SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (73413)5/2/2010 6:01:47 PM
From: Jim McMannis  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
All that might have been considered before the drilling ban was lifted but I'm not one to point fingers quite yet.

Someone needs to take charge and bring in every resource they can get to stop it and clean it up. Even if it's other oil companies.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (73413)5/2/2010 9:12:17 PM
From: koan  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 149317
 
I think Obama's team may methodically round up the oil and Wall street criminals. And boy are they pervasive.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (73413)5/2/2010 10:27:22 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 149317
 
"All these things should have been explored BEFORE BP was granted the permits to drill in the Gulf"

Oh, crap. I know spouting off makes you feel good, but you have no idea what you are talking about. Everything was done by the regs we require. There was no difference between this well and Thunderhorse.
en.wikipedia.org
Thunder Horse may need Viagra, tho, cuz it' beginning to underperform in a hurry. Getting a high water cut. That'll do more to stop deep water than all the leaks in the world.
Message 26500415



To: stockman_scott who wrote (73413)5/2/2010 11:06:17 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 149317
 
Ed Whitacre's Battle to Save GM from Itself

Brought in by Obama's car czar to help revive the automaker after bankruptcy, "Big Ed" fired CEO Fritz Henderson and took the wheel himself. GM's sales are bouncing back, but Whitacre's redesign is just beginning

By David Welch

This Issue
May 3, 2010

The 15 General Motors dealers who flew to Detroit last September for a dinner with GM management were not an easily rattled bunch. They had endured the worst auto sales slide in 25 years, as well as the bankruptcy of the iconic carmaker on which they had built their businesses. Only three months had passed since GM accepted a $50 billion federal bailout, announcing the retirement of four of its eight brands and the shutting down of 1,900 dealers—a third of its domestic retail network. These dealers were the survivors, some of the more prosperous people in their towns, and they wanted a little reassurance.

CEO Fritz Henderson gathered the group in a private conference room at the Westin Detroit Metro Airport and tried to demonstrate that he had a plan, according to an executive in the room who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to describe the dinner. Henderson announced that GM was going on the offensive with better models, new marketing, and a plan to remake its sclerotic corporate culture. Then he introduced the other GM boss in the room, the one the government had sent to keep an eye on the company.

Edward E. Whitacre Jr., a laconic, squinty-eyed, six-foot-four-inch Texan, had been GM's nonexecutive chairman for barely two months. He was typically blunt. "We're going to get this turned around," Whitacre promised. And if current leadership can't fix the company, he said, "we'll find someone who can." To Duane Paddock, a dealer in Buffalo whose family has been selling Chevys for 75 years, Whitacre's words weren't menacing, just matter-of-fact. He liked hearing that Whitacre would find a way to win. "We knew the world was going to change," says Paddock, one of Chevy's largest retailers and often the top seller in New York State. "We knew the personnel would change. But you don't know who will be left."

Not Henderson, as it turns out. Whitacre and the board fired him on Dec. 1, ending his tryout on day 143. The board, reconstituted in July with Whitacre and seven other new members joining five from the old guard, had been skeptical that Henderson, a GM lifer, was radical enough to change the company. Whitacre—the former telecom executive who turned a broken Baby Bell into the resurgent AT&T (T)—decided he was the man to fix GM. "Fritz was moving to change things," says an executive with direct knowledge of the decision who was not authorized to speak about it. "But a lot more needed to be done."

Ed Whitacre, 68, wasn't looking to live in Detroit. He has made his home San Antonio for many years—his office there is crowded with statues of cowboys, cattle, and horses—and is involved in the vital affairs of his home state; he helped his alma mater, Texas Tech University, hire Bobby Knight as its basketball coach. His wife, Linda, stays mostly in Texas, but Whitacre took an apartment in downtown Detroit and got to work.

Within three months of Henderson's ouster, he had eased out four other executives, reassigned 20 more, and brought in seven outsiders to fill top jobs—a shock to an insular company that had long been famous for paving over failure while compensating it handsomely. The tide also swept out solid performers allied with the old regime, such as Vice-Chairman Bob Lutz, who had overseen the development of the Chevy Malibu, the Cadillac CTS, and eight other vehicles that were beginning to sell well. Lutz was marginalized by Whitacre and announced his retirement, effective May 1. "In the past," says Lutz, "GM was accused of not enough change. You have to find the balance between the pace of change and trauma to the organization."

People close to Whitacre say he would rather cope with trauma than accept the status quo at a company that lost $84.3 million a day in 2008.

Three days after taking over, he reorganized sales and marketing, and then, after just three months, let his deputy reorganize the departments again—a restructuring of the restructuring that caused middle managers to fear for their jobs and even question whether Whitacre had the right disposition for his. Some say that fear has made them more cautious when Whitacre wants them to take more risk.

Whitacre isn't big on deliberation—or on talking to the press. He refused several requests to comment for this story, though GM did provide access to dozens of employees—from Whitacre's fellow executives to assembly workers. Although some refused to speak on the record, their comments create a detailed portrait of a corporate culture in flux. "Ed's view is that the business is more complicated than it needs to be," says Vice-Chairman Stephen Girsky, a former Wall Street auto analyst who has become Whitacre's right-hand man.

Former CEO Rick Wagoner, who lost $88 billion between 2005 and 2009, used a dozen metrics to evaluate his executives. Whitacre, who holds just one meeting per week with his 13-member management team, has boiled it down to six: market share, revenue, operating profit, cash flow, quality, and customer satisfaction. He wants nimble managers who decide fast and correct mistakes faster. Vice-Chairman and CFO Christopher P. Liddell, who arrived from Microsoft (MSFT) in January, recently remarked that 12 of GM's 13-person executive committee are either auto industry rookies or new to their jobs. (The two men at the top, Whitacre and Liddell, are the car company rookies.) The two people tasked with remaking GM's image with consumers, North America President Mark L. Reuss and Marketing Vice-President Susan Docherty, are in their 40s and taking on massive responsibility for the first time in their careers. "He realizes that the biggest change GM needs is cultural," says Jim Kahan, who was senior vice-president for corporate strategy under Whitacre at AT&T. "It was always blaming the union, the government, or the economy." Says Reuss: "What we were doing didn't work. The time of providing for everybody, no matter what their performance, is gone."

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page

businessweek.com



To: stockman_scott who wrote (73413)5/2/2010 11:42:12 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Big Wind Farm Off Cape Cod Gets Approval

By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: April 28, 2010

BOSTON — After nine years of regulatory review, the federal government gave the green light on Wednesday to the nation’s first offshore wind farm, a fiercely contested project off the coast of Cape Cod.

Opponents said they would continue to fight construction of the farm, known as Cape Wind, which would sprawl across 25 square miles of Nantucket Sound.

But the decision is expected to give a significant boost to the nascent offshore wind industry in the United States, which has lagged far behind Europe and China in harnessing the strong and steady power of ocean breezes to electrify homes and businesses.

“This will be the first of many projects up and down the Atlantic Coast,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said at a news conference here in the Massachusetts Statehouse with Gov. Deval Patrick, a Democrat and supporter of the venture, at his side.

In announcing the much-anticipated decision, Mr. Salazar hastened to add that he was requiring the developer, Cape Wind Associates, to take several steps to mitigate possibly adverse effects on the environment — including views from the Kennedy Compound National Historic Landmark, which overlooks Nantucket Sound. Those steps include adjusting the turbines’ color and configuration.


Opposition to the proposal from Senator Edward M. Kennedy, who died in August, had been a major thorn in the Obama administration’s side in advancing the project.

The Cape Wind farm would lie about 5.2 miles from the nearest shore, on the mainland, and about 13.8 miles from Nantucket Island. The tip of the highest blade of each turbine would reach 440 feet above the water.

The long-running struggle over the project underscores how divisive even a “clean” energy project can be in the United States.

Friends and foes have squared off over the impact it would have on nature, local traditions, property values and electricity bills; on the profits to be pocketed by a private developer; and even the urgency of easing the nation’s dependence on fossil fuels, a priority of the Obama administration.

Opponents argued that Cape Wind would create an industrial eyesore in a pristine area; supporters countered that it was worth sacrificing aesthetics for the longer-term goal of producing clean, renewable energy.

Developers say that Cape Wind will provide 75 percent of the power for Cape Cod, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard — the equivalent of that produced by a medium-size coal-fired plant. It would also reduce carbon dioxide emissions by the equivalent of taking 175,000 cars off the road, officials said, and provide 1,000 construction jobs.

The project has also made for some strange bedfellows. Cape Wind is backed by both Greenpeace and the United States Chamber of Commerce.


It has been opposed perhaps most prominently by members of the Kennedy family. Senator Kennedy was a longtime sailor on Nantucket Sound and fought the project up until he died.

In a nod to the concerns of the Kennedys — and presumably other property owners in the area — Mr. Salazar said he had ordered Cape Wind to limit the number of turbines to 130 instead of the initial 170, to move the farm farther away from Nantucket and to reduce its breadth to make it less visible from the Nantucket Historic District.

Mr. Salazar said that the turbines should also be painted off-white to reduce their contrast with the sea and sky while still remaining visible to birds and that their lights should be turned off during the day and dimmed more at night than originally planned.

Officials said Mr. Salazar had told them that he planned to call Victoria Reggie Kennedy, the senator’s widow, to discuss his decision.

Still, in Mr. Salazar’s assessment, the view from the Kennedy compound was not a big issue, and he noted that Nantucket was hardly an untouched landscape, with busy marine transport and fishing, and tall structures including communications equipment.

Mr. Kennedy’s nephew Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmental lawyer, could not be reached for comment on Wednesday. But he told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that Cape Wind was “a boondoggle of the worst kind.”

“It’s going to cost the people of Massachusetts $4 billion over the next 20 years in extra costs,” he said.

In agreement with the Kennedys was Senator Scott Brown, a Republican who succeeded Edward Kennedy. He said Cape Wind was “misguided” and would hurt tourism and boating in the area.


Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, has lent only mild support to the project — in part, officials said, out of deference to Senator Kennedy’s objections. Mr. Kerry said Wednesday that the government had conducted an exhaustive review and that he had faith in the process.

Mr. Salazar sought to project an air of finality with his announcement, declaring at one point, “This is the final decision of the United States of America.”

Governor Patrick said construction could begin within a year. “We are on our way,” he said.

Nonetheless, questions remained about when and even if the Cape Wind project would be built. Opponents vowed to seek an immediate injunction to stop it, although after nine years, the courts may decide that it has been reviewed enough.

1 2 Next Page »

John M. Broder contributed reporting from Washington.

nytimes.com