728x90_newspapers_dark_1.gif

Friday, October 22, 2010

Drilling freeze ended _ but when will work resume? - Philadelphia Inquirer

WASHINGTON - The U.S. is back in the deep water oil-drilling business. The question now is when work will resume.

The Obama administration, under heavy pressure from the oil industry and Gulf states and with elections nearing, lifted the moratorium that it imposed last April in the wake of the disastrous BP oil spill.

The ban had been scheduled to expire Nov. 30, but Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Tuesday he was moving up the date because new rules imposed after the spill had reduced the risk of another catastrophic blowout. Industry leaders warily waited for details of those rules, saying the moratorium wouldn't be truly lifted until then.

"The policy position that we are articulating today is that we are open for business," Salazar declared.

The reality is more complicated. While the temporary ban on exploratory oil and gas drilling is lifted immediately, drilling is unlikely to resume for several weeks at least as oil and gas companies struggle to meet a host of new safety regulations. For example, the CEO of a company responsible for a well would have to certify it had complied with all regulations. That could make the person at the top liable for any future accidents.

"Operators who play by the rules and clear the higher bar can be allowed to resume," Salazar said.

The April 20 BP spill, which was triggered by an explosion that killed 11 people, dumped an estimated 200 million gallons of oil in the Gulf, harming wildlife and severely cramping coastal businesses. BP sealed the well last month and expects to eventually pay at least $32 billion to handle the cleanup and damage claims.

News that the moratorium , much-despised along the Gulf Coast , was being lifted came as a federal judge weighed a drilling company's bid to overturn it.

The action also came just weeks before midterm elections in which Democrats face widespread criticism for overextending government actions on the economy, including the health care overhaul, the economic stimulus plan and the drilling moratorium. A federal report said the moratorium probably caused a temporary loss of 8,000 to 12,000 jobs in the Gulf region.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs denied that pressure from the oil industry or anyone else played a role in the decision to lift the moratorium ahead of schedule. It was, he said, "part of a very deliberative policy process ... that got done more quickly than the original timeline."

Salazar said he knew that some drilling supporters would say the new rules are too onerous, while critics would say risks remain in deep water drilling. The truth is, there will always be such risks, Salazar said, but "as we transition to a clean energy economy, we will still need oil and gas from the Gulf of Mexico to power our homes, our cars, our industry."

Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-La., called the end of the drilling ban great news for Louisiana's economy and workers, while Sen. David Vitter, R-La., contended there would be a "continuing de facto moratorium" on drilling that could extend for months or years. Melancon is challenging Vitter for his Senate seat next month.

Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Democrat, applauded the decision to lift the ban but said she would not release her hold on Jacob Lew, President Barack Obama's choice to head the Office of Management and Budget. Landrieu has blocked a Senate vote on Lew, in part, to protest the moratorium.

"Today's decision is a good start, but it must be accompanied by an action plan to get the entire industry in the Gulf of Mexico back to work," Landrieu said, calling on the administration to accelerate permit approvals for drilling in shallow and deep water and provide greater certainty about regulations industry must meet.

The White House expressed disappointment. Officials continue to believe her actions are "outrageous" and "unwarranted," Gibbs said.

Salazar emphasized that companies seeking to drill exploratory wells will have to prove they have the appropriate steps in place to contain a worst-case accident.

The new rules include many recommendations made in a report Salazar released in May, including requirements that rigs certify that they have working blowout preventers and standards for cementing wells. The cement process and blowout preventer both failed to work as expected in the BP accident.

Under the new rules, a professional engineer must independently inspect and certify each stage of the drilling process. Blowout preventers , the emergency cutoff equipment designed to contain a major spill , must be independently certified and capable of severing the drill pipe under severe pressure.

Todd Hornbeck, CEO of Covington, La.-based Hornbeck Offshore Services, said lifting the moratorium would leave the industry in a "de facto moratorium stage" until the government fully explains how new drilling permits will be issued.

"We're still in the dark," said Hornbeck, who heads up one of the companies that sued to block Interior's initial moratorium. His company provides vessels and other services for the offshore industry.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican and fierce opponent of the drilling ban, called the announcement good news, but added: "The devil is always in the details."

He said he will watch closely to see if new drilling permits are issued promptly.

Industry groups expressed similar skepticism. Both the American Petroleum Institute and the National Ocean Industries Association said they were concerned that a "de facto moratorium" would replace the one the administration lifted Tuesday.

Dan Favre, campaign organizer for the Gulf Restoration Network, a Louisiana-based environmental group, said the decision to lift the moratorium put the region at risk.

"The Gulf and our communities have a long road to recovery from the BP disaster," he said. Local fishermen are still out of work, effects on wildlife have not been fully assessed and long-term work is needed to ensure ecological and economic recovery, he added. "We certainly can't afford another oil catastrophe."

Ensco Offshore, which owns and operates offshore drilling rigs, asked a federal judge last month to overturn the moratorium. U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman set a Tuesday deadline for legal briefs in the case, but has not said when he would rule.

,,

Associated Press writers Dina Cappiello, Julie Pace and Darlene Superville in Washington, and Michael Kunzelman and Kevin McGill in New Orleans contributed to this story.


View the original article here

India, South Africa could complicate US agenda in UN Security Council - Christian Science Monitor

Washington

The rise of the world’s middle powers was on display at the United Nations Tuesday as India, South Africa, and Germany were all elected to join the big guns on the United Nations Security Council for two years, starting in January.

Skip to next paragraph

The arrival of the South Asian and African regional powers as two of the five new nonpermanent members elected to the Security Council Tuesday could bring new clout to the council – in developing nations, in particular.

But adding India and South Africa to a council where Brazil already holds one of the 10 total nonpermanent seats could also pose new challenges to the council’s old guard, including the United States. Iran, for example, could find a new base of support in the troika of developing powers, all of which have resisted mounting US-led pressures on Iran over its nuclear program.

Brazil voted against the latest round of UN sanctions against Iran in June, and India indicated at the time that it did not favor the resolution and considered sanctions “counterproductive.”

Brazil, India, and South Africa "want to be among the big players, they want to be the ones who get permanent seats [on the Security Council] eventually," says Steve Groves, an expert in international institutions at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.

The UN General Assembly elected five new nonpermanent members to join the five nonpermanent members that still have a year on their revolving terms. Together the 10 will join the council’s five permanent and veto-wielding members: The US, China, Russia, France, and Great Britain.

India, South Africa, and Colombia ran unopposed for the two-year terms reserved for their regions, while Germany and Portugal were elected to two seats reserved for the “Western” regional group.

Portugal won over Canada in what in the end was the election’s only hotly contested race.

With the addition of India, the Security Council will include all of the world’s major emerging powers known as the BRICs: Brazil, Russia, India, and China.
At the same time, the newly configured council will also include five of the six countries that are pressing for a permanent seat on a proposed expanded Security Council.

The gathering of so many powerful developing countries on the council at once has some diplomatic experts predicting trouble for the US agenda, be it Iran, North Korea, Sudan, or Burma (Myanmar). But Heritage's Mr. Groves says the US should take this "rather unprecedented opportunity" to test the kind of world powers these countries want to be.

"I would hope the US would take this as an opportunity to say, 'OK, Brazil, India, and South Africa, you are among the rising powers of the world and want to play a bigger role, let's see how responsible you are now,' " he says, "When the question is Iran or North Korea, will they act with international security in mind or follow the same regional and parochial interests? Let's see if they really want the responsibility."

The confluence of potential permanent members onto the council – Germany, India, South Africa, Brazil and Nigeria (like Brazil an existing nonpermanent member) – is likely to boost pressure for a reform of the council, which has operated under the same five post-World-War-II powers since the UN’s founding in 1945. Japan, which is also a likely candidate for an expanded council, finishes up its current nonpermanent term in December.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Tuesday that Germany would “want to use this seat to increase our influence on the reform of the UN.”

Germany already is a member of the group of nations – the council’s five permanent members plus Germany, or the so-called “P5 + 1” – that are attempting to address the Iranian nuclear issue through diplomatic means.

The Iran issue remains unresolved, with Tehran continuing to pursue a nuclear program that it says is peaceful but which world powers suspect is aimed at delivering a nuclear weapon. With Iran moving forward just as the Security Council balance appears to be shifting away from favoring additional punitive action, some diplomatic experts suggest the Iran portfolio could eventually be taken up outside the council by an ad-hoc “collation of the willing.”


View the original article here

Israeli Freeze Terms Rejected by Palestinians; Talks in Limbo - BusinessWeek

October 11, 2010, 7:01 PM EDT By Calev Ben-David

Oct. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set terms for the renewal of a West Bank settlement freeze that were swiftly rejected by the Palestinians, leaving the status of U.S.-brokered peace talks in limbo.

Netanyahu told parliament yesterday he was ready to convene his Cabinet and ask for an extension of a freeze on settlement building if “the Palestinian leadership tells its people in an unequivocal manner that it recognizes Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.”

Mohammad Shtayyeh, a member of the Palestinian Authority negotiating team, said Netanyahu’s demand was “unacceptable.”

The comments come as the U.S. is trying to keep peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians alive after Israel’s 10-month freeze on construction in the West Bank expired on Sept. 26. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has said he will only return to talks if Israel reimposes the construction moratorium.

“There is no way that the Palestinian Authority is going to make this declaration,” said Jonathan Spyer, a political scientist at Israel’s Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, near Tel Aviv. “The government of Israel is trying to educate the U.S. administration on why there is no basis for a productive peace process at this point.”

The Palestinians reject Israel’s demand that they recognize it as the state of the Jewish people on the grounds it undermines the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Israel says recognition of it as a Jewish state is necessary to ensure the Palestinians don’t make additional claims once a peace treaty has been signed.

‘Work Constructively’

“The parties must work constructively to create conditions for the negotiations to continue,” U.S. State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said in an e-mail. “Both sides need to take steps if we are going to move forward.”

The Arab League last week backed the Palestinian Authority’s position not to resume direct peace talks until Israel renews the freeze, and gave U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration more time to revive the peace effort.

Israel had signaled last week that a compromise may be in the works. “The U.S. has come back to Israel with a number of suggestions, incentives if you would, that enable the government to maybe pass a limited extension of two or three months,” Ambassador Michael Oren told the Washington Post.

Shtayyeh said Netanyahu was “adding additional complications” to the renewal of talks. “We hope that the international community will bring Israel into the talks without any conditionality,” he said.

West Bank

About 500,000 Jews have moved to the West Bank and east Jerusalem since Israel captured the territory in 1967.

The United Nations says that settlements are illegal, and the International Committee of the Red Cross says they breach the Fourth Geneva Convention governing actions on occupied territory. Obama has said the settlements aren’t legitimate.

Israel says the settlements don’t fall under the convention because the territory wasn’t recognized as belonging to anyone before the 1967 war, in which Israel prevailed, and therefore isn’t occupied.

Netanyahu, who spoke at the opening of the winter parliamentary session, told lawmakers that security arrangements for Israel were vital in ensuring that “the peace was maintained.” He said they would also safeguard the country “in the regrettable but possible event that the peace was violated.”

Israel and the Palestinians agreed last month to try and reach an agreement on the framework for a comprehensive peace accord within a year. All the issues at the core of the conflict would be on the table, including the borders of a future Palestinian state, security arrangements for Israel, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, and the status of Jerusalem.

Spyer said he expected more bargaining in the month before the Arab League meets again to discuss the peace process. “There will be a series of proposals and counterproposals,” he said.

--With assistance from Alisa Odenheimer in Jerusalem. Editors: Peter Hirschberg, Louis Meixler.

To contact the reporter on this story: Calev Ben-David in Jerusalem at cbendavid@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Peter Hirschberg in Jerusalem at


View the original article here

Could we ever learn to love driverless cars? - BBC News

12 October 2010 Last updated at 06:36 ET By Jon Kelly BBC News Magazine David Hasselhoff in Knight Rider David Hasselhoff in Knight Rider: the future of motoring? Google's engineers have tested a self-driving car. But could motorists ever really let go of the wheel?

No more pile-ups, no more road rage, no more exasperated cursing as you stall at the lights.

Reading the paper during the morning commute, enjoying the scenery rather than staring at the tarmac, cutting your transport costs down to a fraction.

The promises of automatic, driver-less cars like those currently being tested by Google in California are many and varied.

Environmentalists say they could slash carbon emissions. Safety campaigners hope the removal of human error could reduce the number of road casualties which, in the UK alone, numbered 2,222 deaths and 24,690 serious injuries in 2009.

But, like a sticky clutch, the nagging doubts persist.

Could a planet with 350 million Top Gear viewers ever willingly surrender the joy of pushing down on the accelerator, the thrill of the open road? Will we ever have enough faith in technology to step inside 2,500kg of motor vehicle with no-one at the controls?

It's not as though the idea is especially novel. The notion of a "smart", driver-free motor vehicle has long persisted in science fiction, most memorably - at least, among aficionados of kitsch 1980s tea-time television - in the form of KITT, David Hasselhoff's sentient car in the series Knight Rider.

And real-life scientists, too, have been intrigued by the idea for many years.

As far back as 1977, engineers at the Tsukuba Mechanical Engineering laboratory in Japan produced a self-driving car which reached speeds of 20mph (32km/h).

In the following decade, a robotic Mercedes-Benz tipped the speedometer at more than 60mph (97km/h) on traffic-free streets. By 1994, scientists had developed a vehicle that was able to negotiate its way through three lanes of Paris traffic.

Annotate image of google car

The Darpa Grand Challenge, a contest sponsored by the US defence department, pits driverless cars against each other over courses nearly 100km (60 miles) long. And driverless taxi pods are already transporting passengers around London's Heathrow airport.

Most recently, Google's cars have negotiated 140,000 miles (225,260km) - including navigating San Francisco's streets and crossing the Golden Gate Bridge - using radar sensors, roof-mounted video cameras and a laser range finder which lets it "see" other vehicles, according to the company.

This long lineage prompts the question: why aren't we, already, abandoning our cars and hailing self-driving taxis to take us to work? Surely it would be cheaper, more fuel-efficient, and leave us less vulnerable to dangerous drivers.

Undoubtedly, many technical issues still need to be ironed out. If a desktop computer bluescreens the crash is metaphorical. If the complex network of computers required to navigate a car through a typical urban commute fail, it's all too real.

Dr John Baruch, of the University of Bradford's school of computing, informatics and media, believes the automotive industry has deliberately refrained from investing in such technology.

He notes that air passengers are more than happy to fly in craft steered by auto-pilot, and is confident that all it would take to transform our way of getting around would be a dedicated team of engineers and a few million pounds of investment.

But this, Dr Baruch believes, would bring its own set of negatives - undermining the very concept of private car ownership and drastically reducing the number of vehicles on the road. He envisages robotic taxis summoned on demand replacing cars sitting idle in driveways for most of the day.

Continue reading the main story Quentin Willson
Any system would have to be 150% reliable before anyone would put their faith in it”

End Quote Quentin Willson Motoring journalist As a result, he suspects the major car manufacturers have dragged their wheels when it comes to development.

"They're against it because it would make cars into white goods," he says. "They couldn't sell you the experience of driving - but it would cut costs, we wouldn't need so many cars on the road, and there would be fewer accidents.

"I don't believe people would miss driving to their offices. I'd rather read or get on with some work than sit in a traffic jam staring at someone's exhaust pipe."

All the same, many remain sceptical. The motoring journalist Quentin Willson believes the idea is a potentially valid one that deserves research and investment. But he says we will have to go a long way before we put our such a level of trust on a daily basis in robot drivers.

"The pleasure of driving is already being eroded in this country, anyway," he concedes. "But I suspect that any system would have to be 150% reliable before anyone would put their faith in it.

"The human brain can react quickly to the blizzard of information we're confronted with on the roads. By contrast, we know what sat nav is like - it takes you on all sorts of circuitous routes.

"It's a terribly laudable idea but I don't think it's going to work."

Only time will tell whether this utopia will come to pass - and, indeed, whether motorists will be prepared to surrender the pleasures and frustrations of life behind the wheel.


View the original article here

Fed Minutes Point Toward Quantiative Easing - Forbes

The release of the minutes from the September 21 meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee is the latest in a long series of debates about the possibility and effectiveness of a further round of asset-purchases by the Central Bank. The minutes show that a majority of the members of the FOMC are ready to "provide additional monetary policy accommodation" if the economic recovery doesn't spur employment growth and appropriate inflation.

The minutes from September's meeting were released Tuesday in the midst of mixed market feelings about quantitative easing. After the jobs report was released last week, some analysts and investors explained that the markets had "already priced in QE 2" and that the policy was necessary at a large scale to keep the status quo. The facts seemed to support this as the mediocre jobs report, with a deceleration in most indicators, had little negative impact on the equity market.

In the September meeting, most members of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy committee were cautious about the future, and "saw merit in accumulating further information before reaching a decision about providing additional monetary stimulus." Some members were unwilling to engage in further QE unless the outlook worsened. It also becomes apparent that the purchase of longer-term Treasury securities is essentially the only policy possibility the Fed is looking into. The lack of any substantial improvement in the September job report may be the final nudge to galvanize Fed action.

Kansas City Fed president Thomas Hoenig dissented from the FOMC's statement in September, and remains opposed to the central bank's stance. Hoenig blames the high unemployment rate on "exceptionally low rates earlier in the decade that contributed to the housing bubble and subsequent collapse and recession." Hoenig advocates raising rates to "approach 1%" and to allow the Fed balance sheet to shrink as debt holdings mature.

The next FOMC meeting takes place on November 2 or 3. It is expected that the institution headed by Ben Bernanke will further its asset-purchase program while keeping rates between 0 and 0.25%. Bernanke is looking to solve the problem via demand stimulation and inflation expectations, he has the support of most of the Federal Open Market Committee, the market remains expectant.


View the original article here