JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Japan joined Glasgow but tells people at home to double oil and gas production by 2040

Doesn’t look like the dawn of a “new energy era”

Oil BarrelsThe third largest economy in the world signed up to the Glasgow circus, but is actually telling its own corporate heavyweights to get into oil and gas. The government approved a strategic energy plan on October 22 which essentially says “double oil and gas production by 2040”. (From 34.7% of domestic consumption up to 60%). This is mostly about being energy self sufficient. But they aren’t telling industry to “double your wind farms”. They’re not worried they might run out of solar panels.

It’s a kind of quiet NetOneHundred plan.

Which countries at Glasgow are the suckers reducing fossil fuels?

Notalotofpeopleknowthat.

Japan Is Backing Oil and Gas Even After COP26 Climate Talks

By Stephen Stapczynski  and  Tsuyoshi Inajima, Bloomberg

Government officials have been quietly urging trading houses, refiners and utilities to slow down their move away from fossil fuels, and even encouraging new investments in oil-and-gas projects, according to people within the Japanese government and industry, who requested anonymity as the talks are private.

Japan imports 90% of its energy. This is about security:

That plan says “no compromise is acceptable to ensure energy security, and it is the obligation of a nation to continue securing necessary resources.”

That latest strategy calls for the share of oil and natural gas produced either domestically or under the control of Japanese enterprises overseas to increase from 34.7% in fiscal year 2019 to more than 60% in 2040. Japanese officials plan to convey to other nations the importance attached to continued investments in upstream supply, the people added.

Renewables are the thin-blue and-yellow GT stripe across the graph. Call it “decoration”.

Oil, Gas

Oil Barrels: http://pngimg.com/image/21314

10 out of 10 based on 75 ratings

122 comments to Japan joined Glasgow but tells people at home to double oil and gas production by 2040

  • #
    Curious George

    “Japan .. tells people at home to double oil and gas production by 2040.”
    Two times zero is a zero.

    327

    • #

      Apparently a third of their natural gas and oil is domestically produced or at least owned by Japanese companies working overseas. They want to raise that to 60%.

      Possibly they realize they need to own the supply lines, even if they can’t find those resources in Japan.

      470

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        I think too they know China is a problem, so from a Defence point of view they need to be sure they cant be cut off from energy supplies.

        100

    • #
      Analitik

      The relevant phrase in the Bloomberg article is

      either domestically or under the control of Japanese enterprises overseas

      If you are saying this thread is poorly titled, I agree.

      106

      • #

        Whether Japan prefers oil and gas from domestic wells or foreign-wells-they-control is not the point.

        What matters is that they signed the Glasgow Agreement, but act as though they know they have to have oil and gas in 2040.

        They are behaving as if everyone else in the world will too.

        Would oil and gas supply lines matter if photovoltaics could keep them warm and run their factories?

        220

        • #
          Analitik

          The clearer title would be

          Japan joined Glasgow but tells people at home they will double oil and gas production by 2040

          11

          • #
            R.B.

            It’s just a heading. While I’d be critical of a misleading heading if it mattered, e.g. when they have something libelous in quotation marks, this doesn’t.

            00

      • #
        Tim Spence

        The title is appropriate, I can’t see a problem there.

        70

        • #
          Analitik

          tells people at home to double oil and gas production

          Doesn’t that strongly imply that the increase in oil and gas production will be “at home”, ie Japan?

          00

          • #
            William

            No, the people at home may control assets offshore and overseas.

            10

          • #
            Kalm Keith

            Hi Analytik,
            🙂 pull back for the bigger picture.

            Probably Jo’s intent was to say that while the Japanese were engaging in the Glasgow drama at one level, they had another group operating out of sight of those Glaswegians that was “countering” their public showmanship.

            I like it.

            30

      • #
        Ian

        That’s just unnecessary nit picking as the title of the article provides all the relevant information.

        33

  • #
    John+R+Smith

    A new religion encourages new faux public virtues.
    Like electric cars.
    And masks.
    More virtuous if you wear two at a time.
    Don’t forget your rainbow flag (almost as good as a vax card).

    201

    • #
      Klem

      I’d get the vax tomorrow if they eliminated the vax card. Having to ask the government for permission to have dinner with my family is for sheep.

      20

  • #
    David Maddison

    Australia, the dumb, actually, the VERY dumb country, is engaged with a Japanese consortium plus Aussie taxpayer dollars to produced hydrogen with coal in Vicdanistan. Naturally, Australia gets to keep and bury the CO2 by-product and the fantasy is that the hydrogen will be used to power a hydrogen economy in Japan.

    It was Turnbull’s idea so do it is guaranteed to be a disaster. Even “environmental” groups are sceptical. Finkel also supports it.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-12/hydrogen-from-coal-production-begins-la-trobe-valley/13241482

    First hydrogen produced from Latrobe Valley coal generates export hopes, emissions fears
    ABC Gippsland /

    By Jarrod Whittaker

    Posted Fri 12 Mar 2021 at 6:15am Friday

    A Japanese consortium hopes the production of hydrogen using coal from the Latrobe Valley in a world-first trial will prove it is possible to export the emerging fuel source.

    Key points:

    -Hydrogen has been produced from coal in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley

    -A Japanese consortium wants to test whether it is possible to export the emerging fuel source

    -But environmental groups are sceptical about the potential of hydrogen made using coal

    The consortium has produced the first hydrogen at a plant at the Loy Yang mine, south-east of Traralgon, and plans to transport it to Japan from the Port of Hastings in a specially designed ship later this year.

    The $500 million Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain (HESC) project involves creating hydrogen gas at the plant and refining it for transport.

    Hydrogen is touted as a clean energy source with a range of uses including in fuel cells and powering vehicles.

    The project is in its pilot phase, and because producing hydrogen using coal creates greenhouse gases, it will not commercialise it unless it is able to capture and store the emissions.

    Announced in April 2018, then-prime minister Malcolm Turnbull attended the launch of the project, which received $50 million each from the Victorian and federal governments.

    SEE LINK FOR REST

    180

    • #
      David Maddison

      If something is a very bad idea, Australia is certain to adopt it.

      https://phys.org/news/2006-12-hydrogen-economy-doesnt.html

      Why a hydrogen economy doesn’t make sense

      In a recent study, fuel cell expert Ulf Bossel explains that a hydrogen economy is a wasteful economy. The large amount of energy required to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds (water, natural gas, biomass), package the light gas by compression or liquefaction, transfer the energy carrier to the user, plus the energy lost when it is converted to useful electricity with fuel cells, leaves around 25% for practical use — an unacceptable value to run an economy in a sustainable future. Only niche applications like submarines and spacecraft might use hydrogen.
      “More energy is needed to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds than can ever be recovered from its use,” Bossel explains to PhysOrg.com. “Therefore, making the new chemical energy carrier form natural gas would not make sense, as it would increase the gas consumption and the emission of CO2. Instead, the dwindling fossil fuel reserves must be replaced by energy from renewable sources.”

      While scientists from around the world have been piecing together the technology, Bossel has taken a broader look at how realistic the use of hydrogen for carrying energy would be. His overall energy analysis of a hydrogen economy demonstrates that high energy losses inevitably resulting from the laws of physics mean that a hydrogen economy will never make sense.

      “The advantages of hydrogen praised by journalists (non-toxic, burns to water, abundance of hydrogen in the Universe, etc.) are misleading, because the production of hydrogen depends on the availability of energy and water, both of which are increasingly rare and may become political issues, as much as oil and natural gas are today,” says Bossel.

      “There is a lot of money in the field now,” he continues. “I think that it was a mistake to start with a ‘Presidential Initiative’ rather with a thorough analysis like this one. Huge sums of money were committed too soon, and now even good scientists prostitute themselves to obtain research money for their students or laboratories—otherwise, they risk being fired. But the laws of physics are eternal and cannot be changed with additional research, venture capital or majority votes.”

      Even though many scientists, including Bossel, predict that the technology to establish a hydrogen economy is within reach, its implementation will never make economic sense, Bossel argues.

      “In the market place, hydrogen would have to compete with its own source of energy, i.e. with (“green”) electricity from the grid,” he says. “For this reason, creating a new energy carrier is a no-win solution. We have to solve an energy problem not an energy carrier problem.”

      SEE LINK FOR REST

      310

      • #
        David Maddison

        Australia used to be the envy of the world.

        Now it’s seen as a warning.

        330

        • #
          PeterS

          Succinct and true. I wonder when the warning will be recognised by Australia let alone the rest of the world. When it’s too late? A majority win by either major party at the next federal election will only prove that we as a whole haven’t taken heed to the warning. I’m expecting and hoping we are not that dumb and that one or more of the minor parties who are already warning us of the CAGW scam and CODID-19 scam being propagated and supported by both major parties have a significant say in what the next government does for both issues.

          220

        • #
          Mal

          More like a laughing stock
          Ust DUMB and dumber.

          100

      • #
        Mal

        A hydrogen economy?
        I think it will bomb!

        120

        • #
          Ted1

          South Korea’s KEPCO are reported to have invested $750 million in a coal prospect at Bylong in the western Hunter Valley over a period of about ten years. The Greens opposed it tooth and nail, but were overruled time and again. Then when Kepco might have expected to commence mining the project was blocked. The issue cited by the court decision was not new. It was there from the beginning. This was a foul business that waited till the final stage to block the project.

          The latest news is that Kepco are now looking at establishing a hydrogen production facility at Bylong.

          The “conspiracy theorist” in me thinks maybe their objective might be to retain ownership of the prospect until a change of government or economic circumstances allows them to mine the coal.

          50

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Maybe hydrogen is the new “star wars” to drain our coffers and give us nothing.

          Anything Turncoat backed should be dumped immediately….

          40

      • #
        RickWill

        We have to solve an energy problem not an energy carrier problem.”

        The emerging problem is energy storage without degradation.

        Australia is already experiencing considerable curtailment of intermittent energy.
        https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/major-publications/qed/2021/q3-report.pdf?la=en&hash=F7831B51290237F9033B5D22E52EF4C1

        Economic self-curtailment driven by high FCAS costs rather than low energy prices again featured in Queensland during the quarter. On 3 July when there was extended volatility in prices for the Raise 6 Second and Raise 60 Second Contingency FCAS services, a high proportion of wind and solar generators rebid to reduce their output and minimise exposure to Raise costs which are recovered from online generators. Over the most volatile period of the day, up to 80% of potential semi-scheduled output was self-curtailed (Figure 54)

        The utilisation of the intermittent generation capacity will reduce as more intermittent generation is added. In these circumstances, the energy is available at zero marginal cost.

        The question that emerges – can a hydrogen extraction process be built at sufficiently low capital cost, operating with highly variable intermittent power supply to be economic? The energy cost during periods of economic curtailmentis free.

        Hydrogen needs to be viewed as a competitor to batteries. In that regard it has a three significant benefits.
        1 Hydrogen has an energy density of 140MJ/kg. This is around 500 times higher than current lithium batteries. It drops back somewhat when the mass of containment is added but still a couple of orders of magnitude higher than batteries.
        2. Hydrogen in water is essentially a limitless source on earth and recycles readily.
        3. There is no reduction in energy available over time. It does not deteriorate as an energy store.

        This video details vehicle energy storage technologies:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRAEAtRlFE

        00

        • #

          Hydrogen needs to be viewed as a competitor to batteries. In that regard it has a three significant benefits.
          1 Hydrogen has an energy density of 140MJ/kg. This is around 500 times higher than current lithium batteries. It drops back somewhat when the mass of containment is added but still a couple of orders of magnitude higher than batteries

          Rick, energy density is not exactly the prime factor for utility storage technology !
          Energy efficiency and facility costs are likely much more influential in choice.
          Batteries are not impressive on either metric at 90% or so EIEO , and $1.0m/Wh…
          …but, in comparison an equivalent hydrogen power storage system is a JOKE…
          …50% EIEO, and unknown $$$s for electrolysers, fuel cells, compressors, storage vessels, water purifiers, etc etc…

          20

    • #
      Geoff+Croker

      Meanwhile there is 500 Billion, yes that is BILLION, barrels of lights C6-C20, trapped in those same coal pores they are heating to make methane and CO2.

      All up, the resource including the shale under the coal and near surface in NE Danistan is about 2,500 Billion BOE ex-tractable. A$180 TRILLION dollars. One of, if not the largest, untapped oil and gas resource on Earth.

      Such riches are countered by unbelievable ignorance at MANY levels of government. Everyone who does not work for government in Danistan must become equally poor. Expect more government.

      220

      • #

        Geoff, Nice $ figure. Can you find a respectable source for that estimate (I’m not suggesting you can’t, just that I’d like to see it). Please. 🙂

        80

      • #
        Geoff+Croker

        20% by weight of the lignite is C6-C20. There is 395 Billion tons under Gippsland, 1,200 Billion tons under Bass Strait just off the coast. Then there is 600 Million tons of black coal under the lignite with 15-18% by weight (more heavy hydrocarbons), then there is the shale with methane and lights. All up its 2,500 Billion BoE extractable assuming a 60% possible.

        Detail is off line in SEC reports. I do have lab analysis of the lignite and a working process to extract the volatiles at under A$30/BoE. The volatile component of coal is measured by weight dry ash free (DAF).

        So far BHP ESSO have managed to get just 4 Billion Barrels of light oil (“sourced” from lignite). The BIG resource is unconventionals. Tight gas and lights from shale will need fracking and volatile extraction from coal seams will need solvents. There is a LOT of GAS.

        No-one is going to finance this when the entire state is “wagged” by four city green seats and divisive politicians. Victoria has voted to be poor. We live off WA’s largesse. I recommend you secede.

        90

        • #

          Happily it will still be there once the pseudo crisis has passed. That is the really good thing about fossil fuel. It ain’t going away.

          82

        • #
          Geoff+Croker

          Jo,

          I suggest you start reading works by Exxon and the DoE about extracting oil from coal. I seem to recall that oil was called “coal oil”. Then go for any on-line references from David Allardice and Alan Chaffee if available, plenty more offshore from dead people. Then go to Carbon Innovation Australia (Brian Davey) and you will soon get the idea and the frustration that has been building in Victoria for 40 years…….

          In regards to solvent extraction and where it works, there are several companies doing this commercially in the US on shale oil and tar sands.

          60

          • #

            Synthetic fuels and oils can start from coal gas or natural gas so even when we run out of crude, there will still be gasoline.

            Today’s energy crisis not about reserves, but is self inflicted out of ignorance. The fix is easier said than done which is the Marxists and alarmists must stop blabbering about things they misunderstand owing to the constant stream of misinformation about CO2 and the climate coming from the IPCC/UNFCCC and the media.

            50

          • #

            Thanks for all your answers Geoff and Lance.

            00

          • #
            Simon

            18th Century technology that went obsolete when large petroleum reserves where discovered. Highly inefficient, expensive, and huge greenhouse gas emissions.

            03

        • #
          Lance

          What I can find, published, re: AU oil/gas reserves is:

          Oil: https://www.ga.gov.au/digital-publication/aecr2021/oil

          14 Billion BOE, 2019, recoverable, probable and contingent. 84 Billion PJ.

          Undiscovered: 34 Billion BOE.

          Gas: https://www.ga.gov.au/digital-publication/aecr2021/gas

          96.5 Tcf proven and probable reserves. 106.5 PJ.

          Coal conversion to oil/gas, ie Synfuels , have a roughly 69% conversion efficiency for gasoline, so that’s possible. All sorts of issues with waste disposal and costs. But a HELE coal plant has a 70% efficiency. So thats a thought.

          If there are other resources it would be interesting to have a look.

          30

        • #
          Ross

          I think your estimates of Brown coal (lignite) are a little inflated. If you are talking economic reserves of brown coal then there is estimated to be 33 billion tonnes of that in Victoria readily accessible in the Latrobe Valley. For the whole of Victoria your figures are probably correct. Pretty well the whole of Gippsland has a sub domain of brown coal, but is it readily accessible?? Either way that’s a shipload of brown coal. Presently Victoria burns around 67 m tonnes per year, so we have around 500 years supply of brown coal. Why the hell wouldn’t we just keep burning it for cheap electricity??

          20

          • #
            Geoff+Croker

            There is 33 Bt easily extractable for surface treatment.

            Solvent can do it insitu.

            The 1,200 Bt under Bass Strait is ideal for insitu extraction. The black coal under the brown coal ditto.

            Victoria has not burnt 67 Mt for a long time. Would be about 35 Mt now.

            10

            • #
              Ross

              Thanks, Ok, so all that sub domain brown coal (with the extractable C6-C20) could be potentially accessed via a solvent like process. Amazing. Which means Victorians have the potential to be South Pacific Saudi Arabians. We could be the power house of Australia as well as an oil exporter, and all this is already documented in old State Electricity Commission documents?

              10

  • #
    Harves

    That’s 3 of the world’s 5 largest economies who don’t want anything to do with Nut Zero. The house of cards is starting to fall.

    310

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Only 3?
      The USA is releasing oil reserves to drop the fuel price and encouraging OPEC countries to boost production.
      China – no comment necessary.
      Japan – see above.
      Germany and the UK are both burning more coal than last year and as much gas as they can get (owing to lower generation from wind and solar). And given the “fiddling of the books” both countries indulge in by burning (imported) wood, household rubbish and ‘biofuels’ all said to be ‘carbon free’ (and don’t mention the carbon offsets) you might be thinking that they aren’t going to reach Net Zero by any foreseeable date.

      100

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Only 3?
      USA is releasing oil stocks to reduce the price and encourage use. Also they are asking OPEC to increase output.
      China – need I say anything?
      Japan – refer above.
      Germany and the UK are both burning more coal this year than last, and as much natural gas as they can get because generation from wind and solar has dropped markedly (something caused by the weather). Both will want even more coal and gas if their announcements about shutting down coal and nuclear next year actually happen. And don’t forget that most of their “reductions” are due to “fiddles” like burning IMPORTED wood chips, burning household rubbish and “biofuels” and claiming that they don’t emit CARBON. And the ‘little’ matter of Carbon Off-Set Certificates.

      100

  • #
    TdeF

    Only the media believe the fraud of man made CO2 caused Global Warming. The 130 Glasgow delegates from Nepal told you that. Which do they fear most, 2 degrees of warming or rapidly rising sea levels? The ultra rich in their private jets told you that. 40,000 people who arrived at a conference which could have been held on the internet told you that. What was it all about? The biggest river of free money in human history.

    And of course, no matter how many explanations you read about why the world is cooler and wetter against all predictions, it is colder with record rain. China is struggling to heat their houses. What happened to drought and heat?

    Steadily slowly rising CO2 levels have nothing to do with the weather or the climate or human activity. That is not only provable, after 33 years it is obvious.

    No one is calling out fake science because they would be attacked as heretics, non believers, traitors. It is a political issue. So the Japanese say nothing.

    And no one believe the pandemic killer Wuhan Flu started itself. And you will be attacked if you dare suggest it started as a Chinese weapon launched to soften up the US and Europe with millions of infected people sent into both. Remember the communist Mayor of Florence with his hug a Chinese day?

    And Australia is under massive economic attack with public threats by China for even daring to ask about the origin of the virus, which answers the question. Japan is also getting ready for military and economic isolation through interruption of the sea lanes. It is why everyone needs submarines. And not in thirty years. Australia buys everything but food from overseas by ship. Japan buys food and energy by ship. The islands in the Pacific are very vulnerable to isolation, which is why Japan tried to create a Pacific empire too.

    340

    • #
      David Maddison

      Remember the communist Mayor of Florence with his hug a Chinese day?

      Here’s a little propaganda piece from the Chinese Global Television Network.

      https://youtu.be/mNMdg4morQs

      It was brilliant because many of the Chinese workers in Italy were sent there infected to “spread the joy” and you would be “racist” if you didn’t put yourself in a situation to acquire the infection by hugging a possibly infected person.

      ARTICLE Chinese guest workers/slaves living near Florence:

      https://ww.fashionnetwork.com/news/made-in-italy-by-chinese-workers,377237.html

      130

      • #
        max

        David, You need to blame your ancestors who give Universal suffrage to everyone including communist, socialist….

        50

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          I think there was exemptions for Peers of the realm, Ministers of Religion and Idiots, at least in the UK.

          30

    • #
      TdeF

      I looked it up. The average height of Nepal is 3,255 metres (10,712 feet) but the landlocked country includes Mount Everest at 8,848 m (29,029 ft). So the rapid sea level rise is not really an immediate threat. There is no higher point on earth.

      As for temperature, winter in the Kathmandu valley, 10C to a blistering summer 26C. A little bit warmer than the North Pole.

      But the average Mt. Everest summit temperature in January is -33° F (-36° C) but can drop to -76° F (-60° C). The average summer temperature though is a balmy is -2° F (-19° C). Much cooler than the North Pole.

      So why did the government of Nepal send all those people to a yak fest? Or is that the answer?

      130

    • #
      Mark Kaiser

      The 130 Glasgow delegates from Nepal told you that. Which do they fear most, 2 degrees of warming or rapidly rising sea levels?

      lol

      I’m guessing rapidly rising sea levels.

      Source: Kevin Costner/Waterworld.

      30

  • #
    Yonniestone.

    Tradition says a GT stripe will make something go faster, so clever Japan has worked out the renewables stripe actually works the opposite for any country trying to get ahead in the energy race.

    While the vehicle is handicapped the only winners are the sponsors of the stripe.

    100

  • #
    el+gordo

    Realpolitik, the drums of war are beating and Japan needs the security of oil.

    ‘The cabinet of Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio approved on November 26, 773.8 billion yen ($6.7 billion) defense spending in the fiscal 2021 supplementary budget amid growing military threats from North Korea, China, and Russia.

    ‘Including U.S. Forces realignment-related expenses allocated for mitigating impacts on local communities, this marked a record figure for defense appropriations in history in an extra budget.’ (The Diplomat)

    82

    • #
      max

      Realpolitik –correct –they learned from the best British and Americans

      40

    • #
      Dave in the States

      They would be foolish otherwise. Virtue signaling in Glasgow is one thing, but the real existential threat is what they must deal with, not an imaginary one.

      100

  • #
    David Maddison

    Rather than Turnbull and Finkel’s bizarre idea to burn Australian coal in Australia to make hydrogen by a hugely inefficient process, while Australia keeps the CO2, why don’t we send coal directly to Japan for them to burn to make something useful like electricity?

    Mmmmmm.

    230

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Making hydrogen from (dirt cheap) brown coal is the cheapest method. Transporting brown coal isn’t economic. But the really bizarre idea is to base your economy on hydrogen.
      What will happen is that turning hydrogen into a liquid and transporting it (slowly through the tropics) will turn out to be so expensive that even politicians will balk esp. when the voters realise what they will be forced to pay.
      The other problem is that burning hydrogen and getting only water requires a supply of pure oxygen. Burning it in air results in nitric oxides like the ones found by EU worrywarts from diesel vehicles.** That will likely result again in banning the use of hydrogen except in expensive ways.

      **Due to the high flame temperature – also well known to occur with lightning strikes, resulting in some boost to plant growth.

      162

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    If you just bought an electric car, put more sunbeam collectors on your roof and batteries to collect them because of 97% settled science, not only have you been diddled and offset by Japan, but China also …

    China tells coal producers and burners to ramp up for mass production and burning in 2022!

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/china-sets-2022-annual-thermal-coal-prices-700-yuant-media-2021-12-03/

    It appears coal was not consigned to history at the failed COP26, Glasgow.

    h/t: @junkscience

    150

    • #
      Dennis

      And Australia was one of the few that refused to stop mining and using coal.

      The left leaning media here played that down well and truly or just ignored it.

      30

  • #
    Neville

    Thanks for highlighting the quick Japanese turnaround Jo and they are facing a massive future threat from China, Nth Korea, Russia etc.
    But can anyone tell me why TOXIC, dilute, clueless S & W are called clean energy or sustainable energy and DITTO EVs?
    These so called clean energy frauds have a very short lifespan and the entire TOXIC mess ends up in LANDFILL, FOREVER.

    AGAIN here’s Mark Mills accurate short video and a transcript is available at the link. Just a few minutes to watch or read the transcript. These rare earth minerals also cause a super TOXIC mess just to mine them and in very poor countries like the Congo. And Chinese money seems to fund so much of these disasters. When will they WAKE UP to these TOXIC energy con tricks?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqppRC37OgI

    140

  • #
    LloydWW

    Remember the line “it’s not the Government’s job to try to pick winners when it comes to energy technology”? Well, now that it seems our Governments have picked every loser can we now get back to a more realistic approach, please?

    Replacing our current coal fired generators with with an equivalent nameplate amount generation from HELE plants would guarantee base load supply and simultaneously cut carbon dioxide emissions.

    I don’t think we could realistically scrap solar and wind even though I think we ought to. But we could cap the amount of new solar and wind generation and as our current fleet ages and fails, redirect their replacements into providing electricity to those areas in our nation which are far removed from more reliable generation. Or just not replace them at all.

    I think we could make a national security argument to invest in reacquiring the ability to refine oil.

    It’s insane to not do these things now. All these projects require time. I hope our political leaders are quietly having discussions about this sort of thing behind closed doors. Sooner or later we will not be able to rely on China to sell us more solar or wind especially if armed conflict occurs over Taiwan, even if Australia stays out of that conflict. (Which I think we’d be mad to – the world needs Taiwan and its high tech industries.)

    At the same time we need to have a national discussion about removing the ban on nuclear power generation, if only so we can intelligently make allowances for advances in nuclear technology.

    We need to do these things if are to become a significant partner in AUKUS (in spite of our allies’ leaderships) but we we need to it for ourselves if we hope to remain a viable nation.

    140

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      LloydWW:
      I agree we should do something about fuel supply esp. diesel (trucks, trains, tanks?)
      Brown coal is cheap and not worth trying to sell overseas. There is Australian technology to up-grade it to near black coal standard (by compression). Banned by Do Pi Dan.
      Brown coal burnt in a modern plant (German technology) the emissions fall to 800kg/MWh (37.5 to 39.6% reduction) – NIL interest from the Greens (they want the most expensive process for electricity).
      Turning that brown coal into diesel is old technology. Used by the Germans in WW2 and by South Africa in the 1970’s and 80′. That plant switched to specialty chemicals once the country got access to cheap oil. The same starting point produces hydrogen – in fact we have a pilot plant in Gippsland doing that – NIL interest from the Greens (they want the most expensive process).
      WE have lots of natural gas just off-shore and under Gippsland which might be used to generate hydrogen. Banned by Do Pi Dan AND NIL interest from the Greens. It might also be used to make methanol as that plant in NZ (Mobil technology with zeolites) in the early 1980’s. That could be turned into petrol or used with the brown coal process as feedstock for further chemicals (e.g. butanol which might be used as a (non-hygroscopic) additive in diesel fuel.
      And we could use black coal to produe acetylene (and a raft of other chemicals) but that requires lots of reliable cheap electricity and the Greens want to ban that.

      70

    • #
      Dennis

      Maintaining Australia’s refinery capacity and possibly increasing it is part of the “Plan” from the “aspirational goal” to achieve net zero emissions based on research and development of new technology, if possible, and in that Plan oil refinery capacity comes under “Future Fuels”.

      20

  • #
    Dave in the States

    If Biden is willing to sell out his own country to China, and the UN, and the EU, as he has proven, he will sell out Free Asia without batting an eye. He probably has already promised to.

    170

  • #
    Philip

    How I wish we had such leadership and sense to understand resource and control of it.

    The sleeping giant few talk about is the rising price of Urea. Apparently Australia doesnt make urea, we get it from China. I find that hard to believe, that Australia with its vast gas reserves doesn’t make Urea here. We hand our food supply to China? I can understand plastic toys and tools, but fertiliser ? No urea, no food.

    120

    • #
      Dave

      Australia makes about 500,000 tonnes per annum.

      Diesel Adblue in diesel used about 205,000 kilos for all our diesel trucks per year.

      Surely we could supply urea for our transport industry.

      60

      • #
        Philip

        Right. So we do produce urea here. My logic assumed that to be so. Perhaps we import it as well ? A farmer yesterday was telling me it comes from China. 500,000 tonnes, we’d use more than that Id guesstimate. I spread about 200 t per year for just one farmer.

        60

        • #
          Dave

          Agree

          We import about 2.5 million tonnes per year. Most from China.

          We should be making our own.

          80

        • #
          Earl

          No, come 2022 and our urea production is history according to this extract from a Daily Mail article on the developing urea shortage:

          “Chemical manufacturer Incitec Pivot was Australia’s only urea maker but its Brisbane plant is closing in 2022 and Daily Mail Australia understands urea is no longer produced at Gibson Island as the factory is repurposed.”

          60

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Philip;
      The other major fertiliser is ammonium nitrate (also used in explosives e.g. that big bang in Beirut a few years ago).

      70

  • #
    John Hultquist

    I’m going off topic with this – – electric vehicles

    First, for general all around use I think they are a dumb idea.
    In a closed building, say a warehouse, they are a good idea.
    Saving the planet – Uff da!
    Nevertheless, the autos, including small trucks, that are coming to retail market are impressive, still improving, and expensive.
    An unimaginably large amount of money has been thrown at EV propulsion – motors and batteries. And to justify the expected costs, the car bodies and interiors are getting a high-end effort.
    If a person can afford $150,000 for a personal auto then replacing a battery and putting in a home charger will not be impediments.

    At this high level, issues of range, handling, style, or whatever, have been conquered.
    These are not for mass consumption. They are for folks that can have David Chihuly decorate their house and garden with glass.

    72

    • #
      Dave in the States

      Exactly, the EV push is all about taking away personal transportation and private ownership from the surfs.

      60

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        And don’t forget that EV range sucks, but thats by design, so as to keep the serfs on the “plantation”…..

        30

  • #
    Steve of Cornubia

    The whole EV thing exemplifies the outrageous contempt that rich environmentalists have for the little people. It truly is their version of, “Let them eat cake.”.

    I have nothing against electric vehicle technology and I would be happy to own one – at some point. That point seems as far away as it ever was though, with the thorny issues of range, recharge times, purchase price and battery life largely unaddressed, despite what the tech junkies say.

    In particular, if all you want is a reliable and comfortable way to get to work, do the shopping and drive out into the country, the EVs just don’t make economic sense. And the less wealth you have, the less sense they make. A fifteen year old Toyota Corolla is cheap to buy, reliable and cheap to run. The folks who buy them typically have limited funds. So what are they to do? If an EV is still around after fifteen years, it’s likely to need its second or third set of batteries and they currently cost more than a whole, old Corolla that still runs like clockwork …

    But I doubt that our betters care if those of limited means are priced out of car ownership. They have a planet to save and we all have to do our bit, eh?

    170

    • #

      Hmm! Nice Tesla. How much trade on will I get for my 7 Series BMW here?

      Sorry mate, it’s no use to us. Internal combustion engine cars are worthless. In fact, you’ll have to pay to have it environmentally disposed of.

      Imagine what people are going to say when they find out their existing car is worthless.

      Labor will probably introduce a cash for clunkers ICU cars.

      Tony.

      130

      • #
        John Hultquist

        ” … you’ll have to pay …”

        I’ve discovered – don’t ask me how I know – that getting rid of a non-functional auto, camper, or recreational vehicle is difficult, costly, labor intensive, or nearly impossible.
        Advice:
        Get rid of such things while they still run and suit someone else’s need.

        70

    • #
      PeterS

      In other words, they are toys for the rich who also own traditional cars as well, very likely several. One day perhaps they will come up with a viable fully electric car to replace traditional cars but I don’t see it happening any time soon. One powered by a ZPM that’s the size of a car battery that would never need recharging for the life of the car would be nice 🙂

      60

    • #
      William

      I commented elsewhere that with the average price differential between EVs and their petrol counterparts, you can fill your car about 250 times meaning you can fill up twice a month for ten years before the EV even begins to make financial sense – and that is only if the original batteries are still working.

      90

      • #

        William,
        The average car user in Oz travels just 30km per day.. (ref Nat Statistics)
        So , at $1.5 /ltr that is roughly $3 per day or say $1000 per year in fuel
        ….but EVs have to be charged also, and typically they would use 7.5 kWh for that same 30 km daily use…which at current domestic electricity price of $0.25 /kWh would be $1.87 per day.
        SO, the EV is only going show a saving, or “pay back” about $1.13 per day , or $412 per year !
        With EV prices approx $15-20,000 more than equivalent ICE models, that would give over 35 years before break even.
        …IE ..NEVER…in normal use !
        There is no financial justification for owning an EV.

        70

  • #
    Will

    It only applies to the west, and everyone knows that as the whole aim is the total destruction of the west economically, militarily and genetically. Whites have been the bete noir of tyranny for millennia and while this will, no doubt, be taken as racism by the usuals, all other races have a poor or nonexistent reputation in this area. Japan and south Korea are excellent states, but neither would be as is if the west had not won WW2 and freed them from Japanese fascism. If you ever have been to Africa and have talked to older black Africans, you will find that many of them deplore the fact that the whites have gone because of the huge, unchecked amount of incompetence and corruption of their own kind. Many African states are materially wealthy (ores etc.) but you wouldn’t know it when you visit (and I do NOT mean by staying in 5* hotels).
    Once the west is essentially “globalized” (see “destroyed”) the subsidies, grants and food supplies will dry up and we will see biblical epoch famines and what is worse, no one will care as they will have enough problems of their own.
    The old “shot in the foot” comment, about doing something stupid and self-harming, will be replaced by “shot in the head”.

    192

    • #
      Philip

      Agree completely.

      80

    • #
      PeterS

      The West has already shot itself in the foot multiple times. It’s hurting and bleeding badly so perhaps it needs a shot in the head to put it out of its misery. The only way to save the West is to get rid of ALL the leaders and replace them with leaders who do not kowtow to the global elites, who are not career politicians and who do not have despot tendencies. That I’m afraid is virtually impossible this side of the crash and burn scenario.

      91

    • #
      Dave in the States

      I hope you don’t take it wrong, but rather as friendly council, but try not to include racial terms in your commentary. They can be easily misconstrued.

      The causes of War in the Pacific is one of the most misunderstood episodes of modern history, today. Many of the issues of that time are now prescient once again in 2021. It’s far too complex a topic for me to address here, but the primary cause of that war was how differently Japan and, the United States under a series of leftwing administrations, saw the ongoing civil wars in China and the Japanese invention there. Japan viewed the rise of socialism in China as an existential threat.

      Many of the causes of the European War, such as fascism, racism, anti-Semitism, the League of Nations, the Versailles Treaty, and empire building, were factors in causing the Pacific War but they were, nonetheless, periphery factors. However, Japan was also threatened from within from an incrementalism of socialism and by militarism. There were opposing factions in the Japanese Military who supported fascism and socialism, and others who supported imperialism, and also factions who remained loyal to Constitutional Monarchy. Compounding such complexities was Japan becoming an economic super power while being a relatively small island nation lacking resources, particularly fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are essential to modern societies then, and now, and for the foreseeable future. One thing I have learned about Japanese history and culture is a tendency toward realism at the expense of idealism.

      120

      • #
        PeterS

        Good points and I thank you for the history lesson. Today though it’s more about a tendency towards idealism at the expense of realism by all governments in the West. How far that goes depends on the people who vote their respective governments into power. Given the high state of aloofness by much of the populations, things do not look good at all. The next federal elections here and in the US will be very revealing. Perhaps people will be more awake and things can be turned around. I wait with much anticipation and hope but keeping a realistic perspective on life by watching what others are doing today, which overall isn’t good. For example, the almost universal take-up of vaccination is a sign that the vast majority of people still trust their governments too much – big mistake.

        80

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          Got a lot out of those posts by Will and Dave.
          🙂

          40

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Agreed. Any time a govt enthusiastically embraces something, the outcome for normal people is rarely good….

          Govts preserve thier own existence first and foremost, the apparent reality that currently govts are just puppet enforcers of the globalists will is truly frightening, when you consider we have in real terms global medical coordinated, willful, complicit, plausibly deniable, incompetence…..

          [wee edit. LVA]

          60

      • #
        Will

        Telling the truth is not “racism” and never has been despite leftist attempts to make it so and you have fallen into their web of deceit by your comment. I am not offended so my apologies if it seems that way. I see truth as truth I am afraid.
        If any criticism of nonwhites is seen as racism without even looking at why it was said as well (I have lived/worked in Africa and spoken to them personally) then there is no point in even trying to debate when truth is seen as racism.

        WRT WW2 Japan was allied with Germany and Italy and had agreed to invade Siberia if war with the USSR broke out. Japan’s invasion of China had very little to do with hatred of communism and they mostly fought the nationalists until 1943 when Stalin began to actively supply Mao and everything to do with the resources, both human and material, of China. The fact that they saw the Chinese as Untermenschen was typical of Japanese racism and was also experienced by every POW, white or otherwise in a Japanese camp. Travel in Japan or China even now with a black person and see racism for yourself. The Japanese are politely so, the Chinese are not.

        FDR pushed Japan into WW2 by ceasing oil supplies to Japan. The latter had 6 mths supply of oil then their ships/aircraft would be immobile. Why did FDR do this? The supposed answer is to force them to leave China alone. The real reason was to help out the USSR as most do not realize just how close was Germany to winning in 1941. The loss of supply forced Japan to invade south to the Borneo oil fields and Richard Sorge a soviet spy in the employ of the German ambassador informed Stalin that Siberia was now safe from attack. This enabled Stalin to transfer 30+ trained, equipped, fresh divisions to Moscow to halt the Wehrmacht. The attacks on US and UK possessions were seen as necessary as both would join in and be at war with Japan. This suited Churchill and FDR totally. The former as with the US in he knew that the war was won and the latter as he could now save Stalin openly.

        I agree with some of your second paragraph but on the whole, while socialism was seen as the enemy it had very little impact at high levels in Japan. If Stalin had lost WW2 there would have been NO communist China.
        As a BTW, the dropping of nukes on Japan saved near 18 million lives (1 million allied. 17 million Japanese) as if invaded, all Japanese, military or civilian, would have fought to the death. Anyone who disagrees with this has NO idea of the reality that was the mid 1945 pacific war. Now that leftist have taken over military history the lies are more blatant.

        90

        • #
          Dave in the States

          Japan did not invade China. Japan’s presence in Shandong Provence was legal and authorized by the Versailles Treaty. Japan legally had troops in China proper from the time of the Boxer’s Rebellion. Japanese companies owned several rail roads in Continental Asia, which they legal purchased from Russia after WW1, after Russia had established them, after Russia invaded and occupied territories in East Asia. Japan was authorized to protect these railroads during WW1 and afterward from Communist Russia by the League of Nations.

          China was not a cohesive nation state from the time of the Taiping Rebellion (which was a socialistic revolutionary movement) so there was no cohesive China to invade. Following the final collapse of Qing Monarchy in 1911 there were as many 1300 factions controlled by regional warlords each with their own private army. The KMT (Nationalists) was just one of them. The KMT was infiltrated by communists, such as Michael Borodin, sent by the Bolsheviks. The Chinese Communist Party and the KMT were allied until 1927. The schism was not about ideology but about power. Chiang Kai-shek won the power struggle which followed the death of Sun Yat-sen. Mao who had been a member of the KMT established the Soviet Socialist Republic of South China with Zhou Enlai and Madam Sun Yat-sen and others in 1929. The Japanese considered Chiang Kai-shek as just another warlord.

          If you don’t think that socialism in China and Asia was a concern to the Japanese Kokutai then you should read the writings of Prime Minister Hara Takashi (who supported Duran and Zhang instead of the KMT for this reason), Minister Takahashi Korekiyo, Prince Konoe, and the Japanese official governmental documents about the threat of communism in China. Prior to the Wilson Administration the US supported Japanese efforts to establish an East Asian Monroe Doctrine to resist the spread of communism in Asia and the further destabilization of China, as evidenced by the Root-Takahara agreement of 1908.

          At home socialism was a threat, made clear by the writings and activism of Kita Ikki, who was a member of the Black Dragon Society, (the Black Dragons had supported the communists in Russia leading up to the Japanese Russian War of 1904 as a way of undermining Czarist Russia) and the war crimes tribunal testimony of Colonel Itagaki about the goals and activities of Cherry Blossom secret society in the Japanese Army. The Imperial Way Faction of the Japanese Army were socialists and took Kita as they intellectual inspiration. In fact Kita was implicated by phone records as part of the 2-26-36 Mutiny by the Imperial Way faction. At that time the Japanese military planners considered a war with The Soviet Union, because the Soviets were ideologically aligned with Mao, as more likely.

          Kita had been advocating that The Japanese withdraw from Continental Asia. Following the failure of the 2-26-36 coup, Mao kidnapped Chiang Kai-shek with the condition of his release being to re- ally the KMT with the Communists in a United Front to push the Japanese out of continental Asia. His communist revolution in China was stalled until the removal the Japanese. Btw, Chiang Kai-shek was allied with Adolf Hitler’s Germany at that time, and the KMT Army were equipped with German weaponry and uniforms, and were being advised by German generals.

          In 1964 it was exposed that the Marco Polo Bridge Incident of July 7th 1937 was started by communist agents embedded among the KMT troops. This was what started the Japanese Sino war between Japan and the Chinese United Front which went full hot at Shanghai a month later when the Chinese United Front attacked the Japanese Marines (legally) stationed there. This also followed the Tung Chow Massacre when Chinese police officers murdered 237 Japanese women and children on July 29th. Chiang and Mao had agreed to form the United Front on July 5th 1937 but it was post dated to July 25th so that it would appear that it was formed in response to Japanese aggression.

          Japan did not ally with Germany and Italy until after the fall of France and the Netherlands. This was simply realpoltik because it allowed Japan to occupy French Indochina which would short circuit the sanctions and boycotts of the FDR Administration, as well as cut off the primary port of entry of Haiphong Harbor that the Americans and British were using to supply the United Front in their war against the Japanese. It also put the Japanese in position to cut off the Burma Road. At the same time Japan allied with Germany and Italy, it secured a non aggression pact with Stalin so they could safely move south. It was the Occupation of French Indochina that caused the oil embargo.

          At the post war war crimes tribunals, the evidence of the long standing anti-communist motives of the Japanese government (or the actions of Japanese secret societies at the time) were disallowed and not allowed by victorious allies. This could have been rather embarrassing, especially for Chiang Kai-shek.

          In setting the record straight I in no way excuse Japanese war crimes or Japanese racism.

          []ED

          20

  • #
    Neville

    The world is going crazy on steroids and here’s more proof.
    We are definitely living in the very best of times, yet the donkeys will be storing data for their future post apocalypse in a black box on Tassie’s west coast.
    Apparently some future visitors will be able to download the data and understand why or how we destroyed our climate.
    This is supported by the Tas Uni and should be ready in 2022.
    Unbelievable garbage but true.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2021-12-06/climate-change-earth-black-box-recorder/100621778

    60

  • #
    Tim Spence

    Is there anywhere in the planet at more than 30ºC? I’m having difficulty finding a place on ventusky.com

    30

    • #
      Philip

      30 degrees. Is that the biggest average?

      Most people including skeptics concede that if the earth global average should warm by 2 degrees or more it would be “a bad thing”. I guess they’re referring to ecological collapse in some fashion. I think it would be fine. Global average is a nonsense standard anyway, most warming will occur towards the poles, I believe, so no where would be too hot for ecosystem function. And change is of zero consequence once that is understood, as there will be losses and benefits, but always a biological ecosystem, quite possibly a better one given that ice is pretty hostile to life.

      40

      • #
        clarence.t

        Most people including skeptics concede that if the earth global average should warm by 2 degrees or more it would be “a bad thing”

        Nope, whoever said that, isn’t thinking.. at all.

        Most skeptics realise its been warmer than that for most of the last 10,000 years.

        Human kind survived and thrived during those warmer periods, and mostly without the use of large amounts of fossil fuel and technology.

        Warming would open up vast areas of current colder regions that are currently too cold to produce food.

        Tropics etc are regulated by the oceans, and would not become any warmer than they are now.

        90

    • #
      RickWill

      Is there anywhere in the planet at more than 30ºC?

      Dallol in Ethiopia reportedly has an average annual temperature of 34C. It is 130m below sea level so enjoys greater warmth partly from the atmospheric temperature lapse rate.

      There are parts of the Indian and Pacific Oceans oceans near the equator that average just over 30C:
      http://www.bomwatch.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Bomwatch-Willoughby-Main-article-FINAL.pdf

      Open oceans cannot exceed 32C due to the regulating action of convective instability; observed as “monsoon”. The ocean waters in the vicinity of the equator are the warmest an annual basis and usually average just over 30C.

      40

    • #
      RdM

      Is there anywhere in the planet at more than 30ºC? I’m having difficulty finding a place on ventusky.com

      Interesting site, thanks.
      Hover around NW Australia, a few places inland above 40ºC – up to 43-44ºC at time of writing.
      Not extraordinary in summer, desert areas, presumably.

      Of course that’s not an average!
      And the point is understood about oceans being limited to ~ 32ºC max.

      10

  • #
    Neville

    Compared to my last link, we can now return to some sanity via Dr Judith Curry’s recent interview about climate change etc.
    You can read her transcript or watch the podcast at the link and I think Judith did an excellent job and easily answered the usual nonsense from the religious true believers.
    The video runs for about one hour if that’s your choice.

    https://judithcurry.com/2021/12/04/interview-climate-change-a-different-perspective-with-judith-curry-part-ii/

    70

  • #
    Analitik

    US reduction in coal powered electricity generation is proving to be “transitory”

    Rising coal demand and the highest coal prices in more than a decade are boosting the profitability of the large U.S. coal miners, which sell their production in advance and are now looking to lock in higher prices for the next two years in negotiations with utilities.

    https://oilprice.com/Energy/Coal/US-Coal-Is-Making-A-Transitory-Comeback.html

    40

  • #
    Ronin

    Another pigeon coming home to rest, trucks using Adblue, the world is running out of Adblue, so the trucks bringing stuff to Colesworths and the trucks picking up our garbage will cease to operate.

    60

    • #
      Philip

      Yes might be some work available if you have a truck with a diesel made before that nonsense was introduced.

      70

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Never heard of it until now. Made from urea. China has stopped exporting.

      How stupid does a government have to be to mandate something without ensuring multiple independent supplies?

      Never mind. That was a rhetorical question.

      80

    • #
      PeterS

      They say the climate is very delicate and vulnerable yet civilisations are far more delicate and collapse all the time while the climate soldiers on. There will come a time when the West will collapse like any other civilisation, and the blame rests totally on mankind, not the climate. How is that for ignoring the elephant in the room.

      50

    • #
      RickWill

      I was unaware of the shortage. It appears it is the result of high gas prices. Gas is used for ammonia production, which is used in urea production, which is the active ingredient in adblue.

      Urea is produced in Brisbane (at least for the present time). Urea reactors are bombs just waiting for the containment vessel to fail.

      There is a large volume urea plant in the pipeline for WA near Dampier.

      20

    • #
      robert rosicka

      Pretty sure adblue is injected into the exhaust so if the computer could be over ridden the truck would still run .

      30

      • #

        robert rosicka
        December 6, 2021 at 7:02 pm · Reply
        Pretty sure adblue is injected into the exhaust so if the computer could be over ridden the truck would still run

        Yes, it is exhaust injected to clean up the NOx emissions.
        ..and i suspect you could just substitute water in the Adblue tank to fool the system if necessary ?
        But it is not just trucks, many diesel cars and vans also run Adblue systems.

        20

  • #
    Ronin

    Incitec in Brisbane make urea and other types of fertilisers as well, but were slated for shutdown, not sure if this has been rescinded recently with the advent of high fertiliser prices and low availability.

    30

  • #
    John+R+Smith

    And viola … mod.

    00

  • #
    Neville

    Another very informative post from Kip Hansen about relative sea level rise or RSL and how this is the best data we have to accurately observe before we waste endless trillions of $ on their so called mitigation fra-d and con tricks.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/12/06/why-we-must-quit-worrying-about-uncertainty-in-sea-level-projections/

    10

  • #
    Neville

    The co2 Coalition site has an easy quiz for most people here on Jo’s site.
    So I took the quiz and of course I got a perfect score. And if I can do it anyone here should be okay.
    Check out their members and you’ll understand why you can trust their articles and science.
    They have a very long and impressive list of scientists that they can refer to for advice.
    Check it out.

    https://co2coalition.org/climate-quiz/

    00

  • #
    Neville

    More from the Times story about the possible Russian invasion of the Ukraine.

    “American intelligence officers believe Moscow has drawn up plans for a military offensive on several fronts as the Kremlin continues to move troops, artillery and armour up to the borders of eastern Europe. The crisis has renewed fears that the stand-off over Ukraine, the former Soviet republic that wants to join Nato, could spill into an invasion and war on European soil.

    Images from satellites show Russian forces massing on the border, with analysts predicting that the total troop build-up could reach 175,000. Russian reservists have been mobilised to join 50 battlefield groups, along with tanks and artillery. Moscow has dismissed the concerns, claiming that it is conducting routine military exercises, and accused Ukraine and Nato of aggression.

    Washington is threatening tough sanctions that could cut off Russia from international financial systems if it does not back down.

    “President Biden will underscore US concerns with Russian military activities on the border with Ukraine and reaffirm the United States’ support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine,” the White House said.

    Biden said on Friday that the US had prepared the “most comprehensive and meaningful set of initiatives to make it very, very difficult for Mr Putin”. Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, said that the US could launch “high-impact economic measures that we’ve refrained from taking in the past”.

    Putin is certain to reaffirm Russia’s opposition to allowing Ukraine to join Nato, although Nato has insisted that Moscow has no say in plans for possible expansion. The US believes Russia has 70,000 troops on the border but Ukraine puts that figure at 94,000. Both assessments believe the Russian strategy allows for swift reinforcements to double the number. Ukraine has warned that Moscow could invade next month. US officials said the groundwork for an invasion was backed by a renewed propaganda campaign from Russian-influenced media groups in Ukraine, blaming Kiev for any potential military escalation.

    Maria Zakharova, of the Russian foreign ministry, said: “Russian armed forces on Russian territory is the legal right of a sovereign state. The US media should be concerned by the aggressive activity of the US, not Russia.”

    Ukrainian and Nato sources fear that Moscow could use migrants to seize the Suwałki Corridor — a 60-mile sliver of territory between Poland and Lithuania. The corridor is all that connects Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia with the rest of the European Union and Nato’s European territories.

    Under such a scenario, Russia could push migrants into the corridor and stoke unrest. Russian troops could then sweep in and deploy military patrols along the corridor under the guise of a humanitarian crisis. Such a move would enable Russia to link up its forces in Kaliningrad with Belarus. All this could be achieved in less than two hours, Ukrainian assessments suggest”.

    A diplomat from eastern Europe told The Times: “Refugees are a very sophisticated weapon if they are weaponised.”

    00

    • #

      Hmm ?
      …heavy sanctions on Russia would likely result in Putin turning off the gas tap to Europe !
      A real life game of Risk strategy !

      30

    • #
      Steve of Cornubia

      My main concern about these stories is that I have long believed, like many, that the CCP will invade Taiwan at some point, but that this will occur when Russia engages Nato and the US is a ‘distraction exercise’ in Europe. Russia kicking off another round of war in Ukraine would serve their purposes well.

      20

  • #

    […] Japan joined Glasgow but tells people at home to double oil and gas production by 2040 […]

    00