Movement Afoot to Ban Oil Sands Import

By April 6, 2008Energy

The desire to destroy U.S. energy security is becoming even stronger among many on the environmental left, as witness this over-the-top essay by the “progressive” writer, Wayne Madsen.

Congress was wise to ban oil drilling in ANWR, one of the most pristine areas on Earth, and it would be equally wise to ban the import of oil from the tar sands of Alberta in Canada. Our Congress also should support efforts by those far-sighted Canadians who are pushing for a moratorium on the further development of Alberta’s tar sands.

Unfortunately, recent reports estimate that Alberta’s tar sands could produce 3.1 million barrels of oil per day by 2015.

That’s a much too tempting opportunity for Canadian businessmen and politicians to line their pockets with increased profits from rising global oil prices by shipping quickly across the border to desperate gas-swilling Americans.

Stop swilling that gas, you crazed Americans!

In any case, appended to Madsen’s column is a good refutation from Mark J. Perry, a professor of finance and economics at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan. Perry reports that Congress has outlawed the Department of Defense from using fuels from the oil sands, a much-underreported story. That’s not all:

California is moving to disallow the use of tar sands oil under a recently approved low-carbon fuels standard sought by environmental groups, and Illinois is among a dozen states also considering such a standard. And Environment Illinois has vowed to challenge any refinery expansion or modification permits that would facilitate greater use of tar sands oil and has asked the Great Lakes state governors to impose such a ban.

The irony is that countries with fast-growing economies such as those in China, Brazil and India are accelerating energy resource development, while resource-rich North America is becoming captive to environmental extremism and continues to restrict access to oil supplies.

This situation points to an inescapable imperative: Congress needs to address the matter, and it should take action to ensure the civilian and military use of Canadian tar sands oil. Our economic and national security depends on it.

Join the discussion 4 Comments

  • Brennan Lloyd says:

    Dearest Richard,

    CO2 is only one of many problems with the oil sands. And even at that the emmisions are nothing to laugh at. 141 million tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2015 isn’t exactly a ha ha to me. But that’s atmospheric **** I mean what are you supposed to do as a normal person? Measure the carbon levels in the air by your house? That **** is invisible. What about the insane tailings ponds visible from outer space. What about one of the largest dams in the world that no one knows about that prevents unheard of ammounts of toxic sludge back from spilling into one of the most essential waterways in alberta. What about the 500 ducks killed THIS WEEK. They died just by landing in them.

  • yonason says:

    The really sickening thing about not drilling in ANWR or off the FL coast, etc., is that we could be largely independent of MidEast oil, and not have to cater to the 12th century whims of the Saudis.

  • Richard Guenther says:

    Oilsands only account for 8% of Canada’s CO2 production (if you are worried about that sort of thing) and Canada accounts for only 2% of the global CO2 production. China adds another Alberta oilsands worth of emissions to its carbon-spewing tally every four weeks so if you really want to do something about CO2 gases, stop buying stuff from China. And if you don’t want to buy oil from our oilsands I hear China is always looking. One medium length pipeline to the BC coast and we are in business again.

Leave a Reply