Marc Morano
Via the Committee to Unleash Prosperity: Kamala Explains Fracking Flip Flop
There is NO “progress on climate.” Today we get more than 80% of our energy from fossil fuels – which is about exactly where we were five years ago – despite the hundreds of billions spent. …
In 2023 the world burned more fossil fuels than at any other time in history. Here are the facts:
Global energy-related CO2 emissions increased by 1.7%, driven by China and India.
Fossil fuel consumption in 2023 reached a record high, rising by 1.5% to 505 exajoules.
China is by far the world’s largest consumer of primary energy, burning 34% of world consumption 170.7.
Almost no country is meeting their UN anti-fossil fuel targets.
Via the Committee to Unleash Prosperity: Kamala Explains Fracking Flip Flop
It’s entertaining to watch liberal operatives explain why Kamala is suddenly retreating from her radical positions on everything from the border wall, to the Green New Deal, to reparations, to fracking, to taxing unrealized capital gains, to Medicare for all, et al.
She says even though her positions shift with the political winds, “my values haven’t changed.”
But her campaign’s explanation below for why she is now FOR fracking is a non sequitur.
As we’ve noted many times on these pages, there is NO “progress on climate.” Today we get more than 80% of our energy from fossil fuels – which is about exactly where we were five years ago – despite the hundreds of billions spent.
As for Kamala’s statement that other nations are reaching their climate targets, that’s a myth too. Actually, in 2023 the world burned more fossil fuels than at any other time in history. Here are the facts:
-
- Global energy-related CO2 emissions increased by 1.7%, driven by China and India.
- Fossil fuel consumption in 2023 reached a record high, rising by 1.5% to 505 exajoules.
- China is by far the world’s largest consumer of primary energy, burning 34% of world consumption 170.7.
- Almost no country is meeting their UN anti-fossil fuel targets.
#
Related:
Despite the mandates, subsidies & regs — solar & wind generate only 14% of U.S. electricity in 2022
Study in journal Science: Only 63 of 1,500 Global Climate Policies of Past 25 Years Worked to Reduce CO2 Emissions – A success rate of 4.2% – Study author: ‘We find that it’s very rare that [subsidies and regulations] really work in reducing emissions.’
July 18, 2024
“These so-called green or ethical solutions aren’t solutions at all. Just very good marketing from the $1.5 trillion a year climate change industry.” A whole heap of inconvenient truths on the corporatist transfer of wealth of net zero. pic.twitter.com/Jr6fy2AY3X — James Melville (@JamesMelville) July 16, 2024 Rachel Mathews:
Bjorn Lomborg: ” The US produces mostly fossil fuel energy (84%). Solar and wind make up just 2.2% of all energy (not just electricity). Over the past decade, solar and wind increased total energy production by 2.1%. Fossil fuels increased energy production by 27.9%.
The US is mostly run on fossil fuels, also in 2023. 82% of all energy (not just electricity) consumed comes from coal, oil and gas. Nuclear is 9%, renewables (mostly biomass) is 9%. Solar and wind contributes 2.5%.
The US, has since 2019, produced more energy than it consumes. And it has never been more energy-independent since WWII. Last time of small energy surpluses was 1957.”
March 5, 2024
Juice: Why Wind and Solar Make Our Power Grid Less Reliable: Excerpt: “Just to produce one turbine, we have to extract 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete, and 45 tons of non-renewable plastic. Then we’ve got to transport that and burn fuel, getting it all carried across the world and put up. And none of these things that go into a turbine are renewable.”
‘Coal is now world’s top energy source’ – Coal, no longer shunned, keeps Europe’s lights on
Black Rock’s Larry Fink Admits Green Energy IS A FRAUD! – At the WEF, Larry Fink ironically destroys net-zero when it comes to the power needed for AI: “By 2030 [data centers] need 30 gigawatts.. Where’s that power gonna come from? To power these data companies you can’t have intermittent power like wind & solar”
#
Almost all new capacity build is renewable, the share of EVs is rising. Hard to imagine what will happen in the coming years.
The german grid got more reliable with a rising share of renewables.
I’d like to see data on that last comment – I just got back from a month in Germany and there is growing discontent with the price, regulation and unreliability of electrical supply.
Where in Germany?
https://thinc.blog/2023/11/02/graph-of-the-week-clean-energy-makes-germanys-grid-more-reliable/
A blog. You love blogs.
Sources for the graph are in the image
Top 10 Largest Economies in the World 2024
Rank & Country GDP (USD billion) GDP Per Capita (USD thousand)
#1 USA 28,783 85.37
#2 China 18,536 13.14
#3 Germany 4,590 54.29
Three biggest world economies following three different energy plans makes it hard to compare which is better.
The source of your graph is supposedly “renewables-in-germany” dot com
The website image you cite as a source is a fake website. We seem to have lost the insert image button or I would prove it.
Do you ever check your sources or are you a complete imbecile?
Strange, from 1973 through 2010 the main source for “baseload” power for my Electric Utility was a Nuclear power plant. Then, in 2011 the NPP was shut down/decommissioned and the equivalent power replaced by an equal amount of Wind Turbine power
Since that date over 20% of our electricity came from Wind Turbine facilities I and every neighbor, fellow worker, friend I have asked has confirmed by answering “Yes” to they question “I Rarely had an outage prior to 2011 and today I have at least one a month, often two or more.”
[Retired Plant Manager of the NPP that was decommissioned.]
LEARN SOMETHING – Renewable Energy is not RELIABLE and is a serious concern by FERC who are pushing new stronger requirements on meeting Grid Reliability Standards. GOOGLE IT.
I assume that was directed at MUN, not at me
Definitely!
I still see the insert image button.
“is a fake website”
My anti-virus blocked access to that web site.
This is my spam filter’s view of that site
That directly suggests that MUN’s computer is viral loaded.
Unsafe at any connection.
Any links supplied by MUN should be scrubbed out.
LOL.. the main reason is more and better interconnections to other countries that have reliable electricity from fossil fuels and nuclear.
Why are you so easily FOOLED.. ??
Without those external links, German electricity would collapse in a heap almost indefinitely
Stating the obvious here, but building newer systems should increase reliability, not just maintain the current state.
To do a just comparison you would need to look at the reliability of new dispatchable power plants against new intermittent sources.
And for solar (not wind) there are the inherent risks of new technology. They will fail in new and unexpected ways with time.
https://rmi.org/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2024/06/RMI-Cleantech-Revolution-pdf.pdf
Page 27
A leading far-left propaganda outfit.
You gullible little twit !
@MUN,
Obviously, you and those that created the cited, referenced link are completely and utterly oblivious to the fact that the main, major and utterly unsolvable unreliable problem undefinable problem of unreliability is the fact that nature creates the majority of that unreliability NOT MAN, not manufacturing, not lack of quality control, not lack of maintenance, not lack of planning ahead, not the phony “Peak Oil,” “Peak Gas,” “Peak Coal,” “Peak Uranium,” Increased efficiency of Unreliables, etc. Man can’t even predict the weather while they are standing in it. Man can not even predict how much Wind/Solar generation just to create Complete Net Zero, lor how much it would cost.
Man has, however, predicted that a Manhattan scale program of construction of a Net Zero capable Renewable Energy infrastructure. Before the program was half completed that the replacement of the already completed Renewable Energy Infrastructure will over shadow the manpower, cost and capability of ever achieving completion.
The present failure rate of Wind/Solar is about 20 years, thus after only twenty years the existing, newly installed, infrastructure needs replaced.
More like 4 years, but I quibble.
“Manhattan scale program of construction of a Net Zero capable Renewable Energy infrastructure.”
Based upon real results of Net Zero expenditures versus achievements, our government(s) have already ear marked over $1.3 Trillion dollars without viable usable success.
45%? LOL
Mr. steed: If you follow this troll, you’ll note that he loves to make an absurd claim without cite, waiting for the challenge so he can emerge “victorious” (in his own head, he wears a cape and flies) by then posting the latest mendacious article from CliSci Information Central. As you can see here, just a gaslighting troll.
So for this site: Everything that isn’t fabricated by koch and exxon.
There you go off into your little conspiracy la-la-land yet again.
REALITY is something you are incapable of grasping.
For every dollar oil corporations spend funding climate research, there is over $100 fed into climate activist organizations.
Follow the money.
Not according to reports in German newspapers.
And the newspapers are…?
Google it.
Aww, the good old “I have no sources, so do your own research”. You don’t even speak german, am I right?
Just repeating what you did to me in a different thread.
I like it, fair is fair!
“”The economy, Europe’s biggest, was the weakest among its large euro zone peers last year, as high energy costs, feeble global orders and record-high interest rates took their toll.””
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/why-is-germanys-economy-struggling-2024-2024-01-08/
All those freebie renewables…. will ensure de-development.
They should have focused on renewables instead of russian gas.
As I said: All those freebie renewables…. will ensure de-development.
And they are.
Or tell the Greens to sit down and shut up, and fracked for their own domestic gas.
The Europeans were advised to not to trust the Russians. They laughed.
And on windless nights.
They can shut the whole country down… what’s left of it !
You are funny!
Thanks.
“Almost all new capacity build is renewable …”
For new capacity, China is adding two coal plants – per week!
https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/27/energy/china-new-coal-plants-climate-report-intl-hnk/index.html
India is also ramping up their build rate of coal-fired plants.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-increase-coal-fired-capacity-2024-by-most-least-6-years-2024-02-01/
You and your fellow travelers are doing an excellent job of shutting down heavy industry in the West. However, you have just moved it to countries with less stringent pollution controls and put a lot of blue collar workers out of work.
China’s coal-fired power boom may be ending amid slowdown in permits
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/22/chinas-coal-fired-power-boom-may-be-ending-amid-slowdown-in-permits
Awful fighting for better living conditions instead of getting fucked over by the rich. We should reintroduce slavery to please them.
Let’s see, I rebutted your assertion that new builds are renewables, and you responded that we should reintroduce slavery?
I used to read your comments to make sure I wasn’t only getting one side of things. However, you have clearly demonstrated you are a loon and a low-rent intellect with your non sequiturs.
Myusername started out here as misinformed but actually admitted getting things wrong occasionally. Now he’s completely brainwashed by alarmist propaganda. He never admits getting anything wrong now, even when his statements are utterly refuted.
Maybe he’s really an AU (artificial unintelligence) – a test by one of the big companies to see if we’re fooled and think it’s a human.
Would take a totally warped mind to come up with “the Luser bot” !
Not only that but User’s response was a link to a “May Be Ending” article in the Grauniad
Based upon information that China believes should be secret and none of the West’s business.
“we should reintroduce slavery”
I think it must have been referring to the manufacture of solar panels in China.
He is only here for the S & Gs of inciting flame wars in comment sections.
Energy Institute Statistical Review of World Energy 2024
“Oil consumption in particular rebounded on the back of China relaxing its covid lockdown……...crude oil broke through the 100m barrels per day for the first time ever and coal demand beat the previous years record level”
“Renewables share of total primary energy reached 14.6% an increase of 0.4%…….Fossil fuel consumption as a percentage of primary energy declined by 0.4% to 81.5%”
“global coal production reached its highest ever level…...the Asia- Pacific region accounted for almost 80% of global activity and “Global coal consumption was over 164 EJ for the first time.,,, China was responsible for 56% of consumption of world coal…..India exceeded the combined consumption of Europe and North America for the first time”
“Coal retained its position as the dominant fuel for power generation with fossil fuels overall forming 60% of global electricity generation.
Coal generation in China increasing at twice the rate of unreliables.. 6.5x the rate in India
“reintroduce slavery”
Too late. China has already insituted ‘re-education’ camps
“More reliable with a rising share of renewables”? Having been in Texas in February 2021, I snorted with disgust. Rather than building dispatchable sources, Texas indulged in subsidy mining, AKA “wind power”, which worked so very well in still air and freezing rain.
Sure, the regulators were deceived by claims of global warming, and did not adequately weatherize the system. Some of the failings were due to Green dogooderism, like requiring electric, rather than gas, compressors on gas pipelines. But wind and solar produced bupkis.
Is this the same Germany that’s just had the far right (and left) make massive gains in elections, due in large part to the move towards “renewable” energy?
Converting ALL FF energy (heating, cooking, transportation, rail, shipping, flying, etc.) will require greater than an 800% increase in generation and the associated (aka required) grid (distribution and transmission) enhancements necessary to accommodate the additional loads for recharging electrified transportation. EV shipping and airlines do not exist with the ability to cross oceans and won’t for a long time to come. FF will be necessary into the next century.
Plus manufacturing Wind and Solar generation requires Coal mining for mineral reduction and oil/gas extraction for petrochemical stocks to create the needed lightweight components as well as increased mineral mining and processing for other major components
Windmills use oil.
We need a better class of troll. At least Griff was entertaining.
It does not take a genius to realize that the majority of the reduction in CO2 emissions by those showing a reduction comes from exporting their emission causing activities to different Countries or States, e.g. India, China Vietnam, etc. which means that globally, the CO2 emissions are the same as they were 20 – 40 years ago.
nailed it!
Wokeachusetts brags its most energy efficient state in America- but doesn’t mention we exported most industries and now import almost everything.
Actually they are greater than 40 years ago, close to double.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissions/
Not that it means anything to the “climate,” since there is no empirical evidence that atmospheric CO2 levels drive the Earth’s temperature.
And lots of new interconnects to fossil fuel and nuclear powered countries.
It is not hard to imagine power shortages, rationing, and widespread poverty amid a vast misallocation of resources, materials availability falling short of demand, and environmental destruction on a global scale.
The tone of the article:
Kissing up to the “Green New Deal” with
“No progress on climate”
“These solutions aren’t solutions”
“Clean energy states aren’t powered by solar or wind”
“US still produces most energy from Fossil Fuels”
doesn’t promote the viewpoint that there isn’t any Climate Crisis.
It looks like there’s agreement that CO2 is a problem when it isn’t.
The tone seems to be “We have to do better” when it should be “What we’re doing is stupid”
Electing Kamala in Nov will be yet another proof of your final statement.
Lets go Brenda
Trump 47
Vance 48
“Progress on climate” is pure hubris. Might as well make the next discussion what progress we’re making on stopping the tides from coming in, ala King Canute.
‘There is NO progress on climate’
Given that Earth climate[s] is beyond the control of humanity what manner of progress – if any – was expected?
On one level at least the climate alarmism thing is an atheist’s delight. Utterly bonkers.
Nuclear should be so much MORE! Let’s build them!
Nuclear expert Mycle Schneider on the COP28 pledge to triple nuclear energy production: ‘Trumpism enters energy policy’
https://thebulletin.org/2023/12/nuclear-expert-mycle-schneider-on-the-cop28-pledge-to-triple-nuclear-energy-production-trumpism-enters-energy-policy/
Iniquum argumentum
As ever.
Not clicking the link. If the best the author can do is associate one thing his team doesn’t like with another thing his team doesn’t like then it seems “not worth reading”.
Who?
Back to REALITY, little muppet
Australia and the Global Nuclear Renaissance – Australian Institute of International Affairs – Australian Institute of International Affairs
Countries who continue down the DEAD END and UNSUSTAINABLE path of wind and solar, destroying their local environments…
.. will be left in the dustbin of history.
The mess created in those countries will remain as a disgusting reminder of the anti-CO2 idiocy and corruption that has swept the western world.
“Schneider: Climate change emergency contains the notion of urgency”
Emergency? Says it all.
56 F this morning in Maryland after high 90s late last week.
Global warming. /s
Morning temperature lower than peak temperature last week.
Peak science right here.
Zero science in any of your comments…
… just parrot like regurgitation of fact-free propaganda.
Maryland set a record of consecutive days in the 50s breaking the 20 year old record of 1 day.
You twisted my words. I did not say the high 90s were the peak nor did I say they were afternoon temperatures.
56°F was the NWS’ temperature claim here in Virginia.
Only my thermometers showed the actual temperature as 52°F – 54°F.
Another 20°F drop and we’ll have early frost.
It makes me glad to see we are still using a lot of fossil fuel, as the world needs more CO2. The more the better. Celebrate life make more CO2, the basic building block for life on this planet.
You can Google “At today’s rate when will fossil run out“
While we are using them up is time to build more nuclear. Then we can use the waste heat to make fuel.
Anyway they have been touting the end of fossil fuels for a long time and yet we are still finding more. Probably because the fossil fuel industry stops looking when they get 40 years of reserves.
When allowed to explore.
Very true.
We are not running out…
“What is Oil?All we have talked about so far is what is named “conventional oil”. There are at least 2 major “unconventional oil” sources that are vastly larger than all of conventional oil. These are the “Tar Sands” (much of which are in Canada) and the “Oil Shale” which covers hugh areas of the United States (along with other parts of the world). The shale is presently not considered an oil reserve of any sort, since nobody can make money off it at present oil prices. Trillions of barrels of oil that exist, but are not counted.
What is a ‘resource’ changes with price and technology.
A resource is something of economic value; it becomes a reserve once folks start using it. Canadian tar sands were not a ‘resource’ 50 years ago, now they are. U.S. oil shale holds a Trillion+ bbl of oil minimum, but is not counted as a resource when prices are below about $100/bbl.
This page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_shale
puts the recoverable shale oil estimate at about 3 trillion barrels. That is about 100 years at present oil consumption rates if all oil consumption was supplied from shale oil. Somehow I don’t feel like I’m running out…
With oil over $100 / bbl the “oil” reserves of the world double or triple…
How much is “ultimately recoverable”? Nobody knows, but it is immense.
This puts us at somewhere around 200 years out before we are really at risk of “running out of oil”… But even this ignores an “oil” source.
Synthetic Oil & “Oil” Products; CTL – Coal To LiquidsCoal can be easily turned to gasoline and Diesel (as done by SASOL in Africa, or Rentech, Syntroleum, and Synthesis Energy Company in the U.S.A.) or into “petro” chemicals as is done by Eastman Chemical company (ticker EMN) today.
See: The SASOL site for more.
And they are not the only ones doing this. The process was invented in Germany prior to the Nazi era by FIscher and Tropsch so it is commonly called FT technology. During WWII, the Nazi war machine ran on FT fuels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer-Tropsch
During the Arab Oil Embargo of the 1970’s, South Africa was threatened with a cut off of fuel from the west. They dug out their history books and SASOL was born. They have been running a modern economy on synthetic oil ever since.
Their economy has benefited from the stable energy costs and foreign exchange retention (i.e. not sending gold to OPEC). They are the most industrially advanced economy in Africa. They are an existence proof that this technology is all that is needed to provide all the “petroleum” fuel products we need, even if we don’t have enough “petroleum”.
All you need to do to make synthetic crude oil is take any material that contains a hydrocarbon component (plastic, paper, biowaste, coal, tree chips, garbage, slaughter house waste) put it in a pressure vessel and cook at high temperature with a little water, and pressure (500 degrees Fahrenheit and pressurized to 600 pounds per square inch, for about 20 minutes). Out comes a synthetic crude comparable to a high quality crude oil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization
http://discovermagazine.com/2006/apr/anything-oil
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/agricultural_waste.pdf
There is a new microwave process that is also being worked on to do the same thing.
Basically, we run out of “Oil Products” long after we run out of oil, since we can use coal or any other carbon source.”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/there-is-no-energy-shortage/
The manufacture of fuel was part of my statement I have been looking into it for a while now. Quite cheap when you use the waste heat from a reactor to power the reaction.
Reminds me of: Peak Copper (Wiki)
History
“Concern about the copper supply is not new. In 1924 geologist and copper-mining expert Ira Joralemon warned:
… the age of electricity and of copper will be short. At the intense rate of production that must come, the copper supply of the world will last hardly a score of years. … Our civilization based on electrical power will dwindle and die.”
That’s 100 years ago. Doomsters will need to get back to us in 2124.
Probably much later…
Running out of copper isn’t the problem it’s developing all the mines necessary to meet growing global demand.
International Energy Forum ‘Copper Mining and Vehicle Electrification’ May 2024.
Limited resource constraint arguments seem to lode every time. For balance, I wonder whether we’d find more-than-enough rare elements for electric cars if scarcity increased price even a little.
I did a study a few years back. There are enough copper reserved to plate all the earth’s land mass with over 5 feet of thickness (I believe the thickness is greater, but I discarded the analysis and am going on memory…. 20 feet might have been the answer).
First answer: “If we continue at our current rate, it is estimated that all of our fossil fuels will be depleted by 2060.”
I’d love to dig into who “we” are, and what “current” means.
I Googled SC’s exact quote because I have not wondered similar questions for decades. I _did_ wonder it decades ago. There was no fracking then and Mexico was doing great drilling in the Gulf. Someone please repost a photo of the New England whale oil price spike – it will feel like 2008 all over again.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/09/03/epic-fail-there-is-no-progress-on-climate-u-s-still-consumes-82-of-our-energy-from-fossil-fuels-in-2023-despite-hundreds-of-billions-spent-by-biden-harris/#comment-3964144
Per Google:
1.6 E12 barrels of oil in known reserves
35 E9 barrels world annual consumption
45.7 years is what those numbers calculate to.
Seems the answer is more like 2024 + 45.7 = 2069 and change, call it 2070.
That does not account for any of the untapped oil sources discussed elsewhere in this thread.
“about exactly”, “Almost no”
One-year snapshot graphics to match time series statements.
Just trying to read sources with equal critical thought – the data charted supports the thesis written.
My greater interpretation is that data pointed smart people where they were not willing to go, they balked for 30 years, now they want AI to do it for them.
Allow me to interpret:
“about exactly”
No need to quibble over a decimal place.
“Almost no”
No need to make an absolute statement when there is a possibility that somewhere someone did, either by luck or intent. The world is a big place and it is possible somewhere the targets were met.
Saw this yesterday at ZH and found it worth reading===>
https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/kyle-bass-says-green-war-blackball-oil-was-doomed-fail
One point it made was that energy transitions take many years and can’t be done quickly.
And you can’t “transition” from something that provides energy on demand to something that provides energy at the whim of the weather, and also requires what is supposedly being “transitioned” from both for “backup power” (needed more often than not) AND for all energy inputs into what is supposedly being “transitioned” to.
There was never a “transition.” There never will be a “transition.”
From the above article’s title:
“There is NO progress on climate – U.S. still consumes 82% of our energy from fossil fuels in 2023 . . .”
Errrr . . . on simple question: What is the science-based rationale to believe burning fossil fuels has anything to do with the world’s climate?
rationale: Definition per Cambridge
the reasons or intentions that cause a particular set of beliefs or actions
Science really does not support the Climate Syndicate. Politics does.
O/T. Not the hottest evah, but the MO puts a brave face on it
“”UK experienced coolest summer in nearly a decade. Northerly winds brought colder Arctic air – but overall trend still one of warmer temperatures, says Met Office. “”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/03/uk-coolest-summer-in-nearly-a-decade/
Ho hum.
Down here, the effect of the huge warming spike in the stratosphere that gave us unusually warm latter half of August, seems to have dissipated.
Back to winter-like 5ºC overnight… brrr.
“There is no progress on climate” :
What kind of progress are we supposed to do ?
We are already well in the Modern Climate Optimum.
Who would be so dumb to want to get out of it ?
That does excellently describe alarmists.
Of course – just read the science
Reasonable rational people in a prosperous nation would continue what they started decades ago — build safe, clean, reliable, cost-efficient nuclear power plants to replace carbon burning power plants. Of course, an irrational un-educated part of the US population killed safe, reliable nuclear power, deciding that burning trees and building batteries and miles and miles of expensive and unreliable windmills and solar cells was a good idea.
At some point, reasonable people will realize that “fighting climate change” is not working or affordable and then they will stop doing that.
Won’t they?
“We are not programmed to respond in that area.”
I Mudd, Star Trek.
Or “Sorry, Dave, I can’t do that.”
It is laughable to say biomass is renewable and a suitable substitute for fossil fuel. We cut down our forests and other natural resources or we burn our food for energy. That is just stupid. And no matter what renewable we talk about none of them renewable and most aren’t even recycled. What a terrible mess we have let happen.
As I like to put it – “You can burn stuff along faster than you can grow it.”
Just look at Haiti for a prize example of using biomass for energy.
There’s an opening for a green hydrogen superpower if anyone’s interested-
Carnarvon’s future uncertain as Hyenergy green hydrogen project stalls (msn.com)
Hydrogen has always been a nonstarter. Way too expensive to produce for a modest recovery of energy.
Worse: An energy SINK, not an energy SOURCE.
Takes more to produce than what is gotten from burning it, and any method of producing it is going to involve fossil fuels.
Greta Thunberg has been arrested in Denmark.
https://x.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1831309207808684246
She seems to be “prosperous”
A little known but amazing fact that is not generally acknowledged by either the Democratic or Republican parties is that the US internally produced its historically largest amounts of crude oil and natural gas in December 2023 . . . that would be under the Biden/Harris administration.
See:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpus2&f=m ,and
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9070us2M.htm
There are definite reasons that neither political party wants to publicize this fact . . . think about it.
In spite of Biden’s policies, not because of them. Future shortages will be caused by his failures to hold lease sales as required by law.
His failures may continue to have impacts beyond January 2025, but at least we-the-people won’t suffer from any additional policies from him after he becomes ex-President.