Alberta oil boycott

[Boblobla]

From calgary.ctv.ca

A meeting of U.S. mayors has resulted in a boycott of oil from Canada’s oil sands. The resolution was passed at a weekend meeting in Florida. The mayors made the decision for environmental reasons. They say our oil is too dirty and they’re looking to promote unconventional sources of energy to fuel their municipal fleets.

Dirty? A pretty ballsy remark from the largest creator of GHG in the world...

Feel free to critique my numbers but through reading and presentations I have seen I have seen the following numbers about the Oil sands GHG emissions.

I have read that they make up 4% of Canada emissions which amounts to .1% of the total world emissions. I have also seen the stat Canada makes up ~2% of the total global GHG emission and of that 2%, only 2% is from the oil sands. Both of these numbers were from presentations that sourced to stats Canada I believe but I wasn't able to find those exact numbers in a quick search.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) says the U.S. resolution won't have any financial effect, but it's worried about the effect on public perception. Pierre Alvarez, CAPP spokesperson, says to counter the bad publicity it's launched a new website.

“It's one of the things we have got to talk more about. We have been great about talking about the economic issues. I think maybe we need to spend a little more time talking about the environmental issues.”

CAPP says a ban on fuel made from the oil sands is almost impossible to enforce, because no one can trace where the oil came that makes up an specific litre of gas.

The bad press is something that we don't need. Especially after the hippies jumped all over the 400 birds that died in a tailing pond. Do you have any idea how many bird are killed by 'green power' every year? I can guarantee that more than 400 birds are killed by windmills on a yearly basis.

From Wiki with all the normal warning and disclaimers:

In the United States, turbines kill 70,000 birds per year, compared to 57 million killed by cars and 97.5 million killed by collisions with plate glass.

That's it. I am going to start a petition to ban windows in houses because they are detrimental to the environment. If we assume that 400 birds a year are killed in the oil sands (that number is high) houses are 250,000 times deadlier.

You can use numbers to spin any tale you want.

Ban houses.

Save the birds.

[Nufy]

It will have little to no effect.

More politicians jumping on the Green bandwagon to get their name in the paper.

[Muta]

Interesting, if they follow through. Might be hard to follow through, but if they do, good on them. Alternative energy is the way to go.

[BlackArcher101]

I guess it's the same as the city saying they are only going to buy green electricity, but in the end, it's the same electricity everyone else uses. Not sure how they will buy "greener" gas in this case though.

[mykalberta]

It will have no effect. Classic case of leftist windbag mayors.

Anything they try would be shot down with NAFTA regulations. I suggest the US worry more about its worsening social standards as inidcated by the pregnancy pact in Mass and its worsening financial status rather than how oil is removed from Northern Alberta.

Albertan's are not the ones who financed September 11, 2001 - nor are we part of an oil cartel that attempts to inflate world oil prices. If the US continues on this course of arrogance I am sure China, Japan, or India would be more than willing to buy up any oil we have. Perhaps its time to change partners and do see do over to Asia

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

If the US continues on this course of arrogance I am sure China, Japan, or India would be more than willing to buy up any oil we have. Perhaps its time to change partners and do see do over to Asia

Exactly! I'm sure the American government would be pretty concerned if we started selling the majority of our oil to China.

[Ozy_Flame]

If I'm not mistaken, China already has it's hands in the oilsands.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...5/22/CHINA.TMP

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If I'm not mistaken, China already has it's hands in the oilsands.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...5/22/CHINA.TMP

I don't think that is a secret. Just pointing out that the US Federal Government has more realistic idea's than the Municipal Governments trying to look "Green". When it comes to supplying oil to a huge consumer like the US.

[Azure]

Okay then.

[Bobblehead]

This is like switching to "Light" cigarettes.
Unless they can curtail consumption, they are still going to be generating the same amount of green house gases when they burn whatever they use.

[comrade]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

The bad press is something that we don't need. Especially after the hippies jumped all over the 400 birds that died in a tailing pond. Do you have any idea how many bird are killed by 'green power' every year? I can guarantee that more than 400 birds are killed by windmills on a yearly basis.

From Wiki with all the normal warning and disclaimers:

In the United States, turbines kill 70,000 birds per year, compared to 57 million killed by cars and 97.5 million killed by collisions with plate glass.

That's it. I am going to start a petition to ban windows in houses because they are detrimental to the environment. If we assume that 400 birds a year are killed in the oil sands (that number is high) houses are 250,000 times deadlier.

You can use numbers to spin any tale you want.

Ban houses.

Save the birds.

That argument is ridiculous. The difference between the tailing ponds and the others is that the tailing pond poisoned the birds.

You can also use idiocy to spin any tale you want.

[BlackEleven]

There's nothing wrong with trying to be green, but boycotting oil from a particular location will accomplish nothing. If they truely want to be green, they should focus their efforts on reducing the amount of oil they consume instead. But of course that's a lot harder to do from a political standpoint, so they take the easy way out and find a scapegoat instead.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by comrade

That argument is ridiculous. The difference between the tailing ponds and the others is that the tailing pond poisoned the birds.

You can also use idiocy to spin any tale you want.

At least you focused on the parts of the post there were not serious...

Ban houses? Come on.

Oh, and a poisoned bird is worse than one that gets mortally wounded and suffers a slow agonizing death?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

but boycotting oil from a particular location will accomplish nothing.

Is it even possible? I don't know, but I kind of doubt it.

Cooking up inventive ways to raise the price of gasoline doesn't seem like a good idea right now.

[Muta]

Calgary's response, and Alberta's:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/sto...co-invite.html

[bradster57]

Beggers can't be choosers. Get your oil from Iran or Sudan then.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Is it even possible? I don't know, but I kind of doubt it.

Cooking up inventive ways to raise the price of gasoline doesn't seem like a good idea right now.

I very much doubt it as well. But apparently they think its possible if they are advocating this boycott...

Even if they could manage to boycott it, what are they going to replace it with? Mid-East oil? That has its own political connotations attached....

The best solution is simply to reduce consumption.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

The best solution is simply to reduce consumption.

But that would actually affect them. You clearly don't understand the problem...

[photon]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

The best solution is simply to reduce consumption.

Or simply find an alternative energy source.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by bradster57

Beggers can't be choosers. Get your oil from Iran or Sudan then.

Thats what I say as well. Let OPEC screw them over.