https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/24/business/energy-environment/frontier-oil-sands-canada.html
Canadian mining company Teck Resources has recently abandoned a major oil-sands mining expansion proposal that was scheduled for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's approval. This frees the leader from a choice that could have caused a deadlock between environmental and energy interest groups. Proponents of the oil-sands proposal cited its potential economic boons, including new job opportunities in Alberta and increased global oil exports. Meanwhile, opponents drew attention to environmental costs such as deforestation and carbon dioxide emissions, along with resistance from Indigenous groups. This issue is especially relevant, as Canada is currently the world's fourth largest oil producer, contributing over 60 percent of American oil imports. But at the same time, facing the challenges of tomorrow calls for a shift to environmentally-friendly plans that honor climate change policies such as the Paris Climate Agreement.
Needless to say, this is a multifaceted issue that touches on the "economy vs. environment" debate. But maybe it isn't a debate after all… Maybe both sides could win.
- Do you think it was wise for Teck Resources to abandon its oil-sands mining project?
- What do you believe was the greatest motivating factor behind Teck Resources' decision?
- Do you think there exists an energy plan that is beneficial for the both the economy and the environment?
This. This right here is how you make change. Protesting a government won't do anything, you have to attack the problem at its source - the economy. Yes, it was extremely wise for Teck Resources to abandon this project, both from an economic and an environmental standpoint. More and more people are beginning to realize the disastrous effects of climate change, which is beginning to lower the global demand for oil. This makes extracting oil less profitable over time, especially if the rate of electric car ownership keeps going up too. The greatest motivating factor was profit - and I think that's a fantastic thing. If society is truly moving in a direction where the most profitable thing to do for an oil company is simply to stop, I think the world still has a fighting chance.
ReplyDeleteLike what Phillip said, Teck Resources’s decision to cancel this plan is a good decision. While I would like to believe that the concerns about the environmental impact is why Teck Resources dropped the project, the reality probably is that they don’t want to be the one blamed for the environment further deteriorating in Canada. Originally I assumed they did not want to have to spend a lot of money, but that would be counterbalanced by the influx of jobs the project would create. I do believe there could be an energy plan that is beneficial to the economy and environment, but it would have to deal with renewable resources (wind, hydro, solar) or alternatives to fossil fuels (specifically, funding research into producing oil from algae, etc.).
ReplyDelete1. I do agree that for long-term economic benefit and for environmental purposes, this was a good decision. While short-term, oil=good, what I hope (or perhaps expect) lots of companies to be moving forward is making investments in energy technologies now so they can get ahead of their competitors in the future. Even if we discard any altruistic motivation for getting off oil and simply focus on long-term benefit, solar panels and renewable sources of energy are going to be more viable if international markets collapse.
ReplyDelete2. Probably, to some degree, the above factor of not wanting to fall behind in comparison to other companies. This is also a strong PR boost too, which helps if they have other ambitious plans.
3. Yes. Invest in clean energy now so we can get ahead of everyone else. That may be too cynical of a take, but when the apocalypse hits, we want to be the ones fairly afloat.
Teck Resources’s decision to abandon its oil-sands mining project was a smart move, especially for environmental reasons. I think that they backed out because they didn’t want to be responsible for the long term effects of the project. Climate change is becoming more and more prevalent and people are fighting to prevent the earth from being destroyed. It was a smart business move for Teck Resources to prevent their company from being the reason environmental problems escalate. I do believe that there is an energy plan that is beneficial for the economy and the environment. It would probably include solar or wind energy and other alternatives to the things that are globally damaging.
ReplyDeleteCanada is fascinating in that it is in some ways two-faced. On one hand it is seen, and at least some of its citizens like to see themselves, as a bastion of liberal and progressive values in North America (this often also involves standing on opposition against the United States). This is partially true. A good example of this concept would be Canada's health insurance system. But at the same time, it has a very non-progressive underbelly. This case illustrates the two most famous examples of that, oppressing their native population and being a massive producer of oil, which of course contributes to climate change.
ReplyDelete