With a President with the intelligence capacity , I guess that is all we KNOW!
OIL!!!!
WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!
Does T Boone Pickens have any credibility with any real thinkers?
"But Pickens knows he’s unique. Unless, he says, “Congress adopts clear, predictable policies” — with long-term tax incentives and infrastructure — so thousands of investors can jump into clean power, we’ll never get the scale we need to break our addiction. For a year, Senate Republicans have been blocking such incentives for wind and solar energy. They vote again next week.
If only we had a Congress and president who, instead of chasing crazy schemes like offshore drilling and releasing oil from our strategic reserve, just sat down with Boone and Shai and asked one question: “What laws do we need to enact to foster 1,000 more like you?” Then just do it, and get out of the way. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/opinion/27friedman.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
The Surge and all the IDIOTS on the so-called "NEWS'" Channels ...
Including the Racist Pig Lou Dobbs .
They should have consulted Joe Biden prior to mouthing off for a week on who would admit the 'SURGE' worked or as Dobbs Mouths it, "SUCCESS, GREAT SUCCESS"....
Refocus on Afghanistan
Despite surge, political progress and economic development lag in Iraq.
By Joe Biden
USA Today, 7/24/08
Recent events have demonstrated clearly that Barack Obama's judgment on Iraq is right. Now, it's time to heed that judgment so that we can successfully end the war while refocusing on the fight in Afghanistan.
Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that there have been significant gains in lowering the levels of violence in Iraq. These gains have come from the heroic sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, as well as the success of the Sunni tribes in fighting al-Qaeda, and the cease-fire that has been respected by Shiite militias.
But the stated purpose of the surge was to help bring about the political progress and economic development necessary for long-term stability in Iraq. That progress still lags.
That is why we must welcome the growing consensus in both the USA and Iraq for a timeline that will allow the responsible redeployment of our combat brigades out of Iraq. I agree with Sen. Obama and the prime minister of Iraq that we can safely redeploy all our combat brigades out of Iraq in 2010, with a residual force to fight terrorists, train Iraqis and protect our personnel.
This redeployment is absolutely necessary if we hope to restore our military strength and finish the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan's tribal areas. This is the central front in the war on terror. This is where the 9/11 attacks were planned and where terrorists could be plotting against America today.
With the Taliban and al-Qaeda on the rise and violence more severe than at any time since the beginning of the war, we must free up more resources in order to succeed. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledges, we can do so only if we redeploy our forces from Iraq.
Success in Iraq must not be defined by staying in Iraq indefinitely; success is leaving Iraq to an Iraqi government that is reconciling its differences and taking responsibility for its future.
It's time to encourage the Iraqi government to stand up on its own while we refocus on the war in Afghanistan and the broad range of national security challenges we face. Barack Obama is profoundly right that the next president must be more than commander in chief for Iraq — he must meet challenges to America's security around the world.
Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He wrote on behalf of the Obama campaign.
They should have consulted Joe Biden prior to mouthing off for a week on who would admit the 'SURGE' worked or as Dobbs Mouths it, "SUCCESS, GREAT SUCCESS"....
Refocus on Afghanistan
Despite surge, political progress and economic development lag in Iraq.
By Joe Biden
USA Today, 7/24/08
Recent events have demonstrated clearly that Barack Obama's judgment on Iraq is right. Now, it's time to heed that judgment so that we can successfully end the war while refocusing on the fight in Afghanistan.
Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that there have been significant gains in lowering the levels of violence in Iraq. These gains have come from the heroic sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, as well as the success of the Sunni tribes in fighting al-Qaeda, and the cease-fire that has been respected by Shiite militias.
But the stated purpose of the surge was to help bring about the political progress and economic development necessary for long-term stability in Iraq. That progress still lags.
That is why we must welcome the growing consensus in both the USA and Iraq for a timeline that will allow the responsible redeployment of our combat brigades out of Iraq. I agree with Sen. Obama and the prime minister of Iraq that we can safely redeploy all our combat brigades out of Iraq in 2010, with a residual force to fight terrorists, train Iraqis and protect our personnel.
This redeployment is absolutely necessary if we hope to restore our military strength and finish the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan's tribal areas. This is the central front in the war on terror. This is where the 9/11 attacks were planned and where terrorists could be plotting against America today.
With the Taliban and al-Qaeda on the rise and violence more severe than at any time since the beginning of the war, we must free up more resources in order to succeed. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledges, we can do so only if we redeploy our forces from Iraq.
Success in Iraq must not be defined by staying in Iraq indefinitely; success is leaving Iraq to an Iraqi government that is reconciling its differences and taking responsibility for its future.
It's time to encourage the Iraqi government to stand up on its own while we refocus on the war in Afghanistan and the broad range of national security challenges we face. Barack Obama is profoundly right that the next president must be more than commander in chief for Iraq — he must meet challenges to America's security around the world.
Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He wrote on behalf of the Obama campaign.
The 'SURGE'......
Email I sent to CNN:
You ask Obama's Communications Director about the 'SURGE' AGAIN.....and then John follows up with the STORY of TWO CAR SUICIDE NOMBS in IRAQ? Maybe you should RE-PHRASE your questions REGARDING THE ‘SURGE’!
What in the world are you thinking? Is this not part of the 'SURGE'?
You ask Obama's Communications Director about the 'SURGE' AGAIN.....and then John follows up with the STORY of TWO CAR SUICIDE NOMBS in IRAQ? Maybe you should RE-PHRASE your questions REGARDING THE ‘SURGE’!
What in the world are you thinking? Is this not part of the 'SURGE'?
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Czechoslovakia, Iraq/Pakistan border, ......Shias, Sunnis, Americans, ......
Know wondwer we are so firgiving of these 'MINOR' Gaffes!! Yikes!
That beauty pageant had ot right, HAND ALL AMERICANS A MAP!!
If this is not a big deal, what is?
As Barack Obama began his trip to the Middle East and Europe, the media was already speculating about the possibility of a gaffe. Obama's travel "carries political risk," the New York Times reported, "particularly if Mr. Obama makes a mistake."
But the only foreign policy error made in the last few days came this morning on ABC's Good Morning America, when John McCain made ANOTHER geography gaffe while trying to criticize Obama's visit to Iraq. (Just last week, McCain repeatedly referred to Czechoslovakia, a country that hasn't existed since 1993.)
Asked by Diane Sawyer whether the "the situation in Afghanistan in precarious and urgent," McCain responded: "I think it's serious. . . . It's a serious situation, but there's a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border."
But as ABC's Rick Klein noted: "Iraq and Pakistan do not share a border. Afghanistan and Pakistan do."
That beauty pageant had ot right, HAND ALL AMERICANS A MAP!!
If this is not a big deal, what is?
As Barack Obama began his trip to the Middle East and Europe, the media was already speculating about the possibility of a gaffe. Obama's travel "carries political risk," the New York Times reported, "particularly if Mr. Obama makes a mistake."
But the only foreign policy error made in the last few days came this morning on ABC's Good Morning America, when John McCain made ANOTHER geography gaffe while trying to criticize Obama's visit to Iraq. (Just last week, McCain repeatedly referred to Czechoslovakia, a country that hasn't existed since 1993.)
Asked by Diane Sawyer whether the "the situation in Afghanistan in precarious and urgent," McCain responded: "I think it's serious. . . . It's a serious situation, but there's a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border."
But as ABC's Rick Klein noted: "Iraq and Pakistan do not share a border. Afghanistan and Pakistan do."
Friday, July 25, 2008
Unions.........What good are they?
opinion
Six little words
By David Sirota
Article Last Updated: 07/24/2008 09:08:46 PM MDT
History books teem with six-word phrases, from the comforting ("Nothing to fear but fear itself") to the inspiring ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall") to the embarrassing ("Read my lips: no new taxes"). But the six words "on the basis of union membership" could be more momentous than any of those. Though hardly Roosevelt's rhetoric, Reagan's bluster or Bush's clumsiness, the clause could solve America's wage crisis.
Of course, when Tom Geoghegan told me this in a Chicago park two weeks ago, I almost snarfed my coffee through my nose. Solving major social problems typically demands more than six words. But as the longtime labor lawyer and author explained his idea to me on a muggy afternoon, it started making sense.
Geoghegan reminded me that data show the more union members in an economy, the better workers' pay. The problem, he said, is that weakened labor laws are allowing companies to bully and fire union-sympathetic workers, thus driving down union membership and wages.
Enter Geoghegan's six words. If the Civil Rights Act was amended to prevent discrimination "on the basis of union membership," it would curtail corporations' anti-labor assault by making the right to join a union an official civil right.
"Hang on," I interrupted. "Joining a union isn't a civil right?"
Correct.
Under current law, if you are fired for union activity, you can only take your grievance to the National Labor Relations Board — a byzantine agency deliberately made more Kafkaesque by right-wing appointees and budget cuts. Today, the NLRB takes years to rule on labor law violations, often granting victims only their back pay.
Union leaders are now focused on reforming the NLRB — an admirable goal — but Geoghegan's plan implies that workers are harmed by being legally leashed to Washington in the first place. His proposal says rather than being forced to rely on an unreliable bureaucracy for protection, workers should be empowered to defend themselves.
The six words would do just that. Regardless of whether the NLRB is strengthened or further weakened, persecuted workers would be able to haul union-busting thugs into court. There, unlike at the NLRB, plaintiffs can subpoena company records and win costly punitive damages.
Bolstering his argument, Geoghegan told me to consider variations in corporate behavior.
For example, because the Civil Rights Act bars racial discrimination, businesses are motivated to try to prevent bigotry — they want to avoid being sued. But when it comes to unions, there is no such deterrent. The lack of civil rights protection effectively encourages businesses to punish pro-union employees — and publicize the abuse to intimidate their workforce. By making the six words law, the dynamic would shift. Companies would have a reason — fear of litigation — to respect workers' rights.
When Geoghegan and I finished chatting, I remembered why I believe he is America's most talented writer and thinker on labor issues. His relative anonymity is a tragicomic commentary on the media and the American left. The Milton Friedmans are celebrated by pundits and cast in bronze by conservative think tanks, while the Geoghegans are dismissed by the chattering class and ignored by a progressive movement that regularly venerates Hollywood celebrities as its heroes.
Perhaps, though, this proposal will change things. In developing a way to shift incentives, Geoghegan has discovered a solution that both unionists and economists can love. It cribs the best from liberals' pro-union sympathies and conservatives' distrust of Big Government, and should make him famous (or at least a cabinet secretary).
After all, anyone who can bring such disparate ideologies and adversaries together is worthy of serious consideration — as is his six-word stroke of genius.
Denver political analyst David Sirota (www.credoaction.com/sirota) is author of "The Uprising," published in June. He is a fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network.
Six little words
By David Sirota
Article Last Updated: 07/24/2008 09:08:46 PM MDT
History books teem with six-word phrases, from the comforting ("Nothing to fear but fear itself") to the inspiring ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall") to the embarrassing ("Read my lips: no new taxes"). But the six words "on the basis of union membership" could be more momentous than any of those. Though hardly Roosevelt's rhetoric, Reagan's bluster or Bush's clumsiness, the clause could solve America's wage crisis.
Of course, when Tom Geoghegan told me this in a Chicago park two weeks ago, I almost snarfed my coffee through my nose. Solving major social problems typically demands more than six words. But as the longtime labor lawyer and author explained his idea to me on a muggy afternoon, it started making sense.
Geoghegan reminded me that data show the more union members in an economy, the better workers' pay. The problem, he said, is that weakened labor laws are allowing companies to bully and fire union-sympathetic workers, thus driving down union membership and wages.
Enter Geoghegan's six words. If the Civil Rights Act was amended to prevent discrimination "on the basis of union membership," it would curtail corporations' anti-labor assault by making the right to join a union an official civil right.
"Hang on," I interrupted. "Joining a union isn't a civil right?"
Correct.
Under current law, if you are fired for union activity, you can only take your grievance to the National Labor Relations Board — a byzantine agency deliberately made more Kafkaesque by right-wing appointees and budget cuts. Today, the NLRB takes years to rule on labor law violations, often granting victims only their back pay.
Union leaders are now focused on reforming the NLRB — an admirable goal — but Geoghegan's plan implies that workers are harmed by being legally leashed to Washington in the first place. His proposal says rather than being forced to rely on an unreliable bureaucracy for protection, workers should be empowered to defend themselves.
The six words would do just that. Regardless of whether the NLRB is strengthened or further weakened, persecuted workers would be able to haul union-busting thugs into court. There, unlike at the NLRB, plaintiffs can subpoena company records and win costly punitive damages.
Bolstering his argument, Geoghegan told me to consider variations in corporate behavior.
For example, because the Civil Rights Act bars racial discrimination, businesses are motivated to try to prevent bigotry — they want to avoid being sued. But when it comes to unions, there is no such deterrent. The lack of civil rights protection effectively encourages businesses to punish pro-union employees — and publicize the abuse to intimidate their workforce. By making the six words law, the dynamic would shift. Companies would have a reason — fear of litigation — to respect workers' rights.
When Geoghegan and I finished chatting, I remembered why I believe he is America's most talented writer and thinker on labor issues. His relative anonymity is a tragicomic commentary on the media and the American left. The Milton Friedmans are celebrated by pundits and cast in bronze by conservative think tanks, while the Geoghegans are dismissed by the chattering class and ignored by a progressive movement that regularly venerates Hollywood celebrities as its heroes.
Perhaps, though, this proposal will change things. In developing a way to shift incentives, Geoghegan has discovered a solution that both unionists and economists can love. It cribs the best from liberals' pro-union sympathies and conservatives' distrust of Big Government, and should make him famous (or at least a cabinet secretary).
After all, anyone who can bring such disparate ideologies and adversaries together is worthy of serious consideration — as is his six-word stroke of genius.
Denver political analyst David Sirota (www.credoaction.com/sirota) is author of "The Uprising," published in June. He is a fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network.
Many oil industry insiders believe this is a bubble
Peak Oil or Oil Bubble? - The Oil Bubble ArgumentWritten by FrugalTrader on Jul 24, 2008 filed under Ed Rempel
This is a guest post from Ed Rempel (CFP and CMA). For those of you joining us recently, Ed has written a number of controversial articles for MDJ in the past. Today’s article is a continuation from yesterdays post with a counter argument that it’s not peak oil but an oil bubble.. Make sure to participate in the poll at the end.
In his 1998 book, “The Roaring 2002’s”, demographics expert Harry Dent predicted that the large block of baby boomers in their peak earning years would cause one financial bubble after another. Since then, we had the tech bubble, a real estate bubble in the US, nearly an income trust bubble in Canada, Chinese stock market bubble, and now what looks like an oil and resources bubble.
Just like the unlimited potential of the internet that led to the tech bubble, there are real explanations for oil’s rise, but they do not explain a price increase from $10 to $145/barrel.
Arguments in favour of a Oil Bubble
1. Index futures for oil and resources have been created in the last couple of years and have resulted in massive speculation that has driven much of the oil price rise. Many institutional investors are allocating a portion of their assets to commodities primarily through the futures market, which has created incremental “investment demand”. Commodity index futures are about 80% oil. Because of the comparatively high price inelasticity of both oil supply and demand, relatively small disruptions in supply or increments in demand can have outsized effects on price.
According to a May 19, 2008 report titled “Blame It on Your Pension Fund” from Probability Analytics Research in Chicago, open interest in the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude and Brent Crude oil contracts traded have more than tripled over the last 5 years, rising by 1.3 million. At 1,000 barrels per contract, this represents incremental demand of 1.3 billion barrels of oil, or about 53% of the increase in world oil “consumption” over that period. Index speculators would not necessarily have accounted for all of that increase in open interest, but Michael Masters (Masters Capital Management), in testimony before a Senate subcommittee on May 20, 2008, estimated that over the last 5 years, index speculators through the futures market increased their net exposure to petroleum products by the equivalent of 848 million barrels of oil, an impact roughly equivalent to the 920 million barrel increase in demand from China over that period.
In a tight market for physical oil, how large a price impact could the incremental investment demand from commodity indexers have had? Probability Analytics Research estimated the equilibrium oil price without investment demand is $60-75 per barrel, with investment demand adding roughly $60 to the price of oil.
2. Demand is not out-pacing supply. In the last 12 months, world oil demand is up only 2%, while supply is up 2.5%. Meanwhile, the price has nearly doubled. How can this be anything other than pure speculation?
3. Most oil experts assume the proper oil price should be between $60-90/barrel. Almost all oil analysts assume a price of $80-90/barrel when valuing oil company shares. The $60-70 range is often quoted by Saudi Arabian oil minister Ali Al-Naimi as being a realistic price for oil, since that is the marginal cost of production for alternative energy sources. In fact, OPEC, which controls 40% of the world’s oil, states that there is “no justification for oil above $80/barrel” and that “fundamentals do not support a price above $80/barrel”.
4. Anecdotal evidence is that the long-awaited demand reductions resulting from high oil prices may have begun. The widely-used quote is: “The cure for $145 oil is $145 oil.” Airlines—choking on $4 per gallon jet fuel prices—are slashing capacity. Sales of gas-guzzling SUVs and light trucks are collapsing in the U.S., while small cars and hybrids are flying off the lot. Public transportation use is increasing. Many are changing jobs to be closer to home, or moving closer to their job. Oil demand is starting to drop off throughout the OECD. Demand responses take time, but we may have reached a tipping point. Gary Becker, an economist at the University of Chicago, has calculated that in the past, over periods of less than 5 years, oil consumption in the OECD dropped by only 2% to 9% when oil prices doubled. But over longer periods, consumption dropped by 60%.
5. Oil supply increases may be on the way. Six years is not a long time in the context of the time it takes to develop an oil field. The last doubling of oil prices has occurred in the last year or so. No supply response over that time frame could have been reasonably expected. The largest new field for years was just discovered in Brazil and is estimated to contain 5-8 billion barrels.
6. Huge amounts of oil are thought to exist off-shore. George Bush just lifted an executive ban that has existed since 1990 on off-shore oil drilling. If the legislative ban is also lifted, then off-shore drilling can finally start. Drilling is banned in many other regions rich with oil or gas resources due to long-term energy strategies and environmental concerns.
7. Oil-producing countries do not necessarily have the incentive to increase production as rapidly as oil-consuming nations may want. They may believe that they will maximize the long-term value of their oil reserves by developing them more slowly.
8. Oil price subsidies in many countries will become increasingly difficult to maintain. Higher gas prices in these countries would result in lower demand. The latest jump in oil prices is making subsidies much more costly, and strains on governmental budgets are forcing some nations to lift subsidies. On May 24, Indonesia raised fuel prices by +30%, followed shortly by Taiwan (+13%) and Sri Lanka (+24%). China has just recently increased its gas prices, since the subsidies that amounted to about 1% of GDP.
9. Many European geologists, especially in Russia, still believe in the abiogenic theory. Oil is widely considered to be a fossil fuel in the West, but this belief is far from unanimous world-wide. The abiogenic theory states that oil is created by carbon released by microbes that migrates upward from the earth’s mantle. It has been popularized in the West recently by Thomas Gold, professor at Cornell University. If it is correct, then not only can oil be continuously created, but there may be far more oil in the earth than most believe. Oil companies have not drilled in areas most likely to contain abiogenic oil. Most geologists consider oil to be a fossil fuel, but the abiogenic theory has not been proven false.
10. Governments have not responded with official policies and have not officially expressed concern. Peak Oil has been discussed endlessly in the press and in the financial industry. Governments must know what is going on and are not concerned.
11. Alternative fuel sources will reduce our need for oil. Humans are adaptive. There are many fuel sources available now and high oil prices will make alternative sources much more viable.
12. Peak Oil is being a marketed. Most of the strongest proponents of Peak Oil are in the investment industry working for companies that have made huge amounts of money from rising oil prices.
13. Many oil industry insiders believe this is a bubble. Those that believe this is a bubble include OPEC, Saudi Arabian oil minister Ali Al-Naimi, Richard Rainwater (Texas oil billionaire), and George Soros (legendary hedge fund manager).
What is your opinion?
Many readers of MDJ are well-read in many issues, so your opinions here would be very interesting. What is your opinion? Which are we currently witnessing?
A. The beginning of Peak Oil.
B. An oil bubble.
http://www.milliondollarjourney.com/peak-oil-or-oil-bubble-the-oil-bubble-argument.htm
This is a guest post from Ed Rempel (CFP and CMA). For those of you joining us recently, Ed has written a number of controversial articles for MDJ in the past. Today’s article is a continuation from yesterdays post with a counter argument that it’s not peak oil but an oil bubble.. Make sure to participate in the poll at the end.
In his 1998 book, “The Roaring 2002’s”, demographics expert Harry Dent predicted that the large block of baby boomers in their peak earning years would cause one financial bubble after another. Since then, we had the tech bubble, a real estate bubble in the US, nearly an income trust bubble in Canada, Chinese stock market bubble, and now what looks like an oil and resources bubble.
Just like the unlimited potential of the internet that led to the tech bubble, there are real explanations for oil’s rise, but they do not explain a price increase from $10 to $145/barrel.
Arguments in favour of a Oil Bubble
1. Index futures for oil and resources have been created in the last couple of years and have resulted in massive speculation that has driven much of the oil price rise. Many institutional investors are allocating a portion of their assets to commodities primarily through the futures market, which has created incremental “investment demand”. Commodity index futures are about 80% oil. Because of the comparatively high price inelasticity of both oil supply and demand, relatively small disruptions in supply or increments in demand can have outsized effects on price.
According to a May 19, 2008 report titled “Blame It on Your Pension Fund” from Probability Analytics Research in Chicago, open interest in the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude and Brent Crude oil contracts traded have more than tripled over the last 5 years, rising by 1.3 million. At 1,000 barrels per contract, this represents incremental demand of 1.3 billion barrels of oil, or about 53% of the increase in world oil “consumption” over that period. Index speculators would not necessarily have accounted for all of that increase in open interest, but Michael Masters (Masters Capital Management), in testimony before a Senate subcommittee on May 20, 2008, estimated that over the last 5 years, index speculators through the futures market increased their net exposure to petroleum products by the equivalent of 848 million barrels of oil, an impact roughly equivalent to the 920 million barrel increase in demand from China over that period.
In a tight market for physical oil, how large a price impact could the incremental investment demand from commodity indexers have had? Probability Analytics Research estimated the equilibrium oil price without investment demand is $60-75 per barrel, with investment demand adding roughly $60 to the price of oil.
2. Demand is not out-pacing supply. In the last 12 months, world oil demand is up only 2%, while supply is up 2.5%. Meanwhile, the price has nearly doubled. How can this be anything other than pure speculation?
3. Most oil experts assume the proper oil price should be between $60-90/barrel. Almost all oil analysts assume a price of $80-90/barrel when valuing oil company shares. The $60-70 range is often quoted by Saudi Arabian oil minister Ali Al-Naimi as being a realistic price for oil, since that is the marginal cost of production for alternative energy sources. In fact, OPEC, which controls 40% of the world’s oil, states that there is “no justification for oil above $80/barrel” and that “fundamentals do not support a price above $80/barrel”.
4. Anecdotal evidence is that the long-awaited demand reductions resulting from high oil prices may have begun. The widely-used quote is: “The cure for $145 oil is $145 oil.” Airlines—choking on $4 per gallon jet fuel prices—are slashing capacity. Sales of gas-guzzling SUVs and light trucks are collapsing in the U.S., while small cars and hybrids are flying off the lot. Public transportation use is increasing. Many are changing jobs to be closer to home, or moving closer to their job. Oil demand is starting to drop off throughout the OECD. Demand responses take time, but we may have reached a tipping point. Gary Becker, an economist at the University of Chicago, has calculated that in the past, over periods of less than 5 years, oil consumption in the OECD dropped by only 2% to 9% when oil prices doubled. But over longer periods, consumption dropped by 60%.
5. Oil supply increases may be on the way. Six years is not a long time in the context of the time it takes to develop an oil field. The last doubling of oil prices has occurred in the last year or so. No supply response over that time frame could have been reasonably expected. The largest new field for years was just discovered in Brazil and is estimated to contain 5-8 billion barrels.
6. Huge amounts of oil are thought to exist off-shore. George Bush just lifted an executive ban that has existed since 1990 on off-shore oil drilling. If the legislative ban is also lifted, then off-shore drilling can finally start. Drilling is banned in many other regions rich with oil or gas resources due to long-term energy strategies and environmental concerns.
7. Oil-producing countries do not necessarily have the incentive to increase production as rapidly as oil-consuming nations may want. They may believe that they will maximize the long-term value of their oil reserves by developing them more slowly.
8. Oil price subsidies in many countries will become increasingly difficult to maintain. Higher gas prices in these countries would result in lower demand. The latest jump in oil prices is making subsidies much more costly, and strains on governmental budgets are forcing some nations to lift subsidies. On May 24, Indonesia raised fuel prices by +30%, followed shortly by Taiwan (+13%) and Sri Lanka (+24%). China has just recently increased its gas prices, since the subsidies that amounted to about 1% of GDP.
9. Many European geologists, especially in Russia, still believe in the abiogenic theory. Oil is widely considered to be a fossil fuel in the West, but this belief is far from unanimous world-wide. The abiogenic theory states that oil is created by carbon released by microbes that migrates upward from the earth’s mantle. It has been popularized in the West recently by Thomas Gold, professor at Cornell University. If it is correct, then not only can oil be continuously created, but there may be far more oil in the earth than most believe. Oil companies have not drilled in areas most likely to contain abiogenic oil. Most geologists consider oil to be a fossil fuel, but the abiogenic theory has not been proven false.
10. Governments have not responded with official policies and have not officially expressed concern. Peak Oil has been discussed endlessly in the press and in the financial industry. Governments must know what is going on and are not concerned.
11. Alternative fuel sources will reduce our need for oil. Humans are adaptive. There are many fuel sources available now and high oil prices will make alternative sources much more viable.
12. Peak Oil is being a marketed. Most of the strongest proponents of Peak Oil are in the investment industry working for companies that have made huge amounts of money from rising oil prices.
13. Many oil industry insiders believe this is a bubble. Those that believe this is a bubble include OPEC, Saudi Arabian oil minister Ali Al-Naimi, Richard Rainwater (Texas oil billionaire), and George Soros (legendary hedge fund manager).
What is your opinion?
Many readers of MDJ are well-read in many issues, so your opinions here would be very interesting. What is your opinion? Which are we currently witnessing?
A. The beginning of Peak Oil.
B. An oil bubble.
http://www.milliondollarjourney.com/peak-oil-or-oil-bubble-the-oil-bubble-argument.htm
Thursday, July 24, 2008
South Carolina, the QUEEN of BANKRUPTCY has an idea!!
Issue #21.30 :: 07/23/2008 - 07/29/2008
Wanted: New Tax “Entity”
Palmetto Institute, Key Lawmakers Push for Tax Study Group
BY BILL DAVIS
It’s turning into a perfect storm for Act 388, the state law passed by the General Assembly in 2006 that last year switched public K-12 education funding from private property tax revenues to a 1-cent increase in the state sales tax.
The economy is flagging. Property values are sinking. School districts across the state have been hit with tens of millions of dollars in shortages in the wake of the switch.
What to do?
The Palmetto Institute, founded by Lake City billionaire Darla Moore to improve the financial situation of every South Carolinian, has hit upon a plan for the state to avoid future gaffes. In April, the Institute released a study entitled “Selected Issues in South Carolina’s Tax and Education System.”
Among many recommendations, the study called for the creation of an independent, professionally staffed “entity” to review future changes in the state’s tax structure.
The review would do more than just calculate how much more or less the state would receive in revenues from changing the tax system, which is the purview of the Board of Economic Advisors. The new entity also would consider how changing the tax structure would affect the overall economy.
Moore this week spoke in Charleston, a quick commute from one of her million-dollar mansions, and shared with her well-heeled audience a message that would usually be anathema to a group of homeowners: All that money you’re saving on property taxes will end up costing you more money down the road.
Moore stumped that Act 388 unfairly and disproportionately shifted the education tax burden from homeowners to the business community and that would, in turn, result in a “chilling effect” on the state’s business climate. In the long run, business and industry would flourish or relocate here less, she argued, and taxes would go up for everyone across the board.
Without openly assigning blame, Moore, credited with being the “queen” of debtor-in-possession financing in the “greed is good” 1980s, pointed out that the state conducted no in-depth studies into how the switch would affect its economy.
Rep. Don Bowen, R-Anderson, said he would have shaken his head “no” had he been there. Bowen won his first House campaign in 2006 on the topic of the education switch being good for South Carolinians of every stripe — not just ones with Oprah-like net worth.
Bowen, in Columbia recently to attend a pro-switch conference, argued Moore didn’t have the perspective of state homeowners who “were really hurting because of the property taxes. She’s so rich, she doesn’t care if she has to pay more taxes.”
Not true, responded Palmetto Institute director James Fields, who agreed with Bowen, up to a point, that property taxes were hurting average Joes and Janes.
Fields responded that everyone in South Carolina will suffer more if the Legislature continues to make piecemeal tax changes. “All we are saying is that if they want to change the tax system, that’s fine,” he said. “But just don’t do it in such a way that it breaks the other parts of the economy.”
Moore said she would need big friends in the State House in the coming legislative session if the blue-ribbon entity were to have any political life.
Last year, the Senate, pushed by Sen. Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, passed a bill that would create a similar panel. The bill died in the House, according to House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, because it came late in the session when there wasn’t enough time for the House to deal with it.
Both Leatherman and Harrell have vowed to make passing a similar bill a priority. Leatherman told Statehouse Report that he would pre-file legislation to create the entity and would move it through the Finance Committee, of which he is chairman, in January.
“The creation of a taxation realignment commission is one of the most important things the General Assembly will do this next session,” said the normally reticent Leatherman. “We must get a better handle on the interaction and interdependence of our revenue streams. For too long, we have approached tax decisions in a piecemeal fashion. The time for a comprehensive approach is past due.”
Crystal ball: Keep a close eye on Leatherman’s pre-filings, as how he would structure the commission differently from Moore and others could spell the difference between it being politically, or economically, viable.
Bill Davis is the editor of SC Statehouse Report; he can be reached at billdavis@statehousereport.com. Let us know what you think: Email news@free-times.com.
Wanted: New Tax “Entity”
Palmetto Institute, Key Lawmakers Push for Tax Study Group
BY BILL DAVIS
It’s turning into a perfect storm for Act 388, the state law passed by the General Assembly in 2006 that last year switched public K-12 education funding from private property tax revenues to a 1-cent increase in the state sales tax.
The economy is flagging. Property values are sinking. School districts across the state have been hit with tens of millions of dollars in shortages in the wake of the switch.
What to do?
The Palmetto Institute, founded by Lake City billionaire Darla Moore to improve the financial situation of every South Carolinian, has hit upon a plan for the state to avoid future gaffes. In April, the Institute released a study entitled “Selected Issues in South Carolina’s Tax and Education System.”
Among many recommendations, the study called for the creation of an independent, professionally staffed “entity” to review future changes in the state’s tax structure.
The review would do more than just calculate how much more or less the state would receive in revenues from changing the tax system, which is the purview of the Board of Economic Advisors. The new entity also would consider how changing the tax structure would affect the overall economy.
Moore this week spoke in Charleston, a quick commute from one of her million-dollar mansions, and shared with her well-heeled audience a message that would usually be anathema to a group of homeowners: All that money you’re saving on property taxes will end up costing you more money down the road.
Moore stumped that Act 388 unfairly and disproportionately shifted the education tax burden from homeowners to the business community and that would, in turn, result in a “chilling effect” on the state’s business climate. In the long run, business and industry would flourish or relocate here less, she argued, and taxes would go up for everyone across the board.
Without openly assigning blame, Moore, credited with being the “queen” of debtor-in-possession financing in the “greed is good” 1980s, pointed out that the state conducted no in-depth studies into how the switch would affect its economy.
Rep. Don Bowen, R-Anderson, said he would have shaken his head “no” had he been there. Bowen won his first House campaign in 2006 on the topic of the education switch being good for South Carolinians of every stripe — not just ones with Oprah-like net worth.
Bowen, in Columbia recently to attend a pro-switch conference, argued Moore didn’t have the perspective of state homeowners who “were really hurting because of the property taxes. She’s so rich, she doesn’t care if she has to pay more taxes.”
Not true, responded Palmetto Institute director James Fields, who agreed with Bowen, up to a point, that property taxes were hurting average Joes and Janes.
Fields responded that everyone in South Carolina will suffer more if the Legislature continues to make piecemeal tax changes. “All we are saying is that if they want to change the tax system, that’s fine,” he said. “But just don’t do it in such a way that it breaks the other parts of the economy.”
Moore said she would need big friends in the State House in the coming legislative session if the blue-ribbon entity were to have any political life.
Last year, the Senate, pushed by Sen. Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, passed a bill that would create a similar panel. The bill died in the House, according to House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, because it came late in the session when there wasn’t enough time for the House to deal with it.
Both Leatherman and Harrell have vowed to make passing a similar bill a priority. Leatherman told Statehouse Report that he would pre-file legislation to create the entity and would move it through the Finance Committee, of which he is chairman, in January.
“The creation of a taxation realignment commission is one of the most important things the General Assembly will do this next session,” said the normally reticent Leatherman. “We must get a better handle on the interaction and interdependence of our revenue streams. For too long, we have approached tax decisions in a piecemeal fashion. The time for a comprehensive approach is past due.”
Crystal ball: Keep a close eye on Leatherman’s pre-filings, as how he would structure the commission differently from Moore and others could spell the difference between it being politically, or economically, viable.
Bill Davis is the editor of SC Statehouse Report; he can be reached at billdavis@statehousereport.com. Let us know what you think: Email news@free-times.com.
FREEDOM? Oh yes!
In a flagrant political act, the State Department has barred its employees from attending Sen. Barack Obama's speech in Berlin tonight. Under the pretense that he is maintaining political neutrality, the Washington Post reported today, State Department Undersecretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy has interpreted the Foreign Affairs Manual in the most restrictive way, claiming that he is ensuring that foreign service officials will remain untainted by a "partisan political act." (Spouse and family members, however, have generously been excluded from this ruling.) The U.S. embassy, which is headed by ambassador Robert Timken, a businessman and crony of George W. Bush's from Ohio, who is widely reviled in Germany for his ignorance of foreign affairs, has instructed officials not to attend the rally. The American Foreign Service Association has complained about the edict but there's not enough time to dispute it. Funny that.
The truth is that there would probably be few better opportunities for embassy officials to get a feel for the views of the Germans by mixing with them during the rally. Of course, the sentiments expressed by Germans, who worship Obama as much as they loathe George W. Bush, might not be ones that the administration is eager to hear.
Indeed, the administration has a long and tawdry record of trying to browbeat government agencies into submission, whether it's the CIA or the Centers for Disease Control. The State Department is perhaps highest on the list of conservatives and neocons who see it as the center of disloyalty and treachery. But this latest action represents a new low. If it's going to these lengths, the Bush administration must be really worried about Sen. John McCain's prospects.
The truth is that there would probably be few better opportunities for embassy officials to get a feel for the views of the Germans by mixing with them during the rally. Of course, the sentiments expressed by Germans, who worship Obama as much as they loathe George W. Bush, might not be ones that the administration is eager to hear.
Indeed, the administration has a long and tawdry record of trying to browbeat government agencies into submission, whether it's the CIA or the Centers for Disease Control. The State Department is perhaps highest on the list of conservatives and neocons who see it as the center of disloyalty and treachery. But this latest action represents a new low. If it's going to these lengths, the Bush administration must be really worried about Sen. John McCain's prospects.
November 26, 2006, the SURGE BEGINS........
Cheney Seeks Saudi Arabia's Help on Iran, Lebanon, Palestinians
Sunday, November 26, 2006
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Vice President Dick Cheney sought Saudi help on Saturday in dealing with Iraq's spiraling violence and other regional trouble spots where U.S. policy is on the line: Iran, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.
Cheney's visit with King Abdullah was brief, lasting only a few hours before he flew back to Washington, but it underlined the two allies' concerns over upheavals across the Middle East, which many Arabs blame on U.S. policies.
In a sign of the urgency of the U.S. concern, President Bush is scheduled to meet with Iraq's prime minister in the Jordanian capital Wednesday and Thursday to discuss security matters.
• Visit FOXNews.com's Mideast center for more in-depth coverage.
The unusual succession of visits by the two U.S. leaders was planned before outbursts of violence this week dramatically worsened the situation in two countries of key American interest — Iraq and Lebanon.
On Tuesday, an anti-Syrian Lebanese politician was gunned down in Beirut, highlighting the fragility of the U.S.-backed government and heightening tensions between that country's pro- and anti-Syrian forces.
Two days later in Iraq, suspected Sunni insurgents set off a series of car bombs that killed more than 200 people in a Shiite district of Baghdad, fueling an upsurge in the retaliatory sectarian slayings that threaten to tear the nation apart.
The meeting at Yamama Palace likely focused on both conflicts, as well as the Israeli-Palestinian front, which stands at a key crossroads amid attempts to form a new Palestinian government and get peace negotiations going.
The U.S. Embassy declined to comment on the discussions and Saudi officials were not available.
Before the meeting, a Saudi official said Cheney was expected to ask oil-rich Saudi Arabia to use its considerable influence with Iraq's Sunni Arab minority to promote reconciliation with Iraqi Shiites and Kurds. Sunni insurgents have staged some of the bloodiest attacks on U.S. troops and Shiites.In return, Saudi Arabia wants the U.S. to help rein in Iraq's Shiite militias, which have been blamed for sectarian attacks that have killed thousands, said the official, who agreed to discuss the meeting only if not quoted by name because of the sensitivity of the talks.
On Lebanon, the Saudi official said the kingdom wants to ensure there are no cracks in support for the U.S.-backed government, which is opposed by groups allied with Syria and Iran. Saudi Arabia has strong links to the anti-Syrian bloc dominating Lebanon's Cabinet and parliament.
The official said Saudi Arabia hopes Washington will not snub any Palestinian government that emerges from talks between the militants of Hamas and the more moderate Fatah faction. The U.S. and other nations have shunned the current government led by Hamas, which has refused to recognize Israel and renounce violence against the Jewish state.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, of Fatah, is trying to work out a new unity government with Hamas, but Arabs hope the U.S. will be flexible with how much Hamas must moderate to allow a resumption of the peace process with U.S. ally Israel.
Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries on the Persian Gulf are also deeply concerned over the West's confrontation with Iran over that nation's suspect nuclear program.
Gulf countries worry about the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran and its attempts to expand its influence in the Middle East. But they also fear the West's attempt to force Iran to rein in its program could bring Iranian reprisals.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Vice President Dick Cheney sought Saudi help on Saturday in dealing with Iraq's spiraling violence and other regional trouble spots where U.S. policy is on the line: Iran, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.
Cheney's visit with King Abdullah was brief, lasting only a few hours before he flew back to Washington, but it underlined the two allies' concerns over upheavals across the Middle East, which many Arabs blame on U.S. policies.
In a sign of the urgency of the U.S. concern, President Bush is scheduled to meet with Iraq's prime minister in the Jordanian capital Wednesday and Thursday to discuss security matters.
• Visit FOXNews.com's Mideast center for more in-depth coverage.
The unusual succession of visits by the two U.S. leaders was planned before outbursts of violence this week dramatically worsened the situation in two countries of key American interest — Iraq and Lebanon.
On Tuesday, an anti-Syrian Lebanese politician was gunned down in Beirut, highlighting the fragility of the U.S.-backed government and heightening tensions between that country's pro- and anti-Syrian forces.
Two days later in Iraq, suspected Sunni insurgents set off a series of car bombs that killed more than 200 people in a Shiite district of Baghdad, fueling an upsurge in the retaliatory sectarian slayings that threaten to tear the nation apart.
The meeting at Yamama Palace likely focused on both conflicts, as well as the Israeli-Palestinian front, which stands at a key crossroads amid attempts to form a new Palestinian government and get peace negotiations going.
The U.S. Embassy declined to comment on the discussions and Saudi officials were not available.
Before the meeting, a Saudi official said Cheney was expected to ask oil-rich Saudi Arabia to use its considerable influence with Iraq's Sunni Arab minority to promote reconciliation with Iraqi Shiites and Kurds. Sunni insurgents have staged some of the bloodiest attacks on U.S. troops and Shiites.In return, Saudi Arabia wants the U.S. to help rein in Iraq's Shiite militias, which have been blamed for sectarian attacks that have killed thousands, said the official, who agreed to discuss the meeting only if not quoted by name because of the sensitivity of the talks.
On Lebanon, the Saudi official said the kingdom wants to ensure there are no cracks in support for the U.S.-backed government, which is opposed by groups allied with Syria and Iran. Saudi Arabia has strong links to the anti-Syrian bloc dominating Lebanon's Cabinet and parliament.
The official said Saudi Arabia hopes Washington will not snub any Palestinian government that emerges from talks between the militants of Hamas and the more moderate Fatah faction. The U.S. and other nations have shunned the current government led by Hamas, which has refused to recognize Israel and renounce violence against the Jewish state.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, of Fatah, is trying to work out a new unity government with Hamas, but Arabs hope the U.S. will be flexible with how much Hamas must moderate to allow a resumption of the peace process with U.S. ally Israel.
Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries on the Persian Gulf are also deeply concerned over the West's confrontation with Iran over that nation's suspect nuclear program.
Gulf countries worry about the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran and its attempts to expand its influence in the Middle East. But they also fear the West's attempt to force Iran to rein in its program could bring Iranian reprisals.
Vice President Dick Cheney made a one-day visit to Saudi Arabia
All Things Considered: November 25, 2006DEBBIE ELLIOTT, host:
Vice President Dick Cheney made a one-day visit to Saudi Arabia today to hold talks with King Abdullah on the growing problem in Iraq. The two leaders also discussed other troubled spots in the region, such as the Palestinian territories.
NPR's Peter Kenyon has more.
PETER KENYON: Officials said the agenda for the meeting between Cheney and King Abdullah included what to do about the violence in Iraq that appears to be worsening week by week, how to deal with the political crisis in Lebanon that has the government on the edge of collapse, as well as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the question of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Iraq was seen as the top item on the agenda, primarily because this coming Wednesday, President Bush is scheduled to meet with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
It's not clear what Maliki will gain from his meeting with Bush, due to take place in Amman, Jordan. It is clear what he could lose, the support of a key Shiite faction in the Iraqi government, the one loyal to the cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, which is threatening to walk out if Maliki goes ahead with the meeting.
In Cairo today, Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal raised the specter of a third Palestinian Intifada. He said it could come in six months if there isn't progress towards a comprehensive peace agreement. Meshaal insisted that such an agreement would have to include Israel giving up all the land it has occupied since the 1967 War.
Peter Kenyon, NPR News, Cairo.
ELLIOTT: In a related development today, Israeli President Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas have announced a ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip. Israel has mounted a series of raids and airstrikes there, which they maintain are to stop militants from firing rockets into Israel. The ceasefire is set to go into effect at 6:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, ending a five month conflict.
Copyright ©2007 National Public Radio®. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to National Public Radio. This transcript may not be reproduced in whole or in part without prior written permission. For further information, please contact NPR's Permissions Coordinator at (202) 513-2030.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.
Vice President Dick Cheney made a one-day visit to Saudi Arabia today to hold talks with King Abdullah on the growing problem in Iraq. The two leaders also discussed other troubled spots in the region, such as the Palestinian territories.
NPR's Peter Kenyon has more.
PETER KENYON: Officials said the agenda for the meeting between Cheney and King Abdullah included what to do about the violence in Iraq that appears to be worsening week by week, how to deal with the political crisis in Lebanon that has the government on the edge of collapse, as well as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the question of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Iraq was seen as the top item on the agenda, primarily because this coming Wednesday, President Bush is scheduled to meet with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
It's not clear what Maliki will gain from his meeting with Bush, due to take place in Amman, Jordan. It is clear what he could lose, the support of a key Shiite faction in the Iraqi government, the one loyal to the cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, which is threatening to walk out if Maliki goes ahead with the meeting.
In Cairo today, Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal raised the specter of a third Palestinian Intifada. He said it could come in six months if there isn't progress towards a comprehensive peace agreement. Meshaal insisted that such an agreement would have to include Israel giving up all the land it has occupied since the 1967 War.
Peter Kenyon, NPR News, Cairo.
ELLIOTT: In a related development today, Israeli President Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas have announced a ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip. Israel has mounted a series of raids and airstrikes there, which they maintain are to stop militants from firing rockets into Israel. The ceasefire is set to go into effect at 6:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, ending a five month conflict.
Copyright ©2007 National Public Radio®. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to National Public Radio. This transcript may not be reproduced in whole or in part without prior written permission. For further information, please contact NPR's Permissions Coordinator at (202) 513-2030.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.
Friday, July 18, 2008
2nd Letter to Mr Lou Dobb's regarding his HYPOCRISY
8.8 Billion USD (Dollars) missing from the Profound Success, you INSIST to proclaim, in Iraq.
What about Afghanistan?
Financial Services Mr. Dobbs? What has happened to the Financial Services in this country MR. Dobbs? Did the ILLEGALS do this Mr. Dobbs? Did Obama Mr. Dobbs?
Seems to me, McCain should have warned the American People since he has the experience in the S & L SCANDAL in the eighties? You recall that don’t you Mr. Dobbs? Where is that 8.8 BILLION USD?
Cost-Plus Contracting has KILLED many of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan while taking a shower. To this date, have you reported any of this? If so, when. Once again, your hypocrisy of “supporting” our troops is reflective of your lack of reporting and knowledge. Once again, you have failed to inform your audience of the CORRUPT Execution of this debacle in Iraq and who knows where else, because you surely don’t report of seem to know.
It seems that you are sure ready to spout off your rhetoric on the age of Mr. Obama, the “YOUNG” Senator. Seems to me, Dick Cheney was of a particular age you seem to favor. What good was that Mr Dobbs?
What about Afghanistan?
Oh yes. Please Mr. Dobbs, tell us more please! Keep reminding us of the Profound Success in Iraq that you insist to proclaim.
What about Afghanistan?
Again Mr. Dobbs, what is YOUR AGENDA?
What about Afghanistan?
Financial Services Mr. Dobbs? What has happened to the Financial Services in this country MR. Dobbs? Did the ILLEGALS do this Mr. Dobbs? Did Obama Mr. Dobbs?
Seems to me, McCain should have warned the American People since he has the experience in the S & L SCANDAL in the eighties? You recall that don’t you Mr. Dobbs? Where is that 8.8 BILLION USD?
Cost-Plus Contracting has KILLED many of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan while taking a shower. To this date, have you reported any of this? If so, when. Once again, your hypocrisy of “supporting” our troops is reflective of your lack of reporting and knowledge. Once again, you have failed to inform your audience of the CORRUPT Execution of this debacle in Iraq and who knows where else, because you surely don’t report of seem to know.
It seems that you are sure ready to spout off your rhetoric on the age of Mr. Obama, the “YOUNG” Senator. Seems to me, Dick Cheney was of a particular age you seem to favor. What good was that Mr Dobbs?
What about Afghanistan?
Oh yes. Please Mr. Dobbs, tell us more please! Keep reminding us of the Profound Success in Iraq that you insist to proclaim.
What about Afghanistan?
Again Mr. Dobbs, what is YOUR AGENDA?
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Lou Dobbs, HAS FAILED his viewers
Lou Dobbs: If I recall, Gen Petreaus advised Congress and GW Bush that there would be a small window of opportunity! This profound success is exactly what? Have we stopped paying the Sunnis and Shias? Is the window closing or when did that window close? So we know this success is REAL, like you proclaim to be. Exactly what is the success here Lou Dobbs?
You are doing a great job keeping the AMERICANS as IGNORANT as your opinions. Just a tip: opinions are like buttocks, we all have one!
Lou, I thought your expertise was money ? Yet, your devotion to attack Obama throughout your show is quire blatant. But that is ok.
I am curious Mr. Dobbs, when and where was your last trip out of this country? You really need to inform your audience of your passport history. Just so we can verify your expertise when the knowledge we are seeking, from the MEDIA, (which includes you, RADIO and CNN) for information regarding foreign policy or international relations? Please educate us of all your WORLDLY experience. Please Mr. Dobbs, show us!
One last thing, for now, you, Lou Dobbs, HAS FAILED your viewers with incorrect, TRUE information regarding our country’s Financial Institutes in this country! You are an ECONOMIST, or at least PROCLAIM to be. Where have you been Mr. Dobbs? This has not happened over night. Just where have you been? You are a complete FRAUD. And have failed to expose this fraud that is now just sprouting. How long have you known about this fraudulent economy?
You have an agenda. But maybe you can try some real TRUTH and let us know what you REALLY WANT? By the way, I never hear you propose any real answers to all your WHINING!
You are doing a great job keeping the AMERICANS as IGNORANT as your opinions. Just a tip: opinions are like buttocks, we all have one!
Lou, I thought your expertise was money ? Yet, your devotion to attack Obama throughout your show is quire blatant. But that is ok.
I am curious Mr. Dobbs, when and where was your last trip out of this country? You really need to inform your audience of your passport history. Just so we can verify your expertise when the knowledge we are seeking, from the MEDIA, (which includes you, RADIO and CNN) for information regarding foreign policy or international relations? Please educate us of all your WORLDLY experience. Please Mr. Dobbs, show us!
One last thing, for now, you, Lou Dobbs, HAS FAILED your viewers with incorrect, TRUE information regarding our country’s Financial Institutes in this country! You are an ECONOMIST, or at least PROCLAIM to be. Where have you been Mr. Dobbs? This has not happened over night. Just where have you been? You are a complete FRAUD. And have failed to expose this fraud that is now just sprouting. How long have you known about this fraudulent economy?
You have an agenda. But maybe you can try some real TRUTH and let us know what you REALLY WANT? By the way, I never hear you propose any real answers to all your WHINING!
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Since Poulsen's trial is now set to begin Oct. 1, it pushes the trial of James K. Happ, another former National Century executive, to Dec. 1.
Now why is this delay for Happ occurring? After the NOVEMBER election of course. Does any reporter really know where Happ is form or what his job at NCFE really was? If so, no one has yet to connect the dot!
Who does Happ really know? (Hint: Bush Connection)
The former CEO of National Century Financial Enterprises Inc. has successfully put off his trial on fraud-related charges by two months.
A federal judge ruled Friday that Lance Poulsen, the leader of the Dublin-based health-care financing company before it collapsed in 2002, will begin facing charges of securities fraud and conspiracy on Oct. 1 instead of Aug. 4. U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley granted Poulsen's July 7 continuance request after Poulsen's attorneys argued they needed more time to review 40 boxes of documents the government is scheduled to make available between now and August.
"A two-month continuance will ensure that Poulsen has the time to obtain and review the documents that he plausibly claims are central to his theories of defense," Marbley wrote in his July 11 order.
Since Poulsen's trial is now set to begin Oct. 1, it pushes the trial of James K. Happ, another former National Century executive, to Dec. 1. Poulsen and Happ have both pleaded not guilty.
Poulsen, 65, co-founded National Century in 1991, building it into a major health-care financing company. It specialized in buying receivables from medical providers at a discount, which gave the health-care businesses the quick cash they needed. The receivables were then packaged as asset-backed bonds and sold to investors.
But National Century fell into Chapter 11 bankruptcy six years ago. The Justice Department alleged Poulsen and other executives ran a sophisticated Ponzi scheme that bilked investors out of nearly $2 billion. Poulsen pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy, securities fraud, wire fraud, money laundering conspiracy and concealment of money laundering.
Five other former National Century executives were found guilty in March of running a multiyear securities fraud at National Century. Poulsen was scheduled to go on trial with them, but his day in court on those charges was delayed because the government also accused him of trying to tamper with a witness.
Shortly after the March convictions of the five executives, Poulsen stood trial on the witness tampering charges. A jury found him and an associate, Karl Demmler, guilty of trying to bribe a government witness who is planning to testify against Poulsen in his securities fraud trial.
Who does Happ really know? (Hint: Bush Connection)
The former CEO of National Century Financial Enterprises Inc. has successfully put off his trial on fraud-related charges by two months.
A federal judge ruled Friday that Lance Poulsen, the leader of the Dublin-based health-care financing company before it collapsed in 2002, will begin facing charges of securities fraud and conspiracy on Oct. 1 instead of Aug. 4. U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley granted Poulsen's July 7 continuance request after Poulsen's attorneys argued they needed more time to review 40 boxes of documents the government is scheduled to make available between now and August.
"A two-month continuance will ensure that Poulsen has the time to obtain and review the documents that he plausibly claims are central to his theories of defense," Marbley wrote in his July 11 order.
Since Poulsen's trial is now set to begin Oct. 1, it pushes the trial of James K. Happ, another former National Century executive, to Dec. 1. Poulsen and Happ have both pleaded not guilty.
Poulsen, 65, co-founded National Century in 1991, building it into a major health-care financing company. It specialized in buying receivables from medical providers at a discount, which gave the health-care businesses the quick cash they needed. The receivables were then packaged as asset-backed bonds and sold to investors.
But National Century fell into Chapter 11 bankruptcy six years ago. The Justice Department alleged Poulsen and other executives ran a sophisticated Ponzi scheme that bilked investors out of nearly $2 billion. Poulsen pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy, securities fraud, wire fraud, money laundering conspiracy and concealment of money laundering.
Five other former National Century executives were found guilty in March of running a multiyear securities fraud at National Century. Poulsen was scheduled to go on trial with them, but his day in court on those charges was delayed because the government also accused him of trying to tamper with a witness.
Shortly after the March convictions of the five executives, Poulsen stood trial on the witness tampering charges. A jury found him and an associate, Karl Demmler, guilty of trying to bribe a government witness who is planning to testify against Poulsen in his securities fraud trial.
Recruitment of fraud examiners is a priority for a lot of companies and government agencies....
It's a lovely night in Boston, a perfect night to kick off a conference – in this case the annual Fraud Conference hosted by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. About 2,000 people are attending this year's event, which seems to have pleased the ACFE's staff.
Tonight was all about a soft introduction to the conference. The exhibit hall was open and fortified with four open bars, at least two hors d'oeuvre and one dessert table, and several hundred people wandering about and catching up with each other.
"Unfortunately, it's a good time to be a fraud examiner," one person remarked. Aside from the increased focus corporate fraud is receiving from authorities for reasons ranging from terrorism to a general increase in awareness, anti-fraud operations face many of the same challenges other financial departments must contend with: more work to do, but too few accountants to do it with.
In my own rounds of the exhibit hall, I found an interested mix of organizations, not all of whom are here to peddle their services. Recruitment of fraud examiners is a priority for a lot of companies and government agencies. Here's a sampling:
The National Reconnaissance Office
Naval Criminal Investigative Servide
Secret Service
National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association
I2 Software
Fraud Exchange Software
Huron Consulting Group
Georgia Southern University College of Business Administration
U.S. Postal Inspection Service
Deloitte
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Internal Revenue Service
Institute for Fraud Prevention
Not all of these folks are here with a focus on recruitment, though that seems to be precisely why the government agencies have set up booths. What's interesting about the list is the range of opportunities it illustrates. On top of government, there are software companies here, industry associations, several publishers and a number of service providers.
http://jobsinthemoney.blogspot.com/2008/07/fraud-conference.html
Tonight was all about a soft introduction to the conference. The exhibit hall was open and fortified with four open bars, at least two hors d'oeuvre and one dessert table, and several hundred people wandering about and catching up with each other.
"Unfortunately, it's a good time to be a fraud examiner," one person remarked. Aside from the increased focus corporate fraud is receiving from authorities for reasons ranging from terrorism to a general increase in awareness, anti-fraud operations face many of the same challenges other financial departments must contend with: more work to do, but too few accountants to do it with.
In my own rounds of the exhibit hall, I found an interested mix of organizations, not all of whom are here to peddle their services. Recruitment of fraud examiners is a priority for a lot of companies and government agencies. Here's a sampling:
The National Reconnaissance Office
Naval Criminal Investigative Servide
Secret Service
National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association
I2 Software
Fraud Exchange Software
Huron Consulting Group
Georgia Southern University College of Business Administration
U.S. Postal Inspection Service
Deloitte
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Internal Revenue Service
Institute for Fraud Prevention
Not all of these folks are here with a focus on recruitment, though that seems to be precisely why the government agencies have set up booths. What's interesting about the list is the range of opportunities it illustrates. On top of government, there are software companies here, industry associations, several publishers and a number of service providers.
http://jobsinthemoney.blogspot.com/2008/07/fraud-conference.html
Free Market! Isn't that the American Way?
BUSH PROMOTES DRILLING!!! JEBB IS OUT OF OFFICE!!!
NOW WHO IN THE WORLD WOULD LISTEN TO ANYTHING BUSH HAS TO SAY? YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!! THE ROOSTERS ARE COMING HOME!!
NO REGULATION! KEEP GOVERNMENT OUT! NO OVERSIGHT!
Remember, 2000, BUSH GAVE TAX CUTS TO SUV PURCHASES AND VEHICLES OVER A SPECIFIC TONAGE! BUSH PROMOTES DRILLING!!!
For the last 20 years, we have heard how the FREE MARKET, is the way to prosperity with little or no oversight of government involvemnet.
This is also the approach to the Health Care system in America. The reason the Finanacial Industry is so CRITICAL, is becuase this has effected the GLOBAL MARKET, not isolating or subjecting to just the effect to AMERICANS as the Health Care System does.
NOW WHO IN THE WORLD WOULD LISTEN TO ANYTHING BUSH HAS TO SAY? YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!! THE ROOSTERS ARE COMING HOME!!
NO REGULATION! KEEP GOVERNMENT OUT! NO OVERSIGHT!
Remember, 2000, BUSH GAVE TAX CUTS TO SUV PURCHASES AND VEHICLES OVER A SPECIFIC TONAGE! BUSH PROMOTES DRILLING!!!
For the last 20 years, we have heard how the FREE MARKET, is the way to prosperity with little or no oversight of government involvemnet.
This is also the approach to the Health Care system in America. The reason the Finanacial Industry is so CRITICAL, is becuase this has effected the GLOBAL MARKET, not isolating or subjecting to just the effect to AMERICANS as the Health Care System does.
Drill! Drill! Dril!!! Is that all you can do?
Is there anything else this half - Educated , LOW INFORMED Nation can think of,t hen to continually live and breath for the FINITE, (Get your Webster out) Resource of OIL!!
Does anyone value EDUCATION or KNOWLEDGE from EXPERIENCE that will HELP US?
Such as T Boone!!!
By Dan Reed, USA TODAY
SWEETWATER, Texas — Get ready, America, T. Boone Pickens is coming to your living room.
The legendary Texas oilman, corporate raider, shareholder-rights crusader, philanthropist and deep-pocketed moneyman for conservative politicians and causes, wants to drive the USA's political and economic agenda.
"We're paying $700 billion a year for foreign oil. It's breaking us as a nation, and I want to elevate that question to the presidential debate, to make it the No. 1 issue of the campaign this year," Pickens says.
Today, Pickens will take the wraps off what he's calling the Pickens Plan for cutting the USA's demand for foreign oil by more than a third in less than a decade. To promote it, he is bankrolling what his aides say will be the biggest public policy ad campaign ever. The website, pickensplan.com, goes live today.
Jay Rosser, Pickens' ever-present public relations man, promises that Pickens' face will be seen on Americans' televisions this fall almost as frequently as John McCain's and Barack Obama's.
"Neither presidential candidate is talking about solving the oil problem. So we're going to make 'em talk about it," Pickens says.
"Nixon said in 1970 that we were importing 20% of our oil and that by 1980 it would be 0%. That didn't happen," Pickens says. "It went to 42% in 1991 with the Gulf War. It's just under 70% now. Where do you think we're going to be in 10 years when our economy is busted and we're importing 80% of our oil?"
Finding solutions to other major issues, including health care, are important, he concedes. But "If you don't solve the energy problem, it's going to break us before we even get to solving health care and some of these other important issues." And it has to be done with the same sense of urgency that President Eisenhower had when he pushed the rapid development of the interstate highway system during the Cold War.
Of course, Pickens also has a particular solution in mind.
Wind. And natural gas.
Last week, Pickens loaded up his $60 million, top-of-the-line Gulfstream G550 corporate jet with reporters and a few associates from his Dallas-based BP Capital energy hedge fund and related companies and flew here to illustrate just how big — and achievable — his vision is.
There's not much to Sweetwater except for wild grasses, scraggy mesquite trees and rattlesnakes (Sweetwater hosts its famous Rattlesnake Roundup each spring). The gently rolling terrain and vegetation make it ideal for raising cattle, which is what its first settlers did in the 19th century, and what their descendants do today. A regional oil boom in the 1950s and 1960s poured money into the area's economy, as have two oil revivals since: one in the 1980s and one now.
But the exciting new industry in town is wind energy. You can drive for 150 miles along Interstate 20 and never be out of sight of a giant wind turbine, claims Sweetwater Mayor Greg Wortham, who does double duty as executive director of the West Texas Wind Energy Consortium.
Were it a country all by itself, Nolan County, Texas, would rank sixth on the list of wind-energy-producing nations, says Wortham. Year-round wind conditions, the terrain, low land prices and a small population make it an ideal location for wind farms. It already produces more wind-generated electricity in a year than all of California. And the business is growing so fast that he struggles to define it by numbers. By year's end, there'll be more than 1,500 turbines in Nolan County, representing a $5 billion investment. In the multicounty Rolling Plains region, there are already 2,000 operating turbines.
Add those operating further west, the Permian Basin region around Midland and Odessa, and the entire area has more than 3,000 turbines operating, producing about 6,000 megawatts of electricity — about equal to the power produced by two to three nuclear power plants.
Growth potential
The growth potential is, well, electrifying.
New turbine towers are going up at a rate of three to four a day in the Sweetwater area, Wortham says. "It depends on the (Texas) Public Utility Commission, but the number could be 20,000 ultimately," Wortham says.
Pickens, who over the past two years has become the USA's biggest wind-power booster, is quick to note that "there could be lots of Sweetwaters out there," especially in the nation's midsection, where winds are ideal for power generation.
Indeed, though Sweetwater is a windy place, plenty of locations farther north in the Great Plains are even better suited to wind farming. One is about 250 miles north of Sweetwater, near Pampa, northeast of Amarillo in the Texas Panhandle. That's where Pickens is building what would be the world's largest wind farm, four times larger than the current titleholder near here. So far, he has spent $2 billion on the project, including a record purchase of nearly 700 wind turbines this year from General Electric. He expects to spend up to $10 billion on the project and to begin generating electricity in 2011.
Though Pickens doesn't own a single wind turbine in the Sweetwater area, Wortham was eager to play host to the oil baron and the reporters traveling with him. Sweetwater, he says, is proof that wind power has much more potential than its many skeptics believe.
"People hear about the 8-foot-tall wind turbines at Logan airport in Boston or the five turbines at Atlantic City and think 'interesting,' " Wortham says. "But they don't see how we can get to the 300,000-megawatt-production level" established by the Bush administration as a national goal for 2030. "Once you come to Sweetwater, you see that it can be done, and be done pretty easily, not only here, but … anywhere there are prime wind conditions. None of this existed seven years ago. Now, we produce enough electricity in this one county to power a large city, and we do it cheaply and cleanly."
Getting lots more electricity with wind is only half of the Pickens Plan. Increasing wind-power production by itself won't reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil because most of that oil is consumed as gasoline.
The key, Pickens says, is that wind energy can be used as a substitute for natural gas now burned to generate electricity. That, in turn, will make far more natural gas available for use as a transportation fuel. Pickens' plan is to produce enough wind power within 10 years to divert 20% of the natural gas now used to fuel power plants for use in cars and trucks. That's much more aggressive a growth plan for the development of wind energy than envisioned by the Department of Energy, which doesn't expect the USA to be getting 20% of its total energy needs from wind until at least 2030.
Pickens foresees as many as a third of the vehicles running on natural gas within only a few years. Julius Pretterebner, director of the Global Oil Group at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, says getting 15% to 20% of the USA's cars to run on natural gas — in some cases, in mixtures with other fuels in dual-fuel vehicles — by 2020 would be an outstanding achievement, and doing that will require federal support to expand the necessary infrastructure.
Powering vehicles with compressed or liquefied natural gas, CNG or LNG, has been Pickens' pet project since the late 1980s.Yet the concept has been very slow to catch on.
Distribution is a major problem. CNG drivers can, like Pickens, install inexpensive equipment to fill up at their homes. But with fewer than 800 natural gas filling stations around the USA, drivers can't count on being able to fill up wherever they go. So, for the most part, CNG, or LNG, has remained limited to fleet operators, such as local bus companies or big-city police departments.
And that's where David Friedman, research director in the vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says most natural-gas-powered vehicles will continue to be operated because of the distribution problem, the lack of vehicles made specifically to run on CNG, and the cost of converting conventional vehicles to run on CNG.
"I honestly think (natural gas') role will be in medium- to heavy-duty vehicles and fleets — and as a stepping stone to hydrogen fuel-cell-powered vehicles in the future," Friedman says. Only one car, a version of the Honda Civic, is available from the factory ready for CNG fuel, he says, and only at a significant premium over the price of a conventionally fueled version.
If you build it …
Pickens aims to shout down the skeptics by taking his case to the people via his TV ad campaign. If the nation is to break its addiction to foreign oil, a network of CNG stations could be built along interstates and in major cities for a relatively small investment, he says. Some gasoline retailers have told him they would add CNG pumps to their stations once they're certain there'll be enough vehicles capable of running on natural gas to justify costs.
Washington, Pickens adds, can encourage the move to natural-gas-powered vehicles by providing modest economic incentives for fuel retailers to invest in CNG pumps at their stations, for automakers to build CNG-powered cars and for individuals to convert their existing vehicles to CNG use. And it should continue to provide tax incentives for another 10 years to encourage wind energy's rapid development as part of an overall plan to wean the nation from foreign oil, he says.
"It certainly would be cheaper than what they're doing already for nuclear," Pickens adds. But he's also in favor of developing more nuclear energy, and every form of alternative energy to reduce oil imports. "Try everything. Do everything. Nuclear. Biomass. Coal. Solar. You name it. I support them all," he says. "But there's only one energy source that can dramatically reduce the amount of oil we have to import each year, and that's (natural) gas."
Pickens is an outspoken believer in the so-called peak oil theory that holds that maximum world production has peaked at about 85 million barrels a day — vs. current demand of about 86 million barrels a day — and will never rise much above that even with lots of new drilling and production.
"Even people who continue driving gasoline-powered cars and trucks will benefit" from his plan, he says.
Critics could easily accuse Pickens of advocating a major new public policy initiative that will line his own pockets. He is, after all, a big player in both the wind power and natural gas businesses. Pickens says while his hedge fund will earn money for its investors, earning more money personally is meaningless: "I'm 80 years old and have $4 billion. I don't need any more money."
He's more concerned that his efforts to make reducing foreign oil dependency the No. 1 issue on the national agenda will be dismissed by the public and, therefore, by Washington. So he says he's carefully steering his plan clear of partisan bickering.
He's already enlisted an unlikely supporter: the Sierra Club. "I will be in the front row of the chorus cheering" him on, says Carl Pope, its executive director, who flew with Pickens to Sweetwater.
Pope sees wind and solar energy as inexpensive sources of power that, along with other non-carbon forms, can be pooled to greatly reduce the need for oil- and coal-fired electric-generating plants.
"When it's cloudy in Dallas and the wind's not blowing in Sweetwater, but the sun's blazing in the (Western) deserts, solar energy can run all those air conditioners in Dallas. When it's windy in Sweetwater and cloudy in the desert, wind energy from Sweetwater can heat homes in Chicago.
"Mr. Pickens and I probably don't see eye-to-eye on some other matters," Pope concedes. "But he's right on this one."
Setting goals, clearing roadblocks
Washington's role, Pope said, should be in setting the goal and clearing roadblocks such as the patchwork of state, regional and federal regulations that block the creation of a true national grid that can shift electricity from anywhere in the country to anywhere that it's needed.
Getting support from groups and people not ordinarily aligned with his conservative political views is important to Pickens. A lifelong Republican, he'll vote for McCain. But he's not involved with McCain's campaign, largely to keep his plan from being dismissed as mere campaign rhetoric.
"This has to be a bipartisan effort," says the man who four years ago offered $1 million to anyone who could disprove the charges made against Democrat nomine Sen. John Kerry by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
"This is not about Republicans vs. Democrats," Pickens says. "This is about saving our country from the ruination of spending $700 billion a year on oil imports. Ninety days after the oil hits our shores, it's all burned up, and we've got nothing to show for it. But they (foreign oil producers) still have our money. It's killing our economy."
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2008-07-08-t-boone-pickens-plan-wind-energy_N.htm
Does anyone value EDUCATION or KNOWLEDGE from EXPERIENCE that will HELP US?
Such as T Boone!!!
By Dan Reed, USA TODAY
SWEETWATER, Texas — Get ready, America, T. Boone Pickens is coming to your living room.
The legendary Texas oilman, corporate raider, shareholder-rights crusader, philanthropist and deep-pocketed moneyman for conservative politicians and causes, wants to drive the USA's political and economic agenda.
"We're paying $700 billion a year for foreign oil. It's breaking us as a nation, and I want to elevate that question to the presidential debate, to make it the No. 1 issue of the campaign this year," Pickens says.
Today, Pickens will take the wraps off what he's calling the Pickens Plan for cutting the USA's demand for foreign oil by more than a third in less than a decade. To promote it, he is bankrolling what his aides say will be the biggest public policy ad campaign ever. The website, pickensplan.com, goes live today.
Jay Rosser, Pickens' ever-present public relations man, promises that Pickens' face will be seen on Americans' televisions this fall almost as frequently as John McCain's and Barack Obama's.
"Neither presidential candidate is talking about solving the oil problem. So we're going to make 'em talk about it," Pickens says.
"Nixon said in 1970 that we were importing 20% of our oil and that by 1980 it would be 0%. That didn't happen," Pickens says. "It went to 42% in 1991 with the Gulf War. It's just under 70% now. Where do you think we're going to be in 10 years when our economy is busted and we're importing 80% of our oil?"
Finding solutions to other major issues, including health care, are important, he concedes. But "If you don't solve the energy problem, it's going to break us before we even get to solving health care and some of these other important issues." And it has to be done with the same sense of urgency that President Eisenhower had when he pushed the rapid development of the interstate highway system during the Cold War.
Of course, Pickens also has a particular solution in mind.
Wind. And natural gas.
Last week, Pickens loaded up his $60 million, top-of-the-line Gulfstream G550 corporate jet with reporters and a few associates from his Dallas-based BP Capital energy hedge fund and related companies and flew here to illustrate just how big — and achievable — his vision is.
There's not much to Sweetwater except for wild grasses, scraggy mesquite trees and rattlesnakes (Sweetwater hosts its famous Rattlesnake Roundup each spring). The gently rolling terrain and vegetation make it ideal for raising cattle, which is what its first settlers did in the 19th century, and what their descendants do today. A regional oil boom in the 1950s and 1960s poured money into the area's economy, as have two oil revivals since: one in the 1980s and one now.
But the exciting new industry in town is wind energy. You can drive for 150 miles along Interstate 20 and never be out of sight of a giant wind turbine, claims Sweetwater Mayor Greg Wortham, who does double duty as executive director of the West Texas Wind Energy Consortium.
Were it a country all by itself, Nolan County, Texas, would rank sixth on the list of wind-energy-producing nations, says Wortham. Year-round wind conditions, the terrain, low land prices and a small population make it an ideal location for wind farms. It already produces more wind-generated electricity in a year than all of California. And the business is growing so fast that he struggles to define it by numbers. By year's end, there'll be more than 1,500 turbines in Nolan County, representing a $5 billion investment. In the multicounty Rolling Plains region, there are already 2,000 operating turbines.
Add those operating further west, the Permian Basin region around Midland and Odessa, and the entire area has more than 3,000 turbines operating, producing about 6,000 megawatts of electricity — about equal to the power produced by two to three nuclear power plants.
Growth potential
The growth potential is, well, electrifying.
New turbine towers are going up at a rate of three to four a day in the Sweetwater area, Wortham says. "It depends on the (Texas) Public Utility Commission, but the number could be 20,000 ultimately," Wortham says.
Pickens, who over the past two years has become the USA's biggest wind-power booster, is quick to note that "there could be lots of Sweetwaters out there," especially in the nation's midsection, where winds are ideal for power generation.
Indeed, though Sweetwater is a windy place, plenty of locations farther north in the Great Plains are even better suited to wind farming. One is about 250 miles north of Sweetwater, near Pampa, northeast of Amarillo in the Texas Panhandle. That's where Pickens is building what would be the world's largest wind farm, four times larger than the current titleholder near here. So far, he has spent $2 billion on the project, including a record purchase of nearly 700 wind turbines this year from General Electric. He expects to spend up to $10 billion on the project and to begin generating electricity in 2011.
Though Pickens doesn't own a single wind turbine in the Sweetwater area, Wortham was eager to play host to the oil baron and the reporters traveling with him. Sweetwater, he says, is proof that wind power has much more potential than its many skeptics believe.
"People hear about the 8-foot-tall wind turbines at Logan airport in Boston or the five turbines at Atlantic City and think 'interesting,' " Wortham says. "But they don't see how we can get to the 300,000-megawatt-production level" established by the Bush administration as a national goal for 2030. "Once you come to Sweetwater, you see that it can be done, and be done pretty easily, not only here, but … anywhere there are prime wind conditions. None of this existed seven years ago. Now, we produce enough electricity in this one county to power a large city, and we do it cheaply and cleanly."
Getting lots more electricity with wind is only half of the Pickens Plan. Increasing wind-power production by itself won't reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil because most of that oil is consumed as gasoline.
The key, Pickens says, is that wind energy can be used as a substitute for natural gas now burned to generate electricity. That, in turn, will make far more natural gas available for use as a transportation fuel. Pickens' plan is to produce enough wind power within 10 years to divert 20% of the natural gas now used to fuel power plants for use in cars and trucks. That's much more aggressive a growth plan for the development of wind energy than envisioned by the Department of Energy, which doesn't expect the USA to be getting 20% of its total energy needs from wind until at least 2030.
Pickens foresees as many as a third of the vehicles running on natural gas within only a few years. Julius Pretterebner, director of the Global Oil Group at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, says getting 15% to 20% of the USA's cars to run on natural gas — in some cases, in mixtures with other fuels in dual-fuel vehicles — by 2020 would be an outstanding achievement, and doing that will require federal support to expand the necessary infrastructure.
Powering vehicles with compressed or liquefied natural gas, CNG or LNG, has been Pickens' pet project since the late 1980s.Yet the concept has been very slow to catch on.
Distribution is a major problem. CNG drivers can, like Pickens, install inexpensive equipment to fill up at their homes. But with fewer than 800 natural gas filling stations around the USA, drivers can't count on being able to fill up wherever they go. So, for the most part, CNG, or LNG, has remained limited to fleet operators, such as local bus companies or big-city police departments.
And that's where David Friedman, research director in the vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says most natural-gas-powered vehicles will continue to be operated because of the distribution problem, the lack of vehicles made specifically to run on CNG, and the cost of converting conventional vehicles to run on CNG.
"I honestly think (natural gas') role will be in medium- to heavy-duty vehicles and fleets — and as a stepping stone to hydrogen fuel-cell-powered vehicles in the future," Friedman says. Only one car, a version of the Honda Civic, is available from the factory ready for CNG fuel, he says, and only at a significant premium over the price of a conventionally fueled version.
If you build it …
Pickens aims to shout down the skeptics by taking his case to the people via his TV ad campaign. If the nation is to break its addiction to foreign oil, a network of CNG stations could be built along interstates and in major cities for a relatively small investment, he says. Some gasoline retailers have told him they would add CNG pumps to their stations once they're certain there'll be enough vehicles capable of running on natural gas to justify costs.
Washington, Pickens adds, can encourage the move to natural-gas-powered vehicles by providing modest economic incentives for fuel retailers to invest in CNG pumps at their stations, for automakers to build CNG-powered cars and for individuals to convert their existing vehicles to CNG use. And it should continue to provide tax incentives for another 10 years to encourage wind energy's rapid development as part of an overall plan to wean the nation from foreign oil, he says.
"It certainly would be cheaper than what they're doing already for nuclear," Pickens adds. But he's also in favor of developing more nuclear energy, and every form of alternative energy to reduce oil imports. "Try everything. Do everything. Nuclear. Biomass. Coal. Solar. You name it. I support them all," he says. "But there's only one energy source that can dramatically reduce the amount of oil we have to import each year, and that's (natural) gas."
Pickens is an outspoken believer in the so-called peak oil theory that holds that maximum world production has peaked at about 85 million barrels a day — vs. current demand of about 86 million barrels a day — and will never rise much above that even with lots of new drilling and production.
"Even people who continue driving gasoline-powered cars and trucks will benefit" from his plan, he says.
Critics could easily accuse Pickens of advocating a major new public policy initiative that will line his own pockets. He is, after all, a big player in both the wind power and natural gas businesses. Pickens says while his hedge fund will earn money for its investors, earning more money personally is meaningless: "I'm 80 years old and have $4 billion. I don't need any more money."
He's more concerned that his efforts to make reducing foreign oil dependency the No. 1 issue on the national agenda will be dismissed by the public and, therefore, by Washington. So he says he's carefully steering his plan clear of partisan bickering.
He's already enlisted an unlikely supporter: the Sierra Club. "I will be in the front row of the chorus cheering" him on, says Carl Pope, its executive director, who flew with Pickens to Sweetwater.
Pope sees wind and solar energy as inexpensive sources of power that, along with other non-carbon forms, can be pooled to greatly reduce the need for oil- and coal-fired electric-generating plants.
"When it's cloudy in Dallas and the wind's not blowing in Sweetwater, but the sun's blazing in the (Western) deserts, solar energy can run all those air conditioners in Dallas. When it's windy in Sweetwater and cloudy in the desert, wind energy from Sweetwater can heat homes in Chicago.
"Mr. Pickens and I probably don't see eye-to-eye on some other matters," Pope concedes. "But he's right on this one."
Setting goals, clearing roadblocks
Washington's role, Pope said, should be in setting the goal and clearing roadblocks such as the patchwork of state, regional and federal regulations that block the creation of a true national grid that can shift electricity from anywhere in the country to anywhere that it's needed.
Getting support from groups and people not ordinarily aligned with his conservative political views is important to Pickens. A lifelong Republican, he'll vote for McCain. But he's not involved with McCain's campaign, largely to keep his plan from being dismissed as mere campaign rhetoric.
"This has to be a bipartisan effort," says the man who four years ago offered $1 million to anyone who could disprove the charges made against Democrat nomine Sen. John Kerry by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
"This is not about Republicans vs. Democrats," Pickens says. "This is about saving our country from the ruination of spending $700 billion a year on oil imports. Ninety days after the oil hits our shores, it's all burned up, and we've got nothing to show for it. But they (foreign oil producers) still have our money. It's killing our economy."
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2008-07-08-t-boone-pickens-plan-wind-energy_N.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)