| Today's Headlines | |
Low oil prices unlikely to hurt railroads much
A collapse in oil prices won't
derail the railroads' profit engine even if it
does slow the tremendous growth in crude shipments seen in recent years.
…more>>
|
|
 
|
|
Investigators look for cause of Ohio refining factory fire
Investigators are trying to figure out what caused a New Year's Day fire at a
Toledo-area refining factory. …more>>
|
|
|
|
|
GE Oil & Gas technology used in coal seam gas liquefied natural gas production
GE Oil & Gas systems were used
in the first-ever large-scale production of
LNG from coal seam gas at BG Group’s Queensland Curtis LNG plant.
…more>>
|
|
|
|
|
DNO finishes drilling Jawhara-3 offshore exploration well in Tunisia
Norwegian oil and gas firm DNO ASA
declared drilling for its Jawhara-3 well
in the Sfax Offshore Exploration Permit in Tunisia is complete.
…more>>
|
|
|
|
|
Tamarack Valley Energy announces record oil production
Tamarack announced a record exit
production rate averaging approximately 9,700 boe/d during the last 14
days of December, 2014.
…more>>
|
|
|
|
|
Golar enters into agreement for second floating liquefied natural gas liquefaction vessel
The Company anticipates that the
conversion vessel Gimi will be delivered to Keppel shipyard in Singapore
as early as Q2, 2015.
…more>>
|
|
|
|
|
Cyprus says Turkey must stop 'bullying' over offshore gas
Nicos Anastasiades said that
Turkey
must stop trying to impose its will on its tiny neighbor.
…more>>
|
|
|
|
|
BLM extends comment period for proposed oil pipeline
The Bureau of Land Management is
giving
the public more time to comment on a proposed pipeline that would be
capable of moving 50,000 barrels of crude oil a day.
…more>>
|
|
|
|
|
Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire - Major Energy and Environmental News and Commentary affecting the Nuclear Industry. Nuclear Activities
Monday, January 5, 2015
PennEnergy's Daily Petroleum Update 1/5
PennEnerjgy's Daily Power Update 1/5
| Energy News | |
Renewable Energy: US Success Beyond Solyndra
The contentious US government program that backed
green-energy enterprises such as the now defunct Solyndra is showing
signs of success as a bulk of its sponsored projects begin to thrive …more>> |
|
|
|
|
Converging Power, Gas Markets Raise Questions for Data Management
North American and European electricity markets are
undergoing a transition of expansion through organized marketplaces and
the realignment of practices along interfaces among neighboring markets …more>> |
|
|
|
|
PGE begins operations at new 220 MW gas-fired power plant (Video) New 220 MW gas-fired power plant will help balance
renewables and meet peak demand for Portland General Electric Company customers …more>> |
|
|
|
|
Minority Report for Machines Data analytics is changing many business models by
ushering in a world of predictive maintenance, energy savings, and remote diagnostics in real time …more>> |
|
|
|
|
Westinghouse significantly expands nuclear fuel supply in Ukraine Westinghouse and NNEGC Energoatom have agreed
to significantly increase fuel deliveries to Ukrainian nuclear power plants through 2020 …more>> |
|
|
|
|
Mississippi groups attack CO2 emissions limits Mississippi regulators and utilities are savaging the federal
government's proposal to force Mississippi power plants to cut carbon dioxide emissions. …more>> |
|
|
|
|
States work to meet new renewable energy standards From New Mexico and Texas to Montana and New York, PNM and
other investor-owned utilities are facing higher renewable energy standards starting this year …more>> |
|
|
|
|
AWED Energy & Environmental Newsletter: January 5, 2015
AWED Energy & Environmental Newsletter: January 5, 2015
The latest Energy and Environmental Newsletter, is now online.https://www.masterresource.org/alliance-for-wise-energy-decisions/awed-energy-environmental-newsletter-january-5-2015/
Here are some of the key Energy related reports:
Physician: Wind Turbines Make People Ill
Key Wind Energy Liabilities (an excellent list)
Selections from the Wind Energy Archives (another very good list)
Stop hating on NIMBYs: they’re saving communities! (applies to wind energy)
Harvard Lawyer: The EPS's Clean Power Plan Is Unconstitutional
Here are some of the interesting "Global Warming" related reports:
Sunday, January 4, 2015
Back to the Future: Advanced Nuclear Energy and the Battle Against Climate Change
Back to the Future: Advanced Nuclear Energy and the Battle Against Climate Change
http://www.brookings.edu/research/essays/2014/backtothefuture
http://www.brookings.edu/research/essays/2014/backtothefuture
Iran's president calls for end to isolation, urges nuclear deal
Iran's president calls for end to isolation, urges nuclear deal
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-iran-president-nuclear-deal-20150104-story.html
Nuclear power is the greenest option, say top scientists
Nuclear power is the greenest option, say top scientists
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/nuclear-power-is-the-greenest-option-say-top-scientists-9955997.htmlIsraeli nuclear weapons, 2014
Israeli nuclear weapons, 2014
Abstract
Although the Israeli government neither
confirms nor denies that it possesses nuclear weapons, it is generally
accepted by
friend and foe alike that Israel is a nuclear-armed
state—and has been so for nearly half a century. The basis for this
conclusion
has been strengthened significantly since our
previous estimate in 2002, particularly thanks to new documents obtained
by
scholars under the US Freedom of Information Act
and other openly available sources.1
We conclude that many of the public claims about the size of the
Israeli nuclear arsenal are exaggerated. We estimate that
Israel has a stockpile of approximately 80 nuclear
warheads for delivery by two dozen missiles, a couple of squadrons of
aircraft,
and perhaps a small number of sea-launched cruise
missiles.
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/70/6/97.full
ANS Update: Vermont Yankee: Born of “Yankee Ingenuity,” Now No More
Updates from ANS Nuclear Cafe Blog
|
Is this email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser. |
|
|||
|
"ROLLING" IRAN
From Michael Brenner
mbren@pitt.edu
mbren@pitt.edu
"ROLLING" IRAN
The investigative journalist and scholar Gareth Porter last week published an article that paints a troubling picture of the Obama administration's line of thinking about the suspended nuclear negotiations with Iran. http://www.middleeasteye.net/
Porter's analysis leaves us with two questions. First, will the American strategy of "rolling over" the negotiations indefinitely work in terms of the administration's self-defined conception of America interests? Second, does 'success" as measured by Washington conform to either the United States', or the region's, actual long-term interests?
As to the former, the unstated but crucial suppositions of the Obama people are that it will be able to maintain the current stringent sanctions regime in place indefinitely while the Iranians hold in suspension their nuclear activities. On close examination, both look dubious. The world is not a static field wherein Americans can experiment with strategies while everyone else remains fixed in position. That intellectual bias has long distorted American diplomacy. In this case, others parties are unlikely to observe the sanctions stipulations for years to come even as it becomes increasingly evident that it is American foot-dragging that is impeding a settlement of the issue. Heavy energy importers like China and India in particular will be disinclined to pay a price just to satisfy the requirements of an American grand strategy for the region with which they do not agree. The ice sheet that has frozen external support for the Iranian economy already has begun to break up; that is probably a unidirectional process.
Iran for its part cannot be expected to allow itself to be passively led down the primrose path by Uncle Sam from now until January 2017. Even leaving aside the dynamics of Tehran's internal politics, acceding to American manipulation will grate on Iranian pride. It could decide simply to leave the NPT and clear the path toward weapons development or resume programs it has suspended. More likely, it will do two other things: play upon the widening divisions in the international community on sanctions; and make itself disagreeable on other issues where it has influence.
Porter correctly points out that the Obama people are in the process of devaluing the importance of Iran's good behavior on these other issues, e.g. ISIL, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Sunni-Shi'ite fault line. Now that ISIL's momentum appears to have been broken, that view is gaining currency. This despite the political turbulence that still wracks the region, despite the continuing decline in American influence, despite the lack of progress in achieving any of the United States' stated objectives. So why Washington's complacency and self-satisfaction? After all, it still must struggle with intractable realities represented by the following: an ISIL that will be a formidable force as far ahead as the eye can see; the attendant growing menace of terrorist acts; a Baghdad government that may no longer be endangered but whose writ runs over only a segment of the country; unresolved Arab-Kurd tensions; an estranged Turkey which under an increasingly audacious Erdogan is working both sides of the street; Assad ensconced in Damascus at once enemy and ally vis a vis ISIL; the marginalization of pro-Western democratic forces throughout the region; a Yemen in chaos that is less pliable to American demands; and, of course, the spiraling downward of Israeli-Palestinian relations. Yet Washington somehow seems satisfied with all this and sees no incentive to reach an accommodation with Iran
How do we explain this bizarre logic? There are two underlying bases for it. The first is that no core American interests are at stake in the Middle East and never have been. In other words, perpetuation of the current disorder does not endanger American security and prosperity. ISIL or any other violent jihadist group has neither the means nor intention of striking the United States. That, of course, is the great myth that has fired the "war on terror" and which no one dare admit. A weak Iraq has no practical consequences for United States other than embarrassing the promoters and enablers of the invasion who seem quite able to surmount any embarrassment. A Syria in protracted civil war similarly is in itself no threat. Erdogan's dangerous game and grandiose ambitions are a more serious matter. Obama's people, though, seem to be coping with it by resorting to their habitual tactic of sublimation. In short, they are avoiding facing up to the harsh reality since they have not a clue as what to do about it. As to the Sunni-Shi'ite civil war within Islam, its intensity and potential implications never have been fully appreciated in Washington. Hence, they do not see how a nuclear accord with Iran could be a critical stepping stone toward easing these tensions.
The implications for thinking among the House of Saud are correspondingly slighted. The Saudi leaders' dedication to eliminating the clerical regime in Tehran is underestimated and the tangled worries in Riyadh about the external threat, the legitimacy of their own rule, and the challenge from the Salafists they cannot control are not the subject of any comprehensive American policy. We treat the Saudis on a piecemeal, issue-by-issue basis. That approach is now producing meager results on specific issues like ISIL; it may also put off a day of reckoning that could further shake the region.
How about oil as the compelling American interest in the Middle East? It certainly has been since the 1930s. That has begun to change, though. Official Washington is riding a wave of optimism as the foreseeable energy independence of the United States could give it a freer hand in the region. Unimpeded access to Gulf oil, in particular, would lose much of its cogency. The indirect economic effects of a supply disruption that produces recession in Japan, Europe and China is discounted. Obama's strategists haven't gotten that far.
The other explanation for Washington's insouciance about a Middle East in strife is Israel. From the vantage-point of the Netanyahu government (and probably that of any successor), the status quo is satisfactory. Iran's nuclear potential is frozen – and that is their main security concern. ISIL fighting Assad indefinitely suits them fine. An enfeebled Iraq also is welcome. Turkey's Ottoman ambitions are of no concern since they never will materialize and ISIL, despite Turkish aiding and abetting, is contained. And they can finish the job of burying Palestinian hopes for an independent state while Washington is busy chasing around the region trying to keep the lid on various simmering crises. Whither Jerusalem goes, so goeth Washington.
The investigative journalist and scholar Gareth Porter last week published an article that paints a troubling picture of the Obama administration's line of thinking about the suspended nuclear negotiations with Iran. http://www.middleeasteye.net/
Porter's analysis leaves us with two questions. First, will the American strategy of "rolling over" the negotiations indefinitely work in terms of the administration's self-defined conception of America interests? Second, does 'success" as measured by Washington conform to either the United States', or the region's, actual long-term interests?
As to the former, the unstated but crucial suppositions of the Obama people are that it will be able to maintain the current stringent sanctions regime in place indefinitely while the Iranians hold in suspension their nuclear activities. On close examination, both look dubious. The world is not a static field wherein Americans can experiment with strategies while everyone else remains fixed in position. That intellectual bias has long distorted American diplomacy. In this case, others parties are unlikely to observe the sanctions stipulations for years to come even as it becomes increasingly evident that it is American foot-dragging that is impeding a settlement of the issue. Heavy energy importers like China and India in particular will be disinclined to pay a price just to satisfy the requirements of an American grand strategy for the region with which they do not agree. The ice sheet that has frozen external support for the Iranian economy already has begun to break up; that is probably a unidirectional process.
Iran for its part cannot be expected to allow itself to be passively led down the primrose path by Uncle Sam from now until January 2017. Even leaving aside the dynamics of Tehran's internal politics, acceding to American manipulation will grate on Iranian pride. It could decide simply to leave the NPT and clear the path toward weapons development or resume programs it has suspended. More likely, it will do two other things: play upon the widening divisions in the international community on sanctions; and make itself disagreeable on other issues where it has influence.
Porter correctly points out that the Obama people are in the process of devaluing the importance of Iran's good behavior on these other issues, e.g. ISIL, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Sunni-Shi'ite fault line. Now that ISIL's momentum appears to have been broken, that view is gaining currency. This despite the political turbulence that still wracks the region, despite the continuing decline in American influence, despite the lack of progress in achieving any of the United States' stated objectives. So why Washington's complacency and self-satisfaction? After all, it still must struggle with intractable realities represented by the following: an ISIL that will be a formidable force as far ahead as the eye can see; the attendant growing menace of terrorist acts; a Baghdad government that may no longer be endangered but whose writ runs over only a segment of the country; unresolved Arab-Kurd tensions; an estranged Turkey which under an increasingly audacious Erdogan is working both sides of the street; Assad ensconced in Damascus at once enemy and ally vis a vis ISIL; the marginalization of pro-Western democratic forces throughout the region; a Yemen in chaos that is less pliable to American demands; and, of course, the spiraling downward of Israeli-Palestinian relations. Yet Washington somehow seems satisfied with all this and sees no incentive to reach an accommodation with Iran
How do we explain this bizarre logic? There are two underlying bases for it. The first is that no core American interests are at stake in the Middle East and never have been. In other words, perpetuation of the current disorder does not endanger American security and prosperity. ISIL or any other violent jihadist group has neither the means nor intention of striking the United States. That, of course, is the great myth that has fired the "war on terror" and which no one dare admit. A weak Iraq has no practical consequences for United States other than embarrassing the promoters and enablers of the invasion who seem quite able to surmount any embarrassment. A Syria in protracted civil war similarly is in itself no threat. Erdogan's dangerous game and grandiose ambitions are a more serious matter. Obama's people, though, seem to be coping with it by resorting to their habitual tactic of sublimation. In short, they are avoiding facing up to the harsh reality since they have not a clue as what to do about it. As to the Sunni-Shi'ite civil war within Islam, its intensity and potential implications never have been fully appreciated in Washington. Hence, they do not see how a nuclear accord with Iran could be a critical stepping stone toward easing these tensions.
The implications for thinking among the House of Saud are correspondingly slighted. The Saudi leaders' dedication to eliminating the clerical regime in Tehran is underestimated and the tangled worries in Riyadh about the external threat, the legitimacy of their own rule, and the challenge from the Salafists they cannot control are not the subject of any comprehensive American policy. We treat the Saudis on a piecemeal, issue-by-issue basis. That approach is now producing meager results on specific issues like ISIL; it may also put off a day of reckoning that could further shake the region.
How about oil as the compelling American interest in the Middle East? It certainly has been since the 1930s. That has begun to change, though. Official Washington is riding a wave of optimism as the foreseeable energy independence of the United States could give it a freer hand in the region. Unimpeded access to Gulf oil, in particular, would lose much of its cogency. The indirect economic effects of a supply disruption that produces recession in Japan, Europe and China is discounted. Obama's strategists haven't gotten that far.
The other explanation for Washington's insouciance about a Middle East in strife is Israel. From the vantage-point of the Netanyahu government (and probably that of any successor), the status quo is satisfactory. Iran's nuclear potential is frozen – and that is their main security concern. ISIL fighting Assad indefinitely suits them fine. An enfeebled Iraq also is welcome. Turkey's Ottoman ambitions are of no concern since they never will materialize and ISIL, despite Turkish aiding and abetting, is contained. And they can finish the job of burying Palestinian hopes for an independent state while Washington is busy chasing around the region trying to keep the lid on various simmering crises. Whither Jerusalem goes, so goeth Washington.
Tepco and the NRA are non-transparent hiroshimasyndrome.com
My comment: I think non-transparent is the wrong characterization.
Saturday, January 3, 2015
Court Vacates Portions of EPA’s Ozone Rule
Court Vacates Portions of EPA’s Ozone Rule
By Enerknol Research
A
federal appeals court has rejected portions of revisions to EPA’s 2008
ozone rule that would delay compliance deadlines and
revoke transportation conformity requirements. On December 23, 2014, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated
portions of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2008 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone. The court
Three Obstacles to EPA’s O3 Rule: Industry Opposition, Implementation, and Congressional Oversight
Three Obstacles to EPA’s O3 Rule: Industry Opposition, Implementation, and Congressional Oversight
By Matthew Morrison, Bryan Stockton | Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently proposed revising
the national air quality standard for ozone, the key pollutant in smog
and regional haze. EPA acknowledges that the rule will cost billions of
dollars each year to implement. Industry fears the additional regulatory
costs, and environmentalists assert the rule does not restrict ozone
enough. Select jurisdictions with high levels of background ozone,
particularly Western states, will find it more difficult to reach
attainment, and current mechanisms to account for naturally-occurring
ozone spikes may prove inadequate. Republican leaders in the House and
Senate have signaled their intention to oppose the rule in legislation.
The EPA must navigate these complex issues as it prepares to finalize
the rule by October 1, 2015.http://breakingenergy.com/2015/01/02/three-obstacles-to-epas-o3-rule-industry-opposition-implementation-and-congressional-oversight/?utm_source=Breaking+Energy&utm_campaign=95112c0e65-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f852427a4b-95112c0e65-407304281
The Year of Concentrating Solar Power: Five New Plants to Power America with Clean Energy
The Year of Concentrating Solar Power: Five New Plants to Power America with Clean Energy
By U.S. Department of Energy
Solar
is increasingly providing clean, sustainable energy for our nation’s
homes, businesses and industries. Clocking record-breaking growth and
reaching a total of more than 4,700 megawatts of new installed capacity,
2013 was a big year for solar photovoltaic systems. But we’re also
excited to watch 2014, which will mark a major milestone for a different
The Pro Nuclear Twitter Directory at Neutron Bytes is now a Twitter list you can follow
The Pro Nuclear Twitter Directory at Neutron Bytes is now a Twitter list you can follow
Dan Yurman
dan.yurman@outlook.com
Twitter: @djysrv
To view Tweets from a list:
Go to your profile page.
Click on the Lists tab.
Click on the list you'd like to view.
You'll see a timeline of Tweets from the users included in that list.
Please share this link with others.
From now on when I add a pro-nuclear Twitter feed to the directory it will also go on the list.
Dan Yurman
dan.yurman@outlook.com
Twitter: @djysrv
Utilities Should Avoid Over-Investing When Integrating Renewable Energy Into Their Grid
Utilities Should Avoid Over-Investing When Integrating Renewable Energy Into Their Grid
By Jon Pietruszkiewicz
Utilities
exploring ways to integrate their renewable energy sources into their
existing fleet should carefully examine the costs and characteristics of
the many flexibility options at their disposal. This advanced planning
can greatly reduce their investment needs, according to Jon
Pietruszkiewicz, Project Manager, Black & Veatch. “Our message to
utilities concerning their variable energy renewable
Vermont Yankee: Born of “Yankee Ingenuity,” Now No More
Vermont Yankee: Born of “Yankee Ingenuity,” Now No More
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2015/01/02/vermont-yankee-born-of-yankee-ingenuity-now-no-more/
Friday, January 2, 2015
Atomic Power Review: Ukraine Nuclear Plants - Resources and Information
|
Posted: 02 Jan 2015 01:00 PM PST
For
the second time, Russian news sources have reported an incident at a
Ukrainian nuclear plant as a much more serious event than it actually
was. The first time this happened is documented by a post I made for the American Nuclear Society;
this time, a house load transformer at Zaporizhzhya Unit 6 was the
culprit, causing the unit to reduce power to 10 percent and come off the
grid. The unit was back up quickly with no negative effects to anyone
inside or outside the plant.
Since it would appear that these news outlets will continue to misrepresent events at this (and perhaps other) Ukrainian nuclear plants, I've decided to construct a post that will give quick links to resources you can use yourself to check on conditions of Ukraine's nuclear plants. Ukraine's Nuclear Plants The operator of Ukraine's nuclear plants, all of which date originally from the days of the former Soviet Union, is Energoatom. Its home page in English is here. There are four nuclear power stations in Ukraine; the one in the news recently and largest in Europe is the massive Zaporizhzhya NPP; Rivne NPP, South Ukraine NPP and Khmelnytska NPP round out the fleet. •Rivne NPP (sometimes seen as "Rivno") is the oldest of the sites. The site was originally named the "West Ukraine" NPP and began construction in 1973 with two units of type VVER-440. These plants were constructed using the updated (1974) V-213 plant design that had vastly improved containment as compared to the older V-230 plant design, and Units 1 and 2 came on line in 1980 and 1981. The site was expanded by two VVER-1000 plants, units 3 and 4 which came on line in 2004 and 2006 respectively after a construction hiatus. A planned fifth unit, also a VVER-1000 was never built. All four units continue in operation today. •South Ukraine NPP is actually part of an enormous energy center called the "South Ukraine Power Complex," which includes not only the nuclear plant but a large pumped storage power plant and a hydro-electric station. South Ukraine NPP is a three unit plant with Units 1, 2 and 3 being VVER-1000 type. Originally planned as a two unit station. The units came on line in 1982, 1985 and 1989 and work together with the Tashlyk Hydro Pumped Storage Power Plant and the Olexandrivska Hydro Power Plant in providing energy for the area. (The combination of the nuclear plant and pumped storage plant is mentioned in this post on load following nuclear plants.) •Zaporizhzhya NPP (sometimes seen as "Zaporizhia" or "Zaporozhye") was ordered in 1977, began construction in 1979 and is Ukraine's (and Europe's) largest nuclear plant. The site houses six VVER-1000 reactor plants, Units 1 through 6 which came on line between 1984 and 1995 and also houses a large, dry, above ground spent fuel facility placed in operation in 2004. This plant has its own website. •Khmelnystska NPP (sometimes seen as "Khmelnitskaya") is presently a two unit nuclear station with two operating VVER-1000 nuclear plants, Units 1 and 2 which came on line in 1987 and 2004 - the second unit being held up by the general Ukrainian nuclear construction moratorium 1991-1993. Two further units, Units 3 and 4 are partially complete on the site (75% and 28% respectively) and Energoatom plans to complete these plants in the future (although no completion date is given on the company's website.) ---------- -Ukrainian nuclear regulator Ukraine's regulator is the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine; its English language website is located here. News items are available as they're translated. -Ukrainian nuclear plant status The status of Ukraine's nuclear plants is updated daily at this link. Click on the most recent date. ---------- Energoatom's Press Center in English is here. Energoatom has a wonderful photo gallery here that nuclear communicators may wish to access. The above links and information should give nuclear communicators what they need to find the truth, quickly, in the case of further misleading stories about nuclear plants in the Ukraine. I welcome the inclusion of further links readers may wish to provide. Sources consulted include "Soviet Nuclear Power Plants," David Katsman, Delphic Associates 1986 1:15 PM Eastern 1/2/2015 ATOMIC POWER REVIEW ••••••••••••••••••••• Additional Information for reference - updated 4 PM 1/2/2015 Zaporizhzhya NPP events at Unit 3 on November 28, 2014 and at Unit 6 on December 28, 2014 both were related to the "house power transformers" at the units -- transformers that supply power to the many electrical loads inside the nuclear plants themselves if the turbine generator is not operable or trips. In the case of the November 28 event, Unit 3 shut down at 19:54 hours safely and was back on the grid on December 6. In the case of the December 28 event, Unit 6 took its generator off the grid at 05:50 hours but did not experience a reactor trip (scram, or shutdown) and returned its generator to the grid at 22:35 hours the same day. Unit 3 event press release by Energoatom Unit 3 event press release from IAEA Unit 6 event press release from Ukraine nuclear regulator The event on 28 November has been rated by IAEA as INES Level 0 (zero.) That on December 28 has not yet been rated by IAEA but is an almost identical circumstance and can be expected as 0.  |
Lower Oil Prices Will Not Turn Producers into Pushovers
6:03 PM (4 hours ago)
| ||||
| ||||
Published on January 2nd, 2015 | http://www.lobelog.com/lower-
by Paul R. Pillar
The steep drop in the price of oil during the latter half of 2014 has generated much comment about how this development has weakened major oil-producing countries and supposedly made their governments more pliable on issues that separate them from other countries. Such commentary flows partly from the tendency of media and the commentariat to over-analyze any major development and to identify winners and losers. In the current instance it also reflects how people have happily noticed that several of the significant producers whose revenues have been most adversely affected by the price decline are countries commonly identified as adversaries of the United States, including Venezuela, Russia, and Iran. Edward Luttwak remarks that the price decline “is knocking down America’s principal opponents without us even trying.”http://www.lobelog.com/lower-oil-prices-will-not-turn-producers-into-pushovers/
Lower Oil Prices Will Not Turn Producers into Pushovers
The steep drop in the price of oil during the latter half of 2014 has generated much comment about how this development has weakened major oil-producing countries and supposedly made their governments more pliable on issues that separate them from other countries. Such commentary flows partly from the tendency of media and the commentariat to over-analyze any major development and to identify winners and losers. In the current instance it also reflects how people have happily noticed that several of the significant producers whose revenues have been most adversely affected by the price decline are countries commonly identified as adversaries of the United States, including Venezuela, Russia, and Iran. Edward Luttwak remarks that the price decline “is knocking down America’s principal opponents without us even trying.”http://www.lobelog.com/lower-oil-prices-will-not-turn-producers-into-pushovers/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)