vo-banner.jpg

Confused by the tar sands climate threat? Take a look.

Update: My chart below has been widely reposted already. NRDC included it their lobbying package sent to every US Senator and Representative before the incredibly close vote on March 8th to once again deny the Keystone XL permit. Other groups have reposted it including Forest Ethics, Tar Sands Action, Oil Change International and 350.org

Update 2: It has been pointed out to me that a circle labelled “recoverable now” in my original chart is really an estimate for “will become economic.” I’ve changed the chart and text below to reflect this.


In an ancient fable, people in the dark describe the different parts of an elephant they happen to be touching: tusk, tail, ear, trunk, belly, leg. When they compare notes they discover deep disagreements.

Navigating modern day climate claims surrounding the Alberta tar sands feels a lot like trying to make sense of those ancient notes.

Not only do the tar sands have many components but each has vague and sometimes overlapping nicknames: reserves, oil-in-place, recoverable, proven, viable, future. Add to that a blender of techno-speak and metaphor such as 200 ppm, 160 GtC, 50 per cent of estimated resource, “carbon bomb”, 0.36°C, “at our significance level” and 85 tC ‘equal share’.

All this confusion makes it hard for Canadians to address our own elephant in the room: how much climate pollution from the tar sands is compatible with a safe and stable climate system.

To make sense of the jumble of climate impact estimates and terminology I created this graphic to try to bring them all together. It’s my attempt to draw that elephant in a familiar landscape.

Carbon bomb? This new graphic lets you decide.

Here’s a quick tour.

Two small brown circles on top show the cumulative climate pollution from all the fossil fuels ever burned in Canada. Canada is the 9th largest of 185 nations in all time total cumulative climate pollution. All the climate pollution from all the coal ever burned in Canada is the smaller of the two brown circles.

The larger red circles show the relative amount of climate pollution that would be released if each of the different slices of the tar sands is excavated and burned. To give a sense of scale, potential tar sands emissions are compared with past fossil fuel emissions.

Here is a description of each, starting from smallest and working outwards…

More in Climate Snapshot

"Carbon tsunami" lead by Enbridge Northern Gateway takes aim at BC

A flood of mega-carbon projects threaten to quickly turn British Columbia into one of the world's dirtiest economies.

Car Carbon series: cool new animation, plus the jaw-dropping impact it left out

What weighs sixteen billion pounds yet hides in plain sight?

Comments

Well, since you use 'tar'

Well, since you use 'tar' rather then what it IS, oil, that automatically proves your just agenda driven against the project. Seeing as you don't refine TAR to get oil. All the OIL sands is is the worlds largest naturally occuring oil spill that people are cleaning up and making useable. Sure, it'd be better if we could just pull a rainbow outta our rears and switch to renewables. But since they aren't even remotely ready to take the place of oil what do you expect people to do? Go back to living in a preindustrial era? Oh wait. That means most of the world starving to death since we wouldn't be able to produce or transport the food needed to support the number of people there is now.

Never mind the world was warmer in the past then it is now multiple times and somehow the world didn't collapse nor everything go extinct. Medieval Warp Period being the most recent, as well as warmer periods during the Roman and Greek eras. As well as ice ages. Yet somehow climate is supposed to STOP changing just because we demand it to now. Seeing as how climate always has and always will change, the phrase climate change is redundant and New Speakish.

tar sands

Dear sleel,  I sugest that you take the time to read up on some of the causes of climate changes past and present.  If you now of any scientific studies that suggest that our current consumption of fossil fuels is not resulting in climate changes resulting from global warming I would be very excited to read them.