The Sky Is Falling, The Sky Is Falling!

Obama says, NO, but maybe later. It reminded me of this:

Obama is the Keystone Cops, going over a cliff and still never getting his "man".

Poor old "heavy crude" sometimes called "bitumen", it's not as fast flowing as "light, sweet crude", so it's called "dirty". Alberta oil sands have been a huge target of foreign funded attacks by our stupid, greedy "greens".

Interesting to know, Alberta is not the only producer of "heavy crude", even though you wouldn't know it from our far left media/environmentalists.

 Increasing U.S. Dependency on Foreign Crude Oil
Over the past five years, studies of global oil production have consistently predicted that diminishing discoveries of conventional crude oil will cause worldwide oil production to peak and irreversibly decline by the end of the present decade.^{[1], [2], [3], [4], [5]} But heavy hydrocarbons still remain as a largely untapped petroleum resource — heavy crude oil and natural bitumen (also called “tar sands” or “oil sands”) exist in abundance.

Shocking! Conventional oil (1.02 trillion) is ruled by the middle east, and heavy oil (5.6 trillion) is ruled by Canada. Still Obama rejected Canadian oil in favour of middle east oil and even the Venezuela heavy oil. A well hidden fact is that California oil is 51% "heavy crude", but don't expect environmentalists to tell you about that, or to ever protest in the US.

Heavy oil was discovered in California before the turn of the previous century and currently comprises about half of the state’s crude oil production. With this production spread among more than 200 reservoirs, significant infrastructure to access heavy oil is already in place.

Foreign interests are sponsoring Canadian environmental groups to stop the Gateway pipeline. WHY? What's in it for them, except control of our oil without investment in it?

Even the middle east realizes that "heavy crude" has to be looked at.

Middle East oil countries should increase production of heavy oil as oil prices remain higher and improved technology makes it easier, those attending an industry conference in Bahrain were told.

....

Production and refining of heavy crude costs more than recovering and processing light crude. Production of heavy oil from oil sands in Canada’s Alberta province has an estimated break-even point of $35 a barrel, Mirza noted. But Bahrain’s heavy oil could be recovered at a cost of between $8 and $9 a barrel, he said.
Oil prices in recent weeks have fluctuated in a range of $70 to $80 a barrel, which OPEC officials have declared an ideal range.
“Heavy oil will be a savior to the ever-increasing demand for fossil fuels from the developing nations,” Mirza was quoted as saying.

Hello environmentalists, the gig is up. You should go to the middle east and tell them that they need the same environmental controls as Canada has had imposed on them. But they won't because environmentalists are chicken little's, running around in circles, wearing polar bear suits, yelling that the sky is falling, the sky is falling!

Alberta Quiet Now, Soon To Erupt!

Alberta, the "bad boy" for voting Conservative is being battered from all sides because we dare to be productive and create jobs, which in turn creates wealth. I am sick and tired of the NDP and Liberals using us as a whipping boy to incite the masses against our oil sands.

We have one lone NDP MP "environmental" lawyer in Alberta, she only got elected because Conservatives were ticked off with Jaffer. As I drive through that riding to get to work, I see lots of Duncan signs, but I drive through the university area so that is expected. Soon the university students go home and the properties with signs will sit empty. That means the real residents of the riding, not the university students will actually get to determine the results in the riding.

What bothers me about Duncan is that she won because of all the Liberals voting for her instead of their own party. It was a mini Liberal/NDP coalition. That really tells you exactly how "principled" those Liberals are, if they would abandon their own candidate and vote NDP. It also shows you how FAR left the Liberals have drifted. Classical Liberals would be more at home with Conservatives.

Duncan released her report after the standing committee on environment and sustainable development failed to reach a consensus after a two-year study into the effects the oilsands industry has on water in Alberta and the Northwest Territories. During the two-year study, the MPs on the committee heard from 60 witnesses and toured the oilsands around Fort McMurray, Alta. In the end, no report on the committee's findings was issued to the government.

It would be safe to say that Duncan is the first Green candidate to be elected to Parliament. She hates the oil sands, wants to stop the development, and actually thinks Alberta is going to thank her for it. Vote her out. She already has a huge university pension, and if she is re-elected she will get a huge pension paid for by Canadian taxpayers.

Funny how those NDP candidates like Layton and his wife talk about supporting the "poor" and suck up over a million dollars a year in income from taxpayers. Duncan is no different. She wants to retire with two golden pensions that middle class Canadians could not even imagine.

The environmental effects also spill over into the neighbouring jurisdictions of Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories.

The report says additional oilsands projects should not be approved until environmental assessments do a better job of outlining cumulative impacts.

It also recommends Environment Canada dispatch inspectors to Fort McMurray to keep on top of environmental law violations.

Such a monitoring system should be paid for by public and the oilsands industry, Duncan said.

The report released by Liberal members of the committee came to similar conclusions.

Linda Duncan has been working against all the hard working people who have come to Alberta in hopes of getting a good paying job in the oil industry. She has her law degree, those who toil daily in the oil sector do not. She wants to send more people to the unemployment lines, because it won't impact her in any way. It's easy to preach from a golden pension platform, looking down at the peons.

This election, both the NDP and Liberals have come out against the oil sands, even though Iggy stated he would not kill the golden goose.

“Under Stephen Harper, every single Quebecker is sending roughly $75 a year to subsidize dirty fossil fuel producers,” Mr. Layton said at Insertech Angus, a company that trains underemployed young people to rebuild computers from cast-off parts.

“The result of this subsidy is an increase in the greenhouse gases pumped out in Canada and a competitive disadvantage for businesses looking to build clean solutions and the new energy economy,” Mr. Layton said.

He fails to mention the 17 BILLION that Alberta sends to the rest of Canada, 8 BILLION going to Quebec alone. He also fails to mention that oil companies already pay into a research and development fund in Alberta. He came to Alberta and forgot to even mention the oil sands, then he goes to Quebec and slams our province. Hypocrite. Here is an even bigger hypocrite, who told Alberta he would never, never, never ever kill the golden goose and then turns around and proceeds to do just that:

Once again, Canada's most valuable resource and prime job-creator sounds like a temporary case of gas. Two days before, Ignatieff made Alberta's political irrelevance even more obvious when he released his energy policy.

There would be a tanker ban on the West Coast, so forget pipelines and oilsands exports to China -forget, in fact, the province's entire strategy for the future of the oilsands.

The Liberals also plan to institute a national cap-andtrade strategy that would surely suck billions out of Alberta.

To ensure that no coin is overlooked, they would immediately halt an investment-friendly tax break the Conservatives will allow to linger until 2015.

Can you say NEP II??? This is worse than Dion's carbon shaft, this is a clear indication that the NDP and Liberals, with Bloc support are planning to steal from the west to give to the east.

Alberta is quiet now, we have been listening to Layton, Iggy and Duncan closely. We have made our minds up, and will vote Conservative this election, but what the opposition doesn't understand and obviously doesn't care about is that Alberta is simmering. We are stoking the fires right now, waiting for the election results, but we are tired of all opposition parties making us the "bad boys" of Confederation, when we are the ones who are feeding them.

The sickening part is that the opposition think they can continue to stomp on us with their Birkenstock, while sipping their lattes, and calling us knuckle dragging (Fife CTV), rednecked, hillbillies, while taking our taxes from us to support all their socialist programs. Shades of Atlas Shrugged!

Be very careful what you vote for Canada. Our very existence as a country depends on it. Ignore the west if you dare. Join us if you want a strong vibrant country. We will not be stopped by eco-nuts like Duncan Donuts. It is still the wild west, where we believe in the individual, guns, private property and God.

Oil Sands Are Sexy Now!

Well, time for the eco-nuts to go over to Libya and tell Gaddafi to stop bombing oil rigs, it's bad for the environment, don't you know. Suddenly the Alberta oil sands are looking good to the US. Maybe we should tell them to stuff it! We won't, but they should be made to realize that they are not our only customers.

It has taken war in the Middle East to turn the tide of negative public opinion on the oil sands. After four years of beatings from the environmental movement that severely damaged Canada’s international reputation, the oil sands are re-emerging as a secure source of energy in a risky oil world.

New imagery helped a lot. The pileups of bodies in the evening news, victims of Middle East despots firing at their own people to protect their oil wealth, make the tar pits in northern Alberta look like responsible oil in comparison.

Move along little doggies, your time is done, we see you for what you are, and you are anti-commerce, anti-children and anti-intelligence.

David Wilkins, former U.S. ambassador to Canada and now a lobbyist in Washington for the Alberta and Saskatchewan governments, says the mood in the U.S. capital has changed noticeably in the past few weeks.

“People are listening more,” he said in an interview. “People are more focused on the source of energy coming from Canada, the fact that it’s a stable, friendly country.”

I always liked David Wilkins, you could tell he really liked Canadians. What has his replacement been doing? Anyone heard from him? Anyone even know what his name is? Crickets.

The idea of buying oil from irresponsible governments who use oil money to oppress the population is contrary to U.S. values, she said.

In contrast, “Americans see the values of Canada being aligned and have high opinions of the social structure, the environmental track record. And though they see environmental difficulties, they don’t see them out of scale to other sources of oil and they also see that given the size of the resource, the capital and the people involved, that these challenges can be addressed through technology.”

I guess Ezra Levant was right, our oil is ethical oil. How are the eco-nuts going to counter his book "Ethical Oil" now? When you hear that England is going to have blackouts because they are going to rely on wind power, you have to understand that the eco-nuts want us back in caves, freezing to death. They hate the technology that has allowed us to progress beyond being hunter/gatherers. Funny how they are the ones flying around the world protesting man's achievements, while we drudges stay home working and providing for our families.

“It’s the right place, right time for Canadian energy now,” said Mr. Wilkins, in Calgary this week to announce a partnership with Global Public Affairs, a top national government relations firm, and the South Carolina law firm of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, where he runs the public policy and international relations practice.

“Canada has got a lot to brag about, from its financial foundation, how it weathered the recession, to the vast sources of energy it has,” all re-enforcing the energy security message.

The change bodes well for pending legislation. Momentum is shifting in favour of approving the much delayed extension of TransCanada Corp.’s $13-billion Keystone Express pipeline system from the oil sands to the U.S. Gulf Coast. One Washington insider said the line is likely to get the go ahead by December, after the U.S. administration feels critics have been given enough time to vent their views.

As the middle east erupts, Canada sails on a steady course, with PM Harper at it's helm. If an election is caused by the opposition, it will show that they could care less about Canadians. They want power, and if that means a coalition, they will step on voters wishes to make sure they get that power.

NO Pipelines, NO Tankers, NO Social Programs!

BC, land of the free to be hypocritical. Their greenies are protesting a pipeline to Kitimat BC because, well, just because. Okay, they are worried about oil spills from the pipeline. Do they know that a pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver has existed for over 50 years, without a spill?

As a matter of fact, even the far left Tyee, has an article that shows an increase in oil tanker traffic from Vancouver. Do the people living in Vancouver know that a oil pipeline runs under the city? One or two commentators show some common sense:

blackie

There's an appalling lack of knowledge about what that hated pipeline system actually does (and has been doing now for about 50 years), and what would happen in the Lower Mainland if it were suddenly shut down (as so many of you seem to be arguing).

1. It transports crude oil to the one remaining refinery in the Lower Mainland (there used to be four). Shut down the line, and that refinery either closes and lays everyone off, or starts importing oil in tankers (which is how it happened before they built the pipeline.)

2. It transports in batches gasoline, diesel, jet fuel etc -- all refined products -- sold in the Lower Mainland. Shut the system down, and you can put all the cars and the buses up on blocks and get your bicycles out (don't forget the snow tires). The alternative is to ship much much more of that stuff in tankers on the highways -- all the way from Edmonton. Think that's safer?

3. Yes, it ships some crude offshore in tankers, and more of it every year. No tanker spills yet. If Dogwood and First Nations opposed to the Kitimat line succeed (I think they will) then you can expect even more crude (triple, in fact) to come down the line to Vancouver. Why? Hands up all those who think it's a good idea to sell oil only to the US.

I know, you don't want Canada to sell ANY oil to ANYONE. Well, good luck with all those great social programs you like.

Funny how the opposition are yapping about no oil tankers on the west coast when they have been there for years. They also don't want a pipeline to Kitimat because the pipeline might burst or something. It's a plain case of blackmail. The environmentalists and First Nations are blackmailing the oil companies and Canadians by their lawsuits and protests. If they persist, look at what Alberta can do:

We can send it right on down to Seattle or Portland or any other destination that already has existing pipelines. Oh, my goodness, we might even be able to send that tar sands oil to eastern Canada. LOOK, we already have pipelines going to Winnipeg and Ottawa. Yikes how did that happen? Real pipelines sending real oil all across Canada and the US with no big spills. You lefties better get those pipelines shut down tomorrow because it is obviously too dangerous in high density areas. Seriously, shut them down! Stop all oil tankers from docking at the Vancouver and Halifax harbours, NOW!

In Ottawa on Tuesday, a group of environmentalists, first nations and Opposition Members of Parliament called for a West Coast ban on oil tanker traffic. Such a ban would kill the Enbridge project.

Hey lefties don't forget the East Coast too, you don't want to appear to be hypocrites do you? Oh, I forgot the Irvings OWN the east coast and they love blood oil, not Alberta's ethical oil. Talk about a monopoly that should be investigated. Suck it up sweethearts, you are blackmailing Canadian taxpayers, and we will not stand for it anymore. Stop the pipeline if you want, we will send our oil to Seattle, and they can gain the employment benefits, or Billings Montana, then we won't have to deal with BC at all.

NO pipelines, NO tankers, NO social programs!

“But I’ve seen a few that might heat up your Cheerios a little.”

How ethical is this? What an eyesore! Deep gouges in the earth, no trees, tailing ponds, a blight on our earth. A non-renewable resource that is being dug up as fast as people are demanding it! The solution, environmentalists tell us is to stop production. I agree! If people would stop buying it, the companies would not be making obscene profits, and wildlife would not be threatened.
A new book by Ezra Levant called "Ethical Oil" makes the case that Alberta oilsands are the most ethical in the world. Why do environmentalists and greenies pick on Canada? If it's not our seal hunt they are japping about, it's the oilsands. Why have they been quiet about the Gulf oil spill? Why aren't they over in China protesting their coal mines? Why are they quiet about this:


All those pictures are not the Alberta oilsands, it's pictures of mining operations for granite! That very popular, must have kitchen countertop! Granite! It is a non-renewable resource, that companies in the US, Italy, Brazil and India, to name a few, are digging up as fast as they can to meet the ever increasing demand from households and businesses.



That's not the worse of it. Granite is actually dangerous.

“It’s not that all granite is dangerous,” said Stanley Liebert, the quality assurance director at CMT Laboratories in Clifton Park, N.Y., who took radiation measurements at Dr. Sugarman’s house. “But I’ve seen a few that might heat up your Cheerios a little.”

Allegations that granite countertops may emit dangerous levels of radon and radiation have been raised periodically over the past decade, mostly by makers and distributors of competing countertop materials. The Marble Institute of America has said such claims are “ludicrous” because although granite is known to contain uranium and other radioactive materials like thorium and potassium, the amounts in countertops are not enough to pose a health threat.

.....

The E.P.A. recommends taking action if radon gas levels in the home exceeds 4 picocuries per liter of air (a measure of radioactive emission); about the same risk for cancer as smoking a half a pack of cigarettes per day. In Dr. Sugarman’s kitchen, the readings were 100 picocuries per liter. In her basement, where radon readings are expected to be higher because the gas usually seeps into homes from decaying uranium underground, the readings were 6 picocuries per liter.

So, forget granite countertops in my home. I wonder if Suzuki has granite in his homes? How about Green May?

I wonder when the environmentalists are going to start shouting about the radon in granite, it being a non-renewable resource, and how mining granite is killing the environment and destroying the natural habitat? Right..... I'm not holding my breath waiting, I prefer my cheerios cold and safe to eat.