Sentences with phrase «of oil sands development»

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.

This may be due more to the nature of the oil sands development contaminants vs those found in the other rivers??? I'm guessing O&G contaminants which tend to be nasty carcinogens amongst other things... I have to read if the evaluations of what constitutes poor or good water quality what it is based on (which contaminants etc.)... I will look at your details... Any water pro's out there that can put the details above into context?

Weaver argues that the climate effects of oil sands development will have only a small effect on global temperatures and that the potential of coal and gas consumption to contribute to serious climate change is much greater.

As has become the norm, their objections were supported by over-estimates of the greenhouse gas implications of oil sands development.

Having grown up in the oil sands region, she witnessed the impacts of oil sands development on her Nation's people, culture, and land.

Indeed, our analysis supports recent comments in the EPA's review of the State Department's final impact statement that, with oil prices in a sustained range of $ 65 - $ 75, «construction of the pipeline is projected to change the economics of oil sands development and result in increased oil sands production, and the accompanying greenhouse gas emissions, over what would otherwise occur» [2].

On Thursday, June 16, API hosted bloggers for a conference call to discuss the economic benefits of oil sands development and the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.

The program is designed to provide an improved understanding of the long - term cumulative effects of oil sands development.

(Reuters)- Exxon Mobil on Sunday continued cleanup of a pipeline spill that spewed thousands of barrels of heavy Canadian crude in Arkansas as opponents of oil sands development latched on to the incident to attack plans to build the Keystone XL line.

I would agree though that one of the more effective ways (if not the most effective) to limit the growth of Oil sands development is to limit the rate at which it can be delivered to its primary consumer, the US.

Much of the coverage and political reaction seemed to spin the Swart and Weaver work into some sort of vindication of oil sands development when they are clearly on record opposing expanded development.

The economic benefits of oil sands development, while considerable, are unevenly distributed across the country, making interprovincial tensions understandable.

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.

In March of 2008 the Canadian Boreal Initiative, the Pembina Institute and the Alberta Research Council published a report recommending the use of offsets in the oil sands region of Alberta as one tool to control the terrestrial impacts of oil sands development, including the impact on caribou.

«In light of growing trends, and following the decisions made today, the government of Canada has determined that foreign state control of oil sands development has reached the point at which further such foreign state control would not be of net benefit to Canada,» Harper said.

What will also be an issue, potentially for legal appeal, is what the Joint Review Panel didn't consider: the impacts of oil sands development.

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.

A Pembina Institute study from 2009 estimated the costs to reclaim what was then 686 square miles of oil sands developments and 170 square miles of tailings ponds would run as high as $ 15 billion.

Scientists expressed concern that the oil and gas regulations will fail to do anything meaningful on climate change given the federally - allowed expansion of oil sands developments, and the long history of broken promises on climate action.

Both CAPP and Conference Board studies are spun to make the benefits of oil sands developments appear to be more evenly widespread throughout Canada than they are.

Not exact matches

Tuesday vote was taken hard in Canada where development of the oil sands is important to Alberta's budget.

Environmentalists oppose the project because it will encourage the development of Canada's oil sands, a type of oil resource that requires more energy to tap than conventional reserves.

«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.

It adds that «approval or denial of the proposed project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area.»

The Alberta government's revision of the Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP) continues down a wrong - headed path where the province is willing to take on environmental risk to enable oil sands development.

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.

Executive director Ed Whittingham lambasted the government's «five - year track record of failing to meaningfully tackle greenhouse gas pollution and avoiding federal responsibility for oil sands development.»

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.»

Little wonder that the promise of benefits from oil sands development is cold comfort for Ontarians and Quebeckers as the once - dominant manufacturing sector struggles to reinvent and revitalize itself.

Evan Solomon: They have argued that they want to make sure that environmental assessment, though they argue it needs to be rigorous, is getting in the way of development of big energy projects and specifically around the oil sands and pipelines.

We did not consider that there was a sufficiently direct connection between the project and any particular existing or proposed oil sands development or other oil production activities to warrant consideration of the effects of these activities.

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.

Yesterday, the Pembina Institute and Equiterre released a report entitled Booms, busts, and bitumen: The economic implications of Canadian oil sands development.

Oil sands development is a matter of provincial government policy: in a government policy paper (the Mineable Oil Sands Strategy) issued a few years ago (and since recalled), the core area of the oil sands resources in Alberta was designated a «sacrifice zone», within which it was acknowledged that significant and irreversible environmental impact would be permitted to occur, to enable the realization of the significant economic benefits such development promisOil sands development is a matter of provincial government policy: in a government policy paper (the Mineable Oil Sands Strategy) issued a few years ago (and since recalled), the core area of the oil sands resources in Alberta was designated a «sacrifice zone», within which it was acknowledged that significant and irreversible environmental impact would be permitted to occur, to enable the realization of the significant economic benefits such development promisOil Sands Strategy) issued a few years ago (and since recalled), the core area of the oil sands resources in Alberta was designated a «sacrifice zone», within which it was acknowledged that significant and irreversible environmental impact would be permitted to occur, to enable the realization of the significant economic benefits such development promisoil sands resources in Alberta was designated a «sacrifice zone», within which it was acknowledged that significant and irreversible environmental impact would be permitted to occur, to enable the realization of the significant economic benefits such development promised.

Contamination from upstream tar sands / oil sands development is causing higher levels of cancer and other serious disease for members of the Athabasca Chipewyan and...

And there's analysis of key turning points in the development of the oil sands, crucial to understanding what is unfolding in Alberta.

The government and the oil and gas industry have spent lavishly to promote fossil fuel development, but a poll for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers found that only 51 % of us think tar sands / oil sands development is worth the environmental risk; 49 % think it isn't.

While the largest component of this extraction is exploration and development of oil and gas resources, the bureau is also responsible for «non-energy minerals» (primarily sand and gravel) excavated from the ocean floor.

Rarely recalled, though, is the wide - eyed way Harper described oil sands development to the Brits that day, calling it «an enterprise of epic proportions, akin to the building of the pyramids or China's Great Wall.»

Forget the fixed costs of development; just the operating costs of keeping a project online are significantly higher than the revenue that an oil sands producer would earn from selling their bitumen.

«Until ongoing efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production of oil sands are more successful and widespread, the Final SEIS makes clear that, compared to reference crudes, development of oil sands crude represents a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions,» the EPA states in a letter made public Tuesday.

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.

Seeing an opportunity to offset some of the emissions from its oil - sands development, the province of Alberta committed Can $ 2 billion (US$ 2.1 billion) to sequestration in 2008 and is now working out agreements with commercial partners on four projects.

«We have environmental impacts now, and these impacts are about to get a lot bigger,» notes oil sands policy analyst Marc Huot of the Pembina Institute, an environmental group working for responsible development.

Regarding Keystone, I myself think it is clear that Obama should say no to Keystone, because it is something in his power to do, which would have some effect on retarding development of the tar sands (despite what the flawed State Department EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] said), and because we really wouldn't get any significant benefit from saying yes; no real oil security, few permanent jobs, and most of the money goes to Canada and to refiners in free - trade zones.

We still don't know enough about tar sand oil, or bitumen, which takes longer to break down due to its high viscosity, but doesn't spread, we also don't know much about the behavior of oil from a blowout, such as the Deepwater Horizon BP blowout, and we know little of how crude oil behaves in the Arctic Ocean, where there is ice, or how to remediate it,» said Michel Boufadel, director of NJIT's Center for Natural Resources Development and Protection and a member of the panel of experts charged with evaluating the impact of spills in Northern waters.

But rather than searching for ways to stretch the oil we still have — like a modern Hanukkah — it makes more sense to accelerate development of clean alternatives such as electric cars or biofuels from algae — and avoid dirty ones like turning coal or tar sands to liquid fuels.

He and his colleagues found that over the course of four months, 11,400 tons of particulate matter — including bitumen and cancer - causing polycyclic aromatic compounds — were deposited within 30 miles of oil sands upgrading facilities belonging to two of Canada's major oil sands development companies, Suncor and Syncrude.

Aerosols from the production of heavy oil is a growing climate and pollution concern because new tar sands developments are on the drawing board in Venezuela, Utah and elsewhere, the study says.