Tar sands exploitation is a really bad idea

Environmentally and financially, getting oil from the tar sands in Canada is not a good idea, and hasn't been since its inception 30 years ago. The largest tar sands deposits are in Venezuela and Alberta, but there are also a few in the United States. Canada is already struggling with the effects of tar sands mining.
The first step in mining the tar sands is to get to the sand. That means digging a pit approximately 150 feet deep. After that, the sand must be trucked back to processing plants, the bitumen melted out, and impurities such as sulfur skimmed off before it can be shipped.
Canada's Environmental Defense calls this the most destructive project on earth, and with good reason. Huge swathes of boreal forest have been cut down to make room for processing plants and tailings ponds. The ponds for this project are objectionable for the same reason most other mine tailing ponds are--they contain incredibly toxic materials. PAHs, naphthenic acids, and mercury levels are all on the increase. The Ministry of the Environment in Canada says a danger posed by the tailings ponds is the possibility of these poisons leaking into the groundwater. This is certainly happening, but the worst effects of the poisons are already being seen downstream. The tailings ponds are located on the banks of the Athabasca River, separated from the main channel only by earthen walls. Experts say that if these walls fail, we will forget all about the Exxon Valdez disaster. Meanwhile, fish are deformed, and the incidence of rare forms of cancer have tripled in the nearby tribes. The doctor who discovered this and tried to bring it to the attention of the government was quickly shut down.
A lot of mine tailings are piped into wetlands, killing any amphibian life and frequently killing birds that try to land there. Ornithologists are worried about the long-term effects on migratory bird populations. Processing the oil requires a huge amount of water, more than the city of Calgary could use in two years. Most of this fresh water ends up in tailings ponds.
The fallout from the mining affects provinces as far away as British Columbia and the northern United States. Indiana has has problems with air pollution and acid rain from the tar sands operation. British Columbia has both those problems plus the fact that oil tankers will bring the oil up along the coastline. Of course, they then risk oil spills.
Syncor, the oil company most heavily invested in the Canadian tar sands, promises to mitigate the damage, but this is nearly impossible. Right now the foremost idea is to bury the tailings ponds under fresh water and hope they will be filtered out. You don't have to be a scientist to see that this poses a huge risk to everyone who drinks that water. The poisons can easily seep into groundwater or the wetlands. Besides, the ecological damage will already be done. The companies could easily mitigate the damage as they go along, but it costs twice what they are spending now to do that. Much cheaper to just let the volatile organic compounds (such as benzene, a known carcinogen) to just dissipate in the atmosphere.
The question is, is it worth it? If you are head of a corporation that mines the sands, probably. If you are the person actually doing the mining and processing, I doubt it. It is supremely unfair to the tribal entities. They have had to put up with Manifest Destiny and its ramifications for years now, and now they are being poisoned by an operation from which they will likely not benefit. It is a major health hazard to people across Canada and parts of the United States who breathe in the toxins released in the purification process. Now, back to that head of the corporation--I assume he is breathing the same air and drinking the same water. His body functions just like those of other humans. History has taught us that it is rare for environmental damage to be a good motivator unless it affects us. Even with pots of money, I doubt that dying of a preventable cancer will make it worth it to the CEO.