Americans Think The JV Team Planted Bomb On Russian Plane; Brits Think That Russian Jet Over Egypt Downed By "Bomb" -- November 4, 2015

Updates

November 6, 2015: Reuters is reporting:

The sound of an explosion could be heard on the black boxes recovered from a Russian plane that crashed over Egypt's Sinai Peninsula on Saturday, according to an investigator who had access to them, French TV station France 2 said on its website on Friday.

According to the investigator, the explosion was not consistent with an engine failure, the report said. 

Original Post

 

Link here for the CNN story/update on the Russian commercial airline that went down over Egyptian Sinai a couple of days ago.

The latest U.S. intelligence suggests that the crash of a Russian passenger jet in the Sinai over the weekend was most likely caused by a bomb on the plane planted by ISIS or an ISIS affiliate, according to a U.S. official familiar with the matter.

But the official stressed a formal conclusion has not been reached by the U.S. intelligence community.

"There is a definite feeling it was an explosive device planted in luggage or somewhere on the plane," the official, who is familiar with the latest U.S. intelligence analysis of the crash, told CNN.

Link here for the British story/update on the Russian commercial airline that went down over Egyptian Sinai a couple of days ago.

Britain said Wednesday it has information suggesting the Russian jet that crashed in the Egyptian desert may have been brought down by a bomb and it was suspending flights to and from the Sinai Peninsula as a precaution.

My original post when the story broke:

First hunch may have been correct.

Immediately after news of the downed Russian a/c killing 224 on board, I wrote Don:

• most dangerous aspects of commercial flying, non-terrorist-related mishaps: take-offs and landing 
• once at cruising altitude, most likely reason for unexplained crash: terrorists 

The plane was 25 minutes into flight; well past take-off and leveling off.

Both CNN and Fox News  has the story on-line. The Los Angeles Times is not yet reporting it.

***************************

The Keystone XL Debate Becomes Tiresome

I was going to do a series of polls on the Keystone in light of a recent post by RBN Energy, but after seeing the story in today's WSJ, it's not worth the effort.

The "Keystone" is about two political parties raking in cash on this argument. The story itself no longer has any relevance.

I was concerned a bit after RBN Energy suggested that petcoke would be in short supply if the US did not have access to heavy oil, but that's a bit of hyperbole, also.

In today's WSJ, front page of section B: Pipeline delay unlikely to hurt refiners in US. The lede:

Oil imports from Canada set a record in August, averaging 3.4 million barrels a day, according to data released Monday by the U.S. Energy Department.

In fact, the U.S. has bought 64% more Canadian crude so far this year than it did in the same stretch of 2008, the year TransCanada first asked the U.S. government for permission to build the pipeline that would run from Alberta to Texas. That is an extra 1.2 million barrels of oil flowing into the U.S. from Canada every day, or 45% more crude than Keystone XL would have carried had it been constructed.

Unless someone knows something I don't know about the US manufacturing base bursting forth at 10% GDP next year, it sounds like the US is getting all the heavy oil it needs.

*******************************

The Story No One Is Talking About

Yesterday the numbers suggested that the US will sell 18 million vehicles this year, a record of some sort, and something no one would have foreseen a year or so ago. But with gasoline well below $2.00 / gallon and likely to stay inexpensive for the next 20 to 30 years (or so the car dealers would have you believe), the American car manufacturers are going gang-busters with the internal combustion engine, which by the way is the real issue here. If the anarchists can bring down the ICE, they can bring down GM, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler. At least that's their thinking. Whatever. But I digress.

The US is likely to set some kind of record this year, selling upwards of 18 million vehicles. Tesla, if you believe Elon Musk and his pitch, should be contributing to that record. But here's the reality:

Tesla's deliveries rose 49% to 11,603 in the third quarter, putting its deliveries this year through September at 33,140.

At that rate, at the end of the year ([1.49 x 11,603] +33,140) Tesla will have delivered 50,428 vehicles this calendar year.  

Tesla has already lowered its sales forecast to 50,000 to 55,000 from 55,000. Tesla's forecast for deliveries puts it at 50,000 to 52,000 in deliveries for the year. 

Back-of-the-envelope calculations:

• 52,000 - 33,140 = 18,860 vehicles in the fourth quarter
• 18,860 - 11,603 = 7,257
• 7,257 / 11,603 = 64% increase over the quarter ending this past September.

So, we'll see.

I suppose if Elon can get to 52,000 that will put us over the 18 million mark.

52,000 / 18,000,000 = 0.003 or 0.3%.

By the way, the WSJ story that posted some of those numbers also mentioned the following:

• Tesla is a maker of luxury electric cars
• Tesla posted a wider $229.9 million net loss due to hefty costs to launch the Model X SUV
• Tesla forecast that it would deliver between 17,000 and 19,000 vehicles in this current quarter
• initial versions of the SUV are priced at about $132,000
• one year ago, Tesla posted a $3 million profit (2 cents/share)
• this year, same quarter, Tesla's posted a loss of $75 million or a loss of 58 cent/share