Class Notes (834,979)
Canada (508,839)
POL250Y5 (38)

POL250 October 8th.docx

3 Pages
Unlock Document

Political Science
Andrea Olive

POL250 October 8 , 2013 - Turn it in: Class ID= 7134036 password= greentrees - Submit by 9:10 am on Thursday, October 17 - Nukes for Oil? - Canada has 8 nuclear power stations, 1 in New Brunswick, 6 in Ontario and 1 in Quebec - Using nuclear energy to fuel Tar Sands - Idea to detonate a nuclear bomb in the tar sands to melt the bitumen and make it easier to get - Prime Minister Diefenbaker did not think this was a good idea - PM Harper is for the idea; as is France’s Avera - Nuclear plans provide a sustainable solution for oil sands industry energy requirements, and do not produce GHG emissions (Atomic Energy if Canada, page 148) - Canada Centre for Nuclear Innovation at the University of Saskatchewan - Examining the possibility of SK creating a nuclear power station near Fort McMurray to power the tar sands by 2020 - Lots of nuclear energy producers have expressed interest; Toshiba is building, should be operational by 2020 - Overall it will bring down greenhouse gas emissions - Reasons to support: less co2 emissions, decrease dependence on natural gas, help Canada meet climate targets, we have lots of nuclear potential, more jobs, energy sovereignty , new energy markets - Reasons to oppose: expensive, nuclear waste, water intensive, hazardous, less of a market for radio active oil, environmental damage from mining, nuclear programs, multinational owners will profit, keeping nuclear potential to ourselves - 15 trillion dollars according to The Economist (bitumen fuels) - Alberta’s remaining oil reserves are 170.8 barrels, 13% of total global oil reserves - About 1.6 million barrels of crude were produced every day by the oil sands in 2012 - Alberta is not profiting like it should be, share of industry revenues is 39%, the lowest of any oil state - Mismanagement and ethical lapses (page 163) - When an oil company mine or drill for oil on private property, they have to pay a share to the owner of that property - Alberta owns the tar sands property and leases it to lease companies to mine (Shell, Chevron) - Royalties are a complicated economic equation - Canada has bitumen, not oil - Bitumen has a larger cost of production, this raises royalties and it no longer becomes economically beneficial to produce bitumen - Companies could decrease production in Canada and increase production elsewhere - About 151,000 Albertans are directly employed in the oil and gas extraction and mining sectors in 2011- that’s one of every 14 jobs in the province - Royalties from the oil sands were 3.7 billion in 2010-2011 - According to the Canadian Energy Research Institute, Alberta can expect 350 billion dollars in Royalties and 122 billion dollars in provincial and municipal tax revenue from the oil sands over the next 25 years - Alberta is not saving for a rainy day, no funds being put aside for reclamation - No long term planning for extraction or use of this resource Petropolitics st - Thomas Friedman, 1 law of Petropolitics: the price of oil and the quality of freedom invariably travel in opposite directions - More oil, less freedom - Oil dominated country, people will have less freedo
More Less

Related notes for POL250Y5

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.