"Tampering with energy infrastructure is a dangerous activity."
I know that the term "ethical oil" has some blemishes on it because of issues surrounding its origin, but I believe in the concept behind the term. I want my personal gasoline purchases to go towards subsidizing medicare and not subsidizing a despot or paying for a tyrant to bomb his neighbour.
While it's so ridiculous that you can't help but laugh at it, it's also unjust, anti-democratic and something that Canada's new prime minister promised would never happen again. Last June, now-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unveiled his party's environmental platform standing with his back to the Burrard Inlet in Vancouver's Kitsilano neighborhood. With a withering critique that Stephen Harper's government had "chosen to be a cheerleader instead of a referee" when it came to pipelines, he promised a complete overhaul of the National Energy Board assessment process.
With the 42nd federal election in the books here in Canada, now the clock starts ticking down the 42 days until the Paris climate talks begin. The good news is that Stephen Harper is no longer the Prime Minister of Canada. After nearly a decade in power, Harper has left a sea of devastation in his wake when it comes to climate change. Here's the bad news: while Stephen Harper's government may have been a supporter of the fossil fuel industry, Justin Trudeau has failed to distinguish himself as a much better option.
The president's rationale for rejecting the Keystone Approval Act is not actually based on an assessment of whether Keystone XL is in the U.S. national interest--that process is ongoing at the State Department. Rather, Mr. Obama's veto justification is that the Act "attempts to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest."
Officials in the Canadian province of Alberta say they hope to talk to Alaska leaders about shipping tar-sands crude oil
While the probability that a train-load of inappropriately classified oil products would careen down a hill in rural Quebec and explode, killing 47 people and contaminating a fragile lake ecosystem was so infinitesimally small as to be almost incalculable, the consequences were devastating and will be felt for generations.
Activists in British Columbia have responded to the National Energy Board's approval of the Northern Gateway oil pipeline with threats of illegal activism reminiscent of the 1990s. Civil disobedience has an honourable history; the question is whether a particular group on a particular matter is justified in such actions. Where people's rights are systematically violated, where they are denied recourse to the courts, or to their elected representatives, the case for civil disobedience is clear. But the Northern Gateway Pipeline proposal does not represent such a violation.
We examined data pertaining to the safety of three modes of oil transport in North America and found that on an apples-to-apples basis, transporting a billion tons of oil over a mile of distance by pipeline has a very low likelihood of leakage -- less than one incident per billion ton-miles. The risk of a leak by rail is twice as high.
We woke up undamaged from last night's storm, thanks to the small, deep cove our skipper Neil found off Meyers Passage. But
Ever since the Calgary-based energy distributor Enbridge applied to modify its use of an oil pipeline running between Ontario
The Harper government is blatantly adhering to the interests of one industry over the broader interests of all Canadians, and over the fundamental protection of our land and waters. What are we to make of how easy a time these industry lobbyists had at furthering their own interests?
It used to be that a few guys from the oil industry could get together over drinks and make the decisions on major infrastructure projects. Then it started to fall apart. Faith in the industry and their supposed regulators was shaken with the Deepwater Horizon spill.
The oil industry is used to getting its way without much fuss, but now thousands of citizens, unions, legislators and celebrities have come together to fight for the energy future they want. It has been inspiring, but it also raises an important question: shouldn't every decision about a new energy project face this type of scrutiny?