this blog has moved to a new address:

Please update your RSS, bookmarks, and links to

Monday, January 26, 2009

an oil sands poker face?

Just how strong a hand are the Oil Sands for the Provincial and Federal Government to play with the new Obama Administration? Not very, according to Robert Silver.


Gauntlet said...

His point about the Prime Minister not being able to negotiate with the oil is true.

That said, the US (absent a major depression) is going to need more oil, not less. Coal will not make up the difference, and for the time being, it's worse than oil sands in terms of carbon output. Meanwhile, oil supplies virtually everywhere but Alberta are declining, and the global demand for oil is skyrocketing with the emergence of the Chinese and Indian markets.

It's not a card game. It's a foregone conclusion.

Anonymous said...

I cannot see why Canada would stake any of its future on a non-renewable resource that is an environmental catastrophe waiting to happen... (or in fact, happening already). It's a black mark against this country's reputation.

Anonymous said...

Laurence, what's your timeline for "future"? Do you mean 5, 10, 25 50, 100 years?

NWT has staked much of its future on a non-renewable resource called diamonds. Is this smart?

Anonymous said...

Hans Franz,
There is an enormous difference between diamonds and oil. One resource imperils the climate of the world, and moreover, the Alberta oil sands are the dirtiest form of oil on the planet. For that reason, Alberta risks finding its closest trading partner, America, increasingly unwilling to buy its exports. For these and many more reasons, oil has no long term future in Canada's economy. Absolutely take the money its generating now... for sure. But invest that as much as possible in finding alternate source and developing the clean energy infrastructure this country needs.