Topic: Energy Crisis 2.0 in the New World Order era - page 6. (Read 2608 times)

The only part I don't agree with is the "soon" part. We definitely have to find a replacement for the finite amount of fossil fuels on earth but it is slow and expensive, not to mention with the way consumption is increasing, the clean replacements are not going to be enough in the near future.

Renewable energy sources can and, most importantly, should replace current fossil energy sources. Without this, humanity will no longer survive, since the use of oil, coal and gas as energy sources and in internal combustion engines leads to drastic climate change and this process threatens to soon become uncontrollable.

At the same time, the technology of alternative energy sources continues to improve and become cheaper. Surely their use will soon become simple and cheap, and thus we will be able to solve most of our current energy problems.

Regarding Petroleum Renewables and Energy Outlook.
The energy component of the oil market is conditionally fuel for solutions using internal combustion engines in one form or another.
The process of abandoning internal combustion engines is already gaining momentum. And this is reflected in the share of global oil production that goes to the production of such fuel.

At the same time, it is foolish to deny that if we are talking about hydrocarbons, the picture is not so rosy.
For example - cogeneration plants, thermal power plants, they operate on fossil carbonaceous fuels (coal, fuel oil, ....).
The second not very positive example is the chemical industry. Most of the world around us is made up of plastics, paints .varnishes, glues, .... And these are mostly oil/gas derivatives.
A third example is industrial facilities, like metallurgical plants, which mostly consume coking coal and other carbon mixtures.

If we go back to oil - about 55% (10 years ago it was about 65%) of oil is used for fuel production, for internal combustion engines (in one form or another), and there is a downward trend. The chemical industry consumes up to 25% of oil. The non-energy sector still consumes about 11% (bitumen, oils, etc.)

Therefore, it is likely that in the coming decades there will be a marked decrease in the share of oil for the production of fuel for internal combustion engines, but it is unlikely that the need of the chemical industry will decrease.

I think it would be a good idea to field a team of experts who understand renewable energy governance by evaluating the potential of renewable energy resources available in the region. If indeed the above is not helpful and is considered inadequate, then it can be concluded that other steps and efforts must be taken.

Sadly it can not.
Because for starters the renewable energies you named can not replace fossil fuels in a lot of products we are using. You see gas, oil and their products are used in a lot more than to produce electricity.
Additionally building the infrastructure to use renewable energies is difficult and in certain places impossible. Not to mention that in certain cases (eg. nuclear power and electric cars) majority of countries need to import both the technology and the fuel (nuclear fuel and lithium batteries) which means another form of "energy" crisis.

That is the hardest thing, you may not trust the information given by the governments, and to be fair you wouldn't be wrong, they do lie a lot and that is understandable. However, what do you trust then? Yourself? Some youtube? Some guy on twitter? That means, you may not have the correct information at all, governments in every part of the world will lie, that is what governments do, but not like anyone else has the right correct data neither, which makes this situation even harder. Energy crisis could be solved in every nation, just create self sufficient ones, solar, wind, nuclear, hydro, and anything else you can find, these are all stuff that you can do to cover energy need of a nation without being depending any other nation, its as simple as that.

If we do not generally trust official sources from different countries, but rely on “intelligence” that was somehow leaked to social networks or the press, then we will go very far in our reasoning. If intelligence information appears in the media, it means that it was thrown there for some purpose and it does not always correspond to reality.

The Armed Forces of Ukraine note that the Russians at the front receive three times more armored vehicles and other weapons than the Armed Forces of Ukraine receive from all their partners. In addition, such military equipment often comes from old models due to the fact that the countries that supply Ukraine with this equipment take advantage of this opportunity to modernize their armed forces. But even such outdated technology, as a rule, is superior to Russian models.

These aren't militia or militant groups. These are part and parcel of these countries. For example Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government and also part of the armed forces of Lebanon. Just like how US has army, marine corps, navy, etc.
Same with Yemen, Ansarollah is part and parcel of Yemen and its government. It is not just Houthis by the way, Houthis are only a portion of the Ansarollah.

That's like saying Zbroini syly Ukrayiny is an excuse to show Russians invasion of Ukraine as a novel cause.
Armed forces are there to protect people and fight against invaders.

It is interesting to point out that all these 3 movements were formed after their respective countries were invaded by foreign forces and most of their soil were occupied since their "old armies" were useless against invaders. They were formed to defend their homes and take back their soil.

P.S. It is even more interesting to point out that Hamas is like the democratically elected government as they've won the election for the Palestinian Legislative Council by the majority vote and have the most number of seats in the PLC.

Yes you are right. What Israel is doing is committing war crimes and the West is also involved in it by supporting Israel directly. This genocide they are conducting is preplanned as many analysts said because they really know about a possible attack by hamas and they have done nothing so that they have an excuse to do ethnic cleansing in the Gaza Strip. Syria and lebanon are the closest to the conflict but i don't think they will join the cause directly instead they will do a proxy counter through hizbullah, huthi and other militant groups in that region.


Hamas is a excuse to show Israel's genocide as a novel cause.

Generally speaking any tensions in a energy rich region affects the prices as we've already seen it in the market that it caused "volatility". Luckily the conflict was kept inside the occupied Palestine and it did not enter next phase to have the biggest impact on the price.

The next phase (that fortunately didn't happen) would have been the conflict region growing in size and specifically reaching the seas (Red Sea and the Persian Gulf) which would have shot the energy price to the moon.
Basically ever since the commandoes of armed forces of Yemen seized the Israeli ship that was sailing under the protection of US navy and US did not dare respond, it changed the face of the conflict. In fact it was the last straw that led to the cease fire planned to start tomorrow 10 AM.

It depends on what "Arab countries" you are talking about. If it is the occupied colonies like Saudi Arabia, nobody expected them to do anything other than what US orders. Otherwise Lebanon and Syria as the closest ones and Yemen as the farthest one have been directly involved.

And at the heart of it, this war is not geopolitical. It is crime against humanity since it is categorized as ethnic cleansing or a genocide.

To be clear this is not a war between Hamas and Israel, it is a genocide committed by the Zionist regime against the people of Palestine.

Israel or palestine none of these countries is an oil producer in the world. How will their conflict affect the oil price if other arab countries do not join the war? This new war front in the middle east is geopolitical, and there are small chances that other arab countries will join the war directly to protect hamas or the people of Gaza. What you are trying to draw doesn't make sense because Hamas and Israel have been fighting for a long time. The death of hamas leader is not something new. This is an event that happens frequently. If you want to conclude who's fault it is, you will just start a long debt because the situation becomes fishy due to the propaganda war conducted by both iran and israel.

Great title op! Sounded like something straight out of a Star Wars movie. Anyway, I don't really know a lot about global economies, but I can tell that the Russia-Ukraine war is the primary reason for the energy crisis 2.0 after reading some posts.

Both countries lost a lot from this war, but they gained a lot too clearly which makes me wonder if it will ever truly end later on.

The propaganda and mouthpieces you shared from Russia, Ukraine, US, etc. are all repeating the official statements not the actual total value. The official statements also only include the total value they needed to take out of their budgets.
But if you follow open source intelligence sources (easily found on the internet) there are a lot of solid proof of the actual amount that is being sent to Ukraine. Some of which is also mentioned in the news as some article that you'd normally skip and won't be counted in statistics.
For example what the American mouthpiece NYT says here is a tiny portion of a couple of billion dollars worth of weapons and ammunition (a lot more than just some shells) being sent to Ukraine which is not counted in any statistics they report as total.

As for the time frame, again just check the news. For example last year Pentagon stated that there are 8-10 flights a day sending arms to Ukraine. These days sometimes that amount is barely any shipments in a week. Even the recent statements by EU politicians says that they can no longer provide aid to Ukraine in the promised timeframes and now it would take months before they can send certain things like shells for example. Like Germany that is promising delivery in 4-5 months from now!!!

I wonder where you got the information that the total amount of US aid to Ukraine amounted to more than $243 billion, and it was delivered in the form of cargo in less than 10 days? The current Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, Medvedev, could only have come up with this after another binge. He makes similar statements from time to time.

I was able to find the following information on the Internet about the assistance provided to Ukraine in connection with the military attack on it by Russia:

The Washington Post wrote that since the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, the United States has allocated more than $66 billion in total aid to Ukraine. This is more than the US provides in aid to any other country. More than $43 billion was allocated to Kyiv as military aid, accounting for 65% of the total.
Washington provided $23.5 billion directly for weapons and equipment, $18 billion for other assistance (training, consulting, logistics and equipment), and $1.5 billion for grants and loans to other countries for the purchase of weapons and equipment. Another $20.5 billion was allocated to support Ukraine’s budget, and more than $2.6 billion was allocated to support displaced persons, refugees and other vulnerable populations in the country and abroad.
https://www.epravda.com.ua/rus/news/2023/08/7/702986/

American Defense Secretary Austin, during his current visit to Ukraine, said that the United States provided assistance to Ukraine in the amount of 42 billion, and the remaining 50 US allies allocated 36 billion. That is, total assistance to Ukraine amounted to $78 billion.
https://ukraina.ru/20231121/1051206971.html

Even the Russian Gazeta.RU, citing Pentagon information, reported that from February 24, 2022 to April 19, 2023, the volume of Washington’s military assistance to Kiev reached $35.4 billion. Moreover, since the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidency (2020), Ukraine has been allocated from the US budget of $36.1 billion in aid.
https://m.gazeta.ru/army/2023/04/19/16582849.shtml

But where is the fantastic 243 billion dollars for Ukraine, and in ten days?

While the topic has shifted from economics to politics, I'll allow myself to return to the topic of this thread

I came across a more pancake history of gas prices, I recommend reading it. Natural gas futures:

Prices are now at 1997-2000, 2017-2021 levels. I.e. the market has returned to its average state.



I think that's a pretty good argument, against the "energy crisis"

You mean from now on (not so far). Because the total of more than $243 billion aid in shipments that reached Ukraine in less than 10 days is not considered small quantities. Although from now on since US decided to send all that aid to the terrorist organization murdering kids in Palestine, the shipments would reach Ukraine in 30-40 days.

It's funny that people are still repeating this old and already debunked propaganda
It is even funnier that they still think Iran's military assistance is some old Shahed136 drones. If you want to know how it looks like just check out Yemen that has gone from the poorest Arab country with only some AK47s to fight with, to the number 2 missile power in the world (after Iran) and has a military that is stronger and more modern than half of NATO members.

Wrong. The delay is because all the production is being sent to the apartheid Zionist regime occupying Palestine so that they can murder more women and children. So they can no longer send the same amount in the same timeframes to Ukraine as before.

I call that progress that you have at least accepted that your first post in this quote chain was complete nonsense and you had no way of defending that nonsense that you thought changing the topic entirely could work

I’m not ready to argue whether nuclear weapons should have been used against Japan at that moment or not, it’s really a very difficult question. I’ll even choose the answer - it wasn’t worth it...
At the same time, I will confirm that it is necessary to destroy the Nazi regime as a goal!

But then - you have some kind of selective memory... Like always

Let's talk about the victims of the USSR/Russia without nuclear weapons, but with the help of primitive, cruel, I would say sadistic methods of exterminating tens of millions of people around the world? Ksati ideology killed more than nuclear weapons! The ideology of communism (and its mutations) is responsible for about 100 million people killed around the world in the 20th and 21st centuries. The USSR destroyed more than 20 million, both its citizens and citizens of other countries, China destroyed more than 65 million, ....

But this doesn’t fit into the concept of propaganda that you adore, right?

Why aren’t you concerned about the use of depleted uranium shells against Ukraine since 2014? Would you like to talk about this topic? Or phosphorus shells against peaceful Ukrainian cities? I understand - it’s not interesting, and there’s nothing to answer, because... We will quickly reveal the lies, but as always you have no other “facts”



Some said, “Yes, we will capture Ukraine in 2-3 weeks.” 

I don’t think that China will dare to do this, having already huge problems in the economy and social tension... Moreover, it is unlikely that Xi, having such plans, would go to pay his respects to the USA.
Once again - without the Western market, currency, technology and investment - China, if it does not slide to its previous level, will become something like the USSR during the Cold War - seemingly strong, but despised by everyone and without positive prospects, although yes - they will circle around “friends”, while China will feed them, but as soon as it cannot feed them, at best they will abandon him and forget...

The fact that Russia is at war in Ukraine with the entire Western world is fairy tales for Russians, who need to be given some kind of justification for why Ukraine was not captured in a few days, as planned in the Kremlin. Let me remind you that in the first two months, when the Western world was just watching the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and from their help Ukraine had only javelins and stingers to wage guerrilla warfare in the supposed rapid occupation of the territory of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Armed Forces inflicted such a major defeat on the invading Russian army that it the remnants were quickly withdrawn from central and northern Ukraine to avoid complete defeat.

After providing Ukraine with several units of Western modern military equipment, the Russian army was forced to leave part of the Kherson region along with its regional center, Kherson, and simply fled in panic from the Kharkov region, abandoning even serviceable armored vehicles. As a result, there was much more military equipment captured from the Russians than the entire West provided. Several Himars missile systems delivered to Ukraine turned the tide of the war. And this is the much-hyped “second army of the world”? What would happen if Russia started to fight with NATO, where there are hundreds of times more such complexes?

Ukraine is receiving military aid, but in very small quantities so far. But the Ukrainian Armed Forces fight not with numbers, not with the help of a “fiery shaft,” but with skill and ingenuity. Ukrainians were distinguished by this even during the Second World War. But on the other hand, if Ukraine was preparing for this war and had the current weapons for its defense, how would Russia justify itself? After all, if we compare the potential and resources of these two countries, then Russia is tens of times superior to Ukraine in all indicators. Where is such superiority seen on the battlefield? Or does Russia only know how to show its strength somewhere in Syria, Africa, where they fight almost with bows and arrows?

Besides, who is Ukraine at war with now, if Iran is providing military assistance to Russia, and North Korea recently supplied Russia with about a million shells for the war in Ukraine? This is despite the fact that the entire West has also pledged to supply Ukraine with a million shells, but deliveries are delayed because it is difficult for them to collect even that many of them.

And that's actually part of the point being made in the topic. China, which is a Nuclear Power, can't make another country, Russia, which is another Nuclear Power, bow down and make it their "slaves". That would be a catastrophe in foreign relations.

Plus China will just put themselves in a bad geo-political situaton. Japan in the West, Russia in the East, and India in the South? Where can China's military go?

Yeah it was an Eastern underdeveloped country that dropped two nukes on Japan or used nuclear munitions in Iraq, dropped the MOAB in Afghanistan or is currently using chemical weapons in Palestine
The Western "developed" and "democratic" and "human right loving" countries have never done such things.
/end of sarcasm

Speaking of China, some are predicting that they will start annexing Taiwan during the US election process...