Vote

            In keeping with the spirit of the new digital age, America has become crazy for all things electronic. However, the author has found many things about the moral and ethical behavior of the business-as-usual crowd that bear redress. Old-fashioned values and mores have not been supplanted by information instilled at the speed of light, except for those whom have not yet lost a job because of a medical history, been denied medical insurance, or had evidence of a physiological issue thrown across the billboard of the internet. Of course, the firms that do not have the fear of litigation hovering like a Sword of Damocles over the boardroom, will not get the message until it is too late for them.

            The Healthcare industry has much to worry about when considering compromised patient records. According to a recent article in Biotech Week (Biotech Week, 2008), the industry’s concentration upon medical privacy and compliance has created significant and transparent data leakage.

"Healthcare facilities are complex environments where information is stored and shared in a number of ways that are critical to patient well-being," said Brian Lapidus, chief operating officer of Kroll Fraud Solutions. "Until healthcare organizations expand their data security measures to address the threat of data compromise as well as privacy and compliance, patients will continue to be at risk."

Patients alone do share all the risk that compromised data can bring to bear upon the disenfranchised victims of medical record fraud. It is clear; the institutions that bear the responsibility of keeping patient records safe are at great risk of litigation. In the professional journal Legal Eagle Eye Newsletter for the Nursing profession (Vol .15, 2007) A charge nurse’s employment was terminated because of a “….breach of confidentiality, co-workers’ emails, (and) charts.”  The journal noted that it was in violation of the institution’s policies protecting the confidentiality of colleagues email accounts and computer terminals.

            Public health records have become a prominent site upon the radar of the highest office in the land. President George W. Bush signed executive order #13410 mandating the development of interoperability standards. Those standards and issues regarding personal health records are discussed at length by Mike McBride when he stated, “…. privacy, security and interoperability are the primary issues facing health information exchange, which is the basis for regional health information networks” (The Other Side of EMR, 2007-11). The author firmly believes personal information should remain sacrosanct in the hands of the ones entrusted with the safekeeping. Personal medical history would show diabetes treatment for fifteen years, hypertensive care, and other maladies. That information could cost the acquisition of a new job, if an employer had easy access to it. That knowledge is against the law to use as reason for denying employment but, when known, has been used secretly to deny it. This has happened to me, as it was made known by third-party disclosure, and it can happen to you.

References

1. Breach of Confidentiality, Journal: Legal Eagle Eye Newsletter for the Nursing Profession, Vol. 15, Issue 11, p 8(1). (December 1, 2007)
2. The Other Side of EMR, McBride, Mike, Journal: Health Management Technology, Vol. 28, Issue 11, p. 6(0) (November, 2007)
3. Kroll Fraud Solutions; Gaps in Hospital Security Policies Put Patient Data at Risk, According to New Report, Biotech Week via NewsRx.com.  (April 24, 2008)

Social Investing: Trend or True Investment Philosophy, Investors speak out.

            Before beginning the research for this essay, I was among the disingenuous crowd that would believe that the movement toward socially responsible investment was, indeed, only a trend. Now I know I could not have possibly been more wrong; wanting to put one’s hard-earned money into funds that parallel moral and ethical concerns (Dictionary.com, 2008) is not a fad; the phenomena is an extension of a modern civilized and global culture event.

            The owner of a San Antonio wet cleaner’s called Clothesline Cleaners, Derba Mills, promotes itself as a ‘green cleaner’. I asked her why she chose to build a dry cleaning business around a technology that was more expensive to operate than the rest of the industry she competes with. Her answer surprised me. Ms. Mills said that she wanted to correct an imbalance. You see, dry cleaners traditionally use very toxic and dangerous chemistry to effectively clean textiles and she wants to correct past mistakes. She knows other small business owners that have told her that they would set up a store anywhere but next to a dry cleaner: because it was so smelly. So, when Derba started her business, there was no way that she was going to offend people by watching them gasp for air when they entered her plant (D. Mills, personal interview, August 10, 2008).

            I did not have to go far for my second interview. My wife is Diana Ackerman, the Threadbender; a successful vintage wedding gown seamstress. Her work with vintage textiles was an easy choice for her as her she happens to be a third generation tailor. When I asked Diana why ‘being green’ is such an important aspect of her work, she replied that when she does an alteration or modification to a family heirloom, she feels compelled to use the same textiles from the era the gown was first made to transform a wedding gown, veil, or garter to fit a modern bride’s vision but using only the techniques and materials of the era when first made. So, in that way, she does not further harm the planet by using new components with plastic combs, or made-in-China lace (D. L. Ackerman-Herschel, personal interview, August 8, 2008).

            The first concessions to ethical behavior, as relates to this thesis, came from two interviews of small business owners speaking to a moral understanding of their place in society first and their juxtaposition in the world second. Could this possibly be a trend; one that would go away eventually, like the hula-hoop? I don’t think so.

            And I am not the only one either. In 1980, a stockbroker named Amy Domini noticed that some of her clients were not pleased to invest in companies in industries with which they disagreed: like defense contractors and tobacco companies. She heard those investors question if it were possible to follow their investment objectives without contravening their conscience. In the 1980’s, this was a difficult thing to do. But it made sense to Amy to see a new way of ethically investing was emerging. Moral personalities with a social conscience were beginning to demand the investment trades work the way they wished and not the way they had always done business. In 1984 she authored the book Ethical Investing in an effort to understand how this type of socially cognitive strategy could complement each other. It was finally in 1989 that she partnered with Peter Kinder and Steve Lydenburg to compose the Domini 400 Social Index; an index of 400 primarily large-cap U.S. corporations that are selected on a basis of a wide range of social and environmental standards. A year later they introduced the Domini Social Equity Fund to trace the index fund. Domini believes now that social investors use three fundamental tools to achieve their financial objective: application of social and environmental standards, shareholder advocacy, and community investing (Domini Social Investments, 1997-2007). This is not a trend, it’s a movement.

            And the movement has tentacles that reach to public broadcasting giant Fox News and the Bill O’Reilly news program The O’Reilly Factor. According to Human Events essayist W. Thomas Smith Jr., published in an article titled Doing Business with the Devil, he explains perfectly Bill’s position on the matter. According to O’Reilly, “GE has about $50 million on the table in business dealings with Iran. Doing the math, that means $250 million could have been derived since Iran began killing Americans in Iraq about five years ago. (Smith Jr., 2008).” Mr. Smith reports on a statement by GE’s director of financial communications saying that GE is down to two contracts with global oil and gas companies only and that those contracts would be expired at the end of June 2008.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission queried GE in the summer of 2006 and the company duly disclosed that it not only doing business with private firms in Iran but directly with the Iranian government (Smith Jr., 2008). Fast forward to June 12, 2008: in an article published in the Wall Street Journal and reported on by Mssrs. Benoit Faucon and Roshanak Taghavi titled Oil Majors Say US Restrictions Delay Iran Project, that the impact of delayed GE equipment – due to American  restrictions on selling technology or equipment – are forcing natural gas companies Anglo-Dutch oil giant Royal Dutch Shell PLC and Spanish-Argentine Repsol YPF to not sign an agreement worth $10 billion dollars with Iran because of the delay in implementing a later phase of the project. Quoting directly Shell Chief Executive Jeroen van der Veer at a May 20 shareholders meeting, "Due to American sanctions, we can't apply American technology or equipment (and) will need longer for the preparation of the project." The ramifications of the delayed investment are said to be significant (Faucon & Taghavi, 2008). GE is not the only company to face socially responsive, moral, and ethical concerns. Responding to trepidation in investments from a New York fireman pension fund, the U.S. firm of Halliburton disclosed $50 million dollars of Iran revenue for 2003. We, as the general public, would have never known if not for the conscience of a group of fireman in New York. So, did all the fuss Bill O’Reilly made for GE have an impact on the corporate mettle of an industry giant? We shall likely never know for certain, but I, for one, would certainly like to think so.

            Should there be any doubt in one’s mind that the reasoning behind and the actuation of well-conceived socially responsible investing is here to stay as a new tool for the global community to snip at the hindquarters of the CEO’s in the ivory towers of commerce, allow me to offer one more piece of information gleaned from the Social Investment Forum of the Advocacy and Public Policy forum of Washington, D.C. This groups’ sole stated purpose is to make communication between its associates easier, provide a stage to coordinate public policy decisions, make research funds available, and allow for “members and colleagues to share information and collaborate on shareholder proposals, social investing and corporate social responsibility issues (Social Investment Forum, 2007).” Among the group’s accomplishments is a 2003 litigation victory that requires registered mutual funds and registered investment advisors to disclose their proxy voting guidelines and the votes actually cast on behalf of their clients. This group conducts seminars, public education campaigns, and seeks to create occasions for socially responsible investing (Social Investment Forum, 2007).

            These are stories and testimonies that have touched me immeasurably. Remarkable and aggressive activists are in the world now and are determined to make a difference in the future we leave our children. These are the type of forward-looking campaigners I can place hope for change into. This leaves me with only one question; where’s a bold stand of oak when I need one? I need to hug one.

References

Dictionary.com. (2008). social investing. Retrieved August 10, 2008, from

             Dictionary.com:

            http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/social%20investing

Domini Social Investments. (1997-2007). The Domini Story. Retrieved

            August 10, 2008, from Domini Social Investments:

             http://www.domini.com/about-domini/index.htm

Ebert, R. L., & Griffin, R. W. (2007). Business Essentials, Sixth Edition.

            Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Faucon, B., & Taghavi, R. (2008, June 12). Oil Majors Say US

            Restrictions Delay Iran Projects. Retrieved from

            Yale Global Online:

            http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=10940

Smith Jr., W. T. (2008, June 2). Doing Business with the Devil. Retrieved

            August 10, 2008, from Human Events:

            http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26767

Social Investment Forum. (2007). Advocacy and Public Policy.

            Retrieved August 10, 2008, from Social Investment Forum:

            http://www.socialinvest.org/projects/advocacy/

From the manger’s point of view, the recklessness of sexual harassment activity is unforgivable. The contemporary aspects are well known, defined, and not debatable. The thesis of this essay will be to outline the legal obligations of the company as a whole for the scenarios outlined for an Individual Project; a brief discussion of which will follow in the next paragraph.

Mary, a young female sales professional, is confronted by Frank, a corporate sales supervisor “known for flirting.” Frank intimates to Mary that her expense receipts will not be approved unless she has dinner with him that evening. The scenario ends with Mary contacting Human Resources immediately. The story line being that Frank is known for flirtatious behavior, I am going to assume that this is not the first time that he has demonstrated explicit and unwelcome sexual advances to a junior employee and that the firm’s HR department has heard this same story from other employees in the past. 

The story is at once the classic definition of Quid Pro Quo and only lacks the actual words to detail what sexual favors he desires; that they are entirely understood to be so related, one can be assured. Mary’s sad tale to her HR manger must be something like this, “He told me that if I did something for him that he would do something for me.” And that, for job related matters, is unlawful (Ebert & Griffin, 2007, pp. 306-307). If the incidences of harassment have been documented in the past then the next step to be taken must be the termination of Frank’s employment. No modern U.S. firm can willingly permit credible evidence to go forward without a severe course of action to follow. But if the rumors to Frank’s promiscuity are not documented, then a different course should be considered. I would give him a chance to publicly apologize to Mary. Failing doing that, I would expect his work load to become so overwhelming that he would be forced to resign. Sorry, Frank, but it’s time to update the old resume and find another place to work.

New research has shown a more harmful effect on employees that sexual harassment, however. I have uncovered an article by Jane Kim that provided details of business researchers from the University of Manitoba and the Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada that reviewed 111 cases of workplace social dynamics. They found that as compared to employees who had been sexually harassed, that victims of bullying report feeling angrier and more stressed out; and were more likely to quit their job. The essay by Ms. Kim also quoted statistics provided by the Workplace Bullying Institute, a non-profit organization advocate for victim’s rights, and saw 37 percent of U.S. employees had been bullied on the job as compared to 8 to 10 percent that had been sexually harassed. This cowardly kind of assault comes as: ostracizing co-workers, making office gossip, insulting people about a job performance, or private life. The director of WBI, Psychologist Gary Namie, regards the lack of legal consequences as one reason why the actions cause more harm than sexual harassment does; the victims suffer with little help or sympathy (Kim, 2008). Personally, I have witnessed such aggression passed off or marginalized as ‘personality conflicts’; the objects of ridicule feel delegitimized. One can see the defeat in their faces.

It has come to my intention, because of the research I am doing for this essay, to learn that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has published data to reveal that law suits brought to them by women have steadily declined over the last eight years and allegations filed by men has doubled between 1990 and 2007. This tidbit of information was not the only startling revelation I learned from an article entitled Women Harassing Men. Gretchen Voss reiterated three instances – litigated by the EEOC – to show her point that men are not raised to think of themselves as victims. Now that the times have changed and women have more power in the workplace than they have traditionally garnered, the so-called gentler sex has become predator versus prey (Voss, 2008-06). The amounts of money awarded by juries and the discretely settled out-of-court costs should be enough to warrant corporate attention. So, since complaints about female bosses preying on men have doubled since 1990 it is fair to ask, “What’s going on out there?”

What is going on, in my judgment, is proof positive of the adage that ‘Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.’ This phrase from the historian and moralist John Acton, further noted that “Great men are almost always bad men.” (Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely, 2008) It seems fair to note now that, whether the injustice of sexual harassment is from men or women, the responsibility of management to mitigate and correct is the same.

References

Ebert, R. L., & Griffin, R. W. (2007). Business Essentials, Sixth Edition.

            Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Kim, J. N. (2008). The cubicle bully. Scientific American Mind, 13.

Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. (2008).

            Retrieved July 6, 2008, from The Phrase Finder:

            http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/288200.html

Voss, G. (2008-06). Women harassing men. Marie Claire (US), 96(4).

Jason J. Churchill, October 25, 2000
Revised and submitted November 13, 2000  

Retrieved 052805 from http://maps.unomaha.edu/Peterson/funda/Sidebar/OilConsumption.html

Oil Consumption in North America

Outline

1. Oil Consumption in North America
2. U.S. Oil Production
3. Oil Reserves
4. Importing
5. Misconceptions about Fossil Fuel Resources

Oil Consumption in North America

Currently, the United States consumes 19.6 million barrels per day, of oil, which is more than 25% of the world's total..  As a result, the U.S produces one fourth of the world's carbon emissions.  Despite predictions that the U.S. will exhaust it's supply of oil in as little as forty years, the demand is on the increase, and is predicted to continue increasing, because of the ever increasing population.  Increase in resource consumption is caused by three factors: population growth, new uses found for a resource, and increase in demand for a resource to increase living standards.  The rate of consumption for oil is increasing at a rate of about 2% yearly. 

U.S. Oil Production

The United States produced enough oil to supply its own demand until 1970, (Youngquist paragraph 6). In that year the U.S. had to start importing oil to meet the demand.  The oil production for 2000 is expected to average 5.8 million barrels per day of crude oil.  The production for 1999 was 5.9 million barrels per day.  After the oil price collapse of 1985/1986, U.S. oil production declined dramatically.  Oil production in 2000 is down by 24% from 1985. However, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), oil production is expected to increase by 70,000 barrels per day, or 1.1% in 2001.  There is little to no chance of discovering any significant new onshore oil fields in the U.S.  There is a good possibility of discovering major deposits of oil offshore, but offshore drilling has been banned in many areas.  There are several good prospects far offshore that are open to exploration, but these are usually in very deep waters, and are extremely expensive to drill. The U.S. produces 12% of the world's oil, and this production is concentrated onshore, and offshore along the Texas Louisiana Gulf Coast, extending inland through west Texas, Oklahoma, and eastern Kansas. There are also significant oil fields in Alaska along the central North Slope.

Oil Reserves

According to the EIA, the United States has 21 billion barrels of proved oil reserves as of January 1, 2000.  The U.S. uses about 6.6 billion barrels per year.  That is only enough oil to last the U.S. about three and a half years without importing oil from other countries.  84% of the reserves are concentrated in four states.  Texas has 25%, both onshore, and offshore.  Alaska has 24%, California has 21%, and Louisiana has 14% onshore, and offshore.  Since 1990, U.S. oil reserves have dropped about 20%.  New oil discoveries made in 1999 were made almost entirely in the Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska. (321 million barrels).  All other discoveries were extensions of existing oil fields, or new reservoirs discovered in old fields. (404 million barrels).

Importing

The demand for oil in the United States is increasing slightly every year but domestic oil production is decreasing.  The U.S. is expected to consume an average of 19.6 million barrels per day of oil in 2000.  It is estimated that the U.S. imported 10.9 million barrels per day of oil in the first eight months of 2000, (E.I.A. Paragraph 9).  At this rate, the U.S. is currently importing about 57% of the oil that is being consumed.  The main suppliers of oil to the U.S. at this time are; Canada (1.68 million barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (1.49 million barrels per day), Venezuela (1.46 million barrels per day), and Mexico (1.35 million barrels per day).  The U.S. has energy sanctions against Iran, Iraq, and Libya, all major oil producers that prohibit U.S. companies from doing business with them.

Misconceptions about Fossil Fuel Resources

With few exceptions, 16,000 feet is the maximum depth at which oil is found.  Below that depth, only gas exists, because of the temperature of the earth.  The United States has large areas of oil shale deposits, which are sometimes misconstrued as being a readily available resource. However, oil shale deposits are not the same thing as conventional oil fields.  There are no effective methods for extracting crude oil, from oil shale.  A variety of processes have been tried, and all have failed.  Oilsands, which is another kind of oil deposit, are found in large quantities in Canada.  It has been estimated that the oilsands contain 1.7 trillion barrels of oil, but this oil cannot be recovered by standard methods of well drilling, and has to be strip mined.  After it is dug up, the oil is removed by a water flotation process.  Then, the waste sand has to be safely disposed.  The strip mining process now being used takes the energy equivalent of two barrels of oil to produce one barrel.  In other words, the price to produce it is double the price for which it can be sold.  Another problem with the oilsands, is that much of it is too deep to be reached by strip mining.  Other methods of removing the deeper oil are being experimented with, but they are all very costly.  Canada's oilsands will probably not be produced in large amounts until the world's supply of conventional oil is nearly depleted.

Conclusion

If the natural resources of the world continue to be exploited at such a staggering rate, there will be nothing left to exploit. Conservation strategies have been implemented, especially at times when an energy shortage has occurred, but these strategies are all but forgotten when the shortage passes.  Unfortunately, conserving resources at this point will only temporarily postpone the inevitable, which is total energy resource exhaustion. Unless the lifestyles, and transportation habits, of the ever-increasing population that demand more, and more resources are dramatically changed, or new energy sources are discovered, conserving won't save us.
 
 

Bibliography:
deBlij, H.J., and  Peter O.Muller.
     Geography Realms, Regions, and Concepts. 9th Edition

Rowntree, Lewis, Price, Wyckoff. Diversity Amid Globalization.
     Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Wheeler, Jesse H. Jr., and Trenton J. Kostbade.
     World Regional Geography

 GeoDestinies. Myths and Realities of Mineral Resources. Youngquist, Walter Ph.D..
     National Book Company. 1997. <http://dieoff.org/page132.htm>.

 Energy Information Administration, (EIA).
     <www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/usa.html#OIL>.

 Oil & Gas Journal Online - petroleum, energy news.
     <http://ogj.pennnet.com>.

Jason J. Churchill, October 25, 2000
Revised and submitted November 13, 2000

Retrieved 052808 from http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5666

Oil Consumption Continues Slow Growth

by Joe Monfort

Global demand for oil reached 85.7 million barrels per day in 2007, a modest 1-percent increase over the 84.9 million barrels consumed daily in 2006.¹ (See Figure 1.) This marked the third straight year in which oil demand grew at an annual rate of less than 2 percent.² Despite the slow growth in demand, oil prices rose from just above $50 in January to near $100 at year’s end—close to the all-time inflation-adjusted price record that was reached in the early 1980s.³

The United States continued unchallenged as the world’s single largest oil-consuming nation in 2007, using almost one fourth of the global total at a rate of 20.7 million barrels daily.⁴ But U.S. oil consumption was virtually unchanged for the third year in a row, as rising oil prices discouraged demand despite three years of steady economic growth.⁵

China increased its petroleum consumption by 5.5 percent in 2007, up from 7.3 million barrels per day in 2006 to 7.7 million barrels.⁶ It now accounts for nearly 9 percent of the world’s total oil use.⁷ Over the past decade China has nearly doubled its oil consumption, and the share of global oil used by all nations that do not belong to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has increased from 37 percent in 1997 to almost 43 percent in 2007.⁸ Other top consumers in 2007 were OECD-Europe at 15.4 million barrels and Japan at 5 million barrels daily.⁹ (See Figure 2.)

The crude oil spot price in the United States averaged $72 per barrel in 2007, a 9.5-percent increase over the 2006 average of $66 and nearly triple the average price in 2002.¹⁰ The price of oil averaged over $90 a barrel in the final two months of 2007 and the first two months of 2008, nearing real dollar prices not seen since April 1980. On March 3rd, prices closed at $102.42, having set a new inflation-adjusted record high earlier during intra-day trading.¹¹ (See Figure 3.) The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects an average of $87 a barrel for 2008 as a whole.¹²

These high prices in the face of slowing demand growth have contributed to increasing recognition that limited spare oil production capacity has fundamentally changed world oil markets over the last several years.¹³ World crude oil production (without the natural gas liquids included in the consumption figures cited earlier) actually fell from 73.8 million barrels per day in 2005 to 73.2 million barrels a day in the first 10 months of 2007, according to EIA.¹⁴ This makes 2005 the peak year for world oil production so far, though it is too early to know if this will turn out to be the all-time high.¹⁵

In 2007, crude oil production declined in some of the world’s largest producers—including Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, the United Kingdom, and Venezuela—due to a combina­tion of geological and political factors.¹⁶ Saudi oil production continued to fall in 2007—a voluntary pullback to accommodate a softening market, according to Saudi officials.¹⁷ By late 2007, however, Saudi production was 8 percent below the peak level reached in 2005, despite the fact that oil prices had risen roughly $20 per barrel since then.¹⁸ Uncertainty over the condition of Saudi oil fields and their ability to increase or perhaps even sustain current pro­duc­tion levels is the single largest unknown facing world oil markets.

Meanwhile, crude oil production rose in 2007 in Angola, Brazil, Canada (mainly from tar sands), China, and Russia, which surpassed Saudi Arabia to become the largest producer.¹⁹ But production growth continues to slow in Russia, an ominous sign since that nation has been the most important source of production gains over the past decade.²⁰

The fact that the world is having a hard time expanding oil supply fast enough to keep up with even modest growth in demand is begin­ning to be accepted in some corners of the oil industry. The CEO of Royal Dutch Shell and the U.S. industry–dominated National Petroleum Council have both stated that supply con­straints are likely to put continued pressure on world oil markets in the years ahead.²¹ Although the dreaded phrase “peak oil” is still used mainly by oil industry mavericks like Matthew Simmons and T. Boone Pickens when discussing what lies ahead, their views—if not their language—do appear to be spreading to the mainstream.²²

Political instability contributed to supply disruptions and price volatility throughout many of the world’s oil-producing regions in 2007. Iraq reached its highest level of oil production since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, but this still remains below prewar production levels.²³ In 2007, Iraq raised its production 5 percent over the 2006 figure, with gains in the latter half of the year coinciding with the 2007 “troop surge.”²⁴ Overall, though, tensions in the Middle East remain highly charged and continue to factor heavily into world supply and price activity.

In Nigeria, despite a ceasefire signed by the government and eight rebel groups in Decem­ber, the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta and other factions continue to wreak havoc on oil operations in the oil-rich southern delta.²⁵ As a result of pipeline sabo­tage, kidnappings of foreign workers, and other risks, Nigerian oil production has decreased 15 percent from its summer 2005 peak to an average production of 2.1 million barrels per day in 2007.²⁶ In Algeria, terrorist attacks targeting, among other sites, a United Nations office have also affected world markets and sparked con­cern among foreign oil companies operating in North Africa—a region considered crucial to future oil production.²⁷

Thanks to skyrocketing oil prices, many oil companies again enjoyed record profits in 2007. Chevron Corporation posted a company-best $18.7 billion in profit, while Royal Dutch Shell PLC reported a near-best $31.3 billion.²⁸ Exxon­Mobil Corporation, the world’s largest publicly traded oil company, posted a 2007 net income of $40.6 billion, the single largest annual profit in U.S. corporate history.²⁹

The long-term future of oil companies may not be so bright, however. ExxonMobil reported a decline in oil and natural gas production in 2007, and many companies are finding it hard to replace their reserves.³⁰ Not only have the largest oil fields already been developed, most of the promising prospect areas are controlled by state-owned oil companies, which hold 80 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves.³¹