Why aren't environmentalists upset that 1 million barrels will be traveling every day from Vancouver to Asia on the open ocean?

[surada]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

China owns a major share in Canadian tar sands production.

Ok. I suspect China owns a great deal of many things.

The point is that Keystone XL export pipeline benefits China not the US.

So there's no benefit for the US to have another supply of crude oil?

None. Its a tax dodge.. ALL the tar sand refined product is sold from the Free Trade Zone to foreign countries. The US is by passed entirely.. nor do we reap any financial rewards. We just take the environmental risk for China and Canada for maybe 40 jobs.

 

[ding]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

China owns a major share in Canadian tar sands production.

Ok. I suspect China owns a great deal of many things.

The point is that Keystone XL export pipeline benefits China not the US.

So there's no benefit for the US to have another supply of crude oil?

None. Its a tax dodge.. ALL the tar sand refined product is sold from the Free Trade Zone to foreign countries. The US is by passed entirely.. nor do we reap any financial rewards. We just take the environmental risk for China and Canada for maybe 40 jobs.

Except the oil we import and refine

It's like you don't even logic.

 

[surada]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

I agree we have the technology to replace the tailings ... but why are you assuming the Canadian government is going to pay to do this? ... they have a checkered history in such matters ... how many abandoned strip mines in Canada are sitting un-remediated? ...

Folks living in the Tennessee River valley are still waiting for Oak Ridge to be properly remediated ...

"Canada’s oil sands industry is committed to reducing its footprint, reclaiming all lands affected by operations, and maintaining biodiversity. Oil sands reclamation is an ongoing process during the life of the project. Oil sands operators must develop a plan to reclaim the land and have it approved by government as part of any project’s approval process.

Given the long life cycle of oil sands operations (25 to 50 years for an oil sands mine, 10 to 15 years for in situ), much of the industry’s land reclamation activity is still in early stages. Since oil sands operations began in the 1960s, about 8% of the active mining footprint has been or is being reclaimed. Companies are evolving their operations and technology, and continue to pursue ways to manage impacts on land."

Land Reclamation | CAPP

Returning land disturbed by energy production to a natural state is called “reclamation.”

www.capp.ca

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

They used to just periodically burn off tailing ponds.

 

[ding]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

I agree we have the technology to replace the tailings ... but why are you assuming the Canadian government is going to pay to do this? ... they have a checkered history in such matters ... how many abandoned strip mines in Canada are sitting un-remediated? ...

Folks living in the Tennessee River valley are still waiting for Oak Ridge to be properly remediated ...

"Canada’s oil sands industry is committed to reducing its footprint, reclaiming all lands affected by operations, and maintaining biodiversity. Oil sands reclamation is an ongoing process during the life of the project. Oil sands operators must develop a plan to reclaim the land and have it approved by government as part of any project’s approval process.

Given the long life cycle of oil sands operations (25 to 50 years for an oil sands mine, 10 to 15 years for in situ), much of the industry’s land reclamation activity is still in early stages. Since oil sands operations began in the 1960s, about 8% of the active mining footprint has been or is being reclaimed. Companies are evolving their operations and technology, and continue to pursue ways to manage impacts on land."

Land Reclamation | CAPP

Returning land disturbed by energy production to a natural state is called “reclamation.”

www.capp.ca

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

They used to just periodically burn off tailing ponds.

Ok, is that what they are doing now?

 

[surada]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

China owns a major share in Canadian tar sands production.

Ok. I suspect China owns a great deal of many things.

The point is that Keystone XL export pipeline benefits China not the US.

So there's no benefit for the US to have another supply of crude oil?

None. Its a tax dodge.. ALL the tar sand refined product is sold from the Free Trade Zone to foreign countries. The US is by passed entirely.. nor do we reap any financial rewards. We just take the environmental risk for China and Canada for maybe 40 jobs.

Except the oil we import and refine

It's like you don't even logic.

Motiva is owned by the Saudis and they don't have to add jobs to handle refining tar sands for overseas markets.

 

[ding]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

China owns a major share in Canadian tar sands production.

Ok. I suspect China owns a great deal of many things.

The point is that Keystone XL export pipeline benefits China not the US.

So there's no benefit for the US to have another supply of crude oil?

None. Its a tax dodge.. ALL the tar sand refined product is sold from the Free Trade Zone to foreign countries. The US is by passed entirely.. nor do we reap any financial rewards. We just take the environmental risk for China and Canada for maybe 40 jobs.

Except the oil we import and refine

It's like you don't even logic.

Motiva is owned by the Saudis and they don't have to add jobs to handle refining tar sands for overseas markets.

And? What's your point?

 

[surada]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

I agree we have the technology to replace the tailings ... but why are you assuming the Canadian government is going to pay to do this? ... they have a checkered history in such matters ... how many abandoned strip mines in Canada are sitting un-remediated? ...

Folks living in the Tennessee River valley are still waiting for Oak Ridge to be properly remediated ...

"Canada’s oil sands industry is committed to reducing its footprint, reclaiming all lands affected by operations, and maintaining biodiversity. Oil sands reclamation is an ongoing process during the life of the project. Oil sands operators must develop a plan to reclaim the land and have it approved by government as part of any project’s approval process.

Given the long life cycle of oil sands operations (25 to 50 years for an oil sands mine, 10 to 15 years for in situ), much of the industry’s land reclamation activity is still in early stages. Since oil sands operations began in the 1960s, about 8% of the active mining footprint has been or is being reclaimed. Companies are evolving their operations and technology, and continue to pursue ways to manage impacts on land."

Land Reclamation | CAPP

Returning land disturbed by energy production to a natural state is called “reclamation.”

www.capp.ca

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

They used to just periodically burn off tailing ponds.

Ok, is that what they are doing now?

Same thing but at least the railroads and truckers are making money. Truthfully, I don't care what TransCanada does.... I just hate being lied to.

Tar sands are so thick and corrosive that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow.. and that will have to be imported probably from OPEC.

 

[surada]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

China owns a major share in Canadian tar sands production.

Ok. I suspect China owns a great deal of many things.

The point is that Keystone XL export pipeline benefits China not the US.

So there's no benefit for the US to have another supply of crude oil?

None. Its a tax dodge.. ALL the tar sand refined product is sold from the Free Trade Zone to foreign countries. The US is by passed entirely.. nor do we reap any financial rewards. We just take the environmental risk for China and Canada for maybe 40 jobs.

Except the oil we import and refine

It's like you don't even logic.

Motiva is owned by the Saudis and they don't have to add jobs to handle refining tar sands for overseas markets.

And? What's your point?

I don't like being lied to or bamboozled and I really hate stupid politicians.

 

[ding]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

I agree we have the technology to replace the tailings ... but why are you assuming the Canadian government is going to pay to do this? ... they have a checkered history in such matters ... how many abandoned strip mines in Canada are sitting un-remediated? ...

Folks living in the Tennessee River valley are still waiting for Oak Ridge to be properly remediated ...

"Canada’s oil sands industry is committed to reducing its footprint, reclaiming all lands affected by operations, and maintaining biodiversity. Oil sands reclamation is an ongoing process during the life of the project. Oil sands operators must develop a plan to reclaim the land and have it approved by government as part of any project’s approval process.

Given the long life cycle of oil sands operations (25 to 50 years for an oil sands mine, 10 to 15 years for in situ), much of the industry’s land reclamation activity is still in early stages. Since oil sands operations began in the 1960s, about 8% of the active mining footprint has been or is being reclaimed. Companies are evolving their operations and technology, and continue to pursue ways to manage impacts on land."

Land Reclamation | CAPP

Returning land disturbed by energy production to a natural state is called “reclamation.”

www.capp.ca

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

They used to just periodically burn off tailing ponds.

Ok, is that what they are doing now?

Same thing but at least the railroads and truckers are making money. Truthfully, I don't care what TransCanada does.... I just hate being lied to.

Tar sands are so thick and corrosive that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow.. and that will have to be imported probably from OPEC.

No. They aren't doing the same thing. They are treating it. It was in the post you responded to. See?

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.​

​

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."​

​

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about. What makes that oil corrosive? Oil in and of itself is not corrosive. So exactly what contaminant in the oil is corrosive?

As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand is so thick that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow that has to happen regardless of the transport method.

As for your ASSUMPTION that Canada will have to oil from OPEC to blend with their oil, the oil from Canada's oil sands are blended in Alberta at special refineries known as upgraders. ... This bitumen is diluted with very light hydrocarbons called Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) so that it can flow in pipelines to refineries that then strip the NGLs out and refine the bitumen. So they are getting the NGLs from their gas plants.

Why does this matter anyway. It is a good for the US to have more supplies of oil from nearby countries such as Canada and Mexico which are friendly to the US. Are you arguing we should rely on oil from the Middle East instead?

 

[ding]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

China owns a major share in Canadian tar sands production.

Ok. I suspect China owns a great deal of many things.

The point is that Keystone XL export pipeline benefits China not the US.

So there's no benefit for the US to have another supply of crude oil?

None. Its a tax dodge.. ALL the tar sand refined product is sold from the Free Trade Zone to foreign countries. The US is by passed entirely.. nor do we reap any financial rewards. We just take the environmental risk for China and Canada for maybe 40 jobs.

Except the oil we import and refine

It's like you don't even logic.

Motiva is owned by the Saudis and they don't have to add jobs to handle refining tar sands for overseas markets.

And? What's your point?

I don't like being lied to or bamboozled and I really hate stupid politicians.

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. It's not the politicians who want the oil from Canada. It's the refineries. And they have good reasons for that as well as good reasons for wanting a dedicated pipeline. This isn't about jobs. This is about oil being brought to the market.

 

[healthmyths]

It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.

Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections

With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.

yaleclimateconnections.org

Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211

Fusion, (an energy with a future)!

Definitely a coming source.
Practical, economic generation from fusion is not yet here, and it’s a solid bet that it will not arrive on the grid before the 2030s.

Fusion Energy Is Coming, and Maybe Sooner Than You Think

The joke about fusion energy is that it’s 30 years away and always will be. But significant recent advances in fusion science and technology could potentially put the first fusion power on the grid as soon

www.powermag.com

Just a thought though... reading the following...
Proton-proton fusion is the process that powers stars like our sun. This gravity-powered reaction requires enormous densities and takes about a billion years to complete. Thus, it’s not something that would be practical for energy production on earth.

So my comment is how did Proton-proton fusion come about? Outside of Divine intervention, what other answer to the creation of Proton-proton fusion is there? In other words, chance created Proton-proton fusion as well as life? I'm open minded just as Pascal's wager suggests.

 

[jbrownson0831]

It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.

Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections

With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.

yaleclimateconnections.org

Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211

They are hoping for just that, an ocean big oil spill to help drive home the evil oil storyline to their mindless sheeple.

 

[danielpalos]

Fusion (an energy with a future)!

 

[surada]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

I agree we have the technology to replace the tailings ... but why are you assuming the Canadian government is going to pay to do this? ... they have a checkered history in such matters ... how many abandoned strip mines in Canada are sitting un-remediated? ...

Folks living in the Tennessee River valley are still waiting for Oak Ridge to be properly remediated ...

"Canada’s oil sands industry is committed to reducing its footprint, reclaiming all lands affected by operations, and maintaining biodiversity. Oil sands reclamation is an ongoing process during the life of the project. Oil sands operators must develop a plan to reclaim the land and have it approved by government as part of any project’s approval process.

Given the long life cycle of oil sands operations (25 to 50 years for an oil sands mine, 10 to 15 years for in situ), much of the industry’s land reclamation activity is still in early stages. Since oil sands operations began in the 1960s, about 8% of the active mining footprint has been or is being reclaimed. Companies are evolving their operations and technology, and continue to pursue ways to manage impacts on land."

Land Reclamation | CAPP

Returning land disturbed by energy production to a natural state is called “reclamation.”

www.capp.ca

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

They used to just periodically burn off tailing ponds.

Ok, is that what they are doing now?

Same thing but at least the railroads and truckers are making money. Truthfully, I don't care what TransCanada does.... I just hate being lied to.

Tar sands are so thick and corrosive that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow.. and that will have to be imported probably from OPEC.

No. They aren't doing the same thing. They are treating it. It was in the post you responded to. See?

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.​

​

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."​

​

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about. What makes that oil corrosive? Oil in and of itself is not corrosive. So exactly what contaminant in the oil is corrosive?

As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand is so thick that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow that has to happen regardless of the transport method.

As for your ASSUMPTION that Canada will have to oil from OPEC to blend with their oil, the oil from Canada's oil sands are blended in Alberta at special refineries known as upgraders. ... This bitumen is diluted with very light hydrocarbons called Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) so that it can flow in pipelines to refineries that then strip the NGLs out and refine the bitumen. So they are getting the NGLs from their gas plants.

Why does this matter anyway. It is a good for the US to have more supplies of oil from nearby countries such as Canada and Mexico which are friendly to the US. Are you arguing we should rely on oil from the Middle East instead?

Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive.. It won't flow thru a pipeline unless it is diluted with light crude. Crude oil from Mexico, Syria and Canada are also sour and heavy, but not as the near solid tar sands.

Tar sands oil is thicker, more acidic, and more corrosive than lighter conventional crude, and this ups the likelihood that a pipeline carrying it will leak.
The Keystone XL Pipeline: Everything You Need To Know | NRDC
www.nrdc.org/stories/what-keystone-pipeline
www.nrdc.org/stories/what-keystone-pipeline

 

[ding]

We're a time before this shipping port in Vancouver is realized ... still time for the protests, riots, burning and mayhem to stop this nonsense ...

Unlike conventional crude oil, which occurs as a liquid within the pore spaces of solid rock, oil sands are a mixture of semi-solid oil, sand, clay, and water. The viscous crude, called bitumen, can’t just be pumped like an oil well; extraction methods use more energy and more water and are much more costly than conventional oil drilling. For deposits near the land surface, the sand-plus-oil mixture is strip-mined, then processed with hot water and solvents to release the bitumen. For deeper deposits, the “in-situ” process too is complex: Steam must be injected underground to allow the bitumen to flow into extraction wells. National Geographic, citing a litany of environmental problems left to be addressed, has called oil sands the “world’s most destructive oil operation.”


Mining bitumen strips away forest cover and topsoil, leaving acre upon acre of barren, black ground. The post-processing tailings are piped into vast ponds, which contain an “acutely toxic” mixture of water, sand, hydrocarbons, ammonia, acids, and heavy metals. The total volume of wastewater currently exceeds 4 billion gallons and counting, with 1.5 gallons of tailings waste produced for each gallon of bitumen. Scientific studies have detected toxins in the aquatic environment downstream from oil sands production, and a 2017 analysis estimated that cleanup costs will exceed the value of oil sands royalties collected by the province of Alberta.

There are some issues with the pipeline itself ... but the main focus of environmentalists is what's being done to the Alberta country-side ... the land and the water is ruined, poisoned ... it will cost more to clean-up than the oil produced is worth ... today ...

With the pace of technological improvements, the time will be soon that we can extract this resource without the huge overhead ... we'll need oil then more than we need it now ...

If you are talking about the open pit mining of the tar sands, I wouldn't expect technological improvements to change that. The shallow stuff has to be mined. There aren't any other options. So whatever technological improvements in mining operations occur that would most likely be about efficiency of the operation, not elimination of surface mining operations. So I doubt it would change the environmental impact much. The environmental impact decision rests with Canada, not the US. It's their land.

As for the land and water being ruined I don't have enough information to form an intelligent opinion, but would assume the Canadian government does. I would also assume they have more information than you. So unless corruption is involved, I would expect them to weigh the pros and the cons and make an informed decision. Wouldn't you?

I agree we have the technology to replace the tailings ... but why are you assuming the Canadian government is going to pay to do this? ... they have a checkered history in such matters ... how many abandoned strip mines in Canada are sitting un-remediated? ...

Folks living in the Tennessee River valley are still waiting for Oak Ridge to be properly remediated ...

"Canada’s oil sands industry is committed to reducing its footprint, reclaiming all lands affected by operations, and maintaining biodiversity. Oil sands reclamation is an ongoing process during the life of the project. Oil sands operators must develop a plan to reclaim the land and have it approved by government as part of any project’s approval process.

Given the long life cycle of oil sands operations (25 to 50 years for an oil sands mine, 10 to 15 years for in situ), much of the industry’s land reclamation activity is still in early stages. Since oil sands operations began in the 1960s, about 8% of the active mining footprint has been or is being reclaimed. Companies are evolving their operations and technology, and continue to pursue ways to manage impacts on land."

Land Reclamation | CAPP

Returning land disturbed by energy production to a natural state is called “reclamation.”

www.capp.ca

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

They used to just periodically burn off tailing ponds.

Ok, is that what they are doing now?

Same thing but at least the railroads and truckers are making money. Truthfully, I don't care what TransCanada does.... I just hate being lied to.

Tar sands are so thick and corrosive that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow.. and that will have to be imported probably from OPEC.

No. They aren't doing the same thing. They are treating it. It was in the post you responded to. See?

"The Government of Alberta, through the Tailings Management Framework (TMF) for the Mineable Athabasca Oil Sands, provides direction for all oil sands operators to manage fluid tailings volumes, during and after mine operations, in order to manage and decrease liability and environmental risk resulting from the accumulation of fluid tailings on the landscape. Recognizing that the mineable oil sands are a significant resource, and that tailings are a by-product of mining activity, the TMF provides a framework to manage existing and future tailings production.​

​

The objective of the TMF, and associated regulatory requirements, is to minimize the amount of fluid tailings on the landscape and ensure operators reclaim tailings progressively over the life of the mine. Project-specific targets are set for each operation to ensure tailings are ready to reclaim within 10 years of the end of the mine’s life. To enable this goal, it is also recognized that treated water will need to be released from oil sands mining operations to enable overall reclamation of the mine sites."​

​

CAPP - Canada's Oil & Natural Gas Producers

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents companies large and small that explore for, develop and produce natural gas and oil throughout Canada.

www.capp.ca

As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about. What makes that oil corrosive? Oil in and of itself is not corrosive. So exactly what contaminant in the oil is corrosive?

As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand is so thick that they will have to add millions of barrels of light crude to get it to flow that has to happen regardless of the transport method.

As for your ASSUMPTION that Canada will have to oil from OPEC to blend with their oil, the oil from Canada's oil sands are blended in Alberta at special refineries known as upgraders. ... This bitumen is diluted with very light hydrocarbons called Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) so that it can flow in pipelines to refineries that then strip the NGLs out and refine the bitumen. So they are getting the NGLs from their gas plants.

Why does this matter anyway. It is a good for the US to have more supplies of oil from nearby countries such as Canada and Mexico which are friendly to the US. Are you arguing we should rely on oil from the Middle East instead?

Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive.. It won't flow thru a pipeline unless it is diluted with light crude. Crude oil from Mexico, Syria and Canada are also sour and heavy, but not as the near solid tar sands.

Tar sands oil is thicker, more acidic, and more corrosive than lighter conventional crude, and this ups the likelihood that a pipeline carrying it will leak.
The Keystone XL Pipeline: Everything You Need To Know | NRDC
www.nrdc.org/stories/what-keystone-pipeline
www.nrdc.org/stories/what-keystone-pipeline

You should actually read what I wrote. Instead of responding to something I didn't write.

 

[ReinyDays]

You should actually read what I wrote. Instead of responding to something I didn't write.

Ding: "As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about." ...
surada: "Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive."

Sounds like surada is responding to something you wrote ... not that I agree but surada's statement is in line with the article in the OP ... extraction and clean-up will cost more than the oil is worth ...

 

[surada]

You should actually read what I wrote. Instead of responding to something I didn't write.

Ding: "As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about." ...
surada: "Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive."

Sounds like surada is responding to something you wrote ... not that I agree but surada's statement is in line with the article in the OP ... extraction and clean-up will cost more than the oil is worth ...

ding

Crude oils have different quality characteristics - Today ...

Crude oils have different quality characteristics

www.eia.gov

Image

Many types of crude oil are produced around the world. The market value of an individual crude stream reflects its quality characteristics.

Two of the most important quality characteristics are density and sulfur content. Density ranges from light to heavy, while sulfur content is characterized as sweet or sour. The crude oils represented in the chart are a selectio…

Crude oils that are light (higher degrees of API gravity, or lower density) and sweet (low sulfur content) are usually priced higher than heavy, sour crude oils. This is partly because gasoline and diesel fuel, which typically sell at a significant premium to residual fuel oil and other \"bottom of the barrel\" products, can usually be more easily and cheaply produced using light, sweet crude oil. The light sweet grades are desirable because they can be processed with far less sophisticated and energy-intensive processes/ref…

 

[ding]

You should actually read what I wrote. Instead of responding to something I didn't write.

Ding: "As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about." ...
surada: "Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive."

Sounds like surada is responding to something you wrote ... not that I agree but surada's statement is in line with the article in the OP ... extraction and clean-up will cost more than the oil is worth ...

She never disputed anything I wrote in my previous post. All she did was repeat what had already been addressed. She has offered no evidence in support of her opinion.

As for the economic viability of producing the tar sands, I think it is safe to say that the operators who invested in the project and their investors who paid for the project would disagree with you.

 

[surada]

You should actually read what I wrote. Instead of responding to something I didn't write.

Ding: "As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about." ...
surada: "Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive."

Sounds like surada is responding to something you wrote ... not that I agree but surada's statement is in line with the article in the OP ... extraction and clean-up will cost more than the oil is worth ...

She never disputed anything I wrote in my previous post. All she did was repeat what had already been addressed. She has offered no evidence in support of her opinion.

As for the economic viability of producing the tar sands, I think it is safe to say that the operators who invested in the project and their investors who paid for the project would disagree with you.

Tar sands are deeply discounted.. about $29 a barrel, The Keystone export pipeline would make more money for the Canadians and the Chinese at the expense of the US.

 

[ding]

You should actually read what I wrote. Instead of responding to something I didn't write.

Ding: "As for your ASSUMPTION that oil from Canada's oil sand are corrosive, I don't believe you know what you are talking about." ...
surada: "Its NOT an assumption.. Crude is graded .. Tar Sands are heavy, sour and corrosive."

Sounds like surada is responding to something you wrote ... not that I agree but surada's statement is in line with the article in the OP ... extraction and clean-up will cost more than the oil is worth ...

ding

Crude oils have different quality characteristics - Today ...

Crude oils have different quality characteristics

www.eia.gov

Image

Many types of crude oil are produced around the world. The market value of an individual crude stream reflects its quality characteristics.

Two of the most important quality characteristics are density and sulfur content. Density ranges from light to heavy, while sulfur content is characterized as sweet or sour. The crude oils represented in the chart are a selectio…

Crude oils that are light (higher degrees of API gravity, or lower density) and sweet (low sulfur content) are usually priced higher than heavy, sour crude oils. This is partly because gasoline and diesel fuel, which typically sell at a significant premium to residual fuel oil and other \"bottom of the barrel\" products, can usually be more easily and cheaply produced using light, sweet crude oil. The light sweet grades are desirable because they can be processed with far less sophisticated and energy-intensive processes/ref…

Great all you have to do is show that tar sands are corrosive and that they are not being processed to meet pipeline specifications. I can tell you from experience that the pipeline specs are extremely stringent. They don't allow products that would corrode their pipeline.

What are Pipeline Specifications and Why are They Important?

When I am going through the proposal process with a client, I am trying to get as much well information as possible. This ensures that the data I pass onto the engineers I work with is as detailed as possible. The more details, the more accurate our proposal sent to…

www.croftsystems.net