Tag Archives: Oil

Venezuela’s Maduro urges Obama to halt “plot” against rival

Venezuela’s Maduro urges Obama to halt “plot” against rival

By Daniel Wallis

CARACAS, (Reuters) – Venezuela’s acting president urged U.S. leader Barack Obama to stop what he called a plot by the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency to kill his opposition rival and trigger a coup before an April 14 election.

Nicolas Maduro said the plan was to blame his opponent’s murder on the OPEC nation’s government and to “fill Venezuelans with hate” as they prepare to go to vote following the death of socialist leader Hugo Chavez.

Maduro first mentioned a plot against his rival, Henrique Capriles, last week, blaming it on former Bush administration officials Roger Noriega and Otto Reich. Both rejected the allegations as untrue, outrageous and defamatory.

“I call on President Obama – Roger Noriega, Otto Reich, officials at the Pentagon and at the CIA are behind a plan to assassinate the right-wing presidential candidate to create chaos,” Maduro said in a TV interview broadcast on Sunday.

Maduro, who is Chavez’s preferred successor, said the purpose of the plot was to set off a coup and that his information came from “a very good source.”

During his 14 years in power, the charismatic but divisive Chavez, who died March 5 after a two-year battle with cancer, often denounced U.S. plots against him and his “revolution.” Critics dismissed those claims as a smokescreen to keep voters focused on a sense of “imperialist” threat.

In kicking off the opposition’s campaign in the provinces on Saturday, Capriles said Maduro would be to blame if anything happened to him.

MADURO TO JOIN TWITTER

Capriles, a 40-year-old centrist state governor who cites Brazil as his economic model for Venezuela, accuses Maduro of using his boss’s death as a mawkish campaign tool ahead of the April 14 vote.

Maduro, 50, a former bus driver who is trumpeting his working-class roots like Chavez, has a lead over Capriles of more than 10 percentage points, according to two recent opinion polls. Both were conducted before Chavez’s death.

Maduro has sought to emulate the late president’s common touch and emotional bond with voters but has struggled – beyond copying Chavez’s bombastic rhetoric against foes at home and abroad.

In Sunday’s interview, recorded at the military museum where Chavez’s body was carried in a somber funeral procession on Friday after 10 days of mourning, Maduro said he had cried more when Chavez died than when his own parents passed away.

Later on Sunday, his campaign team plans to launch Maduro’s official Twitter account in another move reminiscent of Chavez. Chavez’s @chavezcandanga account had drawn more than 4 million followers before his death – making it the second most-followed presidential account after Obama’s.

The election campaign began in a particularly nasty atmosphere, with both sides accusing each other of dirty tricks, and Capriles and Maduro landing very personalized blows.

At stake in the election is not only the future of Chavez’s leftist revolution but also the continuation of Venezuelan oil subsidies and other aid crucial to the economies of leftist allies around Latin America, from Cuba to Bolivia.

Venezuela boasts the world’s largest oil reserves. SOURCE

Oil Pulling Benefits – What is Oil Pulling, Anyway?

Oil Pulling Benefits – What is Oil Pulling, Anyway?

Mike Barrett
NaturalSociety

What is Oil Pulling, Anyway?Most people are at least aware of the idea behind eating certain foods, exercising, and avoiding toxic chemicals to maintain overall health. Indeed, consuming powerful, health-boosting foods and avoiding unhealthy junk is a great way to stay healthy, but there are also some very specific techniques which can be utilized to achieve numerous health benefits. Among these techniques is a lesser known one called oil pulling. What is oil pulling, anyway – and what are the oil pulling benefits?

What is Oil Pulling, Anyway?

Used in ancient Ayurvedic medicine, oil pulling is an Indian remedy used primarily to enhance oral health and cleanse the body. Thankfully, the process of oil pulling is actually quite simple, harmless, and very inexpensive. Simply take one tablespoon of a pure, organic oil and swish it around in your mouth for 15-20 minutes. Move the oil around your mouth through sipping, sucking, and essentially pulling through your teeth. After rinsing, spit out the oil, thoroughly rinse your mouth out with water, and consume 2-3 glasses of water (purified if possible).

During this process, the oil mixes with the saliva, creating a thin, white liquid. Swishing activates the enzymes, and the enzymes draw toxins out of the blood. More specifically, lipids in the oil help to extract toxins from the saliva of the mouth. As you swish the oil around your mouth, teeth, gums, and tongue, the oil continues to absorb toxins while later turning thick and white. At this point, the oil becomes toxic; this is why spitting the oil out instead of swallowing it is an important last step, as you don’t want to reabsorb the toxins. While you can do this process anytime during the day, it is most beneficial upon rising, before eating or brushing your teeth.

While some individuals have had some success by using oils such as coconut and olive, the most popular and effective oils by far to use for oil pulling are sesame and sunflower.
Oil Pulling Benefits

As mentioned, the primary reasons for oil pulling is to remove bacteria, parasites and other toxins from your teeth and mucus membranes, and detoxify. One study showcases the oil pulling benefits on the oral level, where oil pulling with sesame oil was shown to reduce the amount of streptococcus mutants in both teeth plaque and mouth saliva, and boost overall health. Another study also shows how oil pulling can result in a significant reduction in total bacteria count.

As reported by Dr. Group of Global Healing Center, oil pulling benefits on an oral level also include:

Overall strengthening of the teeth and gums and jaws.
Prevention of diseases of the gums and mouth, such as cavities and gingivitis.
Prevention of overall tooth decay
Prevention for bad breath
Potential holistic remedy for bleeding gums
Prevention of dryness of the lips, mouth and throat.
Possible holistic treatment for TMJ and general soreness in the jaw area.

In addition to the benefits of oil pulling surrounding oral health, this ancient therapy also has a number of positive effects on the body. According to an article previously published on The Hindu Business Online (but seems to have been moved or removed), one doctor, Dr. F. Karsch, M.D., presented a paper to the All-Ukrainian Association outlining rather incredible possibilities oil pulling is capable of. Going by Dr. Karsch, oil pulling benefits can help with almost any illness or chronic condition, including:

Mouth & gum disease; stiff joints; allergies; asthma; high blood sugar; constipation; migraines; bronchitis; eczema; heart, kidney, lung diseases; leukemia; arthritis; meningitis; insomnia; menopause (hormonal issues); cancer; AIDS; chronic infections; varicose veins; high blood pressure; diabetes; cracked heels; acne, arthritis; bronchitis; dermatitis; sinusitis; and many more.

Whether you choose to use oil pulling to help treat other conditions or not, the benefits of oil pulling surrounding oral health and detoxification certainly make the therapy worthwhile.

Additional Sources:

Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine

Read more: SOURCE

The United States Has Plenty Of Oil: 10 Facts About America’s Energy Resources That Will Blow Your Mind

The United States Has Plenty Of Oil: 10 Facts About America’s Energy Resources That Will Blow Your Mind

Custom Search

The United States is not running out of oil. In fact, nobody on the entire globe has more energy resources than the United States does. The truth is that we are absolutely swimming in oil and natural gas and we have so much coal that we have no idea what to do with it all. At current consumption rates, America has enough energy resources to completely satisfy all of its needs well into the 22nd century. If we would just access those resources, we would not have to import a single drop of foreign oil. But most Americans don’t realize that we have plenty of oil. In fact, our education system has brainwashed most Americans into believing that our energy resources are rapidly being depleted and that we will soon enter a great energy crisis. We are all constantly told that we must transition to “green energy” before it is too late. But the reality is that America is an energy rich nation and new discoveries of oil and natural gas deposits are being made all the time. Shouldn’t someone tell the American people the truth about these things?

Sadly, Barack Obama keeps running around the country declaring that there is no way that the United States can supply itself with enough oil. During one speech a while back, Obama made the following statement….

“With only 2% of the world’s oil reserves, we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices”

The funny thing is that what Obama said sounds very similar to something that Jimmy Carter said back in 1977….

“Unless profound changes are made to lower oil consumption, we now believe that early in the 1980s the world will be demanding more oil than it can produce”.

How did that prediction work out for Jimmy Carter?

Not too well.

The truth is that Obama is misleading the American people just like Jimmy Carter did. A recent Investor’s Business Daily article explained how Obama is twisting the truth….

But the figure Obama uses — proved oil reserves — vastly undercounts how much oil the U.S. actually contains. In fact, far from being oil-poor, the country is awash in vast quantities — enough to meet all the country’s oil needs for hundreds of years.

At current consumption rates, the United States has enough oil to last into the 23rd century without ever importing a single drop of oil from another country.

But only a very small fraction of the American people know this.

So when are we going to start hearing the truth?

The following are 10 facts about America’s energy resources that will blow your mind….

#1 Back in 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey told the American people that the Bakken Shale formation in western North Dakota and eastern Montana only held 151 million barrels of oil. Today, government officials are admitting that it holds 4.3 billion barrels of recoverable oil, and some analysts believe that the actual number could be closer to 20 billion barrels of oil.

#2 It is estimated that there are up to 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil deposits in the tar sands of Utah.

#3 It is estimated that there are at least 86 billion barrels of recoverable oil deposits in the Outer Continental Shelf.

#4 It is believed that there are 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil deposits in the Green River formation in Wyoming.

#5 Overall, the United States is sitting on approximately 1.442 trillion barrels of recoverable oil deposits.

#6 According to the Institute of Energy Research, the United States has a 120 year supply of natural gas.

#7 According to the Institute of Energy Research, the United States has a 200 year supply of oil.

#8 According to the Institute of Energy Research, the United States has a 464 year supply of coal.

#9 According to Pastor Lindsey Williams, absolutely gigantic oil fields have been discovered up in Alaska that the American public is not being told about.

#10 Goldman Sachs is predicting that the United States will be the number one oil producing country in the world by the year 2017.

But you never hear any of these statistics from Barack Obama, do you?

And some of our oil fields that were thought to be “depleted” are actually filling back up with oil. Many scientists are extremely puzzled by this. The following quote is from a 1999 Wall Street Journal article….

Production at the oil field, deep in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana, was supposed to have declined years ago. And for a while, it behaved like any normal field: Following its 1973 discovery, Eugene Island 330’s output peaked at about 15,000 barrels a day. By 1989, production had slowed to about 4,000 barrels a day.

Then suddenly—some say almost inexplicably—Eugene Island’s fortunes reversed. The field, operated by PennzEnergy Co., is now producing 13,000 barrels a day, and probable reserves have rocketed to more than 400 million barrels from 60 million. Stranger still, scientists studying the field say the crude coming out of the pipe is of a geological age quite different from the oil that gushed 10 years ago.

The truth is that there is still much about the formation of oil that is a great mystery to our scientists.

Unfortunately, much of the information that you have read above is being repressed because it would be very damaging to the “green agenda” that the global elite are trying to impose on all of us.

As I wrote about yesterday, a “green economy” is absolutely central to the “sustainable development” agenda that the United Nations is promoting.

The elitists at the UN believe that carbon dioxide is evil and that it is going to cause catastrophic climate change.

But the truth is that we have always had “climate change” and even if you eliminated all forms of human activity it would only reduce carbon dioxide levels on our planet by a marginal amount.

And carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. Every plant on earth uses carbon dioxide. In the past, our planet actually had much higher levels of carbon dioxide. When there are high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, plant life thrives and more food can be grown.

So if you want the earth to be more “green”, then you should actually want levels of carbon dioxide to be even higher.

Unfortunately, this kind of logic evades the “true believers”.

Folks like Al Gore run around the planet declaring that global warming is going to bring an end to life as we know it if something is not done immediately.

Well, you know what?

The climate on earth is going to change and nothing can stop it. It has always changed and it always will change.

The primary cause of climate change is the gigantic ball of fire that our planet is revolving around. You could fit 1.3 million earths inside the sun. When there is a lot of solar activity the earth tends to get warmer, and when there is not a lot of solar activity the earth tends to get cooler.

The sun has been behaving very strangely in recent years. If this continues (or gets even worse) we are going to see some very bizarre weather patterns in the years ahead.

And there is not a thing we can do about it other than pray.

But Obama is going to continue to repress energy production in the United States and try to push us toward his vision of a “green society”.

Unfortunately, much of what he is trying to do is extremely damaging to our economy. This was beautifully demonstrated in a recent YouTube video entitled “If I Wanted America To Fail”….

So does this mean that alternative energy is bad?

Of course not.

At the same time that we work to exploit the vast deposits of oil, natural gas and coal under our feet, we should also seek to develop cutting edge alternative energy technologies.

For example, most Americans have never even heard of thorium, but many scientists believe that it could provide nearly endless amounts of very safe, very cheap and very clean energy for future generations.

America is not going to run out of energy. America has more energy resources that anyone else in the world and our nation is also one of the leaders in developing cutting edge alternative energy technologies.

This country has a lot of problems, but a lack of energy is not going to be one of them unless our politicians get in the way.

So what do you think about all of this? Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below….

SOURCE

NV Energy windmill program generates rebates, little electricity


NV Energy windmill program generates rebates, little electricity

By Anjeanette Damon

State agency runs out of money to pay for more costly solar power

A year ago, a Reno clean energy businessman warned the Public Utilities Commission that if it didn’t set a few standards for NV Energy’s wind rebate program, its customers could end up footing the bill for turbines that rarely produce electricity.

One reason behind his concern: To be eligible for rebates, customers didn’t need to prove that the wind actually blows enough to justify installing a turbine on their property.

“This could allow unscrupulous developers to sell turbines to unsuspecting customers who will not generate electricity from an installed turbine because there is no wind to power the turbine,” Clean Energy Center managing member Rich Hamilton told the PUC last May. “This problem is especially vexing because ratepayer money could be contributing to the cost of such turbines, which could give the Wind Generations program and the wind industry a black eye.”

The PUC agreed that such a standard would be a good idea but sided with NV Energy’s position that it was too early to move forward with it just yet.

A year later, however, Hamilton’s warning appears to have been spot on.

The electricity produced by NV Energy’s $46 million wind rebate program has fallen far short of expectations.

In a startling example, the city of Reno’s wind turbines — for which the city received more than $150,000 in rate-payer funded rebates — produced dramatically less electricity than the manufacturers of its turbines promised.

“These manufacturers, when they gave us the turbines, they said they were designed to be mounted on a parapet at this height, and that’s what we did,” said Jason Geddes, who runs the city of Reno’s renewable energy program. “But when we started getting actual wind flow patterns, we realized their claims were wrong.”

As first reported by the Reno Gazette-Journal, one turbine that cost the city $21,000 to install saved the city $4 on its energy bill. Overall, $416,000 worth of turbines have netted the city $2,800 in energy savings.

Not all of the city’s turbines performed so poorly. But on average, the small wind turbines installed statewide through NV Energy’s program have yielded disappointing results.

“There is a lot of difference in some of the generators relative to what the (manufacturers) claim,” said John Hargrove, who manages NV Energy’s Renewable Generations program. “A generator can claim to put out 100 kilowatt hours, but that’s based on an assumption that there’s a certain amount of wind. If you don’t have the wind, you won’t have the output.”

That’s exactly why Hamilton pleaded with the PUC to impose a requirement that customers first prove their wind resource before winning a rebate.

“I’m terribly worried about the future of the program,” said Hamilton, whose company does solar and wind projects. “We really, really feel strongly about this. I’m a rate-payer. And if the rate-payers are paying for this, the rate-payer should be getting the most bang for their buck.”

Hamilton also believes equipment standards should be in place to minimize faulty turbines, some of which have fallen apart.

That’s happened both in Reno and in rural Nevada. Geddes said one of his turbines that was rated to 110 mph fell apart in a 105-mph gust.

A more catastrophic failure occurred on a farm in rural Nevada, when a large turbine spun apart only days after it was installed. No one was injured, largely because it was in a remote locale.

“It was very spectacular,” said Matt Newberry, who runs NV Energy’s wind program. “It was only up for a matter of days. We’re relieved we haven’t had any more of those.”

Unlike the solar industry, which has figured out how to correctly install productive solar generators on rooftops and in parking lots across the state, the wind industry in Nevada is still in its infancy.

So far, statewide, about 150 turbines have been installed through a rebate program created by the 2007 Legislature.

Under the demonstration programs, cities, schools, businesses and homeowners are eligible for a rebate up to the full cost of the turbine depending on a variety of factors including the system’s wattage.

The vast majority of the projects are in Northern and rural Nevada. Most of the cost of the program is born by rate-payers of Sierra Pacific, as NV Energy’s Northern Nevada sister company is known, and not the utility’s Southern Nevada customers.

The PUC is again considering the requirements advocated by Hamilton — requirements that will govern the program statewide.

Power company officials first worried stringent requirements could strangle the budding industry. But after a year of experimenting with the program, they appear on board with both resource and equipment standards.
Click to enlarge photo

Leila Navidi

Searchlight resident George Beyer listens while sitting next to a photo of a wind turbine during a Searchlight Town Hall Meeting at the Searchlight Community Center about a proposed wind energy project Thursday, June 25, 2009.

“I think it’s a really smart evolution of the program,” Newberry said. “When it was instituted, nobody really knew much about wind in the state. The market itself, even the Legislature, labeled it as a demonstration program.

“But we want to make sure customers are getting good things. We don’t want to see people install them in places where there’s not good wind.”

Hargrove declared the demonstration successful, largely because of how much the company has learned about small wind projects. He noted the wind program doesn’t make much sense in Nevada’s urban centers.

“Rather than putting a little one in the backyard of a home, we’re focusing on much larger projects that go out on a farm,” he said. “While some early projects are not producing great results, it’s not because wind doesn’t work. We’re tightening up our standards.”

In its newest filing before the PUC, the company is advocating a 10-mph average wind speed standard to be eligible for the rebate.

Not so fast, Geddes warned.

He noted that models used to calculate average wind speed aren’t reliable. For example, the city’s two most productive wind turbines wouldn’t have been eligible for the rebate because wind studies said the average wind speed was below 10 mph.

The only accurate way to test average wind speed is to install an anemometer and take readings for a year, Geddes said.

Geddes would rather see a performance-based incentive. To get a rate-payer-funded rebate, a customer would have to prove the turbine produced electricity.

Such an incentive was passed by the Legislature last year. But Gov. Brian Sandoval vetoed the bill after NV Energy won a last-minute amendment to fund a major transmission line project.

Hamilton countered that investing in an anemometer might not be such a bad idea.

“If you are going to invest tens of thousands in something, it may be worth waiting to do a wind resource assessment,” he said.

SOURCE

Six Submarines

Six Million Submarines

Yesterday, Israel and Germany signed at Israel’s embassy in Berlin an agreement for the supply of the sixth Dolphin class submarine to Israel. The agreement was achieved after a delay caused by Germany conditioning the deal on concessions to the Palestinian Authority. On December 4, 2011, it was disclosed a German submarine had hit Netanyahu’s office, Welt am Sonntag claimed Germany had told Israel in November 2011 that it could not go ahead with the sixth submarine purchase unless Israel transferred the frozen budget to its legal owner, the Palestinian Authority (see Sanctions on Israel Redeem Germany). An upset Netanyahu surrendered on November 27 and opened the way to the last leg of the negotiations process, which ended yesterday

The Type 800 Dolphin class is a diesel-electric attack submarine developed and constructed by Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft AG (HDW), Germany, for the Israeli Navy. The IDF planned since the 1970s to replace its inadequate Gal (“wave” in Hebrew) submarines; from the mid 1980s it was clear a deal would be signed with Germany for newly designed diesel submarines capable of carrying nuclear-warhead missiles. Dolphin—the first boat in the group—was delivered in 1998. Leviatan (“whale”) was delivered in 1999. These two were donated by the German government. The third one—named Tkuma, “revival”—was delivered in 2000; Israel paid for it at a subsidized price, as with the following ones. Tanin (“crocodile”) to be delivered later this year, while Rahav (“wide” and also the name of the prostitute that led the Hebrew spies into Jericho, see Joshua chapters 2 and 5) to be delivered in 2013. Yesterday, the still unnamed sixth boat was ordered. These are the most expensive vehicles in the IDF, the official price tag of such a submarine in 2012 is almost one billion dollars; Germany is said to subsidize a third of this staggering sum.

During the signing ceremony, Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak defined the sixth submarine as an “additional force multiplier.” The latter is a military term referring to an attribute which makes a given force more effective; thus it justifies additional costs as in the case of the Dolphin submarines. One of the characteristics of the last three submarines in the series is an improved propulsion system of undisclosed performance, but that according to sources in the Israeli Ministry of Defense, gives them capabilities similar to those of nuclear submarines. The first three submarines in the group have an unrefuelled range of 8,000 nautical miles traveling on the surface at 8 knots, and over 400 nautical miles at 8 knots fully submerged. They can remain unsupplied for up to 30 days on station, and—obviously—can be served by submarine tender ships that can resupply, rearm, and refuel them at sea. The new boats have undisclosed range capabilities. Combining this with their unusual weaponry, they give Israel the capability of a nuclear second strike.

The Great Game 2012

To Kill the Sun, 2008 by Haya Rukin | Israel’s Samson Option
“Samson” is derived from “shemesh,” Hebrew for “sun”


The Nuclear Second Strike

The Dolphin submarines are equipped with 6 × 533mm diameter torpedo tubes, and 4 x 650mm torpedo tubes, while the boat can carry up to sixteen missiles. Their radar systems were developed and supplied by Israeli companies Elbit and Elta. The wider torpedo tubes can be used to deliver swimmer delivery vehicles and Submarine-launched cruise missiles, SLCMs. The most potent SLCM that can be launched from the boats is the Popeye Turbo SLCM, a variant of RAFAEL’s Popeye, which is an air-to-ground missile. The adapted weapon can allegedly carry a 200kg nuclear warhead. The US Navy recorded an Israeli SLCM test in the Indian Ocean lasting 1,500 kilometers. Combined with the outstanding range of the delivery vehicle, this gives Israel the capability to strike theoretically almost every point on the planet (Urumqi, China, an obvious exception), if used combined with submarine tender ships (Zim could help on this). This provides Israel with an offshore “second strike” capability.

The Great Game 2012

This means that Israel will be able to strike with nuclear weapons from submarines at hidden locations at sea even if its nuclear weapons stored on land are harmed in an enemy strike. However, why does one need a second strike option, if there are no real options of an initial attack taking place? Not even the CIA claims that Iran is militarily offensive. Israel is spending so much money on this that we must be witnessing something else. In 1991, Random House published The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy, by Seymour Hersh. The largest publisher in the world, Random House is closely related to Israel and Jews, (see The Da Vinci Nazi, hence it is difficult to believe this publication took place without the approval and support of Israel. The book’s title refers to the nuclear strategy whereby Israel would launch a nuclear retaliatory strike if the state was being overrun, just as the Biblical figure Samson pushed apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof and killing himself and thousands of Philistines who had gathered to see him humiliated.

Judges 16:30 And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life.

Even Israel acknowledges the Holocaust is its raison d’être. It doesn’t matter what happened there, the official version led to the UN’s Partition Decision. Yet, Neturei Karta’s (an ultra-orthodox Jewish group) website displays documents clarifying the responsibility of Jewish leaders of the time beyond doubts. Sixty years later, the Israeli leadership sees the end. Israel is not a country in the Western sense of the world. We are not talking here about an entity defined by territory, or even by a legal system. That’s one of the reasons why the Knesset legislated the Law of Return, which gives automatic citizenship to every Jew landing on Israel, a law that would be defined as racist elsewhere. That’s why many Israeli denizens do not get citizenship even if marrying a citizen. Right now, it seems this entity’s leaders—call them the Elders of Zion if you want—are looking ahead to the post-State of Israel period because the actual situation is unredeemable in their eyes.

How would they continue to be leaders if the state changes for good? How would they stay in power if it becomes a true democracy also for its Palestinian citizens? The time of choices is approaching. The Jewish leadership will not renounce its powers regardless of the cost. In order to stay in power during the next (and final) Diaspora, they need a new narrative to sell to their badly beaten sheep. Here is where the massive investment in nuclear technologies begins to make sense. It seems this time the narrative would be Samson’s Option, a nuclear holocaust. It may begin as a false flag attack; in order for this to work, the Jewish leaders must be able to claim “we were attacked; the entire world is still against us!” Following the false flag attack, or a surgical Israeli strike on Iranian installations, the latter would be forced to make a defensive strike on Israel. The initiating excuse matters little; Israel must force a cataclysmic attack on itself. Damage so heavy the State of Israel would not be viable anymore. Then, the culprit would be destroyed with the second strike capability acquired with the help of the state-of-the-art German submarines. This last step is necessary in order to destroy all proofs of the scheme, so that history would be written (again) by Zionist forces abroad, with the gracious help of Random House and allies. Nowadays, Israel reports havong six million Jewish citizens, the same number of Jewish victims it claims died during WWII. If the Samson Option scenario takes place, the few survivors will report on six million submarines buried in the deep sea adjacent to Samson’s headquarters. In her work of art, Haya Rukin subtly called this To Kill the Sun.

SOURCE

Wind Farms Paid to Stop Producing Power

Wind Farms Paid to Stop Producing Power
|
Written by James Heiser

While President Obama travels around the United States touting “green energy” as the solution to the nation’s spiraling energy costs, the wind farms of the Pacific Northwest are proving once again that alternative energy sources are having a hard time living up to the praise lavished on them.

According to the UPI, Obama told workers at a truck manufacturing plant in North Carolina: “We’ve got to develop every source of American energy — not just oil and gas, but wind power and solar power, nuclear power, biofuels.” At the same time, the Bonneville Power Administration — a federal agency — has been shutting down wind turbines for hundreds of hours because demand could not keep up with the supply. An article for FoxNews.com (“Wind farms in Pacific Northwest paid to not produce”) details the decision to further subsidize wind farms which could only be built with federal funds:

The problem arose during the late spring and early summer last year. Rapid snow melt filled the Columbia River Basin. The water rushed through the 31 dams run by the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency based in Portland, Ore., allowing for peak hydropower generation. At the very same time, the wind howled, leading to maximum wind power production.

Demand could not keep up with supply, so BPA shut down the wind farms for nearly 200 hours over 38 days.

“It’s the one system in the world where in real time, moment to moment, you have to produce as much energy as is being consumed,” BPA spokesman Doug Johnson said of the renewable energy.

Now, Bonneville is offering to compensate wind companies for half their lost revenue. The bill could reach up to $50 million a year.

The extra payout means energy users will eventually have to pay more.

Lacking a means for storing the excess energy produced by the wind turbines, the capacity of the wind farms simply went to waste when the order came down to cease production for hundreds of hours. Unlike coal and oil fired plants, which produce power on a predictable schedule, wind farm production is literally at the mercy of the elements: whether the turbines are functioning at peak efficiency, or at a standstill because of low windspeed, the needs of the market for power fluctuate according to concerns which may have little or nothing to do with the winds driving energy production. Coal, oil and nuclear plants can fluctuate production to match demand from industry and residential customers, but the wind turbines are ambivalent to such concerns and may overproduce, or underproduce, without concern for economic impact.

It has been known for some time now that wind power falls far short of living up to its reputation for being “green” energy. The problem with wind turbines is not simply one of erratic energy production — the creation of the turbines themselves has led to environmental damage. Mining the raw materials needed for the powerful magnets used in the turbines has led to widespread ecological despoliation in China. As reported for The New American in February 2011, the media in the United Kingdom was already documenting the pollution connected with wind power:

An extensively researched report for the UK’s Daily Mail reveals one of the apparently-unavoidable byproducts of “green” wind power: a vast lake of toxic, radioactive sludge resulting from the production of the powerful magnets needed at the heart of every wind turbine. Thus far, the absurd contradiction at the heart of the expansion of wind power in the United Kingdom has been hidden from the public, because the pollution is far removed from the eyes of the public: The rare earths needed for making the wind turbines are processed in Mongolia, and it is alleged that corporate interests and environmentalists have either concealed that pollution, or attempted to downplay its effects, to avoid public backlash against the expensive and inefficient alternative energy.

Not only were the turbines built at an appalling cost to the environment, they also proved to be most inefficient when they were needed the most. When the UK suffered from a dramatic drop in temperatures, the turbines came to a stop for the simple reason that the winds ceased to blow:

According to the Daily Mail, the absurd inefficiencies of wind power resulted in the UK’s 3,153 turbines producing a mere .2 percent — yes, that’s one-fifth of one percent — of the needed power during the bitter cold which blanketed the nation this past December. (Operating at peak efficiency, the turbines should have been able to provide almost ten percent of the needed power, but unreliable winds had the turbines functioning at less than 2.5 percent of their capacity.)

Aside from the controversies related to the manufacture of the wind turbines, and their highly variable level of energy production, wind farms have also generated protests on the basis of their noise generation, and complaints about their aesthetic effect. One wind farm project in the Pacific Northwest is already on hold due to several factors — despite approval from the Governor of Washington. The Associated Press reports that one of the developers admits the wind farm would not be economically viable:

Opponents of a wind farm on the north side of the scenic Columbia River Gorge say they may appeal Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire’s approval of it.

Meanwhile, one of the developers of the Whistling Ridge Energy Project in Skamania County says the project is on hold.

Jason Spadaro, president of SDS Lumber Co. of Bingen, says he appreciates the governor’s approval but that the reduced size of the approved project is not economically viable right now.

Washington’s energy siting council had recommended that the project be scaled back from 50 to 35 turbines.

With wind farms being paid not to produce, or failing to produce when they are needed, the most reliable and economically-efficient means of energy production continues to be various forms of hydrocarbon-based energy sources, and nuclear power. As noted in a recent Bloomberg article, 35 percent of the world’s energy comes from oil, 30 percent from coal, and 20 percent from natural gas. And, despite Obama’s fixation on alternative energy vehicles, the world’s supply of oil can continue to meet demand for many years to come. Every dollar spent on non-producing wind turbines is coming directly from the pockets of a public already overburdened with taxation and spiraling energy costs. As reported last fall for The New American, new domestic oil production could create a million new jobs by 2018. What is needed is for new production to proceed without interference driven by the ideological agenda which favors inefficient, expensive forms of energy production over proven technologies. Until then, Americans may continue paying wind farms to underproduce.
SOURCE

Timeline: History of the Electric Car

Timeline: History of the Electric Car
1832-1839
Scottish inventor Robert Anderson invents the first crude electric carriage powered by non-rechargeable primary cells.

1835
American Thomas Davenport is credited with building the first practical electric vehicle — a small locomotive.

1859
French physicist Gaston Planté invents the rechargeable lead-acid storage battery. In 1881, his countryman Camille Faure will improve the storage battery’s ability to supply current and invent the basic lead-acid battery used in automobiles.

1891
William Morrison of Des Moines, Iowa builds the first successful electric automobile in the United States.

1893
A handful of different makes and models of electric cars are exhibited in Chicago.

1897

The first electric taxis hit the streets of New York City early in the year. The Pope Manufacturing Company of Connecticut becomes the first large-scale American electric automobile manufacturer.

1899
Believing that electricity will run autos in the future, Thomas Alva Edison begins his mission to create a long-lasting, powerful battery for commercial automobiles. Though his research yields some improvements to the alkaline battery, he ultimately abandons his quest a decade later.

1900
The electric automobile is in its heyday. Of the 4,192 cars produced in the United States 28 percent are powered by electricity, and electric autos represent about one-third of all cars found on the roads of New York City, Boston, and Chicago.

1908

Henry Ford introduces the mass-produced and gasoline-powered Model T, which will have a profound effect on the U.S. automobile market.

1912

Charles Kettering invents the first practical electric automobile starter. Kettering’s invention makes gasoline-powered autos more alluring to consumers by eliminating the unwieldy hand crank starter and ultimately helps pave the way for the electric car’s demise.

1920
During the 1920s the electric car ceases to be a viable commercial product. The electric car’s downfall is attributable to a number of factors, including the desire for longer distance vehicles, their lack of horsepower, and the ready availability of gasoline.

1966
Congress introduces the earliest bills recommending use of electric vehicles as a means of reducing air pollution. A Gallup poll indicates that 33 million Americans are interested in electric vehicles.

1970s

Concerns about the soaring price of oil — peaking with the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973 — and a growing environmental movement result in renewed interests in electric cars from both consumers and producers.

1972
Victor Wouk, the “Godfather of the Hybrid,” builds the first full-powered, full-size hybrid vehicle out of a 1972 Buick Skylark provided by General Motors (G.M.) for the 1970 Federal Clean Car Incentive Program. The Environmental Protection Association later kills the program in 1976.

1974
Vanguard-Sebring’s CitiCar makes its debut at the Electric Vehicle Symposium in Washington, D.C. The CitiCar has a top speed of over 30 mph and a reliable warm-weather range of 40 miles. By 1975 the company is the sixth largest automaker in the U.S. but is dissolved only a few years later.

1975
The U.S. Postal Service purchases 350 electric delivery jeeps from AM General, a division of AMC, to be used in a test program.

1976
Congress passes the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Act. The law is intended to spur the development of new technologies including improved batteries, motors, and other hybrid-electric components.

1988
Roger Smith, CEO of G.M. , agrees to fund research efforts to build a practical consumer electric car. G.M. teams up with California’s AeroVironment to design what would become the EV1, which one employee called “the world’s most efficient production vehicle.” Some electric vehicle enthusiasts have speculated that the EV1 was never undertaken as a serious commercial venture by the large automaker.

1990
California passes its Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Mandate, which requires two percent of the state’s vehicles to have no emissions by 1998 and 10 percent by 2003. The law is repeatedly weakened over the next decade to reduce the number of pure ZEVs it requires.

1997
Toyota unveils the Prius — the world’s first commercially mass-produced and marketed hybrid car — in Japan. Nearly 18,000 units are sold during the first production year.

1997 – 2000
A few thousand all-electric cars (such as Honda’s EV Plus, G.M.’s EV1, Ford’s Ranger pickup EV, Nissan’s Altra EV, Chevy’s S-10 EV, and Toyota’s RAV4 EV) are produced by big car manufacturers, but most of them are available for lease only. All of the major automakers’ advanced all-electric production programs will be discontinued by the early 2000s.

2002
G.M. and DaimlerChrysler sue the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to repeal the ZEV mandate first passed in 1990. The Bush Administration joins that suit.


2003

G.M. announces that it will not renew leases on its EV1 cars saying it can no longer supply parts to repair the vehicles and that it plans to reclaim the cars by the end of 2004.

2005

On February 16, electric vehicle enthusiasts begin a “Don’t Crush” vigil to stop G.M. from demolishing 78 impounded EV1s in Burbank, California. The vigil ends twenty-eight days later when G.M. removes the cars from the facility. In the film “Who Killed the Electric Car” G.M. spokesman Dave Barthmuss states that the EV1s are to be recycled, not just crushed.

2006

Tesla Motors publicly unveils the ultra-sporty Tesla Roadster at the San Francisco International Auto Show in November. The first production Roadsters will be sold in 2008 with a base price listing of $98,950.

2008

January
A Better Place charging spot A Better Place charging spot
The Israeli government announces its support for a sweeping project to promote the use of electric cars in Israel. The effort will be a joint venture between Better Place, a Palo Alto start-up founded by software maven Shai Agassi, and French automaker Renault-Nissan. Agassi’s plan is to create an extensive network of charging spots and to sell EV drivers mileage in their cars like minutes on a cell phone plan. The first Renault electric cars are scheduled to hit the streets of Tel Aviv and other cities in 2011. Better Place announces a host of partnerships to support electric vehicle projects in Denmark, Canada, Japan, Australia and the U.S.

July
Gas prices reach record highs of more than $4 a gallon and car sales drop to their lowest levels in a decade. American automakers begin to shift their production lines away from SUVs and other large vehicles toward smaller, more fuel-efficient cars.

August
On the campaign trail, presidential candidate Barack Obama says he will push to have one million plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on America’s roads by 2015.

November
Struggling to remain profitable during the economic downturn, executives from the Big Three American automakers go to Washington to make the case for a $25 billion Federal bailout of the U.S. automotive industry.

December
BYD, a Chinese battery manufacturer turned automaker, releases the F3DM, the world’s first mass produced plug-in hybrid compact sedan. Though they pack less energy than more conventional lithium ion batteries, BYD opts to power the F3DM with a more stable lithium iron phosphate battery. BYD plans to release the F3DM in the U.S. in 2011, but some industry insiders have doubts about whether the car is ready for the U.S. market. Though sales of the car remain sluggish, Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway purchases a 10% stake in the company.

The National Bureau of Economic Research states officially that the U.S. has been in a recession since December 2007. The economic downturn is global in scope and will continue to exert financial pressures on the already battered U.S. auto industry.

2009

February
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 allocates $2 billion for development of electric vehicle batteries and related technologies. The Department of Energy adds another $400 million to fund building the infrastructure necessary to support plug-in electric vehicles.

April
Prime Minister Gordon Brown announces that the British government will promote the use of electric vehicles in the U.K. by offering a £2,000 subsidy to purchasers. A high-ranking government official estimates that 40% of all cars in Britain will need to be electric or hybrid for the country to reach it’s goal of cutting 80% of its CO2 emissions by 2050.

Chrysler files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. As part of its restructuring, Chrysler forms a partnership with the Italian car maker Fiat.

May
President Obama announces a new gas-mileage policy that will require automakers to meet a minimum fuel-efficiency standard of 35.5 miles a gallon by 2016.

June
The Tesla Roadster The Tesla Roadster
The Department of Energy awards $8 billion in loans to Ford, Nissan, and Tesla Motors to support the development of fuel-efficient vehicles. The automaker loans are the first distributions from a larger $25 billion fund created under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

General Motors, the leading producer of automobiles for most of the 20th Century, files for bankruptcy protection. While strong GM brands such as Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC are slated to continue, smaller names like Saturn, Hummer and Pontiac will be sold or closed. The federal government will hold a 61 percent stake in the reborn General Motors.

August
Nissan unveils its new electric car, called the LEAF (“Leading, Environmentally Friendly, Affordable, Family Car”). The LEAF is capable of a maximum speed of more than 90 mph, can travel 100 miles on a full charge, and has a battery that can be recharged to 80% of its capacity in 30 minutes. Similar to the Better Place initiative in Israel, Nissan plans to work with the Japanese government and private companies to set up charging station networks across several countries. The first production LEAFs are scheduled to go on sale in Japan, Europe, and the U.S. in the fall of 2010.

Late 2009

Though a few electric cars and plug-in hybrids are currently available on the market, several new models including the Nissan LEAF, Chevrolet Volt, and Mitsubishi i MiEV are scheduled to hit the streets in the near future. Toyota, creator of the popular Prius hybrid, has thus far declined to deliver a fully electric car.

Despite promising signs, the electric car will need to navigate a bumpy road before it can become a viable option for many drivers. Challenges to mass adoption include high sticker prices, limited battery life and travel range, and building charging stations and other infrastructure to support electric vehicles.

Sources: Hybridcars.com: History, Electric Auto Association: Electric Vehicle History, IEEE Power Engineering Society: “Electric Vehicles In The Early Years Of The Automobile” by Carl Sulzberger, About.com: The History of Electric Vehicles, Econogics: EV History, Smithsonian Institution: Edison After Forty, Who Killed the Electric Car?

SOURCE

Secretary of Energy Admits Obama Administration “OK” with High Gas Prices

Energy Secretary Chu Admits Administration OK with High Gas Prices

By Mark Whittington

President Barack Obama’s Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu uttered the kind of Washington gaffe that consists of telling the truth when inconvenient. According to Politico, Chu admitted to a House committee that the administration is not interested in lowering gas prices.

Chu, along with the Obama administration, regards the spike in gas prices as a feature rather than a bug. High gas prices provide an incentive for alternate energy technology, a priority for the White House, and a decrease in reliance on oil for energy.

The Heritage Foundation points out that hammering the American consumer with high gas prices to make electric and hybrid cars more appealing is consistent with Obama administration policy and Chu’s philosophy. That explains the refusal to allow the building of the Keystone XL pipeline and to allow drilling in wide areas of the U.S. and offshore areas.

The consequences of the policy are not likely to be of benefit to the Obama administration. The Republican National Committee has already issued a video highlighting the spike in gas prices and the failure of the administration to address the issue.

Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has issued a half-hour video touting an energy plan he claims would result in $2.50 a gallon gasoline. The plan is based on unfettered drilling for oil and gas instead of a reliance on green energy. Gingrich has also savaged Obama’s touting of algae based biofuel as “weird.”

Chu has likely highlighted an issue Republicans are going to pick up and run with. Americans are not going to be appreciative of schemes to hit them in the wallet so the American economy can shift to green energy. Besides American traditional adherence to the free market, the idea of being fleeced by a deliberate government policy is likely to be greeted with anger.

Add into the mix green energy fiascos like Solyndra, and Chu might well have kindled a full blown scandal.

How the Obama administration reacts to the expected firestorm is open to question. Green energy is as part of its fundamental religion as is universal health care, another unpopular Obama policy. If it tries to bull ahead, the electorate will likely punish Obama and the Democrats. If it tries to backtrack, Obama looks weak and facilitating, and likely will still not appease gas strapped Americans experiencing price shock at the gas pump.

SOURCE

Getting Hosed at the Pump

Getting Hosed at the Pump

By Greg Crosby

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Gas prices are going up. A lot. Already the cost of a gallon of gas has increased by 51.4 cents over the past year. By this summer don’t be surprised to see $5.00 a gallon prices at the pumps. That will mean anywhere from $85.00 to $100.00 or more to fill up your tank. But before you start cursing out the big evil oil companies again, let me tell you that it’s a lot more complicated than that. Several factors are at work here.

Even though we’ve had a warmer than normal winter across the country resulting in less demand for heating fuel (which usually means larger supplies of oil in reserve, and should translate to lower prices for us) our gas and oil prices have skyrocketed. As Fox’s Lou Dobbs has pointed out, this is because oil companies HAVE NOT stockpiled the oil that we didn’t use; they have sold it overseas to developing nations like China and India and jacked up prices to us here at home. But this is only half of the story.

President Obama is complicit in this rip off. He is simply fulfilling one of his campaign promises to turn the U.S. into a more “green energy” friendly country. Investors Business Daily has pointed out that during his presidential campaign, Obama admitted he didn’t have a problem with sky-high gasoline prices, he just “would have preferred a gradual adjustment.”

The idea is to make traditional energy sources such as gasoline and oil so expensive that it will force the public into using alternative fuels. His energy secretary, Steven Chu, told the Walt Street Journal before joining the administration that “somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

In a follow-up article, ABC News interviewed a scientist who had worked with Chu, Lee Schipper, who estimated that European gas prices were at about $7 to $9 per gallon back in 2008. And last year, Chu claimed “the price of gasoline over the long haul should be expected to go up.”

Obama has said that he wants to “reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil,” but what he really wants is to reduce the country’s dependence on ALL oil, both foreign and domestic and put us all into electric cars. You might not think that is such a bad idea, and you might be right except for one little thing? the electric cars use more energy and are worse for the environment than the internal combustion engine.

A new British study suggests that electric vehicles might not be as green as environmentalists think. Because of pollution from the factories that make batteries, an electric car has a bigger carbon footprint than a gas-burning vehicle until it’s traveled 80,000 miles, according to the research, which was financed by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air says, “Electric cars aren’t so good for the planet after all. Not only do electric vehicles produce just as much carbon in their overall cycle as internal-combustion engines, the need to replace the batteries actually makes them less green than current technology.” If we want a cleaner way to get around, “the answer is natural gas, not electric vehicles.”

Not only that, but findings from researchers at University of Tennessee, Knoxville, show that electric cars that have been studied in China have an overall impact on pollution that could be more harmful to health than gasoline vehicles.

Chris Cherry, assistant professor in civil and environmental engineering, and graduate student Shuguang Ji, analyzed the emissions and environmental health impacts of five vehicle technologies in 34 major Chinese cities, focusing on dangerous fine particles. What Cherry and his team found defies conventional logic: electric cars cause much more overall harmful particulate matter pollution than gasoline cars.

“An implicit assumption has been that air quality and health impacts are lower for electric vehicles than for conventional vehicles,” Cherry said. “Our findings challenge that by comparing what is emitted by vehicle use to what people are actually exposed to. Prior studies have only examined environmental impacts by comparing emission factors or greenhouse gas emissions.”

But none of this matters. Ideology trumps facts in the Obama administration every time. Whenever Obama has had the chance to encourage oil production, he’s done the opposite. Consider the following:

He needlessly halted Gulf drilling permits after the BP oil spill, and continues to slow-walk them. Permit approvals are less than half their pre-Obama average, and approval times have nearly doubled.

Obama scuttled the 700,000-barrels-a-day Keystone XL pipeline, despite approval by the State Department after an exhaustive three-year review. In addition to oil, this project would have also resulted in over 25,000 new American jobs.

And he endlessly demonizes oil companies while pushing to sharply raise their taxes.

Interesting isn’t it how a socialistic-leaning president and a capitalistic oil industry can come together to make strange bedfellows. Both are getting what they want, while us poor saps just get hosed again at the pumps.

SOURCE

Public Purposely Misled by Obama Administration about Size of Gulf Oil Spill Estimates

Obama Administration Purposely Misled Public about Gulf Oil Spill Estimates

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) has accused the Obama administration of deliberately misleading the public about how much oil gushed from the ruptured BP well in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

Using the Freedom of Information Act, PEER obtained an email from a top administration official that revealed that the White House was pressuring top government scientists to low-ball the oil flow rate.

In late May 2010, Dr. Marcia McNutt, director of the U.S. Geologic Survey and head of the government’s Flow Rate Technical Group, wrote to scientists who complained about the misleading information coming out of the White House about the crisis.

“I cannot tell you what a nightmare the past two days have been dealing with the communications people at the White House…,” McNutt wrote. “The press release that went out on our results was misleading and was not reviewed by a scientist for accuracy.”

She went on to give examples: “Let me give you a flavor of some of the ‘suggestions’ I was getting from the NIC [National Intelligence Council] and from the communications people at the White House and DOI [Department of the Interior] as recently as yesterday afternoon as to how to ‘simplify’ our bottom line:

From a NIC Admiral: How about just saying that the range of flow rates is 12,000 to 25,000 barrels per day? (No, because the 25,000 is a LOWER bound, not an UPPER bound….)

From a White House communications person: How about saying that several lines of evidence suggest that the flow is 12,000 to 19,000 barrels per day but that the rate could be as high as 25,000 barrels per day? (No, because the 25,000 is a LOWER bound, not an UPPER bound…).”

President Barack Obama’s top aides publically insisted that at worst, about 25,000 barrels of oil a day were spewing from the well. Later, it was revealed that the rate was more than 50,000 barrels a day.
-Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsk

SOURCE

Top 10 buyers of Iran’s oil………..yea, America’s not one of them

Top 10 buyers of Iran’s oil

Top 10 buyers of Iran’s oil –

Iran produces about 3.5 million barrels a day of crude with another 500,000 bpd of condensate, exporting about 2.6 million bpd of which 50,000 bpd is refined products, the International Energy Agency estimates.

OPEC’s second largest producer Iran sells large volumes of oil to China, India, South Korea, Japan and Italy. But Turkey, South Africa and Sri Lanka rely most heavily on Iranian oil as a percentage of imports.

U.S. sanctions already forbid imports of Iranian oil. France is pressing the European Union to consider a ban on Iranian oil to discourage Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Iran produces about 3.5 million barrels a day of crude with another 500,000 bpd of condensate, exporting about 2.6 million bpd of which 50,000 bpd is refined products, the International

Energy Agency estimates.

The top ten buyers of Iranian crude are as follows. Data is for the second quarter 2011 from the IEA with the exception of China, India and Sri Lanka which are not IEA members. Data for

those countries is for first half 2011 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Country Imports k/bpd Percent Imports

1. China 543,000 10

2. India 341,000 11

3. Japan 251,000 5.9

4. Italy 249,000 13.3

5. South Korea 239,000 7.4

6. Turkey 217,000 30.6

7. Spain 149,000 9.6

8. Greece 111,000 34.7

9. South Africa 98,000 25

10.France 78,000 4.4

In addition Sri Lanka imported 39,000 bpd in the first half of the year. It is completely reliant on Iranian oil.

Iran holds around 137 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, or nearly 10 percent of the world total, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2011. Despite sitting on the world’s second largest reserves of gas, Iran’s growing appetite for its own gas, combined with tightening international sanctions that have throttled its fledgling liquefied natural gas (LNG) programme, have made it a net gas importer for most of the last decade. Natural gas accounts for 54 percent of Iran’s total domestic energy consumption, while most of the remainder of energy consumption is attributable to oil, according to the EIA.

(Complied by Daniel Fineren and Emma Farge; editing by William

Hardy)

SOURCE

Prepare For Armageddon

Prepare For Armageddon
by Raja Mujtaba

We will do it with or without you, US tells Pakistan

Armageddon (commonly known as the battle against the anti-Christ) according to the Bible, is the site of a battle during the end times, variously interpreted as either a literal or symbolic location. The term is also used in a generic sense to refer to any end-of-the-world scenario.

According to some Muslim and Christian interpretations, the Messiah will return to earth and defeat the Antichrist, Satan the Devil, in the battle of Armageddon. According to the Muslim belief, it would be Imam Mehdi who would precede Prophet Jesus who would fight the one eyed beast called Dajjal (Anti Christ). Then Satan will be put into the “bottomless pit” or abyss for 1,000 years, known as the Millennial Age. After being released from the abyss, Satan will gather Gog and Magog (peoples of two specific nations) from the four corners of the earth. They will encamp surrounding the “holy ones” and the “beloved city” (this refers to Jerusalem). Fire will come down from God, out of heaven and devour Gog and Magog after the Millennium.

According to the Muslim belief, the forces to battle the one eyed beast would rise from the area of Khurasan that comprises of portion of Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and part of Central Asia. If the anti-Christ forces have assembled in Afghanistan, it’s not a coincidence but well thought out Zionist strategy to take on Pakistan, the nuclear power of the Muslim world so its free to advance other Muslim territories without any fear.

Most historians and scholars believe that the present stretching of the US and NATO Forces far and beyond their legitimate areas of interests, is a sign of final showdown. The placement of US forces in Afghanistan is seen as the final buildup to attack the Muslim lands. This could well become the graveyard of the US troops from where they may never escape death. Presently, the grouping of pro and anti Christ Forces is seen to be taking place. The US and NATO clearly appear to be on the side of the Anti-Christ and siding with the Zionists the real anti-Christ Forces. Zionists are known to be Satan worshipers in their secret hideouts therefore are working to create a godless world and control the entire resources.

Sensing these developments, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin prior to his departure for China, cautioned his generals to prepare for Armageddon. A similar message was also delivered to the Chinese leadership that has the Chinese Forces also on high alert. Apparently in the same context, Putin has resolved all differences with China to forge a clear unity for times ahead.

Sino-Russian alliance is very timely, seeing the hard threatening statements of Hillary Clinton that she fired at Pakistan from Kabul before flying to Islamabad is very alarming. Pakistan has some hard decisions to make.

Commander William Guy Carr, in his book ‘Pawns In The Game’ probably written in 1948 stated that third revolution and third world war are in the offing for which the grouping is taking place. He also stated categorically that the third world war would be against Islam.

Plans for this “Total Global War” or the war against Islam the Americans are preparing to launch were first revealed to China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) by a former Blackwater agent Bryan Underwood who has been apprehended by the US authorities for spying.

If one observes the way the US and NATO are waging their wars in Muslim countries proves William Carr to be correct.

Blackwater, the global contractor for CIA is operating in almost all the target countries, arrest of Raymond Davis in Pakistan did expose the US designs; had he been retained and grilled for some indefinite time, much more would have been revealed. Pakistan is infested with Blackwater, they have made inroads in ethnic political parties more so in Karachi, the port city of Pakistan. Balochistan has also become a hotbed where secessionists forces are being patronized by CIA, MI6, Mossad and RAW. As believed now, the US has also launched biological warfare in Pakistan where dengue is killing people on daily basis.

On reading the situation of the coming US plans for Total Global War, Putin spelt out an alliance to integrate the former Soviet Republics into closer cooperation. He scheduled an emergency trip to China to meet with Hu, and ordered the FSB (Russian Agency) to notify China’s MSS of the arrest and detention of their spy Tun Sheniyun who was captured last year for attempting to steal sensitive information on Russia’s most powerful anti-aircraft system.

Today Libya has fallen, how the Libyans would benefit from it only time would tell but one thing is sure that US and her allies have formed a bridgehead in Africa. Further deployment of the US troops in Africa are taking place, its China encirclement there where China has friends in the Muslim countries. Sudan has been split, and Obama plans to occupy some other countries like Uganda, Somalia, Morocco etc. In Africa, says Obama, the “humanitarian mission” is to assist the government of Uganda defeat the Lord’s resistance Army (LRA), which “has murdered, raped and kidnapped tens of thousands of men, women and children in central Africa”. Incidentally, Africa also happens to be the Chinese success story therefore by taking over Africa, China would also be chocked. Libya was one of the major oil suppliers to China now that hangs in air. Gaddafi was trying to dump dollar for gold that instigated the US to attack her through a cleverly manipulated and orchestrated moves.

After having been deceived in Libya where the US assured both Russia and China that it will not attack but did quite contrary to what was promised. Sensing that US plans to attack Syria, Russia and China were quick to veto the American resolution in the security council that infuriated the US Ambassador Susan Rice who left the session in rage.

Dick Cheney pointed out in his 1990s “defence strategy” plan, America simply wishes to rule the world so that’s forging ahead following the Nixonian doctrine, ‘seize the moment.’

Reported by the EU Times, the “New Great Game” moves being planned by the Americans is to strike fear into both Russia and China that includes:

1.) The deliberate implosion of both the US and EU economies in order to destroy the Global Financial System that has been in place since the ending of World War II

2.) The launching of a massive conventional war by the US and EU on the North American, African and Asian Continents to include the Middle East

3.) During this all-out war the deliberate releasing of bio-warfare agents meant to kill off millions, if not billions, of innocent civilians

4.) At the height of this war the US and its allies will sue for peace and call for a new global order to be established in order to prevent the total destruction of our planet.

Confirming the fears, an unidentified source within the US Department of Defense (DOD) warned that the Obama regime was preparing for a massive “tank-on-tank” war and that US military forces are “expecting something conventional, and big, coming down the pipe relatively soon.”

To how close this war may be the FSB in their report states that it will be “much sooner than later” as the Americans have pre-positioned in Iraq nearly 2,000 of their M1 Abrams main battle tanks, have pre-positioned another 2,000 of them in Afghanistan, and between the Middle East and Asia have, likewise, put into these war theaters tens-of-thousands of other typed armored vehicles. This should be a grave cause of concern for Pakistan.

Being at war, the US can also effect “Full Mobilization” of over 1.5 million American reserve forces which can occur at “at a moment’s notice” for which US needs no Congressional approval to expand their areas of operation is also being examined when America is fully poised to advance in Asia and Middle East.

Now that Hillary Clinton is on her Pakistan visit accompanied by the new CIA Chief, David Petraeus, Chairman US Joint Staff, General Martin Dempsey and Marc Grossman. Keeping the armoured buildup in the region and having an Armour Officer as the new Chairman of Joint Staff, could one say it a coincidence or a planned strategy?

Hillary, as expected that I mentioned in my CNBC News analysis on 19th October, has arrived with a tough warning for Pakistan, saying, “We will do it with or without you.” This has certainly placed Pakistan in a very trying situation. Pakistan has other options to join the third force that is in formation led by Russia and China to counter the US moves in the region. If Pakistan, Iran, Syria and other Muslim states including Saudi Arabia join this alliance, that would certainly deter the US and her allies, if not then every Muslim country would fall one after the other without exception and their assets would be frozen.

Important to note about the American plan for global domination through massive warfare is that it is not really a secret, and as (curiously) revealed on the tenth anniversary of the 11 September attacks upon the United States when the US National Security Archive released a memo written by former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in September 2001 wherein he warned “If the war does not significantly change the world’s political map, the US will not achieve its aim.”

To what the “aim” of the United States is as their war against the world has now entered its 10th year, the FSB says, is to prevent “at all costs” the implosion of the US Dollar as the main reserve currency of the present global economic system before the West’s envisioned “New World Order” can be established.

The first threat to the Americans “master plan” for global hegemony came in November 2000 when the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein quit accepting US Dollars for oil and, instead, stated his country would only accept Euros. In less than 10 months an attack on the US was engineered and used that as an excuse to topple Hussein and reestablish the US Dollar as the world’s main reserve currency.

Interesting to note is the failure of Libya’s former leader Gaddafi’s plan to introduce the gold dinar, a single African currency that would serve as an alternative to the US Dollar and allow African nations to share the wealth, but which like Iraq’s Saddam Hussein “plan” brought a swift and brutal invasion by the Americans and their Western allies to keep it from happening.

The only nation that has successfully abandoned the US Dollar is Iran, who since February 2009 abandoned all American currency opting instead to value their oil and gas in Euros. Iran, however, and unlike oil rich Iraq and Libya, has not been attacked due to the Iranians having acquired from Ukraine between 6-10 nuclear armed X-55 missiles (range of 3,000km [2,000 miles]) in 2005. Although the former Ukraine President Viktor Yushchenko denies that the missiles contain their nuclear tips, a statement disputed by the FSB who states they were armed and “ready to fire.”

As a preemption, to counter the planned American blitzkrieg into Central Asia and Pakistan from Afghanistan, Indian Army Chief General VK Singh warned yesterday that thousands of Chinese military forces have now moved into Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir joining an estimated 11,000 more of them believed to have entered that region in the past year.

Before the US ventures into other Muslim lands, the US would want a submissive or a broken and denuclearized Pakistan. In both the scenarios it would mean Pakistan’s death. In such a scenario, Pakistan maybe compelled to go for non conventional weapons; if such a development takes place, India, Israel and the US installations in the region would not be safe. Can the US risk such a situation would only depend on the arrogance and sanity level of the US leadership.

SOURCE

Electric bills set to increase dramatically across the US

Electric bills to increase across the US

For the 14 million Americans without jobs, things are about to get a bit worse for their pocketbooks. Experts predict that electric bills across the country are about to see a serious surge.

As utility companies across America are being forced to make updates to their extensive equipment in order to meet the standards set forth by governmental regulators, energy providers across the country are asking for hundreds of millions of dollars in brand new charges to be added to customers from coast-to-coast to cover the cost. These findings come following a report from The Daily Beast in which the news outlet examined an extensive collection of regulatory filings.

The Daily Beast adds that, as companies across the country only begin to make those upgrades, customers should expect the cost of their electric bills to go up starting soon — and for them to continue to surge for the foreseeable future.

“They desperately need to upgrade,
” former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson adds to their report. “You’re seeing rate hikes everywhere because this is a widespread, national problem.” Richardson has long-attacked the power grid in place in America for being antiquated given the needs of the country. Now his plead is finally being recognized, but the cost could prove catastrophic for an America that is brimming with jobless left unable to get by with their bills as it.

As fees are expected to pile up, patrons can expect helping hands to hold back on assistance. This year’s debt dilemma that nearly crippled the American government and spawned massive downgrades from international raters saw Congress trimming half a trillion dollars from the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program as a way of cutting costs. Additional cuts courtesy of the Barack Obama administration is leaving the program with barely half of what they offered in years past, meaning those they rely on aid might be out of luck.

Specifically, the filings uncovered by The Daily Beast show that 16 electric companies serving over 6 million customers have asked for regulators to approve rate hikes of at or above 5 percent, with the majority of utilities seeking increases of 10 percent. They add that if passed, the rates could be extremely damaging to just not the poverty-stricken and jobless, but for some in select areas. Around three million customers in Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio and West Virginia have seen rate increases at upwards of 88 percent during the last few years, as provider American Electric Power continues to rally for rate changes. Like the legislation being asked for approval now, American Electric Power has cast the blame on the billing increase on regulators forcing them to make upgrades.

Last week Republican Senator Rand Paul made his way onto newspapers across the country for single-handedly halting the passing of a legislation that would cause companies that use oil and gas pipelines to undergo stricter regulations. The Senator argued that the government should not have its say in how businesses act.

“There is a point or a balancing act between when a regulation becomes burdensome enough that our energy production is stifled. We have to assess the costs of regulation and whether they save lives,” Paul said at a hearing earlier this year.

SOURCE

The President Has The “Doomsday” Plane. Who’s going to save you?

Doomsday Plane’ Would Save President and Joint Chiefs in Apocalypse Scenario

By MICHAEL MURRAY

In the event of nuclear war, a powerful meteor strike or even a zombie apocalypse, the thoroughly protected doomsday plane is ready to keep the president, secretary of defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff and other key personnel in the air and out of danger. It may not deflect a Twitter photo scandal, but it can outrun a nuclear explosion and stay in the air for days without refueling.

The flight team for the E-4B, its military codename, sleeps nearby and is ready to scramble in five minutes. It was mobilized in the tumultuous hours after planes crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and southern Pennsylvania on 9/11.

“If the command centers that are on the ground in the United States have a failure of some sort, or attack, we immediately get airborne. We’re on alert 24/7, 365,” Captain W. Scott “Easy” Ryder, Commander, NAOC, told ABC News’ Diane Sawyer as she traveled to Afghanistan with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on the apocalypse-proof plane. “Constantly there’s at least one alert airplane waiting to get airborne.”

All E-4B aircraft are assigned to the 55th Wing, Offutt Air Force Base, Neb. The modified 747s can travel at speeds up to 620 miles per hour, 40 miles per hour faster than their commercial counterparts.

The $223 million aircraft is outfitted with an electromagnetic pulse shield to protect its 165,000 pounds of advanced electronics. Thermo-radiation shields also protect the plane in the event of a nuclear strike.

A highly-trained security team travels with the plane.

“The first people off of the airplane are these guys, they’ll position themselves appropriately around the airplane,
” Ryder said to ABC News. “The secretary also has his own small security staff that does similar things. So these guys are predominately designed to protect our airplane, and the secretary’s staff protects him, as an individual.”

Even though it carries VIPs, their staff and security personnel, the plane is highly fuel efficient. The plane can stay in-flight for days without refueling, a necessity if circumstances demanded the plane’s use by the nation’s top officials.

A precision tech team mans the sensitive electronic technology found on the plan. There is so much powerful electrical equipment onboard a specially upgraded air-conditioning system is necessary to keep it cool and functional.

“Give us the phone number of anybody, anytime, anyplace, anywhere on earth, we can get a hold of them,
” Master Sgt. Joe Stuart, US Air Force, told Diane Sawyer.

It can even communicate with submerged submarines by dropping a five-mile-long cable out the back of the plane. “[We] drop is down and [it] transmits coded message traffic to US submarines,” Ryder told ABC News.

Although the extreme amount of survival technology on the plane more than makes up for it, the plane lacks the amenities found in bases on the ground.

“It’s like being Fedexed
,” Gates told Sawyer. “It’s fairly Spartan, with no windows or anything.”

Even the Secretary of Defense only gets a tiny bathroom with a sink, but no shower. A small trade-off for being able to board this plane as the rest of us dive for cover in a worst-case scenario.

Some more details on the general characteristics of the plane, according to the official U.S. Air Force website:

Primary Function: Airborne operations center

Contractor: Boeing Aerospace Co.

Power Plant: Four General Electric CF6-50E2 turbofan engines

Thrust: 52,500 pounds each engine

Wingspan: 195 feet, 8 inches (59.7 meters)

Length: 231 feet, 4 inches (70.5 meters)

Height: 63 feet, 5 inches (19.3 meters)

Weight: 410,000 pounds (185,973 kilograms)

Maximum Takeoff Weight: 800,000 pounds (360,000 kilograms)

Fuel Capacity: 410,000 (185,973 kilograms)

Payload: communications gear permanently installed on aircraft

Speed: 602 miles per hour (523 knots)

Range: 6,200 nautical miles

Ceiling: Above 30,000 feet (9,091 meters)

Crew: Up to 112 (flight crew and mission crew)

Unit Cost: $223.2 million (fiscal 98 constant dollars)

Initial operating capability: January 1980

Inventory: Active force, 4

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player
SOURCE

Oil and the Falklands – the Saga Continues


Oil and the Falklands – the Saga Continues

Written by John Daly

Like some dimly remembered Gilbert and Sullivan operetta, pitting Hardy British tars against perfidious foreigners, the Falklands periodically recycles into the gaze of bemused international observers every decade or so.

Since the brief 1982 war between Argentina and Britain, the issue of sovereignty of the Falklands has lurked beneath the internationals diplomatic surface, an irritant but hardly threatening to reignite a new round of hostilities. Three decades on from that unfortunate confrontation the issue of the Falklands is again roiling Argentinean-British relations over the possibility that the archipelago contains beneath its surrounding waters something of value – oil.

British oil group Rockhopper Exploration has unveiled optimistic plans for a $2 billion oil infrastructure investment in the Falkland Islands announcing on 14 September that it expected to start pumping oil in 2016 from its four licensed Sea Lion concessions totaling 1,500 square miles, with a projected production rate of roughly 120,000 barrels of oil per day by 2018. Rockhopper Exploration said the fifth well in the Sea Lion complex “had found a high quality reservoir package and oil column.”

This roseate picture is somewhat clouded by several facts, including that currently Rockhopper Exploration has on hand a mere $170 million, enough to pay for two more scheduled wells. Nevertheless, Rockhopper Exploration shares, which have outperformed the European index of oil and gas companies by 14 percent since August, were up 1.1 percent in early trading after the company’s announcement.

A second element in this picture is a sobering fact that while both British and Argentinean companies have drilled a handful of exploratory wells in the water surrounding the Falklands, only Rockhopper Exploration has discovered petroleum.

And thirdly last but certainly not least is the issue of the islands sovereignty, contested by both Argentina and Britain for the last 198 years.

While various City pundits excitedly speculate that the Falklands is to become another North Sea, the above facts taken together indicates at the very least a far greater degree of risk in underwriting Rockhopper Exploration’s ambitious program.

So if the Falklands oil potential is so promising, then why are the international major oil companies not involved? The answer is in brief that they have looked at the islands’ potential and given a pass.

According to a US embassy cable dating from February 2010 and leaked last year by Wikileaks, “ExxonMobil International chairman Brad Corson told us he does not believe there is enough oil on the Falkland Islands continental shelf to be profitable, citing Shell’s earlier oil exploration attempts which they abandoned.”

Argentina is not taking the news lightly, declaring its intention following Rockhopper Exploration’s to both file an official complaint against Britain for oil exploration activities in Falklands/Malvinas disputed waters before the United Nations Decolonization Committee along with inviting the U.N. Special Committee of the 24 on Decolonization Chairman Francisco Carrion-Mena of Ecuador to visit Argentina to hold a meeting on the issue in Buenos Aires.

The Falklands now have the dubious distinction of joining the list of contested offshore maritime oil and natural gas concessions spewed by two or more countries.

These include a growing dispute in the eastern Mediterranean between Cyprus, Lebanon, Israel and Turkey, the final disposition of the Caspian’s offshore waters currently contested by Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Iran, Turkmenistan Russia and rising confrontation in the East China Sea over the region’s offshore waters which involves the Spratly island’s more than 750 islands, islets, atolls and cays, whose various portions of offshore waters are claimed by China, the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei.

What makes the Falklands Argentinean-British dispute unique however is the fact that in 1980 to the countries actually fought a brief vicious war over the archipelago and its surrounding waters. At the time oil exploration of the Falklands waters had yet to begin, and the node and Argentinian writer Jorge Borges famously compared the dispute to “two bald men fighting over a comb.” The stakes are much higher now.

Common sense would seem to indicate that the best way for might be a possible joint venture between the two nations to explore their offshore waters oil potential hand, if any significant reserves are found jointly to develop them with an agreed-upon program of profit sharing, but given the increasingly strident claims sole sovereignty over the archipelago this seems increasingly unlikely.

If therefore Rockhopper Exploration’s drilling programs prove successful, a number of developments seem increasingly clear. First is that, depending on the political temperature in Buenos Aires, future activities may well need the protection of the Royal Navy.

Secondly is Latin America’s increasingly lining up behind Argentina’s claims to the islands, and Brazil recently stated that it would not allow British exploration vessels to use Brazilian ports to exploit any possible oil developments in the Falklands, Rockhopper Exploration will need to source virtually all of the necessary equipment from the other side of the Atlantic as well as possibly Britain, both major expenses for a company which states it has only $170 million of available cash. Furthermore should development go forward, then a total lack of access to Latin American hydrocarbon infrastructure support means that Rockhopper Exploration will probably be forced to use a floating production, storage and offloading (FPSO) vessel to store and transport its output.

Last but not least, the de facto boycott by Latin America of any future Falklands oil production means that the oil at the very least will have to transit South Atlantic before reaching potential markets, further increasing both development costs and shrinking potential profits.

In light of the above, a joint venture would seem to be the most common sense way to proceed, but given the rising jingoistic nationalism flaring over the issue in both London and Buenos Aires, don’t count on any time soon.

While in history is rife with examples of daring oil explorers making fortunes, the number of examples shrink dramatically when major oil companies give a pass on projected production and you future output is situated in a contested site which less than 30 years ago was a “hot” war zone.

By. John C.K. Daly of OilPrice.com

SOURCE