

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Opponents of tar sands got some good news this week.
Oil and gas company Statoil announced Thursday that it was shelving its Corner tar sands project in Alberta.
The Norwegian firm's decision to postpone the project "for a minimum of three years" is due to economic costs of labor and materials, according to a press statement from the company.
"Market access issues also play a role--including limited pipeline access which weighs on prices for Alberta oil, squeezing margins and making it difficult for sustainable financial returns," part of the statement reads.
A similar announcement was made earlier this year by French energy firm Total, which said it was shelving its Joslyn tar sands mine in Alberta because of escalating costs. In addition, Shell announced in February that it was stopping work on its Pierre River mine in the Alberta tar sands.
Anthony Swift writes at NRDC's Switchboard blog that these announcements show it is
...time to abandon the tattered argument that major pipelines like Keystone XL would not enable substantial tar sands expansion and associated carbon emissions. Industry doesn't believe it - and neither should policy makers.
[...]
If we build Keystone XL, we'll see many of the tar sands projects that are being cancelled and postponed become viable once again. At a time when decisive action on climate change is urgently needed, the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would make the problem of carbon pollution worse - enabling the production of some of the world's dirtiest fossil fuels.
Also on Thursday, tar sands critics in the city of Burnaby, British Columbia scored at least a temporary victory in their fight to stop energy giant Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline expansion--a project facing strong opposition.
Canada's National Energy Board (NEB) said that at this time it could not force the city to allow the company to conduct its surveys and studies for the work in the conservation area, which would violate the city's bylaws.
CBC News reported that "Kinder Morgan wants to bore a hole under [Burnaby] mountain as part of a proposal to nearly triple the capacity of the existing pipeline, but the city has vowed to block the project however it can."
In its statement, the NEB writes "that the motion filed by Trans Mountain raises a constitutional question as to whether City of Burnaby bylaws are inapplicable to the company as it exercises its powers under the National Energy Board Act and whether the city should be prevented from enforcing those bylaws."
It is now up to the company to provide formal notice to the attorneys general of Canada and the provinces if it wants to continue, and the issue would then return to the NEB.
Environmental group ForestEthics has said that among the tar sands pipeline's problems is that it could "increase tanker traffic in the region from about 80 a year to over 400 tankers a year."
Mayor of Burnaby and pipeline foe Derek Corrigan said at a rally this month that "that is the scariest concept for us as a city and as a province that you can imagine. When you think about the potential catastrophe that could occur as a result of one of those tankers being damaged in our inlet--the destruction that that would cause to the reputation of this city...the people that surround that inlet...[and] to the wildlife--and never mind the tourism."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Opponents of tar sands got some good news this week.
Oil and gas company Statoil announced Thursday that it was shelving its Corner tar sands project in Alberta.
The Norwegian firm's decision to postpone the project "for a minimum of three years" is due to economic costs of labor and materials, according to a press statement from the company.
"Market access issues also play a role--including limited pipeline access which weighs on prices for Alberta oil, squeezing margins and making it difficult for sustainable financial returns," part of the statement reads.
A similar announcement was made earlier this year by French energy firm Total, which said it was shelving its Joslyn tar sands mine in Alberta because of escalating costs. In addition, Shell announced in February that it was stopping work on its Pierre River mine in the Alberta tar sands.
Anthony Swift writes at NRDC's Switchboard blog that these announcements show it is
...time to abandon the tattered argument that major pipelines like Keystone XL would not enable substantial tar sands expansion and associated carbon emissions. Industry doesn't believe it - and neither should policy makers.
[...]
If we build Keystone XL, we'll see many of the tar sands projects that are being cancelled and postponed become viable once again. At a time when decisive action on climate change is urgently needed, the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would make the problem of carbon pollution worse - enabling the production of some of the world's dirtiest fossil fuels.
Also on Thursday, tar sands critics in the city of Burnaby, British Columbia scored at least a temporary victory in their fight to stop energy giant Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline expansion--a project facing strong opposition.
Canada's National Energy Board (NEB) said that at this time it could not force the city to allow the company to conduct its surveys and studies for the work in the conservation area, which would violate the city's bylaws.
CBC News reported that "Kinder Morgan wants to bore a hole under [Burnaby] mountain as part of a proposal to nearly triple the capacity of the existing pipeline, but the city has vowed to block the project however it can."
In its statement, the NEB writes "that the motion filed by Trans Mountain raises a constitutional question as to whether City of Burnaby bylaws are inapplicable to the company as it exercises its powers under the National Energy Board Act and whether the city should be prevented from enforcing those bylaws."
It is now up to the company to provide formal notice to the attorneys general of Canada and the provinces if it wants to continue, and the issue would then return to the NEB.
Environmental group ForestEthics has said that among the tar sands pipeline's problems is that it could "increase tanker traffic in the region from about 80 a year to over 400 tankers a year."
Mayor of Burnaby and pipeline foe Derek Corrigan said at a rally this month that "that is the scariest concept for us as a city and as a province that you can imagine. When you think about the potential catastrophe that could occur as a result of one of those tankers being damaged in our inlet--the destruction that that would cause to the reputation of this city...the people that surround that inlet...[and] to the wildlife--and never mind the tourism."
Opponents of tar sands got some good news this week.
Oil and gas company Statoil announced Thursday that it was shelving its Corner tar sands project in Alberta.
The Norwegian firm's decision to postpone the project "for a minimum of three years" is due to economic costs of labor and materials, according to a press statement from the company.
"Market access issues also play a role--including limited pipeline access which weighs on prices for Alberta oil, squeezing margins and making it difficult for sustainable financial returns," part of the statement reads.
A similar announcement was made earlier this year by French energy firm Total, which said it was shelving its Joslyn tar sands mine in Alberta because of escalating costs. In addition, Shell announced in February that it was stopping work on its Pierre River mine in the Alberta tar sands.
Anthony Swift writes at NRDC's Switchboard blog that these announcements show it is
...time to abandon the tattered argument that major pipelines like Keystone XL would not enable substantial tar sands expansion and associated carbon emissions. Industry doesn't believe it - and neither should policy makers.
[...]
If we build Keystone XL, we'll see many of the tar sands projects that are being cancelled and postponed become viable once again. At a time when decisive action on climate change is urgently needed, the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would make the problem of carbon pollution worse - enabling the production of some of the world's dirtiest fossil fuels.
Also on Thursday, tar sands critics in the city of Burnaby, British Columbia scored at least a temporary victory in their fight to stop energy giant Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline expansion--a project facing strong opposition.
Canada's National Energy Board (NEB) said that at this time it could not force the city to allow the company to conduct its surveys and studies for the work in the conservation area, which would violate the city's bylaws.
CBC News reported that "Kinder Morgan wants to bore a hole under [Burnaby] mountain as part of a proposal to nearly triple the capacity of the existing pipeline, but the city has vowed to block the project however it can."
In its statement, the NEB writes "that the motion filed by Trans Mountain raises a constitutional question as to whether City of Burnaby bylaws are inapplicable to the company as it exercises its powers under the National Energy Board Act and whether the city should be prevented from enforcing those bylaws."
It is now up to the company to provide formal notice to the attorneys general of Canada and the provinces if it wants to continue, and the issue would then return to the NEB.
Environmental group ForestEthics has said that among the tar sands pipeline's problems is that it could "increase tanker traffic in the region from about 80 a year to over 400 tankers a year."
Mayor of Burnaby and pipeline foe Derek Corrigan said at a rally this month that "that is the scariest concept for us as a city and as a province that you can imagine. When you think about the potential catastrophe that could occur as a result of one of those tankers being damaged in our inlet--the destruction that that would cause to the reputation of this city...the people that surround that inlet...[and] to the wildlife--and never mind the tourism."