Drop the oilsands guilt trip: Canada’s not evil for its energy production, it’s resourceful – just like the U.S.

Every nation on Earth develops, uses, and if it’s lucky, exports the energy resources most readily available to it.

Geography is not morality.

Canada is developing the oilsands for the same reason the U.S. — the “Saudi Arabia of coal” according to Barack Obama — relies on the dirtiest of the fossil fuels to generate half its electricity.

Why? Because it has huge coal reserves.

By contrast, half of our electricity is generated by cleaner hydro power, which we have developed not because we are morally superior to the Americans, but because we have the necessary water resources.

U.S. politicians who come here to cross-examine us about the oilsands — Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi being the latest — or who attack its so-called “dirty oil” from the U.S., are hypocrites.

Let them worry, instead, about the greenhouse gas emissions caused by coal-powered electricity generation in the U.S. — 50 to 70 times greater than those generated by the oilsands.

The oilsands account for 5% of Canada’s emissions, expected to rise to 8% by 2015, and one-tenth of 1% of global emissions. Canada accounts for 2% of global emissions.

Compare that to a combined 40% of global emissions for the U.S. and China, largely because of their heavy reliance on coal to generate electricity.

This doesn’t make them evil. They’re simply using the resources they have to generate power, just as we do.

Geography isn’t morality

The U.S. is lowering its overall emissions faster than China because it’s a more developed country.

Again, geography isn’t morality.

Quebecers aren’t better than Albertans because they happen to live in a province that can generate most of its electricity through hydro power.

Quebecers who regard themselves as morally superior are as foolish as Ontarians who call for a moratorium on Alberta’s oilsands, while supporting the multi-billion-dollar public bailout of Ontario’s auto sector, another major emitter.

This doesn’t mean we should trust the development of the oilsands, which causes significantly more environmental damage than traditional extraction, to the oil companies.

Indeed, polls show most Canadians, while they view the oilsands as an important resource, don’t want the industry getting carte blanche.

But that is a debate for us to have and to resolve on our terms.

What’s preternaturally stupid is to buy into the perpetual bitching of environmentalists that our per capita emissions are among the highest in the world, as if every Canadian was running around setting oil fires.

We live in a big, cold, northern, developed, sparsely-populated, oil-producing country, where the energy requirements for electricity generation, heat and travel alone are enormous compared to other nations.

That’s why our per capita emissions are high, not because we’re evil.

Which brings us to the Kyoto accord, a deal designed mainly by European drafters to punish a big, cold, northern, developed, sparsely-populated, oil-producing country like Canada, while rewarding an environmental basket case like Russia.

Actually, the main intent of Kyoto was to hobble the U.S. economy, but the Americans weren’t dumb enough to ratify it.

Our previous Liberal government was, and the only feeling Canadians should have about that is not shame over failing to implement Kyoto, but anger the vainglorious Jean Chretien ratified it, either because he didn’t know what he was doing, or did know and never intended to implement it beyond posing for the photo-op.

Either way, we need to end our absurd self-flagellation over the oilsands and Kyoto, so we can develop a response to climate change based on rational self-interest, not guilt.
Toronto Sun