Oil Sands Much Cleaner Than Advertised?!

[Amish Rake Fighter]

Steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) is making the oil sands extraction process a whole lot cleaner now by beginning the refining under ground, they've been developing the technology for years.

[D-Money]

Some highlights from the Fraser Institute:

1999 - Pulblished Passive Smoke: The EPA's Betrayal of Science and Policy, which "highlighted the absence of any scientific evidence for linking cancer with second-hand smoke" (from Wikipedia). It backed it up with two conferences on the tobacco industry based on attaching Government regulation of tobacco.

2002 - A study from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that the Institute's figures for "Tax Freedom Day" were largely skewed, and pushed the actual average date nearly two months later in the year.

2007 - In this one year alone, the Institute received $120,000 in funding from Exxon Mobil.

2009 - While Obama was pushing a National health coverage in the States, a report was out that showed solid evidence that U.S. bankruptcies are higher than Canadians, largely due to medical expenses. In an attempt to discredit it, the Fraser Institute released a ministudy claiming that non-business bankruptcies were the same in both countries. However, U.S. bankruptcy rates have been higher for the last decade, with the exception of only the years 2006 and 2007 (largely due to new U.S. laws that made declaring bankruptcy more difficult and requiring more time). So those two years of statistical anomoly were the only ones used in their calculations.

[taxi]

Some highlights from the Fraser Institute:

1999 - Pulblished Passive Smoke: The EPA's Betrayal of Science and Policy, which "highlighted the absence of any scientific evidence for linking cancer with second-hand smoke" (from Wikipedia). It backed it up with two conferences on the tobacco industry based on attaching Government regulation of tobacco.

2002 - A study from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that the Institute's figures for "Tax Freedom Day" were largely skewed, and pushed the actual average date nearly two months later in the year.

2007 - In this one year alone, the Institute received $120,000 in funding from Exxon Mobil.

2009 - While Obama was pushing a National health coverage in the States, a report was out that showed solid evidence that U.S. bankruptcies are higher than Canadians, largely due to medical expenses. In an attempt to discredit it, the Fraser Institute released a ministudy claiming that non-business bankruptcies were the same in both countries. However, U.S. bankruptcy rates have been higher for the last decade, with the exception of only the years 2006 and 2007 (largely due to new U.S. laws that made declaring bankruptcy more difficult and requiring more time). So those two years of statistical anomoly were the only ones used in their calculations.

[D-Money]

Not going to comment on this particular study.  It's obvious the tar sands are not environmentally friendly in any way.

However, the Fraser Institute is highly regarded.  They push a "libertarian" agenda.  They're against regulations on tabacco, but also against regulation on Marijuana.

Also from wikipedia:

[taxi]

The Fraser Institute is all about money. They're against public health care in the states, because the big HMO's and drug companies will lose money. They're against regulation on tobacco because the tobacco companies lose money from it. It's pretty obvious why they would be touting the supposed environmental "benefits" of oil production - as ludicrous as that sounds to anyone with half a brain. They don't give two s**ts about you or your child or the public or the environment - it's just the money.

And again, they're against regulation on marijuana because they realize how much money they can make on it. (Having a buch of stoners who don't bother to read blindly supporting them for this one policy is just an added bonus.)

[Mr. Ambien]

Not going to comment on this particular study. It's obvious the tar sands are not environmentally friendly in any way.

However, the Fraser Institute is highly regarded. They push a "libertarian" agenda. They're against regulations on tabacco, but also against regulation on Marijuana.

Also from wikipedia:

[ronthecivil]

The Fraser Institute is all about money. They're against public health care in the states, because the big HMO's and drug companies will lose money. They're against regulation on tobacco because the tobacco companies lose money from it. It's pretty obvious why they would be touting the supposed environmental "benefits" of oil production - as ludicrous as that sounds to anyone with half a brain. They don't give two s**ts about you or your child or the public or the environment - it's just the money.

And again, they're against regulation on marijuana because they realize how much money they can make on it. (Having a buch of stoners who don't bother to read blindly supporting them for this one policy is just an added bonus.)

[ronthecivil]

Some highlights from the Fraser Institute:

1999 - Pulblished Passive Smoke: The EPA's Betrayal of Science and Policy, which "highlighted the absence of any scientific evidence for linking cancer with second-hand smoke" (from Wikipedia). It backed it up with two conferences on the tobacco industry based on attaching Government regulation of tobacco.

2002 - A study from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that the Institute's figures for "Tax Freedom Day" were largely skewed, and pushed the actual average date nearly two months later in the year.

2007 - In this one year alone, the Institute received $120,000 in funding from Exxon Mobil.

2009 - While Obama was pushing a National health coverage in the States, a report was out that showed solid evidence that U.S. bankruptcies are higher than Canadians, largely due to medical expenses. In an attempt to discredit it, the Fraser Institute released a ministudy claiming that non-business bankruptcies were the same in both countries. However, U.S. bankruptcy rates have been higher for the last decade, with the exception of only the years 2006 and 2007 (largely due to new U.S. laws that made declaring bankruptcy more difficult and requiring more time). So those two years of statistical anomoly were the only ones used in their calculations.

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

I'll wait till you post your scathing critique of the eco-terrorist group known as Greenpeace before passing judgement on the above quote.

[canuckster19]

yup, it's not only a "green" source of energy, but purple, red, yellow, orange and blue as well.

[avelanch]

don't you mean flown?

[avelanch]

I bet that source is magically delicious too.

[bjh]

rainbows? they provide jobs for leprechauns and an influx of revenue (capital gains taxes on whole pots of gold) for the government. it's win-win.

[avelanch]

L O L

[Satan's Evil Twin]

Last time I checked, Greenpeace is not affiliated with the Fraser Institute in any way, and I don't see why you should wait on the other guy. Just because Greenpeace is an eco-terrorist group doesn't make the Fraser Institute any better or worse.

Also, I don't remember the last time I saw someone start a topic with a Greenpeace article is his/her arguing point. Both them and the Fraser Institute are really only good for getting some general ideas. You'll notice an absence of any hard, unbiased facts. In other words, both are crap organizations that I avoid.

[ronthecivil]

Haven't you learned that on CDC, the most (presumably - it's so common) effective method right wingers have is pointing out how bad the "other side" is? This is exactly par for the course.

[Satan's Evil Twin]

Demonising people with opposing viewpoints is common feature of every poltical discussion in every country and every culture.

Since ever.

But go ahead and feel superior!

[taxi]

I certainly don't mind Libertarianism, but regardless of their political stances and how often they agree with mine, I don't like propaganda. It's clear their publishing isn't helping anyone lead to a better understanding of the issues quoted by D-Money, it's fixing information to fit a pre-conceived ideology and that is counter-productive to the goal of studying, not to mention a sham.

[ronthecivil]

This isn't propaganda any more than anything produced by any organization with a political agenda. The Fraser Institute makes no secret of the fact they are against government regulation. Their research is going to reflect that. I really don't see how they are fixing information. If you can point to a specific instance where they have done that, it woud help your argument a whole lot. Just randomly accusing them of that for pushing their political agenda is a bit absurd.

Given the whole "climategate" scandal on this same issue, I don't know how you can call out the Fraser Institute for fixing information.

[canuckster19]

leprechaun unemployment is at an all time high, overbreeding has created too many of them and not enough rainbows to go around. I expect it to be one of the major issues in this year's presidential campaign.