The Presidential election was not the only thing that was decided in the elections on November 4th. Across the nation several states debated one of the more controversial issues in America since at least the 1970’s. Abortion.

The issue at hand in Colorado, South Dakota, and California essentially was the banning of abortion in all forms. As of 12pm I can say that in Colorado and South Dakota the ballot initiatives were soundly defeated. But California was still up in the air.

In Colorado the question for voters was

Defining “person” as at the moment of fertilization

This was defeated with a resounding 73% of no votes. So in Colorado, and as a legal example for the moment in the nation, life still begins at birth.

In South Dakota the question to voters was

Ban abortion except in the case of rape and/or the endangerment of the health of the mother [ie she will die otherwise]

Voters in this less dense than average state also rallied together for a 55% no vote. Obviously voters there feel that there are other reasons and circumstances that need to be included in any consideration of abortion.

But in California one of the most debated issues was on the ballot

Waiting period and notify parents of a minor prior to an abortion

As I stated that as of midnight this had not been resolved. This does not ban abortions, for minors or anyone else, but it is felt by some to overly restrict access to abortions. Effectively it achieves the same end as a ban. Considering how liberal California is on many issues this could go in any direction.

But overall no real headway has been made in the debate on abortion. It is still legal, and many find fault with the degree – or existence – that this medical procedure is used to.

With the election of a Democratic Congress, and an extremely liberal Democratic President who will likely replace at least 1 or 3 Supreme Court Justices there seems no question that nationally abortion will be here to stay. At least for 1 more year on a state by state level.

Do you agree with those votes? How would you voted on the California ballot?

Labels: 2008 election, Abortion, California, Colorado, Democratic Congress, South Dakota, Supreme Court Justices

As I write this President Bush is expected to discuss offshore oil drilling in America, and the opportunity of Oil Shale mining. In recent years I have heard a lot about oil shale and its mining, but I really didn’t know anything about it. Like most I expect the thought of oil shale made me think of a rock that is filled or comprised of oil. That is not the case.

Oil shale is a fine grain rack filled with kerogen. In heating the oil shale a gas from the kerogen is released which can be used in heating homes and creating power, or the gas can be cooled to create a synthetic petroleum-like oil. The use of that oil is similar to the uses for crude oil, but they are not the same thing.

How much oil shale is there, and is anyone using it? Those are the next questions I had. The answer may well surprise you as it surprised me. There is estimated to be 3 trillion barrels of oil equivalent of oil shale in the world. The United States is one of the major sources of deposits in the world with 1.8 trillion barrels equivalent under Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah. This is in comparison to the 267 billion barrels of oil estimated in Saudi Arabia (as of 2006). And currently first world and emerging nations including Germany, Russia, China, Israel, Brazil, and Estonia all have varying degrees of oil shale industries producing energy and fuel. Who knew.

Now consider this, mining companies - such as BHP Billiton, Anglo American, Kazakhmys, Vedanta Resources, Xstrata – and oil companies have been having a strong year as energy is on the forefront of political and investment minds. With the rise in speculation of crude oil prices, rising gasoline and home heating oil prices, and calls for alternative energy sources oil shale stands to be more actively in the public domain than ever before.

Now since there is no oil shale market (yet) and given that mining shale is a very different process from drilling for oil, I would imagine that several oil companies will be looking for acquisitions and joint-venture deals with mining companies that have the ability and experience in this field. Schlumberger, Shell, EnCana, Chattanooga Corp, Fushun Mining Group, Tosco Corporation, Petrobras, Viru Keemia Gripp are just a few involved in some aspect or projects with oil shale. I doubt that the number of companies will decrease in the coming years.

Opportunity abounds for the investor and individual that seeks it. How you take advantage of this potential is up to you. But I would expect that oil shale will become a greater factor in at least American energy future plans than ever before.

Labels: Anglo American, BHP Billiton, Colorado, Crude oil prices, energy alternatives, Fushun Mining Group, Germany, kerogen, oil shale, Petrobras, Saudi Arabia, Schlumberger, Tosco Corporation, Utah