In fact, U.S. employment supported
by oil sands development could grow to a peak of 600,000 jobs in 2035, according to one scenario in a new report from the Canadian Energy Research Institute.
Not exact matches
The Panel excluded any discussion of the environmental impacts of
oil sands development, although they did allow the consideration of increased
oil prices generated
by the pipeline on the taxes and royalties associated with forecast future
oil sands production.
«There's a question of whether going along with the approval of the Northern Gateway pipeline will make LNG
development in B.C. more challenging
by angering First Nations so adamantly opposed to the
oil sands pipeline,» said George Hoberg, a professor at the University of British Columbia's school of forestry and founder of UBCC350, a group pressing for action on greenhouse gas emissions.
The report does envision scenarios in which
oil sands development is curbed
by a combination of lower
oil prices and a lack of pipeline capacity.
The shine has come off the
oil sands, as more investors have started to question whether
oil sands development is really a sure thing, particularly at the speed projected
by bullish petro - boosters.
From a strictly legal perspective, the relevant question is not whether there is a sufficient connection to any particular existing or proposed
oil sands development or other production activity, and certainly not whether such projects or activities were included in the Terms of Reference (ToR), but rather simply whether the GHGs associated with the production of bitumen that will be transported
by the NGP are an «environmental effect» of that project (see NGP Report, Volume II, Appendix 4, Terms of Reference, which defines «environmental effect» very broadly to mean «any change that the project may cause in the environment.»
While provinces other than Alberta are projected to benefit, modelling
by the Canadian Energy Research Institute projects that 94 per cent of the GDP impact of
oil sands development will occur within Alberta.
They point to an article that you wrote in March, I think, of 2012 in Policy Options, where you basically said, dirty
oil, the tar
sands it's called, dirty
oil and the future of our country, where you argue that the
development of the, as you use the word, tar
sands, it's become a political term,
by the way, as you know, is basically not necessarily good for the country, in fact it takes jobs away in the manufacturing sector of Ontario.
First, the Board had ruled that it would not consider the environmental and socio - economic effects associated with upstream activities, the
development of the Alberta
oil sands, and the downstream use of
oil transported
by the pipeline.
White House, environmentalists and U.S foundations seek to block all
oil sands development,
by Duggan Flanakin and Redmond Weissenberger Oilfield workers in Alberta, refinery workers in Texas and countless factory workers just learned that the White House will not allow construction of an
oil pipeline that would bring over half a million barrels of
oil -LSB-...]
In this report the State Department concluded that
by tapping into the
oil sands, KXL would produce more greenhouse gases, but that blocking the project would not prevent
development of those resources.
Useful quantitative measures of the increasing ecological impacts are provided
by the history of
oil development in Alberta, Canada for production of both conventional
oil and tar
sands development.
Additional escalation of the mining impact occurs as conventional
oil mining is supplanted
by tar
sands development, with mining and land disturbance from the latter producing land use - related greenhouse gas emissions as much as 23 times greater than conventional
oil production per unit area [152], but with substantial variability and uncertainty [152]--[153].
The government will increase its royalty share from
oil sands development by introducing price - sensitive formulas both pre - and post-payout, rather than implementing an industry - wide tax on
oil sands production.
•
Oil sands development associated with the Keystone XL could support 117,000 new U.S. jobs
by 2035, according to the Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI).
Although governments and the
oil industry claim that all of the land disturbed
by tar
sands development will be reclaimed, little reclamation has already taken place.
Drilling Down: Groundwater Risks Imposed
by In Situ
Oil Sands Development provides clear, achievable recommendations for improving groundwater management, assessment and monitoring in the oil sands regi
Oil Sands Development provides clear, achievable recommendations for improving groundwater management, assessment and monitoring in the
oil sands regi
oil sands region.
Such an approach would be a sea change from the approach currently pursued
by Stephen Harper's government, which has pressed ahead with
oil sands development and gutted environmental protections of Canada's lakes and rivers, all the while gagging federal scientists to stop the release of data that may contradict the Conservatives» agenda.
Opponents say the proposed $ 5.4 billion pipeline would be a catalyst to unlocking
oil sands development in Alberta, Canada, where a dense, sticky hydrocarbon called bitumen is harvested
by strip - mining and energy - intense steam - based techniques.
As has become the norm, their objections were supported
by over-estimates of the greenhouse gas implications of
oil sands development.
«New Canadian
oil -
sands development is increasingly economically questionable without the additional export capacity that pipelines such as Keystone XL would bring», says Mark Lewis, external research advisor to a report from Carbon Tracker, a think - tank focused on the investment risks posed
by excessive fossil fuel extraction.