You are browsing the archive for Environment.

by jamess

the circuitous path of tracking those undersea oil plumes

8:11 am in Uncategorized by jamess

Gulf oil plume darker; not good news, expert says
By SETH BORENSTEIN — May 25, 2010

The color of the oil gushing from the main pipe has changed in color from medium gray to black. Two scientists noticed the change, which oil company BP downplayed as a natural fluctuation that is not likely permanent.

But engineering professor Bob Bea at the University of California at Berkeley says the color change may indicate the BP leak has hit a reservoir of more oil and less gas. Gas is less polluting because it evaporates.

Bea has spent more than 55 years working and studying oil rigs.

  
Sounds serious.

Too bad we can’t get any submarines down there to start tracking all that Oil, which scientists previously reported, looked to be spreading far and wide, at the mid-levels of the Gulf waters.

Luckily, the Scientist behind the first effort to track the underwater oil plumes, is mounting a second effort, with some new sciencey gadgets …

—–

  
Oh those Scientists, and their expensive toys … I wonder if NOAA will let Dr. Asper, rent "the Alvin" next?

Unmanned robot to troll Gulf oil spill for data
by Martin LaMonica — May 25, 2010

The Seaglider can go up to 1,000 meters below the surface and operate for up to 10 months, while sending data via satellite several times a day. It’s driven through the water by changes in water buoyancy rather than a propeller.
[...]

Researchers plan to use the device to find and monitor the clouds of dispersed oil droplets deep underwater.

"It is important to track any hydrocarbons that might remain at depths for extended periods of time," said Dr. Vernon Asper, of the marine science department from the University of Southern Mississippi, in a statement. "Previous data suggests that there may be some of this material at depths below 700 meters and that it appears to be moving."

Dr. Vernon Asper seems to be on the trail, of "something" … doesn’t he? I like the way, he is now "qualifying his language" …

  
Oceanographer with Midstate Roots Researching Oil Spill
Andy Briggs — 05/24/10

Dr. Asper’s focus is the oil that’s still out in the Gulf.

"We’re out in deep water looking at the oil out there," he told abc27 News by telephone. "We’re looking at it on the surface. We’re looking at it way down below the surface. We have some really cool gadgets that we use to study the oil. We’re trying to figure out right now exactly what those things are telling us."

Asper and the team just spent two weeks on a research ship near the spill. He believes there are huge plumes of oil deep beneath the surface.

"This signal that we’re detecting goes 10 or 15 miles in one direction," Asper said. "The thing about these plumes that’s different than a surface plume is they are three dimensional. If you were in a submarine looking out the window, you wouldn’t see black oil in the water. You would see a mist of particles."

  
I’m surprised Dr. Asper got the "green light" to continue the monitoring efforts,

when the NIUST Team he was on, was given the "red light" only about a week ago, to quit talking to the media "prematurely" about what they have initially found … under the water’s surface:

BP & Feds Still Limiting Independent Researchers Access to Oil Spill
May 20, 2010

NOAA director Jane Lubchenco on Monday decried media reports about plumes of underwater oil as “misleading, premature and, in some cases, inaccurate.”

Lubchenco implicitly criticized scientists on the Pelican, a research vessel operated by the NOAA-affiliated National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology (NIUST), for being hasty in its pronouncements to the media.

No definitive conclusions have been reached by this research team about the composition of the undersea layers they discovered,” Lubchenco said in her statement. “Characterization of these layers will require analysis of samples and calibration of key instruments. The hypothesis that the layers consist of oil remains to be verified.”

  
OK, I’m all for verification and definitive conclusions, but given their initial observations, it’s hard to imagine what the NIUST’s underwater research vehicle, the Pelican, actually saw — if it wasn’t "plumes of underwater oil".

Maybe it was "a 10 or 15 mile" long school of jellyfish?

Hasn’t NOAA heard of "Occam’s Razor" ?

Or perhaps, they simply don’t want to "panic" anyone, about the extent of the Oil damage, unnecessarily.

  
The way I read the sequence of events, NOAA was extremely lucky to have that NIUST Team in place with their monitoring ship in the first place, when and where they were needed, when the initial BP Disaster struck … but hey that’s just me …

Oil cruise finds deep-sea plume
Nature reports from the research ship Pelican as scientists map the hidden extent of the Deepwater disaster.
Nature 465, 274-275 (2010)
Mark Schrope — May 18, 2010

The first oceanographic research expedition into the Deepwater Horizon oil-spill zone has uncovered evidence that a deep-sea plume — probably made of oil, and not visible on the surface — seems to be spreading from the ruptured wellhead.
[...]

The team that found the plume is from the National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology (NIUST), a cooperative effort between the University of Mississippi in Oxford and the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg, funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Silver Spring, Maryland. The researchers had originally been scheduled to map sea-floor formations in the Gulf of Mexico, just 15 kilometres from the Deepwater Horizon platform, and to survey historically significant shipwrecks using autonomous underwater vehicles launched from the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium’s 35-metre-long research vessel Pelican.

But when the oil-well blowout happened, just days before the ship was scheduled to depart, team leaders decided that the group should divert to oil studies and set about getting approval from NOAA, which is funding the expedition through a competitively awarded grant.
[...]

The team spent much of the remaining time at sea mapping the boundaries of a plume that extends about 45 kilometres southwest from the wellhead and roughly 10 kilometres wide at depths of 1,000–1,400 metres. On returning to previously sampled sites, the team showed that the plume was shifting, but that it generally remained at least 100 metres above the sea floor.

  
So much for keeping the world informed about those fortuitous NIUST findings –
as The Team’s daily post of findings, on their blog, abruptly go cold, on May 15th,

without explanation, without verification, and without conclusions.

Maybe those scientists went on vacation, maybe they went back to their ‘Day Jobs’, or maybe they ‘got the word’, from their grant providers [NOAA] to cease and desist, with their "misleading, premature and, inaccurate" public disclosures.

  
Maybe NOAA director Jane Lubchenco, has some sort of ‘Oil Info Clearinghouse‘ in mind, instead? Wait a second, I think this must NOAA’s official site, Deepwater Horizon Incident. Stay tuned for Underwater Plume Updates there …

  
Perhaps NIUST last blog entry, will one day be "finalized" there, too?

NIUST Blog Home
SITREP for May 15, 2010 [their last post]
Written by Arne Diercks and Vernon Asper

The revised goals of the cruise, once our AUV plans were abandoned, were the acquisition of baseline samples of surface sediment at several sites near the accident site for comparison with later samples, and the determination of whether or not the oil was sinking and, if so, how long it might be before it reached the seafloor. The CDOM (Colored, Dissolved, Organic Matter) fluorometer that we bought for the latter purpose worked very well and we are confident that we detected oil not only below the surface but in deep layers that are apparently advecting towards the southwest.

Our activities today include acquiring more CTDs to complete our oil plume mapping work, and a very long (7 hours, 30+ miles) transect with the Acrobat and fluorometer. All of this went well, in spite of the rather poor weather and rough seas. Of interest in this transect was the observation several layers of water near the surface that exhibited higher salinities than the water above them and were apparently devoid of CDOM. These pockets of water were of very limited lateral extent and we look forward to making a detailed analysis of their origin and possible impact on the degradation of the oil. From here, we will steam towards Cocodrie with an anticipated 06:00 arrival, after which we will offload the equipment, disperse the samples and return to our offices. This has been an exciting and challenging cruise and, while we are proud of the contribution we have made toward understanding the fate of the spilled oil, we hope that this first trip to the site is not our last

About NIUST

The National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology (NIUST) was established in 2002 by the University of Southern Mississippi and the University of Mississippi in partnership with NOAA’s Undersea Research Program (NURP) to develop and apply new technologies that enhance undersea research.

Nice chatting with ya. Way to leave us hanging …

  
Just a few weeks earlier NOAA Officials were looking forward to, what the research vessel Pelican, would find out about the ongoing gushers. Later, however, were not too happy about NIUST initial reports to the press?

  
But initially the NOAA was behind the mission …

NOAA Ocean Science Mission Changes Course to Collect Seafloor and Water Column Oil Spill Data
NOAA News — May 6, 2010

A NOAA-sponsored ocean mission, set to explore for deep sea corals, has been redirected to collect seafloor and water column data from areas near the Gulf of Mexico oil spill source.
[...]

The university fleet research vessel Pelican, operated by the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, departed Cocodrie, La., late Tuesday and arrived at the spill source on Wednesday. They will return on Sunday for more supplies, and go back to the site later that week.

The ship had been outfitted and ready to support a different NOAA-funded mission, but it was scrubbed in favor of gathering timely and much-needed data close to the oil spill source.

“This sampling mission is one of many NOAA responses to the oil spill,” acting NOAA assistant administrator for NOAA Research Craig McLean said. “It fills an important gap in researching the interaction of spilled oil and the ocean environment. The samples will help us better understand affected ocean resources.”

  
Well I guess you can’t stop the March of Science (nor the Need for it, either.)

and you can’t stop the March of an Oil Gusher either, unless you’re lucky

(unless you have a lucky streak of 6 out of 10 odds, against the House.)

  
BP internal probe focuses on other companies’ work
May 25, 2010

Live underwater video showed the underwater plume getting significantly darker Tuesday, the color changing from medium gray to black. Two scientists noticed the change, which BP downplayed as a natural fluctuation that is not likely permanent.

But engineering professor Bob Bea at the University of California at Berkeley said the color change may indicate the leak has hit a reservoir of more oil and less gas. Gas is less polluting because it evaporates.
[...]

Meanwhile, scientists warned of the effects of the oil that has already leaked into the Gulf. Researchers said miles-long underwater plumes of oil discovered in recent days could poison and suffocate sea life across the food chain, with damage that could endure for a decade or more.

Researchers have found more underwater plumes of oil than they can count from the well, said Samantha Joye, a professor of marine sciences at the University of Georgia.

The hazards of the plume are twofold. Joye said the oil itself can prove toxic to fish, while vast amounts of oxygen are also being sucked from the water by microbes that eat oil. Dispersants used to fight the oil are also food for the microbes, speeding up the oxygen depletion.

"So, first you have oily water that may be toxic to certain organisms and also the oxygen issue, so there are two problems here," said Joye, who’s working with the scientists who discovered the plumes in a recent boat expedition. "This can interrupt the food chain at the lowest level, and will trickle up and certainly impact organisms higher. Whales, dolphins and tuna all depend on lower depths to survive."

  
The consequences and hazards of several underwater plumes of oil, sound kind of serious.

Certainly we should try to monitor the extent and location of those 3-D toxic blobs, as they begin their ‘world travels’.

Whether or not, anyone has conclusively determined if it’s BP Blob(s) or not. (What happens, if it turns out, they were BP’s afterall ?)

How many multi-mile, mid-level ocean, Oil Blobs, are roaming around out there anyways, if they aren’t from BP’s Gushers?

  
We may, have bigger problems than we realize,

IF those "Blobs of Unknown Origin" — DON’T Belong to BP !

  
But then afterall, we wouldn’t want to ‘Jump to any Conclusions’ now, would we?

  
I for one, will be anxious to see Dr. Vernon Asper, observations, findings, and conclusions — as they stand to date — and what they will eventually amount to.

Hey, maybe he could keep his colleagues (and us) informed on some sort of public website ?

Oh wait nevermind … already tried that once. It didn’t go so well.

I guess we’ll have to wait, for the Science Journal articles, to come out, instead … Go Figure!

by jamess

The Creative Math of BP’s 20, no 40%, Containment

5:00 pm in Uncategorized by jamess

BP has claimed that the new 4 inch Pipe inserted into the 21 Riser pipe is siphoning off 20% of the leaking oil. And then they updated that figure to 40% the next day.

Sounds good on the Morning News, but how did they get those numbers?

I spent a fair amount of time trying to figure out the cross-sectional area of a 4" Pipe vs the cross-sectional area of a 21" Riser Pipe (minus its reported .812" wall thickness)

And those calcs ended up: roughly 4.4% of the larger [inner] area would be covered by the smaller [outer] area — BUT all that was just a Red Herring — it turns out due to this BP picture (and its large rubber gaskets)

BP_Riser_InsertTube.jpg

Looks good on Paper. Could the insert pipe with its many rubber stoppers actually be blocking up to 40% of the leaking oil from the larger pipe?

Yet one wonders, where did that 40% number come from, especially since BP is not all that keen on measuring and monitoring?

First the rest of this "Good News" from the BP Response Site:

BP Response Page: Riser Insertion Tube Tool

The Riser Insertion Tube Tool involves inserting a four-inch diameter tube into the Horizon’s riser (21-inch diameter pipe) between the well and the broken end of the riser on the seafloor in 5,000 feet of water

The insertion tube would be connected to a new riser to allow hydrocarbons to flow up to the Transocean Discoverer Enterprise drillship located on the surface. The oil will be separated and then safely shipped ashore.
[...]

The insertion tube is a five foot long steel pipe about four inches in diameter with specially designed rubber baffles. The tube will be inserted into the Horizon’s riser to provide a direct connection.
[...]

The operation is complex and has not been done before at such depths.

BP_ROV_InsertTube.jpg

BP Photo of the Riser Insertion Tube Tool

And now for the "good spin" Press Releases, about that very "Good News":

BP says tube is containing one fifth of oil spill
By Clement Sabourin (AFP) – May 17, 2010

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana — BP said Monday that about 20 percent of the oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico is being swallowed up by its insertion tube system and no longer feeding a giant slick off Louisiana.
[...]

A tube with a four-inch diameter was inserted by robotic submarines into the main leak and connected via a mile-long pipe to the Discoverer Enterprise, a drill ship on the surface that can process the oil and residual gases safely.

"As we speak we are getting a little over 1,000 barrels of oil a day up through that tube and over the course of today we’ll be trying to increase that rate," said BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles.

And the next day the News is EVEN Better!

Tube now siphons 40% of oil
May 18, 2010

NEW ORLEANS – BP SAID on Tuesday that a tube inserted into a ruptured oil pipe now is sucking up about 40 per cent of the crude spewing into the Gulf of Mexico, about twice as much as it did one day earlier.

The company said in a statement that its ‘riser insertion tube tool’ is estimated to be collecting and carrying about 2,000 barrels a day of oil to flow up to the drillship Discoverer Enterprise on the surface 5,000 feet (1,500 metres) above.
[...]

And some experts have warned that the 5,000 barrels per day estimate by BP vastly underestimate the amount of oil actually spilling into the Gulf, saying the true amount may be 10 times as much.

But wait in both those stories the Percentage Number of Oil Recovered, was based against the initial estimate of the Amount of Oil Leaking daily, 5000 Barrels.

1000 / 5000 = 1/5 = 20%

2000 / 5000 = 2/5 = 40%

But I thought this "baseline" figure of 5000 barrels a day, was a gross underestimate by a Factor of at least 10?

So wouldn’t that change the math to at least:

1000 / 50,000 = 1/50 = 2.0%

2000 / 50,000 = 2/50 = 4.0%

Not such a rosy scenario, when the updated [rough] estimate numbers are used — No wonder BP resisted releasing those Videos. It makes their overly-optimistic sleight of hand, all that much harder to pull off.

4% vs 40% … which "success story" would you rather sell?

SO now for the "Bad News" part of this exercise in Creative Math. What DO independent sources say about what that "baseline" figure, SHOULD BE, for any percentage calculations?

2000 barrels recovered — may look like small potatoes, against truly gigantic gushers. (Although I admit, that 2000 barrels a day, is much better, than 0 barrels recovered, as was the case for the first 3 weeks.)

Gulf oil leak rate much higher than reported, professor says
A mechanical engineering professor who studied the video of the leak estimates the flow to be 70,000 barrels a day — 14 times higher than BP’s estimate.
By Bettina Boxall, Los Angeles Times — May 14, 2010

"I spent a couple of hours this afternoon analyzing the video, and the number I get is 70,000 barrels a day coming out of that pipe," said Steve Wereley, a Purdue University mechanical engineering professor.

Wereley, who has written a book on flow measurement, said his figure was an estimate that could be off by plus or minus 20%.

"BP has said you can’t measure this. I agree you can’t measure [the flow] to a very high degree of precision," he added. "But that doesn’t mean you can’t get a good estimate. This estimate, I think, is much better than the 5,000 barrels a day they have previously been floating."

Professor says:

2000 / 70,000 = 2/70 = 2.8% Recovered ???

Some more on Professor Wereley methodology and error ranges:


Gulf Spill May Far Exceed Official Estimates

NPR – Morning Edition — May 14 2010
by Richard Harris

Steven Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University, analyzed videotape of the seafloor gusher using a technique called particle image velocimetry.

A computer program simply tracks particles and calculates how fast they are moving. Wereley put the BP video of the gusher into his computer. He made a few simple calculations and came up with an astonishing value for the rate of the oil spill: 70,000 barrels a day — much higher than the official estimate of 5,000 barrels a day.

The method is accurate to a degree of plus or minus 20 percent.

Given that uncertainty, the amount of material spewing from the pipe could range from 56,000 barrels to 84,000 barrels a day.

2000 / 56,000 = 2/56 = 3.6% … Low-end estimate

2000 / 70,000 = 2/70 = 2.8% … Actual estimate

2000 / 84,000 = 2/84 = 2.4% … High-end estimate

SO BP is actually collecting between 2.4% and 3.6% of the leaking oil,

IF they had bothered to use an ACCURATE baseline measure.

Still other independent experts have weighed in using, other estimate methodologies:

BP / Gulf Oil Spill – Video of Main Leak Supports SkyTruth Estimates
— Nearly 30 Million Gallons Spilled So Far
SkyTruth.org — May 16, 2010

Multiple scientists have reviewed this video; their estimates of the flow range from 840,000 gallons (20,000 barrels) per day to as much as 2.9 million gallons (70,000 barrels) per day. Add another 15-20% to those estimates for the secondary leak, and it’s clear that SkyTruth’s early alarm back on April 27 — that the spill is actually much worse than the official BP and government estimates — was valid, and conservative.

[That SkyTruth.org has some good descriptions of the other "secondary leaks" as well.]

2000 / (20,000)x(1.2) = 2/24 = 8.3% … Low end, +20% bump for 2nd leak

2000 / (70,000)x(1.2) = 2/84 = 2.3% … High end, +20% bump for 2nd leak

It seems like even Creative Math, can only save this Good News Story, if BP can keep the "official estimate" of total leaking to a mere 5000 Barrels a day. So far they’ve been fairly successful at that aspect of their Message Management.

Too bad, BP can’t stop Reporters from noticing — they’ve been hardly "open and transparent and helpful" about sharing their data.

(and as that last graphic shows, they probably have their [PR] reasons for keeping their cards close to the vest …)

BP withholds oil spill facts — and government lets it
By Marisa Taylor and Renee Schoof, McClatchy Newspapers — May 18, 2010

BP’s role as the primary source of information has raised questions about whether the government should intervene to gather such data and to publicize it and whether an adequate cleanup can be accomplished without the details of crude oil spreading across the gulf.

Under pressure from senators, BP released four videos Tuesday, but it hasn’t agreed to better monitoring.
[...]

Toby Odone, a BP spokesman, said the company is sharing the data with "legitimate interested parties," which include government agencies and the private companies assisting in the cleanup. When asked whether the information can be released publicly, he responded, "Why would one do it? Any parties with a legitimate interest can have access to it."
[...]

Unlike the response to other past national disasters such as Hurricane Katrina where the government was in charge, BP has been designated as the "responsible party" under federal law and is overseeing much of the response to the spill. The government is acting more as an adviser.
[...]

BP also has exercised considerable control over how much is known about the amount of oil gushing into the gulf.

Early on, the government estimated that 210,000 gallons was being released daily. That estimate was based on satellite observations of the water’s surface.

The first look at the oil coming out of the pipe on the sea floor was a video clip that BP released last week in response to demands from reporters and others. It caused a stir because some experts who analyzed it estimated that the amount of oil pouring into the gulf was many times the government’s official estimate.

LoopCurrentPrediction_0528.jpg

"Oil in loop can travel as far north as Cape Hatteras [NC] in a few weeks"

 

No wonder, BP is being so "creative" with "the numbers". (and with the "data")

The less folks know, the better for BP, on this Nightmare of a Story.

 

Hmmmm? I wonder if US Sunshine Laws, apply to Foreign Oil Corporations, working in Domestic Waters, when they have "been designated as the ‘responsible party’ under federal law" ???

If not, they should.

Plain old human decency, and ecologic integrity, kind of depends on "freely disclosed information and data".

BP should quit playing games, and start sharing ALL the Data it has, to ALL interested Parties.

BP should quit trying to "spin us" — and start trying to "win us" over, as to what really happened, with this horrendous accident, and their SOP timetables, ALL without a shred of a proven contingency plan. In.the.event.that.the.worst.should.happen.

Because PR-control, is really a poor substitute, for an actual "disaster recovery plan".

imho.

by jamess

Tale of 2 Countries: Small Business, Growth, and Green Jobs

12:26 pm in Uncategorized by jamess

 

In the USA:

Jobs: Small Business Loans Are The Mountain Blocking Economic Recovery
Phillip Williams — Apr 17, 2010

Why Small Business Loans Are Important

The economy has lost 8.4 million jobs since the start of the recession. Small businesses employ the majority of the American workforce, although the largest single employer is still the federal government.

When the economy starts to recover small businesses rely on loans to bring up their inventory levels. Large banks and smaller institutions have been reluctant to introduce new loans after the failure of a large number banking institutions.

Small banks do not have the resources to start lending again, and the number of new loans have gone down since the start of the recession.

Banks that received funds from the Troubled Asset Relief program. The larger banks that were branded as too big to fail have also reduced the number of new loans they make to small businesses. They have reinvested the funds in lower-return, lower-risk treasury bonds instead.

And in China, a totally different Picture is emerging:

China Posts a First-Quarter Growth Spurt
NYTimes, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS — April 14, 2010

SHANGHAI (AP) — China’s economic growth surged to 11.9 percent in the first quarter but inflation was lower than expected, easing pressure on Beijing to increase interest rates and slow the economy’s rebound from the global slump, the government said on Thursday.
[...]

The data suggested that Chinese leaders were succeeding in their effort to keep stimulus-fueled growth high while preventing inflation from rising sharply.
[...]

Chinese leaders face a challenge in checking inflation and curbing reckless spending on unneeded factories and other assets that could leave a mountain of bad debts.
[...]

"We believe Beijing now needs to take another small step to exit from its stimulus policies," said Stephen Green, an economist for Standard Chartered Bank in Shanghai.
[...]

Lending by Chinese banks fell 43 percent in the first quarter from a year earlier as the government tightened credit controls while trying to wind down its stimulus.

In the USA, Small Businesses, the Engine of the Economy, CANNOT get the Funds they need to Grow.

In the China, they have the opposite problem, they must REV-DOWN their Engines, by CUTTING Loans, to slow down their explosive Growth!

Mind you, this difference is NOT Academic — Our [lack of] National Policy for encouraging Loans to Small Business — MAKES A REAL DIFFERENCE to creating Real Jobs, here in America.

The Green Jobs of the Future, hinge on getting such Capital Investments Too Bad, OUR Bankers have other plans for our ‘collective’ National wealth …

For small business, loans still hard to get
Small business owners complain that they’re still having a hard time persuading banks to lend them money.
BY KEVIN G. HALL, JIM WYSS AND BRIDGET CAREY, MiamiHerald — 04/17/2010

Jim Collins, co-owner with his wife Arlene of Quantum Energy Solutions, has been in business in Sacramento, Calif., since 1974. He has a $50,000 line of credit, backed by the U.S. Small Business Administration, through US Bank, owned by US Bancorp. He has a solid credit history and $30,000 in untapped credit.

Yet when Collins approached the bank about borrowing at least $500,000 to expand his 12-employee firm — which retrofits buildings with energy efficient technologies — he was rebuffed, told that his company lacks resources and collateral. US Bancorp declined comment.

Collins, 70, can’t get the money he needs to hire five additional workers and ramp up marketing, even as the Obama administration promotes the "green jobs" of the future. "The credit crunch is still there. It really impedes our ability to grow," he said. "I’d put five more people to work tomorrow."

Lending across the U.S. economy contracted 7.4 percent last year, the biggest such drop since 1942, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. That means $1.5 trillion in lending evaporated last year, the Treasury Department estimates.

As the Intro story, from Economy News, explains: Banks prefer to invest in:

lower-return, lower-risk treasury bonds instead

… INSTEAD of the Innovative Energy Jobs of the Future!

… those Green Jobs, NEEDED NOW, in established Companies — Here in America! (in Sacramento, Calif, to be exact.)

And the REASON WHY, such Loans to Small Business are being Denied, in America?

US Bancorp declined comment.

Isn’t that nice? "No comment".

Meanwhile, in China, their Economic Growth, is getting all the National "help" they need [to dominate future World Markets, by the way]:

China bubble talk overblown
Soaring Q1 GDP stokes inflation fears
Eric Lam, Financial Post — April 16, 2010

The juggernaut that is China’s economy continued to impress yesterday as it reported 11.9% growth in the first quarter [...]

The annualized 11.9% growth in GDP compares with 6.2% in the first quarter of last year when China was in the grips of the global recession.
[...]

But a new report from Montreal-based think-tank BCA Research said global handwringing over China is overblown.

Instead, China’s growth comes from structural, secular forces that are not going to disappear.

"The country’s economic success and social progress over the past couple of decades is not a mirage," the report said. "If any of the previous predictions of doomsayers were correct, the Chinese economy would have already collapsed multiple times."

These factors [fueling China's growth] include:

economic reforms that have allowed productivity to leap,

— a large pool of well-educated workers,

massive savings in the country’s coffers and

— government policies that are directing resources toward strategic infrastructure development.

Is it any Wonder that the Green Jobs, the Jobs of the Future, are going to China, instead of America?

Our Banks, would rather bet on Wall Street, than bet on OUR Future.

So much for the "Free Market" solving all ills –

"Free" for Whom? … we should start asking …

Certainly NOT "free to" Jim Collins, co-owner with his wife Arlene of Quantum Energy Solutions who ARE TRYING to put Americans back to work, NOW, with those Green Jobs of the Future!

And all they hear … is "NO, you can’t." … from the Bankers who could make it happen.