Dreaming of a Cleaner, Greener Future: An Open Letter to all Members of Parliament

I have long believed that the tar sands development will result in the largest ecological disaster this country has faced, with the exception perhaps of the crash of the cod fisheries (although in that case, at least with time the stocks will be able to replenish themselves; in contrast, there is no guarantee that the land, air, water and atmosphere will be able to heal in our lifetime from the damage of the development of the tar sands).

I’m sure you are aware of the litany of ecological concerns raised by the tar sands, which includes massive energy and water use, contamination of fish and animals, stripping of large tracts of the boreal forest, irreparable health damage to the people that live in the area (especially First Nations who are seeing spikes in cancer and other diseases), the exploding, unsustainable growth of urban centres such as Fort McMurray, and the massive generation of potent greenhouse gases.

I write to urge you, even to plead with you to push the government not to support the construction of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline, which will carry natural gas extracted from the Beaufort Sea down to the tar sands industry.  Despite many claims to the contrary, there is little doubt that this pipeline will be used mostly to fuel sustained, if not increased exploitation of the bitumen (the tar sands unrefined product).

When the pipeline was originally proposed in the 1970s, Justice Joseph Berger put the building of the pipeline on hold for ten years while First Nations land claims were resolved.  Although some land claims have been resolved, the claims for the Deh Cho First Nations, whose territory and access to hunting would be dramatically affected by the pipeline, have not.  This is an issue of primary importance, and must be resolved before any pipeline is even considered for construction. 

For me, the ideal solution is a full-stop of any exploitation of the tar sands, and a dedicated effort to, at minimum, remedy the surrounding ecology and provide medical help to affected communities – in particular the First Nations – who have received the brunt of the tar sands pollution.  However, I realize that this is likely not politically viable (although proposing a solution that would stop the tar sands, but would also provide economic viability for local communities, perhaps by developing a green energy sector in Alberta would be really great), but at the very least, the halting of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline project would significantly slow down production, and at least buy some time to figure out how to undo the damage that this industry has done.

As I mentioned before, if built, the pipeline would maintain, if not increase production in the tar sands, and this is unacceptable.  Government-proposed solutions such as intensity-based targets might only cause a tiny dent in oil sands production but they will not slow tar sands extraction and refining, and will not halt the resultant dangerous increases in cancer rates and massive ecological destruction.

I am sure you understand the urgency of this issue.  The tar sands industry is causing massive injury to the environment, and using an intensity-based target system to address this ecological crisis would be like putting a band-aid on a person who is hemorrhaging blood from a gaping wound (graphic, I know, but accurate).  The only immediate solution is to massively slow down production and ask if the short-term economic gain is really worth the health and ecological sacrifices that affect Canadians today, and will likely constitute an economic, ecological and health burden on generations to come.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment

Email Name		Title Comment smaller | bigger
		I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage. Write the displayed characters Add Comment