Terry Glavin: Canada sells the oilsands to China. Then complains about foreign interference! | MY COMMENT

Canada sells the oilsands to China. Then complains about foreign interference! — National Post
By:Terry Glavin  January 13, 2012

MY COMMENT — Must it always be about extreme positions? Why must it be only about eco-terrorists or big business? Can’t Canada, one of the most developed countries on Earth, extract this resource AND do it in the least harmful way to the environment? Of course we can!

We have world-class technology available now to reduce the impact on the environment, we have a majority government with the necessary expertise to enact legislation to promote more sustainable development and we have ever more billions of dollars being invested by the world’s most powerful countries.

It’s so simple. The government calls a meeting of all stakeholders, who decide upon the “best practices” available, enact legislation with teeth to that effect and invite anyone who doesn’t want to follow that legislation to leave Canada.

Transporting crude oil by pipeline and supertanker is the absolute worst-case scenario. There will be a spill on Canada’s pristine coastline and eventually in BC’s scenic interior.

A better plan from an environmental viewpoint, is to merely ship the raw tar sands product, in the same way that coal has been transported to Asia from BC and Alberta, for decades, with no problems.

Another way that will give Western Canada the opportunity for value-added product (more jobs) is to highly-refine the crude oil into a very clean, fully refined, low-toxicity product and ship it from near Vancouver — a much safer waterway than Kitimat.

In addition to this, tar sands can be highly-refined into ethane gas and sent to Kitimat by a clean gas pipeline and picked up by LNG tanker. LNG tankers are truly innocuous, compared to crude oil tankers. In case of leak, practically zero deaths of ocean life and little, if any destroyed land environment as would be the case with a crude oil spill, LNG merely evaporates into the air, unless ignited — so keep the gas pipeline 5 km back from any populated areas or highway/railway.

See, it’s simple. We merely need a better plan – than the one presently under consideration!

David Suzuki: Screw the Environment! The Pipeline Will Hurt Our Economy | MY COMMENT

David Suzuki: Screw the Environment! The Pipeline Will Hurt Our Economy — The Huffington Post – Canada
By: Dr. David Suzuki  January 12, 2012

MY COMMENT — Dr. Suzuki easily destroys the house of cards arguments put up by some people and corporatio­ns supporting both the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and the Keystone XL pipeline.

There are so many billions of dollars invested in the tar sands now and much of it has been invested by China, the U.S. and others, that there is no going back now. The tar-sands will be extracted every day for decades, unless the price of oil drops below the tar-sands extraction price.

My concern is a spill over pristine land or sea. For that reason, an oil pipeline with supertanke­rs is out of the question. If tar sands product is going to be exported to China (it will be, trust me on this) an oil pipeline and supertanke­rs are the absolute worst way to go. What makes way more sense is to highly upgrade the tar sand material to highly-ref­ined ethane and send it to Kitimat by high-press­ure gas pipeline. LNG tankers are innocuous compared to crude oil tankers! In case of accident, ethane evaporates (unless ignited) into the air instead of destroying thousands of miles of coastline and countless sea-life.

Even exporting the raw tar-sand itself — delivered by rail to the port and carried inside bulk carrier ships (the same way as coal is exported every day in BC) is light-year­s better than shipping crude oil!!

Exporting crude to China from Kitimat, really is the worst option of all the available choices.

———————————————————————————————————-

My second comment on this same article by Dr. Suzuki:

OPEC could care less about Canada’s tar sands oil, or any other oil, anywhere. Regular readers of Middle Eastern newspapers and Middle East oil industry periodical­s know that all the oil OPEC produces every day is already pre-sold — and a year-long waiting list is in place for any extra oil that may become available due to delivery cancellati­on or additions to supply from bulk oil stockpiles there.

Note­: Not all OPEC countries are based in the Middle East, but Saudi Arabia produces about half of OPEC’s total.

Middle Eastern oil costs less, requires much less refining and is of higher quality than any oil in the world — except West Texas sweet crude which is the creme-de-la-creme of petroleum. Saudi oil is rated at about the same ‘sweetness­’ as (North Sea) Brent intermedia­te crude oil which is tied with Saudi oil for 2nd place.

China buys 50% of all Saudi oil extracted and they would buy all of it — and a lot more if they could.

There is no competitio­n between Canada and Saudi or other OPEC countries. If a glut suddenly appears due to market conditions­, buyers always line up to purchase the ‘good’ crude as it is often cheaper especially when you factor in refining cost. ‘Sour’ crude sits until the market picks up again.

Here is a huge dump of informatio­n on the Saudi petrochemi­cal industry for you in PDF form;
http://www­.sabic.com­/corporate­/en/binari­es/SABICCo­rporateBro­chure_E_tc­m4-1610.pd­f