1 1
brenthutch

European Energy Crisis

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, olofscience said:

So...you're criticising Europe for buying and using fossil fuels from Russia...because of their rush to stop using fossil fuels? If you can't see the flaw in your argument, there's not much hope is there...

It is just an observation that Europe reduced production of fossil fuels faster than the could be replaced with rainbows and unicorn farts (solar and wind) and are now faced with the unsavory proposition of being dependent on Russian energy.  

Maybe you can explain why Europe is dependent on Russian oil and gas when they have wind and solar?  Not to mention the trillions of cubic yards of natural gas and billions of barrels of oil under their feet? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

reduced production of fossil fuels faster

The North Sea running out of oil and gas wasn't because of solar and wind. Fracking was only a recent technology that hasn't had time to take off.

Europe is dependent on Russian oil and gas because arguably, they phased out NUCLEAR energy too quickly. 

They had 3 choices: continue nuclear (expensive), start fracking (pretty difficult with high population density and NIMBYs) or just buy from Russia. Buying from Russia was the cheapest and easiest option at the time but was of course bad long-term planning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
58 minutes ago, olofscience said:

The North Sea running out of oil and gas wasn't because of solar and wind. Fracking was only a recent technology that hasn't had time to take off.

 

Why do you keep bringing up the North Sea?  I never mentioned it.  As far as fracking goes you might want to consult with some Yanks, we have been doing it for decades.  I’ll help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY34PQUiwOQ

NIMBY? The threat of war and freezing to death have a way of focusing the mind beyond NIMBY.

 

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

They had 3 choices: continue nuclear (expensive), start fracking (pretty difficult with high population density and NIMBYs) or just buy from Russia. Buying from Russia was the cheapest and easiest option at the time but was of course bad long-term planning.

Why didn’t they go with wind and solar?  After all it is less expensive and more scalable. (according to you)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1