Can the U.S. Double Its Crude Exports in a Year? (BusinessWeek)

By Matthew Philips July 28, 2014

The Flint Hills refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas

An important shift has quietly occurred in the U.S. oil industry in the past month. In late June the Department of Commerce determined that two Texas companies, Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) and Enterprise Products Partners(EPD), could start exporting an ultralight type of crude called condensate. That constitutes the biggest loosening of the U.S. ban on oil exports since it was passed in 1975.

After news of the ruling broke, Commerce Department officials seemed genuinely surprised by the reaction and announced that allowing condensate exports did not ordain a change in the law. Yet, that’s pretty much how the market treated it.

Energy companies are now lining up to get the same permission from the government as Pioneer and Enterprise. There’s talk of building condensate-only pipelines in Texas, home to some of the biggest such reserves in North America. The topic was discussed at length during the Energy Information Administration’s annual conference a couple of weeks ago, and analysts have even begun calculating valuations for oil companies based on a future where the export ban gets lifted.

STORY: Murder on the Pipelines: Drug Cartels Turn Texas Oil Routes Into Killing Zones

The political reality is much different. Although lifting the ban has been discussed more in Congress this year than at any other time during the past four decades, the votes aren’t there and the debate is still an epic fight between oil producers who want to lift the ban and refiners who would rather that oil stay at home.

So for the time being, we’re left to consider the importance of exporting condensate. The problem with condensate is that the U.S. is producing way more than it needs. The most common use for it is as an additive to lighten up heavier crudes and make them easier to refine; it’s also used as an ingredient in chemical plants. But that’s about it. According to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie, the U.S. produces about 750,000 barrels per day of condensate. Since so much of the U.S. oil boom already involves light oil, there’s not a lot of heavy oil to add it to.

On top of that, U.S. refiners don’t really want it. Condensate is so vaporous, it can overwhelm the workings of a refinery and slow down the process of turning oil into a fuel. In a July 7 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Valero(VLO) reported that condensates are “uneconomic feedstocks for our refineries; removing them from crude may improve refinery throughout and yields.”

STORY: The Fight to Export U.S. Oil

The problem will get worse as the U.S. continues to increase its oil production at the fastest pace on record. The EIA anticipates that U.S. oil production will hit 9.3 million barrels per day by 2015. The bulk of that new oil is going to be light and sweet; a lot of it is going to be condensate, considered to be anything with an API (American Petroleum Institute) gravity value of more than 45 or 50.

BLoombergAnything above the blue line is considered very light crude oil

This will only exacerbate the mismatch between oil supplies and U.S. refineries, which aren’t set up to process that much light crude. Most are designed to handle heavier, imported blends. Refineries are already running close to full tilt at the moment, processing more crude than ever. Total refinery utilization is 91 percent, compared with 83 percent in 2009. Refiners are making investments to handle more light oil, but it won’t be enough to absorb it all.

So how much condensate can the U.S. export? Citibank (C) analysts think it could be about 300,000 barrels a day by the end of 2014. Sarah Emerson, president of consulting and research group ESAI Energy, says she agrees. Trade publications are reporting that the first shipment of condensate was loaded for export earlier this month and is destined for Asia. If that keeps up, the amount of U.S. oil exports could double by the end of the year. Canada is exempt from the export ban and already gets about 268,000 barrels of oil a day from the U.S.

STORY: Rising Oil Prices Loom Over World Economic Recovery

BloombergU.S. crude oil exports have already risen substantially in the past year

To export condensate, oil companies have to run it through what’s called a stabilizer out in the field. This removes a lot of the vapor and  makes it less volatile. Once that’s done, it’s ready for export and oil companies can bypass traditional refiners and send it directly for export. According to a June 25 Bloomberg Industries report, it takes about a year to build a stabilizer—and roughly $200 million. It’s unclear how eager some oil companies are to make that investment.

Fadel Gheit, an oil analyst at Oppenheimer (OPY), says he thinks talk of an condensate export boom is overblown. In the weeks after the Commerce Department ruling, he called more than a dozen oil companies operating in Texas. “Not one of them said they had plans to go big in condensate exports,” says Gheit. “It’s not an issue for them.”

Philips is an associate editor for Bloomberg Businessweek in Washington. Follow him on Twitter@matthewaphilips.

Looks are everything in wearable tech (TechRepublic)

By Teena Hammond July 29, 2014

Fashion and design increase the appeal of wearable tech devices, according to panelists at the Wearable Tech Expo in New York. 

Looks matter more than function in the wearable tech business, according to participants in a panel forum last week at the Wearable Tech Expo in New York.

Size matters

One of the first panel questions related to size. Does an oversized wearable appeal as much to the consumer as a more moderately sized one?

"It's about the application that matters. Sometimes it's if the wearable is meant for a construction worker, size might not be an issue, but if it's for a hardcore athletic sportsman and sportswoman, then definitely size matters," said Mikko Malmivaara, sales and marketing manager for Clothing Plus Ltd., which makes sensors for wearable tech clothing.

It's not just the size of the device, but how it fits against the body, said Amy Puliafito, spokesperson for Misfit Wearables, which produces the popular Misfit Shine fitness device. "In everything we did with Shine we were trying to eliminate a lot of friction points people have with their activity trackers," she said.

Form versus function

The next panel question focused on whether form matters more than functionality.

The Wellograph watch.

 Image: Wellograph

Nick Warnock, president of Wellograph, which has developed a new health and fitness wearable, said, "When we started developing Wellograph a few years ago we had all these bells and whistles. Then we took a step back when we saw some wearables appearing on eBay. Instead of putting functionality first, we said, 'Let's start with form and design and then go into functionality.'"

Randy Granovetter, CEO of Comhear, which produces digital audio wearables, said, "No one wants to have something that you're wearing all day long that doesn't look good or feel good. And then you have sensors. Products have sensors in them and then you have audio. It all depends on what you're doing and when you're doing it. What is the technology and the M2M?"

Malmivaara said, "But cool is the word. It is important to design wearables to look good. Even before people know and understand the function of the wearable, they should want it and desire it. Design is the key to that."

Sylvia Heisel, designer/creative director of HEISEL, which designs clothing with tech materials, said, "I think there is this big segment of the population where it needs to work. If it doesn't work, forget it. But beyond that, they're not excited about what the technology is. They don't care. But it has to work and it has to look good."

Designing for aesthetic appeal

The next question focused on whether there are specific design strategies for wearable products.

Granovetter said there are design strategies. "If you're running it has to feel good. If you're listening to music it has to sound good. It has to look good, feel good, and be fashionable for what you're doing in your day."

Warnock said, "You want people to buy it on aesthetic alone, but by the way, it's an activity tracker, heart rate monitor, pedometer. That's what separates you from the different styles and features coming out and it's your own personal style and fashion."

The Misfit Shine is an aesthetically appealing wearable device.

 Image: Misfit Wearables

Puliafito said, "The fashion and tech communities definitely need to come together and talk a lot more, but I do think we have one shortcoming in common which is we're often disconnected from the lives of most people in this country. In addition to make something that is fashion forward and very beautiful we also have to make things that are accessible and customizable so that people can wear it in the way that is most comfortable."

Heisel said, "It's an ongoing thing and as the two come together there is a lot of innovation coming from the textile industry. Electronics companies are getting more aware of design and fashion issues. Electronics are becoming luxury goods. It is the new watch. Something like Shine is a status symbol like a handbag was or a designer T-shirt."

Fashion means different things to different people, Heisel said. "You have to think of fashion as different groups of people with different style. There is maybe one electronics product that works with a huge scope of people but it's going to have to look different to appeal to different people."

Lower prices will encourage adoption and development

Soon, wearables will become more mass market as the prices drop, according to the panelists.

Puliafito said, "The cost of the sensors [within the devices] are rapidly decreasing. We think the future of activity trackers is that they're going to become a commodity and the price will rapidly drop. I think we're really seeing the industry changing in terms of what sensors cost."

Heisel said, "The price and the ability to prototype is going down so quickly. You can 3D print things. You can sample a lot of stuff and make a lot of prototypes quickly."

Teena Hammond is a Senior Editor at TechRepublic. She has 20 years of journalism experience as an editor and writer covering a range of business and lifestyle topics

Internet of things big security worry, says HP

Summary: HP found 25 vulnerabilities per device including everything from TVs to thermostats to home alarms and scales.
By Larry Dignan for Between the Lines | July 29, 2014

About 70 percent of Internet of things devices---including sensors and connected infrastructure---have vulnerabilities that could be exploited, according to Hewlett-Packard.

HP's data is based on it Fortify division and a scan of 10 of the most popular Internet of things devices. HP found 25 vulnerabilities per device. These devices included TVs, Webcams, thermostats, remote power outlets, sprinklers, door  locks, home alarms, scales and garage openers.

The findings, assessed based on the OWASP Internet of Things Top 10 list and vulnerability categories, account for the devices as well as cloud and mobile applications connected to them.

Among the key bullets:

• 80 percent of devices including cloud and mobile apps failed to require strong passwords.
• Eight of 10 devices collected enough data to raise privacy concerns.
• 70 percent of devices didn't encrypt communications and 60 percent of them lacked encryption for software updates.
• Six of 10 devices had insecure Web interfaces.

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

EN MI OPINIÓN: Te detesto !!! (Ricardo Tribin)

Ese te detesto o le detesto, es algo que en no pocas oportunidades se escucha, producto en muchos casos por heridas recibidas en una discusión, las que quedan marcadas en la mente de cada cual no solamente por eso, sino además, y esta es la parte menos grata, por envidias, rivalidades, e incluso por suposiciones inexistentes, las que hacen que el odio llegue a las mentes de los individuos por medio de estas formas y de manera equivocada.

Odiar no es bueno puesto que ello genera un cúmulo de emociones que se repiten y repiten como un carrusel. Alguien contaba que vio en una ocasión a dos personas que estaban reunidas en un restaurante cuando de un momento a otro una de ellas se levantó llena de ira para agredir al mesero que era español. Su amigo se volcó a contenerlo y cuando lo logro le preguntó: oye y a ti que pasa? Pues no te diste cuenta? Estos españoles fueron los que en la colonización de América se  robaron el oro y nos quitaron las mujeres. Hombre, pero sí eso sucedió hace más de quinientos años, como vas a reaccionar así? Lo que pasa, le contesto el agresor, es que yo apenas me entere de ello ayer.

Resentimiento es tomarnos el veneno de la hiel que se desprende, por alguien a quién se odia, pensando equivocadamente que la otra persona es quien se va a intoxicar, lo cual no puede ser más equivocado ya que, quien lo lleva consigo, le toca, no sólo cargar la dura maleta de sus propias dificultades, sino también, echarse encima una carga emocional totalmente innecesaria.

http://ricardotribin.blogspot.com

Miami, Julio 26 de 2014

When it comes to Android vs. iOS in the enterprise, Android is the Borg (ZDNet)

Summary: IBM and Apple may be resisting Android's dominance for now, but resistance is futile. A potent mix of flexibility, diversity and low-cost lets Android be whatever it needs to be -- for any business.

By David Gewirtz for DIY-IT | July 24, 2014 

That's it. Game over. Sell your Google stock. Turn off your Samsung phones. The Android/iOS battle is over and Apple won. No one will ever buy Android devices again.

If you do a quick survey of all the articles on the recent IBM/Apple sales deal, you'd think that somehow, the Good Ship Android had just been hit with a couple of Mk-48 Mod 6 torpedoes and was drifting below the waves (Leonardo DiCaprio not included).

Gimme a break, will ya?

The recent deal between Apple and IBM — wherein IBM will help hawk Apple gear to enterprise customers — will NOT destroy Android's enterprise chances.

This week, my fellow ZDNet blogger Adrian Kingsley-Hughes and I debated this topic in one of ZDNet's Great Debates, entitled In IBM and Apple's wake, has Android lost its enterprise chance?

Great Debate

In IBM and Apple's wake, has Android lost its enterprise chance?

• Read more

As you might imagine, I took the "No" side and y buddy Adrian took the "Yes" side. He argues that "the IBM/Apple partnership is a huge loss for Google, and a massive setback for Android, primarily because it simultaneously endorses Apple's previously weak enterprise endeavors, puts IBM's might behind pushing iOS to its customers, and puts Android on the back foot."

Nah. Not so much.

The IBM/Apple partnership is a sales deal, nothing more. As such, it's more yawner than anything else. IBM isn't the only game in town when it comes to enterprise, and -- let's be honest here -- Apple has a terrible track record of working and playing well with others.

IBM isn't the only enterprise game in town. Beyond Dell, HP, and Microsoft, not to mention Google Apps (which are penetrating enterprises at breakneck speed), there are a wide range of other enterprise players.

This is a nice sales synergy for Apple and IBM. Nothing more. Android is the Borg. It will keep assimilating and certainly Apple and IBM can't stop it.

iOS is incredibly limiting, sold on a very limited set of form-factor devices, and can't be modified with anywhere near the flexibility of Android.

I spent a couple of decades working with IBM and its business partners as the editor of four different journals about IBM's Notes and Domino products. I also headed up a major project at Apple. The point is, I've gotten to know both companies very well.

Employees at both companies are intelligent, competent, and hard working. IBM's secret weapon is its huge stable of independent business partners, who build custom solutions around IBM's offerings.

Unfortunately, IBM has a tendency to step on its business partners; as a result, as loyal as the business partners are, they also spend a lot of their time looking over their shoulders, worried that IBM will swoop in and take the deal they've been working on so hard for so many months.

Apple, on the other hand, likes to do things its way. Period. If you think that Apple might produce a unique version of the iPad or iPhone with certain specific features one major enterprise customer demands in a sales deal, you're high.

Read this

What the iPhone 6 needs to stay ahead of the game

• Read more

Sure, a hot enough feature (like turning the home button into a fingerprint sensor) might be a customer request and might eventually make it into an SKU, but you're unlikely to see, for example, a custom version of iOS built out, just because one customer needs a particular low-level security feature.

In fact, I feel kind of bad for IBM's reps and business partners. No one works with Apple these days without experiencing Apple's philosophy of cooperation: my way or the highway.

Android is far from in trouble here

In addition to Android's obvious market momentum on the consumer side, Android is designed for flexibility. "Flexibility" is not a word in the Apple dictionary.

iOS is incredibly limiting, sold on a very limited set of form-factor devices, and can't be modified with anywhere near the flexibility of Android. On top of that, no matter what form-factor/price you might need, there's an Android device to fill that need. Not nearly as much with a few iPads and an iPhone.

A great example of the flexibility available to Android comes out of an an interview I did with Dell almost two years ago where we discussed how they'd built a military-hardened kernel in Android for devices on the battlefield. The sound quality of the video is a bit bad (I was still figuring out how to make the studio work), but if you want to see where Android can brutalize Apple in the enterprise, this is a good place to start.

And Samsung has made great strides with Knox, also designed for enterprise work. Many mobile device management systems can integrate into Android at whatever level is necessary; most of that is impossible on the iOS platform.

Of course, IBM's involvement with handheld devices is anything but new. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, IBM re-badged the old Palm devices (starting with the original PalmPilot and ending with the m505) and called them WorkPads. So even the "Pad" nomenclature isn't new for IBM. In the long run, things didn't go so well for Palm.

The combination of complete flexibility, low-cost suppliers, and many vendors has given Android the option to be whatever it needs to be, for whoever needs it.

But back to the IBM/Apple partnership: Let's imagine that IBM has a customer who wants to run a custom tablet application -- and wants the screen to show nothing but that application. What do you do about the iPad launcher? Will Apple delete all the apps from it? Probably not.

With an Android solution, you have access to all of the system to do what you need. You're not limited to an icon on the home screen. You can replace the home screen and build a completely self-contained solution that is designed entirely for the work at hand.

Take something as ridiculous as the Newsstand app on iOS. It's there, whether you want it or not. You can't even hide it in a folder. It's unlikely that a customer who wants to completely own an iPad screen will be permitted to do so.

That's not enterprise friendly. It just isn't

The Android market will also be able to gain a foothold (if not a full body lock) on the enterprise market because there are many other providers beyond Samsung. There's a much better chance of finding the right vendor to fit the right solution almost all the time.

If an enterprise customer wants an Android device with an exact set of dimensions, a specific set of colors, a certain material for the shell, and a particular aspect ratio -- Android can provide it. Apple won't. Apple just won't respond to those emails from IBM's soon-to-be-beleaguered sales folks.

Special Feature

BYOD and the Consumerization of IT

The Bring Your Own Device phenomenon is reshaping the way IT is purchased, managed, delivered, and secured. Our editors and analysts will delve into what it means, the key products involved, how to handle it, and where it’s going in the future.

• Read more

Then, of course, you have the internationalization issue. The world is far bigger than just America, and some nations will want enterprise (and government) solutions that are not based on American devices or designs. If China wants a phone, it can buy from Huawei and keep any suspected back doors on the other side of the Pacific.

When Adrian and I sat down to debate this topic, we weren't asked whether IBM and Apple might get some sales out of this deal. We were asked if the IBM/Apple deal is enough of a game changer to blow Android out of the enterprise water.

Obviously, the answer is "no". This is a sales partnership deal for IBM and Apple. IBM makes these deals all the time, for all sorts of markets. They're good at partnering and it does help them close business deals. But as we all well know, it certainly hasn't helped them keep their competitors out of the game.

Android has proven to be a brutally effective competitor. It has grown in popularity at an almost incomprehensible pace. The combination of complete flexibility, low-cost suppliers, and many vendors has given Android the option to be whatever it needs to be, for whoever needs it. This inherent diversity and flexibility will surely impact the enterprise space, and that's before considering that companies like Google, Dell, and Samsung are themselves pretty fierce competitors.

So, no, Android has most definitely not lost its enterprise chance. This is a very long game and Android stands a very good chance of assimilating everything in its path. IBM and Apple may be resisting Android's dominance for now, but resistance is futile

David Gewirtz, Distinguished Lecturer at CBS Interactive, is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in the History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets and is a member of the National Press Club.

Can tech help prevent violence against women? (TechRepublic)

 These tools say 'yes'

By Lyndsey Gilpin July 23, 2014

Technology can't stop violence against women, but it can change how we raise awareness about it and help prevent it. 

Kitestring is a safety service that uses SMS.

I am a 23-year-old-woman, and when I walk alone, I get scared. Sometimes I'm absolutely terrified, and other times, I'm just slightly nervous. Call me paranoid, call me cautious, call me smart.

When I lived in Chicago, almost every evening I would walk with "911" already punched in my keypad, my thumb hovered over the "send" button. Depending on where I am or how safe I feel, I hold my keys out, poised in defense (like that would do much), carry portable pepper spray, or call my mom, who never minds being awoken at 2:00 a.m. to talk to me until she hears my door lock.

The other day, I stumbled across a service called Kitestring, and when I read about it, my jaw dropped. Because I -- as a journalist and a woman, as a human being living in the 21st century -- never considered that technology could ease my fears of something unthinkable happening to me while I walk down the street.

"I think we've reached a unique point in history: technology is advancing faster that our ability to dream up ways to harness it. In my opinion, the last one and half decades have seen more technological innovation than any single century of industrial progress that came before it," said Stephan Boyer, founder of Kitestring (and also currently a master's student at MIT). "But what have we done with it all? Blogging, tweeting, liking, sharing, creating and consuming content are all great ways to feel connected, but personal safety has been a bit of an afterthought."

And he's right. It is an afterthought, even for me -- the target demographic, a person that thinks about this issue every day of my life.

Kitestring is a SMS-based service. Sign up online, then ask it via text message to check up on you in, say, 25 minutes when you are supposed to arrive in your destination. After 25 minutes, Kitestring will send you a text, checking to see if you made it. You reply via text or check-in online. If you don't (and you haven't extended the time or checked in early), it will send a message you created to your emergency contact, letting them know to give you a call. If your phone dies, you lose it, or something happens to you, it will send the message anyway -- it doesn't need your phone to be serviceable.

Of course, this wouldn't be something I would use every time I leave my house, but knowing the technology is available is the important part, and it's good to know it could be use at particularly important or dangerous times. There's also the possibility of missing the message and creating a false emergency.

"Kitestring should have existed a long time ago. SMS has been mainstream for over a decade, and the mass adoption of smartphones began in 2007. I don't think of it as moving forward -- I see it as catching up," Boyer said.

Boyer had the idea for Kitestring back in January, when his girlfriend, who walked home in an unsafe neighborhood, asked him to call to make sure she arrived home safe. With a Google search, he found some of the other apps, but noticed how clunky their interfaces were. So he created a new one. Kitestring is simple -- it isn't alarmist like some others out there. So far, the service has launched in the UK and US. Low connectivity and SMS delivery rates pose the biggest obstacle for scaling the product elsewhere. Boyer said the team is also exploring the possibility of doing a "Kitestring Teams" version of the service targeted at entire organizations, families, or governments.

So what other safety apps like Kitestring are out there, helping to make a difference? Here are a few more examples (and of course, these are not only for women, they can be used by everyone):

• Watch Over Me is a subscription-based service that notifies your contacts via text or social media if you haven't told it you're safe. With the free version, though, you can be watched for only five minutes.
• Circle of 6, lets you pick six friends to alert if you need a ride, help, or if there's an emergency. It's designed for college students.
• Panic Button sends a location and emergency alert to your contacts, as well as a message on your Facebook wall.
• Stay Safe is a similar check-in service, but is possibly not password protected, according to some reviews. It costs $6.99.
• Guardly is a subscription service designed for college campuses or employers. It sends a message and a GPS location to your contacts, campus police, or 911.

It's very difficult to measure how women are in constant fear -- or at least, that we always have some looming thought in the back of our minds -- when we walk alone or with a group of other women, no matter how close to home or to people we may be. There are studies about violence against women in slightly moreconcrete terms which are always about actions: one in six women have been stalked. One in five say they have been raped or have experienced attempted rape.

But there is one study by the General Social Survey was recently brought to light that showed women were twice as likely as men to say they were afraid of to walk in their neighborhoods alone at night.

That still doesn't explain how I choose a certain route home, or if that route actually makes me feel any safer, or why we're taught to only feel at ease when a man we know is walking with us. It also doesn't help me understand why I have to think about these types of things every single day, multiple times a day, and it doesn't make it any less frustrating.

Technology can't solve this problem, but it can change the course of how we think about it, and ultimately, how we address it as a society. Technology can make it impossible to ignore these issues. Take the trending topic #YesAllWomen, for instance.

The hashtag was first used after the Santa Barbara shootings in May, when it came out that the alleged shooter promised revenge against the women who turned him down over the years. The hashtag quickly went viral, with thousands of women engaging in an online conversation to criticize the way society teaches men to feel entitled to women, and to draw attention to scenarios that every woman, everywhere in the world, has experienced.

Lyndsey Gilpin is a Staff Writer for TechRepublic. She writes about the people behind some of tech's most creative innovations and in-depth features on innovation and sustainability.