Frack Check WV » tar sands

Avoid the Keystone XL Pipeline if Possible! Understand, … Finally!

Duane Nichols — Mon, 18 Jul 2022 18:56:40 +0000

The “Keystone Pipeline” won’t make gas any cheaper

From an Essay by Ted Williams, Writers on the Range, July 17, 2022

The Keystone Pipeline is fully operational, daily delivering 590,000 barrels of tar-sands oil from Canada to U.S. refineries.

”A report that the Biden administration is weighing greater imports of Canadian oil is putting a renewed focus on the canceled Keystone XL pipeline and whether it would have made any difference with today’s tight oil supply.” — Energywire

Most of the criticism comes from people who recycle truthiness. Former vice president Mike Pence: “Gas prices have risen across the country because of this administration’s war on energy — shutting down the Keystone Pipeline.” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan: “Biden shut off the Keystone Pipeline.”

Here’s what really happened: No one shut down, canceled, or shut off the Keystone Pipeline. It is fully operational, daily delivering 590,000 barrels of tar-sands oil in Canada to U.S. refineries.

What some pipeline advocates think is the “Keystone Pipeline” is a 1,700-mile “shortcut” called Keystone XL, or KXL. It would have sliced through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma to the Texas Gulf Coast, delivering 830,000 barrels of tar sands oil per day. Many residents of those states fought fiercely against the pipeline cutting through their land.

Now, “Build the Keystone Pipeline” has become a social-media mantra, as if the United States could so decree. It is the Canadian firm, TC Energy, formerly TransCanada, that officially terminated the project once President Biden withdrew its permits.

Even if construction on the pipeline began tomorrow, KXL could not be up and running in less than five years. The KXL pipeline was a project developed by a foreign company that would have delivered foreign oil products to mostly foreign markets.

When President Trump re-permitted KXL in 2017, his own State Department reported that it would not lower gasoline prices. The price of oil is set by the global market and certainly not by U.S. presidents. What’s more, the project was just about dead for a number of reasons, including litigation from aggrieved property owners whose land TC Energy seized by eminent domain.

We should also remember that rendering gasoline from tar-sands oil, the planet’s dirtiest petroleum, is far more polluting and energy-intensive than conventional refining. Some carbon content is burned off in a process that belches greenhouse gases and generates toxic waste called petcoke, which is dumped around the United States in piles six stories high. Petcoke billows through neighborhoods and infiltrates schools and houses even when windows are shut.

Bitumen, basically asphalt, continues to be strip-mined from what used to be Canada’s boreal forests in Alberta. Too thick to be piped, it’s spiked with volatile liquid condensate from natural gas and thus converted to a toxic tar-sands cocktail called ”dilbit,” short for diluted bitumen.

Dilbit, sent through the existing Keystone pipeline, contains chloride salts, sulfur, abrasive minerals and acids, and must be pumped under high pressure. It’s murder on pipes.

In addition to greenhouse gases and petcoke, tar-sands waste products end up in lakes, rivers, fish, wildlife and people. Between 1995 and 2006, when tar-sands extraction was accelerating, Alberta’s First Nations suffered a sudden 30 percent increase in cancer rates.

KXL, if built, also threatened the world’s largest aquifer — the Ogallala. Anyone who thinks Nebraska lacks water should visit Green Valley Township, where I encountered Ogallala water so close to the surface it flowed along dirt roads and ditches. Pintails, mallards, and widgeon billowed out of them. But parts of the aquifer are now depleted, and a major dilbit spill could finish those parts off.

In 2011 a pipeline representative named Shawn Howard assured me that ramming a dilbit pipe through the Ogallala aquifer would be risk free. “Why,” he demanded, “would we invest $13 billion in a pipeline and put a product in it that was going to destroy it like these activists are trotting out? It makes absolutely no business sense.”

The existing Keystone pipeline has ruptured 22 times, including spills in 2017 and 2019 that fouled land and water with 404,000 gallons of dilbit. Business sense, as the oil industry consistently reminds us, is an attribute more often desired than possessed.

######++++++######++++++#######

NOTE ~~ Writers on the Range, Essays from the Mountain West

Writers on the Range provides editorial essays to Western newspapers in the intermountain west. Our topics include public lands, outdoor recreation, water and economic institutions serving the west. Our writers are westerners from 10 states with diverse opinions and insight. As a 501c3 corporation as defined and approved by the IRS, donations to Writers on the Range are tax deductible.

Tar-Sands & Ore Processing Leaves Huge Tailings Ponds

admin — Tue, 14 Jun 2022 01:43:08 +0000

Tar sands industry is out of control in Canada

Ponds of toxic waste in Alberta’s oilsands are bigger than Vancouver — and growing

From an In-Depth Article by Drew Anderson, The Narwhal News, June 4, 2022

Mapping the growth of the toxic reservoirs shows just how far they’ve expanded since 1975, amid a surge in bitumen (tar) mining.

Picture downtown Toronto. All the condos, subways, roads, office towers and people. Now cover the whole thing with a toxic lake. Maybe you’ve never been there. Have you done the drive from Calgary into the Rockies? Imagine almost the entire 105-kilometre stretch from the city to Canmore as one continuous vista of oilsands tailing ponds.

According to a new report titled “50 Years of Sprawling Tailings” from Environmental Defence and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, those are just two examples of how large the tailings ponds in northern Alberta have grown.

And despite new rules introduced in 2016 around managing tailings, the ponds have continued to grow, according to the report. This growth represents an increasing ecological and economic risk that will cost billions of dollars to clean up and could leave taxpayers footing the bill.

So what exactly does that look like on the ground? And what impact do tailings ponds have?

Here’s a bit of background ~ What are tailings ponds?

First thing to note, and it’s something the authors of the report stress right off the top: the ponds are anything but ponds as most people understand them.

“To be calling them ponds when tailings ponds actually are far larger than anything you would ever describe as a natural pond — it’s deception,” Gillian Chow-Fraser, co-author of the report and boreal program manager for the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, says.

“I don’t think it’s being very accountable to the level of destruction that’s happening in northern Alberta.”

One of the largest ponds, notes Chow-Fraser, is eight kilometres long. That’s almost as long as Alberta’s famed Sylvan Lake. Looking further afield, that will almost get you to the top of Mount Everest.

That said, the report uses the term pond to maintain consistency while expounding on the decidedly un-pond-like size of the waste reservoirs.

Inside those ponds is a toxic mix of byproducts from the mining of oilsands, including arsenic, naphthenic acids, mercury, lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons — all of which can impact ecosystems, wildlife and humans.

The ponds also emit air pollution that extends for kilometres.

The purpose of the ponds is to allow the byproducts of mining to separate from the water and settle at the bottom of the pond, a process that can take decades or more. Once those byproducts are settled, the pond can be drained and capped with soil to achieve some level of reclamation.

Why are Alberta oilsands tailings ponds still growing?

The tailings ponds have been growing for nearly 50 years, increasing in size by nearly 800 per cent in the late 1970s, before continuing to grow at varying rates, depending on factors such as global demand for oil and the state of the economy. Most recently, the size of the tailings ponds grew by over 50 per cent from 2010 to 2015, and then by just over 16 per cent from 2015 to 2020, according to the report.

There are now 30 active ponds in the region, the report also says.

The authors used satellite imagery going back to 1975 to measure the physical growth of the ponds — including the fluids and the related impacts such as berms and areas where dry tailings are stored — but not the volume of tailings they hold.

For that they relied on Alberta Energy Regulator reports (more on that shortly).

Aliénor Rougeot, co-author and climate and energy program manager for Environmental Defence, says they included things like berms and beaches created by the ponds — where you would not want to sunbathe — because all of it impacts the surrounding area.

“That’s the peatlands and boreal forest that were taken away, or that’s the area that the Indigenous communities can no longer have traditional practices on,” she says.

In total, the report says the footprint is 300 square kilometres, big enough to more than twice cover the city of Vancouver or a large chunk of Toronto.

“I live in downtown Toronto, and so I think I know what large means, I think I know what human activity taking over nature looks like,” Rougeot says. “And yet when I saw the scale when I saw those maps, especially the layovers of cities. I mean, that was just baffling to me.”

Ponds increase as new expansions or new mines are approved and the existing ponds fail to shrink.

The report did not trace the rise in the volume of the ponds, but that has also increased over the years, and the report notes current levels are 1.4 trillion litres of tailings based on Alberta Energy Regulator figures.

……. much more in the Article and the Report!

Climate Change is an Issue in Canada and Elsewhere

admin — Sat, 24 Nov 2018 09:05:17 +0000

Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada

Tackling Climate Change Requires Healing the Divide

From an Article by Dr. David Suzuki, EcoWatch.com, November 18, 2018

################################

Note: The Alberta province in Canada is unique in both its scenic beauty and natural resources. Banff is in the Rocky Mountains well known for mountain goats. Oil, gas and timber are abundant. The tar sands are being mined and processed into a thick (dirty) crude oil. In May of 2016 forest fires occurred that drove 88,000 people from their homes some near Calgary, their capital city. DGN

##################################

Canadian climate change opinion is polarized, and research shows the divide is widening. The greatest predictor of people’s outlook is political affiliation. This means people’s climate change perceptions are being increasingly driven by divisive political agendas rather than science and concern for our collective welfare.

Over the past year, the Alberta Narratives Project gathered input from a broad range of Albertans (teachers, faith groups, health professionals, farmers, artists, industry, environmentalists, etc.) to better understand how they feel about public discourse on global warming. Participants said they want less blame and a more open, balanced and respectful conversation. Many don’t see themselves in the conversation at all. No one is speaking to them, using language that reflects their values and identity.

Albertans are deeply divided in their climate change perceptions. In 2017, just over half the population was doubtful or dismissive. When an issue is highly polarized, people find it difficult to discuss. The Alberta Narratives Project found people rarely, if ever, speak to others about climate change.

Climate disruption is a collective threat, not just an environmental issue. We must all see ourselves as part of the effort to prevent extreme impacts and ensure sustainable, resilient communities. But how can we take shared action when we can’t even talk to each other about the problem?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent report calls for action to limit warming to 1.5 C to reduce the risk of increasing extreme weather events, prevent catastrophic species loss, decrease numbers of climate refugees and protect human health and resilience.

It’s an urgent warning. After examining more than 6,000 scientific studies, the IPCC was clear: We must cut harmful carbon emissions by at least 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030 and reduce them to net zero by 2050 by cutting emissions and removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

Rising populist politics are weaponizing climate action as a wedge issue for political advantage—with tragic implications. How can we reverse this?

Cities are responsible for 70 percent of global emissions. According to C40 Cities research, they can lead the way by acting across four key areas: energy supply, buildings, mobility and waste.

Recently, Regina’s council unanimously passed a motion to run on 100 percent renewable energy by 2050, a meaningful target in line with the international Paris Agreement and the most recent IPCC report. Victoria has adopted the same target.

Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps wrote that “to solve the climate challenge, we have to weave a strong social fabric, to build on the gifts, assets and talents of our friends, neighbors and colleagues. It means we have to shift our thinking from me to we, from now to the long term.”

In March, Edmonton partnered with the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy for the Change for Climate Global Mayors Summit. They developed the Edmonton Declaration, asking signatories to recognize the urgent need for action that will limit global warming to 1.5 C.

The city’s video says, “Let’s come together and lead the charge against climate change. Let’s show the world how much we love our city and our planet. Let’s change our neighbors’ minds. Change our habits. Change the world. Each of us needs to do whatever we can. Whatever we do, we have to do it now. Because if we don’t change anything, climate will change everything.”

Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples is also crucial.

Dene elder François Paulette said, “First Nations are in a unique position to be leaders in climate change initiatives because of our knowledge of the sacred teachings of the land. We must not be situated as passive recipients of climate change impacts. We must be agents of change in climate action.”

To tackle climate change, we must heal the divide and act—as individuals, families, neighbors, communities and societies.

Wherever you see yourself on the political spectrum, whether you identify as rural or urban, youth or elder, the time for foot-dragging is over. Each of us must join together with others to address climate change, and demand meaningful action from political representatives. All parties must commit. We must call out those who stall or prevent solutions to serve their own self-interest and political agendas.

We can’t afford to wait.

More Large & Long Distance Pipeline$ are Deeper in Trouble

Duane Nichols — Fri, 09 Nov 2018 16:01:12 +0000

Enbridge Line 3 expansion under construction near Hardesty, Alberta

Dirty Pipelines Are Bad Investments and a Reputational Risk for Banks

From an Article by Leola Abraham, Greenpeace (EcoWatch.com), November 7, 2018

More than 400,000 people demanded Credit Suisse stop investing in environmentally harmful projects like pipelines and tar sands.

Growing Resistance to Large & Long Distance Pipelines

The banking industry should stop funding extreme fossil fuel pipeline projects that impact the climate and violate human rights. These projects are risky for banks as they face mounting pressure from a growing resistance movement and increased reputational risk in a world that is recognizing the urgent need to rapidly tackle climate change to avoid climate catastrophe.

Recently, more than 400,000 people, from 138 countries, signed a global petition demanding banks and financial institutions immediately end financial relationships with tar sands pipelines projects and other controversial pipeline companies such as Energy Transfer, the company that built the Dakota Access pipeline.

The Indigenous-led movement at Standing Rock against the Dakota Access pipeline further galvanized and helped grow a global movement against dirty oil pipeline companies. However, it saw the industry lash out in a variety of ways, including Energy Transfer’s baseless $900m SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) against Greenpeace entities and others falsely accusing the groups of orchestrating the resistance at Standing Rock.

People march in support of the Standing Rock Nation at the Civic Center Plaza of San Francisco. The protest was one of many in a global day of action against the Dakota Access Pipeline calling on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to cancel the permit for the project. Cy Wagoner / Greenpeace

Growing Reputational and Investment Risk

Despite the threats of bogus lawsuits and concerning corporate behavior by pipeline companies, many Indigenous Peoples, communities, and allies in the U.S. and Canada remain opposed to the dirty pipelines.

In North America, two out of the five proposed new tar sands pipelines—TransCanada’s Energy East and Enbridge’s Northern Gateway—were canceled after facing Indigenous and environmental legal challenges, widespread public opposition and changing economics.

In some cases the dirty pipelines cut across unceded Indigenous lands and threaten Indigenous rights by putting drinking water and precious ecosystems at risk of oil spills. Knowing there is no safe way to transport oil, no community wants the risk of an oil spill. When a spill inevitably happens, the impacts on the community and the environment are immense and oftentimes irreversible.

Even with this information, new tar sands pipelines are proposed and facing opposition. In Minnesota, Enbridge’s Line 3 pipeline is opposed by a coalition including tribal governments and landowners.

Even the Minnesota Department of Commerce has communicated concerns with the project. Also, recently a group of 13 young people, known as the Youth Climate Intervenors announced they planned to take the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission to court over the approval of Enbridge’s Line 3 tar sands pipeline.

In Nebraska, Indigenous leaders from across the U.S. and Canada signed a formal declaration against TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline and tar sands expansion in general.

In British Columbia, the Secwepemc Nation built solar-powered tiny houses to be placed in the path of Kinder Morgan’s planned new Trans Mountain Expansion Project and Tsleil-Wautuh Water Protectors built a traditional Coast Salish “Watch House” near the pipeline route, which played a central role in organizing resistance to the project.

Thousands gather in Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, for Indigenous-led “Protect the Inlet” mass mobilization against the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Expansion pipeline. Here a “Watch House” is being built near the pipeline route. Zack Embree

In Vancouver, an Indigenous-led protest saw more than 10,000 people peacefully march demanding a stop to Kinder Morgan’s pipeline. What followed was months of resistance including more than 200 people arrested and protests in Quebec and across Canada, as well as in Seattle, the UK, Switzerland, Spain, Australia, Fiji and around the globe.

Ultimately, Kinder Morgan deemed the project too great a financial and reputational risk and, in May, sold the Trans Mountain pipeline and the infrastructure for the Expansion Project to Justin Trudeau’s Canadian government for CAN $4.5 billion. The move was a clear sign that dirty pipelines are risky investments for the companies, the banks and everyone involved.

Growing Line of Investors to Shun Tar Sands

Trudeau’s decision to purchase the pipeline also came after the Royal Bank of Scotland, a large global bank, and BNP Paribas and HSBC, Europe’s two biggest banks, announced scale backs on financing tar sands projects.

Since then, other financial institutions such as the international financial services company, NN Group in the Netherlands, announced its withdrawal from tar sands oil and associated pipeline companies in Canada and the U.S. citing human rights concerns, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions as the main reasons for its departure.

NN Group’s announcement came on the heels of the IPCC report where the world’s leading scientists sounded the alarm, sending a timely message to world leaders that they must get serious and cut emissions from fossil fuels by half in the next 10 years if we are to avoid climate catastrophe.

Banks and financial institutions should wake up and face their role in the looming climate disaster. They must act on their commitments to the Paris agreement—by reviewing their policies and funding patterns and aligning their businesses with a world that limits climate change to 1.5 degrees Celsius, protects the environment, and respects human rights.

As the global petition is delivered to banks, the people-powered resistance movement to stop dirty pipelines will continue because our future depends on it. #StopPipelines

########################

US judge halts construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline

From an Article of CNBC, Reuters News Service, November 9, 2018

>>> A federal judge in Montana halted construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline.
>>> The judgment was on the grounds that the U.S. government did not complete a full analysis of the environmental impact of the TransCanada project.
>>> The ruling deals a major setback for TransCanada and could possibly delay the construction of the $8 billion, 1,180 mile pipeline.

A federal judge in Montana halted construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline on Thursday on the grounds that the U.S. government did not complete a full analysis of the environmental impact of the TransCanada project.

The ruling deals a major setback for TransCanada and could possibly delay the construction of the $8 billion, 1,180 mile (1,900 km) pipeline.

The ruling is a victory for environmentalists, tribal groups and ranchers who have spent more than a decade fighting against construction of the pipeline that will carry heavy crude to Steele City, Nebraska, from Canada’s oilsands in Alberta.

U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris’ ruling late on Thursday came in a lawsuit that several environmental groups filed against the U.S. government in 2017, soon after President Donald Trump announced a presidential permit for the project.

Morris wrote in his ruling that a U.S. State Department environmental analysis “fell short of a ‘hard look”‘ at the cumulative effects of greenhouse gas emissions and the impact on Native American land resources.

He also ruled the analysis failed to fully review the effects of the current oil price on the pipeline’s viability and did not fully model potential oil spills and offer mitigations measures.

In Thursday’s ruling, Morris ordered the government to issue a more thorough environmental analysis before the project can move forward.

“The Trump administration tried to force this dirty pipeline project on the American people, but they can’t ignore the threats it would pose to our clean water, our climate, and our communities,” said the Sierra Club, one of the environmental groups involved in the lawsuit.

Trump supported building the pipeline, which was rejected by former President Barack Obama in 2015 on environmental concerns relating to emissions that cause climate change.

Trump, a Republican, said the project would lower consumer fuel prices, create jobs and reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

FRACKING and Climate Change — Canadian Viewpoint

Duane Nichols — Tue, 30 May 2017 05:05:09 +0000

Action against fracking is growing in Canada

Fracking and Climate Change — Take Action!

The Council of Canadians, www.canadians.org/fracking, February 10, 2017

Industry officials and some governments are promoting natural gas as a “clean, green” fuel, but research shows that fracked natural gas can produce as much greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as coal.

What is fracking?

Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as “fracking,” is a technique to extract natural gas from harder to access unconventional sources trapped in rock formations such as shale gas, coal bed methane and tight gas.

(Hundreds of people joined the tar sands healing walk. Much of the energy produced by fracked gas is used to fuel the tar sands production.)

This unconventional natural gas requires more energy and water to extract than conventional gas from easier to access reservoirs and more porous rock formations. This is only one reason for fracking’s heavy carbon footprint.

Fracking and water

During the fracking process, millions of litres of water, thousands of litres of chemicals and thousands of pounds of sand are injected underground at very high pressure in order to create fractures in the rock allowing gas to ow up wells. Fracking operations deplete water sources, and have been known to contaminate groundwater with methane and undisclosed chemicals. Questions have also been raised about the safety of fracking wastewater disposal.

Fracking and emissions

Proponents of natural gas have said that natural gas is a climate-friendly fossil fuel because it produces less GHG emissions when burned compared to other fossil fuels. According to the Natural Gas Supply Association, natural gas produces half the CO2 emissions of coal.1 But that doesn’t make fracking clean! The lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions – that is the combined emissions associated with extraction, combustion, and methane and CO2 releases – means that fracked gas can be as dirty as coal.2

Fracking releases large amounts of natural gas – which consists of both CO2 and methane – directly into the atmosphere. In fact, fracking wells leak 40 to 60 per cent more methane than conventional natural gas wells.3 This happens when water is forced down into a fracking well in order to fracture the rock formations. Methane ows up the well and is released into the atmosphere before it can be captured.4 The leaked methane is called “fugitive methane” and has been detected using infrared videos. It is identi ed as different from naturally occurring methane.5

Methane in particular is a very powerful greenhouse gas. It can trap 20 to 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than CO2. Two Cornell scientists who have been studying fracking in the U.S. estimate that in the next 20 years methane will make up 44 per cent of the U.S.’s GHG emissions. Along with contributing to global warming pollution, methane leaks kill plants and trees, contribute to ozone formation, and causes natural gas explosions, which have resulted in an average of 17 deaths and 68 injuries per year in the United States alone.6

The future of fracking

Fracking is not a clean or green form of energy. Fracking and the rest of the fossil fuel industry is preventing Canada from reducing its GHG emissions and doing its fair share to mitigate the global climate crisis. Shale gas devel- opment can ultimately bring climate consequences comparable to coal over a century, and worse than coal over two decades.7 Rather than continuing to frack for natural gas, we should be looking for creative solutions to transition off of fossil fuels.

Communities are protecting water and the climate

Many communities are taking action against fracking in order to protect their water and mitigate climate change impacts. A dozen members from the Kainai Blood Tribe in Alberta blocked fracking trucks from accessing their lands.8 The Unist’ot’en in northern B.C. have built a log cabin in a fracking pipeline’s “right-of-way” and municipalities such as Burnaby, B.C. and Niagara-On-the-Lake, Ontario have called on their provinces to put a moratorium on fracking projects.

Take Action!

1. Meet with your municipal councillor and pass a local resolution banning fracking in your community.

2. Write elected representatives of all levels and demand they protect the water, stop emissions, and put a moratorium on fracking.

3. Connect with other local communities actively ghting fracking. Visit www.canadians.org/fracking to add your ght to the “Fracker Tracker” and to learn more about other communities that are taking action across Canada.

For more information about the Council’s campaign to stop fracking, visit: www.canadians.org/fracking

Sources:
1 Natural Gas Supply Association website NaturalGas.org at www.naturalgas.org/environment/naturalgas.asp#emission 2 Page 6 Par tt
3 http://www.scienti camerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-would-emit-methane
4 http://www.scienti camerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-would-emit-methane
5 Green.blogs/nytimes.com/2012/11/20/methane-is-popping-up-all-over-boston
6 Green.blogs/nytimes
7 http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/155101-report-gas-from-fracking-worse-than-coal-on-climate
8 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/09/11/alberta-blood-reserve-fracking-protest.html

See also: Fracking Across Canada — Fractivist’s Toolkit

Massive Canadian Wildfire Displaces 88,000 People in Alberta

Duane Nichols — Fri, 06 May 2016 15:05:29 +0000

Canadian forest fire hazard areas

Massive Canada wildfire spreads south forcing more evacuations

Update news report, BBC News Service, May 5, 2016

A massive wildfire is raging in Alberta and has grown to 210,000 acres (328.2 sq miles), with 88,000 people facing their second evacuation in three days.

The blaze has grown five times its initial size as it spreads south, prompting more than 88,000 residents of the Fort McMurray area to evacuations. But 25,000 of those people who left their homes on Tuesday and moved north may now have to be resettled again.

“Our focus right now is on getting those people south as quickly as possible,” said the Alberta premier. Urban areas in the south are better able to support the displaced, officials said.

The fire is growing in size due to high winds but it is “under control”, said Rachel Notley.

The fire started on Sunday in Canada’s oil sands region and many oil sands projects have cut production. There are still no known casualties from the fire but there was at least one vehicle crash with fatalities on the evacuation route.

Scott Long of the Alberta Emergency Management Agency called the blaze “an extreme fire event” and that rain would be needed to fight it. Cooler temperatures and rain are forecast, giving hope that it could become easier to contain the fire.

Wildfires in numbers

49 wildfires in total

seven are ‘out of control’

more than 1,100 firefighters

145 helicopters

138 pieces of heavy equipment

22 air tankers

The fire has knocked out nearly a third of the country’s daily crude capacity. At least 64,000 barrels of crude output is offline as a result of the fire, according to Reuters.

‘It’s catastrophic’ said a fleeing resident. Szymon Bicz had to leave most of his belongings behind in Fort McMurray.

“The smoke was really overpowering. It was a terrifying experience,” says Szymon Bicz, who fled his home. “Thick black smoke was closing in and surrounded the car. People were driving up on paths and grass verges just to get out of there. I’m hoping my rented house is still intact but I just don’t know. “The whole region is at risk. It’s absolutely catastrophic.”

‘It just doesn’t seem real’ said Fort McMurray residents as they flee their homes

Residents north of Fort McMurray are being told to shelter in place. The blaze grew close to the local airport on Thursday, with the CBC reporting that some buildings have been destroyed, but the main terminal is still intact. All flights are cancelled.

“It is a possibility that we may lose a large portion of the town,” Scott Long, an official with Alberta’s emergency management agency told Reuters. Thousands have stayed in arenas, hockey rinks and school gymnasiums, some with little food and other resources.Authorities in Alberta have called the fire “catastrophic”.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Thursday that the federal government will match donations to the Canadian Red Cross to assist those affected by the fire.

“The outpouring of good will and compassion from Canadians right across the country has not only been inspirational, it has been entirely characteristic of who we are and the fundamental human values we share as Canadians,” Mr Trudeau said.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

Political Change in Canada Favors a Green Economy

Duane Nichols — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:54:49 +0000

Over 36,745 have signed at: https://leapmanifesto.org

Canada’s Progressive Party to Consider Radical ‘Leap’ to Green Economy

From an Article by Nika Knight, Common Dreams, April 11, 2016

Canada’s leftist New Democratic Party on Sunday passed a resolution to “recognize and support” the Leap Manifesto, a campaign launched in 2015 by Naomi Klein and over 200 interested parties, included Indigenous rights, labor, and social justice groups, calling on Canada’s leaders to transition the country to 100% renewable energy.

“The manifesto calls for dramatic change, urging a swift transition away from fossil fuels, a rejection of new pipelines, and an upending of the capitalist system on which the economy is based,” as the Globe and Mail writes.

“Climate scientists have told us this is the decade to take decisive action to prevent catastrophic global warming. That means small steps will no longer suffice,” the manifesto reads. “So we need to leap.”

The NDP resolution is not an adoption of the manifesto itself; instead, the party’s resolution will launch a series of district-level debates about the manifesto across Canada.

“The NDP resolution was passed at a [party] convention in Alberta,” write members of Leap Manifesto organizing team in a press statement. “It was the result of a difficult debate underscored by very real fears and anxieties after 75,000 workers have been laid off by the oil and gas industry since the oil price crash. The Leap Manifesto is a roadmap to create a massive number of jobs in low-carbon sectors and the next renewable economy.”

The organizers quoted a particular section of the manifesto that describes and calls for the creation of green economy jobs:

We want a universal program to build energy efficient homes, and retrofit existing housing, ensuring that the lowest income communities and neighbourhoods will benefit first and receive job training and opportunities that reduce poverty over the long term. We want training and other resources for workers in carbon-intensive jobs, ensuring they are fully able to take part in the clean energy economy. This transition should involve the democratic participation of workers themselves.

The organizers also directed interested parties to read their argument showing how shedding Canada’s reliance on fossil fuels would be a boon to the country’s economy. Such arguments appeared to fall on deaf ears among members of the NDP party in Alberta, who were not pleased with the passage of the resolution and feared it would damage them politically in the largely conservative, pro-oil heart of Canada’s tar sands industry.

“I’m spitting angry,” said Alberta labor leader Gil McGowan to the CBC. “These downtown Toronto political dilettantes come to Alberta and track their garbage across our front lawn.”

Alberta’s NDP Premier Rachel Notley “spoke out against the manifesto during the weekend,” the CBC reported. A member of Alberta’s far-right Wildrose party called the resolution “radical” in an interview with the broadcaster, while McGowan described it as a “poison pill.”

Naomi Klein highlighted Notley’s changing tune since her 2015 election, when she promised to scale back support for oil and gas pipelines.

Alberta NDP won and election telling voters to reject the politics of fear. Why are they spreading it now? #NDP2016 #yeg2016

— Naomi Klein (@NaomiAKlein) April 10, 2016

Outside of Alberta, however, over two dozen local NDP chapters drafted their own resolutions calling on the national party to adopt the manifesto, the Globe and Mail reported.

And despite the fervent opposition from the party’s Albertan contingent, the resolution narrowly passed.

NDP party members in Alberta are so unhappy with the resolution that on Monday some stated that they are considering splitting from the federal branch of the party. Notley told the Calgary Sun that she will not leave the federal party but said she believed the manifesto was “naive,” “ill-informed,” and “tone-deaf.”

The passage of the resolution was celebrated, however, by party members around Canada and on social media by environmentalists and social justice activists worldwide.

“Peace, justice liberty were so common that no one talked about them as far-off concepts but as bread, birds, air, water, voice”- EZLN #Leap

— Harsha Walia (@HarshaWalia) April 10, 2016

The Leap Manifesto organizers were heartened by the NDP’s resolution, but also reminded supporters that there is still much work to be done:

We do not yet have emission reduction plans that are in line with the temperature targets the Trudeau government championed in the Paris Accord. We continue to allow our country to be divided over ugly pipeline battles — the infrastructure of the past — rather than moving as rapidly as possible to a fully renewable economy, with all the good jobs that would go along with it. First Nations communities continue to be confronted with high-risk and polluting infrastructure projects on their land, without their consent.

With the new budget the government has reneged on its campaign promise to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. And they recently signed the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, the first step towards implementing a trade deal that would open Canada’s government to legal challenges from corporations threatened by climate action.

Despite making strides in welcoming refugees fleeing war in Syria, we are alarmed by the federal government’s continued practice of draconian detentions and deportation of migrants. And though there is much political talk of “reconciliation” with First Nations, Indigenous nations still face scandalous inequities and lack of recognition of their rights.

The Leap Manifesto currently has over 35,000 signatories and invites supporters to join the movement.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

The State of Extraction: A Canadian Conference Primer

Duane Nichols — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 15:01:46 +0000

Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, B.C.

The State of Extraction: Corporate Imperatives, Public Knowledge and Global Struggles for Alternatives

The State of Extraction is a free, public conference on Mining, Fossil Fuels and Common Resources and is being held on unceded Coast Salish Territory in Vancouver, B.C. from Friday, March 27^th, to Sunday, March 29^th, 2015 at Simon Fraser University – Harbour Centre, Canada.

Resource extraction of fossil fuels and precious metals is expanding across the globe and is depleting non-renewable resources, damaging the environmental and social lives of communities, both human and non-human, and contributing to climate change as well as planetary mass extinction. Canada is home to some 75% of the world’s extractive companies.

Canada’s corporate and tax laws enable these companies to maximize their global profits, while simultaneously transferring the social and environmental costs of their operations to those communities affected by the extractions. Democratic debate is falling by the wayside as short-term economic calculations drown out the need to protect the long-term future of our planet.

The State of Extraction is a conference that will bring together front-line defenders and Indigenous nations from B.C. and around the world, as well as activists, academics, artists, researchers, authors, representatives of affected communities from across the world and the general public, to examine the new face of resource capitalism in Canada and its influence on the world; the (lack of) public debate about such issues and the role of resource capitalism in structuring (and frustrating) such debate; as well as alternative models of economic and social development.

Keynote Speakers: Chris Hedges, Glen Coulthard, and Aziz Choudry.

For the full schedule and other details, please visit here.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

The State of Extraction: A Conference Primer, by Stephen Collis

To inquire into the current state of resource extraction is to ask fundamental questions about both human rights and the relationship between human beings and the natural environments they inhabit and depend upon. Indeed, it may also be to inquire into the “rights” of the non-human environment itself. It is, therefore, as Naomi Klein has recently argued, nothing less than to acknowledge and investigate “an existential crisis for the human species.”[1] What follows is the beginning of such an investigation, in which the current state of extraction leads to questions about the economy, the state, the climate, justice, and alternatives.

Resource extraction is unavoidably a highly impactful industry: water and land are damaged to extract and process mineral resources, and people living on the land, and depending on its water, soil and biodiversity for their survival, are displaced, suffer negative health effects, and are often impoverished. Human beings, like any species, necessarily metabolize material from the “natural world” in which they find themselves. The development of contemporary industrial civilization, however—especially in the area of fossil fuels and resource extraction—has taken this metabolic process to and beyond its extreme, depleting non-renewable resources at an alarming rate, damaging the environmental and social lives of communities, contributing greatly to anthropogenic climate change, and reducing biodiversity to the point at which scientists are speaking of an unfolding planetary mass extinction.[2]

Change, on the fundamental level that would alter extractive practices, mitigate climate change, and make for more just social relations, is made all the more difficult by the ways our current civilization is completely imbricated with and predicated upon extraction. Modern society in the industrialized world, in Timothy Mitchell’s words, “was made possible by the development of ways of living that used energy on a new scale. … Thanks to this new social-energetic metabolism, a majority of the population could now be concentrated together without immediate access to agricultural land.”[3]

However, as much as the lifestyle many have become used to is dependent upon extractive industries, we cannot lose sight of the fact that these industries exist first and foremost for purposes of making private, corporate profit and are part and parcel of systemic, structural inequalities. Consumption, extraction, and the production of excess carbon dioxide at current levels did not simply arise to satisfy “needs” or “demand”: it was driven by the profit motive and the unevenly developed accumulation of staggering wealth. George Monbiot refers to current practices as “pathological consumption”: only 1% of consumer goods remain in use six months after purchase and “manufacturing and consumption are responsible for more than half of our carbon dioxide production”; furthermore, fossil fuel production and the consumption it enables (the two form a feedback loop) drive escalating inequality.[4]

Extraction is one of the primary modes through which we have for too long been “robbing the future to pay the present,” in Ronald Wright’s words.[5] “If civilization is to survive,” Wright continues, “it must run on the interest, not the capital, of nature.”

… more

[1] Naomi Klein. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate. Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf, 2014: 15.

[2] See Elizabeth Kolbert’s The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. New York: Henry Holt & Co., 2014.

[3] Timothy Mitchell. Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil. London: Verso Books, 2011:12-15.

[4] George Monbiot. Environmental Feedback. New Left Review 45, May – June 2007.

[5] Ronald Wright. A Short History of Progress. Toronto: Anansi, 2004: 79.

See also: http://stateofextraction.org/ and www.FrackCheckWV.net

Pipelines Are Dangerous — Here is the Evidence

Duane Nichols — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 03:14:08 +0000

Shall we pray for Keystone XL or a safe USA?

Senate defeats Keystone XL pipeline

From an Article by Susan Davis, USA Today, November 18

Washington, DC — The U.S. Senate defeated a bill to authorize construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, delivering a blow to Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., by members of her own party.

“I came here 18 years ago fighting to get here, fighting to stay here,” Landrieu told reporters after the vote, “And I’m going to fight for the people of my state until the day that I leave. I hope that will not be soon.”

The bill failed to overcome a 60-vote threshold for passage by a narrow 59-41 decision. All 45 Republican senators voted for it, but Landrieu could not clinch the necessary last Democratic vote.

Thirteen Democrats voted with Landrieu, including outgoing Sens. Mark Begich of Alaska, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, and John Walsh of Montana. Additional Democratic votes came from Michael Bennet of Colorado, Tom Carper of Delaware, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Jon Tester of Montana, and Mark Warner of Virginia.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

New Analysis Reveals Dangerous Toll of U.S. Pipelines

From an Article by Bill Snape, Center for Biological Diversity, November 17, 2014

Washington, DC – With the U.S. Senate poised to vote on the Keystone XL pipeline on Tuesday, a new analysis of federal records reveals the dangerous toll of pipelines in the United States. In just the past year and four months, there have been 372 oil and gas pipeline leaks, spills and other incidents, leading to 20 deaths, 117 injuries and more than $256 million in damages.

The new data adds to a June 1, 2013 independent analysis of federal records revealing that since 1986, oil and gas pipeline incidents have resulted in 532 deaths, more than 2,400 injuries and more than $7.5 billion in damages.

A new time-lapse video includes every “significant pipeline” incident in the continental United States — along with their human and financial costs — from 1986 to Oct. 1, 2014. On average one significant pipeline incident occurs in the country every 30 hours, according to the data.

“There’s no way to get around the fact that oil and gas pipelines are dangerous and have exacted a devastating toll on people and wildlife. It’s appalling to see Congress seriously considering giving the green light to Keystone XL,” said Bill Snape, senior counsel with the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Obama administration’s own analysis says Keystone XL will spill oil, so it’s really troubling to see politicians wanting to add to this dangerous legacy of failed pipelines.”

The analysis comes as the State Department considers the Keystone XL pipeline — which would transport up to 35 million gallons of tar sands oil a day from Canada to Texas — that federal officials have already estimated could spill up to 100 times during its lifetime.

The analysis released today examines pipeline incidents since 1986, including spills, leaks, ruptures and explosions. It’s based on records from the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, which maintains a database of all U.S. pipeline incidents that are classified as “significant,” those resulting in death or injury, damages more than $50,000, more than 5 barrels of highly volatile substances or 50 barrels of other liquid released, or where the liquid exploded or burned. In total there have been more than 8,700 significant incidents with U.S. pipelines, involving death, injury, and economic and environmental damage, since 1986 — more than 300 per year.

“This analysis ought to be a wakeup call to anyone who thinks it’s smart to double-down on these dangerous pipelines,” said Snape. “Voting for Keystone XL is voting for more spills, more environmental devastation and more climate chaos. It’s as simple as that.”

One difference between Keystone XL and the vast majority of other pipelines that have spilled is that it will be carrying tar sands oil, which has proven very difficult, if not impossible, to clean up. A 2010 spill of tar sands oil in the Kalamazoo River in Michigan, for example, has yet to be cleaned up despite four years of effort. Another tar sands spill in 2013 fouled an entire neighborhood in Arkansas. Federal regulators have acknowledged that Keystone XL, too, will spill.

TransCanada’s existing Keystone I tar sands pipeline has reportedly leaked at least 14 times since it went into operation in June 2010, including one spill of 24,000 gallons. The State Department’s environmental reviews have pointed out that spills from Keystone XL are likely to occur, estimating that there could be as many as about 100 spills over the course of the pipeline’s lifespan. The pipeline will cross 1,700 miles and cross a number of important rivers, including the Yellowstone and Platte, as well as thousands of smaller rivers and streams.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

Obama Needs to Stop (not Delay) Keystone XL

Duane Nichols — Sun, 20 Apr 2014 13:48:27 +0000

Limiting Climate Change Starts NOW with K-XL

We Need to Win Not Delay the Keystone XL Pipeline Decision

From an Article by Bill McKibben, EcoWatch, April 19, 2014

The Keystone XL news this past week from DC is both important and murky. In brief, the Obama administration announced yet another delay in their decision about the pipeline, meaning it may be past the midterm elections before a final call is made.

Three things strike me:

In pipeline terms it’s a win. Every day we delay a decision is a day when 830,000 barrels of oil stays safely in the ground. Together we’ve kept them at bay for three years now, and will continue to until perhaps the beginning of next year it seems.

In climate terms, it’s a disappointment. Since the State Department can’t delay floods and droughts and El Ninos, we actually need President Obama providing climate leadership. If he’d just follow the science and reject the stupid pipeline he’d finally send a much-needed signal to the rest of the planet that he’s getting serious.

In movement terms, it’s a sweet reminder that when we stand up we win. Three years ago this pipeline was a done deal, and thanks to you it’s come steadily undone. We can’t match Exxon or the Koch Bros with money; we can and have matched them with passion, spirit, creativity and sacrifice.

So the Keystone fight goes on—we hope many of you will be in DC next weekend for Reject and Protect, joining the Cowboy Indian Alliance to say “hell no” to the pipeline. The Alliance members coming to DC next week are some of the strongest leaders in this fight.

If you can’t be there yourself, can you show your support for the Cowboy Indian Alliance by telling Pres. Obama and Sec. Kerry to use this delay to meet with them.

The decision to delay was made—supposedly—on account for the impact of a possible new pipeline route in Nebraska. As it happens, next week Nebraskans and members of U.S. Tribes and Canadian First Nations will be in Washington—it seems to me that it would be prudent for the President and Sec. Kerry to make plans to meet with the Cowboy Indian Alliance at their encampment and get their story of what this pipeline would mean on the ground.

The climate fight can’t be delayed. We need to keep building the movement, and we need to keep putting heat on leaders like President Obama till we win not delay the decision on the Keystone XL pipeline. Yesterday’s DC decision just reinforces the message that if we stand together we will make a decisive difference—and there is an important opportunity on the horizon to do that in the biggest way yet, to be announced soon.

The last thing to say is thank you. You are the strength in this movement, and together we will make even more amazing things possible.

————– Four Slideshows are available here.

See also:

State Department Indefinitely Delays Keystone XL Pipeline Decision

Could We Win the Keystone XL Battle But Still Lose the Tar Sands War?

Why the Millennial Generation Sees Keystone XL as More Than Just a Pipeline

——–