> on Thursday, September 1, 2011 1:48:16 PM "Darryl McMahon" <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Economically viable" does not equal environmentally viable. Indeed. "Economically viable" has become nearly the antithesis of environmentally viable If 'nearly' applies. Some would say it IS the antithesis. > > http://ottawaaction.ca/join-us (Sept. 26th, 2011, Ottawa Parliament > Hill re: Tar Sands mining) > > http://www.restco.ca/Inuvik_RT_Ottawa.shtml (Sept. 12-16, Ottawa, > Canada > Science and Technology Museum, Ottawa Forum concurrent with Inuvik > Roundtable Review of Arctic Offshore Drilling - a more low-key > affair). > > Darryl McMahon > > On 01/09/2011 1:30 PM, Keith Addison wrote: > > Really? > > > > http://search.japantimes.co.jp:80/mail/eo20110831rs.html > > > > Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2011 > > > > Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands > > > > By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON > > > > The Washington Post > > > > WASHINGTON - When it comes to energy, America is lucky to be next to > > Canada, whose proven oil reserves are estimated by Oil and Gas > > Journal at 175 billion barrels. tar sands are NOT oil, they are an oil precursor. Like the marcellus shale, and all these 'bottom of the barrel' extraction schemes that are coming along these days, one expects there are investment scams at play here, rather than any actual measurable production. _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
