Blog @ MoreWhat.com

BEIJING (Reuters) - China urged other powers on Tuesday to show more flexibility in dealing with Iran’s disputed nuclear programme, playing down prospects of sanctions after six countries met to discuss the standoff.

While Western powers have looked to further sanctions against Iran over its rejection of a U.N. plan to rein in Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, Russia and now especially China have resisted such steps and called for more negotiations.

How about this for a conspiracy theory? China and Russia have ties with Iran. They could care less if the US or its allies view Iranian nukes as a problem. China is hell bent on being a dominate force on the planet and has achieved much in that regard. Russia has lamented the fall of the Soviet Union since it happened and Putin is determined to regain that status as a world power.

Imagine Russia wants to relive the Missiles of October scenario from 1962 and allow Iran to be their proxy and provoke a nuclear standoff or worse, launch a strike against Israel? Israel may well be able to react in advance and preempt a first strike. Add to that any reaction that would come from China and others with nuke capability and Armageddon is poised to occur as the end of the Mayan calendar approaches in 2012. Coincidentally, the year President Obama is up for re-election and the VPOTUS warning of a test shows up late.

Even without the conspiracy theory, the so-called international community continues its impotent policy toward the current nuclear threat.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Another question mark in foreign affairs is Saudi Arabia. Even without President Obama bowing to Saudis for all the world to see, the US has maintained a strange relationship with this Arab country for many years. Most would agree it is simply a matter of hedging bets on oil supplies. But even the country noted as the home of 9/11 hijackers and the birthplace of Osama bin Laden is not exempt from terrorist action within Islam.

Deputy Interior Minister Prince Muhammad bin Nayef was receiving visitors at his home in Jeddah late Thursday when the bomber got close and detonated his explosives. The prince had opened his house to visitors as part of observances for the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

Imagine that. Open the house for visitors during Ramadan and have a terrorist try to kill you. Yes, Ramadan, the Islamic event of fasting and asking forgiveness for one’s sins. Gotta love this religion of peace. So many contradictions, so little time.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The community organizer who is friends with the domestic terrorist William Ayers, hate monger Jeremiah Wright and hires friends from the most corrupt political machine (Illinois) has the audacity of something other than hope to reference the founding fathers and call on the public to support his agenda that is anything but American.

Like mutually exclusive terms President Obama insults the meaning of this nation’s Independence Day when he tries to connect the principles of the founding with his socialist agenda. Those who have dismissed the idea that his agenda is socialist overlook nationalizing private industry, spending and government expansion with the intent of complete government control that will render this great country into nothing more than a banana republic.

Addressing our dependence on foreign energy by taxing all we use rather than a transition approach that draws on our own fossil fuel resources until alternatives become viable in a free market is counter to American ideals which rely on the innovation of a free people. Expecting the public to buy into a universal or socialized, government-run healthcare system rather than encouraging free market solutions also runs counter to American ideals. With these two examples only God may know what the Obama agenda has planned for education, immigration and the remainder of his ideas for transforming the United States into another socialist country like some in the EU and others in this hemisphere.

And then we have the impotent GOP. Based on the report below the Senator who lost an election to the community organizer was chosen to give the opposition party response to ObamaGov. While we can all debate whether or not it would have been wise to have a united response from the US regarding turmoil in Iran the larger issues of our own nation under the leadership of Barack Obama seems more to the point or at least an issue of primary importance. We can do little to help others if we cannot help ourselves and the GOP response appears to be a continuance of Republicans being lost in the wilderness.

Will someone please find a way to encourage this nation’s leaders to remove their collective heads from their collective hind quarters and return sensible government to a young nation which just observed its 233rd birthday.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Pres. Barack Obama

On U.S. Independence Day, President Barack Obama is calling on Americans to remember the spirit of the nation’s founders, and to embrace his domestic initiatives. Republican Senator John McCain, meanwhile, wants stronger U.S. language against Iran’s violent crackdown on protesters.

President Obama, in his weekly address, asks Americans to remember the sacrifices and achievements of the men who voted for independence 233 years ago.

“We are called to remember how unlikely it was that our American experiment would succeed at all; that a small band of patriots would declare independence from a powerful empire; and that they would form, in the new world, what the old world had never known - a government of, by and for the people,” he said.

In July, 1776, the representatives of 13 British colonies in America, gathered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, voted to declare independence from Britain and formed a new nation. At the same time, colonists in hastily-organized and poorly-financed militias battled the British Army for several years, until London officially recognized U.S. independence.

Mr. Obama called on Americans to recall those patriots’ spirit and support his plans to reform the U.S. education, health care and energy policies.

“We are not a people who fear the future,” he said. “We are a people who make it. And on this July 4th, we need to summon that spirit once more. We need to summon the same spirit that inhabited Independence Hall 233 years ago today.”

The president is celebrating Independence Day with a traditional barbecue and fireworks on the White House lawn, with 1,200 military families invited to attend. He is also celebrating his daughter Malia’s eleventh birthday. Mr. Obama leaves late Sunday for a week-long trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana.

Sen. John McCain (file photo)

In the weekly Republican Party message, Senator John McCain of Arizona is also paying tribute to the nation’s founding fathers, who he says “stood up to a powerful oppressor and claimed their natural right to liberty.”

McCain is also invoking the patriots’ spirit as he calls on the Obama administration to speak out more forcefully in support of the anti-government protesters in Iran.

“They did not ask us to arm them or come to their assistance with anything other than public declarations of solidarity and public denunciations of the tyrants who oppress them. We have a moral obligation to do so,” he said.

Senator McCain is rejecting earlier White House claims that a more vocal response by Washington would have supported the Iranian government’s claims of U.S. interference.

“Do they really believe Iranians do not know why they are protesting, and who is oppressing them? Do they think Iranians whose votes were discarded, whose voices have been ignored, whose lives have been threatened by the regime they wish to be rid of, will think America has put them in that position?” he said.

U.S. Independence Day is traditionally celebrated with picnics, parades, concerts, fireworks displays, and readings of the Declaration of Independence.

Besides the thumping given to Ariana Huffington by George F Will on ABC’s This Week (Sunday April 5, 2009) another column by Will ‘drives’ home the point that government meddling in the private sector or attempting to force the public to do what it doesn’t want to do is as ‘feckless’ as other liberal dreams held by those like the HuffPo Queen. (referring to harmony as being inevitable from the roundtable discussion)

Public isn’t buying into auto policy
By George Will
Washington Post Writers Group
Sunday, April 05, 2009

The stunning shift in consumer preferences that should make the White House’s freshly minted auto experts feel vulnerable has been reported under headlines such as “Like a Rock: Hybrid Car Sales Plummet” (Wall Street Journal, Dec. 9) and “Hybrid Car Sales Go from 60 to 0 at Breakneck Speed” (Los Angeles Times, March 17). Absent $4 gasoline, customers do not want the vehicles the politicians want them to want, even with manufacturers now offering large rebates and other incentives. The two best-selling vehicles in America this year are large pickup trucks. (click here to read the rest)

Through Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush (41), Clinton and Bush (43) nothing has been done to address the initial ‘heads up’ that oil is vulnerable or that other energy policy and use could benefit from having more options. Beyond the common criticism or debates on who is to blame or why alternatives have not been pursued effectively is the stubborn reality of bringing a product or service or commodity to market. It must be economically viable to succeed.

Just like peace on earth and goddwill toward men, it’s a nice sentiment but won’t happen until enough people want it. The same goes for alternative fuels, hybrids, electric cars or, to borrow a pet phrase from Obama, ‘a host of’ other issues.

Government rarely considers that the millions of people in this or other countries have millions of varying needs and problems to solve on a daily basis. And that government actions and their one size fits all mentality fails to impress. What’s worse is that whatever meddling politicians choose to be interested in is always paid for by the people that do not want it.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Economic times being what they are who would expect the price of gas to rise? What could consumers learn about the last time the prices fell after reaching near five dollars a gallon at the pump? From the basics of supply and demand to specific world events that affect the markets the consumer sometimes has a significant effect on prices. A huge decrease in demand as gasoline prices peaked last year is often cited as why the price eventually fell. Wouldn’t it be nice if consumers did not require such a severe price increase to encourage cutting back on gasoline purchases? A small reminder of the power of the consumer was illuminated last year but will likely be forgotten in times ahead. That is one reason for this post being published now.

The excerpt below links to an interesting analysis of how the price at the pump is determined. This blog cannot speak to the validity of this appraisal but it is interesting nonetheless. In other words it is worth a read.

Did you know that gas price gouging almost never occurs as prices rise? Rather, it’s most often when dealers keep prices artificially high even as their costs fall. As gas costs were near $5 a gallon until falling and oil companies earn around $100 billion each year, it’s a good time to question what really goes into the price of gas. The numbers on the gas station sign hide a complex set of transactions. Before gas can power your car, it must be discovered as crude oil, traverse three markets, and be refined from crude into gas. Inside, we’ll explain the three markets, walk you through the role of refineries, and show how oil companies use creative tactics to manipulate gas prices…

The piece below is what renewed the interest here on gas prices and how it all works and who is in control a few weeks ago. It mentioned one of the big players.

Lack of Spending Kills US Jobs, Profits
By VOA News
27 January 2009
(brief excerpt)

Valero, the largest U.S. oil refiner, said it lost more than 43 billion as the recession dampened demand for gasoline.

The item below simply describes this major player and is from Wikipedia.

Valero Energy Corporation (NYSE: VLO) is a Fortune 500 oil and gas refining and retail company based in San Antonio, Texas. The company owns and operates 18 refineries throughout the United States, Canada and the Caribbean with a combined throughput capacity of approximately 3.3 million barrels per day, making it the largest refiner in North America.[1] Valero is also one of the nation’s largest retail operators with more than 5,000 retail and branded wholesale outlets in the United States, Canada and the Caribbean under various brand names, including Valero, Diamond Shamrock, Ultramar, Shamrock, and Beacon.

A piece from Motley Fool expands on the list of player and how things are going right now.

Along with Valero Energy and pint-sized Calumet Specialty Products (Nasdaq: CLMT), Holly possesses the ability to process sour-crude feedstocks that provided a competitive advantage during oil’s last climb. With expansions and improvements nearly completed at both refineries, Holly will not only face the next rise in oil prices with about an 18% increase in refining capacity, but also an enhanced ability to process sour crude. In fact, the Navajo refinery will soon be equipped to rely entirely on sour crudes if needed. Although I’ve been cool on the refining sector lately, as the majors have been cutting production, I am intrigued by the company’s competitive refining spreads and the steps underway to enhance that sour-crude advantage.

And who can forget the large campaign by the man below suggesting what we should do about energy? So what has he been doing lately?

T Boone Pickens buys Peabody Energy Corp., Chesapeake Energy Corp., sells ABB Ltd., Westport Innovations Inc, Valero Energy Corp., Tenaris S.A., Talisman Energy Inc., Schlumberger Ltd., The Shaw Group Inc., SANDRIDGE ENERGY INC, National Oilwell Varco Inc., Petrohawk Energy Corp., Halliburton Company, The Greenbrier Companies Inc., Foster Wheeler Ltd., Fluor Corp., DresserRand Group Inc., Chevron Corp., Clean Energy Fuels Corp., BPZ RESOURCES, INC, XTO Energy Inc. during the 3-months ended 12/31/2008, according to the most recent filings of his investment company, BP Capital. T Boone Pickens owns 9 stocks with a total value of $40 million. These are the details of the buys and sells.

This is just a little public service feature that will hopefully keep people’s minds on some of what falls to the back burner these days. Notice what is focused on in the news lately and what has been pushed aside. Not like the current economic conditions will make those items pushed aside a non-issue for the future. Can those we elected to serve in Washington keep their eye on all important issues? Or will they falter and obsess on the most popular while dropping the ball on others?

What could happen or what could be ignored to cause another damaging rise in energy prices? Just a little food for thought on a lazy Sunday in February 2009.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The approach of the general election featuring the selection of a new President in the United States has seen an incredible amount of turmoil surrounding the current political season. The war on terror while producing success such as the troop surge in Iraq has fallen on the deaf ears and blind eyes of the Democratic party as they criticize the party occupying the White House in the form of President Bush and also offer no congratulations that the US has suffered no further attacks on American soil during his watch. Struggles in the financial sector are also blamed solely on the President and his party by the members of the political opposition.

These situations are not an entirely American ordeal of course as the leaders of Russia in the form of Vladamir Putin and Dmitri Medvedev are experiencing similar controversy. The report below may suggest a change in tone from the Kremlin although recent events are more reminiscent of the Cold War than not. Two Russian Tu-160 bombers left Venezuela this week after conducting air patrol flights in the region. They may return in November for a joint exercise that hasn’t been seen since the Cold War that Putin claims he doesn’t want to be ‘dragged into with the West.’

Just like in the old days of the Cold War, Russia flexed its muscle in a small way with the Tupolev jets but in a more symbolic but provocative way with its nearly simultaneous testing of a new ICBM. The Bulava carries six warheads and can travel 10,000 km. Not surprisingly the Russian media expressed the missiles ability to penetrate any future missile shield. A statement likely directed against the US plans to install missile shields in Poland or elsewhere to protect allies from the likes of Iran or other ‘rogue’ nations bent on expanding their influence through terrorist actions.

The apparent change in tone from Mr Putin was not likely in response to European Union members limp challenge to Russia’s thumping of nearby Georgia. After ruling out sanctions, the EU held a meeting and then condemned Russia for the move. Do you suppose they are somewhat timid due to Russia’s control over so much of their oil supply?

Almost mirroring US financial sector woes Russian President Medvedev blamed the move on Georgia as risking the orderly flow of business in the financial markets of Russia. More turmoil and upheaval in Russia may be faced by the ‘privileged class‘ with ties to the West, international finance centers and of all things NATO complicating their agenda. It may be difficult to tell if the Georgian conflict and repercussions from it were responsible for the need to prop up their markets with this week’s 20 billion cash infusion or if Russia was simply experiencing the same problems the rest of the world was.

Perhaps after some time to digest current events and take the world’s temperature, Putin took a different approach to public affairs in the report below. Just like the financial woes in the US and elsewhere, politicians may be making too much of it too soon. If in six months we’re hearing no more of it the proof that most of the talk was purely political will be obvious. Just as obvious as the players doing nothing to prevent future problems and that they were just being politicians.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Putin Rejects Cold War, Backs Economic Integration

By VOA News
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin says his nation is seeking full integration into the world economy and will not be dragged into another Cold War era with the West.

Mr. Putin was speaking to Russian officials and business leaders in the Black Sea resort of Sochi.

On Thursday, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Russia is becoming “increasingly authoritarian” and “aggressive.” At an event hosted by the German Marshall fund, Rice delivered her strongest comments to date about Russia’s invasion of Georgia and other recent actions.

She said the U.S. goal is to make clear to Russia’s leaders that their choices are putting Russia, in her words, “on a one-way path to self-imposed isolation and international irrelevance.”

She said that for Russia to reach its full potential, it must be fully integrated into the international political and economic order. She said Russia is in the “precarious position of being half in and half out.”

In Moscow, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev said Thursday that relations with the United States remain a priority for Russia. He said it would be politically short-sighted to squander the achievements and potential in relations by reviving stereotypes of the past.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.

Before getting to the endless loop that is the entirely politically motivated noise spewing from Nancy Pelosi’s mouth, a brief word on the collective efforts of both stripes in Congress and the fact that nearly every poll on the planet ranks their approval in the teens or twenties. With that fact on the table, how ridiculous is it for Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to dedicate an entire press release on blaming others?

Quite often during the current woes in the financial sector recollections of the savings and loan BAILOUT have been expressed. After the crash of 29 and since many safeguards have been put in place that many agree have aided avoiding another similar disaster. Black Monday in 1987 may be an example of the market’s ability to sustain extreme adverse conditions since the Great Depression. Until the subprime mess and the recent ‘meltdown’ in the financial markets the S&L crisis was probably a faded memory in most people’s minds, including those in Congress, Nancy.

As is the case with most crisis situations every political hack, including you, Nancy Pelosi, cannot resist the temptation to make the story political and pile all blame on the opposition party. The same can be said of your Presidential nominee for 2008. No, not Hillary Rodham Clinton, but Barack Obama who has used this story to attack his rival, Senator John McCain. But Obama may be getting confused or over his head on this story as he announced agreement with the Administration’s efforts to calm the storm and hesitated on announcing his idea of how to solve the problem. Like you, he wants to wait to say that is what I would have done if it works or pounce on the opportunity to make a political statement if it does not.

Simply stating that you represent change as a solution really solves nothing. With no resume’ or list of accomplishments in public service in elected office, Barack Obama’s change would only constitute a different person in the White House which will happen anyway since George Bush is term limited. The change that John McCain offers is based on his long career both in the military and in the Congress. He has actual records that one can access showing his history in government. He has established relationships and the mechanisms required for getting things done. Obama has none of that, Nancy. And YOUR majority in Congress since 2006 has an approval rating in the basement. So get off your high horse and start working with people to get things done.

Need you be reminded of your failed New Direction for America and the laughable highlights such as the most ethical Congress in decades? Stop insulting the American public you claim to champion and get something meaningful done. Your latest fiasco is the empty offshore drilling measure that does not accomplish what is needed and is only another tactic for you to rail on your opponents. Stop throwing the BS and get to work.

Congress’ Approval Rating Ties Lowest in Gallup Records
Bush approval remains near record low
by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ — Approval of Congress has dipped below 20% for only the fourth time in the 34 years Gallup has asked Americans to rate the job Congress is doing. Today’s 18% score, based on a May 8-11 Gallup Poll, matches the record lows Gallup recorded in August 2007 and March 1992.

from Polling Report, Congressional Approval Ratings
a long list of various polls and dates confirming no one thinks highly of Congress and the job they are supposed to do. That includes you Nancy.

Pelosi Statement on $85 Billion AIG Loan

Washington, D.C. — Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued the following statement tonight on the announcement by the Federal Reserve that it will lend up to $85 billion to the American International Group:

“The Bush Administration’s eight long years of failed deregulation policies have resulted in our nation’s largest bailout ever, leaving the American taxpayers on the hook potentially for billions of dollars. An $85 billion loan is a staggering sum and is just too enormous for the American people to bear the risk; Congress will demand answers to prevent this from happening again.

“I have asked Chairman Barney Frank of the Financial Services Committee and Chairman Henry Waxman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee to hold a series of hearings that will examine the Bush Administration’s mismanagement of financial market regulation and how it led us to this remarkable failure. The questions we need answers to are whether fraud played a role in AIG’s failure; why foreign stakeholders are not contributing to help pay for the bailout; and why the Bush Administration didn’t use its existing regulatory authority effectively and sooner.

“The American people deserve to know how eight years of Republican government failed to protect their homes, pensions, college saving plans, and other long-term investments. We cannot afford four more years of the Bush Administration’s mismanagement of our economy.”

The above is just another waste of time presented to you by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic party. If Obama was elected as President she would focus all her attention on the remaining GOP members of Congress as the reason she cannot get anything done. And Obama would parrot the response as he won’t have a clue what to do if placed in the Oval Office.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Trackposted to Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, DragonLady’s World, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, Democrat=Socialist, NN&V, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, , third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Walls of the City, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, , WingLeSS, Wolf Pangloss, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe

Still considering the upside and downside of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as the GOP nominee for Vice-President requires returning to the initial obvious question. Representing a state that receives the bulk of its revenue from energy interests and married to an employee of BP, a company with image problems of its own, the natural suspicion is where do her allegiances lie? To the obvious question there is the obvious liberal answer in the second paragraph of the excerpt below from WaPo.

Sarah Palin and Big Oil

Energy Wire talked to Gov. Sarah Palin in May about her views on Big Oil, offshore drilling and a long-awaited, expensive and controversial natural gas pipeline for which she has been pushing hard. With McCain’s announcement Friday, suddenly her comments seem a lot more interesting.

Many environmental and Democratic activists attacked her yesterday for being too close to Big Oil. They dislike her support for drilling in environmentally sensitive areas, her skepticism about alternative energy sources, and her opposition to listing polar bears as an endangered species. “Sarah Palin reinforces John McCain’s plan to continue the Bush-Cheney big oil energy policies,” said Daniel J. Weiss, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “Palin may be new, but her big oil energy agenda is very old-fashioned.”

Can you be pro-energy, pro-environment and not be corrupted by relationships and transactions with which you must be involved to discharge your duties as a state executive? BP is not a big fan of Sarah Palin’s, according to the report above, as may be the case with other oil interests. She has tried to bring on board other smaller concerns who may willing to use other strategies than the limited scope of ‘big oil’. While she is in favor of drilling in ANWR (and this blog is not) there are places she does not favor drilling and in one instance it is due to concern over the fish population. Not sharing a single opinion is hardly reason to reject a person for public office. And Sarah Palin demonstrates that supporting energy exploration and development does not have to be an all or nothing game. The other criticism in the liberal complaints above may be a bit narrow-minded or simply a campaign tactic to paint the desired picture of a party opponent.

Those opposing McCain/Palin like to say McCain is too old and Palin is too young or McCain is politics as usual and Palin has no experience. If you cannot see the difference between McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden you are not looking hard enough. If you wish to paint the GOP candidates as an extension of the Bush Administration your debate discipline is lacking meaning you’re lazy. To this point in the discussion on this blog McCain has had one glaring flaw on current issues that he does not appear to have reconciled to the satisfaction of many. That would be his support of amnesty for illegal aliens. The criticism that Palin lacks whatever credentials someone thinks she needs to be a heartbeat away from President is probably overplayed. There are plenty of seasoned politicians that raise the same concern for many of us and one of them is Joe Biden.

Before ending this particular post, one more look at Palin and energy. She appears to be at least skeptical on alternative energy sources. Had we as a nation pursued these sources 30 years ago when the word crisis was first seriously linked with oil we might now be within reach of practical replacements for the fossil fuel. But some of the conventional drilling strategies will not provide quick fixes either. And still there are few people talking about the need for refining capacity in addition to domestic oil production. Point is, if Palin is not a big fan of alternatives, right now, that may be part of the reason. She may subscribe to the saying a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, no pun intended, and focusing on known tehcnology is a better bet than untested alternatives.

So, for Paln on energy, this blog sees no problem thus far.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

While returning to research for updating a previous post series, Women in Politics, the following editorial was found. It provides a little light onto Dems, California and the energy situation in the US. Although some of the points have been expressed elsewhere, nonetheless, it is a good brief read. As we approach the November election and the Dems hold there convention in Denver, this item from the Lompoc Record is especially timely.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Move over, Dems, let oil flow

Why aren’t we drilling for more oil in Santa Barbara County?

Ask the Democrat movers and shakers on the South Coast. While you’re at it, ask the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Lois Capps and Senator’s Feinstein and Boxer and the entire California Democrat delegation.

Locally, on July 3, the Board of Supervisors at the urging of 1st District Supervisor Salud Carbajal placed an “emergency item” on the agenda “to consider opposing the opening of federal waters to oil drilling” after President Bush lifted a moratorium on offshore drilling.

Then, when it was learned that several well-informed citizens would speak on the issue, it was suddenly dropped from the agenda. My, that’s a brave move, but not unexpected in a political environment dominated by overanxious liberal environmental activists who favor shrill rhetoric over an objective analysis.

With going green going crazy and global warming fear monger, Al Gore, the failed Presidential contender fanning the flames of doom, one of the strongest criticisms of biofuels like ethanol made from corn was two-fold. It takes more energy to produce corn-based ethanol than can be derived from it and using the amount of corn required to have any significant impact in moving from fossil fuels places extreme pricing pressures on the food supply.

With most of the ‘alternative’ sources of energy years off in the future in terms of practical application, the flames the likes of Al Gore, et al, are fanning are not producing a solution rather a panic of catastrophic proportions. And the far left loves this strategy. Create new victims, attack manufactured villains and the lines of people trying to get taxpayer funding to ‘research’ alternatives may eventually reach around the globe. That is about the only connection between the globe and the term, global economy.

But while the opposing sides, of which there may be more than two, sort out the energy future in this country, one report indicates we should take a more reasoned approach to any major shifts in widespread use of alternative energy sources. According to the report below, “The process yields about eight times more energy than it consumes so it is a much more energy efficient way to produce ethanol.”

If that statement is true, the case for sorghum as an alternative energy source is probably one of the more promising developments in this crazy pursuit. The pursuit is not crazy because it is intended to find non-fossil fuel alternatives but because of the total abandon excercised by most proponents. The Chicken Little posture demonstrated by the most fanatical fans does more damage than good. A little care and a reasoned approach to solutions will minimize mistakes and speed any postive results.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Sorghum: A Biofuel Alternative?

By Paul Sisco
Washington
Biofuel Sorghum report / Broadband - Download (WM)
Biofuel Sorghum report / Broadband - Watch (WM)

International research scientists are meeting in Houston, Texas August 19-22 to discuss various biofuel alternatives to corn, especially sorghum. Some scientists say sorghum - cultivated for food and fodder in various parts of the world - might one day help power our vehicles. VOA’s Paul Sisco has today’s Searching for Solutions report.

In the United States, sweet sorghum is grown for livestock feed and also used as a sweetener in the form of a syrup. In India, the sweet juice inside the plant’s stalk is turned into ethanol and used as a fuel.

This has spurred William Rooney and his team at Texas A & M to work with sorghum. They say it grows faster than corn and can produce more ethanol per plant. “In the near future as we move forward you will see these types of crops become more and more prominent,” Rooney said.

Today, nearly all the ethanol in the US comes from corn. It is widely used as a gasoline additive. But using corn-based ethanol has not stopped gasoline prices from rising, and researchers are experimenting with algae, grasses, and plant stalks as biofuels.

Gene Stevens, at the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources at the University of Missouri, works with sorghum.

“We produced as much ethanol with the corn as we did with the sweet sorghum but the only advantage was that we used less fertilizer with the sweet sorghum,” he explains. “It may be that sweet sorghum may have a niche in some of those soils that are not so productive.”

Also, producing ethanol from sorghum uses less energy than corn — says Mark Winslow with the non-profit International Crops Research Institute.

“The process yields about eight times more energy than it consumes so it is a much more energy efficient way to produce ethanol,” Winslow says.

Critics of corn based ethanol production say it has contributed to rising food prices because of the amount of grain used to make the fuel. That explains, in part, why the search is on to find other biofuel sources.

“I think you are going to hear more about the crops that are starting to make sense,” Rooney says.

Among them sorghum, says Rooney, a proven source of ethanol with more potential than corn.

By Brian Wagner
Miami
Wagner report - Download (MP3)
Wagner report - Listen (MP3)

The United States plans to spend $600 million in coming years to propel development of renewable fuels and other new energy solutions. The funding goes along with millions that private investors are spending to find ways to cut the nation’s dependence on oil. VOA’s Brian Wagner recently met with business and research leaders striving to find the best new energy solutions.

The future of alternative energy appears to be rich, whether it is the potential of new biofuels, citrus peel or farm waste products to supply new energy sources.

At a recent conference in Florida, green entrepreneurs met with researchers and farmers to plot the industry’s future. Scores of research firms are developing conversion methods to process a variety of raw materials into ethanol. Farmers are finding ways to turn long overlooked products, like livestock manure and non-food crops, into fuel supplies.

Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told delegates that green energy is creating great new opportunities for the U.S. economy, especially in the farming sector.

“There is no turning back from a future in which more of our energy resources are grown and harvested in a sensible way,” he said. “That means agriculture is going to be right in the middle of the game.”

Schafer said, under a newly approved farm bill, officials plan to spend $600 million over the next five years to develop and implement new energy technologies, including biofuel crops. That comes in addition to $35 million already being spent.

Green entrepreneurs say federal support is crucial to propel development of advanced technologies that are needed for new energy solutions. Federal loans also are an important tool to give nascent projects the chance to develop into successful businesses.

Some business leaders say government spending still is not enough to offset oil expenditures in the United States, which consumes about 20 million barrels of oil each day. Agriculture Secretary Schafer faced some tough questions from green business leaders at the recent conference.

“Investing 30 million, 50 million even 100 million seems very small in comparison with the opportunities and the size of the problem,” said one attendee.

Schafer said he agrees that more money should be spent, and that is why officials are trying to encourage more private investment.

“It is not just a government effort, it is private sector, too,” he says. “But we are not spending enough money. We are just saying let that oil come in from overseas and we are not doing enough about it.”

In Florida, officials are trying to capitalize on the boom in green technology. Governor Charlie Crist has sought to expand energy research programs at state universities and ordered energy companies to begin offering more electricity from renewable sources. He says his goal is to draw green businesses to the state.

“I believe that Florida can be the green technology hub of America, and clearly the equivalent of the Silicon Valley of green,” he says. “Florida can be known as energy and green industry leaders throughout the world.”

Alan Hodges, an agricultural economist at the University of Florida, has been following the renewable energy field for more than 20 years. He says federal and state initiatives have created a unique climate for growth now.

“There is tremendous interest right now,” he says. “I don’t think there has ever been more interest than there is now, and it is all because of high oil prices.”

Government and private sector interest in new energy has come and gone before.

Joseph Weissman of Aurora Biofuels has been researching the potential of growing algae as a potential source of fuel oil since the oil crisis of the late 1970s. As certain algae grow, they produce oils that can be harvested and converted into fuel. He said government funds helped advance his work until gasoline prices dropped a few years later, and public funding disappeared.

He says the involvement of more private money will help ensure the development of new energy technologies into the future.

“That was lacking in the past, it was all government money,” Weissman says. “Plus government money isn’t driven by the same forces. When someone [private investor] has invested money in something they will see it through one way or another. The government may change its mind overnight.”

Researchers say it is difficult to determine whether algae or another technology is the most promising for the future, and when the general public can expect to see the benefits. But they agree that energy costs will continue to remain high, driving further interest in new energy sources in the future.

from MoreWhat.com:

Sure, the Ag Secretary comments on how great renewable energy ops will be for farmers. Don’t take this wrong, farmers have had a tough time and we all benefit from the food they produce but making things like ethanol and raising food prices as well as an alternative energy source that requires more energy to make than you get out of it begs the question. What the hell are we doing that for?
Of the funding mentioned in the article above, it appears the legal scam artists have a $120 million per year from this pork barrel on which to satisfy their thirst for cash. Liberals complain to conservatives about opposing the rush to green and attacking global warming along with the myriad of schemes such rushes create. Conservatives shout at the liberals for crying the sky is falling and we need to drill with little mention of refining capacity. Both sides focus their sound bites on criticizing the other side and little gets done. But please people, slow down on the pork barrel, low probability, high cost waste of money antics like a $600 million giveaway. After all, it is the taxpayers’ money you’re entrusted to use wisely. Ya, like that ever happens.

Stanford Matthews

This is the fifth and final installment of Pelosi’s Folly & Pin the Tail on the Donkey. Since beginning this series of posts Nancy has done some waffling or flip flopping on energy issues. You can probably find your own sources of that news. Suffice it to say Nancy is as misguided as ever. Combine that with the insanity of Senator Harry Reid and others in the Dems party. But before moving on to things like the contentious Democratic Party Convention and placing their ‘hope’ on the celebrity of Barack Obama, here is the final pass on Pelosi’s (energy) Folly.

Speaker Pelosi’s item 6:
6. If House Republicans are for “all of the above,” why do you oppose efforts to protect consumers like price gouging and holding OPEC accountable for price fixing?

from MoreWhat.com:
Here’s another little link for you Nancy. Gasoline Price Gouging Laws Will Not Benefit Consumers And how do you propose to hold OPEC accountable? Producing our own oil is the best way to use less of their’s. But promoting panic solutions will simply trade one problem for another.

Speaker Pelosi’s item 7:
7. When House Republicans were in the majority for 12 years, our dependence on foreign oil escalated. Why didn’t House Republicans do something about America’s energy independence to ensure we wouldn’t reach the energy crisis we’re in now?

from MoreWhat.com:
Here’s a little bibliography for you Speaker Pelosi. You can peruse the Congressional majorities and read about the various oil shortages brought on by tensiions in the Middle East. To blame the GOP as you have specifically in your item 7 is silly. The wake up call for alternatives to the way we use energy had occured as far back as the sixties and seventies and we, as a nation, did nothing or very little. The general public has an equal share in the blame you want to attach for energy problems.

Party Divisions of the House of Representatives (1789 to Present)

Party Division in the Senate, 1789-Present

1967 Oil Embargo

1973 oil crisis

1979 energy crisis

Speaker Pelosi’s item 8:
8. Democrats will continue to push for legislation to end undue speculation in the oil market that many analysts say has increased the price of a barrel of oil. Will House Republicans support it?

from MoreWhat.com:
And as for the speculation concern you have, you may have noticed that without interfering with the markets the price of oil decreased noticeably in recent days and lower demand was one reason given. Painful as it may be, supply and demand and free markets work pretty well. When we reach a point in which we can no longer afford something the demand falls and so does the price. Our country’s long standing love affair with freedom of movement provided by vehicles using internal combustion engines and petroleum got us here. We’ll pay for the privilege until we learn how to deal with it. Waiting for more than 30 years to deal with it has a cost. Blaming everyone you oppose, Nancy, is ridiculous and counter-productive.

As for Speaker Pelosi’s items 9 & 10 we should do what we can to help those who need it. And as for new standards on sources for electric power for public utilities, any mandates from Congress will also bear a price to consumers. Careful what you wish for Nancy.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Three more items from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s top ten list (sorry, Dave) are as idiotic as others presented in previous posts. In item 3 (below) the Democratic Speaker of the House indicates she favors ‘repealing tax subsidies’ but you can bet she will oppose repealing any taxes. But that is a story for another time. Echoing the Democratic party’s disdain for profitable enterprise she believes the oil companies should be taxed into oblivion as energy policy. She states that ‘Exxon-Mobil is making $1,500 a second’ and implies that is the limit for increasing their tax liability. She fails to mention the staggering tax bill of Exxon Mobil, other oil companies and the tax burden to the American citizens she claims to protect. So here is one excerpt from the Tax Foundation to help you see the other side.

February 2, 2007
ExxonMobil’s Record Profits — And Record Taxes

by Jonathan Williams

Today, ExxonMobil reported the largest corporate profits in U.S. History. From Yahoo Finance:

“Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. on Thursday posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company — $39.5 billion — even as earnings for the last quarter of 2006 declined 4 percent. The 2006 profit topped the previous record, also by Exxon Mobil, of $36.13 billion set in 2005.” [Full story]

While they were recording record profits last year, they were also writing checks to Uncle Sam to the tune of $100.7 billion — two and a half times what they made in net profit. In fact, previous Tax Foundation research found that from 1977 to 2004, federal and state governments extracted $397 billion by taxing the profits of the largest oil companies and an additional $1.1 trillion in taxes at the pump. In today’s dollars, that’s $2.2 trillion.

So Nancy, you know what you can do with your ‘repeal the tax subsidies’ idea.

Top Ten Questions for the House GOP on Energy

08/06/2008

As a small band of House Republicans remain on the House floor to call for “drill only” legislation that would not bring immediate relief to consumers, their constituents deserve to know why their representatives in Congress have failed to support serious, responsible proposals put forward by the New Direction Congress. Americans have a right to know if House Republicans will reverse their opposition to these proposals; will Senate Republicans, including Senator McCain, stop blocking these bills; and will the President sign them?

3. Exxon Mobil announced the highest ever quarterly profit by a U.S. corporation in history last week. With Exxon Mobil making $1,500 a second, how can House Republicans continue to block efforts to repeal tax subsidies to Big Oil?

4. According to the Bush Administration’s own Energy Department, if we repealed the offshore drilling ban today, oil and gas production would not begin there until 2017, and the impact on prices before 2030 would be “insignificant.” Why do House Republicans keep calling for an action that they know won’t solve today’s energy problems?

5. Senator McCain missed two critical votes in the Senate to promote renewable and conservation. The American people have a right to know why he is putting the interests of Big Oil ahead of American consumers. Why is that?

In item number four (above) the wonderful Speaker of the House offers a stunningly stupid question. She suggests favoring independence from foreign oil yet is to short sighted to understand that the US needs to produce crude in America for that to happen. At the same time she wants to force American oil interests to drill on land for which they currently hold leases. It is fine to want to collect royalties that may be owed to the American tax payer from oil companies holding the leases but forcing companies to drill regardless of the probability for success makes no sense. While payoffs from domestic production may not have an immediate effect on prices at the pump, Ms Pelosi, failing to do so will find us in the same boat on imported oil decades in the future.

This blog opposes oil production in ANWR but primarily due to the fact that there are other locations with more promise that should be tapped first. It would be nice if all concerned could develop effective strategies for what to do when things go wrong…. and they will, they always do. Drill domestically where we can. Have contingencies in place for correcting errors effectively. Increase refining capacity to a level that approaches balance between supply and demand. Add this to the other measures like alternative energy sources and conservation, etc., but remember that only non-petroleum sources will not effect prices at the pump immediately either. Nothing will solve the energy problems immediately. And fawning over ethanol which currently requires more energy to produce than it provides as well as other pie in the sky solutions is irresponsible as well.

Part of what Pelosi says about the long wait for results from drilling ANWR is true. But what she fails to mention is why. Much of what would slow results from drilling in ANWR is government, politics, beauracracy and potential legal action associated with the drilling. Check it out yourself by Pelosi’s own reference both from the Energy Dept and US News.

Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Arctic Drilling Wouldn’t Cool High Oil Prices

Of the ten years it would take to begin oil production in ANWR according to Pelosi (and these sources) she fails to mention a two to three year wait to obtain the oil leases and a one to two year wait to develop a plan and get BLM approval. That would be half of the wait to which Pelosi alludes. The point is, this is merely political theatrics by Pelosi, nothing more, nothing less.

And item five (above) by Pelosi does not even merit a response. The leap between item five’s first and second sentence not to mention her failing to connect the dots is as stupid as the three word question with which she finishes that item.

To be continued……

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Nan on drilling: No longer the hoax I knew  (Michelle Malkin)

Top Ten Questions for the House GOP on Energy

08/06/2008

As a small band of House Republicans remain on the House floor to call for “drill only” legislation that would not bring immediate relief to consumers, their constituents deserve to know why their representatives in Congress have failed to support serious, responsible proposals put forward by the New Direction Congress. Americans have a right to know if House Republicans will reverse their opposition to these proposals; will Senate Republicans, including Senator McCain, stop blocking these bills; and will the President sign them?

2. Releasing a small amount of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve has proven in the past to be a critical way to reduce energy prices in the short term used in 1991, 2000 and 2005. Why not support Democrats’ effort to free a small amount of the taxpayer-funded government stockpile to influence the price of the pump within days?

Nancy, this one’s easy. All anyone has to do is check the Petroleum Navigator at the Energy Dept to view prices during the SPR taps you cite. (no noticeable difference in price)

Petroleum Navigator

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from republicanleader.house.gov…..

Boehner on GOP Energy Plan: “If We Get a Chance to Have a Debate & A Vote, We Will Win & the American People Will Win”
On the Radio, GOP Leader Exposes Pelosi Doublespeak Plan on Gas Prices

Washington, Aug 8 - In a radio interview this morning on the Don Wade and Roma Morning Show in Chicago, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) discussed Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) plan, reported in the Politico, to allow her Democratic colleagues to portray themselves publicly as pro-drilling if it helps them politically. The interview comes after the entire GOP leadership team sent a letter to each and every House Democratic Member yesterday, asking them to join the historic energy protest on the House floor started last week by House Republicans. In his interview, Boehner also spoke about his return to the Capitol today to rejoin his colleagues on the floor, Republicans’ “all of the above” energy plan, and the “commonsense plan” to lower gas prices Speaker Pelosi promised the American people 834 days ago. Key excerpts and audio from Boehner’s interview follow:

BOEHNER ON PELOSI’S PLAN TO “HAVE IT BOTH WAYS” ON GAS PRICES:

“What she is basically telling them is you can have it both ways. You can be out there for a drilling plan and be where your constituents are but don’t worry, I’ll never bring [a bill] up. That’s just not going to work. The American people are on to this game of saying one thing in Washington and saying something else back home. And I think there are a number of vulnerable Democrats who want a vote, but so far they’ve been protecting the Speaker. They all voted to adjourn last Friday without a vote. They voted to table our plan on a number of occasions over the last month and they’re helping her. And at the end of the day, it isn’t what you say, it’s what you do and frankly they’ve been aiding and abetting Pelosi, Reid and Obama’s plan to make sure there is never a vote on drilling.” (AUDIO)

BOEHNER ON SPEAKER PELOSI BLOCKING A VOTE TO LOWER GAS PRICES & HER MYSTERIOUS “COMMONSENSE PLAN”:

“We’ve got an all of the above plan that says we need more conservation, more biofuels, speed up the development of alternative sources of energy, speed up the permitting of nuclear electric facilities and more American-made oil and gas and she knows that our American Energy plan, it will pass on the floor of the House. 834 days ago, Nancy Pelosi said on April 24, 2006, ‘I have a commonsense plan to lower gas prices,’ so I sent her a letter 108 days ago on April 22 this year and asked where is your commonsense plan to lower gas prices? Still haven’t seen the commonsense plan to lower gas prices in America.” (AUDIO)

BOEHNER ON HIS RETURN TO THE CAPITOL TO REJOIN HIS COLLEAGUES & THE IMPORTANCE OF THE HISTORIC GOP PROTEST:

“I’m at the Cincinnati airport as we speak getting ready to get on a plane to go back to Washington because I’ve decided that today I’m going to take part in our revolt. I helped start it last Friday and our members have been on the floor every day and we’re going to be on the floor every day until Nancy Pelosi gives us a vote on our America Energy plan… These high gas prices, it’s not just the people at the pump. Everything that we buy has to be delivered somewhere and so it is the cost of food it is the cost of the goods and services we buy. And it’s not just hurting American families, it’s hurting small businesses around America. And we’re going to keep this protest going because there is no way that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama can stand in the way of the will of the American people. The American people want us to deal with this, they want us to deal with it in a comprehensive way. We have a plan and all we’re asking for is a vote. We’re not asking them to pass it. All we’re asking is give us a fair chance and a vote on our plan. And I’ll tell you right now, it will pass. ” (AUDIO)

BOEHNER ON GIVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE VOTE ON ENERGY THEY WANT & DESERVE:

“Listen, I’ve seen the American system work and when the American people speak up and demand something, there is no way the Congress will defy them. When the American people get engaged, the Congress will do what they want. And what we’re asking for is for Nancy Pelosi to call the Congress back, let’s have a real debate over energy, real votes, and we want a vote on our American Energy plan, our all of the above plan and we will win. I’ll just guarantee you, if we get a chance to have a debate and a vote, we will win and the American people will win.” (AUDIO)

BOEHNER ON THE HISTORIC GOP ENERGY PROTEST ON THE HOUSE FLOOR:

“There are no cameras, there are no tv lights, but there are Americans who are visiting the Capitol who are witnessing an historic event because we’re having a real revolt over the fact that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama will have nothing to do with a vote to bringing more American energy to the market to help lower gas prices. ” (AUDIO)