Is the  Federal Government getting into the venture capitalist business, loaning money to a 10-year-old company saddled with a massive debt load and an initial stock price of $6.00 per share?

Case in point, President Obama visited ZBB Energy Storage Corp. last week and expounded upon how green technology is the wave of the future and all the jobs being provided by the aforementioned company.

During a visit to a Wisconsin company to promote his energy policy, President Barack Obama praised ZBB Energy Corporation as an important contributor to a clean energy economy. The Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin-based company makes products that integrate renewable energy generation with smart storage for markets worldwide. The ZBB Zinc Energy Storage System (ZESS) is a proprietary and patented regenerative energy storage system based on zinc/bromide technology, which is very different in concept and design from more traditional methods of energy storage such as the lead/acid battery.

“ZBB has been around for more than a decade, developing batteries and equipment to store energy from wind turbines and solar cells. More efficient and long-lasting storage devices have long been the Holy Grail of renewable energy, since they would allow operators to store intermittent wind and solar energy for later use. A technological breakthrough would be a great achievement, but the problem is that the effort has proven to be both difficult and costly.”

But what is really going on with this company, a company whose stock recently closed at a paltry $0.66 per share? There is another side to this story that must be revealed to the American taxpayers, taxpayers whose hard-earned money is being spent on green projects that rarely pan out.

Did the government even look at ZBB’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission? Since going public in June of 2007, ZBB has been hemorrhaging money. Current losses: $4.9 million in 2008, $5.5 million in 2009 and $6.9 million for the first nine months of this year, bringing their total losses to $44.1 million. Just recently, the company informed their shareholders that more losses are expected and that the company will be in a worse predicament if unable to continue borrowing money. Even with this year’s borrowing totaling approximately $4.7 million and access to $10 million more, due to a new credit agreement, how can ZZB survive if their business stays at current levels, less than 10% of total capacity? This means it can’t currently access the $14 million in federal tax credits, which were supposed to help with equipment for a new facility.

Other problems have been exposed: “A review by the company’s audit committee last fall discovered that ZBB’s former CEO had been wrongly compensated as both an employee and an independent contractor, and that the company had failed to withhold his proper taxes. He stepped down, and the management team was reshuffled. ZBB was also forced to restate its financial results after a separate audit committee review found the company had recognized revenue from a contract in the wrong quarter.”

If ZBB survives the current recession they will still have to increase capacity, and with current revenues and borrowing, this will be very hard to do if red ink continues to flow.

However, should they survive, the feds will say “look at this company and what they have done with green funds.”

The other side of the coin? We know the rest of the story. The U.S. taxpayers will have to eat more debt in an economy that is struggling with so many people out of work. Could all the money loaned have been better spent and utilized?

Read Entire Article

Last Man on the Moon: Global Warming not Caused by People

Biographical Data for: Astronaut Harrison H. Schmitt, PH.D.

SANTA FE, N.M. – Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

Schmitt said “historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D.”

Schmitt also said “geological evidence indicates changes in sea level have been going on for thousands of years.” He said smaller changes are related to changes in the elevation of land masses — for example, the Great Lakes are rising because the earth’s crust is rebounding from being depressed by glaciers.

“They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming,” Schmitt said.

“I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect,” said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists “are being intimidated” if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

Schmitt resigned fromThe Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration, after the group blamed global warming on human activity. In his resignation letter, the 74-year-old geologist argued that the “global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making.”

Apollo 17 view of earth, perhaps the most viewed picture of all times.

Images: 1, 2

Revisiting the Climate Debate, 2009.

Never mind that the scientific community is divided over what causes global warming, how bad it is and how to deal with it. Al Gore plays Chicken Little to the media’s applause, insisting that the world is warming dangerously and that he has the solution.

(Watch the video, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal)

Former Vice President Al Gore repeated his message that climate change is a planetary emergency at the WSJ’s economics conference in California. The Nobel Prize winner declined to take any questions from reporters, but he did receive a couple of challenges from attendees, including Bjorn Lomborg.

Mr. Lomborg, a skeptical Danish environmentalist who thinks the world would be better off spending its money on health and education issues rather than curbing carbon emissions, said to the former vice president, “I don’t mean to corner you, or maybe I do mean to corner you, but would you be willing to have a debate with me on that point?” Gore, as you can imagine, declined.

Mr. Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consensus, a gathering of Nobel Prize winners, drafts a wish list for global problem solving — not just focusing on energy, but everything from education to combating tuberculosis. Audience members at the conference voted for education and energy research as their top priorities. The Copenhagen Consensus is an amazing organization that you should definitely take the time to check out; their work is exceptional.

Well, it’s the era of green wars, but the article “Do As Al Says, Not AS Al Does” speaks volumes about Mr. Gore’s hypocritical lifestyle:

Former U. S. vice-president Al Gore delivered a major address last summer calling on his country to abandon all fossil fuels within 10 years. By 2018, U. S. electricity and fuel should come entirely from “renewable energy and truly clean, carbon-free sources,” he said. Tickets to the event encouraged attendees to “please use public transit, bicycling or other climate-friendly means” to reach the lecture hall.

So how did Mr. Gore and his retinue arrive? In two Lincoln Town Cars and a full-sized SUV that sat idling with the air conditioners blasting while the Gore party was inside.

It was 34 C in Washington. Al Gore can’t be expected to get into an overheated vehicle after he’s worked up a sweat telling others how to save the planet.

Remember, too, the Nobel prize winning environmentalist lives in a Tennessee mansion that produces a carbon footprint 20 times that of the average American home. A sizable chunk of his personal fortune comes from royalties on a zinc mine which had to be temporarily closed five years ago in part because the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ruled it one of the worst-polluting mine sites in America. Illegal toxins were frequently discharged into nearby rivers.

The battle lines have been drawn, but the issues on Global Warming, though stated as complete, will not go away without more research, debate and much needed up-to-date scientific data. Like Dr. Copenhagen has said, “let’s spend our money wisely.”

If cap-and-trade plans like Kyoto are a bust, what should the world do? Vastly enhancing our focus on the research and development of new energy technology offers the most bang for the buck, he says, and is “absolutely better” than capping carbon emissions. Each dollar spent on energy R&D would bring $11 in benefits, his group figures; each dollar spent on traditional cap-and-trade plans brings about $0.90 in benefits.

The American Powers Act, (Cap and Trade??) is an Energy Tax, 2010

The government  believes if gas costs more you’ll drive less. That’s why they want to increase the gas tax, but without your knowledge. They’ll try to say it isn’t a gasoline tax because it doesn’t raise the current 18.4 cents per gallon Federal Gasoline Excise Tax. The details reveal their proposal is a new tax on top of the existing Federal Gasoline Excise Tax. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who helped craft this new gas tax, admitted the higher costs for energy companies “will be passed on” to motorists at the pump. Don’t be fooled by the rhet0ric, this bill is a gas tax on you and your family.

American Power Act: Hurts Small Business, Does Little for Environment
Leading Economist Releases Cap & Trade “522K Job-killer” Report
It’s time that Congress passes a fair and functional Energy Bill, but not a bill that will only add more burden to the taxpayer’s back and do little to help the environment or climate change. It’s time that Congress stops bending to the pressures of the lobbyists, who have spent millions on the American Power Act. It’s not what the lobbyists want, but a bill must be passed that helps America and doesn’t hinder its future growth. Congress must spend our money wisely. There will be no comprehensive energy bill unless the politics are completely removed, but this will not agree with the current politics and a Congress who likes to get stroked.

Photo Credits: 1, 2

Creativity courtesy of nouincolor.com.

The Malaysian-flagged MT Bunga Kelana 3 was carrying about 62,000 tons of light crude oil, the country’s coast guard said. Singapore port authorities said the spill measured about 4 kilometers by 1 kilometer and was located 6 kilometers south of Singapore’s southeastern tip. Singapore and Malaysia activated oil-spill response companies and a clean-up operation involving 20 craft was under way. There were no reports of injuries among the 50 crew members.

A view of the damaged MV Waily, a bulk carrier registered in St Vincent and the Grenadines, after a collision with a Malaysian-flagged oil tanker in waters between Malaysia and Singapore May 25, 2010.

A close-up view shows the damage on the Malaysian flagged MT Bunga Kelana 3 after its collision with a bulk carrier in the waters between Malaysia and Singapore on May 25, 2010,

The incident happened in the Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) of the Singapore Strait, 13 kilometers (8 miles) from the tip of the island nation, the city-state’s Maritime and Port Authority (MPA) said. The spill, equivalent to about 18,000 barrels, is dwarfed by the approximately 175,000 barrels of oil that has poured into the Gulf of Mexico since the deadly April 20 offshore explosion that sank the Deepwater Horizon rig.

Warning the public.

A storm is coming.

Oil slick along the shoreline.

Oil slick that contaminated the sand.

Workers digging up the sand to put it into the black plastic bag.

Overlooking the mess.

Rubbish that were washed up together with the oil.

Bags were left one side for collection.

Workers in action.

Close up of the dry part.

Hardworking personnel cleaning up the sand under the scorching sun for hours.

One of the longer stretch of oil clearance in East Coast Park.

More black plastic bags.

Sucking out the oil.

Overlooking the canal to see how the oil was blocked.

Materials used to soak up the oil.

Working under the bridge.

Personnel moving in line to clear the oil.

An unsung hero.

Yet another unsung hero.

One of the worst areas that required many personnel.

Another long stretch of affected area.

A workman clearing the sand.

Close up of the floating oil on the sea.

Oil rushing the shore.

Picking up the washed up rubbish from spill.

Oil waves pounding the shore.

More than 50 workers were deployed for the cleansing operations within a short time. Later 450 more workers joined to speed up the process. Sand contaminated by the oil sludge was disposed of immediately. Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore had six response craft on site to manage the spill at all time. via: Ricky Gui

It was less than a tenth the size of Singapore’s worst such oil spill since the MPA was created. As much as 29,000 tons of heavy marine fuel oil leaked into Singapore waters from the tanker Evoikos in 1997 after it collided with the Orapin Global tanker.

New study finds untapped shale reserves set to displace coal if carbon pricing enforced

If the United States — and by extension the world — has a hope of shifting to a low-carbon future, that shift will almost certainly involve burning a vast volume of natural gas. So concludes an assessment by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, who estimate that the US could reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector by at least 10 percent virtually overnight by shutting down inefficient coal-fired plants and ramping up gas-powered generators.

“In a carbon-constrained future, gas plays a particularly important role as a bridge,” says Ernest Moniz, who headed the project as director of MIT’s Energy Initiative (MITEI).

(click to enlarge)

For Climate Relief, US Will Turn to Gas via Nature News

(by:papriko)

The site is frequently used as a humorous source for news by radio stations, as well as most late night comedy shows. Founder Drew Curtis says the stories are selected without intentional political bias, but that he rather tries to run both far-left and far-right articles.

With that being said, the community over at Fark really enjoys having Photoshop contests. And, of course, with the Gulf of Mexico gushing crude oil from its depths, Farkers decided to host a Photoshop a Fix to the BP Oil Spill Contest. Our favorite submissions follow.

(Source: ForkParty.com)

British Petroleum has a long record of bold claims and clever slogans. Far too many have proven to be incredibly ironic. BP also has another history, one we are reminded of now more than ever, one they paid top-dollar to cover up. A history of accidents and incidents of epic proportions.

From environmental destruction to human contamination, outright fraud to unbridled lies, BP has us covered. With such an abominable track record it really makes you wonder how they remain in business. I suppose, with enough money, anything can be made to fade from public perceptions… at least for a little while.

Accidents and Incidents of BP

March 16, 1978: Landunvez Oil Spill

The very large crude carrier Amoco Cadiz ran ashore just north of Landunvez, Finistère, France, causing one of the largest oil spills in history. More than a decade later, Amoco was ordered to pay $120 million in damages and restitution to France.

October 21, 1980: New Castle Plant Explosion

An explosion at an Amoco plant in New Castle, Delaware, killed six people, caused $46 million in property damage, and eventually led to the loss of 300 jobs.

1980s-1990s: Naperville Researchers Cluster Cancer

Six former Amoco chemical engineers at the firm’s Naperville, Illinois research campus developed a deadly form of brain cancer. Researchers who conducted a three-year study of the cancer cluster determined that the cancer cases were workplace-related, but they could not identify the source of the workers’ ailments. In June 2010, BP demolished Building 503, where the workers had worked, because according to a company spokesperson, the building was “underused,” and “required upgrades the company deemed too expensive.” Heirs of one of the cancer victim workers won a $2.75 million suit against BP Amoco in 2000.

1993–1995: Hazardous substance dumping

In September 1999, one of BP’s US subsidiaries, BP Exploration Alaska (BPXA), agreed to resolve charges related to the illegal dumping of hazardous wastes on the Alaska North Slope, for $22 million. The settlement included the maximum $500,000 criminal fine, $6.5 million in civil penalties, and BP’s establishment of a $15 million environmental management system at all of BP facilities in the US and Gulf of Mexico that are engaged in oil exploration, drilling or production. The charges stemmed from the 1993 to 1995 dumping of hazardous wastes on Endicott Island, Alaska by BP’s contractor Doyon Drilling. The firm illegally discharged waste oil, paint thinner and other toxic and hazardous substances by injecting them down the outer rim, or annuli, of the oil wells. BPXA failed to report the illegal injections when it learned of the conduct, in violation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act.

2005: Texas City Refinery explosion

In March 2005, BP’s Texas City, Texas refinery, one of its largest refineries, exploded causing 15 deaths, injuring 180 people and forcing thousands of nearby residents to remain sheltered in their homes. A large column filled with hydrocarbon overflowed to form a vapour cloud, which ignited. The explosion caused all the casualties and substantial damage to the rest of the plant. The incident came as the culmination of a series of less serious accidents at the refinery, and the engineering problems were not addressed by the management. Maintenance and safety at the plant had been cut as a cost-saving measure, the responsibility ultimately resting with executives in London.

The fall-out from the accident continues to cloud BP’s corporate image because of the mismanagement at the plant. There have been several investigations of the disaster, the most recent being that from the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board which “offered a scathing assessment of the company.” OSHA found “organizational and safety deficiencies at all levels of the BP Corporation” and said management failures could be traced from Texas to London.

The company pleaded guilty to a felony violation of the Clean Air Act, was fined $50 million, and sentenced to three years probation.

On October 30, 2009, the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined BP an additional $87 million — the largest fine in OSHA history — for failing to correct safety hazards revealed in the 2005 explosion. Inspectors found 270 safety violations that had been previously cited but not fixed and 439 new violations. BP is appealing that fine.

2006–2007: Prudhoe Bay

In August 2006, BP shut down oil operations in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, due to corrosion in pipelines leading up to the Alaska Pipeline. The wells were leaking insulating agent called Arctic pack, consisting of crude oil and diesel fuel, between the wells and ice. BP had spilled over one million litres of oil in Alaska’s North Slope. This corrosion is caused by sediment collecting in the bottom of the pipe, protecting corrosive bacteria from chemicals sent through the pipeline to fight this bacteria. There are estimates that about 5,000 barrels (790 m³) of oil were released from the pipeline. To date 1,513 barrels (240.5 m³) of liquids, about 5,200 cubic yards (4,000 m³) of soiled snow and 328 cubic yards (251 m³) of soiled gravel have been recovered. After approval from the DOT, only the eastern portion of the field was shut down, resulting in a reduction of 200,000 barrels per day (32,000 m³/d) until work began to bring the eastern field to full production on 2 October 2006.

In May 2007, the company announced another partial field shutdown owing to leaks of water at a separation plant. Their action was interpreted as another example of fallout from a decision to cut maintenance of the pipeline and associated facilities.

On 16 October 2007 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation officials reported a toxic spill of methanol (methyl alcohol) at the Prudhoe Bay oil field managed by BP PLC. Nearly 2,000 gallons of mostly methanol, mixed with some crude oil and water, spilled onto a frozen tundra pond as well as a gravel pad from a pipeline. Methanol, which is poisonous to plants and animals, is used to clear ice from the insides of the Arctic-based pipelines.

2006-2008: Texas City refinery fatalities

From January 2006 to January 2008, three workers were killed at the company’s Texas City, Texas refinery in three separate accidents. In July 2006 a worker was crushed between a pipe stack and mechanical lift, in June 2007, a worker was electrocuted, and in January 2008, a worker was killed by a 500-pound piece of metal that came loose under high pressure and hit him.

2007: Propane price manipulation

Four BP energy traders in Houston were charged with manipulating prices of propane in October 2007. As part of the settlement of the case, BP paid the US government a $303 million fine, the largest commodity market settlement ever in the US. The settlement included a $125 million civil fine to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, $100 million to the Justice Department, $53.3 million to a restitution fund for purchasers of the propane BP sold, and $25 million to a US Postal Service consumer fraud education fund.

2008: Oil price manipulation

In May 2010, the Supreme Court of Arbitration of the Russian Federation agreed in support of the country’s antimonopoly service’s decision to a 1.1 billion Ruble fine ($35.2 million) against TNK/BP, a 50/50 joint venture, for abusing antitrust legislation and setting artificially high oil products prices in 2008, TNK and BP declined comment.

2009: North Sea helicopter accident

On April 1 2009, a Bond Offshore Helicopters Eurocopter AS332 Super Puma ferrying workers from BP’s platform in the Miller oilfield in the North Sea off Scotland crashed in good weather killing all 16 on board.

2010: Deepwater Horizon oil spill

On April 20, 2010, a semi-submersible exploratory offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico exploded after a blowout and sank two days later, killing eleven people and causing a massive oil spill threatening the coast of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and Florida. The rig is owned and operated by Transocean Ltd on behalf of BP, which is the majority owner of the oil field. The company originally estimated the size of the leak at about 1,000 barrels a day but later accepted government estimates of a leak of at least 5,000 barrels per day (790 m³/d). On April 30, BP stated that it would harness all of its resources to battle the oil spill, spending $7 million a day with its partners to try to contain the disaster. BP was running the well without a remote control shut-off switch used in two other major oil-producing nations, Brazil and Norway, as a last resort protection against underwater spills. The use of such devices is not mandated by U.S. regulators.

The U.S. Government gave the responsibility of the incident to BP and will hold it accountable for costs incurred in containing the situation. On May 11, 2010, Congress called the executives of BP, Transocean, and Halliburton to a hearing regarding the oil spill. When probed for answers regarding the events leading up to the explosion, each company blamed the other. BP blamed Transocean who owned the rig, who then blamed the operators of the rig, BP. They also blamed Halliburton, who built the well casing. Scientists have been requesting the right to monitor the amount of oil that is actually being released per day, but “‘The answer is no to that,’ a BP spokesman, Tom Mueller, said on Saturday, May 15. ‘We’re not going to take any extra efforts now to calculate flow there at this point. It’s not relevant to the response effort, and it might even detract from the response effort. Steven Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, analyzed videotape of the leak using particle image velocimetry and estimated oil flow rates at between 56,000 to 84,000 barrels per day (8,900 to 13,400 m³/d), or equivalent to one Exxon Valdez spill every 3.5 to 2.4 days. A second, smaller leak has been estimated to be releasing 25,000 barrels per day (4,000 m³/d) by itself, suggesting that the total size of the leak may well be in excess of 100,000 barrels per day and became the largest oil spill in US history.

The Controversy of BP

Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline

BP has been criticised for its involvement with Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, due to human rights, environmental and safety concerns.

Colombian pipeline

In July 2006, a group of Colombian farmers won a multi million pound settlement from BP after the British oil and gas company was accused of benefiting from a regime of terror carried out by Colombian government paramilitaries to protect a 450-mile (720 km) pipeline.

Mist mountain project

There have been some calls for BP to halt its “Mist Mountain” Coalbed Methane Project in the Southern Rocky Mountains of British Columbia. The proposed 500 km² project is directly adjacent to the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park.

Canadian oil sands

BP is one of numerous firms who are extracting oil from Canadian oil sands, a process that produces four times as much CO₂ as conventional drilling. The Cree aboriginal group describe BP as being complicit in ‘the biggest environmental crime on the planet’.

Refinery safety violations

Under scrutiny after the Texas City Refinery explosion, two BP-owned refineries in Texas City, Texas, and Toledo, Ohio, were responsible for 97 percent (829 of 851) of safety violations by oil refiners between June 2007 and February 2010, as determined by inspections by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Environmental and safety record

BP was named by Mother Jones Magazine as one of the “ten worst corporations” in both 2001 and 2005 based on its environmental and human rights records. In 1991 BP was cited as the most polluting company in the US based on EPA toxic release data. BP has been charged with burning polluted gases at its Ohio refinery (for which it was fined $1.7 million), and in July 2000 BP paid a $10 million fine to the EPA for its management of its US refineries. According to PIRG research, between January 1997 and March 1998, BP was responsible for 104 oil spills.

Why no further steps have been taken to stop the repetition of destruction and tragedy I don’t know. I can only hope we will learn to hit them where it hurts, right in the pocket. If the politicians they pay are not elected and we discontinue being customer, how long can they stand alone?