Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 229

Thread: Neil Young talks Horse Shissle

  1. #1

    Default Neil Young talks Horse Shissle

    Neil Young drove to Ft. Mc. in his ethanol/electric car and declared in a Washington speech that the oil sands looked like Hiroshima. Forgot to mention in his speech about the reclamation of the land when the mining is finished in certain areas. He also forgot to mention the big azz non ethanol tour buses his entourage drive around in going from gig to gig. I guess now that he is on tour it's one way to get your name back out there.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/enter...690/story.html
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Neil Young drove to Ft. Mc. in his ethanol/electric car and declared in a Washington speech that the oil sands looked like Hiroshima. Forgot to mention in his speech about the reclamation of the land when the mining is finished in certain areas. He also forgot to mention the big azz non ethanol tour buses his entourage drive around in going from gig to gig. I guess now that he is on tour it's one way to get your name back out there.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/enter...690/story.html
    Even the minuscule reclamation claims being made by industry are nothing more than self-serving pronouncements that haven't even been verified. Per the Alberta Government, as of Dec 2010, of the 715 square kilometres of land disturbed by tarsands mining operations, only 1.04 square kilometres has been certified by the Alberta Government as reclaimed.



    More pointedly, so-called reclamation will never bring the land back to its natural boreal forest (peatlands, old growth, 60% wetlands, etc.) state. Most pointedly, there is no proven solution to deal with the toxic tailponds. One "solution" being hyped by industry is to pump the toxic waste into abandoned old mine pits and cap them with fresh water. Instant lakes all around!

    Your personal slag against Young shows your unfamiliarity with his long-standing environmental activism.

  3. #3

    Default

    Oilsands


    Hiroshima







    Someone mind telling me where the destroyed buildings and dead bodys are on the oilsands????? Oh wait thats right cuz comparing oilsands to a nuke is bloody stupid!

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkmagnoblade View Post
    Someone mind telling me where the destroyed buildings and dead bodys are on the oilsands????? Oh wait thats right cuz comparing oilsands to a nuke is bloody stupid!
    Uhhh... he compared landscapes. Your literal extension to "destroyed buildings and dead bodies" is bloody stupid.

  5. #5

    Default

    Again look at the 2 pics THEY LOOK NOTHING ALIKE.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkmagnoblade View Post
    Again look at the 2 pics THEY LOOK NOTHING ALIKE.
    #landscapeDevastationAnalogy

  7. #7
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default

    The odds are that in 100 years that the oil sands site will be forested and the nuked site will continue to be populated and continue to pollute.

  8. #8

    Default

    What's wrong with the comparison? The same could be said about any new neighbourhood development too. Or look at the environment destruction taking place to build assembly plants for smart phones, flat screen TVs, etc. Look at the land taken up for the entertainment industry where huge buildings in Hollywood have been built. Many music and concert venues are hugely under-utilized spaces. Until the digital era factories had to be built to produce the equipment and the media. What percent of that media was ever played after its initial purchase.

    Build solar and you do a lot of destruction to some huge footprint of natural landscape. Go with hydro and you permanently decimate some rich valley ecosystem. As is stated above, the difference is that once the oil is removed, we'll somewhat restore the land.

    What really amazes me is the massive staging and lighting that today's rock bands move about and set up in cities. Their power consumption alone must top the charts. Probably impacts ticket prices too. Then, what happens to all that custom staging at the end of a tour?
    Last edited by KC; 12-09-2013 at 06:32 AM.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Neil Young drove to Ft. Mc. in his ethanol/electric car and declared in a Washington speech that the oil sands looked like Hiroshima. Forgot to mention in his speech about the reclamation of the land when the mining is finished in certain areas. He also forgot to mention the big azz non ethanol tour buses his entourage drive around in going from gig to gig. I guess now that he is on tour it's one way to get your name back out there.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/enter...690/story.html
    Even the minuscule reclamation claims being made by industry are nothing more than self-serving pronouncements that haven't even been verified. Per the Alberta Government, as of Dec 2010, of the 715 square kilometres of land disturbed by tarsands mining operations, only 1.04 square kilometres has been certified by the Alberta Government as reclaimed.



    More pointedly, so-called reclamation will never bring the land back to its natural boreal forest (peatlands, old growth, 60% wetlands, etc.) state. Most pointedly, there is no proven solution to deal with the toxic tailponds. One "solution" being hyped by industry is to pump the toxic waste into abandoned old mine pits and cap them with fresh water. Instant lakes all around!

    Your personal slag against Young shows your unfamiliarity with his long-standing environmental activism.
    This is interesting. However, how much of that land base in the chart is still being used? We've had a massive expansion of land use so it would seem reasonable that most of it is still in use. Or does this chart show land already available for reclamation?

    Are there a similar charts for agricultural land being returned to grassland, forest etc. or urban lands being cleared of their buildings? Detroit is making some progress there. Or charts of dams being removed and valley ecosystems being restored?

    Bottom line is that we use too much energy and do too little about curbing our resource needs. Rising emerging market populations only exacerbate the situation
    Last edited by KC; 12-09-2013 at 06:44 AM.

  10. #10

    Default

    Another celebrity who should focus on his art and less on crap he clearly knows nothing about. Has he become senile?
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  11. #11

    Default

    So if we clear land to harvest crops or graze cattle for 1000 years its ok. But if we clear land to harvest a resource for 100 years under it there is something wrong? Why are all the other mines of the world not being criticzied?

  12. #12

    Default

    Hiroshima today:


    The oil sands gets a lot of bad press because of its appearance, but the amount of land used compared to the remaining boreal forest in Alberta is minuscule. Look around Edmonton, and how much of the original Aspen Parkland ecosystem do you find left by comparison. Yet I don't here the environments telling us to get rid of farms to restore the original ecosystem; the farms are relatively aesthetically pleasing, and the lobby's marketers know they don't have a leg to stand on. The visual impact of the oil sands make them an easy target. Since we're going to be vilified no matter what we do, we might as well put a couple of fission nuclear plants up there to power the extraction; they can't hate us much worse, can they?

  13. #13

    Default

    I wish we were powering the whole fiasco with nukes and not carbon.
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  14. #14

    Default

    Neil Young, while entitled to his opinion, does not have a degree in any of the sciences. I don't either, but I don't have the press following me and hanging onto my every word. I have no doubt Young's carbon footprint is huge. He has been hauling equipment and roadies around in huge trucks. He no doubt fills stadiums full of high powered stage lights and fancy electronics. The producing and making of his CD's I should imagine uses all kinds of energy. He more than likely owns more than two homes if not more. His publicity stunt to drive to Ft.Mc in his ethanol car was cheesy at best. I did not hear him say he drove back to his home in the States in the same car. It more than likely got hauled onto a trailer and driven back to his 8 car garage. He is not fooling most of us.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  15. #15
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248

    Default

    When I heard about this, my first reaction was "hey hey my my"
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  16. #16

    Default



    Maybe Mr. Young should have picked a subject nearer to his adoptive home. How about a shout out to the surface coal mining that goes on in the States and the carbon foot print of those operations. Maybe stand up in Washington and make a speech on that. What a hypocrite.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  17. #17
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,203

    Default

    Just a bunch of loony left wing b-list celebs who have been rich for years so can tell everyone how to run their lives. Hollywood is full of them and it's not worth arguing with people who will always believe they are right.
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  18. #18

    Default

    Since when are people not entitled to state their opinion? That's all he did. He has a right to do this. Perhaps he gets more press because he is a celebrity but that doesn't mean he needs to be quiet.

    Those Cenova ads that run on tv that make the the tar sands look like some sort of green paradise are ridiculous. No wonder people feel the need to make inflammatory statements at times.

  19. #19

    Default

    He speaks the truth. The two photos basically prove it: wasteland is wasteland.

    Deeper than that: what are the long term health effects of tar sands? Who knows?

    But he does offend against economic reality.

    On the other hand, indless group pile-ons by simpleton homers are quite boring.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WestendMark View Post
    Since when are people not entitled to state their opinion?
    Since when are people not allowed to disagree with them?

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WestendMark View Post
    Since when are people not entitled to state their opinion? That's all he did. He has a right to do this. Perhaps he gets more press because he is a celebrity but that doesn't mean he needs to be quiet.

    Those Cenova ads that run on tv that make the the tar sands look like some sort of green paradise are ridiculous. No wonder people feel the need to make inflammatory statements at times.


    To be fair, Cenova is not strip mining but using less destructive methods. It still has long term environmental issues including water usage, ground water contamination, energy use, global warming etc.


    Strip mining tar sands


    The problem is that much of the damage is strip mining and the huge question is, when the oilsands are depleted or when companies are broke, are taxpayers left with the reclamation? Historically that is the case in many previous environmental cleanups and I do not see a strong enough government in Alberta or Canada that will ensure that big oil cleans up their messes.

    Example

    Syncrude Sydney Tar Ponds

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Tar_Ponds
    Who paid?

    Love Canal

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal
    Company paid $129M but cleanup costs were over $400M plus more paid to affected residents.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WestendMark View Post
    Since when are people not entitled to state their opinion? That's all he did. He has a right to do this. Perhaps he gets more press because he is a celebrity but that doesn't mean he needs to be quiet.

    Those Cenova ads that run on tv that make the the tar sands look like some sort of green paradise are ridiculous. No wonder people feel the need to make inflammatory statements at times.
    No bodies saying he's not entitled to his opinion. The thing is while he is spouting off about oil sands, reclamation, the world coming to an end he has no regard for his own huge carbon footprint. He also has no degree in anything, or anything remotely connected to the oil sands or the oil industry. He's would not get any air time if it where not for him being a D list celebrity. Just because he was good at his music career does not make him an expert in world affairs. The unfortunate part of it is that there are some people will believe him just because he is a celebrity. Kind of like the people who hang onto every word the Kardashian's say. He also forgets that the music he sells is manufactured on C.D's that more than likely come from a by product of the oil sands. He's right up there with Al Core on the bullship radar.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Even the minuscule reclamation claims being made by industry are nothing more than self-serving pronouncements that haven't even been verified. Per the Alberta Government, as of Dec 2010, of the 715 square kilometres of land disturbed by tarsands mining operations, only 1.04 square kilometres has been certified by the Alberta Government as reclaimed.
    Perhaps true (although I note the sands were never 'clean" even in theiir natual state), but still only a tiny fraction compared to the amount of land destroyed and never reclaimed in Canada by hydro damns. We don't see boycots of BC or Quebec electricity even though it has done way more damage to the Canadian natural environment.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    No bodies saying he's not entitled to his opinion. The thing is while he is spouting off about oil sands, reclamation, the world coming to an end he has no regard for his own huge carbon footprint. He also has no degree in anything, or anything remotely connected to the oil sands or the oil industry. He's would not get any air time if it where not for him being a D list celebrity. Just because he was good at his music career does not make him an expert in world affairs. The unfortunate part of it is that there are some people will believe him just because he is a celebrity. Kind of like the people who hang onto every word the Kardashian's say. He also forgets that the music he sells is manufactured on C.D's that more than likely come from a by product of the oil sands. He's right up there with Al Core on the bullship radar.
    You haven't a clue - your opening post concerning reclamation was your first glaring fail!

    As for your personal attacks against Young, you have no idea how he lives. One of his personal activism interests is his support and direct involvement in alternate vehicle fuels, most particularly a combined ethanol/electric approach.

    Your weaselly carbon footprint bluster shows you have no perspective on the bigger picture. For what it's worth, some organization did a study a few years back and compared the so-called footprint of a major rock band on a year-long world tour... their tour was the equivalent of the energy usage of ~ 6000 UK citizens over that years period. Mice nuts in relation to any global emissions reality! But don't let that stop your mind-numbing stoopid detraction from any actual discussion of tarsands issues/problems.

    Young is a fairly humble guy - you might want to watch the youtube video of his actual tarsands related comments. Comments that were given in relation to a U.S. National Farmers Union press conference. Of course, his long-standing support for farmers (American and Canadian) stems from his co-founding Farm-Aid - now almost 3 decades old, having raised almost 50 Million dollars for farmers relief/assistance over that period. How do you like those carbon footprint apples! In this particular tarsands focus, he's also spoken of his support for Nebraska farmers concerned about the proposed Keystone pipeline route... that's one of the direct ties for Young and his concerns over the tarsands/Keystone.

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Even the minuscule reclamation claims being made by industry are nothing more than self-serving pronouncements that haven't even been verified. Per the Alberta Government, as of Dec 2010, of the 715 square kilometres of land disturbed by tarsands mining operations, only 1.04 square kilometres has been certified by the Alberta Government as reclaimed.
    Perhaps true (although I note the sands were never 'clean" even in theiir natual state), but still only a tiny fraction compared to the amount of land destroyed and never reclaimed in Canada by hydro damns. We don't see boycots of BC or Quebec electricity even though it has done way more damage to the Canadian natural environment.
    Principal concerns over the tarsands impact reflect on emissions and the potential affect that "unfettered" expansion might have on shifting/delaying some countries from a more pointed/focused move towards alternate energy. Certainly, the environment visuals are a key motivator... as are concerns over water usage, toxic sludge, reclamation, impacts to First Nations people, etc. However, emissions and emissions potentials are the main driver rallying global attention and resistance/protest of the tarsands. Harper screwed the pooch by not paying any attention to enforcing emission controls on industry... by not actively supporting CCS research/deployments, by not engaging legitimate environment groups calling for "sustainable/responsible" development. Nothing is sweeter than watching Harper go cap-in-hand offering Obama an emissions reduction strategy in trade for his (Obama's) sanctioning Keystone!

  26. #26

    Default

    If Neil (and all the other ***** celebrities) had a time machine, would they go back in time and tell the Incans they were ruining the world too?



    If, when done, we simply grew grass on this, it would be the same damn thing. Except they'll not only turn it back into forest, they're also steam-cleaning the oil out of the bog.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    No bodies saying he's not entitled to his opinion. The thing is while he is spouting off about oil sands, reclamation, the world coming to an end he has no regard for his own huge carbon footprint. He also has no degree in anything, or anything remotely connected to the oil sands or the oil industry. He's would not get any air time if it where not for him being a D list celebrity. Just because he was good at his music career does not make him an expert in world affairs. The unfortunate part of it is that there are some people will believe him just because he is a celebrity. Kind of like the people who hang onto every word the Kardashian's say. He also forgets that the music he sells is manufactured on C.D's that more than likely come from a by product of the oil sands. He's right up there with Al Core on the bullship radar.
    You haven't a clue - your opening post concerning reclamation was your first glaring fail!

    As for your personal attacks against Young, you have no idea how he lives. One of his personal activism interests is his support and direct involvement in alternate vehicle fuels, most particularly a combined ethanol/electric approach.

    Your weaselly carbon footprint bluster shows you have no perspective on the bigger picture. For what it's worth, some organization did a study a few years back and compared the so-called footprint of a major rock band on a year-long world tour... their tour was the equivalent of the energy usage of ~ 6000 UK citizens over that years period. Mice nuts in relation to any global emissions reality! But don't let that stop your mind-numbing stoopid detraction from any actual discussion of tarsands issues/problems.

    Young is a fairly humble guy - you might want to watch the youtube video of his actual tarsands related comments. Comments that were given in relation to a U.S. National Farmers Union press conference. Of course, his long-standing support for farmers (American and Canadian) stems from his co-founding Farm-Aid - now almost 3 decades old, having raised almost 50 Million dollars for farmers relief/assistance over that period. How do you like those carbon footprint apples! In this particular tarsands focus, he's also spoken of his support for Nebraska farmers concerned about the proposed Keystone pipeline route... that's one of the direct ties for Young and his concerns over the tarsands/Keystone.
    Wow, maybe if he did not waste his time with the oil sands he could collect more for farm-aid. As for attacks against Young, I'm sure he'll get over it like I get over the ones you do to me. By the way, your views on the subject were glaringly obvious on up thread #2 the second sentence. Anyway, Jeffie baby, Keep on Rocking in the Free World.
    Last edited by Gemini; 12-09-2013 at 07:08 PM.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  28. #28

    Default

    S
    Somebody needs to do something about those rice paddies as well..............
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  29. #29
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    5,445

    Default

    Sorry Jeff, I've got to say you're out to lunch on this one

  30. #30
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,882

    Default

    KC, of course Jeff didn't answer your post because reality gets in the way of his opinion.
    You make an excellent point, the vast majority of the mine sites are still active or being prepared for development.
    What Jeff fails to mention is that there are only 394 hectares of land that are not in use, reclaimed or undergoing reclamation. Here is the link to the source of Jeff's chart, with all of the information you might want.
    http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/reclamation.html

  31. #31
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,882

    Default

    As for Jeff's "Instant Lake" idea thats a new one I haven't heard. Here are Suncor's efforts at their site.
    http://www.suncor.com/en/responsible/3708.aspx

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    KC, of course Jeff didn't answer your post because reality gets in the way of his opinion.
    You make an excellent point, the vast majority of the mine sites are still active or being prepared for development.
    What Jeff fails to mention is that there are only 394 hectares of land that are not in use, reclaimed or undergoing reclamation. Here is the link to the source of Jeff's chart, with all of the information you might want.
    http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/reclamation.html
    So we also need a chart showing only the yellow line on up, to show post-extraction work-in-progress and 'completed' reclamation.

  33. #33
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    2,561

    Default Neil Young's oilsands trip about showcasing his eco-friendly car: filmmaker

    "CALGARY -- A filmmaker says Neil Young's trip to Alberta's oilsands seemed more about showcasing the Canadian singer's eco-friendly car for a documentary than about learning about the industry.

    Tim Moen has lived in Fort McMurray for 13 years and was contacted by Young's production company, Shakey Pictures, to shoot aerial footage.

    Moen said he spent a couple of hours in a helicopter last week mainly shooting Young's hybrid 1959 Lincoln Continental driving on the highway near Syncrude and Suncor with the oilsands as a backdrop."

    "Young, who was accompanied by actress Daryl Hannah, also spent time with the chief of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, a community downstream from the oilsands that believes the industry's rapid growth is making people sick.

    http://www.ctvnews.ca/entertainment/...aker-1.1452189

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/tim-moe...ada%20Business

    So much for filling in for a band member at a gig.

  34. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    KC, of course Jeff didn't answer your post because reality gets in the way of his opinion.
    You make an excellent point, the vast majority of the mine sites are still active or being prepared for development.
    What Jeff fails to mention is that there are only 394 hectares of land that are not in use, reclaimed or undergoing reclamation. Here is the link to the source of Jeff's chart, with all of the information you might want.
    http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/reclamation.html
    The graph I supplied was fully linked to lead anyone inclined to the associated web-site. Industry has lagged and needed to be pushed/prodded/threatened towards reclamation efforts - care to dispute that? After 40+ years, a measly single fully certified reclamation certificate has been issued - for a gob-smacking 1 sq. kilometer of land! Yowser!

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    As for Jeff's "Instant Lake" idea thats a new one I haven't heard.
    You should get out more! 30 lakes and an unproven technology! Do ya feel lucky - well do ya?

    And the science is still out on whether they will work – or leave a toxic legacy, notes David Schindler, a respected scientist at the University of Alberta. No further end pit lakes should be approved, he said, until “we must have some assurance that they will eventually support a healthy ecosystem.” There is to date, he added, no “evidence to support their viability, or the ‘modelled’ results suggesting that outflow from the lakes will be non-toxic.”


    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    Here are Suncor's efforts at their site.
    http://www.suncor.com/en/responsible/3708.aspx
    PFFFT! Suncor was there from the beginning - since 1967 and the very first mine. By its own figures, Suncor states it has "reclaimed" ~1500 hectares --- 7% of the total ~21,000 hectares of land it has disturbed. Of course, that measly claimed reclamation hasn't actually been certified by the Alberta government. Most pointedly, your touted Suncor efforts that include an attempt to recreate peat requires a timeline measured in centuries to reach sufficient peat depth => per a 2012 paper published in the journal Ecology and Society, UofA professor Lee Foote:

    A primary condition of mine permitting is the agreement to return disturbed wetlands on the mine sites to a socially acceptable condition. Ideally, conditions would be restored to those nearly identical to the premine state. However, peatlands, the primary class of wetland cover throughout the oil sands region, cannot feasibly be replaced because of insufficient available area, time requirements for peat development, gaps in reclamation knowledge, and expense. Peat accumulation is a complex nonlinear process (Clymo 1992) dependent on simultaneous accumulation and decomposition with a positive balance. Restoration of fen peatland conditions requires stable and calcium-rich groundwater of low salinity flowing into low gradient areas with a fairly stable climate and low fire frequency. Even with these exacting conditions, at 1 to 3 mm of peat accumulation per year, approximately one to three centuries would be needed to generate the 30 cm minimum of accumulated peat to technically qualify as a peatland.
    Of course, notwithstanding the aforementioned peat issue/timeline, it will take at least a century to actually realize whether or not the rest of the Suncor efforts will actually result in a viable and sustainable ecosystem. But hey, the rubes eat up the glossies and the press conferences to no end - isn't that right, ralph60?

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Sorry Jeff, I've got to say you're out to lunch on this one
    Hey now! Way to put yourself out there. Do you actually have anything to say?

  37. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Wow, maybe if he did not waste his time with the oil sands he could collect more for farm-aid. As for attacks against Young, I'm sure he'll get over it like I get over the ones you do to me. Anyway, Jeffie baby, Keep on Rocking in the Free World.
    'Jeffie baby' - always refreshing to see I've touched a nerve! If you think I've attacked you I'd suggest you grow a pair!

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    If, when done, we simply grew grass on this, it would be the same damn thing. Except they'll not only turn it back into forest, they're also steam-cleaning the oil out of the bog.
    Nothing to it, right? Just throw out a few seeds here and there... no biggee! Instant forest... instant ecosystem!!! Whaaa!

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    If, when done, we simply grew grass on this, it would be the same damn thing. Except they'll not only turn it back into forest, they're also steam-cleaning the oil out of the bog.
    Nothing to it, right? Just throw out a few seeds here and there... no biggee! Instant forest... instant ecosystem!!! Whaaa!
    Nope. It's not easy. Which is why the reclaimed areas in Ft. McMurray are something to be proud of. It's proof it can be done. The reclaimed areas can support more life than before now that the oil-soaked spongy bogs are gone.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  40. #40
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,103

    Default

    I didn't see any links in the post you had the graph in, Jeff (post 2).

    In reading some of the links others had posted (that had the graph that you provided) the reclaimed land has to meet government standards 15 years after the reclamation has been completed by industry to be certified. Would this not explain the vast difference in what has been reclaimed and what has been certified?

  41. #41

    Default

    Young needs an intervention to wean him of watching Avatar.
    Anyway, Karma's a biatch twice over, his car broke down and producing ethanol is highly carbon intensive.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/10/ne...ar-broke-down/
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    The graph I supplied was fully linked to lead anyone inclined to the associated web-site. Industry has lagged and needed to be pushed/prodded/threatened towards reclamation efforts - care to dispute that? After 40+ years, a measly single fully certified reclamation certificate has been issued - for a gob-smacking 1 sq. kilometer of land! Yowser!
    That's a lot faster than the hydro lake land is going to be reclaimed. Oh hold on, what is it you are talking about? Land destruction (which is far worse with hydro), or carbon (in which case the land reclamation point is moot?).
    Last edited by moahunter; 13-09-2013 at 12:57 PM.

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    That's a lot faster than the hydro lake land is going to be reclaimed. Oh hold on, what is it you are talking about? Land destruction (which is far worse with hydro), or carbon (in which case the land reclamation point is moot?).
    How are hydro reservoirs more destructive than toxic open tailings ponds that kill any life that may come into contact with them?
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  44. #44
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,882

    Default

    Regarding Jeff's "instant lakes all around!".
    This is from the link Jeff supplied with his comment about how I should get out more :
    "The lakes are a project that will engage several generations. Each stands to take a century of work to plan, mine out and establish into a functioning ecological feature. From the moment workers end mining and begin filling the lakes, it could take fully 40 years before governments begin certifying them as environmentally sustainable, the 436-page CEMA report estimates".
    Hardly "instant lakes all around".
    Mining the oilsands is a dirty, complicated business. Cleaning up the sites is a long term job but they are spending millions every year doing serious research.
    Clowns who come up with phrases like "instant lakes all around!" have no interest in serious discussion, they reduce issues to simple phrase soundbites and sit back to admire their own wit.
    Providing charts with no links to sources and using personal insults are no substitute for a serious exchange of ideas.
    From your selective editing, personal insults and misrepresentation of facts it is fairly obvious that you're not interested in a rational discussion of the issues.
    The Luddites are back, only now they call themselves progressive.

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    Regarding Jeff's "instant lakes all around!".
    Just admit you didn't know about the only approach being considered to realistically deal with the scope of the toxic ponds.

    You went to unnecessary lengths to reinforce my "instant lakes all around" summation. I mean, really, the linked G&M article gives a good reflection on the time-frame - third paragraph in! In any case, whatever time-frame you want to shelter yourself under, at the end of the presumed respective initiatives... "suddenly a new lake will exist" Lakes all around buddy, lakes all around.

    I note you skirted away from the cause for concern quote from scientist David Schindler - how convenient for you!

    By the way, do you have any other source than CEMA? You know, CEMA, the industry funded organization! And, of course, one would be remiss in not highlighting that it is your sourced CEMA group that includes this handy lil' informative nugget in acknowledging, "little certainty in the long-term disposition of bitumen byproducts in lake beds", with your linked report reference citing "the sudden occurrence of bitumen slicks on Suncor's 20-year-old sustainability ponds after years of bitumen-free surface conditions."

    Again, you haven't been personally insulted - not by me. Perhaps you might like to offer a qualification on what you consider the personal insults you've suffered/endured!!!

    You're also the third person to question an absence of linked report in relation to a quote I provided. I answered the initial point made. Clearly it went beyond your comprehension capabilities. Oh snap - is that an insult? Let's try again. The accompanying graph I provided was fully cited... the graph includes a link to the website the article appears. On the linked website page is a most prominent link to the accompanying article I quoted from. If you can't decipher a linked graphic source to extrapolate that to the associated article, I'd suggest you throw the quote into Google! I really can't fathom the gyrations being expended by some here to whine about a supposed "missing link". I guess when you have no substantive arguments go with your whining strengths!
    Last edited by Jeff; 23-09-2013 at 05:51 PM.

  46. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    How are hydro reservoirs more destructive than toxic open tailings ponds that kill any life that may come into contact with them?
    Because they are larger and destroy more area. All the natural eco system that existed under that water is gone forever, species can be wiped out if you take away their natural environment. Its very selective to say oil sands are the root of all evil when in reality they only take up a tiny fraction of the earth which has been mined, far more damage to the natural environment is, and has, been done by hydro.
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-09-2013 at 04:51 PM.

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    How are hydro reservoirs more destructive than toxic open tailings ponds that kill any life that may come into contact with them?
    Because they are larger and destroy more area. All the natural eco system that existed under that water is gone forever, species can be wiped out if you take away their natural environment. Its very selective to say oil sands are the root of all evil when in reality they only take up a tiny fraction of the earth which has been mined, far more damage to the natural environment is, and has, been done by hydro.
    Without knowing for sure, I imagine hydro destroys more unique irreplaceable ecosystems than do tailings ponds or even the entire oil sands area - though I'm sure small valleys, ponds etc are being obliterated.

  48. #48
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,882

    Default

    Jeff the only link to your graph is in your imagination. I provide the link in post #30 http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/reclamation.html
    As far as insults go, here is a selection of Jeff's contributions to this topic:
    " literal extension to "destroyed buildings and dead bodies" is bloody stupid" (post #4)
    "You haven't a clue" (post #24)
    "Harper screwed the pooch" (post #25)
    "You should get out more" (post #35)
    "PFFFT!" (post #35)
    "the rubes eat up the glossies" (post #35)
    " Hey now! Way to put yourself out there. Do you actually have anything to say" (post #36)
    "I'd suggest you grow a pair!" (post #37)
    "Just throw out a few seeds here and there... no biggee! Instant forest... instant ecosystem!!! Whaaa!" (post #38 )
    "Clearly it went beyond your comprehension capabilities. Oh snap - is that an insult?" (post #45)

    So Jeff doesn't link to his graph, wildly misrepresents reclamation efforts and when called on it resorts to insults, over and over and over again.
    This would be a waste of time except Jeff and clowns like him get in the way of serious people trying to address serious issues.

  49. #49

    Default

    Young's carbon footprint is bigger than his un-warranted ego. Hypocrites like Robert Redford, Al Gore, Daryl Hanna, Neil Young jetting around with their unnecessary entourage trying to be hip and relevant but missing the mark. Why don't these fools use their spare time trying to change the gun laws in the states. Guns have killed more people than the oil sands ever have. The world would be a better place without all those guns on the streets. Without oil and it's by-products............not so much.
    Last edited by Gemini; 23-09-2013 at 08:27 PM.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  50. #50

    Default

    Hey Ralphie! I note you aren't responding to the meat of my last post, choosing instead to settle in on "links and perceived insults"!

  51. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    Jeff the only link to your graph is in your imagination.

    So Jeff doesn't link to his graph, wildly misrepresents reclamation efforts and when called on it resorts to insults, over and over and over again.
    You are bloody clueless! The link is in the graph itself. How many times does it have to be mapped out for you? Your fundamental premise here is that I "hid something"! Again, if you look at the graph link you see it originates from the Alberta government website ("Alberta Oil Sands"). The very first icon based link on the page is where the actual related article exists (where, of course, the same graph exists). Are you one of these old fart types new to the internet? And no, I didn't "wildly misrepresent reclamation efforts"

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    As far as insults go, here is a selection of Jeff's contributions to this topic:
    Allrightee! I'll play. In the very post you called me a clown, you whined about receiving personal insults. I stated I didn't personally insult you and challenged you to qualify what met your standard of being personally insulted. Your example list isn't much of a reach, is it? If you're going to suffer a personal weight of worldly insults or what you perceive as insults directed at other C2E members... I'm particularly taken with your personal insult attachment to comments made in regards to Stephen Harper's actions (or lack of) and Suncor reclamation efforts (or lack of). The only post directed your way that you offer as an example is #35... and yes, and in that you knew nothing about the "Grand Lakes Recreation Plan" for toxic tailings ponds, you do need to get out more! Now, sorry... if you took "getting out more" as a personal insult, I'll gladly offer up a replacement you'd prefer - let me know. If you're going to present yourself with some degree of authority on tarsands reclamation, while presuming to school me on the topic, while knowing absolutely nothing (claiming to have never heard of it) of the 'Grand Lakes Recreation Plan', yes, you are sheltered in your knowledge base and need to expand on it... you know, get out more! (post #45 was just raggin on ya, on your whiny claim of being personally insulted).

    Given that you take personally your perceived insults of other members, or politicians, or companies/corporations, etc., I certainly don't want to increase on the weighty burden you carry. I suggest you put me on ignore.

    As for the rest of your examples, I'll certainly stand by them as either "giving as good as I get" commentary, or simply a reflection on your sensitivity... or the fact you couldn't actually find any personal insults directed your way and had to reach big time for whatever you could find/imagine!

  53. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Young's carbon footprint is bigger than his un-warranted ego. Hypocrites like Robert Redford, Al Gore, Daryl Hanna, Neil Young jetting around with their unnecessary entourage trying to be hip and relevant but missing the mark. Why don't these fools use their spare time trying to change the gun laws in the states. Guns have killed more people than the oil sands ever have. The world would be a better place without all those guns on the streets. Without oil and it's by-products............not so much.
    tarsands don't kill people, GUNS kill people! Oh wait, I thought it was people kill people??? The NRA is comin after ya Gemini. In any case, the last time you trotted out this celebrity carbon footprint go-to, you were advised that you were missing the bigger emissions picture. Same again!

  54. #54

    Default

    Oh Jeffie Baby, stop sitting in your basement eating buffalo wings in your underwear and writing fan letters to Mr. Young. Don't be an eco-warrior all your life, take a day off now and again. It's a big world out there, go out and enjoy it.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  55. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    How are hydro reservoirs more destructive than toxic open tailings ponds that kill any life that may come into contact with them?
    Because they are larger and destroy more area. All the natural eco system that existed under that water is gone forever, species can be wiped out if you take away their natural environment. Its very selective to say oil sands are the root of all evil when in reality they only take up a tiny fraction of the earth which has been mined, far more damage to the natural environment is, and has, been done by hydro.
    Without knowing for sure, I imagine hydro destroys more unique irreplaceable ecosystems than do tailings ponds or even the entire oil sands area - though I'm sure small valleys, ponds etc are being obliterated.
    And hydro releases much less carbon than burning ten barrels of oil to make one barrel of oil that will then be burnt.
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    tarsands
    You do realize there is no tar in the oil / bitumen sands?

  57. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dialog View Post
    And hydro releases much less carbon than burning ten barrels of oil to make one barrel of oil that will then be burnt.
    Hydro dams aren't perfect on CO2 either though:

    Life-cycle Global Warming Emissions

    Global warming emissions are produced during the installation and dismantling of hydroelectric power plants, but recent research suggests that emissions during a facility’s operation can also be significant. Such emissions vary greatly depending on the size of the reservoir and the nature of the land that was flooded by the reservoir.
    http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/o...ric-power.html

    And oil sands mines release much less carbon in North America than coal mines, and are miniscule in terms of CO2 on a global basis. Every week in China two new coal power plants fire up. One coal power plant in Taiwan has roughly the same annual output of CO2 as the entire oil sands.

    http://www.ethicaloil.org/news/myth-...here%E2%80%9D/

    Oh, but nobody notices a few new coal power plants in China...
    Last edited by moahunter; 24-09-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  58. #58

    Default

    Not perfect, but a fraction of tarsands output.

    How is the tarsands carbon output forecast to grow over the next 30 years?
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    tarsands
    You do realize there is no tar in the oil / bitumen sands?
    You need to do your research and recognize that term originates from industry itself. The shift to "oilsands" was entirely a public relations exercise by industry/government. Is bitumin, oil? Why not call it bituminous sands? Why do some have such a problem with the original name?

  60. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    And oil sands mines release much less carbon in North America than coal mines, and are miniscule in terms of CO2 on a global basis. Every week in China two new coal power plants fire up.

    Oh, but nobody notices a few new coal power plants in China...
    Ezra Levant and the Harper government thank you for quoting from "Ethical Oil"!!!

    Do you ever actually do any research on your own? Are you just a sponge for any kind of propaganda that meets your measure of overt denial? That China coal plant nonsense, in reality, is a position where China is retiring old inefficient plants and replacing them with newer more efficient plants, or building more new more efficient plants outright, with capabilities toward CCS. China is also a world leader in research and trial deployments of carbon capture within coal plants - notwithstanding the world leading efforts and positioning it has in alternative energy pursuits.

    Anyone who projects this false balance doesn't accept what the emissions path is for exporting ever increasing tarsands output across the world, extending dependencies on fossil-fuels, delaying countries from more concerted efforts to decarbonize their energy use, delaying countries from reducing dependencies on fossil-fuels and developing alternative energy paths.

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Oh Jeffie Baby, stop sitting in your basement eating buffalo wings in your underwear
    You read like you have real experience in what you describe! Don't you have any more celebrity carbon footprint nonsense to post? Gemini - ever the bigger picture guy!!!

  62. #62
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default Neil Young announces the "Hipocrisy never sleeps" tour

    I think that we are at the point of Jumping the Shark here when Mr. Young is raising funds for a First nations band fight with the Big oil companies.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/...ticle15821894/

    In this case the same First Nation is knee deep in the profits from the same oil companies claiming to be their "Strategic Partner" Please check out their website !

    http://www.acden.com/home.php

    Neil , You did not think this one through !

  63. #63

    Default

    I don't know why d-listed celebrities are working for native causes as, one way or the other, natives do very well speaking up for themselves. Neil Young is trying to stay relevant for the wrong reasons. If he wants to play politics he should run for office.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  64. #64
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I don't know why d-listed celebrities are working for native causes as, one way or the other, natives do very well speaking up for themselves. Neil Young is trying to stay relevant for the wrong reasons. If he wants to play politics he should run for office.
    A singer whose CDs still hit the top part of the charts and can still tour NHL arenas is hardly a "D list celebrity". Or maybe you need to look up what the word even means.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  65. #65

    Default

    ^Please supply a chart of Young's latest album being in the TOP part of the charts.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  66. #66
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  67. #67
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  68. #68

    Default

    ^Î did not ask you to supply web-sites for the history of Billboards around the world. What I asked is for was you to supply proof of Young's most recent album being in the TOP part of the charts.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  69. #69
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248

    Default

    I provided proof of his recent CD being in the top part of the charts...it's not my fault you're too illiterate or lazy to read.
    Last edited by Sonic Death Monkey; 10-12-2013 at 08:57 PM.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  70. #70

    Default

    ^Now your just trying to wrangle out of the request. I want one website with the actual data of his recent album being top in the charts. I don't want data that is clouding the water and I have to wade through it. Stop being evasive. Just one actual page on the web will do.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  71. #71

    Default

    what the actual hell is going on here?

  72. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    I don't know why d-listed celebrities are working for native causes as, one way or the other, natives do very well speaking up for themselves. Neil Young is trying to stay relevant for the wrong reasons. If he wants to play politics he should run for office.
    He is hardly a D list celebrity, Neil Young is one of Canada's most famous and influential musicians world wide.

    While I totally disagree with his stand on the issue, I've got to hand it to him for putting his money where his mouth is, he said he would help this group with their cause and he has, in a big way.

  73. #73
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248

    Default

    Thanks for backing me up, moa. If Neil Young was a D list celebrity then he'd be opening for Trooper at the River Cree instead of touring in large arenas. And yes, I'm a huge Neil Young fan even though I disagree with his oilsands stance.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  74. #74

    Default

    I think Neil Young is a delusional old hippie, but I do like a lot of his music and he is still a major player in the music industry around the world.

    He still records an sells music, still does large shows, and I saw him as a guest on Letterman a month or two ago. Calling him "D-list" is incredibly naive.

  75. #75

    Default

    D-List:
    These interesting people are great at keeping Hollywood afloat. For if not for the D-List celebrity, there would be few sleazy scandals. Per the Ulmer Scale, these are the "minor" celebrities. They sometimes are able to hover about in their daily endeavors without being recognized; but the paparazzi rarely clamors for photographs, unless there is a hot story attached to the photo. Per Hollywood standards, a "D-List" celebrity is virtually too obscure to be included on the Ulmer Scale. This is typically because their moment in the limelight has passed, though they are still regarded as important enough to be included in some pretty impressive social circles.
    GOOGLED IMAGES: Anna Nicole Smith, Erik Estrada, David Hasselhoff, Nick Lachey, Ashley Simpson, Chad Lowe

    http://voices.yahoo.com/a-list-z-lis...894.html?cat=7
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  76. #76
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    If Neil Young was a D list celebrity then he'd be opening for Trooper at the River Cree instead of touring in large arenas.
    And might I add, his anti-oil gig announcements would have gone unnoticed.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  77. #77

    Default

    ^Oh come on, your more intelligent than that. You just have to browse 'Neil Young anti oil' to see how many articles/newspapers are reporting this.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  78. #78
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248

    Default

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/musi...rt-debuts.html

    Alan Jackson, Beach Boys, Neil Young chart with top 10 debuts

    June 13, 2012
    Adele, country singer Alan Jackson, the reunited Beach Boys and veteran rocker Neil Young all have noteworthy entries on the new Billboard Top 200 Albums chart.
    Another reunion -- this one between Young and his periodic collaborators in the band Crazy Horse -- has given him his highest charting album since “Harvest,” which went all the way to the top in 1972. Young and Crazy Horse’s “Americana,” which digs into the treasure trove of traditional folk music with their versions of such songs as “Oh Susannah,” “Clementine” and Woody Guthrie’s “This Land Is Your Land,” sold 44,000 copies and enters the Billboard chart at No. 4 this week.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  79. #79
    C2E Bandwidth Hog
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    29,248
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  80. #80

    Default

    Young has lived in California for the last 30+ years. When he does come back to Canada he disses an industry that drives the economic. We don't need ex citizens like him being turn coats.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  81. #81

    Default

    Turn coats? Are we next going to charge him with treason? FFS....

    The idea that you have to support the oil industry and all their practices to be a good Albertan or Canadian is laughable. The whole Alberta economy hinges on shipping out as much of our resources for the cheapest possible return. As goes Oil, so goes Alberta. So much for diversification.

  82. #82

    Default

    Nobody is saying he has too support it. He's entitled to his opinion. What he is doing is using his money, fame and connections to slam an industry that does more for the nation than he has ever done. He does not stop to think his own carbon footprint is probably way larger than the average Joe.

    From this article: http://neilyoungnews.thrasherswheat.org/
    The problem I have with Neil these days is that he has become very political in his views about pipelines and sources of energy, but based on his past and present day life style I do not believe that he really buys it. He has picked all the low hanging fruit in his career and just like any other aging rock star he has to latch on to what the "Fancy" people are buying these days and that is Climate Change products. Do you think Neil will attend the award ceremony he so deeply despises all these years (the Grammys)? I am willing to bet he will throw 3 tonnes of carbon in the atmosphere to be there.

    When a musician gets political in there views, we have to question their motivations, otherwise we just become jock sniffers. I am not a jock sniffer. Climate Change Album, video and book in the works with LinkVolt as the prop??

    Jason Smith
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  83. #83

    Default

    ^It's from a Bruce Cockburn song 'If a tree falls in the forest' does anybody hear........

    Of course chicks get my logic. Men lack that in so many ways.

    Just kidding..................
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  84. #84

    Default

    You can oppose his political leaning all you like. But when you start tossing out terms like "turn coat" I question your motivations.

    You're either with us or against us - George W. Bush

  85. #85

    Default

    ^Look the definition of 'turncoat' up. Young's a Canadian and what he is doing is kicking us in the gonads with his phoney war on the oil industry. What does Dubya have to do with it?.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  86. #86
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Surrey, BC
    Posts
    473

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Nobody is saying he has too support it. He's entitled to his opinion. What he is doing is using his money, fame and connections to slam an industry that does more for the nation than he has ever done.
    He's doing something for the first nations groups fighting the industry. Last time I checked these groups were made up of Canadians.

  87. #87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Look the definition of 'turncoat' up. Young's a Canadian and what he is doing is kicking us in the gonads with his phoney war on the oil industry. What does Dubya have to do with it?.
    Kicking "us" in the gonads? Really? REALLY??

    turn·coat (tűrnkt)
    n.
    One who traitorously switches allegiance.

    Wouldn't he have had to support the oil companies in the first place in order to switch allegiance? Neil Young has always been on the left side of the political spectrum. There's no turncoat here.

    Dubya was famous for drawing a line that said "good" was on this side and "evil" was on that side. And he got to be the one who drew the line. Much like you're doing, deciding that in order to be a "good" Canadian you have to pledge your allegiance to the oil companies over the First Nations.

    If you're not in favour of strip mining, tailing ponds, increased CO2 emissions, leaks of toxic material into lakes & streams and all that the oil sands are responsible for then you're a turncoat. Which is a total absurdity.

  88. #88

    Default

    ^See you cherry picked your version of what 'turncoat' is. Yeah, and all you people that have never benefited from what the oil sands have given the line starts here. All of you that own a car, heat a house, fly on a plane, play a record, get stuff out of a bottle, use a credit card, start a lawn mower, been to a huge concert where moving the equipment took the carbon foot print of a small town, the list is endless. If you have done at least 3 of these things your all a bunch of hypocrites or cavemen.
    We ALL support the oil industry weather we like or not. Young probably supports it more than us because of his bigger than normal carbon footprint.
    Last edited by Gemini; 11-12-2013 at 05:22 PM.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  89. #89

    Default

    I took the first definition. You want more?

    turncoat [ˈtɜːnˌkəʊt]
    n
    a person who deserts one cause or party for the opposite faction; renegade
    Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged

    urn•coat (ˈtɜrnˌkoʊt)

    n.
    a person who changes to the opposite party or faction, reverses principles, etc.; renegade.
    [1550–60]
    Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary,

    A turncoat is a person who shifts allegiance from one loyalty or ideal to another, betraying or deserting an original cause by switching to the opposing side or party.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turncoat

    Still not seeing how any of these apply to Neil Young.

    Oh dear, if you've ever used a fossil fuel then you MUST support open pit mining and all the various pollution from the oil sands then you must be opposed to all fossil fuels. Any attempt to limit their effects of people or the environment must be met with appropriate measures such as charging them with treason. After all, all Canadians support the oil sands. All 100% of them. Any dissent is evidence of support for terrorism.

    I suppose next you'll be going after the solar and wind manufacturers. After all, they're looking to reduce the sue of oil. Commies!

    (Man, I think I strained my sarcasm muscles)

  90. #90

    Default

    ^So do I put you down for being a hypocrite or a caveman (or maybe cave person is more politically correct).
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  91. #91

    Default

    Ha Ha Ha, even Young himself says he's a hypocrite.
    You can't make this stuff up.

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...248/story.html
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  92. #92
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,103

    Default

    At least he is raising money for the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation’s legal challenges. Maybe this means less taxpayer's dollars will be needed.

  93. #93
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  94. #94

    Default

    Much like how the Conservatives, both federally and provincially, along with the oil companies keep claiming they're in favour of developing the oil sands in an environmentally responsible manner.

    At least Neil Young isn't getting billions of dollars in subsidies.

  95. #95
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,753

    Default

    Hiring a helicopter to fly overhead and film yourself driving an Eco friendly car says it all here. C'mon Neil.
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  96. #96

    Default

    I guess Neil's message is, if you are a multimillionaire you have every right to thumb your nose at everyone who doesn't have the ability to buy a million dollar custom-built eco-friendly car like him.

  97. #97
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default Site C Dam - Mr.Young ? hey , hey , my ,my

    I wonder what Mr.Youngs opinion on this renewable ( albeit patently destructive ) project is ? I think that this is a greater threat to the ACFN community directly .

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...says-1.2463100

  98. #98
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,882

    Default

    I hope Neil Young will remember,
    An Alberta man don't need him around anyhow..

  99. #99

    Default

    Well that's telling him
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  100. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph60 View Post
    I hope Neil Young will remember,
    An Alberta man don't need him around anyhow..
    Lol, would love Lynryrd Skynyrd to come do a charity event for Shell and Suncor...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •