Skip to main content

Returning Land To Their Natural State? Not If You Go Bankrupt!

The toxic wastes of the Canadian oil patch in Alberta has been spreading in the boreal forest since bitumen mining began there in the 1960’s. 

The mix of clay, water, toxic acids and leftover bitumen has sprawled into artificial ponds big enough to cover an area twice the size of Vancouver. More than one trillion litres of the gunk called trailings fill these man made waste lakes. It would take five days for the same amount of water to pour over Niagara. The ponds emit methane and other greenhouse gases. They attract and kill migrating birds and are totally inhospitable to aquatic life. No fish and few invertebrates can live in them. 

According to Jodi McNeill, policy analyst for the environmental think tank, Pembina Institute, ”The ponds have grown and grown over the last five decades. If we continue kicking the can down the road we will be leaving a legacy of ten’s of billions in clean up costs to future generations”. 

Oil companies are required to return the lands they develop to their natural state, which is a joke, especially when they go bankrupt, which one did last August leaving 4,000 uncleaned wells and pipelines. The Alberta Energy Regulator has estimated it will cost $130 billion to clean up the mess if they can. It may not be so easy considering leakage from the ponds has got into the surrounding groundwater and the nearby Athabasca River. 

Of one thing you can be sure of – everywhere capitalism sticks its filthy tentacles it destroys life in one way or another.
For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC


Popular posts from this blog

What do we mean by no leaders

"Where are the leaders and what are their demands?" will be the question puzzled professional politicians and media pundits will be asking when the Revolution comes. They will find it inconceivable that a socialist movement could survive without an elite at the top. This view will be shared by some at the bottom. Lenin and his Bolshevik cohorts argued that we couldn't expect the masses to become effective revolutionaries spontaneously, all on their own. To achieve liberation they needed the guidance of a "vanguard party" comprised of an expert political leadership with a clear programme. The Trotskyist/Leninist Left may remix the song over and over again all they want but the tune remains the same: leaders and the cadres of the vanguard can find the answer; the mass movements of the people cannot liberate themselves. The case for leadership is simple. Most working-class people are too busy to have opinions or engage in political action. There’s a need for some…

Lenin and the Myth of 1917

A myth pervades that 1917 was a 'socialist' revolution rather it was the continuation of the capitalist one. What justification is there, then, for terming the upheaval in Russia a Socialist Revolution? None whatever beyond the fact that the leaders in the November movement claim to be Marxian Socialists. M. Litvinoff practically admits this when he says:In seizing the reigns of power the Bolsheviks were obviously playing a game with high stake. Petrograd had shown itself entirely on their side. To what extent would the masses of the proletariat and the peasant army in the rest of the country support them?”This is a clear confession that the Bolsheviks themselves did not know the views of the mass when they took control. At a subsequent congress of the soviets the Bolsheviks had 390 out of a total of 676. It is worthy of note that none of the capitalist papers gave any description of the method of electing either the Soviets or the delegates to the Congress. And still more cu…

No More Propertyless

Socialism is the name given to that form of society in which there is no such thing as a propertyless class, but in which the whole community has become a working community owning the means of production—the land, factories, mills, mines, transport and all the means whereby wealth is created and distributed to the community. The first condition of success for Socialism is that its adherents should explain its aim and its essential characteristics clearly, so that they can be understood by every one. This has always been the primary purpose of the Socialist Party's promotion of its case for socialism. The idea of socialism is simple. Socialists believe that society is divided into two great classes that one of these classes, the wage-earning, the proletariat, is property-less the other, the capitalist, possesses the wealth of society and the proletariat in order to be able to live at all and exercise its faculties to any degree, must hire out their ability to work to the capitalis…