The Commerce Times

Jobs vs. the environment: Professionals discuss both sides of the Alberta Oil Sands

When it comes to oil, Canada is largely self-sufficient – but as the recent explosion has demonstrated, this crown jewel may also be an environmental threat to our country.

The Alberta Oil Sands, the second largest source of oil in the world, is one of Canada’s most illustrious and controversial resources, which has the energy industry buzzing.

However, it has others conversing for an entirely different reason. Environmentalists are calling foul on the industry leaders for attempting to expand the project without fully understanding the extent of its potential environmental effects. And on the other side of the spectrum, the business perspective claims it will improve Canada’s ailing economy.

Both sides were discussed at the Public Engagement and Alberta Oil Sands event held at the St. Lawrence Town Hall on Monday June 21. The event was organized and hosted by the fgl Open Global Business Society, a civic forum that focuses on social, cultural and environmental concerns related to global business. The event was kicked off with Tom Huffaker, the Policy and Environment Vice-President of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, where he discussed the many benefits that the oil sands offer.

“Half a million jobs, 120 million dollars in tax revenue per year, and 1.7 trillion dollars in economic activity over the next 25 years,” Huffaker said.

“The oil sands are a huge resource, and make a major contribution to energy security throughout North America.

“It has big economic benefits for Canada.”

Huffaker didn’t disregard the potential environmental consequences in his speech, but said that it was not a threat as much as an “environmental challenge”. Especially, as he said, when there are much larger environmental concerns in North America.

“If we were to double or triple the output of the oil sands without becoming more efficient, we would begin to approach the CO2 emission of the coal fire power plants in the great state of Indiana,” he said.

There has been increasingly scathing criticism on Canada for developing this resource from other parts of the world, addressed Huffaker.

“I would argue that there’s not a country on the planet would not develop this resource if they had it, no matter what parts of Europe who don’t happen to have this resource might say.”

Andrew Nikiforuk, author of “Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent,” contradicted Huffaker’s words and said he did not believe the Alberta Oil Sands should be considered a jewel, especially with the catastrophic oil disaster still occurring in the Gulf of Mexico. He called into question the nature of the resource.

“As Tom mentioned, it is the second largest deposit of hydrocarbons on the planet, but it is not oil,” Nikiforuk said.

“This is bitumen, [which] is a third rate hydrocarbon, extremely heavy, mixed with sand and clay, and it takes brute force to pull it out of the ground and refine it.”

Nikiforuk was also concerned with expanding the project any further and what it would do to the nature of the economy.

“Our dollar goes up and down with the price of oil,” he said, referring to the increasing investment in the oil sands.

Nikiforuk said he is not against the project, but would like to see more regulation occur.

“This is not an issue that public relations can resolve, this is an issue that requires good public policy and we have yet to see that policy emerge at either a national or provincial level,” Nikiforuk said.

“Until that happens, this ugly debate will continue.”

“I would cap production at around 2 million barrels a day,” he continued. “We’re not solving any problems by producing more of this product.”

Nikiforuk was followed by Janet Keeping, President of Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership, who said we need leadership to take us beyond this polarization to find a middle ground.

“It’s not purely an Alberta problem,” she said

Reminiscent of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth,” Dr. Jerry Mitrovica of the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University illustrated the imminent dangers of climate change and what can happen if we don’t reduce carbon emissions. He also spoke on the tug of war that often happens between scientists and economists.

“When people had a concern in the economic structure of North America, particularly in the US, there was very little debate when a trillion dollars was spent in trying to keep that economy afloat,” Mitrovica said.

The Oil Sands Director at the Pembina Institute, Simon Dyer, talked about other environmental concerns; including First Nations land rights, and looks to improve current practices.

“We believe that responsible oil sands development is possible,” Dyer said.

“We also believe that the current approach to oil sands development epitomizes unsustainable development.”