40 Comments

Great article Irina.

Expand full comment

My only troubling throught... If Russia is going ok the why have so many O&G execs been defenestrated or committed some other form of suicide ( 8 at last count) . 15bcfs a day of Gas down the pipes to europe is stranded unless other ways of moving it are found. Is it possible that these guys complained that they don't like this plan and were met with and answer from uncle Vlad . ?

Expand full comment

I have no reliable info about the oil execs, I remember covering one actually hilarious case of drug overdose and a couple of others. I also have no access to Russian media, thanks to EC censorship, so I don't know what the official versions are. As for gas, they're expanding their local gas network, so some of that gas will be redirected to home locations. Later on, expansion of the Power of Siberia. The thing that the West repeatedly ignores about Russia is that they are hardy. Even if some oil and gas production has to be sacrificed, they'll do it. AND they'll have enough for the domestic market, unlike us.

Expand full comment

I have to be a little honest i have a tainted view of Russians as my wife if a Czech. You are right about the hardiness though. The last century of suffering is hard to fathom. Im quite scared Vlad is going to shock the world economy with the oil weapon, sit back and watch the economic carnage on his golden toilet at his Sochi Palace

Expand full comment

Russia is happily exporting oil to the world. It's a handful of countries that have a problem with that and are doing everything it can to make this problem worse.

Expand full comment

This is why I love and support your writing. Bold and strong opinions expressed vividly.

I don't agree with everything you say but I love the way you say it, I respect your well-supported views, and I appreciate that I can constructively offer my own counter-perspectives too.

On Russia, I wholeheartedly agree. Europe was no partner to Russia and Russia doesn't need Europe, Europe needs Russia.

On Renewables, they are still a drop in the grid and an effect of the failure to plan and execute well. They are not the cause of the "energy crisis", they are a pimple on the ass of certain grid operators (like California and Germany) who have over-committed and under-planned for their integration. The move from 0% to 10% of the grid is easy, the move from 10% to 100% takes careful planning and decades to construct, or else it can and will result in systemic failures. Regrets are appropriate now because we should have planned and executed a sane and sustainable transition sooner; but we didn't. Now we are living within a moment where there is a crisis and our failures are more apparent than ever. Yes, we could run the world's economy on 100% Renewables 24/7/365, in good weather years and bad, forever. Or at least until the next ice age, which will come again too (geological time, which neither oil or Global Warming can ignore either). Its not the technology or the natural resources that we lack.

Point is, we are in a crisis, created in part by a failure to plan and in part by a Plan to Reset the global order. Russia and the Ukraine are part of the Grand Chessboard.

"There is enough oil and gas in the world to last us for quite a while unless our consumption spirals out of control." "Quite a while" is symptomatic of the problem. How long do we have to begin what before what ends? Quite a while before we run out of choices? Quite a while before we have to artificially curtail consumption growth by curtailing population growth or turning it rapidly negative (Plan B)? The failure to plan is a Plan to fail.

Thank you for your important contributions and the pleasure it is to read and reply them.

Respectfully,

Dennis

Expand full comment

Thank you, Dennis. It would be a boring world if we agreed on everything. I appreciate your comments, as always.

Expand full comment

It's not renewables, its wind & solar. Hydro & geothermal are practical, reliable sources of electricity, albeit severely limited by geography.

And the crisis is all about the wind & solar scam. In 1999 Germany was 31% clean, zero emissions Nuclear electricity, 170TWh/yr. At that time they started their program to replace Nuclear with Wind & Solar, buffered with Russian gas. Now after having spent over $500B on wind and solar since then they are now at 28.8% wind + solar, 165TWh/yr. Zero achievement after $500B down the sewer. If Germany has spent $230B on Nuclear power they would now be 100% clean Nuclear electricity. 3X the results at <1/2 the cost. And now most of Germany's wind & solar will have to be replaced over the next decade. And of course they would now be able to laugh at Putin's natural gas pipeline blackmail.

And wind/solar are NOT sustainable energy. In fact they are physical impossibility. The low EROI (Energy Return On Invested) wind/solar/batteries is just too low.The economy would collapse trying to implement it. EROI for such a system would certainly be less than 3:1. It takes an EROI of >14:1 to run a modern industrialized economy.

https://festkoerper-kernphysik.de/Weissbach_EROI_preprint.pdf

And wind + solar is costing 6X traditional energy sources (nuclear/coal/gas/hydro) in Europe right now. And that will only increase with increased levels of wind + solar as that will increase grid inefficiency and needless grid duplication.

Expand full comment

Germany's industries do not run on electricity alone, they rely heavily upon natural gas for primary chemical feedstock, not just for fuel. If their grid were 100% nuclear you would still have a Russian gas crisis, only you would also have a Russian enriched uranium crisis too. To call this "Russian blackmail" is inappropriate. Its more like a deadly game of chicken, somewhat akin mutually assured destruction. Only Russian and Europe destroy each other. Europe got played by the US. The Euro is down, USD & Ruble up. Europe freezes and economic disorder ensues while energy, food, and material rich USA and Russia get richer, and the US grows its global energy market share. If you can't recognize that then everything else you say is completely our of context. The same failure to plan that I spoke of is the failure to plan for more nuclear. I like nuclear; I invest in nuclear; I understand the nuclear cycle and where it and when it all takes place. But I earn my living developing large solar; I consult with grid planners and policymakers; I speak at conferences on solar's challenges and values. I know solar's potential and I know what a failure to plan sustainably looks like, and this is both a failure to plan and a Plan to fail in action. Blaming wind and solar as failed technologies and declaring nuclear the victim is simplistic and wrong. You are victim of a con game that will destroy Europe and lead to a massive and rapid resurgence of nuclear energy in Europe and elsewhere, but the USA will become the controlling source of most Western uranium supplies and European countries will become beholden to the USA for fuel. That plus the Euro and European Economic Community will become a failed experiment. That's what the real Plan looks like. It ain't pretty. I have lots of family in Europe and I don't wish it to be true, but this is not about wishing or would have, could have, should have ... it's about what is happening now and why. It really is 3D Chess and you are only seeing two opponents in two dimension. This is global war, with kinetic battles in Europe already, with far worse yet to come. Wind and solar are not your main problems: refugees; food security; energy security; a stable currency; out of control civil unrest ... These are your problems. Nuclear can't save you. It's checkmate for Europe but you can't see it. Not what I want, but how I see it.

Expand full comment

Well you are correct about Nuclear electricity not eliminating the need for gas for industry and heating. Never said it did. But it would take a good chunk out of the Russian component of their gas consumption. And almost certainly if Germany had made the big move to nuclear, surrounding nations would also done so, thus further reducing the need for Russian gas. In addition they could also have used Nuclear district heating and heat pumps. Add to summer gas storage and LNG imports they would likely be impervious to Russian gas supply cutoff. And if governments like Germany had embraced Nuclear tech we would already be building high temperature modular molten salt reactors which can also supply much of the industrial heat needs. And burn spent nuclear fuel. And they also could have developed a methanol energy supply which could also replace gas & oil consumption.

Easy to get enriched uranium. Many countries can supply that. And there is no shipping constraints, unlike gas. Fly it from anywhere on Earth. However it would be ridiculous for Germany to build a strong domestic nuclear industry and not also develop their own enrichment and fuel reprocessing just as France has done. France needs 5oz of uranium per person per year to supply 88% of their domestic electricity generation. The other 12% with their indigenous hydro. That's $15 worth of uranium per person per year. There is never going to be a supply issue with that.

And nobody has stated nuclear will save you from all the many problems. But it helps a lot, a very lot. A stable economical reliable domestic electricity supply is a very strong component of a successful socioeconomic system and if you don't have that you will have a FAILED socioeconomic system. So it ain't everything but it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY and its a damn big component of everything necessary. The rest of the problems can be tackled and solved by similar use of rationality, integrity and honesty. Like every problem corruption is the biggest impediment.

Expand full comment

I would add that if Germany had gone with a strong nuclear baseload electricity supply there would be ample nighttime electricity for electric heat, electric heaters are cheap. So that would at least avert people freezing in their homes, they could use electric heat to heat their hot water and homes overnight. And having low electrical bills would greatly ease the pain they now suffer from extremely high electricity AND gas bills.

Expand full comment

Uranium is going to come from Canada and Australia, not the United States. It can be processed/enriched by France, the USA, Canada, and plenty of other countries. Wind and Solar are abject failures as civilizational power sources. Their intermittency and low density are insurmountable problems. If you're in the business you may be too invested to see it, but it's obvious. They are very cool tech - for some specific (mostly remote) uses and in specific locations they are excellent. But they are not going to power civilization, ever.

Expand full comment

Dennis - I strongly recommend Peter Zeihan's new book "The End Of The World Is Just The Beginning" for some eye-opening information on wind & solar "renewables" and population.

Expand full comment

Maybe if NATO didn't continually push east to Russia's western border, which Russia said would not be tolerated since the Berlin Wall fell, maybe if Ukraine didn't kill tens of thousands of ethnic Russians in the Donbass, maybe if the U.S. didn't foster a coup in Ukraine, maybe if the West didn't steal Russia's central bank reserves, maybe then Vlad would be more accommodating.

Expand full comment

If only...

Expand full comment

He still did try to accommodate them. Ukraine & Russia had a tentative agreement to end the war in April, mediated by Turkey. Then the Bankster overlords has their puppy Boris fly to Ukraine to tell Zelensky to forget about it. As the old adage goes: "All wars are Banker Wars".

Revealed: U.K. SABOTAGED Russia/Ukraine Peace Deal In April!:

https://rumble.com/v1i6ssf-4-revealed-u.k.-sabotaged-russiaukraine-peace-deal-in-april.html

Expand full comment

This is what I find unforgivable: that the EU and the U.S. are striking a moral pose but neither of them is appealing for negotiations and a quicker end of the war. Macron tried and that was it. Whatever side one supports, the longer this war goes on, the more people will die, this is the simple fact and it should have been the most important consideration but when has human life been the most important consideration in a war for anything.

Expand full comment

Brilliantly put as always and 100% right. I immediately commented on his article saying he was the one being absurd but it does make you despair as to whether our leaders will ever “get” that the energy transition needs to be measured and involve nuclear.

Expand full comment

Yes, despair has become part of my daily routine.

Expand full comment

Love (of the Green Dream) means you never have to say you're sorry.

Expand full comment

Good one!

Expand full comment

Your expose' of Birol' op-ed cuts like a knife. You expose the IEA as a propaganda arm for the WEF and its unsound strategy of subjugating energy security in favor of net-zero. When will the EU learn that impoverished nations will never reach net-zero?

Expand full comment

When they suffer the consequences of their decisions.

Expand full comment

It's just a wealth transfer scam. They use phony credits in developing countries to pretend to reduce emissions in Western countries. Part of their deindustrialization effort. For instance a schlock carbon marketing financial firm will buy up tropical rainforest in Brazil. Claim they are protecting it from logging, farming & cattle ranching. Sell the credits to Western countries to offset emissions. It's just a bookkeeping charade. The farms, loggers & ranchers will just use different land. It does zip. And then a fire will release all the carbon in the preserve anyway. No refund to western companies for that. And then the scam artists will sell more credits to regrow the forest in their preserve that just burned down.

Expand full comment

The alignment and partnership of Russia, China, India, Brazil and Arab states is not to be underestimated. The EU’s arrogance and irrationality is tantamount to young children before they are taught to reason.

Expand full comment

Yes, I'm wiping tears, there is something inherently funny when your shredding poor Birol's arguments to chips. Russia may not be winning the actual war, but definitely has us Europeans worried on the energy front. And we wouldn't be in this uncomfortable (and cold) situation if we haven't systematically mismanaged the transition, letting go of baseload capacity and only partially replacing it with "non-pilotable" as they say. And yes, the best thing we could do now is to sit down and thing this through again - what do we want? and how's the best way to reach it, without setting any artificial limitations ("no nuclear") right at the beginning.

So this crisis may actually lead to some good. Not under the capable hands of our dear Ursula, who still lives in fairyland (based on her latest proposal to effectively cut the last remaining Russia deliveries).

Expand full comment

Here, have a tissue. 😊 I agree, this could lead to something positive such as thinking before acting, hopefully.

Expand full comment

Last paragraph is so much fun!

I hope they come down to earth as soon as possible. The Metaverse is bad for them.

Regards!

Expand full comment

Frankly, I wouldn’t trust even a three day weather report from the EU Energy leadership. Their predictions are odiferous.

https://images.app.goo.gl/LQfo1hXTaz4LPCm19

Expand full comment

Man that Fatih Birol is just impressive isn’t he? The transition narrative must be maintained at all costs, even if it means bald-faced gaslighting and shredding any and all credibility of his organization in the process.

My favorite line in the piece: “as anyone of questionable normality such as myself would know...”

I feel much the same, and I have awkwardly pulled up Electricity Map on my phone during many social gatherings to demonstrate France/Germany differences, etc. On a regular basis I want to shake people and say DON’T YOU SEE WHAT’S HAPPENING?!?

Expand full comment

I once spent two weeks taking screen shots of Germany's energy mix on random days so I could shove them into people's faces and say the same thing you want to say to them. It is an invaluable source of hard facts but facts mean little to the righteous transition devotee, I'm afraid.

Expand full comment

Upbeat? I’d be anxious to read what you write on a downbeat day....maybe nothing, laying in bed, with no inclination to get up...

Expand full comment

It's usually doom, gloom, and extra heavy sarcasm, sprinkled with outright insults. I hope. :D

Expand full comment

Irina great article and rebuttal, you better be careful they will censor you for stating verifiable facts.

I am banned from Financial Times for pointing out to an author his mistakes about modern monetary theory a year ago. Just like this putz, solar and wind will never replace fossil fuels or nuclear power. Until we can harness the suns power in another way and even then, clouds and winters will cause problems. The problem is those unelected officials of the West do not want to admit they goofed on the sanctions and prefer to sacrifice their populace's lives and this is sad. Those same politicians will not suffer at all the taxpayers got their backs.

Expand full comment

I'm very grateful for the existence of Substack in this age of censorship, to tell you the truth.

As for the screw-ups, they might get voted out of power and that will hurt.

Expand full comment

I read that FT article this week and I had a feeling this might elicit a response from you, Irina. Excellent dissection of the word games politicians are smothering us in!

Expand full comment

:D Thank you!

Expand full comment

‘Like shooting fish in a barrel’ ….

Expand full comment