Al Gore on Canada’s Oil Sands – Misread & Misunderstood? (#20)

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, in an interview on a wide range of issues, published in the Globe and Mail, on Saturday May 4th, 2013, unleashed a storm of protest in #Canada by his answer to the following question by the interviewer – 

“Have the oil-sands boom and pipeline debates affected Canadian-U.S. relations?”

Mr. Gore is quoted as saying (italics are ours) - “Yes, and I think that ultimately it hurts Canada. The so-called resource curse is most often understood in the context of small nations whose revenue streams are dominated by the exploitation of a single resource. It’s a bit more complex than that with Canada, but the resource curse has multiple dimensions and [that includes] damage to some extremely beautiful landscapes, not to mention the core issue of adding to the reckless spewing of pollution into the Earth’s atmosphere as if it’s an open sewer.

We will come to our senses, but I had hoped that Canada, like Australia, would point us in the right direction and added to the chances for the World as a whole to make a moral and courageous decision sooner rather than later.”

Most objectors, including Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver who called Mr. Gore’s remarks “wildly inaccurate and exaggerated comments”, are reading Al Gore’s answer to be applying directly to Canada’s “the oil sands and pipeline”, part of the question above. In fact it would seem Al Gore answered the question in the affirmative that the oil sand and pipeline debates were hurting the Canada – U.S. relations, but it does not seem that he was referring to Canada exclusively when he was talking about the “resource curse” or “…damage to some extremely beautiful landscapes…”, or when he mentioned further on “…reckless spewing of pollution into the Earth’s atmosphere as if it’s an open sewer”.

In reading the interview it seems to me, that he answered in a more inclusive manner when he said “The so-called resource curse is most often understood in the context of small nations whose revenue streams are dominated by the exploitation of a single resource”. It seems he was including Canada in the “…context of small nations whose revenue streams…” etc. So, while we Canadians can still bristle in being included in the context of “small nations”, or in all nations “recklessly spewing”, but we may have overreacted if we thought he was exclusively addressing our performance alone. Although to be fair, we ourselves aren’t too happy about Canada’s performance in that regard of late, having said that, in the top ranked polluters in the World, Canada is not the most polluting by a long shot, China and the U.S. are.

In fact the “reckless spewing” statement applies much more accurately to China and the U.S. According to the United States Energy Dept., the United Nations and the European Commission estimates, the total green house gas emissions (GHG) in thousand tonnes per annum: China – 9,700,000; U.S. – 5,420,000; India – 1,970,000; Russia – 1,830,000; Japan – 1,240,000; Germany – 810,000; South Korea – 610,000; and then Canada – 560,000.  

If someone is to say that on a per capita basis Canadians are one of the top polluters, it would be correct, but the atmosphere does not know or care. It is who is spewing the most tonnes/annum.