Proclivities wrote:

Just-in-time manufacturing can lead to some interesting problems, but I hear people howling about the 25 days until diesel runs out and I wonder if they think that McDonalds has a year's supply of Big Macs sitting on the shelves too? HYPOTHETICAL because of course they do but you get my point.

 thisbody wrote:
Oh, Tucker Carlson is definitely not a product of nature. He's more of a mixture of narcissism, grievance, and demagoguery.

 kurtster wrote:
Ok, so connect the dots for me.

Your idea for the quickest way to an end to the Russia's military action against Ukraine is tied directly to oil and its availability? This will lead to peace? Please enlighten me as to what would be the ideal scenario to achieve that. Allocate all Ukrainian oil & natural gas production to Russia for the next 1, 2, 3, 5 years... or indefinitely? Or is Ukraine supposed to just give up all of their natural resource producing lands to Russia? Seems like that would certainly make Russia prosperous.... Ukraine?.... not so much.
 
How does Biden's support of alternative sources of energy (which is needed and inevitable though you would prefer to believe otherwise) even factor into a discussion of ending the conflict in Ukraine or maybe you just wanted to vent for venting sake?

 kurtster wrote:
I guess it depends who you ask:
"Inventories of diesel and gasoline are down below five-year averages, and if the entire world were to stop, we would have 25 days worth of diesel. But the world doesn't stop. We're not counting on it stopping," Ed Hirs, a professor of energy economics at the University of Houston...  "Now we have 25 days' supply when we would ordinarily have around 35 to 40," he said.
The only way there would be a run on diesel is if buyers panic and start stockpiling, Hirs said, adding, "That could cause an issue."

 kurtster wrote:
you can replenish a lot of gas in 50 days if you set your mind to it. Consumption is also down significantly in 2022 (partly due to a mild autumn). Contrary to the Kremlin's line amplified by Tucker Carlson I believe, we are not too perturbed here in Europe. We are starting from a very high base line and can save a shit ton in gas consumption without it costing too much in the quality of life.

 kurtster wrote:

I don't think you need to worry your head about that too much.

 Lazy8 wrote:
...with a logo set in Comic Sans.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

In Sharm El-Sheikh, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned against a "renaissance" of oil, gas and coal. At the same time, he promised more money for the protection of rainforests. More speed and more ambition are needed in the fight against global warming.

Germany wants to double its pledged support for the global protection of rainforests - from one to two billion euros. This was said by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the climate conference in Sharm El-Sheikh, according to the speech transcript. The money is to be invested primarily in protecting the rainforests in the Congo Basin of Central Africa and in the Amazon region.

A.k.a. symbolic politics..

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
1)  Yeah,  What does that mean ?  I'll tell you what that means.  You have a 9 to 10 week supply stashed.  That's it.  Then what ?

German gas storage could quickly empty after a few frosty days - network regulator chief

In finding that factoid I also found that the EU in general is at about 80 % capacity.  Not much when you think in days.

Here in the States we were recently informed that we have a 50 day supply of diesel. No diesel ?  The country stops.  No trucks, no trains, people freeze to death, especially in the Northeast.  Then people starve with no food being shipped.  And our asswhipe of a POTUS has drained our strategic reserve for a political ploy making things even more unsure.

2)  I'm still reading though I find it troubling find the author was an employee of the Wilson Center at the time this was written.  The Wilson Center is at the center of Russian propaganda and disinformation over here.

Once again, I'll raise my primary point that the quickest way to peace is with an abundance of oil.  For a whole host of reasons. Peace through prosperity.  Doesn't look like that will happen anytime soon with Biden once again declaring a fight to the death against the fossil fuel industry.

 black321 wrote:
…oh, good one!

 Lazy8 wrote:
again, not entirely true..   from that Tageschau article (run through DeepL)

Other EU countries even more independent of Russian gas In fact, some EU countries have already become independent of Russian gas faster than Germany. Italy, for example, has concluded gas supply agreements with Algeria, Qatar and Azerbaijan. As a result, the share of Russian gas imports fell to 21 percent of Italy's energy needs. Spain and Portugal are in an even better position; they are largely independent of Russian gas and even supply gas to other EU countries. Spain is playing an increasingly important role in the European LNG market. The Iberian peninsula is home to six LNG terminals. France has also made provisions. The "grande nation" has three LNG terminals. So far, France imports most of its natural gas from Norway - via a direct North Sea pipeline to Dunkerque. Denmark and Sweden are largely self-sufficient in energy.

And the forward prices for natural gas on the TFF trading hub, Europe's biggest exchange are easing constantly, with day ahead prices even becoming negative as a long line of ships are waiting to offload their LNG but confronted by full storage in Europe.


EDIT: more on those negative prices  "Europe's not out of the woods" (yet)

 Lazy8 wrote:
If not nature herself, who may have brought that one about?

 thisbody wrote:
OK, I won't. Not sure what I'd have to say to a headline aggregation site that advertises itself as "Where barflies get together" anyway.

As to NoEnz' point: Germany isn't Europe.  Turkey is at the end of it's economic rope and is busy fashioning a noose out of it, and Britain is seeing considerable political turmoil from rising energy costs. Rising fuel prices are a major talking point for the Tucker Carlson right in the US. This problem isn't solved.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
Don't tell that to the Moon of Alabama!

 Lazy8 wrote:

Not true for Germany at least.  This links to a German PBS page, but you can scroll down to the chart which needs no explanation. It's from the end of August but I'm pretty sure the situation hasn't changed much. If anything the aversion to Russian sources has got even more extreme since the sabotage of Nordstream 1 and 2.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
Lest anyone start popping the corks to celebrate European energy independence this is only possible because the pipelines thru Ukraine are still operating. That tap can turn off at any moment, and importing gas by tanker as driven the cost up to crippling levels.

This is a good summation of Ukraine's gas woes, brought about by the familiar issues of a state-owned utility being simultaneously incompetent and corrupt. Ukraine owes Russia a lot of money for its past gas purchases, something that could form the basis of their reparations claim after the war.

 black321 wrote: 

 VV wrote:

Lighten up Francis, no one is upset, it was just a joke.

 black321 wrote:

This is what I posted in response to your previous post:

I guess you must mean the long and storied history of Russian repression. Nope, I don’t think anyone is discounting that at all. In fact I think everyone recognizes it as a primary contributing factor to the current state of affairs.
  
And you are upset by it and saying I am making sh*t up about you? Tell me where the made up sh*t is in that statement? There is nothing personal in it at all. You must have a guilty conscience my friend.

 kurtster wrote:
Well, yes. That's what I was referring to when I said at the back of Putin's cerebellum somewhere.  But I think there is good evidence that oil and gas is not Putin's primary motive. All of the wars on Russia's borders have been about quelling local independence and restoring regimes aligned with Russia. Moreover, the timing of the 2022 invasion closely followed Lukashenko losing the election in Belarus (before getting reinstalled by Russia  - i.e. a refusal to accept an election and getting installed by force - sound familiar?). 

I contend that what Putin is most afraid of is domestic unrest and the encroachment of western democracy. In fact, this IMO is the only prism to view the messages coming out of Russian TV which are an exercise in pure absurdity. So, sure, oil may play some role in his reasoning, but power and control is by far more important to him.  This is also the only rationale that makes sense to him accepting all the downside risks attached with an invasion of Ukraine and holding Europe hostage in terms of oil and gas supplies.  Risks that have now become manifest:

Europe's gas storage is 100% full. There's no way Europe is going to ever rely on Russia for its supplies to the same extent ever again. 
He's lost his conventional army and is now hauling out old WWII stock to send to the front.
Nor can he rebuild his army because of sanctions on essential western parts
He's decimating his population of young fathers and is anyway facing a demographic crisis.
It's possible that up to 700,000 people have fled  Russia 

As for Ukraine.. it is true, like any country going through a massive transition from one-party rule to democracy there was a problem with corruption (Russia has the same issue) and a diversity of political parties jockeying for position. The invasion has changed all that. Putin has made a unified nation out of Ukraine. Another major fail on Putin's part, but Ukraine's gain. 76% of the nation favour fighting until victory,and this after all the losses and damage that the war has caused. They are not going to back down, regardless of what support they get from the west.


btw..  if you feel like reading something to balance out your diet of Tucker Carlson soundbites, you could try reading something like this.