Tar sands' climate threat, security promise both exaggerated: report

Further development of Alberta’s famous oil sands will be neither the climate disaster that activists fear nor the energy security panacea that proponents suggest it is, the Council on Foreign Relations concludes in a new report.

The reality of the oil sands in the international energy and climate picture suggests both the United States and Canada would be wise to develop climate policy in tandem, or at least link whatever independent cap-and-trade programs for greenhouse gases each government may develop, a researcher at the New York-based think tank says.
It is unlikely that Canadian oil sands can free the United States of its dependence on Middle Eastern oil, the report concludes. But as the only non-OPEC source with the potential for large production growth over the next several years, the tar sands have very strong energy security implications — meaning U.S. policymakers should not impose any restrictions on their development through such means as low-carbon fuel standards or special import tariffs, Levi concludes.

The council’s analysis suggests the oil sands are unique in that they hold the potential to reduce OPEC’s revenues, thus weakening the cartel and those members that often undertake policies hostile to U.S. interests. If the oil sands could replace 2 million barrels per day of OPEC production, that would lead to a $70 billion per year cut in revenue to OPEC states, even with prices at $100 a barrel.

New York Times