LyrArc Article Gist
Canada's pitch to the US before tough negotiations with Jamieson Greer to preserve Canada's automobile industry, its aluminium industry, dairy industry with benefits gained in the past. US had also put forward its pitch for 82% North American content and 50% of it from the US for all automobiles sold in the US. Carney takes a positive approach presenting Canada as a strong partner that would Make America Great Again by offering its vast mineral resources, and its resources of oil and LNG. It says LNG will double from 2030 to 2040 from 50 million to 100 million tonnes of LNG annually. 56 critical minerals agreements with $18 billion in investment, doubling the electricity grid for lowest cost power and second lowest emission in OECD countries. Canada is an anomaly in trade says Sir Ivor Jennings in his book on the British Commonwealth. Its trade east to west is an anomaly when if it was truly apart of the North American economic region it would trade north to south. This is the result of Montgomery's failure to take Quebec during the War of Independence as Washington planned the war with Britain. For instance Ontario would trade with Vermont and New Hampshire and New York near its borders. Instead the dairy industry in Canada operates in competition with the US and sends product east to west. Washington and Oregon are not trading normally with neighbors British Columbia instead shipping product back to eastern Canada. For years the US allowed Canada and Mexico benefits in trade that hurt is own auto industry. Jamieson Greer is expected to change this so that US manufacturing can compete with China and European Union on a level playing field. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
EIA says half of the benefit of higher fuel efficiency standards for Automobiles 2010-2020 in US was lost because of SUV's and the incentivizing of SUV's in the 2006 CAFE standards have made things worse. The first SUV's came in the 1980's. By 2004 SUV's made up half of car sales and by 2025 outsold cars 2 to 1. What if we took all SUV's and large cars off the roads, or even some of these SUV's by deincentivizing of SUV's in the US CAFE corporate fuel efficiency standards? What would be the savings in crude oil and in carbon footprint? Would it be about the same as releasing an additional 400 million barrels of oil into the markets in addition to the 400 million barrels that are now released through EIA and member countries? This New Yorker essay touches on this idea. During the Iran war the volatile Middle East as a source of oil supplies is a major problem for countries. Some are rationing supplies and in one country 40 million children are not going to school for 2 weeks starting this week because of the sources of oil are so precarious, government offices will only have half of the employees, the rest working from home (almost like Covid pandemic). Many other countries face that situation. The International Energy Agency recently reported that, if “SUVs were an individual country, they would rank sixth in the world for absolute emissions in 2021, emitting over 900 million tonnes of CO2.” The agency says governments must redesign their CAFE standards and their policies so that it would reduce S.U.V. sales, tax gas guzzling vehicles. EIA cites governments in the EU doing this- “Some governments have already started introducing relevant measures, such as France and Germany, which have put a tax on large and high-emissions cars.” Within SUV's also there is an opportunity to reduce the size and make more efficient space utilization designs. Small savings also add up. One has to realize that the current freedom to use energy freely in places like the US with self sufficiency in oil comes with a sense of responsibility for using it wisely so that it can be exported to cut the trade deficit, precisely what the president is doing with India, to cut a trade deficit of $58 billion before it gets to $100 billion. Section 301 is already in place for investigations by the US of 18 countries for a new basis to use tariffs after the Supreme Court decision. A similar approach is taken with EU for hundreds of billions of reductions in trade deficit that will only strengthen the US dollar and the US economy in the long run , and be good for stock markets and jobs as it reduces oil prices and increases the manufacturing capacity/cost for the Nation. Europe, India and China can do the same. Remember that in 2010 SUV's made up 17% of total world sales, and by 2025 SUV's made up 46% of world vehicle sales. This would create another 400 million barrels for the oil markets, which would triple what was released through EIA  this week to 1.2 billion barrels and this would create 120 days of supply replacement for the 10 million b/d lost from Straits of Hormuz, and effectively end the Iran War as it would be clear that prices can be kept low even in the $50's. Essentially buying time till the SU can get more production in Venezuela and other parts of the world to replace much of the Middle Eastern oil that is ending up in a quagmire. This is the best way for the US and Europe, India, China to ensure jobs growth, economic growth with low cost crude oil in the $50 range and ensure much of the poorer countries like Egypt and Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have access to oil at prices they can afford and eliminate poverty. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's government takes the first steps to create a market where credits can be traded on rights to emit carbon, burn fossil fuel and create emissions harmful to the environment and health. Big emissions come from chemical plants, steel and cement factories, and burning of coal by power plants. China is the world's largest user of coal for energy. The credits are a way for this sector of the economy to participate in cutting emissions. The provincial level program run on a pilot basis with only $400 million in credits will now transition to a larger program covering entire sectors of the Chinese economy that are responsible for carbon emissions. Experts say this program takes time to structure and the Chinese government is moving forward even though this takes time.

LyrArc Article Gist
How to get smaller supply chain companies with less than investment grade ratings to shift to renewable energy contracts that last 5-10 years when banks have strict lending criteria. Walmart has a solution working with Schneider Electric. Consider that companies are tackling emissions across their entire supply chain. For Walmart this means cutting one billion metric tons of emissions by 2030. Under Gigaton PPA Walmart suppliers can form a group to buy energy. So that Amy's Kitchen, Great lakes Cheese, and Levi Strauss collectively purchased a12 year renewable energy purchase agreement  from a wind farm in Kansas operated by Danish energy company Orsted. Energize is a similar program funded by drug companies Pfizer, Biogen and others for their supply chain and delivered by Schneider Electric. Consider that for Microsoft's 13 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions, 96% come from the supply chain. It needs to cut emissions by half by 2030, a big challenge. In the European Union the solution being considered is for the European Commission to offer state backed and market backed guarantees for deals. Guarantees would be offered by member states of the EU or banks and insurers to provide backing for purchase agreements buyers to overcome credit constraints. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Iran War and rescue of pilot of downed F15-E in mountainous terrain in southern Iran April 4 2026. CSAR or Search and Rescue Missions become a critical part of the war. The pilot was a colonel trained for the mission and spent 24 hours in mountainous terrain which was monitored by US forces, after intelligence located him in a mountain crevice. For this to be possible unlike in the Vietnam War and Korean War other nations are not involved as in the earlier Cold War.  The US under DJT as president has shifted to respecting Russia as a Northern European power that it can talk with (meetings with Putin in Alaska 2025) and China as a trade partner (planned meeting in Beijing in April 2026) that it can talk with unlike with previous administrations of Biden, Obama and Bush where China had afree hand in economic matters and global trade and Russia was shut out of the world economic system by elites who ran the government in the US at that time. Russia seeks reintegration in the world political and economic systems, and China seeks acceptance as an economic power which the US respects, both points in which the US has offered to accept. US has also repeated the line to China that it was not going to do the job of keeping Hormuz open for China and Japan to get 90% of oil imports, and in oding so risk losing its soldier's lives, while China and Japan can quietly watch doing nothing to help free navigation of international waters. Note that the narrowest strip of water of 13 miles separates Oman from Iran so that a part of these waters are on the Omani side and not on the Iranian side making free use of that Omani part under international law possible- in which sense Iranian hostile activity closing the Omani side also is a violation of free navigation. This is not pointed out by Iran or Japan or even Britain who are benefitting from US action and remaining silent or being ambivalent or accusing US of being interventionist even when everyone knows MAGA base rejected Bush in the Republican party and the elites and embraced DJT for great part because they want nothing to do with interventionist adventures in the Middle East for certain. US is getting a bum rap from European allies and from China, India, Japan and the media inside the US and in those countries as if the US seeks oil from the Middle East. It was Britain where a lot of the posturing goes on about non intervention that started this oil based intervention since 1900 in Iran itself, and in artificial states of Iraq, Syria, that it created out of the collapsed Ottoman Empire in World War 1. Sykes and Picot were the US and French diplomats who set that up. US under DJT has accomplished self sufficiency in oil and US has no need for anything from the Middle East, no desire to even get involved, and MAGA well grasps that fact and wants to keep it that way. Only nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles with long range to hit US and EU are reason for US action, which is reason enough for EU, China, Russia to set their own goals so that non proliferation in dangerous areas is prevented. So that the people of China, Russia, India, Europe and the rest of the world can enjoy the fruits of their own labors after a century of severe hardships and struggles which the American people if not their elites respect, and the fruits of peaceful cooperation which the American people extend to the World, and to China, Russia and India. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The move by Peugeot and Fiat Chrysler to merge is seen as an effort to use consolidation as a way to tackle depressed demand. Ford and GM are struggling in foreign markets, as Toyota and VW have expanded in foreign markets, and Geely has expanded in China with stakes in Daimler and Volvo AB. Added costs for the shift to electric cars, higher emissions standards,  are also hurting car makers. Global new car sales of 96 million in 2018 are expected to decline by 4% in 2019, and remain sluggish, with the U.S. China trade war and Brexit taking its toll. Some car companies are particularly affected. Chrysler's European car factories ran at about 52% in 2018, well below European industry average of 73%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Entergy is one of the largest energy companies. Its CEO for nine years, Wayne Leonard, talks to Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal. Its the No.2 generator of nuclear power in the USA, and uses coal for only 7% of its energy. He has made his name in nuclear energy, and here he talks about the government's cap and trade program and nuclear energy. He points to today's technology as far superior to the technology that was used in the Failed Three Mile plant, that put back nuclear energy plants in the USA for decades. He believes that price signals are needed for CO2, and the cap and trade program helps to do this, so he supports the cap and trade program. He admits that self interest colors perception of Entergy, compared to coal using utility producers like Duke Energy and American Electric Power. With coal only 7% in its portfolio of plants, and big in nuclear energy, it stands to gains from a cap and trade program, whereby Congress will set a ceiling on emissions, then allows businesses to sell any of its extra allowances that stand for the right to make emissions. And in doing so creating the largest commodity market, in carbon backed securiites. He and the government agree on the point that the allowances should be auctioned off, rather than given away as the companies with many coal plants believe. And the billions in new revenue from these allowances would be returned to the public. He understands that the view of companies like Duke and AEP, that use coal and would have to increase rates, and face the anger of ratepayers as they pay more for the allowances. He also thinks the bill should be written with a fine pen, so that if Congress mandates 20% of energy come from renewables. That it should specify replacing coal not natural gas as what this replaces, to get rid of the most polluting sources. He points to the real need for looking at things globally, as doing things locally, even to show responsible leadership in the world community, can lead to no progress in the global picture. The reason is that China is going ahead with the rapid construction of conventional coal plants. It has surpassed USA coal capacity, and is on track to double it sometime in the next decade. If the USA closed down every single coal plant, and all the time new coal plants are going up in China and India, then we would have ruined our economy, and it was'nt making much difference globally. And he says, if we just say lets lead and people will follow us, "its silly", because China isn't going to follow us, especially when they have $2 trillion invested in their coal plants, and they still aren't feeding feeding all their people. So how to deal with this? Develop the new technology for carbon capture for existing conventional coal plants, and help the Chinese with retrofit technology to curb emissions in a realistic manner. At this time most current funding is devoted to technology for second generation systems, that are still 10-20 years away....

LyrArc Article Gist
After the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Agreement, China and the European Union sought to fill the leadership on this issue. Yet the reality now looks to be different. China decreased coal consumption between 2014-2016. Now China is ramping up coal generation as it needs to provide stimulus to a slowing economy as trade relations with the U.S. worsening.  In 2017 the trend reversed with state backed loans to help economic growth and surge in provincial permits.  China is now moving forward with plans to add coal fired power equal to almost the total U.S. capacity, according to Coalswarm, which tracks power plants worldwide for coal use. This would push coal fired production to above the cap of 1,100 gigawatts China has set and its current cap. Its current production is already about half of the world's total coal fired generation and quadruple that of the U.S. In 2017 China made up one fourth of total CO2 productions.  Canada is missing its emissions targets and is not likely to meet 2020 targets say experts. In the EU members reliant on coal power energy oppose EU parliament efforts to end subsidies to the most polluting plants by 2025, seeking delay of one decade. At the climate change talks in Katowice, Poland, these changes are facing opposition. As a sign of how the situation is changing since the 2015 Paris Accords, the protests in France by yellow vest protestors started in opposition to a carbon tax intended to meet France's climate change targets. That tax increase is being withdrawn by president Macron. Families struggling financially had a different perception of the increase in the fuel tax and even young people who support meeting emissions reduction joined the protests, as reported in the New York Times and The Times. This tells a lot about how the issue of climate change has changed in the public perception in three years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Dan Maffei won his Congressional seat from an incumbent Republican from Syracuse. Others of the 35 first term Congressmen represent a rural, small town and suburban areas like Maffei. And they are not about to lose their seats after tough congressional campaigns, they say, by voting the wrong way on health care reform. As one from Maryland put it he is not willing to foloow the lead just to follow the lead. These are the Congressmen that Steny Hoyer, Rep. from Maryland, who leads the Democrats in the House, wants to give more time as this is what they wanted. And these Congressmen are making themselves heard and making changes in the health care legislation where they disagreed.

LyrArc Article Gist
The differences in the Democratic party between conservatives and liberals that make it difficult to get things done in healthcare, energy and other areas. The lack of White House leadership in a number of areas, and in anumber of instances. The lack of Senate leadership on these issues with the Senate not having done much in energy and healthcare legislation. Add to this the influence of the $133 million that lobbyists spent in the 2nd quarter 2009 alone. The failure of Republicans and Democrats in Congress to push vigorously for cost control in the health care industry adds to these problems.

LyrArc Article Gist
The influence of lobbyist on members of Congress just as the Obama administration, having studied the failure of the Clinton submitted healthcare plan try a different strategy of letting Congress come up with a healtcare plan. $133 million was spent in the second quarter alone by healthcare industry lobby interests creating headaches for reform efforts and the Obama administration.

LyrArc Article Gist
The House Energy and Commerce Committee passes ahealthcare plan with 31 to 28 vote. The Senate version takes adifferent approach. The Senate version has moved away from the employer requirements in the House bills. The Senate committee is moving towards aproposal to require employers to contribute if their workers are getting government assisted insurance coverage. It has also moved away from the surtax on the wealthy in the House bills which is expected to raise $500 billion. Instead the Senate version proposes an excise tax on insurers for health plans that offer generous benefits. Under the current bill being considered in the Senate such a insurance policy tax could raise $180 billion. The Senate Finance Committee is also different in that instead of the public insurance option it offers nonprofit health insurance cooperatives as an alternative. There is agreement between the two parties on anumber of things so the debate will center on the public insurance option, surtax on the wealthy to pay for the plan, and the requirement for an employer mandated coverage for all employees....

LyrArc Article Gist
How companies like United Health are lobbying aggressively to shape the new helathcare legislation to their benefit. BW says the health insurers like United Health, Aetna and Wellpoint are already winning through clever and effective lobbying of Congress. Former Senator Tom Daschle works as aconsultant for United Health. Senator Conrad who has led aeffort to replace the public plan with nonprofit medical cooperatives, which would be a weaker competitive threat to insurers, is also influened by the insurers. United Health's CEO Helmsley and its person working with Congress on healthcare Simon Stevens met with Conrad on June 4. When lawmakers in Congress cite consulting group Lewin Group, that 88 million or 56% of those with employer provided coverage would desert private insurance for a government run program, they are quoting acompany owned by United Health. The Congressional Budget Ofice says these numbers are too high. United Health has used savy presentations on how to cut costs, and help Blue Dog and other Democrats articulate their positions, to gain influence in shaping the plan to their interests. United Health thus counts a lot with Matheson, and Mike Ross of Arkansas, who are prominent with the 52 Blue Dog Democrats. and with Senator Mark Warner of Virginia. And United Health put together an effective lobbbying group, even hiring the chief of staff of House Democratic leader Steny Hoyer. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The House bill on health care cleared the House Committee on Energy and Commerce with a vote of 31 to 28. Five Democrats joined all 23 Republicans. Compromises were reached with Blue Dog Democrats, centrist Democrats who had concerns about the cost of the health care overhaul. The bill will be taken up again in September after the August recess, when Congress will be faced with the task of recociling the House and Senate versions and reaching common ground on a number of proposals. Some common ground has already been achieved between centris and Blue Dog Democrats and Democratic members who support Obama's proposals. Among the changes on which consensus was reached in the House version: 1. Access Insurers will have to accept all applicants and will not be able to charge higher premiums because of medical history or current illness. All insurers will have to offer a minimum package of benefits, to be defined by the federal government, and nearly all Americans will be required to have insurance. Insurers will have to get prior approval from the government before increasing premiums over a certain amount. About 95% of Americans will be covered this time. The cost will still be approaching $ 1trillion over 10 years. Federal subsidies will be given to those who cannot afford health insurance and Medicaid coverage will be expanded. And the insurance will be made more affordable for the uninsured. Democrats also reached a consensus on creating some sort of government insurance plan or nonprofit cooperative to compete with private insurers. 2. Mobility And under this new plan it will be easier to change jobs as one would retains one's health insurance. This should actually help the job market, and help promote the mobility that is needed, now that jobs are shifting out of sectors like autos to sectors like energy. 3. Cost The Energy and Commerce Committee voted 47 to 11 to set aprocedure for the government to give federal approval of generic versions of expensive biotechnology drugs. By one estimate this saves $9 billion over 10 years. The Democratic proposals from the Energy and Commerce Committee would authorize the Health and Human Services Secretary to negotiate prescription drug prices for Medicare benificiaries. The agreement and consensus among the conservative, liberal and centrist Democrats, and Democrats with ties and connections to the health care industry was reached after intensive negotiations, and adoption of a package of amendments that helped bridge the differences they had. ...