Sunday, September 30, 2012

Three ways to fix the climate in 2012 and beyond

SOLAMON ALTERNATIVE ENERGY :


Over the last two years, the consequences of 150 years of fossil-fuel development have materialized with a vengeance. The U.S. has experienced the worst drought in 80 years, replete with unprecedented Western fires and fears of widespread crop failure. This on the heels of record-breaking U.S. spring temperatures, with record daily highs outpacing record daily lows at a staggering pace of 12:1 since the start of the year. This on the heels of record U.S. flooding throughout the Mississippi basin last year. These examples reflect only the U.S. experience, in a world where record-breaking extreme weather is becoming the norm.

Seedlings

It’s hot. It’s going to get hotter. And despite the politics of the moment, extreme weather will eventually drive a national consensus on climate action. What can each of us do to insure we get there soon, rather than too late?

There are three answers. The first is to build political power. Elect clean-energy champions at the municipal, state, and national levels who can pass policies enabling a clean-energy revolution. The second is to stop expansion of the global carbon infrastructure. This will cut pollution — some — but will also build the morally grounded movement that must ultimately drive a strong clean-energy politics. Answer three? Grow the green shoots of the emerging sustainable economy.

Job #1: Politics

Nationally, global warming is barely getting a mention in the 2012 election. There has been some sparring over “clean-energy future” versus “Solyndra waste and fraud.” Romney has tried to beat Obama with a Keystone pipeline stick. But Obama has had little incentive to campaign hard on a green economy, while Romney wants to steer clear of his flip-flopping record on climate.

That said, this election matters, and the presidency is critical. Depending on the outcome, Clean Air Act regulation of carbon pollution will either unfold in a slow and steady manner, or it will be gutted. Critical Supreme Court appointments will shape the next 20 years of judicial decisions at they relate to action on climate. Finally, it is possible that, freed from reelection constraints, Obama may develop into the kind of visionary leader who could drive legislative gains post-2014, particularly if extreme weather continues to pound the country.

Experience shows that smart policy is critical to drive rapid clean-energy investment: feed-in-tariffs in Germany; wind power subsidies in the U.S.; municipal PACE financing (until it was cut off by the lending agencies) in Berkeley, on Long Island, and in other U.S. communities. But good policy requires powerful politics, electing politicians who understand and are committed to the vision.

In the short term, the House is likely to retain a climate-hostile majority, so national climate-friendly and green legislation will be stalled for at least two more years. This reality only underscores the urgency of the political project. For the remainder of 2012, and starting again in January 2013, pushing for strong clean-energy majorities in state legislatures and Washington, D.C., must be job No. 1 for the climate movement. (To get involved, contact your state’s League of Conservation Voters.)

#2: Saying no, getting to yes

After the electoral smoke clears, no matter who is president, another side of the climate movement must swing into action: disciplined, large-scale opposition to new coal, oil, and gas development, including nonviolent direct action.

Facing slow-growing and even declining demand at home, U.S. oil and coal companies are seeking to ship North American oil and coal abroad, primarily to feed booming demand in Asia. Building ports and pipelines to export tar-sands oil and Powder River Basin coal only lines the pockets of these corporations. This infrastructure, over its lifetime, will lead to tens of billions more tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

At the same time, hydrofracking technology has created a rush toward gas production in the U.S. — often in highly populated areas. While natural gas has the potential to serve as a “bridge” fuel to renewables, recent research has highlighted dangers not only to local communities in terms of water supply and impacts on natural lands, but also to the global climate. Depending on the so-called “fugitive emissions” of natural gas from leaks, natural gas can be as bad as coal in terms of global-warming impacts.

The good news is that slowing gas development until technologies can be proven safe — and the leaks can be better understood, identified, and plugged — is a smart strategy for gas-rich regions. The gas is not going away. Communities that ban drilling until the risks can be effectively managed (if they can be) are simply storing away their natural wealth for a later date. And potentially they will earn more money in the process, when the value of the gas in the ground has risen.

The Keystone XL pipeline action in which more than 1,200 people were arrested at the White House could set the precedent for post-election climate activism, regardless of whether the president is Obama or Romney. If so, tens of thousands of students, citizens, retirees, and taxpayers will take their personal commitment to climate stabilization up several notches.

The personal experience of widespread civil disobedience is highly combustible fuel for a political movement. It inspires and equips the participants to become powerful moral ambassadors to their communities about the unacceptable future that we are locking in for our children, and for ourselves. These collective experiences, channeled into a winning, morally grounded politics championing a prosperous and just clean-energy economy, can be a recipe for real change in America. Serious policy change demands powerful politics, and strong politics only grows from the ground of deep moral commitment.

Saying no to new fossil-fuel development is part the battle of climate stabilization. The rest of the job is up to “change agents” in businesses and communities across the country. Ultimately, clean energy alternatives have to be scaled up and their costs driven down. This is the work of green business entrepreneurs, supported by smart policy.

#3: Grow green

From Cleveland to Portland, from Grand Rapids to New York, and in Sacramento, Kansas City, Baltimore, and dozens of other American cities and towns, there are game-changing, sustainable enterprises beginning to spread their wings. Within the confines of existing national policy, municipalities and states are creating space to incubate a new generation of business leaders.

One example, local to my region: In Troy, N.Y., two entrepreneurs have set out to eliminate Styrofoam from the face of the earth. Ecovative grows big blocks of what are essentially mushrooms and carves them up to make sculpted shipping sleeves, shipping peanuts, and even the equivalent of foam insulation wallboard. Instead of a petroleum-based product that requires intensive mining and processing to produce, and after disposal persists for tens of thousands of years, the company’s product grows at room temperature, and after it has served its purpose, it can be broken up and put into a garden as compost.

What companies like Ecovative have is a powerful vision. Through the traditional business lens, environmental and social problems appear as costs that companies are best off externalizing. In contrast, sustainable business leaders consider these as challenges to be solved, profitably, through innovation. Indeed, solving many of the world’s most pressing environmental and social problems can only be achieved if the solutions are profitable, and therefore able to rapidly achieve global scale. But business cannot solve our problems alone. Ecovative, for example, relied on critical government start-up grants to develop a competitive product.

So the third strategy leg is to grow the green economy ASAP. We all need to become green change agents—starting our own businesses or driving change internally on “green teams” within our existing workplaces.

This is an “act local, impact global” strategy. At a political level, slowly but surely the “jobs vs. the environment” story is getting beaten out by the “green economy” story. Perhaps the best political news of the last two years was the way that California voters, treated to a full-throated duel between these two narratives in the battle over Prop. 23 in 2010, endorsed a clean energy future by a 2-1 margin. This explains the desperate attack by the fossil-fuel industry on green tech.

As the real green economy grows stronger, business interests begin to align with planetary survival, making progressive energy policy easier to push through, and harder to repeal. Failure by Congress to renew the wind energy tax-credit, for example, threatens 37,000 jobs. Romney’s opposition to the credit is threatening his campaign in states like Iowa, where even Tea Party congressmen support wind development. And in states like California and Oregon, a powerful virtuous cycle is emerging: A stronger green business sector pushes for better policy, which strengthens the sustainable business sector further, empowering it to push for yet stronger policies.

Two roads

Over the next 15 years, the carbon blanket surrounding the planet is virtually certain to rise from its current value of 400 parts per million to 420 ppm. But what we achieve — as political citizens, as anti-fossil-fuel activists, and within the businesses where we work — will determine what comes after: whether we can turn the course of civilization, whether the planet will heat up 4 degrees F, or 12 degrees F, within the lifetimes of our children.

The good news is that we don’t need to lay awake at night worrying what to do with our lives. Good work, with profound consequence, is everywhere.

SOURCE LINK: http://grist.org/climate-energy/three-ways-to-change-the-climate-in-2012-and-beyond/

Thursday, September 20, 2012

Nuclear energy can help abate global climate change

http://qctimes.com/news/opinion/mailbag/nuclear-energy-can-help-abate-global-climate-change/article_52da0998-fefe-11e1-9cd1-001a4bcf887a.html


According to realclimate.org’s Aug. 26 update on the Arctic sea ice, “We noted earlier that the Arctic sea-ice is approaching a record minimum. The record is now broken, almost a month before the annual sea-ice minima usually is observed, and there is probably more melting in store before it reaches the minimum for 2012 — before the autumn sea-ice starts to form.”

The past 12 months have been the hottest ever in recorded history, nationwide and worldwide. Ice reflects a lot more sunlight back into space than open water does. The melting speeds up global warming.

The change in sea ice causes the jet streams to become wilder, causing more radical weather down here. For agriculture, it means it rains at the wrong time, and there is less food.

Many countries are already having a food crisis. The food crisis will come here if we continue causing more global warming. Over 1,500 U.S. counties are drought disaster areas now. Global warming means no food here by some time just after the middle of this century.

We can do something about global warming. We can convert all fossil-fueled power plants to nuclear.

Monday, September 17, 2012

Demand for Foreign Oil at Lowest Point in 15 Years


Wonder which president is responsible for today's astronomically high gas prices? Get 10 key facts on exactly when gas prices spiked and what the primary factors were.

There is a lot of misinformation shared freely across social networks with regard to gas prices, fuel costs, drilling our way to energy autonomy and more. Most of the debate is bereft of actual data and statistics, which is what this article provides. This is not intended to influence your choice, but rather to clean up the debate by fueling it with real data, not speculation, assumption and outright lies.

1. Energy Independence: Less Oil Imported in 2012 Than in 15 Years
So far in 2012, the U.S. has imported less oil than at any time over the last 15 years (during the entire George W. Bush Administration). You have to go all the way back to 1997 to find a year when the U.S. imported less oil.

U.S. Imports of Crude Oil
Not Seasonally Adjusted

1/2 Year Quantity in barrels (Jan. - June)
2012 1,573,029,000
2008 1,787,933,000
2004 1,902,607,000
2000 1,674,108,000
1999 1,616,337,000
1998 1,609,336,000
1997 1,464,233,000

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

2. Energy Consumption: Oil Imports 11% Lower Under President Obama Than Bush Administration

Under the Obama Administration, oil imports are 11% lower than during President George W. Bush's second term in office (and 10% lower, on average, than both terms).

U.S. Imports of Crude Oil
Not Seasonally Adjusted

Year Quantity in barrels

2012 On track to be below 1998
2011 3,321,918,000
2010 3,377,077,000
2009 3,314,787,000
2008 3,590,628,000
2007 3,690,568,000
2006 3,734,226,000
2005 3,754,671,000
2004 3,820,979,000
2003 3,676,005,000
2002 3,418,022,000
2001 3,471,067,000
2000 3,399,240,000
1999 3,228,092,000
1998 3,242,712,000
1997 3,069,431,000

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

3. Fiscal Responsibility: President Barack Obama's Administration Spent Hundreds of Billions Less on Oil Imports Than President George W. Bush

In 2008, under President George W. Bush, the U.S. spent $10.3 billion more importing oil than was spent in 2011. The savings in 2009 and 2010, under President Obama's leadership, was even more pronounced, at $153 billion and $90 billion, respectively.

Cost of U.S. Imports of Oil

Year Total Cost
2011 $331,582,054,000
2010 $252,160,511,000
2009 $188,711,775,000
2008 $341,912,489,000

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

4. Cost Savings: President Obama's Administration Spent Hundreds of Billions Less on All-Energy Related Petroleum Products Than President George W. Bush

In 2008, under President George W. Bush, the U.S. spent $17.5 billion more importing all energy-related petroleum products than was spent in 2011. The savings in 2009 and 2010, under President Obama's leadership, was even more pronounced, at $193 billion and $115 billion, respectively.

U.S. Imports of Total Energy Related Petroleum Products

Year Total Cost
2011 $421,222,815,000
2010 $323,763,355,000
2009 $245,690,140,000
2008 $438,686,820,000

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

5. Price Gouging at the Pump: The Price of Oil More Than Tripled Under President George W. Bush

Between 2000 and 2008, under the administration of President George W. Bush, the price of oil increased 3.6 times, going from an average price per barrel of $26.44 in 2000 to $95.22/barrel in 2008. The all-time high price of oil was set in the summer of 2008, when oil reached $147/barrel and gas prices soared to $4.11, on average, nationwide (source: Energy Information Administration). By comparison, oil prices have increased only 11% since President Obama took office. Oil Price per barrel in 2011 was $99.82/barrel.

(Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis)

Demand pushed up prices under President Bush, whereas today oil prices are elevated as a result of supply side concerns -- particularly the Civil Wars in so many Middle Eastern countries that began in 2011 -- and the increased demand for oil in developing countries, like China and India.

6. It Takes a Lot of Oil to Fight Two Wars

How is it that we are importing so much less oil and petroleum products and spending far less in 2012 than when President George W. Bush was in office? Ending the War in Iraq certainly helped. The net fuel sales in Iraq this fiscal year (so far) are 55 million gallons, compared to 538 million gallons in 2009. When war breaks out, oil consumption spikes, and conversely, when war ends, there is a reduction in oil consumption. President George W. Bush fought two wars while in office; whereas President Obama ended the War in Iraq and eliminated Osama bin Laden.


Source: Defense Logistics Agency

7. Domestic Oil Production Increased

What is even more surprising is that oil production has increased under the Obama Administration. This has also contributed to lower demand for oil and petroleum product imports. In 2008, the U.S. was producing 5 million barrels of crude oil per day. In 2011, production was up to 5,658,000 of crude oil per day.

(Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration)

8. The Leading Producer of Natural Gas

Since 2009, the U.S. has also become the leading producer of natural gas. Natural gas contributes 25% of U.S. power to the grid. Renewable energy has almost doubled, to 13% of the grid's power.



9. Dramatic Shift in U.S. Citizens' Appetite For Oil

High oil and gasoline prices dramatically changed the American public's appetite for gas guzzling vehicles. As a result of having to purchase gas at $4.11 in 2008, a lot of U.S. citizens took public transportation, purchased fuel-efficient cars, and some, like my dad, even started riding bikes! On August 28, 2012, the Obama Administration finalized new fuel economy standards of achieving 54.5 MPG for cars and light-duty trucks by Model Year 2025. Ford, GM, Chrysler, BMW, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar/Land Rover, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Toyota, and Volvo, as well as the United Auto Workers, were all a part of the initial agreement, which was announced in July of 2011.

10. The Correlation Between War and Oil Consumption

War can even keep oil demand high in a recession. In 2001, the U.S. was suffering economically from the Dot Com boom/bust and 9.11. Yet, due to the invasion of Afghanistan, oil imports increased that year by 72 million barrels. By the time of the Iraqi Invasion on March 19, 2003, the U.S. was importing 277 million more barrels of oil each year than when President Clinton was in office. Peak demand for oil imports continued through the first 13 months of the Great Recession -- at a time when gas prices were higher than they had ever been -- while President George W. Bush was still in office, due to the fuel needs of fighting two wars. Click over to my longer article on my home page to see a comparison chart of "War, Recession and U.S. Imports of Crude Oil."

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis and the National Bureau of Economic Research

The trend reversed in 2009 with our scale down of the Iraqi War, our pullout of Iraq on August 18, 2010, the capture (elimination) of Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011, and a new public appetite for fuel-efficient cars and trucks.

The Bottom Line on Energy Independence
Sharon Burke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs, said it best in her testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee on March 29, 2012.

As long as the United States depends on oil, the price we all pay at the pump will be driven by a volatile, global market. For DoD, that means unpredictable fuel bills that crowd out other investment - every dollar hike in the price of oil per barrel raises our bill by $130 million. More to the point, DoD must take into account the destabilizing effects of global energy wealth and poverty, the resource competition resulting from rising demand in growing economies, and with 89% of oil exports moving by sea, the need to secure the global commons. The President's Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future seeks to change that calculus by taking steps to stabilize today's energy economy while investing in the innovation that will allow us to displace the primacy of oil in our national and military energy security.

Consider this. If we drove electric cars, rode our bikes to work used canvas bags and video conferenced a few meetings (instead of flying), then we could furnish our own oil, instead of making totalitarians in the Middle East rich. Why does the debate focus so much on drill drill drill, baby, instead of self-reliance (which could happen almost overnight) if we simply kicked our oil habit? And why would anyone be worried about spending $27.2 billion developing homegrown energy products, when we are giving away 15 times that amount -- $421.2 billion -- for oil and petroleum imports annually to nations that are not that friendly to us?

Monday, September 10, 2012

Small company exploring potentially huge shale oil find in western Newfoundland



CALGARY - A long, narrow stretch of shale rock that runs along western Newfoundland's coastline might be home to North America's next big oil find.
So believes the junior oil explorer that's snapped up virtually all of the land in the Green Point shale.
But Shoal Point Energy Ltd. (CNSX:SHP) hasn't quite figured out how to economically draw the crude — some 23 billion barrels of it in place, according to one estimate — from the uneven, broken-up rock.
"It's a bit of a wild frontier still," said George Langdon, the company's Newfoundland-raised CEO, who has long been fascinated by rocks on the Rock.
"There's a lot of oil in place. We haven't proven the viability of it yet. But just the sheer number of what could be in place there makes it, to me, one of the significant resources in North America, right up there with the big ones"
As in other shale formations throughout North America, tapping the Green Point will require hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to unlock the resource. The controversial practice involves injecting a mixture of water, sand and chemicals underground in order to crack the rock.
Fracking has unleashed huge supplies of natural gas and oil from shales across the continent, but it also brings with it concerns over the safety of groundwater supplies near drilling sites.
Each shale region is different, so what works in the Pennsylvania Marcellus or the North Dakota Bakken might have to be tweaked to adapt to the Green Point's geologic quirks.
Indeed, it's hard to draw a direct comparison between the Green Point and other North American shales. For starters, it appears to be several times thicker and the rock has been jostled around by moving tectonic plates.
"The shale is really broken up quite a bit and when a shale is broken like that, it can be very difficult to drill," said Larry Boyd, director of geoscience at AJM Deloitte, the Calgary consulting firm that Shoal Point hired to evaluate its Green Point potential.
It's difficult, he said, "just to get a hole that will stay together and won't catch your tools and things like that."
"We're really kind of pioneering something really brand new here."
The Green Point also extends into the offshore. So far, the wells have been drilled from land. In the future, it may be possible to tap the shale from platforms or barges in the shallow waters of Port au Port Bay.
Shoal Point's activity so far has been at the south edge of the formation, which stretches north along the coast well past Gros Morne National Park.
The Toronto-based company, a small outfit with less than a dozen employees, is far and away the biggest landowner in the Green Point, having amassed more than 280,000 hectares across three blocks of land.
Shoal Point been going it alone and has drilled two wells so far. The first one was actually directed at a deeper oil target and happened upon the oil-soaked shale in the process.
The second was drilled last year into the Green Point shale itself, but successfully testing it has been slow-going. Shoal Point hopes that will happen next year, after which it aims to apply to the Canada Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board for what's known as a significant discovery licence.
Shoal Point acknowledges it will take a player with much deeper pockets and technical expertise to fully develop its land and has been actively looking for a joint-venture partner to help.
Langdon — who travels frequently between Newfoundland, the financial centre of Toronto and the energy centre of Calgary — was recently out West to meet with possible partners and set up a data room for them to pore over company information.
"We think this play is big enough, has potential resources enough to attract the largest oil companies in the world," said Langdon, a geologist by trade.
"If this play was sitting in Texas or sitting in the western basin, there'd probably be people all over it, but that will happen in time. I think it's potentially a fantastic resource. It could be even of strategic importance —I think it's potentially that big."
In some regards, Green Point has an edge over other shale zones. For one, it's believed to contain high-quality light, sweet crude that sells at a premium price.
There is also a deepwater port at Stephenville, not far from Shoal Point's operations, from which the oil could be loaded onto tankers and shipped to any number of lucrative Atlantic markets.
By contrast, Alberta oilsands crude and other landlocked North American sources have been fetching discounted prices due to a dearth of pipelines to coastal waters.
Newfoundland is also no stranger to energy development, with oil currently flowing from the Hibernia, White Rose and Terra Nova developments off the island's eastern shore.
The area where Shoal Point would be drilling is sparsely populated and without much farmland. So as Langdon sees it, fracking is likely to stir less opposition than in areas like Pennsylvania, New York State or the Quebec lowlands.
The region has long suffered from high unemployment. In fact, scores of Newfoundlanders currently travel to western oilfields for work.
"We would like to see that maybe reversed a little bit," said Langdon.
"If something like this becomes viable, we've got decades and decades of potential employment and production."
Though Boyd describes Green Point as a "world class resource," he said "we're a long way off to really see that it will work."
"But it is kind of exciting. A lot of successful plays start out this way with really a lot of unknowns and you've got to go out and drill and keep on drilling until you figure out how it works."

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Fuel subsidy fraud: Court refuses young Tukur, Arisekola-Alao's application to travel




Lagos (WorldStage Newsonline)-- A Lagos High Court in Ikeja on Friday rejected the requests of Mahmud Tukur, son of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur and Abdullahi Alao, son of Ibadan based businessman, Alhaji Abdulazeez Arisekola-Alao, for a leave to travel abroad while their trial over alleged fraud in fuel subsidy collection is ongoing.

Justice Lateefat Folami, a vacation judge, told the accused persons including Felix Ochonogor, who are directors of one of the oil companies indicated for oil subsidy scam, Oil Marketing and Trading Companies (OM&Ts) to wait until their trial judge, Justice Adeniyi Onigbanjo  resume from his annual vacation to hear the application.

The judge while ruling on the application by the trio seeking the permission of her court to travel abroad for Hajj and business trip that she cannot overrule the earlier order granted by the trial courts which adjourned the matter till November 13, 2012.

According to Justice Folami, she cannot grant their application to travel outside the country, since Justice Adeniyi Onigbanjo, who ordered the seizure of their travelling documents did so to ensure that they appear for their trial on the fixed dates.

The court also held that allowing them to travel for Hajj rites which would begin in October will clash with the November dates earlier fixed for trial by the trial Judge and that the dates allegedly meant for their business trip abroad had been overtaken by event.

The accused persons who were arraigned in July by the Economic and Crimes Commission (EFCC) before Justice Adeniyi Onigbanjo over their alleged roles in the Petroleum Support Fund (PSF) fraud were specifically accused of conspiracy, obtaining money under false pretence, forgery and use of false documents.

In their Motion on Notice dated August 14, 2012 before the vacation Judge, the applicants had through their counsel, Olaniran Obele said they need to travel to Paris and London for a business trip.

Specifically, Mahmud, the first applicant wants to travel abroad to attend a board and committee meetings of which he is a director and also intend to perform this year's Hajj.

Ochonogor, the second applicant also want to travel to Paris to enable him attend a bond holder meeting which should have hold last month but was rescheduled to August 27 to enable him attend and explain his present situation before the board.

In their application, they tendered three exhibits comprising Notices of Meetings which they intend to attend both in London and Paris.

Their lawyer had argued before. Justice Folami that the applicants will not abscond should their application be granted, adding that the first applicant's father who is PDP Chairman stood surety for him and he would not want to jeopardise that.

"The second applicant was abroad when they were charged and was called by the first applicant and he came back for his arraignment voluntarily.

"When they were granted administrative bail, the second defendant traveled to Ukraine and did not abscond but came back for his arraignment", he said.

However, opposing the application, EFCC counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo told the court that Justice Onigbanjo's order asking the applicants to drop their International Passport has not been reviewed.

He said there was nothing in the exhibits tendered by the applicants that showed or suggesting to show that the meeting to be attended by the second applicant has been rescheduled.

Monday, September 3, 2012

Subsidy scam trial: court grants bail to suspect


 One of the suspects of fuel subsidy fraud, Oluwaseun Ogunbambo, who was earlier denied bail due to his history of unresolved criminal allegations and multiplicity of identity, on Monday regained his freedom before another judge of a Lagos High Court. This came after the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) filed separate charges of banking fraud against him. The accused allegedly obtained separate loans of N230 million and N430 million from Stanbic IBTC Plc in 2010 with forged documents. Justice Adeniyi Onigbanjo had on August 1 denied Mr Ogunbambo bail after he was arraigned along with Habila Theck and their firm, Fargo Energy Limited, on six counts of fraudulently collecting N976.6m from the Federal Government purportedly as payment for subsidy on importation of petrol. While Mr Theck was granted bail, Mr Ogunbambo’s bail application was refused.

 The accused however was on August 19, released on bail by Justice Lateefat Folami, a vacation judge, who the accused turned to during the original judges’ annual vacation. Mr Ogunbambo had asked Justice Folami for bail on the grounds of health. The judge had granted the bail despite admitting that his grounds of ill health were “unmeritorious”.

 Justice Onigbanjo had ordered that Mr Ogumbambo be remanded in Ikoyi Prisons, saying “his multiple identities and his propensity to get multiple passports each time one was seized,” were weighty enough to warrant the denial of the bail.

 The judge also refused the bail application on the grounds of the accused person’s “previous and unresolved criminal allegations”. Rather than granting bail, Justice Onigbanjo granted an accelerated hearing of the trial, saying the suspect’s criminal history had “cast a huge question” and doubt on his claim that he would not “take flight” and be available to attend trial. Counsel to the EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs, had earlier told the court about the difficulty encountered by the commission in arresting Mr Onigbanjo and charging him to court.

 Mr Jacobs said Nigerian and British passports were seized from him in 2010 when he was granted administrative bail during his investigation for the alleged banking fraud. “He was invited and released on bail but jumped bail and that has stalled the trial since 2010,” he said.

He added that despite the seizure of his passports, Mr Ogunbambo was found to still be travelling abroad. The EFCC lawyer had said, “Even if he deposits a passport with this court, this will not guarantee his presence because he will go and get another one. “He uses different names and changes names as he likes. “In the UK passport his name is Benson Oladayo Adetokunbo Shobowale. But in this case, he is Oluwaseun Ogunbambo.” Apart from using forged documents to obtain loans from the Stanbic Bank, Mr Ogunbambo was also said to have been caught with cash at an Irish airport, a matter which he said was still under investigation.