The oil sands get a makeover

Being number one doesn't always make you popular, and the world's biggest industrial project is looking to revamp its image.

With anti-oil sands campaigns ramping up in the U.S., and revelations of mutant fish in the Athabasca River, Alberta’s environmental image is taking a hit. In response, the industry’s supporters are looking for ways to reframe the debate.

Compared to other oil producing countries Canada is a saint, says Sun Media’s Ezra Levant (who, by the way, wrote himself into some serious trouble this month in an unrelated column). “If we shut down the oilsands, Americans are going to fill up their cars with gas from somewhere else,” he argues. It’s much better for everyone if Americans get their oil from Canada than from Saudia Arabia, “a theocratic dictatorship where women have no rights, foreign migrants do the dirty work, and that finances terrorists.”

But concerns over the oil sands “must not be dismissed or taken lightly,” says a Calgary Herald editorial. “There is too much at stake in the oilsands for it not to be as environmentally pure as it can be.” The idea is that the oil sands are too economically important to let them be brought down by fixable environmental problems, which is why the industry needs to stop regulating itself and bring in independent oversight instead. “If for no other reason than optics, the foxes must not be left guarding the henhouse, not matter how tame and responsible the foxes.”

In a dense but thorough column in the Edmonton Journal, researchers Joseph Doucet and Rolf Mirus outline what should be done to make sure the oil sands are economically viable for as long as possible. That includes winning the optics battle. “Alberta will never win a public-relations war that pits oilsands mining against the environmental virtues of completely different energy sectors, such as hydroelectricity,” they write. Instead Alberta should compare its oil sands to other crude oil operations like deep sea drilling, which is less popular than ever after the BP Gulf disaster. Doucet and Mirus also say “Alberta to date has not effectively communicated the relative aggressiveness of its $15/ton carbon charge.” Doing so could win it some friends.