Drill Now: Soros and Obama bet on Brazil and not Louisiana because it wasn't profitable for them

November 12, 8:29 PMLafayette Political Buzz ExaminerKen LaRive

Previous Next

11 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Lafayette Political Buzz Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Lignosulfonate mud: the most versatile oilfield mud system ever invented.

Photo by Ken LaRive

Brazil and Louisiana have a lot on common when it comes to natural resources. Though we live in different hemispheres, we both have a comparable temperate climate and grow similar crops. Like us, cotton, rice, and sugar cane are main staples, and both of us are located on major bodies of water with complex meandering river systems. But mostly, that is where the similarity ends.

Last month Obama and his handler Soros invested in Petrobras, Brazil's Nationalized oil company on the stock exchange. Why didn't they bet on our oilfields, or indeed develop alternative fuels to make us independent as promised? Why?

Delving into what Brazil's past efficiency has been, they might seem a sure bet. Two billion dollars would have given Louisiana a real shot in the arm, if bio fuel was the genuine objective, and we could have used our natural resources to become more independent of oil. Why isn't Obama challenged?

I can't say with certainty that this is the biggest betrayal of any administration, but seeing this for what it is, is beyond belief.

Eighty-five percent of Brazil's electricity comes from hydroelectric power. They are the second largest producer of bio fuels, after the US, and they are also developing bio-mass and wind. Offshore, like us, lay one of the major oil finds of this century, and promises to project them to be one of the world's largest producers.

Sounds rosy, but Brazil has one of the highest energy prices in the world. Lack of efficiency is a factor, but inordinate taxes is primary. Brazil is a socialistic state, and though supposed to be Democratic, is fascist in nature, just the kind Obama and Soros want to see here, in capitalistic America.

Mismanagement in 2001 and 2002 left the nation floundering with energy rationing. Primarily it was because they depended too much on one source, hydropower, and when it didn't rain, little could be generated. In 2006, there was such a need for natural gas to run their thermal power stations, in dire desperation Bolivia bought up Pertobra assets. Another similarity, because nationalization does not work. Government control of the private sector is ludicrous even half way around the world.

What saved them this year was the economic down-turn where people can no longer afford electricity and so stopped using. The gap between demand and supply is narrow and so they must have been so glad to see the Obama/Soros investment. If they begin to grow, recover, before the new infrastructure is completed, they will again be in trouble.

In the mean time, Brazil's government is trying to add 3GW per year to the 105GW capacity being produced now. Their aim is to build two new hydroelectric plants on the Madeira River in the Amazon with horizontal turbines propelled by river flow. This way no dams have to be constructed. The first one, Santo Antonio will be completed in 2012, and the second, Jirau, will go on line in 2013.

Brazil estimates that after those two come on line the energy production ratio will have 55 percent thermal, 42 percent hydro, and 3 percent from wind farms.

A third super-hydro plant is being propose on the Xingu River, in the Amazon, and if approved will be the world's third biggest hydroelectric plant in the world.

Environmentalist recently questioned Brazil about the clear-cutting of rainforests to produce sugar cane for the production of ethanol. Twenty-nine billion liters were produced last year according to Unica, or 29 percent of the world's ethanol. Brazil denies rainforest destruction.

Author's note: Production of ethanol is more efficient than US corn ethanol. It costs Brazil $0.83 per gallon to make in 2007, but in the US $1.14 per gallon. Did I mention we grow sugar cane in Louisiana, with mountains of rice chaff? The vegetation that chokes our inland rivers were brought here from Brazil. Bio-mass? What a concept! What of the Chinese vine choking our Mississippi forests? Any ideas?
With US oilfield technology we will develop and produce this new oil-find for the economic advancement of Brazil, while we are inhibited from drilling our major find here. But it is worse that. Brazil has technology and ability in alternative fuels that we here in Louisiana could have implemented with the 2 billion given to Brazil. We were never given that opportunity. Obama and Soros has it set up to give away American ingenuity, with little or nothing in return but more layoffs.

Obama doesn't have to answer these accusations because no one in the media has the guts to make it an issue to his face in front of a camera. On the first page today, of The Advocate of Baton Rouge, we celebrated the return of the Brown Pelican to our shores first , then Honored Veteran Service next. After that, socialized child care where more regulations will expand to cover more services, and then finally "The State" offers "free" H1N1 vaccines. Is there a trend here? Is this "The independent voice of South Louisiana?"

Obama socialism.