Canada: What About Energy Independence As An Issue?
Darn good question. Two articles for your consideration.
********************
First article:
Arctic oil and gas rush alarms scientists
Rather than alleviate global warming, nations rush to exploit region
by Stephen Leahy
As greenhouse gas pollution destroys Arctic ecosystems, countries like Canada are spending millions not to halt the destruction but to exploit it.
Late last August, Canada announced a 93.7-million-dollar prospecting programme to map the energy and mineral resources of the region. There are "countless other precious resources buried under the sea ice and tundra," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said during the announcement. The government's mapping effort is expected to trigger 469 million dollars in private sector resource exploration and development.
Arctic oil and gas rush alarms scientists
Rather than alleviate global warming, nations rush to exploit region
by Stephen Leahy
As greenhouse gas pollution destroys Arctic ecosystems, countries like Canada are spending millions not to halt the destruction but to exploit it.
Late last August, Canada announced a 93.7-million-dollar prospecting programme to map the energy and mineral resources of the region. There are "countless other precious resources buried under the sea ice and tundra," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said during the announcement. The government's mapping effort is expected to trigger 469 million dollars in private sector resource exploration and development.
"It is estimated that a quarter of the world's undiscovered oil and gas lies under the Arctic," Harper said.
This scramble to exploit some of the most environmentally delicate regions of Earth has alarmed international experts who are meeting this week in Iceland to make recommendations to the United Nations and world governments on how to protect the polar regions.
"Many experts believe this new rush to the polar regions is not manageable within existing international law," says A H Zakri, director of the United Nations University's Yokohama-based Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS), co-organisers of the conference with Iceland's University of Akureyri.
"Pressure on Earth's unique and highly vulnerable polar areas is mounting quickly and an internationally-agreed set of rules built on new realities appears needed to many observers," Zakri said in a statement.
In Iceland, leading scholars will detail fast-emerging issues in international law and policy in the polar regions caused by such developments as the opening up of the Northwest Passage. They will identify priorities for law-making and research and offer their best advice to governments about what they should be doing now and in the future, said conference chair David Leary of UNU-IAS.
"Climate change is the number one issue for the polar regions. Iceland experienced its hottest day in history this summer," Leary told IPS from Akureyri in northern Iceland. "I expect some strong recommendations on climate change to come from this meeting."
As climate change opens the Arctic Ocean to shipping, fishing, and other resource exploitation, pollution will pose another major threat to the region, he said.
"Arctic sea routes are among the world's most hazardous due to lack of natural light, extreme cold, moving ice floes, high wind and low visibility," said Tatiana Saksina of the World Wildlife Fund's International Arctic Programme.
The Arctic marine environment is particularly susceptible to the effects of pollution and cleaning up oil spills would be extremely difficult if not impossible. "Yet there are no internationally binding rules to regulate operational pollution from offshore installations," Saksina said in a statement. "Strict standards for the transportation of Arctic oil are also urgently needed."
Keep reading ...
And now, to the second article - which drives at the question posed in the title of the current post:
Energy independence should be an election issue
Canada still dependent on foreign oil, because USA has first dibs on Canadian oil
by Ricardo Acuña
One of the ways in which the current US presidential election differs from the current Canadian federal election is that oil prices, energy independence and energy security are all critical campaign issues for the US.
Americans are upset about high prices at the pump, and they are clearly concerned about being so dependent on "volatile" countries in the Middle East and Venezuela for more than a quarter of their petroleum needs.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats have responded by making energy security and independence key planks in their respective platforms, and Senators Obama and McCain have gone out of their way to ensure they are addressing these issues in every speech.
The key issue they are addressing is the fact that the US currently imports more than 12 million barrels of oil per day, which represents almost 60 percent of its annual consumption of oil. With a full-out war being waged in Iraq, another one possibly on the way in Iran and an unabashedly unfriendly government in Venezuela, Americans are rightly concerned about the security of their supply. Add to that the reality that terrorist attacks against oil company facilities throughout the Middle East and Africa have been on the rise, and you can gain an appreciation for their level of concern.
It is to that end that John McCain is promising that "in a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025." Not to be outdone, Barack Obama is promising to "eliminate" the US's need for Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil "within 10 years."
Combined, the Persian Gulf and Venezuela account for just over 26 percent of US oil imports. Both candidates are vowing to eliminate the need for these imports through some combination of conservation measures and the promotion of "alternative fuels." Obama includes a windfall profits tax in his plan, and McCain wants to end the current moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf.
Although their specific plans differ substantively, there can be no doubt that it is incredibly smart and strategic for them to be addressing these questions in such a high-profile way during this election.
These same issues, however, will receive no airtime or profile whatsoever during Canada's current federal election. Why would they?
Contrary to popular belief, Canada imports substantial amounts of oil every year — about 40 percent of all the oil we consume in Canada is imported. Breaking those numbers down regionally shows that Eastern Canada is dependent on imports for 90 percent of its oil needs.
Of the almost 850,000 barrels that Canada imports each day, almost half comes from OPEC countries, including Algeria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. In other words, we are almost twice as dependent on volatile countries for our imports as the United States. Despite that fact, not one of Canada's federal parties even mentions energy security on their websites or in their platforms.
If we as Canadians can understand why the US would want to eliminate the need for the 26 percent of their imports that come from the Middle East and Venezuela, why are we sitting back and doing nothing about the fact that more than 45 percent of our imports come from similarly volatile countries?
Is it because of Alberta's tar sands, which are estimated to hold the world's second largest reserve of oil after Saudi Arabia?
Keep reading ...
This scramble to exploit some of the most environmentally delicate regions of Earth has alarmed international experts who are meeting this week in Iceland to make recommendations to the United Nations and world governments on how to protect the polar regions.
"Many experts believe this new rush to the polar regions is not manageable within existing international law," says A H Zakri, director of the United Nations University's Yokohama-based Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS), co-organisers of the conference with Iceland's University of Akureyri.
"Pressure on Earth's unique and highly vulnerable polar areas is mounting quickly and an internationally-agreed set of rules built on new realities appears needed to many observers," Zakri said in a statement.
In Iceland, leading scholars will detail fast-emerging issues in international law and policy in the polar regions caused by such developments as the opening up of the Northwest Passage. They will identify priorities for law-making and research and offer their best advice to governments about what they should be doing now and in the future, said conference chair David Leary of UNU-IAS.
"Climate change is the number one issue for the polar regions. Iceland experienced its hottest day in history this summer," Leary told IPS from Akureyri in northern Iceland. "I expect some strong recommendations on climate change to come from this meeting."
As climate change opens the Arctic Ocean to shipping, fishing, and other resource exploitation, pollution will pose another major threat to the region, he said.
"Arctic sea routes are among the world's most hazardous due to lack of natural light, extreme cold, moving ice floes, high wind and low visibility," said Tatiana Saksina of the World Wildlife Fund's International Arctic Programme.
The Arctic marine environment is particularly susceptible to the effects of pollution and cleaning up oil spills would be extremely difficult if not impossible. "Yet there are no internationally binding rules to regulate operational pollution from offshore installations," Saksina said in a statement. "Strict standards for the transportation of Arctic oil are also urgently needed."
Keep reading ...
********************
And now, to the second article - which drives at the question posed in the title of the current post:
Energy independence should be an election issue
Canada still dependent on foreign oil, because USA has first dibs on Canadian oil
by Ricardo Acuña
One of the ways in which the current US presidential election differs from the current Canadian federal election is that oil prices, energy independence and energy security are all critical campaign issues for the US.
Americans are upset about high prices at the pump, and they are clearly concerned about being so dependent on "volatile" countries in the Middle East and Venezuela for more than a quarter of their petroleum needs.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats have responded by making energy security and independence key planks in their respective platforms, and Senators Obama and McCain have gone out of their way to ensure they are addressing these issues in every speech.
The key issue they are addressing is the fact that the US currently imports more than 12 million barrels of oil per day, which represents almost 60 percent of its annual consumption of oil. With a full-out war being waged in Iraq, another one possibly on the way in Iran and an unabashedly unfriendly government in Venezuela, Americans are rightly concerned about the security of their supply. Add to that the reality that terrorist attacks against oil company facilities throughout the Middle East and Africa have been on the rise, and you can gain an appreciation for their level of concern.
It is to that end that John McCain is promising that "in a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025." Not to be outdone, Barack Obama is promising to "eliminate" the US's need for Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil "within 10 years."
Combined, the Persian Gulf and Venezuela account for just over 26 percent of US oil imports. Both candidates are vowing to eliminate the need for these imports through some combination of conservation measures and the promotion of "alternative fuels." Obama includes a windfall profits tax in his plan, and McCain wants to end the current moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf.
Although their specific plans differ substantively, there can be no doubt that it is incredibly smart and strategic for them to be addressing these questions in such a high-profile way during this election.
These same issues, however, will receive no airtime or profile whatsoever during Canada's current federal election. Why would they?
Contrary to popular belief, Canada imports substantial amounts of oil every year — about 40 percent of all the oil we consume in Canada is imported. Breaking those numbers down regionally shows that Eastern Canada is dependent on imports for 90 percent of its oil needs.
Of the almost 850,000 barrels that Canada imports each day, almost half comes from OPEC countries, including Algeria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. In other words, we are almost twice as dependent on volatile countries for our imports as the United States. Despite that fact, not one of Canada's federal parties even mentions energy security on their websites or in their platforms.
If we as Canadians can understand why the US would want to eliminate the need for the 26 percent of their imports that come from the Middle East and Venezuela, why are we sitting back and doing nothing about the fact that more than 45 percent of our imports come from similarly volatile countries?
Is it because of Alberta's tar sands, which are estimated to hold the world's second largest reserve of oil after Saudi Arabia?
Keep reading ...
0 POVs/Comments:
Post a Comment
Please feel free to comment on APOV. However, remember to keep in check your tone and respect for all here. Let rational, reasoning, enthousiastic and passionate conversations and discussions rule first and foremost in our participatory democracy, so as to facilitate the free exchange of reality-based facts and ideas. In between, do not forget to have fun and enjoy yourselves ... in other words: keep on rockin'! - Mentarch