• 6 minutes Trump vs. MbS
  • 11 minutes Can the World Survive without Saudi Oil?
  • 15 minutes WTI @ $75.75, headed for $64 - 67
  • 12 hours Satellite Moons to Replace Streetlamps?!
  • 35 mins U.S. Shale Oil Debt: Deep the Denial
  • 2 days US top CEO's are spending their own money on the midterm elections
  • 1 day EU to Splash Billions on Battery Factories
  • 9 hours The Dirt on Clean Electric Cars
  • 6 hours Owning stocks long-term low risk?
  • 13 hours Can “Renewables” Dent the World’s need for Electricity?
  • 2 days Uber IPO Proposals Value Company at $120 Billion
  • 2 days The Balkans Are Coming Apart at the Seams Again
  • 2 days OPEC Is Struggling To Deliver On Increased Output Pledge
  • 2 days A $2 Trillion Saudi Aramco IPO Keeps Getting Less Realistic
  • 2 days 47 Oil & Gas Projects Expected to Start in SE Asia between 2018 & 2025
  • 24 hours The end of "King Coal" in the Wales
Large Crude Build Forces Oil Prices Lower

Large Crude Build Forces Oil Prices Lower

Oil prices slipped on Wednesday…

The Oil Keeps Flowing: Iran Evades U.S. Sanctions

The Oil Keeps Flowing: Iran Evades U.S. Sanctions

While President Trump’s stated aim…

Canada Threatens EU with Trade War over Oil Sands Ban

The European vote on the 23rd February which could potentially classify Canada’s oil sands as highly polluting and effectively ban their trade with the EU, has attracted angry retaliations from Canadian officials. Canada fears that the EU Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) could set a precedent to other countries around the world, affecting the exports of its tar sands.

Canada’s oil minister, and David Plunkett, ambassador to the EU, sent some letters to the European Commission threatening, "Canada will not hesitate to defend its interests, including at the World Trade Organisation."

Darek Urbaniak of Friends of the Earth condemned the letters as “further evidence of Canadian government and industry lobbying, which continuously undermines efforts to combat climate change. We find it unacceptable that the Canadian government now openly uses direct threats at the highest political levels to derail crucial EU climate legislation.”

Blunkett wrote to Connie Hedegaard, the European Commissioner for climate change to say that, "if the final measures single out oil sands crude in a discriminatory, arbitrary or unscientific way, or are otherwise inconsistent with the EU's international trade obligations, I want to state that Canada will explore every avenue at its disposal to defend its interests, including at the World Trade Organisation."

An official from the Canadian government attempted to justify his countries stance by saying that, “we oppose an FQD that discriminates against oil sands crude without strong scientific basis. The oil sands are a proven strategic resource for Canada; we will continue to promote Canada's oil sands as they are key to Canada's economic prosperity and energy security.”

Quite rightly the European Commission disputes the claim that their votes will not be based upon scientific evidence. As Colin Baines, the toxic fuels campaign manager at the Co-operative, said, “there is a wealth of independent science stating that tar sands fuels emit significantly more carbon than conventional oil, no matter how many briefings Canada gives claiming otherwise.” He added that, "the Canadian government's aggressive lobbying and attempted intimidation of the EU is making it look increasingly desperate. But its threat of a WTO challenge faces one massive problem: tar sands oil is not a 'like product' with crude oil, so no unlawful discrimination exists under WTO. The EU must adhere to the science and penalise the higher emissions."

By. Charles Kennedy of Oilprice.com


x

Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • wws on February 23 2012 said:
    kudos, wilson! You hit the nail squarely on the head.

    And notice the baldfaced lie made by Colin Baines in the last paragraph?

    Colin claimed:
    "tar sands oil is not a 'like product' with crude oil,"

    BZZZT! Wrong answer! Once oil is processed and put into a pipeline, oil is oil. There are different grades, but Colin obviously has no clue as to what is meant by the term "fungible."

    If tar sands oil can be shipped, refined, and used just like regular crude oil, then it most definitely is a "like product". The only difference is the words which the fanatics use to try and attack something which offends their eco-religious gaia worshipping sensibilities.
  • Wilson Carsman on February 22 2012 said:
    Oil, schmoil. All the faked science about human generated 'climate change' aka Global Warming..which isn't warming, is a globalist tool. Plain and simple. If any bought-and-paid-for cliamate change idiot hasn't seen or heard of SOHO, which is closely monitoring the Sun's activity, they should. No bozo, the Sun IS effecting our climate right now, lump it or like it. So based upon what(?); Rothchild interest, making more money, world domination, the Europeans want a fight? Great. Let's fight. The first thing Canada should do is cut off ALL GRAIN EXPORTS TO EUROPE, followed by ALL RAW MATERIALS, metals, etc. The Euro is a doomed currency anyway, and its only a matter of time before the Eurozone collapses before our very eyes. THEN, we'll pick off the rest like geese at a duck hunt. Cars, we'll buy North American, wine from BC and California and the rest we don't care. take your phoney science and put it where the sun don't shine...Scotland...

Leave a comment

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