"If all of the insects that lived on Earth dies, all life on Earth will be dead in 50 years. If humans that lived on the Earth dies, all animal life will flourish."
Oilsands development is one giant environmental cleanup. The oil has been leaching into the Athabasca for thousands of years. The Oil companies are just cleaning the sand and putting it back into nature. After they are gone the area is pristine and clean. Its truly a win win for the economy and the environment.
Incredible presentation that moves the floor of our consciousness. We all share in all the social networks to get the message to more people. As an immigrant to this beautiful country, I join this initiative. I will take the message to as many people as possible. Make the same as me. Edward Suzin
Its a win for everyone, oilsands oil has been leaking into the Athabasca river for millennia. The extraction of the oilsands is simply one big environmental cleanup. After the oilsands are removed the site is reclaimed and in better shape than it began.
The key is to reduce energy demand in the first instance. Space heating or cooling can be reduced by 50% or more through design, and has been done already thousandfold in Europe over the past 20yrs. Passivhaus technology (Germany) virtually entirely eliminates the need for space heating (which = 78% of energy demand in an average UK house) - for the cost of extra insulation only, its a no-brainer. This should be the first step.
And you clearly care nothing for those who will still be alive after you. Some of us do; and we don't want to ruin the Earth and inflict suffering on all of Earth's inhabitants of the future.
It's not about being good or evil - it's about having the courage to make a difficult choice now to avoid worsening circumstances down the road. Procrastination isn't normally thought of as a truly "evil" act, but it can be. It means you may miss opportunities down the road or compromise the options available to others (our children and ourselves in the future). Like anything - there are shades of gray, circumstances etc. Instead of asking if he drives, I'd ask if he could he afford an electric!
There is this nice concept, that every company should be forced to take all the costs from raw material to product, back to recycled materials. This would realistically raise the prices products that's price is currently pushed down by "outsorcing" some of the costs to natural damage. Canada has to be aware, that they are one of the top 3 countries to live in considering quaity of life. A position easily lost, when the environment is destroyed. the stakes are high.
Unbelievable - I couldn't watch it till the end . . . this is what Dr. Jim Hansen is referring to when he says, "GAME OVER" for the planet. Watch this and weep. Life as we have known it will never be the same. My heart feels the pain of our Mother Earth . . . and the suffering of our children and future generations. Why am I alive to witness this absolute horror. It is exponential Mordor
I must logically assume that the 22 dislikes are people who DO NOT CARE about leaving behind a clean & diverse (let alone liveable) planet for their children!!
For SO long we've depended upon oil, never looking far enough ahead to the damage and wars it would cause. I'm not blaming those who've only known big business oil money. But now, seemingly so quuckly, the use of oil IS causing damage to our earthly home. So what do we do about it? How can we transition, in an already hostile environment among nations, on this issue? We can continue as we are and watch our world die until it hits us Very Personsonaly. But then it will be too late. We have the global intelligence to find better & cleaner alternatives, thus creating thousands of new job oportunities. But change, especially when one is comfortabke, comes hard. I don't have the answers. But I wonder how much more abuse this so-called lie of global warming will be ignored. I am an average old person, and I've had time to witness so much natural loss to our earth, devastating climate change for our growing populstion. Very sad people don't begin caring for Earth. I love how it once was, and relatively speaking, only 60 years ago.
GARTH IS A HERO! Thank you for the awesome presentation and I am glad like so many of us you cry inside with the pain of watching our lands being destroyed. WE CANADIANS NEED TO DO MORE. IF YOU SIN IDLY BY THEN YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE STATE OF OUR COUNTRY OR OUR WORLD. YOUR IDLENESS IS WHAT'S MAKING THIS WORLD.... YOU HAVE A CHOICE
Trying to decide on this.Does coal create dirtier energy than Tarsands? (looking for an actual answer) I am sympathetic but uncomfortable that since most realize that we can't just close all polluting industries tomorrow, why pick on the Tarsands? It's big, looks bad and concentrated in one place so it's an easy target but it's a miniscule part of the overall industrial problem. We need to do something but is it unfair to pick on 1 group of investors/citizens. Does this serve the cause?
I can't post the link but you should google "current Cenovus well pad" to see a pic of a current in situ operation in the oil sands region. He also makes no mention of the immense technological innovation surrounding the oil sands in recent years that has and will continue to help lower things like GHG emissions, water usage, and land disruption, year after year.
This is so upsetting... Right now on Cape Breton island, Nova Scotia the government is trying to clean up the tar ponds from years of the steel industry. Cancer rates are high and it has affected so many people. Seeing this just makes me sick, it's like the tar ponds times a billion. I am absolutely disgusted. Why is this happening!
This talk really helps put the expansion into perspective. Expansion like this really sends the wrong message - that dirty industry will expand infinitely despite ecological cost. The contrast of toxic waste volume of the tar sands versus nuclear power waste is also something that really strikes me.
But I do completely agree that tar sands (known as oil sands, but it makes it sound better, so people don't assume that it's dirty tar) is the VERY WORST way to go, and you are partly right...
you know what, that is probably one of the smartest, most intelligent responses ive heard in a very long time. i %100 agree. but on the other side of the coin, i need to make money. im in mining, because in canada its probably the best chance at making a living. it provides my family with an upper middle class lifestyle, which i am very thankful for. anyways man i respect you last comment. people need to wake up...
Very compelling presentation makes a good case about the destruction due to contamination of chemicals. Although I gotta agree Dsgooden, Andrew Weaver from UVic determined that main threat to global warming are natural gas and coal, not oil. Also, he claims boreal forest is twice as effective at sequestering greenhouse gases than tropical rainforests, Is that right? I always thought that the tropical rainforest supported more flora per square meter than anywhere else. Are there sources for that?
@Dsgooden Showing emotion is not a bad thing, in fact it shows how passionate he is about his stance on the issue. As for global warming both coal and oil are non renewable unclean sources of energy and this is about the production of oil and the pollution it causes without even burning it Also this fills the wallets of the oil companies it does not make a nation strong in fact as he pointed out it hurts a nations people and if increasing cancer rate 10 times doesn't count as damaging what does.
I went onto the Google Earth. What an amazing site as you can see this leeching into the southwestern corner of Lake Athabasca. The purest water being polluted by greed. If you look to the lakes west of Lake Athabasca you can see that three lakes are absolutely polluted and dead. The fresh water is gone.
Solar panels can do 5W whilst occupying the same space, but trees use no resources to plant, don't require yearly maintenance, don't magically degrade in 20 years, improve groundwater, reduce erosion, provide habitats for animals, change local weather patterns and in the end of it you can just cut it down and burn it, and all carbon released was whatever was captured. Plus you don't need to clear habitat to plant trees or use concrete. And you gain building materials if you don't burn it.
It suffices to observe that no biofuel has demonstrated a very good energy yield. Harvesting the crops and putting the energy in a useful form (like fuel or electricity) costs energy as well. Even bioethanol struggles to break even and that comes from corn which is far more efficient at creating chemical energy from sunlight than trees can ever hope to be. Biofuels and other vegetable sources of energy will have their place, but it can never be a full replacement for other renewables.
However, it does make the most sense at this point (by a long shot) if all of the many factors are considered. And that's not just for Canadians. I strongly believe it's the best option for everyone. That is why the oil sands are, and will continue to be exploited. If you open your mind and actually consider alternative scenarios, you'd be thankful that the oil sands are in a place like Canada where the environment is so heavily valued and there's immense pressure for continued technological..
"devastation that the planet has never seen before" I'd imagine the Chicxulub event was considerably more damaging than digging up a thin layer the earths crust to extract the oil from the sand. We will always need an energy source as easy to use as oil. People go on and on about renewables but they don't see how much damage and energy those materials use. Most renewables are terribly inefficient. Growing trees to burn is more efficient than wind or solar.
Irreparably damaging ecosystems which have taken millions of years to arise for the short term benefit (perhaps a decade or so) is pretty much the definition of myopic stupidity. Renewables are also not the answer - the answer is to reduce our energy dependency on fossils fueled by our rapacious consumer culture. 1960s and 1970s first world nations ran on only a small fraction of the fossil fuels we use today. Over a third of all the fossil fuel ever used has been consumed in the past 30 years, wrap your head around that and understand what it implies!
yes, I agree with your statement, however at this time resistance and blockades are not for pipelines transporting crude, but rather the diluted bitumen which has the sole source north of Fort Mac - totally agree that investment in alternate 'clean' energy is imperative and as I see it, could be a economically beneficial as well. As to TARsands, and all other hydrocarbons won't go away anywhere if we stop using them. To my mind one of the best uses of hydrocarbons is for polymers...future ways
How does his emotion undermine anything? A man who weeps for something other than himself is a breath of fresh air in a world led by callous morons who weep only for themselves.
I work at the UBC doing research. Yes there is about 15% reclaimed land at this point. In the next 10 years it will be 25%. Most tailings are still in use, and efficiently I must say, thats why that number isn't increasing. Also, if you care to notice, they are building more tailings either, because they don't need any more. Ever been to a non oil sands mine? Because they all look the same. Corporate shrill? You people need to go read the actual scientific reports, not that you would understand.
@orrpatrick - check out Citizens Climate Lobby, which has grown from 3 Canadian groups to 20 in the last year. There are at least 30 in the U.S. It's inspiring, informative, and very supportive to all their volunteers.
I've already made many of the sacrifices necessary of humanity. I sent my BMW to the scrap yard and I take public transportation exclusively, I don't eat out of season foods that required shipping, and eat locally produced foods as often as possible. I am not the "cokehead" of your analogy. Oil companies DO stand in the way of some every important changes, like a gross vehicle weight based tax system to curb over consumption. They DO spend millions lobbying on K street.
On the other hand: a solar panel can already generate 4 times more energy over its lifetime than it cost to produce the panel (this is for a moderate climate, for sunny climates it is about 7). This number is hardly unfavourable compared to many other sources of energy. For third generation designs (screen printed dye and organic solar cells), this number will be even better. Wind does even better in this regard, with an energy yield ratio of 80.
Steven - Most Canadians feel as you do but it's not possible to simply "vote it out at our next opportunity". As a capitalist nation our country is so far down the proverbial rabbit hole that provincial & federal governments are slaves to corporate interests and power. In 2007 the Alberta govt tried to increase energy industry royalty payments by 20%. In 2010, amid lawsuits and other lashings by industry, the increase was repealed. Our current conservative federal govt is also very pro-oilsands.
The only thing that will stop the tar sands is replacing oil with some other type of energy. That will only happen if this other type of energy is cheaper than oil. The solution will not come about if we focus on negatives; it will not happen if we try to use force to stop these companies. The solution is to focus on positives. Such as investing in alternative energy in order to make it cheaper than oil. In an economically driven society this is the only way that change will occur.
To anyone watching this, please do further research to gain better understanding of this issue! Yes, we do need change in the world to protect our precious environment. However, I am so sick of seeing people like this who may not really care about this issue or any other. They are simply making money creating these presentations, and not offering to help with, or even suggest solutions! I am also fed up with the number of celebrities who jump on their fossil fuel powered band wagons to protest anything to do with the oil and gas industry. Unfortunately, as the world is today, we depend on fossil fuels. We also depend on agriculture, which by the way, does more environmental harm than all other industries combined. (see other TED presentation - The Other Inconvenient Truth) Don't get me wrong, these presentations are great. They get people thinking, and possibly spark some conscience or change. Just remember to take everything with a grain of salt, and keep in mind that we ALL have to change our lifestyles to make a difference, and it is not going to happen overnight by "voting against" Oil Sands production or pipelines!
Mind you, I'm not arguing that we shouldn't do what you're proposing at all. We definitely need well-kept lands like you're describing. But they will not solve the energy problem, not by a long shot.
What about the reclamation projects? We shut down a project because there was one bird nest in a damn tree. I'd like to see any other company shutting down projects over a bird nest.
Thats an interesting idea, but that would just make the dilbit pipes burst, and that would cause a series of unneeded problems... The US and Canada can't immediately just stop the use of oil. We just have to prevent further usage, and invest a lot of money into real clean energy, like wind energy, solar, and more...
@ChristopherMarlowe The global temps during the MWP were actually .2 degrees C cooler than today's global temps. Also, the temperature rise happened over centuries, while our temperature rise is happening over decades. Look at the temperature graphs, constructed by actual climate scientists, our temps are rising so fast compared to MWP that we nearly go in a vertical line up, while the MWP, if put on the same graph, looks more like a mound.
Actually it's "bituminous sands". Both the terms "tar sands" and "oil sands" are slang and have been used for over a half century. "Tar" is modified pitch produced primarily from the wood and roots of pine by destructive distillation under pyrolysis. Bituminous sands (sometimes called oil/tar sands) contain various mixtures of sand (or rock) with bitumen or heavy crude oil and not "tar".
Thank you for that positive perspective. I agree that now is no time for apathy, complacency, or despair. It is well past that point of fear. It is upon us and we as a people must react or ultimately face our own extinction and at the very least, the destruction of all that, which makes being alive in this very natural planet, a joy.
We're all to blame, but blame doesn't even matter at this point. All that matters is if you personally care about having a future for our species - whether you're young or old, with kids or without. Anyone whose actions or behaviour answers that question with "no" should be thrown in jail and all their assets used to solve the real pressing problems. Sorry, I know that's sounding a bit too black and white. The stakes are high, but I'm confident we can do this if we cooperate instead of compete.
Sometimes it gets a bit overwhelming with the potential negative future scenarios possible. Not just climate change, but the full gambit of large and small scale behaviours humans engage in that causes suffering to others. At the end of the day though, you have to believe its possible to get beyond these seemingly overwhelming problems. There's nothing to be gained by being complacent, apathetic or giving up in despair. Religious prophecy is equally pointless, we must create our own future.
Interestingly, bitumen is actually classified as a pitch (like tar), so calling them "Tar Sands" is not as inaccurate as most people think. But I prefer to think of them as Mordor.
A quick Google search will come up with pages of articles on how another major oil company like BP,Chevron,Shell,ect. or their interest groups have bought a growing organization in the alternative energy sector. There is no debate about that, it happens all the time. I guess you could say there is a certain level of speculation when it comes to intentions. But if you look at how these organizations function before and after being acquired cost almost always increases, in some cases drastically.
This is sad seeing the comments completely missing the mark on trying to utilize new, innovative ways to produce energy sustainably on a global scale. This is to protect our planet and each other.
While this all looks the one thing I would say is can they clean up and reclaim after? All mining operations look awful during production but the potential for clean up and leave a newly growing forest behind might make this slightly less awful. Also why the hell aren't they made to line the tailings ponds to stop leaching? That seems a no brainer
Actually I'll make one more point. When someone goes on an alarmist rant like this it's important to put the numbers associated with the scientific jargon being thrown at the audience into context. Most of the audience doesn't understand these numbers for what they are and so they get their opinion from the rhetoric of the speaker. "I don't know what a greenhouse gas is but I know it's bad and that sounds like a lot of it". Given context you can understand the numbers for what they are.
I knew tarsand was very bad, but I must confess I had no idea how insane it really is! As a norwegian I allready felt bad for my goverment's investment in this filthy energy, now I'm beside myself with anger! I didn't sign up for this, and I have to spread this video to my countrymen. We have an election coming up in september, I hope this issue will be a big reason to change people's vote!!!
Maybe someone can tell me where I can find that website fighting against this Canada's crazy idea of destroying such a beautiful and important place for every human being? I would like to find out more and join or sign the petition and to do at least a little bit for trying to stop it! Please let me know about that:)
...though, as I very very rarely speak about these things anymore with people as I've come to the brutal conclusion that there's practically nothing I could say or do that will make the overwhelmin...
Trees get their carbon from the air, and they get the water from the ground. The only boost they need for growth is the occasional bushfire. All the leaves which drop breakdown into the soil and self-fertilise. Nobody in their right mind would ever fertilise a tree. If you wanted to add nitrogen, planting clover in the area will do the job and provide forage for animals, and the animal dung will help to further fertilise the soil. Plus the cattle will never get sick from corn/grains.
If an environmentalists said it, it's because it supports their story, not because it's true. If a corporation said it, they left something out because it detracts from their story.
I'm getting to the point where I am sick of hearing people preach about how the oil sands are bad. I live in alberta. I've seen the oil sands, refineries, etc. After the sands are depleted its much like a waste land. Its restored. The money made from it, and how it si restored afterwards makes up for the ecological damage. People are ignorant. And preach more than learn.
The big questions - What comes next? How do we get there with the smallest ethical toll possible? This vs. death toll since people have been dying, and many more will, same for species going extinct. I think it's safe to say we'd rather this NOT happen. If you followed the civilization thought experiment and considered the implications of accelerating tech (intelligence singularity) the future is quite clear, though getting there less so. End of privacy --> tolerance, compassion not(corruption)
Also while I'm on this rant, there's one more point I want to address. He talks about the carcinogens in the rivers poisoning the fish/people and chokes up (rehearsed or genuine? debatable). The thing is, the oil sands are natural, we didn't create them. Do you think the Earth knows that there is a river in a certain area and says to itself "hey, I better make sure I don't let any of this bitumen seep into this river, animals might get hurt" yeahhhh no.
indeed~!! it's time we all wake up and realize we are driving ourselves to extinction if we continue to live the way we do under the capitalistic monetary economy.... we need a global shift to RBE
@mographzach I didn't actually miss that part. I just know from experience that the government doesn't ever give money back or use taxes for their intended purpose. Take for example the gasoline taxes. They do not go to fund roads. Taxes are used by the government to pay for debt and to start wars.
Garth, your heartfelt and knowledgeable talk about this subject of Canadian tar sands is excellent, clear and made easily digestible for your listeners. The fact that the indigenous tribes are knowingly HAVING to eat carcinogenic foods, that the ecosystem is destroyed on such an unvbelievable scale, just the sheer craziness of a fossil fuel world gone mad needs to come to a rapid halt. We cannot allow this to develop in our lifetime. What are we leaving for our children and the children of those indigenous peoples? Toxic wastelands. Please keep on talking, keep on explaining to people and hope that the momentum builds so that we stop this INSANITY.
Then you can sell the animals for food. The soil will be rejuvenated and fit for growing food crops, and you'd never need chemicals since the cattle/clover/trees have already deposited their nutrients into the soil. No land is wasted, and we're still going to need meat for people to eat. There are tons of benefits of simply planting trees when you look at the big picture. Increased bird life, reduced erosion, improved air quality, building materials, animal feed, whatever you want basically.
There are two sides to everything. Yes, demand is there, but also corporations themselves use propaganda and marketing ploys to drive demand where it needn't exist. I don't buy cosmetics, clothes from overseas, coffee from Colombia (or anywhere for that matter), and I seldom fly. If we were all to revert to horse and cart, greenhouse emissions would rise not drop. But ignoring all of this, the economic costs associated with climate change far outweigh the benefits of excessive emissions.
The only way to make it stop is to find a way to make it unprofitable to do it. They are making money by making someone else pay for the bad consequences. They need to be made to pay for ALL of the damage and FULL remediation of the site (and to feed the people who lose their food source AND their medical bills). The only body that could possibly make them pay is the government. We need to force these companies to be forced to pay the renewable & battery R&D costs too...that'd be about square...
I live in British Columbia and I think that there are an overwhelming number of citizens, including First Nations citizens who will never allow a pipeline carrying that toxic goop through the province. Leave it in the ground and transition to sustainables.
I think that if the time comes that Canadian officials continue to support the extraction of Bitumen sands, and the US officials allow for the pipeline to come through to the US - US and Canadian citizens should, as brothers and sisters, start a new revolution. Non-violent of course.
Why was henrikmk's post flagged as spam? Consider the people killed, who developed cancer or were injured from our use of nuclear power and compare this to fossil fuels. Even with the dangers we still drill/dig for fossil fuel yet just mentioning a nuclear power option gets ones post flagged. Why are we so terrified of developing modern, safer nuclear power? Done right (carefully) nuclear power holds a lot of promise for our long term power demands. With experience safety will improve too.
I'd just like to see our gov investing more money on R&D for new batteries and renewables rather than give it to companies to develop more technology to make the dirty thing cleaner. We know we need to shift away from oil, so all energy related money should be used for environmental protection for what's out there already, not for increasing yields. So they cut DFO - good job Harper! -_-; I'll be disappointed, but not surprised if Canada's gov keeps "developing" until people stop buying oil. :(
That's all fair, but if you want to generate any serious amounts of energy, planting trees simply isn't going to cut it. The numbers don't work out and you simply don't have enough space to generate the energy you need. Not to mention that if you want to grow trees for energy, you're going to need fertilizer to boot, because you're taking away nutrients from the soil. Making and using fertilizer costs heaps of energy and also creates a lot of pollution problems.
National aquaduct construction from Gulf of Mexico to Pacific to Atlantic, possibly to Great Lakes also: harvesting sea minerals, hemp/corn (ethanol)/food crop irrigation, drinking water production, and...ENERGY creation using hydroelectric, wind, hydrogen, and solar methods. Natural gas/coal would be used as backup resource for critical systems. Write your government officials, use social media, and request investment in these opportunities.
they are investing in alternative energy to maintain their hegemony, not out of altruistic sense of good. This is not conspiracy, this is observation of the greed and avarice of the system. It is quite transparent when you look at the market trends.
It is a wave that is sweeping the world.... not much truth to it though. Please do come to Fort McMurray and see how well the oil sands companies are reclaiming and getting aboriginals into employment. It is crazy insinuation if u just base ur perspectives on hearsay and do a TED talk on it. I always respected TED and am truly surprised that they let this happen right here in Canada which knows the value of its oil and how much it means to the economy.
The 'tar sands' make up 0.2% of Canada's boreal forest. For the entire tar sands projects, there is 500x more boreal forest. Look it up. The oil companies' reclamation projects are a joke, but whatever. Go visit some of the other thousands of square miles of the boreal forest if you don't like it. Get over it, people. Life is too short to completely lose it over a small portion of a forest nobody ever visits.
well this is exactly the way a person should not think. believing u cannot make a difference and keeping the status quo maybe does not make u the bad guy, but sure as hell doesnt make u any better. people can already make a difference with very little effort, true it wont fix the problem, but is a starting point. btw, public transportation in most of the industrialized countries is way greener than ur 4000cc chevy, and local vegetables consumption is an effective way to reduce co2 emissions.
Residents of Fort McMurray know better, live better, make more money and support the Canadian economy.... I live and believe that for sure.... what are the options to change the fuel the world moves on?
![[Live] : ONE 169 วันนี้!! "อนาโตลี vs อูมาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3YZVWuFJg/mqdefault.jpg)
![“อ.เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม” มาตามคำเรียกร้อง แหกศาสตร์ฮวงจุ้ย เตือนสติอย่างมงาย | แฉ 7 พ.ย. 67 [1/3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5fc4S3xBNfc/mqdefault.jpg)
This is the only TED video that has made me cry. I am heartbroken by the human race and the impact we are having on this beautiful, doomed planet.
"If all of the insects that lived on Earth dies, all life on Earth will be dead in 50 years. If humans that lived on the Earth dies, all animal life will flourish."
Weird, I had a semi euphoric feeling looking at all those colorful nature photos. Then the sand-tar photos came up and my stomach turned.
Wow, this insanity needs to be stopped!!!!
Party on Garth; you're doing beautiful work for an ethical cause. Thank you.
I'm crying with you Garth
What can we do about this? How can we stop this horrible thing? I call upon anons to shed some light for the right path!
Oilsands development is one giant environmental cleanup. The oil has been leaching into the Athabasca for thousands of years. The Oil companies are just cleaning the sand and putting it back into nature. After they are gone the area is pristine and clean. Its truly a win win for the economy and the environment.
9:34 Bless your Heart
Update from 2019?
I learned a great deal from this presentation. Thank you very much for your passion. I am active on this topic.
What about now, what're you up to?
Its videos like this, that need to go viral ...
Incredible presentation that moves the floor of our consciousness. We all share in all the social networks to get the message to more people.
As an immigrant to this beautiful country, I join this initiative. I will take the message to as many people as possible. Make the same as me.
Edward Suzin
Its a win for everyone, oilsands oil has been leaking into the Athabasca river for millennia. The extraction of the oilsands is simply one big environmental cleanup. After the oilsands are removed the site is reclaimed and in better shape than it began.
The key is to reduce energy demand in the first instance. Space heating or cooling can be reduced by 50% or more through design, and has been done already thousandfold in Europe over the past 20yrs. Passivhaus technology (Germany) virtually entirely eliminates the need for space heating (which = 78% of energy demand in an average UK house) - for the cost of extra insulation only, its a no-brainer. This should be the first step.
And you clearly care nothing for those who will still be alive after you. Some of us do; and we don't want to ruin the Earth and inflict suffering on all of Earth's inhabitants of the future.
well turn off all your heat in the winter, and walk everywhere. good luck.
@@daveklebt7732 lmao
It's not about being good or evil - it's about having the courage to make a difficult choice now to avoid worsening circumstances down the road. Procrastination isn't normally thought of as a truly "evil" act, but it can be. It means you may miss opportunities down the road or compromise the options available to others (our children and ourselves in the future). Like anything - there are shades of gray, circumstances etc. Instead of asking if he drives, I'd ask if he could he afford an electric!
There is this nice concept, that every company should be forced to take all the costs from raw material to product, back to recycled materials.
This would realistically raise the prices products that's price is currently pushed down by "outsorcing" some of the costs to natural damage.
Canada has to be aware, that they are one of the top 3 countries to live in considering quaity of life. A position easily lost, when the environment is destroyed. the stakes are high.
Unbelievable - I couldn't watch it till the end . . . this is what Dr. Jim Hansen is referring to when he says, "GAME OVER" for the planet. Watch this and weep. Life as we have known it will never be the same. My heart feels the pain of our Mother Earth . . . and the suffering of our children and future generations. Why am I alive to witness this absolute horror. It is exponential Mordor
I must logically assume that the 22 dislikes are people who DO NOT CARE about leaving behind a clean & diverse (let alone liveable) planet for their children!!
This made me cry in shame and anger
For SO long we've depended upon oil, never looking far enough ahead to the damage and wars it would cause. I'm not blaming those who've only known big business oil money. But now, seemingly so quuckly, the use of oil IS causing damage to our earthly home. So what do we do about it? How can we transition, in an already hostile environment among nations, on this issue? We can continue as we are and watch our world die until it hits us Very Personsonaly. But then it will be too late. We have the global intelligence to find better & cleaner alternatives, thus creating thousands of new job oportunities. But change, especially when one is comfortabke, comes hard. I don't have the answers. But I wonder how much more abuse this so-called lie of global warming will be ignored. I am an average old person, and I've had time to witness so much natural loss to our earth, devastating climate change for our growing populstion. Very sad people don't begin caring for Earth. I love how it once was, and relatively speaking, only 60 years ago.
How much natural leeching into the rivers from the tar sands were happening before mining? Kudos to Canada for cleaning up this natural pollution!
GARTH IS A HERO! Thank you for the awesome presentation and I am glad like so many of us you cry inside with the pain of watching our lands being destroyed. WE CANADIANS NEED TO DO MORE. IF YOU SIN IDLY BY THEN YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE STATE OF OUR COUNTRY OR OUR WORLD. YOUR IDLENESS IS WHAT'S MAKING THIS WORLD.... YOU HAVE A CHOICE
Trying to decide on this.Does coal create dirtier energy than Tarsands? (looking for an actual answer) I am sympathetic but uncomfortable that since most realize that we can't just close all polluting industries tomorrow, why pick on the Tarsands? It's big, looks bad and concentrated in one place so it's an easy target but it's a miniscule part of the overall industrial problem. We need to do something but is it unfair to pick on 1 group of investors/citizens. Does this serve the cause?
Amen, Brother!
I can't post the link but you should google "current Cenovus well pad" to see a pic of a current in situ operation in the oil sands region. He also makes no mention of the immense technological innovation surrounding the oil sands in recent years that has and will continue to help lower things like GHG emissions, water usage, and land disruption, year after year.
This is so upsetting... Right now on Cape Breton island, Nova Scotia the government is trying to clean up the tar ponds from years of the steel industry. Cancer rates are high and it has affected so many people. Seeing this just makes me sick, it's like the tar ponds times a billion. I am absolutely disgusted. Why is this happening!
This talk really helps put the expansion into perspective. Expansion like this really sends the wrong message - that dirty industry will expand infinitely despite ecological cost.
The contrast of toxic waste volume of the tar sands versus nuclear power waste is also something that really strikes me.
But I do completely agree that tar sands (known as oil sands, but it makes it sound better, so people don't assume that it's dirty tar) is the VERY WORST way to go, and you are partly right...
Where did you get your information? Thanks for posting this
you know what, that is probably one of the smartest, most intelligent responses ive heard in a very long time. i %100 agree. but on the other side of the coin, i need to make money. im in mining, because in canada its probably the best chance at making a living. it provides my family with an upper middle class lifestyle, which i am very thankful for. anyways man i respect you last comment. people need to wake up...
Very compelling presentation makes a good case about the destruction due to contamination of chemicals. Although I gotta agree Dsgooden, Andrew Weaver from UVic determined that main threat to global warming are natural gas and coal, not oil. Also, he claims boreal forest is twice as effective at sequestering greenhouse gases than tropical rainforests, Is that right? I always thought that the tropical rainforest supported more flora per square meter than anywhere else. Are there sources for that?
@Dsgooden Showing emotion is not a bad thing, in fact it shows how passionate he is about his stance on the issue. As for global warming both coal and oil are non renewable unclean sources of energy and this is about the production of oil and the pollution it causes without even burning it Also this fills the wallets of the oil companies it does not make a nation strong in fact as he pointed out it hurts a nations people and if increasing cancer rate 10 times doesn't count as damaging what does.
I went onto the Google Earth. What an amazing site as you can see this leeching into the southwestern corner of Lake Athabasca. The purest water being polluted by greed. If you look to the lakes west of Lake Athabasca you can see that three lakes are absolutely polluted and dead. The fresh water is gone.
Solar panels can do 5W whilst occupying the same space, but trees use no resources to plant, don't require yearly maintenance, don't magically degrade in 20 years, improve groundwater, reduce erosion, provide habitats for animals, change local weather patterns and in the end of it you can just cut it down and burn it, and all carbon released was whatever was captured.
Plus you don't need to clear habitat to plant trees or use concrete. And you gain building materials if you don't burn it.
I just learned a lot from him
It suffices to observe that no biofuel has demonstrated a very good energy yield. Harvesting the crops and putting the energy in a useful form (like fuel or electricity) costs energy as well. Even bioethanol struggles to break even and that comes from corn which is far more efficient at creating chemical energy from sunlight than trees can ever hope to be. Biofuels and other vegetable sources of energy will have their place, but it can never be a full replacement for other renewables.
However, it does make the most sense at this point (by a long shot) if all of the many factors are considered. And that's not just for Canadians. I strongly believe it's the best option for everyone. That is why the oil sands are, and will continue to be exploited. If you open your mind and actually consider alternative scenarios, you'd be thankful that the oil sands are in a place like Canada where the environment is so heavily valued and there's immense pressure for continued technological..
"devastation that the planet has never seen before"
I'd imagine the Chicxulub event was considerably more damaging than digging up a thin layer the earths crust to extract the oil from the sand.
We will always need an energy source as easy to use as oil. People go on and on about renewables but they don't see how much damage and energy those materials use. Most renewables are terribly inefficient. Growing trees to burn is more efficient than wind or solar.
Irreparably damaging ecosystems which have taken millions of years to arise for the short term benefit (perhaps a decade or so) is pretty much the definition of myopic stupidity. Renewables are also not the answer - the answer is to reduce our energy dependency on fossils fueled by our rapacious consumer culture. 1960s and 1970s first world nations ran on only a small fraction of the fossil fuels we use today. Over a third of all the fossil fuel ever used has been consumed in the past 30 years, wrap your head around that and understand what it implies!
yes, I agree with your statement, however at this time resistance and blockades are not for pipelines transporting crude, but rather the diluted bitumen which has the sole source north of Fort Mac - totally agree that investment in alternate 'clean' energy is imperative and as I see it, could be a economically beneficial as well. As to TARsands, and all other hydrocarbons won't go away anywhere if we stop using them. To my mind one of the best uses of hydrocarbons is for polymers...future ways
How does his emotion undermine anything? A man who weeps for something other than himself is a breath of fresh air in a world led by callous morons who weep only for themselves.
I work at the UBC doing research. Yes there is about 15% reclaimed land at this point. In the next 10 years it will be 25%. Most tailings are still in use, and efficiently I must say, thats why that number isn't increasing. Also, if you care to notice, they are building more tailings either, because they don't need any more. Ever been to a non oil sands mine? Because they all look the same. Corporate shrill? You people need to go read the actual scientific reports, not that you would understand.
@orrpatrick - check out Citizens Climate Lobby, which has grown from 3 Canadian groups to 20 in the last year. There are at least 30 in the U.S. It's inspiring, informative, and very supportive to all their volunteers.
I've already made many of the sacrifices necessary of humanity. I sent my BMW to the scrap yard and I take public transportation exclusively, I don't eat out of season foods that required shipping, and eat locally produced foods as often as possible. I am not the "cokehead" of your analogy. Oil companies DO stand in the way of some every important changes, like a gross vehicle weight based tax system to curb over consumption. They DO spend millions lobbying on K street.
On the other hand: a solar panel can already generate 4 times more energy over its lifetime than it cost to produce the panel (this is for a moderate climate, for sunny climates it is about 7). This number is hardly unfavourable compared to many other sources of energy. For third generation designs (screen printed dye and organic solar cells), this number will be even better. Wind does even better in this regard, with an energy yield ratio of 80.
@gaiagale couldn't agree more, I'll see you there my friend.
Where is the link to promote action. Great video, very inspiring, dropped the ball on the call to action!
Steven - Most Canadians feel as you do but it's not possible to simply "vote it out at our next opportunity". As a capitalist nation our country is so far down the proverbial rabbit hole that provincial & federal governments are slaves to corporate interests and power. In 2007 the Alberta govt tried to increase energy industry royalty payments by 20%. In 2010, amid lawsuits and other lashings by industry, the increase was repealed. Our current conservative federal govt is also very pro-oilsands.
The only thing that will stop the tar sands is replacing oil with some other type of energy. That will only happen if this other type of energy is cheaper than oil. The solution will not come about if we focus on negatives; it will not happen if we try to use force to stop these companies. The solution is to focus on positives. Such as investing in alternative energy in order to make it cheaper than oil. In an economically driven society this is the only way that change will occur.
To anyone watching this, please do further research to gain better understanding of this issue! Yes, we do need change in the world to protect our precious environment. However, I am so sick of seeing people like this who may not really care about this issue or any other. They are simply making money creating these presentations, and not offering to help with, or even suggest solutions! I am also fed up with the number of celebrities who jump on their fossil fuel powered band wagons to protest anything to do with the oil and gas industry. Unfortunately, as the world is today, we depend on fossil fuels. We also depend on agriculture, which by the way, does more environmental harm than all other industries combined. (see other TED presentation - The Other Inconvenient Truth) Don't get me wrong, these presentations are great. They get people thinking, and possibly spark some conscience or change. Just remember to take everything with a grain of salt, and keep in mind that we ALL have to change our lifestyles to make a difference, and it is not going to happen overnight by "voting against" Oil Sands production or pipelines!
Mind you, I'm not arguing that we shouldn't do what you're proposing at all. We definitely need well-kept lands like you're describing. But they will not solve the energy problem, not by a long shot.
9:40...Powerful
What about the reclamation projects? We shut down a project because there was one bird nest in a damn tree. I'd like to see any other company shutting down projects over a bird nest.
powerful
Thats an interesting idea, but that would just make the dilbit pipes burst, and that would cause a series of unneeded problems... The US and Canada can't immediately just stop the use of oil. We just have to prevent further usage, and invest a lot of money into real clean energy, like wind energy, solar, and more...
@ChristopherMarlowe The global temps during the MWP were actually .2 degrees C cooler than today's global temps. Also, the temperature rise happened over centuries, while our temperature rise is happening over decades. Look at the temperature graphs, constructed by actual climate scientists, our temps are rising so fast compared to MWP that we nearly go in a vertical line up, while the MWP, if put on the same graph, looks more like a mound.
Actually it's "bituminous sands". Both the terms "tar sands" and "oil sands" are slang and have been used for over a half century. "Tar" is modified pitch produced primarily from the wood and roots of pine by destructive distillation under pyrolysis. Bituminous sands (sometimes called oil/tar sands) contain various mixtures of sand (or rock) with bitumen or heavy crude oil and not "tar".
Thank you for that positive perspective. I agree that now is no time for apathy, complacency, or despair. It is well past that point of fear. It is upon us and we as a people must react or ultimately face our own extinction and at the very least, the destruction of all that, which makes being alive in this very natural planet, a joy.
We're all to blame, but blame doesn't even matter at this point. All that matters is if you personally care about having a future for our species - whether you're young or old, with kids or without. Anyone whose actions or behaviour answers that question with "no" should be thrown in jail and all their assets used to solve the real pressing problems. Sorry, I know that's sounding a bit too black and white. The stakes are high, but I'm confident we can do this if we cooperate instead of compete.
Sometimes it gets a bit overwhelming with the potential negative future scenarios possible. Not just climate change, but the full gambit of large and small scale behaviours humans engage in that causes suffering to others. At the end of the day though, you have to believe its possible to get beyond these seemingly overwhelming problems. There's nothing to be gained by being complacent, apathetic or giving up in despair. Religious prophecy is equally pointless, we must create our own future.
Interestingly, bitumen is actually classified as a pitch (like tar), so calling them "Tar Sands" is not as inaccurate as most people think. But I prefer to think of them as Mordor.
A quick Google search will come up with pages of articles on how another major oil company like BP,Chevron,Shell,ect. or their interest groups have bought a growing organization in the alternative energy sector. There is no debate about that, it happens all the time. I guess you could say there is a certain level of speculation when it comes to intentions. But if you look at how these organizations function before and after being acquired cost almost always increases, in some cases drastically.
Is that really the only option?
A serious dedication to cleaner energy sources doesn't mean people are necessarily going to start eating each other.
This is sad seeing the comments completely missing the mark on trying to utilize new, innovative ways to produce energy sustainably on a global scale. This is to protect our planet and each other.
While this all looks the one thing I would say is can they clean up and reclaim after? All mining operations look awful during production but the potential for clean up and leave a newly growing forest behind might make this slightly less awful. Also why the hell aren't they made to line the tailings ponds to stop leaching? That seems a no brainer
Actually I'll make one more point. When someone goes on an alarmist rant like this it's important to put the numbers associated with the scientific jargon being thrown at the audience into context. Most of the audience doesn't understand these numbers for what they are and so they get their opinion from the rhetoric of the speaker. "I don't know what a greenhouse gas is but I know it's bad and that sounds like a lot of it". Given context you can understand the numbers for what they are.
I knew tarsand was very bad, but I must confess I had no idea how insane it really is! As a norwegian I allready felt bad for my goverment's investment in this filthy energy, now I'm beside myself with anger! I didn't sign up for this, and I have to spread this video to my countrymen. We have an election coming up in september, I hope this issue will be a big reason to change people's vote!!!
Maybe someone can tell me where I can find that website fighting against this Canada's crazy idea of destroying such a beautiful and important place for every human being? I would like to find out more and join or sign the petition and to do at least a little bit for trying to stop it! Please let me know about that:)
...though, as I very very rarely speak about these things anymore with people as I've come to the brutal conclusion that there's practically nothing I could say or do that will make the overwhelmin...
Trees get their carbon from the air, and they get the water from the ground. The only boost they need for growth is the occasional bushfire. All the leaves which drop breakdown into the soil and self-fertilise. Nobody in their right mind would ever fertilise a tree. If you wanted to add nitrogen, planting clover in the area will do the job and provide forage for animals, and the animal dung will help to further fertilise the soil.
Plus the cattle will never get sick from corn/grains.
If an environmentalists said it, it's because it supports their story, not because it's true. If a corporation said it, they left something out because it detracts from their story.
@kevlarshaft .... Im WITH you..agree totally.
I'm getting to the point where I am sick of hearing people preach about how the oil sands are bad. I live in alberta. I've seen the oil sands, refineries, etc. After the sands are depleted its much like a waste land. Its restored. The money made from it, and how it si restored afterwards makes up for the ecological damage. People are ignorant. And preach more than learn.
Then those that are need to be stopped, and held accountable. If that doesn't work, then more extreme measures are needed ad justified.
The big questions - What comes next? How do we get there with the smallest ethical toll possible? This vs. death toll since people have been dying, and many more will, same for species going extinct. I think it's safe to say we'd rather this NOT happen. If you followed the civilization thought experiment and considered the implications of accelerating tech (intelligence singularity) the future is quite clear, though getting there less so. End of privacy --> tolerance, compassion not(corruption)
Also while I'm on this rant, there's one more point I want to address. He talks about the carcinogens in the rivers poisoning the fish/people and chokes up (rehearsed or genuine? debatable). The thing is, the oil sands are natural, we didn't create them. Do you think the Earth knows that there is a river in a certain area and says to itself "hey, I better make sure I don't let any of this bitumen seep into this river, animals might get hurt" yeahhhh no.
THE TIME FOR CHANGE IS NOW!
indeed~!! it's time we all wake up and realize we are driving ourselves to extinction if we continue to live the way we do under the capitalistic monetary economy.... we need a global shift to RBE
@mographzach I didn't actually miss that part. I just know from experience that the government doesn't ever give money back or use taxes for their intended purpose. Take for example the gasoline taxes. They do not go to fund roads. Taxes are used by the government to pay for debt and to start wars.
Garth, your heartfelt and knowledgeable talk about this subject of Canadian tar sands is excellent, clear and made easily digestible for your listeners. The fact that the indigenous tribes are knowingly HAVING to eat carcinogenic foods, that the ecosystem is destroyed on such an unvbelievable scale, just the sheer craziness of a fossil fuel world gone mad needs to come to a rapid halt. We cannot allow this to develop in our lifetime. What are we leaving for our children and the children of those indigenous peoples? Toxic wastelands. Please keep on talking, keep on explaining to people and hope that the momentum builds so that we stop this INSANITY.
Then you can sell the animals for food. The soil will be rejuvenated and fit for growing food crops, and you'd never need chemicals since the cattle/clover/trees have already deposited their nutrients into the soil.
No land is wasted, and we're still going to need meat for people to eat. There are tons of benefits of simply planting trees when you look at the big picture. Increased bird life, reduced erosion, improved air quality, building materials, animal feed, whatever you want basically.
There are two sides to everything. Yes, demand is there, but also corporations themselves use propaganda and marketing ploys to drive demand where it needn't exist. I don't buy cosmetics, clothes from overseas, coffee from Colombia (or anywhere for that matter), and I seldom fly. If we were all to revert to horse and cart, greenhouse emissions would rise not drop. But ignoring all of this, the economic costs associated with climate change far outweigh the benefits of excessive emissions.
im speechless, shocked
How does one respond.
It isn't just an issue for North Americans to deal with alone.
The only way to make it stop is to find a way to make it unprofitable to do it. They are making money by making someone else pay for the bad consequences. They need to be made to pay for ALL of the damage and FULL remediation of the site (and to feed the people who lose their food source AND their medical bills). The only body that could possibly make them pay is the government. We need to force these companies to be forced to pay the renewable & battery R&D costs too...that'd be about square...
this is the most digusting thing i have ever seen. amazing speaker
I live in British Columbia and I think that there are an overwhelming number of citizens, including First Nations citizens who will never allow a pipeline carrying that toxic goop through the province. Leave it in the ground and transition to sustainables.
I think that if the time comes that Canadian officials continue to support the extraction of Bitumen sands, and the US officials allow for the pipeline to come through to the US - US and Canadian citizens should, as brothers and sisters, start a new revolution. Non-violent of course.
Why was henrikmk's post flagged as spam? Consider the people killed, who developed cancer or were injured from our use of nuclear power and compare this to fossil fuels. Even with the dangers we still drill/dig for fossil fuel yet just mentioning a nuclear power option gets ones post flagged. Why are we so terrified of developing modern, safer nuclear power? Done right (carefully) nuclear power holds a lot of promise for our long term power demands. With experience safety will improve too.
I'd just like to see our gov investing more money on R&D for new batteries and renewables rather than give it to companies to develop more technology to make the dirty thing cleaner. We know we need to shift away from oil, so all energy related money should be used for environmental protection for what's out there already, not for increasing yields. So they cut DFO - good job Harper! -_-; I'll be disappointed, but not surprised if Canada's gov keeps "developing" until people stop buying oil. :(
That's all fair, but if you want to generate any serious amounts of energy, planting trees simply isn't going to cut it. The numbers don't work out and you simply don't have enough space to generate the energy you need. Not to mention that if you want to grow trees for energy, you're going to need fertilizer to boot, because you're taking away nutrients from the soil. Making and using fertilizer costs heaps of energy and also creates a lot of pollution problems.
National aquaduct construction from Gulf of Mexico to Pacific to Atlantic, possibly to Great Lakes also: harvesting sea minerals, hemp/corn (ethanol)/food crop irrigation, drinking water production, and...ENERGY creation using hydroelectric, wind, hydrogen, and solar methods. Natural gas/coal would be used as backup resource for critical systems. Write your government officials, use social media, and request investment in these opportunities.
they are investing in alternative energy to maintain their hegemony, not out of altruistic sense of good. This is not conspiracy, this is observation of the greed and avarice of the system. It is quite transparent when you look at the market trends.
@DCskater53 I totally agree with you. Great talk, but don't know how or where to support
why doesn't this guy go to talk to congress they should hear this
It is a wave that is sweeping the world.... not much truth to it though. Please do come to Fort McMurray and see how well the oil sands companies are reclaiming and getting aboriginals into employment. It is crazy insinuation if u just base ur perspectives on hearsay and do a TED talk on it. I always respected TED and am truly surprised that they let this happen right here in Canada which knows the value of its oil and how much it means to the economy.
The 'tar sands' make up 0.2% of Canada's boreal forest. For the entire tar sands projects, there is 500x more boreal forest. Look it up. The oil companies' reclamation projects are a joke, but whatever. Go visit some of the other thousands of square miles of the boreal forest if you don't like it. Get over it, people. Life is too short to completely lose it over a small portion of a forest nobody ever visits.
well this is exactly the way a person should not think. believing u cannot make a difference and keeping the status quo maybe does not make u the bad guy, but sure as hell doesnt make u any better. people can already make a difference with very little effort, true it wont fix the problem, but is a starting point. btw, public transportation in most of the industrialized countries is way greener than ur 4000cc chevy, and local vegetables consumption is an effective way to reduce co2 emissions.
@cazzajecko stand corrected...I thought you were talking about the video being bad....sorry
Residents of Fort McMurray know better, live better, make more money and support the Canadian economy.... I live and believe that for sure.... what are the options to change the fuel the world moves on?