What’s the Real Story Behind the Enbridge Pipeline?
With the spotlight shining on clean energy, the stage has been set for the U.S. to rid itself of a harmful addiction to foreign oil. The stars are aligned and the cards have been dealt. Soon we’ll have kicked the dirty habit, right?
Sarah Palin seems to think so. Perhaps you’ll remember her proposal to tap the natural gas supply found under the pristine Alaskan wilderness. As Governor of Alaska she “fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history . . . a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.”
While it may be true that part of America’s energy independence lies under Alaskan soil, there’s more to the story than simply drilling for oil. Drilling for Alaskan oil may be even dirtier than it seems.
Alaska’s 35 trillion feet of natural gas could be used to wean the U.S. from our mother in the Middle East, but that isn’t quite what the authors of the pipeline have waiting on the next page. Much of the natural gas harvested in Alaska would be used to expand the oil sand (tar sand) projects in Alberta, Canada. Such expansion of the tar sands projects would bring the finished tar sands product to our front doors. Now what’s wrong with that? Isn’t tar sand a way out of our dependency?
“The tar sands of Canada constitute one of our planet’s greatest threats. They are a double-barreled threat. First, producing oil from tar sands emits two-to-three times the global warming pollution of conventional oil. But the process also diminishes one of the best carbon-reduction tools on the planet: Canada’s Boreal Forest,” said Dr. James Hansen of Columbia University.
The Alberta tar sands project has gained the moniker “the most destructive project on earth.” Al Gore stated that “For every barrel of oil they extract there, they have to use enough natural gas to heat a family’s home for four days.” Tar Sands operations currently use about .6 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day. By 2012, that level could rise to 2 billion cubic feet a day. I guess that it would be important for them (the Big Oil companies who are harvesting oil from the tar sands) to have a reliable ‘domestic’ source of natural gas. It would certainly save them a few bucks.
It isn’t simply the horrendous amounts of natural gas consumed that is disturbing about the tar sands projects. Most of the tar sands rest peacefully under Canada’s Boreal Forest, the world’s largest intact forest. Alberta’s oil sands underlie one-fifth of the province, and it is possible that oil sand exploitation could affect an area 40 times larger than the mine-able area.
All is not what it seems to be. A new docking of very large LNG tankers for discharge on the east coast puts LNG into the Midwest and southern states far cheaper and is probably more dependable than is a pipeline from Alaska.
The Boreal forests as we know them are doomed. Climate change investigations which started seriously about 10 years ago determined early on the Boreal forests were among the earliest losses we will identify. This, with or without the help of industry.
Add to this the thaw of the tundra in the arctic. This will release more CO2 into the atmosphere than all the fossil fuels being burned. It will be a major dump. One has to question if we can survive at all.
“A new docking of very large LNG tankers for discharge on the east coast puts LNG into the Midwest and southern states far cheaper and is probably more dependable than is a pipeline from Alaska”
I would love to see your back-up/spreadsheets. As director of a large international energy concern, we have invested millions of dollars in research, engineering studies and trading strategies that show the contrary.
Let me say this, you at least attempt to sound sane in your story, which is a step up from most environmentalists. But you lost me when you quoted Jim Hansen. That guy is a bigger liar than Al Gore. And that is saying something.
Like Gore, whatever Hansen says, just think the exact opposite is true, and you will be correct every single time.
As for Alaska’s “pristine” lands, have you ever SEEN ANWAR? I’m talking about where we should be drilling for oil? This area is best described as a hell hole! It’s barely inhabitable tundra in the long winter, and a mosquito infested swamp in the summer.
ANWAR is the size of the state of South Carolina. The part where the oil (and a lot of natural gas too) is about the size of DFW airport. (Or LAX)
If the environmental zealots, the warmmongers would settle down and shut up, we have plenty of CLEAN ways to get oil to supply America’s needs for the next couple of hundred years. IN AMERICA!
And make no mistake about it, we will always use oil for much of our energy, as well as it’s many other uses.
The sand tar is a red herring, and just another way to try to do whatever it is the loons are trying to do. At this point it’s hard to even tell what their goals are any more. Other than trying to destroy America and our way of life.
We have oil and natural gas all over America. More oil than all of the middle east, and more natural gas than all of the world’s oil supplies.
If we were smart, instead of chasing ridiculous non-productive technology, we’d have converted a considerable amount of our cars and trucks to run compressed natural gas. The technology to do this is only 100 years old! And it is better now that we have the latest computer engine management systems.
I salute Governor Palin. She’s one of the few out there that gets it. She’s pro-American and pro-progress! Totally the opposite from the so-called “president” we have now!