Suncor, Shell, Petro-Canada, Husky and Imperial Oil are officially more environmentally trustworthy than the Alberta Government

You know it's got to be bad when even the OIL COMPANIES are asking for a temporary moratorium on expansion of the oilsands, in order to allow for the creation of conservation areas. What kind of twilight zone must we live in if business is lobbying the government to preserve more land for conservation? This story was originally reported in the Globe and Mail with more detail, but for your convenience I have posted the CBC's summary of the story below:

Companies call for oilsands development freeze: report
Last Updated: Monday, February 25, 2008 | 10:33 AM MT
CBC News

For the first time, major oil producers are calling on the Alberta government to introduce a partial moratorium on oilsands development in the province's north, according to a newspaper report.

Companies including Petro-Canada, Suncor and Shell Canada signed a private letter last month asking the province to freeze land lease licences until 2011 in three areas around Fort McMurray that have not yet been developed, the Globe and Mail said Monday.

The provincial government sells the licences to allow companies to find and produce crude.

"Further granting of new surface and sub-surface rights would continue to reduce the available options for the establishment of new conservation areas that would serve to accomplish a balanced suite of regional outcomes," reads the letter obtained by the newspaper.

The missive is also signed by Environment Canada and environmental group Pembina Institute.

The Globe reported that a majority of the Cumulative Environmental Management Association, a group of 46 industry, government and aboriginal members working in the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo, support the letter.

But at least four major companies that are a part of CEMA, such as Encana and Canadian Natural, rejected the call for a partial moratorium, with Syncrude abstaining from taking a position.

A spokesman from Alberta's Energy Department told the newspaper the government is working on a response, which will likely come after the March 3 provincial election.

UPDATE: Alberta's aboriginal chiefs have also come out in support of a moratorium. Also of note in the story is the Liberal's response  to the initial Globe story. I have yet to see anything from the Tories or the NDs, but will be sure to do so if and when they respond.

UPDATE #2: NEP Alert! Oh no, I spoke too soon. An updated version of the CBC article has Stelmach's response and surprise, surprise he has envoked his memory of the NEP and Trudeau for the third time THIS election.

At a campaign stop in Calgary on Monday, Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach said he's not surprised by the recommendation but pointed out that support for it is not unanimous.

"Governments do not control the economy," he said. "The last time the economy was controlled by a government was back in the '80s, and it was the federal Trudeau Liberals that I ended up paying 22 per cent interest rates … We're not going back to those dark days."

In the past, Stelmach has said the government shouldn't "touch the brake" of the provincial economy.

He also said the government will not respond until CEMA finalizes its recommendations which are due in June.

Stelmach may be correct to say that governments do not control the economy, but they do control the conditions in which it operates. They set tax rates, allocate public lands for sales and sell mineral leases. They have complete control over these rates and can use them to stimulate or slow under or over performing economies - every jurisdiction in the world does this.

Also, this is pretty hypocritical, given that Stelmach himself revoked OSUM sub-surface lease under Marie Lake last year, explaining that all of Alberta isn't for sale. Hmm... looks like everything is back on the (free) market after all.

Update #3: A longer piece from the Edmonton Journal describing Stelmach's reaction in greater depth, and an updated article from the Herald touching on the NDP's position.

Comments

[DMFB]

Not to be entirely, ridiculously cynical here, but is it all possible that these companies, who all already have operations set up/on the way, are calling for the moratorium to prevent any other competitors from getting in while they (the established companies) build up capital/human resources/whatever to be able to develop them themselves in a few years time, using the environmental angle because it happens to be in the news lately (and makes them appear a bit more responsible)?

Not to always see the bad side of everything, I just have a hard time believing that oil companies actually care enough about the environment to do something like this. It would make a lot more sense to me if they were just waiting for the current spate of projects to get finished, so they wouldn't be overtaxing the available pool of labour, or something.

[Martin]

That would be a risky gambit given that they appear to be pressing for the establishment of conservation areas, meaning lands where development would be banned for the long term.

Other than that, I share your cynicism.

[eh]

I love how Stelmach's response to this was to bring up the NEP and Trudeau (see updated CBC article). At least this latest conjuring of ghosts is slightly more topical than past incidents (e.g. health care).

[DMFB]

That would be a risky gambit given that they appear to be pressing for the establishment of conservation areas, meaning lands where development would be banned for the long term.

Depends where they want conservation areas set up, but that's a fair point.

Also, I'm beginning to think NEP/Trudeau is Stelmach's standard response to anything. It's a matter of time before he's blaming the weather on the NEP.

[Trevor]

The NEP did devastate our economy. This blog has more then once said that Alberta's latest boom will soon turn to a bust.

[eh]

In reference to the discussion between DMFB and Martin, I have two thoughts to add:

1. If this is just another case of Big Oil greed (which it certainly could be), I question why the (highly respected) Pembina Institute is involved. Surely the intelligent folks working there would only be involved in such an effort if they thought it would result in tangible environmental benefits?

2. If the areas selected for conservation are indeed bitumen-rich, what's to stop the AB government from allowing drilling or mining at a later time? We've seen that in the past these kinds of activities have occurred in Alberta's 'protected' areas.

Thus, I concur that this issue should be treated with cautious cynicism.

[Aaron]

Not to be entirely, ridiculously cynical here, but is it all possible that these companies, who all already have operations set up/on the way, are calling for the moratorium to prevent any other competitors from getting in while they (the established companies) build up capital/human resources/whatever to be able to develop them themselves in a few years time, using the environmental angle because it happens to be in the news lately (and makes them appear a bit more responsible)?

They're profit maximizers. Corporations exist in order to max out shareholder value. Anything else is just window dressing. It's their way of putting a dent in the government's bottom line while maximizing their own.

[ch]

I definitely share the cynicism raised by Martin, DMFB, and eh. I definitely don't see this as some sort of miraculous environmental conversion by serial environmental offenders.

My point was only that it's completely ridiculous that these companies are actually willing to conserve land from development (whatever their motivation) and our government is just like, "NOPE, sorry, free market rules." It's really just symptomatic of Alberta's larger environmental regulation processes.

Remember in the debate over Kyoto ratification, Suncor 's VP brushed it off, saying meeting Kyoto targets would only cost them about $0.25 a barrel? In contrast, Alberta's government got on it's high horse spewing rhetoric about economic devastation and evil Ottawa, etc.

My point is just that often companies can make changes to the way they do things, to make their practices more environmentally-friendly with little effort/losses, but there is no incentive for them to do so because Alberta refuses to regulate ANYTHING to do with the oilsands.

Aaron: I agree that corps are obviously always looking out for their bottom line, but you're ignoring the fact that sometimes the bottom line IS compatible with environmental friendly outcomes.

[Steve Kelly]

Looks more like a corporate welfare ploy if I ever saw one to keep out others wishing to develop and hold leases. Think EnCana and CNRL have a fair point in fairness. Read between the lines on this one as 'the majors' only do what is in their interests at our expense with the Pembina Institute tagging along for cosmetic purposes. Another blow for fair minded Canadian innovation.