People search for "oil sands pros and cons" and hit this. They never comment, so I assume it is not interesting enough data to peruse fully. Do they just hit it and quit? I dunno. Maybe not, because the "behavior" tab in the google analytics says some folks even spend over 40 minutes reading the horrible garbage in this "blog".
For the old Human Record, I've written twice (or 2.5 if you count the feigned kookery one) on this subject:
First Thing on Oil Sands: http://writtting-d.blogspot.ca/2011/05/canadian-election-super-power-rankings.html
Second Thing on Oil Sands: http://writtting-d.blogspot.ca/2012/02/pros-and-cons-of-canadas-crude-oil.html
Are those google stats true? Are people hitting "oil sands pros and cons" and spending 40+ minutes reading about the crap I write? Can that possibly be true? Is there something to be gained from my fragmented and bad opinions?
When I re-read what I wrote in those two Oil Sands articles, I felt bad for calling Pierre Elliot Trudeau a "jabroni" and other bad names.
So, in the obtuse case (probably 1,000,000,000 to 1) that the people who I think are actually reading what I write (i.e. people with vested interest in which applies to the oil sands) are actually reading this, there's only one more tidbit of information I'd like to add to the "oil sands" debate and it's one that has always stuck out like a thorn in my side when saw it I thought about it.
It's from a page in Buckminster Fuller's book, Critical Path, in which he mentions both Pierre Elliot Trudeau and Energy. I'd like to bring up this piece of information because it is actually interesting and makes me feel bad for calling Trudeau a "jabroni",
- Buck Fuller, Critical Path, (Intro:p.xxxi)
"In the early years of Trudeau's premiereship of Canada, when he was about to make his first visit to Russia, I gave him my world energy network plan, which he presented to Brezhnev, who turned it over to his experts. On his return to Canada, Trudeau reported to me that the experts had come back to Brezhnev with: 'feasible...desirable.' "
Was Trudeau's vision of a National Energy Program something bigger? Something not corrupt? Something even inspired by Buck Fuller?
|Arris Dome, circa 1967|
(Note: Buck Fuller's main connection to Montreal/Quebec/Canada is the pretty cool biosphere or dymaxion-involuted-cross-cut-non-flat-plane-series-of-sixty-degree-angles Bioshpere which is really cool looking)
When you look at the troubles of energy in Canada and the world, and at the danger of reliance on fossil fuels, was the National Energy Program really a scam or was it an earnest attempt to get people to work together? I don't know, all I know is that paragraph from Crtitical Path is pretty interesting.
Maybe P.E. Trudeau wasn't a big-time Jabroni after all (possibly just a small-time jabroni).