By Robert Bradley Jr. — March 4, 2022
“Certainly, the path of energy transition has never been clear. Five climate summits have taken place over the past 30 years, and progress has always fallen short. This latest setback may just be the latest in a long series of halfway measures and setbacks.”
“For critics of the European Union’s climate policies, the sudden focus away from greenhouse gas emissions and on existing fuel reserves is validating.” (NYT, below)
Let history note that the February 23, 2022, print edition of the New York Times admitted that “net zero” was a long shot. This breaks the narrative that Net Zero was the inevitable future with politics and business and high technology leading the way. Forget energy density; energy reality would be remade by a shared narrative of hoping and wanting it to be remade.
The beginning of the end of Net Zero Mirage has launched. COP 27 in nine months will confront a tripartite fossil-fuel boom, as well as elections that will demote climate zealotry in the United States and around the world.
Mainstream, politically correct, cancel-culture leaders such as the New York Times ignored the warnings about how wind and solar were fickle energies trying to replace the real thing, the carbon-based mineral energies we take for granted. But the naysayers were just spouting off agenda-driven Big Oil drivel, right? Wrong. What happened in Texas (a wounded grid from wind/solar penetration) just over a year ago has been playing out in slow motion in the UK/EU.
“Climate Fears on Back Burner as Fuel Costs Soar and Russia Crisis Deepens” by Patricia Cohen tells the story of now-versus-then (subtitles added):
It was only three months ago that world leaders met at the Glasgow climate summit and made ambitious pledges to reduce fossil fuel use. The perils of a warming planet are no less calamitous now, but the debate about the critically important transition to renewable energy has taken a back seat to energy security as Russia — Europe’s largest energy supplier — threatens to start a major confrontation with the West over Ukraine while oil prices are climbing toward $100 a barrel.
For more than a decade, policy discussions in Europe and beyond about cutting back on gas, oil and coal emphasized safety and the environment, at the expense of financial and economic considerations, said Lucia van Geuns, a strategic energy adviser at the Hague Center for Strategic Studies. Now, it’s the reverse.
“Gas prices became very high, and all of a sudden security of supply and price became the main subject of public debate,” she said.
The renewed emphasis on energy independence and national security may encourage policymakers to backslide on efforts to decrease the use of fossil fuels that pump deadly greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
Fossil Fuels to the Rescue
Already, skyrocketing prices have spurred additional production and consumption of fuels that contribute to global warming. Coal imports to the European Union in January rose more than 56 percent from the previous year.
In Britain, the Coal Authority gave a mine in Wales permission last month to increase output by 40 million tons over the next two decades. In Australia, there are plans to open or expand more coking coal mines.
And China, which has traditionally made energy security a priority, has further stepped up its coal production and approved three new billion-dollar coal mines this week.How Europeans are responding to high energy bills.
“Get your rig count up,” Jennifer Granholm, the U.S. energy secretary, said in December, urging American oil producers to raise their output. Shale companies in Oklahoma, Colorado and other states are looking to resurrect drilling that had ceased because there is suddenly money to be made. And this month, Exxon Mobil announced plans to increase spending on new oil wells and other projects.
Higher Prices, More Drilling
Ian Goldin, a professor of globalization and development at the University of Oxford, warned that high energy prices could lead to more exploration of traditional fossil fuels. “Governments will want to deprioritize renewables and sustainables, which would be exactly the wrong response,” he said.
Europe’s transition to sustainable energy has always been an intricate calculus, requiring it to back away from the dirtiest fossil fuel like coal, while still working with gas and oil producers to power homes, cars and factories until better alternatives are available.
For Germany, dependency on Russian gas has been an integral part of its environmental blueprint for many years. Plans for the first direct pipeline between the two countries, Nord Stream 1, started in 1997. A leader in the push to reduce carbon emissions, Berlin has moved to shutter coal mines and nuclear power plants, after the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. The idea was that Russian gas would supply the needed fuel during the yearslong transition to cleaner energy sources. Two-thirds of the gas Germany burned last year came from Russia.
Future plans called for even more gas to be delivered through Nord Stream 2, a new 746-mile pipeline under the Baltic Sea that directly links Russia to northeastern Germany.
On Tuesday, after President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia recognized two breakaway republics in Ukraine and mobilized forces, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany halted final regulatory review of the $11 billion pipeline, which was completed last year.
A Holdout
“I don’t think the threat from Russia is outweighing the threat of climate change, and I don’t see coal mines opening up across Europe,” said James Nixey, director of the Russia-Eurasia program at Chatham House, a research organization in London.
Admissions
Certainly, the path of energy transition has never been clear. Five climate summits have taken place over the past 30 years, and progress has always fallen short. This latest setback may just be the latest in a long series of halfway measures and setbacks.
Still, without a more comprehensive strategy to wean itself off gas, Europe won’t be able to accomplish its goal of reducing emissions 55 percent by 2030 compared with 1990 levels, or to reach the Glasgow summit’s target of cutting net greenhouse gases to zero by 2050.
As Mr. Nixey acknowledged, “this debate is changing” as leaders are forced to acknowledge the downsides of dependency on Russian energy.
A rising concern. Russia’s attack on Ukraine could cause dizzying spikes in prices for energy and food and could spook investors. The economic damage from supply disruptions and economic sanctions would be severe in some countries and industries and unnoticed in others.
The cost of energy. Oil prices already are the highest since 2014, and they have risen as the conflict has escalated. Russia is the third-largest producer of oil, providing roughly one of every 10 barrels the global economy consumes.
Gas supplies. Europe gets nearly 40 percent of its natural gas from Russia, and it is likely to be walloped with higher heating bills. Natural gas reserves are running low, and European leaders have accused Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, of reducing supplies to gain a political edge.
Food prices. Russia is the world’s largest supplier of wheat and, together with Ukraine, accounts for nearly a quarter of total global exports. In countries like Egypt and Turkey, that flow of grain makes up more than 70 percent of wheat imports.
Shortages of essential metals. The price of palladium, used in automotive exhaust systems and mobile phones, has been soaring amid fears that Russia, the world’s largest exporter of the metal, could be cut off from global markets. The price of nickel, another key Russian export, has also been rising.
Financial turmoil. Global banks are bracing for the effects of sanctions designed to restrict Russia’s access to foreign capital and limit its ability to process payments in dollars, euros and other currencies crucial for trade. Banks are also on alert for retaliatory cyberattacks by Russia.
A Changed Debate
Even in Germany, where the progressive Greens have gained a more influential voice in the government, there has been a shift in tone.
This month, Robert Habeck, Germany’s new minister for the economy and climate change and a member of the Greens, said events had underscored the need to diversify supplies. “We need to act here and secure ourselves better,” he said. “If we don’t, we will become a pawn in the game.”
Energy prices started to climb before Mr. Putin began massing troops on Ukraine’s eastern border, as countries emerged from pandemic closures and demand shot up.
But as Mr. Putin moved aggressively against Ukraine and energy prices soared further, the political and strategic vulnerabilities presented by Russia’s control of so much of Europe’s supply took center stage.
“Europe is quite dependent on Russian gas and oil, and this is unsustainable,” said Sarah E. Mendelson, the head of Carnegie Mellon’s Heinz College in Washington. She added that the United States and its European allies had not focused enough on energy independence in recent years.
Overall, Europe gets more than a third of its natural gas and 25 percent of its oil from Russia. Deliveries have slowed significantly in recent months, while reserves in Europe have fallen to just 31 percent of capacity.
For critics of the European Union’s climate policies, the sudden focus away from greenhouse gas emissions and on existing fuel reserves is validating.
Arkadiusz Siekaniec, vice president of the Trade Union of Miners in Poland, has long argued that the European Union’s push to end coal production on the continent was folly. But now he hopes that others may come around to his point of view.
The climate policy “is a suicidal mission” that could leave the entire region overly dependent on Russian fuel, Mr. Siekaniec said last week as American troops landed in his country. “It threatens the economy as well as the citizens of Europe and Poland.”
For Mateusz Garus, a blacksmith at Jankowice, a coal mine in Upper Silesia, the heart of coal country, politics and not climate change are driving policy. “We will destroy the power sector,” he said, “and we will be dependent on others like Russia.”
Final Comment
Atlas is Shrugging. Wind and solar are parasitic to electricity from carbon-based energies. The New York Times energy writers are catching on just a bit, but how much longer will they stick to the script that wind and solar are the basis of a sustainable energy future for the masses?
…elections that will demote climate zealotry in the United States and around the world.
_____________________________________________________
How many times have I seen, the “It’s beginning to crack”
post here at WUWT only to see that it only gets worse.
A quick Google news search on “Climate Change” turns
up the usual breathless head lines about saving the planet.
Let’s start with the USA’s import of Russian gas and oil, nearly 10% of USA’s needs or was it 10% of total Russian output.
Whichever it is, the volumes must be huge.
No, not really, its 10% of US imports, 3% of consumption, but we produce 88% of what we consume.
Also we actually export 5 times as much domestic production as we import from Russia. However its getting all the US oil to where it needs to be consumed, geography and maybe a few missing pipelines contribute to that, but I doubt even Keystones XL would make it so there is no incentive to import Russian oil to the west coast and Hawaii that don’t have nearby sources of oil ready to tap.
Because of Jones Act restrictions on shipping, Hawaii gets oil from Russia instead of domestic sources. Let’s start with repealing the Jones Act and other self-imposed restrictions.
After a very short search:
The Jones Act requires goods shipped between U.S. ports to be transported on ships that are built, owned, and operated by United States citizens or permanent residents.
I am reminded off the law of unintended consequences.
Man takes wife to airport, parks the car and goes inside the terminal to see her off. Returns to car and to his surprise he can’t open the door. His wife had her keyless fob in her purse, and his was in his coat pocket where he left it at home.
Something similar happened to me. My family had driven down to Florida to visit relatives. I had to return early because of work. We were behind schedule and my wife asked me to pull the car out so it could be loaded, then I drove to the airport. When we got to the airport we parked in the loading zone and I grabbed the luggage and rushed to make the flight. I was halfway home when I realized my keys were still in the ignition, back in Florida. I stayed with neighbors while my keys were overnighted from Florida.
They could get their needs from just about any other supplier, say, Canada for instance. But that would require US environmentalists (paid by Russia from what I have heard) to stop interfering with Canadian production and pipelines.
I’m not sure oil makes sense for Hawaii electric generation anyway, they should go green.
Green clean LNG. Mexico has a LNG terminal in Ensenada, Australia exports as much LNG as we do. But we don’t have any west coast terminals, or the pipelines or local production to make it feasible.
Yep, we keep building more and more of those stupid windmills operations. Government must hate poor people.
True – but they LOVE very rich people!
Not all rich people…just the connected.
Only if you define ‘connected’ as ‘high-value doners.’
Indeed. This website seizes on every temporary change as a permanent shift.
India for example has been trying for a decade to increase domestic coal production, as reported here -but only to displace imports, not ramp it up…
Your statement: “Indeed. This website seizes on every temporary change as a permanent shift.” is just a projection of how you look at climate.
Haha, yeah, textbook example of projection! https://psichologyanswers.com/library/lecture/read/709537-what-is-projection-in-psychology-example
Actually you are right – waiting for truth from the New York Slimes – every lie that fits we print, is waiting for windpower while becalmed, or solar power at night….
You’re (fecklessly) trying to mislead, AGAIN, Griffter. India’s coal production has increased over 10% in the last 10 years. The only problem for them is that, not counting the Covid slowdown, its consumption has been increasing faster. The rate of consumption increase appears to be getting higher too. It is projected to increase for the next two years at 4% per year. Their consumption is increasing so fast that their production can’t keep up.
Griff, is India using more or less coal?
As is often the case, griff isn’t entirely wrong.
Regardless of why India is increasing coal production, the fact remains that the usage of coal in India is increasing rapidly.
The largest coal producer in the US is Peabody Energy. Their stock symbol is BTU. Over the last twelve months, the price of their stock has risen 555%. Yeah, there is NO decimal in that number. They have ramped up as fast as they can, are mining as much as the can, and making huge profits.
But you had to go to India to argue an irrelevant point. One doesn’t ramp up facilities to address a short term need, but that goes over your head.
According to the IEA coal demand is expected to rise to an all time high of 8031 million tonnes in 2024 the increase driven by China (+135 Mt) and India (+129 Mt) and SE Asia (+50Mt).
They estimate that coal fired power generation will increase by 4.1% in China, 11% in India and 12% in SE Asia.
This 11% increase in Indian coal fired power generation has been pointed out to you numerous times yet you still parrot the ‘displace imports’ meme.
https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-2021
Yep. Many times before I have wondered if we were beginning to see a sea change.
The wind/solar renewable energy farce can’t continue forever. Surely things will start breaking and people will come to their senses eventually. It didn’t seem to be happening very fast though.
So, what’s different this time?
Before fracking, when we were dependent on OPEC, folks bemoaned the fact that we were sending piles of money to people who hate our guts. Well, now Europe realizes the outcome of that. Putin’s invasion of the Ukraine is financed by the money Europe sent to him for natural gas.
Monckton’s recent article adds to the pile of evidence that the Soviet Union actively worked to subvert western civilization. As far as I can tell, Putin continues that.
Could it be that Putin’s invasion is the wake-up call our politicians needed to begin cleaning out the foreign funded corruption of our society.
In the mean time … defund the universities.
Commie you better put China at the head of that list. Russia is small potatoes.
It would be a bad idea to ignore China, especially under Xi. That said, I think the Soviets/Russians have a way better record when it comes to subversion.
Along with the CIA.
Compared to your KGB?
Dude they are birds of a feather. Open your eyes my friend. Since WW2 the US has been putting themselves in all kinds of world conflicts. We are not always the good guys and Putin is not a good guy. Ukraine is the new Black Lives Matter.
I guess that’s the difference between you and I. I believe that subverting totalitarianism is always a good thing. You don’t.
PS: I just love how you dismiss the killing of thousands of civilians and the leveling of cities as being the equivalent of Black Lives Matters.
Mark take your same rhetoric and go after China?
I have no love for Putin but the practical move is to let Ukraine fall and instead focus on increasing energy production here and in the west. Remove our dependency on foreign regimes.
Who has China invaded lately?
Vietnam, Himachal Pradesh, Tibet.
Even if true to the same extent, subverting totalitarianism versus freedom is an easy choice for civilized people.
So for every conflict are you ready to go in and fight totalitarian regimes. Why are you not calling for a ban on China? Why?
Who has China invaded lately?
Tibet, Vietnam, Himachal Pradesh.
Russia may be better at subversion but China has figured out that it’s less trouble and less expensive to just buy out both ‘big business’ and the Universities. It may take a bit longer but is more effective.
Yours is a very fair point. But a war like this, coming on top of the growing problems of forced decarbonization, could well be a tipping point. Energy voters will help decide in nine months!
Yes, as the Republicans continue to commit unforced errors, the chance of a change in the House or Senate diminishes.
What world do you live in?
In other news, a University of Wisconsin study sez corn ethanol adds CO2 to the environment….seems disturbing soil means more CO2 as the main reason. I mean really….these anti- CO2 people seem to lose on all fronts…..but their losses seem to cost everybody money.
“these anti- CO2 people seem to lose on all fronts”
Indeed. But.
People keep listening to them, so they keep costing us money.
After the third time around the block, whose fault is it, really?
.these anti- people people seem to lose on all fronts…
You’re welcome
An R&D firm I know divides its people into technical-people and peoples-people.
Only peoples-people are eligible for management, while the technical-people resent being managed by mere peoples-people.
No kidding! Just imagine the coffee stand chat!
BNBN, yours is a useful observation as to how organizations may and often do operate.
More than two decades ago, it was apparent to me that a significant number of the people who were on a management track career in a large industrial company were expert at manipulating the organization, for their own benefit, short term or long term. One of the skills for this group was the ability to be a rapid response glib talker during meetings.
Other people on the management track were very talented, educated, up-to-date and could ask excellent and probing questions relative to successful financial, engineering, human resource and scientific endeavors in addition to managing the organization to achieve desired results.
I noticed that it became common to speak of talented and productive STEM professionals as just “subject matter experts”. Although this can be a useful statement it can also be used to suggest an elevated worth for the glib-talkers and is a method to manipulate the organization.
Based upon what I have learned at WUWT.com, this has probably been used effectively to enable the CAGW agenda. Climate communications, history of science, psychology, linguistics, marketing, alliance with mainstream media and politicians, parasitic law firms, and on and on.
Honestly, a lot of that doesn’t matter. The ability to speak last and forcefully on a subject, even if you are just repeating what others have said, cements a good image of you in people’s minds. It can really be just that simple.
Speak last, forcefully and wisely. Good advice.
A high tech company I worked for back in the 60s and early 70s was already figuring that one out. They use to promote good tech people to management but, since few made good managers and they didn’t want to lose ’em it was a lot of trouble finding them good jobs in their fields but in another physical location. So, they tried hiring graduates in business management. At least if they didn’t work out they could just ‘let the go’ and not lose good talent.
My problem is quite recent – a 2 track promotion was tried. I noticed location shifting was on. Although when that became Shanghai, the game was up.
In other words, EU R&D discovered EU funding talk was just wind, Shanghai was better – remember the 2008 bank bail-out? The whole problem was due to EU R&D commitment. They were focused on IP, or rent-seeking.
The irony is neither the tech-people nor the peoples-people, nor the smart talkers saw this coming – the Board certainly did.
And just think, The US was, at one time, the largest exporter of wheat.
Now it is Russia.
So was the ethanol thing really about increasing corn acreage to reduce wheat acreage so Russia would make more on their wheat exports?
Just because you are a conspiracy theorist doesn’t mean there is no conspiracy!
The ethanol thing is about expanding the legislatively mandated market so more high price ethanol can be sold. IN addition to the percentage mandates, ethanol displacement of pure gasoline means lower mileage, thus adding additional sales to keep traffic moving.
In the mean time, I can’t get my favorite form of ethanol – Knob Creek – for love or money…
It was just a handout to US farmers. It caused a huge shift from other crops to corn, which in turn cause less supply and higher prices for those other foods, which was a factor in the Arab Spring revolts and increased hardship in just about every developing country.
“ She added that the United States and its European allies had not focused enough on energy independence in recent years.”. What? Trump was laser-focused on energy-independence in recent years, and now looks like a prophet on the subject. Is the NYT having difficulty in their research department?
“Is the NYT having difficulty in their research department?”
The NYT does not have a research department. What they have is “Fact-Checkers” who check all opinions against the desired Democrat/liberal/leftist narrative. Only those opinions which meet official approval are allowed to see the light of day.
Oh, come on, that’s not fair – they also look at Wikipedia!
Hmmmm…..
No doubt.
We can’t give Trump credit, can we? Next thing you know, you’ll want to give Trump credit for Trump being the only one of the last four US Presidents to not have been run over by Putin.
Trump, as a non-person, can not be credited with anything.
he use of fossil fuels that pump deadly greenhouse gases into the atmosphere
That hysterical journalist hasn’t got a clue how valuable and essential those ‘deadly greenhouse gases’ are to life on Earth – and incidentally, to the process of shielding us from the next Ice Age.
Yes, how true….I guess they must have missed the part in grade school science class about how plants depend on CO2! It isn’t deadly to them at all – but rather life sustaining.
Journalism is right up there with education as the school of last resort. If you’re flunking out any where else one of them will always take you.
a Japanese origami paper kind of shield
Beat me to it. I stopped at that sentence, and mentally re-wrote it as “the use of fossil fuels that add beneficial carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere.”
Net zero can be done, just be honest with the people about what it takes, and abandon fictions like burning wood chips for power or using biodiesel or ethanol is emissions free.
All you have to do is explain to people that these 3 steps can probably get us there:
1. Ban home heating above 60f, or 15c, and ban all use of air conditioning.
2. Ban private auto use.
3. Ban private, business and government air travel, use Skype, zoom or FaceTime. Come up with a list of few humanitarian exceptions that could possibly be allowed.
Ok, that part was simple it’s my clear understandable 3 part program that world governments can now explain to (or impose upon) the people about what it’s really going to take.
I’ll get the popcorn from the solar popcorn maker.
NYT dropped the ball, as usual….
The Welsh coal mine is not increasing its annual production – it just gets to continue mining for the next 20 years and that’s the total during that time.
Are you getting the sense now Griff that you are starting to fight a rear guard action?
I think Griff is starting to be concerned about appearing to work a little to hard for Vlad.
The mood is shifting hard in Europe, people might decide to look harder at income streams of various actors.
The world shouldn’t worry, we in Canada are going to layout our plan for Net Zero this month and next month we are raising the carbon tax, hurrah!🤣
Why bother with a carbon tax it would hit ALL Canadians.
Trudope can just reinstitute the emergency decree and confiscate the bank accounts of all “wrong thinking” citizens, you know, those registered to the opposition parties.
Easy.
This ^
I would assume Canadians would be on high alert after Trudeau (human 💩) seized truckers assets?
No worries
We had Vlad start a war to draw Justin across the pond now we won’t let him return.
He can go dig ditches in the Ukraine for his sins
“Already, skyrocketing prices have spurred additional production and consumption of fuels…”
Really ? Skyrocketing prices have spurred consumption ?
New York Times economics in a nutshell.
Oh dear. The War On Fossil Fuels, whose only “crime” was to provide humanity with abundant, affordable, and reliable energy and plants with their favorite food, CO2, is being sidelined because of this stupid war against Ukraine by Russia. How inconvenient.
At least 3 of the top 10 shale fracking oil drillers said they wouldn’t increase capital investment more than 5% despite increased oil prices.
So I wouldn’t necessarily count on enormous increases in oil production in the US…
Just picking up where they left off would be a big help.
Net Zero and Defund the Police, Slogans as policy with no clue of the reality of that policy on people’s lives. Perhaps the midterms will finally help the proponents of those policies inside those DC beltway a chance to escape their silo and find out what’s going on in their communities.
It takes energy to create energy.
Higher fossil fuel prices increase the cost of all products including the production of non-fossil fuel energy sources.
So if you desire a transition to non-fossil fuel energy sources higher fossil fuel prices will slow that progress.
Surely putting all those new energy extractors to work with zero fuel cost will inevitably lead to lower cost energy – at least that is the fantasy. Reality is that by the time the extractors are worn out, they will not have produced more energy they they took to manufacture, transport, erect and then demolish.
It must be dawning on the vast majority of people (griff aside) that these weather dependent energy extractors doom humans to a miserable life of ever increasing mining activity to continue to keep this resource hungry energy strategy spiralling up the collective anus of humankind.
Price wind and solar only a problem where they dont follow grid spot pricing.
But of course thet are not affordable at grid spot price and must be coupled to battery backup.
Breaking news: A huge fire in the Florida panhandle being battled currently was not – repeat, not, instantaneously seized upon as being caused by the “Climate Crisis”. This is a lost opportunity to “educate” people so that they are properly alarmed about climate. The MSM needs to up their game, and should be ashamed.
The real question is when will countries begin to return to clean, reliable nuclear power. The latest generation plants are a reality away from Chernobyl.
The last two or three generations of plants are a “reality away” from Chernobyl.
The folly of the anti-pipeline anti-drilling climate alarmists stands truly exposed. That these pipelines were not built allayed not a single barrel of oil consumption in the world. It only changed who the producers of the oil are.
Had we in Canada ensured the building of Keystone, Energy East, and timely completion of Trans Mountain, we could today rescue Europe from the clutches of Russia’s energy blackmail.
I’ve heard some suggest that, well, it will take years to build these so it doesn’t really help us with the current problem. WRONG. The current problem is a new cold war that will see Putin (as well as his most likely successors) carving off one bloody slice of Europe at a time. This will take decades to play out, THAT is the current problem.
Build the pipelines at warp speed. Should an economical alternative to fossil fuels arise, there is nothing to stop us from turning them off. Not having them when needed though is suicidal.
Pipelines are the most efficient way to move fossil fuels (and quite a few other things as well). Building more of them means less energy being used. I thought that was what they wanted?
Don’t tell that to Warren Buffet, the major stockholder of BNSF railroad.
I’ve gotten the impression that Buffet was never a green, he was just interested in increasing his profits.
FNYT
Just because they start to realize that they are on the losing team and are trying to shift toward reality doesn’t mean they aren’t leftist shills that will find every angle to detract from the continued growth of the U.S.
In my opinion,
Arming Ukraine does not (and never did) serve the interests of the American people.
Imposing sanctions on Russia does not serve the interests of the American people.
The “global warming/ green energy” lie does not (and never did) serve the interests of the American people.
Yet, she axiomatically assumes that they do ….and at the same time, pretends to have the interests of the American public as a top priority.
The sole purpose of all of this is to serve the interests of Patricia Cohen’s friends and the magnates that secure her salary…..as a well-heeled concern troll.
When will arming another country serve American interests? After Ukraine? Or After Ukraine + Poland? Or after Ukraine + Poland + Baltic States? Or after all of those + Balkans and Romania? Plus France and Germany? Must the tyrant’s armies be landing on American shores before it is time to fight them?
“If you must go to war, go to war as far from home as possible”.
Last century we armed Hitler’s enemeies and we fought in Europe lest the fight come to North America’s shores. This century it is no different. A tyrant with world ambitons is a tyrant with world ambitions, only the name and country of origin has changed.
All the things you mentioned weakens one of the biggest threats to the American people, which would be in their interest.
I don’t see how a stronger Russia, rewarded for taking territory of another nation, would be great for the US.
Wait for the other shoe to drop when China gets its turn.
“I don’t think the threat from Russia is outweighing the threat of climate change”
What, exactly, is the threat of climate change and what is its timeline?
These idiots must soil themselves at the thought of a few degrees of extra warmth.
Doesn’t make any sense, they must be certifiable.
The warmists are world champions at shooting themselves in the foot. They say “We need to eliminate those evil fossil fuels”. Blam! yeow! (Shot left foot) Now they say; “we need fossil fuels but we don’t have any so we have to buy them from Russia at exorbitant prices”.
Next they say; “We need to get rid of evil nuclear power plants” Blam! Yeow again! (Shot right foot) Now they say; “We don’t have nukes and now we don’t have any electricity either.” That hurts! Now we’ve shot ourselves in both feet and we don’t have any more feet to walk on … or shoot!
Moral to the story: It’s not that the Chinese and Russians are smarter than the Western Capitalists. It’s just that they’re smarter than radical left politicians.
Just shows how tenuous the AGW mantra is. Everyone wants to save the world but not on their dime or if it affects their comfort.
Good to see reality taking hold.
But this “greenhouse gas” fantasy has to be put to the sword:
They’re beginning to wake up to the costs of dilute energy with pushback against widespread land sterilization-
County by county, solar panels face pushback (yahoo.com)
and I doubt lesser scorched earth options will cut it in the long run-Erthos
Covering irrigation canals with solar panels seems like a decent idea, cover the canal to cut evaporation loss and generate a few watts in the process
It’s not a decent idea if it makes the panels even more expensive to put up (less efficient setting them up in a long string following the canal and the extra cost to the frame holding it over the irrigation canal.
If the government in the area is going to put them up no matter what, then should at least build them with a very tall frame so the farmer can still use the land underneath and far enough apart so enough sunshine falls on the plants during the day.
But really the panels really only make sense in some remote area where the cost of transmission lines or hauling fuel would be prohibitive.
That big solar farm planned for Australia to supply Singapore only makes sense to mine the subsidy from SN, if a new political order takes over there’s going to be a lot of scrap sunning itself in the Australian wilderness.
The humidity from the canal is also going to shorten the life of the panel and the frame.
What isn’t mentioned are that net-zero’s long shot includes very long abysmal odds.
Wind and solar are parasitic, period!
Wind and solar are unable to run mining and mining equipment, smelting industries, refining industries, industry in general, data centers, manufacturing, all electric transportation systems, etc. etc.
Net zero is not a Long shot! Net zero and any net zero aspirations are totally absurd.
It’s like COVID knew not to spread when the politically correct were protesting.
Now, climate change knows not to happen when liberals need fossil fuels to keep their political jobs and thus promote fossil fuels over renewables.
Energy is free in its raw state, and always has been. The costs are in its collection, conversion and storage. Energy is never made, so it’s never renewable energy. The laws of thermo dynamics state this clearly but many climate scientists don’t seem to understand.
The one time we might experience energy for free is sunbathing, and that’s about it. Even sailing we collect and convert to motion by spending money on masts and sails.
As nature already collected, converted, and stored energy its crazy to forgo this for some green ideological cause. Oil and coal are natural stored energy.
Now if I have not explained this very well, I’m open to correction.
The beginning of the end of Net Zero Mirage has (been) launched.
Fixed.
this makes me so happy! Thanks Vladimir!
You bet energy prices started to climb before Ukraine
warmer, colder
woke is woke
Careful. The current crisis / EU reliance on Russian oil and gas will be turned into an argument against fossil fuels and an argument for “renewables”. Of course nuclear will never be mentioned or if it is it will be that Ukraine’s nuke plants were attacked and so nuclear must be avoided at all costs. Meanwhile, prices at the pump and to heat your house and cook your food will continue to soar as greens punish oil companies and investors and tax carbon while they roll out extravagant, unrealistic and environmentally damaging power plans, such as thousands of square miles of offshore wind to generate a fraction of needed energy. Costs will continue to explode and not transitioning fast enough to green energy pipe dreams will be blamed.