Author: admin

  • Chinese get tough on foreign projects

    Chinese get tough on foreign projects

    Peter Cai

    April 13, 2012

    Clinton Dines.

    Clinton Dines … new hurdles will ensure proper due diligence.

    CHINESE authorities are cracking down on foreign investment after a string of troubled projects that have run up tens of billions of dollars in losses, including two big resources deals in Australia.

    In a decision that will have implications for Australia’s booming resources sector, China’s State Assets Supervision and Administration Commission has published new rules that will hold state-owned enterprises and their executives accountable for bad overseas investment decisions.

    The commission’s move follows two disastrous investments in Australia’s resources sector.

    The largest Chinese investment project in Australia, the $7 billion CITIC Pacific Sino Iron project, conceived by the magnate Clive Palmer, has been dogged by huge cost blowouts and delay. The budget for the project has almost tripled from the initial $2.5 billion estimate.

    A second big investment project, the $2 billion Sinosteel Midwest project, was shelved last year after a string of difficulties. The head of Sinosteel, Huang Tianwen, reportedly lost his job because of investments that had gone awry in Western Australia.

    The commission has demanded more due diligence and risk management on all overseas investment deals by state-owned companies. No penalties have been announced but executives will be held ”accountable” for foreign investments that result in significant losses for the state.

    Since the start of China’s ”going out” initiative in 2003, which encouraged Chinese companies to invest overseas, Australia has been a favourite hunting ground for them.

    The Labor government is believed to have approved more than $70 billion worth of investments from Chinese companies since it was elected in 2007.

    That growing investment in Australia will be affected by the commission’s new regulations.

    ”Failed Chinese investors are likely to point their fingers at Australia and there is the potential for the ill-judged investments to become part of the tone of the bilateral relationship,” the former president of BHP Billiton China, Clinton Dines, said.

    But he said there should be a long-term benefit. ”That the Chinese government is putting some filters and hurdles in place to ensure that more proper due diligence is done is a good thing.

    ”A lot of prospective Chinese investors don’t know much about owning, operating and investing in the resources industry. If there were to be too many bad Chinese investments in Australia, these difficulties would inevitably bleed across into the government sphere and that cannot be good for the bilateral relationship.”

    Mr Dines, who is now the executive chairman (Asia) of the private equity firm Caledonia, said the introduction of the new rules was ”consistent with the evolution of policy thinking in Beijing” as the government reassessed resources security.

    ”The Chinese government has learnt two important lessons since the advent of the ‘going out’ initiative,” he said. ”Firstly, that Chinese companies are not always equipped to be successful buyers, owners and operators of overseas projects.

    ”Secondly, Chinese government thinking is gradually evolving towards the conclusion that security of supply does not necessarily require ownership of these assets.”

    While a number of projects in Australia have cost the Chinese government billions, one is held up as a model of how to invest abroad successfully.

    That company is Minerals and Metals Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of China Minmetals that emerged from the purchase of key assets from OZ Minerals in 2009.

    MMG’s chief executive, Andrew Michelmore, said all his dealings with the state-owned parent company had been positive.

    ”All my experience with Minmetals has been about the return on investments, profitability and shareholder values,” he said.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/chinese-get-tough-on-foreign-projects-20120412-1wwob.html#ixzz1rv9ZC8iT

  • The New EIA Oil Supply Data Confirms Your Peak Oil Fears

    News 2 new results for PEAK-OIL
    The New EIA Oil Supply Data Confirms Your Peak Oil Fears
    Business Insider
    The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently released full-year 2011 world oil production data. In this post, I would like show some graphs of recent data, and provide some views as to where this leads with respect to future production.
    See all stories on this topic »
    Supply Chain Graphic of the Week: Another View of Peak Oil
    Supply Chain Digest
    By SCDigest Editorial Staff A rising number of people are familiar with the concept of Peak Oil, which posits that invidual wells and hence global oil production overall exhibit very predictable patterns of output, such that when the peak of that
    See all stories on this topic »

    Supply Chain Digest

     


    Tip: Use site restrict in your query to search within a site (site:nytimes.com or site:.edu). Learn more.

    Delete this alert.
    Create another alert.
    Manage your alerts.

  • Capitalism, greed and Destruction

    Hello all, (Source Remy Quinter)

    My good highschool friend and treeplanting companion, Chris Hatch, wrote the defining ecological report on the tar sands in 2008 with Matt Price (We were born in Vancouver, Canada).

    The report, commissioned through Environmental Defence, is called: The Most Destructive Project on Earth.

    Garth Lenz (TedX guy) was their photographer, so I’m well aware of what is going on. Their report (which was mostly ignored) is here:

    http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/TarSands_TheReport%20final.pdf

    In 2005, I was working in the renewable energy sector in Canada, and we were all so aware of what was going on with Oil and Coal. In British Columbia there are vast reserves of oil just offshore in one of the more delicate ocean ecosystems (imagine the Queensland Gov’t discovering that one of the largest remaining deposits of oil in the world lie beneath the great barrier reef — that’s the situation in BC).

    And I looked at the projections, and I saw where it was going — no matter what we do, with the current trends, eventually there is going to be deep-sea platforms drilling oil off of the Coast of BC, and eventually there is going to be an ecological disaster there. My conclusion was that we, as a global population with our current level of consciousness, are going to drill every drop of oil out of the ground and mine every ounce of coal out of the ground — end of story. This is why I immediately dropped what I was doing and put all of my energies in the consciousness movement.

    My thoughts don’t approach the issue head-on because I think the head-on approach just doesn’t work. Not only does it not work, I also think it ossifies and contracts those who are concerned with the environment into angry egos, which is the opposite to the highest human potential, which is expansive, creative, compassionate, and, well, a kind of Himalayan wellspring of joy and optimism.

    KARMA:
    I think sometimes we forget just what Canada (and Australia?) was founded upon, and the cultural karma that goes with that:

    Canada was founded as a series of resource-extraction colonies that were satellite feedpoints to enrich the early TransNationalCorporation’s of England (the main reason France and Spain failed in their colonization of the Americas was that their organization was still basically feudal and mercantile in nature, and not gov’t-backed corporate/capitalistic).

    England (specifically the genius of Elizabeth I) through the gov’t-backed LLC in the early 1500’s created a venture system that is unparalleled in efficiency of organization, especially with resource extraction.

    (The only Nation to compare in capitalistic organizational efficiency at that time were the Dutch, with the Dutch East India Company [VOC]. And for those who don’t think that this historical mindset is still significant, look just at a couple of the top  Dutch MNC’s: Royal DUTCH Shell Petroleum (SHELL), ArcelorMittal, the world’s leading integrated steel and mining company, ING, one of the largest banks. — If you think the Dutch don’t represent everything that you aren’t fighting against in terms of small is beautiful, etc., there is NO oil and gas exploration, or even much refining going on in the Netherlands, folks!!!)

    So, back to Canada and the tarsands and Karma for a moment: After the independence of the U.S. in the late 1700’s, Canada, in order to still operate as a profitable resource-extraction satellite for the UK, became one colony, who’s history includes the decimation of the beaver population through the fur trade, decimation of Atlantic Old Growth forests through the Timber trade (Canada basically provided all the timber for the British warships and mercantile ships, so they could create the first truly global expansionist economy), decimation of the Grand Banks Cod stocks, decimation of the Pacific Salmon stocks, decimation of valleys and rivers through strip mining, decimation and total alteration of innumerable ecosystems and almost every major river system through Hydroelectric projects (including Labrador, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, BC).

    This last point in interesting: The ultra-large dams built in British Columbia from the 1940’s through the 1970’s, which are the source of cheap “renewable” energy, besides destroying vast ecosystems (fish, wildlife, forests — the forest weren’t even logged, just submerged), also destroyed most of the more successfully sustainable and peaceful non-aboriginal communities in Canada: The doukhobors. They had lived peacefully in the very valleys that were scheduled to be flooded, and were forcibly removed, the children forcibly taken from the families to be institutionalized in boarding schools. Total cultural genocide.

    This cultural destruction (notwithstanding ecological destruction) is very, very recent history that is forgotten easily in people’s wish to believe that Canadians are ecologically, or highminded. British Columbia is land that mostly was never even ceded by treaty — it is mostly occupied land, according to the world law courts.

    This is to say that the original dominant essence of the Canadian psyche has no ecological leanings whatsoever. The Canadian psyche, in essence, seeks survival and prosperity through raw resource extraction and export to the hub economy. And in a cold climate, this prosperity is contingent upon organization upon a massive scale.

    So, the Tar Sands is just Karmaic (or historical) BAU – Business as Usual. To REALLY fight such a venture is to propose to dissolve the very idea of Canada (as to truly fight the Coal mining in Australia is to probably do the same).

    Guys like David Suzuki are considered Nutbars by the majority of ordinary citizens. He’s tolerated for his genius in times of prosperity, but in (perceived) times of lack or downturn, the old ways reassert themselves immediately.

    And the old ways are that the very IDEA of Canada is founded upon Elizabeth I’s genius of agreeing to create the Gov’t-backed LLC (Limited Liability Corporation), and expanding into hinterlands to systematically exploit a resource. That’s over 500 years of cultural momentum, blindness, bias and greed, folks.

    If you don’t figure out a way to face this cultural and economic juggernaut (and that’s EXACTLY what it is, a juggernaut) without getting crushed yourself, you WILL NOT crack this nut, for all your fact-waving and hand-wringing about ecodestruction, I guarantee you.

    In case you haven’t noticed, there have been many non-capitalistic experiments, all of which so far have failed. This is the rub: The capitalistic democracies are the surviving successful models. The mercantile ones failed (Argentenians deeply admire Australian organization, and often wish to emulate Australians, who they consider to be better managers of resources and wealth), the socialist ones failed, the communist ones failed…

    BTW, Australia is also the oldest continuous democracy in the World. Canada is the second. I suggest that a very strong reason that both Countries have such strong democracies is the combination of strong-centralized government that is based upon a Colonial organizational mindset combined with great natural resources that they are willing to exploit unashamedly. Tinkering with the TarSands is tinkering with that — you HAVE to find a better model of government, investment and wealth distribution if you really want to tackle this, and I suggest that doing so means actually re-educating entire cultures as to the nature of ego and the unconscious, not necessarily making them feel bad about their current behaviour and organization (which is what we are aiming to do by criticizing the tarsands projects).

    TarSands and the Aboriginals there is a similar situation again to rising sea waters and TSIslanders. Both communities are on the thin edge of the wedge of ecological collapse and destruction at the hands of expansive global capitalism, which so far is totally unstoppable….

    Upgrade in consciousness, anyone?
    Remy

  • Gulf coast residents say BP oil spill changed their environmental views

    ScienceDaily: Severe Weather News


    IBEX and TWINS observe a solar storm

    Posted: 12 Apr 2012 03:23 PM PDT

    On April 5, 2010, the sun spewed a two-million-mile-per-hour stream of charged particles toward the invisible magnetic fields surrounding Earth, known as the magnetosphere. As the particles interacted with the magnetic fields, the incoming stream of energy caused stormy conditions near Earth. Some scientists believe that it was this solar storm that interfered with commands to a communications satellite, Galaxy-15, which subsequently foundered and drifted, taking almost a year to return to its station.

    Gulf coast residents say BP oil spill changed their environmental views

    Posted: 12 Apr 2012 07:52 AM PDT

    Researchers have found that residents of Louisiana and Florida most acutely and directly affected by the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster — the largest marine oil spill in U.S. history — said they have changed their views on other environmental issues as a result of the spill.
    You are subscribed to email updates from ScienceDaily: Severe Weather News
    To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
    Email delivery powered by Google
    Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
  • States and scientists oppose Murray plan

    States and scientists oppose Murray plan

    AAPUpdated April 13, 2012, 4:04 pm

    The Gillard government is facing stiff opposition from the states and scientists to a draft management plan for the Murray-Darling Basin.

    Three of the four basin states have rejected the plan, which aims to restore the health of the ailing river system by stripping 2750 gigalitres from irrigators and local communities and returning it to the environment.

    On Friday, NSW joined Victoria and South Australia in opposing the plan, saying it failed to take into consideration the triple bottom line of economic, social and environmental needs.

    Deputy Premier Andrew Stoner described the plan as an insult.

    “We’re not going to sign up to a plan that rips huge amounts of water out of our irrigation communities … and which has the potential to kill country towns,” Mr Stoner told reporters in Sydney on Friday.

    Earlier, Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu took aim at federal Water Minister Tony Burke for failing to include the states in negotiating the plan.

    “He’s got to actually bring the states along and bring the communities along with him, and I’m not sure that he’s done that,” Mr Baillieu told reporters in Canberra.

    Meanwhile, a coalition of 60 scientists from universities across Australia also slammed the plan.

    Wetlands expert Richard Kingsford said a major concern was a lack of transparency about reducing the proposed cut to water entitlements from between 3000 and 4000 gigalitres to 2750 gigalitres.

    Professor Kingsford also was troubled by the plan to boost groundwater extraction to as much as 2600 gigalitres annually.

    The Australian Greens jumped on the scientists’ comments, saying they were the strongest indication yet that the draft plan had failed to address the problems of the river system.

    The party called on Mr Burke to reject the proposed groundwater extractions, while requesting the Murray-Darling Basin Authority release modelling of 4000 gigalitres for environmental flows.

    Authority chairman Craig Knowles warned that diverting 4000 gigalitres to the environment could result in towns and homes being moved to avoid inundation.

    “It’s not the volume of water, it’s what you do with the water – it’s about how you manage it,” Mr Knowles said.

    Mr Burke called on Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to make clear the coalition’s position on the draft plan.

    “Mr Abbott has been telling people who want less water for the environment not to worry because he won’t support a bad plan,” he said.

    “Then he tells those who want more water returned to the rivers to not worry because he’ll only support a good plan.”

    Mr Abbott said basin reform had been implemented by the coalition when it was in government.

    “I’m not sure that it has always been very well handled by the current government,” he told reporters in Canberra.

    He refrained from commenting on the draft plan before seeing what changes might be made by the authority.

    “Let’s see what they come up with, and then there will be a strong and sensible response from the coalition,” he said.

    A 20-week consultation period allowed by the authority ends on Monday.

  • Clash of ambitions” 25.000 homes or a new Sydney airport

    Clash of ambitions: 25,000 homes or a new Sydney airport

    Matthew Moore

    April 13, 2012

    Second airport ... a report commissioned by the federal Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, identified Wilton as a preferred location.

    Second airport … a report commissioned by the federal Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, identified Wilton as a preferred location.

    MORE than 25,000 housing blocks are being considered for the Wilton area, potentially torpedoing it as the location for a second Sydney airport and ratcheting up tension between the state and federal governments.

    Confirmation of state government plans for rezoning 2000 hectares for housing came a day after the Herald revealed Canberra had begun the process of establishing a second airport south-west of Sydney.

    The Premier, Barry O’Farrell, opposes a second airport in Sydney, preferring a second facility in Canberra with a high-speed rail link to Sydney.

    A report commissioned by the federal Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, identified Wilton as a preferred location and the federal Transport Department has written to Sydney Airport Corporation asking for talks to initiate the process of approval for a second airport.

    In and around the Wilton site the federal government has proposed are five sites the state is considering for housing.

    The deputy general manager of Wollondilly Shire Council, which includes Wilton, Luke Johnson, said the areas would be adversely affected by an airport although the precise impact would be known only when flight paths were revealed.

    ”In general terms, there’s proposals for housing where the airport is proposed,” he said.

    ”The ones we are talking about are for 6000 sites in west Wilton, 10,000 in total in Wilton, and 10,000 in the area between Appin and Wilton, so the bulk of the dwellings would be in that area.”

    The NSW Planning Minister, Brad Hazzard, said the nine Wollondilly sites were on a list of 31 developer-nominated parcels a departmental group was considering for rezoning.

    The group is seeking sites for quick rezoning and development to stimulate the housing industry.

    Mr Hazzard said he hoped to put recommendations to cabinet by June so the land could be rezoned and development begin.

    New housing around Badgerys Creek caused both political parties to abandon that site but Mr Hazzard refused to say whether rezoning so much land at Wilton would have the same effect. ”I am not going to comment in individual sites,” he said.

    Late last year 43 developers responded to a government invitation to nominate sites for new housing developments. Mr Hazzard said 12 of those had been eliminated because they did not ”cut the mustard”.

    Major sites near a possible Wilton airport include two owned by Walker Corp, one at Appin and one at Wilton south, one owned by Lend Lease at Bingara Gorge and another at south Appin owned by the Mir Group.

    While Wollondilly Council has supported some of the proposed rezonings, it is concerned about who will provide the infrastructure for such a rapid expansion, which the council first heard about in January.

    ”The proposals put to us … are contemplating housing estates where they have a range of lot sizes from 450 to 600 square metres,” Mr Johnson said. ”We did a calculation if they all went forward and we came up with a figure of 25,000 houses. That’s 60 or 75 thousand people.”

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/clash-of-ambitions-25000-homes-or-a-new-sydney-airport-20120412-1wwoc.html#ixzz1ru8BqUI1