In the wake of stepped up pressure from investors, Shell has announced that it will dramatically decrease its future tar sands development.  (Citing the high costs of extracting, transporting and processing tar sands crude, the oil giant's C.E.O., Peter Voser, says the company will channel investments elsewhere.  Stepping back from its previous stated goal of producing 700,000 barrels per day from the Althabasca tar sands reserve, Shell will content itself to simply maintain their current 140,000 barrel per day levels.  While other oil companies continue to forge ahead, Shell will re-examine their impact in the region.) The sentences in the parenthesis sound like they were lifted out of an article? IF they were, we need to cite that information. I think this summary would be fine with removing the info starting with "stepping".

Shell's move is being heralded by environmentalists as a step in the right direction.  A decrease in oil sands production will slow destruction of the arboreal forest and provide much needed relief to indigenous and refinery communities.  The process of refining tar sands crude produces three times more greenhouse gas than conventional refining, meaning that refinery communities are being drastically affected.  Shell is the first oil company to admit that the costs of oil sands may just be too great.

Now is the time to continue to apply pressure to stop tar sands development.  With oil companies beginning to question the wisdom of tar sands investment, we can send a clear message that the key to a sustainable future is to pursue clean energy.  Sign our petition and help send a message to industry and politicians alike that oil sands development is not acceptable.


For more information:

Financial Times (1/26/10) Full transcript of Shell C.E.O.'s interview
Globe Investor (1/26/10) High oil sands costs are driving Shell elsewhere