More than 100 people were arrested in front of Canada's House of Commons yesterday protesting the country's development of its oil sands region.

The protesters crossed official security fences established by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and were fined after engaging in sit-ins. Several environmental groups, including Greenpeace Canada and the Indigenous Environmental Network, organized the rally, which was called one of the largest acts of civil disobedience in Canadian history on the issue of climate change.

"Prime Minister [Stephen] Harper promised to speak for all Canadians," said Mike Hudema, a climate and energy campaigner with Greenpeace Canada who engaged in the protests. "Instead, he became the mouthpiece of the tar sands industry."

Like their U.S. counterparts, Canadian environmentalists said they are worried about the impact of oil sands development on climate change, as well as its potential to cause oil spills and pollutants in Canadian waterways. Canadian oil, or bitumen, in deep sand formations in Alberta releases more carbon dioxide emissions in the production process than does traditional oil drilling.

Some members of the country's Green Party and Harper's main political opposition -- the New Democratic Party -- attended the protest in support, said Hudema. There likely will be additional acts of civil disobedience in Canada, he said.

The Canadian protests follow on the heels of similar arrests in the United States at the White House last month (ClimateWire, Aug. 22).

Harper's government did not respond to a request for comment, but the prime minister said in an interview with CNBC over the weekend that "we are the only country in the world that is a growing supplier of energy, that is a secure and democratic country and whose energy sector is based on market principles rather than strategic objectives."

Other supporters of the oil sands say that development is critical for weaning the United States off of Middle Eastern oil and creating jobs. The effect of oil sands development on climate change is minuscule, they say, considering that Canada produces a fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions.

"The [United States] must make a decision -- import conflict-free crude from Canada or import it from repressive regimes like the Middle East or Libya," TransCanada spokesman Terry Cunha told ClimateWire in August.

U.S. hearings ongoing

The Canadian rally comes at a critical time for the industry, as the State Department weighs whether to approve Keystone XL, a $7 billion pipeline that would roughly double the amount of Canadian crude coming into the United States via a 1,700-mile route. With a decision expected by the end of the year on the TransCanada project, stretching from Canada to Texas, emotions are running high on all sides.

Last week, Canadian broadcaster CTV declined to run a pro-oil sands commercial after the Saudi government threatened legal action via a "cease and desist" letter.

The spot, produced by the Ethical Oil Institute, discussed the status of women in Saudi society and said "why are we paying their bills and funding their oppression?" before showing pictures of the Canadian oil sands as a "better way."

The protest from the Saudis prompted Alykhan Velshi of the Ethical Oil Institute to say in a statement that "this is a brazen act of domestic political interference by a foreign dictatorship."

Meanwhile, the State Department is commencing hearings this week in six states that would host the pipeline -- Nebraska, Montana, Kansas, Texas, South Dakota and Oklahoma -- to hear from the public about the proposal. The State Department must ultimately approve Keystone XL because it would cross international borders.

At Kansas hearings yesterday, Gov. Sam Brownback (R) said oil sands were "a good thing for America, a good thing for Kansas," while environmentalists slammed Keystone XL as a project that would tie the United States to a "dirty" form of oil for a long time to come, the Associated Press reported.

Much of the focus of environmentalists has been on Nebraska, where the governor and the members of the state's delegation say they are worried about the potential about oil leaks from the pipeline into the Ogallala Aquifer, a drinking-water reservoir.

Yesterday, TransCanada pushed back by announcing it was running a series of new advertisements featuring University of Nebraska, Lincoln, professor emeritus and hydrogeologist Jim Goeke, a long-term researcher of the aquifer.

"There is a misconception that if the aquifer is contaminated, the entire water supply of Nebraska is going to be in danger -- that is absolutely false," said Goeke.