There's nothing "ethical" about it

Since when did oil companies give a red rat's ass about the "ethical" behaviour of the governments of lands from which they sucked oil out of the ground?

The truth is, oil companies are some of the least ethical corporations on the planet. Being harboured in Canada doesn't increase their ethical behaviour. It simply masks what they are and have been all along.

Now go read Norm, then go read Ian.

Update: Go Alison!! And check out Holly Stick's links in the comments.

Interesting ... Some people, depending on where they are, cannot access Ian Reid's blog. No one knows why. So ... Norm has reprinted it.

Daryl Hannah: NJAPF* . . . .

*Not Just Another Pretty Face

Don't limit your thoughts of Daryl Hannah to her "Steel Magnolias" and "Kill Bill" roles. She is one tough debater as the shill for Big Oil finds out in their debate on CBC's "Power and Politics" today. She handles herself very well, is well-versed on the issues and makes a strong argument for the environmental side of this issue.

At one point a comment made by the Ethical(?!?)oil rep created the same response from Daryl and I at the same moment: "Oh my god!" (I'm not even a believer in imaginary beings, but that's a whole 'nuther story.) The shill brings out Canadian values of "respect for minorities and gays and lesbians" as a reason to support "fair trade" tarsands oil. Amazing thing to see and one wonders how he sleeps at night.

Check out the video here . . . .

McKibben, Naomi Klein, Suzuki call for civil disobedience

on the tar sands :

"The short version is we want you to consider doing something hard: coming to Washington in the hottest and stickiest weeks of the summer and engaging in civil disobedience that will likely get you arrested.

The full version goes like this ...

Signed ,
Maude Barlow
Wendell Berry
Tom Goldtooth
Danny Glover
James Hansen
Wes Jackson
Naomi Klein
Bill McKibben
George Poitras
David Suzuki
Gus Speth

h/t  Antonia Zerbisias

Behold a Pale hobbyhorse

Steve's mission statement for the Canada First Defence Strategy

Monday - $30 billion
Jay Paxton, Peter MacKay's press secretary : "As such, the speeches are the strategy."
Dan Dugas, MacKay's senior spokesman : "The strategy is what they unveiled."

Wednesday - upon further reconsideration - $50 billion
Peter MacKay's office : "There's a very detailed cabinet document that lays this down and more."
Defence Department senior military official who apparently cannot be named : "There is a very solid, detailed document in existence. It's not just stuff pulled out of the air."

Ok, so not just something Steve pulled out of his ass which he can stuff right back in again when it suits him (h/t Boris)
There is a plan - they're just not entirely sure what it is yet - but Pale at A Creative Revolution took particular note of this :

"One senior officer used an expletive to express his dissatisfaction with how, in his view, the most proactive spending plan the Forces have ever seen was being communicated to the public."
"Military planners said they took a comprehensive modern approach to predict what global security risks or "conflict drivers" such as terrorism, climate change or population migration would drive up demand for the services of the Forces.

"Food is one, oil is another one, water is one," said another military official."

and asks :
Is this finally Steve's military plan to "battle" the climate crisis?

Is this Steve's Green Plan? :

Note : I made a very small addition to Pale's drawing which I hope she will not mind.
Cross-posted at Creekside

SPP and nukes in the tarsands : "a marriage made in heaven"

In 1957 the US Atomic Energy Commission was looking for peaceful uses for nuclear bombs. They began to explore the possibilities of using them in engineering projects and in '58 Project Ploughshares was announced to the world by Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb.
According to historian Dr. Michael Payne :

"the cabinet of Alberta Premier Ernest Manning seriously considered allowing the underground detonation of a 9 kilotonne atomic bomb at Cheechum Crossing in northern Alberta in an experiment to determine if nuclear power might help remove oil from the oilsands."

They don't give up easy, do they?

On Friday the Alberta and US governments signed an agreement to jointly research the use of atomic power for oilsands development. The Alberta Research Council and the U.S. Energy Department’s main nuclear laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, announced they will collaborate on "the potential application of current and future nuclear energy technology".

Particularly illuminating was how differently the "partners" chose to announce it :
Mel Knight, Alberta’s Minister of Energy :

"Meeting our province’s electricity demands both now and in the future begins with reliable and clear information on all of the available energy options,” said Mel Knight, Alberta’s minister of energy. "We welcome collaborations such as the one announced between the Alberta Research
Council and Idaho National Laboratories to provide the solid analysis and research on the options available to address Alberta’s unique needs."

So this is all about Alberta's electricity demands, Alberta's "unique needs" then?
According to INL - not so much...

"This is a marriage made in heaven", said Idaho laboratory associate director Bill Rogers.
Although no budget for the collaboration was announced, he said potentially all his operation’s 3,800 scientists can be drafted into the Alberta project.
"The U.S. is dependent on Alberta for energy security," Rogers said, pointing to the province’s "essential" role as the biggest source of increasing American oil and natural gas imports."

Uh huh. Not that we haven't had, you know, inklings :
Bruce Power buys assets of Energy Alberta Corp. in bid to build nuclear plant

According to Premier Stelmach, Alberta doesn't yet have a written nuclear policy.
I'm betting the US Energy Department and their "main nuclear laboratory" can probably help them out with that.

Cross-posted from Creekside