[Keith_McClary]

We've known for a long time that tailings ponds were not a good way to process the effluent from bitumen processing as it takes too long for the solids in the effluent to settle out.

The television advertisement, one in a series created by CAPP to greenwash the tar sands, shows Shelley Powell, P Eng. of Suncor Energy saying of the tailings: “It’s essentially like yogurt”.
http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/tar-sands/m ... -complaint

[yellowcanoe]

The television advertisement, one in a series created by CAPP to greenwash the tar sands, shows Shelley Powell, P Eng. of Suncor Energy saying of the tailings:

“It’s essentially like yogurt”.
http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/tar-sands/m ... -complaint

Even CAPP has a hard time greenwashing the tailing ponds. Their site says it is the bottom layer of fine tailings (small clay particles) that can still have the consistency of yogurt after many years. Mining started over 30 years ago and thus far only a single tailing pond has been reclaimed!

[americandream]

The television advertisement, one in a series created by CAPP to greenwash the tar sands, shows Shelley Powell, P Eng. of Suncor Energy saying of the tailings:

“It’s essentially like yogurt”.
http://www.sierraclub.ca/en/tar-sands/m ... -complaint

Even CAPP has a hard time greenwashing the tailing ponds. Their site says it is the bottom layer of fine tailings (small clay particles) that can still have the consistency of yogurt after many years. Mining started over 30 years ago and thus far only a single tailing pond has been reclaimed!

From my experiences in the corporate sector, these large projects often turn to custard after the initial love affair. It's excusable. I guess, where finance is involved although many innocents end up suffering in other ways. But environmental damage has such long term consequences, it boggles the mind.

[ROCKMAN]

Yellow canoe - "If the transportation bottleneck was eliminated... If the transportation bottleneck remains, I would expect that some companies would shutdown their operations."

First, there is no "if" with regards to eliminating the bottleneck: this month the southern section of the Keystone XL Pipeline (600,000 bops capacity) will begin delivering production from the oil sands fields directly to Texas refineries. It will be receiving oil from the other Keystone Pipeline system (yes...there are two different Keystone pipelines) that has been transporting hydrocarbons (along with the other 5 pipelines that cross the border) for a long time. The assumption is that the operators will be able to negotiate a better price since they won't be trapped in Cushing. An additional 1+ million bopd deliverability is expected to be completed in less than 2 years.

Second, I'm continually amazed how I many folks want to talk down the profit potential of the oil sands. It often seems to border on childish wishful thinking IMHO. Consider just the expansion of the transport infrastructure: many tens of $billions invested (pipelines, rail, trucking, terminals, etc.) that will take years to recover the initial investment let alone see any profit. So the supposition is that those making these investments are stupid because they don't see the demise of the oil sand plays? Same for the folks who have invested hundreds of $billions in the companies developing the oil sands? And the same assumption that the companies developing the oil sands have hemorrhaged many $billions of losses while increasing Canadian oil exports to the highest level in history? So all those folks betting with their checkbooks aren't as smart as the folks betting with...hmm...nothing. And all these proclamations on a web site focused on the inevitable depletion of the global oil reserve base and the horrendous damage this will do to the economies of oil dependent countries. Truly amazing?

And now there are tens of $billions scheduled to transport oil sands production to both the east and west coasts to allow overseas sales. Export terminals are already being expanded to handle the shipments. And all this money being invested by folks so stupid they don't see the death of the oil sand play just over the horizon? Bottom line: hundreds of $billions invested in a money losing effort with much more being dumped in monthly. Oh yeah...makes a lot of sense. LOL. This reminds me of my ongoing chat with one of our cohorts here who holds fast to the belief that the oil sands production won't make it to the US because the POTUS hasn't approved (yet) the short border crossing section of the Keystone XL Pipeline despite the FACT that even without that tiny section more oil sands production was delivered to the US in 2013 then ever before in history with a new record easily anticipated for 2014. He may not be a shill for the oil patch who is trying to convince folks there's no need to worry about future oil sands production. But he and few others are doing damn good imitations. LOL.

Been said many times but still true: Denial isn't just a river in Egypt. The thought that burning the 2+ million bopd of oil sands production will be prevent it's development while the rest of the world burns 85+ million bopd, trillions of cubic feet of NG and hundreds of millions of tons of coal. Somewhat delusional IMHO.

[Graeme]

So the supposition is that those making these investments are stupid because they don't see the demise of the oil sand plays?

Yes ROCK they are incredibly stupid. Do you think that the world is going to let ff corporations wipe us off the map without a fight? Yes I mean quite literally a fight. That time is rapidly approaching if governments do NOT listen to their people. Here is a chance to have your say and send a very clear message to President Obama to stop Keystone XL because KXL will allow continued exploitation of tar sands which will kill us all. There is a email form at the end of the article in the link addressed to Obama.

What can “Anybody” tell Obama about the Keystone XL?

[americandream]

Do you think that the world is going to let ff corporations wipe us off the map without a fight? Yes I mean quite literally a fight. That time is rapidly approaching if governments do NOT listen to their people.

You've probably posted this elsewhere in here Graeme. However, if you've a link that discusses any approaching tipping point, could you relink it? Ta

[Graeme]

Yes I posted a relevant link in the "Oil via rail" thread. There is no specific future time (perhaps the Obama decision on KXL in a few weeks) but I think public patience is reaching breaking point and the pressure to do something positive is becoming increasingly urgent. The Pentagon and NSA have been preparing for US civil unrest since about 2005 or 2006 as this article published June 2013 demonstrates. Here is an excerpt but read all of it.

Pentagon bracing for public dissent over climate and energy shocks

Top secret US National Security Agency (NSA) documents disclosed by the Guardian have shocked the world with revelations of a comprehensive US-based surveillance system with direct access to Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech giants. New Zealand court records suggest that data harvested by the NSA's Prism system has been fed into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance whose members also include the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

But why have Western security agencies developed such an unprecedented capacity to spy on their own domestic populations? Since the 2008 economic crash, security agencies have increasingly spied on political activists, especially environmental groups, on behalf of corporate interests. This activity is linked to the last decade of US defence planning, which has been increasingly concerned by the risk of civil unrest at home triggered by catastrophic events linked to climate change, energy shocks or economic crisis - or all three.

BTW, I emailed Obama (cc to Harper). Let you all know if I get a response.

Just saw this speculation about decision on KXL.

With U.S. Democrats suggesting a restart on the environmental review of the Keystone XL pipeline, President Obama may further delay his decision on the project, which the House approved to build last summer.

Twenty-five House Democrats, led by Arizona Rep. Raul M. Grijalva, signed a letter earlier this month, urging President Obama to delay the release of a final environmental review on the $9 billion pipeline. If the review process is redone, the pipeline decision could be delayed by another few years, possibly even as late as the end of Obama's term in 2017.

[dissident]

I think the grass roots are more agitated outside of North America. There is little evidence that Canadians and Americans would go out into the streets to fight the current BAU climate policy. All they need to hear is that they would lose their jobs and they will lose all the environmental initiative. There has not been enough pain to truly wake people up. It is all in the academic realm as far as the North American proles are concerned. Thank the MSM for this.

By 2020 things will likely change. The current MSM propaganda about boundless shale oil and gas will be exposed as a bald faced lie and will be a major loss of credibility. Currently, public faith in the MSM is waning but not the point that they are laughed at. Extreme weather events will continue to increase in frequency and intensity and eventually the public perception will shift. Here in Toronto, 2013 was notable for producing two major weather induced blackouts. I think we are only getting started but the incidence will be sporadic, which will delay the linking of the dots in people's brains.

[Graeme]

Then why has the Pentagon been preparing for such unrest since 2006?!!

[yellowcanoe]

First, there is no "if" with regards to eliminating the bottleneck: this month the southern section of the Keystone XL Pipeline (600,000 bops capacity) will begin delivering production from the oil sands fields directly to Texas refineries. It will be receiving oil from the other Keystone Pipeline system (yes...there are two different Keystone pipelines) that has been transporting hydrocarbons (along with the other 5 pipelines that cross the border) for a long time. The assumption is that the operators will be able to negotiate a better price since they won't be trapped in Cushing. An additional 1+ million bopd deliverability is expected to be completed in less than 2 years.

While increased pipeline capacity from Cushing to Nederland will improve the pricing Canadian producers get for their oil, it doesn't increase the number of barrels that can be shipped out of Alberta.

Second, I'm continually amazed how I many folks want to talk down the profit potential of the oil sands. It often seems to border on childish wishful thinking IMHO. Consider just the expansion of the transport infrastructure: many tens of $billions invested (pipelines, rail, trucking, terminals, etc.) that will take years to recover the initial investment let alone see any profit. So the supposition is that those making these investments are stupid because they don't see the demise of the oil sand plays? Same for the folks who have invested hundreds of $billions in the companies developing the oil sands? And the same assumption that the companies developing the oil sands have hemorrhaged many $billions of losses while increasing Canadian oil exports to the highest level in history?

The existing pipeline infrastructure is maxxed out so the billions being invested now to further increase production won't accomplish anything unless more transport capacity is added.

And now there are tens of $billions scheduled to transport oil sands production to both the east and west coasts to allow overseas sales. Export terminals are already being expanded to handle the shipments. And all this money being invested by folks so stupid they don't see the death of the oil sand play just over the horizon? Bottom line: hundreds of $billions invested in a money losing effort with much more being dumped in monthly. Oh yeah...makes a lot of sense. LOL. This reminds me of my ongoing chat with one of our cohorts here who holds fast to the belief that the oil sands production won't make it to the US because the POTUS hasn't approved (yet) the short border crossing section of the Keystone XL Pipeline despite the FACT that even without that tiny section more oil sands production was delivered to the US in 2013 then ever before in history with a new record easily anticipated for 2014. He may not be a shill for the oil patch who is trying to convince folks there's no need to worry about future oil sands production. But he and few others are doing damn good imitations. LOL.

Of the three major pipeline proposals, Keystone XL is the one most likely to succeed as the primary obstacle is getting the cross border approval from the POTUS. Northern Gateway is looking highly questionable as it involves the highest environmental risks of any of the major pipeline proposals and has therefore attracted a significant amount of opposition. It also passes through or close to quite a few aboriginal reserves. It used to be no problem to run a transportation corridor across aboriginal land but now the courts expect a serious level of consulation with aboriginal groups which borders on giving them veto power. Energy East poses less of an environmental risk than Northern Gateway but it too would pass over or close to aboriginal reserves. It also passes through five provinces and getting everyone on board (especially Quebec) will not be easy.

There has been some talk of moving oil by train to Prince Rupert. The results are rather predictable -- since the railline passes through aboriginal land it is a virtual certainly that we'd see aboriginals blocking the railroad line. This is almost an annual occurence in Canada and what generally happens is that the courts won't issue an injunction to stop it and if they do issue an injunction the police refuse to enforce it.

Been said many times but still true: Denial isn't just a river in Egypt. The thought that burning the 2+ million bopd of oil sands production will be prevent it's development while the rest of the world burns 85+ million bopd, trillions of cubic feet of NG and hundreds of millions of tons of coal. Somewhat delusional IMHO.

It's been said here and elsewhere many times before -- if we are going to get a handle on CO2 emissions we have to start leaving FF in the ground. As tar sands production involves a greater impact on the environment than conventional oil it should not be a surprise that it has been targetted. What I don't know is how many of the people who oppose pipeline construction are doing so because of concern about CO2 emissions. People who oppose these projects on the basis of the risk to the environment are hypocrites in my mind if they expect to maintain a lifestyle that involves significant consumption of FF. I would especially direct that thought to people in Eastern Canada who are currently dependent on imported oil. It's a pretty safe bet that most Canadians in Eastern Canada who get their fuel from the refineries in Montreal or St. John don't realize that these refineries use imported oil.

[ROCKMAN]

First: "That time is rapidly approaching if governments do NOT listen to their people". The govts are listening to the vast MAJORITY of the people by supporting the expansion of fossil fuel production

"...it doesn't increase the number of barrels that can be shipped out of Alberta." True but it increases the profit margin which increases production which allows a greater profit margin for folks investing in the transport infrastructure.

"...so the billions being invested now to further increase production won't accomplish anything unless more transport capacity is added". True again. Which is why currently $billions are being spent to now only expand the capability of moving oil out of Alberta but also getting it to over seas markets. Am I the only one readings the many reports covering such activity? I do post them here...maybe there a bit too much ostrich head-in-sand attitude prevailing.

"...Keystone XL is the one most likely to succeed as the primary obstacle is getting the cross border approval from the POTUS." And one more time: not relevant. The southern leg of Keystone XL will be receiving oil from the Keystone Pipeline that has been moving oil across the border for years. As far as moving oil to the west coat that has been ongoing for years via pipeline and rail. And is in the process of expanding as that infrastructure is CURRENTLY being improved. Being done TODAY... not a theoretical plan.

"...if we are going to get a handle on CO2 emissions we have to start leaving FF in the ground". And as repeatedly pointed out that no matter how often that statement (which is obviously true) is repeated it does not change the dynamic: Alberta exported more oil sands production in 2013 then every before in history. And with the continued expansion of the transport system and increased profit potential obviously that record will be broken in 2014.

[Subjectivist]

"...so the billions being invested now to further increase production won't accomplish anything unless more transport capacity is added". True again. Which is why currently $billions are being spent to now only expand the capability of moving oil out of Alberta but also getting it to over seas markets. Am I the only one readings the many reports covering such activity? I do post them here...maybe there a bit too much ostrich head-in-sand attitude prevailing.

ROCKMAN, I think a lot of people visit websites that echo their own opinions and when they come here they expect the same echo chamber effect. However whatever else might be said about peakoil.com it has a wide diversity of opinion that ranges all over the map. You convinced me a long time ago that the border crossing kerfuffle over the KXL is mostly irrelevant. I figured out for myself that even if it were a hold up for exports to America the Canadians would find some other way to export and just leave us out of the picture.

Don't lose sight of the facts, many people here read and appreciate your input.

[yellowcanoe]

"...Keystone XL is the one most likely to succeed as the primary obstacle is getting the cross border approval from the POTUS." And one more time: not relevant. The southern leg of Keystone XL will be receiving oil from the Keystone Pipeline that has been moving oil across the border for years. As far as moving oil to the west coat that has been ongoing for years via pipeline and rail. And is in the process of expanding as that infrastructure is CURRENTLY being improved. Being done TODAY... not a theoretical plan.

I am unaware of any additional pipeline capacity to either the west coast, south into the US or to Eastern Canada that is actually under construction. Let's run through all the projects I am aware of.

Kinder-Morgan submitted their application to build an expansion of the Trans-Mountain line to the National Energy Board only a couple of weeks ago (Dec 16) so they still need to go through the review process and negotiate with the various aboriginal groups along the route. The earliest they expect to have the expansion in operation is late 2017. I'd put my money on it taking a lot longer then that given the number of people in BC who are unhappy with the proposal.

The review panel for the Northern Gateway pipeline has recommended that the Federal Government approve the project, however they have attached 209 requirements to that approval. The project had its formal launch almost 10 years ago and still isn't anywhere close to getting out of the gate. There is no guarantee that Enbridge will ever reach the point of being able to build the pipeline.

Energy East is an odd bird because it involves conversion of an existing natural gas pipeline into an oil pipeline plus new construction from Montreal to St. John, New Brunswick. An application has not yet been submitted to the National Energy Board so the regulatory process has not even started yet. Even if all goes well, it would be years before construction could start.

Assuming the POTUS gave approval to Keystone XL today how long would it take to become operational? I haven't seen any references to construction on the Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City section so it is likely that TransCanada won't start construction until they have the cross border approval in hand. I would not expect an immediate start to construction as they certainly don't have thousands of workers sitting around waiting for the approval to come through.

While rail is increasingly being used to move oil, I'm not aware of it being used to move bitumen from the tar sands. My understanding is that Prince Rupert doesn't even have facilities to offload oil tank cars.

You've said it yourself that the oil business is cyclic in nature. Given that a significant bump in pipeline capacity out of Alberta is years down the road, I'd have to say that there is likely to be a pause in the frantic pace of tar fields development.

[Graeme]

anada’s oil sands brace for conflict-ridden 2014

Brewing disputes with First Nations, claims of mercury pollution and increasing challenges for delivering oil to distant markets are only some of the challenges Canada’s oil sands will face this year, a report released Thursday shows.

According to the study, produced by US-based Industrial Info Resources (IIR), with more markets opening up to Alberta crude oil, pipelines headed east, west and south are giving producers plenty of options in choosing a market.

The problem is, analysts warn, there are too many issues surrounding the province’s oil sands, from simmering disputes between natives and the local and federal governments to growing concerns over the environmental impact of mining the deposits.

In the last year and a half, the federal and provincial authorities have rewritten the book on resource development. Everything from how First Nations should be consulted to land use to oil sands monitoring to the basic regulations for environmental assessment have changed.

Ottawa even said in October that it would invest about $24 million in a two-year international ad campaign to counter “intense and sustained public relations” attacks against Alberta’s oil sands.

While official sources claim the new ground rules are a huge improvement in terms of efficiency and transparency, Canadian Press reports aboriginals are preparing a long list of lawsuits either now or soon to be before the courts.

Natives says the say virtually every one of the many recent policy changes violates their rights and ignores their recommendations.

mining

[Graeme]

Tar Sands Oil Development Is More Toxic Than Previously Thought, Study Finds

The Canadian government has likely underestimated the health risks of Alberta’s tar sands development, according to a new study.

The study, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, focused on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), persistent chemicals that are released during tar sands mining and processing and that have been associated with cancer in humans. Researchers compared the official records of PAH levels from the Athabasca Tar Sands Region to measurements from other scientific studies, and found that actual PAH emissions may be two to three times higher than recorded in environmental reviews.

The researchers discovered that, in previous estimates, the government had probably failed to account for the PAH emissions from evaporating tailing ponds, the toxic ponds that house the waste left over from the mining process, including water, sand, silt, clay, contaminants and leftover oil. Previous estimates also may not have taken into account dust from mining sites, which can contain levels of PAHs.

Though PAHs have been linked to to cancer in humans and birth defects and tumors in mice, the researchers said that their findings weren’t necessarily cause for alarm, because the levels of PAHs they recorded were comparable to those found in big cities, where people breathe in PAHs from sources like soot, cigarette smoke, vehicle exhaust and asphalt.

“It is not that I am raising the red flag here, that we should be very concerned, because we live with these concentrations day in and day out,” Frank Wania, co-author of the study, told the Globe and Mail. “All we are saying is that the basis for the human health risk assessment is flawed.”

But Jules M. Blais, a chemical and toxicology professor from the University of Ottawa who didn’t work on the study, told Climate Central that PAHs are “some of the worst things out there” and that the study’s findings have big implications for people who live along the proposed route of Keystone XL. Levels of PAH have already been found in the Athabasca River, and have increased between 1999 and 2009.

“From the standpoint of Keystone, the concerns are regarding potential breaches that could contaminate soils,” he said. “The same kinds of things that are getting into the Athabasca River could be relevant to Keystone.”

thinkprogress

[Graeme]

Company Has Yet To Stop Leaks That Have Been Spilling Tar Sands In Alberta For 9 Months

Tar sands leaks in Alberta, Canada, that were reported last May — and may have started months earlier — still haven’t been stopped.

Now, a new report says more urgency needs to be placed on finding the cause of the leaks, which so far have expelled more than 12,000 barrels (or maybe even more) of tar sands mixed with water onto the forest floor, making the leaks the fourth-largest release of bitumen recorded in Alberta.

The report, published by Global Forest Watch Canada, looked at the May 20 spill at the Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. (CNRL) Primrose tar sands project near Cold Lake, Alberta, where four underground wells began leaking early last year. In October, the Alberta government ordered CNRL to find the cause of the leaks, which the company has since determined were due to faulty wellbores — a “technical, operational challenge that is totally solvable,” CNRL president Steve Laut said in November.

The company says it’s identified the wells behind the leaks and has so far found mechanical failures in two of them. But, as of January, the leaks still continued. The Alberta Energy Regulator is still investigating the cause of the leaks, however, and hasn’t come to a conclusion on what started them.

Spills like this, the report says, call into question the methods of cyclic steam stimulation, an in-situ form of extracting oil that pushes high-pressure steam underground, creating cracks in rock from which trapped oil can escape. This method is used at the Primrose facility, and is necessary to reach about 80 percent of Alberta’s tar sands.

thinkprogress

[Graeme]

Senators Call For Study On Keystone Health Effects After Doctor Cites Cancer Near Tar Sands

Two Democratic Senators are calling for a comprehensive study on how public health would be affected by the extraction and processing of tar sands — the type of fuel that would be transported through the Keystone XL pipeline — citing increased cancer rates in patients who live downstream of the fuel reservoirs.

Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) told reporters at news conference on Wednesday that they will send a letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry asking for the study. The conference was brought on by what Boxer called “dramatic” new information from Alberta, Canada — where the tar sands are extracted — and where a rare type of cancer has increased by 30 percent since the extraction of the tar sands began.

Among other activists and advocates, Boxer and Whitehouse were flanked by Dr. John O’Connor, a primary care doctor who treats patients in the First Nations community of Fort Chipewyan. O’Connor has drawn widespread attention among Canadian officials for alleging that his patients there have extremely high rates of a rare and incurable bile-duct cancer. He believes the sickness rates are caused by airborne and water-borne emissions from tar sands facilities.

thinkprogress

[yellowcanoe]

Senators Call For Study On Keystone Health Effects After Doctor Cites Cancer Near Tar Sands

Two Democratic Senators are calling for a comprehensive study on how public health would be affected by the extraction and processing of tar sands — the type of fuel that would be transported through the Keystone XL pipeline — citing increased cancer rates in patients who live downstream of the fuel reservoirs.

Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) told reporters at news conference on Wednesday that they will send a letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry asking for the study. The conference was brought on by what Boxer called “dramatic” new information from Alberta, Canada — where the tar sands are extracted — and where a rare type of cancer has increased by 30 percent since the extraction of the tar sands began.

I'm not quite sure what to conclude from this report. It could mean that virtually all sources of health problems in the US have been eliminated so these two senators now have nothing better to do with their time than look at health problems in other countries. Or are they just confused and think that Canada is the 51'st state?

[Graeme]

No. They are not only concerned about the health of Canadians but also their own citizens.

“I want to protect everybody, believe me, but my role and my power lies here,” Boxer said. “I am extremely concerned about the impact of tar sands oil on our people, wherever they live in this nation. The issue before me is Keystone XL which, if approved, will bring a 45 percent increase in the amount of tar sands oil coming through [America] and eventually a 300 percent increase.”

Canadian Company Called U.S. Oil Sands Will Soon Start Extracting Utah's Tar Sands

Think only Canadians need to worry about tar sands extraction? Think again.

In October, U.S. Oil Sands, Inc. joined Kentucky-based Arrakis Oil Recovery as the second company to receive a permit to produce U.S. tar sands. The Utah Water Quality Board gave U.S. Oil Sands a permit to extract 2,000 barrels of oil per day from Utah's tar sands reserves.

Despite its name, U.S. Oil Sands is actually a Canadian outfit based in Calgary, Alberta. The company currently holds leases on just over 32,000 acres in Utah's Uintah Basin. U.S. Oil Sands' mining will take place at PR Spring on the Colorado Plateau in an area called the Bookcliffs, which straddles the Utah/Colorado border.

desmogblog

[Graeme]

Company In Charge Of Ongoing Tar Sands Leaks Wants To Try Again At The Same Site

The Canadian company in charge of a tar sands site that’s been leaking oil for about 10 months has applied for permission to resume extracting oil on the site, despite the fact that an investigation into the spill’s causes has yet to be completed.
Canadian Natural Resources, Ltd. applied in February to start pumping high-pressure steam into the ground at their Primrose tar sands project near Cold Lake, Alberta, the site of four ongoing leaks which have so far expelled more than 12,000 barrels of oil onto the forest floor. CNRL’s application is for a site that is outside the one-kilometer (about .6 mile) restricted zone around the leaks which has been off-limits to drilling since last spring when the leaks were discovered. The company says it will reduce the pressure of the steam and increase monitoring to try to prevent more leaks. But since the site sits on the same geological location as the leak site, opponents say that CNRL should not be allowed to resume mining operations there until investigators uncover the cause of the leaks.
“The most responsible course of action is to err on the side of safety,” Erin Flanagan, an analyst with the Pembina Institute, told the Edmonton Journal.
CNRL also applied in December for a permit to begin pumping steam into the ground at a site far closer to the leaks. That application would have allowed CNRL to resume operations inside the restricted zone, but was rejected by the Alberta Energy Regulator, the fossil-fuels funded corporation in charge of regulating Alberta’s tar sands. The application was withdrawn by CNRL after the company learned of the rejection. Flanagan told the Edmonton Journal that the AER’s decision not to grant CNRL that permit was an “encouraging” sign from the regulator, which gained regulatory control of Alberta’s tar sands late last year.

thinkprogress