Oil Sands Boycott

Between the Keystone XL Pipeline protests and the Chiquita boycott, there has been more and more talk about halting the development of Canada's oil sands on environmental grounds, but is that really a wise course of action?

The environmental savings aren't really that dramatic, given that we're ultimately talking about reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by somewhere between 0.005% and 0.015%:
- Oil from Canada's oil sands produces between 5% and 15% more greenhouse gas, depending what you include and where you live
- The oil sands represent just 5% of Canada's total greenhouse gas emissions
- Canada is responsible for about 2% of the world's total greenhouse gas.

Still, everyone can agree that every little bit helps, so let's switch to other sources. There's just one problem.

Unfortunately if not from Canada, there are only so many places from which to can get your oil. The world's only real exporters of crude oil are, in order, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Venezuela, Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Iraq, Nigeria, Indonesia, Angola, Qatar, Kazakhstan, Canada, Oman, Yemen, Malaysia and Sudan.

Do you notice something different between Canada and these other 19 nations? Predominantly these crude oil competitors, as compared with Canada:
- Aren't democratic
- Don't pay fair wages, don't offer safe working conditions and don't allow unions
- Discriminate based on sex, race, religion and sexual orientation
- Don't share the revenues with the citizens in the form of well-funded social programs
- Are far more likely to engage in war, conflict and/or terrorism than peace-building activities
- Don't have environmental transparency, regulations and safeguards anywhere near Canada's

Even we did reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 0.005% (which we might not, given that last point), at what cost did those savings come?

It's on these grounds that Ezra Levant coined the popular new term "Ethical Oil" to describe oil coming from nations (like Canada) with the world's strongest records of promoting peacekeeping, worker's rights, environmental stewardship, human rights and using profits to fund social programs.

In response, Canada's leading environmental spokesperson David Suzuki asked if oil can ever truly be considered ethical. After all, if Canada continues to develop the oil sands, and continues to pollute more than its fair share of the atmosphere, consequently causing environmental disruptions to parts of the world who have had no say in its development nor any share of the profits, can its oil truly be considered ethical?

Probably not.

But Suzuki's argument applies just as well to the other oil exporting nations as it does Canada, so we should be boycotting all oil development, not just Canada's. If so, where would it make sense to begin that boycott?

Have your cake and eat it too. Use Canada's oil, and reduce your usage by 5% to 15%.

Want more of my non-comedic thoughts on energy and the environment?