(Treasury Sec) Snow Lauds Canada's Oil Sands Projects

[Rose Siding]

TORONTO -- U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow toured one of Canada's oil sands projects and said he was impressed by the potential abundance of secure energy available from its northern neighbor.
....
The two toured the oil sands facility of Suncor Energy Inc. near Fort McMurray in northeastern Alberta. They met with executives from Suncor, Syncrude Canada Ltd., Albian Sands and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.

"We in the United States are looking to make ourselves more energy secure," Snow told reporters. "To have our closest ally, Canada, with these resources available, with a natural market in the United States, it's a huge contributor to energy security for North America."

Snow said he hadn't realized just how vast the oil sands facilities were, saying there was potentially more reserves in Canada than Saudi Arabia.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/09/AR2005070900413.html

[Beaver Tail]

1. Looks like Canada is going to be invaded

[Minstrel Boy]

2. "To have our closest ally, Canada, with these resources available..."

I feel like a turkey, being complimented for being so plump and juicy looking.

[Swede]

10. You said it MB.

I feel a plucking coming.

[Coastie for Truth]

3. John Snow is a locomotive engineer

Not a chemical, petroleum, mechanical, or mineral beneficiation engineer.

Oil sands have an incredibly low ratio of (to use ExxonMobil CEO Lee Raymond's terminology - and he's a PhD chem engineer)

(Energy delivered to the wheels)
(Chemical energy in the petroleum tied up in the oil sands)

that means you waste a heck of a lot of energy in mining, separation, and refining.

If Lee Raymond and I are both doc level chem e's - how come he makes so much more then I do? Oh, forget it

[Beaver Tail]

4. This is true

[Rose Siding]

6. He's padding his resume

The revolving door awaits. And why isn't the *energy* secretary hitting these notes?

I don't know anything about the removal process, but there's lots of controversy over it. The article doesn't have a single opposition source and notes that the process has been "improved".

[KittyWampus]

8. Also Get Massive Amounts Of Filthy Waste

[Coastie for Truth]

9. Oil Sands waste

is as bad as strip mining spoils and deep mining spoils. (Take a look off of runway 29L at PIT or Centurty III Mall in West Mifflin PA). The sulfates leach out of it and mess up the ground water. Really bad stuff.

[hatrack]

14. Tar sands - the oil you MINE!

Yeah, that sounds like a really profitable, efficient way to run an economy.

What is the EROEI on these projects anyway, 1.1? 1.2? And that's only for as long as the cheap on-site natural gas lasts anyway.

[Theduckno2]

15. You got it , tar sands aren't that promising.

Low energy gain (versus energy expended), consumption of substantial amounts of natural gas (soon to be in short supply?) and serious pollution issues. It is nice to have as a long term source of lubricants and specialty oil uses, but it is hardly a good choice to fuel our SUVs.

[Gloria]

5. Doesn't China have dibs on some of these fields already?

I know they've been over there signing agreements....

[lovuian]

7. What this is showing me is Noone wants to depend on Saudis

or Chavez for oil ...but bottomline its still going to cost higher gas prices!!!

[whosinpower]

11. Who was the idiot who invited him?

Can't he keep his trap shut?

[Swede]

12. The US is also eyeing the coal deposits in Western Canada.

But the only way to access the coal is strip mining. Yikes.

[applegrove]

13. Yes - and then you have to 'cook it' to separate the oil from the sand.

Let's keep with the investment & interest in alternatives.