Guest “Is anyone else annoyed every time the Soviet invasion of Ukraine and climate change appear in the same sentence?” by David Middleton
This NPR article isn’t as awful as I thought it would be…
How the war in Ukraine could speed up Europe’s climate plans
April 5, 2022 5:00 AM ET
LAURA BENSHOFFThe war in Ukraine has made getting more fossil fuels to Europe a top priority of the Biden Administration, in order to wean European Union members off Russian energy. But this comes as both Europe and the U.S. are behind on their goals to quickly reduce carbon emissions to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.
The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) calls for an immediate switch to renewable energy, and says the world will need to capture carbon from the atmosphere to stay within 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming. That tension has prompted concern among climate activists, who warn that more fossil fuel exports will mean more climate warming emissions.
“I think it is more likely than not that we’ll look back on this crisis as actually accelerating a clean energy transition,” said Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.
Though, Bordoff notes, it could go either way.
Experts told NPR the climate cost of the war is still up in the air, and depends on how governments balance an immediate need for fossil fuels against long-term shifts in energy production.
[…]
NPR
“Experts?” Presumably NPR thinks these folks are energy experts.
- “Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University”: Former Obama administration official and law professor with no education or experience related to energy (policy is not energy).
- “Tyson Slocum, Energy Program director with Public Citizen”: BA in political science and government, professional political activist and college professor.
- “Clark Williams-Derry, Energy Finance Analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, a group that supports the transition away from fossil fuels.”: BA in mathematics and philosophy, former Webmaster and punster for Grist Magazine.
- “Republican senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana”: US Senator, occasional RINO and MD. While not an energy expert, he does represent an energy-producing state and he has proposed a “plan for an Energy Operation Warp Speed, to supercharge domestic energy production of all kinds.”
- “Amy Myers Jaffe, research professor and director of the Climate Policy Lab at Tufts University”: BA Near Eastern Studies and Arabic, likes to talk about energy.
We have four nonexperts in energy who oppose fossil fuels and view the Soviet invasion of Ukraine as an opportunity to speed up the energy transition that isn’t happening because… climate change. And we have one nonexpert in energy, who wants to Warp Speed US energy production and infrastructure to enable us to help Europe deal with their self-inflicted energy crisis… Self-inflicted because… climate change.
While I don’t consider myself to be an “energy expert.” I’m just s petroleum geologist/geophysicist… But I can look things up. Right now, the only way we can really help Europe is to accelerate LNG (liquified natural gas) exports to them. And the LNG exporters are already doing this. From what I can tell, they are operating at full capacity. It’s not unusual for every LNG export facility in the US to be loading tankers at the same time.
February 28, 2022
LNG tanker congestion forms outside U.S. export terminals
By Marcy de LunaHOUSTON, Feb 28 (Reuters) – More than two dozen liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers were near U.S. Gulf Coast export terminals on Monday, either loading or waiting to load, according to data from Refinitiv Eikon and consultancy Kpler.
European demand for U.S. LNG climbed last year due to local production declines, lack of pipeline supply and cold weather. Sanctions on companies and banks in major gas producer Russia following its invasion of Ukraine appear to be spurring fresh demand. read more
Reuters
LNG Export Terminal Status
There are currently seven (7) US LNG export terminals in operation:
The map above is about a year old. Some of the Gulf Coast LNG facilities have added capacity since this map was made. About 90% of the 11 Bcf/d depicted on the map is concentrated in the four Gulf Coast facilities.
By the end of 2022, the capacity is expected to be about 14 Bcf/d.
The EU plus UK currently consume about 40-45 Bcf/d.
Note: Due to reporting requirements, some volumes of pipeline-imported natural gas are not attributed to a source country.
I don’t know how quickly new LNG export facilities can be Warp Speeded online… But we can start with what was under construction last year and what has been approved by FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) and not yet under construction.
Train 6 at Sabine Pass is already on line and Calcasieu Pass is expected to be online by the end of this year.
The following new LNG export capacity additions will come online by the end of 2022, according to announced project plans:
Train 6 at the Sabine Pass LNG export facility. Train 6 will add up to 0.76 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of peak export capacity. Train 6 began producing LNG in late November; the first export cargo from this train is expected to be shipped before the end of 2021.
Calcasieu Pass LNG. This new export facility has 18 liquefaction trains with a combined peak capacity of 12 million metric tons per annum (1.6 Bcf/d). Commissioning activities at Calcasieu Pass LNG started in November 2021; the first LNG production is expected before the end of this year. All liquefaction trains are expected to be operational by the end of 2022.
EIA
With Calcasieu Pass operating at full capacity, the total would reach 16 Bcf/d. On a side note Venture Global LNG will employ CCS at their Calcasieu Pass facility.
Venture Global Launches Carbon Capture and Sequestration Project
Arlington, VA– Today, Venture Global LNG announced plans to capture and sequester carbon at its Calcasieu Pass and Plaquemines LNG facilities. Having concluded a comprehensive engineering and geotechnical analysis, the company is launching, subject only to regulatory approvals, a shovel-ready carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) project, compressing CO2 at its sites and then transporting the CO2 and injecting it deep into subsurface saline aquifers where it will be permanently stored.
Through this undertaking, Venture Global will capture and sequester an estimated 500,000 tons of carbon per year from its Calcasieu Pass and Plaquemines liquefaction sites. In addition, the Company anticipates using similar infrastructure to capture and sequester 500,000 tons of carbon per year from the CP2 LNG facility once permitted. Altogether, Venture Global plans to sequester 1 million tons of carbon per year, the equivalent of removing nearly 200,000 cars off the road each year for 20 years. The successful deployment of carbon capture and sequestration technology at Calcasieu Pass would be the first of its kind for an existing LNG facility in the United States.
[…]
Venture Global LNG
Being very familiar with the geology of the area and the CCS process, I have no doubt that they can easily do this. In the press release, “carbon” should be CO2. It’s called Carbon Capture and Storage or Sequestration, but it’s actually CO2 that’s captured and stored. At $50/ton, the 45Q tx credit for 1 million tons per year (1 MTPA) would be worth $50 million per year. This is just one of many Gulf Coast CCS projects that are in the early stages of development. LNG facilities are among the most low-hanging CCS fruit. This should please the climatariat, but it just infuriates them even more.
Facilities that have been approved by FERC, but are not yet under construction, would add another 22 Bcf/d, bringing the total to 42 Bcf/d… Enough to keep the lights on in Europe. Unfortunately the current FERC Chairman, appointed by Biden, and Obama judges on the DC Circuit are doing everything they can to short-circuit the construction of these additional LNG export facilities.
FERC Ordered to Revisit South Texas LNG Authorizations as Court Finds Environmental Analyses Lacking
BY CAROLINE EVANS
August 4, 2021A federal court on Tuesday ordered FERC to review its approvals of two planned liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects in South Texas, saying the agency had not adequately explained its approach in evaluating the potential impacts on climate change and environmental justice (EJ) communities.
The decision handed down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (DC) Circuit remands the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s authorizations, clearing the facilities for construction and operation, but it does not vacate them. That leaves the authorizations in place, allowing the developers to continue work on the facilities while the review proceeds.
“We find it reasonably likely that on remand, the Commission can redress its failure of explanation with regard to its analyses of the projects’ impacts on climate change and environmental justice communities, and its determinations of public interest and convenience” under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) “while reaching the same result,” Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins wrote in an opinion on behalf of the court.
The facilities in question, NextDecade Corp.’s Rio Grande LNG and an associated pipeline, and the privately owned Texas LNG development, received FERC authorization in 2019. Neither has reached a final investment decision. A coalition of environmentalists and local activists has long opposed the projects and challenged FERC’s authorizations in court.
[…]
Natural Gas Intelligence
Robert Wilkins is an activist Obama judge. FERC Chairman Richard Glick, a Biden appointee, applauded the decision. He opposed these LNG facilities when he was in the FERC minority. Coups have consequences.
So, there you have it. Theoretically, an energy infrastructure Warp Speed program might be able to save Europe from dependence on Soviet natural gas and rescue them from their own failed policies… However, PBS energy experts, Obama judges, Biden bureaucrats and environmental terrorist organizations are hell-bent on replacing fossil fuels with Unicorns and rainbows.
Soviet?
MARCH 2, 2018
Putin, before vote, says he’d reverse Soviet collapse if he could: agenciesMOSCOW (Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday he would reverse the collapse of the Soviet Union if he had a chance to alter modern Russian history, news agencies reported.
[…]
Reuters
Everything You Never Wanted to Know About LNG
Liquefied natural gas (LNG), is natural gas that is super-cooled to minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 162 degrees Celsius). At that temperature, natural gas transforms from a gaseous state into a liquid. When in liquid form, natural gas takes up to 600 times less space than in its gaseous state, making it feasible and more economical for transport over long distances.
Is it safe?
LNG is very safe to transport, and the industry’s safety record is exemplary. For over 50 years, tankers have safely transported LNG around the world.
LNG is an odorless, non-toxic, non-corrosive liquid and leaves no residue after it evaporates. LNG will not ignite until it becomes a vapor, and even then, the vapor will not ignite until it mixes with air and becomes extremely diluted (5-15% vaporized gas-to-air ratio). Below 5%, there is too little gas in the air to burn; above 15%, there is not enough oxygen.
What if there is a release?
LNG is safely transported by sea because every precaution is taken to mitigate the possibility of a release. If there were a release, vaporizing LNG is not soluble in water and any liquid released on land or in the ocean, would quickly evaporate. There is no possibility for land or water contamination. LNG is non-toxic and it does not chemically react unless ignited.
How is natural gas liquefied?
Natural gas is converted to a liquid in a liquefaction plant, or “Train”. An LNG Train performs four main processes:
1) Pretreatment
Remove dust and slug (water and condensate) along with hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and mercury (Hg). These pollutants can cause corrosion and freezing problems, especially in aluminum heat exchangers.
2) Acid Gas Removal and Dehydration
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is absorbed and removed from natural gas with an amine absorber (acid gas removal or AGR) and remove water using an adsorbent. The removal of these impure substances prevents ice from forming during the subsequent liquefaction process.
3) Remove Heavy Hydrocarbons
Heavy hydrocarbons (C5+) are removed by fractionation before liquefaction. Natural gas is pre-cooled to about -31°F (-35°C) by propane.
4) Separation and Liquefaction
1. Pre-cooled mixed refrigerant (MR) moving through a high-pressure separator separates into a vapor and liquid. Each stream is cooled further, fully liquefied, and sub-cooled in separate tube circuits in the main cryogenic heat exchanger (MCHE).
2. The two sub-cooled MR streams are let down in pressure, further reducing their temperatures. As the mixed refrigerant vaporizes and flows downward on the shell side of the MCHE, it provides refrigeration for liquefying and sub-cooling the natural gas.
3. The pre-cooled natural gas moves through a separate tube circuit in the MCHE, causing it to liquefy and sub-cool to between -238°F (-150°C) to -260°F (-162°C).
4. The LNG end flash at the outlet of the MCHE and in the receiving LNG storage tank, generates flash gas and boil-off gas to make up the fuel gas needed mainly by the propane and MR gas turbine driven compression cycles.
Cameron LNG
Cameron LNG is located just north of Hackberry LA, about halfway from Houston TX to Baton Rouge LA.
Here’s a Google Earth image of the facility:
The facility is about 1.7 miles long from north to south, up to about 0.6 miles wide and covers just over 500 acres.
These are the trains (north is towards the top of the photo):
Each train is about 265 meters (~290 yards) long.
Here’s an oblique shot of the entire facility:
“Coups have consequences.”
Please expand on this “coup”.
As with “shamdemic”, you have a habit of sneaking in fact free whines. Your vagueness invariably increases with the silliness of your name calling.
But back to pimping your employers efforts to cash in on the borrow and spend, winner picking, 45q (unfortunately bipartisan) corporate welfare. I’m sure the posters here will swoon over your name calling. But I hope they snap out of it long enough to consider the latter – as they have in the past.
Please expand less on word salads.
The usual fact free ad hom. Provide us with any word, phrase, sentence, paragraph flying over your comb over. I’m happy to dumb down to Trump level for you.
We’re patient. Because we’ll have to be….
“Because we’ll have to be…”
What on earth are you on about?
Speaking of fact free ad homs, that’s all word salad bob is capable of.
I’m starting to think Bob and Kamala went to the same culinary school, sorry, took the same speaking class.
More like “word slaw” bob. Salads have some structure.
Definitely has the cabbage.
Is English your 2nd language?
Yes, it is. The problem is that BigOilyBlob doesn’t have a first language.
Not an ad hom or similar anywhere. Yet, boob states:
A completely illogical delusional response.
Delusions and paranoia are allegedly treatable. Be sure to find a genuine expert, not press release chasers you prefer.
I use words like “coup”, “shamdemic”, “Brandon”, “Biteme”, etc. to afford feeble minded people an entry point into the discussion.
I’m not usually a fan of invectives in such a well researched essay, but “affording feeble minded people an entry point…” made me laugh out loud. Thanks for a much needed chuckle!
What’s the point in trying to be serious if I can’t use it as an opportunity to trigger trolls? 😉
Ah, the “Hey, **** you man!” reply, you hurled at me in Jr High. Erudite as always.
Separately, sorry about the lunch money. I’m not that guy any more….
bigoilbob, I don’t believe there was a coup. I think Trump mismanaged his campaign and lost the election.
But you have little credibility here, as you relentlessly criticize everything David Middleton writes. David researches information and provides facts, you respond with invective. David gives us thoughtful commentary on energy issues, you give us . . .what?
If every now and then David throws in a non sequitur or ad hominem, or any other Latin term you want, it just makes his stuff more readable. I don’t have to agree with everything someone says to benefit from their wisdom.
I wouldn’t ordinarily feed the troll, but you got me on a bad day.
Being a stickler for logic…
A non sequitur is an inference or conclusion that doesn’t follow from from the premise. Biden’s native language is non sequitur.
An ad hominem argument is an argument against the person, rather than against the argument. People often call personal insults “ad homs”, thinking that ad hominem means something else.
I tend to pepper otherwise serious posts with sarcasm, flippant comments and hyperbole because some people just lock in on the language and it causes them make red herring arguments. Red herrings are one of my favorite logical fallacies to dismantle, right up there with straw man fallacies… And … I just love playing Whack-a-Troll… 😉
I accept the correction!
I don’t think I corrected anything… I just took it as a cue to add some more sarcastic content to the thread… 🍻
How do I have to do to get you to throw in one of your video clips or captioned pictures?
PS I think you should include in your collection the clip where Herminie says, “What an idiot!” 😎
Every Troll has its bridge.
Bigoilbob has not yet realised that big oil is currently willing to go along with the climate scam. They are quite happy to sell us less oil for higher prices: It means they have to do less work supplying us with a product we cannot do without. Inelastic demand curve and all that.
wordsaladbob is quite the clown. He whines when others do what he has been doing.
I hate to say this but judging by your writing if your brain activity dropped 5% doctors could legally harvest your organs.
F J B, blob
I doubt you were ever that guy…I am thinking short bus material.
BO Bob, We are all eagerly awaiting your own essay on the subject, but we’re not holding our breath.
If you don’t have anything substantive to add, just piss off.
About what? Wander back.
And no, I won’t piss off. Sorry if you cant handle the truth….
I for one welcome seeing big oily boob make a perfect ass of himself as he does every time he opens his piehole. We need idiots like big oily boob to spout their stupidity so that the climate scam is further discredited.
I think BigOilBobster believes his writing style makes him look witty and clever.
In reality, the turgid twaddle he writes makes him look like a pompous wally.
If you were sat in my local pub and started coming out with that twaddle you’d be very quickly told to finish up your Bacardi and Coke and p1ss off. We don’t suffer fools gladly round my way.
Once again word salad bob doesn’t even try to refute, he just regurgitates the same tired lies.
Here’s a reality check about what’s going on with Russia & Ukraine from a
Yank POV.
Both Hillary & Brandon are neck deep in scandals involving Russia & Ukraine
which they must keep hidden. The Russia collusion hoax was used by Hillary,
etal.- with the help of Ukrainians- to blame Trump for doing what they had
already done- Uranium One, Skolkovo (think hypersonic missiles & $145M to
the Clinton Foundation), etc. They also tried to effect a coup after he won.
(John Solomon & Mollie Hemingway are good sources for the coup.)
Along with that, Brandon’s polls aren’t dropping as fast as he’s found
something to blame for all his screw-ups. It’s also a way to distract from the
nuttiness of going Green. So he may try to keep the conflict going at least
through the elections by helping/not helping Ukraine so Russia can’t win but
neither can Ukraine- never caring about the plight of Ukrainians.
https://dailycaller.com/2017/03/21/hillarys-hypersonic-missile-gap/
https://bongino.com/ep-1741-the-explosive-connections-the-dems-want-to-cover-up
Pander Bears gotta pander.
The 2014 Biden/Maidan/Slavic Spring in the catastrophic Obama Spring series for social justice, democratic gerrymandering, and redistributive change.
Poor blob…Lots of words strung together at random, meaning absolutely nothing.
“shambolic” is the best description of your comments.
Must be because of the inner tantrum you carry with you, always.
bigoilbrandon: I’ll be happy to expand on “coup.”
“Coup d’etat.”
You’re welcome.
Bother – I had money on it being “Coup de main.”
Of course, the US should build 1980’s era French or Korean design nuclear reactors, to eliminate the reverse learning curve the greens have done to newer designs. Or build new coal plants.
The German Energiewende was a failure, and the Green Blob must be forced to recognize their NetZero fantasy is just that.
French 1980s designs have had safety issues requiring expensive refits in recent years… during which time only exported German electricity kept France going. the cost bankrupted EDF and forced the French govt to take a large stake in it.
I’d go with Korean
South or North Korean?
(for elucidation only)
Obviously the griffendope would be a nork fanboi. With reservations that they’re not really communist enough.
Be careful about what you say. Big Brother XR may be watching &
cancel you!!!
France has been operating Nuclear power stations since 1974 when it decided that nuclear was a better option than Middle East Oil. As a result they are well down on per capita CO2, if CO2 is actually a problem. These French nuclear reactors you despise have been keeping the UK grid running during several wind droughts. That batch of reactors lasted their design life of 40 years and could probably have an extended life to 50+ years, with more frequent and detailed safety inspections. The new generation’s problems have been identified and further builds will have those faults rectified and will last more than 40 years.
Remind me, what is the expected life of of an offshore wind turbine?
The French, like the UK, have a new class of Nuclear Submarines the six Barracuda class submarines using home built reactors. So they could use the same solution as proposed by Rolls-Royce. France being about 2.3 times the size of the UK with the same population SMR make a lot of sense in France.
As the French state controls energy prices then the problems EDF suffered financially are at least in part due to the state.
as usual Griff is talking utter bollox about stuff he knows f-all about.
He’s never been to France and hates the French electricity success story.
Hey who made the Eurostar Griff?
Hint hint it’s French TGV and Alsthom because your little island were so far behind the times they didn’t think you could get an electric train to run at 300-380km/h.
Remember the smoky shitty HST diesel powered things that ran London to Cardiff at twice the price it takes to go Paris-Lyon, taking twice as long?
The TGV is wonderful, but it has been financed largely at the expense of the rest of the SNCF network, which is decrepit and ageing.
I hear the RKMB nuclear design is off patent. Cheap, yet powerful!
Selling LNG to Europe at spot prices will NOT help Europe to transition away from Russian gas; offering long term contracts at prices aimed at being competitive with Russian contracts just might. Any long term strategy to reduce or supplant Russian gas in Europe has to be as good or undercutting the Russian contracts; a little here, a little there when the prices are high just won’t accomplish the goals.
Sorry, forgot to add that any US contract will need assurances that the supply of gas is guaranteed and will survive past the present administration.
The supply of natural gas won’t be an issue. Whether or not the US remains a “rule of law” nation might become an issue.
Although, just a few months before Democrats started badgering the oil industry to increase production and send more LNG to Europe, they were clamoring for a ban on LNG exports.
I need you now but I’m going to divorce you after you have helped me through this tough period.
Thus far European customers have shunned long term contracts for LNG. Asian customers, on the other hand, seem to prefer long term contracts.
Apart from Hungary that is (not sure who else in the EU has a contract with Russia). I just noticed the news articles saying that the EU is trying to ban all long term gas contracts across the entire bloc and is also hoping to buy gas collectively between the member states. I think the EU bureaucrats may be their own worst enemy.
Have you ever heard of a bureaucrat who wasn’t?
Very true. The idea that the EU is trying to push (control of hydrocarbons, then a phased reduction and eventual elimination) favours the spot pricing and not the long term contract approach but flies in the face of the real world data that hydrocarbon consumption is actually increasing across the EU. My feeling is that the more they push for this ideology, the more fractures will appear in the EU; eventually this might be what causes the EU to fragment.
We need one of these: Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B
That’s the problem. We already had one and the survivors all went into politics.
Oh, you meant build one of our own for export. Well OK, just remember to stay away from dirty phones.
Those UV smartphone chinavirus sterilizers have made even the Golgafrinchan telephone sanitisers redundant.
Nice.
LNG cannot be price competitive with Russian pipeline gas. Costs more to produce. But it can be a more reliable albeit more expensive supply.
They are competitive, or were before the invasion. Russia was getting $38/mcf for its pipeline gas back in December and $28/mcf in January..
https://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=russian-natural-gas
However, Russia could easily drop that price and undercut US LNG exports. This might be why European customers have been shunning long-term contracts for LNG.
I guess they would throw mama (Griff) from the train and change strategy…..
UK to build 8 nuclear reactors amid new energy strategy – ABC News (go.com)
By 2050. Won’t help in next few years.
Nothing helps in the short run, but at least the policy glacier has shifted some.
The UK could be extracting its own resources much quicker than that.
But they would rather ruin the country and hurt the population than break the greenie farce.
Once the UK population begins experiencing blackouts and gas shortages, the Greentards will be swept aside.
We must not forget that on 2 February, 2022 the following U.S. Senators authored a letter to the Secretary of Energy proposing limiting U.S. exports of natural gas:
Edward J. Malarkey (sic) D-MA
Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren D-MA
Jack Reed D-RI
Angus S. King, Jr. I-ME
Debbie Stabenow D-MI
Tina Smith D-MN
Richard Blumenthal D-CT
Patrick Leahy D-VT
Gary Peters D-MI
Sheldon Whitehouse D-RI
The letter: https://www.reed.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/letter_to_department_of_energy_on_lng_2-2-22.pdf
Now there’s a campaign angle all ready to go – “These Senators want you to be dependant on Russian gas. Don’t vote for these Senators unless you also think the freedom loving USA should beg for energy from the Russians.”
How does banning exports here in the US cause us to be reliant on Russian gas?
Your idea might play well in Europe, but Europeans don’t generally vote in American elections.
That you know of.
Maybe not in person. Mail in ballots should not be a problem.
Oh that’s where Biden’s votes came from! I did wonder.
I notice a lot of north eastern senators there. Too bad they aren’t interested in getting natural gas to their states so their constituents could have cheap winter fuel.
After driving back and forth across the country over the past two weeks, I’ve seen that New England is so different from the rest on the country.
Some kind of secluded hideaway where they don’t experience how everyone else lives.
The usual suspects in wrong-way policy tilt
Those NPR “experts” sound quite reasonable compared to the latest from Bill Mckibben. His newest organization thinks that shipping millions of heat pumps to Europe and Ukraine will solve all their problems. Apparently the usual suspects including Kerry, Warren and Markey are pushing this also.
My answer is “Who owns heat pump manufacturing companies or shares?”
Yeah, cos whenever you’ve got a Russian tank bearing down on you the first thing you reach for is a heat pump.
Javelin ATGM? Or Bill McKibben heat pump? Tough choice… 🤔
Hmmm….
….. do they make armour piercing heat pumps?
Probably not for a modern tank, but HEAT rounds work fine against most APCs
Ask Zelensky, he’s the only real leader out there now.
Well, Zelensky knows he has his $46m Miami mansion and large overseas bank accounts to fall back on if he has to get out. His citizens, on the other hand, will have to rely on the generosity of the countries that will accept them as refugees.
That’s not fair. Zelensky could very easily have left the scene to become the leader of a “new government in exile”. Instead, he chose to stay at the center of operations and a highly noticeable target for assassination at any moment.
The only ‘threat of assassination’ Zelensky might be under is from Ukraine – 2 negotiators have already been killed by Ukraine for being ‘traitors’ – Zelensky wouldn’t survive to get on the plane. All of the so-called ‘Russian assassination teams’ that the Ukrainians have yelled about have failed to materialise and evidence for their actual existence appears just as absent. Most independent observers agree that it might be in Putin’s interests for Zelensky to remain in power.
Correct. The Azov contingent isn’t going to let Zelensky jet off into the sunset if the situation goes south.
Frank I think Putin has what he needs.
Derg, if “what he needs” means the US shooting itself in the foot, I agree.
Lol…he knows the US has his back and Russia will stay to the East. After all that is what is happening. 🤔
Will you ever provide any objective evidence for your claims?
I think you completely misunderstand the situation – I was pointing out the complete absence of evidence to support what Ukraine has claimed. Why don’t you show me the evidence to support what Ukraine has claimed? Have you seen the conflicting reports into Denys Kyreyev’s death? Have you seen the reports into Zelensky’s offshore account in the Panama papers? There is enough evidence available to show the situation Zelensky is in and after over 8 years of bullsh$t from the bad actors in this, I have the view that I will not take what they say as gospel unless there is evidence to support what is being said. Call me overly cynical if you will but all of the government’s involved in this (without exception) have form for being economical with the truth to the point of being caught in outright lies.
I thought he was the Al Franken of Ukrainian politics…
He is a puppet.
So’s Biden. They probably share the same handlers.
McKibben is a flat-out looney.
He is a modern day Rasputin who has somehow managed to seduce some of the Rockefeller heirs by taking advantage of their pedagogically instilled guilt complexes.
Middlebury College is full of world-saving, guilt-ridden fools. It has some academic strengths but it boggles the mind that any reputable institution would allow a full-on nutcase like McKibben anywhere near naive and impressionable adolescents.
Just wondering… What would be the source of energy for the heat pumps? Solar? Wind? Natural gas?
What? They need an energy source as well? I thought you just installed them and they had everything built in. (I don’t really need a sarc tag, do I?)
There’s been a whole bevvy of this stuff in the media lately.
“I think it is more likely than not that we’ll look back on this crisis as actually accelerating a clean energy transition,”
There’s no harm in wishful thinking, but that’s all it is. What the war has done is to remove the false certainties that the West could claim reduced emissions by outsourcing them to ‘dirtier’ nations and get by.
But Russia is also a major exporter of commodities, such as Nickel, that are vital to the electrification of everything. Those prices have also shot up. That EV isn’t going to get any cheaper.
They haven’t thought it through – again.
Have you signed up for the new E-Humvee yet? Apparently, it only takes about 4 days to recharge on a 120V charger.
David, thanks again for another entertaining and education post.
You been on a real roll recently. YAY!!!!
Keep ’em coming, please.
Regards,
Bob
PS: When I saw S.E. Texas on the map, Shiner Bock came to mind…even though I wasn’t a beer drinker when I lived there. YAY Texas!!!!!!!!!!!
Can’t make chili without Shiner Bock…
No, no you can’t!!
Said he who was kicked out of their hospitality suite more than once back in the late 70’s.
It was a nice ride on the Harley in the spring.
Dan B, I can recall attending an open-air rock concert in Shiner that was sponsored by the brewery. We stood about 20ft from the stage. I believe it was in the 1990s.
Regards,
Bob
A dumb minerals exploration geo wants to know the long term consequences of CO2 down a well.
Doesn’t CO2 go super-critical (at 300K), separate into very reactive ions, mix with the very reactive Na & Cl ions, hydrolyze the wall rock … how many naked oxygens can you have down there before you have rapid oxidation?
I thought you needed a higher temperature before CO2 started a disintegration process that you mention?
The process is to compress the CO2 and inject it as a supercritical liquid. Below a depth of about -3,000′ it will remain a supercritical liquid. We’ll be injecting it into normally pressured saline aquifers (thick, wet sand packages), below a thick marine shale. The objective is to target off-structure, relatively flat areas. The supercritical CO2 forms a plume in the brine-saturated sandstone, migrating outward and generally up-dip from the borehole. The dissolution rate of the CO2 is very sluggish; however it does eventually go into solution, collapsing the plume. There will be some mineralization as it reacts with silicate minerals.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009254117304291
No.
300K is 27º Celcius, 80º Farhenheit, a mild summer temperature.
304K at 73.8 bar.
While I don’t consider myself to be an “energy expert.” I’m just s petroleum geologist/geophysicist… But I can look things up.
You still need the nous to comprehend what you’re looking up and welcome to Hackaday and the climate changers quintessential problem-
Grid-Level Energy Storage And The Challenge Of Storing Energy Efficiently | Hackaday
Using dispatchable hydroelectricity, coal, gas and uranium the conversion from gravity potential, carbon or fissile matter into electricity is performed on-demand. In comparison using mostly intermittent sources for powering a nation’s grid would seem to be an unsolved problem as this requires storing electricity in enormous amounts. Although a reasonable solution may be found in the future, at least at this point in time there is no mature, scalable technology that can perform this function in a way that could be considered economical.
David,
What kind of delays happen when hurricanes move through the gulf? It seems every fall there is one that moves through every two weeks.
I ask because I’m curious if there are any other good places on the east coast to put these lng terminals? Trying to rely on exports from the US when transportation could be interrupted for months at a time doesn’t seem prudent.
Hurricanes suck!
The disruptions can be quite variable. Last year Ida, was one of the worst. Rita, Katrina and Ike are the three other ones that come to mind as really bad ones.
There are a lot of great places on the east coast for terminals. However, pipeline capacity isn’t really adequate. There are currently two east coast terminals and a permitted location in Florida. However, these three facilities won’t have a lot of capacity (<1 Bdf/d each).
Off topic, but just think of the delays in getting the grid back on line ‘post hurricane’ when any significant contribution of ‘supply’ is windmills and solar panels, which will look like part of the debris field after a WWII style carpet bombing.
How many months can YOU live without electricity?!
UK’s energy policy is a self-inflicted disaster. Lefty policies caused a ban on fracking, shut down coal mines, over regulated nuclear, lied about costs, deprecated North Sea oil and gas, now look at us.
….. and worse still, they’re not even lefties, they’re phony-lefty parasites.
The ban on fracking came in under a tory govt, i.e. a right wing one
Several things wrong with that really Griffy – the Tory government is of a slightly different flavour to the Tory party as a whole and is more ‘centre ground’ or even slightly more to the left than the party. The Tory government hasn’t actually banned fracking, they’ve withdrawn support and allowed local moratoria on fracking to stand, this is despite pressure from the Labour party to ban fracking by law. Apart from that it’s a good post – ‘the’ and ‘i.e.’ were spot on.
Everything to the right of hard core socialism, is right wing in Europe.
As is anything to the right of the Progressives / Democrat-Socialists in the US.
There is no right wing government in the UK or elsewhere; they all belong to a left wing spectrum.
There is no “right wing” government in the UK, both are decidedly left wing.
Since the people running most of Europe have begun to decommission their gas wells and are looking at importing Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) to make up the short fall – What about beginning to change over to Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) as it has almost 2½ times as much energy by volume? Issues are price and safety, LPG is heavier than air and can pool.
It hasn’t upset any plans for renewables: it has just got everyone to say they are going to move faster on renewables!
Better invest in diesel powered heavy machinery to mine all those minerals needed for those solar panels.
There are supply chain problems now, don’t expect to go faster.
Oh yes because, throughout all of history, what a government says it might do is exactly what it actually has done. You’re a laugh a minute just for your sheer childish naivete, Griffy.
Except this is the core issue why Europe got itself into this pickle to begin with, which was reckless over installation of low density electric non reliable renewables, and then shutting in its own hydrocarbon production so soon that it can’t even keep their own lights on.
As the first sentence in this post mentioned…”Is anyone else annoyed every time the Soviet invasion of Ukraine and climate change appear in the same sentence? This is the core issue at hand, and the reckless reduction in USA production the last year that led to such massive price increases to global fossil fuel prices. Also in the name of ‘climate change’ including cancelling pipelines in Canada/USA, but green lighting Nord Stream 2 for Russia and Europe.
We are consuming more fossil fuels now every year in a normal economy, getting to near 100 million barrels per day soon. Renewables are not going to make much difference, but drive the price up through the roof, which is a feature for some, but a big bug for the economy, as energy price is the foundation of the economy.
I hope you are supporting the new push for nuclear in the UK, Griff. It is ‘carbon free’ electricity.
So the answer to the problem created by reliance upon ‘renewables’ is…more ‘renewables.’
Yeah that’ll do it./sarc
Yes, that is what they say. But what are they actually doing. There is a difference.
Agreed. Especially if John Kerry can get the Pentagon to sign off on the UN international armaments protocol for Low Emissions Ordinance and speed up the conversion of its tracked vehicles from fossil fuels to electric transmission. If these can be done, then even a prolonged war in the Ukraine may have a negligible impact on overall atmospheric CO2 concentrations and may in fact, speed up the overall reduction, as prolongation of the conflict will increase the window of opportunity for a more rapid deployment of renewable alternatives, as griff has pointed out. However, if the IPCC runs this simulation and reports in the affirmative, it may create a rift between the IPCC and the UN General Assembly which evaluates such conflicts using the more antiquated rubric of traditional humanitarian concerns. However, as the fate of the planet hangs in the balance, the IPPC findings should carry more weight than an unscientific General Assembly vote. IMHO
Griffiepoo, I’ve asked you this several times: why do Renewables require subsidies?
The notion that the Russian natural gas problem will accelerate the transition to net zero is worthy of much ridicule. It can’t technically, let alone economically. The EU is in a VERY unenviable predicament of their own making, with zero short term solutions.
And a fact Dave did not mention is that most of the LNG capacity is already bespoke under long term contracts, for example to Japan—that enabled them to get financing. So there isn’t a lot of ‘spot’ capacity for Europe to buy any time soon.
I did mention that in a previous post. I think it’s about half of the exports that are tied to long-term contracts.
I think most of the LNG going to Asian customers is linked to long-term contracts. Most of what’s going to European customers is purchased on the spot market.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2022.03.28/main.svg
There have been at least a few Asia-bound tankers that have been redirected to Europe. So there’s a little bit of leeway there.
If our government decided to redirect all of the LNG to Europe they would have to force LNG companies to invoke force majeure and break their contracts.
Cheniere’s newly expanded Corpus Christi facility is actually sold out into the 2040’s.
It’s not a Soviet war, it’s a Great Russian war (pre-revolution). So not nationalist left wing but natonalist right wing.
Does it really matter if Vlad fancies himself to be the reincarnation of Stalin or Catherine the Great? 😉
If you like a correct narrative, yes. Putin hates the Soviets.
It’s not a narrative, it’s hyperbole, however…
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-election-putin/putin-before-vote-says-hed-reverse-soviet-collapse-if-he-could-agencies-idUSKCN1GE2TF
The collapse of the Soviet Union meant the end of ‘Communism’ there, or at least the totalitarian system that paid lip service to it. (Not to worry though, Marxist thought is still alive and well in most of our faculty lounges). The downside for most Russians was that their economy also collapsed, with the result they got poorer while the oligarchs, mainly former apparatchiks, picked up the country’s productive assets for a song. Putin’s support hinges on his having brought some degree of order out of the chaos, as well as having stood up to the West.
Do you have any evidence that Putin hates the Soviets?
He has been quoted as saying that the fall of the Soviet Union was one of the great catastrophes.
He hates the design involving separate states in a Soviet system. That should be a warning to current aligned states, not just former ones nearby.
If he sees himself as a reincarnation of Catherine the Great isn’t the picture of him riding the horse completely the wrong way round?
Do you know how hard I had to resist going there… 😆
Can you name any of Putin’s economic policy that would qualify as right wing?
Or are you just using the usual left wing standard that anything you don’t like is right wing?
I see a lot of people declaring that everything they don’t like is left wing. That’s the result of thinking that “left” and “right” are the only categories.
To be brutally honest, I wish Western Europe a huge jolt of hardship. A real kick in the rear leaving people in no doubt of the stupidity of no-energy policies while Europe is still democratic enough to be able to vote in some sanity. If people like Griff et al want to starve in the dark (he is aware he won’t have computer access, right?) and his fellow citizens agree to join him, go for it. I want “green” to become a pejorative term for an entire generation or two.
Nice. You do know that the ‘huge jolt of hardship’ will involve people dying, don’t you? Thousands up to hundreds of thousands if the weather turns colder – I really am hoping they have little or no hardship myself.
Not necessarily. Most deaths occur under extreme cold, which it
isn’t now. Since us humans have brains, people can move in
together, if necessary, being able to shut off the empty dwelling
heat as spring is almost here.
Oh, I’m aware, sadly. But on balance I would rather those suffering be largely white people who have the agency to scream at their govts until sanity is restored than shoving “renewables” on Third World people whom we in the West can blithely ignore.
Well, it seems to have gotten the UK government off the mark on nuclear power, stating they will build 8 new nuclear plants .. with an emphasis on quickly.
‘Quickly’ will be the operative word and probably the point of failure; Hinckley point C reactor was started in 2013 and is expected to be commissioned in 2026, hopefully!
If the USA can supply enough LNG to halt the need for Russian gas then there’s good money heading West from Europe.
EU admits it has given Russia €35billion for energy since the Ukraine war began, while supplying €1billion of military equipment to Kyiv
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10692127/EU-admits-given-Russia-35billion-energy-Ukraine-war-began.html
Policy fail can actually be deadly, right Griff.
The Slavic Springers want to abort the baby, and have her, too. Time will tell if their planned insurrection will remain a viable choice.
Does Josep Borrell have a plan for replacing Euro 35B worth of oil and gas approximately every 41 days?
Eight years… 32 trimesters, 8 under the current regime, in progress. NOW (pun intended) they feint an empathetic response. The Europeans are either mortally green, enthralled with Green through labor and environmental arbitrage, or are narrating yet another handmade tale with “benefits”. Perhaps a foray into a South African, Libyan, etc. adventure into redistributive change.
The war is the demonstration that the Green Dream of our day has been a delusion not because it is not doable. It is just not doable for 20-50 years and Russia and China will do it on their own terms. The war is the result of strategic goals of Russian and China to control the Eastern Hemisphere hydrocarbon markets by cutting off the Black sea from Romanian and Bulgarian planned LNG ports and LNG ports in Ukraine Ukraine is the last of the non-NATO former Soviet states that could be grabbed and it will be grabbed unless we beat the Russians into a bloody pulp fast for which I am not in favor. We need to get to work in the USA fast not fight a global war that we would not win. The reason is clearly strategic not existential. Solving for pattern, the war provided Putin a predictable vehicle to spit his Oligarchs out of his pockets and reset the Russian Economy as it will be fully interwoven with Chinese goals in the East. Putin is prepared to pay the price and is more than willing to take the West with them. Putin is a dialectical thinker. His existential goal is a future synthesis and this is where the glory is for him….long after he is gone. R&C do not care about climate change. Yet they helped paid for the propaganda as a false flag to weaken the West and further the bourgeois delire du jour.de…as a smoke screen. Their goal is to turn Russia and Central Asia into Chinese style economic juggernaut. They don’t need the West. They are going to economically rule the Eastern Hemisphere. Ironically, toward latter half of the 23rd century, they will lead the world into a superconductive energy systems revolution (the next gen battery LOL) that will end hydrocarbon fuel as the cash cow that it is today. China leads the world in Superconductive R&D. America better learn to how to get back to work fast. The make work/medical/legal/banking/401K economy won’t cut it… We need to get back to making stuff without China fast. We need the infrastructure to use our NG and oil locally and export it globally fast. The .globalism of the 1990’s is dead unless we are willing to enter into an era of dependency and declining standard of living or fight a massive global war for many years to come. We have to deal with the current reality and take it from there before we stumble badly. We could have been the alignment with Russia that Russia needed but we just didn’t share the dialectical outlook of 1917 which still operates in Russia and China.
David – I have a question and I’m too lazy to go and look it up myself.
What do they do with all the “cold” that is released when LNG is unloaded and put into pipelines?
I think they leave it on the tankers… 😎
The real answer…
https://www.econnectenergy.com/articles/how-does-regasification-of-lng-work
Correct, and then they load the ships with Ham and cheese for the return trip, the leftover cold keeps it all cold
Ingenious
The only means US climate activists have for quickly reducing America’s carbon emissions to the extent they say is necessary is through drastic and highly coercive government-enforced energy conservation measures.
Those highly coercive energy conservation measures must by necessity include imposing higher prices for all forms of energy, fossil fuel and renewable alike; and eventually, to impose a government-mandated program for the direct rationing of energy.
If climate activists aren’t pushing hard for aggressive government intervention in the economy to raise the price of all forms of energy, and eventually to ration the supply of energy, then they simply aren’t being serious about achieving the carbon emission reductions they claim are necessary to save the planet.
The “raising prices” part of the strategy is already going well, Beta Blocker.
The rationing part is a little farther down the pike, I’d say after the midterms in the U.S.
Fact is, if the second coming of the Prophet, Jesus Christ, and Scooby Doo all happened on the same day, it would still be described as being put at risk because of Climate Change caused by humans.
michael: “[…] if the second coming of the Prophet, Jesus Christ, and Scooby Doo all happened on the same day, […]”
–
–
You’d never hear of it. Twitter and Facebook would cancel their accounts and the YSM would not report a word of it. Google would bury it 27 pages back.
How much energy is needed for this transformation?
And, how much energy is expended to transport the LNG to its final destination?
What transformation?
It doesn’t matter how much energy is expended in LNG transportation. The only thing that normally matters is the cost in $, €, £, etc.
“A federal court on Tuesday ordered FERC to review its approvals of two planned liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects in South Texas, saying the agency had not adequately explained its approach in evaluating the potential impacts on climate change and environmental justice (EJ) communities.”
There will be no progress until the last environmentalist is strangled with the entrails of the last lawyer.
I was with you up to the point where you failed to mention what to do with the bloody career politicians that have caved to both enviromentalists and lawyers?
Lets get serious here: There is NO CLIMATE CRISIS!
THE CLIMATE HAS ALWAYS CHANGED!
5000 years ago, there was the Egyptian 1st Unified Kingdom warn period
4400 years ago, there was the Egyptian old kingdom warm period.
3000 years ago, there was the Minoan Warm period. It was warmer than now WITHOUT fossil fuels.
Then 1000 years later, there was the Roman warm period. It was warmer than now WITHOUT fossil fuels.
Then 1000 years later, there was the Medieval warm period. It was warmer than now WITHOUT fossil fuels.
Then 1000 years later, came our current warm period. You are claiming that whatever caused those earlier warm periods suddenly quit causing warm periods, only to be replaced by man’s CO2 emission, perfectly in time for the cycle of warmth every 1000 years to stay on schedule. Not very believable.
The entire climate scam crumbles on this one observation because it shows that there is nothing unusual about today’s temperature and ALL claims of unusual climate are based on claims of excess warmth caused by man’s CO2.
http://www.debunkingclimate.com/warm_periods.html
http://www.debunkingclimate.com/climatehistory.html
http://www.debunkingclimate.com
Feel free to disagree by showing actual evidence that man’s CO2 is causing serious global warming.
So what you’re saying is that the US operation in Ukraina was implemented for the NS2 to fail and to wean Europe ON gas from USA?
Well played.
Oddgeir