Friends of the Lubicon
PO Box 444 Stn D,
Etobicoke ON M9A 4X4
Tel: (416) 763-7500
Email: fol (at) tao (dot) ca
www.lubicon.ca
March 1, 2008
Oil companies holding tar sands leases to over 70,000 square kilometers of land are being labeled "environmental stewards" because they have asked the Alberta government to impose a "partial moratorium" on oil sands leases on three parcels of undisturbed boreal forest compromising 11,400 square kilometers. These environmentally conscious oil companies acknowledge that leasing this additional land does not "guarantee that commercial bitumen production will occur in that specific location" but they say they are concerned that leasing the land "does open the door to that possibility and the accompanying ecological disturbance".
These environmentally conscious oil companies would like to prevent such "ecological disturbance" until 2011 allowing them to protect their interests from new competition for three years while they struggle with a serious labor shortage. Presumably "ecological disturbance" after 2011 will not pose nearly as serious a threat to the things they are concerned about. Predictably "no project currently underway or in the known (100 billion dollar) lineup of...industry proposals would be (affected)" by this "partial moratorium".
In a related development industry analysts warn that "the oilsands industry faces a natural gas shortage by 2030 without new energy sources to offset gas use in oilsands expansions". They say "continued oilsands development would consume virtually all of Canada's natural gas supply...by 2030". They point out that current demand of 3.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day will increase to 6.8 billion cubic feet per day over the next two decades -- largely due to the huge amount of natural gas required to exploit the tar sands oil -- while Alberta's natural gas production is expected to decline from 13 billion cubic feet a day in 2007 to 6.7 billion cubic feet in 2028.
Under these circumstances, industry analysts say, "oilsands projects would either be forced to shut down or switch to alternative fuels to generate the heat needed to produce steam (required to liquefy the bitumen sufficiently to work with it)". "We're in a very delicate balance", a natural gas supply consultant says. He says "That gets into priorities, whether it's more important to run our Nintendos, cellphones and laptops than have enough gas to produce oil for valuable export markets". (Strangely the natural gas supply consultant doesn't seem concerned about people having sufficient natural gas to heat their homes in a country where winter temperatures can drop to -40 degrees but maybe he still lives at home and his parents take care of heating the family home so all he has to worry about personally are his Nintendo, cellphone and laptop.)
Another industry consultant says "The industry knows that natural gas is in short supply and they are looking for alternatives...nuclear is one of them". (Actually all that keeps the oil industry from publicly heralding nuclear energy as the answer to all the world's problems, including greenhouse warming for which the oil industry is of course largely responsible, is known public aversion to nuclear energy. Instead of seeking technology that doesn't threaten life as we know it -- and being required to ensure the safety of that technology before proceeding with it -- nuclear advocates are seeking to overcome this problem of known public aversion to nuclear energy with a major public relations campaign to sell nuclear energy as a safe, cheap, environmentally friendly alternative to natural gas complete with spin doctors, cynically conceived trick language and pet environmentalists.)
Acknowledging that use of steam to melt the bitumen "is unsustainable" (for all kinds of reasons including the huge amounts of finite natural gas and water it requires), some companies are experimenting with other technologies. Nuclear advocates in the oil industry, who are clearly in the majority, typically dismiss these other technologies as experimental, unproven and uneconomic.
One such new technology is called "fire-flood" or THAI technology. THAI technology involves setting fire to underground strips of bitumen about 100 metres wide and then using this burning bitumen to melt other bitumen -- kind of an updated version of the earlier proposal to melt the bitumen with underground nuclear explosions. There is no regulation of any of this stuff and nobody has any idea about possible environmental consequences.
Lastly, in a third related development, the predecessor of the Alberta Utilities Commission denied a family poisoned by a sour gas well status in the hearing of an application to drill yet another sour gas well in their area. As an earlier decision of that body said when it ruled against a community of people opposed to the drilling a gas well under the lake that provided them with their drinking water:
"Underlying almost all of the written and oral objections was the view that the residents were not prepared to accept any risk, no matter how small, to the well-being of Moose Lake because of its importance as a source of drinking water and recreational activities. While the Board acknowledges this sincerely held position, it must weigh the benefits of oil and gas development in the public interest of all Albertans with the potential impacts to the residents and environment in the area".
Later asked what benefits the decision was talking about, the then head of that provincial regulatory authority said all Albertans benefit from the royalties paid to the provincial government by the oil company on gas produced by that well, or, in other words, oil company profits, and the proportionately small royalties the company pays to the province on the natural gas, are more important to provincial regulators than the health and well-being of a pre-existing human community, the human rights of its members and the environment.
It will be interesting to see if the AUC grants the Lubicon status to be heard in the TransCanada application to build a pipeline across unceded Lubicon land over Lubicon objections.
* * * * * * * * * *
Included below are news articles related to the above commentary with the following titles
1. Siblings live with sour gas poisoning
2. Nuclear an option in a future of gas shortages, says CEO
3. Rally targets oilsands
4. Alberta won't plug oilpatch
Requested freeze on oilsand land development lease sales dismissed
5. Environment trumps economy, Stelmach says
Alberta Tory leader trumpets emissions targets but falls short of calling for controls on oil-and-gas developments
6.No brakes on oilsands
Hanneke Brooymans
The Edmonton Journal
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Camrose - Anita Graff first realized something was seriously wrong when she was getting ready for her brother's wedding and she couldn't hold a hairbrush.
That was about a month after the family heard the jet-like roar that shook their farm and signalled their first exposure to sour gas from a well flare. Anita's younger brother, Darrell, was outside at the time.
"He knew something was wrong immediately," said his mother, Barbara Graff, on Monday.
Darrell had trouble catching his breath. He felt dizzy. Fence post by fence post he staggered back to the house. When his mother opened the door, he fell in and lay on the floor.
Barbara called the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and the flaring stopped that day. The next day it started up again and continued for about a week.
Sour gas contains significant quantities of a poisonous gas called hydrogen sulphide.
Almost 10 years after that first exposure on their Vulcan-area farm, the Graffs' lives remain irrevocably altered, their health permanently damaged.
For this reason, they agreed to speak at a meeting of the Alberta Surface Rights Federation Monday, feeling it is important to warn people about the potential dangers of sour gas. They've also taken a more vigilant attitude towards wells being drilled near the Nanton-area farm they moved to after the initial exposure.
In March, the family will appear before the Alberta Court of Appeal to contest an EUB decision to not grant them standing on an application for sour gas wells drilled in their area.
Living near wells even 2.5 kilometres away makes them extremely uneasy now.
"We live in fear," said Barbara, 56.
Both she and Darrell, 30, used the silver oxygen tank sitting between them during the surface rights meeting. The sour gas exposure poisoned their systems and made them sensitive to chemicals like formaldehyde and volatile organic chemicals, which are found in everything from carpet to cleaners.
Darrell and Anita showed brain injury symptoms so severe that doctors initially diagnosed as multiple sclerosis. Anita, now 32, even had some temporary paralysis.
Since then, the family had gone to the United States to see Dr. Kaye Kilburn, a neurotoxicologist who has done extensive research on the effects of hydrogen sulphide. He was able to diagnose them with hydrogen sulphide-induced neurological disease. This is something most neurologists won't do because they were never taught about it in school, said Kilburn, who was also at Monday's meeting as part of a sour gas information tour.
Kilburn is based in Los Angeles, but has been in Alberta three times over the last year to testify before the EUB on the dangers of sour gas on behalf of landowners.
He said there is no such thing as a safe evacuation zone for sour gas releases and that warning systems won't work because the workers at a leaking well site could be dead within one or two breaths. He also scoffs at EUB recommendations to take shelter in your home because a home has so many permeable surfaces through which gases can move.
Kilburn added that he is convinced exposure to one or two spikes of hydrogen sulphide can permanently damage the brain.
Oscar Steiner, one of the organizers of the sour gas tour, said he wanted Kilburn to speak to Albertans because it's crucial they understand the dangers presented by the current massive exploration for sour gas.
"It's proliferated in the last several years since the easier and less sour reserves have been depleted."
hbrooymans@thejournal.canwest.com
© The Edmonton Journal 2008
Shaun Polczer
Calgary Herald; Canwest News Service
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Calgary - Alberta's oilsands industry faces a natural gas shortage by 2030 without new energy sources to offset gas use in oilsands expansions, the head of nuclear power giant Areva Canada Inc. said Monday.
Speaking in Calgary, Areva CEO Armand Laferrere said continued oilsands development would consume virtually all of Canada's current natural gas supply -- some 92 per cent -- by 2030.
"You need to diversify," he said in the sidelines of the Canadian Energy Research Institute's natural gas conference.
"Natural gas will be part of it, but you need also to have other sources of energy and nuclear -- being competitive and being entirely greenhouse gas free -- seems to me to be an obvious part of it."
According to Bill Gwozd, a natural gas supply consultant with Ziff Energy Group in Calgary, growing natural gas demand within Alberta will more than outstrip the available supply by 2028.
Demand from all sources in the province -- including residential heating, electricity generation and industrial use -- is currently about 3.5 billion cubic feet (bcf) per day, a figure that is expected to rise to 6.8 bcf per day over the next two decades.
Over the same period Alberta's natural gas production is expected to fall from 13 bcf per day in 2007 to 6.7 bcf per day in 2028. Without the proposed Mackenzie Valley pipeline, Alberta would be forced to import costly liquefied natural gas (LNG) or sharply curtail gas exports that account for a fifth of U.S. supplies.
If predictions of a shortage bear out, oilsands projects would either be forced to shut down or switch to alternative fuels to generate the heat needed to produce steam, Gwozd suggested.
"We're in a very delicate balance," he said. "That gets into priorities, whether it's more important to run our Nintendos, cellphones and laptops than have enough gas to produce oil for valuable export markets.
"It's just shock and awe that there's no (government) policy. I'm surprised nobody cares."
But Bob Dunbar, an oilsands consultant with Strategy West Inc., said Areva's numbers fail to account for efficiency improvements that are bound to occur between now and 2030.
Several projects underway are trying to circumvent the need for gas to generate steam in thermal operations.
"It makes the assumption that gas intensity for the industry will continue the way it is," he said. "The industry knows natural gas is in short supply and they are looking at alternatives. ... Nuclear is one of them."
Already, several operators are looking at ways to reduce or curtail natural gas use in their oilsands operations.
OPTI Canada and Nexen Inc. are set to begin production at Long Lake, which uses coke gasification to provide the fuel needed to fire the central upgrading unit.
Other companies such as Petrobank Inc. have devised an in-situ "fire flood" that uses virtually no gas or water to produce partially upgraded oil.
The company's Whitesands demonstration has been up and running for more than 18 months and in late 2007 the company proposed the 100,000-barrel-per-day (bpd) May River expansion.
Later this year, it plans to lay the groundwork for a 50/50 joint venture with Duvernay Oil Corp. using the proprietary technology known as toe-to-heel air injection or THAI.
"We've always said the existing SAGD (steam assisted gravity drainage) technology is unsustainable," said Petrobank CEO John Wright. "Steam isn't the best way to make oil. This isn't news -- everyone has known this forever.
"I don't know what their solution is. I just know what ours is, and it's really quite simple."
© The Edmonton Journal 2008
The Edmonton Sun
February 26, 2008
Struck by a spate of rare cancers they believe are tied to oilsands pollution, First Nations residents plan to rally Saturday in front of the legislature.
Fort Chipewyan is downstream from the tarsands and environmental protesters have long argued that it is suffering ill effects as a result.
Along with cancer clusters, the community has also been struck by rare auto-immune diseases.
"A recent water study confirmed that the water in Fort Chipewyan had increased levels of arsenic, mercury and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and was not safe for consumption, particularly in the fish eaten by local residents," said Mike Hudema, with Greenpeace.
Last week, the chiefs of treaty areas six, seven and eight unanimously approved a call to the province to prevent new oilsands developments until the consequences can be determined through a watershed management and resource development plan.
Fort Chipweyan's Chief Allan Adam said, "Thresholds have to be put in place that will protect ecosystem and human health, along with the well-being of our land."
Saturday's rally is set for 1 p.m.
By Jeremy Loome, Legislature Bureau
The Edmonton Sun
February 26, 2008
The Alberta government has already decided it will ignore a request from oil companies and other environmental stewards to freeze land development lease sales in a portion of the oilsands, despite saying it won't make a decision until later this year, sources have told Sun Media.
The Cumulative Environmental Management Association wrote to various government deputy ministers Jan. 11 and asked for the freeze in an area directly impacting the Athabasca River, noting that the pace of lease sales by the government endangers its efforts to develop new conservation areas in the region before 2011.
CEMA's membership includes most of the oil companies operating in the region, along with other interested parties like the Pembina Institute and neighbouring First Nations. The letter wasn't unanimous, with Syncrude abstaining from a vote and three other companies - Encana, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd and OPTI/Nexen - opposed.
No Bitumen Guarantee
The letter, signed on the members' behalf by CEMA president Randall Barrett, said that "once an area is leased, fragmentation of the forest by exploration activity disturbance is likely. Although the sale of the leases does not guarantee that commercial bitumen production will occur in that specific location, it does open the door to that possibility and the accompanying ecological disturbance."
CEMA, which has been cited by the government as a source for planning future conservation areas and includes government departments among its members, asked for a response within a week. It got none, a government source told Sun Media. But in a meeting between several government departments just after the letter was received, an agreement was reached that the request would be rejected.
The source could not confirm whether that decision was election-related, but did say that "there was a concern that this could be capitalized on as an anti-environmental position."
Yesterday in Calgary, Premier Ed Stelmach said the government hasn't decided yet how to respond to the letter - although on several occasions after it was received by the government, Stelmach said publicly that the government would not "touch the brakes" on oilsands development, suggesting the decision has already been made.
"All recommendations that come forward we take seriously," he said. "Even if there wasn't a request to hold back any of the leases, we would be looking at leases if it extends beyond what we think, what environment thinks, is the most appropriate level of emissions in that area," he said.
Asked by reporters whether he would still repeat his opposition to "touching the brake" on oilsands development, Stelmach instead said that "governments do not control the economy."
Alberta Liberal Leader Kevin Taft said the government's response to CEMA's request - even if it officially hasn't made one yet - speaks volumes.
"I don't know how far out of touch Ed Stelmach could be, but it's pretty far when you have a majority of oilsands companies, the Indian chiefs, the city council of Fort McMurray and all kinds of others saying 'put on the brakes' and Ed Stelmach isn't listening," he said. "The guy's out of touch."
The Pembina Institute's Dan Woynillowicz said the government has fallen into a pattern of ignoring good advice when it thinks the economy might be impacted.
"What we've seen of late is that they certainly like to consult with Albertans and consult with stakeholders and yet there's this disturbing trend of the government then not listening to that advice," he said.
Dawn Walton and Katherine O'Neill
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
February 26, 2008
Calgary, Edmonton — Alberta Progressive Conservative Leader Ed Stelmach has been steadfast about not putting the brakes on oil sands development, but in a surprising about-face in the midst of a provincial election campaign, he suggested yesterday that environmental policy may trump economics.
"Environment takes precedence over the economy," Mr. Stelmach told reporters in Calgary, responding to questions about future expansion in the oil sands north of Fort McMurray.
Still, he warned that government should not step in to "control the economy" and rustled up the image of the still-not-forgotten national energy program implemented by Pierre Trudeau's federal Liberal government in 1980, which drove up interest rates and drove out investment.
"We're not going back to those dark days," said Mr. Stelmach, reiterating his party's environmental plan to cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 14 per cent from 2005 levels by 2050. "Our plan is achievable. It's realistic. It's fiscally responsible."
Renata D'Aliesio, Calgary Herald, Jason Markusoff,
The Calgary Herald; The Edmonton Journal
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Edmonton - Conservative Leader Ed Stelmach signalled Monday he'll ignore a call from some of Canada's largest energy companies to control expansion in the oilsands to protect fragile lands. He also brushed aside a plea from the province's aboriginal chiefs to halt approval of new projects.
Stelmach, who famously said he doesn't believe in "touching the brake" on development, dismissed as preliminary a call for an immediate suspension of government land-lease sales in three massive environmentally sensitive swaths of northern Alberta.
The call, sent to the province less than three weeks before the election began, comes from Environment Canada and several oilsands companies, including Petro-Canada, Imperial Oil and Suncor Energy.
While other oilsands giants disagree with the call, Stelmach said he'll wait until recommendations from a roundtable in June, when the group is expected to call more firmly for the province to protect those three oilsands areas.
In the meantime, Stelmach said his province's own air- and water-quality studies will take precedence.
"The most important thing is balancing the growth in Fort McMurray with environment," said the premier as he campaigned in Calgary.
The letter came from the 48-member Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA) representing industry, government and aboriginals. It was created to advise the province on managing the environmental impacts of the oilsands.
No project currently underway or in the known lineup of multibillion-dollar industry proposals would be touched, noted CEMA spokesman Corey Hobbs.
The proposal recognizes that time is running out for preserving tracts of the Municipal District of Wood Buffalo's boreal forest because mineral rights to 71 per cent of its 68,454 square kilometres have been sold, Hobbs said.
The three proposed green zones are about eight per cent of the bitumen belt. About half of the total oilsands region has been leased to industry.
The recommended plan, still not unanimous despite years of studies, identifies two preservation zones north of Fort McMurray and one south of the oilsands city, totalling 11,400 square kilometres.
The sites were selected as big natural areas of woods, muskeg and wildlife that are untouched by development because the province has not yet sold rights to the bitumen beneath them.
"It's an opportunity to set aside habitat conservation, right in the Athabasca area, so we thought it was worth pursuing. The final decision, of course, would be up to the government," said Brad Bellows of Suncor.
Not all members involved with CEMA agreed with the request, including heavyweights EnCana and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., which is why the province is waiting to decide until CEMA delivers its full recommendations this summer.
However, the Liberals and NDP said Monday they want a slowdown, adding that the pleas underscore the strain on northern Alberta's environment and people. Both party leaders point to poor planning by the province.
More than $100 billion of projects are now underway or planned for the oil-rich region near Fort McMurray, which boasts the largest petroleum reserves outside of Saudi Arabia. But the rush of investment has put strains on infrastructure, the environment and the labour market.
Former Tory premier Peter Lougheed has urged a phased-in approach to oilsands projects.
Liberal Leader Kevin Taft said a public consensus on the oilsands is clearly building. "The consensus is we need to manage oilsands development better. The Tories have allowed a free-for-all," Taft charged in Edmonton. "This is the biggest industrial development on the planet. We need a plan."
In Edmonton, NDP Leader Brian Mason said his party has always favoured a more regulated pace of development.
"The devastation on water and on the environment is severe," Mason said. "And it's really one of the reasons we think we need to be reforming our economy into a green energy economy."
Environmental proponents said Monday all of the parties are falling short in understanding how the boom is affecting life in every corner of Alberta.
"All the political leaders are talking about symptoms really, but we don't see anyone grasping the root cause," said Simon Dyer of the Pembina Institute, an Alberta environmental think-tank and a member of CEMA.
"The oilsands is the engine that is driving the economy. They are driving inflation. They are driving the lack of workers (and) homelessness."
Aboriginal chiefs are worried, too.
At the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs meeting in Calgary, the chiefs unanimously agreed last week to ask the province for a moratorium on new oilsands projects until they can approve the province's plans to manage water and resource development in the region.
Fort Chipewyan First Nation Chief Allan Adam, who proposed the moratorium, said his and other northern communities are suffering from the region's industrialization.
"When you start getting people dying of cancer and for unknown reasons ... when do you put a stop to it?" Adam asked Monday. "Our health, our water, our traditional way of life is at risk."
Stelmach said he spoke with the chiefs before the campaign about their employment struggles and environmental concerns.
With files from Jon Harding, Calgary Herald, and Archie McLean and Gordon Jaremko, Edmonton Journal
jmarkusoff@thejournal.canwest.com
© The Edmonton Journal 2008
fol-request at masses.tao.ca