For the uninitiated, “ethical oil” is a the notion that the tar sands are actually the moral source of oil given Canada’s human-rights record compared to that of other producer nations. The term appears to be the brain child of Ezra Levant, the prominent conservative who wrote the book Ethical Oil: The Case for Canada’s Oil Sands.
It’s an interesting criticism, and it’s true that we are fortunate enough to live in a region where oil production and violent crackdowns aren’t associated with each other. That said, this positive trait does not negate the question of whether things could be improved from an environmental perspective. It’s a very resource hungry process.
Enter an organization that bears the name Ethical Oil. Right now, they’re levying a boycott against a banana producer for opting to fuel their transportation by what they see as more responsible means.
Which means that despite their name, this organization really isn’t about ethics. If it were, they would acknowledge the environmental concerns of this company, even if they disagreed with the specifics. Instead, it’s a front for those blindly advocating development, and the only ethics to be found are in its name.
Comments
4 responses to ““Ethical Oil” Group Not Really Ethical”
As a society, I think it’s important to first acknowledge that there are no “ethics” in the oil industry – Canadian or otherwise.
As an example two, semi-related, cases quickly come to mind:
– 1,600 ducks died in 2008 after landing in toxic tailing ponds. Rather then admit their guilt, the company responsible for the deaths, Syncrude, decided to take their chances in court and went to trial. Thankfully they lost. See: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2010/06/25/edmonton-syncrude-duck-trial-verdict-expected.html for more details.
– Patrick Moore, “Environmentalist and Greenpeace Co-Founder”, has become the poster boy for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. According to Mr. Moore, the “disturbances” created by tailing ponds, i.e., the 1,600 duck deaths mentioned above, are temporary. See: http://www.capp.ca/PublishingImages/2Moore_English.jpg.
Such behaviours are, in my opinion, the antithesis of any remote quality of ethics.
As for Ezra Levant and his cronies, I wish them nothing but a lifetime of having to deal with self-aggrandizing pieces of shit like themselves. If there was ever a need for karma…
I’ll tell you one thing though, I wouldn’t waste any of my personal allotment of oil – ethical or otherwise – to take them to a hospital if they were suddenly viciously attacked by a rogue unit of assassin ducks with laser beams attached to their wings.
They’re no different from any other single-issue advocacy group. Their purpose is to advance their cause above all others, which I don’t see as unethical, unless there are deliberate attempts to mislead people with regards to their stated goals.
Ethical Oil’s mission statement reads: “EthicalOil.org encourages people, businesses and governments to choose Ethical Oil from Canada, its oil sands and other liberal democracies.” Calling for a boycott of a company that in turn is boycotting oilsands oil is, to me, in line with that. Obviously, presenting oilsands oil as the answer to all the world’s problems is hyperbolic and possibly misleading in terms of the nature of the oil itself, but not at all misleading in terms of their goal. While the oil may or may not be ethical (depending on one’s own values), the group is just doing what it says it does.
The same goes for the group on the flipside, ForestEthics, which persuaded Chiquita to boycott the oilsands in the first place. Their use of the word ‘ethics’ in their name can also be questioned, as their mission statement reads: “Our mission is to protect Endangered Forests, wildlife, and human well-being.” Asking Chiquita to fuel their trucks with oil that may come from Iran, Venezuela, or Saudi Arabia – three countries with dubious records on both human rights and environmental protection – could be seen as out of line with the “human well-being” part of their statement. But I don’t see the group as unethical either.
The term ‘ethical oil’ is somewhat ironic, but given that it came from the mind of Ezra Levant – Canada’s answer to Rush Limbaugh – one can’t be surprised.
I posted an awesome response yesterday, but apparently, your site hates freedom, and I’m too lazy to retype it.
It was caught in the spam filter, so I didn’t get the usual email saying a new comment had come in. I just rescued it.