This afternoon I was strolling Whyte ave in Edmonton with my hubby. As I walk pass Lush cosmetics I see this poster in their window. To say I was wild was perhaps an understatement. I sent the pic to my friend Jon who kindly posted it on twitter for me.
Their website shows a very (one sided) flashy video about the "most destructive project on earth"
I also posted the picture on my facebook and got some really great feedback from people who work and reside in Wood Buffalo and others who don't live anywhere near there but support Alberta's Oilsands.
Before I share some of their feedback I want to first say that I value our environment and think we need to each do our part to preserve it for future generations. Secondly I want to say that Alberta's economy depends on this oil. Without the revenue from this resource we could expect to have a provincial sales tax of roughly 16% plus the 5% GST.
It irates me that a soap company that claims their products are all natural are now on a "soapbox" preaching to the world with misinformation about the "tar sands" .
Rob from Fort McMurray said " People are so misinformed. The Dirty Tarsands account for less than 1% of the worlds carbon emissions, where is this info in the video? Coal is the dirtiest energy source in the world, and the US is the biggest coal user and supplier! We don't have an alternative energy source! There are initiatives to clean up the environment, but perspective would be nice!! Level headed conversation, accurate information and logical solutions! When did all reason go out the window?
Mark from Edmonton writes " Another case of the uneducated trying to educate the uneducated. Yes, tearing down trees, digging holes and carbon emissions are bad, but hundreds of thousands of people out of work (remember most of downtown Calgary is employed because of oilsands and most of Nisku and Fort Saskatchewan not to mention the energy traders in places like New York and Toronto) is bad, and the financial collapse of most of Canada would ensue. And let's not single out the oilsands. The coal mines / power plants around Wabamun pollute more than the oilsands as does the PRB (power river basin) in Wyoming. If it wasn't for mining and energy generation in general all those environmentalists wouldn't have Mac computers to produce videos, iPhones to tweet on or Prius's to drive. If it's not mined, it's grown.
and finally.. Leanne from Red Deer said " Have they heard of BP??"
I believe strongly in Alberta's oilsands. I urge you all to approach this subject for discussion based on factual information considering both the environment and the number of Canadians that benefit from it. Really, it's all about balance.
I did a little search for fun. Lush posts the ingredients they use on their website. The chemicals are either derived from the oil/gas/mining industries, or from ingredients imported from tropical countries. What do they use to transport the raw ingredients and the finished products... donkeys?
ReplyDelete"We don't have an alternative energy source!"
ReplyDeleteWOW that is some serious miss information. Alberta has enough wind power projects in the process of development to meet all our energy needs and then some.
That is just one example of many false, or exaggerated claims in this post.
Im not defending Lush's campaigns but rather calling out your double speak. Several times you call for a level headed discussion with accurate information, but you provide no sources for your claims which are grossly inaccurate.
In my opinion the degree of misinformation, and lack of journalistic integrity you exhibit here is probably the reason why Lush and other groups feel the need to try and educate.
Hi Beth,
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting your thoughts. I feel that Lush's anti-oilsands campaign is more about boosting retail sales after a prolonged slump than it is supporting RAN. Kudos to them for taking a stand for something they believe in... however I question the authenticity of their disdain for the oilsands.
A similar campaign was launched by Bed, Bath & Beyond with Wholefoods a few months ago. Consumer pressure encouraged Wholefoods to retract and suggest that their message was taken out of context.
Looking at the campaign launched by Lush via their web site, it appears their sole sources of information included Greenpeace, The Pembina Insitute and Andrew Nikiforuk... all are very well known antagonists of Big Oil in general, as well as the oilsands specifically.
I would like to invite anyone at Lush (their publicist perhaps) to discuss how they arrived at their strategy? Did they conduct full life cycle analysis on their products and ingredients and identify that none use energy sources from hydrocarbons to procure or distribute? That is what is required to launch a full ban on energy derived from oilsands operation.
From my understanding, it is virtually impossible to separate bitumen rich energy vs. other unconventional sources or conventional for that matter.
Good effort Lush, but I feel that working to improve performance of operations and managing within a 3BL approach is time and 'energy' (sorry, I couldn't resist) better spent.
Well, as customers come in to buy the lush product perhaps they should question the customer " Where are you employed?" and when they answer I work in the oilfield, the company should kindly ask them to leave. Funny they wont support the oildsands but will glady take their dirty oil money when they purchase Lush products that keep them in business. So, sick of companies/ people wanting to have their cake and eat it too!!!
ReplyDeleteand I get to cover the Lush "rally" at Bower Place Mall at noon today on this very issue. (Christine)
ReplyDelete"Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"We don't have an alternative energy source!"
WOW that is some serious miss information. Alberta has enough wind power projects in the process of development to meet all our energy needs and then some.
That is just one example of many false, or exaggerated claims in this post. ..."
Well "anonymous"... - there would not be a single wind farm in existence without heavy govt subsidies - read - the rest of us are coughing up our $$ through taxes.
also - the up front costs and constant maintenance required, back up power supply (coal or NG) since the wind only blows intermittently -
the entire wind farm industry is one huge subsidized experiment
Euro countries that have increased their wind farms to where they are producing 20% of their energy needs - have actually had to build more coal fired geration stations to be a back-up supply of electricity -
Maybe someone else is misinformed - and has already drank the koolaid...
for the near future - hyrdocarbon energy will still be the standard - cleaner usage and efficiencies are what will be the leading source of environmental improvements...
build our cities so we live near where we work - or have more companies set up home offices - work via computer - even shared offices - come in one or two days a week - the rest of the time - tele-commute - save 60% expenses right there!!!
as long as we keep doing the same thing - we will get the same results...
Oh yeah - if you are ticked off about LUSH - check out the new FB group - and join
LUSH (cosmetics) can KISS MY TUSH
thanks
boynorth
A copy of my email to Lush
ReplyDeleteWhat a sleazy, hypocritical PR, advertising garbage campaign with your "Wild Rose Country Bath Bomb" and your insane oil sands demonstration! I guess you have learnt from the sleaziest biggest hypocritical eco-moonie groups like Greenpeace. They are no where to be seen on the gulf spill as are you losers, I understand Greenpeace doing nothing as BP gave them a $10 million donation so like other eco-moonie business they got bought off. If you were serious about the oils sands lie you want to prostitute to promote your overpriced, god awful smelling products you would show some class and close all of your store in Alberta, along with all body shop stores, but you are as sleazy as Greenpeace, you will still take money from people that make their money in Alberta from the oil sands. After you close all of your Alberta stores you then need to pre-qualify people who come into your stores to make sure they have NOT made 1 dime from oil sands related business! There are people all over the world that make their living off oil sands related business so if you are serious and this isn't just a sleazy advertising campaign you need to do that, close your Alberta stores and pre-qualify your customers.
I also ask you what about the “tar” sands in Venezuela ?? WTF are they 100% environmentally friendly? as I never hear anything about them from you self serving … well you know.
Another thing I find really offensive about this Lush PR blitz of lies is them making a soap after our provincial flower to promote during this garbage, how sleazy and disgusting can you be?
http://www.financialpost.com/Bath+bombs+sands/3129693/story.html
I suspect this is mostly just a marketing strategy for Lush and WILL probably entice consumers to buy their product. However, in their strategy they should have considered where they were puting there advertisements. ALBERTA in general would be a poor choice.
ReplyDeleteHaha it's not Tar Sands it's oil or bitumen sands. Stupid Cosmetic company.
ReplyDeleteAlso Wind Power also creates problems, it messes with birds and bats a ton
No one in industry denies there are environmental impacts with oil sands production. Nor does anyone in industry deny that we are taking huge steps in improving our environmental performance. The industry has been making continual improvements since the early 90s, investing heavily in technology and innovation and becoming cleaner and more efficient.
ReplyDeletecentralABBeth, you are right on in acknowledging a balance: The world's need for energy, respecting the environment, and understanding the economics. "Stop" is not the answer.
To quote our news release ( http://bit.ly/bBx9fH ) “Unfortunately, activities like this protest blur the lines between fact and fiction and add nothing to the serious dialogue occurring among reasonable people seeking solutions to our energy challenges.”
Base the discussion on balance and on facts please, not on rhetoric and misinformation.
(...and call them oilsands or call them tarsands... both are industry terms www.capp.ca/tarsands)
It’s great to see a vigorous debate on this subject, lots of points of view expressed.
ReplyDeleteBut there is one comment in particular here that deserves some exploration, if we may.
Anonymous at 8:37 said: “Alberta has enough wind power projects in the process of development to meet all our energy needs and then some.”
Wind generation is a fantastic, green addition to the grid, but there is certainly not enough under development to meet all current demand. Nor is there likely to be enough anytime soon, without greatly improved technology, much, much less consumption, and a whole lot of acceptance regarding footprint.
If Alberta wanted to replace, for example, just the Sundance coal-fired electricity operation with wind generation, it would require roughly 10,000 wind turbines in a row from the Montana border to north of Grande Prairie. That’s just Sundance - there are four other major coal generation operations and many more on gas.
I would be glad to break down the numbers if Anonymous @8:37 or anyone else would like.
- David Sands, Government of Alberta
Very cool to have Tony from CAPP (@OilGasCanada) and David Sands (@DSAndsAB)from the Govt' of AB weighing in on this blog.
ReplyDeleteI was having a twitter discussion with other oil and gas communicators about Lush's PR camapaign and marketing choices. All feel that their is significant misinformation used in their campaign (some less politely stated than others).
As Government of Alberta (David Sands) explained, there simply is just not enough energy available from renewable sources to meet demand requirements.
Former Shell CEO, Jeroen van der Veer, estimated that 85-90% of energy requirements are met by sources from fossil fuels. He also explained that by 2050, energy from fossil fuels will drop to about 60% but total energy demand will triple by 2050. If you do the math... energy from fossil fuels will need to double to meet this demand.
Oil and gas still has a large role to play in meeting our energy needs. I suggest companies like Lush focus their attention at improving the environmental performance of developing ALL of our resources instead of implementing brash campaigns that make little sense for 3BL approaches (people, planet, profit).