Subscribe to Dollars & Sense magazine. Recent articles related to the financial crisis. Energy Xtremism (Michael Klare)From TomDispatch, with intro from Tom Engelhardt:Talk about roller-coaster rides: the price of a barrel of crude oil, which was still under $20 the week after September 11, 2001, made it to $147 in July 2008, just before the global economic meltdown, only to hit a low of $32.40 early this year. And yet, in recent months, hardly noticed, it's crept back above $70—and this with "recovery" barely on the horizon and global industrial demand still muted at best. And that's the good news. Surely, as economic activity picks up, oil demand will rise and prices will resume their upward march. And don't be fooled by a spate of announcements, as recently in the Gulf of Mexico, of new oil discoveries, as Michael Klare, author of the invaluable book Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet, indicates. If there is a surge in industrial demand globally, recent discoveries will have little impact on the growing supply of energy. "It's still the one," energy expert Daniel Yergin says of oil in the current issue of Foreign Policy magazine. Yergin, author of a classic history of oil, The Prize, claims that petroleum will dominate the global energy equation for decades to come. Look elsewhere and you can find sprightly scenarios for energy futures based on climate-friendly renewable energy sources. As Klare makes painfully clear, however, there's a third way—and that is distinctly not good news. We are going to enter an age of Xtreme energy, he suggests, and the last-ditch efforts to keep our world on its normal course are likely to devastate the environment, accelerate climate change, inflict widespread pain, and create global conflict. It's not a pretty picture. —Tom The Era of Xtreme Energy Read the full article. Labels: energy, Michael Klare, peak oil, Tom Engelhardt, TomDispatch.com Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Environmental Stuff (Not Pretty)Peak Water? Thanks to Naked CapitalismThe "Great Pacific Garbage Patch" pinpointed at last. Thanks again to Yves Smith. Ever-more bizarre geoengineering proposals. Why can't we just consume sustainably instead? Finally, speculators and oil markets. Thanks to Economist's View. Labels: Economist's View, energy, Environment, environmental crisis, geoengineering, Naked Capitalism, natural resources, oceans, pollution, water, Yves Smith Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Oligarchs' Threat To Indian DemocracyNice FT piece from yesterday:Brotherly shoveBy Joe Leahy Financial Times Published: August 11 2009 20:40 | Last updated: August 11 2009 20:40 Murli Deora, India's oil minister, normally relaxes by playing bridge at the weekend with his wife and friends. But in recent weeks, a rather less genteel contest than that has been intruding on his free time. Mr Deora was a close confidant of Dhirubhai Ambani, the rags-to-riches entrepreneur who built his Reliance polyester group into a corporate titan but died in 2002 without leaving a will. This sparked a succession war between his sons Anil and Mukesh, now Asia's richest siblings. Dropping into Mr Deora's Mumbai home one weekend in June after his customary jog on the seafront, Anil Ambani complained to "uncle" about how he believed Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Industries was trying to corner the spoils of the KG Basin, a giant gas field discovered by the group off India’s east coast in 2000, says a person familiar with the matter. Late last month, frustrated by suspicions that the minister was siding with his brother in the dispute, Anil Ambani went public. He used the podium of the annual meeting of one of his companies, Reliance Natural Resources, to lambast Mukesh’s Reliance Industries and the oil ministry. The nationally televised onslaught--and the release of an earlier letter to Manmohan Singh, prime minister, that contained the same allegations--sent reverberations through the halls of power in New Delhi and has elevated the long-running Ambani succession war into an issue of national importance. "Motivated by corporate greed, RIL [Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Industries] is dishonourably trying every trick in the book to get out of its binding commercial obligations," Anil alleged later in e-mailed answers to questions from the Financial Times. (Mukesh Ambani and Reliance Industries declined to comment for this article.) Not only is the row, which is being heard in the Supreme Court in New Delhi, threatening to disrupt sales from the KG Basin, India’s most important natural resource discovery in decades, but it has also raised questions about how business is done in the world's fastest-growing large economy after China. Read the rest of the article Labels: Ambani family, development economics, energy, India, infrastructure, Manmohan Singh, natural resources, project finance Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Big Supply Chain Shift To Counter Globalization?From The Financial Times:Crisis and climate force supply chain shift By Richard Milne in Amsterdam Published: August 9 2009 18:43 | Last updated: August 9 2009 18:43 Manufacturers are abandoning global supply chains for regional ones in a big shift brought about by the financial crisis and climate change concerns, according to executives and analysts. Companies are increasingly looking closer to home for their components, meaning that for their US or European operations they are more likely to use Mexico and eastern Europe than China, as previously. "A future where energy is more expensive and less plentifully available will lead to more regional supply chains," Gerard Kleisterlee, chief executive of Philips, one of Europe's biggest companies, told the Financial Times. Supply chain experts agreed, with Ernst & Young underlining how as much as 70 per cent of a manufacturing company's carbon footprint can come from transport and other costs in its supply chain. Dan O'Regan, the accounting firm's head of supply chains, said: "It is not just the prospect of regulatory changes but also the downturn that is forcing many organisations to consider restructuring their supply chains in their entirety. I think you will find smaller, more regional supply chains." Mr Kleisterlee said businesses needed to find ways to build an economy on a sustainable basis ahead of the Copenhagen summit on climate change later this year, with "a review of global logistics and transport” one of the important steps. He said that until now cheap transport costs had meant “Mexico wasn't competitive with China for supplying the US". Read the rest of the article Labels: climate change, energy, financial crisis, globalization, multinational corporations, supply chains Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Blue-Green InsurgencyThis is by Carl Davidson, at the excellent website SolidarityEconomy.net.Blue-Green Insurgency Gets Fired Up at the DC Green Jobs Conference By Carl Davidson Beaver County Blue When you walk into a large Washington, DC hotel lobby and find it teeming with thousands of smiling, buzzing people—half in labor union jackets and ball caps, the other half dressed in 30-something hip-hop causal—you know some special is happening. This was the lively, energized scene for three cold wintry days this Feb 4-6 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel, as nearly 3000 activists and organizers gathers for the "Good Jobs, Green Jobs" National Conference. The gathering was convened by more than 100 organizations, representing every major trade union and every major environmental group in the country, among others. It's called the "blue-green alliance," the core of which is the United Steel Workers and the Sierra Club, which jointly launched the "Green Jobs" movement nationally at a conference in Pittsburgh, PA a year ago. The turnout this year is triple in size and highly energized by both the victory of President Barack Obama and the looming onset of an economic crisis unmatched in scope since the Great Depression of the 1930s. In addition to the steelworkers, the building trades were well represented, and the green groups spanned a wide range of concerns, for toxics to energy to climate change. Also notable was the participation of a contingent of "high road" corporations rooted in the growing "green economy." Gamesa, a major Spanish firm specializing in wind turbines, and Piper Jaffray, a large paper company focused on recycled paper products, are two examples. But a critical new dimension was added by Green For All, an organization rooted among inner city youth, and headed up by Van Jones. Jones is the author of "The Green Collar Economy" and an inspirational voice for a rising generation of multinational, multicultural insurgent youth. Read the rest of the article. Labels: Carl Davidson, energy, Environment, green jobs, solidarity economics Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Something Good Comes Out of the Crisis!Remember, though, all those who will be (and have been) hurt by the effects of this monumental waste; and that it provides us with a fine example of the possible effects of outsourcing social and environmental policy to "Billanthropists" like Gates. Note also the similarities in the hyper-exaggerated investment incentives with the financial crisis proper....Biofuels: From hope to husk Financial Times By Kevin Allison and Stephanie Kirchgaessner Tuesday Oct 21 2008 14:20 It was an American dream that has failed to become a reality. For much of the last decade, enthusiasts from President George W. Bush down have touted corn-based ethanol as something approaching a superfuel, a home-grown alternative to foreign oil that would help cut smog and bring hope to struggling farmers. It has not worked out that way. Instead, the ethanol industry has undergone a great boom and bust in which a Financial Times analysis has found investors as savvy as Bill Gates, Microsoft's founder, have collectively lost billions of dollars. Despite the billions more in taxpayers' dollars that was spent to subsidise it, ethanol now eats up nearly one-quarter of the US corn crop without so far fulfilling the hopes held for its beneficial effect either on the environment or US dependence on foreign energy. Read the rest of this article Labels: biofuels, energy, Environment, financial crisis Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Econ-Utopia: The Bloodless Revolution, part 1 of 2: A review of Peter Barnes' CAPITALISM 3.0Econ-Utopia: The Bloodless Revolution, part 1 of 2: A review of Peter Barnes' CAPITALISM 3.0by Jonathan Teller-Elsberg, CPE Staff Economist An Econ-Utopia, brought to you by the Center for Popular Economics. A few weeks ago, CPE Staff Economist Jerry Friedman wrote an Econ-Atrocity reviewing Bill McKibben's new book, Deep Economy. Though he says McKibben "has written a clear attack on much of what ails us," Friedman nonetheless criticizes McKibben for approaching the environmental and social problems of the day from an individualist perspective. For all that McKibben wants to promote and revive "community," he has the attitude (says Friedman) of a "personal Salvationist... [who thinks that] the enemy [is] ourselves: we use too much, waste too much, want too much; and the only salvation for the environment is to change our preferences, use less, recycle more, and choose to live simply." What McKibben misunderstands or ignores, Friedman argues, is the power of social institutions to drive behavior, regardless of the desires and seemingly free choices of individuals. I think that Friedman will find solace in Peter Barnes' recent book, Capitalism 3.0: A Guide to Reclaiming the Commons, since Barnes' approach is definitively institutional. The problem, according to Barnes, is that the structure of the economy and society leave too much power in the hands of corporate capitalism. Even if all the CEOs and boards of directors and politicians were replaced with kind-hearted souls like McKibben, we would still face pretty much the same issues of environmental decay, economic inequality, and other social ills—the logic of capitalism and the legal structure of private property rights force the leaders of corporations to do what they currently do. He learned this from personal experience as co-owner and manager of several business ventures, most famously Working Assets (a telephone and credit card company that donates one percent of gross revenues to progressive charitable organizations). "I'd tested the system for twenty years, pushing it toward multiple bottom lines [that consider social and environmental impacts in addition to profit concerns] as far as I possibly could. I'd dealt with executives and investors who truly cared about nature, employees, and communities. Yet in the end, I'd come to see that all these well-intentioned people, even as their numbers grew, couldn't shake the larger system loose from its dominant bottom line of profit." (Ironically, Bill McKibben is quoted on the front cover of Capitalism 3.0 helping to promote Barnes' book.) While the government is necessary, in Barnes' view it is incapable of successfully addressing these big problems because "most—though not all—of the time, government puts the interests of private corporations first. This is a systemic problem of a capitalist democracy, not just a matter of electing new leaders." (Emphasis in the original.) Having realized that neither the market economy nor the government has any likelihood of halting global warming or reducing inequality, Barnes began to wonder "Is there, perhaps, a missing set of institutions that can help us?" He's been thinking about it for ten years, and he has a positive answer: the commons, which Barnes defines "as a generic term, like the market or the state. It refers to all the gifts we inherit or create together... The commons designates a set of assets that have two characteristics: they're all gifts, and they're all shared. A gift is something we receive, as opposed to something we earn. A shared gift is one we receive as members of a community, as opposed to individually. Examples... include air, water, ecosystems, languages, music, holidays, money, law, mathematics, parks, the Internet, and much more." In his previous book, Who Owns the Sky?, Barnes was already on this track. He then argued that the solution to global warming is to establish the atmosphere as a legally recognized commons, owned by all of humanity, now and into the future, and managed by trustees. This "Sky Trust" would be legally obligated to protect the atmosphere on behalf of those innumerable future generations. It could do so by establishing sustainable limits on the amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere by human activity, and then auctioning off these permits. Because all people share the atmospheric commons equally, the money from this auction would be distributed on an equal basis. The result would be a slowing and eventual halt to global warming and a simultaneous reduction in economic inequality. This time Barnes has widened his vision beyond any particular social problem. His hope is that the establishment of an entire commons sector (of which the atmospheric Sky Trust commons is only one example), alongside the government and private, corporate sector, will create an institutional framework that makes it possible to address a wide array of social problems that result from capitalist profit-seeking and government's systemic inability to be fully representative. [To be continued in the next Econ-Utopia...] Sources: Gerald Friedman, "Econ-Atrocity: The economics, and the politics, of environmentalism," April 20, 2007, http://www.fguide.org/?p=86. Peter Barnes, Capitalism 3.0: A Guide to Reclaiming the Commons. Berrett Koehler Publishers, Inc., 2007. The book is available at no charge as an Adobe Acrobat PDF file at http://www.capitalism3.com/downloadbuy. © 2007 Center for Popular Economics Econ-Atrocities and Econ-Utopias are the work of their authors and reflect their author's opinions and analyses. CPE does not necessarily endorse any particular idea expressed in these articles. If you would like to automatically receive CPE's Econ-Atrocities and Econ-Utopias by email, subscribe (or unsubscribe) by sending an email to econatrocity-subscribe@lists.riseup.net with the subject: subscribe. To see our archive of Econ-Atrocities/Utopieas please visit http://www.fguide.org/?cat=3. Labels: Books, Class, Commons, Econ-Atrocity, Econ-Utopia, energy, Environment, Inequality, News, Political Economy, Politics, Social/Solidarity Economy Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Texas Observer on TXU buyoutOn the Texas Observer's blog, Forrest Wilder sounds some further cautions about the TXU buyout:
Labels: carbon, coal, electricity, energy, global warming, TXU Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). TXU resourcesHere's the New York Times overview of the TXU green buyout.The Dallas Morning News has a handy timeline of all the shenanigans that preceded this development. And Daniel Mottola at the Austin Chronicle does an excellent job of fleshing out that timeline and the rest of this session's battle over global warming and air quality. Labels: carbon, coal, electricity, energy, TXU Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). More on the TXU carbon emissions agreementThe decision by TXU's private buyers to cut back its dirty coal permit applications and to reduce its existing environmental impact rested on the realization that in an energy market where consumers care about how their electricity affects their health and the environment, "the entrepreneurial and the innovative will get more profit" than the polluting approach, said Fred Krupp, executive director of Environmetnal Defense.Environmental Defense also says: In addition to withdrawing permit applications for eight proposed coal plants, Texas Pacific Group and KKR have agreed to:
Environmental Defense and the Natural Resources Defense Council, which negotiated the deal with TXU's buyers, praised their organizations' Texas offices and all of the other organizations and activists who have put pressure on TXU to drop its plans to double its greenhouse gas emissions since the company filed the eleven dirty coal permits in April 2006. These groups included the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, Rainforest Action Network, the SEED Coalition, the Texas Cities for Clean Air Coalition, Texas Business for Clean Air, Citizens Organized for Resources and the Environment, and Neighbors for Neighbors. A representative of the Sierra Club's Lone Star chapter said, "I think that public, grassroots pressure played a big role in this. If the people hadn't spoken up loudly and consistently, the powers that be might still have gone through with it." For some groups, may be a bittersweet victory. According to Environmental Defense: As part of the negotiations leading up to the announcement, Environmental Defense agreed to settle its federal lawsuit against TXU (regarding the Sandow unit) in exchange for an aggressive environmental pledge from Texas Pacific Group and KKR. The new company will continue to pursue permits for the Sandow unit and the two Oak Grove units. Members of the press from Waco, which will be downwind from two of the TXU plants that remain in permitting, expressed concern about the Oak Grove facilities in a conference call with Environmental Defense and NRDC this afternoon. And long-time Dollars & Sense will recall the ongoing fight near Rockdale, Texas, against Alcoa's (and now TXU's) expansion of its aluminum smelter and associated lignite mines and plant in that area. The Sierra Club said that while the group views the withdrawal of the eight permit applications and the other aspects of the agreement as "really exciting, especially the endorsement of the carbon cap," it's important to remember that 11 of the 19 dirty coal permit applications that followed Texas Governor Perry's fast track permitting order in October 2005 are still under consideration. And of the three TXU plants still in permitting, she said, "The Oak Grove ones are the worst. The worst." The Sierra Club added that because these other plants are still under consideration, it's very important that concerned citizens keep pressure on the Texas legislature to pass laws this session that promote energy efficiency, promote renewable energy, and force coal permitting to slow back down—including a proposed two-year coal permitting moratorium that was recently introduced the the Texas Senate. A few days ago, Tom Smith of Public Citizen's Texas office told me that one of TXU's cardinal sins—one of its actions that helped generate so much public opposition to its plans—was trying to "sneak in under whatever emisisons legislation might be passed this session." A cardinal sin, maybe, but also a Texas political tradition (see the Alcoa story, above). David Hawkins of NRDC would perhaps say that cleaning up their act in the first place is the smartest and most just way that TXU could "sneak in" past pending legislation. Said Hawkins, once the session is over and emissions legislation is passed, "companies that have already reduced their emissions of greenhouse gases will automatically be rewarded because they'll have less work to do." Labels: carbon, coal, electricity, energy, global warming, TXU Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). TXU buyout cancels 8 of 11 dirty coal permitsEnvironmental Defense has announced that "as part of their plan to purchase Texas electricity provider TXU Corp, Texas Pacific Group and KKR have agreed to terminate the applications for eight of TXU's 11 proposed coal plants in Texas and will adopt a platform of initiatives that will significantly reduce the company's environmental impact in Texas."More information from the press conference call to follow soon. Labels: carbon, coal, energy, global warming, TXU electricity Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Clean energy in Texas: get involvedRead about Dallas-based energy company TXU's plans to build 11 new coal-fired power plants in Texas here. TXU is already Texas' largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, and the new plants would double TXU's CO2 output. In Texas and around the country, a half dozen major environmental organizations, seven local citizens groups, 36 cities, counties, and school districts, 400 business leaders, three major church groups, and thousands of individuals have been agitating against the plants. To join them, visit Stop the Coal Plant for letters and petitions, ways to donate, the latest press, and a handy fact sheet.Look for more coverage of this activism in the Mar/Apr issue of Dollars & Sense. Labels: carbon, coal, electricity, energy, global warming, TXU Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). Delay in TXU coal plant permitting in TexasIn October 2005, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed an executive order that, among other things, cut the length of permit hearings for new power plants in Texas from 18 months to only six. Last year, Dallas-based power company TXU filed permit applications for 11 new coal-burning power plants that would more than double the company's emmisions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide—a consequence that many consider outrageous, considering that Texas leads the nation in CO2 emissions and TXU is the state's largest CO2 polluter.TXU argues that the new plants will meet Texas' desperately growing need for electricity and that not to build them would have sever consequences for the Texas economy. Opponents argue that the potential costs in federal funding and public health outweigh the alleged energy benefits, and that there are cleaner and more economically stimulating ways to provide the needed electricity. The TXU permit hearings were set to begin Wednesday, but on Tuesday Texas State District Judge Stephen Yelenosky ordered a four-month delay to allow opponents to better prepare their case. The permit hearings are now set to begin June 27. According to the Dallas Morning News, "Judge Yelenosky said his decision hinged on whether the governor may constitutionally direct a hearing officer to reach a decision by a particular deadline." Yelenosky wrote, "I have concluded that the plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their argument that the governor lacks that authority." Perry's office issued a two-sentence reply: "No one should be surprised that a single liberal Austin judge would rule against Gov. Perry and his efforts to increase energy capacity in Texas. We will take a close look at the ruling and make a determination on how we will proceed." No one should be surprised by Perry's response, either—considering that, since his October 2005 fast-track order, Perry's re-election campaign has received more than $100,000 from entities associated with TXU and its proposed plants, as well as five other proposed plants. As the new June 27 hearing date approaches, various legislative actions and activism are in the works to prevent the new plants altogether. A large coalition of state and national environmental, business, and citizens' groups are leading rallies and grassroots lobbying efforts, and the Rainforest Action Network is pressuring the banks that might finance TXU's plants to withhold their support should the permits be approved. Look for more on this story in the Mar/Apr issue of Dollars & Sense. Sources Environmental Defense's overview of the issue Fort Worth Star-Telegram Dallas Business Journal Dallas Morning News Labels: carbon, coal, electricity, energy, financial activism, global warming, TXU Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!). |
