• 5 minutes Malaysia's Petronas vs. Sarawak Court Case - Will It End Up In London Courts?
  • 9 minutes Sell out now or hold on?
  • 16 minutes Oil prices going down
  • 2 mins Oil prices going down
  • 11 hours When will oil demand start declining due to EVs?
  • 15 mins Could oil demand collapse rapidly? Yup, sure could.
  • 3 hours Sabotage at Tesla
  • 10 hours Trump Hits China With Tariffs On $50 Billion Of Goods
  • 11 hours Oil and Trade War
  • 13 hours Russia and Saudi Arabia to have a chat on oil during FIFA World Cup - report
  • 11 hours venezuala oil crisis
  • 14 hours Malaysia's Petronas vs. Sarawak Court Case - Will It End Up In London Courts?
  • 13 hours Sell out now or hold on?
  • 10 hours Germany Orders Daimler to Recall 774,000 Diesel Cars in Europe
  • 8 hours What If Canada Had Wind and Not Oilsands?
  • 15 hours Correlation Between Oil Sweet Spots and Real Estate Hot Spots
  • 7 hours The Wonderful U.S. Oil Trade Deficit with Canada
  • 21 hours Trump Renews Attack On OPEC Ahead Of Group's Production Meeting
  • 9 hours After Three Decade Macedonia End Dispute With Greece, new name: the Republic of Northern Macedonia
Alt Text

The Decisive Battle For Yemen’s Oil Port

Saudi Arabia and its Arab…

Alt Text

Venezuela’s PDVSA Fails To Meet Oil Supply Obligations

Venezuela’s PDVSA has informed eight…

Darrell Delamaide

Darrell Delamaide

Darrell Delamaide is a writer, editor and journalist with more than 30 years' experience. He is the author of three books and has written for…

More Info

Trending Discussions

EU Fuel Standards Become Latest Oil Sand Battlefield for Environmentalists

The latest draft of European Union fuel standards appears to mark a lobbying victory for the Canadian oil industry because it drops tighter restrictions originally envisaged for crude oil derived from Canada’s oil sands.

The new draft now being circulated for debate instead calls for the same standard to be applied to all crude oil, regardless of its source, according to Canadian press reports.

The victory for oil sands crude is part of the ongoing battle between the Canadian industry and global environmentalists, who claim that the carbon footprint for the oil sand product is three times higher than for conventional crude, when energy expended on extraction and refining is included.

The industry counters that the oil sand crude releases only 5 to 15% more carbon when it is actually consumed as fuel.

The New York Times reported earlier this month on aggressive efforts by Canadian embassy staff in the U.S. to lobby with state governments in favor of oil sand crude. Besides the need of Midwestern states for Canadian crude, the report said, equipment for oil sand extraction was often built by U.S. workers and a proposed pipeline to deliver crude from Alberta to U.S. destinations would employ thousands of U.S. workers.

The Financial Times reported this week that a group of institutional investors in oil giant BP has proposed a resolution for the next shareholders meeting demanding that the company do more study of environmental risks before embarking on any major oil sand project.

Environmental groups in Canada attributed the change in the EU draft to intense lobbying not only by the provincial government in Calgary but by the Canadian federal government in Ottawa. Canadian officials had argued that trying to distinguish the source of crude would be difficult and would create an obstacle to trade given the integrated nature of the North American energy market.

“The powerful oil lobby has the Canadian government doing its dirty work again,” John Bennett, executive director of Sierra Club Canada, said in a statement. “Canada should be developing a policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and work with the European Union to create a binding international agreement, not threatening trade sanctions to protect the interests of multinational oil companies.”

The fuel standards will be under discussion for several more months and environmental groups pledged to seek reinstatement of tighter restrictions on the oil sand crude.

By. Darrell Delamaide




Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment
  • Anonymous on March 30 2010 said:
    The article states "lobbying not only by the provincial government in Calgary". In fact, the Alberta Government sits in the provincial capitol of Edmonton.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2010 said:
    Could someone reconcile the difference between environmentalist claims of 3X higher carbon footprint vs industry claim of 5 - 15% higher carbon footprint when it is consumed as fuel. Are they comparing apples to oranges? What are those numbers based on?

    I don't have a dog in this fight, just seems the article isn't clear on that point.
  • Anonymous on March 31 2010 said:
    Basically, the 3 times higher VS 5-15% higher carbon footprint is comparing apples to oranges. The 5-15% represents the total carbon footprint, that is extraction + reffinage + consumption. The 3 times only represents the difference in the extraction process. Of course, both figures are to be considered cautiously given the lack of "objective" studies on the subject.
  • Anonymous on April 01 2010 said:
    Thanks PY.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News