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: Wharf Rat who wrote (78184)6/13/2010 11:59:05 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
See no evil

chron.com

Federal regulators ignored drilling accidents and soft-pedaled penalties
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
June 12, 2010, 5:46PM

What do offshore drilling and investment banking have in common? In recent years, federal regulation has been lax and the designated government watchdogs of both industries have too often proven to be their best friends. The near-collapse of the financial services system in 2008 and the deadly and still metastasizing Deepwater Horizon explosion and subsequent oil spill are the most prominent consequences of a leave-it-to-business strategy.

Revelations of cozy ties between officials of the federal Minerals Management Service and company execs led Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to shake up the agency, separating the regulatory duties from the granting of exploration leases in public waters and the collection of royalties. But that reform barely scrapes the surface of what needs to be done.

Chronicle reporters Lise Olsen and Eric Nalder studied five years of MMS responses to safety violations on platforms and rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. They found that regulators consistently failed to adequately investigate incidents or penalize operators.

MMS investigators failed to visit the scenes of one-third of the 400 violations reported, collected only 16 fines and broke their own rules requiring probes of all well blowouts.

The Chronicle could find no records indicating any MMS investigation of at least nine of 28 well blowouts reported in the Gulf of Mexico in the past five years. Five deepwater blowouts occurred in the last five months alone.

BP, responsible for the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the largest producer in the Gulf, also had the most reported accidents with 47, followed by the third-ranking operator, Chevron USA, with 46. Shell Offshore, the second-largest Gulf oil producer, had a much cleaner safety record with only 22 accidents reported.

MMS officials also frequently granted exemptions from environmental studies for drilling projects. Both the Deepwater Horizon and another apparently leaking well nearby, the Ocean Saratoga, received such waivers. BP filed an oil-spill response plan for its Gulf operations riddled with errors. It listed as its prime wildlife expert a dead man. It also included among Gulf marine animals walruses, seals and sea otters native to cold water regions.

Regulators also left it to the industry to decide what equipment was necessary to safely drill wells in the icy, high pressure environment thousands of feet below the Gulf surface. For example, tieback strings, metal conduits from the bottom of the hole to the surface to strengthen the well structure, are optional. They are costly and require lengthy lead times to manufacture. BP chose not to use one in the Deepwater Horizon. Gene Beck, a drilling expert, told the Chronicle that the lack of the device was a root cause of the blowout.

During the six-month federal moratorium on deepwater drilling, federal and industry officials must sit down and formulate realistic operation standards for all wells in our waters. At the same time MMS must be revamped from top to bottom to make human safety and environmental protection top priorities.



To: Wharf Rat who wrote (78184)6/13/2010 12:53:40 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 149317
 
The state of lithium

by brooklynbadboy
Sun Jun 13, 2010 at 08:02:03 AM PDT

As the United States turns its attention to new sources of energy, one of the most obscure minor metals in the world is becoming a household name. Demand for lithium, specifically lithium carbonate, has increased substantially in the last ten years. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the United States imports 3,450 metric tons of lithium carbonate while producing about 1,500 tons annually. Approximately 80% of the world's lithium is located in the great salt flats of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile. As with any valuable commodity, lithium is becoming another focus of competition in national and world politics.

(While Lithium (Li) and Lithium carbonate (Li2CO3) are very different materials, for the purposes of this article lithium carbonate shall be called lithium.)

Almost all the the innovations in battery technology today use lithium. Lithium is not an obscure, precious commodity. It has applications in ceramics, pharmaceuticals, and in aluminum production. The rapid rise in demand for it, however, is due to its increasing usefulness in lithium-ion batteries. Lithium-ion batteries are desirable because they are lightweight, have a very slow loss of charge when not in use, and have double the energy density of nickel-based batteries. Lithium is commonly found in rock salts around the world. The United States has one domestic major lithium company, American Lithium Minerals of Nevada, exploring throughout the Great Basin. The company has no mines producing at the moment. USGS reports a total 760,000 tons in proven U.S. reserves. There are 13 million tons in other countries, with the Chile and Bolivia holding 3 million and 5.4 million tons, respectively. There are many more details about lithium production I wont address here, but will in future work. Lithium mining, like all mining, has an environmental price. There are alternatives to lithium in development that may render it obsolete. For now, I want to examine the political dimension of lithium production in Chile and Bolivia and its impact on the United States.

Chile

Any talk about lithium has to begin with Chile. Chile exports 50 percent of the world's lithium, mostly through a formerly state-owned company called SQM. The company mines lithium at the huge Atacama Salt Flat, tapping an estimated 2.5 million metric tons in lithium reserves. Julio Ponce Lerou is the son-in-law of the brutal military dictator, Augusto Pinochet, and is the man in control of formerly state-owned SQM. He is one of the richest men in Chile. Larou's control of Chilean lithium is a classic story of corruption common wherever privatization schemes have unfolded. There are other unexplored salt flats throughout Chile, almost all owned by the state. RareMetalBlog notes that under a new "open markets" initiative, the government of the new center-right president, billionaire Sebastian Pinera, has passed measures that will open up new lithium mines to more private interests. Chilean bloggers are already calling Pinera their George W. Bush--complete with "ownership society" rhetoric.

Bolivia

Bolivia made big news when it announced 5.4 million tons of proven lithium reserves in its vast Uyuni Salt Flats. But the government of socialist president Evo Morales has made clear it does not intend to do business like Chile:

In Bolivia, where President Evo Morales has called lithium the "hope of humanity," as well as the key to Bolivia’s future economic prosperity, the government is taking a different approach. According to Bolivia’s new constitution, the country’s natural resources belong to the Bolivian people and must be administered in their collective interest by the state. Instead of exporting raw lithium, the government wants it to be processed, refined, and industrialized, with battery plants and even car factories, on Bolivian soil. The goal is to capture the value added by industrialization for Bolivians, in the form of jobs and economic and social benefits, instead of simply enriching transnational corporations.

Unfortunately, Bolivia does not have the money to mine, refine and add value to lithium this way. Morales has stated that he is actively seeking private investment, but that Bolivia wants "partners, not bosses." This approach has scared away foreign investment, compounded by Morales' closeness to Venezuelan President and U.S. antagonist Hugo Chavez. There are also significant infrastructure problems. The Uyuni flats are remote and inaccessible by road and train, whereas the Atacama flats are very easy to reach. Bolivia has established a state-owned lithium company, and even has met local resistance. The local folk of Uyuni insist on sharing the benefits of mining. Bolivian leaders believe that increasing global demand for lithium will help trump these challenges and will allow the country to become the dominant producer.

President Obama has made automobile battery innovation a centerpiece of his agenda to remake the American economy. Since taking office, his administration has invested heavily in domestic battery production and research and development. The President has announced a goal of putting 1 million battery-powered vehicles on the road by 2015. If that goal is met, the vast majority of these vehicles are expected to use lithium-ion batteries. While the Prius uses a nickel-based battery, Toyota is testinglithium-based batteries. General Motors' new Chevy Volt will use a lithium-based battery. The competition for the design and manufacture of these automobile batteries is the central item driving the optimism among lithium producers. As of today, there is only one domestic lithium mine producing. That mine, in Silver Peak, NV, received a $28.4 million Recovery Act grant for expansion. The mine and a refinement facility in North Carolina are both owned by German chemical conglomerate Chemetall.

Despite domestic production, the United States and China are likely to be the major global importers of lithium carbonate. Increased domestic production of lithium-ion batteries for automobiles will drive the demand in America. Consumer electronics and appliances will drive demand in China. China is also stepping up its domestic mining and refining of lithium believing it to be the "oil" of the 21st Century. China's domestic reserves are also limited, with only 540,000 tons. Both nations have their eyes on Bolivia, but the State Department says bilateral relations have "deteriorated sharply." The U.S. has taken a hardline position against the Morales government over coca production. Morales expelled the DEA from the country after taking power. President Obama talked of a "fresh start" when he met with Morales, but so far his administration has taken a decidedly hostile stance. Meanwhile, China continues improving warm relations with Bolivia, recently signing new trade aggrements. China is looking for Bolivian immigrants while the U.S. is cracking down on immigration. These developments are likely to impact international politics as nations scramble to secure alternatives to oil production. The global competition for resources continues unabated, whether it's petroleum or lithium at stake.

Should lithium become as important a strategic resource for the United States as oil currently is, the domestic political environment in nations like Bolivia, Chile and Argentina will become increasingly important to America. Should Bolivia become successful in its development, that nation's insistence on being more than a simple supplier of materials will strain relations between other entities or nations seeking a share of the country's riches. Nearby states like Chile and Argentina could be influenced by the people's movement in Bolivia and their insistence on enjoying the fruits of the natural resources. How these things play out should be of great interest to the labor, environmental, and business groups in the United States. By insisting on a clean energy transportation system, there will inevitably be unpredictable consequences, both domestic and international. It could be that humanity is on the cusp of the very same global competition for lithium that defined oil exploration and production in the 20th century.

dailykos.com



To: Wharf Rat who wrote (78184)6/13/2010 3:49:23 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
The Gulf Coast oil spill's Dr. Doom

FORTUNE -- As an oil and gas industry insider, Matt Simmons speaks with a bold voice and makes even bolder predictions. His 2005 book, Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy, which argued that Saudi Arabia's oil supplies are way more limited than most people think, raised his profile as an authority on the industry.

For more than 35 years, Simmons has run a Texas-based boutique investment bank, Simmons & Co., which specializes in the energy industry. At times, with his somewhat doom-and -loom-like take on things, there's a hint of conspiracy theorist in his tone. But it's hard to ignore that Simmons is deeply connected and has been pretty much right on in the past: When oil was $58 a barrel the year Twilight was released, Simmons predicted prices would be at or above $100 within a few years. By 2008, when Fortune profiled Simmons, the price of crude had hit $147 a barrel.

As a big believer that wind power is the way of the future, Simmons says the era of easy oil is over and that world oil production will eventually fail to meet expected future demands.

These days, Simmons has been weighing in on BP (BP) and the worst oil spill in U.S. history, following the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico. As BP struggles to permanently stop the gush of oil, Simmons has been warning that the scale of the spill is much bigger and that there's a larger leak several miles away.


Simmons also thinks that perhaps the only way to seal the gush of oil is by doing what the Soviet Union did decades ago -- setting off a bomb deep underground so that the fiery blast will melt the surrounding rock and shut off the spill.

Fortune caught up with Simmons this week to hear his thoughts on the Gulf Coast oil spill, the future of BP and what's ahead for offshore drilling.

Experts forecast an active hurricane season this year. We know it could disrupt efforts to stop the spill, but how else do you think storms could impact the Gulf Coast?

We've got to stop the gusher first. Then we have to deal with the other issues. There's a lake at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico that's over 100 miles wide and at least 400 to 500 feet deep of black oil. It's just staying there. And only the lightest of that is what we're seeing hitting the shores so far. If a hurricane comes and blows this to shore, it could paint the Gulf Coast black. We should have been pumping this oil out onto other tankers weeks ago.

How do you think the U.S. government should handle this disaster?

I think the government should ask BP to leave the United States and turn its operation over to the military. Put the U.S. Navy in charge. Have all the contractors report to the Navy -- the cleanup efforts, the whole nine yards. Because as long as it's in BP's hands, they're going to spin the information as long as they can.

What do you think is in store for the future of BP?

They have about a month before they declare Chapter 11. They're going to run out of cash from lawsuits, cleanup and other expenses. One really smart thing that Obama did was about three weeks ago he forced BP CEO Tony Hayward to put in writing that BP would pay for every dollar of the cleanup. But there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the Gulf of Mexico. Once BP realizes the extent of this my guess is that they'll panic and go into Chapter 11.


There's currently a ban on new deepwater oil projects for six months to prevent other disasters. What lies ahead for offshore drilling?

First of all, to the industry's credit, we went 41 years in the United States without an oil spill. In a minor sense, this is what happened to the Challenger. We had so many successful shuttle takeoffs that the space station got kind of casual about this. But this is worse. BP was so certain that there wasn't any risk that three years ago they thought the insurance industry was ripping them off, so they're self-insured on this. How stupid! It was the best thing that ever happened to the insurance industry.

How do you think the Gulf Coast oil spill will change the energy business, if at all?

Profoundly. We're going to have to go back and re-examine all of our regulatory rules and realize the easy stuff is imminent and the rest of the stuff we do is really risky. We have to start questioning whether it's worth the risk, and do we need to get really serious about developing some alternative energy sources? Now I'm working on a big project in mid-coast Maine called the Ocean Energy Institute, and we're hoping that within the next year we can actually create 50 megawatt offshore wind turbines -- one every five miles a part -- and turn that offshore electricity into desalinated sea water and liquid ammonia. It could replace motor gasoline and diesel fuel.

What are the lessons learned from this environmental disaster?

That oil peaked. The easy stuff is over. We have to continue drilling in shallow water, but we probably need to take a deep breath and step back. Until we develop a new generation of equipment that can respond to these accidents, just don't go into the ultra-deep water and deep formations because it's just too risky.

money.cnn.com