mexico

Video: Energy XXI’s Schiller Sees Opportunity With Exxon Assets

April 13, 2011

April 12 (Bloomberg) — John Schiller, chief executive officer of Energy XXI (Bermuda) Ltd., talks about the oil and natural gas company’s exploration projects, its purchase of Gulf of Mexico assets from Exxon Mobil Corp. and Energy XXI’s cash position. He speaks with Pimm Fox on Bloomberg Television’s “Taking Stock.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Gulf Officials Spend Millions Of BP’s Money On Items Unrelated To Oil Spill

April 11, 2011

NEW ORLEANS — In the year since the Gulf oil spill, officials along the coast have gone on a spending spree with BP money, dropping tens of millions of dollars on gadgets, vehicles and gear – much of which had little to do with the cleanup, an Associated Press investigation shows. The oil giant opened its checkbook while the crisis was still unfolding last spring and poured hundreds of millions of dollars into Gulf Coast communities with few strings attached. In sleepy Ocean Springs, Miss., reserve police officers got Tasers. The sewer department in nearby Gulfport bought a $300,000 vacuum truck that never sucked up a drop of oil. Biloxi, Miss., bought a dozen SUVS. A parish president in Louisiana got herself a top-of-the-line iPad, her spokesman a $3,100 laptop. And a county in Florida spent $560,000 on rock concerts to promote its oil-free beaches. In every case, communities said the new, more powerful equipment was needed to deal at least indirectly with the spill. In many cases, though, the connection between the spill and the expenditures was remote, and lots of money wound up in cities and towns little touched by the goo that washed up on shore, the AP found in records requested from more than 150 communities and dozens of interviews. Florida’s tourism agency sent chunks of a $32 million BP grant as far away as Miami-Dade and Broward counties on the state’s east coast, which never saw oil from the disaster. Some officials also lavished campaign donors and others with lucrative contracts. A Florida county commissioner’s girlfriend, for instance, opened up a public relations firm a few weeks after the spill and soon landed more than $14,000 of the tiny county’s $236,000 cut of BP cash for a month’s work. The April 20 explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico killed 11 workers and spawned the nation’s worst offshore oil spill. As BP spent months trying to cap the well and contain the spill, cities and towns along the coast from Louisiana to Florida worried about the toll on their economies – primarily tourism and the fishing industry – as well as the environmental impact. All told, BP PLC says it has paid state and local governments more than $754 million as of March 31, and has reimbursed the federal government for another $694 million. BP set few conditions on how states could use the money, stating only that it should go to mitigate the effects of the spill. The contracts require states to provide the company with at least an annual report on how the money has been used, BP spokeswoman Hejdi Feick said. But it’s unclear what consequences, if any, the states could face if they didn’t comply. Some of the money BP doled out to states and municipalities hasn’t been spent yet, but the AP’s review accounts for more than $550 million of it. More than $400 million went toward clear needs like corralling the oil, propping up tourism and covering overtime. Much of the remaining chunk consists of equally justifiable expenses, but it’s also riddled with millions of dollars’ worth of contracts and purchases with no clear connection to the spill, the AP found. William Walker, executive director of the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources, said it’s clear now that communities bought more equipment than they wound up needing. But he doesn’t regret handing out BP’s money freely. “At the time we were making these decisions, there were millions of gallons of oil going into the Gulf of Mexico with no clear idea when it would stop,” Walker said. “We didn’t wait. We tried to get (grant money) into circulation as quickly as possible. We didn’t have any extra time. We needed to move when we moved.” ___ When oil from the ruptured Macondo well began to lap at Louisiana’s marshes, BP deployed an army of workers to sop it up and hired contractors who specialize in disaster cleanup. Even with BP and the federal government taking the lead, many communities weren’t content to rely on equipment they had before the spill. Lafourche (luh-FOOSH’) Parish President Charlotte Randolph billed BP for an iPad, saying she needed it in addition to her parish-paid Blackberry to communicate with staff and other officials during the crisis. But she didn’t buy the iPad until Aug. 26, a month and a half after the well was capped and several weeks after the federal government said much of the oil had been skimmed, burned off, dispersed or dissolved. “Just because it wasn’t streaming from the well any longer doesn’t mean it wasn’t approaching our shore,” Randolph told the AP. “My work is very important. Perhaps one day you could follow me somewhere and learn what my work involves. I must be in contact at all times.” Lafourche Parish spokesman Brennan Matherne, who bought a new Dell laptop and accessories for $3,165, said working on the spill had worn out the computer he got just a year earlier for $2,700. Biloxi, home to a strip of casinos overlooking the Mississippi Sound, bought 14 sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks, two boats, two dump trucks and a backhoe loader with its $1.4 million share of BP grant money. Mayor A.J. Holloway, who drove a city-owned 2006 GMC Yukon before the spill, now has one of the vehicles the city purchased with the BP grant – a black 2011 Chevy Tahoe 1500 LT that cost more than $35,000. The city’s public works director and chief engineer also are driving SUVs bought with BP money. Holloway declined to answer questions about his new vehicle. City spokesman Vincent Creel said the mayor has used it to travel to “countless meetings” about the spill and to gauge the city’s response with his own eyes. “The mayor also uses the vehicle in the normal course of his duties, just as other BP equipment is used in the course of day-to-day business,” Creel wrote in an email. Walker, the state official, said he didn’t know about the mayor’s use of the vehicle but doesn’t object. Some Mississippi communities took a conservative approach in using their share of the money. Bay St. Louis received $382,461 to buy safety vests, street barricades, radios and other gear, but decided against buying a vacuum truck or other expensive equipment. City Clerk David Kolf said local officials trusted BP’s word it would handle all the cleanup, so they didn’t see a need to buy a “bunch of new toys.” “They had a lot of heavy equipment already staged here,” he said. “We don’t have the training. We don’t have the personnel.” ___ Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama each got an initial $25 million from BP, followed by the array of payments for tourism marketing, seafood monitoring and cleanup programs. More than $300,000 of BP money went to Kenny Loggins, the Doobie Brothers and Lynyrd Skynyrd for a pair of rock shows to promote the state’s oil-free beaches; BP shelled out another $260,000 in concert-related costs. In Alabama, the state Emergency Management Agency distributed $30 million to local governments without rejecting a single request. Mississippi gave money to 14 counties and cities along the coast, which was dotted with tar balls but never saw the heavy bands of oil that choked south Louisiana’s marshlands. In early August, after the well was capped and the oil threat seemed to abate, the state instructed counties and cities to stop spending BP’s money without prior approval from state officials. “We were trying to make the change from protection to restoration and recovery, and that’s where we are now,” Walker said. Louisiana doled out its initial $25 million to state agencies, including $10 million for the attorney general’s office to devise its legal case against BP and the companies involved in the spill. State agencies spent nearly $9 million more on equipment, including boats, air monitoring units, mobile radios and life vests. Local government leaders in Louisiana were left to lodge their requests for money directly with BP. Gov. Bobby Jindal’s top budget adviser, Paul Rainwater, said the state’s deal with BP specified that the money Louisiana got wasn’t meant to replace anything that was supposed to go to the parishes. Blue-collar Plaquemines Parish, which has absorbed some of the spill’s worst environmental damage, has received slightly more than $1 million in BP money, of which $998,405 went to cover oil-related overtime and other payroll expenses. “I didn’t run up bills. I treated their money like I treated our own,” said Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser, an outspoken critic of BP and the federal government’s response to the spill. “Maybe down the road I’ll look and say we should have stockpiled.” ___ When BP was heavily under attack from the top down for its response to the rapidly growing environmental disaster, the company started throwing huge sums of money at the problems it had in the water and on land. Cutting checks to governments along the coast addressed both issues, even if it meant waiting until later to figure out details like how officials would have to account for the cash. “We recognized the importance of getting funding to the states, parishes and counties quickly, and therefore provided advance funding to help kick start their emergency response,” Feick, the BP spokeswoman, said in an email. The payments to governments gave BP the kind of good PR it desperately needed, said Daniel Keeney, president of a Dallas-based public relations firm. By giving money to communities and allowing them to spend it largely as they saw fit, BP also put a buffer between itself and any questionable spending. “Whether the funds could be perceived as being wasted or not really reflects on the organization accepting the money rather than BP,” Keeney said. Louis Skrmetta, one of the tens of thousands of business owners and individuals still waiting to get a share of a $20 billion claims fund established by BP, finds the state and local governments’ spending galling, even if it’s almost all BP’s money. Skrmetta runs a three-boat fleet that has a contract with the National Park Service to ferry day trippers to Ship Island, a recreation area about 10 miles offshore from Gulfport, Miss. He can’t understand why BP paid so much to governments while businesses were suffering. “I didn’t think there was much logic in it,” Skrmetta said. “Now, looking back in retrospect, it was a way to win over politicians, a way to win over the media.” In February, BP asked Louisiana parishes that received up to $1 million in advance payments in May for a detailed summary of how that money has been spent. Parishes were warned they must exhaust the advance money before they can make any new claims. Some parishes, however, have banked that money and already billed BP for expenses on top of it. Terrebonne Parish says it hasn’t spent any of its $1 million advance, yet BP has paid it an additional $927,842, mostly for contractors and payroll costs. Parish President Michel Claudet said he isn’t concerned that BP will try to recover unspent advance money. “The agreement from the beginning was that it was nonrefundable,” he said. ___ The oil spill drove away tourists and sapped tax revenues, but it was a boon for private contractors and consultants. Governments have spent more than $19 million of BP’s money to hire contractors, according to the AP’s review. The Louisiana attorney general’s office has spent $4 million and counting of BP’s money to hire outside lawyers and accountants to help piece together litigation against the company. Five of the seven law firms hired and their attorneys have poured more than $80,000 total into Attorney General Buddy Caldwell’s campaign coffers in recent years. Amber Davis, who lives with Gulf County, Fla., Commissioner Bill Williams, incorporated Statecraft LLC less than a month after oil began streaming into the Gulf. Three months later, Statecraft won a monthlong, $14,468 contract to perform public information and government liaison work for the county of about 15,000 people. Davis, who has worked in marketing and community relations, said she had planned to form her company before the spill. She also had volunteered for the county’s emergency operations center for three months before she was given the contract. “There is a perception of a conflict of interest in just about anything that anybody does,” Davis said. “I guess my statement to that was that I volunteered anywhere from 15 to 18 hours a day for three months and never received a penny.” Williams said he consulted the county attorney and an ethics commission, and neither saw a problem with awarding the contract to Davis. Gulf County awarded an identical one-month, $14,468 contract – this one for monitoring beach pollution – to Florida Eco Services, a company founded days after the rig explosion by Patrick Farrell, whose wife is on the board of the local Chamber of Commerce. Farrell says he has a background in managing and maintaining properties, as well as beach restoration. County Attorney Jeremy Novak, who also is an attorney for Florida Eco Services, said it was a matter of giving business to locals rather than out-of-state contractors. “It sounds like a bias, and it is, but I’m glad people in Gulf County got work and actually had the ability to feed their families,” Novak said. “I don’t see it as profiteering. I see it as obviously doing what you can because what you’re doing for a living isn’t available to you.” ___ Local authorities could have taken even fuller advantage of BP’s largesse had the company or state officials not nixed some requests that had no clear connection to the oil. Police in D’Iberville, Miss., for instance, were denied a $245,000 mobile command unit, a $140,000 hazardous materials vehicle and a $19,000 Harley-Davidson. “If we had to establish barricades, they thought it would be more maneuverable,” City Manager Michael Janus said of the motorcycle. “It was a bit of a reach, obviously.” Although BP footed the bill for other pricey acquisitions, some officials concede they may have to use taxpayer money to maintain them. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries spent $5 million for 22 boats and the accompanying trawls, nets and hauling vehicles. “Nobody asked me for a space shuttle or anything,” said Wildlife and Fisheries Secretary Robert Barham. BP money will cover the costs of maintaining the vessels, leasing dock space and buying fuel for at least three years, he said. Whether taxpayers will be forced to pick up these costs after that hasn’t been decided. “They don’t run for free,” Barham said. ___ Schneider reported from Orlando, Fla. Deslatte reported from Baton Rouge, La. AP videojournalist Jason Bronis in Gulfport, Miss., and Associated Press writers Holbrook Mohr in Jackson, Miss., Brian Skoloff in Ocean Springs, Miss., and Harry Weber and Troy Thibodeaux in New Orleans contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Toyota Will Begin Suspending North American Production Next Week

April 9, 2011

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Toyota Motor Corp. said Friday that it will suspend production at its North American plants in a series of one-day shutdowns this month as a result of parts shortages caused by the earthquake that hit Japan. The temporary shutdowns will affect 25,000 workers, but there will be no layoffs, the world’s No. 1 automaker said. A March 11 earthquake and tsunami damaged auto parts plants in northeastern Japan, causing shortages. All 13 of its North American plants will have down time, though the duration may vary at a few plants, Toyota spokesman Mike Goss said. For most plants, the one-day shutdowns will begin April 15 and end April 25, the company said. Toyota said future production plans will be determined later. “We’re just monitoring supplier progress on a daily basis, and we’ll make decisions as we go along,” Goss said. The North American plants have been using parts in their inventory or relying on those that were shipped before the earthquake. “We are slowing down to conserve parts yet maintain production as much as possible,” said Steve St. Angelo, executive vice president of Toyota Motor Engineering and Manufacturing North America. Toyota gets only about 15 percent of its parts from Japan for cars and trucks built in North America. Those parts include electronic and rubber components, and a paint additive, Goss said. The production shutdowns will total five days – April 15, 18, 21, 22 and 25 – at its North American vehicle plants, except at Georgetown, Ky., where production will be halted four days. The Kentucky plant makes the popular Camry, along with the Avalon and Venza vehicles. Most of the company’s North American engine and component plants will follow the same schedule, the company said. The schedule might vary for just a few of those plants, Goss said. The incremental stoppage in production is meant to “keep as much production going on a weekly basis as we possibly can so we keep vehicles flowing to our dealerships,” Goss said. Shortages of parts from Japan are also affecting manufacturers outside the country. Ford Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. recently said that several North American plants would be closed for part of this month. Chrysler Group LLC is cutting overtime at plants in Canada and Mexico to conserve parts from Japan. Toyota said its North American plant workers will focus on training and reviewing operations when production is halted so that they can still earn a paycheck. However, they can also take vacation or unpaid time off. Meanwhile, Toyota announced Friday it will resume car production at all its plants in Japan at half capacity from April 18 to 27. The March earthquake and tsunami had forced the company to halt manufacturing due to shortages of parts and power. The company said production at the plants will then halt from April 28 to May 9, which includes a holiday period when factories would normally close.

Read the full article →

SEC Under Criticism Yet Again For ‘Light’ Penalty Against Big Bank

April 7, 2011

The nation’s fourth-largest bank agreed to pay an $11 million fine this week to settle federal charges that it misled investors by hiding critical facts and charging them excessive prices on portions of two billion-dollar securities during the height of the housing boom. Or put another way: For $11 million, one of the world’s biggest investment firms was able to violate basic investor protection rules, defraud its customers, not admit wrongdoing, avoid a trial and likely pocket the profit off similar deals. The investors lost millions. The firm pocketed millions more in profit, more than offsetting the fine. In late 2006 and early 2007, as financial firms rushed to close deals and dump inventory on investors eager to cash in while the good times lasted, Wachovia Capital Markets, a unit of the Wachovia Corporation, sold securities tied to a pair of complex financial products linked to home loans. The products, known as collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, contained slices of bonds backed by home mortgages. From 2004 through 2007, Wachovia, purchased by Wells Fargo in the fall of 2008, arranged 160 such deals worth more than $75 billion, according to data provider Thomson Reuters. The two targeted CDOs — Grand Avenue CDO II, then worth $1.5 billion, and Longshore CDO Funding 2007-3, then worth $1.3 billion — were then diced up and sold to investors. The riskiest portions promised the highest returns. The Zuni Indian Tribe, whose reservation is in Arizona and New Mexico, and another investor bought some of Grand Avenue. What they didn’t know was that Wachovia, upon closing the deal in October 2006, struggled to find investors to buy those portions, according to a complaint by the Securities and Exchange Commission . The unit of the bank that helped underwrite the deal then marked them down on their books to 52.7 cents on the dollar, a reflection of what the firm thought the securities could fetch in the market at the time the deal closed. Four months later, a different unit of the bank sold those same securities to the Zuni tribe and an unnamed investor at 90 and 95 cents on the dollar, the complaint shows. Though that’s a slight discount than the face value of the securities, it’s far above what Wachovia thought they were worth when the deal closed in late 2006. Worse, the market continued to deteriorate. Wachovia never told their customers they had marked down those assets, or that they had paid “excessive” prices. Grand Avenue entered default in early 2008. In the Longshore deal, Wachovia engaged in something similar, according to the complaint. The firm, in order to avoid recognizing losses on rotting securities, marked up the assets backing the CDO by $4.6 million, above what the firm’s internal calculations showed, the SEC said. Investors weren’t told, nor were they told that the affiliate within Wachovia that carried out the deed hadn’t done so on an “arm’s-length basis.” Seven investors bought portions of Longshore. “Wachovia caused significant losses to the Zuni Indians and other investors by violating basic investor protection rules — don’t charge secret excessive markups, and don’t use stale prices when telling buyers that assets are priced at fair market value,” Robert Khuzami, the director of the SEC’s enforcement division, said in a statement . Wachovia defrauded its customers in numerous ways, according to a cease-and-desist order prohibiting Wachovia’s successor, Wells Fargo, from engaging in the same kind of conduct. The firm ripped off investors, didn’t tell them about it, and its internal compliance department failed to catch any of it. Wachovia gave up what the SEC calculated to be $6.75 million in ill-gotten profit, and a penalty of $4.45 million. Most of that money will go to the swindled investors. But one wouldn’t know the severity of the crime by looking at the penalty, market experts say. “Once again, the SEC is giving a bank a light tap on the wrist for egregious behavior,” said Janet Tavakoli, a Chicago-based derivatives expert and founder of Tavakoli Structured Finance. “Now it’s Wachovia, but they’ve done that with many other banks as well.” During the boom, CDO underwriters took home at least 1.5 percent of the CDO’s face value as fee, experts say. For the $1.5 billion Grand Avenue CDO, that’s about $22.5 million. For Longshore, that’s equivalent to $19.5 million. Combined, Wachovia likely made about $42 million in fees. The penalty for Wachovia’s violations is about a quarter of that. The SEC has come under withering criticism for its apparently lax approach towards penalizing the nation’s largest financial institutions for crisis-era securities violations. Since the onset of the crisis, the SEC has found problems at Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, among others. Citigroup misled investors in 2007 about its exposure to more than $50 billion in securities tied to subprime mortgages. Bank of America didn’t tell investors voting on its 2008 merger with ailing investment bank Merrill Lynch that it had authorized nearly $4 billion in employee bonuses at the firm, which lost nearly $28 billion that year. And Goldman Sachs allegedly helped set up a mortgage-linked investment for a favored client that was designed to fail, yet sold it anyway to its other clients, reaping the favored client nearly $1 billion. Citigroup settled for $75 million. Bank of America settled for $33 million. Goldman settled for $550 million. The three firms collectively hold more than $5 trillion in assets. Wells Fargo, which assumed Wachovia’s liabilities when it bought it in 2008 for about $13 billion, has nearly $1.3 trillion in assets. “The SEC may as well just, like on the back of a parking ticket, list the fines so that firms can do a cost-benefit analysis as to whether it’s worth breaking the rules,” said Joshua Rosner, managing director at independent research consultancy Graham Fisher & Co. “Based on what we see out of the SEC, it appears to generally be in the interest of corporations to break those rules.” Wachovia, Tavakoli said, faces numerous lawsuits tied to its sale of complex financial products and soured mortgage loans it made to home buyers across the country. “Wachovia has been involved in a number of dirty deals,” she said. “It has this huge background of problems, and for the SEC not to use its moral authority is ridiculous.” Rosner said the allegations against Wachovia — not disclosing the true price of securities to buyers, and misleading investors about the involvement of its affiliates — were common throughout the industry when it came to packaging and selling CDOs. “It seems strange that there would have only been two such deals,” he said. The SEC declined to comment beyond its statement. A Wells Fargo spokeswoman said the actions were taken by Wachovia during the early days of the credit crisis, and that it was pleased to have resolved the matter. ************************* Shahien Nasiripour is a business reporter for The Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail ; bookmark his page ; subscribe to his RSS feed ; follow him on Twitter ; friend him on Facebook ; become a fan ; and/or get e-mail alerts when he reports the latest news. He can be reached at 917-267-2335.

Read the full article →

Cuba To Drill For Oil In Gulf

April 5, 2011

HAVANA — Cuba and partner companies will begin drilling five oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico this summer in hopes of locating enough crude to justify the costly exploration, an official said Tuesday. “The prospects are very promising” of finding valuable reserves, said Manuel Marrero, an official with the Ministry of Basic Industry. Cuba’s domestic production is exclusively heavy oil with a high sulfur content. Its offshore Gulf waters could contain large quantities of lighter, sweet crude, although a test well in 2004 turned up only modest deposits. Studies since then have pointed to “oil traps” in the marine floor, persuading partner companies to take on the expensive task of exploration in deep water, Marrero said during an earth sciences convention. The drilling is expected to run through 2013. The Cuban government has designated 59 blocks in Gulf waters encompassing 43,200 square miles (112,000 square kilometers) where private energy companies have said they could drill deep-water test wells. The area opened for international investment in 2000, and currently a half-dozen companies, including Spain’s Repsol-YPF, have contracted for 22 of the blocks. None of the companies are American – due to Washington’s decades-old ban of U.S. business dealings with the communist-governed island – although some U.S. firms have expressed interest in the past. Marrero repeated Cuba’s position that it would be open to partnering with U.S. companies. “Any company could participate under Cuban laws,” Marrero said. Earlier this year, Brazilian officials announced that country’s state-run energy giant, Petrobras, would withdraw from the Cuban area. “They had a small block, barely 1,500 square kilometers,” Marrero said. “They discovered prospects, but that can’t compete with the hundreds of prospects they have” in Brazilian territory. According to geologic studies conducted by several institutions, some of them U.S.-based, Cuba’s Gulf reserves could be 5 billion to 9 billion barrels of crude. Nearly a year after the Deepwater Horizon disaster that killed 11 workers and led to more than 200 million gallons of oil spewing from a BP well a mile beneath the Gulf of Mexico, Marrero assured reporters that Cuba’s exploration will be carried out safely. “The equipment that will be used is the most modern, the safest. The regulatory framework is very strict, and the companies that will drill are prestigious and experienced,” he said. “I don’t think we are going to have any more risks.” Earlier this year, Cuba reported its 2010 production totaled 4 million tons of petroleum equivalent – oil plus natural gas – or about 46 percent of its domestic consumption. The rest it obtains from Venezuela on preferential terms.

Read the full article →

Interior Secretary: ‘Absolutely’ No BP Deal On Deepwater Drilling

April 4, 2011

MEXICO CITY/WASHINGTON – The U.S. interior secretary on Monday rejected media reports that BP was striking a deal to resume deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico a year after the worst oil spill in U.S. history. UK media have said BP is in talks with the U.S. government to restart drilling at existing wells less than a year after a blast on the Deepwater Horizon rig ruptured BP’s underwater Macondo well, unleashing millions of barrels of oil. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar called that a “misconception” and a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management regulator said “there are no ongoing negotiations”. “There is absolutely no such agreement nor would there be such an agreement” with BP to resume drilling, Salazar said at a briefing while visiting the Mexican capital. He added that the company would need to go through the same process to resume drilling as other companies. U.S. legal probes into the accident are ongoing, but a presidential commission earlier this year released a report blaming the disaster on systemic safety lapses and a series of mistakes made by BP and its contractors. Months after lifting a temporary ban on deepwater drilling, the bureau has begun approving permits for such activity, greenlighting more than a handful of projects in the past few weeks. (Reporting by Mica Rosenberg and Roberta Rampton, writing by Ayesha Rascoe; editing by John Picinich and Dale Hudson) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Transocean Execs Get Bonuses For ‘Best Year in Safety,’ Despite Gulf Disaster

April 2, 2011

Transocean Ltd. had its “best year in safety performance” despite the explosion of its Deepwater Horizon rig that left 11 dead and oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, the world’s largest offshore-rig company said in a securities filing Friday.

Read the full article →

Jamie Court: Google CEO for Commerce Secretary? A Bad Idea

March 30, 2011

The strong buzz in Washington, DC is that Google CEO Eric Schmidt is President Obama’s top choice for Commerce Secretary and an appointment is coming soon. The CEO who made billions collecting our personal information online and serving us up to advertisers, the guy who created online privacy problems, would head the federal agency responsible for developing and executing the administration’s online privacy policies. Part of me wants to see Schmidt appointed because he would finally have to testify before Congress. Here’s a guy who presided over the largest wiretapping scandal in American history, when Google Street View cars took data presumably from tens of millions of wi-fi networks across the world, and he has not even had to testify before Congress. Now that’s a guy who is wired. Connected all the way to the Oval Office apparently. (Consumer Watchdog made a very funny video about what Schmidt’s faux testimony would look like.) Apparently no one in the West Wing has been able to talk practically with the president, who really wants Schmidt. It’s hard to imagine how a guy who owns roughly $5.41 billion worth of Google stock could avoid a conflict of interest. There’s only one way: Schmidt will have to sell all his stock, and his part ownership of the company. You cannot place that much wealth in a blind trust when everyone knows where the wealth springs from. That’s a seeing-eye trust. The very type that exploded the career of one time Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. Then there’s Schmidt’s crazy mistress/girlfriend stuff that’s too rich for the GOP family values crowd in the Senate not to come after on the character/family values issue. Since this is business, not personal, so I’ll let the online tabloids talk: Eric Schmidt’s ex-girlfriend sets her sights on Facebook ; Google’s CEO Demanded His Mistress Take Down Her Blog ; Is Google CEO’s Other Girlfriend Getting Indiscreet, Too? ; Google CEO Deters Mistress Tattle Tales ; Getting Cozy with Google CEO’s Mistress And His Money ; The Google CEO and His Mistress: The Tell-All Blog ; How Google CEO’s Ex Girlfriend Keeps Tabs on Him ; Google CEO Has Money for ‘Dear Friend’ of His Sometime Girlfriend There are strong policy reasons not to make America’s policy on commerce Google’s brand of business. Consumer Watchdog enumerated them in a letter to President Obama weeks ago, but we have not received a letter back, not even a Gmail. In a nut shell, Google’s brand of business is to ignore ethical mores, social customs, and the rule of law — as a federal judge ruled last week to uphold copyright laws against Google’s digital assault on them in its Digi-Book-Mart deal. The judge sided with Consumer Watchdog and other consumer groups when claiming the deal would give Google a “de facto monopoly.” Obama has shown some remarkably bad judgment at pivotal moments of his presidency. Right before the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, he agreed to include offshore drilling in his energy bill. Just after the tsunami struck Japan, his administration reiterated its support for nuclear energy. Now, on the verge of an online privacy revolution, Obama is about to appoint a CEO who is The Anti-Privacy to his chief privacy post. 90% of the public wants more online privacy. Hmmm, do you think Americans will be happy with Mr. Schmidt and the president in the end? Part of me is looking forward to this nomination since, deal or no deal with Senate leaders on the confirmation, Schmidt will be a big, bright pinata for privacy advocates when he gets to take the oath at the confirmation hearings. I’m betting there are some senators who will ask the tough questions, and finally we’ll get some answers about Google’s scandals. Google stock might even suffer the consequences. This could be one confirmation hearing where Mr. Schmidt, whose known for his verbal gaffes , could cost himself hundreds of millions of dollars with the wrong word choice. (Remember, “Google’s policy is get right up to the Creepy Line?”) If Google’s stock falls $50 or so from its $575 heights based on those hearings, Schmidt’s wealth, based on 9,372,741 shares of stock, goes down by about about a half billion dollars. Now that’s one expensive confirmation process! Jamie Court is President of Consumer Watchdog. His most recent book is The Progressive’s Guide To Raising Hell.

Read the full article →

Obama Talking Energy Policy As Gas Prices Climb

March 30, 2011

WASHINGTON — Facing pressure to curb rising gasoline prices, President Barack Obama is calling for the U.S. to reduce its oil imports by one third by 2025, a lofty goal likely to run into significant obstacles. The White House said Obama will seek to reduce the U.S. dependence on foreign oil by boosting domestic energy production, increasing the use of biofuels and natural gas, and making cars and trucks more fuel-efficient. Obama planned to outline these steps during a speech Wednesday at Georgetown University. In a speech Tuesday in New York City, Obama pointed to rising gasoline prices to underscore the need for a comprehensive energy plan. “We’ve still got a lot of work to do on energy,” the president told an audience of donors at The Studio Museum in Harlem. “The last time gas prices were this high was 2008 when I was running.” Obama contrasted his approach to an energy slogan popular among Republicans. “The other side kept talking about `drill, baby, drill.’ That was the slogan,” he said. “What we were talking about was breaking the pattern of being shocked by high prices” and then lulled into inaction. Obama is far from the first president to set out to make the country more energy independent. U.S. presidents dating back to Richard Nixon had similar goals that achieved little success; the U.S. continues to be the world’s top oil consumer and gets more than 60 percent of its oil from foreign sources. Still, the White House is eager to show that the president understands the burden rising gasoline prices have on middle-class Americans, particularly as his re-election bid draws near. Gas prices have jumped more than 50 cents a gallon this year, due in part to a spike in oil prices amid instability in the oil-rich Middle East. Last week, gas prices averaged $3.58 a gallon nationwide, according to AAA’s daily survey. Even if U.S. consumption of oil drops, it will have little if any impact on gasoline prices, since oil is priced globally and increased demand from China and other developing nations continues to push prices up. Republicans put the blame for the increased costs on Obama’s policies, pointing to the slow pace of issuing permits for new offshore oil wells in the wake of last summer’s massive Gulf of Mexico spill and an Obama-imposed moratorium on new deep-water exploration. GOP leaders have also assailed the president for saying last week in Latin America that he wanted the U.S. to be a “major customer” for the huge oil reserves Brazil recently discovered off its coast. “The problem isn’t that we need to look elsewhere for our energy. The problem is that Democrats don’t want us to use the energy we have. It’s enough to make you wonder whether anybody in the White House has driven by a gas station lately,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Wednesday. In order to meet his goal of cutting oil imports by one third, Obama will call Wednesday for new incentives for companies to speed up oil and gas production on current and future leases. An Interior Department report released Tuesday said more than two-thirds of offshore leases in the Gulf of Mexico are sitting idle, neither producing oil and gas nor being actively explored by the companies who hold the leases. The department said those leases could potentially hold more than 11 billion barrels of oil and 50 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Obama will also call for increased use of biofuels and the construction of four new advanced biofuel plants in the U.S. within the next two year. However, advanced biofuels – fuels made from non-food sources such as wood chips, switch grass or plant waste – are still in their infancy and cannot yet be made in amounts similar to corn ethanol. Congress has directed more money to research and development of those fuels in recent years as some critics of corn ethanol have linked the diversion of corn for fuel to rising food prices. The president will also order government agencies to ensure that by 2015, all new vehicles they purchase are alternative-fuel vehicles, including hybrid and electric. Obama has previously set a goal of putting 1 million electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015. Administration officials said Obama’s plans would require significant spending on research and development, though they offered no cost estimates. Officials said Obama also would reaffirm his support for nuclear power, which has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks after an earthquake and tsunami in Japan severely damaged a nuclear power plant there. As a result of the crisis, U.S. government regulators are reviewing a wide range of issues potentially affecting the 104 U.S. nuclear power reactors, including safeguards to protect them against natural disasters and terrorist attacks. ___ Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Matthew Daly and Jonathan Fahy contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Supreme Court Skeptical Of Arizona Campaign Finance Law

March 28, 2011

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court appeared poised Monday to strike down a provision of a campaign financing system in Arizona that gives extra cash to publicly funded candidates who face privately funded rivals and independent groups. Such a decision would be another blow to public campaign financing, once thought of as an antidote to the corrupting influence of money in politics. President Barack Obama has been the most prominent example of politicians who have abandoned public financing because they can raise far more money privately. The justices heard arguments in a challenge to the Arizona system that gives candidates who opt for public financing up to two times their base amount when they’re outspent by privately funded rivals or targeted by independent group spending. The court’s conservative-leaning justices, who have issued a string of decisions upending campaign finance laws in the past five years, appeared skeptical of the Arizona law because it, in their view, is designed to level the playing field for all candidates. The court has said such leveling often runs afoul of the First Amendment. Among the recent rulings were last year’s Citizens United decision that removed most limits on election spending by corporations and organized labor, and a 2008 decision that voided the federal “millionaire’s amendment” to increase contribution limits for congressional candidates facing wealthy opponents. Both decisions were ideologically split 5-4 votes in which the conservative justices prevailed. On Monday, several justices seized on the contention that the law discourages candidates and independent groups from spending money when they know it will result in more money going to the candidate they oppose. “Just as a common-sense matter, if I’m someone with the capacity and will to make an independent expenditure, why don’t I think twice?” Justice Anthony Kennedy asked. Bradley S. Phillips, the Los Angeles-based lawyer defending the law, said it encourages more competition by ensuring that publicly funded candidates have the chance to run credible races. Phillips said the system is strictly voluntary. Candidates decide whether to take public funds, and if so, they agree not to raise any private money. William Maurer, the Seattle-based lawyer for the challengers, said elections are a “zero-sum game,” and that what benefits one candidate, harms the opponent. Tying disbursements of campaign funds to the activities of privately funded candidates means “each time they speak, the more work that they do, the more their opponents benefit,” Maurer said. The law was enacted by voters in the aftermath of a public corruption scandal in Arizona in the 1990s. Four other states, Maine, New Mexico, North Carolina and Wisconsin, have similar “trigger” provisions that affect some political races, and could be vulnerable if the Supreme Court strikes down the Arizona provision. Another state, Connecticut, changed its law to eliminate its trigger after a federal appeals court struck it down. Los Angeles and New York are among big cities that also provide public money to candidates. Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor sat through part of the argument dealing with a law from her native Arizona. O’Connor looked more favorably on campaign finance restrictions than does her successor, Justice Samuel Alito. Alito seemed to suggest that giving a publicly funded candidate campaign money in one lump sum – so that the amount of money does not depend on an opponent’s campaign activity – could resolve the potential First Amendment problems in Arizona’s law. Justice Elena Kagan seemed strongly supportive of the Arizona law. “I think the purpose of this law is to prevent corruption,” Kagan said. “That’s what the purpose of all public financing systems are.” But there appeared to be five votes to rule otherwise. Doug Kendall, head of the liberal interest group Constitutional Accountability Center, attended the argument and said afterward that the court seemed ready to “gut an effort by Arizona to expand speech while combating the worst public corruption scandal in the state’s history.” A decision should come by summer. The cases, joined together at the high court, are Arizona Free Enterprise v. Bennett, 10-238, and McComish v. Bennett, 10-239.

Read the full article →

Internet Entrepreneur Bypasses High-Tech For Low-Priced

March 25, 2011

NEW YORK — The numbers that fill Warner Johnson’s head shake him from sleep most nights. There are phone numbers and area codes and long-distance calling rates to far-flung places like India, Slovenia and Hong Kong. Phantom phone calls to Mexico or Martinique ring in his dreams. “I just can’t help it,” Johnson said. “It’s my passion.” Johnson, 48, is a Harlem-based Internet entrepreneur whose model relies less on high-tech gadgetry and more on old-school simplicity and ingenuity. His most recent creation is FreePhone2Phone , a telephone service that offers free 10-minute phone calls to any city in the United States and to more than 50 countries around the world on the condition that the user listens to a short advertisement. Here’s how it works: You dial a local access number that you can locate at FreePhone2Phone.com, you listen to a couple 10- or 12-second advertisements, and then you dial the number you’d like to call. At a time when unlimited cell phone calling plans can easily eclipse the $125 mark, and smartphones and the latest tablets require costly data plans for optimized use, FreePhone2Phone is somewhat of a technological throwback. Its use and appeal harkens back to the days when a few quarters and a phonebook were all you needed to reach out and touch someone. And with the cost of gas prices, airline tickets and perishable goods rising for any number of reasons, millions of Americans concerned with everyday expenses can save anywhere from 10 cents to a $1 a minute off their long-distance charges. Johnson said the target audience for his service is broader than those with family or friends abroad, and includes anyone who wants to save money in these tough economic times. “Imagine you could save money at the gas pump by simply watching a few advertisements. Who wouldn’t do that?” he asked. “This is no different.” While the service is free, there are a few catches. Most overseas calls are limited to landline numbers. Each call is limited to 10 minutes, and if you try to call the same number a second time in the same day, the call is limited to five minutes. But the number of free calls you can make in a single day is unrestricted. Since the launch of FreePhone2Phone seven months ago, Johnson said users have made “millions” of calls and saved “hundreds of thousands of dollars.” (He admits to using the service himself at least three to four times a day to call business partners in Latin America.) His story is the stuff of pure Americana: boy with humble, middle-class roots follows his dreams, takes a few risks and finds himself along the way. And that journey has led Johnson to where he is today — a man on a mission. That singular mission has been to spread the word about FreePhone2Phone. Think an African American Billy Mays, Tony Little or Ron Popeil in a pair of perfectly pressed slacks and a sport coat. He tells the delivery guys schlepping packages up and down his block in Harlem about it. He tells the Indian and Greek waiters at his favorite restaurants. And he can’t take a bag of peanuts from a flight attendant or tip a skycap without at least a mention of FreePhone2Phone. “In the middle of the night, I’ll check the iPad to see how many people on the west coast are making calls to Asia or Europe,” Johnson admitted. “India is really big. Mexico is huge, and people are calling Europe like crazy.” FreePhone2Phone is just the latest venture for Johnson, who spent much of the mid-1980s and early ’90s working on Wall Street as an investment banker with Payne Webber. He is also the creator of the website fabsearch.com , which aggregates travel articles from luxury fashion and travel magazines to help people plan where to eat, stay and play while on vacation. His entrepreneurial impulses were nurtured at an early age, when he said his schoolteacher mother, keen to her son’s motivations, offered some sage advice. “Don’t become a doctor,” he recalled her saying. “You care too much about money to be a doctor.” So began his journey from a middle-class black neighborhood in Raleigh, N.C., where he was bused to integrated schools, to summer classes at the prestigious Phillips Academy, the elite prep school in Andover, Mass., and then to the ivy halls of Brown University, where he studied history. While at Brown, a friend introduced him to a program designed to give minority students access to Wall Street. Johnson said he took to that world naturally, and after graduating from Brown with a degree in history, went on to work as an investment banker. But after years of the stress and grind of working in finance, he felt stymied. “I realized that working on Wall Street just wasn’t for me,” Johnson said. “I was following the book and I could imagine my life with success, but I just said, ‘Why do it if my heart’s not into it?’” He recalled wanting to experience life beyond the tacky wood-paneled offices that he so often found himself in, where he consulted for many deep-pocketed businessmen with even deeper financial troubles. “I looked at Ted Turner and he was a rock star to me,” Johnson said. “Guys like that go out there and risk it.” So he quit his job and moved to France. “I learned French and partied my butt off,” he said, with a bit of boyish mischief in his voice. “I decided to eat pizza and be an entrepreneur.” After living in France for a year and a half, Johnson decided to move back to the States, first to New York City’s West Village neighborhood and then to Harlem. It was 1993 and Harlem had yet to gentrify. “Police helicopters were still flying outside of my window,” he recalled. But he said moving to Harlem, the “mecca of black America,” fueled his social and entrepreneurial juices. He was awed by the architecture and cultural richness of the place. “It has made me so proud to be a black American. And you realize the strength, the commitment, the dignity and the patience of my people,” he said. “But it also energized me to go out there and do things. I felt Harlem provided an open canvas for me to be able to pursue my dreams and I knew that I wouldn’t be judged one way or the other.” There were ups and down along the way, Johnson said. Companies he founded have both flourished and floundered. But the last few years with fabsearch.com have been profitable and full of successes, he said. And word of FreePhone2Phone has been spreading quickly, he said, mostly by word of mouth. (Surely, much of it his own.) There are plans to extend the service to more countries and investors, and advertisers have been extremely supportive given the tough lending and investing environment, he said. Meanwhile, Johnson remains his company’s best pitchman. “Your grandmother doesn’t know how to use Skype or Google Voice,” he said. “But this is simple, easy as using a prepaid calling card.” And he allowed that he is consumed by the need to spread the word about what he believes his product can offer money-conscious callers. “This is my passion and joy,” Johnson said. “I can barely go to sleep without telling people about this service.”

Read the full article →

Video: Richardson Says U.S. Should Emphasize Renewable Energy

March 24, 2011

March 24 (Bloomberg) — Bill Richardson, former governor of New Mexico, discusses the outlook for the U.S. energy policy. He speaks with Carol Massar and Matt Miller on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

AMD Hires Ronaldo Miranda as New VP and General Manager for Latin America

March 24, 2011

SUNNYVALE, CA–(Marketwire – March 24, 2011) – AMD ( NYSE : AMD ) announced today Ronaldo Miranda, 50, will join the company effective April 4 as vice president and general manager for AMD’s Latin America region. In this role, Miranda is responsible for all of AMD’s business and operations in Brazil, Mexico, South and Central America and the Caribbean. He brings more than 27 years of experience in successfully managing sales and business operations at various technology companies in Latin America.

Read the full article →

Video: Reese Says ATP Will Double Gulf of Mexico Oil Production

March 22, 2011

March 22 (Bloomberg) — Al Reese, chief financial officer of ATP Oil & Gas Corp., talks about the outlook for the company’s oil production. ATP won a U.S. permit to drill in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, the third company cleared to resume work halted last year after BP Plc’s oil spill. Reese speaks with Pimm Fox on Bloomberg Television’s “Taking Stock.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Diane Francis: Japan and Libya Mark Canada’s Energy Victory

March 21, 2011

Japan’s nuclear catastrophe, and the UN Security Council’s support for Libyan people against Muammar Gaddafi, have financial implications well beyond market volatility. The Japanese “brand”, based on brilliant planning and execution, has been permanently tarnished. First it was Toyota’s colossal recalls and now the world discovers that six reactors were built in an earthquake zone, subject to tsunamis, without sufficient fortifications or back-ups to back-ups. Instead, the repair job has become a Kamikaze-like effort by several dozen middle-aged volunteers whose failure will take the world into uncharted territory. This fiasco guarantees that the nuclear option, to replace fossil fuels and save the world from the effects of over-population, is about as attractive as having Colonel Gaddafi drop by for dinner. This increases dramatically the probability that two Canadian pipeline projects, and others, will be invited to dinner: The Keystone Pipeline expansion bringing oil sands output to US refineries and the Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline will proceed. The US government has been dithering about Keystone’s environmental impact (they already have 50,000 miles of pipelines there) and the Canadian government has dithered for decades about Mackenzie, mostly recently over a request to back a small portion of the line so aboriginals can own a piece of the action. Both governments must approve these lines. In the US, this is because, without construction of new nuclear facilities, the country will need more oil and Middle East volatility means that region is undesirable as a supplier. So Canada’s oil sands are essential. Tellingly, USA Today editorialized in favor of Canada’s “dirty” oil. “The Keystone expansion would provide an extra 500,000 barrels of oil a day from a secure ally and neighbor, enabling the US to offset declining supplies from Mexico and Venezuela and avoid having to reach out to less-stable oil exporters. At a time of rising gasoline prices and turmoil in the Middle East, the US is in no position to be finicky about its oil imports,” said the newspaper. “And here’s something else to consider: If the US blocks the pipeline, Canadian developers have made it clear they’ll be glad to build west instead of south — and sell oil from the West Coast to China.” The Mackenzie Pipeline will, and should, proceed because increasing oil sands production (which needs natural gas), removal of the nuclear option in Canada and commitments to take coal plants out of service by 2025 will require four times more natural gas than it can bring to markets. According to Ziff Energy, a leading energy consultancy, the Mackenzie, Alaska gas pipeline, producible shale gas and conventional gas deposits would all be needed and viable in future. For instance, Ziff said that Canadian conventional gas reserves are declining by up to 20% per year, which requires the replacement of up to 4 billion cubic feet per day of new supplies. That’s equivalent to the total production from three Mackenzie Valley Pipelines. Decline rates are similar south of the border and will require at least ten times’ more gas. Power generation is also starting to switch from coal or oil to natural gas for environmental reasons. In June 2010, this was mandated in a Canadian Federal Government policy which will phase out 33 inefficient coal-fired plants in Canada whose economic life will end by 2025. Their licenses will not be renewed unless their emissions are reduced dramatically to the same level as gas-fired plants. The amount of gas needed to replace these 33 dirty coal plants totals 1.2 billion cubic feet per day, or the entire annual output of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline. Fossil fuels brings me to the democratization of the Arab world and this week’s Libya support in the United Nations. Ten countries voted in favor of a resolution to crush him some time soon by any method necessary, while the other five — China, India, Russia, Brazil and Germany — were smart enough to simply abstain and get out of the way. This vote was historically significant for two reasons: It was backed by broad-based support for democracy and against tyrants and, secondly, it marked a stepping down by the United States from the role of superpower which, frankly, it cannot any longer afford financially or reputationally. The fact is that President Obama is delivering on his promises to take the training wheels off Iraq’s fragile democracy and to be multilateral and let others do the heavy lifting. As an American taxpayer, and a Canadian one, I applaud his behind-the-scenes community activist role in letting if not encouraging the French, of all nations, to take the lead in the Libya initiative, followed by the British, Arab League and African Union. It’s also a sign of fiscal prudence on the part of Washington which is good news for Americans and Canadians alike. Cross-posted in the Financial Post .

Read the full article →

Ian Fletcher: Free Trade Isn’t Helping World Poverty

March 19, 2011

The propaganda for free trade tells us that not only is it the master key to our own prosperity, but also the master key to lifting the world’s poor out of poverty. So if we don’t support free trade, we’re in for a guilt trip like the one that used to make us stick quarters into UNICEF boxes. Unfortunately, free trade just doesn’t work as a global anti-poverty strategy. The spreading Third World affluence one sees in TV commercials only means that the thin upper crust of Western-style consumers is now more widespread than ever before. But having more affluent people in the Third World is not the same as the Third World as a whole nearing the living standards of the First. This is actually not a terribly big secret, and is fairly well known to the people who promote free trade. For a start, the World Bank standard for poverty is $2 a day, so “moving people out of poverty” can merely consist in moving people from $1.99 a day to $2.01 a day. In one major study, there were only two nations in which the average beneficiary jumped from less than $1.88 to more than $2.13: Pakistan and Thailand. Every other nation was making minor jumps in between. The developing world’s gains from trade liberalization (insofar as there are any) are concentrated in a relatively small group of nations, due to the fact that only a few developing nations have economies that are actually capable of taking advantage of freer trade to any meaningful extent. Although it depends a bit on the model, China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Vietnam, and Turkey generally take the lion’s share. This list sounds impressive, but it actually leaves out most Third World nations. Dirt-poor nations like Haiti aren’t even on the radar. Even nations one notch up the scale, like Bolivia, barely figure. So forget helping starving children in Africa this way. They’re not even in the game of international trade–let alone winners of it. Like it or not, this is perfectly logical, as increased access to the ruthlessly competitive global marketplace (which is all free trade provides) benefits only nations whose industries have something to sell which foreign trade barriers are currently keeping out . Their industries must both be strong enough to be globally competitive and have pent-up potential due to trade barriers abroad, a fairly rare combination. As a result, the most desperately impoverished nations, which have few or no internationally competitive industries, have basically nothing to gain from freer trade. What progress against poverty has occurred in the world in recent decades has not been due to free trade, but due to the embrace of mercantilism and industrial policy by some poor nations. (This is, of course, the same way nations like the U.S. and England became prosperous hundreds of years ago.) According to the World Bank, the entire net global decline in the number of people living in poverty since 1981 has been in mercantilist China, where free trade is spurned. Elsewhere, their numbers have grown. The story on global economic progress for poor nations in the last 30 years is roughly as follows: 1. China (one fifth of humanity) braked its population growth, made a quantum leap from agrarian Marxism to industrial mercantilism, and thrived–largely because the U.S. was so open to being the “designated driver” of its export-centered growth strategy during this period. 2. India (another fifth) sharply increased the capitalist share of its mixture of capitalism and Gandhian-Fabian socialism after 1991. It did reasonably well, but not as well as China and not well enough to reduce the absolute number of its people living in poverty, given unbraked population growth. 3. Latin America lost its way after the oil shocks of the 1970s, experienced the 1980s as an economic “lost decade,” and tried to implement the free market Washington Consensus in the 1990s. It didn’t get the promised results, so some nations responded with a pragmatic retreat from free market purism, others with a lurch to the left, the former showing results in the last five years or so. 4. The collapse of Communism left some nations (Cuba, North Korea) marooned in Marxist poverty, while others (Uzbekistan, Mongolia) discovered that the only thing worse than an intact communist economy is the wreckage of one. Much of Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR got burned by an overly abrupt transition to capitalism, then recovered at various speeds. 5. Sub-Saharan Africa spent much of this period in political chaos, with predictable economic results (except for South Africa and Botswana). Washington Consensus policies in the 1990s did not deliver, and the few recent bright spots have yet to deliver increased per capita income or lower unemployment. 6. Other poor countries followed patterns one through five to varying degrees, with corresponding outcomes. China is unquestionably the star here. But all its brutally efficient achievements in forcing up the living standards of its people from an extremely low base, it still has serious problems. Its growth miracle has been largely confined to the metropolitan areas of the country’s coastal provinces. Of the 800 million peasants left behind in agriculture, perhaps 400 million have seen their incomes stagnate or even decline. Over the last 30 years of greatly expanding free trade, most of the world’s poor nations have actually seen the gap between themselves and the rest of the world increase. As economist Dani Rodrik of Harvard summarizes the data: The income gap between these regions of the developing world and the industrial countries has been steadily rising. In 1980, 32 Sub-Saharan countries had an income per capita at purchasing power parity equal to 9.3 percent of the U.S. level, while 25 Latin American and Caribbean countries had an income equal to 26.3 percent of the U.S. average. By 2004, the numbers had dropped to 6.1 percent and 16.5 percent respectively for these two regions. This represents a drop of over 35 percent in relative per capita income. Today, because a few formerly poor nations are succeeding economically while most have been hit with economic decline, the world is splitting into a “twin peaks” income distribution, with a hollowing out of middle-income countries. A significant number of nations have gone backwards, and are now poorer than they were a generation ago. Most poor nations have high fertility, so population growth drags down their per capita income by a percentage point or two every year if economic growth does not outpace it. Contrary to impressions in the media, economic success is actually becoming more concentrated in the Western world, not less. According to one summary of the data by Syed Murshed of Erasmus University in Holland: Between 1960 and 2000 the Western share of rich countries has been increasing; to be affluent has almost become an exclusive Western prerogative–16 out of 19 non-Western nations who were rich in 1960 traversed into less affluent categories by 2000 (for example, Algeria, Angola, and Argentina). Against that, four Asian non-rich countries moved into the first group. Most non-Western rich nations in 1960 joined the second income group by 2000, and most non-Western upper-middle-income countries in 1960 had fallen into the second and third categories by 2000. Of 22 upper-middle-income nations in 1960, 20 had declined into the third and fourth income categories, among them the Democratic Republic of the Congo, also known recently as Zaire, and Ghana. Most nations in the third group in 1960 descended into the lowest income category by 2000. Only Botswana moved to the third group from the fourth category, while Egypt remains in the third category. We seem to inhabit a downwardly mobile world with a vanishing middle class ; by 2000 most countries were either rich or poor, in contrast to 1960 when most nations were in the middle-income groups. (Emphasis added.) This is no accident. Free trade tends to mean that the industrial sectors of developing nations either “make it to the big time” and become globally competitive, or else they get killed off entirely by imports, leaving nothing but agriculture and raw materials extraction, dead-end sectors which tend not to grow very fast. Free trade eliminates the protected middle ground for economies, like Mongolia or Peru, which don’t have globally competitive industrial sectors but were still better off having such sectors, albeit inefficient ones, than not having them at all. The productivity of modern industry is so much higher than peasant agriculture that it raises average income even if it is not globally competitive. Nations which open up their economies to (somewhat) free trade relatively late in their development, and continue to support domestic firms with industrial policy, are far more likely to retain medium and high technology industry, the key to their futures, than nations which embrace full-blown free trade and a laissez faire absence of industrial policy too early in their development. There are numerous documented cases in which trade liberalization simply killed off indigenous industries without supplying anything to replace them. To take some typical examples given by the International Forum on Globalization: Senegal experienced large job losses following liberalization in the late 1980s; by the early 1990s, employment cuts had eliminated one-third of all manufacturing jobs. The chemical, textile, shoe, and automobile assembly industries virtually collapsed in the Ivory Coast after tariffs were abruptly lowered by 40 percent in 1986. Similar problems have plagued liberalization attempts in Nigeria. In Sierra Leone, Zambia, Zaire, Uganda, Tanzania, and the Sudan, liberalization in the 1980s brought a tremendous surge in consumer imports and sharp cutbacks in foreign exchange available for purchases of intermediate inputs and capital goods, with devastating effects on industrial output and employment. In Ghana, liberalization caused industrial sector employment to plunge from 78,700 in 1987 to 28,000 in 1993. One unhappy corollary of this is the so-called Vanek-Reinert effect, in which the most advanced sectors of a primitive economy are the ones destroyed by a sudden transition to free trade. Once these sectors are gone, a nation can be locked in poverty indefinitely.

Read the full article →

Video: Bingaman on Japan Disaster: Political Capital With Al Hunt

March 19, 2011

March 18 (Bloomberg) — Senator Jeff Bingaman, a New Mexico Democrat, speaks with Bloomberg’s Al Hunt about the nuclear emergency in Japan and the outlook for U.S. reactors. Bloomberg’s Indira Lakshmanan and Hans Nichols discuss political turmoil in Libya and the role of the U.S. and United Nations. Sara Eisen talks about the Japanese yen. Margaret Carlson and Kate O’Beirne discuss U.S. budget negotiations in Congress. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Robert Reich: Safety on the Cheap

March 16, 2011

Can we please agree that in the real world corporations exist for one purpose, and one purpose only: to make as much money as possible, which means cutting costs as much as possible? The New York Times reports that GE marketed the Mark 1 boiling water reactors, used in TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi plant, as cheaper to build than other reactors because they used a comparatively smaller and less expensive containment structure. Yet American safety officials have long thought the smaller design more vulnerable to explosion and rupture in emergencies than competing designs. (By the way, the same design is used in 23 American nuclear reactors at 16 plants.) In the mid-1980s, Harold Denton, then an official with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Mark 1 reactors had a 90 percent probability of bursting should the fuel rods overheat and melt in an accident. A follow-up report from a study group convened by the Commission concluded that “Mark 1 failure within the first few hours following core melt would appear rather likely.” Sound familiar? The National Commission appointed to investigate the giant oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last April recently concluded that BP failed to adequately supervise Halliburton Company’s work on installing the well. This was the case even though BP knew Halliburton lacked experience testing cement to prevent blowouts and hadn’t performed adequately before on a similar job. In short: Neither company bothered to spend the money to ensure adequate testing of the cement. Nor did Massey Energy spend the money needed to ensure its mines were safe. And so on. Don’t get me wrong. No company can be expected to build a nuclear reactor, an oil well, a coal mine, or anything else that’s one hundred percent safe under all circumstances. The costs would be prohibitive. It’s unreasonable to expect corporations to totally guard against small chances of every potential accident. Inevitably there’s a tradeoff. Reasonable precaution means spending as much on safety as the probability of a particular disaster occurring, multiplied by its likely harm to human beings and the environment if it does occur. Here’s the problem. Profit-making corporations have every incentive to underestimate these probabilities and lowball the likely harms. This is why it’s necessary to have such things as government regulators, why regulators must be independent of the industries they regulate, and why regulators need enough resources to enforce the regulations. It’s also why the public in every nation is endangered if the political clout of its biggest corporations — BP, Halliburton, Massey, G.E., or TEPCO — grows too large. Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future , now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org .

Read the full article →

Bill Gates No Longer World’s Richest Man After Giving Away Billions

March 7, 2011

NEW YORK (By Michelle Nichols) – Bill Gates didn’t lose his title as the world’s richest man last year; he gave it away by plowing billions into his charitable foundation, experts say. Forbes will release its 2011 billionaires list on Wednesday and Gates, investor Warren Buffett and last year’s richest man, Mexican tycoon Carlos Slim, will almost certainly be in the top three. The trio have topped the list for the past five years. But it would be no contest if Microsoft co-founder Gates had not already given away more than a third of his wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which focuses on global health and development and U.S. education. “It wouldn’t be a competition,” said David Lincoln, director of global valuations at wealth research firm Wealth-X. “(Gates) would have a comfortable margin if he had never discovered philanthropy.” Lincoln said Gates was currently worth about $49 billion, behind Slim, whose fortune he estimated at $60 billion. Buffett, also a philanthropist, is now worth some $47 billion. But had Gates not given away any money, he would be worth $88 billion, Lincoln said. Gates and his wife Melinda have so far given $28 billion to their foundation, the largest in the United States. Forbes’ 2010 billionaires list put Gates’ fortune at $53 billion, but he was knocked into second spot by Slim’s $53.5 billion, losing the crown for only the second time since 1995. Slim has said businessmen do more good by creating jobs and wealth through investment, “not by being Santa Claus,” and while he has still pledged several billion dollars to charity, his efforts have been a fraction of Gates’ philanthropy. Buffett, who Forbes ranked as the third richest man in the world last year with $47 billion, has also pledged almost all of his fortune to the Gates Foundation and has given $8 billion to the organization since 2006. But Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc has fared better than Gates’ Microsoft. Microsoft shares now trade about where they were a decade ago, while Berkshire shares have roughly doubled. Since the end of 2009, Microsoft shares have fallen 16 percent, while Berkshire shares are up 29 percent. Slim’s major companies, which include Mexico’s former state telecoms monopoly Telmex, have also seen gains in their stock prices. “DRAMATIC” PHILANTHROPIC INFLUENCE Gates and Buffett have joined forces to encourage other billionaires to publicly pledge to give away at least 50 percent of their wealth during their lifetimes or upon their death as part of a campaign called The Giving Pledge. Glen Macdonald, president of the Wealth and Giving Forum, said Gates’ philanthropy had influenced the way other rich people in the United States approach their own philanthropy. “Encouraging people and leading by example — there’s no question that’s going to have influence on people’s giving patterns,” said Macdonald. “They are going to give sooner and they are going to give in greater amounts.” But Macdonald, whose group has advised 600 wealthy U.S. families on their philanthropy, disagrees with the public nature of The Giving Pledge, which requires billionaires to release a letter explaining their intentions. So far 59 billionaires have joined The Giving Pledge, publishing their letter at www.givingpledge.org. The campaign does not accept any money nor tell people how to give away their wealth, it just asks for a moral commitment. Paul Schervish, director of the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College, said Gates’ influence had been “dramatic” and likened philanthropy to a gem, saying Gates was “changing the facets by learning and teaching others.” “He would be the first to admit that he is not the origin of the movement, of all the ideas in the movement, for which he is a leader,” Schervish said. “One of the things we’re dramatically finding is (many more) people beginning foundations and endowing them at higher levels while they are still alive,” he said. (Editing by Mark Egan and Cynthia Osterman) Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Nissan raises investments in Mexico to USD1.05b

March 6, 2011

Nissan raises investments in Mexico to USD1.05b

Read the full article →

EVOX Reappoints Javier Priego as CEO as Global Telecom and IT Solutions Firm Continues Double Digit Growth

March 2, 2011

AUSTIN, TX–(Marketwire – March 2, 2011) –  EVOX, a global telecommunications and IT solutions firm based in Mexico, today announced that Javier Priego, has been renamed as CEO. Mr. Priego replaces Antonio Rios, who will continue to play an active role in the company as a member of the board. Mr. Priego, who had acted as CEO of EVOX from 2004 to 2006, will also continue to lead the EVOX’s U.S. division, which is based in Austin.

Read the full article →

Dorie Clark: Why Your Brand Must Be an Experience

March 1, 2011

Last year, I traveled to Madrid and was regaled with tales of its paella, sangria, and tapas. But… the Thai food? In fact, it didn’t come to the Spanish capital until 1995, when the small, high-end chain Thai Gardens opened. (They also boast international outposts in Mexico and Brazil). Jonesing for tofu pad thai, I stumbled onto a marketing lesson more American businesses should apply. Branding strategist Martin Lindstrom reports that 83% of commercial communication appeals only to our eyes, yet a full “75% of our day-to-day emotions are influenced by what we smell” and “there’s a 65% chance of a mood change when exposed to a positive sound.” As marketers, we’re leaving an embarrassing amount of money on the table by ignoring the full sensory experience of how customers experience our brands. Most Thai restaurants I’ve visited in the U.S. range from “hole in the wall” to “pretty nice” — a spectrum seemingly determined by the presence or absence of wall hangings, throw pillows and the like (my local favorite has a three-dimensional wooden elephant glued to the cover of their menu). The food can be amazing at any of them. But in most parts of the country, the customer experience — and the prices charged — are rarely top-of-the-line. Thai Gardens, however — located in a country not particularly known for a robust Asian subculture — has staked out the high end with panache. There are the obligatory golden Buddhas. But also dramatic lighting, from dimmed overhead lights to candles and inlaid artwork on the walls, illuminated from above. Rough-hewn stone pillars and copious wood, evocative of a temple. And — just a whiff as you enter the threshold — incense. Aside from stoners and Catholic priests, most Americans neglect it in our everyday lives — so when it’s deployed, it’s powerful. Otherworldly. An experience outside the norm. Something special. And isn’t that worth a few dollars more on your spring rolls? For too many companies, “branding” means a logo and a tagline — period. But that’s only the tip of the iceberg. The real definition of branding is every single way you communicate with your customers, from how you answer the reservations line to the mint at the end of the meal. Your brand — the essence of what you want to communicate to buyers and potential buyers — should permeate everything you do. Incense and well-lit Buddhas may not be the secret for your business. But we can all learn from Thai Gardens and ask ourselves: How do we create a brand that immerses our clients fully? The more powerfully we create a unique experience, the stronger our customer relationships will be. What are your best strategies for creating a powerful brand experience? Dorie Clark is a marketing strategy consultant for clients including Google, Yale University, and the National Park Service. Visit her website , listen to her podcasts or follow her on Twitter .

Read the full article →

Gulf of Mexico’s 1st deep-water drilling gains approval

March 1, 2011

Gulf of Mexico’s 1st deep-water drilling gains approval

Read the full article →

Hannover House Establishes Controller Position

February 24, 2011

NEW YORK, NY–(Marketwire – February 24, 2011) – Hannover House, the entertainment division of Target Development Group, Inc. ( PINKSHEETS : TDGI ), has established the position of Controller to oversee the company’s internal record keeping and accounting activities, and has tapped entertainment and accounting veteran Eduardo Suarez-Moreno for the job. Suarez-Moreno is an accounting veteran with more than 25-years of experience as a CPA, full-charge bookkeeper and finance and administration director for Virgin Entertainment & Television de Mexico (a subsidiary of the U.K.-based Virgin Entertainment). Suarez-Moreno earned a BS in Accounting and his MBA from La Salle University, and has been living and working in the United States for the past nine years.

Read the full article →

Peter Neill: Lest We Forget: Re-Calculating the True Cost of Deepwater Horizon

February 21, 2011

Just one more look back, please, lest we forget. The Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico provides a telling example of how to calculate the true cost of “progress.” As economists join with scientists, we are moving from observation and study to predictable measurement and advance calculation of the true value of natural resources — the cost of their development, of their loss, of the mitigation and adaptation required by their consequence, and of their implementation without first taking into consideration the broader and deeper financial implications for the community, immediately and downstream. Historically, the conventional corporate argument, typically made to local communities, regulators, and state and federal legislators, has been that the presence of an offshore drilling industry be valued in terms of jobs created, taxes and royalties paid, and value added to the overall financial health of the local, national, and indeed global economy. Given the quarterly financial reports of the oil companies, this evaluation adds up to substantial profit. But so much is left out of the calculation. For example, we tend to forget that the natural resources within any national 200-mile limit are owned by the public and that, as such, government is obliged to exploit that capacity for the national good. In many cases, the legislation enabling the licensing of these resources requires royalty payment frequently designated to restricted funds for specific purposes: scientific research, education, environmental protection or historic preservation. While that may be true on paper, those royalties most often end up not in support of those designated purposes, but in the general fund. Moreover, it is evident that the royalties collected are only a fraction of the market value of those resources, and the profits generated, even after all the substantial costs of administration, exploration, drilling, transportation, refining, distribution, and conversion into innumerable oil-based products, when distributed to the shareholders, represent a not so visible but very real transfer of value from owners to investors, from public sector to private sector, from the many to the few, in not necessarily equitable percentage. Most of us are left out, or in to pay yet again at the gas pump. In addition, government provides enormous public subsidy to the oil industry in the form of incentives and tax credits for exploration and research, technology development, depreciation, and many, many other legislative amendments, regulatory adjustments, and management decisions along the way made for the benefit of the industry. And, of course, there is the continuing presence of politicians and government officials, chosen for their influence, working as lobbyists or sitting on the boards of these companies and expected to avoid direct and indirect conflicts of interest. What, then, is the true value of an oil well drilled a mile down offshore in a unique ecological zone subject to multiple uses? Is it simply the cost of the well or the price of the product? The real calculation must include all the ancillary expense and revenue, and the cost of their loss. When you begin to add up what the public has paid for DeepWater Horizon versus what has been gained — and when you add the hidden subsidy — and when you add the cost of dealing with the immediate consequence of the disaster — and when you add the value of loss to the environmental refugees and communities affected — and when you add the value of damage to the productive ecology and the future revenues lost — and when you add the value of reparation, mitigation and restoration of lost resources going forward — and, ironically, when you add collapsed shareholder investment in a wounded international company — you have a dramatically different equation. From a balance sheet perspective, what in the near term seems profit is in the long term a financial disaster, visualized just a few months ago in the photos of oil slicks, wide and deep, fouled beaches, dead wildlife, destroyed wetlands, unemployed fishermen, bankrupt tourism businesses, depressed local economies, ruined communities — all now rapidly forgotten, business as usual, as BP moves on to Russia. Why would anyone invest in this strategy for the future?

Read the full article →

Rev. Al Sharpton: Paying for the Crimes of Others

February 9, 2011

On April 4, 1968, the world lost a pinnacle in the fight for humanity when our preeminent civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was viciously murdered. Although we are all familiar with his immeasurable struggle for equality and justice, many do not realize that an essential platform for Dr. King’s advocacy was a push for worker’s rights and the necessity of decent livable wages. Today, as states and municipalities across the nation face devastating budget shortfalls, the labor unions and workers that provide necessary services for us all are once again under attack. The state of New Mexico is unfortunately no different, but together we can intervene and protect the ability of workers to peacefully assemble, organize and demand fair benefits. On February 10th and 11th, I will be addressing union members, clergy, community organizers and everyday citizens from across New Mexico to discuss the integral relationship between labor movements and civil rights. Joining me at this pivotal two-day conference will be Lee Saunders, International Secretary-Treasurer for AFSCME (the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees). The two central themes of this vital event are: ‘Civil Servants: Pillars of a Civil Society’ and ‘Faces of Public Service: Thanking Those Who Serve Our Community’. New Mexico, like so many states across the nation, is suffering from some of the largest budget deficits in modern times. Facing a shortfall of an estimated $400 million next year, New Mexico’s legislature proposed slashing the state budget and consequentially slashing the basic benefits countless workers dedicated their lives securing. At a time when so many families are struggling to simply put food on their tables, Governor Martinez of New Mexico would like state workers to contribute even more into their own retirement plans. After decades of organizing and pushing for fair pay and decent benefits, those that provide many of the services all New Mexicans greatly rely on are once again being asked to pay for the crimes of others. When the economic recession of 2008 struck the nation, virtually everyone agreed that Wall St. excesses and corporate greed created a dangerous scenario by which the rich continued to amass wealth, and the working-class/poor suffered increased financial hardship. And today, as unemployment remains disturbingly high, foreclosures continue at alarming rates and the average citizen has to stretch his/her dollars even further, why is the responsibility of rectifying our budgets being unfairly placed on workers? Why must unions be forced to resort back to the days when individuals had no rights and employers could systematically oppress and take advantage of whomever they pleased? And when workers were not the ones responsible for the worst financial calamity ever witnessed since the days of the Great Depression, why must they be the ones to continuously bear the brunt of sacrifice? On the eve of the horrific murder of Dr. King in Memphis, Tennessee in ’68, he addressed sanitation workers and public employees who were members of the local chapter of AFSCME. Fervently pushing for their ability, and the ability of all across the country to organize and demand livable wages, Dr. King gave his life in the struggle for human dignity for all peoples. As Lee Saunders and I gather with union workers and community organizers in New Mexico, let us keep Dr. King’s vision and passion alive just as it was decades ago. When states and municipalities work to salvage their budgets, let’s ensure that the burden isn’t unjustly placed on those that are already suffering the most under these tumultuous times. Let us stand in unison once again.

Read the full article →

Homeowners Turn To Representing Themselves In Foreclosure Court

February 3, 2011

Lawyers are scarce and free legal assistance is overwhelmed in New Mexico, so a community center here is offering an hourlong class in how to download the correct forms, decipher the lingo and mount a defense, however tentative and primitive, against a multibillion-dollar bank.

Read the full article →

Bank Watch: New Mexico’s Largest Bank Fails, Acquired by U.S. Bank

February 3, 2011

U.S. Bank has acquired the banking operations of First Community Bank in Taos, NM, from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). First Community Bank was closed by the New Mexico Financial Institutions Division, which appointed the FDIC as receiver. Under the terms of this transaction, U.S. Bank will receive approximately $2.1 billion of assets and assume approximately $2.1 billion of liabilities, including $1.8 billion of insured and…

Read the full article →

Robert L. Cavnar: BP Wins: EPA Will Agree to Cut Oil Spill Estimate

February 2, 2011

I know I keep saying it, but I told you so .

Read the full article →

Chevron Leaving Coal Mining Industry

January 31, 2011

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Petroleum giant Chevron Corp. said Friday it plans to get out of the coal industry by the end of the year. The decision came after the company determined that new coal technologies were developing too slowly to make staying in the industry a good strategy, Chevron Mining Inc. spokeswoman Margaret Lejuste said. One of the technologies is known as coal-to-liquids, in which coal is processed into diesel, gasoline or other fuels. “Those technologies are so far into the future, 10 to 15 years in the future, they made the strategic decision to focus on other operations other than mining,” she said of the company. Chevron intends to sell off three coal mines in Wyoming, New Mexico and Alabama. The sites include the company’s open pit mine outside Kemmerer in western Wyoming, which has been on the market for about a week. “It’s my understanding there are a number of interested parties who are looking at the mine,” Lejuste said. The company also is closing a deal with Tampa, Fla.-based Walter Energy to sell its North River underground mine in western Alabama. A tentative agreement with Walter Energy was announced last year. San Ramon, Calif.-based Chevron also may sell reclaimed land from a surface coal mine in northwestern New Mexico that has been closed since 2009. The three mines together produced nearly 10 million tons of coal in 2009. Chevron also intends to sell its 50 percent stake in a proposed coal mine outside Sheridan in northern Wyoming. The Kemmerer mine, which employs about 300 people and produces around 5 million tons of coal a year, is one of the world’s largest open pit coal mines. Even so, it’s a small producer compared with the strip mines of northeast Wyoming, which can yield upward of 100 million tons of coal a year. Wyoming produces 40 percent of the nation’s coal, more than any other state, and has invested heavily in coal technologies. Coal-to-liquids should be viable at today’s oil prices, said Mark Northam, director of the University of Wyoming School of Energy Resources. But questions remain about the performance and long-term viability of coal-to-liquids plants, Northam said. “Some folks can stomach that uncertainty and some can’t,” he said. A company such as Chevron has other business besides coal to fall back on, he said, whereas a company such as St. Louis-based Arch Coal is all about coal. Arch Coal has invested in a planned $2.7 billion coal-to-liquids plant tentatively set to open in southeast Wyoming in 2014. “If you were looking at it from the point of view of Arch Coal, where coal is your product and you’re looking to expand the market and protect its position, you would have a different view,” Northam said.

Read the full article →

Video: Reilly Says BP Decisions `Irresponsible,’ `Incompetent’: Video

January 7, 2011

Jan. 6 (Bloomberg) — William Reilly, co-chairman of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, talks about BP Plc’s role in Gulf of Mexico spill. The commission will publish its report on the reasons for the disaster and recommendations for the energy industry and regulators on Jan. 11. Reilly speaks with Lizzie O’Leary on Bloomberg Television’s “Bloomberg Rewind.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Obama Allows Chevron, Shell And 11 Others To Resume Offshore Drilling Without Further Review

January 4, 2011

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Monday it will allow 13 companies to resume deepwater drilling without any additional environmental scrutiny, just months after saying it would require strict reviews for new drilling in the wake of the BP oil spill. The government said it was not breaking its promise to require environmental reviews because the 13 companies – which include Chevron USA Inc. and Shell Offshore Inc. – had already started drilling the wells without detailed environmental studies. Drilling was suspended last year when the administration imposed a months-long moratorium following the BP spill. The ban was lifted in October, but drilling has not yet resumed in waters deeper than 500 feet in the Gulf of Mexico. U.S. officials said the 13 companies must comply with new policies and rules before resuming activity at 16 Gulf of Mexico wells. All but three are exploratory wells – the same type BP was drilling when the blowout of the Deepwater Horizon rig occurred. The April 20 explosion killed 11 workers and set off the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history. “For those companies that were in the midst of operations at the time of the deepwater suspensions (last spring), today’s notification is a significant step toward resuming their permitted activity,” said Michael Bromwich, director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement. The decision is a victory for the drilling companies, which in the past had routinely won broad waivers from rules requiring detailed environmental studies. After the BP disaster, the Obama administration pledged it would require companies to complete environmental reviews before being allowed to drill for oil. The administration has been under heavy pressure from the oil industry, Gulf state leaders and congressional Republicans to speed up drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, which has come to a near halt since the moratorium on deepwater drilling was imposed last spring. The delay is hurting big oil companies such as Chevron Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell PLC, which have billions of dollars in investments tied up in Gulf projects that are on hold. Smaller operators such as ATP Oil & Gas Corp., Murphy Exploration & Production Co.-USA, and Noble Energy Inc., also have been affected. A federal report said the moratorium probably caused a temporary loss of 8,000 to 12,000 jobs in the Gulf region. Bromwich and other officials stressed that the policy announced Monday was not a reversal of its previous plans not to grant waivers known as categorical exclusions for deepwater projects. Instead officials characterized the action as a sort of grandfather clause that applies only to companies that had already begun drilling before the BP blowout. In August, Bromwich instructed his staff not to grant categorical exclusions for drilling plans that involve use of a blowout preventer similar to the one that failed to stop the BP spill. But the August directive did not specify that any companies would be exempted under a grandfather provision. “This decision was based on our ongoing review of environmental analyses in the Gulf and was in no way impacted by a singular company,” said Melissa Schwartz, a spokeswoman for Bromwich. Bromwich said in a statement that the new policy will accommodate companies whose operations were interrupted by the five-month moratorium on deepwater drilling, while ensuring that the companies can resume previously approved activities. William Snape, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, called the announcement “another sad chapter in agency denial that anything is wrong.” Snape said Bromwich and his boss, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, seem to want dangerous oil and gas drilling to go on in the Gulf and Alaska “without any meaningful public scientific review of the risks learned from the BP disaster.” But Randall Luthi, president of the National Ocean Industries Association, called the announcement “a positive development for an industry that has been anxiously waiting to get back to work.” Marathon Oil Co. said it was seeking to obtain permits for deepwater drilling, including one project that was suspended by the moratorium. In an e-mailed statement, Marathon said it is working with the ocean energy bureau on the permits and is optimistic the company will receive approval. The firms will not be required to complete a detailed review under the National Environmental Policy Act, but they must comply with new policies and regulations set up in the wake of the BP spill, Bromwich said. The 13 companies won’t be required to revise their exploration plans if an updated estimate of the most oil that would be released in an uncontrolled spill is less than the amount included in spill-response plans on file with the bureau. If the worst-case discharge estimate is higher, “further reviews will be conducted,” according to the statement. The 13 companies that received the notice are: ATP Oil & Gas Corp.; BHP Billiton Petroleum (GOM) Inc.; Chevron USA Inc.; Cobalt International Energy; ENI U.S. Operating Co. Inc.; Hess Corp.; Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corp.; Marathon Oil Co.; Murphy Exploration & Production Co.-USA; Noble Energy Inc.; Shell Offshore Inc.; Statoil USA E & P Inc.; and Walter Oil & Gas Corp. ___ Associated Press writers Dina Cappiello in Washington and Harry R. Weber in New Orleans contributed to this story.

Read the full article →

Gulf Deepwater Drilling Resumes Without Changes To Spill Liability

January 4, 2011

WASHINGTON — As deepwater drilling returns from a months-long hiatus in the Gulf of Mexico, the protections that Congress drew up to help victims of oil spills remains stuck in legislative limbo with no clear or likely path to passage. The Obama administration announced on Monday that it would allow 13 companies to resume deepwater drilling, which it had suspended in May during the massive BP oil spill that followed the Deepwater Horizon’s April 20 explosion. Administration officials categorized the move, which would affect a total of 16 Gulf-area wells, as a logical step for a drilling industry suffering under the ban. All the wells had been operational before the Deepwater Horizon explosion. Moreover, the affected companies would have to comply with new safety rules, though not new environmental reviews. “Safety is our top priority and the administration has already taken unprecedented steps to increase oversight and safety of offshore drilling,” White House spokesman Clark Stevens said. “Any offshore drilling taking place in the United States must meet the rigorous new safety standards put in place since the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill.” But while the oil and drilling industry was getting back to business, consumer advocates, legal experts and Hill lawmakers were airing concerns that Congress had essentially abandoned its efforts to improve protections and compensation for spill victims. The major piece of legislation that Democrats drew up in response to the BP crisis has yet to pass the Senate, meaning that if another spill were to occur in the Gulf, the total compensation for economic damages would remain at a paltry $75 million. “When you consider the risk that offshore drilling poses to our coastal economies and environment, the current cap on oil-company liability is just a spit in the ocean that does nothing to hold them accountable,” said Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) one of the chief advocates of eliminating a cap on economic-damage liability for oil companies. “Life is good for oil companies, and it’s not just because families are yet again paying at lot more at the pump,” added fellow New Jersey Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, another proponent of the cap lift. “So far, these companies have escaped the most devastating oil spill in history with a fully-intact liability cap to protect their profits and no legislative response.” The failed effort to lift oil companies’ economic liability illustrates how the Senate saucer can cool even the most seemingly uncontroversial legislation. In the weeks after the BP spill occurred, Menendez announced that he would introduce a bill to ratchet up the $75-million liability cap, established by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, to $10 billion. The crisis in the Gulf seemed certain to be costly, and keeping payout levels so low seemed impractical if not morally dubious. Eventually, Menendez would scrap the $10 billion figure in favor of removing the cap altogether. But along the way, things grew complicated. Several unanimous-consent requests to get the bill through the Senate were blocked by Republicans who argued that such a cap would deter smaller companies from drilling. Democrats with close ties to the oil industry, including Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska), eventually joined the chorus of objectors. And even after the White House threw its support behind the proposal in early June and it passed through the Environment and Public Works Committee, the juice wasn’t there to overcome a filibuster. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) paired the measure with larger energy reforms, only to strip it out and create a standalone spill bill. In early August, his office announced that it would not hold a floor vote on the legislation until after the summer recess. But when lawmakers came back in September, the issue was all but forgotten. It remains, today, off the political radar. “We’re still working out the agenda for this Congress,” said a Democratic Senate leadership aide. “There a lot of very important bills to be addressed. We just don’t have specifics yet on what will or won’t be on the schedule.” For victims of the current spill, the practical effect of the Senate’s failure to pass Menendez’s bill will likely be limited. The White House was able to negotiate a $20-billion escrow account with BP, from which it can cover economic damages caused by the summer’s fiasco. But for those who have spent years or decades litigating such matters, the dispiriting consensus has been reached that Congress failed to draw something concrete or positive out of this summer’s catastrophe. “It is a huge problem for future oil spills. Both the Valdez spill and this spill show you that when an oil spill happens, the damages far exceed $75 million,” said Brian O’Neill, an attorney with the firm Faegre & Benson, who has worked extensively on securing compensation for victims of the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska. “The passage of the [Oil Pollution Act of 1990] with that provision in it was one of the great frauds of all time. So to open up the additional platforms in the Gulf, it is sort of like buying the car and not getting any insurance. It is just stupid.” Stupid it may be. But failure to restructure penalties for oil companies was not for lack of want. The vast majority of Democrats supported raising if not eliminating liability caps. The Obama administration, despite allowing a resumption of drilling in the Gulf, claims to back such a move, as well. “We continue to support the removal of caps on liability for oil companies engaged in offshore drilling, as part of a larger effort to hold the industry accountable for these risks and their consequences,” said Stevens, the White House spokesman. The bill could be easily blocked, however, under the heavy weight of oil industry complaints and the committed obstruction of sympathetic Senators. Eventually, enough time elapsed for the political world to move on to other matters and for deepwater drilling to resume. “You’ve got an industry that collectively demonstrated that it was fundamentally unprepared to meet the challenges of deep water offshore drilling,” said Tyson Slocum, the research director for Public Citizen’s Energy Program. “To allow new deepwater drilling to occur without a signing of adequate financial responsibility for their risks places unnecessary burdens on the American taxpayer.”

Read the full article →

Will Gas Prices Rise Even Higher In 2011?

January 1, 2011

NEW YORK — The price of oil is poised for another run at $100 a barrel after a global economic rebound sent it surging 34 percent since May. That could push gasoline prices to $4 a gallon by summer in some parts of the country, experts say. Flying, shipping a package and ordering a pizza all likely would get more expensive in the new year if that happens and companies pass along higher energy costs. Some economists say rising energy prices will slow economic growth. The U.S. is the world’s largest oil consumer, but prices since spring have been on a roll primarily because of rising demand in developing countries, especially China. China’s oil consumption is expected to rise 5 percent next year; that compares with less than 1 percent growth forecast for the U.S. Benchmark oil for February delivery rose $1.54 on Friday to end the year at $91.38 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It reached $92.06 earlier in the day, the highest since Oct. 6, 2008. Nationwide gasoline pump prices now average $3.072 per gallon. Gasoline expert Fred Rozell predicts that 15 states – including Alaska, Hawaii, Connecticut and Rhode Island – will see gasoline prices top $4 a gallon by Memorial Day. “A dollar more per gallon isn’t that much – probably about $750 more per year for each motorist, but there’s a psychological aspect to gas prices,” he said. “People are going to be up in arms about this.” Higher oil prices have fattened oil company profits. Excluding BP PLC, the four other major investor-owned oil companies posted combined profits of $59.7 billion in the first nine months of the year, a 49 percent increase from the year before. Exxon Mobil Corp., Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron Corp. and Total SA are expected to earn $81 billion for the full year. The fifth oil giant, BP, was held responsible for the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history and booked $39.9 billion in charges related to the disaster. Excluding special expenses like the Gulf of Mexico spill, analysts say the company will still earn $20.2 billion in 2010. “There’s nothing this industry can’t survive,” Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Fadel Gheit said. The price of energy and other commodities shifted into high gear in late August when Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke signaled that the central bank was prepared to stimulate the economy by buying government bonds. The $600 billion program didn’t start until November, but speculators had already starting bidding up the value of asset classes like oil. A further oil price spurt came in late November as it became clear that Congress was likely to extend for two more years tax cuts set to expire at the end of the year. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries is capable of raising output, if it needs to, by more than five million barrels per day. Still, Morgan Stanley estimates that the rising energy needs of China and other emerging economies will consume about half of that amount over the next two years. That could create supply pressures similar to those that preceded the price spike of 2008, when oil soared to $147 a barrel. John Hofmeister, former president of Shell Oil and author of “Why We Hate The Oil Companies,” predicts Americans will pay $5 per gallon for gasoline by 2012. Other experts say that’s a long shot. “That means oil close to $200″ per barrel, analyst and trader Stephen Schork said. “We can see it, but we could also see a global depression, too.” In other Nymex trading Friday, natural gas for February delivery rose 6.7 cents to settle at $4.405 per 1,000 cubic feet. Unlike oil, natural gas prices are less than half where they were in 2008. That’s due largely to the technological advances that allowed energy companies to unlock huge deposits in underground shale formations in the U.S. Heating oil for January delivery rose 5.83 cents to settle at $2.5437 per gallon and gasoline for January delivery added 6.14 cents to settle at $2.4532 per gallon. In London, Brent crude increased $1.66 to settle at $94.75 per gallon.

Read the full article →

Video: Feinberg Says Half of BP Fund May Cover Oil Spill Claims: Video

December 31, 2010

Dec. 31 (Bloomberg) — Kenneth Feinberg, administrator of the Gulf Coast Claims Facility, talks about payments made from BP Plc’s $20 billion compensation fund to cover claims resulting from the company’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Feinberg says he anticipates half that amount will be sufficient to cover claims for economic losses. Feinberg also discuss Wall Street compensation. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

GM Turns Oil Spill Boom Material Into Chevy Volt Parts

December 21, 2010

NEW ORLEANS — Boom from the BP oil spill is getting a new charge from the maker of the Chevrolet Volt electric car. General Motors says that instead of going to landfills, roughly 100 miles of plastic boom material will be converted into vehicle parts. The parts deflect air around the vehicle’s radiator. The Volt, a compact car, can go about 35 miles on battery power before a gasoline engine kicks in to generate electricity. At the height of the oil spill, more than 2,550 miles of boom was used in the Gulf of Mexico to try to keep oil from reaching shore. Today, response officials say only 1 mile of boom is being used. Tens of thousands of tons of boom and oily debris have made their way to landfills or incinerators.

Read the full article →

FLASHBACK: Obama Slams Bush Tax Cuts For ‘Millionaires And Billionaires’ (VIDEO)

December 7, 2010

NEW YORK — Over the past three months, Obama described the Bush-era program that he’s now adopting as his own as “tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires” no fewer than 50 times, according to a review of his stump speeches, weekly addresses, and comments to campaign donors and members of the news media. The rhetoric was deliberate: Obama was trying to cast Republicans as the party of the wealthy while his fellow Democrats represented the middle class. He used that rhetoric at campaign events across the country, from Los Angeles and Las Vegas to Des Moines, Iowa, and Richmond, Virginia. During at least three pre-election rallies, Obama, playing to crowds filled with die-hard supporters, railed against the tax cuts for the wealthy, eliciting rounds of boos from the audience, according to White House transcripts. Video produced by HuffPost’s Ben Craw Obama repeated the “millionaires and billionaires” line once again on Monday in announcing the deal, but with a slight twist: Rather than rejecting Republicans’ call for a full extension of the tax cuts, he simply expressed opposition to their demand of making it permanent. Obama didn’t make that distinction on the campaign trail. But in addition to the class-warfare rhetoric, Obama described the tax cuts as unaffordable and ultimately ineffective. On Sept. 25, during his weekly radio address Obama referred to the initiative as “tax breaks we cannot afford.” A few days later, during an event the White House billed as a “backyard discussion” at the home of a family in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Obama said the nation would “have to borrow the $700 billion” — the estimated cost of the cuts over 10 years — “from China or the Saudis or whoever is buying our debt, and then we’d pass off on average [a] $100,000 check to people who are making a million dollars, up to more than a billion dollars.” Obama wanted to make sure that his audience understood that either the U.S.’s main rival for decades to come would be financing the tax cut, or the nation that sells the U.S. most of its oil. He used the reference to China and Saudi Arabia a few times. And while Republicans and some Democrats have claimed that no one — even the wealthy — should have their taxes raised during a recession because that could stunt the recovery, Obama cast aside those fears, arguing on Sept. 29 that “98 percent of Americans wouldn’t see any benefit from it.” On Monday, the White House tone towards the tax cuts changed from hostility to acceptance. On a conference call with reporters, senior administration officials declined to explain why. If passed by Congress, the tax initiative would expire in two years. The Federal Reserve forecasts the unemployment rate to hover around 8 percent at the end of 2012. Prior to the current recession, unemployment hadn’t reached the 8 percent level since January 1984. There have been two recessions since then: 1990-91 and 2001. It’s unclear how the White House will be able to let the tax cuts lapse with 8 percent unemployment. Senior administration officials declined to comment when asked. ************************* Shahien Nasiripour is the business reporter for The Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail ; bookmark his page ; subscribe to his RSS feed ; follow him on Twitter ; friend him on Facebook ; become a fan ; and/or get e-mail alerts when he reports the latest news. He can be reached at 646-274-2455. Ben Craw is the video editor for The Huffington Post. He can be reached at bencraw@huffingtonpost.com.

Read the full article →

BP plans to sell assets in North Sea to cover clean up costs of Gulf of Mexico oil spill

December 7, 2010

BP

Read the full article →

BP Challenge To Oil Spill Size Could Affect Fine

December 4, 2010

WASHINGTON — BP is mounting a new challenge to the U.S. government’s estimates of how much oil flowed from the runaway well deep below the Gulf of Mexico, an argument that could reduce by billions of dollars the federal pollution fines it faces for the largest offshore oil spill in history. BP’s lawyers are arguing that the government overstated the spill by 20 to 50 percent, staffers working for the presidential oil spill commission said Friday. In a 10-page document obtained by The Associated Press, BP says the government’s spill estimate of 206 million gallons is “overstated by a significant amount” and the company said any consensus around that number is premature and inaccurate. The company submitted the document to the commission, the Justice Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “They rely on incomplete or inaccurate information, rest in large part on assumptions that have not been validated, and are subject to far greater uncertainties than have been acknowledged,” BP wrote. “BP fully intends to present its own estimate as soon as the information is available to get the science right.” In a statement Friday, the company said the government’s estimates failed to account for equipment that could obstruct the flow of oil and gas, such as the blowout preventer, making its numbers “highly unreliable.” BP’s request could save it as much as $10.5 billion or as little as $1.1 billion, depending on factors such as whether the government concludes that BP acted negligently. For context, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s entire federal budget for 2010 was $10.3 billion. President Barack Obama has said he wants Congress to set aside some of the money BP pays for fines for the Gulf’s coastal restoration. Louisiana lawmakers are pushing legislation that would require at least 80 percent of the civil and criminal penalties charged to BP, and possibly other companies, to be returned to the Gulf Coast. William K. Reilly, co-chairman of the presidential commission, expressed amazement at BP’s case Friday. Reilly headed the Environmental Protection Agency under President George H.W. Bush. “They are going to argue that it is 50 percent less” than the government’s total? Reilly asked. “Wow.” Under the Clean Water Act, the oil giant – which owned and operated the well – faces fines of up to $1,100 for each barrel of oil spilled. If BP were found to have committed gross negligence or willful misconduct, the fine could be up to $4,300 per barrel. That means that based on the government’s estimate of 206 million gallons, BP could face civil fines alone of between $5.4 billion and $21.1 billion. “They are going to argue it was less,” said Priya Aiyar, the commission’s deputy chief counsel. “BP has not offered its own numbers yet, but BP has told us that it thinks the government’s numbers are too high and thinks the actual flow rate can be actually 20 to 50 percent lower.” Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., a member of the House energy panel that is investigating the spill, said in a statement Friday to the AP that BP has done whatever it could to avoid revealing the true flow rate of the spill. “With billions of dollars at stake, it is no surprise that they are now litigating the very numbers which they sought to impede,” Markey said. “The government engaged independent scientists and multiple techniques to arrive at their estimate. Additional independent peer-reviewed studies have corroborated their estimate. BP has a high bar to meet to overturn this estimate.” BP’s argument could be bolstered by the federal government’s missteps in coming up with a final estimate for the spill’s volume. The Obama administration has offered nearly 10 estimates of how much oil flowed from the BP well, coming up with a refined conclusion late last month of 206 million gallons, which is likely its last. Internal documents released late Friday under the Freedom of Information Act show that the White House was intimately involved in deciding how scientific information was portrayed to the public, particularly when it came to the August 4 release of a document that showed where the spilled oil had gone. The five-page report, which was touted by Carol Browner, the president’s energy adviser, on morning talk shows and at White House press briefing showed that half the oil was gone – either from evaporation, burning, skimming or recovery at the well head. The 3,500 pages of documents reveal that the administration wanted the oil budget to show its efforts to respond to the disaster were working, despite objections from top EPA officials, including Administrator Lisa Jackson, over how some of the data was presented. An earlier version of the press release issued with the paper said that 33 percent of the oil released was captured or mitigated by recovery efforts. A final version, changed hours before its release, said “the vast majority” of the spilled oil was addressed by recovery efforts or had naturally dispersed or evaporated. That morning, Browner appeared on national television saying that an initial assessment by federal scientists showed “more than three-quarters of the oil is gone.” In an e-mail sent later that morning addressed to Browner’s assistant, Heather Zichal, NOAA chief Jane Lubchenco finds fault with the White House’s interpretation of the report’s numbers and attribution of the report solely to NOAA. The report was drafted by several agencies. “I’m concerned to hear the oil budget report is being portrayed as saying that 75 percent of the oil is gone and that this is a NOAA report,” Lubchenco writes. “Please help make sure that both errors are corrected.” The White House acknowledged Browner had misspoke. Lubchenco explains it was only accurate to say half the oil was gone. ___ Associated Press writers Seth Borenstein and Matthew Daly in Washington and Harry R. Weber in New Orleans contributed to this report. ___ Online: National Oil Spill Commission: http://www.oilspillcommission.gov

Read the full article →

Jeffrey Rubin: Irish and Greek Defaults Will Reshape Europe

November 30, 2010

German and British taxpayers are beginning to realize the downside of our economic interdependence in the global economy. When British banks have too much exposure to Irish banks, all of a sudden Dublin’s property crash becomes the UK’s problem. Similarly, when German taxpayers have to bail out bankrupt governments in Athens and Dublin, Greece and Ireland’s problems become Germany’s. How long will that model of international economic interdependence last? Probably not too much longer, particularly if Portugal and Spain have to join the bailout queue, too. What’s increasingly obvious, as I noted in my May 25th blog post , is that the European monetary union is no longer feasible. A monetary union between similar economies, like those of Germany, France and the Benelux countries, is. But clumping fiscally wayward economies with much lower per-capita incomes, like Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Greece, into a common currency union with Northern Europe is no more sustainable than is a monetary union between Mexico and its North American free-trade partners, the US and Canada. It might have taken an oil-induced financial shock to unravel it, but the euro was an accident waiting to happen. By not allowing their loosely regulated banks to fail, countries themselves are failing as a result. So while Irish banks keep their doors open, schools and hospitals will soon close as the country tries to cope with a public-sector deficit one third the size of its economy. (Curiously, these are the very same banks that only recently passed financial stress tests.) German taxpayers, who must shoulder the lion’s share of the financing burden for the 85 billion euro bailout package for Ireland, are understandably increasingly irate that they have to dish out billions so that Ireland can maintain a 12.5 per cent corporate tax rate that steals jobs and production from their own economy. And they weren’t any happier when even more of their hard-earned tax dollars were being sent over as welfare checks to Greece, a country where tax evasion is a national pastime. Taxpayers in creditor countries are starting to ask themselves the same question that bond holders have been troubling themselves over. The burden of reducing a deficit as large as one third of GDP means that the Irish economy, like the Greek one, will be shrinking for the foreseeable future. And shrinking economies, riddled by growing social unrest, are not economies that are able to service gargantuan debt loads. That’s why the bond market was already charging Ireland as much as three times Germany’s borrowing rate. Chances are that Ireland and Greece (and likely Portugal and Spain) are going to default, unraveling the monetary union. What will follow: a born-again drachma, Irish pound and perhaps escudo and peseta. And as those currencies plunge in value against what’s left of the euro (likely still to be traded in Germany, France and the Benelux nations), even the free trade zone may be up for grabs.

Read the full article →