We Know Transparency When We See It – And When We Don’t
Michael Isikoff writes in Newsweek about an Obama Administration stance on revealing which bigwig execs visit the White House on business. The problem is that Obama’s lack of transparency in responding to a FOIA request regarding coal company executives resembles the stonewalling secrecy of the Bush Administration’s handling of similar requests.
As an Obama supporter and Obama voter I am equally elated and dismayed. In the case of energy policy, I’m elated we have a President who seems to be finally making the connection between our dependence on oil – foreign and otherwise – and environmental and national security issues. I’m dismayed by Obama’s refusal to honor public interest groups’ requests to know what coal companies are lobbying the White House on “clean coal” initiatives. The jury is out on the feasibility of clean coal technology and its practicality. As an Ohioan I want to support the coal industry. As an American concerned about pollution, greenhouse gases and the affordability of electricity I want to know more about where the federal government intends to invest clean coal funding and what to expect as a return on investment. As a cynic, I want to know what big spenders – be they coal companies or the Sierra Club – are attempting to game the political system.
Daily Graphic: Oil Well On Way to Climbing Back to $100
Go check out this story at the Financial Times … energy market may conspire to stop recovery …
Goldman Sachs Oil Forecast – $90 by 2010
Just a few days after OPEC projected oil at $90 per barrel in the first quarter of 2010, Goldman Sachs today is saying essentially the same thing:
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. raised its forecast for U.S. benchmark oil by 31 percent to $85 a barrel for the end of 2009 and predicted further gains next year as demand recovers and supplies shrink.
“As the financial crisis eases, an energy shortage lies ahead,” Goldman analysts Jeffrey Currie in London and David Greely in New York said in a report e-mailed today. The bank set a 12-month price target of $90 a barrel for West Texas Intermediate crude, up from $70, and introduced a forecast of $95 for the end of 2010.
Read the Rest of the Story at Bloomberg
OPEC Leader: Oil back to $80-90 bbl by early 2010
This isn’t surprising. OPEC producers scaled back production some time ago in the face of a supply glut brought on by the worldwide recession. OPEC’ers are basically saying, we don’t produce more until we make up for the ridiculously cheap prices over the last year or so.
From Reuters:
Oil prices could reach $80-$90 a barrel by early next year, but OPEC will not increase its output until a huge amount of over-supply has been absorbed, the group’s Secretary General said on Tuesday.
OPEC officials have been nudging up their price aspirations since Saudi Arabia’s oil minister said last week an oil price of around $75 could be achieved later this year and would not undermine a tentative global economic recovery.
“The price will go to $80-$90 maybe at the beginning of 2010,” OPEC’s Abdullah al-Badri told the Reuters Global Energy Summit.
Daily Graphic: U.S. Imported Oil Weighs on Economy
Over at the Pickens Plan they continue to release numbers every month regarding how much oil we import into the U.S. Go check out their Oil Imports page.
Full Text – Obama On Auto Fuel Efficiency and Emissions Plan
(Source: White House Press Office)
12:22 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you. Please, everybody have a seat — have a seat. What an extraordinary day. The sun is out because good things are happening. Before I get started, just some preliminary introductions — I’ll probably repeat them in my formal remarks, but I want to make sure that I acknowledge some people who have been critical to this effort and critical to so many efforts at the state and federal levels.
Could a Honda Product Really Be “Biblically Terrible?”
If The Insight is as Bad as Reviewer Says, It Might Say Something About Automakers Rushing ‘Affordable’ Hybrids to Market
A review for the 2010 Honda Insight by the Times of London caught my attention with passages like this:
So here goes. It’s terrible. Biblically terrible. Possibly the worst new car money can buy. It’s the first car I’ve ever considered crashing into a tree, on purpose, so I didn’t have to drive it any more.
And this:
And the sound is worse. The Honda’s petrol engine is a much-shaved, built-for-economy, low-friction 1.3 that, at full chat, makes a noise worse than someone else’s crying baby on an airliner. It’s worse than the sound of your parachute failing to open. Really, to get an idea of how awful it is, you’d have to sit a dog on a ham slicer.
So you’re sitting there with the engine screaming its head off, and your ears bleeding, and you’re doing only 23mph because that’s about the top speed, and you’re thinking things can’t get any worse, and then they do because you run over a small piece of grit.
Now, I’ve got to tell you – I’m a Honda fan from a Honda family. My own last three cars have been Honda CRVs, two of them were purchased new. My first car was a 1976 Honda Civic – a true rice burner. Hondas are just great cars for a lot of reasons including operating cost, fuel economy, design and resale value.
Not only have I never driven a Honda I didn’t like, I’ve never read anything especially bad about the cars or the company. Then I read this review.
Here’s what I think. In the rush to go green and get the costs of hybrids down, Honda must have cut some corners on the Insight. Are the majority of consumers of clamoring for hybrids? I don’t think so, but I could be persuaded if there’s good data on that. I do believe that Western governments are applying pressure to automakers to get their fleets more environmentally friendly. This is a good thing, but does it have to mean hybrids for everyone immediately?
Some data I have been privy to regards the state of Ohio fleet manager’s decision on choosing a default state vehicle. The state of Ohio found that on all measures including sticker price, the Ford Focus was the most economical choice for state employees who are permanently assigned vehicles. At 30 MPG or so, even their carbon footprint was smaller than Honda’s older model Insight.
This brings about some other public policy issues. Most objectively informed people understand that we must curtail carbon emissions and that oil will only grow increasingly scarce and expensive over time. Government policies affecting the auto industry or consumer choice in cars – such as tax breaks – should perhaps provide incentives to radically move the bar up on CAFE standards.
The world’s auto industry is too important to the overall economy to have great companies like Honda rushing products that aren’t ready. The unintended consequences could be detrimental to brands or worse, turn consumers off to hybrid vehicles.
I don’t doubt that someday there will be affordable hybrids or electric vehicles which provide utility and are a pleasure to drive. For now, maybe we should bridge the gap to that future by perfecting what we know so much about – the internal combustion engine.
Video – Obama Weekly Address – Health Care & Energy
Transcript – Obama Weekly Address – Health Care and Energy
(Source: White House Press Office)
Good morning. Over the past few months, as we have put in place a plan to speed our economic recovery, I have spoken repeatedly of the need to lay a new foundation for lasting prosperity; a foundation that will support good jobs and rising incomes; a foundation for economic growth where we no longer rely on excessive debt and reckless risk – but instead on skilled workers and sound investments to lead the world in the industries of the 21st century.
Two pillars of this new foundation are clean energy and health care. And while there remains a great deal of difficult work ahead, I am heartened by what we have seen these past few days: a willingness of those with different points of view and disparate interests to come together around common goals – to embrace a shared sense of responsibility and make historic progress.
