ＳＯＸ法の悲鳴が聞こえる！
ＳＯＸ法の勝者と敗者(エコノミスト誌）
Regulating business
The trial of Sarbanes-Oxley
Apr 20th 2006 | NEW YORK
From The Economist print edition
The corporate regulation brought in after the Enron scandal stands accused of making matters worse
Ｊ－ＳＯＸの施行でわが国の企業も大騒ぎですが、米国は既に反省期に入っています。企業は内部統制構築（Section ４０４）の負担に悲鳴を上げ、刑事罰のリスクからCEOのなり手も激減しています。一方で、会計事務所は焼け太りになっています。
・・・・・・・・ （前略）Section 404 has almost certainly improved the quality of internal controls at the firms where it has been implemented. But the question is not whether better controls lead to less risk—how could they not?—but whether that reduction in risk is worth the price. According to a recent study by CRA International, a research firm, in the first year of SOX implementation, for larger companies (with a market capitalisation of at least $700m), the average direct cost of Section 404 was $8.5m; for smaller public companies ($75m-700m), the average cost was around $1.2m. The SEC has not yet asked the very smallest public companies, with a value of less than $75m, to comply with Section 404.
The good news is that Section 404 costs are expected to fall by around 40% in the second year, says CRA, as the new system beds in. Even so, the costs are still higher than anyone expected them to be—the SEC initially forecast an average cost of $91,000 per company—and the burden is disproportionately heavy for smaller companies.
Much of the blame for this should be pinned on accounting firms, which, despite being seen by the public as big offenders in the Enron and WorldCom scandals, have emerged as the big beneficiaries from SOX. According to Joe Grundfest, a former SEC commissioner, the audit industry has several incentives to “push Section 404 compliance to a point of socially inefficient hyper-vigilance.” To avoid further damage to their reputations, and to minimise the risk that they will be sued over accounting irregularities, audit firms are adopting the most prudent possible interpretation of the Section 404 rules—rules that are vague and open to argument. And, as Mr Grundfest points out, the “more onerous the requirements of Section 404, the more money the audit profession can earn” by selling its services. （後略）
独断的コメント：
エンロン事件を発端にして即席で立法化されたSOX法ですが、粉飾に加担した会計事務所はアーサー・アンダーセンを人身御供にしながら、SOX法の内部統制システム構築義務という宝の山を見つけました。わが国でも、会計事務所の信用は地に落ちていますが、彼らが主催する内部統制セミナーは大盛況のようです。
尚、米国ＳＯＸ法に詳しくない人は、以下の要約を参照ください。
SOX packaged together five different categories of reforms intended to protect investors from future Enrons. First, rules requiring better internal monitoring for potential fraud by a company's board and executives, including making the people at the top certify the quality of their firm's financial reports. Second, new measures to improve the monitoring of firms by relevant outside professionals, such as lawyers and auditors, who got their own regulatory body, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). Third, more disclosure, including of a firm's internal-control structure. Fourth, new rules on the conduct of corporate insiders, such as a prohibition on loans to executives. Finally, new rules to ensure that securities analysts at banks operate independently from their firms' investment-banking activities.
更に興味のある方は、 ↓
http://www.economist.com/business/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=6838442
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
ウーマノミックス？
女性必読（勿論、男も）！（エコノミスト誌）
Women and the world economy
A guide to womenomics
From The Economist print edition
The future of the world economy lies increasingly in female hands
ＧＮＰという統計値はかなりいかがわしいものとかねがね思っていますが、女性の市場経済への参画は間違いなくこの数値を引き上げます。少子高齢化で成長鈍化を懸念されているわが国は、女性の就業率がまだまだ低いので、十分成長の余地があるようです。加えて、この記事によればはるかに良質の労働力のようです。
“WHY can't a woman be more like a man?” mused Henry Higgins in “My Fair Lady”. Future generations might ask why a man can't be more like a woman. In rich countries, girls now do better at school than boys, more women are getting university degrees than men are and females are filling most new jobs. Arguably, women are now the most powerful engine of global growth.
In 1950 only one-third of American women of working age had a paid job. Today two-thirds do, and women make up almost half of
The increase in female employment in developed countries has been aided by a big shift in the type of jobs on offer. Manufacturing work, traditionally a male preserve, has declined, while jobs in services have expanded. This has reduced the demand for manual labour and put the sexes on a more equal footing.
In the developing world, too, more women now have paid jobs. In the emerging East Asian economies, for every 100 men in the labour force there are now 83 women, higher even than the average in OECD countries. Women have been particularly important to the success of
独断的コメント：
長文のこのレポートは、女性に非常に好意的です。女性のほうが勉強が出来るとか、女性役員が多い会社のほうが収益率が高いとか、チームワークにも秀でているとか、女性への投資は次世代へも好影響をもたらす等々です。又、女性の職場進出は少子化や成長鈍化をもたらすという常識の嘘も指摘しています。
更に興味のある方は是非以下の全文をお読みください。
↓
http://www.economist.com/finance/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=6802551
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
規制天国、インド
インドと日本は良く似ている！
Retailing in
Coming to market
Apr 12th 2006 |
The final frontier for global retailing is beginning to open
市場経済化が進む人口大国インドは、小売業者にとっても美味しいマーケットに見えますが・・・・
（前略）・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・ •Red tape Organised retailers also have to negotiate a bewildering minefield of central, state and local government rules and regulations at every stage of their operations. In most states the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Act, for example, prevents farmers from selling their wares directly to retailers. In Karnataka, in the south, most farm produce must be bought and sold at the government-run market. So at a vast cash-and-carry centre in Bangalore, the state capital, opened by Metro, a German group, the acres of shelf-space designed for fruit and vegetables are empty or otherwise occupied. In many states, land-ceiling legislation prevents large-scale contract farming. Some sorts of food processing are “reserved” for small businesses. In towns the size of shops and permissible opening hours are governed by local rules.
Labour laws discourage large businesses by making it hard for them to lay off staff. Retailers also need to collect sheaves of licences, covering general trading, specific products, pollution clearances and so on. According to a 2003 study, a new shop needed, on average, 15 licences from 11 government bodies, and securing them took an average of six months and cost up to 500,000 rupees. Pantaloon's Mr Biyani says that every time a regulation disappears, a new one takes its place. He identifies the Environment Ministry as the biggest logjam. One of his planned developments has been stalled for a year. He is also exercised by a law in the state of
独断的コメント：
経済が成熟し、ゼロサムの価格競争を強いられる先進国の小売業者にとっては、膨大な人口と二桁近い成長率を誇るＢＲＩＣｓのような知己は垂涎の的でしょう。とはいえ、中国に食い物にされたヤオハンや中々西友を復活させられないウォールマートに見るように、カントリーリスクはかなり複雑なようです。
このレッドテープの記事はまるで日本のことを述べているようです。社会主義思想と官僚天国という点からは、日本とインドは非常に似ています。そういう点では、腕力に任せて市場を切り開こうとする欧米型よりは、搦め手から攻めていく日本の小売業者のほうが成功しそうな気がしますが・・・・・。
更に興味のある方は、 ↓
http://www.economist.com/business/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=6795668
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
リンクス経済をご存知ですか？
東欧のタイガー？
Central European competitiveness
Lynx economies
Apr 12th 2006
From The Economist print edition
The advanced ex-communist countries have done well—and will do even better
かつてファイブ・タイガースという東南アジア５カ国・地域の経済発展が脚光を浴びました。わが国では、現在BRICSに注目が集まっていますが、ユーロ圏では新たにEUに加入した旧共産圏のいわゆるＥＵ８が目覚しい経済発展を遂げているようです。
THE best-performing ex-communist economies are setting quite a pace:
A study by the Vienna Institute for Comparative Economic Studies, a think-tank, and Bank
The study measures the EU-8's competitiveness in terms of export performance (both size and quality), economic structures (a big share for services is a strength, farming and manufacturing are not) and the friendliness of the business environment (from bureaucracy to infrastructure). On some scores, the lynxes have almost caught up. They gain 65% of their gross value-added from services, only just below rich EU countries, at 69%. The second-rank tigers (
独断的コメント：
中国・インドの発展につれて、アジア経済圏は急速に拡大し、この恩恵を受けて日本も漸くデフレ経済を脱することが出来ました。問題は、この雁行型発展が地政学的リスクを先鋭化していくということでしょう。
これに対し、リンクス経済の発展は、ＥＵという経済統一圏を拡大させ、米国への対抗力を着実に増大させていきます。
更に興味のある方は、 ↓
http://www.economist.com/finance/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=6802786
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
上場に向かうプライベート・エクイティ会社
ヘンリー・クラビスはウォーレン・バフェットを目指す？
（インスティチューショナル・インベスターズ誌）
P.E. Firms Inching Toward Public
04/25/06
金融業界の片隅でニッチとして始まったプライベート・エクイティ業務も３０年を経て、今や永久資金を得ようとし始めたようです。
While market watchers comment on the growing blur between hedge funds and private equity, p.e. firms are losing their sharp private focus and are mulling moves to become public. Private equity, reports Reuters, is facing not only an increasing shortage of good buyout opportunities, but also the graying of top directors, “fund-raising fatigue” and a need to diversify. Already p.e. giants The Blackstone Group and The Carlyle Group are considering going at least partly public, and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts is listing a publicly traded fund in
独断的コメント：
８０年代コールバーグ、クラビス、ロバーツ等が始めたプライベート・エクイティ業務は３０数年の間に欧州からアジアにまで拡大してきました。 第１世代が引退の時期に入る一方、競争激化によって、時間に追われる投資手法に限界を感じ始めてきたようです。投資手法やファンド・マネジャーの豪勢な手数料収入も周知の事実になってしまいましたので、返済期限に煩わされないウォーレン・バフェットのような投資会社になりたいという要求が強くなったのでしょう。REITや人材斡旋会社が上場できて、プライベート・エクイティが上場出来ない訳はない、ということでしょうか？
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
経路依存性と原油問題
代替エネルギーの可能性と原油の枯渇問題 (エコノミスト誌）
The oil industry
Steady as she goes
Apr 20th 2006 |
From The Economist print edition
Why the world is not about to run out of oil
石油が燃料源として主流となったのは、偶然の産物のように見えます。
IN 1894 Le Petit Journal of
Despite the victory, petrol's future seemed uncertain back then. Internal-combustion vehicles were seen as noisy, smelly and dangerous. By 1900 the market was still split equally among steam, electricity and petrol—and even Henry Ford's Model T ran on both grain-alcohol and petrol. In the decades after that great race petrol came to dominate the world's transportation system. Oil left its rivals in the dust not only because internal-combustion engines proved more robust and powerful than their rivals, but also because oil reserves proved to be abundant. （後略）
独断的コメント：
歴史には偶然の産物が経路依存性（pass dependence）によって、主流の立場を獲得するということが良くあります。よく引き合いに出されるのが、パソコンのキーボードが、上部左から二義に向かって”qwerty”という配列になっていることです。百年前石油が馬に代わる動力源となったのは、当時の技術力のしからしむところだったのでしょう。
元々長文のこの記事は、経路依存性を述べたものではありません。原油７－ドル時代を迎え、石油に代わる代替エネルギーの可能性や原油の枯渇可能性を議論しているものです。ないように新規さはありませんが、興味あれば、以下をご覧ください。
http://www.economist.com/finance/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=6823506
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
ジェンセン・マーフィー理論をご存知ですか？
Executive pay
Raymond reviewed
Apr 20th 2006 | NEW YORK
From The Economist print edition
Why the outrage about Exxon misses the point
エクソンのCEOは、４億ドルを貰って引退しますが、・・・・・・・・・
THE media have had a field day with the news that Lee Raymond, the retiring chairman of Exxon Mobil, received “compensation” worth at least $398m in his last year in charge of the oil giant. Headlines such as “Exxon chairman's $400m parachute” were everywhere, as editorials condemned what has become the latest “worst-case” example of executive greed running wild.
（中略）
Exxon's ex-boss has been characteristically unapologetic, however. Mr Raymond seems to think that he has actually earned the money—much of which is the result of various long-term incentive schemes and hardly counts as the “retirement package” it was reported to be.
What is more, he has a point. Exxon earned more in profit last year—over $36 billion—than any company has ever done before. True, Mr Raymond has had the good fortune to work in an industry that has benefited from the soaring oil price. But even allowing for that, Exxon under Mr Raymond has enjoyed a remarkable record of using its capital to earn high profits—one reason why it has easily outperformed most other large oil companies in terms of total shareholder returns.
And it is the shareholders, after all, who pay Mr Raymond—and who have done well out of Exxon themselves. The real executive compensation scandals are those cases when bosses do well, while their shareholders do not.
独断的コメント：
「エージェンシー・プリンシパル理論」に基づき、株主と経営者の利益を一致させるために、ストック・オプションの隆盛を招き、この結果米国の経営者は一般職員の５百倍以上の報酬を得るまでになりました。それでも、株主に報いた金額に比べれば、エクソンのレイモンド氏が得る４百万ドルの報酬はなんら後ろめたいものではないと主張するのです。
ジェンセンとマーフィー氏は、会社の利益を１０００ドル増やしたことに対する重役の報酬はわずか３ドル２５セントであることを発見しました。
社会主義の色彩が残り、「格差社会」と騒ぐわが国では、受け入れがたいロジックかもしれませんが、本文の最後にある「株主が報われないのに、経営者が報われるのはスキャンダルだ」という点には反対はないでしょう。
更に興味のある方は、 ↓
http://www.economist.com/business/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=6838726
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
会社のキャッシュは、誰のものか？
Corporate bonds
Control freaks
Mar 16th 2006
From The Economist print edition
Buy-outs are making bondholders more discriminating. High time
会社は従業員のものという日本型の社会主義的企業論は、全く人気がなくなり、会社は株主のものというヤンキー企業論が一世を風靡しています。
これに乗っかって買収ファンドが跳梁跋扈し、企業経営者は恐怖感に駆られ防衛策に躍起となっています。
この株主と経営者の争いの仲で、債権者が取り残されてきましたが・・・・。
FEW British companies look less vulnerable to takeover than Tesco, a supermarket chain that is no one's idea of a shrinking violet. Yet this week Tesco approached the bond markets with an unusual lure to creditors. Its long-term bonds included a covenant that would protect bondholders' interests in the unlikely event that Tesco is gobbled up.
Bankers say it is not the first time that Tesco's bonds have included such a “change of control” clause. Other big companies, even if they seem just as safe as Tesco, are being pressed by creditors to follow its lead.
There are two reasons why. First is the pace and scale of takeover activity around the world, with bidders employing cheap debt in colossal volumes. Second, creditors that have lent with few strings attached in recent, easy-money years are learning to be a bit more demanding.
Change-of-control protection offers them valuable peace of mind. Whereas shareholders mostly relish the thought that a company they own might be on the receiving end of a bid, bondholders are terrified by it. Usually, it means a load of new debt, relegating their claims and cutting the price of their bonds. The very attributes that attract bondholders to a borrower, such as large, stable cashflow to service debt, are the same that entice a leveraged buy-out (LBO) fund. So without change-of-control safeguards, the danger of being blindsided is growing. (後略)
独断的コメント：
会社の支配権をめぐる争いは、経営者と株主、及び債権者にあります。わが国では未だにメイン・バンク制が強固なため債権者＝銀行ですが、バブル崩壊の過程でメイン・バンクの配信が顕著になったため、企業は借り入れ返済を急ぎ、キャッシュの蓄積に励みました。この結果、会社は買収ファンドにとって大変食欲のわくものとなりました。企業経営者は大慌てで買収防衛策に走っていますが、所詮法律では防御に限度があります。三すくみの争いの中で、敵の敵は味方なので、経営者は債権者と共闘して会社を守ることも可能ですが、わが国の銀行は社債権者のような価格暴落リスクをとっていないので、簡単に買収ファンド側に付きます。経営者はテスコのような社債を発行し、買収の実効コストを引き上げるほうが、会社を守ることが出来るのかもしれません。
更に興味のある方は、
↓
http://www.economist.com/finance/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=5637646
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
フラット・タックスをご存知ですか？
東欧の成果は西欧に波及するか？（ビジネス・ウィーク誌）
|
The success of a single tax rate in the East is spurring |
税率を一本化するフラット・タックスは旧ソ連の8カ国以上で実施されています。大国ロシアも含め、その効果は実りつつあり、西欧各国も真剣になりつつあるようです。
The flat tax. In the eyes of many fiscal conservatives, it's the Holy Grail of public policy: One low income tax rate paid by all but the poorest wage-earners, who are exempt. No loopholes for the rich to exploit. No graduated rates that take a higher percentage of income from people who work hard to earn more. No need for a huge bureaucracy to police fiendishly complex tax laws.
Most of these countries' economies are growing at a far-healthier clip than those of their neighbors to the west. So it's no surprise that calls for a flat tax are now being heard in
独断的コメント：
実質鎖国経済のわが国と異なり、海外資本が成長の源泉となる発展途上国では税制が競争要因となります。旧ソ連では、フラット・タックス導入後、対内投資、税収、経済発展で目覚しい成果を挙げているそうです。
高い所得税を逃れるため、国外に居を構えるフランスを始め、ドイツ、イギリスでも検討が始まっています。
やたら税金をとることしか考えられない政府と複雑な税制から生活の糧を得ている利権派に縛られているわが国がフラット・タックス導入を検討する時期は来るのでしょうか？
更に興味のある方は、 ↓
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.
カトリーナは米国を環境派に変えるか？
ガス浪費経済を変えるには困難がイッパイ
（ニューヨーク・タイムス紙）
The New Prize: Alternative Fuels
1ガロン3.39ドルという値段になって、米国ではE85というコーン・エタノールの混合燃料がひっそりと売られていることを発見したようです。
E85はガロンあたり40－50セント安いようで、中東よりも(米国穀物地帯の)中西部を支援しようという愛国心も助けになり、需要が急拡大すると見る向きもあるようです。
それでも、E85を売るガソリンスタンドは一握りに過ぎず、43セントの補助金と45セントのガソリン税を考えれば、競争力を欠く上、ガソリンを本格的に代替するのは膨大な穀物生産量が必要となり、それはそれで別の環境問題を引き起こすようです。
E85 is also less energy-dense than gasoline, so a driver goes a bit less far on a gallon. Its current cost advantage is dependent on a 43-cents-a-gallon subsidy, versus a roughly 40-cent tax on a gallon of gasoline. Environmentalists have generally viewed the rise of flex-fuel vehicles as a boondoggle for automakers, because they are afforded fuel economy credits for making them. The credits have had the effect of driving up oil consumption. Many consumers who buy flex-fuel vehicles are not even made aware of the capability.
On the upside, ethanol is a domestic resource and most studies indicate that it reduces emissions of both smog-forming pollutants and global warming gases, the amount depending on how it is produced. An emerging process of creating ethanol from agricultural waste like cereal straw has the potential for far greater emissions reductions and more efficient land use.
This so-called cellulose ethanol has much greater potential than current ethanol, said Michael Wang, a researcher at the Center for Transportation Research at the
David Friedman, a senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental group, said, "ethanol has great potential to help the
"Corn ethanol can help in the short term, but it has serious limitations, and none of this is going to work if we don't dramatically improve the efficiency of our cars and trucks."
独断的コメント：
唯我独尊の米国が環境擁護派に変わるには、全米を揺るがすショックが必要です。原油高騰とカトリーナはその可能性があるのでしょうが、それだけでは米国人のエネルギー浪費癖を変えるにはいたらないようです。
画期的なイノベーションの商業化を待つしかないのかもしれません。
更に興味のある方は、 ↓
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/10/business/10alternative.html?pagewanted=print
Fair use notice
This Blog News contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner.
The material is being made available for purposes of education
and discussion in order to better understand the complex
nature of businesses in today's world.
We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in relevant national laws.
The material is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
We cannot guarantee that the information contained in this Blog
News is complete and correct or be liable for any loss incurred
as a result of its use.
Nor can we be responsible for any subsequent use of the material.