The Trend Is Expected To Continue

"Contamination of the Athabasca River is a high profile concern. Recent studies suggest elevated levels of pollutants near mining sites including hydro-carbons and heavy metals ... (It) raises questions about possible effects on health of wildlife and downstream communities."

Typical caveats and danger warnings, isn't it? There go the environmentalists again. Not? This is from a just-released "secret" presentation by Environment Canada?

The presentation quoting figures from the Canadian Energy Research Institute representing a collaborative approach by academics, industry and government estimating the creation of over 100,000 direct and indirect jobs in Canada, and an over $1.7-trillion contribution to the economy over the next 25 years. Wow.

Well, hey, that's really terrifically good news. What's the problem, then?

Um, that same presentation warns that Alberta and additional parts of Western Canada face a steep ecological price relating to the oil industry's collateral damage. Didn't we solve all of that with new techniques bypassing the deleterious effects of dredging that sludgy oil? How about all that science-based monitoring on the impact of oil extraction from bitumen deposits?

Remember, wontcha, that Canada's deposits are considered among the largest oil reserves in the world...! Weren't we informed that we've transcended the old technologies that used huge water and energy resources for extraction? That new methodology, engineering and advanced techniques and clean-up would be far less disruptive to the natural ecosystem?

"Bitumen extraction uses between one (in situ) and three to four (mining) barrels of fresh (i.e., Not recycled) water per barrel of oil recovered. Industry demand for water is expected to increase", the report intones. Whaaat! Not what we've been led to believe, not at all. We've solved that stupid problem. We think.

I mean, Environment Minister Peter Kent states the industry is being targeted unfairly by environmental groups, hysterical nutcases. Who excel in exaggeration to make their point. Which is that anything that seems energy-beneficial is a bogey in disguise. Right?

But here's another quote from another Environment Canada document, alerting the government to the reality of a lack of "credible scientific information" useful for countering foreign regulations or legislation designed to stomp on products and industries with sub-par environmental performance. What's that all about?

Worse, the further bald statement that "The oilsands are Canada's fastest growing source of Greenhouse Gas emissions", set to rise by 900% from 1990 to 2020, according to the document. And that would result in an annual footprint of 90-million tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent gases exceeding the output of all vehicles on Canadian highways. According to Environment Canada.

Leading to acidification damaging lakes in Saskatchewan and Alberta, and particulate matter toxic to rivers, landscape and wildlife. This is not amusing. Nor is the warning that "Low flow conditions could damage fish habitat, especially during winter. River flow has decreased over (the) past 30 years (and the) trend is expected to continue."

Hello, Environment Canada: Is this your little idea of a joke? Hello, Environment Minister Peter Kent: what gives?