Something I've wondered about for a while: Canada is our No. 1 source of oil imports. And Canadian tar-sands are often cited by energy optimists as a virtually unlimited source of future oil.
But, um, has anyone asked Canada about this? Or rather, asked Canadians, as opposed to the Canadian government? 'Cause it seems like a pretty raw deal for them. Extracting tar-sands oil is horrifically destructive to the environment and the workers involved. And because of NAFTA, Canada is stuck exporting most of it to us, meaning they're fueling our dreams of empire at the possible expense of their own future energy security. Furthermore, in times of energy scarcity, being a fruitful source of oil immediately contiguous to the world's largest consumer of oil -- and also its most powerful, hyper-militarized country -- might prove to be a little, ahem, awkward.
Anyhoo, Oil Drum has a thread going about all this, playing off this Canadian think-tank report (PDF), which raises all the above concerns. Lots of interesting stuff.
Comments
View as Flat
Biodiversivist Posted 2:47 pm
11 Mar 2006
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:00 am
12 Mar 2006
Because the Canadian government, just as the US government, is really being run by corporate bribery, not elected representatives.
By swapping ownership of resources in different countries, multinationals erode the control of we the people over our own resources. The property rights of these mulytinational corporate "citizens" then trumps any rights of real citizens.
That way environmental, financial, and criminal laws of any one nation are circumvented. It's a lisence to steal, murder, to do anything in the name of the bottom line.
Witness the genocide in Darfur, check out Nick Kristoff's columns on it, China and it's corporate arm is benefitting from that mass killing so they will not allow anyone to step in and stop it. All in the name of their right to resources in the region.
This allows bushco inc to say, we would like to step in and stop the genocide, but that would cause diplomatic problems with China.
What if there is a strike at a US auto plant in China and company officials hire local assasins to kill labor leaders? Then chinese officials can say, well we would like to step in and stop this killing, but that would cause diplomatic problems with the US government.
The wink, wink, nudge, nudge agreement amongst the Harvard, Oxford, and Yale alumni running these multinational corporations is that national boundaries are obstacles to commerce.
The nation/state as we know it is already dead, along with the fiction of individual rights of we the people of spaceship earth. This is the face of multinational corporate feudalism. It does not care of you or anyone or anything on this planet lives or dies. Ice caps melting?
Hehehehey, just more oppurtunies for profit!!
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
DaveGreenAndRed Posted 6:04 am
13 Mar 2006
In addition to the report linked in your article, Parkland Institute has another report specifically related to energy security and the environment. See the link at the bottom of this page: http://www.ualberta.ca/PARKLAND/mediareleases/PRDec1_2005Energy.htm.
Permalink
DaveGreenAndRed Posted 6:22 am
13 Mar 2006
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid
=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1141904468646
Permalink