"TAR
SANDS" here on this website mainly refers to the extensive tar sands of
Alberta Canada. However, tar sands also occur widespread
elsewhere
in the world
(e.g. in Venezuala's Orinoco Belt, Madagascar, Congo) and are
also
under potential threat of exploitation. They comprise
a bitumen-sand-clay-water-mixture
from which can be
extracted, with high energy costs and high carbon emissions,
an
unconventional oil often called a
"dirty oil". Other unconventional oils with high
extraction costs include e.g. shale
oil
from oil shale (e.g. USA, Russia, Serbiaetc...).
There is increasing interest in
exploiting such dirty oil reserves due
to the start of a decline in production rates from depleting
conventional sources, that together with increasing world demand from
emerging economies such as China, pushes up oil prices and
makes such costly extraction methods economically just-about
viable - but
only if the massive negative externalities can be kept out of the
equation (and demand increases as the industry would like - which is
increasingly doubtful). Thus continued capture of governments
by
oil
interests
is required to block regulations designed to prevent such 'market
failure'. The long-term negative consequences for the planet and its
people and wildlife far outweigh the financial benefits to the world's
wealthy minority. Clearly, though we need a certain amount of oil, we
should be reducing our oil dependence and oil consumption and instead
shifting towards low carbon alternatives.
The
Tar
Sands in
Alberta Canada are the 2nd or 3rd largest
oil reserve in the world (or roughly 2nd equal with Venezuala, after
Saudi Arabia), occupying an
area larger than England (if not
Wales too) - and have huge environmental, social, political and
financial impacts and implications that will affect all of us.
So why have so few of us in the UK heard of them? This website aims to
try and rectify this knowledge vacuum (BBC - isn't
that your remit?!); also to facilitate action.
The most important impacts of the Tar Sands oil industry
come under 3 main headings: 1. Ecocide
(a crime under proposed
international law): due to the
extensive
loss
and damage to habitat, wildlife and environment; 2. Huge carbon footprint,
from both
high emissions* and loss of carbon sinks; 3. Re social justice:
the flouting of legal rights of the indigenous peoples,
also of
their basic
human rights for freedom from
ill-health and death from industrial
causes (e.g. pollution-induced cancers).
*emissions
from extraction of oil from tar sands are 4.9
times i.e. near
to five times those for
extracting conventional
oils (& if expressed "wells-to-wheels" for the combusted fuel
end-product i.e. "life-cycle emissions" the emissions are 23%
higher) [source: peer-reviewed
EU-commissioned report by Brandt]
The
2 page Tar
SandsFACT SHEET
pdf provides a brief summary, a
list of environmental impacts,
and a list of links
to relevant
websites (on
page 2) from which the information was collated. Partly
because
this FACT SHEET information was
mostly collated a year ago (and because this website is assembled by
just one person with limited spare time!) -
I also strongly
recommend you
visit the UK
TAR
SANDS NETWORK
(UKTSN) website www.no-tar-sands.org for
the latest news on
events, briefings and actions. This website now has excellent
information - much more so than when I started my web-site - and thus
my website is best seen as being an addition to theirs -
providing
extra
bits of related information - such as on the VALERO connection (NB see
maps below), and
letters/emails from Goverment Ministers, MEPs etc showing their
positions regarding for example the import of Tar Sands fuel into the
UK.
Links to recent tar sands articles of interest can be found on this
pdf, and for very recent links
and today's news look at tweets
by
UKTSN.
Guardian
photo (via link)
of Alberta Tar Sands industry that has replaced former boreal forest.
Note proximity to river (re pollution risk). Indigenous First Nations
people living downstream suffer an abnormally high rate of otherwise
scarce pollution-associated cancers.
Contrasting images: photographer Garth Lenz shows beautiful photos of
the boreal landscape that is being destroyed in his TED talk.
PIPELINE THREATS: 1.
Below the photo is 'Shock
Doctrine' author Naomi Klein's punchy
informative short animation on the need
to stop TransCanada's proposed Keystone
XL
pipeline from accelerating Tar Sands
destruction and
emissions. 2. And here is a c.1 minute video
showing wildlife and habitats
under threat if Enbridge's Northern
Gateway tar sands pipeline is
built to connect Westwards towards
the Pacific (for export of bitumen to China etc). Map showing pipeline routes.
(Also MAP
& MAP).
NB: we need to keep
the Tar Sands industry land-locked to restrict its expansion for
exporting world-wide. EU's Fuel Quality Directive (FQD)
- includes important climate change
legislation (Article 7a) which urgently needs implementation
to
restrict future
imports of high emissions fuels such as from tar sands.
Tim Farron
- our local MP
and LibDem
President has been
continually briefed on Tar Sands facts and news, including in a meeting
last Friday (25Nov11) with myself and
another member of our local climate group SLACC
.
We requested he write an open letter to
Norman Baker to try and persuade him to support a UK vote FOR
implementing the EU Commissioners' proposals for the Fuel Quality
Directive at the EU Member
States meeting on the FQD -
which will effectively ban or restrict import of very high emissions
fuels
including from tar sands.
Very pleased
when Tim tweeted that he is happy to write to Norman at the
DoT. Please
give him
supportby
for example emailing him tim@timfarron.co.uk
or tweeting him @TimFarron
that you would be very
pleased with him doing this. Tim has
a good reputation for working hard for his constituents,
especially on
local issues. I
will be
posting developments - including hopefully his letter or statement:
29jan12 I wrote an article (here in pdf form
of 31jan12) giving an update on
tar sands
and the FQD for the SLACCtt
website blog. This includes Tim
Farron's recent progress re this
issue.
Recent
additions (BLOG):(last
website
addition: 14may12)
NB: Also
see UK Tar Sands Network's
website
and tweets. NB: On
23rd
February 2012 EU member states met to vote on the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD),
resulting in stalemate (see below).
Darek Urbaniak of FoE Europe summarizes the scenario we are
now at re the FQD and the impacts of tar sands industry
expansion
on the world: 'Tar sands - a threat to Europe,
Africa and the world'
(2mar12) in Public Service Europe.
April/May
2012 onwards - I now have
insufficient spare time to adequately
update this blog so see UK Tar Sands
Network's website to
keep up to date.
14may12 Bill McKibben of 350.org writes 'The latest on Keystone XL' [tar sands pipeline].
Today in NYT Editorial: 'Confronting Keystone Again'. Spatial context:
another good map of America's tar sands pipeline system actual
and proposed.
10may12 'RBS outed for pro-tar sands lobbying' - Platform.
Refers e.g. to Reuters article: 'Insight: Canada's oil sand battle with Europe' -
which is a brief history of the battle. 9may12 Climate scientist James Hansen
(Director of NASA Goddard Institute) in 'Game Over for the Climate' OpEd in The New York
Times warns of the climate change perils of Obama's lack of leadership
in restricting Canada's development of its tar sands. Obama pretends he
can do nothing to restrain Canada's tar sands exploitation but he can -
if he restricts construction of tar sands pipelines crossing USA to the
sea. However - Obama has recently done the opposite of restriction - by
promoting construction of the Southern section of Keystone XL through
Texas from Cushing - where there is an oil bottleneck - so that it can
flow to the Texas coast refineries and hence to e.g. the UK.
18apr12 Today TransCanada Corp.
submitted a re-route of its Keystone
XL tar sands pipeline to the
Nebraska state government, which is
claimed to avoid an environmentally sensitive area [The Sand
Hills]. This comes a day
after Nebraska governor signed a bill allowing the state's review of
the pipeline. (via WSJ). But environmentalists say it does not avoid
the sensitive Sand Hills and Ogalalla aquifer: 'New Keystone XL Route - Same Risks,
Same Threats'
(19apr12).
apr12 Launch of Olympic Greenwash Gold, and IEN remind us
about BP
and the tar sands: here.
See UKTSN website 12apr12 BP AGM See
UKTSN's website for info. First
Nations tell BP
shareholder meeting 'BP operations in Tar Sands "could
soon be illegal"'
and hand
deliver statement.
3apr12 Twelve minute video
summarizing the Ecocide
Sentencing Event of 31st March.
22mar12 ECOCIDE: International Lawyer Polly Higgins has written a
'concept paper': 'Closing the door to dangerous industrial activity'
[by implementing UN law against ecocide] that she has this week
submitted to all governments and hopes you will email or send it to
e.g. MPs. The Alberta tar sands are used as an example. You can
download full version or 1-page summary via Eradicating Ecocide website
or the full pdf here.
21,22mar12 A huge disappointment: Obama
to speed up approval of
building of Southern section of Keystone XL tar sands pipeline
between
Cushing, Oklahoma and Port Arthur on Texas' Gulf coast. This
will
bring forward the time when significant amounts of tar sands oil can
get to Europe. Thank you LibDem Minister Norman Baker for helping
prevent timely implementation of Article 7a of EU's Fuel Quality
Directive (FQD) to send the right signal to Obama that tar sands oil
has unacceptably high emissions (the thanks is irony here! < to
those unfamiliar with Norman's stance). Ref. e.g.s: Suzanne Goldenberg 21mar12 for
Guardian, Associated Press 22mar12,
'Obama Energy Tour - Full of Broken
Promises', Politico
- Obama's very pro-oil speech in Oklahoma
- depressing.
19mar12 On 31st March is to be held the Ecocide Restorative Justice
Sentencing Event in
which the two fictional oil CEOs found guilty of committing Ecoside in
the Alberta tar sands will face justice. This open event will
be
broadcast live. See my 30sep11 entry below for background summary.
We hope that the UN will make ecocide an
international crime
against peace alongside e.g. genocide, and wish Polly Higgins and other
campaigners success in achieving this aim.
19mar12 'Canadian Lobby Busting Tour in Europe
Challenges
[Canadian] Government Oil Sands Advocacy Strategy'
- The
Council of Canadians. This tour includes a First Nations
chief and civil society representatives and aims to
urge
European decision makers to stand up to the aggressive attempts by the
Canadian and Albertan governments and the tar sands oil industry to
undermine or kill the EU’s efforts to
reduce transport GHGs
through the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD).
9mar12 'Canada tar sands lobbying threatens
EU climate action'
- Suzanne Dhaliwahl of UKTSN - posted in Public Service Europe website.
8mar12 'UK complicit in Canadian
government’s Dirty
Diplomacy' - UKTSN in this piece
refers to new report by Climate
Action Network entitled: ' Dirty
Oil Diplomacy - The Canadian
Government’s Global Push to Sell
the Tar Sands' (it's a substantial pdf with many refs links). And also
refers (with links) to formerly secret documents of Canada's
Pan-European Oil Sands [Advocacy] Team etc obtained by Access
to
Information requests.
27feb12 'Obama supports TransCanada's bid to
push ahead with
part of oil pipeline [Keystone
XL] between Oklahoma and Texas, but
activists condemn 'betrayal'' - Suzanne Goldenberg, Guardian. abc news.
This NRDC piece
has map showing route (and
pollution-concerns etc by landowners etc). This is very bad news for us
in the UK as it hastens connection of Alberta tar sands to the Texas
Gulf refineries for world export including to the UK. Minister Norman
Baker has failed to make use of the EU Commission's proposals for the
FQD to send a timely red light to Obama that tar sands fuel is highly
polluting.
23feb12 'EU tar sands pollution vote ends in
deadlock -
Decision on whether to label oil produced from tar sands as highly
polluting is delayed as key vote fails to find majority' - Damian
Carrington, Guardian.
23feb12 Member states vote on
FQD reaches a stalemate (i.e.
no qualified majority), with
UK abstaining (at least Norman's rep didn't vote
against). Damian
Carrington writes: 'The impasse means the decision will be referred to
ministers, who will send a proposal to the European parliament for
passing into law' and tweets: 'correction: EU #tarsands vote:
Stalemate: 89 (not 54) votes for proposal to label tarsands oil as v
polluting, 128 against, 128 abstain'. A vote on what ministers propose
may take place in June. Assessment of UK's abstention
by Joss Garman of
Greenpeace (he looks on the bright side! I wouldn't call this a success
- but some relief that UK didn't vote against). Great assessment by
People and Planet HERE.
Reuters: 'EU tar sands fight not over'.
Euractiv: 'EU tar sands pollution vote ends in
deadlock' - by
Damian Carrington but with appended statements by Connie Hedegaard (EU
Climate Action Commissioner), Transport and Environment, Greenpeace,
Joe Oliver (Canada Gov.).
14feb12 ACTION:
Pls
take 2mins to sign & send template email to Norman Baker
& Nick
Clegg to support EU tar sands import-ban on 23Feb: http://peopleandplanet.org/tarsands/takeaction/eu-ban (my tweet).
On 23rd February EU
member states are due to meet re the Fuel Quality Directive - and are
very likely to
vote on it. We hope the UK and Netherlands won't scupper it from
effectively banning/restricting import of tar sands fuel asap with
their delaying alternative methodologies.
7feb12 See interesting additions to
20jan12 Carbon
bubble below.
30jan12 The Beaver
Lake
Cree Nation are
continuing to fight their
legal action
(& pdf)
against the Alberta and Canada
governments for breeching their First Nation treaty
rights
by
allowing tar sands projects to destroy their ancestral
lands. The present court appearance is to defend
against the
governments' attempt to have the action thrown out on technicality to
avoid answering the charge. Beaver Lake Cree are being supported by The
Co-operative (see facebook
link &/or Our support...pdf
). The Co-operative’s Toxic
Fuels Campaign has described
BLCN's legal action as ‘one of
our best chances to stop tar sands expansion’ (if successful,
much of the
industry’s expansion plans would become illegal). 29feb12: 'An Open Letter to European Citizens'
by Clayton
Thomas-Muller (Member of Cree Nation and Tar Sands Campaign
Director, Indigenous Environmental Network www.ienearth.org/tarsands.html). jan-feb12 Palm
oil biodiesel has been
shown to have
almost as high GHG emissions per megajoule as tar sands diesel (palm
oil: 105gCO2equivalents/MJ, tar
sands: 107, as cf conventional
oil: 87.5) when
the effects of Indirect Land Use
Change (ILUC) are taken into account - according to
leaked EU
data seen by EurActiv (Guardian, Sumatran Orangutan Society). Rainforest
destruction is not the
only carbon-emitting land use change resulting from expanding palm oil
production - the drainage of peatlands on which
they often stand releases much CO2 (20% of all Malaysian
Palm oil is
produced on drained peatlands (wetlands.org)
and also much of that from Indonesia). I hope the EU
rapidly
use these new figures for bio-diesels to change their instruction for
increasing the proportion of biofuels in transport fuels -
which is at present environmentally destructive
(Greenpeace
state: "By making it law to put biofuels in the fuel tanks of cars
across Europe, they've incentivised the destruction of rainforests
around the world in the name of fighting climate change") (and
see EurActiv). These figures can
also be used by us
to try and counter the use of such biofuels to feed power stations: A
year ago Eric Pickles gave the go-ahead (despite big
opposition)
to the building of a biofuel power station likely to run in big part on
palm oil (info pdf).
The Sumatran Orangutan Society (SOS) provide a template letter and url
to help you email the new Secretary of State for Energy and
Climate Change Ed Davey NOT to subsidize the burning of bioliquids such
as palm oil in power stations HERE, and
biofuelwatch ditto to your MP HERE.
In addition to emissions both palm oil and tar sands
industries result in ecocide and loss of land rights to
indigenous
people. FoE & actionaid on costs of
biofuels.
'Oil sands mining and reclamation
cause massive loss of
peatland and stored carbon' < Significant
areas of both Alberta
boreal forest and Malaysian and Indonesian rainforests occur on
peatland (called muskeg in Alberta). The UK is investing in the
destruction of both! (e.g.RBS). Though
organizations in the UK are trying to
repair some of our UK peatlands and research
into peatland carbon flux in UK,
the UK gov have put off the date
that protective law comes into force: BBC
R4 Costing the Earth 'The Power of Peat'(14mar12). 20apr12
sequel: Excellent
briefing pdf for Scottish Parliament: 'Peatlands and Climate Change' (in Fig.3 Indonesia
ranks 3rd in
world for its area of peatland). Example of destruction of deep peat
forest Orangutan habitat: Tripa peat swamps, Aceh, Indonesia.
23jan12 Serbia
oil
shale: the likely
environmental impacts if it's exploited
emphasize the urgency for
EU's Fuel Quality Directive (FQD)
to be implemented with the
already-available default values for life-cycle emissions for
unconventional oils (which would restrict import of shale oil into the
EU). According to this IPS article the Serbian
government "has
announced that the corporate players itching to enter the shale
extraction race would be announced by mid 2012." The
proposed default value for oil shale (131.3 gCO2eq/MJ) is 50%
higher than
the average for conventional oil sources (87.5), and is even
higher than that for tar sands (107). The FQD needs to be used to make
clear ASAP to Serbia and to interested "corporate players"
(oil
and financial interests) that the EU cannot be viewed as a potential
market for its shale oil. As with extracting oil
from tar
sands, extra emissions are just part of the impact: Belgrade Professor
Dejan Skala: "The environmental problems are enormous" "entire diverse
ecosystem of the locality is destroyed" "massive amounts of water
consumed" "deposition pools" - sounds like tar sands ecoside. Other
refs: e.g. wikipedia, pdf on geology and "potential". Feb12 sequel: Estonia has reserves of shale
oil and as it is
an EU member state this may deter it from supporting implementation of
Article 7a of the FQD.
2012
NB: EU member
states meeting on the FQD is to be on 23rd February.
The FQD -
Fuel Quality Directive (here more specifically - its Article 7a) - is
important climate change legislation which when fully
implemented
will hopefully in effect
ban
import into the EU any transport fuels with high life-cycle emissions
such as diesel sourced from tar sands.
20jan12 Criticism
of Norman Baker's
words re the FQD: I have
just uploaded a pdf document I
produced last month that
comments on DfT Minister Norman Baker's 2dec11 piece on the Fuel
Quality Directive in Liberal Democrat Voice. I had emailed this last
month to Tim Farron MP (copied to Simon Hughes MP). Here is a LINK to it.
And here is its summary:
Norman
very wrongly misrepresents both the
Fuel Quality Directive (repeatedly echoing Canada Government myths) and
environmental campaigners in his statement
in Liberal Democrat Voice and elsewhere. Furthermore – he
ignores
the great urgency
to implement the FQD with a tar
sands value, and downplays the dangers of delay
that his alternative methodology will cause (regardless of whether
delay is
unintentional on his part.)
The tar sands industry is pushing hard to
get its products to the sea in sufficient quantity for export
(including to
Europe) and to invest in infrastructure both for this and for increased
production – which needs access to markets abroad. They may
not
wait for
Norman’s comprehensive methodology! However
comprehensively effective his alternative methodology for the FQD might
potentially
be (and he does little to reassure environmentalists of this) - it runs
too
great a risk for the FQD being too late in implementation (or of being
again diluted
by oil interests) – because it increases the likelihood of
being
pre-empted by powerful
investment-related decisions for increasing tar sands infrastructure
based on
the export of tar sands products beyond America – including
to
Europe. With the
effectiveness of the FQD on a knife edge, further delays in
implementation are
likely to be interpreted by the industry as a green light –
particularly if
caused by a government regarded as supportive of the Canadian
government’s
promotion of the Tar Sands industry (i.e. the UK Government). Such oil
industry
decisions are likely to increase pressure on EU Governments to dilute
the FQD
to prevent their investments failing. Norman appears to be oblivious of
these dangers
that he increases.
20jan12
California's Low Carbon
Fuel
Standard is their equivalent
of EU's Fuel Quality Directive
Article 7a. It was due to start enforcement from 1jan12 but on 29dec11
oil companies succeeded in getting a judge's decision to delay it -
which
in turn may (hopefully) get overturned by an appeal. More info on this legal battle. . 20jan12 Carbon
bubble: 'Fossil fuels are
sub-prime
assets,
Bank of England governor [Mervyn King] has been warned' in an open letter
by 'a high profile
coalition of investors,
politicians and scientists' [Guardian article
quotes] - 'The huge reserves of
coal, oil and gas held by companies listed in the City of London are
"sub-prime" assets posing a systemic risk to economic stability' - a
'carbon bubble'. Curbs on GHGs to reach COP17 targets would
mean
'just 20% of existing fuel reserves could be burned'. The
Co-operative's toxic fuels campaign face-book
site 'The Beaver Lake Cree vs
Tar Sands' states: 'This
is especially true of tar
sands, the world's most
highly
emitting transport fuel. The Co-operative Banking Group has said this
in the past in relation to tar sands, holding investor seminars,
co-tabling shareholder resolutions and publishing reports such as Toxic
Fuels - Toxic Investments (seehttp://www.co-operative.coop/Toxicfuels/Reports-and-resources).
It's very positive
that other large investors now
agree.' 83%
taxpayer-owned RBS has
invested heavily into the tar sands industry - including $2.5billion
following the bailout with taxpayers money PDF.
They must reduce their toxic liabilities. 2Feb12 SEQUEL: Reply from Mervyn King, Bank of
England. 6Feb12: a
very interesting follow-up article: Carbon bubble: Bank of England's
opportunity to tackle
market failure. But: 'Myopic'(?)
views of energy investment analysts(13july11) were dismissive of the
likelihood of
unusable 'stranded assets' - they appear to assume that legal
constraints to use of fossil fuel reserves that make up company values
won't happen in their foreseeable future. BP similarly expect no
significant constraint by international emissions legislation and
expect fossil fuel dominance until at least 2030 (article by Charlie Kronick,
senior climate
advisor, Greenpeace UK). Implementing an effective Fuel Quality
Directive
may be one way of getting them to re-think?
8feb12 sequel: The Great Carbon Bubble: Bill
McKibben on Why the
Fossil Fuel Industry Fights So Hard Against Climate Action.
16feb12 sequel: Investors call on European Central
Bank to address
'carbon bubble' risk by
James Murray in BusinessGreen.
And 24feb response by Scottish Widows
Investment
Partnership. Personally I am
concerned by the RBS/taxpayers'
billions in the tar sands industry - not just as an investment
risk - but the 'chilling' effect it may have on the UK Government (e.g.
via Chancellor George Osborne) to support implementation of an
effective FQD Article 7a (as well as of course its more direct
environmental consequences etc).
19jan12 UK
Tar Sands Network
post: "Huge Victory: Obama kills Keystone!".
Also refers
to the recent start of hearings on Enbridge's
proposed Northern
Gateway
pipeline that aims to connect
the Alberta tar sands Westwards to
access
the Pacific and China - which is fortunately being blocked by united opposition from the First Nations.
[27jan12 update post by UKTSN
& c.1minute video
of wildlife & habitat under
threat]. These pipeline
delays/rejections are helping keep the Tar Sands industry as
land-locked as possible to discourage its desired rapid expansion which
is export-dependent. Also includes embedded 10 minute film STOP
THE PIPELINE: The Rise Against Keystone XL.
18jan12 Excellent
News! - Obama
today rejected TransCanada's application for the Keystone XL
pipeline
but the US State Department said this does not preclude a re-applicationwith
a different route (there had
been very strong local opposition in Nebraska for routing through the
environmentally sensitive Nebraska Sandhills area of the Ogallala
aquifer). Obama stated that "The
rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by Congressional Republicans
prevented a full assessment of the pipeline’s impact,
especially
the health and safety of the American people, as well as our
environment," TransCanada
announced they will re-apply. Sources: CBC News, Washington Times, Guardian,
and here.
16jan12 Dutch
alternative methodology
for FQD: It's not just UK
(Norman Baker) that is promoting an
alternative methodology for the FQD, but so too is the Netherlands -
home of Shell (which has a huge stake in the Alberta Tar Sands), and Damian Carrington's Guardian piece reveals
some snippets about the Dutch attempt to derail the
Commissions
FQD proposals - which appear to be a “ludicrous”,
unworkable & ineffective alternative (and which Norman Baker
had
ambiguously referred to as a “creative suggestion”
in
LibDem Voice on 2dec11). Alternative methodologies will of
course
delay implementation of the FQD...
13jan12 Emily Coats
of UK Tar Sands
Network questions Norman Baker
on why he is opposing the EU's
proposal to give tar sands an immediate default carbon value in the
FQD, but gets a predictable answer: Emily's post. 15dec11 A FOI request has revealed that Canadian
and Big
Oil lobbying suppressed consideration of possible Low Carbon Fuel
Standards (i.e. similar to
the LCFS
in California and the FQD
in
Europe) for 11 U.S. states. Also the Canadian Government in
trying
to derail the FQD has been falsely claiming that California's LCFS is
"unimplementable"; fortunately their deceit has been shown up and
corrected by
California REF
and on 16dec11 the California Air Resources
Board voted unanimously to move forward with the LCFS in California REF.
13dec11 Oil research
expert Lorne
Stockman of OIL CHANGE
INTERNATIONAL
has produced a very informative and illustrated report for
Greenpeace UK and PLATFORM London: 'GETTING TO MARKET: EMERGING
INVESTOR RISKS IN THE TAR SANDS' - the pdf is downloadable from
web-page: Tar sands have trouble getting to
market. In summary:
the Alberta tar sands industry wishes to massively expand production,
but to make this viable it will need to export to overseas markets
(including Europe and China). However it is facing much opposition to
its proposed pipeline infrastructure to connect it to the sea from its
landlocked location, and is concerned about EU's Fuel Quality
Directive denying export to Europe (& any to other markets that
might copy EU's example). What's more it faces competition from
other oil sources.... Thus investing into tar sands
infrastructure has become financially risky. Great
aerial photos and map.
13dec11 The Canadian government gets a Fossil
of the year award for
being
the most obstructive nation to climate progress at "COPOUT17", and
announces it's getting out
of the Kyoto protocol. The
reasons it gives
are deceitfully flawed and fabricated. We all know that the real reason
is that its desired huge expansion of tar sands production will mean a
big increase in its CO2 emissions.
8dec11 TOTAL
say their decision will
be
made "in the near future"
on whether to go ahead with a
huge tar sands mining project recently approved by Ottawa: makes you
wonder how much this might affect France's attitude to the FQD. Canada
- now the Alberta Government - has recently (12th-20th Dec) sent yet
another official to Europe to lobby for the Tar Sands industry,
visiting Paris, Geneva (WTO) and UK.
8dec11 Chris
Davies MEP and LibDem
Environment Spokesman in the European Parliament must be congratulated
for the courage of writing the following words in his 6th December
article in the Liberal Democrat Voice Chris Davies MEP writes... Slipping
deeper into the
tar sands: “The weak and obfuscating position on
tar sands being
taken by the Coalition Government is an embarrassment to every Liberal
Democrat who wants to believe that having our representatives in office
will advance the environmental agenda.” His views are also
shown in the
following 6th December Guardian piece
in which Damian Carrington
writes: Chris Davies,
the MEP who is the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman in the
European parliament, told me: "It is extraordinarily naive for
ministers and officials to take the special pleading by Canada as
though it were gospel truth, rather than what it is - an attempt to
protect narrow financial interests." Davies is savage about the UK
government's position, for which fellow LibDem Norman Baker is the
responsible minister: "The whole isssue of tar sands is becoming a huge
source of embarrassment to every Liberal Democrat who wants and expects
a government of which we are part to be leading on environment issues
and in the fight against climate change." It is also well worth
reading comments
below this by Colin and James Lloyd in particular. Chris Davies' piece in
Liberal Democrat Voice followed LibDem DfT Minister Norman Baker's
piece in the same website on 2nd
December, beneath which I wrote a
comment about Norman's misrepresentations (I had to put it tactfully
there!) and lack of a wider concept such as the urgency for an
effective FQD to be implemented.
7dec11 Good
news: The decision
on Enbridge's proposed
Northern Gateway Pipeline has been delayed until late 2013 - a year
later than expected. This proposed pipeline route aims to link the
Alberta Tar Sands Westwards to the Pacific for export to e.g. China,
but this would mean crossing a number of watersheds of important
salmon-rivers and forest habitats, to reach a long narrow
sound
potentially vulnerable to oil leaks. Pipeline leaks are highly likely -
particularly as the diluted bitumen is acidic and corrosive to
pipelines [14dec11 REF on safety of tar sands pipelines].
There
is huge opposition from the First Nations. REF1REF2REF3
23nov11 URGENT
QUICK EASY
ACTION:Take 5
minutes and send
Minister Norman Baker a letter telling him that there is no place for
fuel from Tar Sands dirty oil in a green European Union! peopleand
planet.org have provided a
template email to make this quick and easy: www.peopleandplanet.org/tarsands/takeaction/eu-ban
15nov11 article by
Lorne Stockman of Oil Change
International & Price of Oil assesses the oil industry's most
likely modified business plans or strategies resulting from Obama's
10nov11 announcement delaying a decision on the proposed Keystone XL
pipeline.
10nov11: Excellent news
from The Whitehouse
today: Keystone
XL Tar Sands pipeline decision to be delayed until 2013
(after
Presidential election) while
further assessments are carried out, including an alternative route to
avoid pollution of the Ogallala aquifer in Nebraska - particularly the
sensitive ecosytem of the Sand Hills area. Obama makes a statement
referring to concerns for the
environment, health and safety, and for a clean energy economy! Links
to statements/articles by: U.S. State DeptBill
McKibben for Tar Sands ActionBBCNYTimes
Canada: CBC NewsPembina
InstituteThe Globe and Mail
For other links to articles on
and following from this choose from tweets by www.twitter.com/@NoTarSands
NB: we must stop UK Gov (eg Minister Norman Baker) continuing to
block/delay EU's Fuel Quality Directive from becoming effective in
preventing tar sands fuels getting into Europe. An effective FQD made
law would give out a strong worldwide signal and help an
environmentally-favourable KXL decision in 2013 (the KXL has a strong
worldwide-export motive).
6Nov11: Today (Sunday) significant Tar Sands action in the
U.S.,
with a related
solidarity action
in
London: In
the U.S. 12,000
people surrounded the
White House to encourage Obama to reject the Keystone XL Tar Sands
pipeline, and in the UK the UKTSN carried out a "miniature action"
(employing a model White House)
outside the U.S. Embassy in London.
Obama has recently at long last said a few words about some of his
feelings re the Keystone XL - which give a slight glimmer of hope - in
contrast to the ominous signs from the US State Department (and Hillary
Clinton) over the past months.
20oct11 Joe
Oliver, Canada's
Natural Resources Minister, was presented
with "The Greenwash Propagandist of the
Year Award" at
the London Scool of Economics, where he was giving a lecture promoting
Canada's tar sands industry. He is currently broadcasting much
greenwash disinformation and is certainly living up to his award. I
congratulated him
for winning this award on his face-book site, but as expected my
comment was soon deleted - maybe he is not quite so proud of his skills
at greenwashing.
11oct11
Shockingly brave stunt
by two UKTSN activists at The Canada-Europe Energy Summit: They act out
a physical metaphor of the "chummy" relationship between UK and Canada
governments over promoting the Tar Sands oil industry:
Emily
Coats:"This seedy relationship puts profits for the oil industry and
banks ahead of much needed legislation which will curb emissions from
transport fuel in Europe" and "Pete the Temp" Peter Bearder: "The
government
is
supporting sleazy Canadian lobbying efforts and today's Energy summit
shows just how intimate they have become to promote the tar sands
industry." Video, explanatory text & vg
link(scroll down to
Oct.11). This summit was
run by an organization
that promotes Canada's Tar Sands industry and is in partnership with
the UK Government. At the end of the video you will see
sitting next to
Canada Government's Gordon Campbell the UK's Foreign Office Minister
Lord Howell of Guildford (formerly a minister in Thatcher's government)
- who is noted by an interesting article in The Independent
as being George
Osborne's father-in-law and as having expressed climate-sceptic views
in the past.
Excellent news
(REF & REF): On 4oct11
the European
Commission voted almost unanimously to (re-)instate to the Fuel Quality
Directive(FQD) a
greenhouse gas
emissions default value to fuel sourced from tar sands
(and
values to other high emissions unconventional
sources such as oil shale and coal-to-liquid), so as to fulfil the
purpose of
the FQD to achieve the EU’s pledged aim to reduce the carbon
footprint of fuels
(per unit of energy) by 6% by 2020. The
decision
accurately recognizes that use of tar sands fuels emits 23% more GHGs
than
conventional-sourced fuels over its 'life-cycle' (i.e. including
combustion; 4.9x more in extraction). This will effectively ban their
import into
the EU
if approved by a qualified majority vote by the EU member states and a
final
approval by the European Parliament’s Environment
Committee. Unfortunately
it
appears that the UK Government still wish to block
or continually delay an effective FQD by 1.lobbying
EU member states to oppose the EU
Commission decision, and 2.usinga
new
stalling tactic by pushing
for an
alternative (and deliberately time-consuming) methodology.
The
Valero connection:
VALERO:
Tar
Sands diesel to UK via Keystone XL and Valero
("Texaco"
brand fuel
stations) On
1st
August BBC News Wales announced
that Valero Energy Corporation
(largest oil
refinery Corp. in the US) bought Pembroke
Refinery
(Milford Haven), 11
terminals and
around 1,000 petrol stations in the UK and Ireland - most
of which
will be familiar to you as the Texaco
brand. Valero's US
Gulf coast Port
Arthur refinery will be the largest recipient of Tar Sands diluted
bitumen ("dilbit") via the Keystone XL pipeline if Obama agrees to its
construction - in the face of opposition from top climate scientists,
Nobel Laureates
and many others. Valero's business plan is to refine much of this
dilbit to diesel for export - much of it to the EU. The UK now
has
Valero's first massive retail infrastructure
in the EU.
Easy
quick ACTION: Please
sign@avaazpetition
to tell@whitehouse&@BarackObamato
stop the#TarSandsKeystone
XL pipeline-http://bit.ly/q7Fdlc#noKXL NB:
this makes it even more important and urgent to urge Minister Norman
Baker to back rather than block or delay the re-instatement of
an effective
EU Fuel
Quality Directive to stop import of Tar Sands fuel, before
Obama
announces his decision. I have emailed my MP Tim Farron on
this
and you are welcome to use ideas within my email
to email your MP (inadvisable if you
suspect he/she is supportive of the present Government's
deregulation policies for big business profit before environment).
SOURCES include: TAR SANDS IN YOUR TANK - EXPOSING
EUROPE’S ROLE
IN CANADA’S DIRTY OIL TRADEExporting
Energy Security – Keystone XL ExposedBBC
Wales News re Valero acquisition Valero and the Koch brothers are
main funders and
backers of Proposition 23: the "California Jobs Initiative" - which
aims to derail implementation of Schwarzenneger's Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006 (aka AB 32), because such carbon
emissions legislation - especially if copied elsewhere - may
restrain future profits from their Tar Sands
investments and prospects such as via the Keystone XL pipeline. UK - beware!
- Valero are over
here now. Sources include DESMOGBLOG and
SourceWatch. Koch Brothers info.
UK
Tar Sands Network have now also posted an article on the
Valero
connection: Tar Sands on fast track to the UK?!
It would not surprise
me if Valero has been in un-reported discussion with the UK Government
as to its prospects for importing Tar Sands products here.
The EU
has been trying to restrict import of Tar Sands fuel into Europe due to
its high production carbon emissions - with the Fuel Quality Directive
(FQD).
But the UK Government is
trying to prevent the FQD from being effective in this aim, now by
delaying re-instatement of an emissions value for tar-sands-derived
fuel to distinguish it from fuel derived from more conventional
sources. Furthermore - UK Government is supporting an "investor-state clause"
within
another EU law (sensu lato)
under negotiation (called CETA
- explained below and HERE)
- which almost unbelievably will
give oil Corporations
(and other
Corp.s) legal powers to sue any Government or body that restricts their
profits in trading Tar Sands
products (or any other products) by
means of for example environmental or climate change legislation such
as the FQD. I have
now received a letter back from
Government (via my MP) in reply
to my letter regarding the CETA (my
26july posting below) which shows the Government position continues to
be as I have described - it gives false and flimsy re-assurances with
regards Government concerns about higher emissions fuel sources such as
from
tar sands, and gives obvious priority to financial benefits of the CETA
to UK GDP
(via free-trade rights to big business). I
recently briefly
met my MP Tim Farron (President
of LibDem Party)
to update him on this matter.
David
Cameron's
pro- Tar Sands position has
been shown during his recent
visit
to Canada and its Conservative PM Stephen Harper - who is one of the
most anti-climate-change-legislation leaders in the world. This is
summarized in this tweet by @NoTarSands(UK
Tar Sands Network):
David Cameron getting
chummy w Stephen Harper arguing against the Fuel Quality Directive
inclusion of#tarsandsvaluet.co/7g6qvlyU
This
links to an
article in Canada’s Globe and
Mail
– which shows that Cameron is supporting the Tar
Sands
industry and import of its products into Europe – fuel from
the
dirtiest most high-emissions oil fuel source on earth. All
Scameron’s promises for "greenest government ever" and talk
on
reducing emissions is shown very clearly to be totally untrue
in
reality. Cameron’s team (eg British High
Commissioner to Ottawa Andrew Pocock) are
regurgitating Harper’s flawed and false propaganda in trying
to
stymie the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD). E.g. – exactly as I
predicted in my recent article criticizing Davies’
letter, Pocock is stated as pointing out: “it’s not the only
high-emissions oil in
the world – pointing to the process of flaring gas in
oilfields
in Russia and Nigeria as less than ideal.”
- a very
flawed argument – as I have explained already regarding the
FQD.
In summary -
re-instating an emissions value for tar sands (= source of highest
emissions) does not preclude subsequent addition of values for other
oil
sources. Also - significant flaring emissions are not an intrinsic
unavoidable part of conventional oil extraction, whereas emissions in
producing tar sands oil for refining are intrinsic and not currently
avoidable without leaving the tar sands alone.
On 30th
September 2011 the tar sands industry (in the form of 2
fictional oil company bosses)
was in the dock in the Supreme Court mock ecocide trial, with
Michael Mansfield QC prosecuting. The jury found the 2 fictional bosses
guilty of ecocide in the Alberta Tar Sands - ecoside being the
large-scale destruction or damage of an ecosystem. Lawyer and Barrister
Polly Higgins and others
are working hard to make ECOCIDE a crime under UN international law
alongside
genocide & other such laws. The law regards decision-making
individuals within governments or corporations as liable for
ecocide (they can't escape by blaming the corporation), and aims to
deter them from ignoring ecosystem impacts in decision-making. UK
accomplices to the Tar Sands ecocide
include for example David Cameron and others in the UK
Government
or RBS if they continue to back the tar sands industry. Unfortunately
no time during the mock
trial to get them or fictional replacements in the dock -
hopefully that time might come!
MPs should consider their positions in relation to the tar sands
ecocide. Too many have turned a blind eye - if they haven't been
accomplices.
For further information: http://www.thisisecocide.com/
and http://www.eradicatingecocide.com/
Read tweets and links under #ecocidetrial
- http://twitter.com/#!/search/%23ecocidetrial
then shorten to #ecocide.
Protests
against the Keystone XL Pipeline
also see e.g. http://www.tarsandsaction.org/ 25,26sep11
Protest action at Ottawa against the tar sands industry. See ottawaaction website and facebook
and media news e.g.
20sep11
Obama will decide in December on the KXL pipeline. Heather
Libby
(MD of TckTckTck.org) lists those for and against in The Great Tar Sands Standoff
[Infographic] SUMMARY
STATEMENT of Tar Sands Action outside Whitehouse in Washington, DC,
August 20-September 3, 2011. 1253
were arrested (including top climate scientist(s)) in the largest
sustained act of non-violent civil disobedience in
the U.S. nation's history, in an effort to stop the construction of the
1800-mile
Keystone XL oil pipeline from the Tarsands in Alberta, Canada to the
Gulf of
Mexico at Port Arthur, Texas. See UK TAR SANDS
NETWORK web-pages on the Keystone XL
Pipeline protest:
http://www.no-tar-sands.org/2011/09/pipeline-pressure-hots-up/ If
we burn through the tar sands, warns NASA expert James Hansen, it's
"game over" for the climate.
2sep11 = Day 14
of the Keystone
XL Tar Sands Pipeline Protest
outside the White House, and author Naomi Klein and Indigenous Leaders
from Alberta have joined the protest. For photo & info: http://www.tarsandsaction.org/day-14-author-naomi-klein-indigenous-leaders-join-keystone-tar-sands-pipeline-protest/
If the Pipeline
is constructed it will greatly
increase the ease of transport of tar sands products (especially
diesel) to the EU and UK. A few days ago the US State Department
Environmental Impact Statement absurdly
& falsely concluded#KXLpipeline
for#tarsandsbitumen
would have minimal
effect on environment!
http://nyti.ms/qyYEaP
- my tweet on 27august - an ominous indication of how Obama
is
likely to decide. It would help if the EU decides to make the Fuel
Quality Directive effective before Obama decides on KeystoneXL - so as
to give him a steering red light - but the UK and Dutch (Shell)
Governments have been trying to delay re-instatement of the tar sands
oil life-cycle carbon emissions values to the FQD - necessary for it to
be effective.
26july11: Please
read my email to my
MP re CETA.
If you agree with
it please email likewise or similar to your MP. LINK
More about CETA under
"Unique opportunity?" and in the NEWS
& ACTIONsection
below.
17july11: The CETA,
and the big implications to
Europe (& the US environment) of the Keystone XL pipeline
proposal (in
the NEWS
& ACTION
section below, but read "Unique opportunity?" first for the context).
8july11: "Yellowstone River Oil Spill a Red Flag Ahead
of Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline Decision" - 8july11 article by Miles
Grant on National Wildlife Federation website: http://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/Media-Center/News-by-Topic/Wildlife/2011/07-08-11-Yellowstone-River-Oil-Spill-a-Red-Flag-Keystone-XL-Tar-Sands-Pipeline-Decision.aspx
Unique
opportunity?
(June/July11) The battle over the EU Fuel Quality Directive
(FQD)
- which has been ongoing for
many months - may be a unique opportunity for us to have some
influence on the trade of tar sands oil not just with regards Europe
but also world-wide - especially in the USA,
so I hope you find time to read up about it (see "URGENT"
&
"Weasel Diesel" below), and to urge UK Transport Minister Norman Baker
(LibDem) via e.g. your
MP - not to dilute or delay the FQD from classifying tar sands oil as
being of significantly higher carbon footprint than conventional oil
(in accordance with the data, facts and recommendations
in Adam
Brandt's (Stanford University) report commissioned by the EU). Also
read about CETA
- the Canada-EU free trade agreement under
negotiation - which threatens to
undermine the FQD and give tar sands
oil companies the power to legally challenge any limits we put on trade
in tar
sands oil. Oct11 sequel: 'Tar Sands and the CETA'
- briefing paper by CCPA
(Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives). Also see e.g. UKTSN on CETA.
.
URGENT (21&22june11
posting but petition still running):
Please sign Avaaz petition - No tar sands in Europe - http://www.avaaz.org/en/crude_politics
Weasel
Diesel?
I have received email letters from Tory MEP's which show
that
they
are
trying to deceive the UK public about the carbon footprint and
environmental impact of oil from the Tar Sands, in contradiction with a
BP admission at its recent AGM:
BP’s
CEO “Mr
Dudley admitted that BP’s methods of
extracting oil sands was more polluting than conventional
crude”
(FT.com),
Conservative MEPs state: “SAG-D, is deep mined
rather than open cast and therefore causes little environmental
footprint”
[SAG-D is extraction method
used by
Husky-BP].
- Weasel
words?
Deception? See NEWS
& ACTION
section
below - where you can read "Weasel
Diesel?"
- shows the deception I received in reply from the Con.
MEPs - with
my analysis (though the deception is obvious anyhow!).
Madagascar tar sands
The World Development Movement
website reports that RBS
has
lent £303 million to
the French oil giant TOTAL
which is preparing to extract oil from the tar sands deposits in Madagascar.
This threatens to cause
environmental damage which is likely to include pollution of land and
water resources essential for the livelihoods of the poor people there.
You can help raise awareness to challenge RBS. SeeNEWS
& ACTION
section
below. June 2011: WDM
needs your URGENT help (just takes a few minutes!). Some older
additions: UK
is a major financier of
the Tar
Sands industry, with the main UK
direct contributors including RBS,
Barclays and HSBC. RBS
financed the
Tar Sands industry with $2.5
billion
(=c.£1.6B) of taxpayers money soon after it became 84% owned
by
us following the banks bailout, which added to its pre-bailout
investment of $5 billion thus totals $7.5
billion into the Tar Sands. RBS
is also
helping finance a major
pipeline proposal from the Tar
Sands to near
the Pacific, by a company (Enbridge) infamous for its oil leaks
(including Tar Sands
crude into the Kalamazoo River)
- and the proposed
route is in threatening proximity to important wild salmon rivers! A pdf collates more
detailed facts and figures of UK
financing of the Tar
Sands industry. Another pdf gives some ideas of what
you can do. NEWS & ACTION
section: National
and
local
(Kendal /
South Lakeland) news. Article:
'What are the TAR
SANDS? How do they affect us?' [April
2010] (with
2 photos)
(a shorter version is on SLACC BLOG web-page) GRAPH
showing atmospheric CO2
over the last 2K
years -
with
data-point for March 2010, and link to BBC
animation
This
graph gives a remarkably clear picture. Although "correlation is not
cause", the co-incidence it shows is
hard to ascribe to anything other than man's actions. Though it does
not show how strong CO2 is
as a driver for the recent
global warming or its relative contribution, it nonetheless looks like
CO2
is a
likely causative candidate. Posted
on 17/6/11:
Greenpeace tar sands slide-show during
which Melina
Laboucan-Massimo, a member of the Lubicon Cree First Nation describes
the impact of oil and gas developments and the recent oil spill in the
traditional territory of the Lubicon Cree in northern Alberta: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz3nSscXamI&feature=share%5C
The
A4 "Google
TAR
SANDS RBS POSTER" below is
designed to get key facts and associated icons across to people in a
hurry, and to encourage readers to voice their
opinions to those with influence.
Things you can do with this poster - see below this gif image. www.vimeo.com/6597349www.fairpensions.org.uk/tarsands/action Click to the left
to obtain the A4 Acrobat pdf version which you can save. Do e-mail it
on to as many people you know who might be even slightly interested.
(Also you could e-mail on the info sheet or simply name this website in
your e-mail.)
Print and display it where-ever you think fit - but ask first where
appropriate even if only to be courteous. Be prepared for unexpected
refusals.
(Oil companies sponsor various establishments - which can potentially
lead to suppression of information about e.g. the Tar Sands, Nigeria
Delta etc)
Some other ideas
for poster display:
CAR: On "parcel shelf" at back of car. BICYCLE: You could attach it to
your bicycle crossbar when you chain it up in town - e.g. to a
lamp-post near an RBS branch!
(e.g. seal it in plastic sleeve; attach latter to crossbar
with
string spiralled through holes along sleeve. Can be rolled tightly
around crossbar when cycling, tied in place)
Privately owned coffee shops may allow you to add it to their magazine
rack if you speak to the person in charge. Your hairdresser may be
happy to display it (waiting customers often want something to look at
or read).
Posted
on 17/6/11: Greenpeace tar sands slide-show during
which Melina
Laboucan-Massimo, a member of the Lubicon Cree First Nation describes
the impact of oil and gas developments and the recent oil spill in the
traditional territory of the Lubicon Cree in northern Alberta: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz3nSscXamI&feature=share%5C
LOCAL GROUPSwith
involvement with Climate Change issues such as the Tar Sands
(Kendal area and South Lakeland, Cumbria UK -
which is
where I live)
SLACCtt is
the South Lakeland
(Lakes for
short) Action on Climate Change Towards
Transition www.slacc.org.uk
It's main focus is on local ways of reducing GHG
emissions, including the Transition approach Peak
Oil Update
January 2010 is a
10 page document on www.slacc.org.uk
(page 7 section "Non-conventional
Oil" puts
the Tar Sands oil production in the wider context of Peak Oil)
SLWDM South Lakeland World
Development Movement -
campaign for justice for the world's poor. SLWDM
website: www.south-lakeland-wdm.org.uk
National
WDM website: www.wdm.org.uk
NB:
this section will be re-organized soon - because it partly repeats some
of the "Recent Additions" section near the top of this page,
and
partly contains additional information and additional links absent from
"Recent Additions"
And selected tar sands news below:
March to September 2011: Posted
10&14sep11: VALERO:
Tar
Sands diesel
to UK via KeystoneXL and Valero
("Texaco"
brand fuel
stations): On 1st
August announced that Valero
Energy Corporation (largest oil
refinery Corp. in the US) bought Pembroke
Refinery
(Milford Haven), 11 terminals and around 1,000 petrol stations in the
UK and Ireland - most of which will be familiar to you as the Texaco
brand. Valero's US Gulf coast Port Arthur refinery will be the largest
recipient of Tar Sands diluted bitumen ("dilbit") via the Keystone XL
pipeline if Obama agrees to its construction - in the face of
opposition from top climate scientists, Nobel Laureates and many
others. Valero's
business plan is to refine much of this dilbit to diesel for export -
much of it to the EU. The UK now has Valero's first massive
retail infrastructure
in the EU. (The Pembroke refinery
will export part of
its petrol to the US East coast.)
Easy quick ACTION: Please
sign@avaazpetition
to tell@whitehouse&@BarackObamato
stop the#TarSandsKeystone
XL pipeline-http://bit.ly/q7Fdlc#noKXL NB:
this makes it even more important and urgent to urge Minister Norman
Baker to back rather than block or delay the re-instatement of
an effective
EU Fuel
Quality Directive to stop import of Tar Sands fuel, before
Obama
announces his decision. I
have emailed my MP Tim Farron on this and you are welcome to
use
ideas within my email
to email your MP (inadvisable if you suspect he/she
is supportive
of
the present Government's deregulation policies for big business profit
before environment). SOURCES include:
TAR SANDS IN YOUR TANK - EXPOSING
EUROPE’S ROLE
IN CANADA’S DIRTY OIL TRADEExporting
Energy Security – Keystone XL ExposedBBC
Wales News re Valero acquisition Valero and the Koch brothers are
main funders and backers of Proposition 23: the "California Jobs
Initiative" - which aims to derail implementation of Schwarzenneger's
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (aka AB 32), because such carbon
emissions legislation - especially if copied elsewhere - may
restrain future profits from their Tar Sands
investments and prospects such as via the Keystone XL pipeline. UK - beware!
- Valero are over
here now. Sources include DESMOGBLOG and
SourceWatch. Koch
Brothers info.
SUMMARY
STATEMENT of Tar Sands Action outside Whitehouse in Washington, DC,
August 20-September 3, 2011. 1252
were arrested (including top climate scientist(s)) in the largest
sustained act of non-violent civil disobedience in
the U.S. nation's history, in an effort to stop the construction of the
1800-mile
Keystone XL oil pipeline from the Tarsands in Alberta, Canada to the
Gulf of
Mexico at Port Arthur, Texas. See UK
TAR SANDS NETWORK web-pages on the Keystone
XL Pipeline
protest: http://www.no-tar-sands.org/2011/09/pipeline-pressure-hots-up/
2sep11 = Day 14 of
the KeystoneXL
Tar Sands Pipeline
Protest
outside the White House, and author Naomi Klein and Indigenous Leaders
from Alberta have joined the protest. For photo & info: http://www.tarsandsaction.org/day-14-author-naomi-klein-indigenous-leaders-join-keystone-tar-sands-pipeline-protest/
If the Pipeline
is constructed it will greatly
increase the ease
of transport of tar sands products (especially diesel) to the EU and
UK. A few days ago the US State Department Environmental Impact
Statement absurdly
& falsely concluded#KXLpipeline
for#tarsandsbitumen
would have minimal
effect on environment!
http://nyti.ms/qyYEaP
- my tweet on 27august - an ominous indication of how Obama
is
likely
to decide. It would help if the EU decides to make the Fuel Quality
Directive effective before Obama decides on KeystoneXL - so as to give
him a steering red light - but the UK an Dutch (Shell) Governments have
been trying to delay re-instatement of the tar sands oil life-cycle
carbon emissions values to the FQD - necessary for it to be effective.
ACTION - see
paragraphs below re FQD & CETA.
17july11:
postings
re the
major threat of the Canada-EU
free trade negotiations (CETA)
are
given below (heading CETA).
Madagascar - people and
environment
threatened by oil extraction from tar sands The
WDM website reports that RBS
has lent £303 million to the French oil giant TOTAL
which is preparing to extract
oil from the tar sands deposits in Madagascar.
This threatens to cause environmental damage which is likely to include
pollution of land and water resources essential for the livelihoods of
the poor people there. ACTION:
URGENT: Take
2 minutes to tell @total
to stop mining tar
sands in Madagascar and destroying
livelihoods & the environment http://t.co/67Sle8n(copy of a WDM tweet -
june 2011; WDM
provide a template e-mail to TOTAL CEO). Also you
can help raise awareness to challenge RBS. See WDM web-page www.wdm.org.uk.
Weasel
Diesel? Threat to make the EU Fuel
Quality Directive (FQD)
into a greenwash by classifying Tar Sands oil as being of the same
carbon footprint as conventional oil: The Canadian
government (backed by Conservative MEPs) have been strongly
pressurizing the EU to
dilute
its Fuel
Quality Directive
(FQD) to falsely classify Tar Sands oil as being of the same
life-cycle-carbon-footprint as conventional oil, which will make the
FQD fail in its primary aim to
reduce the carbon footprint of oil used in the EU, and also make the
FQD into a "greenwash" for facilitating trade in Tar Sands oil
elsewhere in the world such as in its nearby market - the USA. This would obviously
be disastrous not
just in undermining
the aim of the FQD (and
ultimately allowing import of tar sands oil into the EU) but also
to give it the opposite effectglobally on carbon
emissions,
and also encouraging further destruction of Canada's boreal forest etc,
destruction of parts
of Madagascar etc.
As a result of the pressure by the Canadian "oiligarchy" and pro-oil
interests - a default value for Tar Sands life-cycle carbon emissions
was removed from the FQD but EU countries except for the UK and Dutch
(Shell) Governments want it re-instated.
Keith Taylor MEP's 29jul11 article on the FQD is worth reading: "Tar sands and Canada's meddling in EU
affairs",
also his blog.
Earlier
this
year www.call4.org started
a campaign on this with
useful info, video, and a very comprehensive
standard message for emailing to your MEPs, on this web-page: http://www.call4.org/campaigns/keep-europe-out-of-the-tar-sands/
[though spot the
accidental error in the template & correct it] RESPONSES
to this from MEPs in NW England show big differences in party
lines: LABOUR
MEP Brian Simpson LIB-DEM
MEP Chris Davies - to which he
appends
14jul10 letter from EU Commissioner CONSERVATIVE
MEP Jacqueline Foster
[EU
Commissioner for the Environment Connie Hildegaard
(14jul10 letter to MEPs)]
In contrast to the responses from Labour and Lib-Dem MEPs - the
response from Conservative
MEPs is a deception that tries to portray
that tar sands oil has a similar carbon footprint to
conventional oil: Click WEASEL DIESEL? (pdf)
to
read my explanation of this deception (with many relevant
facts) -
though it is obvious
anyhow. (NB: I am continually improving this pdf). Some progress
towards success:
(UK Tar Sands Network are working hard
on this)
29mar11 www.theecologist.org
8june11
The European Parliament have passed
a resolution today that "Reiterates its concern about the impact of the
extraction of oil sand on the global environment ...." (full text in WEASEL DIESEL?
pdf - and info
showing that the UK government has been trying to delay the
implementation of an effective FQD by a
reluctance to accept that existing evidence differentiating the carbon
footprint of tar sands oil from conventional oil is adequate without
further evidence distinguishing the more carbon-intensive conventional
oils [so it
appears that a "plan B" is to
delay the FQD if "plan A" for the FQD to be watered down into
a
greenwash deception isn't being realized]). ACTION:
URGENT: Sign Avaaz petitions (see links above).
Also: e.g. write/email your views to e.g. Con.
MEPs about their deception, with incisive questions that reveal its
flaws.
Also: Write/email your MP to urge Minister for Transport Norman Baker
to accept that the carbon emissions of producing tar sands oil are so
significantly higher than for conventional oil that this should be
urgently reflected in the
Fuel Quality Directive, without any delay for emissions data for heavy
oils - because correcting the FQD for tar sands oil does not preclude
modifications to reflect heavy oil emissions when such data becomes
available.
The
website www.writetothem.com/
provides names for your MP, MEPs etc and a means of contacting them.
Or try http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/ "If
you wish to contact Norman in his ministerial capacity please emailnorman.baker@dft.gsi.gov.uk." (pasted
from Norman Baker's website) Also: info@normanbaker.org.uk
-
this url probably primarily for matters in his Lewes constituency
CETA
(Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) is a proposed Canada-EU
free trade agreement under negotiation which threatens to
legally
undermine EU climate change policy (e.g. the FQD) and increase the
already over-large powers of oil companies etc etc (many devils in the
details!). Further information:
17july11 postings: CETA
THREAT:
Ongoing negotiations in Brussels between EU and Canada towards a free
trade agreement (CETA) threaten to hugely increase import of tar sands
oil into Europe if Canada's government has its way, by undermining EU
climate policy such as the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) and giving
power to tar sands oil companies to challenge UK or EU social and
environmental regulations and policies if they try and limit free trade
in tar sands oil. I recommend you read UK
Tar Sands Network's "Keep Europe out of the Tar Sands"http://www.no-tar-sands.org/campaigns/ceta/
and it's link to an excellent
CETA-briefing pdf. The
write-up of a meeting it organized during this July's round of CETA
negotiations is also very informative: www.no-tar-sands.org/2011/07/trading-blows-tar-sands-critics-in-brussels-face-off-with-canada%E2%80%99s-pr-machine/ ACTION:
URGENT: Having
read about CETA you will no doubt
wish to do something to remove the worst clauses (or stop CETA
altogther!). Do write to your MP and MEPs, and you are welcome to base
your letter on my email to Tim Farron MP.
Copy and paste sections
if you so wish, or use your own words to give it more
identity.
Greenpeace's
May 2010 report TAR SANDS IN YOUR TANK
shows that some
tars sands oil already gets to Europe
in petroleum products from
the US Gulf Coast refineries (USGC), but that is likely to hugely increase
when/if the
Keystone XL pipeline reaches
the USGC from Alberta with its
direct supply of diluted bitumen that the refineries will want to
partly convert into diesel for the EU market. The Obama government is
yet to openly give the full go-ahead to the controversial Keystone XL.
Thus there is urgency for an effective FQD to be implemented before the
US gov decision, and free from Canada's interference via e.g. the CETA. www.greenpeace.org.uk/files/pdfs/tar-sands-in-your-tank.pdf The
Keystone XL pipeline
[Alberta tar sands to the Mexican Gulf] is also a huge environmental
& social threat to the land it is planned to cross,
which
includes the huge ancient Ogallala aquifer of great importance
providing drinking water and irrigation and also to natural habitats
e.g. the Nebraska Sandhills (ancient sand-dune area stabilized with
interesting flora). Refs: example.
It would carry diluted tar sands bitumen
("dilbit") which is known to be more corrosive to pipelines than
conventional crude oil and ruptures are inevitable if the present
inadequate levels of upkeep of pipelines prevails. - A disaster in the
making - unless the Obama government can be steered away from giving it
the go-ahead. An effective FQD is thus urgent.
http://www.foe.org/keystone-xl-pipeline ...................................................................
ACTION:
FairPensions are now running a “Got
Oil?” campaign to
urge pension companies to promote
environmental, social and financial responsibility in oil companies
they invest in such as BP, in the light of BP’s Mexican Gulf
disaster. Sign and email their recent draft letter (in collaboration
with Greenpeace). www.fairpensions.org.uk/tarsands/action ACTION: They
also have links to other Tar Sands campaigns.
ACTION:
"Say
no to tar sands by joining our tarnishedearth
photo
petition - http://www.tarnishedearth.co.uk
The EU Fuel Quality Directive, a European Union law that would
effectively prevent tar sands oil from getting into Europe, has been
watered down following pressure from the Canadian government and big
oil companies. Join The Co-operative, Greenpeace and WWF in asking the
EU to reverse its decision and keep tar sands oil out of Europe."
OLD NEWS: Shell AGM is on
18th May.:
visit www.fairpensions.org.uk/tarsands/action where you can
instruct your pension provider to vote for FairPensions' shareholder
resolution on the Tar Sands tabled for Shell's AGM. This will highlight
your concerns to Shell, even if outvoted by those agreeing with the Tar
Sands industry.
Local
news
and ACTION
(for KENDAL and South Lakeland,
Cumbria
UK)
Wednesday April
28th outside the RBS
Kendal branch around 8 members of the South Lakes World
Development Movement (SLWDM) held a peaceful demo to make the
public
aware of RBS's investment of our money into the Tar Sands -
mainly by
giving out leaflets to passers-by - particularly customers of
RBS. For details see BLOG (April
29th) on SLACCtt website. Such WDM demos
were held widely over Britain on the same day (date of RBS AGM).
Saturday 1st May
10am SLWDM repeated last Wednesday's demo outside RBS Kendal branch -
again for about an hour (we had to end soon after the hour anyhow as we
ran out of leaflets - despite
starting with lots). A much enjoyed social occasion - including the
coffee afterwards (- sitting outside in the sun in Market Square until
the rain came).
AUGUST: Climate
Camp direct action against RBS
financing of Tar Sands, Enbridge pipeline, and Cairn's risky drilling
West of Greenland. See Climate Camp website or see SLACC's
website for dramatic photos and videosetc.
For more local related news re Climate Change see BLOG page on
SLACC's website.
Or join SLACCtt: You will receive a monthly e-mail with news of recent
and future
local events including re the Transition movement (Kendal is
now a
Transition Town).
KOCH
- The US oil baron Koch brothers
("Kochtopus") fund climate change denial
propaganda e.g. via the Tea
Party movement (which they founded & fund via AFP - Americans
For
Prosperity) which also gets
spread by e.g. Murdoch's Fox News. They also contribute (e.g.
financially) to the writing and implementation of anti-environment
(etc!) legislation both state and federal via a body called ALEC
and lobbying for laws that will increase power and wealth for
corporations and the rich elite and suppress democracy, health, income
etc, etc for everyone else. Another good ref on Koch and Alec: Koch, Exxon Mobil Among Corporations
Helping Write
State Laws - Bloomberg 21jul11BACK TO TOP
OF NEWSBACK TO TOP of web-page
(more to add - but put simply - at demos outside your local RBS branch)
Banner
printing
and construction tips
(more to add)
If your printer can't print all of image on one long sheet, print on 2
A4 sheets:
1. Before printing, zoom on upper half of image so that lowest visible
part of image is just below "CO2"
(and top
of image still visible).
2. In Print
dialogue box for Print Range select
Current view.
3. Remember/note what Print dialogue box states for zoom % (should be
around 97% to 100%) (I had opted for "Fit to
Printer margins").
4. Print top half of image onto 1 A4 sheet.
5. Slide down to lower half of image (don't alter zoom).
6. Again select Current view - checking that zoom% is the same
(otherwise the 2 halves won't match up).
7. Print lower half of image onto 2nd A4 sheet.
Improvements
to
the banner
I hope to add side-arrows from the TAR SANDS box pointing to:
- POLLUTION/TOXINS > diseases in both humans &
wildlife
e.g. Cancers
etc in indigenous communities.
- HABITAT LOSS - Loss of carbon sink of Boreal Forest
&
peatland, and consequently of wildlife.
- I need to add "potential" or "possible" to the red arrow box - as we
can't be totally certain in predicting future climate change.
In the meantime - you could add these to your prints with a marker pen.
You could also add a big red blood droplet from the B of RBS - to
represent "blood oil" - disease and death in the indigenous
communities
Photo
of banner
(on
2 A4
sheets stuck together)
This banner needs amending:
I would prefer the word "INCREASED" to the word "CATASTROPHIC" because
the former is very highly likely as a
recent&present&future
causal relationship, whereas the latter is a future
possibility. Also the banner presently omits the other immediate
present-day
negative impacts which are visibly obvious with 100%
certainty such as the
huge habitat losses and effects on indigenous tribes.
Ideas
and tips
re peaceful demos
for your
town
(based on recent demos in Kendal, Cumbria [see Local news
above])
Do you have a group in your town - such as WDM or FoE - who might be
interested?
1. As a small group stand outside or in the vicinity of your RBS branch
with the aim of making RBS customers and other passers-by aware of the
issue in the hope that some may be deterred from having their savings
with RBS, might write reasons to RBS if they remove their savings, and
may even contact their MP or the Chancellor.
2. Hand out the leaflets for example the good one headed "STOP YOUR
MONEY SPONSORING RBS' 'BLOOD OIL' INVESTMENTS" produced jointly
by People and Planet, World Development Movement, Indigenous
Environmental Network and PLATFORM London.
3. Ensure you do not break any laws or obstruct anyone going about
their business. Be amicable towards RBS customers - most will
not
have heard of the issue.
4. The RBS branch are highly likely to phone the police - especially if
you haven't informed them. Thus it is best to inform the police
beforehand of your peaceful intentions just to hand out
leaflets
and that you have no wish to break any laws or obstruct anyone going
about their business. Also it is probably a good idea to also inform
the RBS branch of this (maybe a few minutes before starting(?)) so that
they don't get worried about any possible illegal action against them.
By sticking to these guidelines you can repeat the demos.
5. It is a good idea if all or most of you wear something unifying your
group to the public (e.g. our group wore WDM T-shirts [- though I wore
my Co-op Tar Sands T-shirt]).
6. Banners/placards (like the one to the left) will help advertise -
but I have noticed that some members of the public appear to prefer to
discretely take a leaflet from some-one without a banner - so probably
(debatably?) best to have some with, some without banners - the latter
closer to passers-by.
7. Our demos lasted about an hour - afterwards we
enjoyed a
chat over coffee outside a nearby cafe.
Enjoy it - then you'll feel like doing it again!
This
dragonfly1
website is designed by
Dr Henry Adams - a
Consultant
Ecologist based in Cumbria, UK, to
help spread
awareness of the subjects and to provide links to
help visitors
investigate for themselves.
(Apologies for the primitive
retro-styling - just
too busy to improve
presentation.)
Although
it is hard for me to verify collated information - which often lacks
statement of source, I try to base my
own interpretations and
views on a critical read of the facts I find, in as near to a
"scientific" approach as possible. However - I must also admit an added
desire to
increase awareness of environmental issues with a view
to helping
enable appropriate
action that is beneficial for biodiversity and for people or
communities under threat (e.g. indigenous people). I
am not a climatologist - a huge and complex subject, nor have
I an
in-depth expertise on all the subjects here - some of the information
is mostly
collated from other
websites. Thus for example the facts
collated in the TAR SANDS FACT SHEET are from the websites
also
listed there and I cannot be certain of their 100% accuracy.
As regards the unfortunately highly polarized and hijacked subject of
whether man is responsible for the recent global warming trend - I do
not hold a belief
either way,
but instead reckon it is highly
likely
that the big rise in atmospheric CO2
resulting from
man's activities has had a significant contribution to recent climate
change, indeed accounting for much of it (this is the view of most
[c.97% of] climate scientists*) - though the exact relative importance
of CO2
as a highly likely causal driver
for the recent climate change needs more thorough investigation
and other natural and often complexly cyclical natural factors
need to be also taken into account even though they are less likely to
be the prime driver (because the latter have caused
climate changes in the past before man became influential, and are
likely to continue to do so). It is wise to follow the
precautionary principal regarding man's likely influence instead of
waiting for 100% certainty or absolute "proof" before changing our
ways. The degree of acceptance of man's influence on climate change by
climate scientists is now so high that we should work on this basis.
Whatever your own assessment as to the degree that man has or has not
influenced the climate, or your level of certainty, one thing is very
certain - the huge environmental devastation that the tar sands
industry has brought about in Alberta Canada, and the potential similar
devastation that threatens other tar sands, e.g. in Madagascar.
* Who d'you reckon is more likely to be correct: denialists (who often
have a vested oil interest or high-carbon life-style) - OR - 97% of
publishing climate scientists? According to a 2009 survey: 97% of
actively publishing climate scientists answered yes to the question:
“Do you think human activity is a significant contributing
factor
in changing mean global temperatures?” PT Doran & M
Kendall
Zimmerman “Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate
Change” EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical Union,
90,
2009. http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf
E-mail
address for writing a comment or
question: infox@dragonfly1.plus.com
