Tar Sands should be an election issue

04.16.11: In the Toronto Star today by Michael Lewis. Michael seems to understand.


I haven't seen much on this since the campaigning started. Maybe someone can explain it to me...


The articles I have seen indicate I am on a different planet! Other than this article, no one is focusing on the tar sands since the debate.
Maybe it is time to capitulate, as our time appears to be wasted thinking we can change the election outcome (replacing Harper).


Harper is the man. 
The average Canadian deserves him ... and Peter Kent's 'ethical' crude. 


Is it time to consider other things ... golf comes to mind? 

04.04.11: In the New York Times Sunday - NO to new tar sands pipeline. 
The council of Canadians also reported the article with more details.


Food & Water Watch (USA based environmentalist group) also speaks out about the real problems it will bring. 


I must be missing something that most people are aware of. 


Canada's tar sands are tremendously important to Canadians ... right? 
We are sitting on a gold mine and have a lot of wealthy people keen and eager to develop the oil for export. They understand how beneficial this business is to Canadians.
Without it, we would not survive in this global economy ... correct?


Or is it the case of Harper satisfying a lot of people who will reward him after he leaves politics (did someone say he was leaving??).


Greenpeace is very good at identifying negative impact of tar sands development:
1. open pit mines scorching the earth
2. the process uses more water than a city of 2 million people
3. 36 million tonnes of CO2 a day
4. toxic lakes leak more than 11 million litres a day
5. The EPA estimates 82% more GGEs than conventional crude production


More videos explaining the devastating impact: 
These two are very informative:
1. What are the tar sands?
2. What is the impact of the tar sands on the climate (Dr Andrew Weaver)? 


The Council of Canadians is also speaking out on this subject. Apparently, Harper is going ahead with another contempt of parliament initiative.   


It really amazes me there isn't a powerful group involved with deterring this environment irreparable destruction. Perhaps Greenpeace needs more significant (benevolent) support ...


I can understand the USA need for their pipeline from northern Alberta and their total disregard for our environmental impact...dramatically reduces their dependency on middle east oil.


While it may prove beneficial that americans become concerned about pipeline leaks, in my opinion it will not deter them. Even serious environmental impact won't deter them.


As with any large country running out of resources, the USA will exploit whoever they can to ensure their continued drain on natural resources, before understanding the importance of the word "renewable".


It sure would be helpful, in a federal election, if there was real benefit in promoting preservation of our environment for future generations!


If none of our three major parties use this as a major platform in this election, again I will be disappointed in our political system!