"We see critical evidence of how social media is impacting mindsets and behaviors with the rapid depletion of gas stocks on the East Coast in this mini-crisis. "
Read this quote in a earlier article. What if targeted sanctions aren't possible because social media makes people so nuts with hatred that even Russian exports that we need to live are going to be unofficially sanctioned due to the angry mob not government policy. We already saw this with Shell buying Russian oil and getting tar and feathered for it. Whatever you think of the US and European governments random angry people on Twitter are a couple rungs below them in economic decisions.
The goal is not our current citizens' well-being, the goal is to shift to a new energy creation, distribution, and usage regime. The polices enacted, including hostilities in Ukraine, promote this objective.
that USA are no longer a power only you yourselves do not know.
Your energy policy is actually suicidal. But how could it not be? Politicians only care about their own luck and the interests of the sponsors of the electoral campaign, in order to maintain the farce of a democracy that serves no one and that, in essence, is nothing more than a bipartisan dictatorship.
The petrodollar spree has come to an end. The world has become aware that it cannot afford the American spree in controlling the dollar printing and oil trade.
When will the American people wake up? Never, therefore, pretending to be purposeful is very effective, as there is evidently the perfect theater between right and left. Like in a prison and that will never be able to see the context, the whole and that there is a world beyond the gas station.
Maybe the flash and the nuclear mushroom will make them open their eyes for the first and last time.
The leaders of the US and Europe are not serious. I'm convinced they will ban Russian oil in America and when $6 gas per gallon happens instead of taking responsibility they're going to blame the oil companies and grill them in senate hearings for being so greedy.
Oil is the definition of fungible. We ban RUS imports the tube of toothpaste will squeeze and tankers go to PRC and elsewhere. We pay $100Bbl they sell to others for $80 (I don't know their all in price but it's prolly less than shale) that other oil gets routed here. Is that a distinction without a difference? Is the 5th fleet going to block Straits of Malacca or Arabia and crash the world economy. Oil finds a way.
Has Biden and his administration ever explained how the US will wage a "Boots on the ground" war without Oil and Gas. Will the tanks and Armored vehicles run on Solar power ? Will the soldiers establish a wind farm when advancing on territory ?
Well, this will need to be revised, too, because the sanctions are now hitting closer to where the money pays for the Russian fossil fuels. Also, the Western oil majors are divesting from Russia.
No doubt, German energy will get too expensive for comfort in the short term. Maybe long thereafter, as well. US LNG can fill some of the gap, and Germany should consider investing in local infrastructure to receive and re-export it.
But, at the end of the day, fossil fuels trap Germany and most of Europe into a toxic dependency on Russia and others. Energy is central and geopolitics are, in many ways, downstream to it. That means that Europe needs to do a heavy lift toward energy independence. It means *everything's* on the table: conventional sources like LNG and even potentially "clean coal" or biomass that create local pollution and contribute to Climate Change.
But also renewables, which aren't a universal solution, but they aren't as useless as this blog tends to suggest. The Northern coast of Europe is ideal for offshore wind, mountanous parts are great for onshore wind, and the Mediterranean is ideal for solar. Use what works where it works. There are solutions to intermittency that already work don't need to involve batteries.
It also means nuclear. Both keeping old plants online longer (Germany has already 180-degree-turned on this) and investing in next-generation plants, whether they are economic outside of subsidy or not (as France is doing).
And, lastly, it means rethinking design and retrofitting both our built environment and systems of energy usage to better match our predicament. There is no reason at all that any building in Europe should still be heated with heating oil or inefficient electric elements. Just replacing those antiquated systems cuts energy needs drastically. Houses from the Ireland to Cyprus use 3-4x the energy they need to be using in the winters. Heat pumps are an ideal solution for both heating and cooling--the technology has been there for decades, but it's not widely adopted outside of Scandinavia. Smart grids can smooth out demand, but so can simpler design tweaks and cultural changes: Doing something as simple as installing blackout curtains or opening windows upstairs can massively reduce energy usage. Short trips and idling in traffic are the biggest causes of transport energy over-usage: why not replace stoplights with roundabouts to smooth traffic flow? Do people realize that driving a few blocks at low speed uses the same amount of fuel as driving for a mile or km at highway speed? How does such knowledge change behavior? All these things are small, in isolation, but it's far cheaper and easier to marginally reduce energy consumption than to scale out different sources.
There simply is no substitute for oil to have any semblance of business as usual moving forward. The discovery of conventional oil was a 1-time lottery ticket for humanity and the party is almost over. There may be zillions of barrels in the ground but the fracking industry doesn't have an Energy return on energy invested that will allow most of it to be pulled out of the ground.
The nuclear energy sector doesn't look like it's going to save the day. It is run mostly be older engineers that are simply not being replaced. That knowledge is irreplaceable and there seems to be no political will to take emergency measures to save the industry.
Green energy and the drive towards EVs in general is not working even remotely. There's not enough copper, nickel, cobalt, silver, etc.... that can be pulled out of the ground to make all this 'green' tech. How much lithium is required for all this? At any rate, it all has to be dug out of the ground using heavy diesel fuel machinery, then shipped everywhere with bunker fuel. Then the batteries need to be charged, undoubtedly using coal. Not to mention, how is the broke-assed consumer going to borrow all the money to buy this entire fleet of spendy green vehicles?
And lets stop wasting resources in a vain attempt to cure a nonexistent “problem”: anthropogenic climate change, aka, global warming. If those who hyperventilate about it were genuine in their concern they would be all in for zero carbon nuclear energy, but they are not. So one must conclude they have another agenda.
If those who hyperventilate about it were genuine in their concern... they wouldn't fly private jets and sail private yachts around the world, even to "climate conferences".
It's funny that you show a picture of pump Jack's. Those are the rocking back and forth mechanisms that pump oil. Thing is, they are a symbol of old depleted reservoirs or ones that never made the grade. This is a perfect picture of America's relationship with oil. Not tomorrow, but soon.
maybe you are right, but i'm always find it fascinating, that pieces like this fail to consider the true seriousness of climate change, and pretend that only developig more fossil capacity could work against the energy crisis. what russia showed us imo is that we should cut our dependency of fossil fuels, the sooner the better
I think you'll find the basis of Doomberg's point is that it is not possible to leap frog from our current fossil fuel dependent position to 100% "green" energy immediately and that we need to continue providing energy to the world using existing technology (including green nuclear energy), whilst transitioning to "greener" sources of energy production. If we simply stopped using fossil fuels tomorrow, the CO2 issue would be solved very quickly through decimation of the global population and global warming would be the least of our problems.
So what is the "true seriousness" of climate change. To be serious about, need to stop the hyperbole (trying to attach every natural event to CC & say end result is catastrophic), use precise language (CO2 vs "carbon" & less basic vs "acidification"), understand logarithmic CO2 IR absorption, recognize fossil fuels have reduced deaths from natural disasters, recognize all the positives from fossil fuels (which even CA courts have done), be transparent about renewable costs instead of hiding behind "carbon" schemes & tax credits. Additionally, stop with calling skeptics climate deniers, most so-called deniers believe CO2 emissions from hydrocarbons have caused global temp to rise. However, it diverges from there with where the warming is happening, future warming projections, impacts from warming, CO2 benefits (greening of earth & food crop yields) and the importance of fossil fuels not only for combustible but non combustible demand. You can't have latter be economical w/o the former. Stop with re-imagine, recognize that theory or modeling work does not prove viability, it needs to scaled up. So prove it works in full size production before claiming it works.
Thank you! I am also not a denier but sckeptical about the current measures. What balint is saying; it doesn't work, do more! While what we are seeing now is reality and ESG slugging it out and it looks like reality is winning.
Well, I guess you were partly wrong about the SWIFT part too. It’s obvious that the West is deliberately trying to create a war by forcing Putin’s hand. With CONvid partly in the rear view mirror in the US, but with politicians still in fill fearmongering mode in Europe, it’s clear that Europe is the target of a massive shock and awe tactic. After the vax mandates, Europe will have to soon start rationing fuel/gas and as a ‘preparation’ for the next winter, more drastic and totalitarian measures can be expected.
Great piece. Could you please figure out what's going on with all the nuclear power plants both abroad and at home. Why are theyclosing them all? What do they have to gain by doing this other than provide energy insecurity to the public. Today, they are reversing course on Turkey Point in Miami and Peach Bottom in PA...not to mention all the other ones they've closed and or are closing in Germany, NY and CA. What is going on?!
US & European energy policies are completely bonkers/nuts..
"We see critical evidence of how social media is impacting mindsets and behaviors with the rapid depletion of gas stocks on the East Coast in this mini-crisis. "
Read this quote in a earlier article. What if targeted sanctions aren't possible because social media makes people so nuts with hatred that even Russian exports that we need to live are going to be unofficially sanctioned due to the angry mob not government policy. We already saw this with Shell buying Russian oil and getting tar and feathered for it. Whatever you think of the US and European governments random angry people on Twitter are a couple rungs below them in economic decisions.
The goal is not our current citizens' well-being, the goal is to shift to a new energy creation, distribution, and usage regime. The polices enacted, including hostilities in Ukraine, promote this objective.
You wrote: "Instead, Germany shelved the project and now we have war."
Are you really naive enough to think that Germany stopping Nord Stream 2 "made" Russia invade?
that USA are no longer a power only you yourselves do not know.
Your energy policy is actually suicidal. But how could it not be? Politicians only care about their own luck and the interests of the sponsors of the electoral campaign, in order to maintain the farce of a democracy that serves no one and that, in essence, is nothing more than a bipartisan dictatorship.
The petrodollar spree has come to an end. The world has become aware that it cannot afford the American spree in controlling the dollar printing and oil trade.
When will the American people wake up? Never, therefore, pretending to be purposeful is very effective, as there is evidently the perfect theater between right and left. Like in a prison and that will never be able to see the context, the whole and that there is a world beyond the gas station.
Maybe the flash and the nuclear mushroom will make them open their eyes for the first and last time.
Good luck with your exceptionality.
The leaders of the US and Europe are not serious. I'm convinced they will ban Russian oil in America and when $6 gas per gallon happens instead of taking responsibility they're going to blame the oil companies and grill them in senate hearings for being so greedy.
Oil is the definition of fungible. We ban RUS imports the tube of toothpaste will squeeze and tankers go to PRC and elsewhere. We pay $100Bbl they sell to others for $80 (I don't know their all in price but it's prolly less than shale) that other oil gets routed here. Is that a distinction without a difference? Is the 5th fleet going to block Straits of Malacca or Arabia and crash the world economy. Oil finds a way.
Has Biden and his administration ever explained how the US will wage a "Boots on the ground" war without Oil and Gas. Will the tanks and Armored vehicles run on Solar power ? Will the soldiers establish a wind farm when advancing on territory ?
Well, this will need to be revised, too, because the sanctions are now hitting closer to where the money pays for the Russian fossil fuels. Also, the Western oil majors are divesting from Russia.
No doubt, German energy will get too expensive for comfort in the short term. Maybe long thereafter, as well. US LNG can fill some of the gap, and Germany should consider investing in local infrastructure to receive and re-export it.
But, at the end of the day, fossil fuels trap Germany and most of Europe into a toxic dependency on Russia and others. Energy is central and geopolitics are, in many ways, downstream to it. That means that Europe needs to do a heavy lift toward energy independence. It means *everything's* on the table: conventional sources like LNG and even potentially "clean coal" or biomass that create local pollution and contribute to Climate Change.
But also renewables, which aren't a universal solution, but they aren't as useless as this blog tends to suggest. The Northern coast of Europe is ideal for offshore wind, mountanous parts are great for onshore wind, and the Mediterranean is ideal for solar. Use what works where it works. There are solutions to intermittency that already work don't need to involve batteries.
It also means nuclear. Both keeping old plants online longer (Germany has already 180-degree-turned on this) and investing in next-generation plants, whether they are economic outside of subsidy or not (as France is doing).
And, lastly, it means rethinking design and retrofitting both our built environment and systems of energy usage to better match our predicament. There is no reason at all that any building in Europe should still be heated with heating oil or inefficient electric elements. Just replacing those antiquated systems cuts energy needs drastically. Houses from the Ireland to Cyprus use 3-4x the energy they need to be using in the winters. Heat pumps are an ideal solution for both heating and cooling--the technology has been there for decades, but it's not widely adopted outside of Scandinavia. Smart grids can smooth out demand, but so can simpler design tweaks and cultural changes: Doing something as simple as installing blackout curtains or opening windows upstairs can massively reduce energy usage. Short trips and idling in traffic are the biggest causes of transport energy over-usage: why not replace stoplights with roundabouts to smooth traffic flow? Do people realize that driving a few blocks at low speed uses the same amount of fuel as driving for a mile or km at highway speed? How does such knowledge change behavior? All these things are small, in isolation, but it's far cheaper and easier to marginally reduce energy consumption than to scale out different sources.
Meaningless unless the billions in China and Africa can improve their lives with more energy
Being America's enemy can be dangerous, but being our friend can be fatal.
There simply is no substitute for oil to have any semblance of business as usual moving forward. The discovery of conventional oil was a 1-time lottery ticket for humanity and the party is almost over. There may be zillions of barrels in the ground but the fracking industry doesn't have an Energy return on energy invested that will allow most of it to be pulled out of the ground.
The nuclear energy sector doesn't look like it's going to save the day. It is run mostly be older engineers that are simply not being replaced. That knowledge is irreplaceable and there seems to be no political will to take emergency measures to save the industry.
Green energy and the drive towards EVs in general is not working even remotely. There's not enough copper, nickel, cobalt, silver, etc.... that can be pulled out of the ground to make all this 'green' tech. How much lithium is required for all this? At any rate, it all has to be dug out of the ground using heavy diesel fuel machinery, then shipped everywhere with bunker fuel. Then the batteries need to be charged, undoubtedly using coal. Not to mention, how is the broke-assed consumer going to borrow all the money to buy this entire fleet of spendy green vehicles?
And lets stop wasting resources in a vain attempt to cure a nonexistent “problem”: anthropogenic climate change, aka, global warming. If those who hyperventilate about it were genuine in their concern they would be all in for zero carbon nuclear energy, but they are not. So one must conclude they have another agenda.
If those who hyperventilate about it were genuine in their concern... they wouldn't fly private jets and sail private yachts around the world, even to "climate conferences".
It's funny that you show a picture of pump Jack's. Those are the rocking back and forth mechanisms that pump oil. Thing is, they are a symbol of old depleted reservoirs or ones that never made the grade. This is a perfect picture of America's relationship with oil. Not tomorrow, but soon.
maybe you are right, but i'm always find it fascinating, that pieces like this fail to consider the true seriousness of climate change, and pretend that only developig more fossil capacity could work against the energy crisis. what russia showed us imo is that we should cut our dependency of fossil fuels, the sooner the better
I think you'll find the basis of Doomberg's point is that it is not possible to leap frog from our current fossil fuel dependent position to 100% "green" energy immediately and that we need to continue providing energy to the world using existing technology (including green nuclear energy), whilst transitioning to "greener" sources of energy production. If we simply stopped using fossil fuels tomorrow, the CO2 issue would be solved very quickly through decimation of the global population and global warming would be the least of our problems.
So what is the "true seriousness" of climate change. To be serious about, need to stop the hyperbole (trying to attach every natural event to CC & say end result is catastrophic), use precise language (CO2 vs "carbon" & less basic vs "acidification"), understand logarithmic CO2 IR absorption, recognize fossil fuels have reduced deaths from natural disasters, recognize all the positives from fossil fuels (which even CA courts have done), be transparent about renewable costs instead of hiding behind "carbon" schemes & tax credits. Additionally, stop with calling skeptics climate deniers, most so-called deniers believe CO2 emissions from hydrocarbons have caused global temp to rise. However, it diverges from there with where the warming is happening, future warming projections, impacts from warming, CO2 benefits (greening of earth & food crop yields) and the importance of fossil fuels not only for combustible but non combustible demand. You can't have latter be economical w/o the former. Stop with re-imagine, recognize that theory or modeling work does not prove viability, it needs to scaled up. So prove it works in full size production before claiming it works.
Thank you! I am also not a denier but sckeptical about the current measures. What balint is saying; it doesn't work, do more! While what we are seeing now is reality and ESG slugging it out and it looks like reality is winning.
Well, I guess you were partly wrong about the SWIFT part too. It’s obvious that the West is deliberately trying to create a war by forcing Putin’s hand. With CONvid partly in the rear view mirror in the US, but with politicians still in fill fearmongering mode in Europe, it’s clear that Europe is the target of a massive shock and awe tactic. After the vax mandates, Europe will have to soon start rationing fuel/gas and as a ‘preparation’ for the next winter, more drastic and totalitarian measures can be expected.
Great piece. Could you please figure out what's going on with all the nuclear power plants both abroad and at home. Why are theyclosing them all? What do they have to gain by doing this other than provide energy insecurity to the public. Today, they are reversing course on Turkey Point in Miami and Peach Bottom in PA...not to mention all the other ones they've closed and or are closing in Germany, NY and CA. What is going on?!