there's a growing danger Alberta and its oilsands will be tarnished in the United States, and this could impact its energy exports.

Chris Sands, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Hudson Institute who specializes in Canada-U.S. relations, contends Alberta has both "the blessing and the curse" of being on everyone's mind right now.

"The issue for Canada is that Alberta's oilsands may well be stigmatized as dirty oil of the sort we shouldn't want to purchase in the United States," Sands says.

"That has a huge impact on the saleability and the value even of the resource, particularly in the near term before it's established its place in the market."

But David Biette, director of the Canada Institute at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, believes Alberta has time to polish its image. He believes most Americans aren't that familiar with Alberta or its energy resources.

Alberta may be painted as the environmental bogeyman in Canada, but it doesn't share that "status" in the United States, he contends.

"It's not like dirty oil trips off the tongue of most people," Biette says.

Which is why the Alberta government is launching its public relations offensive.

Stevens, who is the province's International and Intergovernmental Relations Minister, says his job is to combat what he calls misconceptions about the province's oil.

Stevens says the government must ensure the media, regulators and politicians in the United States are educated about Alberta's energy supply and understand there are strict environmental regulations in place.

He concedes the "dirty oil" campaign is grabbing attention.

"It's very clear that it's receiving media coverage," he recently told the Herald editorial board. "Because it's receiving media coverage, it's necessary for us to ensure the true story with respect to oilsands is told."

Stevens acknowledges the aftermath of the looming U.S. presidential election -- where all three contenders are likely to take a tougher stance on the environment -- could raise further questions about the oilsands.

That makes it all the more important that the provincial government get ahead of the issue, he says.

"We have to tell our story. We have to be vigilant," he said.

Opponents are remaining vigilant, too.

North American environmental group ForestEthics, known for waging high-profile battles against the logging industry, has turned its focus on northern Alberta.

"We've taken on the tar sands because we think it's one of the most important issues facing Canada these days, and North America," says Tzeporah Berman, who works for ForestEthics in Vancouver.

"We are well aware that the Alberta government is coming to D.C., this week," she adds, declining to disclose details of planned protests.

"Keep your eye on the Washington press."

rdaliesio@theherald.canwest.com

jfekete@theherald.canwest.com


© The Calgary Herald 2008