Thursday - July 31, 2008
Another Inconvenient Fact
You’ll certainly hear this story a few hundred billion times* in the next couple of days:
However, what might be most interesting about Exxon’s 2008 2Q earnings report was its effective tax rate of 49%, up from a rate of 44% in the 2Q of 2007.
That’s right: ExxonMobil paid taxes of almost 50% on its $11.7 billion earnings.
I bet that took a big bite out of the money available for dividends to the tens of millions of stockholders! Go read the rest at The New Editor.
* I’m wondering, since “billions and billions” is a quantity known as a Sagan, should a “hundred billion” be called a Mugabe?
Posted by Drew458
on 07/31/2008 at 04:10 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • Taxes •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - July 30, 2008
Moonbat Pelosi, Plantetary Savior
The Democrat leadership once again shows their priorities: you can go screw; caribou, sea lions, and lobsters are more important.
Congressional Republicans are stepping up attacks on Democrats who are blocking votes on oil drilling legislation, homing in on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who was quoted saying that she wants “to save the planet.”
Pelosi, in an interview published Tuesday in Politico.com, defended her efforts to stall spending bills, saying as speaker she decides which bills will make it to the House floor.
“I’m trying to save the planet. ... I will not have this debate trivialized by their excuse for their failed policy,” Pelosi said. “When you win the election, you win the majority, and what is the power of the speaker? To set the agenda, the power of recognition, and I am not giving the gavel away to anyone.”
Nancy is in charge, thank you. She has the power! But that also means she has the responsibility ... and this bunch hasn’t accomplished a damn thing in 2 solid years. And since Nancy is in charge and setting the agenda and deciding what gets recognized, therefore she is completely to blame. It’s a good thing we don’t have Sharia Law, because the right response is that of the Red Queen.
Ahead of a Republican press conference Tuesday focusing on stalled energy priorities, House Minority Leader John Boehner responded ...
“She’s got time to go out and promote her new book tour and her new book, but she doesn’t have time to schedule a vote on the floor of the House and let the American people have their will expressed?”
Boehner blamed Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama for preventing relief.
“For 25 years, Democrats have blocked more American-made oil and gas. That’s why we’re in the predicament we’re in,” said Boehner, R-Ohio. Voters want Congress “to vote on more American made oil and gas. We want to do that. She, Harry Reid, Barack Obama are standing in the way.”
House and Senate Democrats are using their control of Congress to avoid voting on opening up the Outer Continental Shelf and the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve to oil exploration, which they say is unnecessary because oil companies already have leases to millions of acres of federal land.
While this is slightly “truthy”, just because the oil companies have leases doesn’t actually mean they are permitted to put a drill bit into the ground. Nor does the existence of a lease mean that oil or gas has been located. On the other hand, we know where lots of oil and gas are, right offshore. Just ask the Chinese, who are busy drilling for it right off the coast of Florida.
“American families and businesses are struggling with skyrocketing gas prices at the pump, but President Bush and his Republican allies in Congress continue to stand in the way of real relief,” Pelosi said in the statement. “Instead, the Bush-Cheney policy, an energy plan crafted by two oilmen in the White House, revolves around the best interests of Big Oil – from protecting tax breaks to expanding domestic oil and gas drilling.”
Because, you know, I’m going to go take my shovel and dig an oil well out front here in the parking lot. Let’s blame big business for the gas price crisis, and make special taxes to gouge the oil companies because prices are high, and at the same time prevent them from harvesting new sources of the resources ... and then blame them even more when the lack of supply causes the demand to skyrocket. These people are morons. You can’t revoke the Law of Supply and Demand Nancy. And since every other nation on earth with a bit of coastline is out there drilling already as fast as they can, your “save the planet” is a bunch of crap. All it means is “screw the Americans”. That’s not an attitude I want represented in Washington.
Boehner suggested Obama is among Democrats who he says are influenced by a “radical group of environmentalists” pushing higher gas prices.
“If you listen to Barack Obama during the primaries, you know, he didn’t think $5 gas was all that bad. He was just upset it got there so quickly. And what you’ve got, you’ve got a bunch of radical environmentalists who think that we ought to have higher gasoline prices so Americans will drive less,” Boehner said.
Americans are already driving less. But there is a lower limit. Public transportation just isn’t a complete solution for the rural and suburban areas. Carpooling really only works for shift workers who all live in the same neighborhood. And while Detroit is turning to smaller more efficient vehicles again, an awful lot of people can’t afford to go out and buy a new one right now. So most of us have already done about as much as we can; the lower limit has nearly been reached.
With four legislative weeks left before the November elections, after which Congress is likely to punt big issues until the next administration takes office, little time is left to find a means to reduce oil costs, which is blamed for driving up inflation and slowing down the economy.
“They’re trying to run out the clock,” Boehner said.
No kidding. I’ve got a better idea: let’s run them out of office. Both parties, but especially the Dems.
PS - note how Nancy makes a fist in the above picture. Isn’t that an obscene gesture in Latin America?
Posted by Drew458
on 07/30/2008 at 10:55 AM
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Environment • Inflation and High Prices • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • Politics •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - July 24, 2008
Oil!!
The area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil, 1,670 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas, and 44 billion barrels of technically recoverable natural gas liquids in 25 geologically defined areas thought to have potential for petroleum. The U.S. Geological Survey assessment released today is the first publicly available petroleum resource estimate of the entire area north of the Arctic Circle.
These resources account for about 22 percent of the undiscovered, technically recoverable resources in the world. The Arctic accounts for about 13 percent of the undiscovered oil, 30 percent of the undiscovered natural gas, and 20 percent of the undiscovered natural gas liquids in the world. About 84 percent of the estimated resources are expected to occur offshore.
“Before we can make decisions about our future use of oil and gas and related decisions about protecting endangered species, native communities and the health of our planet, we need to know what’s out there,” said USGS Director Mark Myers. “With this assessment, we’re providing the same information to everyone in the world so that the global community can make those difficult decisions.”
Of the estimated totals, more than half of the undiscovered oil resources are estimated to occur in just three geologic provinces - Arctic Alaska, the Amerasia Basin, and the East Greenland Rift Basins. On an oil-equivalency basis, undiscovered natural gas is estimated to be three times more abundant than oil in the Arctic. More than 70 percent of the undiscovered natural gas is estimated to occur in three provinces - the West Siberian Basin, the East Barents Basins, and Arctic Alaska.
The USGS Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal is part of a project to assess the global petroleum basins using standardized and consistent methodology and protocol. This approach allows for an area’s petroleum potential to be compared to other petroleum basins in the world. The USGS worked with a number of international organizations to conduct the geologic analyses of these Arctic provinces.
Technically recoverable resources are those producible using currently available technology and industry practices. For the purposes of this study, the USGS did not consider economic factors such as the effects of permanent sea ice or oceanic water depth in its assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources.
Exploration for petroleum has already resulted in the discovery of more than 400 oil and gas fields north of the Arctic Circle. These fields account for approximately 40 billion barrels of oil, more than 1,100 trillion cubic feet of gas, and 8.5 billion barrels of natural gas liquids. Nevertheless, the Arctic, especially offshore, is essentially unexplored with respect to petroleum.
Ok, don’t ask me how they figure these fields are 22% of the undiscovered resources. I mean, how do they know, since the rest hasn’t been discovered yet? But this is a huge find, and I expect the price of oil to fall based on the news, even though it might take years to develop the technology. Submarine drilling rigs and flexible, heated pipelines submerged below the seabeds maybe.
Now the race will be on to claim territory and set up drilling. Let’s hope for some Global Warming too, which will make their jobs a whole lot easier. Gosh, while this assessment is only 10% of the size of the latest one from the oil shale beds, because it’s in international waters there won’t be any Senator Salazar to get in the way. No let’s hope the neither Bush nor Black Jesus signs that damn UN Law of the Sea treaty either, which would screw us big time with this.
Posted by Drew458
on 07/24/2008 at 10:31 AM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - July 15, 2008
Using Jimmy as an excuse
Today is the anniversary of Jimmy Carter’s Malaise Speech. In recognition thereof, I couldn’t drag myself to the keyboard today.
I hope I can do better tomorrow. Thank you, and good night.
Oh hell ... I can do better right now. The only blogging idea I came up with today was this one, but as usual, I have to go an do a little research ... which means I learn something, and then have to stop and think. I was just going to mock the crap out of ole man Dhimmi, and the flaccid downer of an address he gave on this day back then. But then I actually read it.
Have you ever read that thing? 1979 remember? Nearly 30 years ago, right? Written by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, right? ...
As you know, there is a growing disrespect for government and for churches and for schools, the news media, and other institutions. This is not a message of happiness or reassurance, but it is the truth and it is a warning.
...
We believed that our Nation’s re sources were limitless until 1973, when we had to face a growing dependence on foreign oil.
...
Looking for a way out of this crisis, our people have turned to the Federal Government and found it isolated from the mainstream of our Nation’s life. Washington, D.C., has become an island. The gap between our citizens and our Government has never been so wide. The people are looking for honest answers, not easy answers; clear leadership, not false claims and evasiveness and politics as usual.What you see too often in Washington and elsewhere around the country is a system of government that seems incapable of action. You see a Congress twisted and pulled in every direction by hundreds of well financed and powerful special interests. You see every extreme position defended to the last vote, almost to the last breath by one unyielding group or another. You often see a balanced and a fair approach that demands sacrifice, a little sacrifice from everyone, abandoned like an orphan without support and without friends.
Often you see paralysis and stagnation and drift. You don’t like, and neither do I.
...
we are the generation that will win the war on the energy problem and in that process rebuild the unity and confidence of America.
...
All the traditions of our past, all the lessons of our heritage, all the promises of our future point to another path, the path of common purpose and the restoration of American values. That path leads to true freedom for our Nation and ourselves. We can take the first steps down that path as we begin to solve our energy problem.Energy will be the immediate test of our ability to unite this Nation, and it can also be the standard around which we rally. On the battlefield of energy we can win for our Nation a new confidence, and we can seize control again of our common destiny.
In little more than two decades we’ve gone from a position of energy independence to one in which almost half the oil we use comes from foreign countries, at prices that are going through the roof. Our excessive dependence on OPEC has already taken a tremendous tool on our economy and our people. This is the direct cause of the long lines which have made millions of you spend aggravating hours waiting for gasoline. It’s a cause of the increased inflation and unemployment that we now face. This intolerable dependence on foreign oil threatens our economic independence and the very security of our Nation.
The energy crisis is real. It is worldwide. It is a clear and present danger to our Nation. These are facts and we simply must face them.
What I have to say to you now about energy is simple and vitally important.
Point one: I am tonight setting a clear goal for the energy policy of the United States. Beginning this moment, this Nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977—never. From now on, every new addition to our demand for energy will be met from our own production and our own conservation. The generation-long growth in our dependence on foreign oil will be stopped dead in its tracks right now and then reversed as we move through the 1980’s, for I am tonight setting the further goal of cutting our dependence on foreign oil by one-half by the end of the next decade—a saving of over 4 1/2 million barrels of imported oil per day.
Point two: To ensure that we meet these targets, I will use my Presidential authority to set import quotas. I’m announcing tonight that for 1979 and 1980, I will forbid the entry into this country of one drop of foreign oil more than these goals allow. These quotas will ensure a reduction in imports even below the ambitious levels we set at the recent Tokyo summit.
Point three: To give us energy security, I am asking for the most massive peacetime commitment of funds and resources in our Nation’s history to develop America’s own alternative sources of fuel—from coal, from oil shale, from plant products for gasohol, from unconventional gas, from the Sun.
...
Point four: I’m asking Congress to mandate, to require as a matter of law, that our Nation’s utility companies cut their massive use of oil by 50 percent within the next decade and switch to other fuels, especially coal, our most abundant energy source.Point five: To make absolutely certain that nothing stands in the way of achieving these goals, I will urge Congress to create an energy mobilization board which, like the War Production Board in World War II, will have the responsibility and authority to cut through the redtape, the delays, and the endless roadblocks to completing key energy projects.
We will protect our environment. But when this Nation critically needs a refinery or a pipeline, we will build it.
Point six: I’m proposing a bold conservation program to involve every State, county, and city and every average American in our energy battle. This effort will permit you to build conservation into your homes and your lives at a cost you can afford.
...
So, the solution of our energy crisis can also help us to conquer the crisis of the spirit in our country. It can rekindle our sense of unity, our confidence in the future, and give our Nation and all of us individually a new sense of purpose.You know we can do it. We have the natural resources. We have more oil in our shale alone than several Saudi Arabias. We have more coal than any nation on Earth. We have the world’s highest level of technology. We have the most skilled work force, with innovative genius, and I firmly believe that we have the national will to win this war.
Nice points Jimmah. I guess nobody was listening. Drill more, use less, explore alternate ways, do what needed to be done. (notice that he didn’t actually say a word about drilling or making more nuke plants, but he did say build more refineries if necessary). I may have to go heave after saying this ... but Carter ... was ....right.
Twenty Nine Years Ago ... and nothing has changed. He could give most of that speech again today and it would be just as applicable.
Posted by Drew458
on 07/15/2008 at 09:06 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • Politics •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - July 14, 2008
Over To You Nancy!
Bush backhands the ball squarely onto Pelosi’s side of the net. What now San Fran Cow?
(Al Reuters) President George W. Bush on Monday lifted a White House ban on offshore drilling to try to drive down soaring energy prices, a largely symbolic bid unlikely to have any short-term impact on high gasoline costs.
...
With prices at the pump over $4 a gallon, Bush pushed the Democratic-controlled Congress to expand offshore oil and natural gas drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf and give oil companies access to the Arctic Wildlife National Refuge.
...
“Today, I’ve taken every step within my power to allow offshore exploration,” Bush told reporters. “This means the only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources is action from the U.S. Congress.”
...
“Now the ball is squarely in Congress’ court,” Bush said after signing a memorandum reversing a presidential ban that was instituted by his father, then-President George Bush, almost two decades ago. “The time for action is now.”With an eye to the November election, Bush accused Democrats of having “done nothing” as gas prices have gone up and urged them to pass a law for “responsible offshore exploration” and to give states a say in the decisions.
“Sooner or later, the American public will get so tired of high prices, that they will put pressure on politicians to make changes,” Larry Nichols, chief executive officer of Devon Energy Corp, an independent U.S. producer, told Reuters.
Posted by Drew458
on 07/14/2008 at 04:41 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • Politics •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - July 12, 2008
Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less - sorry, not allowed
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge David Lawson overturned a decision by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service to give Savoy Energy of Traverse City a permit to drill an exploratory well near the AuSable River’s south branch.
Rep. Matthew Gillard, D-Alpena, said Friday he was ecstatic regarding the judge’s ruling to overturn a 2005 decision that allowed oil and gas drilling near the Mason Tract.
“I hope this will be the final word,” Gillard said. “On behalf of my constituents and residents throughout Michigan who care about protecting our most precious natural assets, I have long been concerned about this drilling plan.”
According to the Associated Press, Lawson ruled the agency had acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” by giving Savoy the permit in 2005.
The proposed wellhead would be located in the Huron-Manistee National Forest about three-tenths of a mile from the Mason Tract. Federal assessments had found the drilling would have no significant environmental impact. The Sierra Club and Anglers of the AuSable sued the government to halt the drilling.
In 2005 Savoy had plans to build at least three wells in the Mason Tract if results from exploratory tests turned out to be positive. The lifespan of the wells was estimated to be from 20-25 years.
Savoy Energy obtained a permit from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality in 2003 to construct an 11,000-feet exploratory well in the Huron-Manistee National Forest and then “slant” drill to search for gas deposits under the Mason Tract.
Gillard said it’s irresponsible for people to be drilling in roadless and natural wild lands.
“As a state lawmaker, I believe one of my primary responsibilities is to preserve Michigan’s outdoor gifts - its lakes, forests, rivers and streams - for the pleasure of future generations,” he said.
This drilling would have been a little bit outside the famous Mason Tract area ( please read this short paper to understand what was planned to be built! ) by the Huron National Forest. The Mason Tract surrounds part of the south branch of the Au Sable river, world famous for being one of those fly fishing trout meccas. Although the area is open to fishermen, hunters, hikers, and perhaps off road vehicles, it is a relatively pristine wilderness.
I have no idea if oil or gas has been found in the nearby area, but the well under discussion here would have taken less than 4 acres of land, which is not very much at all. If gas was found, the wellhead would be more than 2 miles away from the river itself.
Leaders of the environmental groups urged the company and the government to look for other places to explore for oil and gas.
“We’ve said from the beginning we didn’t want to stop them from drilling,” said Marvin Roberson, a forest policy specialist with the Sierra Club. “We want them to drill from a place that won’t be harmful to the old-growth forest or the recreational experience.”
Although the Mason Tract is state property, the federal government owns rights to minerals beneath it and leased production rights to Savoy. In 2003, the company filed for a permit to drill into one of its lease holdings.
The plan was to clear about 3.5 acres of forest for a well site on federal land, then drill beneath the Mason Tract at an angle. If enough gas or oil was found, the company intended to install a pipeline and build a production facility about a mile east of the well.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management approved the project shortly after the Forest Service granted the permit. But it has been on hold since Lawson issued an order in December 2005 blocking the company from clearing land to get started.
So this looks to me like a case of NIMBY on the one part, and a case of judicial activism on the other. The state owns the land, but the fed owns the mineral rights underneath. Huh? Odd, but I can accept that part. Fine. So the Savoy company leased the rights from the fed, and the state issued them a permit 5 years ago to drill. Then when the Forest Department gave them the go-ahead to actually clear a bit of land and get to work, this judge steps in and stops them. Because, don’t you just effing know it, there’s this little birdie who might be upset by the noise, and Savoy didn’t spend enough time trying to understand the birdy’s feeeelings.
But the judge ruled the Forest Service didn’t consider how degrading the area could harm tourism, and said the agency did a “woefully inadequate” job of evaluating how the drilling might affect the Kirtland’s warbler, an endangered songbird that nests in the area.
Kirtland’s Warbler has evolved itself into a corner, so to speak. It winters solely in the Bahamas, and nests only in a few counties in central Michigan in habitat that must contain jack pine not less than 10 feet tall or greater than 20 feet tall. I wonder what the taxpayers would say if they knew how many millions of their dollars have been spent over the years to maintain the proper habitat for this finicky little bird?
learn more about Kirtland’s Warbler after the jump. And about the millions of tax dollars that have been spent to save this fussy species.
Posted by Drew458
on 07/12/2008 at 01:16 PM
Filed Under: • Environment • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - July 10, 2008
Our leaders are in carbon-cloud cuckoo land.
leaders are in carbon-cloud cuckoo land. Leaders? What leaders? We don’t got no stinkin’ leaders. oops. wrong movie.
I read this guy in The Telegraph a lot. He writes on this subject quite a bit and naturally takes bricksNbats due to his anti gorebal warming opinions.
And as well all know, only the tree huggers and gorebals have a right to opinions.
By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 10/07/2008For a perfect example of what is meant by “gesture politics” - an empty pledge given solely for effect, which the politician has no hope of honouring - one could not do better than this week’s commitment by the G8 leaders on how they want us to fight climate change.
Sitting on their cloud-wreathed Japanese mountain top, they solemnly agreed that, to halt global warming, their countries would aim by 2050 to halve their emissions of carbon dioxide.
A tiny indication of the fact that they didn’t really have a clue what they were talking about was a slip by Japan’s prime minister, Yasuo Fukuda, when he had to be corrected for announcing that the CO2 cut would be measured from “1990 levels”.
Even when he amended this to “present-day levels”, he was merely spouting empty words into the oriental air.
Three things make this aspiration by the leaders of the world’s “eight richest countries” not just vainglorious grandstanding, but positively dangerous.
The first is that, as well as having no idea how they could achieve such an absurdly ambitious target, they may inflict immeasurable damage on their economies just by trying to do so.
One after another, it is becoming clear that all the costly measures so far proposed to cut carbon emissions are pie-in-the-sky.
The drive for “renewable” sources of energy, such as building thousands of wind turbines, is turning out to be little more than self-deception (the combined output of all the 2,000 wind turbines so far built in Britain is less than that of a single, medium-sized, gas-fired power station).
Even the environmentalists have realised that biofuels are a farce, needing more CO2 to produce than they save. The EU’s much-vaunted “emissions trading scheme”, so far costing us all an estimated £40 billion, has not resulted in any reductions of CO2 emissions whatever.
If the G8’s leaders genuinely wanted to cut carbon emissions by 50 per cent over the next 40 years, this would mean taking steps they haven’t even begun to contemplate. It would require such a drastic cut in our energy use and standard of living that their peoples would have risen up in mass revolt long before the target was reached.
And nothing better shows up the unreality of all this - as President Bush tried to point out in the summit’s only flash of honesty - than the fact that China (not represented at the G8, although it now has the world’s fourth largest economy) is already putting out more CO2 than anyone else.
As it builds two new coal-fired power stations a week, China has no more intention than India of joining the Western economic suicide club.
The second reason why this infatuation with cutting carbon emissions is beginning to look extraordinarily reckless is that the whole scientific theory on which it is based now appears distinctly questionable.
The orthodox global-warming thesis, accepted by pretty well every politician in the Western world, but not by a growing number of scientists, is that, as CO2 levels in the atmosphere continue to rise, so too should global temperatures. Unless we can drastically reduce those CO2 levels, the world is thus threatened with catastrophe.
In the past year or two, however, evidence has been piling up to suggest that there may be a fundamental flaw in this theory. Even though atmospheric CO2 has continued to rise to levels not seen since the distant geological past, temperatures have not been following suit.
After 2000 the global temperature curve flattened out at a level significantly lower than the freak year 1998, and in recent months temperatures have dropped to levels not seen since the early 1980s.
Despite the best efforts of the global-warming lobby to keep the scare going, the northern hemisphere enjoyed its coldest winter for decades, and this summer has shown the curve sinking even lower.
Even the warmists are having to find excuses for the fact that their theory doesn’t exactly seem to be holding up, conceding that the next 10 years may see a period of global cooling, before the “underlying warming trend” returns worse than ever.
Other scientists point out that, rather than look to CO2 for an explanation of global temperatures, a much more convincing link can be seen in the activity of the sun, with current sunspot levels having dramatically fallen to levels associated with historic periods of global cooling recorded in the past.
Yet just when such huge question marks are being raised over the “CO2 equals warming” theory, our politicians have swallowed it whole, as an act of blind faith - using it to justify such massive costs to our economy that our whole way of life seems destined to change significantly for the worse.
The third respect in which all this is becoming seriously dangerous applies specifically to us here in Britain. While Gordon Brown prattles about wind turbines, and plays silly games for the cameras with electric cars, Britain within a few years is facing the near certainty of a massive shortfall in our electricity supplies.
By 2015, thanks to the obsolescence of our nuclear power plants and the forced closure of nine of our major coal and oil-fired power stations under EU anti-pollution rules, we are due to lose 40 per cent of our current generating capacity - and Mr Brown hasn’t the slightest practical idea of how to fill the gap.
Forget the nonsense about a 50 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2050. Our Government has already committed Britain to go even further, by imposing a statutory cut of 60 per cent through its Climate Change Bill.
But long before that, unless those who rule us come down out of cloud cuckoo land very fast, our lights will go out, our computers will shut down, our economy will judder to a halt and we shall face a national catastrophe. We may well be meeting that 60 per cent target sooner than we think - but not for reasons that reflect well on our politicians, of any party.
Posted by Drew458
on 07/10/2008 at 01:11 PM
Filed Under: • Climate-Weather • Environment • International • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - June 30, 2008
Ah, who cares? It’s only those filthy wogs anyway
Isn’t that special? Another half a percent of the world’s population is joining the ranks of the Poor ‘n Starvin
The replacement of traditional fuels with biofuels has dragged more than 30 million people worldwide into poverty, an aid agency report says.
Oxfam says so-called green policies in developed countries are contributing to the world’s soaring food prices, which hit the poor hardest. The group also says biofuels will do nothing to combat climate change. Its report urges the EU to scrap a target of making 10% of all transport run on renewable resources by 2020.
Oxfam estimates the EU’s target could multiply carbon emissions 70-fold by 2020 by changing the use of land. The report’s author, Oxfam’s biofuel policy adviser Rob Bailey, criticised rich countries for using subsidies and tax breaks to encourage the use of food crops for alternative sources of energy like ethanol.
“If the fuel value for a crop exceeds its food value, then it will be used for fuel instead,” he said, “Rich countries… are making climate change worse, not better, they are stealing crops and land away from food production, and they are destroying millions of livelihoods in the process.”
...
One UN adviser went as far as describing biofuels as a “crime against humanity”.
Gosh. The nerve of some people. Like they think palm oil grows on trees?
Posted by Drew458
on 06/30/2008 at 04:52 PM
Filed Under: • Inflation and High Prices • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - June 28, 2008
THE PRICE OF FUEL AND THE FUTURE
I always liked this guy and still have trouble understanding just what went wrong and exactly why he resigned.
My take, he was driven out by the left. Or am I missing something?
Posted by Drew458
on 06/28/2008 at 06:50 AM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - June 24, 2008
Don’t be such a cruel tease!
Yeah, IF we could control the entire speculation market. World-wide. Except that ... we can’t! Doing so is the kind of job the UN was supposed to be put in place to do. Oh God, help me, I’m falling off my chair laughing at the thought of that one!
Near-record oil prices could quickly fall by half if Congress were to rein in speculators, according to testimony Monday from a hedge fund manager and oil company adviser on Capitol Hill.
Michael Masters, of Masters Capital Management, told a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that - with greater regulation - oil prices could drop to $65 or $70 a barrel within about 30 days.
“That’s half of where prices are today, and gas prices would reflect that,” he said.
Roger Diwan, an adviser to oil companies at Washington, D.C.-based PFC Energy, agreed that regulation could lead to a drop in prices. He said it would take no more than 30 days for speculation in the oil market to decrease and gas prices to fall.
The topic of energy speculation is front and center on Capitol Hill this week. A Senate hearing is scheduled for Tuesday and another House panel examination is set for Thursday.
Last Friday, three Democratic House members including Stupak introduced a bill attempting to better regulate the oil markets. To underline his case, Stupak said speculators now control 71% of oil on the market. That means only 29% control the physical oil being traded, down from 61% eight years ago. He blamed loosely regulated trading markets with numerous loopholes for the ease that traders have to buy and sell crude.
“We can eliminate a major avenue that traders use to avoid oversight,” Stupak said Friday. “It’s time for Congress to close the Enron loophole and lower our gas and diesel prices by 50%.”
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com)—Close loopholes on foreign oil trading. Limit hedge funds from pouring money into the market. End oil speculation altogether.
Congress is vowing to take actions that it believes will reverse runaway crude and gasoline prices. Oil rose above $136 a barrel on Monday - more than double what it cost a year ago - and gas hovered around $4.07 a gallon.
Lawmakers have introduced nine different bills on speculation - not to mention many more that tackle other causes of escalating fuel and oil prices. Several of the speculation measures have bipartisan support. No fewer than four separate hearings have been scheduled for this week, including a House hearing held Monday exploring foreign trade regulation.
Go and read them all if you’d like. Some make some sense, at least one is totally unworkable. And all of them require all the other trading nations to play along. Like I said, this is a job for the UN. ( which means that nothing will ever happen )
Posted by Drew458
on 06/24/2008 at 01:40 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Less Than a Day to show Hansen is an idiot
Yesterday it was “Special interests have blocked the transition to our renewable energy future,” from NASA’s Dr. Hansen. Oh noes, Big Oil is slamming the door on us all!!!!111!! Today ...
A contract to build what is being called the nation’s first offshore field of wind turbines was announced Monday between a Delaware utility company and a firm that is to build the generators off the Atlantic coast. Officials from Delmarva Power and Bluewater Wind announced details of the contract at a news conference Monday in Newark, Delaware.
Bluewater spokesman Jim Lanard said the power company will get about 16 percent of its electricity from a field of 150 wind turbines, anchored in the seafloor about a dozen miles off Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.
The contract with Delmarva would use less than half the projected generating capacity the energy park is expected to have when completed. The rest would be sold to other customers.
The project’s cost is estimated at $1.6 billion, according to a project official with Bluewater. The offshore site is expected to be operational within four years, but the timing depends on how quickly regulatory agencies can review and approve the construction project.
Using electricity generated by the wind, “Delmarva Power will be able to light about 50,000 homes a year, every year” for the duration of the 25-year contract, Lanard said, with first power expected by 2012. He said the project may help stabilize consumer energy costs, since the contract locks in the price Delmarva will pay per kilowatt-hour.
Bluewater previously established an offshore “energy park” operating off Denmark.
Each turbine in the Delaware project is to sit on a pole about 250 feet above the waterline, where the ocean is about 75 feet deep. The poles are to extend 90 feet into the seafloor, and the units are to be constructed to withstand hurricane-force winds.
From the shore, the park will be visible only on clear winter days, and the turbines will be nearly invisible during summer months when Rehoboth Beach fills with vacationers, Lanard said.
Each blade on the three-blade rotor is to be 150 feet long.
I think this is very interesting. First, because Bluewater says the project is good to power 100,000 homes not the 50,000 stated here. Next, because this is the Free Market at work. Delmarva is going to sell off most of the power generated. I ran some numbers, and if Bluewater’s generation claims are accurate, then Delmarva Power can turn a profit even if the project has a 350% cost overrun and needs waaay more maintenance than anticipated. And that’s the real bottom line: if Delaware can make money with wind power, you had better believe New Jersey and all the other coastal states will be planting these things ASAP. And if Delmarva Power can sell off half the power produced at market rate, while selling the rest to their customers at cost 
, then they can make an extra $42 million a year. Not too bad. The other interesting bit is that the project cost includes dismantling they whole thing at the end of 25 years. Why? Will the pylons be worn out by then?
And since the pylons in this project are a dozen miles out at sea ... out into the tidal currents or the Gulf Stream perhaps? So I’m wondering if they should just go ahead and hook some tidal generators on to the base of each pylon? I spent an hour or so looking into them, and it looks like they can do the job if the water is moving at a whole 4mph. Every volt in the bucket helps, right? Especially since South Korea, Scotland, and a couple of the Scandinavian countries are willing to be the guinea pigs for that one.
Is that what’s really holding things back, Dr. Hansen? Industry’s “Very dangerous. You go first” risk aversion policy? Not eviiil Big Oil after all? Butt head.
Posted by Drew458
on 06/24/2008 at 01:07 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - June 23, 2008
If the Saudis say it, it must be so
NEW YORK - Oil prices rose Monday on disappointment over Saudi Arabia’s modest production increase and concerns that output from Nigeria will decline. Retail gas prices, meanwhile, inched lower overnight, but appear unlikely to change much as long as oil prices remain stuck in their recent trading range.
Saudi Arabia said Sunday at a meeting of oil producing and consuming nations that it would turn out more crude oil this year if the market needs it. The kingdom said it would add 200,000 barrels per day in July to a 300,000 barrel per day production increase it first announced in May, raising total daily output to 9.7 million barrels.
So the Saudis agree to pump more oil, and the price goes up anyway. Their production is now up half a million barrels a day compared to a few months ago. 500,000 is about a quarter of a supertanker’s cargo capacity worth of crude. Go figure. Actually, don’t. Conveniently not mentioned in this article (which I’m not linking to just in case AP is feeling testy today) is what the leader of their tribe, King Abdullah, said yesterday:
Earlier Sunday, King Abdullah said Saudi Arabia is not to blame for soaring oil prices, blaming speculators and surging demand in such developing economies as China and India.
“There are several factors behind the unjustified, swift rise in oil prices and they are: Speculators who play the market out of selfish interests, increased consumption by several developing economies and additional taxes on oil in several consuming countries,” King Abdullah said in speech.
Naturally, oil baron T Boone Pickens disagrees (while likely making another fortune off of the speculative market maybe?):
(he called) the Saudis’ additional production “peanuts” and said at least two million additional barrels per day are needed to make a meaningful dent in oil prices.
He said blaming speculators for higher prices is “silly” and told the U.S. Senate last week that global oil production has peaked at 85 million barrels per day.
Meanwhile, the Gulf is becoming a floating oil storage yard, with more than a dozen ships, possibly a lot more than that, filled up with oil just hanging out. Making money by just sitting around I guess?
Iran has 13 to 15 supertankers idling in the Gulf with capacity to hold as much as 30 million barrels, the ship-tracking data shows. Iran has not said how much oil is in the tankers. Hojatollah Ghanimifard, executive director of international affairs at National Iranian Oil Co., said June 2 that some vessels were storing crude while refineries carried out annual repairs.
Maybe there is nowhere for the ships to go ... if pumping capacity exceeds refining capacity, what other choice do they have?
King Abdullah is not the only one blaming speculators. And I’ve read elsewhere too that there is actually a temporary oil glut.
OPEC President Chakib Khelil said the Saudi initiative would fail to lower prices, blaming oil’s climb above $130 a barrel on speculation, rather than a lack of crude. Saudi Arabia’s output increase is ``illogical’’ and may do nothing to lower prices, he said after the meeting in Jeddah.
Also, if the oil is of ``poor quality,’’ it would have little effect on prices, Thierry Lefrancois, a strategist with Natixis in Paris said last week.
Oil prices rallied to a record $139.89 in New York on June 16, five times the average six years ago. World oil demand will rise 800,000 barrels a day, or 0.9 percent this year, according to the International Energy Agency.
This is looking like one of those Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t situations. I think it’s past high time to put the brakes on the speculation market. Now, just who is in charge of that again?
UPDATE: Here’s a laugh. Shows you how fast things change ... this is from 2005.
“[I]nstead of a crest being reached sometime this decade, an inflection point in world oil output will occur sometime beyond 2020, after which production will plateau for several more decades.
“[A]s a result, supply could exceed demand by as much as six million to 7.5 million barrels per day later in the decade” that will lead to an extended period of lower prices beginning as early as 2008.”
This article is actually pointing out the foolishness of that kind of forecasting. And it goes on to make a very telling point, something that most of us dumb consumers don’t really know about:
Currently, the world does not have adequate refining capacity for even the slightly more heavy, sour conventional crude that constitutes our present supposed “excess capacity” of 1.7 million bpd. Refiners, particularly those in China, will have to invest billions of dollars in sophisticated refining equipment before they will be able to process even these heavier conventional oils.
This kind of reminds me of when the US supply of hard coal started to run out and we had to switch to soft coal. Yep. The world’s refineries are set up for the “light sweet” crude oil. The easy to refine stuff that gives you high percentages of gasoline per barrel. A lot of the easy oil is gone now. Time to figure out a new approach; all that oil-shale oil is the heavy sour stuff, high in sulfur content and thick as tar. But it can be refined and some refineries are already set up to handle it. There is a lot more to the oil equation than just how much can be squeezed from the ground.
Posted by Drew458
on 06/23/2008 at 10:16 AM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - June 19, 2008
An Email From Newt
Gosh Newt, I can do a lot better than just a mere 5.
Could it be that this petition is actually working? I’ve seen the links on dozens of web pages. Maybe hundreds. The number of signatures went from under 100,000 to over 240,000 in just two days, and now, barely a week later, it’s over 1,000,000.
And, unless you “question the timing” - because, yeah, Newt is smart enough to realize that $4 a gallon is going to be a psychological tipping point, and time the push of his petition to crest at just about the right time, which is a brilliant move - this thing is starting to show results. Although the last I heard the Florida governor was only talking about the Gulf Coast.
So we need another million or three signatures. Oh, and if you send them $10 you get a “Drill Now” bumper sticker, sure to annoy the econuts out there on the roads.
I signed in when it was just over 100,000. Who cares? What matter is that I used my real name and address and signed the thing honestly. I also had a good number of emails going back and forth with the campaign folks, which lead me to the two big posts (sorry for the rapib rant) I put up on the subject. Gas prices in NJ are about the lowest in the nation, and the prices in my area are about the lowest in the state. But even so I was forced to pay $4.01 a gallon on Monday. Though I did find a Lukoil station on Tuesday that was still charging “only” $3.92 for regular when you pay cash. Either price has got my dander up, but good.
Drilling for more oil and more gas, and building the necessary pipelines and refineries to deliver them ... it isn’t the ultimate solution, but it’s a big help for the shorter long term future. Now let’s get some kind of cap on the crazy ass petroleum futures market too.
Signing this thing isn’t all you have to do. You’ve got to email, write, and call your Senators, Governors, and CongressWeasels. Because if they’re against this, then they’re out of a job. Simple as that.
Posted by Drew458
on 06/19/2008 at 10:17 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - June 17, 2008
Election Season BS
Sen. John McCain on Tuesday will propose lifting the ban on offshore drilling as part of his plan to reduce dependence on foreign oil and help combat rising gas prices.
“The stakes are high for our citizens and for our economy, and with gasoline running at more than four bucks a gallon, many do not have the luxury of waiting on the far-off plans of futurists and politicians,” McCain will say Tuesday in Houston, Texas, according to excerpts of his speech released by his campaign.
“We have proven oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production. And I believe it is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions and to put our own reserves to use.”
McCain’s plan would let individual states decide whether or not to explore drilling possibilities.
McCain does oppose drilling in some parts of the wilderness and says those areas must be left undisturbed.
“When America set aside the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, we called it a ‘refuge’ for a reason,” he will say.
McCain on Tuesday will also criticize the energy policy of rival Barack Obama.
“He says that high oil prices are not the problem, but only that they rose too quickly. He’s doesn’t support new domestic production. He doesn’t support new nuclear plants. He doesn’t support more traditional use of coal, either,” McCain will say.
“So what does Sen. Obama support in energy policy? Well, for starters he supported the energy bill of 2005—a grab bag of corporate favors that I opposed. And now he supports new taxes on energy producers. He wants a windfall profits tax on oil, to go along with the new taxes he also plans for coal and natural gas. If the plan sounds familiar, it’s because that was President Jimmy Carter’s big idea too—and a lot of good it did us,” he will say.
McCain will argue that a windfall profits tax will only increase the country’s dependence on foreign oil and be an obstacle to domestic exploration.
“I’m all for recycling—but it’s better applied to paper and plastic than to the failed policies of the 1970s,” he will say.
Obama on Tuesday blasted McCain for changing his stance on offshore drilling.
“John McCain’s support of the moratorium on offshore drilling during his first presidential campaign was certainly laudable, but his decision to completely change his position and tell a group of Houston oil executives exactly what they wanted to hear today was the same Washington politics that has prevented us from achieving energy independence for decades,” he said in a statement.
Which proves that both candidates are pretty stupid. No you dope, McCain’s new position is called “adapting to current circumstances.” We didn’t have this problem back in 2000 when McC first ran. Remember how gas was $1.58 a gallon? And how is suddenly changing over to a pro-drilling stance going to prevent us from acheiving energy independence? And how is it the same old DC politics, when for decades DC has been against drilling anywhere for anything? Claptrap from Obambi.
Crap. I don’t believe either one of these sock puppets.
- Change the rules. Playing the oil futures market should require a 65% investment, not 7%.
- Drill everywhere for everything in every way. Oil, shale, natural gas. Find it, pump it, put it in a brand new pipeline.
- Not a drop of American oil gets sold to anyone other than Americans. Hmm?
- A chicken in every pot, and a nuclear reactor in every garage.
- 15 more refineries, not just 1.
- 2 gasoline blends, not 57.
- Build some of these alternative renewable sources we’ve heard about for 35 years already. Large scale.
- We’ve got lots of methane hydrate too. What’s the plan for that stuff?
- Screw corn ethanol. Food is for eating.
- Nice fat tax breaks/incentives for more efficient machines and building insulation
- Realistic CAFE requirements for vehicles. And no exceptions. If it doesn’t weigh more than 3 tons and isn’t registered to a corporation, it’s a private vehicle. Cars, SUVs, Minivans, light trucks all subject to the same requirements
Posted by Drew458
on 06/17/2008 at 12:23 PM
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • Politics •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
