Column: Appalling New Historical Precedent – Surplus Cash Flow Cannot Solve World’s Energy Problems, By Design


 Terry Etam

[Scene: Suburbia. A harried wife returning home from work. Angry slamming of a front door.]

“I’m home! Where are you? What the hell is going on? Why is the garage full of cash? I can’t even get the car in! What are you, Heisenberg now?”

“No, no, no. Honey, I can explain! We’re having a really good year at work, like really good -“

“Listen ya mook! You better come clean! You work in natural gas. Furnaces excite you. No one piles up cash like that unless they’re big tech or drug lords. Now again: What’s going on?”

“I’m telling the truth. We had a bunch of inventory, so to speak. All of a sudden everyone’s nuts for the stuff. Bidding wars. You’d think it would be great but…”

[Wife notices open laptop in his hands. Browser open to a site called “Ten foolproof ways to launder money”. She points.]

“So what’s that then?” [Man drops laptop and runs shrieking from the room.]

OK, first things first – stay calm everyone, the above vignette is only a dramatization. All is ‘normal’ in suburbia. Money laundering under IFRS is so onerous that few bother.29dk2902l

But Houston, we do have a problem. And Calgary too. A cash flow problem that is the exact opposite of what most people endure. In the hydrocarbon industry, there is currently more cash being generated than can be properly deployed, and where that cash goes is going to create a problem of significant proportions. 

Admittedly, it feels pretty stupid to call this a problem. And people will rightly point out that there were years of low or no cash flow, and that’s just the way it goes in cyclical industries. And they’ll say that complaining about too much cash is about as moronic as it gets.

That’s all true. But it doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem, and as is usual with the hydrocarbon industry, it’s a communications/image problem. Even giving it back to owners is not going to be so easy.

First, some pertinent background. The reason for the excess cash flow is that there is a global shortage of hydrocarbons (which is in turn creating a shortage of many other things that rely on hydrocarbons). Global natural gas prices are through the roof, and oil prices refuse to fall much below $100/barrel despite demand destruction (minimal) and massive releases from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Even coal prices have risen dramatically.

Here’s what high prices do to producer Cash Flow: a research firm earlier this year modelled 2023 CF for an amalgamation of 9 integrated/oil sands companies, 13 large cap producers, and 15 small/mid cap ones. Forecast CF for this group at $70 oil, after capital expenditures, is $190 billion. At $110 oil, that number hits $350 billion. (And this doesn’t include the really big guns like Saudi Aramco…)

Ten thousand shareholders are ecstatic at that news; five billion people get irate. The latter aren’t interested in nuance; erroneously or not, they smell a rat, and they want vengeance (more on that in a second).

In a normal business cycle, high commodity prices are a clear signal for investors to move into the market, and for producers to ramp up production to capture those high prices. Commodities are a cyclical industry, one that seldom sees perfect alignment between supply and demand to the point of steady prices, so the price signals are important rebalancing factors.

A cliche that usually earns one a social media beating is to say: “this time it’s different” – but this time it really is, at least when it comes to hydrocarbon production. Companies are not reinvesting/growing production for a lot of reasons – lack of infrastructure, investor pressure to return cash to shareholders, and the relentless pop-culture drumbeat that hydrocarbons are a dying industry (what’s actually dying are people/industries from a lack of hydrocarbons, but that’s a whole different story).

We therefore are now seeing producers selling commodities at ridiculously high prices, at the same time that governments roll out climate policy after climate policy that discourages additional production and incentivizes a pivot away from hydrocarbons. 

There is little new production on the horizon – few new field discoveries, few new mega projects. 2015-19 benefitted from mega projects kicked off around 2009-14 – a period of sustained prices and “normal” energy business cycles.

Mega projects are harder to launch than WWIII. Literally. Only despotic regimes will approve a new oil mega-project (for example, Canada approved the huge Bay du Nord offshore Newfoundland oil project (whose owners are a long way from proceeding with)).

Big Oil is floundering around in a state of wealthy self-immolation, trying to appease everyone, doing a hundred different things to earn social license. Increasing production is not on that list.

The owners of most of the world’s oil reserves – national oil companies – are shovelling the windfall CF towards otherwise-rioting citizens who for some reason want reliable and affordable energy and a bit of food. Others, not subject to poverty, are finding entirely new toys to spend excess wealth on.

Saudi Arabia is building – I kid you not – a 170-kilometre by 200-meter human petri dish for citizens to exist in called The Line, complete with 170 km glass walls on either side and filled with hundreds of micro-ecosystems. Think of it as moving into a modern shopping mall where you can only leave on monitored and moderated excursions into nearby “wilderness” at designated places. It’s exactly the sort of thing dystopian fanciers and kid’s movies have been predicting forever. And it’s expected to cost about a trillion.

That’s where the money is going. It’s not going back into production growth, yet demand is still rising for all forms of hydrocarbon. And don’t forget that at a 5 percent decline rate, the world needs to add 5 million b/d of production. That is half a Saudi Arabia, or another Canada.

The consequence is as inevitable as it is unexplainable to the general public, which is going to take a utility-bill-beating like they’ve never thought possible, because supply can’t keep up with demand, and governments are actively hindering the recovery process.

As a fairly consistent rule of thumb, the average citizen does not know or care about energy until either: a) it costs a lot more to fill the car, or b) utility bills go up. Then all of a sudden they care a lot. 

Because the whole energy complex is so hard to explain, few industry groups step into this void to try to do so, and even if they do, the nuance gets lost in a blank stare of audience boredom. 

That is a disaster, because the public’s demand for answers is always sated – but not necessarily by the wise. Into this void steps a ragtag assortment of simplistic dot-connectors who very quickly invent a causal link that sticks, because it is simple and relatable to the public.

Pundits take to social media (and the real media) to point to two irrefutable and widely reported current events: your utility bills are going through the roof at exactly the same time that producers are reporting record profits. 

Then boom, that devastatingly simple message, misguided as it is, takes off like a wildfire, because it is easily digested, and anger needs a focal point. Consider Britain, where household utility costs have risen by 54 percent this year already and are expected to rise by a further 116 percent by January. Lower-income citizens may simply have no way to pay these bills.

Harrowing tales of “energy poverty” fill comments sections, and groups such as “Enough is Enough” have soared from birth in July to 20,000 followers in the first week of August to 130,000 a week later and heaven knows who many now. A separate group, Do Not Pay UK, has 100k Twitter followers, hundreds of subchapters, and is organizing a mass boycott of utility payments as of October 1. (The 1990 UK Poll Tax experience provides the template; millions refused to pay a new tax and eventually governments backed down.)

Hundreds of millions of people around the world won’t be able to afford food or pay their heating bills this winter. Industries are simply shutting down due to things like soaring natural gas prices. People will lose their jobs, and then go to homes they can’t afford to heat.

There is no easier connection, in the grossly over-simplified world of mainstream energy commentary, than linking huge hydrocarbon producer profits with soaring utility bills. 

The question is: what to do about it?

Governments have limited options. They can subsidize utility bills, which helps but also ensures consumption will continue to be strong. Governments could encourage more conventional energy supplies, but are barred from pursuing the idea by the climate crowd whose representatives dictate most energy policy in the western world (check out Biden’s appointees to the US Department of Energy – some Bloomberg green-reporting refugees, climate activists…not a single representative from the hydrocarbon industry that provides >80% of US energy).

There is little producers can do to help out. Their ‘inventory’ – oil and gas reserves – is in incredibly high demand, and is being bid up in price. What would help alleviate this situation is to find and develop more reserves, but the world’s cultural elite, the group that dominates western political schools of thought, has ‘scientifically’ linked any weather event – anything at all – with climate change, which is linked to ‘fossil fuel combustion’, which is therefore bad, and the mere suggestion of increasing production is unacceptable. To even point out the benefits of hydrocarbons is enough to earn a rapid introduction to cancel culture. 

For producers, a mighty storm is brewing. Those new ‘cash-return-to-shareholder’ frameworks, which have been universally adopted, are perfect fertilizer for opponents of hydrocarbons. Their (climate activist) messaging just became ten times easier, with a few of the most basic stats imaginable – hey look, oil companies just distributed a hundred billion to shareholders, and your utility bill went up by the same amount. Grab a pitchfork and let’s go.

The optics are a recipe for disaster, unless the industry finds a better way of explaining itself. First and foremost, the industry needs a spine – no more apologizing for providing fuel for the world’s survival, no more capitulating, no more apologizing for the industry’s very existence. By all means reduce emissions, but draw a line in the sand at the mention of Scope 3 emissions – how people choose to combust hydrocarbons, and for what reasons, is between citizens and governments; it has nothing at all to do with fuel providers.

Be crystal clear: the world’s energy crisis is the product of design, and not just Putin (he was an accelerant, but the process was well underway before his war). The golden goose has had its beak stapled shut.

We need people to stand up and say loudly and clearly that the emperor has no clothes, that humanity is doomed without significant new hydrocarbon investment, that new energy has its place as a supplement and offshoot of the hydrocarbon system, and that to ignore these facts is to doom hundreds of millions. If the industry can’t explain exactly how and why all that cash is accumulating, then they are going to pay for it one way or another (warning shots: British windfall tax on oil/gas producers, and Biden’s new tax on share buybacks). Nuanced logic won’t stand a chance against the dominant mainstream narrative, or against rioting/cold/hungry people.

Recent studies indicate some people have not bought this book yet. That might explain a lot of the chaos. Pick up  “The End of Fossil Fuel Insanity” at, or It’s not too late. Thanks for the support.

Read more insightful analysis from Terry Etam here, or email Terry here

5 17 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael in Dublin
August 19, 2022 6:09 am

My prediction: if Americans are starving politicians will blame it on climate change and not disastrous economic and energy policies. We need to pin down the experts with their climate and economic folly. We must ask them now what kind of punishment they deserve for contributing to worldwide famine deaths that go against the trend of huge increases in food production over the past 75 years.

James B.
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 19, 2022 6:51 am

While true, that’ll never happen. Journalists agree with Leftist, anti-people policies. They imagine that they will be insulated from the ensuing chaos.

Chris Foskett
Reply to  James B.
August 19, 2022 8:03 am

They haven’t got a chance of being insulated as the society collapses as the SMEs go bankrupt, especially as the UK has no energy price cap for businesses. A small business that I am involved with, £500k turnover has seen it’s electricity bill go from £10k a year to £42k!

Ed Reid
Reply to  James B.
August 19, 2022 8:40 am

“To sit back hoping that someday, someway, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last–but eat you he will.”
Ronald Reagan

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 19, 2022 9:16 am

I have argued for about a year that sceptics concentrating on arguing the science ain’t going to cut it. The totalitarians have very effectively marginalized sceptics into ineffectiveness. They won’t debate, they’ve cast us as knuckle dragging shills for the oil industry. Having that label in the minds of the madding crowds is a bit frightening. We should be using every means to reveal the real game being played BEHIND the false front of ‘climate change’ and shaming our leaders, shaming the enabling ‘scientists’, shaming WEF conspirators, shaming or turning the media ‘collective’.

Jordan Pearson seems to be able to resonate with 10s of millions of people. A few years ago he claimed to have spoken to over 100million people, not to brag, but to note there is a huge demand for his messaging. Notice how the Hadley Centre Crisis Climate purveyors got frightened by the social media storm criticizing their take on the UK two day ‘heat wave’.

These ‘scientific enablers’ are vulnerable personalities having only known admiration until now! Pontificating on the Climate Crisis puts them in the crosshairs of an angry population who are suffering deeply from the gov policies policies that they are enabling! Take it to these evil creators of the accelerating misery of 100s of millions of people. Tell them that Dr. Betts prevailed on departing PM May to give another £billion of poor taxpayer’s money to the Climate slush fund. I think we shut their stuff up, maybe even get a walk back or two.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Gary Pearse
August 19, 2022 12:19 pm

It is Jordan Peterson. He was asked on Sky News Australia yesterday about governments not doing a cost vs benefit analysis on their climate actions. The same was true on covid. How do we get them to present such an analysis on major spending for public comment and debates in their parliaments before voting on these matters?

A stumbling block is the government propaganda being echoed in the media rather than them being a good public watchdog and warning citizens. How can we bombard them with hard questions and shame them if they avoid or give devious answers?

Perhaps we should insist in all insurance policies that if the companies want to factor in climate change that there is a customer protection clause that if a company accepts fraudulent climate views they can be held liable in the future by the customer and his family. If enough customers do this insurance companies will be forced to look more critically at the climate alarmist claims and counter claims?

Governments don’t do ‘any analysis at all’ into climate policy

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 20, 2022 3:33 am

In Australia the Members of Parliament who are qualified to comment are ignored, Keith Pitt MP is an electrical engineer for example.

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 21, 2022 12:46 pm

I remember before “climate change” became an issue, I had to write a cost/benefit analysis of a interstate/interstate highway interchange, which I had designed. The analysis was done AFTER a detailed design review chaired by the Chief Engineer (CE). It also included an Environmental Impact Study (this was in the early ’70’s) .

After the CE left me with a new AHole, I crawled back to my office and after a few weeks submitted another design for torture. There were several iterations and by the time the final design was accepted I had left the agency through a loss of seniority due to accepting a new position (#4 out of 200) followed by a redundancy caused by a state budget shortfall (best thing that ever happened to me BTW).

The interchange was finally built about 15 years after my departure, but by that time a lot of useless features, like centerline masstransit/HOV were bolted on which eventually caused the original design to fail as the city slowly began to die.

The bottom line is there were a LOT of unanticipated exogenous events which affected a large scale long term engineering project.

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 19, 2022 9:18 am

Every problem in the world is caused by climate change,
and can be fixed with more windmills and solar panels
Caused by climate change
Caused by climate change
Caused by climate change
Morbidly obese lesbian women of color
Caused by climate change
How do I know this?
Because “scientists say so”

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 20, 2022 9:49 am

No, they’ve chosen to blame it on terrorist “Republicans” and imaginary white-supremacy groups.

Tom Halla
August 19, 2022 6:22 am

Voting out the greens is the only real approach. The “energy crisis” of the late 1970’s was solved with Carter losing.

Reply to  Tom Halla
August 19, 2022 8:14 am

Yes, but, certainly in the UK, it is very hard to find a non-green (in this sense) politician in any of the existing Parties.

Reply to  IanE
August 19, 2022 4:21 pm

When that has happened in the past with other issues, one Party was consigned to the history books and a new Party replaced it offering different solutions.

Bill Toland
Reply to  Tom Halla
August 19, 2022 8:15 am

Unfortunately, that is not possible in Britain. Every major political party has the same insane green policies.

Richard Page
Reply to  Tom Halla
August 19, 2022 8:19 am

The greens were never actually voted in, they’ve corrupted the political class to the extent that, even if you replace all the current governments, the program will continue. There needs to be an active opposition – a political pushback not just a regime change.

Reply to  Richard Page
August 20, 2022 3:37 am

Their political agenda and related sales and marketing has been greatly enhanced by the use of “green” everything, described as green.

Steve Case
August 19, 2022 6:30 am

    supply can’t keep up with demand, and governments are actively
    hindering the recovery process.

And who has the inside track to government. Where did all those old Bolsheviks go when the USSR collapsed Dec 26th 1993?

    the climate crowd whose representatives dictate most energy policy
    in the western world (check out Biden’s appointees to the US
    Department of Energy…not a single representative from the
    hydrocarbon industry that provides >80% of US energy).

How many have ties to left wing organizations?

    Be crystal clear: the world’s energy crisis is the product of design.
    The golden goose has had its beak stapled shut.

And just exactly who are those designers?

    We need people to stand up and say loudly and
    clearly that the “emperor” has no clothes, 

Yes, but the emperor has a mask, and it needs to be stripped away.

Last edited 3 months ago by Steve Case
Dr. Bob
August 19, 2022 6:46 am

Oil companies, when flush with cash, will invest in other opportunities that will expand their business. Already Chevron purchased REG (Renewable Energy Group) as an entree into that market. And I expect other Super Majors to start acquiring renewable assets but are waiting for the industry to shake itself out and find out which technologies are viable. There are many schemes and misplays out there that are little more than Pump-and-Dump schemes. Companies that have existed for years spending investors funds and developing nothing profitable.

All of these efforts exist due to the Federal Renewable Fuels Standard and the California Low Carbon Fuels Standard which can provide additional margin for so-called renewable fuels. Renewable NG can have LCFS value of $75/mmBTU or more. That is insanity. And it is all paid by the consumer and taxpayer.

Reply to  Dr. Bob
August 19, 2022 7:46 am

There are no technologies that are viable, even with massive subsidies.

Last edited 3 months ago by MarkW
Rick C
Reply to  Dr. Bob
August 19, 2022 2:02 pm

Sure, buying into renewable energy is a win-win for big oil companies with excess cash. They get in on both the subsidy mining and greenwashing.

Ben Vorlich
August 19, 2022 6:49 am

Well, the only hope I can see is that some poor nations with previously marginal reserves start producing either to do their citizens or leaders some good. Once a few bricks are removed from the block I’m hopeful the whole thing might come crashing down.
But perhaps that’s because I’m an optimist

August 19, 2022 6:55 am

Governments do rather well from higher prices, having a larger tax take.

Dave Fair
Reply to  fretslider
August 19, 2022 4:06 pm

In the short term. That money and more is going to partially cushion the higher prices, further fueling inflation. The Western governments’ war on FFs has been successful: All of the problems will be blamed on the FF industry, corrective actions will take years to even begin implementation and eventual societal relief won’t occur until many years in the future.

I don’t know if we can avoid massive social unrest; things don’t look bright. FFs are the basis of our civilization. Politicians can’t order up reliable and affordable energy at their whim. Shortages, massive price increases and rationing are cooked into our energy future (and all the rest of the things that support our standard of living) for at least the next decade (optimistically).

Learn Mandarin. I won’t be around to worry about it.

Reply to  Dave Fair
August 20, 2022 1:59 pm

Get your revenge financially by investing in good old fashion fossil fuel companies. That’s all I own and my account is up 61% for the year. I’m green- but a different kind of green.

August 19, 2022 6:57 am

First of all, it isn’t just hydrocarbons – it is all mining/extraction plus all physical production, period.
Secondly, the governments in the US, EU, Australia and elsewhere are already embarking on the solution: demand destruction.
Make enough people lose jobs, they collectively start buying less.
Too much demand problem solved!
Don’t you feel better now? I certainly do /sarc

August 19, 2022 7:19 am

The usual BDS, with a long prologue. Even with the current light regulatory footprint on CONUS production, the best producer in the juiciest oil play – Pioneer, in the Permian – at quite high product prices – can not/will not invest enough to replace reserves. Between that and the fact that shalers were, as a whole, losing market cap before the pandemic, and that other explorers elsewhere are failing at E&P (starting during the T**** administration no less) and trying to rebrand themselves as CCS parasites, and you have a good look at Peak Oil.

What to do? Feel free to add to leases, but the neglect of the current unused leases demo that the new ones will be even more goat pasturey. I don’t know the answer(s), but neither does this author. I agree with Terry on both of his critiques of poorly conceived gubmint interventions, but they are not a significant part of the problem.

Reply to  bigoilbob
August 19, 2022 7:48 am

I often wonder what world BoB lives in, it certainly isn’t this one.
“light regulatory environment”

Last edited 3 months ago by MarkW
Reply to  MarkW
August 19, 2022 8:09 am

E&P’s rule the roost in the CONUS. The law’s are routinely cowed by the combination of paid up elected officials, thousands of high $ oil and gas lobbyists, and the tech disparity between gubmint and private sector tech folks. I am most familiar with the latter. We make twice what our regulatory counterparts do, and select accordingly. So, it’s no problem BS’ing/bullying them into doing (or not doing) whatever we aks. This is why private sector E&P’s employ so many engineering and geological para professionals. Our usual proposed “solution” to a problem is “Can’t we just monitor it?”, and the hapless regulators usually cave. So, we send innumerable, unread, “monitoring” reports to those regulators, written by those para’s.

Still remember the California regulator who routinely gathered up a sheaf of these “monitorings”, for us to review together. I would offer to do so with him at his favorite lunch spot. The papers sat in an extra chair, Fred got his lunch, win win.

You have no specifics, and are obviously not n the oil and gas biz.. Could it be that you only have the echosphered alt.facts that are being fed to you?

Reply to  bigoilbob
August 19, 2022 3:54 pm

I see you are still trying to push the idea that anything less than total government control of everything counts as light regulations.

Reply to  MarkW
August 19, 2022 4:54 pm

The hyperbolic claim of the day. With the usual zero amount of factual back up.

The US oil biz is the most private sector dominated of any in the world. That’s why they can still, until recently, replace reserves in among the least fruitful producing areas in the world. I celebrate the business environment that helped us to this result. And I made 5%er money from being a petroleum engineer in that era.

But the regulators are, and have been, as hands off as almost anywhere. And we have, among other things, the 12-13 $ figures of shirked and soon to be shirked asset retirement obligations to show for it. The work will (1) not be done, (2) be done 0.5 assed, or (3) will be done by the gubmint with T****s regressive, trickle up 2017 tax system paying for it. Probably with still more Repub borrow and spend $….

Reply to  bigoilbob
August 20, 2022 7:40 am

LOL, can’t even bring yourself to type the name Trump.

TDS invalidates any argument you might present.

paul courtney
Reply to  bigoilbob
August 19, 2022 8:02 am

You don’t know the answer, and the author’s answer is brushed off as “BDS”. (Thank goodness you didn’t call anybody a name.) The LIGHT footprint that you refer to, does it include the SEC? If you want to produce oil, can you identify what the fed is doing to discourage production? Isn’t the SEC carrying out Admin policy to shut down fossil fuels? Or am I misstating the policy?
Please address the “poorly conceived gubmint interventions” regarding financing your oil production business, which are all too effective at telling producers not to produce.

Reply to  paul courtney
August 20, 2022 2:12 pm

Let me help Bob out. I worked as a lawyer in the oil and gas industry for over 30 years from Texas to China and many stops in between. Getting wells permitted and drilled in Texas has traditionally been very easy. Its a business friendly state. But the farther you move from Texas the more difficult the regulatory environment becomes. Its extremely difficult at the Federal level in DC to get anything done. Couple that with environmental groups who take any rare Federal regulatory win to Federal Court with a $200 filing fee and it becomes very difficult to permit projects at the Federal Level. And its even more difficult dealing with European regulators or most of the governments in Asia. So Bob is mostly correct about light handed regulation if you limit his comments to Texas.

August 19, 2022 7:49 am

Control the energy and the food and you control humanity.

Totalitarianism beckons, we are being herded like sheep and I’m not sure there’s much that can be done about it now.

The traps have been set and are now being sprung. Global energy shortage and land being robbed from farmers by making it impossible to farm by government legislation, net zero or variations thereof. No fertiliser for you dirty proles so you can feed yourself, because it’s bad for the environment, and so are you.

The media owned by the totalitarian left, and the new news outlets like Facebook and Twitter all co opted to do what totalitarians do, control and censor. What’s next? Limited access to the internet altogether. Your broadband bills will be next to skyrocket because ISP’s have to pay for the electricity they use, and guess who gets punished? You do of course. Trouble paying? They’ll just put you on a pay as you go tariff with minute by minute charging, just like the good old days with dial up.

And we have supply chain problems as well, how did that ‘coincidentally’ happen at the same time as all these other global challenges?

All we’re left with is civil unrest, but that won’t work as the solutions are beyond individual nations. Even if Liz Truss pushed the button the day following her selection as PM to frack and dig coal, it would be far too late to stop businesses crashing over the next year or so, and people dying of the cold this winter.

Let’s stop paying our energy bills, except much of the UK has invited those natty little smart meters into their home. No need for an expensive raid on your property to cut your gas off, just do it remotely from the utility company HQ.

Food riots and looting will bring with them curfews. Much of that can be enforced by surveillance camera’s now littering the UK’s towns and cities. Facial recognition will ensure your bank account can be frozen for being disobedient. They not only demonstrated their ability, but their desire to use that tactic in Canada against the truckers.

Most of us have watched the instruments of control assembled around us, but were convinced it was for our own protection and the good of humanity.

Shortages of everything are, and will be, justified by ‘saving the planet’, which brings with it control of our lives by certain individuals. You won’t have to queue for anything though. Far too much chance of food, or water riots.

No, you’ll be summoned by an app on your phone when and where to turn up for your rations. Money will be automatically extracted from your bank account, but that’s only yet another method of control as money will be an illusionary bribe to keep you quiet. It will have no use by anyone other than certain people or organisations, certainly not as a transactional means between we filthy proles, other than permitted by the state.

George did warn us.

Reply to  HotScot
August 19, 2022 9:29 am

“Control the energy and the food and you control humanity.
Totalitarianism beckons, we are being herded like sheep and I’m not sure there’s much that can be done about it now.”

Repeated in bold font for emphasis. Great wisdom in one sentence.
I would add information control (censorship) and demonization of political enemies too,

Election Circus: Stop Calling Them Democrats. They’re Communists.

Reply to  Richard Greene
August 20, 2022 3:39 am

Yes, and user friendly description is Socialist Democrats.

Reply to  HotScot
August 19, 2022 10:07 am

I don’t see this ending well for the rulers, at least in the US. There are many, many people who own many cordless hole punches, and will use them if pushed to the breaking point. Canada is aggressively trying to collect and remove the hole punches from the population for what many believe is to remove that threat to the government’s final solution.

Reply to  BrentC
August 19, 2022 10:37 am

A tiny fraction of those hole punch owners would respond, think Covid. The majority will cower in their homes.

Marshal law and the intervention of the armed forces will be too much for a relatively few angry vet’s and concerned citizens.

Bear in mind, the majority of the armed forces rolled up their sleeves for the jab as well.

Reply to  HotScot
August 19, 2022 4:32 pm

Only 45% of colonists supported the Revolutionary War. Military forces trying to defeat that many armed citizens would be doomed to failure. Snipers around every corner. Drones carrying IEDs. Sabotage. The wars in Ukraine and Afghanistan show the difficulty of trying such a strategy.

You could, of course, simply destroy all the cities and kill the populace, but when you ‘win’, what is it you will have won?

Reply to  Jtom
August 20, 2022 7:44 am

Totalitarians are always prepared to burn their country to the ground to rule over the ashes.

Just look at Biden.

Reply to  HotScot
August 21, 2022 7:31 pm

– a VERY poor extrapolative argument there.

#1 – While you would be hard pressed to find a “sovereign citizen” among the military, there is QUITE a large difference between obeying an order to take a needle in the arm, and obeying an order to fire into a mob of hungry men, women, and children. (I would also note that more military resistance was shown to the CoViD “vaccine” than to the anthrax shot.)

#2 – The majority of the rank and file – the “operators” if you will, that deal out retail death – are still the product of red regions of the country, both red States and the majority of red counties even in the deepest darkness of blue States.

#3 – High officers, it is true, are largely of the elite classes. However, their selection is also largely NOT based on military competency, but on their ability to dance to the political music. Someone like “General” Milley would be hard pressed to plan, lead, and execute a successful raid on a Texas whorehouse.

#4 – There are some would-be cowardly sadists and sociopaths among the ranks, I am sure. But I would also note that even in the extremely corrupted Capitol and DC Police forces, there were only TWO that indulged their murderous tendencies in a situation where they had to know that they would be given a pat on the head and a dog biscuit for their “service.”

Reply to  writing observer
August 22, 2022 8:49 am

Sadly, your optimism is misplaced. Given the choice, few civilians will pick up arms and fight.

The armed forces still punish members for desertion. In a time of confrontation that would probably be accepted as a bullet in the back.

August 19, 2022 8:06 am

It’s an old story. Government implements policies that create an energy crisis. Governments blame ‘Evil’ energy companies for the rise in prices. Governments seize profits of energy companies.

It’s a tried and true plan.

Reply to  Fraizer
August 19, 2022 4:36 pm

And what happens next? If you look at the results in Venezuela you will find your answer.

August 19, 2022 8:22 am

one word . . . Nuclear

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  jono1066
August 19, 2022 12:03 pm

Doesn’t do a thing about transport or all the other things fossil fuels are used to make aside from electricity.

Richard Page
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
August 19, 2022 1:14 pm

True but nuclear can displace hydrocarbons that are used for energy production which would ease the price hike somewhat.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Richard Page
August 21, 2022 1:04 pm

 for energy production ” <– electricity

Peta of Newark
August 19, 2022 8:32 am

How many times?:We are going to do something sooooo dumb as to extinguish ourselves

Ha, as if eating weeds that disabled our inbuilt Vitamin C production wasn’t dumb enough, we then demonised saturated fat, salt and took on eating sugar.
That was ‘food’ sorted, now we set about demonising, waht is effectivly one of our longer lasting inventions: – We now demonise Fire

To (so far) cap it all, now routinely poison ourselves with Glyphosate
What happens when it becomes part of our DNA like the Vitamin C weed did – and have no fire?

It’s OK, the Autistics are going to inherit The World – by 2050 the takeover will be complete.
(According to ‘trend-lines- and, how we soooo lurrrrrve trend-lines round here, especially ‘never better‘ ones like that)

Because Autism is not a disease or affliction
Once you’ve gained a modicum of experience and met a few, you realise that it is a conscious choice/decision, made by the 3 or 4 year old child.
Even by then they seen enough of this insane world and ‘throwing that switch‘ is their way of escaping it.
neat huh

They are sooooo brave.

Reply to  Peta of Newark
August 19, 2022 9:06 am

Glyphosphate bans are catching on though…

and the GM soya/glyphosphate cultivation thing doesn’t happen in Europe

Reply to  griff
August 19, 2022 3:27 pm

Read the article moron. It’s a list of a few local authorities banning glyphosate and others considering it. A miniscule proportion of America. Yet another leftist propaganda piece regurgitated by you.

No one has ever demonstrated GM foods do anyone any harm to people whatsoever.

Andy Pattullo
August 19, 2022 8:41 am

Thank you Terry for another clearheaded wake up call. I would only add that, after 20 years of study I find no evidence to support the idea that the burning of hydrocarbons is doing anything adverse to our weather/climate. The danger exists only in poorly-constructed climate models which fail every test of validation. (The topics I have taught include issues of scientific practice and modelling).

We need to stop giving lip service to a scientific fabrication that will kill modern society and destroy the natural environment when nearly 8 billion are starving, cold and in the dark. Let’s stop this nonsense now and get back to reality. You can’t change the natural laws of physics and pretending otherwise is humanity’s doom.

August 19, 2022 9:51 am

Very well said. We are at the mercy of those who control the energy sector and it’s not the producers. And those that control it don’t want fossil fuels to become history because then they would lose control. They want to own it.

Kevin kilty
August 19, 2022 11:22 am

The windfall profits tax has even raised its head again — that 70s show re-run. Politicians cannot learn, in fact learning would be detrimental to their careers; the general public simply adhere to Voltaire’s observation that in a food riot the first building burnt down is a bakery.

August 19, 2022 2:50 pm

This article highlights a point I have been trying to make for years. Our side needs to broadcast our information wide and far in the simplest language possible. Yes energy and climate are complex hard to understand subjects. Our side seems possessed with giving every detail, every justification no matter how complex or foreign it is to the average guy. All of the complex stuff needs to be available but we will never win the hearts and minds of those we need with highfaluting scientific and academic language. Someone on our side has to be able to boil down these complex issues into simple elevator speeches everyone can understand. Once we have hooked them make more complex arguments. If we don’t win over the average guy we will lose, it’s as simple as that.

Reply to  Bob
August 20, 2022 3:44 am

Consider the marketing hyperbole and puffery created to be attractive: wind “farms”, national parks created for UN Agenda 21 presented as “for future generations” hiding the locking up of natural resources and even access in many areas, “green” hydrogen must be environmentally friendly as compared to “Carbon pollution” describing carbon Dioxide, etc.

John Hultquist
August 21, 2022 1:26 pm

At 54 comments and counting:
 The CO2/AGW concept has been accepted by governments and instilled as an axiom as strongly as two points determine a straight line.
Watch and listen to Willie Soon’s recent talk:

All the anti-AGW science that can be accumulated will not dislodge this global warming concept.
Twenty-five years of chilling – while atmospheric CO2 continues to rise – will be needed. Note, too, that during the next 25 years most of the big names in the climate catastrophe clan will be gone. Saint Greta and her followers will be in their 40s and will realize they have been lied too.
This scenario assumes that world belligerency has not destroyed much of known civilization in the next 10 years.   

%d bloggers like this: