Saturday, August 13, 2005
PLUG IN, TURN ON, DROP OUT
Experimental Hybrid Cars Get Up to 250 Mpg
By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press
CORTE MADERA, Calif. - Politicians and automakers say a car that can both reduce greenhouse gases and free America from its reliance on foreign oil is years or even decades away. Ron Gremban says such a car is parked in his garage.
It looks like a typical Toyota Prius hybrid, but in the trunk sits an 80-miles-per-gallon secret — a stack of 18 brick-sized batteries that boosts the car's high mileage with an extra electrical charge so it can burn even less fuel.
Gremban, an electrical engineer and committed environmentalist, spent several months and $3,000 tinkering with his car.
Like all hybrids, his Prius increases fuel efficiency by harnessing small amounts of electricity generated during braking and coasting. The extra batteries let him store extra power by plugging the car into a wall outlet at his home in this San Francisco suburb — all for about a quarter.
He's part of a small but growing movement. "Plug-in" hybrids aren't yet cost-efficient, but some of the dozen known experimental models have gotten up to 250 mpg.
They have support not only from environmentalists but also from conservative foreign policy hawks who insist Americans fuel terrorism through their gas guzzling.
And while the technology has existed for three decades, automakers are beginning to take notice, too.
So far, DaimlerChrysler AG is the only company that has committed to building its own plug-in hybrids, quietly pledging to make up to 40 vans for U.S. companies. But Toyota Motor Corp. officials who initially frowned on people altering their cars now say they may be able to learn from them.
"They're like the hot rodders of yesterday who did everything to soup up their cars. It was all about horsepower and bling-bling, lots of chrome and accessories," said Cindy Knight, a Toyota spokeswoman. "Maybe the hot rodders of tomorrow are the people who want to get in there and see what they can do about increasing fuel economy."
The extra batteries let Gremban drive for 20 miles with a 50-50 mix of gas and electricity. Even after the car runs out of power from the batteries and switches to the standard hybrid mode, it gets the typical Prius fuel efficiency of around 45 mpg. As long as Gremban doesn't drive too far in a day, he says, he gets 80 mpg.
"The value of plug-in hybrids is they can dramatically reduce gasoline usage for the first few miles every day," Gremban said. "The average for people's usage of a car is somewhere around 30 to 40 miles per day. During that kind of driving, the plug-in hybrid can make a dramatic difference."
Backers of plug-in hybrids acknowledge that the electricity to boost their cars generally comes from fossil fuels that create greenhouse gases, but they say that process still produces far less pollution than oil. They also note that electricity could be generated cleanly from solar power.
Gremban rigged his car to promote the nonprofit CalCars Initiative, a San Francisco Bay area-based volunteer effort that argues automakers could mass produce plug-in hybrids at a reasonable price.
But Toyota and other car companies say they are worried about the cost, convenience and safety of plug-in hybrids — and note that consumers haven't embraced all-electric cars because of the inconvenience of recharging them like giant cell phones.
Automakers have spent millions of dollars telling motorists that hybrids don't need to be plugged in, and don't want to confuse the message.
Nonetheless, plug-in hybrids are starting to get the backing of prominent hawks like former
CIA director James Woolsey and Frank Gaffney, President Reagan's undersecretary of defense. They have joined Set America Free, a group that wants the government to spend $12 billion over four years on plug-in hybrids, alternative fuels and other measures to reduce foreign oil dependence.
Gaffney, who heads the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy, said Americans would embrace plug-ins if they understood arguments from him and others who say gasoline contributes to oil-rich Middle Eastern governments that support terrorism.
"The more we are consuming oil that either comes from places that are bent on our destruction or helping those who are ... the more we are enabling those who are trying to kill us," Gaffney said.
DaimlerChrysler spokesman Nick Cappa said plug-in hybrids are ideal for companies with fleets of vehicles that can be recharged at a central location at night. He declined to name the companies buying the vehicles and said he did not know the vehicles' mileage or cost, or when they would be available.
Others are modifying hybrids, too.
Monrovia-based Energy CS has converted two Priuses to get up to 230 mpg by using powerful lithium ion batteries. It is forming a new company, EDrive Systems, that will convert hybrids to plug-ins for about $12,000 starting next year, company vice president Greg Hanssen said.
University of California, Davis engineering professor Andy Frank built a plug-in hybrid from the ground up in 1972 and has since built seven others, one of which gets up to 250 mpg. They were converted from non-hybrids, including a Ford Taurus and Chevrolet Suburban.
Frank has spent $150,000 to $250,000 in research costs on each car, but believes automakers could mass-produce them by adding just $6,000 to each vehicle's price tag.
Instead, Frank said, automakers promise hydrogen-powered vehicles hailed by
President Bush and Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, even though hydrogen's backers acknowledge the cars won't be widely available for years and would require a vast infrastructure of new fueling stations.
"They'd rather work on something that won't be in their lifetime, and that's this hydrogen economy stuff," Frank said. "They pick this kind of target to get the public off their back, essentially."
CalCars Initiative: http://calcars.org
Friday, August 12, 2005
YO, GW - PAY ATTENTION TO REAL MATTERS OF NATIONAL SECURITY, YA DUMBASS
U.S. report warns of China sub threat
By Michael Kilian, Chicago Tribune
Little noticed by the public, a just-released Pentagon report to Congress carries a strong warning that China's rapidly expanding and improving submarine fleet poses a mounting military threat to the United States.
The end of the Cold War left the United States the world's supreme naval power, and the Pentagon, occupied with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has shifted its priorities away from seaborne threats in recent years.
The Pentagon has even diverted components of its anti-submarine warfare arm to other purposes.
China, though still well behind the U.S. in terms of the strength of its submarine fleet, has turned to an undersea vessel that American planners had considered largely obsolete--the diesel-electric attack submarine--to boost its arsenal. And it is equipping its submarines with new technology from Germany and elsewhere to make the craft harder to detect and more lethal than ever before.
Experts predict that China's submarine fleet will substantially outnumber that of the U.S. within the next 15 years.
As the Pentagon report, delivered to Congress last month, says, the new Chinese navy is a force designed mostly to prevent or dissuade the U.S. from intervening in a conflict between China and Taiwan. But it also is giving China the capability of menacing Japan and striking U.S. cities with submarine-launched nuclear missiles from far out in the Pacific.
"China is in the midst of perhaps the largest military buildup the world has witnessed since the end of the Cold War," Richard Fisher, vice president of Washington's International Assessment and Strategy Center, a national security think tank, said at a recent hearing of the House Armed Services Committee.
John Tkacik Jr., a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, raised a similar alarm.
"China's ambitious weapons modernization and reforms in military doctrine are aimed at promoting vast increases in its comprehensive national power," Tkacik told the House committee. He said the Pentagon report is "a wake-up call to the administration, to Congress, to the Taiwan government and to our friends and allies in the Asia-Pacific region that . . . China stands poised to assert itself as the pre-eminent power in the Asia-Pacific region."
China appears to be strengthening all branches of its military--improving training and weaponry for its huge army, increasing its short- and long-range ballistic missiles, adding new aircraft and precision munitions to its air force and developing unmanned aircraft, the report said.
But submarines have become a high priority. China has about 64 surface warships in its navy and 55 or more attack submarines, designed for use against enemy surface ships and submarines as well as ground targets.
These not only include its current Song-class sub, armed with anti-ship cruise missiles that can be launched underwater, but a new Yuan diesel-electric attack sub as well. China also is expected to introduce a nuclear attack submarine this year and has bought four highly capable Russian Kilo-class attack submarines with eight more on order from the Russian military.
In contrast, Taiwan has just 27 surface warships and four submarines.
U.S. fleet of 59 attack subs
The U.S. has a fleet of 59 attack submarines of all classes but, as experts have noted, has commitments for them all over the world.
At current attrition and replacement rates, experts estimate the U.S. attack fleet will be down to 40 submarines or fewer within the next 15 years, while China expands its fleet by perhaps 35 modern subs.
Another great leap forward in Chinese attack submarine capability has been the introduction of "air-independent propulsion" technology to its attack force.
According to Lt. Cmdr. Bill Murray, a veteran submarine officer now serving as an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College, AIP technology has transformed the diesel-electric sub into an ultrastealthy, state-of-the-art ship-killing weapon.
Nuclear subs are quieter than diesels, but attack subs running on batteries are quieter still.
"When they're on battery, they're incredibly difficult to find," Murray said. "So, unless you know where they are, they could be anywhere, which complicates the United States' or any opposing navy's ability to operate on the surface."
According to Lyle Goldstein, another Naval War College expert, diesel-electric subs have been able to operate for only two or three days on batteries, having to resurface to recharge them. With AIP, the submarine carries its own air supply, as it might extra fuel, and can recharge its batteries while deep underwater and stay submerged for two or more weeks.
"I don't think anybody really knows how far the Chinese are along with it, but we've found some very disturbing signs," Goldstein said.
According to Goldstein and Murray, the Chinese acquired much of their AIP technology from Germany. They emphasized that their assessments are their own and not official views of the Naval War College or the Navy.
All American submarines are nuclear; the Navy has no diesel-electric attack craft. Last fall, the Swedish government leased the Navy the use of one of its AIP-equipped diesel-electric vessels and crew so American anti-submarine warfare forces could train against the wider-ranging submarine tactics AIP makes possible.
As the Pentagon report on China observed, the U.S. has emphasized capability over quantity in maintaining its submarine fleet. But numbers give the Chinese certain advantages.
"Numbers matter," Murray said. "The Chinese obviously believe that numbers matter because they're turning out submarines like sausages. The Chinese are definitely on the winning end of an arms race."
Though the collapse of the Soviet Union decreased the need for the nuclear submarine as a globally deployed, second-strike nuclear deterrent, the U.S. underwater fleet still is spread worldwide as part of a strategy of projecting force on all oceans and major seas. That mission includes protection of the United States' wide-ranging carrier battle groups.
China is showing its new emphasis in other ways. It traditionally has been so focused on its army and ground warfare that for decades it had army generals commanding both its air force and navy. The new navy commander, Zhang Dingfa, is a navy admiral and veteran submarine officer.
Capitol Hill reaction
Alarm over the Chinese buildup is spreading on Capitol Hill. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) argued that this was no time to cut back the size of the U.S. attack sub fleet or to close the Navy submarine base at Groton, Conn., as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has recommended.
"The best anti-submarine weapon is another submarine," Hunter said.
The Pentagon report on Chinese military power assessed its submarine buildup as part of a coercive effort to persuade Taiwan that "the price of declaring independence is too high" and that naval action against Taiwan might include a blockade or outright attack.
"They want to deter us from interfering if they feel they have to use force to deter Taiwan [from independence], raising the potential cost [in sunk ships and casualties] of U.S. intervention to such a high degree that they think we will calculate we can't defend Taiwan without paying an exorbitant cost," Murray said.
Although Rumsfeld has raised concerns about China's military buildup, he has continued to state publicly that he believes the Taiwan dispute will be settled through peaceful negotiation.
"Our position with respect to Taiwan and the People's Republic of China hasn't changed in years," he said at a news briefing last month. "Our view is that whatever changes are to be made in that connection should be made on a peaceful basis by both countries."
"You judge military threat in two ways," said Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, who becomes chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff next month. "There're lots of countries in the world that have the capacity to wage war. Very few have the intent to do so. And clearly, we have a complex but good relationship with China. So there's absolutely no reason for us to believe there's any intent on their part."
"On the contrary," Tkacik said. "The Pentagon report shows that there is every reason to believe that China intends either to coerce Taiwan or to attack it. There is no third option."Friday, August 12, 2005
THE BUSHCO FATCATS ARE TOTALLY FULL OF SHIT - IT REALLY *IS* GETTING WARMER!
Scientists find errors in global warming data
By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY
Satellite and weather-balloon research released Friday removes a last bastion of scientific doubt about global warming, researchers say.
Surface temperatures have shown small but steady increases since the 1970s, but the tropics had shown little atmospheric heating - and even some cooling. Now, after sleuthing reported in three papers released by the journal Science, revisions have been made to that atmospheric data.
Climate expert Ben Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, lead author of one of the papers, says that those fairly steady measurements in the tropics have been a key argument "among people asking, 'Why should I believe this global warming hocus-pocus?' "
After examining the satellite data, collected since 1979 by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather satellites, Carl Mears and Frank Wentz of Remote Sensing Systems in Santa Rosa, Calif., found that the satellites had drifted in orbit, throwing off the timing of temperature measures. Essentially, the satellites were increasingly reporting nighttime temperatures as daytime ones, leading to a false cooling trend. The team also found a math error in the calculations.
"Our hats are off to (them). They found a real source of error," says atmospheric scientist John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville, whose team produced the lower temperature estimates.
When examining the balloon data, Yale University researchers found that heating from tropical sunlight was skewing the temperatures reported by sensors, making nights look as warm as days.
Once corrected, the satellite and balloon temperatures align with other surface and upper-atmosphere measures, as well as climate change models, Santer says.
Global warming's pace over the past 30 years has actually been quite slow, a total increase of about 1 degree Fahrenheit. It is predicted to accelerate in this century.
Mark Herlong of the George C. Marshall Institute declined to comment. The group, financed by the petroleum industry, has used the data disparities to dispute the views of global-warming activists. In recent years, however, the institute has softened its public statements, acknowledging that the planet is indeed getting warmer but still maintaining that the change is happening so slowly that the impact is minimal.Thursday, August 11, 2005
ART HARVEY IS MY HERO
Berry farmer's suit stuns organic Goliaths
By Andrew Martin, Chicago Tribune
Arthur Harvey, an organic blueberry farmer, lives in a 168-year-old house with an outhouse out back and a solar panel on the roof, which he uses to power his computer.
He doesn't care for pesticides or herbicides, believing many of them aren't necessary and possibly are dangerous, and he decries modern plumbing because it fails to recycle the nutrients in human waste, which when composted properly can be turned into fertilizer.
Despite his off-the-grid lifestyle, Harvey has used the most conventional of means to turn the nation's booming organic industry on its head.
Frustrated by the federal rules that govern what foods can be labeled organic, Harvey, representing himself, sued the U.S.
Department of Agriculture in 2002. He argued that the regulations were far more lax than the original organic legislation intended. While his lawsuit was tossed out of federal district court, Harvey won several crucial points on appeal earlier this year.
The appellate court agreed with Harvey that dairy farmers must feed their cows 100 percent organic feed in the transition year before their milk can be sold as organic, rather than 80 percent organic, 20 percent conventional feed.
And, in a decision that prompted doomsday warnings from some food companies, the court clamped down on manufacturers' use of non-organic agricultural products like oils and spices, and eliminated use of such synthetic substances as vitamins and bleach in organic processed food products.
As a result, some of the nation's largest organic companies may be required to reformulate their products or stop labeling them as organic, all thanks to Harvey.
"If consumers find out that their food is becoming more organic, I think they'll be willing to spend an extra 25 cents," said Harvey, 73, who dismisses talk that his lawsuit will weaken the organic industry. As an example, he said Newman's Own Organics, a spinoff of a food company founded by actor Paul Newman, uses a synthetic lye on its pretzels to make them shiny. Because of the lawsuit, the company may have to stop using the lye or stop labeling the pretzels as organic.
"Is Newman's going to go under because their pretzels won't be shiny? I don't think so," Harvey said.
Before they scrap their recipes or change their labels, however, organic food manufacturers say they are waiting to see how the Harvey lawsuit plays out in Washington. The National Organic Standards Board, which advises the USDA on organic issues, is meeting Monday in Washington to begin discussing the fallout from the lawsuit, and the agency is planning to devise new regulations to address Harvey's grievances.
But many food manufacturers and organic dairy companies would like to keep the organic rules the way they are, and they are hoping Congress will revisit the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. The Organic Trade Association, for one, hopes Congress will pass a clarification to the original legislation that would maintain the existing program, said William Friedman, a Washington attorney who represents the group.
While the outcome remains uncertain, the fallout from the Harvey suit is the latest example of the growing pains in the organic industry, which has expanded at an annual 20 percent clip in recent years. The industry was started primarily by counterculture farmers who grew organic produce, but it has grown into an annual $12 billion business in the U.S. that has turned one-time hippies into millionaires and attracted major food companies including Tyson Foods, Dean Foods and General Mills.
But as the industry has grown, so have tensions between small, idealistic purists like Harvey and larger farmers and companies eager to expand organic beyond a lucrative but relatively small niche.
"Maybe our politics and our industry is maturing in the same way as everybody else's does," said Kathleen Merrigan, who wrote the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 while working as an aide to Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) (D-Vt.) and now is an assistant professor at Tufts University. "So instead of sitting around the table making decisions, everybody starts hiring lawyers. . . . We're doing public policy by court decree, and that is really sad."
The Organic Foods Production Act was written when the organic industry was made up mostly of organic farmers, but few organic food manufacturers. As the industry expanded to include organic dairy and processed foods, the USDA created rules to accommodate that growth.
Currently, products that are 95 percent organic are eligible for the USDA's organic seal, and products with at least 70 percent organic ingredients can advertise that they are made with organic ingredients.
If an ingredient isn't available in organic form, the department allows manufacturers to use up to 5 percent non-organic or synthetic ingredients and still label the product organic.
But the appellate court ruled that the USDA could not grant a blanket exemption to non-organic agricultural products--if the organic equivalent isn't available--unless they were approved by the agency after a public review process. Moreover, the court ruled that synthetics cannot be used at all if a product is to be called organic.
Several organic manufacturers said they likely would be forced to use the less desirable "made with" organic ingredients label if the Harvey ruling is upheld, a decision that ultimately may hurt organic farmers because there might be less demand for their products.
"It's just created incredible turmoil for us," said Nancy Hirshberg, vice president of natural resources at Stonyfield Farm, an organic yogurtmaker.
She said organic yogurt includes small quantities of non-organic inulin, which is made from Jerusalem artichoke root and increases calcium absorption, and synthetic pectin, a thickening agent that is made from fruit peel.
Because no organic substitutes exist for either product, she said Stonyfield may be forced to label its yogurt as "made with" organic ingredients rather than organic. If that were the case, she said the company probably would only pay for organic milk, which makes up more than 70 percent of the total, and buy non-organic sugar and fruit because they are less expensive.
Annie Christopher, founder and president of Annie's Naturals, said she may be forced to label her salad dressings as made with organic ingredients because they contain a miniscule amount of synthetic xanthan gum to give them consistency. "You are talking about a product that is one-tenth of a percent to one-quarter of a percent of the formulation," she said.
Peter Meehan, chief executive and co-founder of Newman's Own Organics, said most manufacturers dip their pretzels in a synthetic lye bath briefly because it turns the pretzels brown and shiny during baking. Without it, "they look like the palest breadsticks you've ever seen. It just doesn't work."
Harvey, who also does organic inspections, said he was generally pleased with the outcome of his lawsuit but wishes, in retrospect, that he would have had more legal expertise, in the hope that the appellate court might have upheld more of his claims against the USDA.
"Nobody said that every single product should be available with an organic label," he said. "If you have a standard, you have to draw the line somewhere."Thursday, August 11, 2005
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THERE'S TOO MUCH CRAP IN THE AIR
Malaysia declares emergency as haze worsens
PORT KLANG, Malaysia (Reuters) - Malaysia declared an emergency near its capital on Thursday as acrid haze from Indonesian forest fires drove air pollution readings into the danger zone, forcing a brief closure of its biggest port.
Peninsular Malaysia faces its worst pollution crisis in eight years. Choking haze from forest fires on Sumatra island is threatening public health, disrupting transport and stoking fears for the economy.
Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak told a news conference in the capital the government was doing everything possible to deal with the problem.
In Teluk Nipah, a village near Port Klang, 70 km (44 miles) west of the capital, schools were closed and the haze hid objects more than 200 m (220 yards) distant.
"I have had fewer customers since last week," said Rani Talib, 33, the owner of a street hawker stall. Five customers eating dishes of chicken and rice all wore facemasks.
"My doctor gave me medical leave for two days," said Muzamil Olel, 32. "I have a sore throat and a headache."
Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi declared an emergency for the areas of Kuala Selangor, a fishing and agricultural town, and Port Klang, the country's biggest port, after pollution reached "hazardous" levels there.
Both places are in Selangor, Malaysia's wealthiest and most-densely populated state, which surrounds the capital. Schools in Selangor would be closed for the rest of this week, state Chief Minister Khir Toyo said.
In an emergency, the government can order the closure of state and private-sector offices, although establishments offering essential services, such as markets, clinics and hospitals, will stay open.
The government can also limit the use of private vehicles and ban open bonfires, but haze emergencies do not involve curfews or handing power to the police or military, officials said.
Malaysia has offered to help fight the fires on Sumatra, and its environment and commodities ministers flew to the island to meet Indonesia's forestry minister and officials from Jakarta's environment ministry.
State news agency Bernama said the Malaysian plan covered three aspects -- putting out fires, inducing rain through cloud-seeding, and long-term plans to prevent a recurrence.
On his return, Malaysian Environment Minister Adenan Satem told reporters the Indonesian response to the plan had been positive. "The ministers will discuss this with various local governments in Sumatra," he added.
Najib told the same news conference Malaysia would deploy 125 firemen and rescuers to Sumatra, along with five fire vehicles. "They will leave any time, once we get clearance from Indonesia."
In Jakarta, a spokesman for President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said he wanted serious action to resolve the problem. "If we find any negligence we will surely take stern action," spokesman Dino Patti Djalal said.
Haze at Port Klang halted cargo-handling operations for two hours, but they resumed by late afternoon after visibility improved, a spokeswoman said. "We will continue to monitor the situation," she added.
An airport on the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur closed as visibility fell below 300 m (330 yards), grounding many small government and private jets that use it.
The pollution crisis is the worst since 1997, when smoke mainly from Indonesian forest fires blocked out skies across Southeast Asia.
Fires on Sumatra, close to Malaysia's west coast, flare up around this time each year as farmers, plantation owners and miners burn forests to clear land during the dry season.
But health authorities say the smog has reached dangerous levels, and asthma attacks have soared.
The pollution index had fallen slightly by Thursday evening to stand at 295 in Kuala Lumpur and 486 in Port Klang, below the 500 level that triggered the emergency, although in Kuala Selangor it was at 527, the environment ministry Web site said.
Readings of between 0 and 50 are considered to be good and 50-100 moderate.
The haze has also hit the stock market, dragging down shares in the airport, airlines and tourism industries.Tuesday, August 09, 2005
RIDE YOUR BIKE TO WORK, DAMMIT!
Everyone is getting fatter because they drive 2 blocks to buy Twinkies at the Safeway. Iran is building nukes, and oil is $64 bucks a barrel. We kiss Saudi Arabia's ass while they subjugate their own people and keep the price of oil climbing. The skies are filled with smog and hurricane predictions are doubled because of global warming. What the fuck is wrong with this nation? Are we really such complete retards?
Oil near record with Middle East in focus
LONDON (Reuters) - Oil held near its record high of $64 a barrel on Tuesday as traders worried a nuclear stand-off with
Iran and possible militant strikes in Saudi Arabia could disrupt crucial Middle East exports.
The United Nations' nuclear watchdog was to hold an emergency meeting in Vienna after OPEC's second biggest producer Iran restarted work at a uranium conversion plant, defying the European Union and running a risk of U.N. sanctions.
In the world's top exporter Saudi Arabia, U.S. missions were shut for a second day because of security concerns. Britain said militants were in the "final stages" of planning attacks.
"By far the biggest jolt to the markets has come from the geopolitical front," said Edward Meir, an analyst at Man Energy.
"We think that the bigger source of tension is emanating from the Iranian situation," he added in a report.
U.S. light sweet crude was 19 cents down at $63.75 at 1145 GMT, having soared to a new record high of $64.27 a barrel, 48 percent higher than the start of the year.
London Brent crude was down 23 cents at $62.47, having raced to a record high over $63.06 a barrel.
With U.S. crude averaging above $53 a barrel for the year to date, in real terms prices are well above those during the 1974 Arab oil embargo. But crude is still below the $80 a barrel average seen in the year after the 1979 Iranian revolution.
"The price is definitely going to $65 a barrel," said Kevin Norrish, an analyst at Barclays Capital.
Despite the rampant oil price there is no sign yet of demand letting up. Worries that the world's biggest consumer the United States may run short of gasoline after a string of unexpected refinery closures has contributed to the price surge.
"Investors who were unduly negative about the prospects for the world economy at the start of the second quarter have been rapidly reappraising and revising their forecasts as we've moved through the third quarter," said Andrew Milligan, head of global strategy at fund manager Standard Life Investments.
"Moves in the dollar, moves in U.S. interest rate expectations and moves in the oil price are all part of that reappraisal," he added.
REFINERY PROBLEMS LINGER
Nearly a dozen U.S. refiners have been forced to close down units unexpectedly in the past few weeks as a summer of near full-throttle operations begins to take its toll.
Adding to the list, Sunoco Inc shut its 200,000 barrel per day (bpd) Philadelphia refinery at the weekend after a fire, while Valero Energy Corp. also cut gasoline production by 50,000 bpd at its Sunray, Texas, refinery.
The glitches, coupled with still strong demand, are likely to cause another fall in weekly U.S. gasoline inventories, industry analysts predicted on Monday.
Stocks were expected to draw by 1.8 million barrels while crude inventories dip just 200,000 barrels. U.S. government data on industry inventories is due to be released on Wednesday.
Pump prices in the United States reached a record high $2.37 a gallon last week, the government said on Monday, but the global economy has thus far largely shrugged off higher fuel costs.