Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label safety. Show all posts
Showing posts with label safety. Show all posts

Monday, October 29, 2012

More Domestic Oil Than Saudi, Fewer Refineries


BLUF: As oil prices increase, Obama touts the oil exportation capacity of the United States. Quietly, the administration continues to cut off access to our petroleum resources and make licensing more and more difficult, we continue to lose our national financial blood paying OPEC nations for our energy. We MUST save our finances for our nation while we open up and safely access the more than 200 years of oil and natural gas within our own borders. We must cut off hostiles like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Russia, and the like from our money.

 

We have all watched our finances suffer from the skyrocketing cost of gas. During the last two years we have talked about the Keystone Pipeline and its importance in getting crude to refineries.  The Keystone would bring oil from the north Midwestern regions of America. The estimated oil reserves, according to US Energy Information Administration (EIA), 317.6 billion cubic feet which is more than 25 billion barrels of oil. This estimate only takes into consideration what technology has been able to verify. That is important as there may well be more oil than we have found. This report can be found reported in Canadian newspapers. Why not in American news media? Someone does not want the American public to know this (1).

 

A recent commentary that has links back to Newsmax talks about how Obama is making it harder to access our own natural resources. Additionally, America is ranked within the top 15 oil exporting countries. So, we are exporting oil, our own prices are going up, and access to our reserves is being cut off.  Reports state that we are exporting around 2 million barrels per day. At the same time, we are importing 22 million barrels per day for our own consumption. Shipping costs have gone up, prices for gasoline have hit stratospheric levels, and we are selling oil. With the price of crude, this would make sense, at first blush; however, it would be a wiser investment (rebuilding, updating, maintaining our own oil infrastructure will put hundreds of thousands of people back to work and paying into the national tax system thereby lowering our national deficit) than selling crude as a cheap and unfinished raw product.

 

Think of it this way, finished diamonds are highly sought after while raw, uncut diamnds are not sold in stores. Why? What is the daily consumer going to do with uncut, unpolished, raw diamonds? The value in any product comes from it being made into something more valuable.

 

Alaska’s congressional delegation — Sens. Mark Begich (a Democrat) and Lisa Murkowski, and Rep. Don Young — call the administration’s action “the largest wholesale land withdrawal and blocking of access to an energy resource by the federal government in decades.”

Who are we importing oil from? Each day, the U.S. uses about 21 million barrels of oil-more than any other country in the world. It imports about 58% of it.  One of those countries  is Socialistic Dictator Chavez’s Venezuela where miners and oil rig workers die regularly in facilities that are maintained at safety levels far below those of US standards, and are likely to be far more hazardous to the surrounding environment. Another one is Saudi Arabia, one to which Obama showed his (sadly our nation’s, too) servitude to by bowing in front of.  The more than 30 other nations include a number of countries which have a record of internationally opposing the US.

 

Someone at journalstar.com has written a piece about how the Keystone Pipeline project is about to become as useful as the pyramids. The pipeline that will transfer all that oil to refineries and shipping ports is about to become obsolete? It seems to us that the Alaskan Pipeline is not able to handle the full capacity of the oil reserves in the Alaskan Wildlife Reserve. It hails the US prospect of exporting oil. The piece ignores the facts that drilling into those reserves is becoming more and more restrictive, made so by the current administration (3) (4).

 

The gross ignorance of transporting that oil out coupled with some minor grammatical errors that are college freshman mistakes and that the author completes missed the concept of HOW to actually get the oil shipped out of those northern reserves tell us two immediate things about the author. First, the author supports the restrictions that are in place preventing our access to the oil reserves and the jobs that would result from that access. Second, the author was writing out of reflex rather than rational thought and research.

 

Our take, at MSMII, is that the Keystone Pipeline is vital in that it would provide hundreds of thousands of jobs in drilling, construction, facility maintenance, refineries, and the thousands of other jobs that would develop around that jobs base. Another point that MSMII feels is worth stressing is this nation’s capacity to refine that crude and make it into usable, sellable products of value.

 

Please, do not take our word for it, check the links below. After the bibliographic links we have also included a number of statements and the sites through which we researched them.

 

 

 

 





 

 

Further Reading for your edification



 

United States Now Has More Oil Than Saudi Arabia: Obama Bans U. S. Drilling: Forces Our Money To Islamic Nations For Oil.

The United States has plenty of oil within US borders. We don’t have to rely on foreign oil anymore! It is just a matter of drilling and getting the oil out. The oil is there! Remember the song….”America, America God shed his grace on thee”? It is true! God provided this country with more than enough oil for generations to come.

Did you know…

There is a massive 200 billion barrel oil field located in North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana. And it even gets better! Because of new horizontal drilling technology, it is estimated that this huge field may even produce up to 500 billion barrels of oil! The Saudi’s are estimated to have only 260 billion barrels of oil, clearly putting America in the cat bird seat!

 


But the good news does not stop there! Alaskais just waiting to drill for oil. In fact the governor of Alaska is suing the government for failing to drill for oil. Alaskan oil fields are massive. At Gull Island, Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, there is enough oil and natural gas to keep America going for the next 200 years! Yes, for the next 200 years!

 


There is even better news! The US Outer Continental Shelf has 112 billion barrels of oil, not to mention a whopping 656TRILLION cubic feet of natural gas! WHY are people struggling to pay winter heating bills when we have natural resources like this?

 


Oil shale is abundant in the US. In fact, half of all the earth’s oil shale deposits are located within 150 miles of Grand Junction, Colorado! Shell Oil is working on new technology which will make oil shale extraction financially feasible. They plan to open a shale oil plant in 2010. It will provide a piece of the puzzle toward energy independence for the United States.

 


Then of course, just about everyone knows that the United States is the Saudi Arabia of coal. With 275 billon tons of coal! We have more coal than just about any other place in the world. Enough coal for American needs for the next 250 years! Once again, new technology is underway to make coal burning safe for our environment.

 


So there we have it! It is time for the US to get serious about energy independence and drill for oil. The environmentalists should move to China and India where pollution is really is out of control. With the new technology used in the oil fields of today, the impact on the environment is there but it is controlled. With environmental controls oil fields can be environmentally safe.

When it comes to the environment we need to understand that as long as there are billions of people living on this planet, there will to be a negative impact on the environment. That is just the way it is unless billions of people die, and even then environmentalists would complain about rotting corpses creating a problem for the environment. There is simply no way around problems with the environment when you have billons of people to contend with. The human race needs to protect this planet, yet we have to live too. Living without energy is not an option. Until we have plentiful, green energy we will have to rely on the oil based solutions of old. It will take time to convert to green energy and that quest is just as important as drilling for oil is now. We can’t let the ball drop in either arena.

Obviously we should have been exploring our oil supplies 10 years ago. Now it will take at least 2 years before oil and then gas will come back down to a livable price for most Americans. 80% of all Americans claim climbing gas prices are affecting their lives in a very negative way.

And is it no wonder! Food prices go up every time a barrel of oil reaches a new high. Add to all of this are the flood woes of the Midwest which will mean even higher food prices yet to come. This winter will be especially tough for most people as they struggle to heat their homes with the highest projected heating costs of all time, and if that is not enough, they will be hit with unaffordable food prices, making it harder than ever to put food on the table for the family. This is not the America I know, or want to know.

Whoever wants to be the next president can easily get elected if they take the bull by the horns, and start drilling! We need to open the US oil fields in Alaska, Montana, and North and South Dakota as soon as possible. And, once we have that oil flowing all across America, we can tell the Middle East what to do with their oil. For too long we danced to their tune. It was degrading to both President Bush and Americans across the country when he went begging to the Saudi’s, hat in hand, pleading for increased oil production, which the Saudi’s denied. No American president should ever have to go through that again, especially when we have billions of barrels of oil right in our own back yard.

The next few years will be a time of financial hardship, but once American oil becomes available, it will not take long for the economy to turn around. This time of austerity is beneficial in a way, because it forces us to seek new and better ways to do things. And, new and better ways of doing things…..well that is a lot of what this country is all about! In the face of adversity, we will prevail and prosper in the end! We can do it! God Bless America!

Hub Pages

The Obama administration is continuing a ban on offshore drilling in favor of offshore wind farms at a time when gasoline threatens to reach $5/gallon an economic nightmare the American public might see develop in 2011.

OBAMA MOTTO ~ KEEP AMERICA OUT OF WORK

 


The biggest wave of refinery closures on the U.S. East Coast is raising the specter of gasoline shortages during the peak-demand driving season.

The region will have lost almost half of its refining capacity in six months by July, according to data compiled by Bloomberg based on Energy Department statistics. Requests to send gasoline on Colonial Pipeline Co.’s link from the Gulf Coast to the eastern U.S. have exceeded capacity since August, company data show.

Gasoline futures have risen 24 percent this year, the most of any of the 24 commodities in the Standard & Poor’s GSCI index, on speculation that the closures will crimp supply in New York Harbor, the benchmark contract’s delivery point, just as improving U.S. economic growth and job hiring spurs demand. At the same time, shipping rules limit the availability of tankers to supply the region from the Gulf, while European refiners reduce exports in the face of lower profit margins.

"Domestic infrastructure remains extremely constrained and there is not enough time for that to be resolved by summer," Amrita Sen, a London-based analyst at Barclays Plc, said Wednesday in an e-mail. "Gasoline supplies will be highly constricted as a result and prices will have to rise to attract more imports."

Gasoline for April delivery fell 0.5 percent to $3.3396 a gallon yesterday on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Spot prices for reformulated fuel in the U.S. Gulf Coast were 7.13 cents a gallon above Nymex futures, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Regular gasoline at the pump in the East Coast was $3.811 a gallon as of March 19, 7.7 percent higher than a year earlier, Energy Department data show.

The risk of shortages increases the prospect of record costs for motorists during a U.S. presidential campaign. Pump prices may reach an average of $4 a gallon this summer and might climb to near $5 in some areas of the East Coast, Stephen Schork, president of the Schork Group, an energy-consulting firm in Villanova, Pa., said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio March 5.

In its most recent gasoline price survey, AAA reported last Friday that a gallon of unleaded in New Jersey cost $3.63, up from $3.39 a year earlier. As prices inch towards $4, the state’s motorists are paying an average of 20 cents less than drivers nationwide.

Sunoco Inc. and ConocoPhillips have shut two plants in Pennsylvania and plan to idle a third that together could process more than 700,000 barrels a day of oil. Hovensa LLC closed a plant in the U.S. Virgin Islands that was the largest offshore shipper to the region.

Colonial will expand a line supplying fuel to New York Harbor by 125,000 barrels a day by 2014, the company announced at a San Diego conference March 12. Cargoes arriving from abroad may account for 36 percent of Northeast gasoline consumption this year, the Energy Department said Feb. 27.

The closures reduce the capacity to produce summer-grade reformulated gasoline, or RBOB, the fuel on which Nymex futures are based, with the approach of the peak driving season between the Memorial Day weekend in late May and Labor Day in early September.

"It’s more difficult to make than winter grade and you’ve got a lot of major producers out of the market," Edward L. Morse, the global head of commodities research at Citigroup Inc. in New York, said yesterday in telephone interview. "I don’t know where the material is going to come from."

 


Refinery Capacity Report

Data series include fuel, electricity, and steam purchased for consumption at the refinery; refinery receipts of crude oil by method of transportation; and current and projected atmospheric crude oil distillation, downstream charge, and production capacities. Respondents are operators of all operating and idle petroleum refineries (including new refineries under construction) and refineries shut down during the previous year, located in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and other U.S. possessions.

The 2012 Refinery Capacity Report does not contain working and shell storage capacity data. This data is now being collected twice a year as of March 31 and September 30 on the Form EIA-810, "Monthly Refinery Report", and is now released as a separate report Working and Net Available Shell Storage Capacity.

 


Contrary to popular belief there are many, spread all over. According to the EIA, 149 refineries are operating in the United States. However, they are not all dedicated to refining oil into usable gasoline, and 149 still aren't enough. The real problem, however, is not that there aren't enough refineries (which, once again, there aren't,) but that the refineries we have are not working at maximum capacity. Regularly, their parent companies will shut them down or scale them back, dramatically reducing their output. The oil companies say its due to refinery age, repairs, etc. There is much debate, however, as to whether or not these actions are actually deliberate in order to boost prices at the pump. It could be argued that with problems occurring that increase expenses for oil companies that their increase in profits recently makes those same statements of high expenditures false. What adds further weight to the debate is the fact that dozens of refineries have been closed in the past 15 years, which doesn't add up during a supply shortage or price spike caused by the same, with increase in demand. It is also widely known that in the mid-1990's some refineries were closed as a direct result of refinery overproduction, during times of surplus, which was due to a loss of profits by the relevant companies. This further makes recent industry profit spikes quite coincidental, now that those refineries are closed and production is strickly controlled, shortage or surplus with every barrel with limited refineries, which can be slowed for any reason. Regardless, production of gasoline and related products is affected, and to be fair, 60% of U.S. oil is imported, and so conflicts in Iraq and problems with Iran, Venezuela, long shipping times/distances all can also dramatically affect the price of gasoline as well, and have been known to hamper it in the past.

 


Q:Does the U.S. lack sufficient oil refining capabilities?

A: We have half as many refineries as we did in 1982, and they're not meeting demands. Regulations, practical challenges and economic factors all play a role.

FULL QUESTION

The lack of U.S. oil refinery capacity keeps being blamed for some of the large increases in gas prices. Do we lack refining capacity and, if so, why?

FULL ANSWER

Though oil refinery productivity in the United States has been improving, the number of operating refineries has been dropping steadily. In 1982, the earliest year for which the Energy Information Administration has data, there were 301 operable refineries in the U.S., and they produced about 17.9 million barrels of oil per day. Today there are only 149 refineries, but they're producing 17.4 million barrels – less than in 1982, but more than any year since then. The increase in efficiency is impressive, but it's not enough to meet demand: U.S. oil consumption is 20.7 million barrels per day. Refinery capacity isn't the only factor in the price of gasoline, and according to the EIA it's not the most important one either (that would be the cost of crude oil), but it's certainly a contributor.

Existing refineries have been running at or near full capacity since the mid-1990s, but are failing to meet daily consumption demands. Yet there hasn't been a new refinery built in the U.S. since 1976. Why? Several factors: Building a refinery is expensive, there are a lot of environmental restrictions on where and how they can be built and nobody wants to live near one. One company, Arizona Clean Fuels, has been trying to construct a refinery in the Southwest since 1998. Getting a permit to build took seven years, and the company twice changed the plant's proposed location because of environmental restrictions and land disputes. The refinery is projected to have a $3.7 billion total price tag. The EIA recorded per-barrel profits of $5.29 in 2006; at that rate, the 150,000-barrel-per-day refinery would need to operate for almost 13 years before its profits outweighed the cost of building it.

In short, the reason for not adding more refineries is straightforward: It's hard, and it's expensive. The reason that we have so few in the first place is more complicated. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surplus of refining capacity. Then, over the course of two decades, half of the plants shut down. In 2001, Oregon senator Ron Wyden presented to Congress a report arguing that these closings were calculated choices intended to increase oil company profits. Fewer refineries means less product in circulation, which means a lower supply-to-demand ratio and more profit. Wyden's report cites internal memos from the oil industry implying that this reduction was a deliberate attempt to curtail profit losses.

The economic pressures of oversupply could have led to plant closings even without a more calculated decision, of course. In 2005, the head of the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association testified at a House hearing that the rate of return on investment in refining averaged just five and a half percent from 1993 to 2003.

Gasoline shortages in California

Shortages in the Southeast

People are talking about exporting oil? Refineries are closing ... We have greater oil reserves than Saudi Arabia, the leading oil selling country today, but our refineries are closing.

 

Thursday, September 22, 2011

More Good News From the TSA

“And, here’s ANOTHER fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Napolli!!” is likely what the bloated government would say to its sidekick.

Another TSA agent has been arrested and accused of rape.

Clifton Lyles, who worked at the Nashville International Airport, was arrested earlier this week in Rutherford County, Tennessee, and charged with statutory rape. His bond was set at $10,000, according to NewsChannel 5 WTVF-TV in Nashville.

Earlier this month, a TSA employee was arrested in Nevada and charged with six counts of lewdness with a child.

In March of 2010, a TSA worker was arrested in Massachusetts and charged with statutory rape, enticement of a child and indecent assault and battery on a person 14 or older, a Boston news station reported.

The agency has weathered a number of criminal accusations since its inception in late 2001 following the September 11 attacks.

In February, the TSA admitted in federal court that a supervisor and two TSA agents were arrested and charged with stealing thousands of dollars in cash from the luggage of travelers. Another employee was arrested and fired for assaulting a co-worker in a dispute over a parking space.

Several days before the TSA admission of guilt, a TSA security officer at Newark Liberty International Airport pleaded guilty to accepting bribes and kickbacks from a colleague who regularly stole money from passengers during security screenings, Reuters reported.

Passenger theft by TSA employees is a nationwide problem, writes Howard Portnoy. According to TSA records, press reports, and court documents, around 500 TSA officers have been fired or suspended for stealing from passenger luggage.

Airports in New York City harbor the most flagrant offenders, according to Portnoy, “but virtually no city in the nation is safe from the TSA’s sticky fingers.”

Violence is also a problem. In August, a former TSA employee was charged with a federal hate crime after he allegedly attacked an 83-year-old Somali man on May 4, 2010.

Another recent headline goes into how a black woman had to let TSA agents run their fingers through her hair. One gent I work with says that this is just part of the cost of living in a free society. This is an outrage! That we, the people, have to pay taxes in order to support an organization that is inept, has not found or foiled one actual threat, has repeatedly been found to not do adequate background checks, employs rapists, power-hungry abusers, pedophiles, molesters, thieves, and has even found some of its employees to be assisting drug couriers is a disgusting and absolute outrage! All this and more for a paltry 2011 proposed budget was $43.6 BILLION dollars. No terrorist acts caught at the gate for a price tag of $43.6 billion dollars just this year and our personal as well as national dignity is all it costs.

But, wait! There’s more! Call now and receive a signed picture of Michael Chertoff and Sam the Eagle titled Separated at Birth.

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/?q=articles/news/the_black_diaspora_news/32673
http://www.infowars.com/another-tsa-employee-accused-of-rape/

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Jobs! Jobs! JOBS! and oil

Carl Larry of Blue Ocean Brokerage (a private financial intermediary specializing in the brokerage of cash–based and derivative commodity and energy products)
"Who knows where we're going to pull barrels from with OPEC at 30 million a day and our imports barely at 9 million?"
The American Petroleum Institute reported a decline in weekly crude oil and gasoline inventories

I do not believe that there is a threat of an oil embargo. I do, however, feel that there are several problems with having a national reliance on imported oil.

Of primary importance in today’s news are jobs and the price of gas at the pump. If the price of gas is not a big concern, then it should well be! The cost of gas has about doubled over the last two or three years. Even Prius owners (getting 50 mpg) are feeling the pinch.

Jobs
Everyone has been waiting to hear how Obama plans to create jobs. The idea of creating, making something out of nothing, is somewhat illusionary. The jobs are potentially there now. That bears repeating. The jobs are potentially there now. The Keystone XL Pipeline project is still languishing and will until Obama puts his foot down. There is a bill which is forcing him to do so at the end of this year. This Pipeline which would bring oil into US refineries along the Gulf of Mexico is estimated to need roughly 138,000 people to build. That does not include the necessary maintenance crews, to personnel needed at the Gulf refineries, and all the other jobs which will spawn from this one project. I understand that this nation needs to see a growth of about 200,000 jobs per month for then ext several years to recover, but this is a good start.

If Obama shifts the current US policy on oil and natural gas the projected result is 1.4 million jobs and the government would get, via taxes and fees, some $800 billion dollars. Not too bad for a start, right?

National Security
Since the US military and economy both run on and are reliant upon oil it is no leap to say this is an Achilles Heel for America. In 1973 countries of the Middle East who formed OPEC made the US subject to an oil embargo. Nothing runs for long without oil and people WILL pay, through the nose apparently, to get it. Granted, the Department of Energy was formed to lessen our dependence on imported oil, a reliance that has now soared upwards from 20% to roughly 50%. That’s right, the Department of Energy was formed to lower our reliance on imported oil and it has increased since the 1970’s.  We did learn something, though. While global dependence on oil imports has generally increased since 1980, vulnerability to short-term interruptions has not.  That is what I have been told. I am not in the position to believe this as I am paying $40 to $50 dollars to fill my compact car’s tank.

The situation is that our manufacturing rate continues to fall, gas prices have increased and stayed high, there are opportunities for the US to secure and use domestically available resources for security and economic growth. Why have we not begun doing this? This next step of creating American jobs, strengthening American security, reestablishing America as a premier country is now sitting on a desk in the White house waiting for Hussein Obama to give a thumbs up or down.

I think that the threat of pulling aid, as made by Kay Granger of Texas, is one we should follow through on immediately. Do it now! Sink the BILLIONS in aid money into our own aid! Why should Egypt get $2 billion of our dollars while we should be investing in ourselves?

Friday, August 26, 2011

Week In Review August 26, 2011

A number of issues have been expanded on this week. The most important of which, I think, include Syria and Department of Homeland Security.

Syria
In 1963 the al-Assad family took control of Syrian leadership. Basher, the current president, was born shortly after. He took power when his father died; in 2000 and 2007 Basher was “elected” after running unopposed each time. The al-Assad family has long been involved in chemical weapons (receiving several plane loads from Iraq in 2002), weapons proliferation with Iran, as well as routinely their subjects, err, citizens (he was elected, after all).

So what? Here the world can see that a slightly less megalomaniac than Ahmadinijad is doing precisely what Saddam Hussein and Mommar Khadafy did. Where they were forcibly and violently removed from power, after 32 and 42 years in absolute control, the al-Assad family stands unopposed by anyone outside of Syria. In fact, the UN cannot even bring a full coalition of outrage in a letter about al-Assad as Russia and China (both receiving US development funds as well as other US aid) are siding with al-Assad. I say siding with as they are not opposing nor speaking out, they are blocking further (useless) sanctions and any actual action that would follow the eventual and blatant violation of sanctions. Again, the “So What” here is that al-Assad is slaughtering his own subjects. Russia, China, and Iran are all backing al-Assad. Iran has funded, armed, and made numerous deals and deployments into Syria. Russia, China, and Iran have all stated that they want to, not just see, but be part of the destruction of the United States.

Now what? Not that I advocate total annihilation or genocide; I do, however, believe in the pre-emptive strike in order to defend a nation’s sovereignty and safety. A nation may also conduct a pre-emptive defensive strike to protect allies that are unable or incapable of defending themselves. Self-Defense on a national basis is what I am calling it. Right now, due to the START Treaty that Obama unwisely signed with the Russians, we now have a surplus of nuclear weapons. Does anyone see a problem with Syrian Green Glass? Yes, take a tactical nuke and put it into Basher al-Assad’s palace. No big loss of oil there. One homicidal and deeply twisted dictator and his entire family line are taken out. No ground troops from the US or coalition nations in harm’s way, done.

What about Obama’s Executive Order 13338? That? The executive order that prohibits us from buying oil from a country that produces less oil yearly than the US uses in a month? I think I called that an empty gesture from an empty suit. Representative Granger wants to see something with teeth, like having the $2 BILLION tax dollars budgeted to Egypt removed if they continue to oppose Western interests.



The Department of Homeland Security preparedness grant program awards for fiscal year 2011 puts $2.1 BILLION tax dollars into security initiatives and response organizations. None, or very little, of this $2.1 BILLION tax dollars seems to go into answering the questions presented by Dr. Jim Giermanski, Chairman Powers Global Holdings, Inc.

1.  Does DHS believe and support the use of Container Security Devices (CSDs) as being consistent with law, foreign security programs, non-government organizations, and the private sector bottom-line needs?
2. Does DHS believe that container security technology and CSDs serve as revenue producers for the private sector?
3. Why is the official policy on physical security for containers sealed "doors-only?"
4. Other than the incentives claimed by CBP for the private sector's participation in C-TPAT, what U.S. government incentive is used to encourage the use of CSDs?
5. Why is DHS not participating with the EU and other nations who are working together to develop an international standards and protocols for CSDs?
6. What can Congress do, but has not done to encourage CSD usage? 
7. What has DHS done with respect  to informing and encouraging Congress to ratify the Rotterdam Rules recognizing that these new Rules improve supply chain security?
8. Given increased security concerns about Mexico, what CSD pilots or programs have been used or tested in Mexico/U.S. cross-border commercial practices?
9. In which CSD pilots, if any, has DHS participated?
10. Why is DHS not complying with the mandates of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 with respect to CSD for usage HAZMAT movements?
11. If Trade Facilitation is one goal of CBP, why wouldn't CBP/DHS required the use of CSDs knowing that their usage is a financial benefit to the user as well as to the government?
12. Since DHS admits that transshipments are a legitimate security concern, why hasn't DHS mandated CSD usage for all containers inbound to the United States which transit a transshipment port?
13. Why has the "Green Lane" concept not yet been implemented in seaports to encourage CSD usage?
14. Why continue weak programs such as CSI knowing there is no actual verification of container contents?
15. Why is it that DHS/CBP has not yet addressed the current proven vulnerability of using the required 433.5 to 434.5 MHz spectrum in our ports knowing and admitting in writing along with the Office of the Secretary of Defense that the vulnerability truly exists as indicated in this DHS statement: ... these technologies...can be exploited and potentially used to trigger an explosive device.
16. Has DHS funded or directed an empirical study of the impact of closing all U.S. seaports and land ports-of-entry as a result of one or two dirty bomb blasts in the U.S. ports?

So, this week, while Ron Paul and 77% of the sitting democrats voted against enabling rules of engagement that actually PROTECT our military personnel, Janet Napolitano is spending $2.1 BILLION of our tax dollars on initiatives and response.

So what? DHS has put another $2.1 BILLION tax dollars into feel good initiatives rather than actually identifying and stopping threats.

Now what? I propose we do away with the Department of Homeland Security. But, they are there in case of a National Emergency, you say. What about the National Guard? Aren't they dual hatted to serve in support of the military AND to serve their states in response to national emergencies? Well, yes, they are. What about the highly important and visible role they play at airports? Don't most airports already have police, fire, rescue, and security elemnts working there? Well, yes, they do. Now what, you ask. The government tears down, repeals the institutionalized walls outlawing the sharing of information that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in putting up and allow the standing and proven methods of investigative, law enforcement, intelligence, and common sense to work.

Oh, yes, support Electrolux, they said that putting more sharia compliant rules in play within their organization sucks.

Thank you and have a great weekend.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

An Open Letter to Secretary Napolitano

By: Dr. Jim Giermanski, Chairman Powers Global Holdings, Inc.
Dear Secretary Napolitano:

First, you must know that I speak for myself, not my firm or any constituency.  Since the attack of 9/11, and the subsequent creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),  I have been thinking about the economic role of the global supply chain as it impacts the United States, and about the role of DHS in addressing the supply chain in light of all the U.S. and international security programs, national laws, global security standards, and the money allocated to DHS for our homeland defense.   My thinking turned to speaking, to writing, and now to questioning directly the degree to which DHS has addressed serious questions of concern.

The following questions are not in any specific order because they difficult to categorize.  However, the last two may be the most serious.

1.  Does DHS believe and support the use of Container Security Devices (CSDs) as being consistent with law, foreign security programs, non-government organizations, and the private sector bottom-line needs?
2. Does DHS believe that container security technology and CSDs serve as revenue producers for the private sector?
3. Why is the official policy on physical security for containers sealed "doors-only?"
4. Other than the incentives claimed by CBP for the private sector's participation in C-TPAT, what U.S. government incentive is used to encourage the use of CSDs?
5. Why is DHS not participating with the EU and other nations who are working together to develop an international standards and protocols for CSDs?
6. What can Congress do, but has not done to encourage CSD usage? 
7. What has DHS done with respect  to informing and encouraging Congress to ratify the Rotterdam Rules recognizing that these new Rules improve supply chain security?
8. Given increased security concerns about Mexico, what CSD pilots or programs have been used or tested in Mexico/U.S. cross-border commercial practices?
9. In which CSD pilots, if any, has DHS participated?
10. Why is DHS not complying with the mandates of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 with respect to CSD for usage HAZMAT movements?
11. If Trade Facilitation is one goal of CBP, why wouldn't CBP/DHS required the use of CSDs knowing that their usage is a financial benefit to the user as well as to the government?
12. Since DHS admits that transshipments are a legitimate security concern, why hasn't DHS mandated CSD usage for all containers inbound to the United States which transit a transshipment port?
13. Why has the "Green Lane" concept not yet been implemented in seaports to encourage CSD usage?
14. Why continue weak programs such as CSI knowing there is no actual verification of container contents?
15. Why is it that DHS/CBP has not yet addressed the current proven vulnerability of using the required 433.5 to 434.5 MHz spectrum in our ports knowing and admitting in writing along with the Office of the Secretary of Defense that the vulnerability truly exists as indicated in this DHS statement: ... these technologies...can be exploited and potentially used to trigger an explosive device.
16. Has DHS funded or directed an empirical study of the impact of closing all U.S. seaports and land ports-of-entry as a result of one or two dirty bomb blasts in the U.S. ports?

The answers to these questions to me are obvious and referenced by outside sources and experts.  CSD usage is clearly in line with national law, international organizations, and sound business practices.  It is a revenue generator documented in reports of Stanford University, A.T. Kearny, Bearing, and even the Congressional Budget Office.   While CBP touts the benefits of using CSDs, it still does not provide "tier three" privileges like Green Lanes at U.S. seaports, actually required by the Safe Port Act of 2006 if a container security device is used.  Additionally, "doors-only" physical security is simply dumb!  There are many ways which have been empirically demonstrated that can bypass locked container doors.   Patting down children before boarding a plane and not securing a container electronically is simply unbelievable and indicative of DHS leadership.

With respect to working with Congress to encourage CSD usage, I know of no suggestion by DHS to Congress of providing tax credits for CSD usage, yet tax credits for home improvements, cars, appliances, solar energy, mine rescue, distilled spirits, etc., etc., are common.  I also question whether DHS has encouraged Congress to ratify the Rotterdam Rules which provide an additional layer of security compared to The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act under which we now operate. 

With respect to cooperating in international pilot programs utilizing container security technology, specifically those within the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) or even with our Mexican partner, DHS was conspicuously absent.  After almost 3 years of work,  the FP7's Smart Container Chain Management Program (SMART-CM) will culminate in its workshop to  deliver: Container Security & Tracking Devices’ technical characteristics and Security Messages’ standardization.   Not only is DHS absent in the international standardization efforts,  it has also paid attention to the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 and its requirements to monitor "end-to-end" the movement of "security-sensitive material" including HAZMAT, to detect "radiation detection equipment,"  "breaches," and to detect and monitor the  internal environment of the conveyance carrying these substances.
With respect to CBP programs like CSI, supply chain security experts and retiring CBP personnel who can now speak freely acknowledge these programs do not genuinely verify container cargo contents.  There is also evidence, in light of official testimony by former CBP leadership, that DHS is unaware of any technology to neutralize the transshipment vulnerability.  However, CSDs were, in fact, available at the time of his testimony to neutralize this vulnerability.

For me, one of the most troubling issues, is that DHS admits in writing to the vulnerability created of the federal requirement to use radio frequency identification (RFID) frequency spectrum 433.5 to 434.5 MHz in U.S. ports.   Its use to trigger an explosive device is confirmed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.  This was again reported on in August, 2011 by senior investigative reporter and on-line editor of HSToday.US and comments from readers confirm his report.

Imagine the impact of a WMD explosion in one of our ports on our weakened economy, let alone loss of life at the impacted ports?    Vessels carrying imports to the United States could not discharge their cargo.  U.S. exporters could not ship by vessel when vessel cargo accounts for 90% of global shipments.  There would be a serious impact on energy, jobs, pharmaceuticals, food, and more.   It appears to me that given your department's handling of these aforementioned problems and issues, it is only a matter of time for a cataclysmic event of this nature to occur, shutting down all other seaports and land ports-of-entry as 9/11 did to air traffic.

So, Madam Secretary, what is your department doing to address these obvious supply chain  issues?  What is being done to include the U.S. and international private sectors in handling these problems for which private sector solutions already exist?  Why is DHS not involved with developing international standards when the U.S. private sector is represented on the EU Commission's advisory board for the FP7 Programme and involved with CSD international standardization?   I only hope that you are aware of these serious threats and take action  with Congressional support to immediately to address them.  And if you have been aware of these threats, and have done so little to address them realistically, for me, your continued tenure as Secretary should be in jeopardy.   Except perhaps for C-TPAT, a program established before your tenure as Secretary, I believe that your handling of global supply chain vulnerabilities has been reactive at best and perfunctory at worst.
http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/an-open-letter-to-secretary-napolitano

Legitimizing A Terror Group

The Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) has been on the Terrorism Watch list for quite a long time. During this time the group is alleged to have helped provide information about Iranian nuclear proliferation. At least, during the past few years the MEK has been providing detailed information to interests outside of Iran.

The group has been exiled from Iran for attempting to overthrow the Shah in the 1980’s. It mixes Marxism and Islam. A socialist Islamic mix, could it work? No, it could not work. We are all witnessing the failing of Muammar al-Gaddafi, who seized power in Libya with a military coup in 1969, called his ruling ideology “Islamic socialism”.

Also, recall that muslim socialists believe that the quran and islam are in line with equality and redistribution of wealth. Those ideas have been doing great things for America, so let’s go ahead and take a group that was founded in terrorism, has lived in exile, is in opposition to the Iranian Regime, and, as of last year, was still considered a terror threat and legitimize them! Or is Obama hoping that, by taking the group off of the list they will become more public and, like the people in Pakistan who helped bring down Osama, become mounted trophies on the wall of another extremist regime? A regime, mind you, which has murdered its own citizens with impunity while Obama says it is no concern of ours. A regime that has spent decades assisting Bashir al-Assad of Syria commit ethnic cleansing of Sunnis.

In my opinion, flood the Clintonian State Department with phone calls denouncing such a move. This group started off by killing Americans in Iran. Let’s not allow these people to go without answering for their crimes.

While we are at the task of calling the State Department, let’s also give a call out to those who also support (by way of being paid to lobby) former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani; former Vermont governor Howard Dean; former NATO commander Wesley K. Clark, President Obama's former national security adviser Gen. James Jones; former F.B.I. director, Louis Freeh; former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson; former attorney general Michael B. Mukasey; and Lee H. Hamilton.