RELEASE: President Obama Urged to Say No to Canada’s Tar Sands

Canadian government wants special treatment for the world's dirtiest oil. In first international trip, President Obama must stand strong on clean energy and sufficient climate policies.
By Earth's Newsdesk, a project of EcoInternet
CONTACT: Dr. Glen Barry,
Filthy tar sands will ensure a global climate disaster (Seattle, WA) — On February 19, President Barack Obama travels to Canada on his first international trip as President, where he will face pressure from the Government of Canada to support production of Alberta's filthy tar sands oil [search]. An international network of environmental groups has launched the “Obama2Canada” campaign[1] urging President Obama to stand strong on his new energy economy agenda and reject entreaties from Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to shelter the dirtiest oil on earth from global warming regulation.
“Tar sands oil is the dirtiest form of energy in the world. It has no place in President Obama's plans for a clean energy economy,” said Sierra Club Dirty Fuels Campaign Coordinator Pat Gallagher. “Tar sands oil accelerates global warming. It destroys forests. It endangers public health. Instead of importing this expensive, dirty oil, we can invest in clean energy that will create millions of much-needed, sustainable jobs.”

Called oil sands by proponents, tar sands are the very dirtiest of fossil fuels. Producing oil from tar sands emits three times the global warming pollution as conventional oil, requires excessive amounts of energy and fresh water, and destroys huge swaths of ancient boreal forest. Given its massive carbon footprint, tar sands would almost certainly prove unviable under any reasonable climate change regulations. Along with ending the use of coal and old growth forest destruction, stopping tar sands is essential global climate policy required to maintain an operable atmosphere.
### MORE ###
EcoInternet's Earth Action Network has launched an independent affinity email protest campaign[2]. There global citizens can let the new President know how seriously they take climate change, urge him to reject tar sands, and support further immediate urgent action in pursuit of sufficient climate change policies.
“This may be our most important climate campaign ever. Tar sands development is the most ecologically destructive project in the world. When fully developed, tar sands will indefinitely continue North America's addiction to climate destroying fossil fuels, ensuring abrupt and runaway climate change exceeds safe levels. There is virtually no chance of minimizing climate change and achieving global ecological sustainability should tar sands production continue or expand,” says EcoInternet President Dr. Glen Barry.
### ENDS ###
[1] Obama2Canada Contacts:
Kristina Johnson, Sierra Club (415) 977-5619
Jennifer Foulds, Environmental Defence Canada, (416) 323-9521 x 232
Lisa McCrummen, Obama2Canada: (206)321-9461
More information, including photos, B-roll video and other campaign materials are available on
Urge President Obama to Say No to Canada's Filthy Tar Sands
EcoInternet provides the world's largest and most used climate and environment portals at and . Dr. Glen Barry is a leading global spokesperson on behalf of environmental sustainability policy. He frequently conducts interviews on the latest climate, forest and water policy developments and can be reached for comment at:

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. M Dance says:

    Yes, this is important. Good stuff Glen, and other environmental spokespeople. Keep up the good work!

  2. David Moore says:

    The Alberta tar sands holds huge reservoir of oil that is mixied with frozen sand and requires huge amounts of energy and fresh water to mine, thaw and refine it.
    Without the tar sands and oil shale (a similar dirty oil found in the US Rockies) the world will run low on affordable oil and conservation will naturally take place. This
    is good for oil conservation and to slow global warming and was already happening during the last runup of oil and gasoline prices.
    Obviously the world will eventually exploit some dirtier oil sources but this should be delayed until future centuries when humans have learned to control the pace of their impacts. There is no sign of this now and we need to radically slow oil consumption now. BOYCOTT TAR SANDS GASOLINE. CHECK OUT THE ACTIVISTS OF EDMONTON and ALBERTA FIRST NATIONS.

  3. Lisa McCrummen says:

    Remember that British advertising blitz, in which Shell referred to its development of the Alberta oil sands and its construction of the largest U.S. oil refinery as “sustainable,” statements that the U.K. Advertising Standards Authority, said they were untruthful and unsubstantiated because they implied these projects were environmentally benign. Shell, in its arguments to the ad authority, defined the concept as providing cheap energy to meet social and economic needs of future generations, while the ad clearly implied that sustainability had everything to do with protecting the environment. (
    Well -; this week in preparation for Obama's visit, Canada may be trying the same idea. Unfortunately, while full page ads in the Washington Post and the NY Times hope to reinforce the importance of the (oil) trade partnership and environmental responsibility -; scathing reports abound.
    Buyer beware?
    Lisa McCrummen

  4. S. Kaye says:

    It is inconceivable that Canada needs support from our Pres to dig up and process tar sands. They are doing it right now big time and the oil is flowing into the US in substantial quantity. No Presidential approval needed. I do not see how anything he says could affect he outcome. They don't need our approval, our money, our blessing. Tar sands extraction is a horrible environmental mess, is a huge financial benefit to Alberta and Canada. The best Obama can do is to ask the Canadians to replace the forests destroyed in the process, to clean up the waters polluted, to protect the wildlife displaced, to minimize the disruption. The low price of oil will discourage new investment in the tar sands, so that alone will be somewhat helpful.
    S. Kaye

  5. I would suppose that since the U.S. buys over 65% of this dirty oil, that we have some say over the matter. Doing the best we can do is of little worth if our atmosphere and biosphere become inoperable and unable to support life. We need to identify and implement sufficient solutions, which means rejecting tar sands and oil.
    Dr. Glen Barry

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.