Don’t tell Greta, but the hits keep coming for wind projects…
For perspective, $4 billion equals about 28 billion DKK. Orsted’s equity is 76 billion DKK, so that $4 billion hit is equivalent to some 37% of its market cap. How the hell did they get it that wrong? Perhaps we can just put it down to delusional expectations that pervaded in the wind industry and still pervade today.
Remember: your energy bills have skyrocketed in order to subsidise bird-killing wind turbines that don’t work. You may think it’s just silly and those pushing this agenda are simply delusional, but this is actually part of the Net Zero agenda to deliberately deindustrialise (and thereby impoverish) the West, while China and other countries unashamedly continue to capitalise on the huge economic prosperity afforded by the use of fossil fuels.
None of this has anything to do with saving the planet, and everything to do with demolishing our standard of living, demolishing our economic prosperity and transforming the former middle class into a neo-feudal peasant class.
- From Wall Street Silver: “Net Zero was never viable. It is impossible to completely remove CO2 from our energy needs and overall economy. Politicians are just now beginning to realize that. Just about every modern technology requires oil, natural gas and/or coal in order to function. Many of the metals required need to be mined and new deposits are often remote with no access to the electric grid.”
- Then there’s this from The Travelling Scientist: “The Paris accord interestingly promotes “non-fossil biocarbon-based” CO2 sources as being okay and counts towards net zero… so cutting trees and burning wood is no problem to the regulators, and becoming ever more popular to meet regulations companies are even patting themselves on their backs in their quarterly reports for doing so.”
- And this from James Melville: “The unethical truth of net zero. Around 40,000 child slaves in Congo work in hazardous conditions in cobalt mines, with inadequate safety equipment and for very little money. The cobalt is used in many products – including electric car batteries.”
A Thought Experiment
Here’s something that I’d not thought about before, but hear me out on this because with the neocons puffing up their chests and threatening armageddon, it may be worth considering the “how.”
US refineries (total) only store about 40 million gallons of military-grade jet fuel (not commercial grade) at any given time, or about 36,400 flight hours for an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet launched from an aircraft carrier. For 40 x -18s per carrier, this is about 910 flight hours. A carrier holds roughly 3 million gallons of fuel for its wing, about 68 flight hours per bird. Now, consider that a notional mixed complement of 20 x F-35s and 20 X F-15EXs operating out of Kadena AFB would consume about 62,400 gallons per hour combined.
Thus, just a single carrier wing and a single AFB wing’s complement of fighters (80 combined) theoretically all operating at once would drink 106,400 gallons per hour. So, the net stores of military jet fuel immediately available from US refiners above the global contingency supplies managed by the Defense Logistics Agency at any time represents about 375 net flight hours for one carrier and one air wing.
Put another way, this is less than 16 days of high intensity air operations by far fewer assets than the US would throw into an all-out theatre conflict in the Pacific Rim. DLA Energy ended FY2022 with 1.68 billion gallons of on hand inventory of jet fuel to serve the entire DOD combined inventory of 14,000+ aviation assets (cargo, fighter, rotary wing, bombers, drones, tankers, and recon). This begs the question: how fast would two theatres of conflict burn through all contingency supplies of fuel? And what does DOD do when the well runs dry?
The jets in question will run on anything this side of cooking oil. The question is, how will DLA be able to move product from points of production to the point of use?
How about refuelling?
What happens when Turkiye and Saudi Arabia shut down Western abilities to use their military bases in the region? Or even if they simply hinder the actual supply of fuel to these bases?
Once again, there is no political security without energy security. We may be about to find out exactly how important that actually is.
Look for the Big Daddy not the Narrative
Multiple narratives are being used (as shown in the comic above), but they missed out the big daddy in the graphic. Climate change. We know full well (because serious looking men on the telly tell us) that climate change is the biggest threat to mankind and that by not showering and eating bugs you can save the planet.
It escapes most people that while this is being suggested billions of dollars are being spent bombing the isht out of Ukraine and now Gaza, emitting more CO2 than entire countries emit in decades. Aside from the mandatory bug-eating, we’re told that something else is the saviour.
Renewables. The touted saviour. The proverbial man on a white horse. Except, the man has already fallen off the horse and on closer inspection the horse looks like this…
Editor’s Note: The Western system is undergoing substantial changes, and the signs of moral decay, corruption, and increasing debt are impossible to ignore. With the Great Reset in motion, the United Nations, World Economic Forum, IMF, WHO, World Bank, and Davos man are all promoting a unified agenda that will affect us all.
To get ahead of the chaos, download our free PDF report “Clash of the Systems: Thoughts on Investing at a Unique Point in Time” by clicking here.
The post It’s not About Saving the Planet, It’s the Big Daddy We Need to Look For appeared first on Doug Casey's International Man.