Sentences with phrase «tar sands in»

TransCanada, the «energy transfer company» responsible for getting the incredibly dirty diluted bitumen oil from the tar sands in western Canada, and also potentially Bakken crude, to refineries in Quebec City and St. Johns, New Brunswick, has notified the Canadian government that it is cancelling its proposed Energy East pipeline project, citing slowing growth in -LSB-...]

With tar sands in the fuel mix, achieving the additional emission reductions will cost more money.

As we've noted before, simply stopping the Keystone XL pipeline won't keep the tar sands in the ground, but it won't make them easier to bring to market.

And when you ask that question, the answer is not a barrel of oil from Saudi Arabia, and it is definitely not a barrel of oil from the tar sands in Alberta.

Now that we do know, it's imperative that we move quickly to alternate forms of energy — and that we leave the tar sands in the ground.

James Hansen, NASA's leading climate scientist, has said this about the Keystone pipeline: that if the pipeline goes through and we burn tar sands in Canada, it's «game over» for the planet.

It's no secret, and safe to say, that TreeHugger isn't supportive of extraction oil from tar sands in Canada (or from oil shale in the Rockies for the matter).

Only Way to Ensure No Bird Deaths Is To Shut Down Tar Sands Production We've detailed the myriad problems with tar sands in more posts than I can remember, so let's just go with the Greenpeace statement on the incident.

If agreed by states, LCFS could have a significant impact on the sale of fuels derived from Canadian tar sands in the United States, regardless of any decision the Obama administration makes over the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.

Everyday for the last several years we've stopped TransCanada and kept tar sands in the ground.

The tar sands in Canada are an environmental disaster in other ways, but the incremental emissions of greenhouse gases are small compared to the far greater threat of massive coal expansion in China, or potential fugitive emission of methane from fracking, or massive deforestation in Indonesia and Latin America, or any number of other major sources of greenhouse gases.

The tar sands in northern Alberta have emerged as one of the largest and most destructive energy projects in the world, and Canada's fastest - growing source of greenhouse gas pollution.

Overwhelmingly, experts agree that oil mined from tar sands in Alberta, Canada is far worse for the climate than most of the oil currently produced and sold in the United States, because of the added pollution from extracting, refining, and delivering it.

The plan also fails to counter the growing use of climate - destroying tar sands in EU fuels.

With signs asking to keep tar sands in the ground cheekily blending with the orange party signs on both sides of Thomas Mulcair, and with folks interrupting his speech again and again with questions from within the crowd, they put pressure on Mulcair so as to clarify his position on Energy East.

He mentioned wanting to keep climate change under 2 °C, but didn't acknowledge that in Canada that means keeping 85 % of the tar sands in the ground.

Needless to say that these actions are successfully bringing climate change and tar sands in the spotlight.

Transporting toxic crude oil — and tar sands in particular — is inherently dangerous, more so because oil companies care about profit, not public safety.

Even if other production comes on line, e.g. from unconventional sources such as tar sands in Alberta or shale in the American West, their relatively high cost of production could permit low - cost producers, particularly Saudi Arabia, to increase production, drop prices for a time, and undermine the economic viability of the higher - cost competitors, as occurred in the mid-1980's.

With the government not approving TransCanada's pipeline project due to left - wing environmentalist groups, the hope was that «dirty» oil would not be imported from the tar sands in Canada to the US.

To increase supplies, most companies are looking to tar sands in Canada or converting coal or natural gas into liquid fuels, technologies that emit far more carbon dioxide than conventional oil does.

Line 3 is a proposed pipeline that would bring crude oil from the Alberta tar sands in Canada to Superior, Wisconsin in the United States.

Climate activists have rallied in opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, the controversial project to carry oil from tar sands in western Canada south to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico.

In a nutshell — Canadian tar sands in Alberta.

There are some tar sands in the US as well, located mainly in eastern Utah.

Geophysics reveals the requirements: phase out coal, leave tar sands in the ground, do not pursue the last drops of oil.

While options remain open (the possibility of doing more upgrading in Alberta and the use of existing pipelines and rail transport to the US) nixing KXL will be a significant impediment to accelerated development of the tar sands in the medium term and an increase in the chance that the Athabasca bitumen will stay in the ground for ever.

The more immediate problem is the upswing of production of the tar sands in Alberta, Canada.

The book also mentions Norway as a shining example regarding the tackling of climate change, but the world is more nuanced; Norway also pushed for more oil drilling in the Arctic, and is involved in tar sands in Canada, as well as oil exploration in Libya.

And although Alberta currently boasts a carbon price of $ 15 per metric ton, it is not enough — at less than a dollar per barrel — to keep greenhouse gas pollution from the tar sands in check.

«The Athabasca tar sands in Canada are being mined and converted to petroleum at a cost of about $ 20 a barrel,» he says.

ExxonMobil admitted that the pipeline had been used to transport a molasses - like form of crude extracted from tar sands in Canada.

Meanwhile, the thirst for oil drives the mining of tar sands in Alberta and the flooding of old wells with steam or CO2 in California and Texas.

A new plan would change how Canada evaluates proposed development, such as this tar sands mine in the province of Alberta.

The Keystone XL pipeline would have transported the dirtiest and most expensive type of petroleum from tar sands in Alberta, Canada, to US refineries in the Gulf of Mexico.

«If you go with the numbers that are being published, if you account for the tar sands in Northern Alberta, we're supposed to have the second largest oil reserves in the world, second only to Saudi Arabia,» says Ma.

«We should be focused on transitioning to renewable energy instead of piping the dirtiest of fossil fuels from tar sands in Canada across the U.S. to the Gulf of Mexico so that it can be shipped to our competitors in China,» Gillibrand said.

«In your discussions with the Canadian government, we encourage you to raise concerns over the environmental and social problems associated with tar sands production and make no exemption for the tar sands in any binational agreement addressing climate change» says the open letter.

Not exact matches

Grantham also has strong views on the oil market, which isn't surprising for a devoted environmentalist who participated in Keystone pipeline protests and has called for the death of the «tar sands.»

The pipeline would connect Canada's tar sands with refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast that specialize in processing heavy crude oil.

«The cost of actually doing deep - sea drilling, the cost of doing fracking in North Dakota, the cost of tar sands, the cost of Arctic drilling is way, way, way higher than anyone admits,» Shah said.

Environmentalists have fought for years to stem Canadian oil sands production, which some call tar sands, in favor of cleaner energy.

Over the last few days, posts by Bill McKibben in the Guardian and by NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen on his own website at Columbia have again brought forward the statistic that, «the tar sands are estimated to contain at least 400 GtC (equivalent to about 200 ppm CO2).»

The report also counters warnings from environmentalists that the pipeline's construction would spur a huge increase in production from western Canada's tar sands, believed to be one of the biggest reserves of crude oil outside Saudi Arabia — unleashing torrents of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

It started in 2008, when my partner Kristin and I decided to go to Northern Alberta to fly over the tar / oil sands, to see for ourselves what had up until then been hidden from plain sight.

On this issue too it seems their heads are also firmly planted in the tar sands.

And International Energy Agency chief economist Fatih Birol recently suggested that Canada should meet the challenge by expanding production in the Alberta tar sands and opening up the B.C. coast to oil and gas exploration.

BC doesn't need the tar sands and in fact has the potential to power much of Western Canada with clean renewables in perpetuity.

HSBC, the biggest bank in Europe and the world's seventh - largest, has resolved to stop funding Arctic drilling, tar sands / oil sands development, and most new...

Add in stolid First Nations resistance to a proposed pipeline from the tar sands to Kitimat, and all these powerful pressures converge on the aptly named Second Narrows, which already has seen its oil tanker traffic rise precipitously in the past decade.