iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Rebecca Tarbotton

Rebecca Tarbotton

Posted: October 1, 2010 05:34 PM

James Cameron Goes to the Tar Sands

What's Your Reaction:

The most powerful man in Hollywood just confronted the most powerful industry on the planet. Director James Cameron wrapped up a three-day tour of Alberta where big oil is making its biggest play for the planet's dwindling oil reserves in the form of Canada's colossal tar sands project.

Cameron made the trip on the invitation of George Poitras on behalf of Indigenous Environmental Network, whom he met last year at the UN. Poitras has been a long-time advocate for his small community, Fort Chipewyan, just downstream from the toxic tar sands development in Northern Alberta. Those in Fort Chipewyan along with several other Indigenous communities are resisting the tar sands development because of the devastating health, human rights and environmental impacts the project poses.

"We need to put the brakes on expansion and learn more about how to extract this resource in a safe manner," Cameron declared to a packed press conference, "we must include the First Nations in these important policy decisions because right now they can't even trust the water they are drinking."

National news networks carried live coverage of Cameron's trip in the US and Canada as pundits from all sides clamored to interpret the director's every word. The attention could not have come at a better time. This year, tar sands became the biggest source of oil imports into the US, with more than a million barrels per day of the dirty crude flowing across the border. If big oil gets its way, investors will pour $218 billion of investment capital into tripling oil production from tar sands by 2020, and another $35 billion or more to expand pipelines and refineries to process the muck.

A 2009 report by WWF and the Co-Operative Bank concludes that if production continues at this rapid pace around 87 billion barrels of tar sands oil will be mined, burned and ultimately released into the atmosphere as more than 50 gigatons of CO2 by 2050.

This week, James Cameron added his voice to the chorus of voices pushing to stop the destruction caused by tar sands development. It is critical that we in the US, the largest consumer of this dirty oil, do the same. The real solution to the horrors of the tar sands is to transition away from this devastating source of oil extraction and toward a green energy economy.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 12
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
MimiK
living in dramatic times
12:13 PM on 11/03/2010
@victoria blue: awesome cogent reporting. turn it into an article for grist, please.

The Transition movement explains tar sands extraction with this lively metaphor: imagine a pub where beer has been spilled onto the carpet for a century, and one is extracting all the little spots of spilled beer in the carpet.

insanity when you think of all the sunlight and wind -- the "fuels from heaven" all around us.
04:17 PM on 10/27/2010
Get used to oil production that costs more, takes more energy inputs, and generates more environmental waste and damage. We are at Peak Oil, the point where we have used about half of the oil that is easy to produce. The on-land pressurized light sweet crude in super giant fields like Ghawar is gone. In its place is production from the Alberta oil sands and the deepwater GOM and the Santos Basin. We have just seen the enhanced environmental destruction associated with the BP Macondo deepwater blowout, and entropy will not be denied as we proceed down the Peak Oil production curve.

I sympathize with those who want to preserve their lands - this spoilage and waste generation represents an unprecedented tragedy for the human race. We are literally watching the death of nature. But the problem is unchecked population growth that was fueled by cheap petroleum. 6.8 billion hungry souls now demand petroleum to produce and ship food, and even now the current industrial food production system (and its globalized political organization) can't adequatey feed everyone. We could control and reduce population, but nature will likely do it for us.
12:25 AM on 10/05/2010
Good Job. The tar sands of Alberta are the shame of Canada. Alberta is the Texas of Canada and they don't really care for the environment. Only the money.
07:05 PM on 10/03/2010
The Oilsands are the poster whipping boy for groups like the Rainforest Action Network, a group that originally was set up to shutdown the forest industry in British Columbia; which succeeded , turning BC into a have not province that now receives equalization payments from the Federal Govt. Like all eco-groups then they refused to acknowledge the effects of silviculture , tree farming being by the logging companies when describing the horrible, terrible, awful effects of logging ( tree farming).

Now to keep the donor parade going, the eco-groups have moved to the OilSands but they still play their deceptive games.
Fort Chipewyan is NOT on the Athabasca River - check for yourself on Google Maps - Google Earth. Fort Chip is on Lake Athabasca and the water that flows by it is lake water that flows north to meet up with the Athabasca River - look for yourself and when you do- plug in 'Uranium City ,Sask.
It's on the north side of the lake and it closed 1980 but for 50 years it dumped its radioactive tailings in the lake. Here's what the Sierra Club said in Mine Watch in 2001 - scroll down to Uranium City :
http://www.miningwatch.ca/en/toxicanada-13-good-reasons-establish-clean-canada-fund

Fort McKay is halfway closer to Fort McMurray and is actually on the Athabasca River yet they have less than half the cancers and illnesses of Fort Chip. But they haven't been eating radioactive fish for 50 years either.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
07:06 PM on 10/06/2010
really? it's all a conspiracy by the multi million dollar eco-groups against the trillion dollar oil companies. sure it is. step back, take a breath, Big money is corrupt, absolute power and money do corrupt absolutely. Oil companies have killed people and destroyed ecosystems all over the world, for money. The Tar sands are a terrible source of energy.
06:27 PM on 10/03/2010
three whole days in an area the size of texas... i think i speak for most canadians when i say we are sick of celebrities making publicity pit stops in our country...paul mccartney, didn't even know what province he was in when he deplored the eastern seal hunt, sitting comfortably in some petroleum based arctic coat... we can manage without their help quite well
do not assume for one minute that the proposed pipeline will cross british columbia, this is the home of greenpeace and of so many environmental groups that they have a directory, there have been damaging criminal attacks against another gas pipeline recently... do not confuse british columbia with alberta
unfortunately, many canadians consider the tar sands to be a litter box, you go there to do your business and leave before the smell gets you, very few live there for long or care, but will continue to go there as long as americans buy the oil
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:22 PM on 10/02/2010
I live in Nebraska and this state is under siege by Transcanada who wants a build a pipeline to carry tarsands from Alberta, Canada thru the US down to Texas. There is already a pipeline that runs through the heavy clay soils of the eastern part of the state, just west of Lincoln. This newest proposed tarsands pipeline is plotted through a more western route, under the beautiful Nibrara River (historical homeland of the Ponca and Chief Standing Bear), the fragile Nebraska Sand Hills, (really just the biggest sand dune in North America) and over the largest underground freshwater lake in the world, the Ogallala Aquifer. Because this pipeline crosses the international border, the proposal requires the US State Dept's approval. The EPA has rejected Transcanada's EIS as imcomplete. Despite these requirements, Transcanada sent letters to landowners threatening eminent domain action. Some landowners gave in. Others just got pissed off. The citizens of Nebraska are galvanized to stop this pipeline. Please write to the US State Department and let them know you oppose this pipelint, too. The United States just cannot risk contamination of the water supply that provides 30% of this country's food. Help!
08:54 PM on 10/02/2010
That's fine, don't like oil from Canada, then buy it from the Middle East. Canada can sell the oil sands oil to the Chinese, exports are increasing daily & the Chinese have invested in the tar sands projects. There's already two proposals for pipelines from Alberta to the West Coast of British Columbia to ship crude to Asia.

I am all for alternative energy & the green economy, BUT ... that transition doesn't happen overnight.

And, all Americans had better start riding bicycles.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:22 PM on 10/04/2010
While there is some question as to what country the refined tarsand oil will actually end up so benefit to the US is not assured, the point of the post is that the proposed route is of the Transcanada Keystone XL pipeline is through what is probably the most fragile "land" in the country: grass-anchored sand. The sand allows for refill of the largest body of underground fresh water, vital to this state and the country's food. Sand is also very prone to wind erosion. Nebraskans gave up trying to farm it decades ago, but its good for ranching. Many, many people have already suggested that the second pipeline follow alongside the route of the first, which goes through far more stable environments as it all hooks up in the same places anyway. You just have to see it:
Ogallala Aquifer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer
Nebraska Sandhills: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_Hills_(Nebraska)
Map of Proposed and Existing Keystone Pipelines: http://pipelinesinternational.com/news/transcanada_responds_to_keystone_xl_pipeline_concerns/041815/
One Sandhills Visitor's Blog about the Sandhills: http://top100golf.blogspot.com/2006/07/sand-hills-golf-club.html
And, of course, the migratory flyover route of hundreds of varieties of birds, especially the cranes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandhill_Crane
Hope that helps to clarify our concerns.
photo
laymancanuck
IGNORANCE has used up its quota of TOLERANCE
04:36 PM on 11/05/2010
You're right. How come no one every talks about conserving energy any more. No need for a huge military presence to protect your secure supply of Canadian Oil. Huge R and D dollars are going into cleaning up the oil sands. Focus your attention on cleaning up the american coal industry.
04:27 PM on 10/26/2010
Exactly. Thru sand! Pull your head out of the sand and you will realize that all the windmills in the world can not make a computer.That takes petroleum!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:12 PM on 10/01/2010
Cameron's convinced me.

I think I shall buy a a 8200 sq ft house replete with large swimming pool and tennis courts, plus another house as an environmental show case, and then fly around the world in private jets lecturing people endlessly of the dangers of their greedy, opulent, CO2-belching life styles and the big, rich, evil oil companies that support it.

It's the least I can do.