| markmiuselc | Date: Thursday, 28 Nov 2013, 9:39 PM | Message # 1 |
|
Private
Group: Users
Messages: 19
Status: Offline
| It's not a free-for-all, yet. But more oil producers and refiners -- perhaps the ones who have dragged their feet for a long time -- are testing the renewable power waters. Oil companies have primarily dipped their toes into ethanol, as soon as the bane of refiners' existence, including Valero's bid recently for a number of ethanol plants owned by bankrupt-plagued VeraSun and energy giant BP's partnership with Verenium to build a cellulosic ethanol plant. It is practical that Valero, the largest U.S. refiner, would benefit from VeraSun's predicted fire sale of assets. Valero, combined with the rest of the refining industry, is mandated to blend ethanol into the gasoline it generates. Those mandates are certainly not going away and the amount of ethanol in gas will probably continue to edge up despite pleas against it.Despite the huge drop in crude prices, oil companies are still making money and so are the most likely candidates to acquire the increasingly large number of failing ethanol production companies. Purchasing could bode well for Valero, a business known for buying cheap assets and then turning them into profitable businesses. The organization has even hinted at expanding the plants to feature cellulosic technology if it becomes available, which probably means once it can be economically viable. Valero has covered every one of its bases with its investment last month into cellulosic start-up ZeaChem, that's still on track to start construction on its biorefinery this year.Valero hasn't shied away from other alternative energy projects either, including an investment in the algae-fuel company Solix Biofuels and its particular development of wind farms through Sunray Wind,one among its subsidiaries. Valero has already spent over $100 million to develop its Moore County, Texas wind farm.Because the willingness to fund sustainable energy projects slows, because it has the past a few months -- especially those related to ethanol -- try to find more large oil companies to open up up their wallets. Big oil contains the big three, as Cascadia Capital's CEO Michael Butler noted inside a recent news articles: money, global reach and distribution.Take Exxon. The corporation is loaded with nearly $40 billion in cash or over until now has avoided direct investment in renewable energy. The company states it is committing funds to in-house research. There exists plenty of speculation Exxon will take advantage of depressed oil prices and cheap shares to buy up other oil companies. It's miles more likely Exxon will buy resources with a bargain, such as large stakes in Canada's oil sands. It's easier, first, and the company won't face precisely the same regulatory hurdles. It is usually a perfect time for the organization to pick up a few beleaguered ethanol producers.The important question for Valero and also other large refiners is diesel. Diesel is expected to sell at a discount by April, dropping below gas the first time since July 2007. The worldwide recession is expected to dampen interest in diesel,hurting refiners like Valero and Marathon Oil, which together are spending a minimum of $6 billion to increase diesel output. Some are predicting Western Europe's thirst for diesel will drive demand back up as well as prices in a few months, preserving margins for businesses like Valero. If demand for diesel fails to materialize and supplies increase, Valero would have far less cash that will put into other projects including renewable power. ugg broome
This story was written by Sean Lutzmann, The BG News Your name doesn't have to be Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac that you can be concerned about the recent economic news. Eventhough it may seem that the economic collapse that we are hearing about will not have a direct impact on pupils as much as it is effecting the shareholders of recently bankrupted manufacturers like Lehman Brothers and AIG, there'll most definitely be a alternation in how easily and just how cheaply students will be able to apply for loans, especially from private institutions. We need to keep this issue at heart as we consider who we vote this November so your country doesn't see a repeatof what happens whenthe government enables unfettered capitalism. First off, I hope we as the younger generation can now realize what made older folks so upset in the event the Bush administration and Republicans like John McCain proposed privatizing a portion of Social Security Insurance (SSI). Though it should never be depended on as one's sole income once retirement rolls around, this safety net created as a result of the Great Depression (created in part because of banks making unwise investments in people and businesses who couldn't pay off their debts) ought not to be determined by the whims in the stock market with a potentially unwise and nearsighted mentality spread throughout the country's lending and investing class. But retirement and SSI checks are a bit further later on for those of us in college or maybe starting our careers. A far more immediate effect is going to be our ability to spend on the education that is so imperative to our future careers. In line with the New York Times, most economists usually are not as worried about access to state- or federally-subsidized loans up to they are concerned with loans from private institutions, which about 10 percent of all students ought to resort to taking should they be not given enough federal funding from government sources. There is a possibility however, that because federal government gets deeper and deeper indebted -- it has just added over $400 billion on the trillion dollar bill this season alone, according to the White House (and that is before the extra supplemental funding on the Defense Department because wars in Afghanistan especially in Iraq rage on) -- educational funding funding may be threatened by the urgent should restore fiscal sanity to this particular nation's budget. Needless to say, there has been an urgent must restore fiscal sanity on the budget for a while now, from the time we've been engaged in a war that some economists believe will surely cost us $2 trillion. We've had irresponsible tax cuts primarily benefiting the top five percent of income earners on this country, which in accordance with the Congressional Budget Office will have cost us $2.6 trillion by no more 2010, and with the upcoming mass-retirement in the baby-boomers that will drain Social Security, we're only 1 more big spending splurge away from being faced with some serious spending decisions. Any particular one "splurge," I believe, just became of come in the form of a $700 billion bailout our government will so generously provide. Cell phone the Ron Paul libertarians on the market who think among the first things to be cut within the federal budget ought to be the Department of Education (followed closely by an enormous cut in defense spending), this would possibly not be a problem. "Let the individual sector be in charge of lending money," some may say. But the core reason behind all of this financial chaos is the fact lenders gave plenty of sub-prime mortgages to people many knew darn well wouldn't be able to pay them back. Odds are good that banks in the future are going to learn from this and overcompensate by avoiding risky loans to students. Sowhat there has been here is a potentially perfect storm for financial aid scarcity, with potentially less government funding meeting track of a much more conservative lending environment,which leavescollege students caught in the middle. ugg bootd
This was a week of close-ups, some welcomed yet others unwanted.Rosie O'Donnell started her stint on ABC's "The View" Tuesday morning, Filling the moderator slot vacated in June by Meredith Vieira (who went to NBC's "Today" show), O'Donnell was greeted by a rousing standing ovation from your studio audience.Katie Couric made history Tuesday since the first female solo network news anchor in the news. The debut broadcast of "The CBS Evening News with Katie Couric" handily won the ratings race in their time slot.In the broadcast, Couric revealed the 1st photos ever shown in public places of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' baby, Suri. The photos were from the family's cover photo shoot on Vanity Fair.Hilary Duff didn't just pose for Seventeen magazine's October issue, she signed onto be the magazine's guest editor, too.The CBS soap opera "Guiding Light" celebrated the airing of their 15,000th episode Thursday. The show originated on radio in 1937 and gone to live in television in 1956. Lindsay Lohan was certainly not ready for her close-up when she arrive at an event to promote her movie "Bobby" in the Venice Film Festival . A gust of wind blew up Lohan's dress as she was exiting a boat, revealing what was — or in other words wasn't — underneath her dress. An employee of the Bauer-Griffin agency, which distributed the photos in the usa, confirmed to TheShowbuzz.com that the photos were taken by an Italian photographer on assignment for your Matrix agency in the U.K. and the best of her knowledge these folks were authentic.Maybe Lindsay should ask Jennifer Aniston about how to deal with the paparazzi. Aniston reached a confidential agreement which has a photographer who used a telephoto lens to get topless shots of her in your own home last year.For once, Paris Hilton probably wasn't thrilled to achieve the paparazzi in attendance: She was stopped on a DUI early Thursday morning. Although spokesman Elliot Mintz says Hilton "had one drink," police say she was driving erratically when pulled over at a Hollywood intersection stood a blood alcohol degree of .08, which is considered legally intoxicated. She was released on her own recognizance hours later. Models vogued and singers performed for your cameras at the second annual "Fashion Rocks" concert in The big apple on Thursday. Case was curated by Elton John and featured performances by Beyonce, Fergie, The Pussycat Dolls, Bon Jovi or anything else. The event raised funds for that Elton John AIDS Foundation. It airs on CBS Friday night.Lisa Marie Presley, Eve, Dita Von Teese and Debbie Harry displayed photos of the MAC Viva Glam advertising during a news conference on Wednesday. 100 % of the sales of Viva Glam lipsticks and lip glosses are donated to HIV and AIDS programs, including treatment, education and daily necessities."Crocodile Hunter" Steve Irwin was tragically killed by a stingray on Monday while filming a documentary about Australia's Great Barrier Reef. The TV star and animal expert loved finding yourself in front of the camera, which he used as a tool to educate his viewers about wildlife preservation. The Discovery Channel is encouraging his fans to make donations in his memory to wildlifewarriors.org.au.By Judy Faber short black uggs
This story was written by Editorial Board, Daily Texan Considering Alaskan Sen. Ted Stevens' federal indictment last week, most of his former political allies have rushed to give any recent contributions they out of Stevens or his political action committee to charity. Texas' own Sen. John Cornyn, who in accordance with OpenSecrets.org received $15,000 from Stevens over the last election cycle, has vowed to give on $10,000 of the contribution to charity. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY, announced Wednesday that he would also give $10,000 for the Wayside Christian Mission, the identical organization that reaped the huge benefits when the senator tried to soothe his conscience - and maybe more importantly, that of his constituents - after news of the Jack Abramoff scandal broke. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, a member of the Senate's ethics committee, was feeling especially philanthropic following the charges brought against Stevens and announced he'd give more than $19,000, a sum that sums gifts given from way back to 2001, to several Kansas charities. Like bidders within an auction, these senators seem bent on outperforming others within the race to distance themselves from the disgraced senator to a point of near hysteria. The thought that the best way to absolve your crime of connection to the morally dubious is cutting a check mark to your neighborhood charitable organisation is specious at best. Would forfeiting the allegedly "tainted" money to charities let it become a positive force on the globe and provide for the disadvantaged? Most probably. But what we fail to notice is how helping the poor inner-city youth of Kansas or Kentucky (or whatever specific crusade the senator's charities espouse) should come as a result of a Stevens' violation with the oaths of his office. Simply dumping funds on the Red Cross' doorstep does not alleviate the burdens that Stevens has put on society, and more specifically, tax-paying individuals. The thousands of dollars that have been sent indiscriminately to charities by guilt-ridden senators should fund the price tag on Stevens' investigation and subsequent trial. This million-dollar expense is the primary burden that Stevens has transpired on to Americans and is the only valid, logical location to reallocate any tainted funds other senators desire to purge themselves of. Had the senator directly robbed a charity, then your charitable actions there has been would have been more appropriate. However, Stevens' crimes - no less than the ones that we currently are conscious of - were limited to the financial cost of those who fund the Department of Justice (i.e., taxpayers). The idea of charity is grossly misconstrued in modern American society. Charitable acts should be a result of a sincere desire for a cause or mission with the organization, not as a punishment or even an attempted atonement. If one needs to see more research done on cancer of the breast or more relief work completed in Darfur, then there are appropriate organizations where one can send his or her money. However, guilt within your or one's associate's actions isn't reason to give money - be it theirs or their associate's - to a unaffected charity. mulberry bag outlet uk
By CBS News Foreign Affairs Analyst Pamela Falk reporting through the United Nations: The U.N. met for four hours Saturday night after Israel began a ground incursion into Gaza, but didn't reach agreement on any statement, and rejected a Libyan-sponsored proposal with an immediate ceasefire.The U.N. Security Council had issued a consensus statement on New Year's Eve, however the Deputy U.S. Ambassador, Alejandro Wolff, blocked anything on paper which would have come out of your late-night meeting, which occurred shortly after the ground incursion began. The reason, Wolff said, was that the U.S. considered that there was no immediate prospect that Hamas militants would cease their rocket attacks against Israel."We're not going to equate the actions of Israel, an affiliate state of the United Nations, with the actions of the terrorist group Hamas; there's no equivalence there," Wolff said. "The Charter with this organization respects the proper of every member state to exercise its self-defense. And Israel's self-defense just isn't negotiable."Meeting in emergency session but unable to issue any written statement of consensus, finger-pointing was the only common ground. The Palestinian Representative said the U.S. was the only real nation which blocked your firm stand out. The Libyan Ambassador said that deficiency of a unified position by the Arab nations seemed to be at fault. It was not surprising how the Security Council would not reach an agreement, considering that the United States - with veto turn on the Council - supports Israel's position that negotiations should happen outside the U.N. until the moment that Hamas stops the shelling of southern Israel. Though the lack of agreement stands in stark contrast having a U.N. Security Council Resolution passed 3 weeks earlier, during calmer days, which required a two-state solution as well as a restart of the peace negotiations. The Security Council was scolded by U.N. General Assembly President Miguel D'Escoto, an ancient Nicaraguan Sandinista, who called the lack of action by the Security Council sign of the Security Council's disfunctionality. He called the failure of action a "monstrosity." "There are a few members of the Security Council which are trying to protect their particular political interests," d'Escoto said. "This is indeed a shame … people are dying."Secretary General Ban Ki-moon asserted he was sure that the ground incursion would increase civilian suffering. The sole sign of agreement was a verbal statement by France's U.N. Ambassador who, as Council president, announced there was "strong convergences" among the 15 members expressing serious concern about the deteriorating situation in Gaza along with the need for "an immediate, permanent and fully respected ceasefire."The Security Council will return whenever a high level delegation of Arab ambassadors comes to New York Sunday or Monday and can hear from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday. The diplomatic stalemate reflected the divisions from the Security Council by what to do next - to have the U.N. formulate a strategy, or to enforce a partnership once Hamas has opted for a ceasefire and the parties involved agree to international monitors to secure up against the smuggling of arms into Gaza. In the long run, if a durable ceasefire is defined into place, it is likely that the U.N. Security Council can be asked by its members to create a new road map to enforce the peace - but lose your pounds . be no prospect of these at least in the next day or two. mulberry online outlet
Britney Spears won modified visitation rules Thursday that allow her two boys to shell out one overnight a week with her, and the pop star's attorney requested Spears' mother become the required court-appointed monitor.Spears made a surprise appearance problem after Superior Court Commissioner Scott Gordon held a morning hearing on her behalf emergency request to flourish visitation but declined to rule. He gave attorneys for Spears and her ex-husband, Kevin Federline, who was recently granted custody, added time to discuss the matter outside court.Spears once was allowed monitored visits with the children but no overnight stays. Neither she nor her attorneys spoke to reporters as soon as the closed, afternoon hearing.During the earlier open hearing, Spears' attorney, Anne Kiley, argued that overnight visits were crucial for Spears to bond with her sons, 2-year-old Sean Preston and 1-year-old Jayden James."I think it is an emergency on their behalf not to have overnights with their mother, which they've always had," she told Gordon."What possible concern can he (Federline) have in case there are monitors present?" she asked.Superior Court spokesman Allan Parachini announced the new visitation order but he couldn't say who would function as the overnight monitor. Photos: Britney Spears Federline, who was simply not at the hearings, decided to the modification, his attorney, Mark Vincent Kaplan, said outside court."He agreed - weren't required to - but he agreed which he would allow that additional time ... provided that there were additional assurances in place that made him notice the kids were protected," Kaplan said.Spears' attorney had asked legal court to consider her mother, Lynne Spears, because monitor.Kaplan would not say if the first overnight would occur or who the monitor would be, but he said he opposes use of family members as court-appointed monitors as a result of conflict of interest.Spears, 25, and Federline, 29, were married in October 2004 and divorced last July. They both must appear in court Oct. 26 for a status hearing.In the original Oct. 1 order requiring Spears to relinquish custody, Gordon granted her some visitation but said a monitor has to be present and the visits could possibly be cut short in the event the monitor decided Spears' behavior endangered the youngsters.When he took the youngsters away, Gordon said Spears had involved in "habitual, frequent and continuous use of controlled substances and alcohol." He ordered her to have random drug and alcohol testing two times a week.He reiterated Thursday that he worried that the pop star's troubles could harm the kids.He also criticized Spears because of complying with previous court orders, repeatedly praoclaiming that the current custody order taking her children away resulted from her choices.Gordon told Kiley he had not received some of Spears' drug test results completely from the lab, while he had ordered, although he previously an attorney's declaration she has passed them.Federline's attorney, Kaplan, stated it was frustrating that Spears' lawyers would try to change the Oct. 1 custody order so soon after it was issued."If she could remedy all of the problems ... in one week, that would be a miracle," he said.When Spears attained the courthouse dressed up in blue jeans, a long black sweater and wearing aviator sunglasses, she said "I'm doing good." She sipped from the Coca-Cola can as she approached the courtroom. Legal counsel took it from her and placed it over a bench as she entered.Spears played nervously along with her jeans pocket as she stood to be sworn in.The commissioner allowed Spears to help keep her dark sunglasses on, telling her, "I understand you have a condition." The condition has not been disclosed.Reporters were then inspired to leave and the hearing continued in today's world.She spent around an hour in the courtroom, then drove off within a white Mercedes-Benz swarmed by news media at the stop light. She escaped only after sheriff's deputies ran from the courthouse to aid her. ebay mulberry handbags
[url=http://www.ahlborn-kirchenorgeln.com/uggspascher.html]ugg australia[/url]
|
| |
|
|
