People Who Live Downwind of Alberta Tar Sands sites Getting Blood Cancer

The source is unamiliar to me, but the science seems sound enough to pass a warning.................this crap is headed for
Texas oil refineries eventually (though it would be cheaper and smarter to simply refine it en situ as it were......)
I am sure there are those who will yawn and pass on, but anyone affected by such pollution should pay attention.....
The article is here........thinkprogress.org...

reply to post by stirling


It suggests high benzene levels, which makes sense. If you ever see those trucks pumping out storm sewers next to a gas station? Well, yeah… it's benzene clean up.

Odd that it is so cancerous, cause the damn thing is so simple, and it's a building block for just about anything you want to make chemically.

But it is so cancerous (hehe, people used to use it as aftershave) that a minor spill calls out those trucks to clean up ASAP. And, all gas stations have benzene spill problems. Something to do with the liners for gasoline storage.

In any case, where's my aftershave?

Why would that article be talking about Fort Saskatchewan? Sure it's downwind if the wind is blowing directly south, along with a lot of other towns.

Fort Macmurray and Fort Saskatchewan are about 5 hours apart on the highway.
If I could get mapquest to work, I could get a better mileage estimate.

Fort Saskatchewan is really close to Edmonton.

I googled the distance. 410 kilometers.
For there to be a correlation I would think everywhere between, as well as the north west corner of Saskatchewan would also have to be affected.

Fort Saskatchewan isnt downwind of the Athabasca oil fileds, it due south. In fact all three oil fields in Alberta are either North (Athabasca, Peace River) of Fort Saskatchewan or East (Cold Lake). More nonsense.

reply to post by snowspirit


It is strange that they wouldn't test closer areas. It should be worse the closer you go. I suppose they don't want workers on the project and their families to know. Small populations, who cares I guess. I would like to be informed if I lived close as to the amount of this chemistry in the air. I suppose those working and living closer use this study to say, they must be nuts there, we aren't sick and we live right here....not sick right now is the relevant phrase, when their kids and spouse get messed up there could be a little bitching.

Why only men? Maybe they only tested men so that women wouldn't think it effects them and get fired up? Or is it somehow tied to testosterone levels or other differences.

Tactics that neglect to test people out of a target group are always used nowadays to hide the truth. You see it on those class action lawsuits advertisements on TV. Babies who were born with this defect and have this problem while the mother was on this med can join this class action lawsuit.....in reality the medicine screws up stem cells which leads to inappropriate repair of adults over a long term which can lead to cancer. Most people say "I am glad I wasn't pregnant and taking this med" when in fact their risk of abnormal cell growths...cancer...is higher from the med because our body uses stem cells to regenerate things. The medicine was probably never given to pregnant mothers in the first place so there was nobody that would qualify.

So by shifting our focus TPTB can make us assume that we are not effected. This is perfectly legal.

The study, which examined ten years of health records, found incidence of leukemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in men was higher in communities closest to the sources of pollution than in the surrounding counties. Though the study could not definitively link the uptick in cancer incidence to the increased pollution, the researchers said it was enough to call for reductions in the emissions from the industrial center.

I assume the study was comprehensive in nature it covered a lot of communities i believe, including those "upwind" of said sites......Fort Sask was one of those studied,.......not the focus....

Did you actually read the information? Or simply try to pick holes in what you skimmed? Hmmmm?
ATS is going downhill rapidly.......We try to deny ignorance, especially our own.........................

reply to post by stirling


Thanks for sharing this story, Stirling. It's disturbing on many levels. Not least of which, that I had some connection to the Mayflower, Arkansas oil spill through knowing someone who'd worked the clean up. That was tar sands oil. No oil is nice and pretty ...but THAT stuff is a special kind of bad. Nasty Nasty stuff.

...Although, I must say, this adds a new dimension to the concept of nasty, where that is concerned.

reply to post by stirling

Did you actually read the information? Or simply try to pick holes in what you skimmed? Hmmmm? ATS is going downhill rapidly.......We try to deny ignorance, especially our own......................... edit on 1-11-2013 by stirling because: (no reason given)

I read the whole article.
Maybe they mixed up Fort Macmurray and Fort Sask.

There are frakking operation all over Alberta, maybe that's contributing.
There are also gas plants all over, where the truckers transfer gas from one plant to another.

Edmonton is a lot cleaner than it used to be - there used to be such a gross haze over the city. Really bad. Fort Saskatchewan is within 20 kilometers, maybe past pollution also contributed.

They can't just say that Fort Mac (tar sands location) is the problem, unless they include Fort Mac and closer communities.

It could even be well water problems.

Also, the way the wind blows, is usually a little more in an easterly direction, whether north east or south east.
Central east or north east Saskatchewan would likely give a more accurate study.

snowspirit
Why would that article be talking about Fort Saskatchewan?

There's a lot air pollution in Fort Saskatchewan due to the oil refineries and fertilizer plants in the surrounding area...might have something to do with it.

reply to post by Tucket


That would make more sense than to blame it on the tar sands.
Other industry.

SirMike
Fort Saskatchewan isnt downwind of the Athabasca oil fileds, it due south. In fact all three oil fields in Alberta are either North (Athabasca, Peace River) of Fort Saskatchewan or East (Cold Lake). More nonsense.

Fluor (one of the largest contractors in the world, former subsidiary of Halliburton disagrees with you)

Athabasca Oil Sands Project - Fluor
www.fluor.com/projects/pages/ProjectInfoPage.aspx?PrjID=74‎
Shell Canada - Athabasca Oil Sands Dry Bitumen Plant ... Units (PPU) of its Athabasca Oil Sands Downstream Project, located in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta .

www.fluor.com...

Executive Summary
Shell Canada Ltd. awarded Fluor the engineering, procurement, and construction of the Primary Process Units (PPU) of its Athabasca Oil Sands Downstream Project, located in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta.

This facility has a design capacity of 155,000 barrels of dry bitumen per calendar day. It also includes a crude/vacuum unit and an 80,000 BPSD, two-train LC-Finer hydrocracker. In addition to the primary process units, the project includes hydrogen production, a sulfur block, and offsites and utilities.

Fluor was also responsible for EPC of associated modifications to Shell's adjacent Scotford Refinery in a joint venture arrangement. The largest scope of the Athabasca Oil Sands Downstream Project (AOSP) is the downstream portion, or the Scotford Upgrader. The ASOP is the world’s largest heavy oil upgrader project with a $1.1 billion award to Fluor. The Upgrader, based on hydroconversion technology, processes bitumen from the Muskeg River Mine into high-quality, low-sulfur, light synthetic crude oil

I think semantics are getting in the way.
Down wind sounds like the wind is blowing pollution "downwind", like air born from the tar sands


Down stream is down the pipeline, 400 km south.
Then refined, and whatever else they do with it.

The Scotford plant is just a few km north east of Fort Saskatchewan.
Between the refinery and the fertilizer plants, yeah, pollution plus......

The fact remains that the Tar Sands product is overly blessed with noxious stuff that sweet light crude doesnt have a lot of....
The point being if they pipe it to texas refineries the pullution possibilities rise for the neighbourhood there........
Already signs of contamination are showing in Alberta......
This stuff is hardly worth the effort to produce it, its so energy needy, and toxic....the fuel value doesnt add up.....
just sayin......s

snowspirit
I think semantics are getting in the way.
Down wind sounds like the wind is blowing pollution "downwind", like air born from the tar sands


Down stream is down the pipeline, 400 km south.
Then refined, and whatever else they do with it.

The Scotford plant is just a few km north east of Fort Saskatchewan.
Between the refinery and the fertilizer plants, yeah, pollution plus......

There are no semantics here, you are confused. It is called the "Downstream" project for a reason!

Executive Summary
Shell Canada Ltd. awarded Fluor the engineering, procurement, and construction of the Primary Process Units (PPU) of its Athabasca Oil Sands Downstream Project, located in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta.

This facility has a design capacity of 155,000 barrels of dry bitumen per calendar day. It also includes a crude/vacuum unit and an 80,000 BPSD, two-train LC-Finer hydrocracker. In addition to the primary process units, the project includes hydrogen production, a sulfur block, and offsites and utilities.

Fluor was also responsible for EPC of associated modifications to Shell's adjacent Scotford Refinery in a joint venture arrangement. The largest scope of the Athabasca Oil Sands Downstream Project (AOSP) is the downstream portion, or the Scotford Upgrader. The ASOP is the world’s largest heavy oil upgrader project with a $1.1 billion award to Fluor. The Upgrader, based on hydroconversion technology, processes bitumen from the Muskeg River Mine into high-quality, low-sulfur, light synthetic crude oil.

Client's Challenge
The project includes new upgrades, housed within the Primary Process Units (PPU), a hydrogen manufacturing plant, a sulfur complex, utilities and offsite facilities, and modifications to the existing refinery. It will convert bitumen, a thick crude oil mixed with sand, transported via pipeline from the Muskeg River Mine in Fort McMurray, Alberta, into synthetic light crude oil that is high quality and low sulfur.

Fluor played a key role in the construction management of the entire project. Fluor’s early project planning of design, procurement and field operations helped the Client achieve its aggressive goals. The construction teams were involved at the beginning of the project and were able to realize significant schedule improvements.

On March 25th, 2003, the Athabasca Oil Sands –Scotford Upgrader was producing synthetic crude oil.

You see? It is a processing plant for bitumen pumped from the oil sands project up north. They are not saying the pollution made it's way down there by itself, they are saying it was pumped there through a pipeline to be processed.

Shell Canada - Athabasca Oil Sands Dry Bitumen Plant Client: Shell Canada Limited Location: Scotford, Alberta, Canada

You see? It is a processing plant for bitumen pumped from the oil sands project up north. They are not saying the pollution made it's way down there by itself, they are saying it was pumped there through a pipeline to be processed.

Yep. Downstream, not down "wind"
Piped down pollution as opposed to airborne wind pollution particulates.

Unfortunately, because of NAFTA's proportionality clause, keystone also has to happen, unless the US turns it down.

We're stuck exporting gas and oil, even though the US does not need it.

Both conventional oil and gas have already peaked in Canada. Canada imports about 49% of its oil needs, with almost half its imports coming from very insecure sources ' OPEC countries. Unlike all other IEA member countries, Canada has no Strategic Petroleum Reserves.

Meanwhile, Canada is obligated by NAFTA's proportionality clause to make two-thirds of its domestic oil production and 60% of its current natural gas production available for export to the U.S., even if Canadians experience shortages.

crash-watcher.blogspot.ca...