Becky White and the Secret Mission have just released this catchy and hilarious protest anthem/call to action track and music video — featuring RAN’s own Executive Director Rebecca Tarbotton on violin — called “Man Up!” The song calls on people to gather at the White House on November 6 to persuade President Obama to make the right decision and oppose the disastrous Keystone XL Pipeline project, the fate of which is being decided by his Administration right now.

The movement to stop this massively destructive pipeline has brought together a wide array of unlikely allies and has exploded into a national political force to be reckoned with in a very short amount of time. Please check this out and share it widely to spread the word on this crucial and time-sensitive issue!

The White House. Nov 6. Be There.

These are the final moments before President Obama makes a decision to approve or reject the construction of the dirty and dangerous Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. On November 6, exactly one year before the election, thousands will come together to completely encircle the White House in an act of solidarity to convince President Obama to make the right decision to reject the Keystone XL.

More than 4000 have already signed up to participate. This is fantastic, but we need thousands more!

Please don’t stay at home this Sunday wondering whether your presence would have made a difference. Come stand with us for clean energy, for human rights, for all of our futures. Sign up now!

“So many lives are on the line right now. The system is crashing. It’s crashing economically and it’s crashing ecologically. The stakes are too high right now for us not to make the most of this moment.” — Naomi Klein at Occupy Wall Street

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer at the BMO Shareholder meeting in Vancouver

As Canadians were casting their votes in the Federal Election, another important decision was playing out in the board rooms of Canada’s top banks: what to do with Enbridge, sponsor of the Northern Gateway Pipeline.

Over the last several weeks, RAN  teamed up with First Nations of the Yinka Dene Alliance to put senior banking executives on notice as they gathered for this season’s round of annual shareholder meetings. The message? First Nations are rights-holders, not stakeholders.

Here’s how they reacted (each bank’s name is followed by the total amount of funds raised for Enbridge since 2007):

• Bank of Montreal: $286 million

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer, Ann Ketlo and Jasmine Thomas of the Yinka Dene Alliance pressed CEO Bill Downe to dump Enbridge and update long-outdated policies on human rights and the environment. Downe invited them to a meeting to discuss community concerns. More than 50 supporters rallied outside.

• Toronto Dominion: $5 billion

CEO Edmond Clark accepted the invitation of Chief Jackie Thomas of Saik’uz First Nation to visit her community. He also pledged to to uphold the bank’s recognition of Indigenous Rights based on Free Prior Informed Consent. (See this video of the exchange, starts at 64:32.)

• Scotiabank: $10 billion (!)
  

No comment from CEO Rick Waugh after a moving speech by Jasmine Thomas, a youth representing the Yinka Dene Alliance. (Listen to her presentation at this link, starts at 1:58:20). Scotia’s written response to the Alliance was equally vague.

• CIBC: $220 million

Jasmine Thomas and Supporters at the CIBC AGM in Winnipeg

Unlike the other banks, CIBC hasn’t responded to a letter from Chiefs of the Yinka Dene Member Nations raising concerns about Enbridge. This despite (or maybe because of) Enbridge CEO Patrick Daniel’s position on the bank’s Board. After Jasmine’s remarks, Board Chair Charles Sirois also failed to say anything of substance (catch the meeting here).

RBC has also been a big fundraiser for Enbridge (as in $1.5 billion raised since 2007), but didn’t get a visit from the Yinka Dene Alliance or RAN. We opted out this year as a sign of good faith in RBC’s new policy announced in December. The policy ostensibly requires the bank to consider whether clients obtain free, prior, informed consent (FPIC) of Indigenous communities impacted by client activities. How this policy will apply to Enbridge remains to be seen.

Learn more about why FPIC is important here.

Learn more about the Yinka Dene Alliance here.

Those bankers have been busy. All told, RBS has raised more than $9.2 billion for companies operating in the tar sands since it was bailed out by British taxpayers in 2008. More than $2 billion of that total was raised just in the last six months since the bank produced it’s glossy report.

Let’s look into the deals RBS brokered in the last six months:

• Enbridge: $ 100 Million

A proposed massive new pipeline from the tar sands through the heart of the Great Bear Rainforest to a tanker port on the coast of British Columbia. RBS ran the books together with RBC, HSBC and Deutsche Bank on a $400 million bond issued by Enbridge last Septemeber. Each bank earned an estimated $87.5 million on the deal.

• Kinder Morgan: $275 Million

A proposed a competing West-Coast pipeline through the Great Bear Rainforest. This one from the tar sands to a tanker port near Vancouver, BC. RBS led the bond deal in February.

• BP: $950 million

Partnered with Husky to build a $2 billion tar sands strip mine forced-steam drilling project. And don’t forget the Gulf Spill. RBS managed two giant bond deals for BP in October and March.

• Statoil: $150 Million

RBS issued a revolving credit facility (think credit card) to Norway’s state-owned oil company last December. Last month Norway’s government paved the way for increasing Statoil’s already substantial tar sands stake.

• Total: $400 Million

French Oil company building a massive new tar sands strip mine. CEO says tar sands are the future: ‘”To justify our massive investments in the oil sands, we’re looking at what the world will look like in 2020, 2025 or 2030,” he told a reporter in 2009. RBS led the bond deal in January.

• Marathon: $600 Million

The midwest oil refiner spent $2.2 billion to retool it’s Detroit refinery to take more tar sands. Meanwhile, its neighbors are worried about more asthma and cancer. RBS led the bond deal in January.

Was RBS alone in supporting these businesses? No. Many banks were involved.

Do these companies do more than develop the tar sands? Yes they do.

But is RBS any less culpable for using taxpayer money to finance tar sands? No it is not. Follow the Indigenous activists making that case at the Bank’s shareholder meeting this week.

*A note on numbers. All the numbers quoted here are pulled from Bloomberg, which ranks banks according to the value of deals they lead in a particular sector.  These numbers are the value of those deals, not the value of RBS ownership or interest in those securities.

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer

CEO Bill Downe’s unmistakable message at today’s Shareholder Meeting was that Bank of Montreal has changed. During his 10 minute speech, “change” showed up 14 times! The “world has changed” he declared. “Embrace change.” “If there’s one thing I hope you take away from these remarks,” he concluded, “it’s that BMO is changing.” I half expected him to break into his best David Bowie: “Ch Ch Ch Ch Ch CHANGE-ES!!”

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer had a very different message. She came to the meeting representing the Yinka Dene alliance, a union of five First Nations of British Columbia resisting a $5.5 billion tar sands oil pipeline proposed to run directly through their traditional territory, threatening salmon runs that have defined her community for centuries. From Geraldine’s perspective, BMO looked as culpable today as it did in 2007, when the bank underwrote $286 million of credit to Enbridge, the company seeking to build the pipeline. (Check back soon for a link to her  speech to shareholders and those of Ann Ketlo and Jasmine Thomas, also from the Yinka Dene Alliance).

In fact a review of BMO’s public disclosures shows that the bank’s Indigenous rights standards are essentially the same today as they were when the bank was founded in 1817—non-existent.

So while BMO may be changing in some ways, it is falling behind in terms of its handling of Indigenous rights. Both TD Bank and Royal Bank of Canada have policies in place that affirm the right of First Nations to free, prior, informed consent over the use of their traditional lands and resources. It’s time BMO made the change to do the same.

Thanks to everyone who turned out to support the Yinka Dene, more than 50 of you by our count.  And thanks to Andrea MacDonald for her great photos of the rally.

Addiction – noun \ə-ˈdik-shən, a-\: persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful. (Merriam-Webster)

Citi has a problem. Despite renewing its vows in 2009 to tackle “Environmental and Social Risk Management,” including mountaintop removal coal mining, Citi is relapsing into fossil fuel addiction.

Last year, Citi raised more than $34 billion for the coal and oil industries, but raised less than two percent of that amount for companies developing renewable energy like wind and solar.

Dirty deals led by Citi last year included a $500 million bond issued by Transcanada, proponent of the Keystone XL pipeline. The $7 billion pipeline would carry crude oil strip-mined from Canada’s tar sands 1,800 miles south to the Gulf States for refining. The project would triple US oil imports from the tar sands and threaten the largest fresh-water aquifer in the world, while keeping the United States addicted to oil for many decades to come.

Citi also led the combination of Massey Energy and Alpha Natural Resources. At over $7 billion, the acquisition creates the largest mountaintop removal coal mining company in the country. MTR has devastated the Appalachian landscape and displaced hundreds of families from the region.

Other low points from 2010 include raising $1.3 billion for BP and Transocean — the companies responsible for the Gulf oil spill.

Citi needs to stop making excuses and denying that it has a problem. That’s why RAN is staging an intervention. Today, people around the world are making a difference in all of our futures by picking up the phone and calling a banker at Citi. This is no email petition, we’re actually putting our supporters on the phone with the bankers that need to know about Citi’s financing of fossil fuels so that they can help their company change course.

If you are a Citi employee reading this and want get in touch with RAN, please email answers@ran.org.

Yesterday, AP reported that the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline to Texas won’t decrease gas prices (I broke that story last month, but who’s counting). In fact, a report commissioned by pipeline sponsor TransCanada now shows that connecting tar sands producers with Gulf Coast refiners actually pushes gas prices up for everybody.

That same report contains another unreported secret: Keystone XL won’t decrease so-called “unfriendly” oil imports either. According to the same 2008 report, if Keystone XL were completed in 2013, Gulf Coast “imports are forecast to decline initially before 2010… and then to increase by over 600,000 [barrels per day] by 2020.” Why? Because Gulf Coast “Crude runs… are projected to grow by over 500,000 [barrels per day] by 2020.” (See chart from the report, below).

So while TransCanada’s radio commercials claim that the “Transcanada Keystone Pipeline can reduce America’s dependence on  oil from unfriendly places, like Venezuela and the Middle East, by up to 20 percent,” the company’s own research shows otherwise.

The chart below sums it up nicely. If we build XL, we’ll continue importing just as much oil from Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and other “unfriendly sources,” while dirty Canadian crudes will top off the tanks of expanding Gulf Coast refineries. Put another way, Keystone doesn’t make us less dependent on dangerous sources of foreign oil, it only digs America deeper into a crushing dependence on an ever-dirtier, ever more expensive addiction to oil.

"PADD III" refers to the Gulf Coast Region--NM, TX, MS, MI, LA and AL

Clearly, it means a significant about-face on tar sands for one of the world’s biggest banks. Before today, RBC trailed its peers on basic issues like Indigenous rights, water quality, and the environment. A review of the Bank’s 2009 annual report shows strong philanthropy and energy-saving initiatives across the bank, but relatively few screens for lending and other core financial services. Despite being one of the world’s biggest financiers of the tar sands, RBC’s business in the sector escaped any systematic environmental or social review. During a speech to shareholders in early 2009, CEO Gord Nixon claimed that concerns about tar sands concerns were “not a bank issue.”

What a difference a year makes. In a post to its website, RBC announced its first ever “Policy on Environmental & Social Risk Management for Capital Markets.” The policy guides the bank in assessing the environmental and social impact of its clients and deciding what to do about them. While the announcement doesn’t go into details, Rainforest Action Network (RAN) got a peek at the language in the new policy last month.

The policy breaks significant new ground on Indigenous rights. For clients with operations within Indigenous territories, the bank will document the status of consultation with those groups. That’s not especially new. In fact many banks have incorporated the World Bank standards of “consultation, leading to broad community support” into their lending policies. Where RBC raises the bar is in documenting whether clients have “policies and processes consistent with the standard of “Free, Prior and Informed Consent.”

That “consent” clause—commonly referred to as FPIC (pronounced “eff pick”)—was taken from the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was endorsed by the US government just last week and by the Canadian government last month. No other bank has yet issued such an explicit expectation of its clients regarding Indigenous rights. RBC also extends this policy to its entire capital markets business — not just a handful of its biggest loans, as is the standard established by the Equator Principles.

Policies are one thing, but results for communities facing off against RBC’s clients are quite another. The first test of RBC’s new policy will happen in the heart of the Great Bear Rainforest in British Columbia, where Enbridge is proposing a 727 mile long pipeline to carry more than half a million barrels of tar sands oil per day to a tanker port in Kitimat. Along the way, 61 First Nations are (strongly) withholding consent for the project due to failed consultation over its substantial social and environmental impacts to traditional territories.

Enbridge will likely go to the bond market to finance the $5.5 billion project. If RBC steps in to underwrite that bond, the bank’s policy will have meant little to the communities which it purports to honor. If RBC opts out, it will be a new day in the banking world. Rumor has it that the World Bank will be adopting similar “consent” language in its revised IFC Performance Standards expected to be released next year. RBC’s handling of this new commitment will be a bellwether for the private banking sector’s willingness to implement this emerging international standard.

Is RBC up to the challenge?

Let us know what you think in the comments section below.

In an interview reported today by Lauren Krugel of the Canadian Press, CEO Russ Girling said:

I don’t believe that there’s a causal link between the two… It will be developed responsibly, in my view, irrespective of whether we build a pipeline or not… That oil will go someplace, so I think this push to connect somehow the development of the keystone pipeline to the development in the oilsands is not valid.

That’s a very different message from TransCanada PipeLine’s most recent Annual Report which states:

The increase in WCSB crude oil exports from Alberta requires access to new markets, including the Gulf Coast. TCPL will continue to pursue additional opportunities to move crude oil from Alberta to U.S. markets.

So for its investors, increasing tar sands production “requires” the XL pipeline, but for the American public concerned about locking in dirty oil imports, the two have nothing to do with one another. Which do you believe?

Avatar vs. tar sands. See the resemblence?

James Cameron, “the most powerful man in Hollywood,” is in Alberta. Canadian TV cut into regular broadcasts this morning to show footage of him climbing into a helicopter for an areal tour of the tar sands. He’s touring with industry reps this morning, then will visit with Indigenous leaders later this afternoon in Ft. Chipewyan. He’s expected to do a formal press briefing on Wednesday.

Cameron is visiting on the invitation of George Poitras on behalf of the Indigenous Environmental Network issued last year at the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Rights at the UN. Kevin Libin at the (conservative) National Post is providing live coverage during the industry tour. CTV is also getting good footage, including Cameron’s comparison of the tar sands to destruction of the Amazon and his movie Avatar.

Meanwhile, tar sands development is beginning to encroach on US soil. Utah’s Division of Oil, Gas & Mining just approved the first ever commercial lease for tar sands development adjacent to Canyonlands National Park. Transcanada is also pushing for approval of a $12 billion pipeline to bring 1 million barrels per day of tar sands crude oil to the Gulf Coast.

Both projects show an industry pushing our economy deeper into oil addiction–scraping bottom to extract the last, dirtiest drops of a fundamentally a non renewable resource.

Take action to demand a stop to tar sands production in the US and watch this space for updates on Cameron’s “Avatarsands” visit.

RAN Chicago Rallies at Canadian Consulate

Following three significant spills of tar sands oil from aging pipelines in the Midwest, RAN Chicago took action. An afternoon protest was themed around pushing back on Canada’s tar sands and kicking our addiction to oil. Of the various placards on display (stop the serial spiller!), the hypodermic needle filled with oil was my personal favorite.

If oil is like a drug, then the Canadian Consulate in Chicago has become the kingpin of US tar sands trafficking. The Consulate has teamed up with oil companies to push through new tar sands pipelines, and strong-arm companies into keeping tar sands crude flowing into Midwestern refineries.

Meanwhile on the other coast in British Columbia, RAN’s Eriel Deranger joined over 300 at a march in support of First Nations opposed to the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline in Prince George British Columbia.  The proposed pipeline would move up to 525,000 barrels of oil a day from the tar sands in northern Alberta to tanker port in Kitimat, BC.  The project would cross unceded territories claimed by over 20 First Nations.  It would also cross 785 watercourses, fragment wildlife habitat and impact fragile salmon fisheries.  Enbridge has a long history of pipeline spills and other accidents, including the one million gallon spill of crude oil into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan in July—one of the largest spills in U.S. history.

The pipeline protests come just one week after a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences showed that the tar sands industry is poisoning the Athabasca River. The study confirmed worries about elevated rates of cancers by communities downstream.

But Downing Street won’t enforce basic environmental standards at RBS so Climate Camp is taking direct action. The camp is calling for RBS to end financing of dirty fossil fuel projects like Canada’s tar sands.

RBS defended itself in the press by touting its backing of alternative energy projects. The bank told the Guardian that “in 2006 the bank was the world’s largest single financier of wind and green energy.” It told the BBC that “In recent years RBS has been one of the most active banks in the world in providing funding for renewable energy projects.”

Those claims are royal BS.

According to financial market data compiled by Bloomberg, RBS ranked third as financier for alternative energy companies in 2006. In the period since the taxpayer bailout, RBS ranks a distant 19th!

This chart illustrates the point. Of the more than $15 billion RBS raised for the energy sector since the bailout, just $83 million went to alternative energy–less than one percent.

Check out this great new flick from our friends at Climate Camp UK. This year, they take on Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS)- among the world’s top financiers of fossil fuels. The Climate Camp crew doesn’t mess around; previous camps successfully shut down the third runway at Heathrow and Kingsnorth power station in Kent.

Visit www.climatecamp.org.uk for details on the camp Aug 21-24 near Edinburgh, UK.

A light at the end of the tunnel?Photo:  . SantiMB . via Flickr

The tar sands tide may finally be turning at Canada’s biggest bank. RBC is among the largest financiers of Canada’s Tar Sands but so far lacks policies adopted by other banks that seek to limit harm to Indigenous rights, water quality and climate.

That may be changing. Last week, representatives from RBC showed us a summary of the new draft Environmental Risk policy that it hopes will fill the gap. It’s too early to draw conclusions– the early draft has yet to be ratified by the bank’s Senior Management–but here’s our initial take on where we see progress relative to other banks, and where we still see distance.

Bottom line, we think bank is moving in the right direction on Indigenous rights and the environment but falls well short of establishing a significantly new standard for responsible banking. On a scale of 1 (worthless) to 10 (perfect), we gave the draft a 5. Here’s why:

On Indigenous rights, the policy acknowledges “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) as an international standard established by the UN, but requires it from clients only where FPIC is national law.  Elsewhere (including in Canada’s tar sands), the bank relies on the weaker World Bank standard of “free, prior, informed consultation” and meaningful accommodation. Essentially, RBC is proposing the same “recognize” language on FPIC that TD adopted in 2007, though RBC claims its application will be more robust.

We’ve been asking RBC’s to require evidence of consent from its clients no matter where they operate, especially in Canada’s tar sands where recent studies show that Indigneous communities are facing elevated rates of cancer. RBC maintains that demonstrating consent is impractical given the inconsistent interpretation of “consent”, the lack of a legal framework for establishing “consent” in Canada and overlapping and unresolved land claims and interests. We disagree. Our view is that consent is really just the product of consultation that takes “no” for an answer. It’s a hard pill for industry to swallow, but it’s the right thing to do.

On land and water, the bank singles out clients operating in “environmentally sensitive areas” which it defines as tropical forests, UNESCO world heritage sites, critical habitat for species at risk and High Conservation Value Forests. The policy would require an assessment of whether clients “prevent or mitigate” irreversible adverse impacts to these areas, but stops short of imposing clear penalties if they don’t.

We’ve been asking RBC to phase out financing to companies that can’t do business without wrecking the environment. Despite the bank’s assurances that these new guidelines will help weed out bad apples, we remain unconvinced. We like to see the bank defining “environmentally sensitive areas” but the policy lacks the teeth to avoid doing them harm.

Finally, we’ve been asking RBC to meet Unicredit’s commitment to measure and reduce its “financed emissions” of CO2 by reigning in financing to tar sands operators and other large CO2 emitters. They offered to encourage clients to disclose emissions under the Carbon Disclosure Project, but won’t cut clients that don’t. Again, good sentiment, but ultimately lacking teeth.

We want to see the policy improve but really it’s the practice that counts. And there’s no shortage of test cases in the queue. Analysts expect more than $100 billion to flow into tar sands developments within the next decade. We’re keeping an eye on two: the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline strongly opposed by a number of well organized First Nations, and the Total Joslyn North Mine which threatens the Athabasca watershed with yet another toxic tailings pond. Both companies will likely come knocking at RBC for financial backing for these projects. How will RBC respond?

But enough pontificating from us. Let’s hear from you! One way or another, this policy will impact how the banks relate to the growing controversy over tar sands. How should we respond? Please give us your questions and ideas in the comments.

Alberta Minister Iris Evans. Photo: Dave Cournoyer

Fearful that the union of environmental activists and cosmetics purveyors spells doom for the tar sands, Canada’s biggest oil boosters totally freaked out about our campaign with LUSH Cosmetics this week.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) were the first to freak out.  A hurried press release boldly asserted that “It’s technology – not soap – that enables cleaner energy.” The hoaky humor got a laugh, but the laughing was at them not with them. Carola Hoyos at the Financial Times panned that CAPP “has drawn the line at designer soap“.  Dina O’Meara at the Calgary Herald came down even harder writing that “CAPP should know better than to charge out, guns blazing, in reaction.” But charge out they did, upping the ante with a challenge (via Twitter no less!) to an in-person debate. We humbly obliged of course, but now they’re not returning our emails (or tweets). C’mon guys! Let’s talk it out!

Not to be outdone, the Government of Alberta freaked-out big time and picked up the phone. Alberta Minister Iris Evans (voted best-dressed in Alberta!) pulled her rapid-response team for “frank discussion” with LUSH and RAN. Her blog post after the call included “just a sample” of the gems she dished out including that “Oil sands account for less than 0.1 per cent of world’s greenhouse gas emissions.” By way of sample comparison, BP Gulf Spill (depending on who you ask) accounts for less than .1 percent of oil spilled globally, but we don’t think it’s a good idea either.

Frankly,we’re tickled pink that our little campaign has drawn so much attention. We’re educating thousands of average folks across North America about the hidden cost of our oil addiction, and it’s good to know who’s freaked out by that.

Bonus Quiz: How much more CO2 does Alberta emit per-capita than the global average? Winner gets a t-shirt!

It’s the same  mantra CAPP offers just about every time the industry’s challenged.  They thought an ad placed in Variety Magazine was “blurring of the lines between fact and fiction.” They called a spoof video game by Polaris “inaccurate“.  They challenged Al Gore invoking interest in a discussion “based on scientific facts.”

Trouble is, CAPP won’t dispute our facts. Not one! We even asked CAPP to defend their blurry assertion and take us on point-for-point, as we have occasionally done with the Government of Alberta.  No dice. Canada’s oil industry would rather lob accusations than discuss substance.

No matter!  We’ll keep dishing out the facts and look forward to a rebuttal in the comments.

1. Oil sands mining is licensed to use twice the amount of fresh water that the entire city of Calgary uses in a year. The water requirements for oil sands projects range from 2.5 to 4.0 barrels of water for each barrel of oil produced.
2. At least 90% of the fresh water used in the oil sands ends up in tailing lakes so toxic that propane cannons and floating scarecrows are used to keep ducks from landing in them.
3. A 2003 report concluded that “an accident related to the failure of one of the oil sands tailings ponds could have catastrophic impact in the aquatic ecosystem of the Mackenzie River Basin due to the size of these lakes and their proximity to the Athabasca River.”
4. In April, 2008 a flock of migrating ducks landed on a tar sands toxic lake and died.
5. Processing the oil sands uses enough natural gas in a day to heat 3 million homes in Canada. Natural gas requirements for the oil sands industry are projected to increase substantially during the projected period from 17 million cubic metres (0.6 billion cubic feet) per day in 2003 to a range of 40 to 45 million cubic metres (1.4 to 1.6 billion cubic) feet per day in 2015.
6. The toxic tailing lakes are considered one of the largest human-made structures in the world. The toxic lakes in Northern Alberta span 50 square kilometers and can be seen from space.
7. Producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands produces three times more greenhouse gas emissions than a barrel of conventional oil. In 2004, oil sands production surpassed 160 000 cubic metres (one million barrels) per day; by 2015, oil sands production is expected to more than double to about 340 000 cubic metres (2.2 million barrels) per day.
8. The oil sands operations are the fastest growing source of heat-trapping greenhouse gas in Canada. By 2020 the oil sands will release twice the amount produced currently by all the cars and trucks in Canada.
9. The Alberta Oil Sands Operation are the largest single point source of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada.
10. By 2015, the Alberta Oil Sands are expected to emit more greenhouse gases than the nation of Denmark (pop. 5.4 million).

Hat tip to Desmogblog for pulling these together with sources. For more fun facts and materials visit ran.org/tarsands

Update: Responses to comments follow

David! Steve! Welcome to the Understory. Thanks for taking the invitation for a rebuttal.

To David’s point, the fact above came from Canada’s National Energy Board in 2003.  Not sure where your numbers come from David, but unfortunately the NEB numbers are the latest Government data we could find–and that’s a problem. Government doesn’t have the data that it needs to manage water impacts of tar sands development.

Steaming oil out of the ground through in-situ isn’t a solution to the water problem in the tar sands by far. Canada’s Pembina Institute has done some of the best work on this point. Below is a chart from their recent report card on In-Situ water use. Current and proposed projects could withdraw more than 15% of the Athabasca River’s water flow during its lowest flow periods, reducing the availability of fish habitat threatening health of the river’s ecosystem .

Water use by in-situ tar sands mines

As for Steve’s comment, we’re really just comparing dueling statistics. As I’ve stated before, you have to compare apples to apples. Emissions from transit grew 36% 1990-2008 while emissions from Oil and Gas extraction grew 285%. And transit is now trending down with -.5% growth in emissions ’07 to ’08. Compare that to an increase of 2.9% from oil and gas (http://bit.ly/bTVZ1L). And that was during a downturn! NEB expects tar sands oil production to jump 11% this year (http://is.gd/bp7jW) and you can bet emissions will too.

Photos by BP and National Geographic

Last week, we reported that Canada’s tar sands have just become the biggest source of oil imports to the US. This week we compare tar sands to the other big source of US oil–the Gulf of Mexico.

Industry backers are trying hard to spin differences between tar sands and the Gulf. During a cheerleading trip to DC Germany last month Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach Environment Minister Jim Prentice speculated that the risk of tar sands development in Alberta is “probably less than the kind of risks associated with offshore drilling.” Stelmach, choosing his words a more carfefully on a simmilar mission to DC used the word “safer” when he made the same comparison.

We see more similarities. As more conventional supplies of oil dry up, deep water drilling in the Gulf and strip mining for oil in the tar sands represent the dirty, dangerous future of our oil addiction unless we break the habit.

Both regions represent a large and growing supply of oil the US. Canada’s tar sands just became the top source of imported oil (about 1 M barrels/day or just over 8%), and the Gulf of Mexico has long been the top supply of domestic production (1.6 M barrels/day or just over 30%). Analysts expect expect double digit growth in production from both regions over the next decade or so.

Both are an expensive fix too, requiring sky-high oil prices to turn a profit. Profitable production from Canada’s tar sands requires oil prices at around $100/barrel. Deep water production requires oil prices of at least $70/barrel. Despite the costs, analysts expect investors to pour more than $167 billion into deep water drilling  and more than $120 billion into Canada’s tar sands by 2014.

And then there’s the environment. There’s no doubt that the Gulf spill is a catastrophe. But Stelmach’s cynical pitch last month ignores the devastating ecological harms of strip mining for oil. A recent report from CERES concluded that the millions of gallons of toxins leaking from giant tailings ponds every year are “like the Gulf of Mexico spill, but playing out in slow motion.” For evidence, he need only look to thousand of animals that have perished in these pits, and the unusually high rates of cancer in native communities living downstream.

So who wins the Deathmatch?  Big Oil. Everybody else loses.

Rally at the RBS Shareholder Meeting. Credit Ric James

We’ve been going after the Royal Bank of Canada for bankrolling the tar sands for some time now. Today, we went after the other Royal Bank–the Royal Bank of Scotland–with our friends across the pond. RBS ranks 7th globally among banks backing tar sands operators, but first in the UK where taxpayers now own more than 80% of the bank.  Hundreds converged on the Bank’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders and more than 15 bank branches across the UK.

Tomorrow RAN’s own Eriel Deranger meets with RBS Chairman Sir Phillip Hampton (more on that here). Will he pull the plug on companies destroying water and habitat and recognize the basic rights for Indigenous communities like other leading banks have done? We’re hoping he can out-do the “maybe” we heardfrom COO Barbara Stymiest in February.

World Development Movement has a great set of pictures from the demo today in Edinburgh. So does Ric James. Also, check out press coverage from the  Caledonia Mercury, The Independent, Politics.co.uk, The Scotsman and a mention over at the BBC and the Financial Times.

Indigenous Activist Protests RBC Waterloo Branch

An activist was arrested this afternoon at the Waterloo Branch of RBC Bank. Mark Corbiere was charged with mischief for hanging a banner reading “Boycott RBC” and “Stop the Tar Sands” from the roof of the branch, located in uptown Waterloo.

The protest was one of eight “Fossil Fools Day” protests at RBC branches across Canada. For the last five years, activists around the world have adopted April Fools Day as a day of pranks and protest against fossil fuels and climate change. According to Bloomberg, RBC is a top arranger of financing to companies operating in the tar sands.

Those present report that Corbiere was joined by 10 supporters chanting and holding banners in front of the bank branch during the protest. CTV cameras were on scene to catch the action. After an hour of negotiations, police removed Corbiere from the roof and confiscated his banner.

In the spirit of Fossil Fools day, 13 Cities in Canada have taken action and pulled creative pranks and tricks on tar sands supporters.

8 communities in Canada: London, Toronto, Waterloo, Peterborough, New Westminster (BC), Duncan (BC), and Victoria all targeted RBC as the top financier in dirty tar sands projects. In Waterloo, one indigenous activist was arrested after a banner drop at a local branch of Royal Bank of Canada.

photo: Tristan Glenn

In Montreal, 70 people staged a bike bloc protest shutting down the roads in and out of Montreal’s oil refining sector

with clean, green people power.  A banner was hung in front of the Enbridge Trailbreaker Pipeline stating “Changeon le System, Pas le Climat. Trailbreaker=Tar Sands” where cyclists blockaded the road to draw attention to the downstream, destructive effects of the Athabasca Tar Sands.  “The east end of Montreal is a seldom seen and discussed region, but it is the largest urban oil refining center in Canada,” says Cameron Fenton, a member of Climate Justice Montreal.  ”It is a vast wasteland of oil, gas and chemical storage tanks, threatening the health of local residents and all Montrealers. If completed, the Trailbreaker would bring the direct effects of the Tar Sands right here.”

In Edmonton and Calgary, local residents delivered “awards” in the shape of Black and Gold ducks to Premier Ed Stelmach and Environment Minister Jim Prentice respectively.  In Halifax, local youth called out Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Environment Minister Jim Prentice and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty in front of CBC radio for failing to respect the rights of first nations communities affected by tar sands development, and suspending the popular ecoEnergy retrofit program yesterday.  “Harper doesn’t grasp the science [of climate change] let alone the moral issues,” says Emily Rideout, student at Dalhousie University.  “I’d like to see Canada adopt a science-based target, pull out of the tar sands – or at least put a moratorium on development.  Instead, we’re cutting eco-energy programs and funding.”

“Fossil Fools Day is an international day of action to hold dirty politicians and industries accountable for expanding a fossil fuel industry that is fast destroying our planet and our communities,” said Fenton. “In Canada, the biggest Fossil Fools are tar sands developers, investors and political supporters. It’s time they stop the foolery, stop the tar sands, and start building the green economy we want to leave for the next generation.” The group is calling for a global response to ensure that we respect Aboriginal title and peoples and avoid catastrophic climate change.

“Tar sands projects are destroying our forests, our water systems, and are endangering people in Canada,” says Skye Augustine, student at the University of Victoria. “As a

member of the G8 and the G20, we have the resources to look for alternatives and create a clean, green energy economy that protects people and the planet.”

Worldwide, Fossil Fools Day is promoting strong, just climate legislation, corporate responsibility and a clean renewable energy future.  “It is time that Canada cleans up its dirty energy addiction,” said Kimia Ghomeshi, National G20 and Climate Organizer for the Canadian Youth Climate Coalition.  ”People in Canada are ready for change. We need to stop providing subsidies to dirty fossil fuel industries, make substantial investments into the renewable energy sector, and provide a just transition for workers in the tar sands. This is what real climate justice looks like.”

In the lead up to the G8 and G20 meetings taking place in Canada in June 2010, climate justice activists are raising the profile of the tar sands industry in Canada as the key reason the Canadian government is refusing to do its fair share to set deep and binding greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, and tarnishing Canada’s international reputation as a result. For details of days of action leading up to the arrival of the G20 in Toronto, visit http://g20.torontomobilize.org

For photos, visit http://www.flickr.com/photos/climatejusticecanada/

For nomination and action videos, visit www.youtube.com/canadaclimatejustice

For more information on Fossil Fools Day actions, visit http://canadaclimatejustice.wordpress.com/