Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 33 of total 33 in this topic |
LaurenceGH
Sport climber
FRANCE
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Apr 22, 2013 - 08:40am PT
|
Hello 'brothers and sisters in arms', it just came to my notice that permission to mine Tar Sands in the Uinta Basin of Utah has been given, this is obviously a disaster in the making. I am not American but I dearly love this area, it has given me profound pleasure, please don't let these sacred places be poisoned and blighted. Perhaps the climbing community would at least like to know about it, so maybe spread the word. There's lots of info about how bad Tar Sand Mining is, but mining and pollution this close to the Colorado river whose water so many people depend on seems very foolish.
Anyway you folks over there probably know more about it and Tar Sands than me so and you are certainly in a better position than me, so there you go. yours etc Stevie Haston
Here is a link
https://www.facebook.com/utahtarsandsresistance
http://steviehaston.blogspot.fr
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 11:41am PT
|
Thank you Laurent. Now, who is in line to sign the pledge "I PROMISE TO PAY MORE FOR GASOLINE TO (insert imaginary statement or cause here)". Queue up behind.... well, as there is no line yet, a new one can be formed.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 11:49am PT
|
the reason that "we" are mining the tar sands is that the cost of that particular expensive resource is falling below the value, that is, we are spending more on fossil fuels... and those fossil fuels, a non-renewable resource, are being expended, and that lack of supply is driving up its value.
worse, we're altering the environment of the Earth doing it.
so we can decide to just continue doing it, and not worry at what the total costs of that action is, or we can figure out how to not do that... albeit at some expense...
but we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that our choice doesn't matter to us or to the future.
as climbers, we see this already in the exploitation of those beautiful areas we travel to to climb, ironic in that our travel, for the most part, drives the exploitation.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 01:32pm PT
|
Ed, "exploitation" has become a loaded word, but it isn't always negative. To exploit means to take advantage. Taking advantage is morally neutral; taking unfair advantage is not.
As couchmaster argues, restricting supply of petroleum will raise the price of petroleum products. I understand the thrust of your argument to be that allowing mining of tar sands without payment of the cost of environmental change is unfair. Economic theory agrees with that premise.
This is a long-winded way of saying that the issue should be whether the parties mining tar sands will, in fact, bear the cost of environmental degradation. Unfortunately, few in the "let-them-eat-cake" wing of the environmental movement would accept that. They want their own preferences for the environment to take place, regardless of what others in society want. While we may get our way in the short run carrying out such policies, sooner or later, those with different values will overwhelm us and, I fear, lead to a system that doesn't take environmental degradation into account at all.
For that reason, the position that we must stop all environmental degradation leads, in my opinion, to bad results for the environment. Unless my perception is way off base, I rather believe that if people had to choose between no environmental change and no consideration for the environment, the majority would choose the latter over the former. When we oppose tar sands mining on an absolute basis, we essentially offer the public that all-or-nothing choice. I don't like where that ultimately leads.
John
|
|
Hoser
climber
vancouver
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 01:39pm PT
|
As couchmaster argues, restricting supply of petroleum will raise the price of petroleum products.
The logic that tar sand oil will reduce your pump price or keep it from rising is flawed, the reason tar sand oil is now profitable is due to the rising price of oil on the whole.
Furthermore, by allowing petroleum products to increase in cost will allow renewables to be competitive. That is the only way we can make the transition from carbon based fuels to those that are renewable, and yes it will cost more but less than the costs associated with climate change and pollution.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 01:45pm PT
|
exploitation in this case is the "less loaded" meaning, but it generally conveys a sense of making something of value that doesn't necessarily look like you could.
tar sands have been around for a very long time... and the cost of exploiting them, recovering the fossil fuel potential from them, is not a new thing. as the cost of fossil fuels go up, the value of exploiting the tar sands starts to make economic sense, even if that value is projected into the not too distant future.
so we see that it's ok if the "free market" does this, it seems natural, yet when the USG contemplates a carbon tax, that is seen as a negative. however, how do you value the environmental costs of exploiting the resource, and the cost of the consequence of burning the resource?
one way would be to have no public lands and include the atmosphere in that too. the idea is that we cannot regulate the commons, so lets do without them. all the land would be owned by a private concern whose sole interest is in economic return on that ownership investment, same with atmosphere.
we would pay to use those resources, and let the market determine the costs... the owner of the atmosphere has a hard time, apparent liabilities for weather events, etc, caused by the use... with no gov't to indemnify them for the problems. but this would get the pricing right...
fail to pay your monthly atmosphere use bill? no oxygen for you!
we have moved from a population that is an insignificant user of the resources to one that is a significant user of the resources, so significant that the finiteness of those resources is becoming an issue. the finite atmosphere, fresh water supply, farmable land, fish in the sea, all these things are under pressure... not to mention places where there is no trace of humans.
how do you value that? economically?
in the past, John, you've punted by saying you've been trying a long time to come up with some valuation scheme, but have failed... but on the other hand you caution doing something that might not get it right... well, isn't that being obstructionist? here the good is the enemy of the perfect... and if you can't find a solution, shouldn't you just throw in the towel and let someone else try something?
or do we dither away this time?
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 02:11pm PT
|
so we see that it's ok if the "free market" does this, it seems natural, yet when the USG contemplates a carbon tax, that is seen as a negative.
Sad to say, too many people who purport to be believers in the market agree with that statement.
I aimed my comments at the idea that any particular process, in this case the mining of tar sands, although it applies to fracking or any other environmental bogeyman du jour, is so ipso facto bad that we should never allow it.
The logic that tar sand oil will reduce your pump price or keep it from rising is flawed, the reason tar sand oil is now profitable is due to the rising price of oil on the whole.
I don't think couchmaster is saying that, and I'm certainly not. We're saying that anything that increases supply would, absent more, result in a lower price than not increasing supply.
John
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 03:26pm PT
|
DMT,
I think modern mining regulations in West Virginia, as one example, that require complete repair of any environmental degradation, are about as close as we come currently. Otherwise, I, too, think that we let the cost of environmental degradation be borne by everyone, not just the users of the mined product.
It does not follow, though, that if mining fails to bear the full environmental cost, we should prohibit it altogether. Frankly, you don't strike me as the wingnut you're purporting to be, because I doubt, from both your words and your actions, that you support the all-or-nothing choice to which I directed my opposition. Unfortunately, the reflexive opposition to all mining of anything -- which I do see expressed -- leads to my "let-them-eat-cake" epithet.
john
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Social climber
SLO, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 03:30pm PT
|
Big mines in the U.S. never close-- they operate at a loss, sometimes for decades, to avoid closure costs.
But this particular argument is about drilling as opposed to mining.
|
|
Hoser
climber
vancouver
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 04:49pm PT
|
Just one example, that's all I ask - an example where the mining company and its investors actually bore the environmental costs.
In Canada we have a carbon tax, we also have funds that tey pay into for returning the land back to some sort of original state.
But really its not the land that costs the most for clean up, its the injection of Co2 into the atmosphere. The greens here in Canada believe it should be $100 a tonne, which is $70 more than it is now.
With a carbon tax that high industry could afford to look into carbon capture and renewables
|
|
Sierra Ledge Rat
Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 05:04pm PT
|
Search Google images for "mountain top removal"
When you western boys are clamoring to stop mountain top removal coal mining in my state of West Virginia, then I'll join in your efforts to stop tar sand mining in utah.
Wouldn't it just be easier to invade Canada and steal their tar sands? I mean, we're invading the Middle East for oil all the time. It would be a whole like easier to knock off the Canuks than the Taliban.
Here's what's happening to the beautiful mountain state, West Virginia, all in the name of "CLEAN COAL."
Acidic mine drainage from "CLEAN COAL."
|
|
Hoser
climber
vancouver
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 05:10pm PT
|
Canada is the largest supplier of oil to the US. That is the main reason why we are trying to get to Asia, you guys have way too much oil and the price is waaaay down compared to the rest of the world.
Carbon tax would help you ledge rat, when it comes time to vote let them know you want your energy prices to contain the true costs, those that include the environment and the production. We need to make it law that carbon based fuels be priced accordingly
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 07:20pm PT
|
Utah tar sands are too small to affect pump prices in any way. Same goes for the Canadian tar sands. We are talking about a few million bbls/day on a 90 million bbl/day market. If we lifted the sanctions on Iran, then gas prices might fall.
You can't point to some rinky dink project and say it is going to change the world. Yes, the company doing the project might make money, but it won't change what you pay at a pump 15 miles away one whit.
Here is how to lower gas prices.
1) Hope for a recession in China.
2) Carpool. Americans are by far the most gluttonous users of oil on the planet. Most oil goes to transportation fuel. Get rid of your V8 unless you are a rancher. Buy a civic. Hell, even the larger cars now have pretty decent gas mileage.
All I hear is bitch, bitch, bitch. All people want is sub three dollar gas. Well, it is over three bucks because we burn a quarter of the world's production.
While we go around building aircraft carriers, other countries build rail and subway systems. So suck on it. It drives me crazy when people bitch about gas prices.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 07:27pm PT
|
Well spoken Base. No disagreements here.
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2013 - 08:05pm PT
|
scalping mountains is good..i'm an american and am entitled to a higher standard of living than the rest of the world. as long as my belly is fat, my
environment climate controlled, and my fat ass is parked behind the wheel of a gas guzzler to make that 1/2 mile round trip to the pharmacy to pick up my blood pressure meds, i'm happier than the proverbial pig in sh#t. oh yeah, and a whopper, wit cheese, too.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 02:00am PT
|
DMT,
Do you fly a bunch?
|
|
krahmes
Social climber
Stumptown
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 02:43am PT
|
Can you cite one example, just one, of a large mining operation conducted by private enterprise, in the U.S. that bore the cost of environmental degradation?
One will do, just one....
The Cannon Mine that ran in Wenatchee from 1980-1994 comes to mind. It was a big modern mine and it has been reclaimed. I got a tour just before it shut down in 1994.
Here’s the link:
http://www.genesbmx.com/cannon-gold-mine/
As for the oil sands here’s the link to the company website:
http://www.usoilsandsinc.com/index.php?page=home
The stock is trading for $.09/share. So the endeavor sits there in dreamer and schemer territory.
I’ve seen plans drawn by Occidental to mine the thrust at McKittrick back in the 1970s.
A carbon tax isn’t such a bad idea; should nuclear have an irradiation tax? What is in those solar panels and is it good for groundwater? What is going to happen to the desert tortoise? How do you put a price on the surface occupancy and the bird kill of a wind farm? How much water does geothermal mine and how do you assess earthquake risk? If were willing to go to war in Iraq over the steady supply of oil to the Western hegemony and spend treasure and spill blood what does that say about us that we want it pristine in our neck of the wood?
I don’t quite know how to process fact that two biggest factors to the reduction of the USA atmospheric CO2 release was the great recession and the abundance of natural gas that has been created from fracking. Fracking is wholly a creation of the free market. If an industry can sprout, exist, and profit within the regulatory maze of the USA why shouldn't it be allowed to run its course?
9 cents is cheap; but I’m not buying.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 03:04pm PT
|
All I hear is bitch, bitch, bitch. All people want is sub three dollar gas. Well, it is over three bucks because we burn a quarter of the world's production.
While we go around building aircraft carriers, other countries build rail and subway systems. So suck on it. It drives me crazy when people bitch about gas prices.
someone must have drilled into a raw nerve.....pun intended.
by the way, tax the crap out of gas and lets use it for something useful like better mass transit.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 03:59pm PT
|
BASE, I would like to propose adding synchronization of urban traffic lights to your list, along with better public transit. As to the latter, it should not surprise you that my solution differs from the big public works championed by the current "progressive" (but in fact economically reactionary) agenda.
The best public transit system I ever experienced was in Beirut when I was there for several weeks in 1970. They had no light rail, but they had a seemingly infinite number of black Mercedes 190D taxis. My relatives spent the summer months in the cooler mountains east of the city. They owned a pharmacy in the Hamra area, near the "downtown." Every morning, we would walk a couple of blocks to an area where the taxis congregated, find one heading toward the Hamra, and get in. When there were four passengers, the driver would take off. It usually took no more than a minute to fill the taxi, and it was then a nonstop, 40 kilometer ride to the Hamra.
The sight of the morning commute, with roads filled with seemingly identical black Mercedes 190D's, was something to behold. They also had regular buses, but the taxis formed the backbone of the system.
Here, we seem fixated on large scale. True, a ten-car passenger train uses less fuel per passenger/mile than a car with five people, but only if the train is full. The flexible, relatively market-driven and lightly-regulated taxi fleet of Beirut in 1970 formed a far superior transportation system to the bus or rail systems in most of our cities. it saddens me to see how rigid we've become in transportation options.
John
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 04:35pm PT
|
The taxi driver was smart. He got multiple fares with the same expense as taking one passenger. I assume that one of his main costs was fuel.
There is a really good point to be made here. Car pooling or just not driving...any way to more efficiently use carbon based fuels, is the way to go. Instead, if you are on a commute, count how many cars there are that contain one person.
Many mining companies pay for clean-ups of old environmental damage to the groundwater. There was an old lead-zinc smelter in northern Oklahoma, and I believe the legacy owner ended up being Phelps-Dodge. My wife headed the state monitoring of the clean up, and she said that they were quite easy to work with. Cleanups are part of their budget. Other companies run and hide like crazy over superfund or RCRA laws.
My wife is a high ranking worker at the state land protection division. I hear about environmental cleanup woes and successes every night at dinner.
I'm not saying that all mining is good. All I'm saying is that the human race has been mining since before the Bronze Age. We still need and use metals, no matter how green you think you are. So I really get pissed when somebody sneeringly calls companies greedy.
They are no more greedy than most of us as individuals. This is just what they do. Most acid mine runoff is from old, old, sulfide deposit mines. When that rock finally meets fresh water, which is acidic, it weathers the tailings. With modern mines you have to treat the runoff.
We are caught up in this catch 22. People get angry over ugly environmental damage, but when product prices go up, they blame greedy companies who simply sell the metals or oil or coal on the open market.
We are the ones who demand. We need to cut demand on nigh everything, but particularly with carbon based fuels.
By the way, air travel is by far the least efficient form of travel when it comes to oil use.
Me? I get up, walk fifteen feet to my home office, fire up the computers, and go find oil and gas without ever driving. The only real trip that I've been on this year was a 4 hour round trip (alone) last week, for a meeting with a client.
Just be careful about how you use what little oil we have left. The days of cheap wells and gushers is long gone. The true cost of oil is mainly overseas, where entire countries and lives are involved. If we used half of what we use, we wouldn't be reliant on the middle east, and we could yank out our huge military presence.
For a great read on the topic of oil, go buy The Prize. It is exhaustively researched and covers oil from its initial discovery until today, including the Gulf War.
You don't think we went to war in Kuwait because a little country got knocked off do you? We did it because Iraq, and Sadaam Hussein, who we had been in bed with for years, but was an evil dude, suddenly doubled his oil reserves overnight. Iraq was instantly Saudi Arabia, and that could not be tolerated. He who controls supply controls price, and the exporting nations control supply. Every oil company on the planet, although they are big companies, are a fly on the ass of the exporting countries, who have the bulk of the world's supply.
We, as a race, need to get off of oil. We are running out of "cheap oil," and mother nature is already kicking in as demand still rises as supply peaks. That is why oil is 90 bucks and we still pay for it. It is going to only get worse, and we cannot do anything about it beyond the 2 year congressional election cycle. We are incapable of running our country as efficiently as even a no-name company.
We just want, want, want, want. Americans are the worst.
I've been for a carbon tax since it first came up over twenty years ago. The only way to make people conserve is to make it too expensive to waste.
So when you look at all of the environmental damage, don't make it an us and them issue. It is an us issue, and we need to look in the mirror to find the solution.
We are already over halfway to the co2 level of the late Jurassic/Cretaceous hothouse event, which was caused by a massive period of volcanism. I think that we are either very close to, or have already passed, the tipping point beyond doing anything about it.
That mountain top coal is burned to give you electricity. We all use electricity, and coal is the largest generation fuel. Just turn the lights off. Look at Las Vegas, sucking up all of that Lake Mead hydro power.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 04:49pm PT
|
John,
We have never invested in an efficient transportation system in this country. We spend our money on military adventures.
If you are ever in a big eastern city and enjoy the subway or the bus system, it is great and cheap.
I'll give you an example of a country who is really taking care of its oil: Iran.
Iran has some of the largest gas fields on Earth. They have sold their domestic oil to its citizens at a cheap price.
Iran is peaking right now, and since their only source of money is oil, they are converting their transportation infrastructure to natural gas so that they can sell the oil and up the nation's income.
So you have some savage muslim clerics who are more far sighted that us. We are sitting on massive deposits of natural gas, which is cleaner than any other fossil fuel. If we just switched our transportation fleet to natural gas, it would be a good strategic and environmental move.
The only downside with natural gas is that a tankful takes you about half as far as a tank of gasoline.
China has very little oil, but massive coal deposits. That's why their air is brown. The Chinese actually invest in the oil and gas plays in the United States. No sh#t. I've gotten the maps ready to put in the data room for potential joint venture partners. Total..the French, Statoil, the Norwegians, and CNOOC, the Chinese, all come in for a look and then buy a part of the play.
Yep. The Chinese are drilling in the United States. They can't import it obviously, but it doesn't matter where you find it. The income they make pays for the imports that they get from the Middle East.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 04:51pm PT
|
DMT, I've just seen your posts on so many energy threads. You need to understand how it works. Go buy The Prize. It weighs about two pounds, but if you want to understand oil, I highly recommend that you start with that book. Then you will see that world power and domination has a deep connection with oil.
It sucks, I know, but if you have to fly, OK. My plumber needs a big truck. I don't have to fly or buy a big truck.
You are doing your best.
Do you understand what I'm saying? For most of us it is a choice. Not for you or my plumber, so that's fine.
I don't need a big truck or to fly. You are like my plumber. You fly for a reason.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 05:43pm PT
|
BASE,
Every time I visit a city with a good, cheap, subway/metro/el/BART/light rail system, I'm always jealous and think "What can we do to bring that here?"
Unfortunately, the answer comes out the same: nothing will make such a system make sense here with our current population density. Car pools work, if the schedules of the car pool participants remain predictably stable. I was able to car pool for my first job out of college, but public transportation, even seemingly cheap and convenient public transportation, has some inherent disadvantages relative to a private vehicle.
When I lived in Pasadena and worked in downtown LA, (before the days of the LA Metro) I took an RTD bus to and from work. It stopped one block from my apartment, and three or four blocks from the office. It ran every six minutes when I left for work in the morning, and at a similar interval from about 4:00 to about 6:00 p.m. Despite this, I found that I was losing about 40 minutes per day compared with driving, and most of this extra time was not productive because I could do little work on the bus, partly because of privacy concerns for clients, and partly because I wasn't that likely to have a seat.
In addition, I often had to be in the office past 6:00 p.m., and the service intervals quickly became enormous. If I had to carry anything voluminous home (and I often did), finding a place to put it on the bus made the trip an ordeal.
In contrast, taking a car alone cost about $1.00 per trip more in direct expenses, but had at least the following advantages:
1. It allowed me 40 more minutes of productive time a day -- and I was billing then at a rate of several dollars a minute. This fact alone more than paid for the extra cost of driving;
2. I could control my environment. It was exactly as warm or cool as I wanted, I listened to exactly what I wanted to hear, I wasn't going to sit next to someone who stunk, or who talked or otherwise annoyed me (of course, I exchanged that annoyance for the annoyance of incompetent drivers) -- and I was guaranteed a seat.
3. My car left exactly when I wanted to, from exactly where I was, and arrived exactly where I wanted to go.
4. I could carry anything that would fit in a car with an enormous trunk.
5. I could make unanticipated trips to outlying courts or offices, and
6. Since my car was garaged adjacent to my office in a reserved space, it was much more convenient in the (admittedly rare) rain.
I've seen several campaigns trying to get people out of their cars, but none address the advantages of a private automobile, or accept that those choosing to use one might be making a rational choice. Designing a system that we know requires the public to prefer it (rather than being compelled to use it) would force us to make a transportation system based on people's rational preferences, rather than on our ideas of what's best for someone else.
John
|
|
roadman
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 05:47pm PT
|
In Canada we have a carbon tax, we also have funds that tey pay into for returning the land back to some sort of original state.
I'm calling B.S. on that one "buddy" You boys sure are gud at greenwash up here, but your time has come! It's a joke what you do with those funds! Basically a slush fund into the pockets of company friends of some of your unelected senators...
Only in Canada would you believe you can "return the land back to some sort of original state"
It's not Apples to Apples with the US and CA. You guys poop in the river and call it a fart! Old growth logging is the standard policy up here has been so you can "grow faster more productive stands" I think I'm in the majority here when I say, most in CA would like to see more good jobs that don't involve resources. Can't gov. do something there?
Remember your clean waters act? Well tell me how many CA water ways are protected (ie require monitoring) now? 2 miles, is it even that? Yeah, you see the US has this little thing called checks and balances! Nice little artifact of the ass whooping we gave the Brits! We can't have some gov. get elected and wipe away all our laws and protections like CA can.
Go figure, your people vote for the house- house appoints the MP- MP appoints the entire Senate! and they force everything they want down the throats the other 4 partys! Gee maybe needing 21% of the vote to win ain't such a good thing after all?
We got problems for sure, but at the end of the day we'll have old growth forest, pristine wilderness, and natural examples of what it was like before we f*#ked it up.
CA's fed owns like 4% of the land and protects none of it. Hell, your endangered species act covers all of 6 animals right now! All the power lies with the Province and as we all know giving the locals all the control and they'll never see past their nose! Having that check n balance on the fed/state level is what helps maintain enviro laws.
US fed owns like 40% of the land (the people's land) There is no comparison between the US and Canada on environmental issues in my opinion.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013 - 10:25pm PT
|
well a carbon tax would answer John's statement:
"I've seen several campaigns trying to get people out of their cars, but none address the advantages of a private automobile... " by increasing the cost relative to mass transit the "advantages" (which is mostly just convenience) would have a cost...
|
|
roadman
climber
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013 - 02:25pm PT
|
Canada per capita wastes more than most countries in the industrialized world. They Drive more RV's, waste more water, planning to mega dam more rivers, have no meaningful protection (on the books) for land,water or old growth, no federal endangered spices act (ok in name only, when you consider it only covers 2% of the land in CA), minimal to no recourses for stoping illegal development -standard here is build the fines into the project cost since they are so low and ill enforced.
How does this go unnoticed...1)lack of any real journalist or at least they're numbers and skill are so low it's a none issue that anything will ever be brought to light, and 2)no enforcement whatsoever. Penalties here are nonexistent to laughable. I could site a ton of laws here, but wont because that's not the point. I think we can agree that the courts here are a little silly? I mean you gave the train terrorist dude full citizenship! (look it up it's scary!)
The point is, we shouldn't compair the US to Canada. Cause we all know the best country in N. America is the United Mexican States!
P.s.Oh yeah, and last time i checked your national anthem has GOD in it too!!! Guess you're happy trusting God and the Queen!
|
|
Hoser
climber
vancouver
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013 - 03:12pm PT
|
BC will be electing a provincial government that has stated firmly that no tar sand pipelines will be crossing our province to tidewater.
Those tar sand folks are now looking at shipping it via the Beaufort sea during the ice free months. Once that gets squashed and if Obama stands firm on Keystone, Alta is going to be in for some tough times.
Little by little Roadman, hopefully we can get governments to increase carbon taxes as well
|
|
roadman
climber
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013 - 03:22pm PT
|
Hope you're right Hoser.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013 - 04:12pm PT
|
Hey Stevie, tough crowd here, huh?
It's a tough fight.
Tar Sands extraction up on the plateau north of Grand Junction is not an easy win. It's a big, empty area with a history of local extractive industry, coal and gas in one form or other.
The real fight, one easier to win, more worth fighting, that will have more support, will be closer to Canyonlands. White Canyon, just outside Natural Bridges National Monument:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Canyon
And the Tar Sands Triangle, west of Canyonlands:
http://moabcanyoncountryrisingtide.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/the-tar-sands-triangle/
http://ostseis.anl.gov/documents/maps/osts015_4StateShadedRelief.pdf
These areas are far more pristine. They're close to Canyonlands NP, Natural Brides NM. It's got less tar sand potential than the Uintah Basin areas. But it's on US Oil Sands' radar. They want to mine it.
Last year, their website listed these area. I see that this year it's not on their website. Maybe because they know it'll be a harder battle and they don't want to frighten people?
|
|
roadman
climber
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013 - 07:45pm PT
|
Utah and the western slope are in big trouble, but at least they aren't as messed up at this place......
http://www.theinternational.org/articles/305-why-are-greeks-protesting-canadian-mining
Canada:
Tar sands- unchecked
#1 world exporter of DDT
#1 world exporter of uranium
Exports 150,000 tons of asbestos:only country in G8
Canada was one of the first countries to sign the Kyoto protocol. It was also the first to formally withdraw from it.
Congratulations Canada! You export cancer...
|
|
dee ee
Mountain climber
citizen of planet Earth
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013 - 09:32pm PT
|
Tarbuster mining sands in Utah? Oh the shame. Roy, give it up.
I can't believe I was first on this smart ass website.
|
|
roadman
climber
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2013 - 01:57am PT
|
Jim, don't get me started on the fish farm chaos (unregulated ) on the west coast of BC. I'm sure we can both agree on that being a bad idea?
Anyway, I've got to burn some jet fuel in the AM so I'm no better than the rest....
Ps. Any recommendations on movies/tv show to get me up to snuff on Canada and its structure of governance.? The stuff I've been reading has clearly led me astray :-)
|
|
| Messages 1 - 33 of total 33 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!