Originally Posted by Steve_P

Thank you both.

The answer lies in the fact that it is in the constitution (I believe) that the provinces not the federal government are responsible for their resources.

Originally Posted by Steve_P;

Thank you both.

The answer lies in the fact that it is in the constitution (I believe) that the provinces not the federal government are responsible for their resources.

Originally Posted by Novocastrian

As I said, I know the history, but it still makes me shake my head in bemusement.

Originally Posted by Souvenir;

Why? Is it because you don't believe that people really are greedy short-termists?

Originally Posted by Novocastrian

Not really. I think that its because I'm an internationalist at heart.

Originally Posted by Jingsamichty

I read the other day about US mayors putting pressure on Canada about 'dirty oil'.

First thought of course is Pot, Kettle, Black, but then I wondered if the US might actually resent being dependent on and enriching Canadian oil producers even more than it does OPEC producers?

Originally Posted by Souvenir;

Bleeding-heart pinko.

Originally Posted by Souvenir;

Isn't the US military - a big oil consumer - also getting stroppy about dirty oil?

Originally Posted by Souvenir

Isn't the US military - a big oil consumer - also getting stroppy about dirty oil?

Originally Posted by Novocastrian

There's a considerable lobby in Washington who are very much against it. It is at least a strong possibility that after the Presidential election, the market in the US for oil sands product will dry up.

Originally Posted by Steve_P;

The U.S. Military I'm sure would be happy yo take oil from whoever they can get it off.

It's the U.S. Congress that is getting stroppy, it's an election year.

Originally Posted by iaink

Wasnt he also saying that OPEC output was meeting current demand, and that increasing output was pointless lipservice.

Seems to me the current "high" cost of oil is due to speculation thats based on political instability in the oil producing regions, rather than true supply and demand market forces. Could be that bubble will burst and prices will come down again, or it could be that demand from China and other developing nations will keep the price high regardless.

I read somewhere that saudi oil costs less than $10 a barrel to get out of the ground and to the end user, but oil sand oil only starts to break even with the extraction cost at $70....and I dont know if they figured in the cost to return the landscape to the way they found it in that figure, which the oil companies are legally commited too. Given the way that they dragged their heels in cases like the Exxon Valdes cleanup, you have to wonder if they are really going to do that anyway.

I wouldnt say selling oil to the US at $136 a barrel is "bargain basement", and as oil prices increase north america WILL have to make changes in its energy use profile, as has happened in Europe as a result of higher taxation levels focusing minds on economy. Will that happen soon enough? Probably not Im afraid. If $136 is an inflated price, then better to sell to the US now at $66 a barrel profit, than to hold on to this resource and sell after the bubble burst for only $30 profit?

Never mind the economics of the situation, the global environmental effect is the real issue, and with china racing to catch up with a US style consumer society, Im afraid the outlook is very bleak for my childrens children. I first became aware of global warming in 1989, reading Ben Eltons book Stark, and frankly, what has changed in 20 years that will make enough difference to prevent us passing a tipping point at which point it will be too late?

Oil supply is not a concern in the short term, there is more extractable oil reserves known about now than there was 30 or 40 years ago when people first started to say it was running out. As the price increases, so does the level of technology available to to extract it where it was previously impractical or to make it from other sources, but thats a dangerous game, and even at $5000 a barrel, eventually you cant extract what is no longer there. However, it doesnt matter if oil runs out in 50 or 100 or 1000 years time. If we dont wean ourselves off carbon fuels in the much shorter term, it wont matter anyway.

It seems to me the North American majority seems to be pinning all its hopes on some sort of "Star Trek" solution..by which I mean they expect the engineers to pull some fantastic (unnamed) solution to the problem out of there arse at the last minute, to narrowly avert disaster. Unfortunately things on this planet seldom work out quite like that.