Environmental disaster in the making

[Artisi]

This is well worth the time spent to review this presentation in full.

Please pass onto all your friends and associates who care about the future.

http://youtu.be/84zIj_EdQdM

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)

 

[zdas04]

That is the worst example of spin that I've ever seen. Every word out of that man's mouth was carefully selected to incite, not inform. It is so full of unsubstantiated claims and incendiary phrases that I wouldn't know where to start refuting it.

The forest pictures were pretty.

David

 

[Artisi]

It probably balances out the argument for its continuation by the converted self interested parties.
However, it's not my field of expertise so I leave the arguments to others better informed than I, but after being involved in Ranger uranium in the Norther Territory of Australia which was supposedly state of the art I no longer believe the "converted" that these undertakings are safe.

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)

 

[zdas04]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that industry is perfect and that the environmentalists are evil. There are sound, rational arguments for and against the tar sands project.

My problem is that the video didn't make any of them. The video was long on emotion and short on either facts or alternatives.

If we could get the emotion out of many of these projects, engineers could find cost-effective ways to achieve the major goals (i.e., recovering an economic asset in a way that minimizes impact to the environment).

David

 

[TGS4]

I'm going to guess that you've never been there.

I see it as a decades-long clean-up project. There was (and still is) oil slicks on the Athabasca River (naturally occurring), tar balls on the Clearwater River (again, naturally occurring).

Regarding the tailings ponds - they are used to recycle the water - thousands and millions of times, for each drop of water. There's nothing that's toxic in there that wasn't in the oil-laden sand already.

Regarding the in-situ extraction - they are not allowed to use ANY fresh water. They use brine from sub-surface reservoirs ONLY. Excellent engineering challenges, that brine...

All oilsands operators are required to reclaim their old mining areas. So far, thousands of acres have been reclaimed, and the quality of the forests are now much better than they were prior. This is not coming from an industry spokesperson - I am highly skeptical of their claims as much as the next person. But I have first-hand experience that backs up my statements.

That said, I am happy to no longer work right up there - there are serious issues with fugitive emissions (VOCs) at the upgraders, but they have made good improvement on NOx and SOx emissions from the stacks.

If we could get the emotion out of many of these projects, engineers could find cost-effective ways to achieve the major goals (i.e., recovering an economic asset in a way that minimizes impact to the environment).

The good thing is that while all of this whining and crying and complaining goes on, there are tens of thousands of engineers that are doing exactly that. I know more "environmentalist" process/mechanical/civil/electrical engineers than I know "environmentalist" hippies. Profit and exploitation are WAY down on their priority lists.

In summary (any fellow Canadians will recognize this quote), but if there are groups that want to stop this production, well then, "let the bastards freeze in the dark". If you don't like that oil, then don't use it. However, I think that when push comes to shove, even the most strident environmentalist will choose to use it...

 

[zdas04]

TGS4,
Exactly. As I look at industrial development in general and Oil & Gas in particular around the world, I see a LOT more responsible behavior than irresponsible behavior. I was involved in the far periphery of the heavy oil work in Canada when Amoco bought Dome in 1989. The potential for disaster was huge, but responsible operators did some really good things to minimize the risk. There will always be folks who do stupid things either through greed or ignorance, but they will never again be in the majority. I know a large number of the pool of engineers available to work on the tar sands and am pretty sure that the results will never be published on an e-NGO web page.

On a similar vein, last year I was looking for a well in Colorado. The directions were to go to the Chiparosa Compressor Station and turn right. I had been to that compressor station hundreds of times. It was abandoned 5 years ago, but historically it takes 20 years before my industry has even removed all the equipment (not a proud acheivement, but that is the way it has been) so I was pretty sure that I could find it. I couldn't. BP did a PERFECT job of reclaiming the site and even when I got out of my truck and walked around I could not tell where the reclamation ended and nature started. They didn't make the site "better" than they found it, they made the site exactly like they'd found it.

My guess is that as portions of the tar sands are depleted, the reclamation will return it to a pristine condition and the environmentalists will be absolutely silent about it.

David

 

[TGS4]

There are some genuine concerns about the wetlands - everything up there is muskeg.

But, don't buy the bull that this is fantastic boreal forest. It's mostly muskeg with little bits of forest. From Fort Chip down south to the edge of the farming regions, there's far more muskeg than forest. The reclamation makes real boreal forest, wetlands, etc.

One other thing - about the aboriginal population. Until the white man showed up, they were living a subsistence life, hunting and trapping just enough to feed and cloth themselves. Now, even without a high school education, anyone can earn >$90k/year working at the mines. The oilsands companies (NOT mandated by ANY government) have committed to make significant use of aboriginal-run companies for subcontracting; basically if there is an aboriginal-run company that can do what is needed, then they get first dibs on any job. The entrepreneurship shown by many of the youth is absolutely astounding. It's the "I liked it when I just hunted and trapped" folks that are having issues. These NIMBY's have been very vocal - mostly because they don't work for a living. The silent majority (I have friends who are part of that silent majority, so again I speak from first hand experience) are too busy working, and so their voices are not heard.

 

[evelrod]

The future, if the past is any indication, will be decided by the $$$$$ and the environment will ultimately pay the price.

Rod

 

[IRstuff]

And it's precisely the money involved that companies would otherwise leave a mess. So, sure, companies now reclaim and refurish land they've raped for minerals and whatnot, but that was not always the case. If not for this type of emotional appeal, the average person wouldn't give a dam and the result would be tailings left to leach toxins into runoff and watertables, and so on.

Timber companies now tout their reputation of replanting and reclaiming forest lands, but again that was not the case even in the last century. I've driven by forest land that was clear cut in the early 20th century, and the land has remained barren for nearly a century

TTFN
faq731-376

 

[VEBill]

There's supposed to be a new process under development that will partially refine the tar sands in-situ (deep underground). The oil companies will drill a few holes, start some underground process, and then 'up from the ground comes a bubbling crude.'

So I've heard (on BBC if I recall correctly)...

 

[TGS4]

VE1BLL - what you are talking about is otherwise known as "fire-flood". That scares the crap outta me. They ignite the oil in-situ, and feed it with oxygen. The heat of combustion and added pressure both slightly upgrades the oil as well as reducing viscosity. It's supposed to be very controllable with the oxygen addition. Given the issues that some in-situ SAGD producers have had with porous cap-rock, I'm more than a little skeptical...

IRStuff - the companies want to reduce their tailings pond use as much as anyone. Except for Syncrude, which converted their original mine into a tailings pond, all of the other producers have sacrificed oil-in-place to put tailings on top. And one of the reasons to the massive tailings ponds was that the sands that were naturally contaminated with bitumen have a high content of fine clays. Fine clays don't settle out very quickly, so there are significant retention time issues with their mature fine tailings. Recent (like in the last two years recent) there have been some engineering leaps forward with polymers specially designed to settle out the clay tailings. Enough so that Suncor was able to retire two of their massive mature fine tailings ponds.

Like I said, there are far more engineers involved up here that are looking for better ways to protect the environment than there are engineers and MBAs who are out the f^&k the environment. Hey, we actually live here, too...

Of course, this product needs prices above $80/bbl to be economic, because it is highly capital intensive. If there were no demand, then prices would drop, and there would be no "pressure" to develop this resource.

 

[VEBill]

Bingo. Your mention of "fire-flood" led me to find "Toe-to-Heel Air Injection", which is the specific version I heard mentioned on BBC.

Setting fire to the planet - what could go wrong with that?

 

[stanier]

There is not an environmental challenge in the world that will be solved by an enviromentalist. These challenges will be solved by scientists and engineers provided they are given the resources to do it.

Enviromentalists are akin to a castrated tom cat wailing and a screaming every night on a fence post. He wants to do something but does not has the equipment to achieve a result.

Because some irresponsible organisation has been allowed to pollute or destroy should not prevent that industry being developed by responsible companies.

"Sharing knowledge is the way to immortality"
His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

http://waterhammer.hopout.com.au/

 

[IRstuff]

Perhaps, but environmentalists are the ones that build up the groundswell of public opinion and desire for the change.

THAT is definitely not something that engineers and scientists do, since they're too busy with their projects and looking at their shoes. ;-)

TTFN
faq731-376

 

[Artisi]

and their pay packets.

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)

 

[stanier]

Artisi,

You paint a glum picture of engineers. Your view is that engneers dont have a social conscience.

Some environmentalists confuse issues with their left wing politics. e.g. nuclear power. The world would be a better place with more nuclear power as it provides cheap clean power. many environmentalists cannot get over the fact that nuclear bombs start from the same uranium.

Some of the green manifestos paint human beings as feral species that should be reduced in number. I dont see many greenies stripping bear because their clothes have come from oil based products, made on machines made from steel that has been mined and produced. Yet they cry out when a mine, steel mill, power station etc is announced. Greenies still happy to drive cars and ride trains and all the other items the industrial revolution and engineers have given them yet whinge and whine about development.

Hypocrites & Tom Cats the lot of them.

An environmental scientist on the other hand provides information that the engineer and scientist can work on to provide a solution. An environmental scientist is well respected in the engineering community.

"Sharing knowledge is the way to immortality"
His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

http://waterhammer.hopout.com.au/

 

[TGS4]

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)  

It would appear that you do not have all of the facts, and you are theorizing. There's some good advice there. I suggest you follow it.

 

[Artisi]

Stainer and TGS4

I know many engineers that have a an acute social conscience and will always strive for the best solution, however there are always the others that are exactly the same as the extreme greens and environmentalist except working on the other side.

TGS4, not intending this quote as a slight against yourself, however,
"let the bastards freeze in the dark" is a justification and "catch-cry" by some to ride roughshod over those with a social conscience and percieve that there may well be long term problems, this is whether they are well informed or not.

As always with issues of this nature where is or should be a happy compromise, but where big money is involved and governments see easy tax $'s you can be sure which side will come out on top of any argument and act as they seem fit and justify their actions as being in the best interests of the people, world etc etc.

I am not qualified to pass comment on the safety of these projects, however, I don't like the look of what I see and what could happen and feel justified in making what is a very small contribution along with others who are saying lets be careful and be sure what we know what we are doing.

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)

 

[waross]

"Let the Eastern Bastards freeze in the dark".
The phrase originated many years ago in Canada in response to legislation in Canada that taxed western oil to subsidize eastern purchases of offshore oil. It well expressed widespread western feelings at the time.
The phrase AND the allusions that it evokes may be felt by some to be appropriate to the present NIMBY attitudes by those who oppose for the sake of opposition.

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[zdas04]

First time I heard that phrase it was during the Carter administration and it was proposed as the official state motto of Texas.

David