ALERT: Urge President Obama to Say No to Canada's Filthy Tar Sands
Canadian government wants special treatment for the world's dirtiest oil. In first international trip, President Obama must stand strong on clean energy and sufficient climate policies.
TAKE ACTION! On February 19, President Obama travels to Canada on his first presidential international trip, where he will face pressure from the Government of Canada to support production of Alberta tar sands [search] oil. Called oil sands by proponents, tar sands are the very dirtiest of fossil fuels. Producing oil from tar sands emits three times the global warming pollution as conventional oil, requires excessive amounts of energy and fresh water, and destroys huge swaths of ancient boreal forest.
President Barack Obama must be strongly encouraged to stand strong on his new energy economy agenda and commitment to urgently address climate change, and reject entreaties from Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to shelter the dirtiest oil on Earth from global warming regulation. Let the President know how seriously you take climate change, urging him to reject tar sands and support further immediate urgent action in pursuit of sufficient climate change policies. TAKE ACTION!
Comments
I wonder if it is necessary to frame this issue in such anti-Canadian tones. The USA is the number one polluter in almost every single category in the world whereas Canada has led the world in clean energy production. So it's a lot like the pot calling the kettle black for an American to write this the way it is phrased.
For example 'Filthy Canadian Tar Sands' should be 'Canadian Filthy Tar Sands' or 'Filthy Tar Sands in Canada'.
Then 'Canadian government wants special treatment for the world's dirtiest oil.' is misleading. Tar sands REQUIRE special treatment to convert to oil - that is a scientific fact having NOTHING to do with the Canadian government.
BTW: I am against development of the Tar Sands but see no good reason to run down Canadians in the process. You should know that GWB included the Alberta, CANADA, Tar Sands in his DOMESTIC oil supply figures!
Posted by: Ron Stephen | February 15, 2009 2:19 AM
I fully agree with the comments made by Ron Stephen about the wording used in this 'Alert'. I have supported many of the alerts and have high praise for Climate Ark so far. However, having lived in Canada (in fact I hold dual Canadian / British citizenship and during my 21 years there I visited the oil sands on business a couple of times) I believe that the wording needs reworking. In principle I disagree with the oil sands project but believe that the steps being taken to try and limit environmental damage are substantial. Th USA has large deposits of a similar material, Oil Shales, but to extract the oil from them would be even more damaging than using the Oil Sands. The Canadian project has been running for many years now and may just be the lesser of two evils ie taking oil from the Sands or from the Shales. I do agree that any significant expansion of the present extraction level should be resisted.
Posted by: Paul F. Negus | February 17, 2009 9:48 AM