On Sun, 12 Jun 2022 19:51:19 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> On 06/12/2022 12:38 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2022 05:24:39 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/11/2022 05:40 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2022 07:08:59 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 06/10/2022 09:42 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2022 04:09:04 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 06/10/2022 06:21 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 23:48:25 +0100, "Commander Kinsey"
>>>>>>>> <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 03:51:56 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/09/2022 11:06 AM, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 22:16:57 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/08/2022 01:49 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Jun 2022 06:27:09 +0100, rbowman
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bowman@montana.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/06/2022 11:07 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 11:09:47 PM UTC-7,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bill....@ieee.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 7:39:50 AM UTC+2, Ricky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:26:08 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gas price was still cheap in 2019, around $3. It's $8
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unlikely to fall back again. So, less of the stuff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> burning up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course the price of gas won't stay at $8 a gallon. If
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> else, over the next few years, the amount consumed will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drop
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of BEVs and that will continue to make permanent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decreases
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the price of oil and gasoline.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is an enviromental argument for taxing it more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heavily, so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less of it gets burnt. As more renewable energy becomes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> availalble,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taxing fossil carbon will put less of crimp on the economy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole, so it probably will happen, but the fossil carbon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extraction
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> industry won't like it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure if it really make sense to ship LNG to Europe. We
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (US) got
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than enough and Europe need more of it. For $8 NG, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> costs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around $3 to liquidify, $6 to ship and $2 to gasify. It makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zero
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economical sense, but only political sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not an overnight solution either. The last I knew Germany
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was light
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on LNG terminals that could easily be wired into the existing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipelines
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for distribution. I see it as the US trying to sweet talk them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that really isn't to their advantage. The Ukraine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fiasco is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good excuse for dropping the pipeline that would be the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obvious
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fuck the Ukrainians, buy cheap Russian gas!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That seems to be slowly occurring to the Europeans.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> India is amping up coal production and imports to generate
>>>>>>>>>>> power, and
>>>>>>>>>>> buying Russian oil to refine and export to countries that won't
>>>>>>>>>>> drill
>>>>>>>>>>> or refine themselves.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The market works.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/exclusive-india-seen-facing-wider-coal-shortages-worsening-power-outage-risks-0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The market or desperation?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They need to stop reproducing so fast.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.news18.com/news/india/indias-birth-and-fertility-rates-have-fallen-more-than-chinas-data-shows-3967391.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The whole world is trending towards negative population growth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2 billion would be a good number.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 10 million in the US would be good... Even the 160 million of 1950
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> be better than 330 million and growing. Double the population ain't
>>>>>>> double the fun.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now compare your density to the UK. I meant how many people not how
>>>>>> stupid you are :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> 68 million in 93 thousand square miles. You must be falling over each
>>>>> other. This state is 147 thousand square miles with slightly over 1
>>>>> million. You could drop the entire UK into the eastern part of the
>>>>> state
>>>>> where there's not much besides prairie dogs and antelope.
>>>>>
>>>>> At 700 people per square mile there are few American states thatcome
>>>>> close.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/183588/population-density-in-the-federal-states-of-the-us/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yip, the UK is so overloaded it will soon sink. It's not global
>>>> warming, it's weight!
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hank-johnson-worries-guam-could-capsize-after-marine-buildup/
>>>
>>>
>>> He said he was joking but given the quality of our politicians you never
>>> can tell. At least you didn't make Boris walk the gangplank to lighten
>>> the load. I do like the idea of sending excess baggage to Rwanda though.
>>> Where, exactly, is Rwanda again?
>>
>> I hope you're joking. Most yanks don't know where their own country is.
>> https://youtu.be/kRh1zXFKC_o
>
> I'll admit on being hazy on Africa. First, most of the countries there
> have changed since my school days. Second, who really gives a damn?

Agreed, although the guy who thought South Africa was in the West....

And really, name ANY country, and they don't think of er.... America?