About Me

Name: The Truth
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

Nuclear Horizon An atomic economy is booming in New Mexico

 On April 27, Greg Mello--a tall, intense man whose natural state is vague dishevelment--was in court, watching his witness annihilate (at least in Mello’s view) the US Department of Energy’s case.

Mello is the Harvard-educated co-founder and executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group, a nuclear disarmament advocacy organization based in Albuquerque, but with a concerted focus on the activities of Los Alamos National Laboratory. Last year, LASG sued to stop the construction of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) project, a new facility at LANL designed to process--and possibly produce--plutonium-based nuclear warheads. 

On this particular Wednesday, Mello’s lawyer had called Frank von Hippel, a nuclear physicist and Princeton professor, to testify against the facility--essentially a costly, heavily fortified nuclear warhead processing facility situated over a geologic fault zone (see sidebar: “Price Point”).

In his prepared testimony, Von Hippel argued the need for new warheads “has vanished”; the earthquake hazard is now “much larger” than previously thought; the last full environmental assessment of the project--completed eight years ago--is insufficient for a project whose cost has swollen from $350 million to more than $3 billion.

All of this, Von Hippel says, amounts to a more fundamental question: Does New Mexico really need to be researching and building new nuclear weapons?

Mello doesn’t think so--but says the political momentum isn’t on his side.

“New Mexico is viewed as a place with a compliant government, where nuclear contractors can get federal money,” Mello explains. “There’s no private sector demand for most of this stuff, and a great deal of it could never be licensed or permitted.”

Even so, the CMRR facility--along with its budget--has expanded virtually unheeded since it was first proposed in 1999. 

“It’s terrifying,” Mello says. “It’s frightening for New Mexico, both in itself and because of what it’s not: renewable energy; investment in our housing and building stock, our infrastructure, our schools. A very tiny group of people have captured an outsize amount of attention from a political elite and are setting far too much of our agenda.”

Greg Mello of Los Alamos Study Group is challenging the lab's new plutonium facility.

Within Santa Fe, Mello’s view is relatively common. At the LASG meetings and study sessions he hosts in the basement of a local church, attendees are routinely knowledgeable to the point of expertise. And in addition to various environmental protection and renewable energy groups, Santa Fe also hosts two other nuclear disarmament organizations, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety and Nuclear Watch of New Mexico.

Southern New Mexico, though, is a different story. There, lawmakers and academics extol the virtues not only of nuclear research and development, but they also court uranium processing plants and waste disposal facilities with gusto--and, in some cases, financial incentives.

In fact, the morning of Von Hippel’s testimony, a collection of public officials, scientists and executives had gathered in a conference room in Hobbs, some 350 miles south of Santa Fe. They were discussing New Mexico’s future as a focal point for the new nuclear age, in which economies rely increasingly on nuclear power and entire processing industries spring up around the “uranium fuel cycle,” which begins with mining and ends with waste disposal. Every stage of that process can be monetized--and nearly every stage has commercial operations in New Mexico.

“The state currently has a stake in a lot of aspects of this cycle--the mining, the enrichment, the storage,” Mat Lueras, vice president for corporate development at Uranium Resources Inc., a mining outfit that owns 183,000 acres of uranium mineral rights in New Mexico, tells SFR. Because of that, Lueras says, URI has “seen widespread local and state support from New Mexico politicians” for its efforts to restart uranium mining.

To Daniel Fine, a research associate at New Mexico Tech and at the Center for Energy Policy in Hobbs,
such enthusiasm is simply an acknowledgment of the inevitable.

“Nuclear energy, worldwide and in the United States, has a very strong future,” Fine says. “Twenty percent of our electricity is nuclear. There’s potential planning for 50 percent more.”

In Fine’s view, New Mexico’s role in that future remains to be determined. But given what’s already here, and the gradual buildup of a nuclear fuel cycle complex in the state’s southeastern counties, a nuclear future may indeed be unavoidable. Take the beginning of the fuel cycle, for instance.

“New Mexico,” Fine says, “is the Saudi Arabia of uranium.” for more link to--->

http://sfreporter.com/santafe/article-6070-nuclear-horizon.html

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

US Rep. Pearce: Nuclear energy industry in US has political problems, not technological

HOBBS, N.M. — U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce says the U.S. nuclear energy industry doesn't have technological problems — it has "political problems."

The "United States developed the nuclear power field and then regulated it out of existence. We have built no new nuclear power plants in 30 years," Pearce said Wednesday, the first day of a two-day international nuclear energy conference in Hobbs.

The Republican New Mexico congressman said nuclear power is essential to the nation's energy future, and suggested that the Fukushima nuclear crisis in Japan brought on by a devastating earthquake was an incident to build from, not run from.

"We should be analyzing exactly what went on, instead of saying 'no' to all nuclear," Pearce told the gathering, which is considering how to make nuclear energy a viable and essential piece of the world's energy portfolio.

Former U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico, a longtime supporter of nuclear energy, thanked Lea and Eddy counties in southeastern New Mexico for being open to the nuclear industry. The counties are home to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, the federal government's underground nuclear waste repository; Urenco USA, which runs a uranium enrichment plant near Eunice; and International Isotopes, which proposes to provide uranium deconversion services for the plant.

Domenici said the area is unique because the people "don't run and hide when we hear the words 'nuclear' or 'radioactive.' We sit down to learn about the facts and myths, and make sure they are completely understood."

In the next year, the United States must find a way to finance some nuclear power plants and make a commitment to dispose of the nuclear waste now spread across the country, Domenici said.

___

Information from: Hobbs News-Sun, http://www.hobbsnews.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Domenici to Speak at Uranium Conference

HOBBS, N.M., April 18, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Former Senator Pete V. Domenici will be the key note speaker at the Uranium Fuel Cycle Conference, April 27 in Hobbs, N.M.

The N.M. Center for Energy Policy, which is a division of New Mexico Tech, in partnership with the Economic Development Corporation of Lea County and New Mexico Junior College, is organizing the conference to bring together leaders in nuclear-related mining, energy and waste management. Domenici has long been considered one of the most consistent and forceful national advocates of the nuclear industry.

The six-term senator from New Mexico is a member of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, a panel formed by the U.S. Department of Energy in 2009 and tasked by Secretary Steven Chu to study options for the disposal of nuclear waste.

New Mexico Tech Vice President Dr. Van Romero, a speaker at the event, said Domenici is expected to deliver remarks relative the uranium fuel cycle, with special attention to environmental issues related to disposal of spent fuel.

A special session will address the crisis at the Fukushima reactor in Japan.

"As we understand more and more about what is happening and what has happened in Fukushima, it becomes more obvious that spent fuel pools are a major contributor to environmental issues," Romero said.

"This will be the first public forum to review public safety issues in the nuclear energy industry since the incident in Japan," conference organizer Dr. Daniel Fine said. "This is terribly important because of the potential loss of public confidence in nuclear energy."

Fine said that public polls showed that 60 percent of Americans opposed nuclear energy after the Three Mile Island incident. Public sentiment did not begin to improve until 2005 and we would like to avoid a decrease in public confidence because of the accident in Japan, he said.

The conference takes place in Lea County, which is known as the EnergyPlex of Eastern New Mexico with capital investment in uranium enrichment and waste/storage and with uranium tailings recovery potential.

To learn more about the conference or register, please visit www.energyplexnm.com or call 575-397-2039.

©2011 PR Newswire. All Rights Reserved.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Uranium Conference Adds Discussion of Japan Accident

Uranium Conference Adds Discussion of Japan Accident

HOBBS, N.M. March 30, 2011 – The Uranium Fuel Cycle Conference has added a new special session to the event, scheduled for April 27-28 in Hobbs. “Japan and Nuclear Energy: What Went Wrong and Its Impact” will feature a policy impact presentation from an official from the Department of Energy.

Conference organizer Dr. Daniel Fine of the N.M. Center for Energy Policy announced Monday that the additional event will give experts a forum to discuss public health and safety, which have stepped to the forefront of nuclear energy discussions since the accident in Fukushima, Japan.

Dr. Van Romero, Vice President of Research and Economic Development at New Mexico Tech, will give a technical presentation, explaining what happened and comparing the incident to the Three Mile Island incident of 1979. Romero also serves as a professor of physics. Previous to his academic position, Romero worked 12 years in the nuclear reactor industry.

Tim Beville, of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy, will join Romero in the special session, which will begin at 8:30 a.m. April 28. Beville will discuss how the accident in Japan will affect U.S. nuclear energy policy and programs.

“This will be the first public forum to review public safety issues in the nuclear energy industry since the incident in Japan,” Fine said. “This is terribly important because of the potential loss of public confidence in nuclear energy.”

Fine said that public polls showed that 60 percent of Americans opposed nuclear energy after the Three Mile Island incident. Public sentiment did not begin to change until 2005, he said.

“Do we want to see another generation of loss of public confidence in nuclear energy because of the accident in Japan?” he said. “That topic underlines this special session.”

Fine said Beville’s presentation represents the first time a Department of Energy official will present the federal government’s position on future nuclear energy development in America since the Japan accident.

“This is a major response in the Southwest and in New Mexico to create a national forum for nuclear energy in the future,” Fine said. “We’ll present a technical review of what went wrong in Japan, but also look at U.S. policy and program review in terms of the consequences of the Japan accident.”

Fine said the Uranium Fuel Cycle Conference will be the first public education event outside Washington to focus on Japan and its impact on nuclear energy in the United States.

In his presentation, Romero will examine what has happened at the Fukushima Reactor from a scientific and engineering perspective, without a political spin.

“My intention is to make sense of all the information available,” he said. “I want to put the facts out there and allow people to make an informed decision about the viability of nuclear power in New Mexico.”

Romero said he expects the incident in Japan to slow down development of new nuclear reactors in New Mexico, but he hopes recent events promote continued discussion about the future of American energy policy and how U.S. leaders can craft policy that promotes safe nuclear energy.

“The events in Japan have raised concerns about the safety of nuclear power,” Romero said. “If you listen to the news, it seems like there’s nothing but crisis after crisis. Yet, nothing has really happened. There is cause to be concerned. Like anything, there are risks; we need to understand those risks and act appropriately.”

Romero said two lessons learned from recent events are that smaller reactors are probably safer and that storing spent fuel at the reactor is not a good practice.

Also in the realm of public safety, the conference will address issues regarding development and licensure of reactors in seismically active zones, such as California, which gets 15 percent of its energy from two nuclear reactors, Fine said.

The event takes place in the energy corridor of Eastern New Mexico with capital investment in uranium enrichment and waste/storage and with uranium tailings recovery potential. Small Modular Reactor technology will be presented as a new and innovative technology choice for deployment.

Both Romero and Beville will present projections on the future of nuclear energy in the U.S. Southwest – also a conference first.

The Special Session is part of a planned two-day conference organized by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy beginning the morning of April 27. For registration and information see the Center for Energy Policy website.

– NMT –

By Thomas Guengerich/New Mexico Tech

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Impact of Shale Gas Technology on Geopolitics Dr. Daniel Fine of M.I.T.

Reprinted from Congress.org

By Elspeth Suthers, F11

May 4, 2010

Dr. Daniel Fine of the Mining and Minerals Resources Institute at MIT addressed students at The Fletcher School during a talk sponsored by Fletcher's International Security Studies Program and offered his insights into how the development of new technology will allow the United States to tap vast, previously inaccessible, resources of natural gas that will impact everything from the price of gasoline to the ability of Chinese companies to buy equity in Russian natural gas fields.

The United States has a monopoly on “hydro-fracking” technology. The technology, short for hydraulic fracturing, releases natural gas trapped in shale deposits by injecting the deposits with high-pressure water mixed with sand and small amounts of chemical additives.

According to Dr. Fine, the “cloud over gas” used to be “do we have enough gas?” In 2003, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan declared that the United States did not have enough natural gas, and that it would be necessary to import liquid natural gas (LNG). This, said Dr. Fine, was clearly a mistake in the light of the new hydro-facing technology, not only because importing LNG poses a security risk to the United States, but because tapping natural gas from shale represents an economic “bonanza” in “the most [economically] repressed parts of the country:” western New York, western Pennsylvania and West Virginia, areas which suffer from high rates of unemployment, and are estimated to host 490 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The thousands of jobs that could be created in these areas could stand in the way of President Obama’s pursuit of subsidies for renewable energy.

Substitution away from imported gas by the United States will impact Russia, the world’s largest exporter of natural gas, where gas production is controlled almost exclusively by government-run Gazprom. Moreover, Chevron has signed an agreement with Poland to search for and extract natural gas there, and similar arrangements have apparently been made in Romania. “When Chevron announces that they have gas [in Poland],” Dr. Fine said, “then Russia is shut out,” and will no longer be able to act as a near-monopoly supplier of gas in Eastern Europe.

Seeing the threat to Russia’s interests, Dr. Fine suggested that Putin has de facto “joined the friends of the Earth,” claiming that hydro-fracking will lead to problems with water supply. Beyond that, however, Dr. Fine pointed out that Gazprom has recently acquired the largest gas field in Russia that was not already under its control, and that the location of this field, outside of Irkutsk, near the border with China, gives a clear indication of the direction that Russian policy is headed.

“China is moving towards a gas economy rapidly” to get away from the images and problems associated of coal, said Dr. Fine. China is well aware that its reliance on coal, and the emissions associated with it, not only present an environmental and health threat to its own population, but that China is vulnerable to increasing attacks from Western environmentalist groups as climate change becomes a more prominent political issue. China does not have large gas deposits of its own, and so, Dr Fine suggested, will want to take advantage of Russia’s weaker position vis-à-vis Europe, to demand not only lower gas prices, but also the ability to purchase equity in Russian gas fields, something China has not yet been allowed to do.

Returning to address some of the environmental concerns surrounding shale gas extraction, Dr. Fine said that, in light of the jobs that will be created , and in light of the economic advantages of natural gas—which is cheaper than either coal or nuclear power, and far less expensive than any current renewable technology—it will be politically difficult for any administration to challenge shale gas unless it can be conclusively shown to have adverse environmental effects that outweigh the benefits. Shale gas wells, Dr. Fine said, are only used when an impermeable rock layer surrounds them, so that none of the estimated 5.5 million gallons of water used for extraction can seep into the groundwater. In addition, most wells can recycle their water, and ultimately, “use less water than an average golf course.”

Finally, Dr. Fine predicted that we are not, in fact, entering an era of “peak oil,” that with the new production coming from the Iraqi oilfields, and with new natural gas deposits replacing other petroleum fuels, we can expect to see a decline in world oil prices. He predicted that on April 1, 2017 in Medford, Massachusetts, gasoline will cost barely over $1/gallon at the pump. Whether that prediction proves true or not, it certainly provides something to think about.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hobbs conference focuses on nuclear energy issues

           N.M. Tech News Service

          HOBBS – Nuclear energy, small-scale reactors and safety in the industry will take center stage next month at the 2011 national energy conference in Hobbs.
        The Uranium Fuel Cycle Conference on Wednesday and Thursday, April 27 and 28, will focus on potential developments and implementation of small-scale reactors.
        The conference features top leaders in nuclear technology, including Babcock & Wilcox, New Mexico Tech, URENCO USA, Washington TRU Solutions, Uranium Resources Inc., Energy Solutions and the U.S. Department of Energy.
        The "uranium fuel cycle" begins with mining, continues with enrichment, followed by use in a reactor, and ends with processing and storage. Hobbs is in the center of the developing Eastern New Mexico Energy Corridor, which is involved in all aspects of the nuclear energy fuel cycle.
        "Almost the entire cycle is contained in New Mexico, from mining to waste storage. This conference is an important step in bringing together key players in the area and continuing a dialogue about energy and our national policies," said Van Romero, Ph.D. and vice president of research at New Mexico Tech.
        A new enrichment facility is now operational near Eunice, N.M. A deconversion plant is in the licensing stage in Lea County. Also located in the region are Waste Control Specialist LLC and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, near Carlsbad, which is a long-term storage facility funded by the Department of Energy. While not currently being mined, vast deposits of raw uranium ore exist in west-central New Mexico.
        What's missing? The small-scale nuclear power plants.
        "Communities in southeast New Mexico have expressed an interest in nuclear power," Romero said.
        One area the conference will focus on is the commercial deployment of small nuclear reactors in eastern New Mexico. Representatives of Babcock & Wilcox will present their strategy to how to deploy a light-water reactor system to provide energy to communities in New Mexico.
        Babcock & Wilcox is the leading international company in development and deployment of small-scale nuclear reactors. The company unveiled the B&W mPower reactor in 2009. The mPower reactor, with its scalable, modular design, has the capacity to provide 125 megawatts to 750 megawatts of electricity for a five-year operating cycle without refueling. The reactor is designed to produce clean, near-zero emission operations, according to the company website.
        Following the Babcock & Wilcox presentation, Romero will lead a discussion on "Small Reactor Research and Readiness." Then, a representative from the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy will talk on the status and outlook for nuclear energy development.
        The two-day conference is hosted by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, a division of New Mexico Tech, the Economic Development Corp. of Lea County and New Mexico Junior College.
        Online registration is under way at www.energyplexnm.com or by calling 575-397-2039.
       
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Energy policy will change under GOP House by Dr. Daniel Fine

Santa Fe New Mexican, November 8 2010

With the Republican Party's newly won control of the House of Representatives, national energy policy could be rolled back to 2005, with all legislative advances under a Democratic Party majority at risk. Republicans could adopt a dual-track strategy that attacks energy regulation through budget reductions of the Environmental Protection Agency that de-fund efforts to impose carbon emissions on industrial infrastructure, at a minimum coal-burning utilities and the gas and oil complex of extraction and refining.

With a Republican House majority, no further loss of tax code advantages for the oil and gas industry is anticipated. While the Oceans Management remake of the Department of Interior's Mineral Management Service can be indirectly restrained through the Interior Department budget, originating in the House of Representatives, its existence and mission as a regulatory enforcer of off-shore oil and gas development is beyond a roll-back. This is a permanent institutional change as a direct consequence of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

No consideration of carbon cap and trade is even remotely expected. In New Mexico, oddly enough, with a Republican majority in the House opposed to a federal cap-and-trade law, conditions for a state version will in theory become more favorable. However, the rejection by both candidates for governor of the current initiative should block local efforts to fill the federal void.

The new Republican majority could impose restrictive legislation on renewable energy strategic tax incentives which provide Treasury Department cash pay-outs of 30 percent of construction investment costs of solar energy and other renewables. This could be done in several committees holding hearings on the dependency of renewables manufacturing and capacity expansion on continued government support in conflict with market conditions of abundantly cheap natural gas as a price-setter and competitor.

Partial repeal of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 will be a target of the new Republican majority. Although approved by President George W. Bush, the mandate for 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022 could be subject to revision. There is currently popular resistance to the ethanol requirement of 10 percent from 5 percent per gallon of gasoline because of consumer issues with the risk to pre-2007 engines. A Republican majority could attempt to cap the requirement at 16.3 billion gallons, which is scheduled in 2013, freezing the 10 percent change and avoiding further consumer problems at the pump.

Sen. Jeff Bingaman, leading a Democratic Party majority in the Senate, will be compelled to defend both renewable energy and the moderate renewable portfolio standards (15 percent by 2021) he has proposed in the remnant of the current session of Congress. He could invoke a call to Republicans for a bipartisan consensus to recognize what has been done and avoid the bitter and costly fight to roll it back. Some Republicans might consider this opening as preparation in 2012 for the contest over the White House: a consensus position avoids the tag of anti-renewable energy and environment in that presidential campaign . A consensus framework would stabilize at least $275 billion in renewable energy research, investment, finance and development costs.

Some of this is carried on the books of major oil and gas companies. New Mexico research universities and national laboratories have established innovative technology capabilities along with student career commitments in renewable energy. Whatever the direction of the market, a Republican majority in the House of Representatives could discover national economic and energy security value of supporting renewable energy basic and applied research.

World green energy technology leadership has been taken by China. With the exception of final technical mastery in solar power, China is now the dominant low-cost developer, producer and exporter. A Republican majority in the House of Representatives could find itself defending renewable energy against China in much the same way as it rejected China's bid to buy UNOCAL (oil and gas) five years ago — on national security and energy security grounds.

A roll-back to 2005 could revive the compromise that former Sen. Pete Domenici achieved that year under a strategy of energy diversity that emphasizes national energy output expansion from all sources without political discrimination. To roll-back to a fossil fuel policy preference would violate 2005.

Daniel I. Fine, Ph.D., is a research and energy policy associate for New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, New Mexico Tech.
http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Opinion/My-View--Donald-M--Fine-Energy-policy-will-change-under-GOP-Hou
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dr. Daniel Fine on Cap & Trade

Audience Questions and Expert Answers

At the 2009 Energy Conference hosted by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy in Hobbs, NM, audience members were encouraged to record any questions they might have had for members of the expert panels. As the questions are answered, they will be posted to page linked below.

Question 1:

Q: Do you favor a Carbon Tax or carbon Cap & Trade? Since carbon Cap & Trade is fertile ground for abuse and a huge bureaucracy to support it, how would it be imposed? Europe imposed Cap & Trade and it was rife with fraud and failed.

View Answer

Cap & Trade assumes a phased-in lower Cap over time which compels more credit buyers to buy.  Operational costs are theoretically anticipated to fall as the choice of new abatement technologies replace the need to buy credits for existing emissions.  In short, lower emission technologies equal lower operational costs under amortization schedules and carbon credit buying decreases. Dr. Daniel Fine, NMCEP Research Associate

Question 2
Q: Recently, Rep Mike Conaway intimated in an article in the Midland-Reporter (Permian Basin Oil Report- Sunday - April 12, 2009 -  page 4F). He stated that the “Cap and Trade system is mentioned that could be very negative for Texas” He went on to say that higher electricity costs could cost individual families (an average family) $3100 a year. Where will the average family come up with the cash to do this? And if that is true for Texas, what would be the case for NM?

View Answer
A: The number of $3100 per family per year as a cost of cap & trade depends on the auction or free distribution to the utility industry of carbon credits.  Following the conference, the utility would be given free 35% of the total of emissions (cap).  This is pending action by the U.S. Senate.  It, alone, reduces the $3100 cost significantly. Dr. Daniel Fine, NMCEP Research Associate at New Mexico Techhttp://nmcep.nmt.edu/index.php/2009-Energy-Conference/2009-conference-q-a-group-2.html
For more q and a on cap and trade by Dr.Daniel Fine click on this link


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

At $60 a Barrel, oil industry still seeing layoffs

At $60 a barrel, oil industry still seeing layoffs

To all Town Hall Readers

I just want to point out a very interesting article not being reported very far on the Oil Industry which is at an economic and business standstill here. The current oil price does not support drilling and is leading to further layoffs in the Western states.

Read on---> via the Associated Press

http://pddnet.com/news-ap-at-60-a-barrel-oil-industry-still-seeing-layoffs-052409/

examples of the Crises?

Alonzo Aranda, chairman of the Hobbs,NM chapter of the Association of Energy Service Companies, said companies are still laying off workers.

"It is as bad as it was last month and last month was the worst month so far," he said.

Or

Dr. Daniel Fine, research scientist for New Mexico Tech's Center for Energy Policy, points to the discovery of shale natural gas as part of the cause in the drastic drop in the price of natural gas.

"They were predicting 10 years ago that we were entering an era of natural gas shortage," he said. "The shale gas was an unexpected source."

As a result, gas lines and storage containers across the nation are overflowing with natural gas, and with production of goods down on a global scale, natural gas is not in demand, Gray said.

"If they are not building cars then the big foundries are not running and building gas," he said. "I think natural gas has five years before it comes back, in my opinion."

Uncertainty in oil prices also is taking a toll on the oil and gas industry.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Senator Bingaman: Renewables Here to Stay

From the Hobbs News-Sun by Levi Hill--Renewable energy is here to stay, but it will require government input as the nation moves forward with green energy. That was the message from U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., Tuesday at the second Energy Conference held by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy at the Lea County Event Center. Bingaman was the keynote speaker for the event. The daylong conference drew more than 400 attendees from across the nation to discuss issues surrounding the nation's continued push toward energy independence and green energy. More than a dozen panelists and four panels were...

Read more at the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy--->http://nmcep.nmt.edu/index.php/NMCEP-and-Related-News/bingaman-renewables-here-to-stay.html
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Seantor Bingaman and Panel debate U.S. Energy Challenge

From the Hobbs Sun-News by Levi Hill--The past, present and future of renewable energy in the United States was the focus of a daylong conference in Hobbs Tuesday where leaders across the energy industry came together. More than a dozen panelists and four panels were part of the second Energy Conference by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy of New Mexico Tech. More than 400 people attended the one-day conference at the Lea County Event Center

Read more at the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy website --->"US Energy Challenge Debated"
http://nmcep.nmt.edu/index.php/NMCEP-and-Related-News/us-energy-challenge-debated.html
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dr. Daniel Fine: Lehman Brother's, others drove oil barrel prices up

An interesting article from the New Mexico Business Daily:

http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/stories/2009/01/26/story6.html

Expert blames speculation for price volatility, supports regulation

The sudden crash in oil prices might be the smoking gun that shows speculation, rather than supply and demand, drove the huge run-up in oil futures last year.

Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology’s Center for Energy Policy told participants at a forum in Albuquerque Jan. 16 that massive, speculative trading by investment banks like Lehman Brothers, hedge funds and others is what drove oil above $140 per barrel.

It created a “colossal energy price bubble,” said Fine, a former MIT research associate and contributing editor on natural resources for BusinessWeek.

“Like real estate, the energy bubble was based on excessive, open credit that allowed big investment firms to instantly arrange contracts without putting anything up,” Fine said. “No deposit or letter of credit was needed.”

After Lehman Brothers folded in September, investigators found it held 10,000 oil contracts of 1,000 barrels each, Fine said.

Once speculative borrowing ended, oil prices plummeted to below $35 per barrel, which Fine said can’t be explained by supply and demand.

“At this point, total world demand for crude has fallen just two percent,” Fine said. “U.S. demand since the peak is down less than five percent. I say it’s not supply or demand, it’s fall out of speculation and the relative absence of credit from the financial services industry.”

Bob Gallagher, president of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, agreed that speculation played a major role, but said current prices are too low.

“Nearly $150 per barrel was ridiculous, but so is $35 per barrel,” Gallagher said. “We’ve got to get the speculators out and find the fine line between supply and demand. I believe the real price would be between $75 and $80 per barrel.”

Forecasts vary, but Fine said most market analysts expect prices to slowly climb over the next two years to somewhere between $60 and $80 per barrel.

To minimize speculation, Fine called for tighter regulations, such as greater transparency on domestic and foreign commodity exchanges and higher margin requirements for contract deposits.

U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-NM, supported such policies last year as chair of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

Bingaman spokesperson Jude McCartin said the senator will introduce new regulatory proposals this year.

“He will soon unveil energy legislation that includes measures to protect against speculation,” McCartin said.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »