How crude oil shapes the Canadian landscape
Much has been said about the oil sands in Alberta and the issues that arise in its existence. For many, the oil sands symbolize economic potential, growth, and consistent capital, for others, it remains a harmful process that fundamentally urges human rights deficits among the Canadian people. The oil sands debate often involves the balancing act of weighing the economic benefits alongside the moral and ethical- a dichotomy which seems shallow and harmful within itself.
In 1967, Canada’s centennial year, a milestone in Canadian history was achieved. The Expo ‘67 allowed Canada to garner international attention, and begin to further develop and flourish their identity. Beyond the glamour of the worldwide exhibit, a lucrative and promising industry was unfolding in the Canadian West.
Suncor Energy (now the largest oil company in Canada) opened their first plant in September 1967- among the international spotlight of Expo 67. Just four years earlier, companies took an enormous risk and invested $250 million into the oil sands, then called the Great Canadian Oil Sands, and finally saw their investment pay off. Once the project officially began, 45,000 barrels a day were being produced from the promising, untapped reservoir of bitumen in Fort McMurray.
On opening day, Alberta Premier Ernest Manning made a powerful statement that stands true now more than ever: “This is a red letter day, not only for Canada but for all North America. No other event in Canada’s centennial year is more important or significant.”
As Canada’s centennial year celebration came to end, the development of the oil sands stood poised to become one of the biggest and most influential resources in Canadian economics. In a way, the oil sands have become a part of national identity- growing alongside the nation while shaping and changing the landscape for better or worse.
Currently, the oil sands have become Canada’s largest economic resource, producing approximately 1.9 million barrels of crude oil per day in 2012. The growth and prominence of the oil sands in Canadian culture is outstanding. Seemingly, the economy has been shaped in such a way that a co-dependency has formed between major oil companies and the Canadian government.
Furthermore, oil sands production is still rapidly on the rise, and shows no signs of stopping. Estimated to double its production within the next decade to 3.5- 4 million, the future of Canada is permeated by the lingering economic promise of crude oil.
While a solid amount of the oil produced is used and sold domestically within Canada, the oil industry remains at the top as Canada’s largest export industry. Exports mostly occur throughout North America, but the market has stretched across Canada towards the East coast, and even internationally in highly-populated Asian markets.
There is no doubt that the oil sands are a valuable natural resource that boosts the Canadian economy, but there are certain issues that need to be addressed within the discourse of environmentalism. Many concerns arise in the rapid increase of oil sands production- namely, the mass environmental harm and the expenses needed to keep production running. Approximately $30-billion per year is invested into the expansion of the crude oil industry. Could that money be better spent elsewhere? Should we invest in a more future-friendly resource, as opposed to one that is temporally limited?
Many of these questions linger among Canadians and environmentalists alike. One specific notion, which would aim to amalgamate the oil sands into a more environmentally-friendly process, involves investing in sustainable methods of extraction. Once again, the issue lies within economics and capital- investing in sustainable technologies would be extremely costly, and would undoubtedly drain even more capital resources that could be spent elsewhere in the infrastructure.
The heavy investment into crude oil production debatably stains Canada’s environmental image. Under the Harper administration, Canada’s involvement in reducing carbon emissions has been among the lowest worldwide. While the oil sands are not the sole contributor to these emissions, what remains constant is the lack of regulations imposed upon large corporations.
In 2009, international delegations met and agreed to the Copenhagen Accord; nations pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 2020. A new series of reports show that Canada will fail to fulfill its obligation by 2020. In fact, carbon emissions are set to increase, as more natural resources are becoming available to Canadian corporations.
The main concern for many environmentalists is the lack of institutional intervention within the oil and natural resource industries. Without any regulation imposed by the government, coupled with the visible lack of adherence to international pledges to reduce carbon emissions, it is evident that Canada is crucially neglecting key environmental issues.
Shawn McCarthy, a writer for The Globe and Mail, notices the inherent divide between representations of environmentalism in Canada. McCarthy writes:
“The Harper government vilifies pipeline opponents as radicals bent on undermining the national interest, while environmentalists paint the Prime Minister as public enemy No. 1 on climate change. The loudest voices proclaim: ‘Let her rip’ or ‘Shut her down.’ Somewhere in between, there’s a path that weighs the economic benefits against the environmental costs, takes into account the rights of First Nations and the need for a competitive industry, and deploys capital into 40-year projects that won’t be stranded as the world moves to a low-carbon economy”
The actions (and inactions) of the Canadian government alongside the voices of rightfully concerned environmentalists creates an atmosphere in which there is a clear divide. The permeating threat of environmental harm surround Canadian citizens at every turn. It is clear that Canada is not doing enough internationally, but perhaps what is most problematic is the sheer disregard of Canadian voices- the same voices who have shaped and cultivated the land, and made it their home. While the economic and capital growth remains at the forefront of governmental concern, the need for environmental action is more visible and urgent than ever.