Utter devastation of wildlife, awful pollution and an environmental disaster, I was shocked when I saw the photo's - so much different than the adverts on TV!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...d-barrels.html

I think that it is absolutely despicable that a dragonfly was killed a result of those tarsands thingiemawotsits. Bastards

The third picture, isn't that the one Eric Clapton just sold for $34m

It's flying around. Buzz, buzz, buzzin'. It's evidently not dead.

Wouldnt the sub zero temps have done for the dragonfly anyway?


Im having deja vu again, didnt we do an oildsands picture thread / discussion before?


I did laugh at the comment in the D-M complaining that it was part of the "left wing media" though...

If Canada didn't have this stuff to dig up or trees to sell it would be a third world country.

It's definitely a Better Life for the Kids

I love seeing people who don't have a clue about how oil is extracted and refined making an arse out of themselves over a few sensationalised photographs. I'd love to know where they think their petrol comes from.

Incidentally, I saw two moose just last night - a mother and calf - and a grey wolf last week. Earlier this year I was thrilled to see a lynx. Additionally, on this "devastating" project, I have seen bears, elk, wolves, foxes, horned owls and sandhill cranes among others.

It's a nature lover's paradise up here.

Did you spot any Newfies I believe they are rarer to spot than the Lynx?

Perhaps, or perhaps there would be more economic focus on some of the leading edge manufacturing and tech operations that are based here, Ballard, Bombardier, RIM, MDA, Corel etc

Indeed, but normally attatched to the bonnet of a Newf's F-150.

Ok, not actually true (sometimes) but I thought as we were quoting the daily mail I would add to the sensationalism

Hmmm, I dont think the usual "pump it out of the ground" type operation has quite the same environmental footprint and energy usage to get the end product to market.


Perhaps you are seeing all that wildlife because the trees that they usually hide among have recently been removed?

Has any area yet been re-established as its supposed to be?

What about the polutution that made its way into the water supply downstream?

None of that seems particularly reflective of how petrochemicals are normally brought to market. Sure, its a dirty business, but not as dirty as the oilsands.

By the way, what happens to all that sulphur if a raging forest fire makes its way through that area?

I take the bus.

Usual "pump it out the ground"? Don't be so naive. There aren't many places in the world you can "just" do that. And you're forgetting that it then has to be transported and refined...

The animals I saw were all in or in amongst the trees. Despite what the photographs IN THE DAILY MAIL suggest, there really isn't wholescale deforestation for hundreds of miles.

Some of the earlier sites have been restored, and there are new trees grwoing and bison herds established. The damage is no more permanent than if a forest fire had been through. And, something that many people seem to forget - once the bitumen has been extracted from the ground, it can no longer leach into the waterways as it has been doing for thousands of years. Don't think of the oilsands as environmental destruction - think of it as a giant natural spill clean-up operation.

How can a forest fire get to that sulphur? There's no forest near it.

Guess all those refineries around Sarnia must be making nice clean Ontario petrol.

I commute by plane.