More and more analysts foreseen that oil prices will shrink just because consumers from the USA will use it less, dragging down the revenues of the companies and, consequently, making them cut speculative deals. The experts add that, even the energy usage rates do not plunge, the present charges drive to new sources´ development. I hope so, but I am not optimist about this based in three reasons.
First, once it is reached a energy usage level, it is not likely to reduce it unless by means of severe economic depression. Ok, the USA is in a recession, everybody knows, but nobody is saying it will be that bad, yet, and most economists say the World will pass throughout the year growing just a little bit slower than has done in the quinquennium.
Second, it is a myth to say the OECD members are turning more energy efficient annually. They are just importing more goods, hence using energy abroad.
Third, expecting the oil can be replaced by a new source in a short time is a wishful thinking. In most of the booming economy countries, petroleum is already a alternative source by coal and it will not be left behind as a supplier without a good and reliable substitute, which existing technology does not offer in the needed scale.
Then the consumption of oil is bound to increase rather reduce, pointing the prices up.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
You can always count on... II
...the hypocrites.
The former New York Governor has made a career fighting prostitution rings. Apparently the rings have struck back.
Many are comparing Spitzer with Bill Clinton. It makes some sense: both are politicians , democrats, and were caught in sex scandals. But, well, Clinton has not paid for it. He has not expend money nor let the political job. Home run for the "come back kid".
In the opposite direction, Spitzer has paid, as the news are saying, $80,000 dollars in hooker´s bills (strike one), has resigned from his mandate (strike two), and has Biblically known Misses Dupre, a.k.a. Kristen, (it was definitively not a strike, considering the pictures I have seen on the news I even would love pass the same experience if I could afford- he can easily say in your face Bill).
So, as we saw, the results were all but alike, and the hypocrite that climbed fighting prostitution is facing ruin for using it. Poetic justice.
Just a commentary: when all parts are in a consensual agreement prostitution should not even been considered a crime, despite it the ex-prosecutor have battled it as a crusade, so he could not appear as a usual costumer VIP.
The former New York Governor has made a career fighting prostitution rings. Apparently the rings have struck back.
Many are comparing Spitzer with Bill Clinton. It makes some sense: both are politicians , democrats, and were caught in sex scandals. But, well, Clinton has not paid for it. He has not expend money nor let the political job. Home run for the "come back kid".
In the opposite direction, Spitzer has paid, as the news are saying, $80,000 dollars in hooker´s bills (strike one), has resigned from his mandate (strike two), and has Biblically known Misses Dupre, a.k.a. Kristen, (it was definitively not a strike, considering the pictures I have seen on the news I even would love pass the same experience if I could afford- he can easily say in your face Bill).
So, as we saw, the results were all but alike, and the hypocrite that climbed fighting prostitution is facing ruin for using it. Poetic justice.
Just a commentary: when all parts are in a consensual agreement prostitution should not even been considered a crime, despite it the ex-prosecutor have battled it as a crusade, so he could not appear as a usual costumer VIP.
You can always count on... I
...the authoritarians.
They will never fails who wants free media coverage.
If the demonstrators in New Delhi had have completed their march, nobody outside such downtown would even know about it. Now every single person that watches news broadcasting has seen people been beaten and arrested.
I am sure that the people around the world is actually bound to say "Free Tibet". Or at least the citizens which enjoys democracy are more likely than yesterday to blame China . Thanks to the repression of a bunch of red wore by the India´s authorities to take the graces of Chinese Comunist Party.
They will never fails who wants free media coverage.
If the demonstrators in New Delhi had have completed their march, nobody outside such downtown would even know about it. Now every single person that watches news broadcasting has seen people been beaten and arrested.
I am sure that the people around the world is actually bound to say "Free Tibet". Or at least the citizens which enjoys democracy are more likely than yesterday to blame China . Thanks to the repression of a bunch of red wore by the India´s authorities to take the graces of Chinese Comunist Party.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
More debate, please
More than anyone, USA need change their energetic matrix and costs are not a good parameter to stop putting the wheels of innovation rolling.
As innovation I’m not talking about new technologies or sci-fi stuff, but just the tested and well-known concepts in a intelligent new way.
Think about the transport; that is one of major oil demanding industry in that country. Just adopting the hybrid technology in all their cars, USA would cut their oil needs in a third part. And hybrids are a totally proved technology.
And why not increase the rates of biofuel use? Is not energetically stupid when farmers that grow oil-rich crops use Arabic prospect fuels instead backyard made biodiesel? Moving something a half-world to move a equivalent energy doesn’t seem sensate in my point of view and if a govern worried in make itself free of oil-rich countries humours don’t see it, needs take a pill of reasonability.
Other way would helps is the electranet proposed by Al Gore. Linking all majors regions by transmission lines and using many forms of generation with small decentralized power plants combined with the already in use big energetic facilities.
Imagine if all the roofs around the Midlands were covered with photovoltaic panels (there are already some 40% efficient in the solar light conversion). Maybe it couldn’t provide all the electricity needed, but could afford a big part. The same for the existent technologies to catch energy from sea waves, tide, wind and geothermal.
A matrix with just one of these compounds could not guarantee the country needs but if all of them were exploited at same time, USA will make itself a liquid exporter of energy.
Some will say all these ways to generate are more expensive than the oil-coal burning plants and it could hurt the typical American family’s budget. I would ask: How much is this budget wounded for the military expends necessary to guarantee the Middle East oil’s supply? Or the lives lost in these wars? Or environmental messing provided for the gases wasted in oil burned (greenhouse ones or not)?
The oil advocates’ use say there is not a substitute for it. This is partially true.
There is not one substitute that can replace oil in all its uses, but there are many that can do it in many kinds of use.
Limiting the debate just in costs is good just for the big oil companies and the oil-rich countries that control the international prices. Other parameters could be environmental, health and wages distribution.
A working-well capitalism don’t like oligopolies and dislike it more when it is in a so central issue.
As innovation I’m not talking about new technologies or sci-fi stuff, but just the tested and well-known concepts in a intelligent new way.
Think about the transport; that is one of major oil demanding industry in that country. Just adopting the hybrid technology in all their cars, USA would cut their oil needs in a third part. And hybrids are a totally proved technology.
And why not increase the rates of biofuel use? Is not energetically stupid when farmers that grow oil-rich crops use Arabic prospect fuels instead backyard made biodiesel? Moving something a half-world to move a equivalent energy doesn’t seem sensate in my point of view and if a govern worried in make itself free of oil-rich countries humours don’t see it, needs take a pill of reasonability.
Other way would helps is the electranet proposed by Al Gore. Linking all majors regions by transmission lines and using many forms of generation with small decentralized power plants combined with the already in use big energetic facilities.
Imagine if all the roofs around the Midlands were covered with photovoltaic panels (there are already some 40% efficient in the solar light conversion). Maybe it couldn’t provide all the electricity needed, but could afford a big part. The same for the existent technologies to catch energy from sea waves, tide, wind and geothermal.
A matrix with just one of these compounds could not guarantee the country needs but if all of them were exploited at same time, USA will make itself a liquid exporter of energy.
Some will say all these ways to generate are more expensive than the oil-coal burning plants and it could hurt the typical American family’s budget. I would ask: How much is this budget wounded for the military expends necessary to guarantee the Middle East oil’s supply? Or the lives lost in these wars? Or environmental messing provided for the gases wasted in oil burned (greenhouse ones or not)?
The oil advocates’ use say there is not a substitute for it. This is partially true.
There is not one substitute that can replace oil in all its uses, but there are many that can do it in many kinds of use.
Limiting the debate just in costs is good just for the big oil companies and the oil-rich countries that control the international prices. Other parameters could be environmental, health and wages distribution.
A working-well capitalism don’t like oligopolies and dislike it more when it is in a so central issue.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Doping
Everybody say that sportive doping is cheating, but most part of these same people use doping in work or study.
The modern doping methods don’t increase directly the ability during the competition. It increases the ability of train in the same way coffee is used to keep the somnolence away for sleepy students preparing for the finals.
If it is encouraged in our children why is it said cheating when is used for athletes?
If we say that drugs can’t be used for players to stay in practice we need say the same when it is used to keep the vigilant recruits working.
And we need call dope too the material advantages some have over the not too rich athletes.
The moral issues are rigid just in the head of rigid people. Call a person immoral because it doesn’t follow the same moral vision that you is dangerous.
You can be calling yourself of this.
The modern doping methods don’t increase directly the ability during the competition. It increases the ability of train in the same way coffee is used to keep the somnolence away for sleepy students preparing for the finals.
If it is encouraged in our children why is it said cheating when is used for athletes?
If we say that drugs can’t be used for players to stay in practice we need say the same when it is used to keep the vigilant recruits working.
And we need call dope too the material advantages some have over the not too rich athletes.
The moral issues are rigid just in the head of rigid people. Call a person immoral because it doesn’t follow the same moral vision that you is dangerous.
You can be calling yourself of this.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Evil axis
Too much was said over the danger that Syria, North Korea and Iran represent to planetary peace but the action of the auto-impost sheriff is going to other direction.
Mexico was put this week under the spotlight as the most dangerous country in the world for the U.S.A..
Its frontier are now more militarized with the national guard sendidng personal over there.
The "wall of shame" will be amplied more than 300 miles.
OK, it´s part of the country sovereign defends its frontier the way it guess better but how explaim two allied - both signatories of a comercial agreement with U.S.A. (nafta) - that are Mexico and Canada can receive treatment so different.
Latinization of North America is a no-return reality. Threat the undocommented with criminalization and point the Army´s weapons against the workers exporter countries will not solve the problem.
To say the truth, it will create a lot of others.
After lose a war, to find another external enemy - quiet and peaceful this time - is everything the "president of war" needs.
But we not. "All we need is love" as the Beatles have preached wisely many times. I could add we need some money too but surely they know more than me.
Mexico was put this week under the spotlight as the most dangerous country in the world for the U.S.A..
Its frontier are now more militarized with the national guard sendidng personal over there.
The "wall of shame" will be amplied more than 300 miles.
OK, it´s part of the country sovereign defends its frontier the way it guess better but how explaim two allied - both signatories of a comercial agreement with U.S.A. (nafta) - that are Mexico and Canada can receive treatment so different.
Latinization of North America is a no-return reality. Threat the undocommented with criminalization and point the Army´s weapons against the workers exporter countries will not solve the problem.
To say the truth, it will create a lot of others.
After lose a war, to find another external enemy - quiet and peaceful this time - is everything the "president of war" needs.
But we not. "All we need is love" as the Beatles have preached wisely many times. I could add we need some money too but surely they know more than me.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Ethanol: why?
If you live in U.S.A. probably heard about how Brazil have coped imported oil dependency investing in ethanol as a fuel for its cars.
I´m afraid the people has not told you all the truth.
Yes, it´s true Brazil has nominal authonomy in oil and the ethanol helped it a lot but it is definitivaly not a easy way for follow; the program has more than 30 years over here and it is based in very specific points of my country. Despite it, bigger part of this authonimy as garanted by producing oil, not ethanol.
First; the total comsuption of oil in Brazil is about 1,7 million of barrels per day and the ethanol that is used daily is equivalet to 200 thousands of barrels of oil, basically as cars´ fuel.
The energetic matrix in U.S.A. is a lot different but if we don´t consider this will realize the size of it is too big for change quickly. They use about 20 million barrels daily and if start to burn ethanol in the same proportion Brazil does this will need about 2,35 million barrles of oil equivalent.
The biggest produce of ethanol, yes yet Brazil, makes about 15 billion liters every year. For provide the amount the U.S.A. would hipotetically need in this case 12 Brazils wouldn´t be enough.
The ethanol would be very scarce and the prices very high, and the main reason the people is given to adopt this as fuel is the high prices of gas.
Second; Brazil had when started the program - and still has - not utilized lands to grow its for-ethanol crops. In the U.S.A. any favoured crop will substitute other one, depends on the sell value of them. Instead foreign oil dependency maybe foreign corn or sugar cane dependency.
Does all this mean U.S.A. should´t adopt ethanol as a combustible?
No, this doesn´t. U.S.A. should adopt this but gas prices is the worst reason.
It can be used for ecolocical reasons, for estrategical reasons ad until for economical reasons but before defends it everyone should read more about it, don´t swallow the ethanol producers´ speach as they pray this.
I´m afraid the people has not told you all the truth.
Yes, it´s true Brazil has nominal authonomy in oil and the ethanol helped it a lot but it is definitivaly not a easy way for follow; the program has more than 30 years over here and it is based in very specific points of my country. Despite it, bigger part of this authonimy as garanted by producing oil, not ethanol.
First; the total comsuption of oil in Brazil is about 1,7 million of barrels per day and the ethanol that is used daily is equivalet to 200 thousands of barrels of oil, basically as cars´ fuel.
The energetic matrix in U.S.A. is a lot different but if we don´t consider this will realize the size of it is too big for change quickly. They use about 20 million barrels daily and if start to burn ethanol in the same proportion Brazil does this will need about 2,35 million barrles of oil equivalent.
The biggest produce of ethanol, yes yet Brazil, makes about 15 billion liters every year. For provide the amount the U.S.A. would hipotetically need in this case 12 Brazils wouldn´t be enough.
The ethanol would be very scarce and the prices very high, and the main reason the people is given to adopt this as fuel is the high prices of gas.
Second; Brazil had when started the program - and still has - not utilized lands to grow its for-ethanol crops. In the U.S.A. any favoured crop will substitute other one, depends on the sell value of them. Instead foreign oil dependency maybe foreign corn or sugar cane dependency.
Does all this mean U.S.A. should´t adopt ethanol as a combustible?
No, this doesn´t. U.S.A. should adopt this but gas prices is the worst reason.
It can be used for ecolocical reasons, for estrategical reasons ad until for economical reasons but before defends it everyone should read more about it, don´t swallow the ethanol producers´ speach as they pray this.
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Starting
As a foreigner, I think can see the facts in a different way.
It can have some value for the readers or not, I hope it has.
Fell free to correct me or disagree with me, I don´t know english that much and any comments about it will be good.
It can have some value for the readers or not, I hope it has.
Fell free to correct me or disagree with me, I don´t know english that much and any comments about it will be good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
