"But I also wrote that if he..."
"I also learned at the time..."
"...I was disappointed in his behavior."
"But, I really wanted to like Al Gore. I thought of him..."
"I defended him ..."
You sound like a stalker.
Thanks for that Roger.
I don't know (Even though I worked in the oil indusrty for a few decades, Texas and Oklahoma have always been a question mark to me.) about Texas. Here in California Ag. is definately the cause of the problem and, in my mind, should be the root of the solution.
Currently, folks are worried and jockeying for position but the drought hasn't hit home yet. I know this because the communities around me haven't seen their property values rise at all. There are some places (Oakley, Bethel Island, Walnut Grove, Rio Vista, Isleton, etc...) where you can get fresh waterfront property with water rights and a dock for a few hundred thousand. When the water restriction bite starts to hurt a bit, these places will start increasing in value. Until then, it's just noise.
"I guess i am looking at it to simple, but if its not raining, what good would having a dam do."
Snow melt is the bulk of Californias water supply.
I don't have a problem with R.O. plants. That's fine municipalities near the coast. It's going to be a bit tougher for ag. and those folks in Fresno.
I don't think tankers are needed. Brine outlet just needs to piped far enough a diffused over a large enough area. As a side note, one of the responibilties I had on a job I worked in the Caribbean was to ensuring the plants R.O. (or desalination if you prefer) unit operation. The municipality had an identical unit that failed on a regular basis. If we couldn't give them water they had to barge it in. Since water weighs more than gas or diesel it actually more expensive to transport.
Again, rain water collection isn't going to do anything. The California Aquaduct is an open topped ditch. We lose more to evaporation than rain water collection would make up. If collecting rain water makes one feel better, then fine go ahead and do it but in my opinion it's a waste of money and effort.
"Eventually the environmentalists protecting water slugs in the Sacramento River are going to be over turned and that water is going to have to be made available to farmers in the central valley."
I'm one of those "water slugs" and have riparian rights so take this from that stand point. The water that goes to the central valley has been causing salt water intrusion into the Sac./S.J. delta. If this continues there won't be any fresh water going South at all. What will be going South is brackish water and if that continues it will be completely salt water. What I think needs to happen is crop management. If you're a farmer with junior water rights you should be HIGHLY advised that growing crops that require alot of water you won't be covered in drought years AND government backed crop insurance isn't going to cover you. I can't wait to hear all of the small government folks start to eat their young when the rice farmers and orchard owners cash in their government backed crop insurance policies next year.
Longer term there needs to be a restriction at the Carquinez Straights. These restrictions can't be permantent because during wet years they would cause major flooding. This will reduce the amount of salt water intrusion and allow more water to flow where it needs to go.
I haven't decided which is funnier, Forbes quoting an Environmentalist or the Environmentalist thinking LA should just collect their rain water to solve the drought issues. Rain in So. Cal. isn't the same as most places in the US. An inch of rain is a good sized storm. When it does happen we hear about houses sliding off of foundations, hill sides changing their seating positions and what not. Most of our water comes from snow pack melt, not rain. Also, one of the main reasons the water is allowed to run off is to hold back salt water intrusion from the feed source. I find it curious that this same guy says California largest use of electricity is to pump water. Color me skeptical.
Yes, China imports crude but from the view of a shipping company stock holder you have to recognize that the route from oil suppliers to China is much shorter route than to the US. Then there's also this;
With the pipeline from Russia, shipping is no longer the bottle neck for their supply.
Lake Tulloch isn't far from where I live. Lake Tulloch is a reservoir (Exactly the sort of thing Mrs. Fiorina is blaming the "Environmentalists" for not having more of.) owned and operated by a local Ag.District. Your article correctly states that the Ag. District isn't letting water out currently but though this Summer they're going to be drawing off of the lake with enormous amounts water. When that happens the Lake Tulloch Alliance (A bunch of very wealthy home owners who don't want to see their, currently, waterfront homes border a dusty pit.) will have themselves a piqued fit directed at the Ag. District.
I actually think the Ag. District is being responisble in this case. They built that reservoir specifically for this situation.
"It's time to "take on" CA agricultural interests."
You're preaching to the choir brother! If you look under covers on the subject, you'e going to hear about folks trying to unwind a scheme called the Williamson Act. Most (I can't say all but everybody that I know using it.) apply for this to reduce their property taxes. In return they can't develop or turn a profit on the property. The net effect is that tax payers are subsidizing private hunting reserves and in some cases writing off any improvements. All of the people I know using this have water rights for duck clubs. They're now looking at buying the state off for back taxes to get out from under the act so they start to sell water.
The whole water thing is a soup sandwich out here. In my opinion, managing the types of crops grown is going to be the fastest, easiest and most effective way to deal with the drought. It's also going bring out all of the Cliven Bundy types, freaking out about change.
By the way, I also have water rights. I don't use them any more than the average suburban home uses theirs. One of my neighbors is using so much water for a catfish pond that the water table around us is raised so high that the low points on my property puddle up enough to keep the critters from getting thirsty. Yes, federal Ag. tax dollars helped pay for that pond and their trucks all have Romney bumper stickers.
Raising prices for water could be a step but it isn't a cure all fix. Water and mineral rights also come into play. If you have senor water rights, water is basically free to do with as you wish.
Unfortunately, I think the next step out here is for the state to restrict certain crops like rice, lettuce and alfapha from being grown. They use far more water and get less value than orchards or livestock. Those crops can also go fallow for a time without any great future impact.
It's going to be tough out here for some people. The interesting thing for me is going to be watching the "red districts" of California suddenly looking for help from the governemnt when the situation starts to bite hard. Mrs. Fiorina blaming evironmentalists for the drought is nothing more than throwing a scapegoat out there for them to flip out over.
Refinery maintenance season is over, the strike looks to be settled and refineries are going to be ramping up for Summer blend. The over supply is going to get tapped in the next few months. Once that happens, the most expensive storage (tankers) is going to be used first. The only thing holding crude prices down is the strength of the dollar.
I'm out. I suspect that FRO will have good numbers this coming quarter but their (and most tankers companies) entire business plan is skewed. The fact is petroleum users have closer sources than they have had in the recent past. Once the contango ends, and it will end, the tanker business will be back to looking at too many ships for the number of routes out there.
If you really want to invest in shipping, my suggestion is to look at the product side.
Getting a tax break for depreciation on any commodity reserve should be no more allowed than one on a shirnking bank account. Depreciation on capital expeditures to obtain those reserves is an entirely different matter.
Tank rentals are generally longer term.Tankers can be rented on the spot market.