 | "Deeply Troubling" (or, wanna have a laugh/cry...?) | The Oil Drum | Peak Oil, Persuasion, and the World Meme |  |
DrumBeat: July 12, 2006
Posted by threadbot on July 12, 2006 - 9:25am
Citgo to Stop Selling Gas at U.S. Stations
CARACAS, Venezuela — Venezuela-owned Citgo Petroleum Corp. has decided to stop selling gasoline at some 1,800 stations in the United States following calls by President Hugo Chavez to nix contracts that benefit U.S. consumers more than Venezuelans.Citgo, which is wholly owned by Venezuela's state oil company, currently has to purchase 130,000 barrels a day from other refining companies to meet its service contracts at 13,100 stations across the U.S.
The Houston-based company has decided to sell only the 750,000 barrels a day that it produces at three U.S. refineries in Lake Charles, Louisiana, Corpus Christi, Texas, and Lemont, Illinois, according to a statement late Tuesday.
That will mean that over the next year Citgo will withdraw completely from 10 states and stop supplying some stations in four additional states, Citgo spokesman Fernando Garay said Wednesday.
Iran's mullahs promise to cover China's demand for energy
Chinese Ambassador to Tehran Leo Jen Tung conferred here Tuesday with the Head of Majlis Energy Commission Kamal Daneshyar on expansion of mutual cooperation on energy sector between the two countries.[Update by Leanan on 07/12/06 at 9:41 AM EDT]At the meeting, Daneshyar called for continued expansion of good relations between the two countries and voiced Iran's readiness to meet the demands of China in the energy sector.
The Mother Of All Battles: For Oil
Blair is going nuclear to avoid blackmail over gas
The BBC gives us a Guide to Russia's key energy clients
Malacañang Palace seeks to cushion new oil price hikes
Pakistan: Loadshedding across country planned
With no let up in energy crisis, the government is expected to start formal loadshedding and spread its duration evenly to different parts of the country to enable consumers to plan their life accordingly....He said the government believed that announcements in the past of no-loadshedding had been counter productive because there was nothing the government could have done when there was a clear gap between demand and supply. “It is better to face public and come up with shortest possible means to fill the gap,” said the senior official.
U.K.: TV standby buttons will be outlawed
THE Government is to outlaw standby switches on televisions and video and DVD players to cut the amount of electricity wasted in the home.Refrigerators, washing machines and dishwashers will have to become energy-efficient, and lightbulbs that burn too much energy will be phased out.
IEA sees oil supply growth exceeding demand in '07
When fuel is the price of champagne
[Update by Leanan on 07/12/06 at 10:48 AM EDT]
The Summary of Weekly Petroleum Data for the Week Ending July 7, 2006 has been released. There was a big draw on crude inventories. Price of oil is heading skyward.
[Update by Leanan on 07/12/06 at 2:21 PM EDT]
Oil sends trade deficit higher in May
WASHINGTON (AP) — America's trade deficit rose in May as the price of imported oil jumped by the largest amount since 1990 in the run-up to the first U.S.-Iraq war...."Oil is sucking us dry and even stronger world growth cannot keep the trade deficit from widening," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Ie what is used in the fractional distallation process NG ?
How much of each usable fraction from different types of oil do you get.
Can anyone confirm whether non-OPEC is up 1.1 mbpd day this year yet? I was under the impression that it was flat or delining, with the decline being made up by OPEC.
The best guess is that Russia and China have sided with Iran, and told the US/UK that they will not under any circumstances stand by while Iran is attacked. US expansionism has thus been brought to a rude halt.
Possible?
Soon the time will have run out on the latest offer made to the Iranians, and the Iranians will continue to try to drag it out without outright rejecting it. I doubt they have any intention of giving up the nuclear fuel cycle. So what will we do then - just say "ok, then, never mind"? Not likely, and the rhetoric is increasing already.
This is a regular strategy of these people, both domestically and otherwise - you use a tool like the UNSC to enable you to do what you want with some level of legitimacy, and if you cannot you do what you want anyway, and thereby destroy the credibility of the organization that opposed you. You count on the fact that no one will actually try to enforce the rules. In the end you have absorbed new powers.
BTW, I find it very interesting that the saber rattling over N Korea is so muted by the administration. It was the liberals who wanted a preemptive strike, while Cheney played it down. Why? Because they have nothing we want, and we must save the military force for those places resources we actually care about.
Definately not, but US has an experience of presenting defeat as a victory. Most certainly the neocons will impose unilateral measures - diplomatic restrictions, additional trade restrictions etc. Some satellites (UK) will also join for the measures to look more impressive. The practical effects will most likely range from mediocre to none, but the media can fume them enough to save the administration face.
I still consider attacking Iran as highly unlikely - whichever way you look at it, the consequesnces even from a limited air strike will be disastrous, and I can see it only as an act of desperation. I don't really believe that people with so much (money and power) to lose would act so short-sightedly.
yea, the US will make sure the embacy is closed, stop buying oil, and the important date trade.
Now, if nuclear reactors didn't exist as an option for civian power...what WOULD be the reason for Iran to have such for power?
(the %5 link - because I just find out and wanna share how selling Iran oil mattered....)
http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2006/07/greening-antarctica.html#comments
COTA to slam brakes on transit options
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Tim Doulin
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
COTA might abandon any attempt to add light rail, streetcars or bus rapid transit.
The Central Ohio Transit Authority has been studying all three, but none qualifies for federal funding right now, officials said.
COTA President William Lhota will share today with the agency's board preliminary findings of a study that looked at how much each option would cost and how each would affect such things as noise, traffic, parking and the environment.
The same findings will be shared in public meetings over the next month. Lhota wants to hear from the public before recommending to the board at its July meeting whether to continue pursuing one of the options.
"At this time, based on everything that we know, it is our plan in July to recommend to the board that we not proceed any further," Lhota said yesterday.
There has been talk of a light-rail system in central Ohio since the 1970s. As recently as 1999, voters rejected a levy request that would have funded light rail.
From 2002 to the end of April of this year, $13 million, including about $367,000 in COTA money, has been spent to study the feasibility for light rail, bus rapid transit and streetcars.
As mandated by the Federal Transit Administration, COTA in the last year weighed the capital costs of each of the three transit options against projected ridership, travel-time savings and other benefits.
COTA found that light-rail and streetcar options each would cost $510 million to $640 million to build and would have a projected average weekday ridership of 9,000 to 18,000.
Bus rapid transit would cost $225 million to $375 million to build and have a projected average weekday ridership of 6,000 to 9,000.
Under the federal guidelines, light-rail and streetcar options would have a cost-effective index of $60 to $100 and bus rapid transit would be $35 to $45.
The FTA requires an index of $23 or less.
"The bottom line is that, when you cut through all of this, light rail, streetcar or bus rapid transit do not meet the current criteria for federal funding," Lhota said.
Federal funding would cover as much as 50 percent of capital costs.
"The FTA approval process is complicated and, from my perspective, has always been a moving target," said Bill Porter COTA board chairman.
"While this is a disappointment to the short-term future of alternative modes of transportation in central Ohio, it does not mean that light rail, streetcars or bus rapid transit will never be a reality in our community."
COTA would need local taxpayer support to fund about 25 percent of a rapid-transit system.
COTA still plans to seek voter approval for a tax-levy increase on the November ballot. If the board drops the thought of alternative transit, money from an approved levy would be used to enhance bus service.
"We still need a levy to pay for expanded bus and paratransit service necessary to alleviate crowding and lack of service in some areas," Lhota said.
COTA's study is separate from the city's streetcar study. Earlier this year, Mayor Michael B. Coleman created a 42-member panel to study streetcar service for Downtown.
Karl Gelfer, a COTA rider for more than 30 years, said that while he supports light rail, COTA shouldn't pursue it at this time.
"The voters don't want it," said Gelfer, a retired state worker who lives in Clintonville.
"The bus service needs to improve before we go with a light-rail option."
URL is:
http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/06/06/20060606-A1-01.html
In this case, Columbus Ohio is denied a chance at a non-oil transportation alternative because of limited Federal funds and limited local support.
Yesterday, it was about how Manila increased rail capacity by 50% by just buying more rolling stock, a VERY economic scaling effect. (My guess, +10% costs, +50% capacity)
Rail typically scales up beautifully, unit costs go down (strongly) as volume goes up. Add miles anywhere on the system and this will add ridership density on every existing mile and every station. Transit Orientated Development speeds up the larger the system grows.
I rarely get comments with these articles though. Are they of value ?
Keep 'em coming! Most of us TODers have very little knowledge of RR and mass-transit. I try and soak it up just like I try to absorb the info series on Shale oil.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I'd like to take up your invitation with a few thoughts on light rail. As a child, I lived in Oak Park, IL, within easy walking distance of a stop on the Elevated system. It was very convenient: from there, a dime would get me almost anywhere in Chicago. At that time also (1930s) there were connections from the downtown "loop," or from convenient stations, with electric interurban routes to points up to 50 miles or so away in northern Indiana and west and southwest of Chicago, as well as north 90 miles to Milwaukee. All these were heavily used commuter lines. All this was in addition to the "heavy rail" local and commuting services.
In the early part of the century, electric power use was heavy in the winter months and somewhat slack in the summer. In order to balance the load, power companies across the country, especially in the north, invested in amusement parks where there was light rail access. I can't speak for other areas, but around Chicago, the interurban lines were built as part of a utility holding company pyramid scheme headed by Sam Insull, that collapsed in 1929, taking some of my Dad's stock with it. However, the electric lines continued to operate beyond the depression years. The need for summer load balance turned around after the war, with the spread of air conditioning.
In my view, the public and political resistance (re: Ohio, in this thread) is simply stupid and short-sighted. It appears to stem from it being seen as antique or quaint -- nostalgic and just not "progress" -- therefore unwanted. But, dammit, it WORKED!
Cheers,
-- Mort.
There have been efforts to kill it/grab the real estate from right of way using precisely the quaint & antiquated story. But it still WORKS.
IME, people tend to just scroll by large chunks of text.
But, rest assured, it is appreciated...along with your tidbits of life in New Orleans.
Rick
I have to admitt, though, that I very often scroll down, whenever it gets too technical, or too specific to certain US locations.
Absolutely, your posts have great value, especially if you are living in the US, but less so on this side of the Atlantic.
I'm having a great time at TOD. You could wipe me off the floor reading that OPEC does not belief PO "theory". That debat is over; PO is not a theory, it's a physical certainty. OPEC may belief that it is at least decades away, but claiming they do not belief in PO is for sure a lie. Ask Indonesia.
So, keep up the good work. It will be appreciated.
Casey Jones
If you want to add "and this is why New Orleans is one of only 3 cites worth saving" and I'll respond telling you to go pound sand.
Rubber VS road - 40 lbs of force to move a ton. Steel wheels VS steel track - 5 lbs of foce to move a ton. It is a 'DUH' issue. So what are you looking for? A 'thanks' each time you point out how much better tail is?
Actually I've never heard Alan mention anything about tail. Rail, yes, but no tail. Interesting Freudian slip though.
Does anyone (worldwide) use gondola technology to enhance rail? I would think that this type of technology could be used to move goods and people over and thru areas where even light rail would be expensive to implement.
There is a ski-lift type gondola system from Manhatten to small island 1/2 way to Queens. From distant memory, seats about 60. Used by commuters.
Probably a few more examples.
In the overwhelming # of cases, rail works best for higher volumes of people.
Or...here's a vision...a micro-gondola device that can traverse power lines...even in rural areas. Perhaps the poles would have some widget added to allow the micro-gondola to by-pass them. It could be used as a "package" delivery device . I wonder how much additional weight the average power line can hold?
They are quite common in former east europe.
As far as I know no such system is in use in Sweden. The proposals have so far lost out to biogas or ethanol busses or more ambitious proposals for tramways, most of them not yet built. And there allays someone who somewere tries to sell some track-taxi concept.
Reminds me that I once heard that the reason for the hight of overpasses on the original German autobahns were to provide clearance to electrifie truck traffic. Trucks were smaller in the 1930:s.
I dont think there are any pressing reasons for complete automation of passanger traffic since there probably will be plenty of people competing for the driving jobs.
Gondolas on power poles will need some new kind of power pole system but the electricity distributors would perhaps prefer a cablification. Cables in the ground are much more reliable and are very storm resistant, they also look better, that is not at all. :-) I have seen power poles on manny US programs and it look a little thirld-world cobbled togeather. Perhaps they are popular due to a need for a much larger number of transformers to save on expensive thick 110V wiers?
Anyhow, I would image that a new power line micro-gondola system would eventually be rather attractive. I think a box about the size of a typical office desk could work (6'x3'x3'). Perhaps the power companies would get rid of that "third world cobbled together" look over time. I can image my "take out Chinese" dinner arriving in minimal time (kept warm by a built-in hot plate device) -- as the delivery gondola slips silently up to my house (while my car stays silently parked in the driveway).
The standard over here is that if you cut a cable you pay unless you have asked for a free cable marking and then you only pay if you dig at the marking. If the cable is at the wrong location the power distributor pays.
You mean if ground level transformers and switches get flooded? Regular PEX insulated cables are water proof and most of them are also used in water, they even work better in wet ground when loaded since that provides a little cooling.
I have onle seen very short press release versions of cost comparisions. Cables won when comparing the whole multi decade life lenght, they do probably not win if the intrest rate is high. Cheap labour might change the calcualtion but the material cost should be about the same globally if you are a large distributor.
And there might be other reasons, people here dont like overhead wiers, they look ugly, farmers dont like to have poles in their fields and poles alongside roads is an additional traffic risk. Large parts of Denmark looks better then Sweden and one of the reasons is that the have cablified more. But the main reason is reliability during storms and the cost of having service people waiting everywhere. Power line building and maintainance is no longer local busines as it used to be over here and cablifieing is a technological way of providing the same kind of reliability.
Almost the only new power poles installed for voltages less then some 20 kV are where the ground is bedrock or full of stone blocks and there insulated wiers or cables depending on how you define them are regularly used. They can handle a tree leaning on them withouth interrupting service and if a whole forest goes down modern linkage breaks in a controlled way saving the poles, I dont know if the cables are tough enough to survive that. My guess is that damaged insulation is ok as long as the wire/cable are strong enough to be rehung in the poles isolators if you have a real emergency. In the same way as emergency 20 kV ground cables were left on open ground to get repairs done faster, this gave some fireworks when forestry machines rolled over them but I dont think anyone were killed.
Micro gondolas sound like a very fun idea to contemplate and calculate. I have read about simmilar compressed air tube-transportation ideas or micro wehicle in small culvert ideas. They have a problem with the capital cost for building the system. Your micro gondola system is unfortunately not something for where I live since it probably will have a hard time with ice on the powerlines.
My guess for future logistics is much more rail combi traffic with local battery or plug in hybrid distribution wehicles and probably manny packet/post offices to collect packages at the same time as doing other buinesses.
The local trend in Sweden is a now completed closure of most traditional complete service post offices over 15 years. Probably since the dismantling the cash only spare banking infrastructure in case of WW 3 and definately due to the arrival of internet banking overtaking the payment order system we used instead of cheques. This has been replaced with a more fine grained system of small delivery points in shops and larger kiosks for collecting packages and mail to big to fit in your mailbox.
In my home town is a small logistics central being established to recieve heavy trucks and repackage the deliveries to small biogas driven delivery trucks thus getting rid of heavy and awkward delivery traffic in the city center and saving a fair ammount of fuel. It is situated so that a railway spur can be added later. We are not yet ready for the second or third(?) try for getting light rail combo traffic going with small containers. And such a system is technically an easy one.
It would be not just for postal package delivery, but also for normal retail transactions. Perhaps the micro gondolas would have "line heaters" where necessary.
The first niches that make sense seem to be deliveries to disabled people and high profile luxuries that were fun as internet ghee-whiz.
This part is fairly independant of delivery via optimised car routes, compresse air mail tube or micro gondolas. But the staff and capital cost and delivery times are of course different.
If you want to solve this figure out chilled gondolas, freezer gondolas and why not also heated gondolas.
Line heating has been used to defrost high tension lines but it eats power since it essentially means turning the power line into one long resistiv heater in freely moving cold air. Dont bother with the minus celsius part of the market. If you get people to want any kind of system like this you have done good and if you get something workable that is better then small delivery trucks in any climate you have done even better.
A real problem is that if a truck gets stuck under a bridge, the bus can't divert to go around it, adding to the traffic jam. Plus you can't easally turn a bus around unless it had an onboard emergency genset. (not a bad idea given upcoming chronic rolling blackouts!)
http://www.ruf.dk
A power company could attach micro-gondolas to the tops of existing power poles. They could start (after peak oil makes this look more sensible of course) by delivering the most popular single trip items on the most popular routes. They could have Pizza, Chinese food, diapers, cigarettes, DVDs, and beer & wine delivery to a selection of "destination poles" in big neighborhoods. The pilot project would branch out from the initial network -- just walk down to your neighborhood community center and wait for the gondola to deliver your dinner!
Could. Most poles that are installed are ment to hold up wires. Not the forces of a gondola.
Go talk to the engineers at the power company and ask for the design calcs.
Then, visit a gondola firm and ask to see the force calcs for their towers.
Also look about - how many power poles have 'gondola obstructions'?
That stuff looks like it requires a lot more real estate and equipment investment than my micro-gondola concept.
In some magical future where electrical energy replaces all oil, the power grid will need to be reworked. Already, the present grid is overtaxed in parts of the US of A. The ruf concept could house the expanded power grid, which would be needed for a electrial power grid transport system.
A "redo" with a ruf system makes sense if the power grid needs to undergo a large expansion of capacity, and part of tht new demand will be transportation. Room temp superconductors stikes me as a reason for such a new buildout. Or perhaps when nuclear power gets too cheap to meter eh?
Those power grid towers that hold up long distance power lines could work also for micro gondolas. They look strong. I wonder if they are hurricane strength? Perhaps UPS or FedEx should look into this.
If it got going almost everywhere (between major cities) the airlines could use them to send our luggage from airport to airport. This would probably pay for itself before too long.
An endless array of new & innovative transportation designs keep appearing. Monorails are the most enduring (in part because they are the best solution in a very small niche) and RUF is one on the newest ones. A bewildering array of airport people movers have been installed world-wide.
Collectively, these concepts have been lumped together as "gedgetbahn". Much time, money and effort has been spent on them and none are as generally* useful or economic to build and operate as convential rail systems. The US actually built a few in the late 1970s and early 1980s when we were looking for solutions to our oil dependence (see below).
However, IMO, we do not have the time or money to waste on more experiments wuth gadgetbahn. We need to build what works !
RUF is not worth the waste of time to consider. It has an exposed high voltage rail. In an accident, a twisted metal structure could short that out with "adverse condequences". Someone could have a flat tire, get out, jump over the "V" and put their hand in the wrong place. Not acceptable today.
What happens when the bus stops every few blocks, does a line of cars behind stop as well ?
Unique design cars and buses are required with "limited utility" and market. How does one induce Toyota to design and build just one RUF model ?
*Monorails have a very small and limited market where they are the "best" solution. Advocates routinely underestimate their costs to build & operate and discount the value of commonality everywhere with multiple suppliers to chose from.
Some US gadgetbahn:
Miami MetroMover
http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/miami.htm
Morgantown Group Rapid Transit
http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/morg.htm
Irving Texas Peoplemover
http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/lascol.htm
Jacksonville Monorail
http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/jack.htm
All of the above are quite uneconomic by any standard transportation metric.
Most transit advocates see "gadgetbahn" proponents as being pro-car and anti-transit, who are using an impractical design to confuse & delay a good solution.
What happens when the bus stops every few blocks, does a line of cars behind stop as well ?
Because you don't feel it is worth the time to consider, no one will ever be able to answer your straw man.
Oh wait. If you think like a linear rail, stopping and staring is a problem.
http://www.ruf.dk/w_calc/la_calc/la9.htm
" At or near each rail crossing is a station and a multi branch rail access/egress point." Guess THEY have thought of the problem.
A nice RUF feature is the ability to move about cargo w/o the need for humans. Like the 'micro gondola' idea. I have yet to see the 'what works rail' plan for that.
I have talked privately with Westexas that Trolley freight on the Dallas DART lines is doable off-peak one they finished expanding the system.
The electrified Long Island RR also runs freight off a 3rd rail.
This is NOT six months after President Carter's speech !
If we were fully funding every viable Urban Rail project in the nation, and electrifying 100 miles of freight rail/month and the date was July 13, 1982; then I would be willing to fund some gadgetbahn experiments (RUF would likely not get my vote though).
Consider the time to build prototypes, debug them, build a minimal real world system (with Toyota or Honda building low volume one car & one mini-bus model), gather operational & cost data, re-engineer for any safety or operational problems. expand the initial network a bit, etc. Most likely a dead end that ends up being scrapped.
At an absolute minimum, if successful, you would take 15 years (20 to 30 years more likely) before RUF displaced 0.1% of US oil consumption. Meanwhile RUF would consume resources and time, delaying projects that we KNOW work, and work well !
I am generally opposed to gadgetbahn now. We have a large # of choices that we know work, and work well.
For example, there may be a place for funiculars, which we know all about already.
In my micro gondola design, the gondolas could by-pass each other at any tower (appropriately configured). Think of it as a segmented line rather than a continuous line.
I'd bet there is an air corridor NY-DC (225 miles) or Boston-NY (215 miles) where the airlines could save enough money by "shipping" luggage over the gondolas to pay for itself in a fairly short time. Let's see...those "flights" take about 1 hr 20 min to 1 hr 36 min (gate to gate), add on waiting, loading, and un-loading will get you to at least 2 hours. So the micro-gondola would have to travel about 110 mph to make the same trip in the same time.
Looks like I'd have to install a lot of pole-top "?" (<-- that's the shape) hooks and run a lot of strong wire. <P> This is not really for gondola companies though, it may be more of a robot thing. What's the closest existing vehicle that traverses a "wire" with its own motor? Electric rail? Roller coaster?
Hummm, 225 million devided by 6000 is $37,500 per rider. Be a lot cheaper to buy each rider a new fuel efficient car and supply them with free gas for the rest of their lives?
The G8 Conference is heating up already. Garry Kasparov, former world chess champion and an strong critic of Putin says his group is being arrested and beaten up by police and operatives of the FSB:
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2006/07/11/012.html
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article1173244.ece
-------------------
President Vladimir Putin's fiercest domestic critics and political challengers have defied the Kremlin and held an alternative G8 summit in Moscow, four days before the real thing.
The "anti-summit" was an attempt to persuade the West to get tough with the Russian leader. Speaker after speaker complained about the state of democracy and urged G8 leaders to stop treating Mr Putin as a democrat.
Igor Shuvalov, Mr Putin's G8 point man, had made it clear before the anti-summit that the Kremlin did not want "high officials" from foreign countries to attend, warning their participation would be viewed as "an unfriendly act". Two senior officials from the US State Department also ignored the warning to stay away.
Another protester tried to punch the former Russian prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov, who is a potential presidential contender for the opposition.
----------------------------
From Yahoo news:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucgg/20060707/cm_ucgg/hostingg8summitcantchangerussiasrealities
-------------
One of the cleverest recent comments about the New Russia came from Ivan Krastev, a prominent Bulgarian strategic thinker. "The transition," he said, "has been from one-party state to a one-pipeline state."
--------------
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Russian president tells NBC that VP was on `an unsuccessful hunting shot'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12355000/
Putin translator, "Move Rook to position f3."
http://www.regnum.ru/english/672003.html
-----------------
President of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili believes that the upcoming G8 summit in St. Petersburg will have determining significance for the world politics.
As the Georgian president stresses, his last visit was not limited to negotiations with George Bush. "There was a separate meeting with the US vice president, where US chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, defense secretary and energy secretary, other officials, we had talks with practically all top officials of the US administration," Mikhail Saakashvili notes.
According to the Georgian leader, his visit to the US was a historical one "because of the moment, at which we are all now." He stressed that "the G8 summit would be a decisive one in terms of where the world will go in the near future" and that "everything is being decided right up at the moment": "What is this world? Is it where everything is determined by weapons, money, oil, big strategic or global interests, and small countries even do not have their own place? Where bargains are stricken behind them, and their fate is determined by others? Or is it the world, where moral, principles, freedom of various nations are equally important as it has been declared by the free world for decades? Will small countries have their say in this world?"
Mikhail Saakashvili finds it very symbolic that before the G8 summit he had a meeting first with Russian President Vladimir Putin and then with George Bush, which was the last meeting of the US president with a foreign visitor before the summit, which coincided with the US Independence Day and Bush's 60th anniversary. "I think it is a clear indicator for everyone of the role of our small country in the big world politics. We are actors not only in protecting and forming our fate, but because our people are special, and because of special events in our new history, we participate in forming the biggest world interests and policies, in determining, and what the main thing is, what our place in this all is," the Georgian president stresses.
"I do not have claims to be a world actor, or for our country to become a world actor. It goes here about the fact that we have our own interests, our small interests that are very big for us. Our country has turned out to be in the center of global interests. We have very powerful friends now, and it has its price: we have very strong enemies too. And I want all of us to comprehend it properly," Saakashvili notes.
----------------------------------
Will Bush push Georgia to join NATO? Will Putin cutoff Georgian FF supplies if they try to join NATO?
Speed Chess allows very little time to prevent miscalculation in the Great Game! Yikes!
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
The latest EIA data show a big drop in crude oil inventories, because of big drop in crude oil imports.
As I predicted, total US petroleum imports, on a four week running average, have started falling again--and oil prices have started rising again.
IMO, the pattern that we will see for years and probably decades to come is the following: (1) a drop in oil exports; (2) followed by an increase in oil prices, as remaining exports go to the highest bidder, followed by (3) a period of relative stability, and then the cycle starts all over again.
We had one complete cycle this spring, and IMO we at the start of another cycle right now. What amazed me this past spring was the number of people that kept trying to explain how falling petroleum imports and rising oil prices meant that we had plenty of oil.
Look at the consumption numbers--up in the US and China and way up in many oil exporting countries--while world crude + condensate production, as predicted by the HL method, is down 1% since December. Someone has to be cutting back.
As I said, this ain't rocket science. What baffles me is that anyone is contesting the hard cold facts. How in the world can you predict rising oil production when the four largest producing oil fields are all past their peak production? I suspect that Ghawar and Cantarell are both on the verge of catastrophic declines.
What falling imports? Total Net Imports are UP 2.9% year-on-year (YTD = 187 days).
We measure declines from the peak. Oil production peaked in Texas in 1972, but 1973 produduction was 6.3% higher than 1971. Based on your reasoning, this means that Texas didn't peak.
In 2006 so far, we have 27 weeks of US import data. On a four week running average, 21 of the 27 weeks show lower petroluem imports that what we showed at the end of 2005. The most recent four week running average number, for 7/7/06, is once again below the 12/30/05 running average number. Oil prices are up 25% since December.
But fundamentally world crude + condensate production is down since December and the four largest producing fields in the world are all past their peaks. I'm not building my Export Land model based on a few weeks of export/import data, I'm building it based on an analysis of the HL data and the fact that the world's top exporters are more depleted than the world is overall. This is why I predicted--in January--that we would face a net oil export crisis this year.
It probably makes more sense to look at a longer period than 4 weeks anyway, either months or quarters. How does 1q06 compare with 4q05? BUt, even this may be misleading. SPring is when refiners shut down for maintenance, and some opec countries have, at least in the past, reduced output in this season to support price, and this could in theory explain SA reduced output. So, it is reasonable to compare yoy quarters, eg 1q06 vs 1q05, or years, but can't yet compare 06 vs. 05. (in your example, you compared texas 73 vs 72).
The future may be dark, but premature to declare Deffeyes won the pool, and this is true even if mex/sa continuously reduce output going forward; Chris (and, apparently, aspo too) is expecting substantial non-opec increases in 07, plus the ng/ethanol conversion is surging. So, 07 could easily be peak year even if he has underpredicted field declines.
Of course, we may well see higher prices even as total production edges up or maintains stuart's bumpy plateau. The world wants at least 2% more/year, might not get it.
Depends. Not if the imports graph looks like this:
Please look at my graph again. Isn't that what it shows? All 2006 numbers are less than December 2005! (The horizontal axis being conventionally time).
Robert and I traded about 20 postings on this subject. He kept getting hung up on weekly import numbers. My point was that I could not reconcile rising oil prices and falling imports this spring--unless the falling imports were due to a bidding war. If the refiners did not need the oil, why were they paying more for it?
But the primary point is that I am not building my Export Land model based on the weekly export/import data. I made the prediction, in January, that we would see falling export capacity this year based on the observation that the leading exporters are more depleted than the world is overall.
Since I made the January prediction, oil prices are up by 15% to 25%, world oil production is down, Saudi production is down and on balance US imports are down (21 out of 27 weeks), relative to late December.
US imports in 2006, relative to the first half of 2005, are not the issue, no more than Texas oil production in 1973, relative to 1971, was the issue as Texas started its long term decline.
To answer your question directly. Yes. But your plot suggests continuously rising imports in 2006, which is not the case. 21 out of 27 weeks were down relative to late December, with only 6 up (all four week running averages).
The two downward trends on the import graph in 2006 correspond to price increases. IMO, this is simply evidence of declining net export capacity--as I predicted in January--being allocated to the high bidders.
I suggest to you to try to find real import graph to take a good look at. Graphoilogy is loaded with real graphical data from real production, import and export numbers. The simple assumption you made are too much simple and far from reality.
Oil is a real material, not a mathematical concept you can work to fit your desired curve or equations.
Before arguing on something you have just a bit of knowledge of, try to learn more about it. Your arguments will then be very much more interresting.
I never denied this fact, but as I said it is no more relevant to Peak Oil considerations than is the fact that Texas oil production in 1973 was down relative to 1972, but up 6.3% relative to 1971. Does that mean that Texas did not peak? No.
That was the point that I made when US imports started rising, following the spring price increase, Just because US imports were rising--following a bidding war--didn't mean that imports everywhere were rising.
This is sort of what I mean when I say you have set yourself up an unfalsifiable position. I could take the opposite position: When imports in the U.S. were falling, that doesn't mean imports elsewhere were falling.
Your argument is highly dependent upon the specific time period under consideration. There are times that we see rising imports and falling prices. That does not fit your model, but you always say something like "well, maybe imports elsewhere were falling". There are two problems with that argument. First, prices fell slightly during the period of rising imports. Second, there is no direct evidence that imports for other countries were falling; it's all anecdotal evidence.
I really think what you have here is just too little data upon which to base a conclusion. I don't intend to get into another huge back and forth, but I thought I would weigh in since my name was invoked. :)
Cheers,
RR
I look more at finished gasoline stocks than total gasoline stocks which are blending components+finished. At the end of last week the finished gasoline stock should be somewhere around 120.6 million barrels which is below the lower half of the average range for the same period of the year (mean 155 mb, lower limit at 129 mb). The historic low since 1990 was on 2006/04/26 at 113.922 mb.
In the same manner, finished gasoline imports are below the lower limit of the average range of the same period of the year (computed over the last 5 years, mean 533mb/d, lower limit 423 mb/d, last 4-week average 408 mb/d, last week ending at 380 mb/d).
At actual rate of consumption, the stocks represent err ... 12 days in reserve.
We do not know what percentage of crude oil stocks consists of heavy, sour crude versus light, sweet crude. IMO, flat to declining invnetories of light, sweet are being obscured by rising inventories of heavy, sour. As Cantarell crashes, this will probably result in more of a total crude oil shortage.
BTW, I've been thinking of your definition of Yergin's day. IMHO it should be the first day when the nearest future of WTI (or Brent ?) closes above 76$. Waiting for a second crossing day implies that the futures drop below that level. But what if a sudden event drives futures well above that price ? In such an unlikely but not impossible case, we would have to wait too long before a new crossing occurs.
If there is a shift toward Heavy Sour does that push the products from gasoline to distillates?
http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/12/markets/oil_eia/index.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/longterm/blackm/plunge.htm
We have a winner!!!
Energy Price Change High Low Settle Last Update†
Light Crude
(NYM) 74.85 +0.69 75.00 73.75 74.16 7/12 1:45pm
But wait...where is the headline news? Where is the coverage of this incredible event?
Only on TOD!!
Oil prices hit new records amid escalating crisis in the Middle East
http://futures.fxstreet.com/Futures/news/afx/singleNew.asp?menu=economicnews&pv_noticia=11527846 11-a0a30f08-17860
LONDON AFX - Oil prices hit new records as Israel clamped an air, sea and land blockade on Lebanon and bombed Beirut airport in what is seen as a dangerous new escalation to the Middle East conflict
At 10.25 am, August-dated Brent contracts were up 1.11 usd at 75.50 usd, after striking an all time record of 75.60 usd that broke the previous 75.09 usd record set last Friday amid rising tensions over Iran and North Korea
Meanwhile, August-dated US light crude futures were up 85 cents at 75.83 usd, after striking a new all time record of 75.89 usd earlier to break Friday's all time high of 75.78 usd
Oil price up.
Cool summer breezes blowing in the GOM.
No real media catastrophies this month.
World's 4 largest oil fields in decline?
The end - whatever that is - is in sight.
The end (stage 1) must be oil prices rising to the point where this lowers global demand - $100-$150? And at that point interest rates must rise, property values crash, consumer driven growth dives, governments go bust and "recession stage 1" sets in.
At that stage do oil prices fall back? Or does falling production go faster than falling consumption?
And all this by the end of July.
As the plane prepares to take off.]
Old lady: Nervous?
Ted Striker: Yes.
Old lady: First time?
Ted Striker: No, I've been nervous lots of times.
This pretty much sums up our feelings, we too have been nervous about world events lots of times......
But this time it's different!
Rumack: I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.
Love that movie.
It does feel different this time, but if we can maintain a sense of humor, perhaps we will survive.
In May, world markets had a severe shake down - stocks, gold, copper etc. The one striking omission amongst the carnage was oil which barely fell at all. It seemed to me that oil was the cause of the shake down - high prices - higher interest rates etc.
So yes, I do think this time could be different - but there will be no well defined peak in production or price. The whole process probably started back in 2003 with shrinkage of spare production capacity.
Many will correlate the current upward movement with trouble in Lebanon. My feeling is that this upward movement would have happened anyway (don't like using spike as it has transient conotations).
Airplane is a great movie but a future remake will perhaps have to be called Blimp.
The stock market seems to hang in midair on Wednesday mornings trading in a very narrow band.
Any guesses on stock levels before the report comes out since we are all waiting?
More on the Mexican election [I have no idea on how truthful these websites are]:
---------------
Death by Video: Mexico's Election Fraud Is Coming Undone
Video and Audio Evidence, an Outraged Citizenry, and Panic from the White House Are Converging to Make López Obrador the Next Mexican President.
-----------------
http://www.narconews.com/Issue42/article1972.html
----------------
Harvest of Discord From a Rural Tally
The apparent winner of Mexico's presidential vote got nearly one-fifth of his victory margin from a single district. A complaint is filed.
In Guanajuato's District No. 13, one of 300 electoral districts across Mexico, Calderon piled up a 44,000-vote margin, equivalent to almost one-fifth of his nationwide edge over Lopez Obrador, candidate of the Democratic Revolution Party, or PRD.
Lopez Obrador's supporters express disbelief over that margin.
"Valle de Santiago is the strongest bastion of the PRD in Guanajuato," said Miguel Luna Hernandez, a PRD congressional deputy who won election here three years ago. "It doesn't make any sense that they would give us such a terrible beating here."
Among the inconsistencies that PRD supporters cite: Two precinct reports show polling stations at street addresses that do not exist in the city listed. In another precinct, two different vote totals were listed for Calderon. In others, the sum of leftover blank ballots, discarded ballots and votes cast did not equal the number of ballots issued to a precinct, though the difference was often just one or two ballots.
"I've been in politics for 25 years, and my gut feeling tells me that the will of the people here was not expressed in the tally of the votes," Luna said. "Double voting and a double reporting of precincts took place."
"Just because we're poor doesn't mean we're ignorant," said Alma Delia Rico, who said she declined an offer of roofing materials. "If they don't count our votes, we might even start a war."
--------------
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-heartland12jul12,1,878741.story?coll=la-headline s-world
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Yes, and as I recall from the campaigns of the first Mayor Daly, even the dead voted twice for him too. Now that is a 'popular' politician.
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I read in the business section of today's paper that the largest multi-brand car dealership in Delaware is going to open up the area's first stand-alone Hummer dealership. The owner said that in spite of rising gas prices, he's seen no drop off in demand for Hummers, which have been selling briskly.
The building for the new Hummer dealership is designed to look like a cross between a Quonset hut and an airplane hanger, consistent with the military image of the Hummer. One satisfied customer has had four Hummers so far, absolutely loves them, and for his next one is planning on buying their largest model, which weighs 7,500 lbs and gets an average of 11.5 mpg.
Opening up a Hummer dealership in times like this strikes me about as smart as sinking your life savings into opening up a Pierce Arrow or Dusenberg dealership in September, 1929.
So, while the message is getting out, a little tidbit like this tells me that we have a hell of a long way to go.
Earlier local auto commericals showed our streetcars (Toyota, Ford, Buick & Chevy). Logic ? No. Just an emotional appeal (like a pretty girl, but to both genders).
Local advertisers show streetcars in their commericals as a signal that they are New Orleans based (and add interest/appeal). No irony for furniture, health care, dry cleaner, clothing, food, daiquari ads to show streetcars. One can take the streetcars to get to their businesses. But automobile ??
We moved heaven & earth to get minimal, pieced together streetcar service back somewhere in town after Katrina (1923/24 built St. Charles streetcars on Canal with used Boston DC rectifier).
The wife and I watched an interview with a car industry market analyst last year on 60 Minutes. The guy basically said SUV popularity was pure emotion. His exact words were, 'These things make you think it's Mad Max out there! You could put a machine gun on top and people would buy more.'
http://www.hummerh8.com/
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2000/6/exorbitant.html
but now I'm not so sure...
Actually, I'd be willing to bet that Hummers will sell well for some time into the future. Seriously; can you picture your professional athletes, your real-estate tycoons, your former B-actors turned politicians, and your big-time-sling-your-bling drug-dealers driving Toyota Corollas? As Leona Helmsley famously said "that's for the little people!"
There will always be people who just don't get it. But in this case, while I don't know the demographics of the typical Hummer buyer, I'd bet they're reasonably affluent - enough that they don't care much about the present cost of fuel. But I'd bet they're mostly not so wealthy that they won't soon begin to care!
That is an entirely accurate and quite entertaining description of our local Hummer dealership built last year. (South Portland, Maine)
I don't know if Lawrence Kutlikoff and the St Louis Federal Reserve Review are actually part of the US Federal Reserve system or not. In any event, Is America Bankrupt?
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/06/07/Kotlikoff.pdf
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/money2.htm
Has he been fired yet?
Spooky stuff....
The Fed is the lesser of two evils. Would folks really like to go back to the world where the legislature controls the money supply (time to get elected so fire up the printing press!)or when there was no lender of last resort?
Central Banks have become increasingly independent because legislatures, quite rightly, have absolutely no credibility when it comes to regulating the money supply.
Is the Fed imperfect? Yes. Does it have biases? Yes. Should we junk it and go back to the old way? Probably not.
Please show how the 'legislature' crated more gold/silver
Please show where the reality you are claiming was the case.
Come on. So when we had a 'hard' money policy during the 19th century and unregulated banks and no lender of last resort things were hunky dory right? All those bank panics never happened and the deflationary policy of gold-backed dollars didn't hurt borrowers at the expense of investors?
As for the link between Central Bank Independence and inflation....
From "Central Bank Independence and Macroeconomic Performance: Some Comparative Evidence," by Alberto Alesina and Lawrence H. Summers, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Vol. 25, No. 2. (May, 1993), pp. 151-162
Given, economists are not quite sure why we see this relationship and there are papers out there that cast doubt on the empirical relationship, but I believe the consensus is that independence gives CBs the maneuvering room needed to make tough decisions independent of political manipulation.
As for 'legislatures' creating more gold or silver -- they don't have to. All they have to do is debase the currency, a tactic as old as the Caesars.
Please show where the reality you are claiming was the case.
I believe I just did.
Oh, and you might want to count up and compare bank runs and depressions during the 'gold' era of the 19th and early 20th century to the number of bank runs and depressions today.
Come on.
You claim the 'printing press' is turned on when the money is in control of the state.
Yet, a money system that prevents that condition is rejected by you.
So you condem a 'running of the press' AND you condem when a press can't be run. Huh.
Let me guess, a money supply controlled by a private corporation is a better plan?
Now, care to explain why the M3 money supply is no longer being published in the US of A? Please feel free to explain how it is not in any way influnenced by the body politic.
Yes, because the world is a complicated place. Too little inflation and the money supply can't keep up with economic growth and the result is unemployment. Too much and you get all the usual problems associated with high inflation. An independent central bank that can print money in a responsible manner is a fair compromise, though one often difficult to achieve in practice because its effectivess rest solely on how credible an institution it is.
Plus, you grossly, either out of ignorance or in order score points among the clueless, misrepresent the nature of this 'private corporation'. The Fed is independent, yes, but it's head is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Congress could change the laws and bring the Fed under more direct supervision if it so wished. It's a creature of the government that has been insulated from day-to-day politics because of the special role it places in regulating the money supply.
I see.
So, care to explain why the M3 is no longer being published? Some kind of fair transparancy?
Plus, you grossly, either out of ignorance or in order score points among the clueless, misrepresent the nature of this 'private corporation'.
Ok, please explain HOW saying "Let me guess, a money supply controlled by a private corporation is a better plan?" is a 'gross misrepresentation'?
Ok, please explain HOW saying "Let me guess, a money supply controlled by a private corporation is a better plan?" is a 'gross misrepresentation'?
Because it's not 'really' private in the way, say, Exxon-Mobil is. You're making it sound like the Fed is the creaion of a cabal of bankers when in fact it's a creature of the federal government. A past Congress decided to tie the hands of future (present) Congress' because it was perceived to be in its long-term self-interest to do so. But, just becuase it would be extremely difficult to regain complete Congressional/Executive control over the Fed doesn't mean it can't be done or that this tacit threat to do so isn't in the back of the mind of very Fed Chairman.
Congress has in effect delegated the regulation of the money supply to a dedicated, independent agency. There is nothing 'conspiratorial' in this. It happens all the time. A good thing too, else we would have ignorant, vote-seeking politicians in charge of raising interest rates or printing money, not economics and financial professionals.
The Fed is a creature of the government. It's chairman is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. congress can 'destroy' it whenever it wishes to. Do you dispute this?
That is your response?!?! I've asked you to explain and you say 'its a problem'?
Next up, you've got this:
but less troubling than, say, the Bush administration filling the EPA up with industry reps.
Oh, well because there are OTHER problems, the transparancy of the M3 is not to be considered.
Well then. Glad that is all sorted out.
Why then, sonny boy, are you bothering to post about money when the global temp is rising, people are starving, and there is a shooting war! Well?
If you are going to post, can you actually BOTHER to answer the question:
Now, care to explain why the M3 money supply is no longer being published in the US of A?
Because an answer "Sure, stopping publication is troubling," is simply craptastic.
Anyway, if special-interest capture is the answer, then it was captured in the same way other government agencies are captured, not because of some nefarious conspiracy between 'old banking families' and multinational banks.
Or, does your 'explanation' also include 'old banking' families? Maybe the Bavarian Illuminati? UFOs? I know, Elvis and the Jews have consorted with the Devil to control the Fed, right?
Either way, please cite real evidence, ok? Talk show transcripts and 'books' that allegedly talk abou thow the Fed is 'owned' by European banking families won't cut it.
why?
Ok, then you are admitting you've got nothing.
Other than the rest of your text where you argue with yourself and pretend it is me. Because that is what the rest of your text is.
Either way, please cite real evidence, ok?
Why don't YOU follow your own advice and show where I've actually made the argument in this tread about the running of the money press you've claimed? Come on Sonny boy.....step up or step off.
I pointed out how using physical items in limited supply like silver/gold prevent the government from running the press.
I see half-baked conspiracy theories
That you claim I've made.
Still waiting for you to provide the links to where I have claimed a theory of a conspiracy.
Oh, and Sonny Boy, I'll point how a member of Congress, Ron Paul has claimed that under The Fed system, the money printing press will be cranked up per the desire of the elected officials.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst071006.htm
So either Ron Paul is right, being a memebrr of Congress and all, or your data you offer up as proof from a 20th century book is wrong for the 21st century.
Now lets look at your answer.
"You're making it sound like the Fed is the creaion of a cabal of bankers when in fact it's a creature of the federal government"
No, I believe I said "Let me guess, a money supply controlled by a private corporation is a better plan?"
It looks like you are having a dialoge in your head, and somehow you THINK I've said stuff I have not.
Now lets look at your answer.
"You're making it sound like the Fed is the creaion of a cabal of bankers when in fact it's a creature of the federal government"
No, I believe I said "Let me guess, a money supply controlled by a private corporation is a better plan?"
It looks like you are having a dialoge in your head, and somehow you THINK I've said stuff I have not.
Christ, how fucking dense are you? The Fed has a large degree of independence, but it is NOT independent in the sense a real private bank is. Why is that so hard to understand? It's as if you and the other tin-foil-hatters are willfully trying to misunderstand something very simple.
Anyway, I believe I have demonstrated that an INDEPENDENT central bank is good for monetary stability. Let me (sigh), once again, post this:
See the line? It means more independence means less inflation. Less....inflation....good. Go read the citation above and the larger literature on CB independence, pro and con, before spouting off nonsense.
Have you, by the way, counted up the number of bank panics and recessions/depressions under the 'gold standard' and compared the number when we were not under the gold standard?
Is the Fed perfect? No. Does it have policy biases? Yes. Is it better than having Congress control the money supply? Yes. Is it better than relying on the straightjacket of the gold standard? Yes. Is it better than having no official lender of last resort? Yes.
Does it matter? You make up the argument you want to have. When you feel like having an actual discussion VS an argument with yourself, I'll be waiting.
It sounds crazy, but it's true. If you say this is the best solution, then why has no audit been done on the FED in it's ENTIRE HISTORY?
From federalreserve.com...
Now this is specific to the branch banks. We can set up ten shell companies that all lead back to a few people. It's not that hard, drug lords have many of them to launder their money.
Yet everyone who actually looks for the info knows there are NO GAO audits because the FED will not allow it. So is this a credible institution? I think NOT! So the FED is clearly lying above, so do you really believe that they are a not for profit company?
Check out this primer for a better FED...
http://www.counterpunch.org/nader02112006.html
I think this would be a good first start...even though it's never going to happen.
It sounds crazy, but it's true. If you say this is the best solution, then why has no audit been done on the FED in it's ENTIRE HISTORY?
Come on. This is tin-foil hat stuff. Member banks are REQUIRED to buy into the Federal Reserve system, and no more gives them control over it than you have 'control' whether it will rain today. The Fed's policy biases, such as they are, are caused more by the way in which the Fed is staffed (finanical experts and professional economists) than by the power 'members' have over it.
Yet everyone who actually looks for the info knows there are NO GAO audits because the FED will not allow it. So is this a credible institution? I think NOT! So the FED is clearly lying above, so do you really believe that they are a not for profit company?
The Fed's credibility is seen in how investors keep track of every word uttered by its chairman.
Come on. This is Tin-foil hat nonsense. The Bavarian Illuminati, the Templars, and Freemasons are no doubt at work.
The Fed's 'profits', such as they are, are meaningless. It's role is to 'create' or destroy 'money' through reserve requirements, interest rate policy on its overnight loans, and through its purchase of US treasuries through its open market operations in New York. Villifying the Fed because it makes 'profits' (horrors!) is akin to villifying God because he is omnipotent. It's a nonsensical argument.
I would be concerned if the Fed DIDN'T somehow make profits. In fact, profits are simply a side effect of its principal goal of regulating the money supply. How can the Fed set interest rates, for instance, if it can't charge an interest rate on its loans?
Anyway, those suggestions aren't bad. But, let's not make the Fed out to be a cabal of evil bankers.
Yes it is.
You did not answer this. If things are so rosey then why is the FED so evasive of a general all inclusive audit? You're as much a tool as I am a tin foil hat wearer.
You did not answer this. If things are so rosey then why is the FED so evasive of a general all inclusive audit? You're as much a tool as I am a tin foil hat wearer.
It's a dumb question.
No bureaucracy likes to have another agency look around the place and then shit on the rug -- which is what the GAO, god bless them, does on a regular basis. This is normal bureaucratic politics -- not a sign that the Elders of Zion and the Illuminati control the place. Perhaps if you read something other than conspiracy books on how Freemasons control the Fed or primers on Austrian Economics you would know this.
Note, I'm not saying the Fed is great of prefect. It definitately has its own policy biases. But you need to stop with the conspiracy nonsense.
You missed the point. I'm not saying they won't open the books b/c of XXX. I'm saying that the fact that the books haven't been audited by anyone is enough cause for concern period. If I wanted to push the conspiracy angle I would have named names and I didn't. I didn't say I bought into any conspiracy theory, I offered a general statement that many books say it's is owned by banking families from the USA and old Europe.
Fannie Mae is audited and so are private banks. Yet this one quasi government body who is privately owned does not answer to anyone. So power doesn't corrupt absolutely, I forgot. Yeh the GAO does nothing, great point. So all the reports available on their site with audited balance sheets, are for nothing. The data that they provide isn't real...ok.
And you misunderstood my point abou the GAO. The GAO is a great agency. When I said it 'looks around and shits on the rug' I meant its investigations causes political problems that bureaucrats don't want to deal with. That alone is reason enough for any agency, including the Fed, to resist opening up to it. All the problems with the Fed can be chalked up to the usual symptoms of bureaucratic politics and the bureaucratic mentality.
You don't need conspiracy nonsense or ridiculous comments about how vested interests conspired to take the US off the mythically perfect Gold standard and use the Fed to control the economy. Stuff like this:
I didn't say I bought into any conspiracy theory, I offered a general statement that many books say it's is owned by banking families from the USA and old Europe.
What books? Who says this? Which 'old banking families'? What publishing houses did these books come out of? The Fed is 'owned' by no one. It's 'membership' owns it in the same way depositors at a credit union 'own' the credit union or an individual stockholder 'owns' a company -- i.e. they don't. The family of Jewy Von Moneyhoffen from Europe doesn't control the Fed. Chase doesn't control the Fed. The Fed is a quasi-independent agency of the federal government set up to serve as the lender of last resort and to regulate the money supply. It's made up of professional economists and financial experts. Most of what it produces is academic research on financial markets.
The president just appointed a new Fed Chariman for fuck's sake. Do 'privately owned' entities have thier chief executive appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate?
Could the Fed use more transparency? Sure. But the fact threre isn't a lot of transparency doesn't mean you can jump from here to tin-foil-hat-land in one go.
The Fed has been singing the same tune as the GAO. That is "Cut spending, cut entitlements, Don't burden taxpayers to support gov't spending increases". While the Fed has made many bad calls in my opinion, they aren't part of some conspiracy. If you read Greenspans testimony to Congress, virtually every discussion Greenspan tells congress that spending is out of control and is completely unstainable. The Fed has also been on the front lines about discussing energy security, trying to convince congress to take action. In Mid June, Greenspan gave testimony to Congress telling them that they need to act on Energy Security to avert a crisis. The bad guys aren't working for the Fed, they are the houses of Congress and the Senate.
Sonny boy, you don't quite get it. In these here parts, "professional economists" just shows your source of data is no good.
If you are gonna try an make a defendable argument, "professional economists", is gonna get you mocked. Got it Sonny boy?
The Fed's policy biases, such as they are, are caused more by the way in which the Fed is staffed (finanical experts and professional economists)
Sonny boy, you don't quite get it. In these here parts, "professional economists" just shows your source of data is no good.
If you are gonna try an make a defendable argument, "professional economists", is gonna get you mocked. Got it Sonny boy?
Do you even understand what I wrote? I am not citing professional economists, I am saying because the Fed is made up of professional economists that is the ultimate source of their policy biases.
As for source data, I believe my citation of the paper establishing the link between infaltion and CB independence is evidence of that. Perhaps you have a problem with the methods used therein?
At least I don't reference 'books' that say the Fed is 'owned' by 'old European banking families.'
Which, again, using 'professional economists' as a source of authorty will get ya mocked about these parts.
But not as bad as making up stuff outta whole cloth.
At least I don't reference 'books' that say the Fed is 'owned' by 'old European banking families.'
What gets you mocked MORE is when you make up stuff. Because no where in this thread where I challenge you on governments printing money being bad have I said what you claim I have.
But go ahead. Show where I have ya liar.
I wilt in the face of your contempt.
Which, again, using 'professional economists' as a source of authorty will get ya mocked about these parts.
(Yawn) You really are an idiot.
Ron Paul says different:
"Faced with uncomfortable financial realities, Congress will seek to avoid the day of reckoning by the most expedient means available-- and the Federal Reserve undoubtedly will accommodate Washington by printing more dollars to pay the bills. The Fed is the enabler for the spending addicts in Congress, who would rather spend new fiat money than face the political consequences of raising taxes or borrowing more abroad."
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst071006.htm
Now, why should I believe YOUR claims Sonny Boy VS the claims of someone who would be pulling the strings of the Fed?
(Come on, refute Ron Paul's position)
Thomas Jefferson's comments opposing such an institution are worth re-reading.
The paper offers three policies to eliminate the nation's enormous fiscal gap and avert bankruptcy: a retail sales tax, personalized Social Security, and a globally budgeted universal healthcare system."
I was really astonished at how bluntly a member of the US Federal Reserve system would say that America is fiscally screwed.
I fear that the supply demand fundamentals will cause the price to increase and that the fundamentals underlying the US$ as described by Mr Kotikoff will make a bad problem much worse.
I think even if their were plenty of oil to meet demand (I feel there is not)the price of oil would increase due to declines in the value of the US$.
I'd like to add this concept to the "EVOS":
In other words, physics is rather mechanistic on a macro scale and rather chaotic on a micro scale. Inversely, economics is chaotic on a macro scale and perhaps mechanistic on a micro scale.Economists are constantly trying to foist in futility simple linear models to understand macro events.
Note in the same report that OPEC now expects global production to be 84.6 mbpd in 2006. OPEC also expects non-OPEC production to be up but not as much as previous predictions.
There are also consumption and demand figures in this report that westexas may find interesting.
Premier Bernard Law announced a dramatic energy plan last spring, promising to cut fuel taxes, regulate prices, and cap utility rate increases.
It's not working so well....
New Brunswick gas stations turn off pumps to protest price regulation
Station owner bumps prices over regulation to survive
When I was growing up, they had gas wars too, with one gas station trying to undersell the other. I had this naive image of gas station attendants pulling their nozzles and spraying each other with gas.
If I recall correctly, gas was around 30 cents/gal. back then. Those were the days, eh?
5 oil companies, 4 car companies, and Wal-Mart.
Exxon Mobil 380.08
General Electric 346.27
Citigroup 243.99
Microsoft Corp. 237.69
Bank of America 222.7
Wal-Mart Stores 191.72
Procter & Gamble 185.4
Johnson & Johnson 179.5
Pfizer Inc. 173.51
Altria 162.46
Here is by profits (in $millions):
Exxon Mobil 36,130.0
Royal Dutch Shell 25,311.0
Citigroup 24,589.0
BP2 22,341.0
Bank of America Corp. 16,465.0
General Electric 16,353.0
HSBC Holdings 15,873.0
Total 15,250.0
Gazprom 14,865.2
Chevron 14,099.0
And finally here are the airlines that are still in the Fortune 500, with revenues and profits, (in $millions):
228 Air France-KLM Group 26,099 1,111
282 Lufthansa Group 22,447 563
312 AMR 20,712 -861
333 Japan Airlines 19,426 -417
369 UAL 17,379 -21,176
414 Delta Air Lines 16,191 -3,818
442 British Airways 15,189 804
IS THAT A TYPO??!? If that's true that means United will cease to exist a year from now.
United may still cease to exist a year from now. Most airlines are really hurting and many are at risk of folding in the next few years (United and Delta in particular).
Survival Guide: Addicted to Oil
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13773313/site/newsweek/
The article you reference is "What We Need Is Policy" by Jane Bryant Quinn.
Regarding oil production, she says:
"Production is declining in most of the countries outside the OPEC cartel, even with new sources such as Canadian tar sands. At some point - perhaps in the next few years - OPEC will also be pumping at diminishing rates."
This sounds a lot like peak oil to me.
Regarding bio-fuel, she says:
"Depending on which expert you consult, bio-fuels either (1) take much more petroleum to produce and transport than they save or (2) save a little energy but not a lot. They're not a way out of the oil hole. In fact, they may dig us in deeper."
This is not news to most TOD readers, but it is a nice one-page article in the MSM that has some ideas we would like to get across to a general audience. We should be sure to "Digg" and "Redditt" the article, and highlight it to our friends.
Yep I was hoping that it would get noticed some because it seemed to have a bit more of a cautionary tone to it - rather than all the happy talk and the "technology will save us" party line...
Thanks for the response.
It says that April has been revised down by 580kb. Was this figure used by Stuart in his last plateau graph?
"World oil supply in May is estimated up by 445 kb/d from a downward-adjusted April base. Total supply reached 85.0 mb/d. Increases derived 275 kb/d from OPEC, and 210 kb/d from the OECD, where a pause in North Sea maintenance played a part. Among other non-OPEC producers, increases from Asia and Latin America were offset by declines from Africa and the Middle East. An upward revision of 215 kb/d for first quarter supply came mainly from OPEC crude and NGLs. However, a sizeable 580 kb/d downward revision to April supply was due to lower OPEC and OECD supplies."
I've heard that this winter the UK Department of Trade was phoning round operators on a daily baisis begging for more gas. As the UK sldes into importing are they now doing the same for oil?
A very serious point here is that world wide infrastrucure may be getting tested to the limit. Normally HS&E is one of the first activities to get sidelined when prices are down - it looks like the same might apply when prices are up.
Rig explosions might just get more common - a symptom of dissintegrating society.
I expect to see our friendly neighborhood "drive by poster" show up any day now.
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip.asp
Crude oil Down 6.0 million barrels
Gasoline Down 0.4 million barrels
Distillates UP 2.6 million barrels.
Also, the IEA just came out with their monthly Oil Market Report summary.
http://omrpublic.iea.org/
For the first time in memory, the IEA did not give their estimate of world oil production for last month. WHY? I haven't a clue. But they had OPEC June production up by 200,000 barrels which is in line with the EIA's Short Term Energy Report which had OPEC June production up by 300,000 barrels over revised May production. They revised May production down by 30,000 barrels which leaves the total OPEC increase for June up by 270,000 barrels.
The EIA's Short Term Energy Report for OPEC can be found at:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/3atab.html
Venezuela will presumably have to buy less petroleum from Russia, now that it doesn't have to supply all those Citgo stations. The question is whether that Russian oil finds it way to the U.S. market via other routes. At least some will. All? Maybe not.
I read this to mean that they have to buy gasoline (130,000 barrels a day) from other refiners to suply their gas stations. I don't think they will be brining less oil into the US, although I don't know who's getting the Russian oil; maybe one of their other neighbors or China.
I can't find the original Russian oil contracts article, but I'm not sure that the oil was specifically going to Citgo. Doesn't Venezuela have contracts with other countries that they also need to fulfill?
Citgo is selling one of their refineries, and that is apparently one of the reasons they decided to cut back on gas stations. They are also selling some asphalt plants. FT quoted an anonymous Republican as saying Citgo may be having problems with their refining capabilities.
"July 11 (Bloomberg) -- Syria, under fire from the U.S. for the alleged support of terrorism, plans to end its currency peg to the dollar by year-end to reflect closer trade ties with Europe, central bank Governor Adib Mayaleh said."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aq02gZD0k4bQ&refer=home
Rather than simply selling oil at high prices through intermediary countries while continuing to recycle dollars back into the US banking system, as Saul Eslake, Chief Economist of the Australia & New Zealand Banking Group, Ltd warned June 22 in his report to the International Conference of Commercial Bank Economists "The Emergence of Oil Producers as Net International Creditors: Possible Implications for the Global Financial System", oil producing countries that are enemies of the US have developed strong trade ties with Asia and Europe and are no longer reliant on the US for export revenue. They can cut off the oil AND stop lending the US the money needed to buy it without suffering much from the revenue loss. This could make the 1970s energy crisis look like a cocktail party.
$200 oil with high inflation and interest rates?
Syria switching reserves to euros is a first step in the process. Not coincidentally, gold, silver and platinum all rallied on the news.
http://www.zapworld.com/about/news/news_xebraships.asp
Good for hiding in the tall grass, too.
I do like that under 10K price tag, but I'd want a test drive to see how that delta wheel layout handles in a turn.
Such delta-configured three wheeled ATV's are already outlawed in the US.
http://www.donalfagan.com/html/trikes.html
Now granted, I was a 250 lb fellow testing $800 Chinese trikes that were intended for 150 lb people. The $4,000 German Hase was much more stable, and a $4,000 tadpole may well be more stable, too. But I see no inherent advantage either way.
EVs have really heavy batteries that can help with stability, as in the super narrow Tango, so I'd give the Xebra a chance of being a decent ride.
http://tinyurl.com/n56da
Good one!
The blogspot
http://energikrise.blogspot.com/
had recently a post with some interesting diagrams (in English and click able for larger views) about developments in energy consumption and energy mix for the United Kingdom.
The first diagram, in MBOE; million barrels of oil equivalents a day, illustrates net exports from and net imports to UK of fossil fuels for the years 1981 to 2005.
UK re-entered the role as net importer of energy in 2004. Surprisingly coal imports saw to this, and most recently, 2004, imports of natural gas surpassed exports.
The UK will in the near future have to increase natural gas imports, and this is to happen, as the European natural gas market is growing tighter. A few more years into the future UK will again become a net importer of oil.
As of 2005 UK imported net approximately 14 % of its total energy needs.
The second diagram shows the development in energy consumption by energy sources for the years 1965 to 2005 for UK.
The interesting about UK is that natural gas as of 1999 became the most important primary energy source. There are few other OECD nations where natural gas is as dominant in the energy mix as in the UK.
From The American Conservative, no less.
The drama continues to unfold in unpredictable ways.
- get buddy-buddy with Saddam all over again. (he WAS a client dictator after all)
- Invade and occupy the place
Obviously we made the wrong move. The infamous doomer peaknik Jay Hanson predicted that as we close in on the peak we would invade Iraq - as shown. His "fossilgate" essay has his theory of the first time to hold the oil patch largely untapped to later unsequester it as the last swing producer.Had we got buddy buddy again, Iraq would still serve as a check and balance on Iran, a much better position than we have now. That would have been my move, not invade.
Why we don't hassle North Korea is obvious - for one reason out of two:
- North Korea has no oil, the obvious reason
- Even without a nuke, Seoul is within range of permanently mounted artillery pieces (zillions of them) always at the ready on an instant's notice
If we got stupid, the zillion artillery pieces suddenly get turned on. The pieces alone are normal artillery, but in the aggregate form a conventional-powered WMD. And some of the shells could contain chem weapons. Even without a nuke, if we attack North Korea, Seoul is toast just from the zillion artillery pieces alone - even without a single chem weapons shell.Result? Kim Jong Il got to shoot off some of his own fireworks to celebrate the 4'th of July!
In any case North Korea is one one of the last really unexplored potential conventional oil provinces in the World - located excellently for China, Japan, South Korea and the US.
Hezbollah Fires Missiles Into Northern Israel, Several Wounded
It's escalating fast. Iran backs Hezbollah. Hang onto your hats, the manure has hit the air conditioner.
U.S. Blames Syria, Iran For Israeli Soldiers' Kidnapping
Israel now fighting on two fronts.... Stay tuned.
wtmhta/c
wtmhta/c ????
Israel Accuses Lebanon Of "Act Of War" Over Kidnapping
Act of War.
Look at the oil price spike since about 4:00 pm today.It was an interesting choice of words by Israel to call it an "Act of War." Some mobilizing of forces is taking place but not a full mobilization. But the fact that Hezballah crossed the border into Israel to undertake this operation is pregnant with significance.
This is from an Israeli source:
DEBKAfile reports: Iran's national security adviser Ali Larijani flies to Damascus aboard special military plane Wednesday night as war tension builds up around Hizballah kidnap of 2 Israeli soldiers
July 12, 2006, 10:14 PM (GMT+02:00)
Larijani is also Iran's senior nuclear negotiator. He will remain in Damascus for the duration of the crisis in line with the recently Iranian-Syrian mutual defense pact. His presence affirms that an Israeli attack on Syria will be deemed an assault on Iran. It also links the Israeli hostage crisis to Iran's nuclear standoff with the West.
The White House released a statement holding Syria and Iran responsible for Hizballah abduction and demanding their immediate and unconditional release.
The Syrian army has been put on a state of preparedness.
DEBKAfile's military sources add that the Iranian air force, missile units and navy are also on high alert.
DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report Hizballah acted on orders from Tehran to open a second front against Israel, partly to ease IDF military pressure on the Hamas in the Gaza Strip. This was in response to an appeal Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal made to the Iranian ambassador to Damascus Mohammad Hassan Akhtari Sunday, July 9.
DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report Tehran's rationale as composed of three parts:
- Iran shows the flag as a champion and defender of its ally, Hamas.
- Sending Hizballah to open a warfront against Israel is the logical tactical complement to its latest order to go into action against American and British forces in southern Iraq.
- Tehran hopes to hijack the agenda before the G-8 summit opening in St. Petersberg, Russia on July 15. Instead of discussing Iran's nuclear case and the situation in Iraq along the lines set by President George W. Bush, the leaders of the industrial nations will be forced to address the Middle East flare-up
Any Israeli decision taken at prime minister Ehud Olmert's high level consultation in Jerusalem Wednesday night must take this turn of events into account before deciding on limited air strikes against Hizballah and Lebanese civil targets without delay.Our sources also report that immediately after Nasrallah's statement to the media, Hizballah's leaders went into hiding, their bases were evacuated and their fighting strength transferred to pre-planned places of concealment. Ahead of the abduction, Hizballah ordnance and missile stocks were transferred to the Palestinian Ahmed Jibril's tunnel system at Naama, 30 km south of Beirut, which was built in the 1980s by East German engineers.
The Israel navy has long tried to smash this coastal underground fortress from the sea without success.
Israel began calling up an armored division, air crews and technicians from the reserves Wednesday night. DEBKAfile's military experts: If Israel's leaders opt for an anti-Hizballah operation on the lines of Operation Summer Rain against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the IDF can expect the same measure of success as it has had in recovering Gilead Shalit and ending the Qassam missiles barrage
Guys what the hell is this? We are producing 81 million barrels. Westexs your input will be appreciated. Anyone else too, feel free to help me understand this.
Damn should have bought more dec 2010 futures.
Unless he has some inside info on production collapses in the Middle East.
MRS: [The Saudis have] Somewhere between 50 and 70 million barrels of domestic tank farms and they have about 10-15 million barrels of Atlantic basin tank farms ... The only times there is clear evidence of a Saudi surge was during the Iraq war where it jumped by about 800,000 barrels a day for about 45 days. I bet you they were just emptying the tank farms."
http://agonist.org/story/2005/6/6/151857/0004
Interesting article. Nymex crude >$75 this evening. The production and consumption figures are at best guestimates. The key point for me is the increasing number of comments comming from ME OPEC suggesting that production might be in decline.
Or do I only percieve there to be an increasing number of ME OPEC comments since I started reading TOD - all of about 9 days ago?
Well no. The UK Energy review published yesterday was full of references to Energy Security which is their euphemism for Peak Oil.
According to the BP statistical report (I downloaded the spreadsheet the other day), the world produced 81,088 thousand barrels of crude oil last year, which was 1% higher than 2004's total of 80,198 thousand barrels.
The EIA and IEA figures (around 85mbd) are "all liquids".
"MILWAUKEE (AP) -- Two vehicles crashed, four people were arrested for fighting and three officers got sent to the hospital -- all over some free gasoline Wednesday.
For the most part, hundreds of drivers waited patiently for hours for about $30 worth of free gasoline from Allstate Insurance as a reward to Milwaukee for ranking high on its safe drivers list.
Some cars started lining up before midnight for the gas, and the line stretched far from the service station into a residential area, trapping some residents in their driveways Wednesday morning, said Anne E. Schwartz, Milwaukee Police Department spokeswoman." ...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Free-Gas-Frenzy.html
Not a good portent for our future behavior.
The New York doctor who gave Divorce a "7/10/06" is in critical condition with 2nd and 3rd degree burns over 3/4 of his body.
I guess future ex-wives can take solace that when the NG runs out a "7/10/06" will not work!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3730919a13,00.html
It seems Shell thinks the poorer pacific islands will be among the first to be unable to afford gas.