Aug 21, 2009
The government is busy stemming the flow of immigration from Mexico,
but it's welcoming a different kind of flood from the north. The State
Department just approved a project to pipe some of the world's dirtiest
oil from Canada into America's fuel-hungry economy.
Under the permit, according to the State Department, the Alberta Clipper Pipeline
system "will carry up to 450,000 barrels of crude oil a day from the
Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in Canada to refineries in the
U.S.," channeling the black gold across the northern Midwest.
The oil, to be dredged up from tar sands development, is some pretty heavy stuff. According to a statement released today by Earth Justice, the Minnesota-based Indigenous Environmental Network and other groups:
Tar
sands development in Alberta is creating an environmental catastrophe,
with toxic tailings ponds so large they can be seen from space and
plans to strip away the forests and peat lands in an area the size of
Florida. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands
production are three times that of conventional crude oil and tar sands
oil contains 11 times more sulfur and nickel, six times more nitrogen
and five times more lead than conventional oil. These toxins are
released into the U.S. air and water when the crude oil is processed
into fuels by refineries.
Though it insists that the administration wants to move the country away from fossil-fuel dependency, the State Department defends the plan as a boon to America's strategic interests and a source of desperately needed jobs:
Approval of the permit sends a positive economic
signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability
and availability of a portion of United States' energy imports, and in
the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction
jobs for workers in the United States.
The perversity of promoting economic development through
environmental destruction is not lost on the communities that suffer
deeply from both poverty and pollution. Indigenous communities in the U.S. and Canada are protesting the pending incursion on forests and native lands.
Marty Cobenais of the Indigenous Environmental Network stated, "The voices and rights of the Leech Lake Band members are not being listened to by the Obama Administration."
Tribal activists are pushing for a referendum process that could help derail the project, but given the government's track record on honoring tribal rights, don't expect a major policy shift.
Native communities in Canada, too, are outraged that their lands are being exploited without adequate compensation to the impacted communities.
As for the purported economic benefits of tar sands extraction, the Canada-based environmental group Polaris Institute
says that in Alberta, the oil industry has contributed to economic
volatility and increased inequality, thanks to an unfair royalty
structure that ends up starving low-income communities. And despite the
promise of jobs, Polaris argues, "cheap labour practices allow oil
companies operating in the tar sands to cut their labour costs by
hiring non-unionized workers and workers from other countries." As U.S.
officials push forward their "shovel ready" construction projects,
Alberta provides a cautionary tale for what can happen when sustainable development goals are traded for short-term gains.
Though the tar sands project is rolling ahead, native-led grassroots environmental activism does not go unnoticed by corporate interests. An alarmist report from the Canadian Defense Security and Foreign Affairs Institute paints nonviolent First Nations protesters as a potential terrorist threat--that is, to the oil industry.
In reality, the most lethal threats
are those that the political establishment accepts as the cost of doing
business. The toxic cross-border exchange endorsed by the State
Department reveals who controls the continent's resources and
artificial boundaries--and how easily those forces can violate the
sovereignty of nature and its original inhabitants.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Michelle Chen
Michelle Chen is a contributing editor at In These Times. She is a regular contributor to the labor rights blog Working In These Times, Colorlines.com, and Pacifica's WBAI. Her work has also appeared in Common Dreams, Alternet, Ms. Magazine, Newsday, and her old zine, cain.
The government is busy stemming the flow of immigration from Mexico,
but it's welcoming a different kind of flood from the north. The State
Department just approved a project to pipe some of the world's dirtiest
oil from Canada into America's fuel-hungry economy.
Under the permit, according to the State Department, the Alberta Clipper Pipeline
system "will carry up to 450,000 barrels of crude oil a day from the
Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in Canada to refineries in the
U.S.," channeling the black gold across the northern Midwest.
The oil, to be dredged up from tar sands development, is some pretty heavy stuff. According to a statement released today by Earth Justice, the Minnesota-based Indigenous Environmental Network and other groups:
Tar
sands development in Alberta is creating an environmental catastrophe,
with toxic tailings ponds so large they can be seen from space and
plans to strip away the forests and peat lands in an area the size of
Florida. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands
production are three times that of conventional crude oil and tar sands
oil contains 11 times more sulfur and nickel, six times more nitrogen
and five times more lead than conventional oil. These toxins are
released into the U.S. air and water when the crude oil is processed
into fuels by refineries.
Though it insists that the administration wants to move the country away from fossil-fuel dependency, the State Department defends the plan as a boon to America's strategic interests and a source of desperately needed jobs:
Approval of the permit sends a positive economic
signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability
and availability of a portion of United States' energy imports, and in
the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction
jobs for workers in the United States.
The perversity of promoting economic development through
environmental destruction is not lost on the communities that suffer
deeply from both poverty and pollution. Indigenous communities in the U.S. and Canada are protesting the pending incursion on forests and native lands.
Marty Cobenais of the Indigenous Environmental Network stated, "The voices and rights of the Leech Lake Band members are not being listened to by the Obama Administration."
Tribal activists are pushing for a referendum process that could help derail the project, but given the government's track record on honoring tribal rights, don't expect a major policy shift.
Native communities in Canada, too, are outraged that their lands are being exploited without adequate compensation to the impacted communities.
As for the purported economic benefits of tar sands extraction, the Canada-based environmental group Polaris Institute
says that in Alberta, the oil industry has contributed to economic
volatility and increased inequality, thanks to an unfair royalty
structure that ends up starving low-income communities. And despite the
promise of jobs, Polaris argues, "cheap labour practices allow oil
companies operating in the tar sands to cut their labour costs by
hiring non-unionized workers and workers from other countries." As U.S.
officials push forward their "shovel ready" construction projects,
Alberta provides a cautionary tale for what can happen when sustainable development goals are traded for short-term gains.
Though the tar sands project is rolling ahead, native-led grassroots environmental activism does not go unnoticed by corporate interests. An alarmist report from the Canadian Defense Security and Foreign Affairs Institute paints nonviolent First Nations protesters as a potential terrorist threat--that is, to the oil industry.
In reality, the most lethal threats
are those that the political establishment accepts as the cost of doing
business. The toxic cross-border exchange endorsed by the State
Department reveals who controls the continent's resources and
artificial boundaries--and how easily those forces can violate the
sovereignty of nature and its original inhabitants.
Michelle Chen
Michelle Chen is a contributing editor at In These Times. She is a regular contributor to the labor rights blog Working In These Times, Colorlines.com, and Pacifica's WBAI. Her work has also appeared in Common Dreams, Alternet, Ms. Magazine, Newsday, and her old zine, cain.
The government is busy stemming the flow of immigration from Mexico,
but it's welcoming a different kind of flood from the north. The State
Department just approved a project to pipe some of the world's dirtiest
oil from Canada into America's fuel-hungry economy.
Under the permit, according to the State Department, the Alberta Clipper Pipeline
system "will carry up to 450,000 barrels of crude oil a day from the
Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in Canada to refineries in the
U.S.," channeling the black gold across the northern Midwest.
The oil, to be dredged up from tar sands development, is some pretty heavy stuff. According to a statement released today by Earth Justice, the Minnesota-based Indigenous Environmental Network and other groups:
Tar
sands development in Alberta is creating an environmental catastrophe,
with toxic tailings ponds so large they can be seen from space and
plans to strip away the forests and peat lands in an area the size of
Florida. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions from tar sands
production are three times that of conventional crude oil and tar sands
oil contains 11 times more sulfur and nickel, six times more nitrogen
and five times more lead than conventional oil. These toxins are
released into the U.S. air and water when the crude oil is processed
into fuels by refineries.
Though it insists that the administration wants to move the country away from fossil-fuel dependency, the State Department defends the plan as a boon to America's strategic interests and a source of desperately needed jobs:
Approval of the permit sends a positive economic
signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability
and availability of a portion of United States' energy imports, and in
the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction
jobs for workers in the United States.
The perversity of promoting economic development through
environmental destruction is not lost on the communities that suffer
deeply from both poverty and pollution. Indigenous communities in the U.S. and Canada are protesting the pending incursion on forests and native lands.
Marty Cobenais of the Indigenous Environmental Network stated, "The voices and rights of the Leech Lake Band members are not being listened to by the Obama Administration."
Tribal activists are pushing for a referendum process that could help derail the project, but given the government's track record on honoring tribal rights, don't expect a major policy shift.
Native communities in Canada, too, are outraged that their lands are being exploited without adequate compensation to the impacted communities.
As for the purported economic benefits of tar sands extraction, the Canada-based environmental group Polaris Institute
says that in Alberta, the oil industry has contributed to economic
volatility and increased inequality, thanks to an unfair royalty
structure that ends up starving low-income communities. And despite the
promise of jobs, Polaris argues, "cheap labour practices allow oil
companies operating in the tar sands to cut their labour costs by
hiring non-unionized workers and workers from other countries." As U.S.
officials push forward their "shovel ready" construction projects,
Alberta provides a cautionary tale for what can happen when sustainable development goals are traded for short-term gains.
Though the tar sands project is rolling ahead, native-led grassroots environmental activism does not go unnoticed by corporate interests. An alarmist report from the Canadian Defense Security and Foreign Affairs Institute paints nonviolent First Nations protesters as a potential terrorist threat--that is, to the oil industry.
In reality, the most lethal threats
are those that the political establishment accepts as the cost of doing
business. The toxic cross-border exchange endorsed by the State
Department reveals who controls the continent's resources and
artificial boundaries--and how easily those forces can violate the
sovereignty of nature and its original inhabitants.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.