Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 13 February 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.103
News: Briefing
Obama may be tough on Canada's tar sands
How will future US emissions regulations affect North America's biggest oil owner?
When US President Barack Obama visits Canada next week for his first foreign trip, the issues of oil from Alberta's tar sands and, more widely, climate change will be high on the agenda. Alberta's oil is plentiful and handy for US customers, but getting it out of the ground takes a heavy toll on energy and the environment.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
It seems that Nature has become a political and religious magazine rather than a scientific one. The religion it espouses is Anthropogenic Global Warming and the sacrosanct catchphrases it uses as axiomatic gospel are things like "carbon footprints" and "carbon trading". Carbon is satanic and evil. I was looking forward to reading about the Neanderthal Genome but a big silence on that score while the BBC and New Scientist have come out with articles on it. So here is my political opinion on the tar sands. If the the price of oil rockets again, as it is bound to withing the next 20 years (a safe bet), then the tar sands will become economical again and if the US doesnt want the oil there is always China, Japan, India who would be happy to buy the oil.
It is not clear to me precisely as to when I started reading the journal Nature. What I am sure of is that it was several decades ago. Apart from being a scientific journal par excellence, it is also a truly international publication. Nature not only entertains diverse views on scientific disciplines but additionally keeps us informed about interesting events taking place on our planet. Hence, it is my hope that Nature shall maintain its unique style. Dr. Upinder Fotadar
I think this is an extremely fair and lucid account of the problems that confront President Obama AND the Canadian electorate in their near-future decisions of whether to support Alberta's tar sands or to pull the plug and move on. I'm also delighted that the tar sands are at last receiving international attention especially from such a prestigious publication as NATURE. I don't share Mr. Dawson's unrealistic opinion that a scientific news organ or its audience when confronted with the obscenity of pollution-for-profit should remain mum and neutral. Something must be done, and the first thing to do is publicize the problem. Very few Canadians are aware of the environmental devastation taking place with the sanction of their own governments in their own backyard, but with the attention of the international press this will undoubtedly soon change. Thank you for this committed, objective, clear and timely account.
This article doesn't mention the hundreds of migratory bird that are dying every year as they land on the tailing ponds and become stuck in the gooey mess.
The obvious solution to the tar sands problem is to generate the heat needed to extract the oil with electricity generated by a nuclear reactor. There is no question that demand for oil will rise again and the US will be compelled to buy oil from wherever it can. Any near-term legislation limiting US importation of Canadian tar sands oil will be changed when the next oil price spike occurs -in about 2 years time. The US public is placing a lot of hope on the emergence of electrically powered automobiles. For these cars to be viable the US will have to create vast new electrical generation capacity in order that people will be able to recharge their vehicles. Given current levels of electricity generating capacity and the reluctance to build either coal or nuclear power plants gasoline derived from petroleum will be the only viable automobile fuel for many years. To replace the energy generated by the burning of gasoline the US would have to build more than 1,000 new large nuclear power plants. Oil is a commodity. Once it is in a barrel its origins don't matter. When world demand again exceeds supply Canada will simply sell its tar sands oil into the global oil market. China is currently building coal to fuel plants that are many times dirtier than Canadian synthetic crude production process. Indeed the US Air Force continues to fund research into the coal to fuel process because it fears not having enough fuel to operate its aircraft in the future. All future Naval vessels will be nuclear powered but aircraft will still require jet fuel. As is customary in the US there will be many forces representing different interests that will make it difficult for a ban on the importation of tar sands oil to last very long.