Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Domestic jet fuel cost has remained relatively stable due to high Us production and largely insulated from the global price shock. The same can be applied to petrol derived fuel should America choose to limit international oil exports. No doubt in a national emergency such a scenario would occur. Fuel are bulk cargo and requires large tanker to transport, if the open ocean becomes no man’s sea, rapid de-industrialization would be the norm. That is for any country that cannot source its own oil
 

IMG_3409.thumb.jpeg.dd3ad7519bdf7a6549bec92fbe48789c.jpeg

Edited by paxamericana
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Domestic jet fuel cost has remained relatively stable due to high Us production and largely insulated from the global price shock. The same can be applied to petrol derived fuel should America choose to limit international oil exports. No doubt in a national emergency such a scenario would occur. Fuel are bulk cargo and requires large tanker to transport, if the open ocean becomes no man’s sea, rapid de-industrialization would be the norm. That is for any country that cannot source its own oil
 

IMG_3409.thumb.jpeg.dd3ad7519bdf7a6549bec92fbe48789c.jpeg

Indeed, the U.S. is a net exporter of crude and petroleum products but it is not a net exporter of (desirable?)  crude oil  - big difference.  

In 2025 the U.S. imported 6.2 million barrels of crude oil / day but exported 4 million barrels / day of crude.

Domestically, the U.S. produces ‘light and sweet’ crude, U.S. refineries aren’t ‘tooled’ to process it – the refineries are tooled for ‘heavy sour’ crude from the middle east / Canada. Ergo, pipelines? Retooling the refineries is economically a non-starter and would take years to complete.

The mismatch keeps the U.S. from  simply using its own  crude production to serve all domestic needs.

And that is why the price at the pump keep rising and  will continue to rise as long as supply is limited. 

Prices rise, inflation surges .........

Edited by John Stone
Posted
2 hours ago, John Stone said:

image.thumb.png.a936ac245ccd5a238edb3604fb371fff.png

Thermal solar plant / China

China is the leader, by far, in the development of green energy and  E.V. 

We built one in Vegas. It desimated monarch butterflies and was inefficient so they are shutting it down.

Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it? 

 

 

Posted
32 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

We built one in Vegas. It desimated monarch butterflies and was inefficient so they are shutting it down.

.............maybe  China can build one  that works for ya? 😁

  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 1
Posted

The 2027 budget request for NASA cuts funding by 23 percent and reduces the Science Mission Directorate by 46 percent, down to $3.9 billion. 

To put those figures in context, the first week of the US's war against Iran cost well over $10 billion

Meanwhile, a spokesman  for China's crewed space  programme has stated that China was 'on track' to launch it lunar mission by 2030.

Artemis III, is scheduled to send the first U.S. astronauts to the lunar surface since Apollo 17 / 1972. Scheduled to launch in 2027.

This is going to be interesting. 

Posted
1 hour ago, John Stone said:

.............maybe  China can build one  that works for ya? 😁

Not if they pay market wages rather than using slave labor. 

Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it? 

 

 

Posted

What weirdo posts a graph on how badly US policy is affecting their own pockets as proof of 'energy dominance'?

How about posting a graph of how much oil is being traded in yuan or euros to accompany it as 'proof' too?

Proof of THE END of US dominance  os a better headline to use.

  • Downvote 1
Posted
6 hours ago, John Stone said:

image.thumb.png.a936ac245ccd5a238edb3604fb371fff.png

Thermal solar plant / China

China is the leader, by far, in the development of green energy and  E.V. 

They are also, by far, the leader in the production of new coal plants...

 

 

  • Like 1

 

 

Posted
3 hours ago, John Stone said:

.............maybe  China can build one  that works for ya? 😁

It is not a matter of working. They are highly expensive and inefficient. China is a state-controlled communist party operation willing to eat those costs. 

 

 

 

Posted
23 minutes ago, User said:

It is not a matter of working. They are highly expensive and inefficient. China is a state-controlled communist party operation willing to eat those costs. 

 

re: They are highly expensive and inefficient

I think that's what they told the Wright Bros. about the airplane. 😁

WWI Generals re: automatic weapons?

 

Posted
Just now, John Stone said:

re: They are highly expensive and inefficient

I think that's what they told the Wright Bros. about the airplane. 😁

WWI Generals re: automatic weapons?

 

Who is they and what exactly did they say?

Just another one of your brain-in-a-blender posts...

 

 

 

Posted
14 minutes ago, User said:

Who is they and what exactly did they say?

Just another one of your brain-in-a-blender posts...

 

........I feel charitable today...😄

Field Marchal Sir Douglas Haig was the C-n-C of the BEF during WWI

Haig is quoted as saying machine guns were overrated during WWI,  especially against mounted calvary, and criticized tactics that relied heavily on automatic gunfire rather than infantry assaults.

Haig is also quoted as saying similar re: aircraft – overrated.

Haig is the design genius of the Battle of the Somme – 1 million casualties in 4 months. 

BEF?

‘Lions led by donkeys’ / German

The point is, technology waits for no man.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, John Stone said:

........I feel charitable today...😄

Field Marchal Sir Douglas Haig was the C-n-C of the BEF during WWI

Haig is quoted as saying machine guns were overrated during WWI,  especially against mounted calvary, and criticized tactics that relied heavily on automatic gunfire rather than infantry assaults.

Haig is also quoted as saying similar re: aircraft – overrated.

Haig is the design genius of the Battle of the Somme – 1 million casualties in 4 months. 

BEF?

‘Lions led by donkeys’ / German

The point is, technology waits for no man.

 

The point is, this has nothing to do with anything I said. 

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, John Stone said:

The point is, technology waits for no man.

 

but without man technology is a non starter, so who wins.

 

Posted
13 hours ago, User said:

The point is, this has nothing to do with anything I said. 

re: They are highly expensive and inefficient 

Haig was anachronistic, dismissive of  technology. 

Posted
1 hour ago, John Stone said:

re: They are highly expensive and inefficient 

Haig was anachronistic, dismissive of  technology. 

Which has what to do with me or what I said? 

 

 

Posted
2 hours ago, John Stone said:

nature. 

So mans attempt to change the climate is moot.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Legato said:

So mans attempt to change the climate is moot.

there can be no technology without man. 

If technology is responsible for climate change then man is to blame. 

A coal  fired generator is an example of technology. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, John Stone said:

there can be no technology without man. 

If technology is responsible for climate change then man is to blame. 

A coal  fired generator is an example of technology. 

But it doesn't wait for man. So moot.

Posted
24 minutes ago, John Stone said:

I don't mind an individual thinking slowly; I mind them publishing faster than they think. 😁

Another brain in a blender post. 

 

 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Legato said:

But it doesn't wait for man. So moot.

It (technology) is dependent on man .......... whether 'man' accepts it (technology) as fact is moot. 😁

It is a fact that solar panels are the most effective form of solar energy.  

It is a fact that solar panels are cost-effective. 

Whether u accept the fact is moot. 

Edited by John Stone
Posted
13 minutes ago, John Stone said:

It (technology) is dependent on man .......... whether 'man' accepts it (technology) as fact is moot. 😁

It is a fact that solar panels are the most effective form of solar energy.  

It is a fact that solar panels are cost-effective. 

Whether u accept the fact is moot. 

You are conflating solar panels with thermal solar now… 

It is not cost effective. They are not the most effective forms of solar energy. 
 

 

 

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,015
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    agackibal
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...