Putin Retaliates With Natural Gas Shutdown After G7 Announces Oil Price Caps

Brent crude chart courtesy of StockCharts.com, caption by Mish

Brent yawned at the announcement of the buyer’s cartel. 

I laughed.

G7 Ministers Forge Ahead with Russian Oil Price Cap

Reuters reports G7 Ministers Forge Ahead with Russian Oil Price Cap, Details Thin

Group of Seven finance ministers agreed on Friday to impose a price cap on Russian oil aimed at slashing revenues for Moscow’s war in Ukraine while keeping oil flowing to avoid price spikes, but Russia vowed to halt sales to countries imposing it.

The ministers confirmed their commitment to forming a buyer’s cartel after meeting virtually. They said, however, that key details, including the per-barrel level of the cap would be determined later “based on a range of technical inputs” to be agreed by the coalition of countries implementing it.

Oleg Ustenko, a senior economic adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, welcomed the development, and said he expected the price range to be between $40 and $60.

“This is fantastic. It’s exactly what we needed” to reduce the revenues that Russia was collecting, he told Reuters. Brent crude futures rose 66 cents to $93.02 a barrel on Friday.

Details Thin

Details are thin because the plan cannot possibly work.

Russia is the biggest exporter of oil and oil products to the EU, supplying 2.2 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil and 1.2 million bpd of oil products, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

China and India will not go along, and Russia has stated it will not sell oil to any country that supports the plan. 

The price of Brent Crude is currently $93 per barrel. Both China and India would gladly take oil at $10 discount of say $83 per barrel if much higher. 

Talk of $40 is crazy. Russia would supply no oil and the price would skyrocket in response. 

Putin’s Response

Putin’s reaction to the plan was swift.

He made the claim that routine maintenance of the Nord Stream 1 pipeline discovered a problem and the entire Nord Stream supply would be shut down indefinitely.

Putin’s ‘Economic War’ Has UK ‘Panicking,’ Ex- Energy Boss Says

Bloomberg reports Putin’s ‘Economic War’ Has UK ‘Panicking,’ Ex- Energy Boss Says

Vladimir Putin has left the UK “panicking” by “waging economic and psychological war” with tactics such as closing a major gas pipeline to Europe, a former energy industry boss has said.

Angela Knight, former chief executive of trade association Energy UK, spoke after Russia’s state energy firm Gazprom announced its Nord Stream 1 pipeline to Germany will remain closed indefinitely.

It had been shut down for three days, reportedly for maintenance work, but will remain closed for longer after Gazprom claimed it had found an oil leak in a turbine, sparking fears of further increases in energy prices around Europe.

She said: “He’s (Putin’s) actually playing the economic war extremely well. He’s playing the psychological war extremely well.

“We have been panicking as a country – Europe has been panicking as well – and it’s not surprising and I’m not critical of it.

Whose Economic War?

Putin started a war with Ukraine. US meddling led to that result. Nonetheless, place the blame 100% on Putin for the invasion if you like. 

In response to the invasion, the US and EU started the economic war with  a series of escalating sanctions on Russia, the latest of which is a nonsensical buyer’s cartel. 

If you put yourself in Putin’s shoes, his reaction was the logical one. 

This will lead to nonsensical charges that I support Putin. I don’t. I never support starting wars nor trade wars that are not winnable. 

The asininity of all these sanctions and coordinated actions is that they have driven up the price of oil and natural gas to the point Russia is making more money than ever before while selling less oil and gas to the EU.

How stupid is that? 

And is there any reason to believe Putin would not shut off all oil exports if the buyer’s cartel price cap actually held firm?

UK Exposed

In Putin’s closure of Nord Stream 1 has left Britain Exposed, the Spectator complains “It is pretty blatant what game Russia is playing.”

Gas supplies to Germany from Russia were already down to 20 per cent of the level they were before the Ukraine invasion. No one should count on the gas being turned on again. Eventually, Europe will manage just fine without Russian gas, once we have commissioned more terminals to receive liquified natural gas (LNG) from the US, Qatar and elsewhere. But that will not be this winter.

Britain and Europe face an additional problem which Russia does not: climate protesters who will automatically oppose any initiative to produce more oil and gas in Europe, or to construct infrastructure to import it, either. That, apparently, is leading us down the wrong road and we should be investing in more wind and solar instead. Except that in 2019 wind and solar accounted for just 4.2 per cent of Britain’s total energy needs – and, in the absence of more than a token amount of energy storage, we are absolutely reliant on gas power stations to fill in when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining.

True, it takes time to bring new oil and gas capacity on line. But we are decades away from constructing energy self-sufficiency based on renewables. We are already waging economic war with Russia, and not winning. To keep the lights on, the government is going to have to win the battle against Just Stop Oil and all others who are opposed to any investment in oil and gas.

Reality of Blatant Games

The Spectator headline caught my eye and I was mentally prepared to debate the article. 

Instead, I praise writer Ross Clark for getting to the heart of the matter. 

Wind and Solar Only Appear Cheaper 

I made that claim the other day, that wind and solar are not cheap, knowing full well that solar energy, where the sun reliably shines, appears to be cheaper than natural gas. 

But what about night? What about clouds? What about winter when the sun only shines for eight hours?

OK solar is cheaper, provided you can rely on it. Perhaps the US desert or Spain. But cloudy UK? Germany? 

What about storage? What about getting daylight energy from Spain to Germany? Arizona to Chicago? How much suitable land is there in Europe? 

Does storage scale? How much minerals will we need to mine and how cheap would they be if we went totally green dependent on batteries?

It seems we are getting to the crux of the matter. 

Clean energy is cheaper provided you ignore all of the reasons you cannot rely on it. The setup is even worse because natural gas as a backup only for nighttime and winter is hugely uneconomical. 

Needed Conversation

Solar Dealer: This beautiful system is really cheap.
Me: Does it run at night? In the Winter? In Canada? In the UK?
Dealer: No, no, no, no.
Me: If it is not reliable, is it cheap?
Dealer: Don’t worry, we will solve this problem by 2040 at an unknown expense.
Me: I think, I’ll wait.

Please note that the state of California just asked people not to charge their cars due to the heat wave and electricity capacity. 

So here we are. “To keep the lights on, the government is going to have to win the battle against Just Stop Oil and all others who are opposed to any investment in oil and gas.”

Some day we may solve all of the problems with clean energy, but mandating its use before that time comes will add to problems and costs, not solve them. 

Telling everyone that solar is cheaper without solving all of the problems of relying on solar is the unfounded hype of the day. 

If it’s not reliable, and storage to scale is not implied, then it’s not really cheap, is it?

Meanwhile, economic insanity continues. 

Major Stress Test in Europe as Russia Shuts Down the Natural Gas Pipeline

For more background on events in Europe, please see Major Stress Test in Europe as Russia Shuts Down the Natural Gas Pipeline

Also consider A Laughable Explanation of the G7 Oil Price Buyers’ Cartel Emerges

This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

137 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
What happened to the pipelines through Ukraine??? Did Ukraine turn off the spigot???
Germany and Europe was getting some gas through Ukraine!!
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  JRM
Dutoit
Dutoit
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
I think that the main non closed gas pipeline which supplies Europe now is the one that comes from Turkey.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Reply to  JRM
Central Europe and the Balkans are still receiving gas through Ukraine.
Dr. Odyssey
Dr. Odyssey
1 year ago
Reply to  JRM
Russia is still selling gas to Ukraine.
Also Gas is transiting Ukraine to the west and Russia continues to pay Ukraine the contractual pipeline transit fees.
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
Reply to  JRM
There is still gas flowing through the Soyuz and the Brotherhood pipeline, although one of the feeds of Soyuz (Sokhranivka) has been constricted by Ukraine (cutting transit capacity by a third). Both run through Ukraine, and Ukraine is still being paid contractual transit fees by Russia.
  • Nord Stream 1 & 2 have a capacity of (110 billion m³/year, 55+55).
  • Yamal is being run in reverse from Germany to Poland (capacity 33), because Poland has a buyers strike
  • Brotherhood pipeline has a capacity of about 33
  • Soyuz pipeline also has a capacity of about 33
  • South Stream would have delivered 63, but too many objections by the US/EU killed it [good move /s]
  • Blue Stream delivers about 16 to Turkey
  • Turkstream has a capacity of 31 and delivers about 16 to Turkey and 16 to SE Europe.
The problem is a buyers strike and the EU’s ill-conceived attempt to weaponize energy flows.
  • Contrary to what you are told by Olaf Shultz and others, it is not Russia that is unreliable and breaking contracts, but the EU.
  • Municipalities (such as the Hague, capital area of the Netherlands) are suing the government for an exemption to the mandated cancellation of their gazProm contracts, b/c they are not getting any bids on tenders, and if they did, the price would increase by 10-12×
  • Russia is still honoring contracts and there is still gas flowing, but only to paying customers; Putin has said gazProm is not a charity.
  • Some gas contracts are not being fulfilled through Nord Stream because of force majeure on Nord Stream 1 — this is due EU sanctions and renegging on service contracts resulting in technical problems; but the EU could easily open Nord Stream 2, which has Russian instead of German turbines.
  • Russia is less enthusiastic about supply to the spot market than in the past; but it has always maintained that long-term discounted contracts are preferable (both to the consumer in terms of price and to the supplier, for planning & amortization of infrastructure)
alexwest
alexwest
1 year ago
test
Dutoit
Dutoit
1 year ago
Another joke, but from US : link to freebeacon.com “U.S. Forces Ordered to Stop Using Gender Pronouns to Improve ‘Lethality’ “
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Dutoit
From someone who has been in command…
They join up by birth ‘gender’. They finish Basic Training. They declare gender dysphoria soon after (often before assignment). They get hormones and sex-change surgery at the military’s expense. They get themselves declared unfit for duty (for psychological issues). They are honorably discharged and receive Military disability pay. Yup,’lethality’.
Dutoit
Dutoit
1 year ago
I don’t know if the following is true, or if it is a proof of the famous English humor:
link to metro.co.uk “Boris tells people to buy new £20 kettle to help with electricity bills
The outgoing PM believes a new kettle could save people £10 a year.”
link to dailymail.co.uk “Whitehall staff testing CARBON paper copying to keep work going in the event of energy blackouts this winter”
And The Sun measures the efficiency of western sanctions : link to thesun.co.uk “Welcome to sanction-hit Russia, where prices are DOWN as Brits suffer from soaring inflation”
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
Reply to  Dutoit
That s indeed the high level of insanity we ve reached these days….. Truss will most likely propose the invasion of Russia in order to end the suffering of the british people ….
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Dutoit
Looking for an investment in these trying times? Try these: link to en.wikipedia.org
SleemoG
SleemoG
1 year ago
Just came across this and found it interesting, never heard of this before:
“The basaltic formations of the Juan de Fuca Plate could potentially be suitable for long-term CO2 sequestration as part of a carbon capture and storage (CCS) system. Injection of CO2 would lead to the formation of stable carbonates. It is estimated that 100 years of US carbon emissions (at current rate) could be stored securely, without risk of leakage back into the atmosphere.[8][9]”
Links to research papers are from 2008 and 2013.
Could carbon sequestration significantly offset fossil fuels?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  SleemoG
I strongly advocate carbon sequestration in vintage champagne.
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
Reply to  SleemoG
No. High-tech energy-intensive expensive solution.
The natural process by which CO² is captured is called weathering.
There have been many proposals for ‘enhanced weathering’ — basically spreading out .ground up olivine rock (unlimited supply) that bind CO² to precipitate as calcium and magnesium carbonates.
It works particularly well in warmer climes, and could quite easily absorb millions of tons of CO² by spreading it along shores or shallow waters. There is a lot of literature about this, Olaf Schuiling is the ‘grandfather’ of this discussion.
SleemoG
SleemoG
1 year ago
Reply to  Webej
Interesting, thanks! I am considering replacing my front lawn with a hardscape. I will look into olivine as an aggregate. I live in SoCal, so a warm-weather climate.
Mish
Mish
1 year ago
“Imagine the impact Putin would have if he priced Russian oil and gas in gold ‘grams’ per barrel, physically delivered to his new Moscow gold-trading center prior to delivery.”
1. It’s important to note that it would not matter one bit.
2. Putin can always buy gold with the euros (not rubles) he receives selling oil and gas
If he wanted gold, he can buy it now. There is no difference between buying gold with euros or dollars and selling oil for gold directly.
The pricing unit is irrelevant, the actual holding of reserves is what matters.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Mish
I agree that Putin can buy gold whenever he pleases, there is no (immediate) benefit from pricing, and reserves matter. There is, however, an ‘information’ effect, building on the new Moscow gold center–designed to take on the LBMA by price discovery. Accepting Euros for oil supports that currency, ditto for accepting US$ for oil–what is the petrodollar, after all. Accepting gold for oil, supports gold, not the petrodollar, not the Euro.
Reserves are important, yet between them, Russia and China produce 660 tonnes of gold annually, about the same as the US, Canada, and Australia combined. Finland, Bulgaria, and Sweden produce about 35 tonnes, and Turkey about 40 tonnes. The result: a reduction of EU gold reserves.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
For an overall summary by country of central bank fx and gold ‘reserves’, July 28, 2022: link to gold.org
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
I have hit on the perfect solution.
Send all the Euro-burgers to Africa for an extended vacation during the winter months.
This will solve two problems:
1. They don’t need gas to heat their accommodations. Energy problem solved.
2. Even small public benefits in Euro’s go a long way in Africa: There, inflation solved.
Another persistent problem that would be mitigated by this is the unbalanced inflows of migrants from Africa to Europe.
Plus it would create a lot of new employment for all those desperate African young men.
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
EU weenies like European Commission Economy Commissioner still think that the EU can corral Putin with their rules and words.
He is out claiming the EU will react, still thinks the HUge EU economy will force the Russian one to bend the knee, etc., etc., with weapons such as European primacy in the insurance field.
These people have learned nothing and are doubling down.
They still think there is a HUge economy outside of diesel, chemicals, steel, aluminum, zinc, and fertilizer, which only make modest contributions to GDP.
GodfreeRoberts
GodfreeRoberts
1 year ago
“the government is going to have to win the battle against Just Stop Oil and all others who are opposed to any investment in oil and gas.”
“The government” has been slow-walking this for decades, compared with middle-income China, which invests more in renewables than the rest of the world combined.
I’m old. If I live another 20 years the climate will still be fine. More fires and floods, but still fine.
But young people will NOT be fine, and they’re getting desperate. They’d settle down if world leaders could act like adult human beings for a change and get a schedule in place and massive mutual assistance. Then we can go ahead and develop more oil wells.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  GodfreeRoberts
Pretty much agree. With one exception:
“I’m old. If I live another 20 years the climate will still be fine. More fires and floods, but still fine.”
That depends on where you live. As you say, it will be worse in 20 years. And it is already horrible in many places throughout the world.
The US has gotten off easy so far. Lots of disasters, but nothing like some other places. Hopefully we will keep being lucky.
As you implied, we are going to keep using more fossil fuels each year for quite some time. It is unavoidable. So things are going to accelerate.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Reply to  GodfreeRoberts
I am greying too, but at the speed things could be unravelling is frightening, and that doesn’t even take war into account.
Let’s just say 8+ billion on a planet with dwindling resources: mineral, water and atmosphere.
There is one part that need to take more resposibility for their offsprings, not to put a more zoological term for it.
Yet another, need to curb their urge to spend above their needs and means. Good luck with that.
Responsible leadership in human society is an oxymoron.
The youth are not desperate, they are globe trotting like never before to find the last pristine corner. They hardly deserve anything better than what’s coming at them.
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  GodfreeRoberts
Yep now they are on a COAL POWER PLANT building binge, when they found out their wind and solar didn’t give enough power!!!!!
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  GodfreeRoberts
What most green alarmists don’t know….
“From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant
greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of
atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the
journal.” Nature Climate Change on April 25, 2016.
Plants, of course, take in CO2, convert it to complex hydrocarbons, and release oxygen back into the atmosphere/water.
Which raises the question… what is the optimum CO2 level for planet Earth?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
42. The answer is 42.
Pontius
Pontius
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
What is the optimal temperature of the earth? Simple question, what balance of Co2 and O2 would lead to optimal conditions – akin to a planetary thermostat. So we develop technology to scrub and sequester co2, to what level. I recall 1960s and 70s, summers not nearly as warm as today, winters were brutally cold compared to today. Climate always in a state of change. Man’s use of fossil fuels artificially increase co2 levels to warm earth, will technology create the opportunity to artificially cool? If so, to what level and who decides.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Pontius
My point is that the CO2 level has varied tremendously over millions of years. And we simple-minded humans assume the current level is ideal because that is all we know. But is it ideal? Large swathes of the planet are frozen or dessert. Those canyons that MIsh photographs were once lakes and rivers–you can walk though petrified forests, while deep down are massive coal deposits–all that carbon was once in the atmosphere. At 3% CO2, one might even wonder if we are living on a slowly dying planet.
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Yep it seems Americans have become weak, when 90 degrees is “declared” a “HEAT WAVE”!!!!
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
1 year ago
“. . . wind and solar are not cheap, knowing full well that solar energy, where the sun reliably shines, appears to be cheaper than natural gas.”
Just like Ford & GM promptly raised their EV prices in response to the 10-year $7,500 tax credit, EVERYONE knows that solar & wind are going to do the same. Why wouldn’t they? Their fossil fuel competitors costs will remain high, especially if Putin continues his war. Without the tens of billions of US dollars, Ukraine would have fallen months ago.
There’s ZERO incentive to push any sort of green savings along to the consumer / companies lined up to do small, medium or large projects. And until there’s a clear winner in storage that can show they’ve got the right cost cutting curve over the next 10 years, forget that making the sort of increase that would have come under a more stable energy transition. Everything green just got a whole lot more expensive, and again everyone knows this, especially the elites who will investing in said companies. Just go ask Paul Pelosi.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
Given that ‘energy can neither be created nor destroyed’ (even at a quantum level), a “clear winner in storage” of energy is the key. Long term, I suspect the answer isn’t a ‘battery’, including lithium ion… However, it might be hydrogen, perhaps far beyond burning hydrogen or fuel cells (proton exchange membranes). For example, in the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy… water electrolysis shows great promise.
Pontius
Pontius
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
I believe you are correct, sustainable energy is intermittent and must be stored for later use. Widespread use of electrical batteries by industry, residential and for EVs will require strip mining most of the third world. Hydrogen probably not the answer either, difficult to store and handle (see NASA difficulty with hydrogen used by Artemis 1 – one reason SpaceX uses methane.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Pontius
Might there be other ways of storing it?
Robbyrob
Robbyrob
1 year ago
If not noted earlier
A great loss
RIP
His PhD thesis was a characteristic mix of software engineering, economic theory, and law
Naphtali
Naphtali
1 year ago
Germany experienced energy starvation before. The Wehrmacht lost much of it’s armor and mobile defense during the period 1944-1945 due to fuel shortages. Will the West repeat that history? When their cartel fails, will the West resort to war against Russia? A new continental alliance is coming and it will not include Nato. We have allowed ourselves to be pushed into a very bad place in history. I think I understand now the evils of great standing armies that our forefathers disdained. It is regrettable that focus was made on military might and not truly free trade after the collapse of the USSR.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Naphtali
I remember thinking back in 1988 when the USSR economic problems became obvious that this was the opportunity for the United States to bring peace to the world. There wasn’t any need for MAD. There was a possibility for Global benevolence. Didn’t happen. Sad.
KenNJ
KenNJ
1 year ago
Putin has all the cards.
Our tough guy politicians should start talking to Russia rather than poking the bear with sticks.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  KenNJ
Russia is a teddy bear. We will rip its arms and legs off and then trample the body.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Same as what the US does to anyone else that doesn’t do what the US tells them.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
And?
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Imagine the impact Putin would have if he priced Russian oil and gas in gold ‘grams’ per barrel, physically delivered to his new Moscow gold-trading center prior to delivery.
Scooot
Scooot
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
It doesn’t seem very practical to me. Buyers of gas & oil would have to physically deliver Gold to Moscow and hope they don’t meet Dick Turpin on the way, and vice versa when Russia are spending it on arms etc.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab

Since that would actually be an attempt to force the world into a Gold Standard it would fail.

Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Now, the US is going to shoot down commercial flights? Ban the use of gold for international transactions?
Russia is already setting itself up as competition to London and New York. Also, Russia is planning the tokenization of gold. Physical transfers are needed only balance accounts.
If a barrel of ‘oil’ trades for X grams of 99.9% gold, what will Saudi Arabia (and other oil producers) do? Take faux US
dollars or gold for its oil?
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
This is like when he insisted that everyone pay for Russia’s oil and gas in rubles. We will see if he does it or not. The problem is that everyone would have to buy gold to buy the oil which would raise the price of gold thus making it more expensive as time goes on because the free float of gold is not big enough nor does enough gold enter into the market by mining to handle those transactions. That in itself would cause the project to fail. If Putin wants to open a gold exchange he is welcome to it.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Putin’s plan to require oil and gas payment in rubles was based on supporting the ruble at a time when the US was trying to reduce the value of the ruble. We’ve already seen how the US tried to lock down Russia’s access to capital/banks/etc, even stopping Russian gold being traded on LBMA. If gold goes up in price, that would be a good thing, and especially hard on faux currencies. Also look at the ‘national ownership’ of gold in-ground resources–it is an eye-opener for global politics.
Mish
Mish
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Would not matter one bit
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Whoa! A BUYERS’ CARTEL? What a brilliant idea! I wonder why no one else ever about it – until now!

Well, maybe, just maybe, because it is a STUPID idea, eh?!

JackWebb
JackWebb
1 year ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Um, a buyers’ cartel works only if the buyers have any leverage.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  JackWebb
Yes. That is why the OPEC has been there for the last 60+ years, but there has *never* been an OPIC.
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
The Rhine dehydrated, winter might be warmer than usual. Germany might escape the worst, this winter. Can they survive winter 2024,
2025…
billybobjr
billybobjr
1 year ago
Reply to  8dots
Well if they are no better than predicting the hurricane season to date . It is the lowest in many years and they predicted
above normal and are now changing their predictions . All the climate predictions from the UN and research institutes who get money from the government on climate change that have been wildly wrong. I would not count on a mild winter if I was the Germans . I do have a accurate prediction for you and they laughed at it .
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  billybobjr
Thank goodness that we haven’t had a hurricane affect gulf oil production yet. Oil would be a lot higher than it already is.
There is a big difference between predicting weather and climate.
Climate models have actually been very good at forecasting the future.
JackWebb
JackWebb
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
You’re going to cite the author of many of those models? LOL
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  JackWebb
I have no problem with NASA.
Roy
Roy
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
I’m sorry. Is that the NASA that just delayed the space launch again for technical reasons as opposed to hurricanes? Or perhaps it is the NASA that put environmental observation modules throughout the US midwest that promptly died due to normal summer temperatures? Or perhaps the NASA that had a mission of demonstrating the Muslim contributions to science and space technology?
There is no singular NASA. There are several. Just like our Federal bureaucracy, there is no single entity, but back to the topic at hand. I will deny there is any measurable/demonstrable effect on the earth’s temperature due to CO2 increases. All of the stress/pain/suffering being inflicted upon the masses is doing nothing to save the planet. That was never the goal of those orchestrating this mess anyway. It is all about power and control.
So.. keep throwing virgins into the volcano and eventually it will rain and you will be proven correct. Perhaps the first girls weren’t actually virgins??? That explains why it didn’t rain immediately. But the high priest who has no other function than throwing virgins into the volcano can sleep easier once it does rain.
I sometimes wonder how long it would take me to wade through the climate model code to point out all (or even just several) of the assumptions used. By assumptions used, I mean fudge factors – multipliers used to correct subroutine outcomes. You should go find a copy of Michael Crichton’s speech “Space Aliens cause Global Warming.” And then, can the same numbers be used for different start and stop times? I bet not.
“There is a big difference between predicting weather and climate.”
One of the big differences is that nearly everyone knows what weather is. Hardly anyone knows what “climate” is – at least on a global scale. I would contend that in order to model the global “climate” you must be able to model the weather in a fine enough grid in a fine enough time interval to come up with the overall “climate.” Of course global “climate” is not actually defined anywhere. And nowhere is the ideal temperature of the earth actually defined. It is all perverse and cynical. Running global climate models is certainly not an implementation of the scientific method.
This, however, is an investment/data analysis blog. I respect the years of knowledge presented. Weather and climate and the investment world do have one thing in common. They are chaotic systems, which by definition are unpredictable. The knowledge you guys (not me) have allows you to notice certain trends if you have seen them before and act accordingly. You don’t need to have a prefect prediction – just close enough to make a profit. For the most part, you bet your own money/lives on your observations. That makes you far more noble than our world leaders.
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy
Remember DC, Miami, Boston, ect ect is supposed to be under water by now according to FAUX Man Made Climate hoaxer AL Gore!!!!
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy

“One of the big differences is that nearly everyone knows what weather is. Hardly anyone knows what “climate” is – at least on a global scale.”

It’s easy:

Weather refers to short term atmospheric conditions while climate is the weather of a specific region or the entire world averaged over a long period of time. Climate change refers to long-term changes.

To me, it’s simple:

The world is getting warmer. The ice is melting. The oceans are rising. And weather is getting more extreme and harder to predict. And it’s going to cause a lot of problems for humanity going forward. And it’s because of mankind’s GHG emissions.

Why do I care?

Not because I am some climate warrior trying to tell you to stop using fossil fuels. That’s a waste of my time.

Its because I am an investor, trying to profit from what’s happening in the world. And what’s happening is an attempt at transitioning from fossil fuels to renewables in order to try to slow down or stop global emissions and climate change.

Though it is not going well. Because the world keeps demanding more energy. And we are not building enough renewables to meet that growing energy need.

Which is why I am heavily invested in oil and gas stocks. Yes. Those evil oil and gas companies. Climate advocates may hate them, but we desperately need them to provide our energy “fix”. And we will need them badly for a long time to come. And I intend to profit from this need.

I can’t personally do anything about climate change. And I am far from noble. All I can do is accept what is actually happening in the world, (rather than fall for conspiracy garbage) and try to make a little money from it.

The only real noble thing I am trying to do is share this investment idea. And guess what I get for that? A lot of criticism and crazy replies. Lol!

Roy
Roy
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
To quote Billy Joel: “You may be right; I may be crazy.”
Earning money through the application of knowledge is almost always honorable. To honestly share insights and knowledge is noble.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy
Thanks!
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Ever heard of survivorship bias? Here’s a Cliff Notes version: link to worldwarwings.com
If you don’t see it, you don’t know it exists?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy
The SLS launch is delayed because the check was returned NSF a second time.
Roy
Roy
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Wouldn’t surprise me. :-}
When I worked for a U.S. Army lab, I discovered that many of the electronics vendors would not sell me anything because the Government had a notorious slow-pay problem. Seems waiting 45 to 60 days for their money was a bit much.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Roy
Having built econometric models to forecast employment wrt global economic factors/fundamentals, I concur on the difficulty level. In fact, I would expect climate modelling to be vastly more complex. And determining causality? Good luck on that.
That the hypothesis changed from global warming to global climate change is very revealing. Warming is far easier to test–it essentially reduces to some level of confidence in the difference of temperature means–if higher, then warming. If lower or the same, then not warming. However climate change–ah–there we test the difference in variance at some level of confidence. The underlying distribution of a number of weather-related variables must change, or shift. Meanwhile, any ‘weather event’ becomes PROOF of change and can be pushed out by the complicit media. Example: No Atlantic hurricanes in August, the first time since 1942, I believe. Climate change or probability?
This is not to say that humankind is not impacting the planet, or that climate is not changing. Precession of the equinoxes alone will change climate (slowly), and the Sun has cycles as well that affect the planet’s weather and climate. Also, we know the north pole is shifting faster than normal, likely to due to anomalies in the core, with increased volcanic and earthquake activity… Only a climate bigot would call me a denier.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Embedded in your cited source is this tidbit: “observational evidence of warming that scientists had in the 1970s, when Earth had been cooling for a few decades.”
Now, isn’t that interesting.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
1 year ago
It’s easy to win chess when all your opponent knows is tic-tac-toe.
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
Putin opened the Vostok drill 2022 in the sea of Japan with Russia, China, India, Syria, Laos and few other nations. 50K soldiers, 40 ships…
Thetenyear
Thetenyear
1 year ago
Dumb and Dumber The Sequel
What happens when a dumb energy policy in the US and an even dumber energy policy in Europe join forces to “fix” things?
Prices go up while supply diminishes. As a result, the US gets poorer, the EU gets more desperate and Russia gets richer and richer.
These policies plus US cash payments to Ukraine are intended to make things better for the Ukrainian people but only serve to extend the violence and killing in Ukraine. Price caps will do nothing to improve the energy crises and bring peace to the area. Only a negotiated settlement can bring an end to the war and improve energy flows to Europe, assuming that is what the West wants.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Putin is desperate. As you say, he had no other choice but to take this step. Like the FED with interest rates. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Meanwhile, yet another Russian oil exec has commited “suicide” and the Russian army is having a fire sale of stolen equipment on Russian eBay and the like.
———-
KICK IN THE RUBLES Inside Putin’s hopelessly CORRUPT army as generals ‘steal billions’ & soldiers ‘flog gear on Russian EBAY’
Sep 3 2022
VLADIMIR Putin’s hopelessly corrupt generals are siphoning off “billions” from the army while soldiers flog stolen gear and vehicles on Russia’s version of eBay, an investigation by The Sun Online has revealed.
Online marketplace Avito is awash with state-of-the-art Russian military kit at a time when Putin’s soldiers are being sent to the frontline in Ukraine poorly armed and poorly supplied.
….
Scooot
Scooot
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Is it true, you never know these days.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Scooot
They have photos and actual listings. Believe your eyes.
billybobjr
billybobjr
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Putin is desperate . Well maybe but they do have fuel and they do have gas , electricity and food . The GDP of
Russia is about 1 /10th that of the US if that . I do believe they are way behind technology wise and have a
corrupt system that is extremely inefficient and waste a huge part of the little GDP they do have . So why exactly are they
the next boogey man or tyrant taking over the world if all that is true ?
SAKMAN
SAKMAN
1 year ago
Reply to  billybobjr
It is because the modern economies trusted Russia to work with. Then After covid in a difficult time, Russia broke the deal, and it was a big enough deal to matter. They can’t win long term, the value system doesn’t work. However, this was the best opportunity to win short term. . . When you are in a position what you are being relyed on for the sake of efficiency, and then you stab your partners in the back.
This regime will never be forgiven, and if the “west” implements tech, then Russia can be left behind.
The true cost of oil is giving money and power to a tyrannical regime that controls the media and throws you out the window if you disagree with it.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  SAKMAN
….. as opposed to a regime that throws you into prison if you expose its war crimes??!!
billybobjr
billybobjr
1 year ago
Reply to  SAKMAN
What ? You have to be kidding . The west did it to itself see link they were warned . The west
move toward green energy ignoring all the warnings made terrible decisions that they are paying for now .
They did exactly what you said Russia does marginalized anyone who disagreed with their Ideology or
their vision see the phrase the “science is settled” . Germany and others closed coal plants nuclear plants ect.
How the hell is that Russia’s faut ? Heck no they shouldn’t have trusted Russia as a single source supplier but they did.
They were warned and laughed about it. Screw them buy more blankets and I don’t blame Russia
for rubbing their nose in it . I don’t care for Russia but Jeezz the west is corrupt too .
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  SAKMAN
“… giving money and power to a tyrannical regime that controls the media and throws you out the window if you disagree with it…”
Could equally apply to the USA if you think critically.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  billybobjr
Fortunately the US corrupt system is much more efficient. At least for the elite.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Yeah yeah yeah. Europe is gonna be a fun place to be in during the winter. Planning a vacation there? LOL.

link to visiontimes.com

No big deal! Germany has the army patrolling the streets every winter, right??!! ROFLMAO.

Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Putin may be desperate, or he might be faking. He’s ex-KGB from a time when deception of the decision-making elite and the public was standard practice. A few people (maybe Russian) making Facebook comments supposedly ‘meddled in the US elections’. Meanwhile the DOJ tosses a few documents on the floor of Mar-a-Largo to frame a past president, covered up an incriminating laptop….
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
You can get some good stuff on our markets that used to belong to the US/NATO and other countries militaries!!!!
Including US military armored HMMVS!!!
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Obviously forgot about family members of US military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan being sent body armor and other critical equipment that they couldn’t get through the US military!!!!
Including US soldiers buying their own equipment!!!
This happened in the “MOST POWERFUL MILITARY” in the world!!!
TheCaptain
TheCaptain
1 year ago
Who runs Barter Town?
Who runs Barter Town?!
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  TheCaptain
Tina Turner does.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Sheesh, it is Master/Blaster. Where you been?
LM2022
LM2022
1 year ago
The EU has filled up its reserved to 80% capacity, that should be enough to get them through the winter with rationing and price caps.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  LM2022
Nope. When storage is completely full, that means they have 20% of what will be used during winter. They still need the other 80%, which comes from daily arrivals from pipelines or LNG.
Storage that is 80% full means they have 16% of what will be needed.
Storage is used as a buffer to supplement fluctuations in daily arrivals.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Good point. These bozos seem to think that once storage is 100% full, the Europeans are fine for the winter – even if Russia cuts off all supply.

Sadly, even the leaders of the western countries are not a whole lot better than these bozos. They are just bozos with advanced graduate and doctorate degrees.

PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  whirlaway
I’m not into the blame game. I’m just into what is actually happening. If I understand what is actually happening, I can better understand the future and the investment opportunities.
If Russia does not resume pipeline gas shipments to Europe than Europe will have to get their gas elsewhere, or find ways to substitute for it, and begin some serious conservation measures.
Europe gets about 40% of its gas from Russia. That is a lot to replace.
In 2021 Europe received 155 bcm of gas from Russia.
This year, Europe has increased non-Russian LNG imports to record levels. Hitting 12.6 bcm in April. That’s a 36% increase, but certainly not enough.
Its going to be a difficult winter for them if Russia cuts all energy to Europe. However, it will get better each and every year after this year, as substitutes will be found.
Still, this all means further upward pressure on energy prices for the rest of this decade.
Economies will slow, inflation will remain persistent, stock markets will stagnate or move lower. But oil stocks should do very well.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
If Russia does not resume gas shipments they may flare some. Then they will sell the rest at a later time. It’s not like it is disappearing.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Yep. But 90% of the gas is dependent on the existing pipelines to Europe and cannot easily be sent to China or India. Much of it will be shut in until both sides agree to resume shipments; whenever that is. Could be months. Could be years.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  whirlaway
As was noted long ago: “We are all Bozos on this bus.”
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  LM2022
Let’s see how Europe looks when it comes out on the other side of winter. However, Germany wants to have its army patrolling the streets from Oct 1. Just for fun, I am sure! 😉

link to visiontimes.com

Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
The French government announced yesterday that all the reactors will be back online before winter which will enable France to export a lot of electricity again. EDF brought in a bunch of teams from the US to back up their own ones to get the work done early. France and the US have similar systems since in the beginning they built their reactors using Westinghouse’s technology. I have also been hearing that France might start drilling for shale oil. France has a awful lot in the Paris basin. Total SA does exploit shale oil in the US and until recently Russia so they do have the expertise.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Greta is going to be really pi$$ed.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Does she have a drinking problem now?
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
She’s Swedish. What do you think?
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
True
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
As Russia Chokes Europe’s Gas, France Enters Era of Energy ‘Sobriety’
The government is helping residents with soaring gas and electric costs, but some businesses are already shutting down amid fears of rationing and blackouts.
By Liz Alderman
Sept. 5, 2022, 12:00 a.m. ET
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
They have been preparing the population for this for the last few months now by basically telling the truth.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Two years ago, I was reading on this blog that an energy crisis was coming.
The war in Ukraine has hastened the arrival of that crisis. And if somehow the war ended soon, it wouldn’t mean the crisis is over.
The world is going to struggle to find enough energy for the rest of this decade as demand continues to grow and supply is coming up short.
There will be some good investment ideas because of this energy crisis. Top of my list is oil and gas, of course.
But Hydrogen is about to become a big deal, particularly in the US. I have taken small positions in Plug Power and Ballard Power.
And I am looking at a dozen other companies that focus on Hydrogen. Still very early and very risky. Hence the small positions.
Also looking at various renewable companies. Every crisis comes with opportunities.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
DOn’t forget fusion power. Lots of companies and countries working on this and commercial reality is closer than many think.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Fusion, if it worked right, means unlimited energy eventually. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for it. Its been 20 years away for 30 years now and is still 20 years away.
One could say the same thing about solar. Potentially more energy than we will ever use. But it will take many years and lots of continual improvements before we can get there.
There is no easy path to producing enough energy to meet current needs or our needs for the rest of this decade. There simply hasn’t been enough investment in oil, gas, or renewables. There will continue to be upward pressure on energy prices as a result.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
“Fusion, if it worked right, means unlimited energy eventually. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for it. Its been 20 years away for 30 years now and is still 20 years away.”
That’s an old, tired cliche. You can do better!
With the current squeeze on oil/natgas caused by Russia;s invasion of Ukraine, a lot more resources are being ported into fusion
About 18 months ago one company, TAE Technologies was claiming commercialization by 2030. I read somewhere (can’t find source) that France intends to have a small fusion reactor working by 2025.
Once fusion power becomes a reality, Russia’s economic engine goes poof and the country crumbles for good. And the Middle East returns to camel rides for tourists on their endless sand dunes.
Claiming a landmark in fusion energy, TAE Technologies sees commercialization by 2030
The company has raised nearly $1 billion to harness the power of the sun
Jonathan Shieber@jshieber / 12:00 PM PDT•April 8, 2021
A list of startup companies working on fusion power:
Top 14 Fusion Energy startups
Last updated: August 30, 2022
Fusion Energy – is an attempt to build Sun-like reactor on Earth that produces times more energy than it consumes. In a fusion process, two lighter atomic nuclei (deuterium and tritium) combine to form a heavier nucleus, while releasing energy.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
What do you call a “tired, old cliche” that has proven to be true decade after decade after decade after decade after decade? An axiom!
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Make sure you let us know which companies would be good investments if fusion finally becomes workable. In particular, I want to know which ones you are investing in.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
I don’t talk about my investments online. It too often makes me second guess myself. I provided you some links. Go read them.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
I’m the opposite. Discussing my investments online, and responding to the inevitable criticism, keeps me thinking about them, and self-analyzing what I am doing. Occasionally, it makes me reconsider what I am doing, but usually it helps me confirm what I’m doing. I just wish more people here would do the same as I am always on the lookout for more opportunities. But most people here just want to criticize and play the useless political blame game.
Thanks for the links.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Also perpetual motion. There are some recent breakthroughs and it should be approaching breakeven in the near future.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Hydrogen is a CARRIER of energy, not a SOURCE of energy. IOW, energy has to be expended to generate hydrogen in the first place. Where is that energy coming from?
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Of course. Hydrogen is energy storage.
The basic (and over simplified) idea behind Hydrogen goes something like this:
  • Renewable energy from wind and solar sometimes goes to waste. We need a good way to store that excess renewable energy that would otherwise be wasted.
  • There are multiple ways to store that excess renewable energy, but two popular ideas are batteries and Hydrogen.
  • Using the excess energy, through electrolysis, they break water into Oxygen and Hydrogen.
  • The Hydrogen stores the energy and when used later in a fuel cell or burned, the only emissions are water vapor.
  • This is all very inefficient, but it is far better than having that excess renewable energy go to waste.
Now, all we need to do is rapidly expand renewables, and create the Hydrogen infrastructure to make use of the excess energy.
Please note I am not advocating for Hydrogen use. I merely accept the fact that this is going to be done, and it could grow to become a multi-trillion dollar industry. And I am interested in the investment opportunities.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Inefficient at present, yes. Long term? PEM ‘goes’ both ways.
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
I’ve been hearing about fusion and hydrogen since I was in school.
When I was a teen-ager they had hydrogen powered buses in Vancouver, but the past 50 years has not seen a trend.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Webej
Yes. Hydrogen has been a slow growth industry for decades. It is currently a $129 billion industry in the US.
However, the recently introduced inflation reduction act will give the US industry a big push by subsidizing Hydrogen at up to $3/kg.
Some think it will grow into a $12 trillion industry.
Whether it gets that big or not, there could be some interesting investment opportunities going forward. But I am proceeding cautiously.
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Most of this money will disappear with zero results…
Money laundering premium..
Look at all those “BRILLIANT” solar breakthroughs during the Obama admin who went broke and closed shop!!!!
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  JRM
Okay. Thanks for your “expert” opinion.”
JRM
JRM
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Yep brilliant the link talks about other countries!!!!
I believe it was seven solar power companies founded in the USA during the Obama admin closed their doors before Obama left office, after taking billions from US taxpayers!!!!
And Obama went to several of these companies and then bragged about all the break through they were having, with the money the US Gov’t was giving them and all closed their doors…Ie Money laundering!!!!~
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  JRM
Your desire to think that you are somehow scoring political points with me is a waste of time. I don’t care about Obama, or Biden, or Trump. I care about what is actually going on in the world so I can invest and profit.
And I don’t care if you think the government will waste money on subsidies. They do that all the time. I do care about which companies can take advantage of those subsidies.
You are probably too stupid to understand that though.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  Webej
The interest in hydrogen is rapidly picking up. About 15 years ago, GM was actively working on fuel-cells as their most-likely future power source. Obama and friends pretty much stopped that when they took over the company and the car guys departed.
JackWebb
JackWebb
1 year ago
Next up: Russia cuts off the oil. Think it’s rough now?
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  JackWebb
Winter is coming and if the oil doesn’t flow it backs up, freezes and then breaks the well pipes. The well then have to be either redrilled or capped. That oil then cannot come back for years meaning that Russia will see its oil production cut by a good amount if they cut.
They might do it anyway but we are in better shape to replace that 10% of world supply that Russia produces.
Jmurr
Jmurr
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
I’m sure India and China will buy it at more than the price cap.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Jmurr
We will see if a cap on Russia’s oils sales will happen. For me I think it would be difficult to do because it never has ever been done but who knows? There is a first time for everything. I had expected that it would be dismissed out of hand as unworkable but the G-7 said they were going to do it. We will see. Greek shippers are providing the bulk of the tankers out of the Black Sea so if the insurance becomes illegal then Russia will have a big problem exporting.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
How Fake GPS Coordinates Are Leading to Lawlessness on the High Seas
A technology enabling the transmission of fake locations to carry out murky or even illegal business operations could have profound implications for the enforcement of international law.
By Anatoly Kurmanaev
Sept. 3, 2022
The scrappy oil tanker waited to load fuel at a dilapidated jetty projecting from a giant Venezuelan refinery on a December morning. A string of abandoned ships listed in the surrounding turquoise Caribbean waters, a testament to the country’s decay after years of economic hardships and U.S. sanctions.
Yet, on computer screens, the ship — called Reliable — appeared nearly 300 nautical miles away, drifting innocuously off the coast of St. Lucia in the Caribbean. According to Reliable’s satellite location transmissions, the ship had not been to Venezuela in at least a decade.
Shipping data researchers have identified hundreds of cases like Reliable, where a ship has transmitted fake location coordinates in order to carry out murky and even illegal business operations and circumvent international laws and sanctions.
The digital mirage — enabled by a spreading technology — could transform how goods are moved around the world, with profound implications for the enforcement of international law, organized crime and global trade.
Tampering this way with satellite location trackers carried by large ships is illegal under international law, and until recently, most fleets are believed to have largely followed the rules.
….
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
I know it is off topic , yet I couldn ‘t stop myself wondering this lazy afternoon /evening, why NASA can t even manage to launch a moon rocket these days, when 50 years ago, men landed on our natural satellite as if it were a piece of cake…..Was it all staged then after all, like some say ?….or is the russian/german braindrain insufficiently rewarded these days within the context of a increasingly unattractive, used to be, democracy ?
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
The US has redundancy in space and NASA is now a small part of launches. The problem with Artemis is that Congress in 2010 ordered Nasa to reuse the technology of the Space Shuttle in order to save money. The Space Shuttle’s engines used hydrogen and that choice caused problems since the beginning because liquid hydrogen is a nightmare to work with. SpaceX tried hydrogen in the beginning but switched to methane. Hydrogen burns better than methane but methane tanks don’t need much isolation so it saved weight in addition to being much easier to work with.
This is the number of payloads by country by year. It will open your eyes. Russsia’s space program was run into the ground by an appointee of Putin who was super loyal but who was as bad an administrator as you can get. The new guy just appointed is much better and knows space. He is trying to undo the damage and announced that Russia is staying in the space station for years more.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
NASA is bureaucracy personified and has a long history of ineptness. They are also forced to kowtow to no-nothing Congresses.
We should have had a moon base 30-40 years ago. We also should have had a decent space station by now, something maybe 3-5 miles in diameter that could manufacture rockets in space or on the moon, where they wouldn’t have to worry about fighting Earth’s gravity to just get into orbit.
———
The Moon is a jumping off point for Mars
Miriam Kramer, author of Axios Space
3 Sep 2022
NASA’s vision of astronauts walking on Mars hinges on first getting them back to the Moon.
Why it matters: NASA is planning to launch its first test flight of its new Moon rocket today, marking one of the agency’s first major steps along a decades-long journey to Mars.
• “We’re going to Mars, and we’re going back to the Moon in order to learn to live, to work, to survive,” NASA administrator Bill Nelson said during a press conference in August.
State of play: By using the Moon as a proving ground for technology needed for missions to Mars, NASA says it can make those future missions safer.
….
RonJ
RonJ
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
“We should have had a moon base 30-40 years ago.”
The manned Moon landing was a Cold War project. Beat the Russians to the Moon. By Apollo 13, the public was already losing interest. A televised session from the capsule, prior to the Houston, we have a problem, moment, was not even carried by the major networks. Not 100% positive, but i am thinking the last couple planned Moon missions were canceled.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  RonJ
Yes, that is what happens with a Congress that lacks vision and is beholden to special interests, which want to keep hold of the reins on power that they currently hold..
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
“why NASA can t even manage to launch a moon rocket these days, when 50 years ago, men landed on our natural satellite as if it were a piece of cake”
The US was China back then. Or, China in 20 years even. An industrial powerhouse with lots and lots of resources. At least some of them still allocated by competent people who once earned them.
Then, by the late 60s, early 70s; control of resources were increasingly handed out to rank incompetents. Idiots even. And that’s not even hyperbole. By way of printed/stolen “asset appreciation”, legal activism, political mandates and the like. Such that by now, the US has much less resources available to begin with. And what is left, is pretty much exclusively “owned”, hence ultimately allocated, by rank and utter idiots. Not one of whom can even reliably count past their 8, or was that 12, huh? fingers.
All the wealth “home owners”, “investors”, “activists”, ambulance chasers, lobbyists and other net-negative riffraff have been handed over the past 50 years, inevitably have to have first been taken from someone else. It’s not as if neither dragging people to kangaroo courts nor sitting on ones rear in a “home” creates any wealth all by itself. And those someone else’s, cannot be anyone but those competent enough to still attempt something productive and value adding. Such that by now, competent guys are out of capital/resources. While the idiot Fed theft beneficiaries have it all. And, being idiots and all, they do what idiots always do: Misallocate, ruin and waste all that which they are handed.
Such that now, neither rockets nor airplanes work anymore. Instead leaking, falling out of the sky etc. Roads are crumbling. California burning and out of power. People are increasingly homeless (in ’68, even a homeless hippie rolling in in a van could find dwelling in Haight Ashbury. It’s what’s referred to as abundance. Or more technically, wealth. The result of productive people allocating resources productively.) And people are also increasingly unable to afford both cars and the fuel to run them. Once mighty American enterprise can’t even compete with a bunch of locked down commies. Not even close. And the gap is increasing by the day. Even with the commies locked into their apartments???!!!!! It’s so lopsided by now that for any American kid who, like many did back in America’s better days, wants to become an astronaut of any significance; it is now prudent to the point of virtually necessary to learn Chinese, in addition to all the rest an astronaut needs to know. And then hope he’s not simply laughed out of the room by association with an “intellectually inferior race” or some such. Commies aren’t known for being neither nice, nor the most reflective, after all….
But hey: What the Yes We Can crowd can do, is “make money” by being handed freshprint in exchange for doing nothing, and cheering for Dear Printer and Dear Leader to “save the system.” While mindlessly pontificating that anyone competent enough to tie their shoes, must surely use black magic and slave labor children from across some border and stuff, to do so. Since slave labor children from across borders are, you know, like, such an efficient way of allocating economic resources and all.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
The top engineer working on the space suit at Raytheon Tech wasn’t even asked to join bid proposal for the new space suits. 35+ years of space suit knowledge was just cast aside. Another top engineer on the space suit retired before COVID and refused to come back as a contractor. The week before retiring, the person let everyone a conference call know they were taking the wrong path on a much smaller tech upgrade project. Oh it was fun to listen to managers get an earful they rightfully deserved. And NASA rewards businesses for ignoring their top talent with a HUGE contract for new space suits?!
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
They still have good engineers.
But they also have politically correct managers with diversity quotas and environmentally friendly materials procurement.
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
OF COURSE you don t want war Mish, neither do I, just like most here on the blog don t want it …..There s only ONE party that wants war at all costs; Deep State US of fckn A, on the brink of losing its global hegemony, together with the rest of the corrupt, worthless G7, US’ butt licking idiots, not to mention of course the utterly clueless EU bunch in general , the latter being in total panick mode by now as a consequence of a dire situation 100% inflicted upon its moronic self, allegedly to defend the interests of one of the most corrupt US vasal states in the fckn world, Ukraine they call it , for the time being anyway ,a Nazi infested criminal pirate nest on the brink of being hopefully and rightfully annihilated by Russia…..and trust me, I do feel sorry about the plight of innocent civilians on BOTH sides falling victim to yet another US created war , it s not because the victim’s skin colour is lighter this time around that it would be more of a tragedy compared with other US involved wars, in which MILLIONS got killed or murdered , IS IT ?…..
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
50 years ago they took a pawn in the far East so they could develop jungle “tools.”
20 years ago they took a pawn in the the Middle East so they could develop desert “tools.”
Now they have a pawn in Eastern Europe so they can develop forest “tools” again.
Ya just gotta have a place to field test the equipment.
caradoc-again
caradoc-again
1 year ago
UK will be opening up parts of North Sea previously denied licenses and expect a rush to frack on land. There is enough energy and gas infrastructure in place but deliberate obstacles placed in the way hindering domestic production. Not perfect but can help the exchequer and take some pressure off.
TBD
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
Reply to  caradoc-again
You ll be fine …..5 years from now ….share some of it with your belgian ‘friends’ , will you, at a friend’s price that is , of course…
Scooot
Scooot
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2

Hopefully we could speed things up by using emergency wartime methods.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.