Ukraine

[BIGUN 1,051]

Just now, Phil1111 said:

But at the same time go all out to wean itself and others from the shackles of oil.

To Ken's and your point - we cannot drill our way to energy independence, but we can use this as a bridge towards weaning off the petro-tit. Today, my s/o goes looking at EV's and PHEVs and moves towards ridding herself of a massive gas-eating lift-kitted Tundra. That may not mean much to you, but for the country girl; it's a large step. 

[Phil1111 910]

4 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Because you don't have such a spigot. 

Well it's not a spigot per say. Just as Canada doesn't have a spigot. But helping Europe and other countries in the world buffer the current shortfalls in oil supply. Through increased free world production IMO is necessary. If punishing Russia and sooner or later by alleviating the shortfalls. We all can teach the Saudi's and the UAE that their loyalties to Putin will have a cost.

[BIGUN 1,051]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

That pipeline is and was mostly a symbol, not a solution.

700,000 barrels A DAY. 

[Phil1111 910]

3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

That pipeline is and was mostly a symbol, not a solution. 

Its a symbol to the US left democrats and right wing republicans. Its also a solution to N. American integrated energy independence.

[Phil1111 910]

4 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

To Ken's and your point - we cannot drill our way to energy independence, but we can use this as a bridge towards weaning off the petro-tit. Today, my s/o goes looking at EV's and PHEVs and moves towards ridding herself of a massive gas-eating lift-kitted Tundra. That may not mean much to you, but for the country girl; it's a large step. 

I agree. This shock to the world's energy supplies is like 1973 all over again. It will do as much to drive EV adoptions and green energy as Elon Musk has done. Germany and Europe will move at maximum speed to wean itself from oil as a result of these prices. Less so America, but it will.

[Phil1111 910]

13 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

We suck less. :)

I think Venezuela is still a high-risk investment. 

Its mistaken to believe that Venezuela has any short term oil surplus supply. Oil companies from outside would have to pour investments in for a couple years to increase supply. They are in a terrible state with no investment for almost 20 years now.

[gowlerk 1,905]

1 minute ago, BIGUN said:

700,000 barrels A DAY. 

It became a symbol of the fight for CO2 reduction. As the deniers got more and more ridiculous the warriors did the same. The pipeline if built will replace several trains per day as the transportation method used to get the crude to the Gulf coast. Making the tar sands more profitable. If they are more profitable more will be invested in production. If there is 700K barrels a day available it will get to market one way or another. If there is an energy shortage opposing pipelines will fall out of fashion. Only a few hard core are willing to freeze in the dark to save the planet.

[BIGUN 1,051]

1 minute ago, Phil1111 said:

This shock to the world's energy supplies is like 1973 all over again. It will do as much to drive EV adoptions and green energy as Elon Musk has done. Germany and Europe will move at maximum speed to wean itself from oil as a result of these prices. Less so America, but it will.

Agree on all points. Our options back then were the Ford Pinto or Volkswagen. Now we have a litany of choices in PHEV & EV. And, my suspicion is this will escalate the timeline towards EV. 

 

[Phil1111 910]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Absolutely. This horror show is it's own thing. I still maintain the best policy is to keep it in Ukraine and make it as drawn out and painful for the Russians as possible. Yes, Ukraine is suffering and yes they will need to give up territory for whatever peace with Russia will look like. Putin will need to walk away with a win, no doubt, and hoping instead for him to be removed is mere wishful thinking. But they'll still be a country, in or out of NATO, and the rest of the world won't be on fire and we can start, finally, to learn how to play the long game against our future enemies.

Well I understand your general point. I don't disagree that it may be drawn out and painful. But obviously drawing it out should not be an objective or policy. The current sanctions will do that. The policy should be to pour weapons and supplies into Ukraine like a river. Put a MLRS system into the hands of every Ukrainian peasant. To end it ASAP.

Such that sunflowers will grow from the grave of every Russian who has mistakenly invaded.

[jakee 1,254]

2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

While we're on the topic, unless all of the 2.5 Million Ukrainians who have fled to Poland are kids, disabled, old or possess some other infirmity that maybe they should be issued war suits and weapons and offered transport to their motherland.

Fighting age men have not been allowed to leave Ukraine. Many Ukrainian men already living abroad have already returned to fight. So yes, the vast majority of people who have fled Ukraine are OAPs, children, or women who are looking after OAPs and/or children.  

[JoeWeber 2,297]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

But obviously drawing it out should not be an objective or policy.

That's not obvious to me. I think that should be the objective. Nothing so quick it inspires escalation over capitulation.

[JoeWeber 2,297]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

We suck less. :)

I think Venezuela is still a high-risk investment. 

Depends how the deal is done. Maybe we do a deal on volume and license the production to oil companies. The more oil we control now to get past this unfortunate time is the more oil we can not pump later to get back on track, if possible. Just get creative and leave the delicate sensibilities at home.

[Phil1111 910]

51 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Depends how the deal is done. Maybe we do a deal on volume and license the production to oil companies. The more oil we control now to get past this unfortunate time is the more oil we can not pump later to get back on track, if possible. Just get creative and leave the delicate sensibilities at home.

Bigun is right. Perhaps you forget that Venezuela is home to the descendants of Nationalize it now, screw the Yanqui imperialists, Chavez.

In other news is a real Republican. Who is unfortunately being driven from office.

"In tweets posted on Friday, as the Russian invasion of Ukraine continued, with cities besieged and bombarded, Adam Kinzinger said: “I want to be honest, in Congress I have only a few votes that in hinds[igh]t, I regret. My biggest regret was voting against the first impeachment of Donald Trump.

“It’s important for political leaders to be transparent and admit regret when needed. The bottom line, Donald Trump withheld lethal aid to Ukraine so he could use it as leverage for his campaign. This is a shameful and illegal act, directly hurting the Ukraine defense today.

“I wish I could go back in time and vote for it, but I cannot. What we can do now is to ensure that this never happens again, and that we all put the interests of our nation above our party. Alexander Vindman [a White House official who was fired for opposing Trump’s Ukraine scheme] and others deserve our appreciation.”

Above from The Guardian

[brenthutch 383]

2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

To Ken's and your point - we cannot drill our way to energy independence, 

We actually are “energy independent” right now, in spite of the Biden administration.  We are a net exporter of coal and natural gas, which outweighs our petroleum imports.  
Reopening federal lands (including ANWR) and ceasing Biden’s anti-oil policies would help close that gap as well.

Edited March 12, 2022 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,297]

37 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Bigun is right. Perhaps you forget that Venezuela is home to the descendants of Nationalize it now, screw the Yanqui imperialists, Chavez.

In other news is a real Republican. Who is unfortunately being driven from office.

"In tweets posted on Friday, as the Russian invasion of Ukraine continued, with cities besieged and bombarded, Adam Kinzinger said: “I want to be honest, in Congress I have only a few votes that in hinds[igh]t, I regret. My biggest regret was voting against the first impeachment of Donald Trump.

“It’s important for political leaders to be transparent and admit regret when needed. The bottom line, Donald Trump withheld lethal aid to Ukraine so he could use it as leverage for his campaign. This is a shameful and illegal act, directly hurting the Ukraine defense today.

“I wish I could go back in time and vote for it, but I cannot. What we can do now is to ensure that this never happens again, and that we all put the interests of our nation above our party. Alexander Vindman [a White House official who was fired for opposing Trump’s Ukraine scheme] and others deserve our appreciation.”

Above from The Guardian

Could be you're right. Could be my views are polluted by almost daily communication with a venezuelan living and doing serious business there and regular talks with venezuelan nationals doing business in the DWI.

Seems to me that today isn't yesterday.

[airdvr 197]

6 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

I agree. This shock to the world's energy supplies is like 1973 all over again. It will do as much to drive EV adoptions and green energy as Elon Musk has done. Germany and Europe will move at maximum speed to wean itself from oil as a result of these prices. Less so America, but it will.

Not having gas vs. paying a premium is not the same thing.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

7 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Absolutely. This horror show is it's own thing. I still maintain the best policy is to keep it in Ukraine and make it as drawn out and painful for the Russians as possible. Yes, Ukraine is suffering and yes they will need to give up territory for whatever peace with Russia will look like. Putin will need to walk away with a win, no doubt, and hoping instead for him to be removed is mere wishful thinking. But they'll still be a country, in or out of NATO, and the rest of the world won't be on fire and we can start, finally, to learn how to play the long game against our future enemies.

Hi Joe,

Re:  This horror show is it's own thing.

As it is now, you are correct.

Once the Russian forces surround Kyiv it will be game over.  

I, at this time ( and, I do hope that I am wrong ), believe that by the end of this calendar year, Ukraine as we knew it two months ago, will no longer exist.

Putin, once he has full control, will declare it a part of Russia.  He will govern it from Moscow.  Only Russian will be taught in the schools.  He may even make it a strictly agricultural nation, to feed the rest of the Russian Federation.

Thoughts??????

Jerry Baumchen

[brenthutch 383]

8 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

Re:  This horror show is it's own thing.

As it is now, you are correct.

Once the Russian forces surround Kyiv it will be game over.  

I, at this time ( and, I do hope that I am wrong ), believe that by the end of this calendar year, Ukraine as we knew it two months ago, will no longer exist.

Putin, once he has full control, will declare it a part of Russia.  He will govern it from Moscow.  Only Russian will be taught in the schools.  He may even make it a strictly agricultural nation, to feed the rest of the Russian Federation.

Thoughts??????

Jerry Baumchen

Russia doesn’t have the resources to occupy Ukraine.  I think it is just as likely that Ukraine will bleed Russia dry, the government will collapse and we get Russia 3.0.

Czarist Russia collapsed after WWI. The end of the Soviet Union was helped along by the failure in Afghanistan.  Given the economic devastation and failure to achieve a quick military victory, Putin’s Russia may meet the same fate.

[olofscience 420]

52 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Only Russian will be taught in the schools. 

Mariupol is 60-80% Russian speaking. And since Putin is now shelling it into oblivion, I'd say it's probably 100% anti-russia.

As brent said - Putin can't hold Ukraine.

[JoeWeber 2,297]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

Re:  This horror show is it's own thing.

As it is now, you are correct.

Once the Russian forces surround Kyiv it will be game over.  

I, at this time ( and, I do hope that I am wrong ), believe that by the end of this calendar year, Ukraine as we knew it two months ago, will no longer exist.

Putin, once he has full control, will declare it a part of Russia.  He will govern it from Moscow.  Only Russian will be taught in the schools.  He may even make it a strictly agricultural nation, to feed the rest of the Russian Federation.

Thoughts??????

Jerry Baumchen

I don't think they have the capacity to occupy Ukraine much less the national will. I don't doubt that Ukraine will accept being smaller just to end the war. I believe a lot will be learned in the assault on Kyiv. If the Ukrainians can kill enough infantry up front that the streets become a killing ground for Russian tanks this thing may wind down sooner than later. I'm not a military tactician by any measure but it seems to me that now would be a good time to knock out as many APC's full of infantry and fuel bowsers as possible and let the tanks come on.

[brenthutch 383]

Conducting military operations in urban terrain (MOUT) is difficult for even the best trained military.  From what I have seen of the Russians, they are utterly incapable of the level of coordination required to be successful in that environment.  I think they know this as well and that is why they withdraw after contact and resort to massive artillery barrages to advance but as Olof has pointed out they don’t make many friends that way.

 

[billvon 2,395]

8 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Quote

 Personally, I don't understand why we don't re-open the spigot here in the US

I agree, Biden should say he made a mistake about the XL pipeline. The US should open the taps on drilling. But at the same time go all out to wean itself and others from the shackles of oil.

The XL would have moved more foreign, not domestic, oil into the US supply.  If US production is the goal, the XL would have moved us farther from that goal.

[brenthutch 383]

5 minutes ago, billvon said:

The XL would have moved more foreign, not domestic, oil into the US supply.  If US production is the goal, the XL would have moved us farther from that goal.

Oil is a global commodity subject to the rules of supply and demand. If the XL facilitated increased supply, it would have reduced pricing pressure without regard to where it was destined 

[Phil1111 910]

2 minutes ago, billvon said:

The XL would have moved more foreign, not domestic, oil into the US supply.  If US production is the goal, the XL would have moved us farther from that goal.

The XL would primarily carry a heavier grade of crude. Which is useful in optimizing the blend for refineries.This explains why Canadian refineries import light crude.

This explains why US refiners need heavier crude stocks to balance inputs that have declined from Venezuela and central America. "Total US crude output has risen from less than 5 million bbl/day in 2009 to over 13 million bbl/day in 2020, mostly due to the rise of tight oil production from shale plays. Tight oil has a relatively high API density, making it much light than conventional oil.

As a result, domestic supply is becoming increasingly lighter, now approaching 40° on the API scale, creating a mismatch with the desired refinery feedstock density, which is about 32°. Demand for heavier grades of crude has therefore increased, as refineries seek to blend light domestic production with heavy and medium grade oil imports."

Someone else posted a day or two ago re crude blends and movements. Which I replied to somewhat the same subject

[billvon 2,395]

7 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

The XL would primarily carry a heavier grade of crude . . . .

Yes.  I agree with all that.  You are arguing that becoming more dependent on foreign oil is a good thing, for all the reasons you listed.