Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Two editorials, two views

The London Free Press and many other Sun Media/Quebecor Media papers carried this editorial by Ezra Levant on the Alberta tar sands: Putting a new face on the oilsands. The right say oilsands; The left say tar sands; Levant says ethical oil.

The New York Times carried this editorial today: Profits before environment. According to the American paper: Tar sands production creates three times as many greenhouse gases as does conventional oil.

The dispute over the soundness of the tar sands development has turned ugly. It wasn't a big turn. The tar sands are an environmental disaster like so many of the things that we do for energy to support our unsupportable-in-the-long-run way of life.

Levant calls his opponents anti-oilsands agitators spreading anti-oilsands lies and propaganda. The Free Press editorial writer claims: "The chief criticism of the oilsands is esthetic: Open-pit mines just don't look pretty." Now it appears to be Levant who is lying.

A little, very little, googling will quickly show opposition to the tar sands and to the new pipeline is because many Native Canadians see the tar sands development as causing "environmental devastation." This is not an esthetic problem.

No comments:

Post a Comment