Reality Check

Skated down to Speeder & Earl's early this morning for some mocha java and the NY Times - the "New England Edition." Kinda skinny on Saturday, but, hey, I'm hooked.

Grew up with it.

Six stories on the front page: Google Eyes Microsoft - More Bombings in Baghdad - Recession Fears at Home - Hillary's Race Education - Teddy Kennedy Revels in the [Obama] Limelight  - and Michael Vick's Dogs Find Kindness!

Excuse me, but....how much did you pay for your last tank of gasoline?

Round-trip, Burlap to Montpeculiar, 80 miles, costs $8-$10 these days.

The top story of the day, I'd suggest, was buried - on Page 3 in the "B" section.

That's right - Page 3!!! Couldn't even make Page 1 of the Business Section.

Exxon Sets Profit Record:
$40.6 Billion Last Year

By JAD MOUAWAD

By any measure, Exxon Mobil’s performance last year was a blowout.

The company reported Friday that it beat its own record for the highest profits ever recorded by any company, with net income rising 3 percent, to $40.6 billion, thanks to surging oil prices. The company’s sales, more than $404 billion, exceeded the gross domestic product of 120 countries.

Exxon Mobil earned more than $1,287 of profit for every second of 2007.

That's more than $40 billion in pure profit!

To put it in perspective, I would note that's almost 10-times the size of the entire budget Gov. Jim Douglas just proposed for the the State of Vermont in fiscal-2009.

Way to go, Exxon-Mobil!

Vermont's junior senator, Bernie Sanders, issued a statement yesterday that said, in part:

“It is absurd for oil companies like Exxon Mobil to be raking in obscene profits while millions of Americans are struggling to pay skyrocketing gas and home heating oil prices.  We owe it to the American people to do everything we can to stop big oil companies from ripping off American consumers."

Nice that some elected official noticed, eh?

Comments

[vermonter]

Exxonmobil is a publicly-traded company. So doesn't that mean that those obscene profits belong to you, and me, and the teacher's union, and everyone who has mutual funds, or a retirement acount, or owns stocks?

[sandy ward]

Hey Vermonter, your green license plate doesn't fool me.

[eyes wide open]

That's why I support passage of the hemp bill, H.267. Here's a little excerpt:

Hemp as a Fuel / Energy Source

By Jeremy Briggs

Biodiesel fuel from Hemp Seed Oil

Hemp seed oil can be used as is in bio-diesel engines. Methyl esters, or bio-diesel, can be made from any oil or fat including hemp seed oil. The reaction requires the oil, an alcohol (usually methanol), and a catalyst, which produces bio-diesel and small amount of glycerol or glycerin. When co-fired with 15% methanol, bio-diesel fuel produces energy less than 1/3 as pollution as petroleum diesel.

Energy and Fuel from Hemp Stalks through Pyrolysis

Pyrolysis is the technique of applying high heat to biomass, or organic plants and tree matter, with little or no air. Reduced emissions from coal-fired power plants and automobiles can be accomplished by converting biomass to fuel utilizing pyrolysis technology. The process can produce, from lingo-cellulosic material (like the stalks of hemp), charcoal, gasoline, ethanol, non-condensable gasses, acetic acid, acetone, methane, and methanol. Process adjustments can be done to favor charcoal, pyrolytic oil, gas, or methanol, with 95.5% fuel-to-feed ratios. Around 68% of the energy of the raw biomass will be contained in the charcoal and fuel oils -- renewable energy generated here at home, instead of overpaying for foreign petroleum.

Hemp vs. Fossil Fuels

Pyrolysis facilities can use the same technology used now to process fossil fuel oil and coal. Petroleum coal and oil conversion is more efficient in terms of fuel-to-feed ratio, but there are many advantages to conversion by pyrolysis.

1) Biomass has a heating value of 5000-8000 BTU/lb, with virtually no ash or sulfur emissions.

2) Ethanol, methanol, methane gas, and gasoline can be derived from biomass at a fraction of the cost of the current cost of oil, coal, or nuclear energy, especially when environmental costs are factored in. Each acre of hemp could yield about 1000 gallons of methanol.

3) When an energy crop is growing, it takes carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air, and releases an equal amount when it is burned, creating a balanced system, unlike petroleum fuels, which only release CO2. When an energy crop like hemp is grown on a massive scale, it will initially lower the CO2 in the air, and then stabilize it at a level lower than before the planting of the energy crop.

4) Use of biomass would end acid rain, end sulfer-based smog, and reverse the greenhouse effect....

http://www.hemphasis.net/Fuel-Energy/fuel.htm

[vermonter]

"Hey Vermonter, your green license plate doesn't fool me."

Right.

[Mr. Geenjeans]

Sorry Bucko,

But all the hemp (as well as "switchgrass" for *those* misguided fools!) capable of being produced in the country wouldn't make a dent in the energy needs of this nation. It just ain't efficient enough!

[sandy ward]

"Right."

Right.

[JPC]

Eyes wide open, most of those facts are inaccurate, inpratical, or just plain misleading. You may want to look to a source that doesn't have such an agenda. For example # 3 is misleading as it assumes there was no plant life present where you intend to plant hemp, #4 is just plain wrong as there are other natural sources that put sulfur in to the air and lead to acid rain. And it certainly isn't going to end the greenhouse effect. Or at least I hope not since this plant would be inhabitable. Further that great source of Methanol is not only toxic, but it burns to hot to be of use as a source of fuel.

As for big oil raking in the profits, maybe Bernie could explain the hold up as COngress was supposed to put an end to it 2 years ago. Oh wait, that's right they thought it a better use of time to intiate 400+ meaningless investigation.

[nek]

"Exxonmobil is a publicly-traded company. So doesn't that mean that those obscene profits belong to you, and me, and the teacher's union, and everyone who has mutual funds, or a retirement acount, or owns stocks?"

Not necessarily. You may not gain any benefit from the increase in profit.

There have been examples of companies (like Microsoft) that have been criticized for the amount of money being kept as "cash on hand". This practice is used instead of paying a dividend, a return on investment.

And then you have examples where executive compensation dips into these profits to an inappropriate extent...one that favors executive pay over increases in dividends.

The unfortunate reality is that these companies seem to forget they are what they are due to American investment dollars and, in some contexts, taxpayer supported US foreign policy.

[JPC]

Eyes wide open, most of those facts are inaccurate, inpratical, or just plain misleading. You may want to look to a source that doesn't have such an agenda. For example # 3 is misleading as it assumes there was no plant life present where you intend to plant hemp, #4 is just plain wrong as there are other natural sources that put sulfur in to the air and lead to acid rain. And it certainly isn't going to end the greenhouse effect. Or at least I hope not since this plant would be inhabitable. Further that great source of Methanol is not only toxic, but it burns to hot to be of use as a source of fuel.

As for big oil raking in the profits, maybe Bernie could explain the hold up as COngress was supposed to put an end to it 2 years ago. Oh wait, that's right they thought it a better use of time to intiate 400+ meaningless investigation.

[Jake]

The first diesel engines (by Rudolph Diesel in 1894) were invented to run on hempseed oil; petroleum wasn't synthesized to mimic hempseed oil for over a decade. Therefore hempseed oil was the primary fuel for automobiles for over 30 years after the invention of the first internal combustion engine.

[JPC]

"The first diesel engines (by Rudolph Diesel in 1894) were invented to run on hempseed oil; petroleum wasn't synthesized to mimic hempseed oil for over a decade. Therefore hempseed oil was the primary fuel for automobiles for over 30 years after the invention of the first internal combustion engine."

Close but that isn't correct, hempseed is what Rudolph Diesal used, but NOT what everybody used, and certiainly not the "primary" fuel for all automobiles.

[eyes wide open]

Thanks for the info, Jake. You might be interested in this article...

Popular Mechanics Magazine
VOL. 69 February, 1938 NO. 2

"New Billion-Dollar Crop"

http://www.globalhemp.com/Archives/Magazines/new_billion_dollar_crop.html

[Douglas Supporter]

I am quite comfortable with my investments. However, the industrialization of hemp is cause for concern in my portfolio.