[IP] more on think of this everytime you fill your tank .. Exxon Mobil Posts Largest Annual Profit for U.S. Company - New York Times
Begin forwarded message:
From: Linda Stone <linda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: January 31, 2006 1:24:43 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on think of this everytime you fill your
tank .. Exxon Mobil Posts Largest Annual Profit for U.S. Company -
New York Times
Dave,
Two items of interest:
1. Cartoon from Defenders of Wildlife
http://exxposeexxon.defenders.org/site/PageServer?
pagename=exxon_exxonmovie&JServSessionIdr006=ngnswzhie1.app23a
2. Good editorial from some folks at Brookings.
-----------------------------------------------------------
REGAINING ENERGY LEVERAGE
By Michael O'Hanlon and David Sandalow
-----------------------------------------------------------
As Iran marches forward in an apparent attempt to develop nuclear
weapons, the world faces a dilemma. Absent military strikes, which
could help entrench a radical regime in power and might only delay an
Iranian bomb, sweeping sanctions offer the best chance of changing
Iran's behavior. Such sanctions -- to be serious -- must involve not
only pistachios, rugs and travel by Iranian leaders happy to stay
home, but the oil exports on which Iran's economy depends.
Yet far from being a sword the world community can brandish against a
recalcitrant Iran, oil is a shield Iran can use to protect itself.
Analysts predict interruption in Iranian crude to world markets would
send oil prices to more than $100 per barrel, weakening the resolve
of governments around the world to take on the security challenge of
Iran's nuclear ambitions.
This is unacceptable. Three decades after the first oil shocks -- and
a quarter-century after the humiliating capture of U.S. diplomats in
Tehran -- the world community remains hostage to its continuing
dependence on Mideast oil. Tough-talking leaders are unable to match
words with action because the hard work of reducing our oil
dependence remains undone.
More than ever, the world needs an energy cushion that will allow it
to consider sanctions against a major oil-exporting country such as
Iran that so flagrantly defies the international community. Such a
cushion is also needed to prevent political instability on the
Arabian Peninsula or terrorist attacks on major oil fields from
leading quickly to full-scale global crisis. We are taking a foolish
and unnecessary risk by remaining so dependent on every drop of oil
pumped that the global economy shudders and political leaders tremble
the moment any major source is threatened.
This vulnerability is not new. But today our ability to overcome it
is better than at any time in decades, for three reasons.
(1) We have a model of success: Brazil. While the United States
dithered for much of the last quarter-century, pursuing ineffective
and inconsistent energy security policies, Brazil set out to reduce
dependence on foreign oil in part by harnessing its agricultural
wealth. Starting in the 1970s, vast sugar plantations were devoted to
producing ethanol, a homegrown liquid fuel. Brazil stuck with the
program through several setbacks and today is essentially independent
of foreign oil.
True, Brazil is blessed with a favorable climate for biofuels. But
the real lesson is that determination and resolve pay off. In the
United States, wildly fluctuating budgets for energy research have
choked progress on biofuels that could increase rural incomes while
enhancing national security.
Building on the Brazilian experience, the U.S. government should
immediately launch a crash program to develop advanced or
"cellulosic" ethanol made from switchgrass, poplar and other nonfood
crops. Technology breakthroughs in the last decade have made this
even more practical than before. Cities should launch community
biodiesel programs, collecting waste oils to produce liquid fuel.
Such steps could also help transform global agriculture, reducing the
need for the traditional farm subsidies in the West and providing
developing countries' farmers more market opportunities.
(2) U.S. automakers are poised for historic transformation: The
strategy of the past several decades -- based on massive advertising
to sell gas-guzzling cars -- has failed miserably. The terms of the
Washington-Detroit dialogue should be rewritten, with Washington
recognizing health-care and pension costs put U.S. automakers at a
competitive disadvantage, and Detroit recognizing its products
profoundly affect our national security.
Starting in the next few model years, all cars sold in the United
States should be "flex-fuel," giving consumers the choice between
gasoline or ethanol. GM and Ford already make such cars in Brazil,
where they're the hottest-sellers.
Then, automakers should leap ahead to commercialize a new generation
of vehicles with oil-saving technologies such as plug-in hybrid
engines and lightweight, super-strong carbon composite materials. A
grand bargain with Detroit agreeing to put many such vehicles on the
road and Washington agreeing to help support health and pension costs
would strongly serve the national interest.
By steadfastly pursuing opportunities in biofuels and automotive
technologies, the United States could in a generation cut in half its
need for oil, reducing the importance of any one supplier. Strategic
implications would be profound -- strengthening the U.S. and our
allies in all manner of dealings in the Persian Gulf and around the
world. The challenge is fundamentally not one of technology, but
political will.
(3) Political prospects: This suggests a third reason the opportunity
for progress on oil dependence is greater today than at any time in
memory. A far-reaching coalition -- including security hawks,
farmers, manufacturers, labor unions and environmentalists -- is
ready to embrace vigorous policies to break our oil addiction.
It's hard to think of a more compelling confluence of events --
September 11, 2001, Katrina, Russia's democratic reversals, Iran's
nuclear program -- to shake us out of our complacency and past ways
of doing things. Although it may be too late to promptly resolve this
particular crisis with Iran, we can be sure there will be others.
This year is the time to act.
Michael O'Hanlon and David Sandalow are senior scholars at the
Brookings Institution.
On Jan 31, 2006, at 4:11 AM, David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: January 30, 2006 9:43:55 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on think of this everytime you fill your
tank .. Exxon Mobil Posts Largest Annual Profit for U.S. Company -
New York Times
From: Chris Beck <cbeck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: January 30, 2006 5:37:35 PM EST
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
"This might be the best macroeconomic environment ever for oil," said
Dave Pursell, a partner at Pickering Energy Partners, Houston-based
research firm.
"More than any of its peers, Exxon knocked the cover off the ball
with its long, disciplined view of global projects."
Yeah, it was the long disciplined view of global projects that
did it.
Had nothing to do with control of a vertical market, reduced supply,
increased demand, a cartel, and huge subsidies from government.
Well, that and possibly pumping more than $8 million into about 40
thinktanks
for PR against global warming probably didn't hurt:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2005/05/exxon_chart.html
--
Chris Beck - http://pacanukeha.blogspot.com
-jsq
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as Linda@xxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-
people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/