Northern BC economy - oil and gas?

Not with any document, no. I read it in a newsletter from the then Ocean Industries BC–not sure if they’ve changed their name since that time. Assuming they didn’t change the percentages to suit their cause, I trust that that number is correct.

[quote=“eccentric”]
Not with any document, no. I read it in a newsletter from the then Ocean Industries BC–not sure if they’ve changed their name since that time. Assuming they didn’t change the percentages to suit their cause, I trust that that number is correct. [/quote]

No - I am sure that an oil and gas lobby group would not change the numbers to suit their cause.  :unamused: Ocean Industries was formed by the merge of the Pacific Coast Offshore Oil and Gas Assn and the Pacifiic Offshore Energy Assn - so I am sure they are completely unbiased.

So, is Bob Payne still the Vice Chair of OIBC?

Seriously, eccentric, if you actually want answers - there are truckloads of studies out there. They are not hard to find - they are just highly technical and hard to read. What is hard to find are readable documents that are not utterly biased one way or the other.

Two other things to consider in your arguments:

• Oil sands pollution is 3 times that of regular drilling.

• Saskatchewan has more oil sands than Alberta.

While recovering this oil adds to our economy, it completely trashes Kyoto protocols. (Yes, I know, Harper is ignoring this).

My biggest question is: How can we address pollution when most of our technologies cause it?

Somehow we must address this dichotomy.

Yea, I know the history. I see your point about them being a lobby group, but they’re not served by changing the numbers. That would make them all liars and the numbers are very easy to check. Since they’re a lobby group, I went with a percentage–something that can’t just be changed.

Plus, 2% isn’t necessarily a small amount–especially when we look at how that 2% is spilled. When there is an accidental spill, it certainly seems to do much more harm than the other 98%. So yea–not arguing one way or the other.

here we go with incorrect facts about oilsands again. 

to address your first statement, oilsands extraction is does NOT create more pollution then driilling of oil, what you are thinking of is the washing and recovery process.  in fact, steam injection oilsands extraction (the new era in the tarsands) is less harmfull then conventional drilling.

and the great story we all hear about how saskatchewan found the largest deposit in the world.  wrong.  a deposit in the shape of a teardrop has been found that runs from northern alberta into the eastern end of saskatchewan has been discovered, but contrary to popular belief, the bulk of it is in fact in alberta

[quote=“rollins”]
to address your first statement, oilsands extraction is does NOT create more pollution then driilling of oil, what you are thinking of is the washing and recovery process.  in fact, steam injection oilsands extraction (the new era in the tarsands) is less harmfull then conventional drilling. [/quote]

Any idea how much energy it takes to generate that much steam? How is that energy generated?

My - very limited - understanding of the oil sands extraction process is that it ** takes more energy** than it generates.

Do you have any info on that?

Oil dropped under $50 on Weds. Tick tock.
77 cent dollar. Wholesale prices up, retail prices down.
Perfect Storm is brewing.