Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiVANCOUVER - As the U.S. election campaign kicks into overdrive, Canadian politicians and oil executives are stepping up lobbying efforts to make sure whoever controls the White House keeps purchasing notoriously dirty oil from the Alberta tar sands.
![[This June 25, 2008 photo shows an aerial view just north of Fort McMurray in Alberta, Canada, where the world's largest oil companies are building massive open pit mines to get at the oil sands. Plans have been made to strip and excavate an area in northern Alberta that's the size of New York state.Executives from Nexen energy, which has major investments in northern Alberta's heavy oil industry, and Tony Clement, chair of a Canadian cabinet committee on energy security, met with Democratic candidate Barack Obama's top energy advisor Jason Grumet late last week to cement the "energy partnership" during the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado. (AP Photo/Eamon Mac Mahon) ]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/oilsands.jpg "oilsands.jpg")
Executives from Nexen energy, which has major
investments in northern Alberta's heavy oil industry, and Tony Clement,
chair of a Canadian cabinet committee on energy security, met with
Democratic candidate Barack Obama's top energy advisor Jason Grumet
late last week to cement the "energy partnership" during the Democratic
National Convention in Denver, Colorado.
The closed-door meeting comes on the heels of comments made by Grumet and other Obama officials which sent shivers through board rooms in Calgary and backhoes in Ft. MacMurray, the epicentres of Canada's oil industry.
In June, Grumet told reporters, "The amount of energy that you have to use to get that [tar sands] oil out of the ground is such that it actually creates a much greater impact on climate change."
"We [Obama's team] are going to support resources... that meet our long-term obligations to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. And I think it's an open question as to whether or not the Canadian resources are going to meet those tests," said Grumet, prior to meeting the Canadian delegation at the DNC.
Currently, Canada is the largest foreign supplier of oil to the United States, sending more than one million barrels of oil per day to its southern neighbour, about half of which originates from Alberta's tar sands.
"Clearly the oil sands is the most high-impact oil available," Simon Dyer of the Pembina Institute, an environmental watchdog, told IPS. "The oil sands are three times as greenhouse gas-intensive as regular oil," said Dyer, adding that roughly three barrels of water are required to process one barrel of heavy oil.
Tar sands production is set to increase from its current 1.2 million barrels of oil per day, to some 3.0 million barrels per day by 2018, most of which is slated for export to the United States.
Tony Clement, the Canadian cabinet minister, told reporters at the DNC that: 'We [the Conservative government] have to be more aggressive in representing Canadian values and interests in the American political scene."
Spokespersons for Nexen Energy and Minister Clement's office did not return phone calls from IPS requesting comment.
"The Canadian government is trying to deal through the back room rather than dealing with the environmental impacts of the oil sands," Simon Dyer told IPS. "Emissions from the oil sands are going to triple [by 2020] and that's inconsistent with the world's desire to lessen climate change."
In addition to official political pressure from Canadian cabinet ministers attempting to force Obama's hand on the tar sands, the oil industry has hired high-powered lobbyists of its own. Gordon Giffin, a former U.S. ambassador to Canada, is now a registered lobbyist in Washington for the energy firm Nexen.
Canadian oil executives attending the Democratic National Convention issued thinly veiled threats to the Obama campaign, stating that tar sands oil would be shipped to China if a new administration in Washington imposed restrictions.
"If you don't like the oil sands oil, what companies will do [in Canada] is build a bigger pipeline to the west coast and export it to China and India," stated Nexen Energy's Dwain Lingenfelter, the company's vice president of government relations and a former deputy premier of Saskatchewan province.
"If the U.S. didn't want the oil, it'll go into the oil market anyway. So they have to be very careful about looking at the whole picture," Lingenfelter, the politician turned oil industry lobbyist, told the Toronto Star.
As competition for energy resources between China and the United States intensifies, Lingenfelter's lobbying may sound convincing, but his analysis shouldn't be taken seriously, according to the Pembina Institute's Simon Dyer.
"A potential pipeline to Asia [via the Pacific port of Prince Rupert] would have to cross the territory of 40 First Nations, where land claims and treaty rights are still hotly contested," said Dyer. "There is growing opposition to pipelines and growing oil sands opposition across the country, so those pipelines [to China] are by no means a done deal."
While pipeline routes out of Alberta will be a major topic of controversy for years to come, there is no doubt that Canadian oil is among the world's most climate unfriendly fuels.
During his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention, Obama promised to end U.S. dependence on Middle East oil within 10 years, while stating that "government must lead on energy independence".
Environmentalists in Canada and the U.S. contend that closed-door meetings with oil executives aren't the best way to foster energy independence.
The current Canadian government, which draws its political and financial support from petroleum-producing regions in the West, is not seen as independent from oil interests. In July alone, oil sands companies held a total of 36 meetings with Canadian ministers and government officials, according to recently disclosed lobbying reports.
Meanwhile, environmental groups only held seven lobbying sessions and these were usually with ministerial assistants and other lower level officials.
13 Comments so far
Show Allfortunately for canada, the large and enviable " --land to population ratio-- " tends to dilute both the left and right political extremes..
sure we have our pendulous swings from left to right and back again, but the smaller mass of population seams to moderate the pendulum of change, to a milder tempo than that of our closest, and increasingly crowded, neighbor to the south.
our current conservative government, sees no shame in suddenly exposing their personal "underbellies", in light of an up-coming election call, after years of secrecy and backroom dealings in all areas of interest to the "people", and contempt of the press.
the liberal governments history of scandal and bribes, centering on and in the Quebec provincial chapter of the party, brought down the federal liberal party via guilt by association, a similar scandal in the Saskatchewan conservative government in the 80's , that resulted in many of the cabinet ministers and their aides being convicted and jailed for fraud and theft , somehow was kept to a provincial level and the federal conservatives did not suffer from the same fate.
the new democratic party , considered left of the liberal party,is still too "young and "green" for most voters to trust with the reigns of power at the federal level, but provincially they have proved capable of holding the fed's feet to the fire, and as a "swing block" in minority federal or provincial governments the ndp can effect change, by levering the support they can throw behind a party willing to bend their way.
our choices tend to reflect Americas choices in almost all things, because our politicians are eagerly and quickly learning the game of "political theater", from the polished and shiny corporate juggernaut,the American media has become as a result of more and more concentration of ownership to a hand full of persons, capable of exerting influence over content at a scale never before afforded corporate media before deregulation.
simplify
starve the beast - keep your money local, barter, trade, dicker..
ignore the fear mongering - selective media exposure.
you really don't need 95% of what you think you do , once you unplug from the nonstop advertising one is exposed to in a day.
The fossil speculators/refiners/distributors illegally colluded with the blessing of Darth Viper to inflate the price of oil to make an array of infeasible enterprises (e.g. tar sands) feasible. This wildly destructive and unnecessary economic activity is required for the capitalist system to self-perpetuate. Not only does it push over-consumption but also pushes the most destructive, resource-intensive methods. Achieving "efficiencies of scale" as astronomical opportunity cost (paid by the people) makes the idiocy feasible, and gains the monster a greater share of a more bloated, inefficient economy. For every unit of tar sand, 1/3 is consumed to extract the other 2/3. Another 1/3 is consumed to refine the remaining 1/3 into gasoline. Given the huge inefficiencies of passenger vehicles (massive overweight, massive reserve hp), only 1% of the original energy is transferred to useful work. This is the American Way.
The ATS may provide *some* oil, but it is an assault upon the earth and it's creatures...many of them. Environmentalists MUST unite.
Talks cheap!!! SHOW ME THE MONEY !!!!
The governor general of Canada fulfills an important function by signing bills of the Canadian Parliament. It is inconceiveable to me that the Queen's representative would sign a bill equivalent to the 2006 US Military Commissions Act which, inter alia, elimated habeas corpus. I imagine the GG would seek advice from Buckingham Palace and be informed that the act of King John in signing the Magna Carta in 1215, which established habeas corpus as a basis of jurisprudence in the English common law system, should not be overturned by the Parliament of Canada.
Her subsequent failure to sign would initiate a constitutional crisis, but more realistically, her role provides an important check on the Parliament.
Like the Australian Governor Generals "check" (more like a coup) against the Labor-led Australian government in the 1970's?
agree elmysterio
Harper is in gb back and probably front pocket as well. Watch for the very slick made by ROVE ads over the next few weeks.
As for the tar sands when the real numbers hit the papers ( I hope ) more people will wake up.
As for USAn well at least we have elections that have a paper trail and not the last 8 years of a person who should NEVER been Prez. The 8 years of not one american having the nuts or guts to make a change. nice little 3rd world country america has turned into.
Then please ask your media to not pay so much attention to the US elections unless it is to criticise the whole, undemocratic US system of elections and governance - most notably it's dictator-like presidency/executive branch.
Fortunately for Canadians, Canada has nothing equivalant to the US presidency - although getting rid of the last relics of the British empire like the governor general might be a good thing to do.
USAn, Some of us Canadians are well aware of the fascist nature of the Harper 'conservatives' and are trying to counter him. We haven't progressed down the fascist road quite as far as the US has, but we're not far behind. This election coming up, which of course, hasn't yet been officially called, is of utmost importance.
Canadians need to speak up and show the world that Harper's fascists don't represent the people. Unfortunately, I've found more and more that the people have been hoodwinked into believing that Harper is a "good guy"... We have a lot of work cut out for us to show our fellow citizens that is far from truth.
"Tony Clement, the Canadian cabinet minister, told reporters at the DNC that: 'We [the Conservative government] have to be more aggressive in representing Canadian values and interests in the American political scene."
Well, Tony Clement does NOT represent real Canadian values. He's a greedy capitalist fascist and frankly, I want to punch him in the mouth everytime I hear him speak.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/04/harper-election.html
That's because the so-called "liberals" in your country are SPINELESS and won't stand up to Harper's rightwing BULLSHIT. Right now in the USA, the only real progressive/liberals are 3rd party candidates. Obama is a JOKE just like Clinton, Gore, and Kerry !
So much for Canada representing any progressive values. The hypocracy of the Canucks claiming to be concerned about AGW while moving forward with this abomination is shocking - they should be collpasing on the floor from the cognitive dissonance of it all! Just the impact to the land is abominable - strip-mining an area the size of New York State - this absolutely dwarf's anything being done in Wyoming or West Virginia.
I go to Canadian newspaper sites regularly, and from their front pages, one would hardly know that Canada is having an election in October through all their fawning coverage of the US election.
I only know because I have a brother and his partner who emigrated to Toronto. When he wrote to the Toronto Star to complain about vastly more column space being used for the US election than Canada's own election, the paper rudely replied" Well, Mr. _____ don't you know that the USA is our biggest trading partner?"
Oh well, at least I thank Canada for informing me about the hazards of Bisphenol A in food contaniers and cans - even if the US consumer still cannot do anything about it.
Their health care system is pretty good too - although it is being fiscally sabotaged by the conservatives and the Democrat-like liberal friends. Thank goodness for the NDP - although my brother found a lot of sell-outs there too.
You Canadians need real fighters similar to Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, etc ...
OK, to be fair, the call for elections (by Harper) is only going out today, but it was fully expected.