Richard Heinberg

Weekly Mulch: The Sticky Truth about Oil Spills and Tar Sands

by: The Media Consortium

Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:53

by Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium Blogger

The National Oil Spill Commission released its report on last year's BP oil spill this week. The report laid out the blame for the spill, tagging each of the three companies working on the Deepwater Horizon at the time, Halliburton, Transocean and BP, and also offered prescriptions for avoiding similar disasters in the future.

As Mother Jones' Kate Sheppard notes, it's unlikely the recommendations will impact policy going forward.

"I think the recommendations are pretty tepid given the severity of the  crisis," Jackie Savitz, director of pollution campaigns at the  advocacy group Oceana, told Sheppard. "Even the small things they're  suggesting, I think it's going to be hard to convince Congress to make  those changes."

No transparency for you!

Last summer, after the spill, the Obama administration tried hard to look like it was pushing back against the oil industry, even though just weeks before the spill, the president had promised to open new areas of the East Coast to offshore drilling.

This week brought new evidence that, despite some posturing to the contrary, the administration is not exactly unfriendly to the energy industry. One of the key decisions the administration faces about the country's energy future is whether to support the Keystone XL, a pipeline that would pump oil from tar sands in Canada down to Texas refineries.  And one of the key lobbyists for TransCanada, the company intending to build the pipeline, is a former staffer for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Friends of the Earth, an environmental group, filed a Freedom of Information requesting correspondence between the lobbyist, Paul Elliott, and his former boss, but the State Department denied the request.

"We do not believe that the State Department has legitimate legal  grounds to deny our FOIA request, and assert that the agency is ignoring  its own written guidance regarding FOIA requests and the release of  public information," said Marcie Keever, the group's legal director, The Michigan Messenger's Ed Brayton reports. "This is the type of delay tactic we  would have expected from the Bush administration, not the Obama  administration, which has touted its efforts to usher in a new era of  transparency in government, including elevated standards in dealing with  lobbyists."

Tar sands' black mark

What are the consequences if the government approves the pipeline? As Care2's Beth Buczynski writes, "Communities along the Keystone XL pipeline's proposed path would face  increased risk of spills, and, at the pipeline's end, the   health of those living near Texas refineries would suffer, as tar sands   oil spews  higher levels of dangerous pollutants into the air when   processed."

What's more, the tar sands extraction process has already brought environmental devastation to the areas like Alberta, Canada, where tar sands mining occurs. Earth Island Journal's Jason Mark recently visited the Oil Sands Discovery Centre in Ft. McMurray, Alberta, which he calls "impressively forthright" in its discussion of the environmental issues brought on by oil sands. (The museum is run by Alberta's provincial government.) Mark reports:

The section on habitat fragmentation was especially good. As one panel  put it, "Increasingly, Alberta's remaining forested areas resemble  islands of trees in a larger network of cut lines, well sites, mine,  pipeline corridors, plant sites, and human settlements. ... Forest  disturbances can also encourage increased predation and put some plants  and animals at risk."

Not renewable, just new

The museum that Mark visited also made clear that extracting and refining oil from tar sands is a labor-intensive practice. He writes:

Mining, we learn, is just the  start. Then the tar has to be "upgraded" into synthetic petroleum via a  process that involves "conditioning," "separation" into a bitumen froth,  then "deaeration" to take out gases, and finally injection into a  dual-system centrifuge that removes the last of the solids. Next comes  distillation, thermal conversion, catalytic conversion, and  hydrotreating. At that point the recombined petroleum is ready to be  refined into gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. It all felt like a  flashback to high school chemistry.

Why bother with this at all? In short, because with easily accessible sources of oil largely tapped out, techniques like tar sands mining and deepwater drilling are the only fonts of oil available. This problem is going to get worse, as The Nation is explaining over the next few weeks in its video series on peak oil.

Energy and the economy

Traditional ideas about energy dictate that even as the world uses up limited resources like oil, technology will create access to new sources, find ways to use limited resources more efficiently, or find ways to consume new sources of energy. These advances will head off any problems with consumption rates. The peak oil theory, on the contrary, argues that it is possible to use up a resource like oil, that there's a peak in supply.

Once the peak has been passed, the consequences, particularly the economic consequences, become dire, as Richard Heinberg, senior fellow with the Post Carbon Institute explains. "If the amount of energy we can use is declining, we may be seeing the end of economic growth as we define it right now," he told The Nation. Watch more below:

Light green

Part of the problem is that the energy resources that could replace fossil fuels like oil-wind and solar energy, for instance-likely won't be in place before the oil wells run dry. And as Monica Potts reports at The American Prospect, our new green economy is getting off to a slow start.

Although the administration has talked incessantly about supporting green jobs, Potts writes that the federal government hasn't even finalized what count as a "green job" yet. The working definition, which is currently under review, asserts that green jobs are in industries that "benefit the environment or conserve national resources" or entails work to green a company's "production process." But what does that actually mean?

"That definition was rightly criticized as overly broad," Potts writes. She continues:

While nearly  everyone would include installing solar panels as a green job, what  about an architect who designs a green house? (Under the proposed  definition, both would count.) ... Another problem comes in weighing green purposes against green  execution: We could count, for example, public-transit train operators  as green workers. But how do we break down transportation as an industry  more broadly? Most would probably agree that truckers who drive  tractor-trailers running on diesel fuel wouldn't count as green workers  even if they're transporting wind-turbine parts. And many of the jobs we  would count as green already exist.

It doesn't exactly inspire confidence that the country is moving swiftly toward a bright green future.

This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of   The Media  Consortium.   It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of  articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Pulse, and The   Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network  of leading independent media outlets.

Discuss :: (0 Comments)

Morning No: No Pigs In Heaven

by: Natasha Chart

Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 06:00

- The AFL-CIO lays out the what's what on the economic situation for 18-35 year olds. Main takeaways: more of them are unemployed, fewer of them can afford to build savings or get health coverage, they're deferring education or planning for a family because of the expense, and just over a third of them are living with their parents.

- In what's likely the best news coming out of Afghanistan of late, opium profits have declined, so fewer farmers are growing it.

- Droughts are driving Kenyan farmers off their land and into slums.

- Droughts, plus debt caused the expense of paying for synthetic inputs and patented, genetically engineered seeds, are driving growing numbers of Indian farmers to suicide.

- Executives at the banks we all bailed out are going to get stock option windfalls this year.

- Obama urges the public to take steps to avoid catching the flu, particularly due to concerns about the new H1N1 swine flu. Seriously, wash your hands.

- In product quality, and it can sometimes be a good thing, there's always room at the bottom.

- If we want to keep our democracy, we need to have a functional social compact that treats all Americans as deserving.

Discuss :: (4 Comments)

"Energy Determines Biological Success"

by: Natasha Chart

Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 17:30

"The crucial factor in all of this is net energy. - Richard Heinberg

Before a certain critical mass of human population, and barring natural disasters, the world's ecosystems in had generally been trending towards increasing the amount of soil and living species. Fueled by sunlight, what was once a poisonous, lifeless ball of rock became ever more welcoming as net surpluses of that energy were cumulatively stored in the form of chemical bonds.

Fueled by fossil sunlight, humanity is currently engaged in the process of returning the planet to its bare, poisoned, inhospitable state.

Though even our fuel might not last much longer. Richard Heinberg's recent review of coal reserve studies indicates that there's only 20 years to go before we hit peak coal. He says there aren't 250 years worth of the stuff to burn even if burning it weren't going to destroy the Earth's ability to support us.

Apropos of this, via hyperlocavore, here's Heinberg talking in 2007 about Peak Everything:

There's More... :: (3 Comments, 910 words in story)
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox