Category Archives: Energy and Resources

Fracking tied to birth defects: Colorado study

February 3, 2014Energy and Resources, Fracking, Health and EnvironmentfeaturedDamien Gillis

Fracking-tied-to-birth-defects-Colorado-study — Congenital heart defects are the leading cause of all infant deaths in the US

A new study, published last week in the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives, draws a correlation between birth defects and maternal exposures to natural gas.

After examining 124,842 births between 1996 and 2009 in rural Colorado, the study found a higher incidence of congenital heart defects (CHDs) and neural tube defects (NTDs) with infants whose mothers experienced higher exposures to natural gas.

The study (download pdf here) was led by researchers from the Colorado School of Public Health and Brown University, with support from The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). Born out of health concerns surrounding the growth of natural gas development throughout the US, it looked at health outcomes for children born of mothers who lived within a 10 mile radius of natural gas development in Colorado.

The researchers note that natural gas “emits several potential teratogens” – i.e. a substance which causes malformations. They suggest concerns around the health impacts of natural gas exposures are real and require more scientific study:

[quote]In this large cohort, we observed an association between density and proximity of natural gas wells within a 10-mile radius of maternal residence and prevalence of CHDs and possibly NTDs. Greater specificity in exposure estimates are needed to further explore these associations. [/quote]

According to the US-based Children’s Heart Foundation, “Congenital heart defects are the leading cause of all infant deaths in the United States,” with over 40,000 babies born every year, suffering from CHD.

David Suzuki: Citizens asked to help with Fukushima radiation research

January 30, 2014Energy and Resources, NuclearfeaturedDr. David Suzuki

An Internet search turns up an astounding number of pages about radiation from Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant meltdown that followed an earthquake and tsunami in March 2011. But it’s difficult to find credible information.

One reason is that government monitoring of radiation and its effects on fish stocks appears to be limited. According to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution:

[quote]No U.S. government or international agency is monitoring the spread of low levels of radiation from Fukushima along the West Coast of North America and around the Hawaiian Islands.[/quote]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s most recent food testing, which includes seafood, appears to be from June 2012. Its website states, “FDA has no evidence that radionuclides from the Fukushima incident are present in the U.S. food supply at levels that would pose a public health concern. This is true for both FDA-regulated food products imported from Japan and U.S. domestic food products, including seafood caught off the coast of the United States.”

Does Fukushima threaten our health through contaminated fish? — Are Tuna and other fish contaminated with radiation?

The non-profit Canadian Highly Migratory Species Foundation has been monitoring Pacific troll-caught albacore tuna off the B.C. coast. Its 2013 sampling found “no residues detected at the lowest detection limits achievable.” The B.C. Centre for Disease Control website assures us we have little cause for concern about radiation from Japan in our food and environment. Websites for Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency yield scant information.

Not out of the woods yet

Fukushima reactor 4 — 1,500 spent fuel rods are being removed from Fukushima Reactor 4

But the disaster isn’t over. Despite the Japanese government’s claim that everything is under control, concerns have been raised about the delicate process of removing more than 1,500 nuclear fuel rod sets, each containing 60 to 80 fuel rods with a total of about 400 tonnes of uranium, from Reactor 4 to a safer location, which is expected to take a year. Some, including me, have speculated another major earthquake could spark a new disaster. And Reactors 1, 2 and 3 still have tonnes of molten radioactive fuel that must be cooled with a constant flow of water.

A radioactive plume is expected to reach the West Coast sometime this year, but experts say it will be diluted by currents off Japan’s east coast and, according to the Live Science website:

[quote]The majority of the cesium-137 will remain in the North Pacific gyre – a region of ocean that circulates slowly clockwise and has trapped debris in its center to form the ‘Great Pacific Garbage Patch’ – and continue to be diluted for approximately a decade following the initial Fukushima release in 2011.[/quote]

Oceanographic Institution calls for public’s help

With the lack of data from government, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is asking the public for help. In January, Ken Buesseler, senior scientist and director of the Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity at the U.S.-based non-profit, launched a fundraising campaign and citizen science website to collect and analyze seawater along North America’s West Coast.

“Whether you agree with predictions that levels of radiation along the Pacific Coast of North America will be too low to be of human health concern or to impact fisheries and marine life, we can all agree that radiation should be monitored, and we are asking for your help to make that happen,” Buesseler said in a news release.

British Columbians can submit coastal water samples

Participants can help fund and propose new sites for seawater sampling, and collect seawater to ship to the lab for analysis. The David Suzuki Foundation is the point group for two sampling sites, on Haida Gwaii and at Bamfield on the west coast of Vancouver Island. Data will be published at How Radioactive Is Our Ocean?, and will include an evolving map showing cesium concentrations with links to information about radioactivity in the ocean and what the levels mean.

The oceans contain naturally occurring radioactive isotopes and radiation from 1960s nuclear testing. Buesseler doesn’t think levels in the ocean or seafood will become dangerously high because of the Fukushima disaster, but he stresses the importance of monitoring.

The Fukushima disaster was a wake-up call for the potential dangers of nuclear power plants, especially in unstable areas. North Americans may have little cause for concern for now, but without good scientific information to determine whether or not it is affecting our food and environment we can’t know for sure. The Woods Hole initiative is a good start.

With contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.

State Dept. report rumoured to bode well for Keystone XL pipeline

January 30, 2014Climate Change, Climate Science, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedCanadian Press

by Alexander Panetta, The Canadian Press

WASHINGTON D.C., United States – Canadian officials say they’re encouraged by what they’re hearing about a long-awaited report on the environmental impact of the Keystone XL pipeline that could be released imminently by the U.S. State Department.

Those sources in Washington and Ottawa say they’ve been told the report could be ready for release within a few days — and that it will bolster the case for the controversial energy project.

“What we’re hearing is that it’s going to be positive for the project — and therefore positive for Canada,” said one diplomat in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he hadn’t seen the report himself, although he had discussed its contents with American contacts.

“The rumours certainly are that it’s very thorough and that the analysis will support the project.”

He said there was optimism amongst Canadian officials but no celebration just yet: “You’re not going to be seeing people high-fiving and toasting with champagne,” he said.

“It’s just another step (in the process).”

Canada ramps up pipeline pressure

Earlier this month, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird was in Washington pleading for a decision soon. He said enough time had been lost on the project and didn’t want to see another construction season wasted.

His U.S. counterpart, John Kerry, responded that there would be no fast-tracking the process.

The actual writing of the report began in August, according to the Canadian source in D.C. With the threat of almost-certain lawsuits looming, regardless of what the final Keystone decision might be, he said he’d heard from U.S. officials that the report authors were under pressure to be especially rigorous.

“What we need is an (environmental impact statement),” he said, “that is so thoroughly done that it will stand up to litigation.”

The report is the latest environmental impact statement on the $7-billion TransCanada project to come from the State Department, which has jurisdiction because the pipeline crosses an international boundary.

Supporters say pipeline won’t significantly affect climate change

The last report, released a year ago, concluded the project would not significantly impact the rate of oilsands development or crude oil demand, nor would it pose any greater risk to the environment than other modes of transportation. President Barack Obama has since declared that he will only approve the pipeline if it can be shown that it will not significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said Wednesday that he expected the forthcoming report to draw the same conclusions as the last one. “There are no new facts on the ground,” Oliver said. “So you know, it’s to be expected that they would come out in the same way.”

Once that step is taken, the U.S. administration will conduct a 90-day review to determine if the project is in the national interest.

Not so fast…

Another Canadian diplomat warned against concluding that the report’s release is automatically imminent. Even if it’s slated to come in the next few days, there’s always a chance someone, somewhere, could hold up its release.

For starters, the accepted wisdom in Washington has been that the State Department document would not be released until an inspector general’s review of conflict-of-interest allegations against a consultant working on the report.

That review into the activities of contractor Environmental Resources Managament came after news that several of its consultants working on the project had also worked for TransCanada and its subsidiaries, without that previous work having been disclosed.

Gary Doer, Canada’s ambassador to the U.S., refused to speculate on the timing or content.

“We have no certainty on the timing,” Doer said in an interview.

But he expressed faith that the Canadian position would prevail: that the pipeline would be the safest, cleanest way to ship oil that would be transported to the U.S., one way or the other.

Oil-by-rail spills used to promote pipelines

Referring to train accidents, including the tragedy in Lac-Megantic, Que., Doer said events since the last State Department review had only served to reinforce the earlier conclusion.

“We believe that the facts have, regrettably, become only stronger on oil vs. rail,” he said. “We believe that (the earlier conclusion by the State Department) will be maintained: higher cost, higher (greenhouse gases) without a pipeline.”

A State Department spokesperson wouldn’t confirm anything.

“The State Department is working on the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS), addressing issues in more than 1.5 million public comments, as appropriate. There is no time line for the release of the Final SEIS,” the spokeswoman said in an email. “The Department continues to review the Presidential Permit application for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline in a rigorous, transparent, and objective manner.”

Athabasca Chipewyan Nation pulls out of govt Oil Sands program

January 26, 2014Energy and Resources, First Nations, Oil&Gas, Tar SandsfeaturedCanadian Press

Athabasca Chipewyan Nation pulls out of govt Oil Sands program — ACFN Chief Allan Adam on tour recently with Neil Young (Canadian Press)

FORT MCMURRAY, Alta. – The First Nation that was the main focus of Neil Young’s recent concert tour about Alberta’s oilsands has withdrawn from a government environmental panel.

The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation announced Friday that it is pulling out of the Joint Oil Sands Monitoring program.

The program is the showpiece of federal-provincial efforts to monitor environmental change in the oilsands region.

A spokesman for the First Nation says it made the move because the program lacks meaningful input from aboriginals and doesn’t deal with concerns about treaty rights.

Last year the Fort McKay First Nation north of Fort McMurray pulled out of the program.

Bruce Maclean, a spokesman for the Athabasca Chipewyan, says the Alberta and federal governments aren’t serious about keeping tabs on the oilsands industry.

“It appears that the Alberta government and Environment Canada see the monitoring program as a way to assure Canadian and foreign investors that the oilsands are being developed in a sustainable way,” Maclean said.

Officials at Alberta Environment and Environment Canada were not immediately available for comment.

The First Nation said monitoring programs should include clear directives to address their concerns about land use and the environment, especially how the oilsands affect air, water and wildlife.

Maclean said the monitoring program did not include enough government money to allow First Nations to have an effective role.

Earlier this month Young played concerts in four Canadian cities to raise more than $500,000 to help the Athabasca Chipewyan band pay for a legal attempt to protect its traditional land north of Fort McMurray.

Young played in Toronto, Winnipeg, Regina and Calgary, and drew fire from politicians and industry over his comments likening the oilsands to Hiroshima.

Gas prices heat up as homes, shale gas wells face record chill

January 25, 2014Energy and Resources, Fracking, Oil&GasfeaturedCanadian Press

by Jonathan Fahey, The Associated Press

NEW YORK – The frigid winter of 2014 is setting the price of natural gas on fire.

Friday, the price in the futures market soared past $5 per 1,000 cubic feet, up 9 per cent for the day to the highest level in three and a half years. The price of natural gas is up 29 per cent in two weeks, and is 50 per cent higher than last year at this time.

Record amounts of natural gas are being burned for heat and electricity. Meanwhile, it’s so cold that drillers are struggling to produce enough to keep up with the high demand. So much natural gas is coming out of storage that the Energy Department says supplies have fallen 20 per cent below a year ago — and that was before this latest cold spell. Says energy analyst Stephen Schork:

[quote]We’ve got record demand, record withdrawals from storage, and short-term production is threatened. It’s a dangerous market right now.[/quote]

Natural gas and electric customers are sure to see somewhat higher rates in the coming months. But they will be insulated from sharp increases because regulators often force natural gas and electric utilities to use financial instruments and fuel-buying strategies that protect residential customers from high volatility.

North America faces second major cold snap

To understand the price increase, just look at the thermometer. A second major cold snap this month is gripping much of the country, including the heavily-populated Northeast. And forecasters are now predicting colder weather in the weeks to come, extending south through Texas.

Natural gas is used by half the nation’s households for heating, making it the most important heating fuel. Electricity is the second most popular heating source, and electric power generators use natural gas to generate power more than any other fuel except for coal.

Commodity Weather Group, which predicts heating demand for energy companies and consumers, said in a report Friday that periodic breaks in the cold weather are expected to be “weaker and briefer, extending the duration of colder weather” in late January and early February.

Shale gas wells can freeze up

There are a couple of other factors at play. In the past, much of U.S. natural gas was produced in the Gulf of Mexico. If weather disrupted supplies there, it was typically in the early fall, during hurricane season, when heating and electricity demand are low and natural gas storage facilities are mostly full in preparation for winter.

Now, much of U.S. production comes from on-shore formations that are more susceptible to cold, ice and snow. Wells that are not designed for such extreme conditions can freeze, halting production.

“Now the threat to production is when demand is at its highest,” Schork says.

Also, electric utilities have for several years been switching to cheaper natural gas for power generation. And new pipelines aren’t being built fast enough to deliver all the gas required at times of high demand. That can lead to regional shortages that send prices skyrocketing.

Gas prices could remain high

When the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Station in Maryland shut down earlier this week because of an electrical problem brought on by snow and ice, power generators across the East Coast scrambled to replace the lost power by cranking up natural gas-fired plants. That sent natural gas prices for immediate delivery, known as the spot price, to a record $120 per 1,000 cubic feet in some markets on the East Coast. To put that in perspective, that’s equivalent to oil at more than $700 per barrel.

Analysts say there is plenty of gas to replenish supplies, and drillers will scramble to boost production so they can fetch prices they haven’t seen since the summer of 2010.

If, that is, the weather heats up later in February and March. If it’s still cold when baseball season opens in early April, though, Schork says, “we’ll be looking at much higher natural gas prices.”

NEB shuts down Kinder Morgan pipeline hearing website for “maintenance”

January 24, 2014Energy and Resources, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedCanadian Press

NEB shuts down Kinder Morgan pipeline hearing website for 'maintenance' — Artist’s rendering of proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline and tanker expansion

VANCOUVER – An oil pipeline critic and New Democratic MP from British Columbia says plans by the National Energy Board to perform maintenance on its website this weekend are “ridiculous.”

Burnaby-Douglas MP Kennedy Stewart recently said his community office would hold Saturday computer labs to show people how they could apply online to participate in upcoming hearings on the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion.

The $5.4-billion Trans Mountain pipeline from Edmonton to B.C.’s coast could result in a seven-fold increase in tanker traffic in the waters that surround Vancouver.

But the National Energy Board says on its website that users could experience service interruptions, starting at 6 p.m. this evening and running until 6 a.m. Monday.

Stewart says the public application process was launched last week and is only open for 28 days.

He says the energy board has not made print copies or printable files of the application available so there is no choice but to apply online. Days Stewart:

[quote]With only 20 days yet to go, ‘network maintenance’ that takes the better part of three days is unacceptable and presents yet another challenge for people who want to have their voice heard during the hearing process. Even seeing that notice will discourage people from attempting to apply.[/quote]

Gitga’at First Nation challenges Enbridge panel ruling in court

January 23, 2014Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersfeaturedCanadian Press

Gitga'at First Nation challenges Enbridge panel ruling in court — Members of the Gitga’at First Nation lead a rally in Prince Rupert in 2012 (Damien Gillis)

by Dene Moore, The Canadian Press

VANCOUVER – The Gitga’at First Nation in British Columbia has filed a court challenge to the federal review panel recommendation in favour of the Northern Gateway pipeline, bringing to 10 the number of applications filed in Vancouver against the project.

The small community centred around Hartley Bay on the north coast said its way of life would be severely threatened by the bitumen-laden tankers that would navigate Douglas Channel on their doorstep.

In applications filed this week with both the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal, the band asks for a judicial review of the joint review panel’s decision.

“We’re talking about hundreds of ships passing by basically our front door… and the impact that that’s going to have on our way of life and the cultural identity of the Gitga’at people,” Cam Hill, an elected band councillor, said Wednesday.

“We are a sea-going people. Our life is on the sea.”

First Nation: Crown failed to consult

The band wants the court to declare that the panel “breached the honour of the Crown in its dealings with the Gitga’at” and failed to fulfil the Crown’s duty to consult aboriginal peoples.

They’re asking the court to quash the report and recommendations or, failing that, to refer the report back to the panel for further consideration.

The joint review panel issued a report last month recommending approval of the 1,200-kilometre pipeline from the Edmonton area to a tanker port in Kitimat, B.C. — with 209 conditions.

Ivan Giesbrecht, spokesman for Northern Gateway, said the company anticipates the court will deal quickly with the legal issues. Said Giesbrecht:

[quote]We’re confident the court will agree that the JRP process was thorough, fair, and based on sound science. In the meantime, we are focusing on the important task of meeting the conditions set forth by the province of British Columbia.[/quote]

Enbridge recommendation faces 10 legal challenges

The Federal Court registry said they have received 10 applications regarding the project with the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal. Most applicants have filed to both courts.

The Haisla Nation, the Gitxaala and several environmental groups also filed applications to both courts for a judicial review within the 30-day deadline.

The reasons for the court challenges vary, including that the panel erred in law by considering the economic benefits of the project to the Alberta oilsands, but ignoring the adverse effects of the development.

Opponents also said the panel made its decision despite gaps in the evidence, such as the absence of a federal study of diluted bitumen and how it behaves in water. That study, which found the heavier, molasses-like product sinks when mixed with sediment in salt water, was quietly released by Environment Canada after the panel wrapped up hearings.

The panel also didn’t get to consider a federal recovery strategy for humpback whales or a draft strategy for caribou, both published by Environment Canada after the hearings ended and years overdue under the federal Species At Risk Act.

All say the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency panel, which conducted the review for the agency and the National Energy Board, made legal errors in arriving at the opinion that the pipeline should be built.

Hill said the Gitga’at felt their voices really weren’t heard during the panel process.

“Court is not an avenue that we really wanted to go down,” he said.

The band did not accept any money from Northern Gateway Pipelines to fund its participation at the many months of hearings, but he declined to say where the money came from for panel participation or for a court fight.

The federal cabinet has 180 days from the time it received the report, released in December, to make a final decision.

Halliburton manager destroys Gulf spill evidence, gets probation

January 22, 2014Energy and Resources, Oil&GasfeaturedCanadian Press

by Michael Kunzelman, The Associated Press

NEW ORLEANS – A former Halliburton manager was sentenced Tuesday to one year of probation for destroying evidence in the aftermath of BP’s massive 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Anthony Badalamenti, of Katy, Texas, had faced a maximum of one year in prison at his sentencing by U.S. District Judge Jay Zainey. Badalamenti pleaded guilty in October to one misdemeanour count of destruction of evidence.

The 62-year-old also has to perform 100 hours of community service and pay a $1,000 fine.

Badalamenti was the cementing technology director for Halliburton Energy Services Inc., BP’s cement contractor on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. Prosecutors said he instructed two Halliburton employees to delete data during a post-spill review of the cement job on BP’s blown-out Macondo well.

The judge said that the sentence of probation is “very reasonable in this case.”

“I still feel that you’re a very honourable man,” he told Badalamenti. “I have no doubt that you’ve learned from this mistake.”

Badalamenti apologized to his family and friends for causing them “undue stress”

“I am truly sorry for what I did,” he said.

Halliburton cut its own deal with the Justice Department and pleaded guilty in September to a misdemeanour charge related to Badalamenti’s conduct. The company agreed to pay a $200,000 fine and make a $55 million contribution to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, but the latter payment wasn’t a condition of the deal.

Tai Park, one of Badalamenti’s lawyers, said in October that guidelines calculated by prosecutors call for Badalamenti to receive a sentence ranging from probation to six months in prison. Zainey, however, isn’t bound by the sentencing guidelines.

Four current or former BP employees also have been charged in federal court with spill-related crimes.

On Dec. 18, a jury convicted former BP drilling engineer Kurt Mix of trying to obstruct a federal probe of the spill. Prosecutors said Mix was trying to destroy evidence when he deleted a string of text messages to and from a BP supervisor.

Mix faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. His sentencing is set for March 26.

BP well site leaders Robert Kaluza and Donald Vidrine pleaded not guilty to manslaughter charges stemming from the deaths of 11 workers on the Deepwater Horizon. Prosecutors claim Kaluza and Vidrine botched a key safety test and disregarded abnormally high pressure readings that were glaring signs of trouble before the April 2010 blowout of BP’s Macondo well triggered a deadly explosion.

Former BP executive David Rainey was charged with concealing information from Congress about the amount of oil that was gushing from BP’s well before the company sealed it.

Prosecutors said Badalamenti instructed two Halliburton employees to delete data from separate runs of computer simulations on centralizers, which are used to keep the casing centred in the wellbore. The data could have supported BP’s decision to use six centralizers instead of 21 on the Macondo project, but prosecutors said the number of centralizers had little effect on the outcome of the simulations.

Halliburton notified the Justice Department about the deletion of the data, which couldn’t be recovered.

“I stand with Neil”: Prominent Canadians backing Young on Tar Sands

January 21, 2014Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Tar SandsfeaturedCanadian Press

"I stand with Neil"-Prominent Canadians backing Young — Author Michael Ondaatje, actress Neve Campbell and rocker Gord Downie are all standing with Neil Young

by The Canadian Press

More than 20 notable Canadians have penned a letter to support musician Neil Young following his concert tour to raise money for a First Nation fighting oilsands expansion in northern Alberta.

The group includes creative and performing artists, authors, scientists, a lawyer, and Order of Canada recipients.

Actor Neve Campbell, Booker-prize-winning author and Officer of the Order of Canada Michael Ondaatje and musician Gord Downie of the rock group The Tragically Hip are among those who have signed the letter.

It says that Young’s tour raised more than $500,000 to help the Athabasca Chipewyan band pay for legal fees to protect its traditional land north of Fort McMurray, Alta.

The letter also says that Canada must decide if it wants to support First Nations rights and protect the environment.

[quote]The time has come for Canada to decide if we want a future where First Nations rights and title are honoured, agreements with other countries to protect the climate are honoured, and our laws are not written by powerful oil companies. Or not.[/quote]

“Instead of focusing on Neil Young’s celebrity, Prime Minister Harper should inform Canadians how he plans to honour the treaties with First Nations,” the letter said.

Campbell said in a written statement that while she has always been proud to call Canada her home, “now as a Canadian I feel deeply ashamed to see that our government has allowed the selfish profiteering of powerful oil companies, and blatantly ignored the health, well-being, and lives of our country’s First Nations, as well as of the well-being of our world’s climate.”

Downie of The Tragically Hip said, “I stand in support of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations and all Canadians who find themselves with no voice in our present version of democracy, who are trying to come up with the entry fee that gets them a seat at the table where their pollution future is being discussed.”

Young played in Toronto, Winnipeg, Regina and Calgary, and drew fire from politicians and industry over his comments likening the oilsands to Hiroshima.

Full text of open letter:

On his Honour the Treaties tour, Neil Young is doing what poets do – forcing us to examine ourselves. This is hard enough on a personal level and it can be even more difficult when we are being asked to examine the direction in which our country is headed.

The time has come for Canada to decide if we want a future where First Nations rights and title are honoured, agreements with other countries to protect the climate are honoured, and our laws are not written by powerful oil companies. Or not.

Neil’s tour has triggered the Prime Minister’s Office and oil company executives. They have come out swinging because they know that this is a hard conversation and they might lose. But that should not stop the conversation from happening. Instead of focusing on Neil Young’s celebrity, Prime Minister Harper should inform Canadians how he plans to honour the treaties with First Nations. This means ensuring the water, land, air, and climate are protected so the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations and other First Nations communities be able to hunt, fish, gather plants and live off the land. Canada signed a treaty with them 114 years ago, and this must be honoured.

The world is watching as we decide who we will become. Will we disregard the treaties we have with First Nations? Will we continue to allow oil companies to persuade our government to gut laws, silence scientists, and disassemble civil society in order to allow reckless expansion of the oil sands?

We are proud to stand with Neil Young as he challenges us all to think about these larger, more profound and humane questions.

Now is the time for leadership and to honour promises that we have made, not personal attacks.

Michael Ondaatje, author, Officer of the Order of Canada
Margi Gillis, dancer, Member of the Order of Canada
Clayton Ruby, lawyer, Member of the Order of Canada
Dr. David Suzuki, scientist, Companion of the Order of Canada
Dr. David Schindler, scientist, Officer of the Order of Canada
Stephen Lewis, Companion of the Order of Canada
Joseph Boyden, author
Gord Downie, musician
Sarah Harmer, musician
Naomi Klein, author
Dr. John Stone, scientist
Tzeporah Berman, author
Amanda Boyden, author
Neve Campbell, actor
Wade Davis, author
Dr. Danny Harvey, climate scientist
J.B. MacKinnon, author
Dan Managan, musician
Sid Marty, author
Andrew Nikiforuk, author
Rick Smith, author
John Valliant, author
Ronald Wright, author

“As long as the Federal Government chooses to defang and denude, rather than uphold, our once-strong Environmental Laws – to whittle them down to mere speed bumps in the way of anyone who wants to make a buck at nature’s expense – then increasingly, we must look to the courts for recognition of our treaties, for recognition of our basic human rights, namely our right to a swimmable, drinkable and fishable water future for all.

I stand in support of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations and all Canadians – who find themselves with no voice in our present version of democracy; who are trying to come up with the entry fee that gets them a seat at the table where their pollution future is being discussed. Every community has the right to be heard, to be able to ask, ‘Is this safe, for us?’ We should all watch the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations and their struggle very closely and with great interest, for their struggle is coming to us all, if it hasn’t already. The day will come when your community will want to ask for truth from power; ‘Is this safe for us? For our children?’ That day you will want to be ready for the answer power gives you.”

Gord Downie, Singer – The Tragically Hip

“I fully support and stand behind ACFN and all First Nations in our country in what shouldn’t be a struggle to defend their treaty rights made in good faith with our federal government. The direction this current government has taken undermines the very values our democracy is built upon and as a Canadian and an artist I must stand up and make my voice heard. Honour the treaties, Mr. Prime Minister. Canadians are listening and are watching and soon will be voting in the name of justice.”

Joseph Boyden, Writer/Author of “The Orenda”

“I had the honor years ago to fly to Fort McMurray to sit with some of the Cree Miskisew First Nations and to hear their plight. I was appalled to hear how our country has dishonored treaties formed with the Nations 114 years ago. Appalled at the effects the toxins from the tar sands are having on their land, their water and now tragically their health. Appalled that our country has turned a blind eye on these issues and a Nation of people for the sake of greed. I have always been so very proud to call Canada my home, and now as a Canadian I feel deeply ashamed to see that our government has allowed the selfish profiteering of powerful oil companies, and blatantly ignored the health, wellbeing, and lives of our countries First Nations, as well as of the wellbeing of our world’s climate. Surely there must be other ways for us to achieve our countries energy independence without sacrificing the health and way of life of our countries’ people? I fully support Neil Young in his tour to bring attention to these issues.”

Neve Campbell, Actress “Party of Five” and “Scream”

Alberta doctors avoid linking health issues to Tar Sands: report

January 21, 2014Energy and Resources, Health and Environment, Tar SandsfeaturedCanadian Press

by Bob Weber, The Canadian Press

EDMONTON – Opposition politicians are raising concerns over a report done for Alberta’s energy regulator that suggests doctors are reluctant to draw links between health problems and the energy industry.

“We do have a culture in this province which actively diminishes healthy and important debate about the health and environmental effects of our dominant industry,” NDP critic Rachel Notley said Monday.

David Swann, a Liberal member of the legislature, said the government doesn’t even want to know the truth. Said Swann, who lost his job as a public health doctor for speaking out on climate change during the Tory government of Ralph Klein:

[quote]It’s clear the government doesn’t really want to know the best science in some of these areas. They haven’t funded it, and they haven’t disseminated the knowledge appropriately to the physician population.[/quote]

Hearing begins into health effects from oilpatch operations

On Tuesday, a hearing is set to begin in Peace River, Alta., about the source and effects of odours that landowners blame on the local oilpatch, particularly the operations of Baytex Energy.

Baytex uses an unusual method of heating bitumen in above-ground tanks to extract the oil. Residents say the fumes from those heated tanks are causing powerful gassy smells and leading to symptoms that include severe headaches, dizziness, sinus congestion, muscle spasms, popping ears, memory loss, numbness, constipation, diarrhea, vomiting, eye twitching and fatigue.

Labs refuse to study health effects of petrochemical exposures

Among the reports commissioned for the hearing by the Alberta Energy Regulator is one from Margaret Sears, a doctor in chemical engineering, who has testified on environmental contamination for many bodies including the Royal Society of Canada.

Sears wrote that even though most health professionals believe petrochemical emissions affect health, Peace River doctors seemed unwilling to consider if the conditions their patients complained of were caused by long-term exposure to petrochemicals.

“There were reports from various sources that physicians would not diagnose a relationship between bitumen exposures and chronic symptoms, that physician care was refused for individuals suggesting such a connection,” she wrote.

Even medical labs refused to conduct an analysis when told it was to be used to try to establish such a link, said Sears.

Doctor refers patient to lawyer instead of offering treatment

One doctor, in a medical report released as part of the hearing, advised his patient “to go through environmental lawyers” and did not prescribe treatment.

Sears confirmed to The Canadian Press that her conclusions were based on interviews with both patients and doctors.

She wrote that the physicians’ reluctance stemmed in part from a lack of research they could use to form a credible opinion and in part from “fear of consequences.”

Conor not surprised

“I’m not surprised,” said Dr. John O’Connor, a doctor who was disciplined in 2007 for raising cancer concerns in the oilpatch community of Fort Chipewyan. The Alberta Cancer Board has since found elevated levels of four different cancers in the community.

“It has been said to me many a time over the last few years, or words to that effect,” he said.

[quote]It’s not easy. You set yourself up as a moving target.

[/quote]

Allan Garbutt, president of the Alberta Medical Association, said he couldn’t comment on the specific concerns in Sears’ report.

“I certainly agree that physicians must not feel intimidated in exercising their advocacy role,” he said.

“There would also be merit in exploring the report’s suggestion that better research on the impact of oil and gas emissions on patients and communities is needed for strong policy development. Better information, training and support for physicians to help diagnose their patients would always be welcome.”

Health Ministry downplays concerns

Matthew Grant, spokesman for Alberta Health Minister Fred Horne, downplayed Sears’s suggestions.

“No concerns of this nature have been forwarded to our office. We would always expect physicians to inform the government of any public health concerns they may have.”

Notley said the province has consistently avoided conducting research that could answer the kind of questions being raised in Peace River.

“The status quo is to believe that nothing’s wrong and all industry has to do is say, ‘Show us a mountain of evidence,'” she said. “It’s very imbalanced, and that imbalance works against people without the resources to build those mountains of evidence.”

Swann said Alberta public health doctors aren’t trained enough to be able to diagnose health complaints caused by environmental contamination.

“We haven’t been trained to do the physical assessment, order the right blood tests and put together the exposure with the health systems,” he said. “We’re working in ignorance, and there is the fear of challenging both government and industry in such a dominant industry activity here.”

Swann said his experience was widely noted among his colleagues.

“I paid a price, 10 years ago. I think the lesson most physicians took from that is that you speak up at your risk.”

The Common Sense Canadian

Critical discussion of key issues shaping our economy and environment.