40 Years after OPEC Oil Embargo, U.S. May Finally Get Off Imported Crude

So you think President Barack Obama’s calls for energy independence have seemed a bit starry-eyed? Well, every U.S. president since Richard Nixon has publicly called for the country to become self-sufficient. Why? Because of oil. Specifically, oil imported from Middle Eastern nations of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

The ongoing chorus stems from a shocking event in October 1973 that remains large in the mind of anyone who was alive then: the Arab Oil Embargo. Yet America may only now be heeding the embargo’s lesson. The U.S. still gets about the same amount of energy from oil as it did 40 years ago, but imported crude may finally be doomed because of a steep increase in domestic production of oil and natural gas, courtesy of hydraulic fracturing. Yes, fracking.

Quickly, here’s how the embargo popped, according to a Wikipedia timeline that has been thoroughly vetted:

Oct. 16, 1973 – Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar unilaterally raise oil export prices by 17 percent, to $3.65 per barrel, and announce production cuts.

Oct. 17 – Arab oil ministers within OPEC agree to use oil as a weapon to influence the West’s support of Israel in the Yom Kippur war.

Oct. 19 – President Richard Nixon asks Congress to appropriate $2.2 billion in emergency aid to Israel. Libya immediately proclaims an embargo on oil exports to the U.S. Saudi Arabia and other Arab oil producing states follow suit the next day^.

Oct. 26 – The Yom Kippur War ends.

Nov. 5 – Arab producers announce a 25 percent output cut.

As a result of the turmoil, on Feb. 11, 1974, Nixon and U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger unveiled Project Independence, a plan to make the nation energy self-sufficient by 1980, primarily by improving energy efficiency and increasing use of “alternative energy sources” such as hydroelectricity. But the enthusiasm faded as prices slowly eased. In 1979, when a second oil crisis occurred, President Jimmy Carter again called for efficiency improvements, conservation and alternative energy, but subsequent action also waned.

The same cycle has occurred again and again: rising energy costs in the mid-1980s, which did lead to tougher Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAF?) standards to improve the gas mileage of cars but didn’t reduce dependence on foreign oil; after the early 1990s recession and the Gulf War in the Middle East (driven by our oil dependence there); and even in 2008, when gasoline prices soared to $4 a gallon, crude hit $140 a barrel, and every company and media outlet touted “green” everything to solve America’s energy woes.

The net effect? In 1973 the U.S. consumed 34.8 quadrillion Btus of oil energy, and in 2013 it is projected to consumer 34.2 quadrillion Btus, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Although oil burned at power plants has dropped to less than 10 percent of what was used in 1973, demand grew during the four decades since, driven by many, many more vehicles. Oil’s share of the nation’s overall energy mix had dropped from 46 percent to 36 percent, but net imports (imports minus exports) are still substantial: they were 30 percent in 1973, rose to a high of 60 percent in 2005, and quickly came down to about 40 percent in 2012. The recent drop has mostly be due to more domestic production of oil thanks to hydraulic fracturing, and more replacement of oil for power and heating by natural gas, also booming because of fracking.

Unlike past attempts to get off foreign oil, the current push might actually succeed, according to Jack Rafuse, principal of Rafuse Consulting in Washington, D.C., who was the White House Energy Adviser to Nixon during the 1973 embargo. “We really are in a different position to finally break the cycle, because of the rapid increase in shale oil and shale gas.” That is, fracking unconventional deposits of both fossil fuels.

Oil demand has decreased across the past five years because of the new wave of steep CAF? increases put into effect by the Obama Administration. Under the regulations, gas mileage will continue to rise significantly through 2025. Furthermore, natural gas should continue to replace oil in power plants and home heating, while oil fuels transportation. Indeed, the EIA has stated that shale gas and shale oil could make the U.S. energy independent by 2030. This time, Rafuse says, the driver is supply and demand economics, not policy or presidential decrees. The one political move that would help the changeover, he notes, “is an end to bans like the one New York State has on fracking.” Needless to say, environmental concerns may not provide such smooth sailing.

The U.S. has never experienced such a large and immediate cutoff in foreign oil supply as it did in 1973, and has never seen as much consumer chaos and long gasoline lines as it did after the second crisis in 1979. But the attempts to wean the country off imported oil have never stuck. Maybe the current trend will. Given that, improvements in energy efficiency might be the greatest legacy of the 1973 embargo. According to Sun Day Campaign, a research and educational organization that promotes sustainable energy, U.S. energy consumption has increased by 28 percent, from 75.6 quads in 1973 to about 97 quads in 2013, yet population grew by 50 percent and the nation’s gross domestic product grew more than 250 percent. In a press release, Sun attributes the greater leverage to legislation, regulations and technological advances related to energy efficiency, as well as consumer efforts to conserve.

So at least we learned something.

 

Image credit: (C) Henrik Jonsson Graphic Design

Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs.
Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health and technology news.

© 2013 ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.



Source: http://news.yahoo.com/40-years-opec-oil-embargo-u-may-finally-142800627.html
Similar Articles: aldon smith   alex rodriguez   K Michelle   Kendrick Lamar Control   Edward Snowden  

Entourage Movie May Never Get Made

By Lex October 15, 2013 @ 1:47 PM

Fuck no. If there’s something that needs to get done right now, it’s a movie based off a mediocre TV show that became downright unwatchable in its final few seasons. But Marky Mark says the Entourage movies is on hold because ‘them guys are being greedy’. To which I think he’s referring to the Entourage actors who want a big payday to make a movie since it’s likely going to be their only source of income for the next forever. I’d ask for bank too. Marky Mark still gets $12 million plus backend to make his two to three crappy movies a year. You know the next and only project Kevin Connolly, Adrian Grenier, and Kevin Dillon have listed on their schedules? Yeah, Entourage the Movie.

Source: http://www.wwtdd.com/2013/10/entourage-movie-may-never-get-made/
Similar Articles: steve bartman   TSLA   iPhone 5S   Shawn Burr   Huntington Beach riot  

Wednesday Morning Political Mix

Good morning.

Can you say lost day?

Can you say 24 hours closer to joining the pantheon of deadbeat nations?

Can you say turning on the default spigot of poison gas? (Warren Buffet can.)

That's where the nation is left this morning after the frantic, feckless and failed efforts Tuesday by House Republicans to agree on a path to avoid our nation's default and end our government's shutdown.

After the GOP House leadership waved the white flag, unable to appease factions that included the hard-line defund Obamacare crowd, the issue moved back to the Democratic-controlled Senate.

By late night, there were strong signs that a deal would emerge today to reopen the government until Jan. 15, and lift the debt ceiling until Feb. 7.

But not before Fitch Ratings put the U.S. government's AAA credit on "ratings watch negative." That signals a potential credit downgrade, directly related to the politics of the default/debt ceiling mess.

While Wall Street retreated Tuesday, early international market reports today suggested they were edging lower, but nothing precipitous as of this writing.

Neither the House nor the Senate, which adjourned at 10 p.m. Tuesday, has a set agenda today, but will be in session.

Here's how the stage has been set for today's efforts to avoid default:

• A scathing lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal advises the Republicans to "wrap up this comedy of political errors." The business bible accused the party of blundering by choosing an unachievable goal – trying to defund Obamacare – and picking the politically unsustainable tactic of using government shutdown and threats to "blow through the debt limit" to get there.

Bottom line from the WSJ: "Republicans can best help their cause now by getting this over with and moving on to fight more intelligently another day."

• Speculation continues over what tactics Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, the leader of the GOP's anti-Obamacare caucus, may use to derail Senate efforts to craft a last-minute deal to avoid default. Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss told NPR's Morning Edition today that he doubts Cruz and his loyal lieutenant, Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, will act to delay. "They're probably looking at the next round," Chambliss predicted.

• And Republicans are facing down one of the most damaging periods in recent memory, one that analysts including Josh Barro at Business Insider say raises the natural question of the party's competence and ability to take care of the nation's best interests. "There is not serious argument for Republican governance right now, even if you prefer conservative policies over liberal ones," Barro writes. "A party that is this bad at tactics can't be expected to be any good at policy-making."

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina put it more succinctly: "We screwed up."

Outside of Washington, here are some other stories we've been following:

• Former Secretary of State Senator/First Lady/prospective 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton at a closed-door appearance before a trade group reportedly took pains to note that Vice President Joe Biden opposed the administration's raid that ended up in the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden. Biden has not ruled out a presidential run in 2016.

• The Federal Reserve today releases its periodic "Beige Book" report that tracks economic conditions, including home sales, consumer spending, lending activity and employment. The anecdotal data is the Reserve's 12 regional banks. In September, the report found "modest to moderate" growth nationally.

• Voters in New Jersey go to the polls today to elect a new U.S. senator. Newark Mayor Cory Booker, a Democrat, is expected to prevail over Republican Steve Lonegan.

Source: http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/10/16/235307606/wednesday-morning-political-mix?ft=1&f=1001
Similar Articles: Janet Yellen   kaley cuoco   Brad Culpepper   neil armstrong   Miley Cyrus VMA  

Uneven enforcement suspected at nuclear plants

BOSTON (AP) — The number of safety violations at U.S. nuclear power plants varies dramatically from region to region, pointing to inconsistent enforcement in an industry now operating mostly beyond its original 40-year licenses, according to a congressional study awaiting release.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission figures cited in the Government Accountability Office report show that while the West has the fewest reactors, it had the most lower-level violations from 2000 to 2012 — more than 2½ times the Southeast's rate per reactor.

The Southeast, with the most reactors of the NRC's four regions, had the fewest such violations, according to the report, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press.

The striking variations do not appear to reflect real differences in reactor performance. Instead, the report says, the differences suggest that regulators interpret rules and guidelines differently among regions, perhaps because lower-level violations get limited review.

The study also says that the NRC's West region may enforce the rules more aggressively and that common corporate ownership of multiple plants may help bolster maintenance in the Southeast.

However, the reasons aren't fully understood because the NRC has never fully studied them, the report says. Right now, its authors wrote, the "NRC cannot ensure that oversight efforts are objective and consistent."

Told of the findings, safety critics said enforcement is too arbitrary and regulators may be missing violations. The nuclear industry has also voiced concern about the inconsistencies, the report said.

The analysis was written by the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, at the request of four senators. Before the government shutdown, the report had been set for public release later this month.

Steven Kerekes, a spokesman for the industry group Nuclear Energy Institute, declined to comment pending release of the report. The NRC's public affairs office had no comment, citing the government shutdown.

The GAO analysis focuses on lower-level safety violations known as "nonescalated." They represent 98 percent of all violations identified by the NRC, which regulates safety at the country's commercial reactors.

Lower-level violations are those considered to pose very low risk, such as improper upkeep of an electrical transformer or failure to analyze a problem with no impact on a system's operation, such as the effect of a pipe break. Higher-level violations range from low to high safety significance, such as an improperly maintained electrical system that caused a fire and affected a plant's ability to shut down safely.

The GAO's analysis shows 3,225 of these violations from 2000 through the end of 2012 across 21 reactors in the West. By contrast, there were 1,885 such violations in the Southeast. Yet that region is home to 33 reactors — 12 more than in the West. The West registered 153.6 violations per reactor, while the Southeast saw just 57.1.

The Midwest, with 24 reactors, had 3,148 violations, for a rate of 131.2 per reactor. The 26-reactor Northeast also fared worse than the Southeast, with 2,518 violations, or 96.8 per reactor.

The Cooper nuclear station in Brownville, Neb., led all sites in lower-level violations per reactor with 363. The next four were Wolf Creek, in Burlington, Kan., with 266; Kewaunee, in Kewaunee, Wis., 256; Perry, in Perry, Ohio, 256; and River Bend, in St. Francisville, La., 240.

The GAO found less regional variation in higher-level safety violations. The six plants with the most higher-level violations per reactor from 2000 to 2012 were Davis-Besse in Oak Harbor, Ohio, with 14; Cooper, 11; Kewaunee, nine; Perry, eight; Palisades, in Covert, Mich., eight; and Fort Calhoun, in Fort Calhoun, Neb., eight.

"I believe the oversight process is totally arbitrary," said Paul Blanch, an engineer who once blew the whistle on problems from within the industry and later returned to work on safety. He also said the NRC isn't providing consistent training to inspectors and regional staff. Blanch was made aware of the GAO findings by the AP.

The report also indicates that some regulators may be missing small problems or giving them short shrift, safety experts said. And they said little violations can pile up and interact with one another to create bigger risks.

"Any time you start tolerating minor problems, you're just setting the stage for major safety problems down the road," said nuclear engineer David Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists. He once trained NRC staff.

Phillip Musegaas, a lawyer with the environmental group Riverkeeper, said regulators should do more to make sure that lower-level violations are fixed. "NRC's tracking to make sure these violations are resolved is completely ineffectual," he said.

In its official response to the report, the NRC defended the objectivity of its plant assessments. At the same time, it acknowledged the regional differences and promised to look deeper into why they happen.

According to the GAO, the NRC regulatory staff also offered several explanations, including regional variations in reactor ages and time spent on inspections. However, the congressional watchdog said those explanations are not supported by the data.

The agency did offer that regulators may be right when they cite the possible impact of joint ownership of sites, a circumstance most prevalent in the Southeast. Nuclear plants under one owner may benefit from more corporate resources and thus avoid violations, the GAO suggested. The NRC also said higher-level violations are more consistent because they are more deeply reviewed.

On other issues, the report said the NRC needs an easier-to-use internal database to help staff learn of historical safety issues that apply to current problems. It also pressed the agency to improve its public documents website to allow tracking of safety violations. The NRC said it would work to improve both tools.

Senators requested the report in reaction to the Japanese nuclear accident at Fukushima in 2011 and an Associated Press investigative series later that year about aging U.S. nuclear plants. The AP series found that federal regulators had relaxed safety rules to keep plants running beyond their initial licenses. It also reported leaks of radioactive tritium at three-quarters of plants and outdated estimates of evacuation times.

The GAO analyzed data for 104 commercial reactors, but four permanently shut earlier this year: Crystal River in Florida, Kewaunee, and the two units at San Onofre in California.

___

The AP National Investigative Team can be reached at investigate@ap.org

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/uneven-enforcement-suspected-nuclear-plants-191626989--finance.html
Similar Articles: Alexian Lien   christina aguilera   Humble Bundle   Hyperloop   Chucho Benitez  

Should an Investor Bankroll Your Dream Home? | AOL Real Estate

Shutterstock

By Mitchell D. Weiss

Houses and college degrees have two things in common: Both cost of lot of money and both depend on specialty financing products to help make them more affordable. But which came first? High prices or budget-friendly payment plans? Consider the latest offering in consumer financial engineering, courtesy of private equity firms and crowdfunding companies.

The lenders' pitch is Faustianly straightforward as in, "You need cash to fund all or part of your (housing) down payments and college degrees. We have plenty of that and we're willing to let you use some of it in exchange for a piece of the action." It's a takeoff on the corporate venture capital model that goes something like this: most assets lose value -- or depreciate -- over time, as with refrigerators and lawnmowers; houses, however, usually do the opposite. These increase -- or, appreciate -- in value. And sometimes they do so quite rapidly, particularly after a market disruption causes prices to be reset at significantly lower levels.

In terms of their future earnings potential, people also appreciate in value when they enhance their human capital by acquiring more skills, experience and education. But both these "asset categories" require investment capital to realize their economic potentials. Enter the opportunists.

The Magic of Affordable Payments: In the case of a house, the financial proposition is equity-based -- a percentage of the upside as measured by the difference between the buy- and sell-prices. In the case of the person, it's royalty based, where the payback is a share of his or her future earnings. But why is it that houses and education cost so much? Are these prices purely market-driven (supply versus demand) or is something else going on?

Housing prices are influenced by many factors including locational attributes (proximity to work, transportation, schools, recreational facilities and so forth), as well as a tax code that rewards indebtedness with mortgage interest-deductibility. However, prices are also boosted through financial alchemy -- creative ways of transforming unaffordability into affordability. Adjustable-rate mortgages are a good example. Homebuyers are lured by the below-market monthly payments (for now) and the hope of bigger, better, more beautiful houses before the higher payments kick in later on.

The exorbitant price of higher education is also made possible with financing. In this case, favorable payment structures are further enhanced by government and financial services industry policies and practices under which loans are approved, not necessarily because they can be repaid, but rather because they cannot be avoided. It's an attitude that's led to an unprecedented expansion on the part of the schools, which in turn has increased the sector's costs and, therefore, the need for even more consumer borrowing as a result.

Until these market-morphing methods are either corrected with legislation or influenced by more economically-conscious consumer choices (particularly in the case of higher education), homebuyers and students should tread carefully when it comes to financing structures that insidiously encourage over-borrowing.

Read the Fine Print, Do the Math: When it comes to adjustable loans, I suggest projecting the worst-case scenario and see whether your budget can accommodate that. For equity- and royalty-sharing arrangements, devise a series of house- and income-appreciation scenarios, and calculate the APRs for each.

For example, I read about one company that makes education loans in exchange for a percentage of the borrower's pretax earnings for a 10-year term. The lender also states that it would limit its total payback to five times the original loan value, should the borrower hit the livelihood lottery. The way the math works, if that maximum were to occur during the course of the repayment period (10 years), the loan's APR would be 49 percent. However, if the borrower were to strike it rich within five of his or her post-college years -- which may not be entirely unrealistic, because royalty-based lenders have so far been highly selective in their approval processes -- the APR would double to 97 percent.

So you might want to think twice before choosing an adjustable-rate mortgage at a time when interest rates are poised to increase, an equity-sharing deal when housing prices are on the upswing, or an income-sharing arrangement at the dawn of a promising career.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its affiliates.

Mitchell D. Weiss is an experienced financial services industry executive and entrepreneur, adjunct professor of finance at the University of Hartford, a member of the board of the university's Barney School of Business and co-founder of its Center for Personal Financial Responsibility.

More from Credit.com:
Why You Should Check Your Credit Before Buying a Home
How to Get Pre-Approved for a Mortgage
How Much of a Down Payment Do I Need?

More on AOL Real Estate:
Find out how to calculate mortgage payments.
Find homes for sale in your area.
Find foreclosures in your area.
Find homes for rent in your area.

Follow us on Twitter at @AOLRealEstate or connect with AOL Real Estate on Facebook.

Source: http://realestate.aol.com/blog/2013/10/14/should-investor-finance-home-purchase/
Similar Articles: Andre Drummond   Jenna Wolfe   Andrea Sneiderman   DJ Khaled   Win McMurry  

Kickstarter now available in Australia and New Zealand, projects launch on November 13th

Kickstarter's world conquest continues: following a Canadian launch in the summer, the crowdfunding service is now available in Australia and New Zealand. Creators in both countries can start building their projects today, and launch as soon as November 13th. Locals can accept pledges from anywhere on the planet, although their backers will have to pay through the Kickstarter website rather than Amazon Payments. If you're eager to learn the ropes, the company is hosting its first workshops for the region between October 27th and November 5th. There's no word of expansion to other countries, but it's clear that Kickstarter's international rollout is gathering steam.

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/15/kickstarter-now-available-in-australia-and-new-zealand/?ncid=rss_truncated
Related Topics: First Day Of Fall 2013   Gta V Cheats  

Geraldine Ferraro: Paving the Way: Hamptons Review

The Bottom Line

Celebratory biography cements Ferraro's place as a trailblazer.

Venue

Hamptons International Film Festival

Director

Donna Zaccaro

THE HAMPTONS, NEW YORK — An encomium for the first woman to run on a major party's ticket for the White House, Geraldine Ferraro: Paving the Way is the kind of admiring doc one would expect from a director, Donna Zaccaro, who is the late Vice Presidential candidate's daughter. Recapping an impressive career almost 30 years after she and Walter Mondale lost to Ronald Reagan and George Bush, the enjoyable film makes a fine point of entry for younger viewers who mightn't have understood the tributes paid upon Ferraro's death in 2011; though its big-screen career may be limited to fests, a video release would be welcomed by students of politics and gender equality.

Interviewed in the final months of her years-long battle with cancer, Ferraro shows no evidence of the toll the disease had taken. She recounts enough details of her youth to make her barrier-breaking adult career seem pre-ordained: Named for an older brother who died before she was born, she was raised by mother who owned a family business and insisted there was nothing boys could do that young Gerry couldn't.

After agreeing to be a mostly stay-at-home mom until her children were all in school full-time, Ferraro used her legal education to get a job in the Queens County District Attorney's office. She made an impression with a new Special Victims unit for cases involving rape and domestic violence, and soon ran for Congress under the cheeky slogan "Finally...a tough Democrat."

Clips of her in public settings depict a remarkable communicator whose straight talk and logic-driven arguments would be welcome on the current political scene; as colleagues recall with admiration, she also had a realistic view of the compromise-based political process that young idealists often lack. ("She's one of us," Tip O'Neil is said to have remarked admiringly.) Interviews with other women who made up the House's tiny female contingent convey a spirit of solidarity while depicting her as a rising star.

Mondale acknowledges her talents, recalling that he had no interest in selecting a "token female" as his running mate. Footage from the national convention in which he presented her to the world is effervescent, and for a time polls suggested they actually might unseat the incumbents.

That didn't happen, of course. Paving the Way shows how hard the candidate worked for her team while depicting the campaign against her as both willfully dishonest and slanted in ways that would become familiar to female politicians in decades to come. (Republican campaign consultant Ed Rollins admits "there was a covert operation" to get Ferraro, spearheaded by an irate Nancy Reagan.)

Though the movie never locates interviewees who have anything critical to say about Ferraro in the present tense, it takes pains to include some high-profile ones who opposed her at the time: Between visits with Bill and Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright and other high-profile supporters, we sit couchside as George H. W. and Barbara Bush recall how, once the election was over, Bush and Ferraro forgot their heated debate and became good friends.

Production Company: Dazzling Media

Director: Donna Zaccaro

Producers: Donna Zaccaro, Janice DeRosa, Andrew Morreale

Director of photography: Jim Sicile

Editor: Andrew Morreale

Sales: The Film Sales Company

No rating, 86 minutes

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/thr/reviews/film/~3/sikmL_hA7sM/geraldine-ferraro-paving-way-hamptons-648558
Related Topics: Kendrick Lamar   Katy Perry Roar   antigua   geraldo rivera   Rolling Stone cover