GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

No the court was correct the first time. It is now issuing policy that one or two individuals wish to see made constitutional. 

 

What issue? A point however neither my opinion nor yours matters. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 minute ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

What issue? A point however neither my opinion nor yours matters. 

Every decision they released in the past couple weeks. They trampled states rights, individual rights and the will of congress.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

38 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Every decision they released in the past couple weeks. They trampled states rights, individual rights and the will of congress.

Are you a US cititzen? i ask that due the fact you have a quite high energy level and a intelligence that compliments it. Yet you post like a teenager going thru a hormonal rage. Or a offshore shrill playing games.

All states now have increased individual rights restored.

Congress merely has to write law that follows the constitution.

Demonstrate a individual right that has been trampled.

Edited July 2, 2022 by Eyes Wide Open

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

6 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Are you a US cititzen? i ask that due the fact you have a quite high energy level and intelligence to that compliments it. Yet you post like a teenager going thru a hormonal rage. Or a offshore shrill playing games.

All states now have increased individual rights restored.

Congress merely has to write law that follows the constitution.

Demonstrate a individual right that has been trampled.

The court did not declare the clean air act unconstitutional. They declared the execution of it unconstitutional. They enshrined  a vague and  entirely new constitutional legal concept called the major questions doctrine to come to their decision. They had to make up brand new law, never used by the Court before to make their finding. It reeks of judicial activism.

The individual right to privacy was trashed when they overturned Roe v Wade.

 

 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

52 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The court did not declare the clean air act unconstitutional. They declared the execution of it unconstitutional. They enshrined  a vague and  entirely new constitutional legal concept called the major questions doctrine to come to their decision. They had to make up brand new law, never used by the Court before to make their finding. It reeks of judicial activism.

The individual right to privacy was trashed when they overturned Roe v Wade.

 

Jay its toddy time. In short a time out... but i took the time to do a quick look. It would seem our young have lost there minds... Below a search of this theroy..in short teenage rage and you are well aware of that. Or again you are just a offshore shrill attempting to create chaos?

https://www.google.com/search?q=major+questions+doctrine&rlz=1C1RXQR_enUS969US969&oq=major+questions+doctrine+&

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by Eyes Wide Open

[notsonice + 1,243]

2 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Put a sock in It Gabby. your in over your head. Stick to scooter's mass transit etc etc etc...You do understand gas prices will be the fundamental issue that removes the political arm that embraces green policy...

So odd Trumps hand picked court blew it all up...Stable Genius...perhaps its time for reflection,

Babbling again I see, Either you are a 7 year old or you are senile

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by notsonice

[notsonice + 1,243]

2 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Are you a US cititzen? i ask that due the fact you have a quite high energy level and a intelligence that compliments it. Yet you post like a teenager going thru a hormonal rage. Or a offshore shrill playing games.

All states now have increased individual rights restored.

Congress merely has to write law that follows the constitution.

Demonstrate a individual right that has been trampled.

another moronic post, where do you come up with your bs babble????

a teenager going thru a hormonal rage???? Grow up as all you can do is post like a 7 year old

PS you must love having the forum idiots upvoting you. 

[notsonice + 1,243]

3 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Are you a US cititzen? i ask that due the fact you have a quite high energy level and a intelligence that compliments it. Yet you post like a teenager going thru a hormonal rage. Or a offshore shrill playing games.

All states now have increased individual rights restored.

Congress merely has to write law that follows the constitution.

Demonstrate a individual right that has been trampled.

Jethro,

when you post ........

a intelligence that compliments it

a offshore shrill playing games

a individual right

 

it shows that you did not pass the 6th grade. 

 

If you need, we can start a go fund me page for you so you can enroll back in an elementary school. 

You post like a 7 year old.

PS what do you think of $5 a gallon gas and the demand destruction?????? EV's to the rescue......Enjoy!

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by notsonice

[notsonice + 1,243]

Peak oil has happened........it is all downhill for oil now...Enjoy the ride

 

Goodbye gasoline cars? EU lawmakers vote to ban new sales from 2035

PUBLISHED THU, JUN 9 20226:51 AM EDT

Anmar Frangoul

 

KEY POINTS

• European lawmakers have voted to ban the sale of new diesel and gasoline cars and vans in the EU from 2035, representing a significant shot in the arm to region’s ambitious green goals.
• It takes the EU a step closer to its goal of cutting emissions from new passenger cars and light commercial vehicles by 100% in 2035
• MEPs will now negotiate the plans with the bloc’s 27 member states.

 

•  

 

Traffic in Paris, France, on May 12, 2020. The European Parliament now supports the European Commission’s goal of a 100% cut in emissions from new passenger cars and vans by 2035.

Ludovic Marin | AFP | Getty Images

European lawmakers have voted to ban the sale of new diesel and gasoline cars and vans in the EU from 2035, representing a significant shot in the arm to the region’s ambitious green goals.

On Wednesday, 339 MEPs in the European Parliament voted in favor of the plans, which had been proposed by the European Commission, the EU’s executive branch. There were 249 votes against the proposal, while 24 MEPs abstained.

 

It takes the European Union a step closer to its goal of cutting emissions from new passenger cars and light commercial vehicles by 100% in 2035, compared to 2021. By 2030, the target is an emissions reduction of 50% for vans and 55% for cars.

The Commission has previously said passenger cars and vans account for roughly 12% and 2.5% of the EU’s total CO2 emissions. MEPs will now undertake negotiations about the plans with the bloc’s 27 member states.

The U.K., meanwhile, wants to stop the sale of new diesel and gasoline cars and vans by 2030. It will require, from 2035, all new cars and vans to have zero tailpipe emissions. The U.K. left the EU on Jan. 31, 2020.

 

Dutch MEP Jan Huitema, who is part of the Renew Europe Group, welcomed the result of Wednesday’s vote. “I am thrilled that the European Parliament has backed an ambitious revision of the targets for 2030 and supported a 100% target for 2035, which is crucial to reach climate neutrality by 2050,” he said.

Others commenting on the news included Alex Keynes, clean vehicles manager at Brussels-based campaign group Transport & Environment. “The deadline means the last fossil fuel cars will be sold by 2035, giving us a fighting chance of averting runaway climate change,” Keynes said.

 

He also argued that the plans provide the car industry with the certainty it needed to “ramp up production of electric vehicles, which will drive down prices for drivers.”

 

For its part, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association said it was “concerned that MEPs voted to set in stone a -100% CO2 target for 2035.”

Oliver Zipse, who is the president of the ACEA and CEO of BMW, said his industry was “in the midst of a wide push for electric vehicles, with new models arriving steadily.”

“But given the volatility and uncertainty we are experiencing globally day-by-day, any long-term regulation going beyond this decade is premature at this early stage,” Zipse added. “Instead, a transparent review is needed halfway in order to define post-2030 targets.”

The EU has said it wants to be carbon neutral by 2050. In the medium term, it wants net greenhouse gas emissions to be cut by at least 55% by the year 2030, which the EU calls its “Fit for 55” plan.

The realization of this plan has not been all plain sailing. The news on cars and vans came after MEPs rejected a revision to the EU Emissions Trading System, or ETS.

In a press release on Thursday, the European Parliament said three draft laws in the Fit for 55 package were now “on hold pending political agreement.”

[notsonice + 1,243]

Oil Demand destruction in full gear, Enjoy

News in the US refining business this past week (and July/August is the peak driving months  of the year...not this year)

$5 gas or is it EVs causing the demand destruction????

BOTH

U.S. gasoline stocks (USOILG=ECI) rose by 2.6 million barrels in the week, the EIA said, compared with expectations for a 452,000-barrel drop.

Distillate stockpiles (USOILD=ECI), which include diesel and heating oil, rose by 2.6 million barrels, the EIA data showed.

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by notsonice

[Polyphia + 82]

4 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The court did not declare the clean air act unconstitutional. They declared the execution of it unconstitutional. They enshrined  a vague and  entirely new constitutional legal concept called the major questions doctrine to come to their decision. They had to make up brand new law, never used by the Court before to make their finding. It reeks of judicial activism.

The individual right to privacy was trashed when they overturned Roe v Wade.

 

 

The SCOTUS has agreed to hear a case on election law (North Carolina gerrymandering case) where the conservative justices may invoke the "independent state legislature theory." https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1106866830/supreme-court-to-take-on-controversial-election-law-case

"'Taken to its extreme, the independent state legislature doctrine could be an earthquake in American election law and fundamentally alter the balance of power within states and provide a pathway to subvert election results,' says professor Richard Hasen, an expert on election law from the University of California, Irvine."  

Based on previous cases, many legal experts believe that Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas will invoke this doctrine. That would mean the ruling would likely depend on Coney Barrett's position. If this comes to pass, we should all be very frightened (as if the recent decisions haven't already been frightening enough).

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

12 hours ago, notsonice said:

Babbling again I see, Either you are a 7 year old or you are senile

 

 

 

Pot calling the kettle black........re-read your belittling posts, you're a sad excuse for a person. And 5 dollar a gallon gas for me and 6 dollar a gallon diesel for me gets passed on to customers. I hope you enjoy spending more on goods and services. Basic economics, you sure you made it past 6th grade?

Edited July 2, 2022 by Old-Ruffneck

[notsonice + 1,243]

3 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Pot calling the kettle black........re-read your belittling posts, you're a sad excuse for a person. And 5 dollar a gallon gas for me and 6 dollar a gallon diesel for me gets passed on to customers. I hope you enjoy spending more on goods and services. Basic economics, you sure you made it past 6th grade?

ha ha ha, you are no better than your pal, Lowlifes such as yourself and your pal resort to name calling when you have nothing else. I get it, when you do not have anything else but BS, you attack people. Sad for you.  Paying more for goods because the high price of oil???? Thanks to assholes like Putin and MBS. The inflation is all brought to everyone because of the cost of oil....Thanks to Oil and the assholes that love to put it to everyone. Nothing new. You make a great case for renewables and EVs when you cry about inflation brought to you by $5 gas. Less dependency on oil means less inflation swings and less impacts on the day to day lives for consumers.

Enjoy the downhill road for Oil, same as coal. 

Basic economics, you sure you made it past 6th grade?....yep you sure are making a case with BS  attacks while you provide nothing to back up what you are saying.

I posted a graph showing the demand destruction for gas yet between the both of you,  are unable to  comment on the graph. You have no comments on the graph???? got it,  you do not have the intelligence to figure out what it says. Got it.

 

 

Enjoy as Peak Oil has happened. 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by notsonice

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,552]

15 hours ago, notsonice said:

Jethro,

when you post ........

a intelligence that compliments it

a offshore shrill playing games

a individual right

 

it shows that you did not pass the 6th grade. 

 

If you need, we can start a go fund me page for you so you can enroll back in an elementary school. 

You post like a 7 year old.

PS what do you think of $5 a gallon gas and the demand destruction?????? EV's to the rescue......Enjoy!

 

 

Ya dont say...Bear in mind one must understand the intended target when communicating. By all accounts Bullseye acheived!

[notsonice + 1,243]

 

Big Oil thanks for the upcoming recession....Big oil sure knows how to screw everyone........ Demand destruction is happening fast ...........A switch to renewables and EVs  is the result

 

MSN

🛢Ditch Dangerous Oil Stocks Before the Recession Hits

Luke Lango - Yesterday 12:38 PM

 

 

 

This year has been one to remember for oil stocks. But what goes up must come down. So, if you own red-hot oil stocks, you’ll want to sell them and look elsewhere to thrive during a recession.

Hey, you’ve had a good run with crude. While the first six months of 2022 saw the stock market’s worst run since 1970, oil prices rose about 50%. That’s crude oil’s biggest breakout since the first half of 2008.

But the second half of 2008 was a different story.

A recession hit, and oil prices slumped into their biggest crash in decades. All told, “black gold” lost roughly 80% of its value in six short months.

Now, the data suggests history is about to repeat itself.

© Provided by InvestorPlaceOil barrel and spilled oil in form of United States isolated on white.

A Repeat of 2008

The bear thesis on oil is a simple one. Oil always gets crushed by more than 40% in recessions. And right now, we’re walking hand-in-barrel into a recession. Black gold is trading near all-time highs ahead of demand destruction and massively overstated supply constraints. So, get ready because oil prices could get crushed in a big way.

This is exactly what happened in 2008.

During the first half of the year, oil prices surged. And stocks struggled on worries of supply constraints, underinvestment in refining capacity, and a still-strong demand for oil. Yet, in the back half of the year, a recession hit. And suddenly, demand collapsed, rendering the supply constraints meaningless. Oil prices dropped 80% in six months.

The parallels to 2022 are eerily similar, right down to the price action. Just look at the following chart. The current oil bull market (blue) is trending in step with the 2007-08 bull market (orange).

© Provided by InvestorPlaceis the current oil bull market about to crash

Both soared from $50 per barrel to $100-plus in about 300 days. Both took another 50 to 75 days to climb to $120-plus oil. And both started to show signs of weakness about 375 days in.

As of today, we’re about 390 days past $50 oil in the current cycle. At present, oil prices are 15% off their recent highs. At this point in the 2008 oil bull market, oil prices were about 17% off their recent highs.

The rally. The peak. The decline. They all line up almost perfectly. That means that if the U.S. economy does spiral into a recession in 2022-23, what comes next could be an epic crash in oil prices.

We think that’s exactly what’s going to happen. As a result, the strategy here should be to ditch oil and buy recession-proof stocks.

Edited July 2, 2022 by notsonice

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Tesla is killing off coal and gas plants with its giant battery projects

REUTERS/DAVID GRAY

Tesla’s battery installations are a danger to coal- and gas-fired power plants.

 

Published June 29, 2022

In 2019, Tesla introduced the Megapack, a battery the size of a shipping container designed to kill coal- and gas-fired “peaker” power plants.

Peaker plants sit idle for most of the day, but fire up to provide extra energy whenever demand for electricity spikes and the power grid can’t keep up. Tesla pitched Megapack batteries as a more climate-friendly alternative to peaker plants because they can store renewable energy when electricity demand is low, and then pump power back onto the grid when demand peaks.

Over the past year, Tesla has stepped up the pace of its big battery projects—and the Megapack is starting to live up to its peaker-plant-killing promise.

Tesla built its biggest battery installation ever in April, which will help California power utility Pacific Gas and Electric replace natural gas plants it plans to phase out starting in 2023. Later this year, Tesla will build its second and third biggest-ever battery projects to shut down the last coal plant in Hawaii and help replace one of the most carbon-polluting coal plants in New Mexico.

Tesla is accelerating utility-scale battery construction

Megapacks are utility-scale batteries, meaning a power company can use them as a backup to store electricity for hundreds or thousands of customers. Each Megapack battery can store three megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity, enough to power about 100 US homes for a day. Tesla’s biggest battery installation involves 256 Megapack battery units with a combined storage capacity of 730 MWh, enough to power about 25,000 US homes for a day or nearly 600,000 homes for an hour.

Tesla’s pace of utility-scale battery construction increased nearly 10-fold in 2021, according to the Tesla Megapack Tracker, an independent database run by software engineer Lorenz Gruber, who monitors battery projects with at least five megawatt-hours of storage capacity. If Tesla’s Hawaii and New Mexico battery projects come online later this year as expected, Tesla will break last year’s installation record by at least 50%.

 

 

Tesla isn’t the only company building utility-scale batteries. Rival battery makers including LG and Samsung, along with local power utilities, have built energy storage projects at similar scale. Meanwhile, Chinese firms are ramping up battery construction, and the country’s dominant utility, State Grid, has set aggressive goals to surpass the US in battery storage by 2030.

The race to build big batteries could build fortunes for the companies that come to dominate the industry—and will play a crucial role in weaning the world off of fossil fuels.

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

2 hours ago, notsonice said:

ha ha ha, you are no better than your pal, Lowlifes such as yourself and your pal resort to name calling when you have nothing else. I get it, when you do not have anything else but BS, you attack people. Sad for you. 

Now I will call you a name, "Socialist, Commie-Fag."  Your IEA graph is outdated from 2015 to 2019 and a 4 week rolling average? Yup, just keep posting crap that"s meaningless. 

5 dollar gas hurts mainly the sub-middle class. 

Here is a graph that show more realistic demand. 

Edited July 2, 2022 by Old-Ruffneck
add link

[Polyphia + 82]

16 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Now I will call you a name, "Socialist, Commie-Fag."  Your IEA graph is outdated from 2015 to 2019 and a 4 week rolling average? Yup, just keep posting crap that"s meaningless. 

5 dollar gas hurts mainly the sub-middle class. 

2015 to 2019 is used as a comparison because of the pandemic--this way, you are comparing apples (pre-pandemic data) to apples (post-pandemic data).

What is the problem with a 4-week rolling average? That basically smooths out the variability that occurs when you report individual weeks. If the information were recorded day-by-day or week-by-week and a best fitting curve were fit to the data, you would see the same patterns.

As for your name calling...try to conduct yourself as the adult that (I assume) you are. There has been an uptick in racist and homophobic comments here recently that are beyond inappropriate.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 hour ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Now I will call you a name, "Socialist, Commie-Fag."  Your IEA graph is outdated from 2015 to 2019 and a 4 week rolling average? Yup, just keep posting crap that"s meaningless. 

5 dollar gas hurts mainly the sub-middle class. 

Here is a graph that show more realistic demand. 

What are you talking about? Your chart is the outdated one from Feb 2021, everything after the dashed vertical line is a forecast.  notsonice is posting a chart from a few days ago showing what actually happened in the US. And a four week rolling average is a standard EIA reporting mechanism. You don't understand charts do you?

Edited July 2, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

39 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

What are you talking about? Your chart is the outdated one from Feb 2021, everything after the dashed vertical line is a forecast.  notsonice is posting a chart from a few days ago showing what actually happened in the US. And a four week rolling average is a standard EIA reporting mechanism. You don't understand charts do you?

Snapshot of global oil supply and demand: May 2022

Our dashboard explores key short-term signposts impacting oil demand, supply, and prices.

 

 

By Elif Kutsal

By Dominika Balikova

By Nishant Nair

By Luciano Di Fiori

Advises clients on strategy and M&A issues across North American unconventionals, global upstream, oilfield services, and midstream, in addition to leading Energy Insights in the Americas.

June 22, 2022Oil prices continued to grow in May, reaching $113/bbl and contributing to record-high inflation levels in Europe and the US. Fluctuations in short-term signposts compared to the prior month include:

• Oil prices. The average Brent crude oil spot price grew to $113/bbl in May from $105/bbl in April. Crude oil prices rose further as Shanghai and Beijing began easing COVID-19-related restrictions and the EU announced plans to cut its Russian oil imports by 90% by the end of the year
• Global oil demand. Global iquids demand increased by 0.9 MMb/d m-o-m in May to 98.6 MMb/d. Demand increased across most regions, except for Europe and Japan, which saw a decrease of 0.3 MMb/d each. Europe’s oil demand is now 0.8 MMb/d lower compared to six months earlier
• Commercial inventories. Commercial inventories increased by 56 million barrels in May, to 4.2 billion barrels globally, mostly driven by an increase in non-OECD inventory
• OPEC 10 production (excl. Iran, Venezuela, Libya). OPEC 10 production remained stable at 29.8 MMb/d. The slight production decrease of 0.1 MMb/d in Saudi Arabia was balanced by production increases in Kuwait, UAE, and other OPEC 10 countries. Overall, OPEC 10 output is up by 3.1 MMb/d y-o-y, however, it is still down by 0.4 MMb/d compared to January 2020
• Non-OPEC production (excl. US shale). Non-OPEC production increased by almost 0.7 MMb/d m-o-m in May to 56.8 MMb/d. With this increase, non-OPEC production is up by 0.8 MMb/d y-o-y
• US shale oil production. US shale oil production continued to rise slightly in May, reaching 8.6 MMb/d. Although US shale output is up by 0.6 MMb/d y-o-y, it is still below pre-pandemic levels of 9.0 MMb/d. Saying that, a continued m-o-m increase in the number of actively-drilling onshore rigs indicates an ongoing rise in activity
• Iran, Venezuela, Libya production. Combined, production levels in Iran, Venezuela, and Libya decreased slightly by 0.3 MMb/d m-o-m to 4 MMb/d in May. This was mainly driven by Libya, where production output declined by 0.2 MMb/d m-o-m to 0.7 MMb/d
• Market sentiment. The sustained high crude oil price is having a negative impact on the global economy, with inflation rising to record-high levels in Europe and the US. If high energy prices are sustained for a longer period, it may lead to demand destruction. On the supply side, OPEC+ producers agreed to increase their collective production by 0.65 MMb/d in each of July and August, rather than by 0.4 MMb/d per month to September as per the previous targets

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

17 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Snapshot of global oil supply and demand: May 2022

Our dashboard explores key short-term signposts impacting oil demand, supply, and prices.

 

 

By Elif Kutsal

By Dominika Balikova

By Nishant Nair

By Luciano Di Fiori

Advises clients on strategy and M&A issues across North American unconventionals, global upstream, oilfield services, and midstream, in addition to leading Energy Insights in the Americas.

June 22, 2022Oil prices continued to grow in May, reaching $113/bbl and contributing to record-high inflation levels in Europe and the US. Fluctuations in short-term signposts compared to the prior month include:

• Oil prices. The average Brent crude oil spot price grew to $113/bbl in May from $105/bbl in April. Crude oil prices rose further as Shanghai and Beijing began easing COVID-19-related restrictions and the EU announced plans to cut its Russian oil imports by 90% by the end of the year
• Global oil demand. Global iquids demand increased by 0.9 MMb/d m-o-m in May to 98.6 MMb/d. Demand increased across most regions, except for Europe and Japan, which saw a decrease of 0.3 MMb/d each. Europe’s oil demand is now 0.8 MMb/d lower compared to six months earlier
• Commercial inventories. Commercial inventories increased by 56 million barrels in May, to 4.2 billion barrels globally, mostly driven by an increase in non-OECD inventory
• OPEC 10 production (excl. Iran, Venezuela, Libya). OPEC 10 production remained stable at 29.8 MMb/d. The slight production decrease of 0.1 MMb/d in Saudi Arabia was balanced by production increases in Kuwait, UAE, and other OPEC 10 countries. Overall, OPEC 10 output is up by 3.1 MMb/d y-o-y, however, it is still down by 0.4 MMb/d compared to January 2020
• Non-OPEC production (excl. US shale). Non-OPEC production increased by almost 0.7 MMb/d m-o-m in May to 56.8 MMb/d. With this increase, non-OPEC production is up by 0.8 MMb/d y-o-y
• US shale oil production. US shale oil production continued to rise slightly in May, reaching 8.6 MMb/d. Although US shale output is up by 0.6 MMb/d y-o-y, it is still below pre-pandemic levels of 9.0 MMb/d. Saying that, a continued m-o-m increase in the number of actively-drilling onshore rigs indicates an ongoing rise in activity
• Iran, Venezuela, Libya production. Combined, production levels in Iran, Venezuela, and Libya decreased slightly by 0.3 MMb/d m-o-m to 4 MMb/d in May. This was mainly driven by Libya, where production output declined by 0.2 MMb/d m-o-m to 0.7 MMb/d
• Market sentiment. The sustained high crude oil price is having a negative impact on the global economy, with inflation rising to record-high levels in Europe and the US. If high energy prices are sustained for a longer period, it may lead to demand destruction. On the supply side, OPEC+ producers agreed to increase their collective production by 0.65 MMb/d in each of July and August, rather than by 0.4 MMb/d per month to September as per the previous targets

Your post says global oil demand for May was at 98.6mbd but your chart that you posted previously clearly shows that in 2018 and 2019 May demand was over 100mbd.  And we are well below what your chart forecast for now. You really don't understand any of this do you?

Edited July 2, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Your post says global oil demand for May was at 98.6mbd but your chart that you posted previously clearly shows that in 2018 and 2019 May demand was over 100mbd.  You really don't understand any of this do you?

Post pandemic we are back to slow rise worldwide crude demand. By 2025 (short 2.5 years) oil consumption will be around 110mmbd.  Massive amounts of plastics go into making EV's. Oil may not come outta the tailpipe but crude is far from Peak, I'd say 2030 level out 120mmbd and slowly start dropping. Liquid fuels will rise too once price drops, which will happen. We are old enough here I think that remembers Carter thru Reagan years of inflation on fuel. It came back down to affordable levels. I was personally on drilling rigs during that time and fuels in West Texas were on average 20c more than in Odessa-Midland. All fuels are trucked into 79735. No close refineries.  As it goes up, it will come back down, just like in the early 80's.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 hour ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Post pandemic we are back to slow rise worldwide crude demand. By 2025 (short 2.5 years) oil consumption will be around 110mmbd.  Massive amounts of plastics go into making EV's. Oil may not come outta the tailpipe but crude is far from Peak, I'd say 2030 level out 120mmbd and slowly start dropping. Liquid fuels will rise too once price drops, which will happen. We are old enough here I think that remembers Carter thru Reagan years of inflation on fuel. It came back down to affordable levels. I was personally on drilling rigs during that time and fuels in West Texas were on average 20c more than in Odessa-Midland. All fuels are trucked into 79735. No close refineries.  As it goes up, it will come back down, just like in the early 80's.

You say we are back to a slow rise in demand and then predict that over the next 2.5 years we will see the fastest demand jump in the last 70 years. The last 11% increase took 8 years.

So the price of oil is going to go down with demand increasing by 11% over the next 2.5 years while supply increases by maybe 3%?

By 2025 China will be at 50% BEV new car sales, that is going to put a real damper on their oil demand growth and EVs don't use any more plastic than an ICE car.

Oh and get ready for the great war on plastic:

California sets the nation's toughest rules for the reduction of plastics

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/01/1109289220/california-rules-reduction-plastics

Edited July 3, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Blackbag99 + 20]

On 4/23/2021 at 7:24 AM, JoMack said:

As Biden, the President of Climate Change, and Kerry, our fabulous Climate Czar, who just gave Japan the thumbs up to dump millions of tons of waste water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean, who then flies off in his private jet to Martha's Vineyard, decide to create a massive legislative boondoggle called the Green New Deal.  Now, they are not alone, they have the full throated backing from a bartender from Westchester NY, a socialist from Vermont, and other liberal climatoligists who get on twitter and tell us definitely that we're all going to all die in 10 years if we don't comply.  So, all of the climate crew are preparing to bring America into the dark ages. We have the new DOE Grishom, ex-Michigan Gov. who didn't meet a pipeline she didn't want to expunge (and Whitmer has now taken up the mantel on Line 5), and then we have Haaland, head of DOI, who didn't meet a drilling rig she didn't want to burn to the ground.  So, we have a group of thugs, pushing their agenda, and with no solutions, objectives,  science, economics, or the actual future of the U.S. in mind, so they press ahead with a monumental agenda where no one wins, expect them.

In 4 months, the U.S. production has dropped over 2 million barrels and the climate wizards are demanding that the U.S. drop its emissions by 50% by 2030.  WHOA!  How is that going to work?  Doesn't matter, just gut up and do it.  Overhauling the electric grid?  1/2 million charging stations?  refitting millions of buildings, transitioning all federal vehicles to EVs, etc.  It's such a lofty goal, but while being in Texas in February, I know for certain, that even 4 days without power, heat, communication and black ice, car dead, it's a pretty scary ordeal, and that's just 4 days.  So, just wondering just a bit about solar and wind, no one seems to be considering the problem of the massive renewable capacity that will be required to supply energy to the nation.  Not only the grid, but the vast swaths of land with new infrastructure at the same time that politicians and landowners from California to Vermont are fighting against the encroachment of large-scale renewable energy projects.

New York is shutting down its last nuclear plant at Indian Point and Gov. (in big trouble) Cuomo won't allow drilling or pipelines, so this should be pretty interesting to watch next winter, L.A. County banned large wind turbines and San Bernardino Co, Humboldt County, and Santa Barbara County rejected new wind turbines in their communities.  So as California, the big kahuna of renewable energy, between 2013 and 2019 California added less than 200MW of new wind energy capacity.  California as we know, will do anything to get to their goal of 30% lower emissions this year, so it's not much of a challenge to find some of the projects they have promoted in order to reach that standard.  Below is Ivanpah, with 350,000 garage size heliostats (mirrors) with 3 459' boiling towers costing $2.2B, backed by the U.S. taxpayers.  The facility has had more problems than Biden's thought process and the beams from the sun blind pilots going into LAX, scorch birds out of the sky (called streamers) - not sparrows by the way, covers 4000 feet of land in the Mojave Desert which "was" protected for wind burrow and the desert tortoise (but, it's for the good of the environment you idiots), and its capacity for all its cost and environmental issues it generates 342MW of power.  That would be 140,000 homes.  Yup, what a great project, and let's mot forget Crescent Dunes, another solar project that went bankrupt last year.  

 

So, we are going into a big giant mass of insanity with the Biden Administration going back into the Iran Nuclear Deal and handing them bucks and China is paying Iran with their cryptocurrency to a million+ bbls of oil.  So, the energy sector along with the country is in big trouble, and it's been 4 months.  We see the oil price moving about $5 bucks up and down every couple of weeks, and it's unsettling with banks lending on environmental risk and social justice risk.  Before the "Woke" came into play between energy and the lenders, risk was based on the proven reserves, developed and undeveloped, and now, how the hell do you calculate social justice risk?  But, wait, Exxon, BP, Shell, Conoco has been fighting failing states like NY, MA, CT, DE (Biden's home town BTW) CA, etc. (blue=disaster), for climate change disinformation.  As Biden says "Wreaked Havoc on Our Climate"! So, the Majors are now folding to the woke crowd, climate change will be the breakthrough for huge legal class actions, and the big question after all is said and done, will America survive?

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry once again I disagree.

I would be a coal buyer all day long, not because I think it has a future, but because it has none.

And when you get to solar, Perovskite crystals means 70% more output for 30% less money. The reality is that fossil fuels have no future. Not that there isn't a ship ton to made before that happens. It will fund my retirement until I die.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

India bans single-use plastic to combat pollution

India on Friday imposed a ban on single-use plastics on items ranging from straws to cigarette packets to combat worsening pollution in a country whose streets are strewn with waste.

Announcing the ban, the government dismissed the demands of food, beverage and consumer goods companies to hold off the restriction to avoid disruptions.

Plastic waste has become a significant source of pollution in India, the world’s second most populous country.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/india/india-bans-single-use-plastic-intl-hnk/index.html