China To Boost Oil & Gas Exploration, As EU Prepares To Commit Suicide

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

I write to thank @Tom Kirkman for posting the article stating that French carmaker Renault is in serious trouble (again) and might "disappear."   The Express is not my favourite news source and  I place little credence in its political articles;  that said, the focus on the French car industry is germaine.   Note from the pictogram of the auto plants' locations that they are all located in the Far North, some right along the Belgian border, and one even all the way against the Bay of Biscay.   These areas of France have been struggling for decades.  The North has been the historical site of French heavy industry, later including such staples as auto and truck tire plants, that sort of thing.  Lots and lots of those plants are abandoned, victims of French uncompetitiveness within Europe due in large part to labour policies.  I think you could argue that French "socialism" with its long paid holidays and short work-weeks, makes those industries uncompetitive in a world with no tariffs and lots of hungry competitors.   

This has a very serious social aspect, in that you see the disintegration of an entire society.  Northern France drifts into poverty, with joblessness the overarching social disease.  Yet the French do not deal with it; in perhaps typical French fashion, more money is thrown into the pit in what are "save the plant" exercises, but the end reality is:  if you cannot fabricate a product that customers will buy at the price point you can offer it, then you are doomed.   A good example of the end result is North America's own experiment in French culture:  the Province of Quevbec and its homegrown fiasco in haeavy manufacturing, the Bombardier Corporation  (which I predict is headed for complete dismemberment and bankruptcy). 

Can the French Government continue with its financial bailouts of their auto industry, when their sales are sluggish and their internal costs consistently high?   Who knows.  For investors in the stock, it would have to give them pause.  At least when France had colonies, there was that outlet for French products.  Those days are gone.  Today a buyer in Algeria or Morocco is no more likely to buy a Renault than to buy a Honda. 

France has had other industrial  downturns: at one time it had a thriving shipyard industry, and built such magnificent ocean liners as ther Ile de France, followed by the S.S. France, both built in the famous Chantiers de l'Atlantique shipyard at Saint-Nazaire.  The dockyard there was the largest on the Atlantic, of any country, the pride of France, and taken over by the Germans as a refuge and repair facility for the Tirpitz  (and famously destroyed by British commandos, who steamed a destroyer packed with explosives right up the channel and blew it up, underneath  the noses of an entire division of German troops). (It got fixed in 1946). As a practical matter, the Chantiers yard is the remaining big commercial yard, and was exclusively concentrated in big cruise ships.  I think those days are over  (bye-bye yard).  Nobody is buying big cruise ships these days. 

What is France going to do?  Float bonds in Germany, to send cash to the distressed industries and cities of the North?  Give up?  Disintegrate? Losing the entire car industry, a prospect that is increasingly likely  (as is the industry in the UK, which incidentally exports some 80% of its volume production, which implies that those cars can be built anywere, as the domestic market has disintegrated) has got to be sobering in Paris.  Yet, it just seems to get continually ignored. 

Edited June 7, 2020 by Jan van Eck

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

7 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Problem: Chemistry.  We are nearing theoretical limits of Lithium.  Headroom to grow does not exist as was NOT the case in the digital camera.  Shocker, Chemistry, does not act like transistors.... who knew🙄

Now several keep touting miracle 2X power density using quantum layering, nanoprinting etc.... Problem, name me one product, made en masse, that uses such technology other than a very small computer chip?  And no, no one will pay hundreds of dollars for a small tiny portion of their energy needs no matter how dense it is.  And all of this to fulfill what reason?  Some pie in the sky, CO2 boogeyman. 

Can you explain what these theoretical limits are? When will they show up?

btw- chemistry is a critical component in transistor manufacturing and miniaturization. 

note all the chemistry discussed in Chemistry of the Microprossor: https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~caramboc/Chemistry of the Microprocessor.pdf

Edited June 7, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

9 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I am holding my breath in anticipation of this glorious, climate saving, non-fossil fuel utopia!

I am guessing it will also cure all the social ills as well as the common cold.

Why would there be any liquid fueled engines at all in this utopia which required electrically produced fuel? Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn’t it? If you are going all EV, get rid of those pesky airliners as well - go ‘whole hog’!

Doug, you asked how to get to 100% renewables. I attempted to provide a practical response that addresses the tow biggest problems (transition strategy and storage), and the next two problems that the anti-greenie "fossils" bring up: energy density and quick refill. You are now asking why we need energy-dense, quick-refill storage, but you already know the answer: airliners and long-haul vehicles. I gave you a solution. Why are you now apparently rejecting it?  My whole point is that 100% renewables can accommodate these needs to the extent that they continue to exist, and that there is an incremental transition path that does not require magical economics or technology.

In my universe, the "extreme greenies" mourn for the days when "the only solution" was to scale back and radically reduce consumption, while the "extreme fossils" completely reject the idea that burning fossil fuels is harmful and mourn for the days when reducing fossil fuel consumption would destroy the economy. Both extremes reject the idea that there may be a practical way to completely stop using fossil fuels while still supporting economic progress.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,133]

3 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Can you explain what these theoretical limits are? When will they show up?

btw- chemistry is a critical component in transistor manufacturing and miniaturization. 

note all the chemistry discussed in Chemistry of the Microprossor: https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~caramboc/Chemistry of the Microprocessor.pdf

You could: GASP!  Look it up yourself.  We knew what the max was in the 70's and are now approaching said limit and are only fleshing out the longevity, flammability, economics right now.  . 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

You could: GASP!  Look it up yourself.  We knew what the max was in the 70's and are now approaching said limit and are only fleshing out the longevity, flammability, economics right now.  . 

HaHa, so you don't actually have any supporting evidence for your claim. I thought so. Because I did look it up and just like transistor miniaturization we are always approaching the limit of what the current tech can do but the market allocates resources to solve the problems and as the date for hitting a wall approaches solutions are found.  It's just like how oil reserves keep growing as technology advances.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

You could: GASP!  Look it up yourself.  We knew what the max was in the 70's and are now approaching said limit and are only fleshing out the longevity, flammability, economics right now.  . 

Researchers at Australia's Deakin University say they've managed to use common industrial polymers to create solid electrolytes, opening the door to double-density solid state lithium batteries that won't explode or catch fire if they overheat.https://newatlas.com/science/deakin-solid-state-battery-polymer-electrolyte/

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,133]

52 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Researchers at Australia's Deakin University say they've managed to use common industrial polymers to create solid electrolytes, opening the door to double-density solid state lithium batteries that won't explode or catch fire if they overheat.https://newatlas.com/science/deakin-solid-state-battery-polymer-electrolyte/

Nothing New: People have been saying that for 40 years.  What all the articles leave out is that an Anode AND Cathode are required... 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

9 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Nothing New: People have been saying that for 40 years.  What all the articles leave out is that an Anode AND Cathode are required... 

Yes, but only recently has the market begun allocating large financial resources to tackle the problem. It will be solved this decade. Meanwhile EV sales will just keep increasing because they haven't hit a wall yet. The current advancement in energy density is LFP Blade batteries. 

BYD will launch a new generation of blade batteries in March, with a 50 per cent increase in volume energy density over traditional lithium iron batteries, ... the volume of the new battery can be increased by about 50% compared with energy density, and the cost is estimated to be reduced by 20% to 30%,

https://news.metal.com/newscontent/101017008/blade-batteries-continue-to-heat-up:-costs-could-fall-by-30-byd-up-15-in-two-days/

[0R0 + 6,251]

7 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

I write to thank @Tom Kirkman for posting the article stating that French carmaker Renault is in serious trouble (again) and might "disappear."   The Express is not my favourite news source and  I place little credence in its political articles;  that said, the focus on the French car industry is germaine.   Note from the pictogram of the auto plants' locations that they are all located in the Far North, some right along the Belgian border, and one even all the way against the Bay of Biscay.   These areas of France have been struggling for decades.  The North has been the historical site of French heavy industry, later including such staples as auto and truck tire plants, that sort of thing.  Lots and lots of those plants are abandoned, victims of French uncompetitiveness within Europe due in large part to labour policies.  I think you could argue that French "socialism" with its long paid holidays and short work-weeks, makes those industries uncompetitive in a world with no tariffs and lots of hungry competitors.   

This has a very serious social aspect, in that you see the disintegration of an entire society.  Northern France drifts into poverty, with joblessness the overarching social disease.  Yet the French do not deal with it; in perhaps typical French fashion, more money is thrown into the pit in what are "save the plant" exercises, but the end reality is:  if you cannot fabricate a product that customers will buy at the price point you can offer it, then you are doomed.   A good example of the end result is North America's own experiment in French culture:  the Province of Quevbec and its homegrown fiasco in haeavy manufacturing, the Bombardier Corporation  (which I predict is headed for complete dismemberment and bankruptcy). 

Can the French Government continue with its financial bailouts of their auto industry, when their sales are sluggish and their internal costs consistently high?   Who knows.  For investors in the stock, it would have to give them pause.  At least when France had colonies, there was that outlet for French products.  Those days are gone.  Today a buyer in Algeria or Morocco is no more likely to buy a Renault than to buy a Honda. 

France has had other industrial  downturns: at one time it had a thriving shipyard industry, and built such magnificent ocean liners as ther Ile de France, followed by the S.S. France, both built in the famous Chantiers de l'Atlantique shipyard at Saint-Nazaire.  The dockyard there was the largest on the Atlantic, of any country, the pride of France, and taken over by the Germans as a refuge and repair facility for the Tirpitz  (and famously destroyed by British commandos, who steamed a destroyer packed with explosives right up the channel and blew it up, underneath  the noses of an entire division of German troops). (It got fixed in 1946). As a practical matter, the Chantiers yard is the remaining big commercial yard, and was exclusively concentrated in big cruise ships.  I think those days are over  (bye-bye yard).  Nobody is buying big cruise ships these days. 

What is France going to do?  Float bonds in Germany, to send cash to the distressed industries and cities of the North?  Give up?  Disintegrate? Losing the entire car industry, a prospect that is increasingly likely  (as is the industry in the UK, which incidentally exports some 80% of its volume production, which implies that those cars can be built anywere, as the domestic market has disintegrated) has got to be sobering in Paris.  Yet, it just seems to get continually ignored. 

France is going to be building battle ships on those shipyards. Big ones. Many of them. They will reclaim some of their mineral rich old colonies. They will use the Nissan connection to gain Japanese support to obtain a market beachead in ASEAN. This will follow the collapse of the Chinese and German export economies first. The US pulls out of Europe.and France has to rely on the EU "friends" to make a coalition force to defend Europe.

France Spain and Italy will split up the Sahara for Solar power to sell to Germany and the Norse Countries.

Edited June 7, 2020 by 0R0

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

20 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

France is going to be building battle ships on those shipyards. Big ones. Many of them. They will reclaim some of their mineral rich old colonies. They will use the Nissan connection to gain Japanese support to obtain a market beachead in ASEAN. This will follow the collapse of the Chinese and German export economies first. The US pulls out of Europe.and France has to rely on the EU "friends" to make a coalition force to defend Europe.

Huh? The US isn't pulling out of Europe, we want to sell them our gas and we want to keep Putin down. Our forces in Germany are being redeployed forward to Poland. 

Even if the US did pull out the only threat France has is from Russia. Europe will have no problem pulling together to fend off a Russian invasion.  Even the UK would jump in the fight because if Germany and France fall to Putin then the UK would be on the front line and they don't want to be the next invasion target.

Vlad's military is a paper tiger and couldn't begin to conquer Europe.

So China and German exports will fail but France will succeed?

Edited June 7, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[0R0 + 6,251]

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Huh? The US isn't pulling out of Europe, we want to sell them our gas and we want to keep Putin down. Our forces in Germany are being redeployed forward to Poland. 

So China and German exports will fail but France will succeed?

German and China exports have no more markets to grow into. 1/3 of global industrial exports will have to be shut down. It is only a question of who's production gets the axe. As soon as China's demand collapse becomes clear as a permanent phenomenon, only triggered by CV19, but not caused by it, nobody will want a trade relationship with it because Germany and other exporters have a heavy excess capacity already and definitely don't want to compete with China's excess. The economies of Europe (Germany) and China are no longer compatible trade partners. They just have not come to terms with it yet.

The US forces are no longer there to protect France and Germany, but just to contain Russia within its territory till it gives up on expansionary concepts of protecting territorial integrity, as will be the case in a decade. At that point the US may want to be there to prevent Turkey from taking the Balkans and the Crimea. I am pretty certain Russia will not nuke Turkey for a violation of its territory. Particularly since Turkmen are the majority ethnicity of Russia by 2030. Putin is working hard to convince Turkmen that they are Russian. Good luck with that.

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

34 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Vlad's military is a paper tiger and couldn't begin to conquer Europe.

Tell that to the Estonians. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

3 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Tell that to the Estonians. 

The Estonians are hardly all of Europe.

Here is a good look at just how badly European forces outmatch Russian forces: 

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Give it a rest, Jay.  You said "begin to conquer."  Gues what:  Estonia sits on the "begin."  And you can bet they have these sleepless nights about the Russians rolling in over the border on the pretext ofr "protecting" the ethnic Russians in Est Estonia  (and Latvia). 

Give it a rest. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,133]

8 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Yes, but only recently has the market begun allocating large financial resources to tackle the problem. It will be solved this decade. Meanwhile EV sales will just keep increasing because they haven't hit a wall yet. The current advancement in energy density is LFP Blade batteries. 

BYD will launch a new generation of blade batteries in March, with a 50 per cent increase in volume energy density over traditional lithium iron batteries, ... the volume of the new battery can be increased by about 50% compared with energy density, and the cost is estimated to be reduced by 20% to 30%,

https://news.metal.com/newscontent/101017008/blade-batteries-continue-to-heat-up:-costs-could-fall-by-30-byd-up-15-in-two-days/

Thank you for tuning into Lithium battery school for the uninformed:

1) BYD were using Shitty low energy density batteries to begin with.  They were using Iron sulfur batteries and then after several MAJOR fires, in their taxis/busses which almost saw them eliminated as a car supplier to China, switched to Lithium Iron Phosphate which sat at 120Wh/kg.  

2) The latest LiFPo currently sits at 160Wh/kg, but everyone assumed it would leap to 180Wh/kg due to change in packaging, and very few could physically get the 160Wh/kg, but everyone was told a 50% leap in energy density was happening.  It would appear that BYD is now going to 180Wh/kg LiFPo which is EXCELLENT news for everyone making a home battery bank for RV/Boat/Home as they are FAR cheaper to make, align with 12V/24V/48V systems unlike NMC batteries, and more importantly DO NOT CATCH ON FIRE like NMC batteries when eventually said NMC batteries reach the end of their lives and dendrites punch through the insulating barrier shorting everything out.  

3) LiFPo is Cheaper to make/buy.  Only problem?  You cannot charge them below 0C.   So, for a large portion of China, this is perfect as it is the sub tropics.  Will need insulation/heaters for up north.  

4) Li NMC(nickel-moly-cobalt) are sitting at ~230Wh/kg(old TESLA) and some are claiming upwards of 250Wh/kg(TESLA model 3/Y).  Theoretical max is around 300Wh/kg.  

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

11 hours ago, 0R0 said:

France is going to be building battle ships on those shipyards. Big ones. Many of them. They will reclaim some of their mineral rich old colonies. They will use the Nissan connection to gain Japanese support to obtain a market beachead in ASEAN. This will follow the collapse of the Chinese and German export economies first. The US pulls out of Europe.and France has to rely on the EU "friends" to make a coalition force to defend Europe.

France Spain and Italy will split up the Sahara for Solar power to sell to Germany and the Norse Countries.

Maybe, but did you consult an astrologer to back up your theory?  At least your horoscope?

[0R0 + 6,251]

4 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Maybe, but did you consult an astrologer to back up your theory?  At least your horoscope?

Take the assumptions and logical progression

1. US is not going to provide a general protection for shipping security and is leaving military entanglements it is already involved in. As both Trump and the Democrats running for office say they will do, and as the public want. Trump has offered new terms of trade where the US' security service is at the cost of mercantile concessions favoring the US. Most countries can't perform under those conditions without subsidy or tariff and other protections so they took a hard pass.

2. This means that each country or trading block that can't play on a "level playing field" - i.e. where US' natural advantages make it unlevel, Are going to need to provide their own security for shipping and to capture supply lines and target markets with military force to back it up. UK and Japan saw that coming, Aussies too, the first have already floated aircraft carriers. All of those also are in the new US trading setup.

3. Shipping security is not a normal state of things. You have to make it happen as piracy has been a big business since time immemorial. Once more navies are out then they turn to supplement the security of commerce with additional income from piracy. Those navies then expand to press important trade partners into exclusive relationships with the country, i.e. colonial systems.

4. Germany (Italy and Spain to a lesser extent) and China are large exporters. They are both facing a shrinking demand demographic, the kind of problem that Japan has faced post 1989. Their futures depend on increasing exports and outgoing external investment to continue production once their boomer workers retire. That is Germany 2030, China 2035. When the bulk of their boomers are retired. By then they need to have either giant leaps of internal productivity (well beyond those accomplished by Japan) and to move to managing offshore production elsewhere. China can't do it, Germany is refusing to. Thus there is no cure for a terminal competitive condition where both countries need to find new markets or go bust with depression level unemployment, financial crisis and government revenue disasters. China and Germany can not be trade partners. They have nothing to gain from accessing each other's markets.

5. France does not have a demographic inversion and is largely a domestic economy with its own production and demand centers. It has people to sell to and trade to engage in. Ageing Europe is as useless as a forest after a fire to France. It HAS TO revive empire in order to grow. German (Italy Spain and E Europe) and Chinese consumption are set to fall off a cliff as their demographics invert.

6. France has nothing much to lose from a Russian or Turkish conflagration in E Europe, Germany does. So France is going to either lead the EU or throw it away as it does not rely on  exports for 43-45% of GDP the way Germany does. It has the flexibility to go on its own and only German financing and investment to gain in the short term, and little to gain long term. France is a mature tiger among frail old wolves, there is no reason for their pact to continue. Regardless of EU decisions, France will re-create its colonial system, nicely or violently, because it simply does not need to care about its EU partners. .

7. Without the US willing to police the seas, there is no impediment to imperial methods of trade by those capable of employing them and needing them. The existence of the Northern African countries as independent entities is entirely owed to the US pressing the old colonial powers to leave their colonies  as part of the Bretton Woods trade system's basic terms - that colonies are open to all member's access on level terms. Without those limits, the old near colonies will be taken back by their old masters. If the US doesn't care, then nobody other than Turkey has any say in it, and it is too far for Turkey to dedicate its navy to it. .

 

[Hotone + 412]

2 hours ago, 0R0 said:

 Regardless of EU decisions, France will re-create its colonial system, nicely or violently, because it simply does not need to care about its EU partners. .

7. Without the US willing to police the seas, there is no impediment to imperial methods of trade by those capable of employing them and needing them. The existence of the Northern African countries as independent entities is entirely owed to the US pressing the old colonial powers to leave their colonies  as part of the Bretton Woods trade system's basic terms - that colonies are open to all member's access on level terms. Without those limits, the old near colonies will be taken back by their old masters.

 

Do you know that citizens of the British Commonwealth member countries (old colonies) can vote in the UK elections?  Meaning that I (Malaysian) can vote in the general elections if I have a UK address at that time. Some Brits I know, tell me that they regret colonizing India, because of Indian and Pakistani mass immigration into the UK.

If France were to regain African colonies, it will lead to the 'reverse colonization' of France.  France will become black (or blacker), and with the numerically superior voters, will have a President of African descent.  There is nothing wrong with that of course, since we are not racist.   

Some people have already predicted that Europe's demography will rejuvenate and grow with the influx of African migration. This may well be the perfect solution to Europe's needs.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Hotone

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 hour ago, 0R0 said:

France will re-create its colonial system, nicely or violently, because it simply does not need to care about its EU partners. .

I'm looking forward to their reconquest of Syria and Vietnam!

[0R0 + 6,251]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I'm looking forward to their reconquest of Syria and Vietnam!

Looking more at mineral resources. Syria is Turkey's back yard..French are not going there.

They don't need to conquer. The colonial model of relationships was more often protectorates rather than areas gained by war.

2 hours ago, Hotone said:

If France were to regain African colonies, it will lead to the 'reverse colonization' of France.  France will become black (or blacker), and with the numerically superior voters, will have a President of African descent.  There is nothing wrong with that of course, since we are not racist.   

That above should cover that item. But the Saharan colonization does not really need a substantial coastal presence, where the population is.

The French made the idiotic mistake of setting up a socialist system including a population that is poorer than they were.

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,133]

8 hours ago, 0R0 said:

Looking more at mineral resources. Syria is Turkey's back yard..French are not going there.

They don't need to conquer. The colonial model of relationships was more often protectorates rather than areas gained by war.

That above should cover that item. But the Saharan colonization does not really need a substantial coastal presence, where the population is.

The French made the idiotic mistake of setting up a socialist system including a population that is poorer than they were.

 

Well actually; NO.  French were SMART: They kept their colonies, though technically they do not have them anymore.  In reality they still do.  West Africa uses the CFA which is based on the Franc, but not the Franc.  SO, most of west Africa jumps as high as the French tell them to as the French have them by their short curlies.  One thing has changed: The Chinese are, uh were(before they went openly racist against black people during Wuhan Flu), getting the mining concessions and enginenering firm concessions that all of the French firms used to get as Paris leaned on the countries using the CFA to do as  they were told.  What they were told is to give the contracts to the French companies.  One of the major reasons USA, UK, German, etc engineering firms have received fewer international jobs.  The French have an advantage in quantity and recognition in international business.  French still have their "colonial" office.  UK does not.  USA never has even though the USD is worlds currency currently. 

[Blackbag99 + 20]

On 6/6/2020 at 8:43 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

They don’t use ANY carbon fuels now? Bullshit!

https://www.google.com.my/amp/s/sweden.se/nature/energy-use-in-sweden/amp/

But you missed my point. With all the promises of renewables, the desire to ‘go green’....just do it! Not by 2050, NOW!

Get off the fossil fuel teat, save the planet NOW! You keep touring the miracle of EV’s and that renewables do not require a fossil fuel backup....so quit talking and DO IT!

Renewable link, Nuclear is not renewable energy. It is non carbon. I think I mentioned that in post you responded too!

EV use less carbon than petrol cars. Full stop end of story. Full use of Grid actually reduces prices not increases it.

Its the BS that the wind only blows a third of the time. If that was a reason not to build generation no one would build gas generation because only uses 28% of its potential output.