The Increasing Sustainability of Conventional Energy: Shell Offshore

By Robert Bradley Jr.

“Major technical and economic advancements are happening within the fossil-fuel industries, not outside of it. The stock energy age–oil, natural gas, and coal age–is still young. The future belongs to the efficient, no taxpayer subsidies or government direction required.”

More than a quarter-century ago, I wrote a policy analysis for the Cato Institute, “The Increasing Sustainability of Conventional Energy.” I concluded:

A ‘reality check’ of the increasing sustainability of conventional energy, and a better appreciation of the circumscribed role of backstop technologies, can re-establish the market momentum in energy policy and propel energy entrepreneurship for the new millennium.

I was reminded of this in regard to offshore oil and gas drilling versus the hyper-expensive, ecologically suspect offshore wind turbines. In this regard, consider this full-page advertisement in the Wall Street Journal by Shell, reproduced verbatim.

“More Value, Less Emissions: How Shell Is Revolutionizing Its Deep-Water Operations”

As rivals appeared to retreat, the energy multinational reshaped its platforms to deliver capital and carbon gains. When Shell’s offshore platform Whale began producing oil in the Gulf of America last year, the super major was also sending an important signal to its investors. It not only demonstrated how the organization was continuing to draw on 50 years of deep-water expertise to deliver high-margin barrels of oil, but just as importantly, Shell’s14th deep-water platform in the Gulf was also by far its most energy efficient.

Whale, the second of Shell’s new generation of smaller, simplified floating production facilities in the Gulf, proved that the organization’s “design one, build many” approach worked, and worked profitably. With its high-margin potential, operational control and increased carbon efficiency, it underlined that the Gulf—where it is one of the largest leaseholders—continues to be a cornerstone of Shell’s upstream business. It is a key factor in the organization’s strategy to deliver more value with less emissions and its aim to sustain 1.4 million barrels a day of liquids production to 2030 with increasingly lower carbon intensity

We continue to look at how we unlock more energy for the U.S. and also for the world. And when we look
across our businesses, the Gulf of America really stands out as optimally positioned to contribute. These
deep-water platforms are multi-billion investments, so there needs to be technical excellence sitting behind every aspect of them. What we do very well is link together all those areas of technical excellence in order to translate into a highly investable proposition as a whole. – Colette Hirstius, president, Shell USA and EVP Gulf of America

A New Platform for Growth
The Whale development is owned by Shell (58.5%, operator) and Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (41.5%). It replicated 99% of the hull and 80%of the topside of its predecessor facility, Vito, the pioneer in the new streamlined, lower cost, higher-return approach, which began production in February 2023. Hirstius says: “When many others were pulling out of deep water and showing much more reservation, we accepted
that challenge and we looked at how we would run and operate our business… In this area we made a bet and that bet has continued to pay off for us.

Performance, Discipline and Simplification for a Competitive Edge
The learnings from Vito and Whale will allow the next platform, Sparta, to be even leaner and more efficient in keeping with the corporate discipline of “performance, discipline and simplification”—as Shell seeks to simplify execution, reduce variability and focus on assets that can deliver predictable, repeatable outcomes. Shell’s deep-water expertise gives it a key competitive edge, with higher-margin barrels of oil produced with a lower carbon intensity.

Once fully ramped up, Vito and Whale are expected to collectively produce up to 200,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boe/d)—enough to fuel the daily journeys of more than 5 million cars in the U.S.—while from 2028, Sparta is expected to deliver 90,000 boe/d at peak production.
Kimarie Michel, a senior operations manager at Shell, says: “We continue to share what we’ve learned, and we’re always focused on making our operations more streamlined and efficient. I’m excited to see how replication and our use of technology will transform how we operate—it’s not the oil field I started in—it’s better.”

Major technical and economic advancements are happening within the fossil-fuel industries, not outside of it. The stock energy age–oil, natural gas, and coal age–is still young. The future belongs to the efficient, no taxpayer subsidies or government direction required.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 11 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
90 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Hultquist
April 19, 2026 6:35 pm

The past couple of weeks has troubled the oil stocks but Shell PLC is up 35.8% since last April. 

johnraw
April 19, 2026 6:56 pm

I fully support and applaud the continued success of the oil and gas industry. My one comment is to point out that it is completely unnecessasary to constantly emphasize the supposed virtue of “reduced carbon intensity” of the latest process. This is just pandering to climate alarmism and in reality we know that we are just coming out of a CO2 draught and that the world is starting to benefit from increased CO2!

Reply to  johnraw
April 21, 2026 4:49 am

I never thought of carbon as being “intense”. I didn’t know carbon had any emotions at all,

Scarecrow Repair
April 19, 2026 8:01 pm

Mostly off topic rhetorical rant/whine/puzzle. I can understand the gut instinct to want “clean” renewable energy rather than burning finite resources. I can understand the tech ignorance about what’s involved in all the concomitant costs — transmission lines, batteries, nasty mining worse than fossil fuels. I can understand ignorance about the momentum of spinning masses; it’s technical and sure seems like something technology should be able to take care of.

What I cannot understand is refusal to recognize that solar and wind are intermittent and unpredictable, and something else has to supply full grid power during those periods, until some cheap form of batteries or other storage are available.

This is not hard to understand. Where does power come from on a windless night? IT HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE! The costs of batteries — financial, environmental, and social — are easy to find. There is no excuse for not understanding such basic simple facts.

I do not understand Greenies at all when they refuse to recognize this basic problem.

/rant

Rod Evans
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
April 19, 2026 10:56 pm

“I do not understand Greenies at all when they refuse to recognize this basic problem”
There are none so blind as those who refuse to open their minds to see….

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Rod Evans
April 19, 2026 11:04 pm

Yes, that’s my point. I can understand almost everything else in one fashion or another. I cannot understand the self-delusion to expect power on windless nights.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
April 19, 2026 11:52 pm

I share your puzzlement. Unfortunately, there are people in the world who believe in all sorts of bizarre things. No rational conversation changes their unique views, views sometimes shared with others though self support learning lessons.
It would require many sessions in a psychiatrists chair environment, to begin to fathom why people with puzzling views hold onto them so tenaciously.
I have come to the settled position, thanks to age and experience, that life is too short to change everybody into rational thinking realists.
We have to accept some people are just. erm…odd.
Look on the bright side, when you engage in conversation with such people, the questions you can ask can be fun. They are forced by their ‘beliefs’ to come back with some answer that is invariably impossible to justify.
That is why in the main these characters do not ever engage in conversations outside their own clique of believers.
I am relaxed with the simple fact, truth will eventually present itself, the truth will out, as they say.

Reply to  Rod Evans
April 20, 2026 3:45 am

“We have to accept some people are just. erm…odd.”

Certainly true of some friends, relatives, neighbors- but unfortunately, odd political types pushing expensive solutions to false problems- that we’re gonna have to pay for- means we shouldn’t accept them.

MarkW
Reply to  Rod Evans
April 20, 2026 8:22 am

The greenies have been told by those who do their thinking for them, that all these problems have been solved, and that’s good enough for them.

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
April 20, 2026 3:43 am

“until some cheap form of batteries or other storage are available”

Which of course will never happen.

MarkW
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 20, 2026 8:31 am

What I love are the false equivalencies that they come up with.

If they can make a computer that can fit into your pocket, they could make a cheap battery that holds a gazillion watts. The only reason they aren’t is because the oil companies are paying them not to.

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 20, 2026 8:58 am

Never say never.

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
April 20, 2026 11:44 am

Well, they might come up with some fantastic battery system, eventually and that’s fine- but it won’t happen by governments trying to force it. If it was up to governments, computers would still be the size of buildings costing tens of millions.

April 19, 2026 10:14 pm

I support fossil fuels. I think CO2 is a benefit not a danger. However, what is the cost of the oil produced here? What price must they have to be profitable?

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 19, 2026 11:06 pm

Doesn’t matter. If the cost of production is above the price they can get, they stop producing and the price goes up.

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
April 19, 2026 11:44 pm

It sure does matter. The higher prices cannot be paid by the poor and middle class. While I fully oppose the Green New Delusion, I oppose automobiles. We need mass transit on steroids, not more cars and highways. The current high prices are, partially, a boondoggle for the oil industry. We need to reduce demand. We can reduce demand with sensible policeies, not the idiotic ones that Biden, Neumann and their ilk have imposed.

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 3:50 am

There is a role for more and better mass transit- but it’s not going to dominate traffic in America due to our large distances people travel often to locations that will always be far from mass transit. And, Americans love their cars. Europe is different – lots of people packed together in a relatively small geographic space so no wonder they built a better mass transit system. And of course, fuel is a lot more expensive in Europe.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 20, 2026 5:41 am

Autos to Mass transit pick up points, then varying degree/type of mass transit. General rule of thumb: if the traffic is very low, then autos make sense. Buses, then trams, then trains

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 7:13 am

As I said, there is a role for mass transit in America but it’ll never be like in Europe or Japan or China.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 20, 2026 8:13 am

While you are probably correct due to the capitalist control of the governments, it could be

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:38 am

And now the paranoia crops up.
The only reason why the world disagrees with you is because somebody else won’t let them.
Next comes the gulags and death camps for those unenlightened souls who just refuse to cooperate with the great collective.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:23 am

Facts and figures, not unsupported accusations.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 9:56 am

Says the guy who claims that the only reason why his dreams aren’t being implemented are because the government is controlled by capitalists.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:59 am

Says the guy who presents Zero evidence to support his position

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 11:42 am

Evidence? The majority of Americans voted for Trump.

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 11:41 am

It’s about political reality which is that Americans love their vehicles and that’s their right to do so. It’s part of their freedom.

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 11:40 am

It’s not about capitalist control of governments- it’s the will of the people to drive their own vehicles. There are of course some trains and busses in America but that could certainly be improved without making it the only or prime source of transportation.

DD More
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 20, 2026 8:44 pm

Guess he doesn’t know the +80% of mass transit gets less than 5 MPG per rider.
Buses are heavy and ridership is low and empty routes to cover in most towns.

Reply to  DD More
April 21, 2026 5:51 am

Exactly, I see them almost empty all the time in my semi rural area of central Wokeachusetts. Busses are fine in huge urban areas as nobody likes driving their car around big cities unless you’re shopping. If I lived in Manhatten or LA, I’d take busses to just get around to the park or museum or theatre. Maintaining these fleets of busses is poor economics. It would almost make more sense in areas like mine for the state to pay for a few uber drivers to get truly needy people around either free or very cheap. It would certainly be cheaper than moving around a multi ton bus.

MarkW
Reply to  DD More
April 21, 2026 11:19 am

Buses and trains also have to make frequent stops and idle a lot.
Not to mention the presence of buses slows down the rest of the traffic causing everyone to waste time and burn gas.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:36 am

It’s been done, it doesn’t work.
When people are given a choice, they chose personal transportation. Like all proto-totalitarians, your desire is to force everyone to use the choices that you favor.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:19 am

Of course people choose luxury. But most people cannot afford it. The US survived using neo-colonialism and exporting their debt in an unsustainable paradigm. Now the capitalist choice is to kill off billions of people, make everyone poor. It is the capitalists who will force mass transit, but it will be bad mass transit

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 9:58 am

Funny that the poor chose cheap cars over buses and trains whenever they can.
Just face it, the only people who like your fantasy world, are those who aren’t forced to live in it.

It is the capitalists that have made everyone rich. It takes socialism to destroy wealth.
Look everywhere in the world.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:10 am

Wow. Capitalists are choosing to kill billions of people?

Capitalists are about making money. Kill billions and who buys the stuff that gives profits to capitalists? Seems killing billions is self-defeating.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:06 am

I used to commute via mass transportation, subway and bus.
50% of my commute time was spent waiting.

DonK31
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 20, 2026 10:23 am

I tried mass transit once. It took just as long to ride if you consider waiting time. And the mass transit still left me a half mile walk to my apartment. If it isn’t any faster than a 3 mile walk and more expensive, why bother?

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 20, 2026 11:14 am

Because of bad mass transporation

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 4:44 pm

All mass transportation is bad. It’s the nature of the beast. The only way to make mass transportation not bad, is to provide more vehicles with less wait time. As you add more vehicles and more routes, you eventually become indistinguishable from a system of individual vehicles, and you are back where you started from.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:34 pm

Whenever one says all or none, one must prove that. You have provided no proof for your assertion. I have proposed a combination for the entire system with the vast majority within medium and big cities being mass transport with the rich being able to have cars but paying for their costs with taxes and fees.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 21, 2026 11:22 am

Just observe the behavior of the people. Can you find a single mass transit system where people are clamoring to ride it?
The mere fact that every single mass transit system is almost completely supported via taxes and bleeds people whenever there is a chance is proof that there is no such thing as a “good” mass transit system.
They are better than walking, just barely.

Reply to  MarkW
April 21, 2026 12:26 pm

So if the capitalists insist on bad mass transit, and the people do not want it, that means mass transit CANNOT work?
The mass transit in Moscow, China, Vienna, Japan are liked

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 22, 2026 12:43 pm

Capitallists don’t insist on mass transit. They are merely pointing out that it is impossible to do mass transit well.

Reply to  MarkW
April 22, 2026 2:21 pm

Show me such a proof! The capitalists bought up the rail mass transit and shut it down. Then they spin this fairey tale that it cannot work- It was capitalists that invented mass transit in NYC and other big cities

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 5:02 am

Another big government. pie-in-the-sky socialist.

Reply to  Phil R
April 20, 2026 7:47 am

Another pie-in-the-sky capitalist without Critical thinking abilities

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:40 am

Typical socialist, only those people who agree with the party are smart. Everyone else is paid off by somebody who has too much money.

Your solution has been tried time and time again. It always fails for the simple reason that it goes against human nature.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:14 am

Typical Capitalist. Only those people who agree with them are smart. Everyone else is paid off by somebody who has too much money.

Your solution has been tried time and time again. It always fails for the simple reason that it goes against human nature.

People are social animals. Greed always causes anti-social behavior. Every society has wanted part socialism, part self-reliance. But you Capitalist want to destroy the socialism as your boom and bust cycle destroys, on and on

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:02 am

I bet your mommy told you that was an intelligent comeback.
Yes people are social animals in that they prefer being around others rather than being alone.
Trying to leap from that to a belief that everyone loves socialism is quite a stretch, even for a socialist.

Fact. Socialist countries have to build fences to keep people in, while capitalist countries build fences to keep people out.

Fact. In capitalist countries even the poor are rich. People living at the federal poverty line in the US live better than do the middle class in Europe, and would be among the top few percent in most of the rest of the world.

Capitalism creates wealth and spreads it around.
Socialism destroys wealth and concentrates it in the hands of those who run the government.

MarkW
Reply to  Phil R
April 20, 2026 8:39 am

This time it’s going to work, because these time it will be my group in charge.

Petey Bird
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 7:39 am

Yes, mass transit is free and has no consequences. More free shit is all society needs.

Reply to  Petey Bird
April 20, 2026 7:48 am

The roads and fuel and wars for fuels are not free. What society needs is more intelligent spending. People pay for mass transit

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:42 am

People pay for the roads they use.
People pay for mass transit via massive taxes on other people.
In every city, the fare box pays for less than 10% the cost of that ride.

Typical socialist, can’t see the real world, and declares that only the intelligent people can see the emperors new clothes.

BTW, your magical trains and buses take energy to run, as much or more than do the cars you hate so much.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:22 am

Yes, people do pay for the roads, but not their fair share.
You have to look at the big picture, the whole package, include the costs of the wars in cash and lives. I said nothing about my or your intelligence. You make up straw man arguments. Show me your facts and sources.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:04 am

Road taxes not only pay for roads, but they pay for many things that have nothing to do with roads, like bike and pedestrian paths.

There have always been wars and will always be wars. I bet you believe that the causes belli for all the current wars is oil.
You don’t have to say anything about your intelligence, the fact that you believe socialism works speaks loudly enough.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 7:48 am

Where does Jimmy live?

Reply to  John Hultquist
April 20, 2026 8:08 am

WTF does that have to do with anything?

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:45 am

If you aren’t smart enough to figure that out, then no wonder you are dumb enough to be a socialist.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:20 am

Insults are not facts and logic, not proof. You are just like Trump, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:05 am

Says the guy who has presented zero facts and insults everyone who doesn’t believe in socialism.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:35 am

Are you trying to argue that unless oil is cheap enough for everyone, then nobody should have it?
Or are you trying to argue that oil should be subsidized so that everyone can afford it.
Both solutions have been tried, and they both end up in misery for the masses.

As to mass transit, there’s a reason why it is always abandoned as soon as people can afford their own transportation.

Your solutions are even more idiotic than anything proposed by Biden and his cronies.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:25 am

In fact, the capitalists bought up the mass transit in LA and shut it down, forced buses and cars on the people.
I am arguing that when oil is not cheap enough to make gas cheap enough, then the people will have no cars and with your leadership, no mass transit

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:08 am

Not that lie again. It’s been disproven over and over again, yet the socialists keep bringing it up.

You are making arguments that only make sense to those who know nothing about economics or how the real world works.

Gas is expensive now, but it is still less expensive than it was under Biden and his war on oil.
When the war with Iran is over, oil prices will go back down.
On the other hand renewable energy will always be expensive as will buses and trains.
They only seem cheap because people who don’t use them are paying for 90% or better of your ride.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:32 am

Are the poor better off if nobody has oil and gas?

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:26 am

I never said that. I say that the oil and gas used for mass transit makes everyone richer

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:08 am

Mass transit, like all other forms of socialism, make people poorer. The only people who ever get wealthy from socialism, are those who run it.

DonK31
April 20, 2026 1:18 am

Are we not being incorrect when we use the term “fossil fuels?” Wouldn’t a more correct phrase be “organic fuels?”

Reply to  DonK31
April 20, 2026 8:12 am

Actually, only coal is organic. Oil is from Fischer-Tropsch process on methane that the earth is full of, natural gas, MH4. That oil seeps up through organic layers in most places, but is not made there.

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 8:47 am

Not only is he dumb enough to be a socialist, it is also dumb enough to believe the abiotic oil nonsense.

You have the process reversed, it starts out as oil, but gets broken down by heat into the lighter elements. All coal, oil and gas come from organic compounds originally laid down on the surface and buried.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 9:16 am

Then how do the get oil without any biological markers from very deep in the earth? You insult, but provide no proof. Show me the facts that support you allegations

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 10:13 am

There is no oil without biological markers.
There is no deep gas, never has been.

Think for a minute, assuming socialism hasn’t completely rotted your brain. How does that oil get there?

It can’t have been there from the beginning of the planet. When the planet was first formed it was molten all the way to the core.
That heat would have broken down any gas to it’s constituent parts, Oxygen and carbon. Oxygen and carbon (for that matter methane itself, could it have survived) are lighter than rocks, and would have floated to the surface.

By the time the crust started forming, there was no way incoming comets and asteroids could have driven any CH4 they might have been carrying to the core.

If abiotic oil was a real thing, oil would be found everywhere. However oil is only found in those places predicted by the biotic origin theory.

Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 11:13 am

There is oil without biological markers.
Assuming Capitalism hasn’t completely rotted your brain, The Fischer-Tropsch process is how the oil got there.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC521091/

MarkW
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 4:46 pm

When you decide to hallucinate, you do a very good job of it.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  MarkW
April 20, 2026 10:14 am

Surface and much more in the oceans, subducted and cooked.

Reply to  Jimmy Walter
April 20, 2026 7:03 pm

Actually there is both biogenic, abiotic and Fischer-Tropsch oil. Biogenic is made naturally from organic material and contains biological markers. Abiotic forms from inorganic C, H2 and minerals under high T/high P deep in the mantle and is observed in hydrovents and some rocks. Fischer-Tropsch is a manufacturing process that uses syngas (CO + H2) + catalyst to produce synoil that is usually cleaner (e.g., low/no S) and more consistent than natural crude oil. Abiotic and F-T oil do not contribute to any great extent to Earth’s commercial oil reservoirs.

Reply to  Ollie
April 20, 2026 9:31 pm

You are rational, reasonable person. I concede I cannot prove there is no biogenic oil since most oil has biological markers. You are correct that manufactured F-T is not significant. However, since the oil reservoirs are refilling, and since that refilling is coming through biological layers, and since there are no biological layers deep down, no one can prove either the original was abiotic or the oil refilling them is either biogenic or abiotic. Thank you for your level headed response.

John Hultquist
Reply to  DonK31
April 20, 2026 8:12 am

I’d vote for Carbon-based. Why? Because the term “organic” is being currupted beyond a meaning we learned 60 years ago. For example: “Organic is a labeling term that indicates that an agricultural product has been produced by integrating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity. Use of sewage sludge, . . ..” That from the Washington State Department of Agriculture.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  DonK31
April 20, 2026 10:13 am

Hydrocarbons and coal.

Or

Carbon based fuels.

DonK31
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 20, 2026 10:34 am

ADJECTIVE

  1. noting or pertaining to a class of chemical compounds that formerly comprised only those existing in or derived from plants or animals, but that now includes all other compounds of carbon.
  2. Antonyms:
  3. inorganic
  4. characteristic of, pertaining to, or derived from living organisms.

organic remains found in rocks.

Organic is carbon based. We are carbon based bi-pedal life forms.

Reply to  DonK31
April 20, 2026 1:11 pm

Mineral fuels.

April 20, 2026 2:03 am

More Value, Fewer Emmissions.
Don’t they teach grammer in schools any more?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Oldseadog
April 20, 2026 2:55 am

They really should. He’s a terrific actor.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Oldseadog
April 20, 2026 2:59 am

It’s Blair’s educashun init?….. he has a lot to answer for.

Mr.
Reply to  Oldseadog
April 20, 2026 4:58 am

maybe grammar is being taught in the spelling classes?
🙂

Reply to  Mr.
April 20, 2026 5:27 am

Oops.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Oldseadog
April 20, 2026 6:27 am

Hey, it happens. I myself have made a misteak now and then. 😜

John Hultquist
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
April 20, 2026 8:17 am

With auto-infill, one can’t be to careful. 🙂

Reply to  John Hultquist
April 21, 2026 4:58 am

Isn’t that the truth!

My auto-fill loves to rewrite what I wrote.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
April 20, 2026 10:15 am

I think it would be a mistake to order a misteak for dinner.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Oldseadog
April 20, 2026 10:16 am

It could also be More Value, Less Emission (as in reduced rate of emissions).

Funny how the “s” dominates.

April 21, 2026 4:46 am

From the article: “carbon efficiency”

What is that? Carbon can be more or less efficient?