.)
POWER POLITICS: Green leaders say Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's motives for weakening environmental protections stem from his interest in expanding and exploiting Canada's tar sands oil and gas deposits, which constitute the second-largest petroleum reserve in the world (after Saudi Arabia's).
Image: iStockPhoto
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Dear EarthTalk: Why were some environmental Web sites blacked out all day back on June 4? Was this some sort of protest or did they get hacked?—Ned Cooper, Detroit
It wasn’t hackers this time. In fact, a group of environmental and social justice organizations representing millions of Canadians blacked out their websites for 24 hours this past June 4 to protest efforts by Canada’s conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper to push through a budget bill that would significantly weaken environmental protections.
Organizations leading the black-out include the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, the David Suzuki Foundation, Ecojustice, Greenpeace, Nature Canada, Sierra Club Canada and World Wildlife Fund Canada, and several others. More than 13,000 other websites—including those of many major U.S. green groups including the Sierra Club—also participated in the black-out and continue to support the effort calling for stronger, not weaker, environmental protections. Reports the Black Out Speak Out website: “The environmental changes are particularly undemocratic and worrisome given the extent to which the government is going to please powerful oil interests...”
Green leaders say Harper’s motives stem from his interest in expanding and exploiting Canada’s tar sands oil and gas deposits, which constitute the second largest petroleum reserve in the world (after Saudi Arabia’s). “Harper’s attacks are happening for many reasons, not the least of which was the success of environmental groups in Canada, the U.S. and Europe in threatening what Big Oil wants most: unlimited tar sands expansion and pipelines like the Keystone XL to send its oil around the globe,” reports Michael Marx, director of the U.S. Sierra Club’s Beyond Oil campaign, on the Huffington Post website. “He put the interests of the oil industry first and looked the other way when it came to enforcing laws about air and water pollution, endangered species and the health of downstream communities.”
Marx says that “tar sands oil companies are destroying a pristine forest the size of England, accelerating the rate of climate change, causing thousands of wolves, bears, migratory birds, and caribou to die, and leaching toxic chemicals into rivers, as downstream communities experience a spike in cancer rates.”
According to Marx, Harper’s government is trying to disarm its opposition by threatening the charitable status (and thus the fundraising ability) of green groups who oppose tar sands, subjecting them to onerous tax reporting requirements to bog them down. “‘Black Out, Speak Out’ is a warning that the Harper Government has gone too far,” says Marx. “This protest has brought together a diverse array of Canadians to defend their democracy and right to have an open debate about the future of their country.”
“Hopefully Black Out, Speak Out will mobilize thousands of Canadians and Harper will learn that it’s one thing to attack environmentalists and quite another to attack freedom of speech,” says Marx. “If the Harper government pursues this repressive policy, it should expect the backlash to spread in Canada, the U.S. and in Europe.”
CONTACTS: Black Out Speak Out, www.blackoutspeakout.ca; Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com; Sierra Club, www.sierraclub.org.
EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E - The Environmental Magazine ( www.emagazine.com). Send questions to: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe. Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.
See what we're tweeting about
21 Comments
Add Comment@geojellyroll, "a strong environmentalist" wow that was funny. You're a right wing nut job whose only respect for the environment is its ability to generate wealth in the short term. To call yourself a environmentalist and support Harper is like calling yourself a pacifist and supporting Bush. Harper has done nothing but reduce environmental protection. You're like those Christians who post comments claiming to be atheists who support the encroachment of Christianity into public policy. The "wolf in sheep's clothing" tactic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"His government is trying the focus on nitty gritty issues" just like the Republicans he emulates, taking money from the population and funneling it into the pockets of his supporters. Harper represents the creep of corporate fascism into Canada. His term in office will be consider a dark period of Canadian History.
@Robert Senatore, "I'm not planning on moving back to a cave." well it certainly sounds like you just climbed out of one. How do you figure that the environmentalists are "out-of-control"? The environment is collapsing around you. You have the coal industry destroying mountains and polluting rivers. You have frackers contaminating ground water. You have massive oil spills. You have the collapse of fisheries. You have climate change. If the environmentalists were out-of-control you wouldn't have any of that. So what you do have is weak environmental protection supported by ignorant americans such as yourself. Get yourself educated.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBlack out of websites, lol what will these elitists think of next? They will put one less cookie out at christmas time for Santa?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe fact is Harper sees you elitist environmentalists for what you are a group of people who want to obtain power and money through totally bogus "solutions" all controlled through incompetent bureaucracies.
Good for the canadians, not sure how you people are managing to go back to economic prosperity but you are now higher on the economically free list over the US and apparently now you have more money per person. Good job and this move to control the out of control environmentalists is a smart move.
If only we in the US could turn the tide of socialism and push the people who want to be controlled by the government out of power as you Canadians apparently have.
@priddseren, "Good for the canadians, not sure how you people are managing to go back to economic prosperity but you are now higher on the economically free list over the US and apparently now you have more money per person." and all that with higher taxes, univsersal health care, and a broader social safety net than any american could ever dream of. I guess funnelling money into the pockets of the wealthy isn't the best economic policy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@gepjellyroll, "Rschmidt..as usual you've said nothing sbout the environmnet." neither have you. But I wasn't trying to say anything about the environment, I was saying something about your claim that you are an environmentalist while at the same time supporting an anti-environmental policy by the most environmentally irresponsible government we've had in decades.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAn interesting related development is the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, which would extend from oil-rich Alberta, across British Columbia (BC) to the Pacific coast, with the intent of shipping oil to China. The rationale for this is that it should give Canada access to more lucrative international markets. (Don't Americans pay full price?)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn a recent conference of provincial leaders, BC's premier was the sole opponent of a new "national energy strategy", arguing that BC would not get sufficient revenues from the new pipeline, which puts BC's environment at great risk. BC's premier is the leader of the major right of centre party (BC Liberal Party), and will be facing a currently more popular left of centre party, the BC New Democratic Party (NDP), in an election expected in May, 2013, which may help explain her seemingly environmentalist stance.
The company that is to build the pipeline is Enbridge, the company that is currently being investigated by the U.S. Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration for their role in the 300 million litres of heavy crude spilled into Wisconsin's Kalamazoo River in 2010 from a ruptured Enbridge pipeline.
Currently, the federal government has not gotten involved in this seeming dispute between Alberta and BC, but it will be interesting to see if federal environmental reviews will have any possibility of preventing the pipeline from going ahead.
This is, of course, more politics than science, but it would be interesting to see what the engineering principle of MTBF (mean time between failures) has to say about the likelihood of a crude oil pipeline failing, and what the historical record has to say about the environmental consequences of a failure would be.
AJ Johnstone...more logging leases were given out in British columbia under NDP governmnets than under others. The NDP speaks of environmnetalism but is in the pocket of labour unions that are gung ho for more forestry, mining, etc. Fishing and agriculture are environmental disaters. Ever hear the NDP knock fishing and farming?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Conservatives are blah, blah,...no, they just aren't as hypocritical as other politicak parties.
The main question which has not been addressed is this: Men are monkeys who spend most of their time quarreling over who will have most of the available ressources. In fact they are so absorbed by this that they are incapable of ensuring the survival of their and other species on the planet. Religion and democracy have not changed this situation. Nothing short of a whole new mindset will get us out of this mess.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou think Harper isn't buying into the Nutty "Clean Energy" SCAM? Then how come Harper is spending > $3B on the hopeless Carbon Capture and Storage charade - just a down payment on the development cost. And consumes about 20% more fuel in the process. And a high O&M cost on top of that. And most everywhere that has tried CCS abandoned it, a total failure. So if he doesn't believe in Climate Change why throw $billions down the sewer?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd why is Harper spending >$1 billion per year on the whacky ethanol scam, called "Renewable fuels", pure BS, a total waste of money - but its "Renewable".
And why is Harper giving away subsidies like a production credit of 1 cent per kwy and the federal PERR subsidy that forces Federal buildings to buy expensive Wind & Solar Electricity, and a huge accelerated depreciation tax subsidy for Wind & Solar Energy, that Hydro & Nuclear don't get, if he doesn't believe in climate change? More $billions down the sewer, except for supposedly some minor reduction in CO2 production.
And why has Harper basically banned new Coal Power plants, unless they have his whacky CCS SCAM attached to reduce their CO2 emissions - if he doesn't believe in climate change? Get ready for obscenely expensive Electricity.
And why is Harper funding Greenie Cultist organizations like the Pembina Institute and the Ontario Clean Air Alliance if he is so opposed to Climate Change. And $billions thrown down the sewer on the whacky Hydrogen Economy Scam.
The real truth is that Harper is an Oil Man - through and through, the only real job he ever had was working as an Office Boy for Imperial Oil/Exxon, which his daddy, also an Imperial Oil employee, got him. So we see once again that Big Oil = Big NG = Big Green. Big Oil is the REAL FORCE behind the CCS, Ethanol, Wind & Solar, Hydrogen Economy, and anti-Coal/anti-Nuclear campaigns.
I have been reading your comments for a long time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYOU ARE NOT an environmentalist.
You support oil at any cost, that's not good. I often wonder if you are paid to support unpopular issues.
Sending sandy oil all over the palace in pipelines isn't just stupid...It's insane.
No matter how much money you make.
It destroys life. Oil companies don't restore the land or support the people and animals that get sick and die.
Oil people are dirty, greedy, psychopaths, unless they are regulated to protect the environment.
It's better to process it closer to where it is, IF it has to be used.
Look at the pipeline trash left in Alaska, who is paying to clean that mess up.
We need clean energy, oil is too dirty, all the way up to polluting the air with toxins.
So, the Australian PM goes full retard and requires the Ozzies to pay 5X the world price for carbon (who is getting the rest of the $$$???) and he is a hero.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Germans, Spanish and Brits are committing self-immolation and bankrupting their nations in the name of the Green Goddess Gaia and they are heroes too.
And rigorous statistical analysis has shown that NOAA has been cooking the temperature data for decades and that the actual temperature trend is less than half of what NOAA has been claiming. But NOAA is right anyway, even though they are dead wrong.
And the Canadian PM says "Can we see some facts, please?" and he's a bozo.
Yeah, let's get right on that one.
Actually, the oil companies in Alaska are far more rabid in their environmental practices than you could possibly imagine. And yes, I have worked there and seen it first hand.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI guarantee that there more oil spilled on the ground at your local Wal-Mart parking lot or in the Greenpeace or Sierra Club,s parkades than on any Prudhoe Bay drill site. And there is infinitely more plastic and crap lying on the ground after any OWS demonstration.
That is reality. Been there seen it with my own eyes. Quite impressive actually.
I am not promoting the NDP, just describing some of the background politics of the situation. Do I expect any political party to deliver change? No.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConstructive change typically comes from the people, from inventors and other determined innovators. I think that constructive change is more likely to come from a Richard Branson or a Steve Jobs type, or from a new Ghandi or Martin Luther or Martin Luther King, Jr., than from any government. And political parties rarely tell the truth or deliver on their promises. Politicians just are NOT social innovators: they make changes only when society pretty much demands it, or innovators have already shown the way. The only radical change that any political party has ever made--left or right--is to grab power and wealth from others in society, which rarely benefits the general populace and usually just creates a new and more controlling ruling class.
Tell me about it...despite our millionaire-owned corporate controlled media's daily spew, Americans are despondently powerless against big oil, big pharma, big banks and the politicians they own. Obama has been a verbal supporter of our middle class, but weak on real action, ultimately somewhere right of Reagan. Our millionaire media is milking that frustration into votes for Romney, who has just enough digits to sign America's death certificate after Grover Norquist drowns it in a bathtub.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you support Harper, there is no way that you're a "strong environmentalist". Obviously you don't have a clue what you're talking about, and you're paying no attention at all to what's really going on.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe only "ideology" is the corporate ideology, sucking up to the Chinese that Harper lives by. Scientific American isn't in the habit of printing ideological arguments. I live in Alberta too, and I've been alarmed by Harper ever since his face showed up on a billboard.
He's going down as the most hated Prime Minister in Canadian history - if we have a Canada left after this corporate robot has left office.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis article is mostly bull. Harper is really not much different on Energy/Climate Change than Obama. Yeah, Harper is promoting Canada's one big Oil source, the Tar Sands, and Obama is totally on board with Drill-Baby-Drill, exploiting Oil Shale, Shale Gas, deep-water offshore Oil and additionally a strong proponent of the incredible Corn Ethanol boondoggle. Like Harper, Obama has not been supportive of Coal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd both Obama & Harper are throwing $billions down the sewer on nutty renewable energy scams, CCS, Hydrogen, Wind, Solar, Ethanol etc.
The big difference between Harper & Obama is that there are a whole lot of big players in the Oil business who DON'T WANT the Tar Sands developed, or want the developed slowed as much as possible, or don't want any Oil shipped to China - they want it all processed in the USA. So there has been 100's of $millions funneled into press, native groups, ENGOs and politicians to condemn the Tar Sands.
Other than that, when it comes to Energy & Climate Change Obama & Harper are both doing about the same, i.e. looking out for the interests Big Oil, Big Agro & Big Green alliance.
Many Canadians (at least some Canadians) have noticed that Darth Harper and the other political leaders do not speak of environmental advantages or disadvantages in proposed projects only the economic benefits. Friends in the First Nations communities suspect that Federal benefits in BC will be reduced to be replaced by "considerations" for agreeing to oil sands pipeline right-of-ways. That and Canada's reduced global warmiming commitments are severely troubling
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisgeojellyroll = priddseren = kdfrancis = G. Karst etc - have I overlooked others? maybe that he is a carlyle buddy who uses his own alternating nicks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisproved himself by various mistakes in his comments to be all the same guy - in essence mixing his own POV with shilling for certain institutions
can be disregarded - should be recycled (special waste)
---
strange how Canadians give up what made them good, and even great when compared to the US, in favour of becoming more and more USamerican. What next? Give up health care and introduce free guns for all?
Nasus: "He's going down as the most hated Prime Minister in Canadian history"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen why do Canadians keep voting for PM Harper. I guess you no longer believe in "consensus" or rather, only when it agrees with your view.
jctyler: "geojellyroll = priddseren = kdfrancis = G. Karst etc - have I overlooked others?"
Yes: Not only am I ALL skeptics, I am also Steven Harper. I am also your psychologist, and I must advise you to resume your medication and re-enter therapy ASAP.
Btw: It is generally bad form to address someone, who hasn't commented yet. Try to stay on thread. Good luck with the lithium. GK
harper and his canadian voters have a very fast lesson to learn from what is happening to the US farmers - save what remains of the environment, vote these guys out of office!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiscarlyle, priddzie, geojelly, postman, karst: in the last weeks we have all read even the most sceptic scientists' opinions and admission that the present US agricultural is very probably due to AGW, the food markets are about to explode, farmers start to bankrupt by the hundreds, and not a single word from any of you? been running your mouths for years and suddenly you disappear? not honorable in arguement, not honorable in defeat? A sore (climate) loser you are, all of you.