When talking about fossil fuels, it is inevitable to think about their impact on the environment. After all, “burning fossil fuels like oil and natural gas produce greenhouse gas emissions such as ozone, methane, carbon dioxide” (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, 2017), and many other substances that harm our planet and contribute to global warming. But as humans we are on an uncomfortable position, fossil fuels generate most of the energy we consume but also pollute the planet, and according to the International Energy Agency, global demand for energy is expected to increase 31 per cent by 2040 (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, 2017). In addition, “Canada's share of global greenhouse gas emissions is about two per cent” (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, 2017), which doesn’t sound as much, but still generates a negative impact on the environment. Then how can be stop using fossil fuels if the energy demand is increasing? Environmental issues are not the only problem with fossil fuels in Canada. Aboriginal communities employ technologies that use fossil fuels and occupy various territories where the reserves of fossil fuels are located. The Canadian government had proposed several energy projects to improve the country’s situation, but “Aboriginal communities argue that they are not being suitably informed and consulted during the planning and decision-making process and that they are not benefitting equitably from these projects. Energy
The U.S obtains more than 84% of its energy from fossil fuels including oil, coal and natural gas. This is because people rely on it to heat their homes, power industries, run vehicles, manufacturing, and provision of electricity. It is apparent that the country’s transportation industry highly depends on conventional petroleum oil, which is responsible for global warming, thus threatening economic opulence and national security. Apart from that, increasing consumption of fossil fuels have elevated health problems in the state, destroyed wild places, and polluted the environment. After conducting Environmental Impact Assessment, projections showed that the world energy consumption would increase by more than 56% between 2010 and 2040. However, fossil fuels will cater for more than 80% of the total energy used in 2040. Sadly, it will be a trajectory to alter the world’s climate, as well as, weaken the global security environment. Importantly, the rate at which the US relies on fossil fuels needs to reduce since it has adverse effects on the planet’s supplies. The society needs to realize that fossil fuels are nonrenewable, thus taking millions of years to form (Huebner, 2003). Notably, the country can reduce dependency on fossil fuels by practicing energy conservation and efficiency,
For various reasons, the Canadian government continues harmful practices in lieu of the concerns from Aboriginal peoples. Returning to McGregor (2004), the power imbalance that exists between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people is apparent (p. 398), especially regarding oil extraction. So long as “western” theories of production and management are followed, opposing ideals will not dominate. There are large profits to be made in the Athabasca region from resource extraction. As a result, the Canadian government reduces the region to a marketable commodity (Latulippe,
In this paper, we focus on using fossil fuels causing climate change. Fossil fuels are fuels formed natural resources such as coal, petroleum and natural gas, which are the most widely used fuel and industrial chemicals in the world. Since industrial revolution, fossil fuels bring a very great quantity convenience and technological products. So we can use cars, planes and all modern products. But fossil fuels cause climate change at the same time. Greenhouse gas, nitrous oxides and a great deal of harmful gas which are from fossil fuels are causing serious environmental problems. Therefore we need to be concerned about the problems caused by fossil fuels and the solutions.
These factors result in several issues and challenges. These matters have brought a conflict between the various stakeholders in this industry (Oilsandstruth.org, 2015). This discussion aims to identify the primary issues associated with the Canada oil sands and the involved stakeholders. Secondly, the stakeholders’ political view will be established. Finally, the discussion will recommend policies that can be effective in solving the challenges associated with the issues.
Dr. Lorne Taylor (2012, p. 3), the chair of the Alberta Water Research Institute, states, “Organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club are convincing Canadians and the world that Alberta’s oil sands are a scourge on the environment”. Environmental groups and the media are unfortunately shedding a poor light on the development of the oil sands in northern Alberta. Bob Weinhold (2011, pg. 119), a veteran environmental journalist, states “the Royal Society of Canada (RSC) panel found no evidence that people are currently being harmed by oil sands activity”. Both the environmentalist side and the oil sands producer’s side must be evaluated with an objective mind as each contains truths as well as embellishments. Taylor (2009, pg. 2) argues that a major misconception is “the province, people and industry of Alberta
The Alberta Oil Sands have affected many stakeholder groups such as government, residents, researchers and employees. However, we will focus on how it affects the Alberta Government; specifically, Ed Stlemech of the Conservative Government. As my stake holder, Ed Stlemech does not live within the Alberta Oil Sands area as well as have any direct relevance to it, I will instead examine how it has affects the citizens of Alberta and more importantly, those who live in and near the Fort Chipewyan area. In this way, the environmental, the economical as well as the societal impacts will impact Albertan voters and therefore impact the Conservative Government in way of the Alberta General Election.
The first relation should be between the natives and their land in connection with the potential petroleum production and the world. This issue is global in scope as 95% of Canada and 12% of the world's oil is in Alberta. A secondary relation is not only in terms of domestic resources, but the global effects of extraction, as NASA supports that the domestic and international effects would be catastrophic with twice the amount of CO2 being emitted from this Canadian extraction than all of the oil used in history (McCreary & Milligan, 116.) As stated initially, the merit of this article focuses on the actions taken by First Nations and their supporters. Enbridge's proposed pipeline project has initiated research in Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge to supposedly help guide them through a means of working with protesting groups. The findings of this research ultimately leaned towards ways of rerouting maps due to regulatory requirements. Enbridge is an example of a corporation that does not recognize the authority of First Nations groups. A neo-colonial relationship is produced and practiced in territory and development (McCreary & Milligan, 117.) There is very little mention on the media about the improvements of First Nations rights. Though there have been triumphs in aboriginal rights, indigenous development according to McCreary are deeply political/material advancements that not only coincide with the events, but are dependent on returns of resource extraction and consumption (McCreary & Milligan,
Modern day Canada is posed with the current issues of energy and the environment becoming increasingly important within the public and political sectors. The impetus has come from a variety of factors such as the collective development of nonconventional resources, the environmental concern from Canadians, and the demand for renewable energy sources. Many premiers have since called for a ‘national energy strategy’ however the clashes of policies on the federal and provincial levels cause a decrease in progress. This has become largely apparent in the current debates over Alberta’s bitumen deposits and pipelines. The Alberta government has advocated for a ‘national energy strategy’ led by Ottawa placing their political emphasis on the need for Canada to achieve a vision of environmental supremacy. This paper seeks to investigate the clashes of interprovincial trade and commerce powers with the provinces natural resource power debates over Alberta’s pipelines and bitumen deposits in conjunction with the general Canadians feeling of a lack of democracy.
Modern day Canada is posed with the current issues of energy and the environment becoming increasingly important within the public and political sectors. The impetus has come from a variety of factors such as the collective development of nonconventional resources, the environmental concern of Canadians, and the demand for renewable energy sources. Many premiers have since called for a ‘national energy strategy’ however the governments tendency to avoid national approaches to energy allows no progression to be made. This has become largely apparent in the current debates over Alberta’s bitumen deposits. The Alberta government has advocated for a ‘national energy strategy’ led by Ottawa placing their political emphasis on the need for Canada to achieve a vision of environmental supremacy. This paper seeks to investigate the clashes of interprovincial trade and commerce powers with the provinces natural resource power debates over Alberta’s bitumen deposits in conjunction with the general Canadians feeling of a lack of democracy.
This demands an intersectional approach when attempting to understand the complex implications it has on a social, political and environmental scale. It has been discussed that the discursive consequences can be seen in maintaining the hegemonic perspectives, silencing of environmental perspectives and progressing the colonial legacy. Also the distributive effects are demonstrated in large economic disparity, and complex social issues in both the communities and aboriginal groups present in Fort McMurray. The recommend course of action to amend these inequities and environmental injustices is to create a new, scientific based, long term environmental assessment act. This act is to stipulate the new parameters the oil an gas sector must follow to preserve environmental integrity in Canada and our resource economy for future generations. This is intended to create a more level playing field against the capitalist tendencies of capital accumulation, and to lessen the social inequalities present in the province. As a final piece of evidence I will offer my own account as a Calgarian moved to the west coast, of the Albertan mind set and understanding of the oil sands. I will admit that my perspective was an indoctrinated one when I initially left Alberta. Not in the sense that there was no environmentalist perspective present in Calgary but, that it was over powered
The aim of this research is to analyze the origins, development and future directions of the environmental justice conflict among grassroots organizations, Kinder Morgan Corporation and the Canadian government over Trans Mountain pipeline expansion in Burnaby, British Columbia. The proposed study also examines what impacts tar sands extraction, production, and transportation may have on the environment, climate change, public health, and indigenous people´s rights to lands; and how tar sands development has shaped Canadian energy policy. Building on both political ecology and environmental justice theoretical-methodological framework, this research analyzes the interactions between global economy's growing energy and materials consumption, the rise of unconventional fossil fuels (e.g. tar sands), and the struggles of low-income and racial minorities for cultural recognition, participation in decision-making, and environmental justice. For this research, I will collect data from legislative documents, policy and technical reports, scientific journals, newspaper articles, participant observation, and semi-structured interviews with representatives and members of grassroots organizations, Burnaby citizens, and if possible, with local government representatives.
The environment is negatively affected be the burning of fossil fuels. The affects of the gases contribute to global warming, along with acid rain and polluted air. This pollution cuts short an estimated 30,000 American lives according to the Clean Air Task Force (Rich). The United States must stop using fossil fuels because the gases produce harm the environment we live causing harm to come all the citizens. “The future of energy production will
Everyday in U.S., immense amount of fossil fuel is burned. Fossil fuels are fuel formed by natural processes, such as decomposition of buried dead organisms. Fossil fuel release carbon dioxide when they are burned which adds to the greenhouse effect and increases global warming. The way we can help the environment and reduce the amount of carbon dioxide is by replaying fossil fuels with solar and wind sources for electric power generations in the U.S.
Also known as fossil fuels, carbon-based fuels are commonly used in today’s society. Carbon plays a vital role in life of Earth. Without carbon, all life on Earth would not exist (World Wildlife Foundation, n.d.). Carbon exists in almost all biological compounds which make up every part in our body, and many more living things. There are many reasons that we use carbon-based fuels instead of other sources of energy such as renewable energy. One reason is that fossil fuels are available and very easy to use. This is because to create electricity, power plants burn fossil fuels to heat water and therefore produce steam (World Nuclear Association, 2015). The steam pushes turbines around in a generator which spins a magnet; creating an electric current (World Nuclear Association, n.d.). Once done, electricity is created (Kindersley, 2007). Other major reasons we rely so heavily on fossil fuels are: it is required to power cars (petrol), create buildings (concrete) and give energy to homes. It is also a cheaper process than using renewable energy sources, as they require a lot of money to build/install (solar panels, wind farms etc.).
The engine of today is largely dominated by the oil industry. Most of our energy consumption is contributed to transportation and movement of goods. This creates a high demand for fuel as the number of miles driven per person is projected to grow. Currently, 86% of vehicles run on fossil fuels, which create heavy amounts of carbon dioxide gas which puts heavy strain on our environment. It is up to large companies to research alternative methods of fuels and compare them to our most dominant fuel. At the moment, proposed alternative fuels are biodiesel, electricity, ethanol, and hydrogen fuel cells. If one of these proves to be a viable source, then we can move toward development of engines that accept these fuels and deviate from standard fossil fuel consumption.