Environment 911 > Our Environment

Facts on Alberta's Oil Sands

For many of us who may not know what exactly an “oil sand” is, oilsands or “tar sands,” as described by the Oil Shale and Tar Sands Programmatic EIS Information Center, are a type of what is called a “bitumen” deposit. Bitumen is a very thick and dense form of petroleum which is found in sand mixed with clay and water in various amounts throughout the world, the largest deposits being Venezuela and Canada. Oilsands in previous eras were often deemed largely unprofitable due to the comparative costs of extracting them as opposed the costs needed for the free-flowing hydrocarbons known as conventional crude oil often pumped from oil wells. However, new technology has made extracting from oil sand resources financially feasible, if not as environmentally feasible. This is because oil extracted and separated from oilsands often requires a significant amount more of polluting processes than conventional crude oil.

In Northeastern Alberta, Canada, three main areas which total approximately 140,000 square kilometers are utilized for the extraction of crude oil from Alberta’s vast oil sand resources. According to Alberta Energy, its oilsands encompass: “the second largest source of oil in the world after Saudi Arabia.” Of the total 140,000 square kilometers used to produce such a prolific output of oil, only 500 square kilometers is actually used in surface mining. This is where the oils sands within 75 meters deep of the surface are shoveled out; the rest of the oil sand resources, which are deeper than 75 meters, are gained through “in-situ” recovery, a process wherein steam is injected into the ground, causing the bitumen to flow to a point where it can be pumped out. This in-situ method leaves a much better environmental footprint than conventional mining, and Alberta’s oil companies and the region as whole appear to make commitment to this mode of environmentally suitable methods. This is simply expressed, for instance, in the environmental portion of Alberta Energy’s website, saying, “The Oilsands Division of the Department of Energy is committed to the rapid development of environmental solutions for oilsands projects.”

And are they measuring up to this statement? Though remaining a target for climate change and global warming activism, by all appearances the Alberta oilsands region seems to be making a good effort. Their reported Environmental Statistics show a company dedicated to making some good attempts at conservation, while maintaining their economic stability. Still, there are many who question or outright denounce the effect on the local environment.

The destruction of habitat due to mining activity, even the less intrusive in-situ process, inevitably has a negative effect on the local wildlife. According to an article by the Canadian Press, Alberta’s Oilsands: Well-Managed Necessity or Ecological Disaster?, “Even in-situ mines require roads, pipelines and other facilities that will chop the forest into smaller and smaller blocks and destroy habitat for animals that require large undisturbed areas.” Conservation plans have been implemented for land reclamation, however, there are issues with this even when successful. The fact is that even if the land is restored, it is usually not restored to its former state. Hence, forests will stand in the place of peat bogs in some cases.

Also, the effect of discharge into the atmosphere and pollution of water sources is a significant issue according to an activist site, Tar Sands 101, which compiles links to articles on the environmental effect of the oilsands. However, according to the previously mentioned Canadian Press report, Alberta’s Oilsands: Well-Managed Necessity or Ecological Disaster?, the effect of pollution in the area is, in fact, not significant. “Even the most alarming estimates of pollution around various oilsands facilities suggest contaminants, such as carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), are well below guidelines.” Furthermore, they point out that “Alberta has always maintained that contamination occurs naturally, as the Athabasca River and other streams erode the bitumen.” This does not mean that there is not a negative effect—dust from the mining activities is a reported problem, as well as a gathering acidity of the soil due to the oilsands. Deposits of toxic water from the oilsands process called “tailings ponds” are one of the most disturbing results of this mining process, killing any birds and wildlife that are unfortunate enough to partake of the poison pond. Attempts are being made to nullify these tailings ponds, however, it may be some time. Finally, the Alberta Cancer Board found cancer rates in downstream Fort Chipewyan to be 30% higher than expected, though it should be noted that the specific causes of this jump in the cancer rate were not investigated. In the end, despite these issues, the final conclusion as a whole nevertheless remains as stated by the Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute—that the region is still relatively comparable to its untouched state.

On the global scale, Alberta does not gain as benign a conclusion. The Alberta oilsands account for 0.1% of the global pollution—a status which some argue is comparatively small because it is a very low percentage, after all, and which some argue is comparatively large because, small number or not, any one entity or region that is singled out at all on the global scale for pollution is a concern. Besides this, there is the dissension over the extra pollution that is inherent in oilsands oil as opposed to other crude oil. Some environmentalists, as reported in the Canadian Press, claim that a barrel of oilsands oil produces up to the three times more so-called greenhouse gases than a barrel of regular crude pumped from a well. However, out of this melee of opinions and counter-opinions emerges no clear consensus as to the comparative scoring of the Alberta region in relation to other similar areas of the planet, but it can at least be agreed that any pollution is, after all, a negative item, and Alberta admittedly produces its share.

This last observation on pollution, that any amount at all is “a negative item,” perhaps need apply to the situation as a whole. The mining of oilsands in the Alberta region of Canada is by no means a purely healthy process—it does cause real and censurable repercussions throughout both the local and even global environment. However, it also should not be unfairly and vehemently labeled as overly harmful to the environment as it is by some parties, nor overlooked as an important and economical beneficent to the surrounding communities as a job source and to the world as an energy source in this time and age. The answer lies somewhere in transition between economic understanding and environmental zealousness.