One of 6 leaks believed to be coming from CNRL’s Cold Lake operation (Chester Dawson/WSJ)
COLD LAKE , Alta. – A First Nation says it is concerned about two other leaks at an oilsands project in northeastern Alberta, bringing the total in recent months to six.
Chief Bernice Martial of Cold Lake First Nation said Monday that she is worried about the safety of drinking water, animals and vegetation in her region.
1.5 million litres recovered already
In July, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. (TSX:CNQ) said a mechanical failure at an old well was behind ongoing bitumen seepage at its (Read more…)
The Council of Canadians announces a national campaign to stop TransCanada’s proposed $12 billion Energy East pipeline, which would ship Alberta‘s dirty tar sands oil to Canada’s East Coast.
The post TransCanada’s Energy East oil pipeline will face fierce opposition: Council of Canadians appeared first on The Canadian Progressive.
One of the more obvious points of convergence in political thought over the past 70-80 years is the greater appreciation of systemic complexity – the recognition that different decisions by many types of actors may collide in unpredictable ways, with the results potentially far outweighing the perceived impact of any single action and reaching people who may have had no idea their interests were affected.
That recognition in turn gives rise to two broad public policy responses: to seek to have a government equipped to identify the risks posed by factors which no other party has the means or will to address, or to give up and leave ourselves at the mercy of forces which interact in ways which we don’t even try to anticipate.
Suffice it to say that Andrew Coyne’s response to the Lac-Mégantic rail explosion is staking out some rather extreme territory in the latter camp.
Here’s Coyne trying to isolate the specific circumstances of the explosion in order to treat the issue as one which doesn’t call for an immediate response:
Consider what a singular convergence of events was required to bring it about. A highly flammable cargo; an unattended train; parked on a hill; on the main track, not a siding; above a town; far enough from town to build up great speed; and, as a final piece, that fatal bend in the track as it entered town. If any one of those is not present, no disaster and no deaths. But even if all are, you still need two more: the failure (so it seems) of the air brakes; and the failure (so it is alleged) to lock the hand brakes.
Now, may be true that Coyne’s list of factors is indeed extremely unusual. But I’m fairly sure the right answer to “how many towns could see the same type of disaster?” is “we don’t know, and should probably find out” – not “one – and since it’s already been blown to smithereens, let’s not worry our pretty little heads about it.”
And indeed, a closer look at those same factors reveals some rather important decisions not to consider possible public safety issues:
Consider what a singular convergence of events was required to bring it about. A highly flammable cargo whose transportation has never been subject to a specific regulatory evaluation; an unattended train which is permitted by regulation; parked on a hill which should presumably be known to the rail operator and regulators alike; on the main track, not a siding which should presumably be known to the rail operator and regulators alike; above a town which should presumably be known to the rail operator and regulators alike; far enough from town to build up great speed which should presumably be known to the rail operator and regulators alike; and, as a final piece, that fatal bend in the track as it entered town which had been pointed out by concerned residents. If any one of those is not present, no disaster and no deaths. But even if all are, you still need two more: the failure (so it seems) of the air brakes; and the failure (so it is alleged) to lock the hand brakes.
Again, this brings us back to the core question of how to deal with complexity. Should we simply ignore risks in the name of minimizing our own costs, presuming that somebody else (and in this case, a private operator devoted to shipping the most product for the least cost) will bother to identify what needs to be done in order to avoid public tragedies? Because the evidence from Lac-Mégantic (and an ongoing series of spills, derailments, explosions and other disasters) doesn’t exactly support the “let somebody else do it” argument.
Moreover, it seems equally obvious that other “convergences of events” might come about elsewhere. And that’s precisely why we need a regulatory structure equipped to evaluate the distinct threats facing all sorts of communities and ensure that they’re being avoided to the extent possible – rather than one based on allowing private operators to self-report on standardized checklists as the primary precondition for carrying out dangerous activities.
But sadly, we have a government more interested in slashing public services than making them work – which is an issue we should be discussing regardless of whether a particular regulatory tweak would have been necessary or sufficient on its own within the complex array of factors which might have stopped the Lac-Mégantic tragedy. And yes, the aftermath of a preventable disaster is probably the best possible time to highlight the fact that we should be making some effort to prevent disasters.
Speaking of which, I haven’t even reached the most galling part of Coyne’s take:
There are things we could do, without a doubt, that would preclude another Lac-Mégantic altogether. We could make the cars out of titanium, or reroute the lines around towns, or take out the bends. But are the costs, potentially high, worth the risk: vanishingly small? We could ban carrying oil by train, but other methods, as I’ve mentioned, have their own risks — and what of the vast number of other hazardous materials that also travel by rail?
Put in its most charitable light, one might read this passage as referring solely to probabilities – to the exclusion of any talk about the cost imposed on innocent parties should the possibility materialize. But surely any rational calculation of risk includes some consideration of both. (Paging Dan Gardner on this one.)
And I’m far from willing to consider this…
…to be a vanishingly small cost incurred in the fulfillment of the apparent highest possible good of ripping carbon from the ground and burning it.
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Charles Campbell discusses Robert Reich’s work to highlight the importance of a fair and progressive tax system. And while Lawrence Martin is right to lament the systematic destruction of Canada’s public revenue streams under the Libs and Cons alike, his fatalistic view that nobody can stem the tide doesn’t seem to match the evidence that the public – in Canada and the U.S. alike – sees inequality as a problem to be solved rather than a fair result of corporate-friendly policies.
- Mark Taliano writes about the Harper Cons’ distaste for (Read more…)
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- George Monbiot writes that corporate control over a political system may be a huge factor in limiting public participation – even as it makes a substantial counterweight all the more important: The political role of business corporations is generally interpreted as that of lobbyists, seeking to influence government policy. In reality they belong on the inside. They are part of the nexus of power that creates policy. They face no significant resistance, from either government or opposition, as their interests have now been woven into the fabric of all three main political parties in (Read more…)
I’ve written before about the Cons’ blatant strategy of saying just enough about regulating greenhouse gas emissions from the oil industry to confuse voters about the issue while blocking the way toward any action. And so the real news in their offer to let the U.S. write the regulations they’ve been promising “next year” for seven years and counting is the prospect that it might actually result in some policy coming into effect.
That is, assuming one thinks the same prime minister who’s gleefully played Lucy-with-the-football with the Canadian public on this exact issue will voluntarily follow through after (Read more…)
by Arij Riahi. Arij Riahi is a legally-trained writer based in Montreal. You can reach Arij on @arijactually. In early July I traveled to Fort McMurray, Alberta. The booming oil town– sometimes renamed Fort McMoney– is located 400 kilometres northeast of Edmonton. It is also the very centre of the country’s largest industrial project. As we […]
Please support our coverage of democratic movements and become a supporting member of rabble.ca.
Oilsands infrastructure near Fort McMurray (photo: Kris Krüg)
EDMONTON – Alberta’s Environment Department has been rebuked by a judge for working behind the scenes to silence groups that question the effects of oilsands operations on the environment.
“This is a black mark for the government of Alberta,” Simon Dyer of the Pembina Institute, an environmental think-tank at the heart of the dispute, said Wednesday.
Alberta needs to walk the talk and be judged on its actions both in terms of environmental performance of the industry and its actions in terms of the regulatory process.
In a ruling filed Tuesday, Court (Read more…)
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Angella MacEwen rightly slams the Cons’ attempt to use Employment Insurance funds as a subsidy for employers at the expense of workers. And Don Lenihan sees the Cons’ structure as a cynical means of trying to claim success by ignoring the actual purpose of funding for training: This reassignment of resources from one social group to another is neither open nor transparent. On the contrary, as we’ve seen, the CJG requires an investment by the sponsoring employer. The unspoken point here is that employers are highly unlikely to sponsor anyone other than (Read more…)
Historian and author Jeremy Brecher argues that activists who engage in acts of civil disobedience and risk arrest are upholding the law, not violating it. The post Civil disobedience as law enforcement appeared first on The Canadian Progressive.
Support for the Swamp Line 9 campaign continues to grow as more and more people are becoming aware of the dangers of aging pipelines and the transportation of tar sands bitumen under Ontario — and specifically through high density areas of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area.
The epicentre of toxicity
The epicentre of the damage is the First Nations community of Aamjiwnaang near Sarnia, Ontario, with 850 community members. Often referred to as “Chemical Valley,” the area is considered one of the most toxic in North America due to the community’s proximity to tar sands refining plants and other chemical refining infrastructure.
The tar sands gang does more than muzzle scientists. It also muzzles environmentalists. This came out loud and clear in a recent case before Alberta’s Court of Queen’s Bench.
Last year, the Oil Sands Environmental Coalition (OSEC), a group consisting of the Pembina Institute, the Alberta Wilderness Association and the Fort McMurray Environmental Association, filed a Statement of Concern with
Assorted content to start your week.- Frances Russell discusses the dangers of Stephen Harper’s authoritarian democracy. And Michael Harris takes note of Harper’s decision to mete out career executions to his own Senate appointees based on exactly the …
ACFN Chief Allan Adam outside an Alberta court in 2012, challenging Shell’s Jackpine development
Shell Canada’s Jackpine oilsands mine expansion plan has received the go-ahead from Ottawa, despite the environment minister’s view that it’s “likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.”
In a statement late Friday, environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq concluded that the effects from the 100,000-barrel-per-day expansion are “justified in the circumstances.”
The nearby Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation has said the project will violate several federal laws covering fisheries and species at risk, as well as treaty rights.
They said they had received so little information on (Read more…)
Assorted content to end your week.
- There was never much doubt that the Cons’ demolition of Canada’s long-form census was intended to ensure that we lack data needed to develop evidence-based policies – and that the effects would be most significant among the most marginalized (or exclusive) groups. And Toby Sanger, pogge and the Globe and Mail editorial board all lament the result, while Sara Mayo observes the suspicion that the data trashed by the National Household Survey includes information about the ultra-wealthy.
- Meanwhile, Frances Russell highlights how the Cons are creating an expectation of falling standards (Read more…)
Miscellaneous material for your holiday reading.
- Paul Buchhelt discusses eight areas where privatization has proven to be a disaster in the U.S. – with one holding particular interest for Regina residents:
A 2009 analysis of water and sewer utilities by Food and Water Watch found that private companies charge up to 80 percent more for water and 100 percent more for sewer services. A more recent study confirms that privatization will generally “increase the long-term costs borne by the public.” Privatization is “shortsighted, irresponsible and costly.”
Numerous examples of water privatization abuses or failures have been documented in California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, Texas, Massachusetts, Rhode Island — just about anywhere it’s been tried. Meanwhile, corporations have been making outrageous profits on a commodity that should be almost free. Nestle buys water for about 1/100 of a penny per gallon, and sells it back for ten dollars. Their bottled water is not much different from tap water.
Worse yet, corporations profit from the very water they pollute. Dioxin-dumping Dow Chemicals is investing in water purification. Monsanto has been accused of privatizing its own pollution sites in order to sell filtered water back to the public.
- Robert Reich responds to three lies used to push for corporate tax giveaways. Bernie Sanders discusses how anti-worker employers have built their obscene wealth on effective subsidies from the public. And Chris Hedges comments on the U.S.’ prison-industrial complex.
- Meanwhile, Bob Weber reports on an attempt to label a closed assembly of oil-backed governments and tar sands lobby groups as a “Pan-Canadian” discussion of pipelines. And Greenpeace’s Keith Stewart offers the appropriate response:
Keith Stewart of Greenpeace said it’s telling that no environmental or aboriginal groups have been invited to help determine the group’s goals and objectives.
“Industry says, ‘Oh yes, of course we’ll engage people — after we’ve set everything up.’ The people who have been expressing concerns aren’t getting any say on setting terms of reference, the types of things that are going to be looked at, how it’s going to operate.”
Noting Alberta has yet to release a long-awaited report on pipeline safety, Stewart suspects the collaborative may be aimed more at public opinion than anything else.
“We’ve see this around the world, where companies who are under fire launch these types of initiatives to try and allay public concern and avoid new regulation,” he said. “They treat it as a public-relations problem rather than an operations problem.”
- Finally, Adam Radwanski identifies the NDP as the big winner in last week’s Ontario by-elections. And while Nora Loreto is rather less optimistic, she’s right in pointing out how that result should help the party influence the province’s wider political system:
Assuming that government holds long enough to even consider a budget, the pressure on the NDP to deliver a budget with the Liberals that reflects some progressive values will be their greatest test in nearly 20 years. The Liberals will need NDP support. The New Democrats cannot rely on weak, populist policies if they’re going to prove that they’re a viable alternative. They’ll have to demonstrate that they can play politics: make serious demands or force a general election.
If the NDP picks their big issues now (public childcare? lower tuition fees? new energy policies?), pulling a Liberal budget to the left won’t be politically difficult.
There are many, many months for the NDP to clean itself up internally and find the best political minds and organizers they can mine from the left. With an activist Ontario Federation of Labour, this shouldn’t be a hard task.
[Edit: fixed typo.]
I did this picture in May 2010. There has been change for the worse. Now that Harper has majority he has become full time salesman for oil companies, Tar Sands, Crude-oil pipeline etc.
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- George Monbiot writes that corporate control over a political system may be a huge factor in limiting public participation – even as it makes a substantial counterweight all the more important:
The political role of business corporations is generally interpreted as that of lobbyists, seeking to influence government policy. In reality they belong on the inside. They are part of the nexus of power that creates policy. They face no significant resistance, from either government or opposition, as their interests have now been woven into the fabric of all three main political parties in Britain.
Every week we learn that systemic failures on the part of government contractors are no barrier to obtaining further work, that the promise of efficiency, improvements and value for money delivered by outsourcing and privatisation have failed to materialise.
The monitoring which was meant to keep these companies honest is haphazard, the penalties almost nonexistent, the rewards can be stupendous, dizzying, corrupting. Yet none of this deters the government. Since 2008, the outsourcing of public services has doubled, to £20bn. It is due to rise to £100bn by 2015.
This policy becomes explicable only when you recognise where power really lies. The role of the self-hating state is to deliver itself to big business. In doing so it creates a tollbooth economy: a system of corporate turnpikes, operated by companies with effective monopolies.
It’s hardly surprising that the lobbying bill – now stalled by the House of Lords – offered almost no checks on the power of corporate lobbyists, while hog-tying the charities who criticise them. But it’s not just that ministers are not discouraged from hobnobbing with corporate executives: they are now obliged to do so.
- Meanwhile, Don Lenihan discusses the elements we should expect to find in an accountable, responsive political system. And Michael Harris once again finds the Harper Cons feverishly eliminating any trace of those traits within their government.
- Finally, Stephen Gorden finds that the federal balance sheet continues to include a structural deficit. Which naturally means it’s time for Deficit Jim Flaherty and the Cons’ lackeys to start hyping yet more gratuitous tax cuts (particularly ones with severe long-term budget impacts) to keep the red ink flowing.
This and that for your Labour Day reading.
- Jared Bernstein writes about the fight for fair wages in the U.S. fast food and retail industries. And Karen McVeigh notes that political decision-makers are starting to try to get in front of the parade of workers seeking a reasonable standard of living: Organisers said the strikes, scheduled a day after the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and a few days before Labor Day, were being held in 60 cities and had spread to the south – including Tampa and Raleigh – and the west, with workers in (Read more…)
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Marc Lee takes a high-level look at the absurdity of our destructive economic choices:
Exhibit one: the North Pole at the moment is a one-foot-deep aquamarine lake. After reaching record low ice cover and thickness at the end of summer 2012, an ice-free arctic in the summer is coming sooner rather than later. All of that blue water absorbing solar radiation instead of ice reflecting it back to space will compound global warming. And as it melts it releases the greenhouse gas, methane, which will further increase warming in one of those bad feedback loops scientists have been warming about for decades. A new study puts the cost of this methane leakage at $60 trillion, a number hard to fathom but close to the world’s GDP in a single year.
Exhibit two: extreme weather is doing some major damage. It’s going to take a while for final numbers to come in, but damages from the Calgary and region floods are estimated in the $3-5 billion range. In Toronto, total damages of $1 billion or more seem plausible. It is important to note that some damages are covered by private insurance, but there are the uninsured too, and even for those with insurance, there are deductibles, caps and fine print. Private insurance notably does not cover replacement of public infrastructure, either. Insurance coverage can be less than 20% of total damages from a natural disaster. In central Europe, flooding caused about $16 billion in total damages back in May, amid a very wet spring. Flooding is a big theme this year, but extreme heat is also a problem: the “heat dome” recently burning up eastern North America, and drought conditions across the plains. All of a sudden, air conditioning is a human right.
Exhibit three: extreme energy development is making a mess. The train derailment, explosion and spill at Lac Megantic is obviously top of mind. Pipeline spills have also been much in the news (even as pipeline companies aspire for new capacity via Keystone XL, Northern Gateway (through northern BC) and Trans Mountain (to Vancouver)). But breaking news includes spills as a result of new extreme tar sands processing, with “unstoppable” leaks from in situ extraction that injects steam below the surface to heat and pump out the bitumen.
(O)ne has to think that all of this damage, from climate change and business-as-usual for the fossil fuel industry, portends political change. Perhaps not this year, but our collective denial of the costs of our fossil fuel addiction has to come crashing down at some point. Or not. Such is our choice right now: is humanity a plankton bloom, here for a good time not a long time, or can we stitch it together to become something more long-lasting on this planet. Life on planet earth will go on, but what will become of the great human drama that has unfolded over the past hundred thousand years? It’s our collective choice to make, so time to roll up our sleeves and build a social movement that will push our political class to action.
- And it’s well worth adding Halliburton’s coverup of its role to the list of appalling actions which should cause a major rethink of our assumptions about how much we can trust our corporate overlords – rather than giving rise to a paltry fine.
- But as Democracy Watch notes, Canada’s premiers apparently can’t hold a meeting without turning it into a corporate-branded event.
- Rick Goldman challenges Andrew Coyne’s attempt to redefine poverty out of existence. Laurel Rothman and Bill Moore-Kilgannon make the case for a national strategy to combat poverty (while recognizing that nothing of the sort is coming from the Harper Cons),
- Instead, the Cons have of course focused on boutique tax baubles which serve little purpose but to drain the federal treasury to ensure nothing useful is done with public money. And Carol Goar points out that even the C.D. Howe Institute recognizes the futility of that choice.
- Finally, Alison links together the Cons’ inner circle to highlight the implausibility that payoffs to Mike Duffy wouldn’t have been familiar to Stephen Harper and his office. And Lana Payne discusses the need to rebuild social trust in the wake of Harper’s “binders full of enemies” attitude toward the majority of Canada:
The list of “enemy stakeholders” (which encompasses pretty much anyone who disagrees with or has disagreed with the Harper government) did serve to highlight once again this government’s colossal insecurity and bullying personality.
But for most political watchers the fact that the Prime Minister’s Office would keep a running list of enemies merely confirmed what they already knew.
This is a government that has taken divisive politics to new and dizzying heights. This is a government that lacks the will and, perhaps, the ability to seek compromise and consensus.
Instead, it prefers to create enemies and then abuse its power in an effort to punish those so-called enemies.
And the list is long. Long enough to fill binders.
Feminists. Environmentalists. Doctors who care about refugees. Academics and scientists for giving a darn about things like evidence and data and real research. Unions. Civil society organizations. Self-identified progressives. The Parliamentary budget officer, or specifically, Kevin Page. The premiers. Senators who don’t toe the line and rubber stamp bad laws. Federal civil servants who blow the whistle when their government lies about government policy, as was the case with an EI fraud investigator recently. Bureaucrats with an informed opinion trying to offer good policy advice, rather than us-vs-them warnings.
As we know, every government runs it course. They get old and tired. The Harper government is looking like that now, despite the attempt to put a new face on cabinet.
Capitalizing on the unpopularity of the federal Conservatives without acting to rebuild both social and political trust with Canadians might result in short-term political success for those who displace them, but what will it really mean for the country?
As Himelfarb points out, social trust is quite different from political trust. Both are needed, but it is the loss of the first that is the bigger concern.
by: Sierra Club Canada | Press Release:
Corporate Climate Campaign led by Sierra Club and ForestEthics Gains Momentum
San Francisco, CA, June 2, 2013 – Fifty-eight organizations, led by the Sierra Club and ForestEthics, released an open letter today demanding that companies take climate action. The letter calls on U.S. corporations with trucking fleets join 19 leading companies in avoiding fuel from refineries that take Canadian tar sands. According to U.S. EPA, tar sands release as much as 37% more carbon pollution than oil from conventional crude.
“U.S. corporations have a critical role to play in (Read more…)
The next installment in our special series of commentaries celebrating the 50th anniversary of Mel Watkins’ classic article on staple theory, focuses our attention on the latest staple boom to remake Canada’s economy: the bitumen sands of northe…
COP 19 ends this week and there is at least one clear message coming from the meeting: Canada is risking the wellbeing of future generations. While most countries agree that climate change needs to be dealt with and carbon output needs to be curtailed, Canada is refusing to budge on its pro-tar sands stance while keeping an ineffiecent resource-based economy running.
Hopefully Canadians will be able to notice the rest of the world is concerned about more than just Rob “Crack Mayor” Ford. Other countries are clearly thinking into the future and let’s hope Canada can do the same.
Good (Read more…)
The following letter to the NEB on Line 9 project was submitted by the Toronto-based group East End Against Line 9.
The National Energy Board (NEB) has been empowered by the federal government to rule on Enbridge Inc.’s project to re-purpose a pipeline (Line 9) so it can carry tar sands oil across Toronto. We regret that the NEB has declined to allow East End Against Line 9 to take part in its hearing on the Enbridge project. The reason given is that the areas we represent — 8-15 kilometres downstream from Line 9 — are allegedly “not in close vicinity to the pipeline route” and we “therefore did not persuasively demonstrate a specific and detailed interest that would be directly affected by the Project.” 
If built, TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline would force Americans to pay as much as 40 cents more per gallon for gasoline in some parts of the country, according to a new report by the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog.
The post Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline Raises American Gas Prices: Report appeared first on The Canadian Progressive.
TransCanada held their ‘open house’ for the Energy East project in Stittsville last week. And what a show it was. Around 40 employees, mostly PR professionals (not high-ranking TransCanada execs or engineers) packed a room at a local area. …
This and that for your Sunday reading.- Andrew Nikiforuk writes that air quality in Alberta’s Upgrader Alley may be among the worst in North America, including dangerous concentrations of cancer-causing chemicals. And Danny Harvey points out that the p…
John Podesta returns to the White House
Canada’s Harper-ment is getting increasingly desperate. The quest to double production out of the Alberta tar sands needs new pipelines (or rail). In recent months, we have seen new proposals for pipelines to the west and to the east, amid furth…
Not surprisingly, Linda McQuaig‘s entry into the NDP’s Toronto Centre nomination contest against Jennifer Hollett has set off plenty of discussion this morning. And much of the focus has been on a possible by-election battle between McQuaig and Chrystia Freeland – the authors of the two most prominent recent books highlighting the gap between the rich and the rest of us.
But I’ll suggest that neither The Trouble with Billionaires nor Plutocrats figures to be the most important piece of reading material for the Toronto Centre by-election. While the campaign will hopefully raise the profile of economic inequality as (Read more…)
Is this show currently playing?
July 12, 2013
On July 5th and 6th, hundreds of people came togethe…
Amid rumors that the Obama administration might try to cut an emissions deal with Canada in order to justify approval of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, leaders from 25 U.S. environmental groups — backed by millions of members and at least 75,000 individuals willing to engage incivil disobedience — warned the president on Tuesday that such a deal would be considered nothing less than a bitter betrayal.
Time for a true or false pop quiz. Is the following a self-evident statement of economic fact? “A capital asset which is not currently being exploited has a value of zero for all purposes.”
I only ask because that seems to be the fundamental assumption behind Andrew Leach’s cost-benefit analysis comparing raw bitumen mining to upgrading. And unfortunately, Leach’s viewpoint seems to fit all too well with the current resource management philosophy of provincial and federal governments alike.
Here’s Leach’s conclusion as to a hypothetical set of developments – one involving an extraction project alone, one an attached upgrader: (Read more…)
Travel Alberta was begging for it. Its latest ads, featuring the many attractions of the province, are really quite nice. But then they end with the extraordinary phrase, “Remember to breathe.” Remember to breathe. How could any satirist resist a phrase like that coming from tar sands Alberta, the country’s pollution province.
And, of course, they couldn’t. A couple of American filmmakers are
THE TORONTO STAR has a frightening report by Emma Pullman and Martin Lukacs: ‘Nobody understands’ spills at Alberta oil sands operation. There’s been a bitumen blow-out — and they don’t know how to stop it. This apparently originated from a …
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
This is not a traditional protest, but a walk led by First Nations communities to call for an end of the destruction of the oil sand…
In times like these, it’s vitally important that we not connect dots like “oil”, “rail”, “deregulation”, “explosion” and “disaster”. Because otherwise, people might start demanding that our corporate reduce the likelihood that we’ll have far more similar incidents to come.
David Suzuki Foundation supporters who live in Western Canada often have eyes riveted on Ottawa to see what the federal government’s next move will be when it comes to environmental issues. So we sometimes too easily overlook Canadians in the Maritimes and Newfoundland and Labrador — coastal regions, like ours, on the front lines of climate change.