Oil-besotted place:Just a cyclist living here

[shootingstar]

Glad to hear Owlie that your alma mater may have shut down that business proposal for fracking on your university's farm.

Hope you find your dream electric assisted velomobile, smilingcat. Can't be that far off in the future.

Tar sands oil processing takes alot more energy and equipment to extract and then left with the residual stuff, that's not oil.

Dearie is also critical of oil field gas flaring-- more pollutants in the air.

In our city, the cycling group has received funding from..the occasional oil company here and there. People / hard core cyclists don't want to discuss it alot.

Well, I guess we could rant on about 'green-washing'. If the companies really wanted to be more "ethical", then fund research for alternative energy sources/projects ..which some of them are.

The city here only picks up stuff for recycling from ....single family dwellings. It is a city of 1+ million people and growing rapidly. The city admits it's abit behind and trying to step on this matter. All condo buildings at this time must use private companies for a fee if they want a recycling program. OUr building right now can't afford it..we have other pressing things that must be fixed.

[NbyNW]

My understanding of the situation with the oil sands is, they are determined to develop that resource with or without new pipelines. It's naive to think that shutting down Keystone XL will stop oil sands development. We are not Canada's only customer. They will just have to find alternative delivery methods, which are less efficient, and different markets, most likely across the Pacific. They don't have the capacity to refine in northern Alberta, and they would have to import more labor. The thought of Fort MacMurray growing any larger in order to build and staff new refineries is horrifying to me, but they are willing to consider that.

For my part I feel that we are being forced to choose between an array of evils ... I would rather see jobs go to communities where refining capacity already exists, rather than see those communities have to suffer economically and see those jobs go up north.

In the US we have gotten minimal coverage of another pipeline proposal known as Northern Gateway. This would enable them to ship bitumen to China. The proposed route is also going through some sensitive areas in B.C. They have had to extend the public comment period because of tons of environmental concern, but the pipe company is beginning to get buy-in from First Nations.

We need to remember that this is a global issue.

[shootingstar]

My understanding of the situation with the oil sands is, they are determined to develop that resource with or without new pipelines. It's naive to think that shutting down Keystone XL will stop oil sands development. We are not Canada's only customer. They will just have to find alternative delivery methods, which are less efficient, and different markets, most likely across the Pacific. They don't have the capacity to refine in northern Alberta, and they would have to import more labor. The thought of Fort MacMurray growing any larger in order to build and staff new refineries is horrifying to me, but they are willing to consider that.

For my part I feel that we are being forced to choose between an array of evils ... I would rather see jobs go to communities where refining capacity already exists, rather than see those communities have to suffer economically and see those jobs go up north.

In the US we have gotten minimal coverage of another pipeline proposal known as Northern Gateway. This would enable them to ship bitumen to China. The proposed route is also going through some sensitive areas in B.C. They have had to extend the public comment period because of tons of environmental concern, but the pipe company is beginning to get buy-in from First Nations.

We need to remember that this is a global issue.

The northern part of British Columbia has some gorgeous virgin forest areas. There is cultural divide in thinking /attitudes between British Columbians and Albertans.

Lest, this whole north of the U.S. border topic seems too remote to some TE members here....maybe I should turn the topic broader to include anyone here who lives in Texas (how about North Dakota where there seems to be oil related work ramping up):

So how is cycling infrastructure, cycling issues viewed in Texas? Does Texan economy continue to be in the grip of the oil/energy industry/barons?

My partner is actually presenting at the Bike Texas Summit early this Feb. in San Antonio. When I first heard of this I said to him: "You are perfect for this, as a Canadian cycling advocate who used to work in the oil industry up in Canada".

True, he did make various biz trips to Texas (contracts work) at that time in life to deal with oil industry counterparts.

[OakLeaf]

The problem for Ohio is that it's a rust-belt state, and it's being sold as a way to bring jobs back to the region.

Fixed that for ya. The reality is it will bring maybe a dozen permanent jobs to the entire state - a fair number of very short term jobs will come in, but almost all of those will be done by itinerant workers, so the temporary jobs benefits to Ohio will be in the form of hotel maids, fast food workers, and prostitutes. If there were money to fix the roads after the drilling crews leave, then it might bring road crews in for a few more temporary jobs, but we've already seen from pipeline installations that there's no money to repair the road damage.

We are not Canada's only customer.

We're not even the customer in mind. The point of Keystone XL is to get the oil to the Gulf of Mexico refineries, so that it can go onto tankers for export to China without having to cross the Rocky Mountains. None of it is intended for the USA in any event. Look it up...

[NbyNW]

We're not even the customer in mind. The point of Keystone XL is to get the oil to the Gulf of Mexico refineries, so that it can go onto tankers for export to China without having to cross the Rocky Mountains. None of it is intended for the USA in any event. Look it up...

I was not referring to refined petroleum product in my post. I was talking about the transport and refining of crude bitumen, which Alberta currently does not have the capacity to do. But we do have capacity in the gulf states. There IS money and jobs (many of them probably already existing, rather than new) in that. Would you like to see those jobs go abroad?

And yes, I'm perfectly aware that there is a great deal of debate and confusion as to what Keystone XL represents in terms of revenue and jobs, be the existing or new, temporary or long-term.

[OakLeaf]

Would you like to see those jobs go abroad?

No, I'd like to see them replaced and enhanced by clean jobs - sustainable energy and, not incidentally, family planning. Jobs vs. environment is a fallacy that's been used very effectively by some industries, but it's completely false. There is actually the potential for many more and more permanent jobs in sustainable energy than in resource extraction.

As the old adage goes, "The trouble is, every time a forest falls, the GDP goes up. With every oil spill, the GDP goes up. Every time a cancer patient is diagnosed, the GDP goes up. Is this how we measure economic progress? Economists must learn to subtract."

[NbyNW]

No, I'd like to see them replaced and enhanced by clean jobs - sustainable energy and, not incidentally, family planning. Jobs vs. environment is a fallacy that's been used very effectively by some industries, but it's completely false. There is actually the potential for many more and more permanent jobs in sustainable energy than in resource extraction.

As the old adage goes, "The trouble is, every time a forest falls, the GDP goes up. With every oil spill, the GDP goes up. Every time a cancer patient is diagnosed, the GDP goes up. Is this how we measure economic progress? Economists must learn to subtract."

I agree with the sentiment but I think the issues are very, very complex. The need to move away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy sources is a decades old conversation. At minimum back to the oil embargo of the early 70's. So why haven't we been able to solve this problem in the intervening decades? Is it too hard of an engineering problem? Do we simply lack the political will? Can we have our cake and eat it too, or are we going to have to make some difficult decisions?

I have yet to hear of a magic switch we can flip to set us on the right track to sustainability.

[lph]

We haven't reached the tipping point. I've just read "The tipping Point", can you tell?

Seriously, I'm convinced it will happen, because it has to happen. I hope it will happen before it has to, because then we have a chance of "controlling" the situation, or at least adapting to it without too much upheaval. In the meantime I think every step in the right direction is a step towards the tipping point, whether it's a small personal step or a big step involving many people.

And there's no doubt that it will cost, in terms of unpopular and difficult decisions. But we are supremely adaptable as a species.

And if you all think this sounds like a lot of hot air, it's because I don't know anything about the specifics of the situation you're discussing so I'm theorizing freely