One of the strongest cases made to support the expansion of the Alberta oil sands is the proposition that our oil is ethical when compared to reserves from the Middle East. From a geopolitical perspective, the purchase of oil from Canadian markets over Arab markets makes sense, but such a conclusion is simplistic at best.

According to Merriam Webster, ‘ethical’ is defined as that which “conforms to accepted standards of conduct.” This definition inherently recognizes that ethics are not static – they are created, endorsed, and re-shaped over time by society. What may be ethical or accepted behaviour in one place may not be shared by another. These standards of conduct shift due to accepted understandings of what is right or wrong, based on our knowledge at a particular time.

For example, it was not long ago that slavery was accepted as ethical behaviour. The notion that human beings could be bought or sold and had no rights of their own to freedom was simply taken as a norm. It was not until this notion was challenged and acceptability changed that slavery was abolished and outlawed. Individuals heard arguments for and against slavery, and ultimately decided that it was in fact unethical.

In the case of oil, modern society has gone through its own process of debate and, I dare say, enlightenment. During the industrial revolution, the use of fossil fuels to power our machines was not questioned. The immediate effects of pollution were dealt with by the rich, and later the middle class, by leaving the inner city for healthier, suburban spaces. Technology was also created to help reduce and mitigate this pollution.

The lesser known, more latent effects of that fossiel fuel usage is, of course, climate change. While on the radar for nearly three decades by scientists, a generally global consensus that, one, it is occurring, and two, it is man-made, has only emerged in roughly the past five years.

Five years ago, the source of your oil was of ethical concern. A country like Canada or Norway, with better records on human rights, would be a more ethical purchase than oil from Russia, Latin America, or the Middle East. But based on our new global consensus on the negative effects of fossil fuel usage, the purchase of any oil, no matter where it comes from, is no longer ethical.

When we are aware of the harmful and long lasting, perhaps irreversible, effects of climate change on people around the world, any corporation, person, or country that continues to purchase and burn oil is acting unethically.

Now there are those who will argue that anyone who currently relies on oil, or fossil fuels, for any part of their lifestyle, are therefore acting unethically. Often this argument is thrown at environmentalists, deeming them to be hypocritical for taking a flight or driving a car. Of course, under the new paradigm this is indeed unethical, but the burden placed on the individual is far too great, when said person has such a limited control on their options for survival. We would not accuse a middle-class individual for choosing to be fat if their neighbourhood is surrounded by fast-food restaurants and grocery stores filled with processed foods. Their choices are constricted by the larger societal processes, leaving much of the responsibility to corporations and governments.

When renewable and clean energy sources are available as freely and priced at the same rate as fossil fuels, and individuals have a legitimate option available, if they continue to purchase the non-renewables, they ought to be deemed as acting unethically. If they switch to the clean energy option, they are choosing to adopt ethical behaviour.

With this in mind, when a corporation – Enbridge – and a government – Alberta and Canada – actively seek to expand the oil sands for export to energy hungry nations, they are choosing to be irresponsible global citizens and are acting against the best interests of society. The ethical option would be to take our existing wealth to invest in clean energy sources, a move that would drive down their costs and put them on a level playing field with fossil fuels.

We are living in a new era where we deeply recognize and understand the negative impacts of fossil fuels. Corporations and governments that refuse to shift their behaviour in this new environment fail to grasp that our ethics have evolved, our norms have changed, and that such choices are no longer acceptable.