Skip to comments.Despoiling Tar Pits?
Posted on 07/12/2006 8:28:24 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The Washington Post is wailing about the environmental ruination of that great ecological wonder, the Canadian tar sands.
Canada's Athabasca Basin holds more hydrocarbons (oil) than anyplace else in the world. It has a huge patch of tarry goo, the remains of a once-vast inland lake, spotted amongst 40,000 square miles of jack pine and black spruce growing amid mosquito-rich swamps. The same evergreen-and-swamp vista extends in a broad band for more than 2000 miles, from the Rocky Mountains in the west to the shores of Newfoundland and Nova Scotia on the Atlantic coast.
The Athabasca's population density is less than 4 people per square mile.
The oil used to pool along the banks of the Athabasca River, where the Indians smeared it to waterproof the seams of their birch-bark canoes.
Today, the Athabasca is the world's best hope to bridge the gap between today's fossil-powered energy system and the energy system of tomorrow, be it nuclear, solar, fusion or something not yet tried.
The Post doesn't want any bridge. Its front page on May 31 headlined "Canada Pays Environmentally for U.S. Oil Thirst: Huge Mines Rapidly Draining Rivers, Cutting Into Forests, Boosting Emissions." Author Doug Struck quotes Elsie Fabian, an elder in an Indian community who says, "The river used to be blue. Now it's brown. . .The air is bad." She complains that she can see steam from a strip mine 10 miles away.
"Giant machines cleave the earth into a cratered moonscape," writes Struck, who says eco-groups are calling for a moratorium on the expansion of the tar sands oil production.
Northern Canada, of course, has lots of water. The whole region is covered with rivers, lakes and swamps. The oil companies say they re-use their water up to 18 times, and then store it in lagoons-though they've yet to figure out how to treat the wastewater other than just letting it evaporate.
They're required to restore the "moonscape" after they get the oil out of the sands.
Indian chief Jim Boucher says his people are creating native-owned companies to provide trucking, catering and other services to the oil companies. Boucher says "the hunting, trapping, fishing is gone." That may be true right around Ft. McMurray, but if his Indians are really keen on hunting and trapping instead of paychecks, there are thousands of square miles of Canadian wilderness not far away.
The tar sands development is "putting unacceptable pressure on the environment," says Julia Langer, of World Wildlife Fund-Canada.
That's pretty much what we heard from the California Wilderness Coalition when it sued to stop a federally approved geothermal power project at Medicine Lake in northeastern California two years ago. The two proposed power plants would impact only 15 acres each, and would produce no greenhouse gases. Remember, it's the eco-activists who tell us greenhouse gases are the most important environmental calamity in the world. Nor would the geothermal plants produce any radioactive wastes. The plants would even feed into the existing Bonneville power grid without any extensive new transmission lines.
If the activists and their media allies are protesting the Alberta tar sands and California's Medicine Lake geothermal plants, what option does society have left -- short of mud huts and darkness?
We'll just have to take the advice of Patrick Moore, one of the original Greenpeace co-founders, who now says, "Build safe nuclear power plants and reprocess their fuel."
That would leave the Athabasca Basin to the blackflies, the mosquitoes, and whatever Indians still want to track and shoot the moose. Good luck to them and the World Wildlife Fund-which we assume will relocate its headquarters from chic Toronto to the tarry banks of the irreplaceable Athabasca.
Dennis T. Avery is a senior fellow for Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C. and is the Director for Center for Global Food Issues (www.cgfi.org). He was formerly a senior analyst for the Department of State.
All I know is that we should live in caves, forage for food off the forest floor and die at age 25. Anything more than that would despoil the Earth.
But that wouldn't support the sacred rites of the G-ddess Abor.
With out Abor-tions, surely Earth would be destroyed by asteroids, as happened before abortions became common.
Just imagine if that oily, gooey mess had been made by a massive oil spill. We would be spending trillions of dollars to clean up every last drop of it.
The more I see and hear of environmentalists, the more sure I become that they are simply idiots.
Just finished reading Michener's novel "Journey" which details the attempt by a lot of desperate people to reach the Klondike gold rush area by going west through Canada instead of along the coast from Seattle. Apparently a few intrepid (stupid) would-be millionaires tried to traverse the Athabascan swamps and ended up attacked so relentlessly by the main game in the area--giant swarms of mosquitos--that they committed suicide for relief. Not an inviting area for enjoying nature, apparently. The native in the area traveled through the area to get to trading posts but they were protected by smelly ointments of some type. They believed the larvae were nutritious, however. Yeah, that sounds like something we want to preserve in its pristine condition.
And did God do an environmental impact study before saying "Let there be light"? What happened to all that pristine darkness?
As the some guys would say on the forum.
I'd hit it.
Your decription sounds like it is prime for using as a resource.
Maybe workers would have to wear anti skeeter gear.
Ack we have tons this year due to a very very wet year and they have to be on the top 10 list of irratating pests.
In other news I was shocked to get a membership application in the snail mail to join the Seirra Club. Nooo Thanks.
Wait until you get an invitation to join AARP. That's unwelcome, for more than political reasons.
The skeeters here are not too bad but infected with West Nile apparently. Good luck.
Why can't we mine the mosquitoes? Lots of biomass that nobody would care about being lost.
Not to be a misogynist, but WHAT IS IT ABOUT FEMALE JOURNALISTS?
Are 99% flaming Socialists?
It is reported that Nazi Germany was propped quite surprisingly by the fairer sex too.
Women, as a matter of observed fact, seem to have a predeliction to inane Socialist policy, no doubt because of their maternal unconditional acceptance and nurturing of children.
Women voters seem to prefer anti-American Democrats.
Men, get your gal in line!
Just a joke honey; don't hit me with that vase.
When all the gas is gone burn an environmentalist!
When that one runs out burn another.
What thread were you trying to reply to? It sounds interesting.
I'd dress in a mosquito suit and go out there with a Hoover vacuum cleaner.
As my husband often says, "protein is protein". Just don't have an Exxon Valdez anywhere near me. ;o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.