July 12, 2010
Reuters
* US presidential commission holds first public meeting
* It may consider issuing early guidance on drilling ban
* Commissioners uncertain of their role regarding ban (Adds comments from co-chair Reilly regarding ban)
By Ayesha Rascoe
NEW ORLEANS, July 12 (Reuters) - Gulf Coast lawmakers and oil industry officials on Monday argued against a moratorium on deepwater drilling on the same day the Obama administration issued a new ban on the practice in the wake of the BP Plc (BP.L) (BP.N) oil spill.
The new ban came during the first meeting of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Spill and Offshore Drilling, the seven-person White House panel charged with making recommendations following the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig and subsequent leak.
Opponents of the ban urged the commission to advise the government to allow some drilling to proceed under new safety guidelines or the Gulf will suffer irreparable damage.
The worst oil spill in U.S. history prompted the Interior Department to place a six-month moratorium on U.S. deepwater exploratory drilling to give the commission time to recommend potential safety enhancements.
That moratorium was struck down by a federal court as too broad but the Interior Department issued another deepwater drilling ban on Monday that is set to last through Nov. 30. [ID:LDE66B0GF]
Despite appeals from drilling advocates, there seemed to be some uncertainty among the panel about what role it would play regarding the ban.
"The idea that we would have a near-term responsibility to recommend policy was not our understanding," said Bill Reilly, co-chair of the panel and former head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Reilly said Interior Department Deputy Secretary David Hayes told him the department would make a decision on the moratorium "irrespective of us."
Earlier Bob Graham, former Florida senator and the panel's other co-chairman, said the commission could possibly issue interim guidance on deepwater drilling before its final report is due in six months.
The panel, which President Barack Obama established with an executive order, is modeled on commissions that looked into the 1986 space shuttle Challenger explosion and the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979.
Larry Dickerson, president and chief executive of Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc (DO.N), told the committee a ban on deepwater drilling would be costly.
"We will have effectively given away a high-tech, high-wage industry that is U.S. dominated," said Dickerson, whose company is the largest U.S. driller and employs more than 11,000 people in the Gulf of Mexico.
Diamond is moving two of its rigs out of the Gulf due to the drilling ban and Dickerson said he sees a "slow motion" domino effect in the industry with future projects and jobs going to workers abroad.
Jay Collins, chief executive officer of oil fields services provider Oceaneering International Inc (OII.N), said his company has been hit by the moratorium and he expects the exodus of oil rigs from the Gulf to continue.
"Our analysis says five of those are likely to move out to foreign locations soon," he said.
Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu disputed the idea that deepwater drilling is unsafe. "This Deepwater Horizon accident is an exception and not a rule and should be treated as such," Landrieu, a Democrat, told the panel.
(Additional reporting by Alexandria Sage; Editing by Bill Trott)
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN12183528
Monday, August 9, 2010
US, S.Korea likely to approve new military exercises
July 14, 2010
Reuters
Reuters
The United States and South Korea are likely to approve next week a series of joint military exercises, including naval and air exercises, in both the Sea of Japan and the Yellow Sea, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.
"We are not yet ready to discuss the precise details of those exercises but they will involve a wide range of assets and are expected to be initiated in the near future," Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said.
The exercises will be discussed when U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visit Seoul next week for bilateral talks, Morrell said.
Factbox: China's energy intensity by province in 2009
July 15, 2010
Reuters
Following is a table showing the energy
intensity of China's provinces in 2009, in terms of energy consumption per unit
of GDP and per unit of industrial added value, and power consumption per unit of
GDP.
The figures were issued on Thursday by China's National Bureau of
Statistics. Percentage changes are comparisons with 2008.
The original table in Chinese is available at
Energy
Energy consumption/
consumption/ unit of industrial Power
unit of GDP added value consumption/
(Tonnes of (Tonnes of unit of GDP
standard coal Pct standard coal Pct (KWh/ Pct
/1,000 yuan) change /1,000 yuan) change 1,000 yuan) change
Beijing 0.0606 -5.76 0.0909 -12.30 68.185 -2.74
Tianjin 0.0836 -6.03 0.0911 -13.54 78.288 -8.49
Hebei 0.1640 -5.02 0.2999 -9.54 144.994 -2.52
Shanxi 0.2364 -5.73 0.4550 -8.81 192.193 -8.50
Inner Mongolia 0.2009 -6.91 0.3557 -15.10 168.672 -9.73
Liaoning 0.1439 -5.08 0.2257 -6.95 111.999 -6.82
Jilin 0.1209 -6.19 0.1621 -8.19 80.913 -8.64
Heilongjiang 0.1214 -5.85 0.1382 -9.64 79.867 -7.72
Shanghai 0.0727 -6.17 0.0957 -5.00 80.849 -6.39
Jiangsu 0.0761 -5.17 0.1107 -10.17 106.425 -5.50
Zhejiang 0.0741 -5.41 0.1123 -4.96 117.650 -2.33
Anhui 0.1017 -5.39 0.2100 -11.13 108.876 -1.83
Fujian 0.0811 -3.81 0.1150 -2.70 103.205 -5.87
Jiangxi 0.0880 -4.54 0.1674 -10.13 92.246 -1.52
Shandong 0.1072 -5.46 0.1543 -9.20 97.249 -3.86
Henan 0.1156 -6.16 0.2708 -11.56 121.836 -4.79
Hubei 0.1230 -5.97 0.2350 -12.27 101.845 -5.52
Hunan 0.1202 -5.10 0.1570 -13.68 91.100 -3.05
Guangdong 0.0684 -4.27 0.0809 -6.94 100.209 -6.13
Guangxi 0.1057 -4.43 0.2235 -6.68 127.987 -2.00
Hainan 0.0850 -2.81 0.2613 -4.53 92.289 -2.61
Chongqing 0.1181 -5.50 0.1854 -11.95 89.427 -4.69
Sichuan 0.1338 -5.83 0.2249 -9.18 108.591 -4.66
Guizhou 0.2348 -4.12 0.4320 -0.03 232.802 -0.83
Yunnan 0.1495 -4.60 0.2739 -3.78 159.110 -4.16
Shaanxi 0.1172 -4.56 0.1367 -5.82 107.851 -7.98
Gansu 0.1864 -6.97 0.3530 -12.84 239.881 -5.55
Qinghai 0.2689 -6.46 0.2936 -9.46 386.212 -2.24
Ningxia 0.3454 -6.26 0.6509 -8.71 472.074 -5.90
Xinjiang 0.1934 -1.53 0.3095 -1.72 140.820 5.73
(Editing by Chris Lewis)
Factbox: The costs of Afghan war to U.S. taxpayers
July 18, 2010
Reuters
Obama has asked for $33 billion more to help fund 30,000 extra U.S. soldiers being sent to Afghanistan this year. He wants $4.5 billion more for beefed-up foreign aid and civilian operations in Iraq and Afghanistan this year; about $2 billion of that amount is dedicated to Afghanistan.
The House of Representatives approved the funding last month and added billions of dollars in non-military spending, meaning the measure must return to the Senate for final approval.
Lawmakers are expected to pass the funds, but are also demanding assurances that the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai tackles corruption to ensure U.S. taxpayer dollars are not wasted.
Following are the costs to U.S. taxpayers so far, as well as some of the future funding needed.
COSTS SO FAR
Congress has approved $345 billion so far for the war in Afghanistan, which the United States invaded to fight al Qaeda and topple the Taliban after the September 11, 2001 attacks. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which produced the figure, said about $22 billion has gone for Afghan-war-related activities in other countries.
COMPARISON WITH IRAQ
Some $708 billion has gone to the Iraq war so far, CBO says. But Afghanistan is becoming the more expensive battleground, as the pace of U.S. military operations slows in Iraq and quickens in Afghanistan.
The current fiscal year, which ends September 30, is the first in which more money has been allocated to Afghanistan ($72.3 billion) than Iraq ($64.5 billion), according to the National Priorities Project, a nonpartisan budget research group that examines congressional appropriations.
MONEY FOR AFGHANISTAN'S MILITARY AND POLICE FORCES
Included in the money spent on Afghanistan is more than $25 billion for training and equipping the Afghan National Security Forces -- the army and police, according to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. Obama wants another $14.2 billion for this purpose for the rest of this year and next; the idea is to leave behind security forces that can take on the responsibility of fighting the Taliban as U.S. forces start to leave.
FUTURE MILITARY COSTS
Future expenses are a question mark, partly because troop levels are uncertain. Obama says he wants to start withdrawing forces from Afghanistan in mid-2011, but that will depend on conditions on the ground. No departure deadline has been set.
Estimates of the cost per troop per year in Afghanistan vary from $500,000 to $1 million depending on whether expenditures on housing and equipment are included along with pay, food and fuel. Medical costs and veterans' compensation balloon as time goes on.
FOREIGN AID AND CIVILIAN SURGE
Foreign aid, including food and development assistance, to Afghanistan has totaled some $17 billion since 2002, according to Department of State and Congressional Research Service documents.
Future expenses are unknown and there is growing concern among lawmakers over corruption in Karzai's government.
Rep. Nita Lowey, a Democrat who heads the House appropriations subcommittee on foreign aid, last month froze about $3.9 billion in civilian aid to Afghanistan pending hearings on how Afghanistan and its U.S. partners intend to handle corruption.
The State Department is seeking more money to help fund a "civilian stabilization strategy" to deliver more economic assistance to Afghanistan, especially its agricultural sector. Part of the idea is to create jobs that will draw insurgents off the battlefield in Afghanistan.
(By susan cornwellEditing by Alan Elsner)
Iran fuel imports nosedive as sanctions bite: source
July 26, 2010
Reuters
Only three cargoes of gasoline have so far reached Iran in July, according to a shipping document seen by Reuters, much less than the seasonal norm, as new sanctions cause ships carrying fuel to be diverted.
A series of new sanctions agreed since June specifically targets Iran's oil trade and industry, making it even harder to do business with the Islamic Republic. The EU adopted formally its latest measures on Monday.
Iran is the world's fifth largest crude exporter, but has to import around 40 percent of its gasoline needs because domestic refining capacity is inadequate.
Traditionally during the summer holiday driving season, Iran needs 11-13 cargoes a month, a Dubai-based trader told Reuters.
The document seen by Reuters showed only three cargoes of gasoline had arrived this month and were supplied by Turkish refiner Tupras and Unipec, the trading arm of China's Sinopec.
The companies were not immediately available to comment.
Another cargo is expected to arrive from Venezuela at the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, two Gulf-based traders said.
They were not aware any other cargoes were heading to Iran.
"The new rounds of sanctions are making things hard right now, and many ships are being diverted, so Iran is only getting a fraction of its actual summer demand," said a trader.
Earlier this month the owner of a gasoline tanker refused to allow the vessel to sail to Iran from Turkey.
"Owners of ships are really worried right now about sending shipments toIran and that's why Iran is looking for alternative companies and countries to import from," said a Gulf-based trader.
As the pressure has mounted on Iran, the insurance market Lloyd's of London said it would not insure or reinsure petroleum shipments going into Iran.
Lloyd's, which has 15 to 20 percent of the global marine insurance sector, is seen as a major influence on other insurance markets with more players pulling back from offering cover to Iran.
Major shipping associations have also created clauses in contracts that enable ship owners to refuse to deliver refined petroleum cargoes to Iran.
ADAPTING TO CHANGE
Industry sources and analysts have anticipated some of Iran's traditional suppliers, such as China and Turkey, would stay loyal.
Venezuela, although very distant, making shipments costly, is also regarded as natural ally.
Iran can also adapt by upgrading its refining capacity, although this requires time and investment. For the shorter term, Iran can reduce the quotas of gasoline available at fully subsidized prices to curb demand.
The Iranian oil ministry has already said demand is on a falling trend. In June, it said average consumption since March had been 63.1 million liters, down 2.7 percent year-on-year.
Its website also said total daily production was 45 million liters, meaning about 18 million liters needed to be imported each day.
Standard gasoline cargoes are 33,000 tonnes or around 45 million liters, traders said, so one would provide around 2-1/2 days of import needs.
Other strategies for plugging the gap include smuggling refined products by land.
Trucks filled with fuel have managed to find a way into Iran despite a pledge by Iraqi Kurdistan to crack down on smuggling activities.
Asked about gasoline imports, an official from the National Iranian Oil Co. said on Monday there was "no sign of difficulties."
He also said crude exports were continuing to China and Europe.
For FACTBOX on Tactics adopted by Iran to overcome sanctions, please click on
(By Amena Bakr and Luke Pachymuthu Additional reporting by Barbara Lewis in Dubai, Robin Pomeroy in Tehran, Orhan Coskun Ankara and David Sheppard in London; editing by Keiron Henderson)
spy chief-nominee warns of more N.Korean attacks
July 20, 2010
Reuters
North Korea's alleged sinking of a South Korean warship earlier this year may have marked the start of a "dangerous new period" of direct attacks by Pyongyang on the South, the retired general nominated to be President Barack Obama's intelligence chief said on Tuesday.
"The most important lesson for all of us in the intelligence community from this year's provocations by Pyongyang is to realise that we may be entering a dangerous new period when North Korea will once again attempt to advance its internal and external political goals through direct attacks on our allies in the Republic of Korea," James Clapper, nominated as director of national intelligence, said in a written response to questions from the Senate Intelligence Committee.
"Coupled with this is a renewed realization that North Korea's military forces still pose a threat that cannot be taken lightly," Clapper added in his response to the questions, released by the committee at the start of his Senate confirmation hearing.
(Reporting by Adam Entous; Editing by Sandra Maler)
U.S. and South Korea to stage military drills after ship sunk
July 14, 2010
Retures
The United States and South Korea are expected to soon approve a series of joint military exercises that aim to deter the North from any future attack following the sinking of a South Korean warship, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.
The naval and air exercises in the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan, likely to be finalized during high-level talks next week in Seoul, go beyond those previously announced following the March attack that killed 46 sailors.North Korea has denied responsibility but is widely blamed for sinking the warship.
"All of these exercises are defensive in nature but will send a clear message of deterrence to North Korea and demonstrate our steadfast commitment to the defense of South Korea," Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said.
He declined to offer details but said the exercises "will involve a wide range of assets and are expected to be initiated in the near future."
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates will likely approve the plans when they meet their counterparts in Seoul on July 21, he said.
China, North Korea's only real ally and benefactor, has closely followed the possibility of U.S. military exercises in the Yellow Sea. It has voiced concern about reports that a U.S. aircraft carrier may be involved.
Morrell said Beijing had no say about the drills, however.
"Obviously (the Chinese) are a regional power and a country ... whose opinion we respect and consider," Morrell said.
"But this is a matter of our ability to exercise in open seas, in international waters. Those determinations are made by us and us alone."
The United States has about 28,000 forces in South Korea, which remains technically at war with the North nearly six decades after the end of the 1950-1953 Korean War.
The U.S. military had long planned to hand over potential wartime operational control of South Korean forces by 2012, should conflict break out on the Korean Peninsula again.
But President Barack Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak agreed last month to push back that date until the second half of 2015.
The delay was meant to send a clear message about U.S. staying power in the region and had been under discussion months before warship's sinking, U.S. officials have said.
Morrell said the delay would allow a broader transfer of responsibilities, including off the ground operations command.
"This will allow us to make sure we are all synched up and ultimately be stronger as an alliance for having taken the time to do so," he told reporters at the Pentagon.
(By Phil Stewart Editing by Mohammad Zargham)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)