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.
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.
So, while a boycott — whether of tourism or of
oil sands products — might be, in and of itself, ineffectual in halting
oil sands development, it may still contribute to a more challenging business case for
future oil sands projects.
For Canada's part, hydrogen could play a critical role in the
future development of
oil sands in a climate - responsible manner.
The proposed
future development of the
oil sands constitutes a serious moral problem.
The mandate of the joint review panel ensured that it focused on risks which can be mitigated without harming the pipeline or the prospect of
future of
oil sands development while ignoring the larger risks that can't be so easily mitigated.