Manwhile, the EU Commission put out a suicide note by announcing a ban on Russian hydrocarbon energy: it's sheer stupidity, which will cause major disruptions in the weeks and months ahead
The crisis that is totally engineered and had no reason to happen. But Uncle Sam just could not let Nord Stream to happen and Europe feel good and happy. It's business is spreading misery around the globe
I think so, too, and this is the next stage in the US-led war to keep 'Europe' in its fold, for without it, the US would be reducd to a local/regional power in the western hemisphere.
As a corollary, if 'Europe' would leave the US, so would East Asia.
That is so true, sadly, but then again, this time, I suppose, the 1989 Revolutions across Eastern Europe will be the role model (once--if--'westerners' ever find out).
They also lack a spin and responsibility to the people and posterity.
When the history of this period will be written, perhaps 200 years from now by a Chinese historian, the judgements of the people 'in charge' will be quite harsh.
There's been quite the lucrative border trade for us swedes a year now, selling candy anc soda and knick-knacks to norwegians eager to spend petro-dollars and rubbing big brother Sweden's face in it. I know for a fact one such shop (think supermarket sized almost) which at least used to have a sign at the till saying "Exchange course is 1:1" which the norwegian cusotmers happily paid. 10:- swedish for a can of Coke which could cost 30:- norwegian (?) is still a good deal if you pay 10:- norwegian for it. A lot of 65+ norweigans really like to go touring in their mobile homes too, and do they spend!
I've personally seen the staff at Systembolaget (monopoly alcohol store managed by the state since drinking is bad for you...) have to limit sales because some Ole-Conny wants to spend 50 000:- on crates of whicky in a smaller store. Swedish governement says "thankee kindly" for the taxes paid.
There's also a very profitable smuggling business going on. Stuff that's ridiculously expensive in Norway is smuggled all the way from Romania via Sweden. What you get for 1/10 of a crown down there you can then re-sale for 10:- here or 20:- in Norway, and still undercut the taxed goods. In Malmö, taxed cigarettes costs some 55:-/pack of 20. Untaxed cost about 20:- or less, depending on your dealer and your relationship with him; swedes pay more, migrants pay less and those of the same culture pays less still.
It's no wonder neo-liberal economists doesn't want to study these things in real life.
To add to your musings: the traficking issue is one of the more curious issues I've encountered here. Instead of demanding, say, lower taxes on such products, Norwegians spend countless hours (to say nothing of the energy involved) on venturing to Sweden. It's insane.
It's also a behaviour that strikes me as 'nouveaux riches' style, for where would Norway be--on any number of indicators you care to choose from--without the hydrocarbon bonanza known as North Sea oil and gas?
To bad that no-one really knows or cares about this here, hence when reality bites, it will come as a lightning strike out of a blue sky.
New rich is precisely right. I think it is easier for me as a swede to see it, since our modern wealth - the boom during the fifties and sixties - was largely due to factors beyond any actual swedish policy or politics:
Not having had the infrastructure bombed during the war. A one-time situation that virtually everyone failed (and still fails!) to understand for what it was.
Instead, it is interpreted as being due to socialist democratic policy and swedish industry simply being that good.
The danes are as always a bit smarter: they learned well during the Kartoffel-kur years.
Yep, Norwegians strike me as such, and I'm quite glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
As to the Swedish experiences of post-WW2 'socialism', a lot of what you say is true, but I think the 'long march' before 1939 should be mentioned, too: much, if not most, of the structural changes to domestic policies occurred in the aftermath of WW1, which is to say quite some time before the Socialists came to power and claimed victory.
In 2006 I was lucky to watch a clip of Congressman Roscoe Bartlett talking about energy on one of those hour long talks in front of night time US Congress, where he laid out this scenario. I read a few books on the subject (of fossil fuel energy focusing on EROEI). Some off the reservation writers like Kunstler, Greer, Heinberg. I am now reading Hienberg's new book Power. Awesome!
Then it was permaculture to my rescue!
So I've been working on it. And I have also done quite a bit to promoting these ideas over that time until I burned out from all the negativity (I had become a doomer in most people's minds).
So now I am going to sit back and watch the show. I'll shake my head and say (to myself) what a bunch of dumbasses.
And beans will make you sick from the protein lectin.
I've been encountering the 'peak oil' community (sic) about 20 years ago, and I'm still a big fan of Kunstler's musings.
Forgive me for stating--watching the show might make sense, as long as your (hungry and cold) neighbours don't know you're warm and have a full larder.
Btw, the beans part above is to help anyone tide over the first weeks. The world produces a lot of food, but it's ill-used/allocated and quite disparately consumed. That said, any gov't would use, say, a (food) crisis to institute tighter command and control before 'allowing' for 'relaxed' rules. In other words: let the people go hungry for a few days before permitting thm food stamps (or whatever digital equivalent you'd like to name).
Your right, beans are better than nothing. I have food all over my place so its not my first choice. Lacto ferment the beans for three days it'll lesson the lectin by 95%.
Oh yeah, when I have a serious enlightening conversation almost always I get to read the " as long as your (hungry and cold) neighbours don't know you're warm and have a full larder" argument for why I shouldn't do anything. But your statement is no doubt the best I've read, normally its grunting something about coming to take my food when they get hungry.
Ok, so lets go with this idea of yours. I will defend my holdings, and in the event I am killed, I will have died with a healthy body and full stomach. The killers, on the other hand, once the food is used up will go back to being hungry and desperate.
The statement is not meant to scare me I know, it is meant for you to excuse yourself from this task.
Look, I don't mean no disrespect or the like, it's just that I've had many of these conversations, they played a considerable role of my wife's and my decision to move to the countryside (with fewer neighbours), and the like. We're currently building our first greenhouse, with the planting of more crops to take place next weekend (we already grow them inside, but next weekend we'll properly plant them).
As to the defence issue, well, I meant it like this: you and I have our lines in the sand, and I'm convinced that 95% (or more) of people will back off, if they see that you're willing to die for these stances. Most people are quick to claim 'undying' allegiance to 'the next thing', but in my experience, if push comes to shove, since virtually all of this is but propaganda-derived, they don't have anything 'to die for'.
I have my convictions, lines in the sand, and the like, my friend. What's perhaps even more important, I also know who and what I'd die for--most people don't, which is your and my advantage.
Very good. I had a feeling you can work this out mindfully.
I suggest doing the greenhouse last. Its a time consumer, time better spent getting a decent main frame design in place and then start working on enhancing soil life. Don't bring in animals until the land can feed them. Count your steps, the tasks that require the most visits are closest to the house.
The first thing is learn to make aerobic compost, find a horse owner nearby, horse manure is easiest to work making this special product.
I won't do more other than finishing the frame, no outdoor planting this week.
As to the soil life, I have a lot of seasoned horse and sheep manure in store, which will tide us over until the compost heaps are progressed far enough (i.e., for next year).
Thanks for bringing my attention to Peter's stack.
As to the matter at hand, well, I doubt most people will put these things together: after all, complacancy and insouciance reign supreme, and Mr. Birol's been on the record (as Rick Larson also said) about this for 2+ decades, as far as I'm aware of it.
Do read the NRK piece carefully: Norway has 2 refinieries that are capable of refining crude oil; now, if you venture over to SBB (State Statistics Bureau), you can see that importation of petroleum fuels is needed:
Gasoline and road diesel (excl. bio.), all in ktonn (source in Table 3)
Production: 6,343 vs. imports: 1,608 vs. exports: 4,475
You know, I think Norway is a good 'survival candidate' with even the slightest, tiniest bit of forethought, thrift, and self-control. Unfortunately, like elsewhere in the spoiled 'West', these qualities are in very short supply.
I recall you mentioned Chris Martenson's notion of 'the remnant' a few weeks ago in one of your comments. I do think it's a valid hypothesis, and if Mr. Birol is correct, we'll soon find out anyways, won't we?
That latter aspect is one that worries me most: it's not even the piss-poor quality of politicians and media people--it's as if they've all resigned themselves to this seemingly unavoidable 'fate'.
Makes me wonder what happened to notions, such as 'a better future' or the like. Or if these people are either misanthropes and/or clinically depressed, even though, thanks to whatever shit they ingest to get them going each day, they just lurch from day to day.
The crisis that is totally engineered and had no reason to happen. But Uncle Sam just could not let Nord Stream to happen and Europe feel good and happy. It's business is spreading misery around the globe
I think so, too, and this is the next stage in the US-led war to keep 'Europe' in its fold, for without it, the US would be reducd to a local/regional power in the western hemisphere.
As a corollary, if 'Europe' would leave the US, so would East Asia.
To be fair, it was with the EU's (suicidal) consent.
That is so true, sadly, but then again, this time, I suppose, the 1989 Revolutions across Eastern Europe will be the role model (once--if--'westerners' ever find out).
Rationing-of-everything is how I grew up. It sucked. Too bad the Eurocrats lack a brain.
They also lack a spin and responsibility to the people and posterity.
When the history of this period will be written, perhaps 200 years from now by a Chinese historian, the judgements of the people 'in charge' will be quite harsh.
There's been quite the lucrative border trade for us swedes a year now, selling candy anc soda and knick-knacks to norwegians eager to spend petro-dollars and rubbing big brother Sweden's face in it. I know for a fact one such shop (think supermarket sized almost) which at least used to have a sign at the till saying "Exchange course is 1:1" which the norwegian cusotmers happily paid. 10:- swedish for a can of Coke which could cost 30:- norwegian (?) is still a good deal if you pay 10:- norwegian for it. A lot of 65+ norweigans really like to go touring in their mobile homes too, and do they spend!
I've personally seen the staff at Systembolaget (monopoly alcohol store managed by the state since drinking is bad for you...) have to limit sales because some Ole-Conny wants to spend 50 000:- on crates of whicky in a smaller store. Swedish governement says "thankee kindly" for the taxes paid.
There's also a very profitable smuggling business going on. Stuff that's ridiculously expensive in Norway is smuggled all the way from Romania via Sweden. What you get for 1/10 of a crown down there you can then re-sale for 10:- here or 20:- in Norway, and still undercut the taxed goods. In Malmö, taxed cigarettes costs some 55:-/pack of 20. Untaxed cost about 20:- or less, depending on your dealer and your relationship with him; swedes pay more, migrants pay less and those of the same culture pays less still.
It's no wonder neo-liberal economists doesn't want to study these things in real life.
To add to your musings: the traficking issue is one of the more curious issues I've encountered here. Instead of demanding, say, lower taxes on such products, Norwegians spend countless hours (to say nothing of the energy involved) on venturing to Sweden. It's insane.
It's also a behaviour that strikes me as 'nouveaux riches' style, for where would Norway be--on any number of indicators you care to choose from--without the hydrocarbon bonanza known as North Sea oil and gas?
To bad that no-one really knows or cares about this here, hence when reality bites, it will come as a lightning strike out of a blue sky.
New rich is precisely right. I think it is easier for me as a swede to see it, since our modern wealth - the boom during the fifties and sixties - was largely due to factors beyond any actual swedish policy or politics:
Not having had the infrastructure bombed during the war. A one-time situation that virtually everyone failed (and still fails!) to understand for what it was.
Instead, it is interpreted as being due to socialist democratic policy and swedish industry simply being that good.
The danes are as always a bit smarter: they learned well during the Kartoffel-kur years.
Yep, Norwegians strike me as such, and I'm quite glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
As to the Swedish experiences of post-WW2 'socialism', a lot of what you say is true, but I think the 'long march' before 1939 should be mentioned, too: much, if not most, of the structural changes to domestic policies occurred in the aftermath of WW1, which is to say quite some time before the Socialists came to power and claimed victory.
You are late to the game!
In 2006 I was lucky to watch a clip of Congressman Roscoe Bartlett talking about energy on one of those hour long talks in front of night time US Congress, where he laid out this scenario. I read a few books on the subject (of fossil fuel energy focusing on EROEI). Some off the reservation writers like Kunstler, Greer, Heinberg. I am now reading Hienberg's new book Power. Awesome!
Then it was permaculture to my rescue!
So I've been working on it. And I have also done quite a bit to promoting these ideas over that time until I burned out from all the negativity (I had become a doomer in most people's minds).
So now I am going to sit back and watch the show. I'll shake my head and say (to myself) what a bunch of dumbasses.
And beans will make you sick from the protein lectin.
Ah, yes, Mr. Bartlett, I remember him.
I've been encountering the 'peak oil' community (sic) about 20 years ago, and I'm still a big fan of Kunstler's musings.
Forgive me for stating--watching the show might make sense, as long as your (hungry and cold) neighbours don't know you're warm and have a full larder.
Btw, the beans part above is to help anyone tide over the first weeks. The world produces a lot of food, but it's ill-used/allocated and quite disparately consumed. That said, any gov't would use, say, a (food) crisis to institute tighter command and control before 'allowing' for 'relaxed' rules. In other words: let the people go hungry for a few days before permitting thm food stamps (or whatever digital equivalent you'd like to name).
Your right, beans are better than nothing. I have food all over my place so its not my first choice. Lacto ferment the beans for three days it'll lesson the lectin by 95%.
And the beans will sprout and grow a crop of green beans which is some of the best eating!
Oh yeah, when I have a serious enlightening conversation almost always I get to read the " as long as your (hungry and cold) neighbours don't know you're warm and have a full larder" argument for why I shouldn't do anything. But your statement is no doubt the best I've read, normally its grunting something about coming to take my food when they get hungry.
Ok, so lets go with this idea of yours. I will defend my holdings, and in the event I am killed, I will have died with a healthy body and full stomach. The killers, on the other hand, once the food is used up will go back to being hungry and desperate.
The statement is not meant to scare me I know, it is meant for you to excuse yourself from this task.
Look, I don't mean no disrespect or the like, it's just that I've had many of these conversations, they played a considerable role of my wife's and my decision to move to the countryside (with fewer neighbours), and the like. We're currently building our first greenhouse, with the planting of more crops to take place next weekend (we already grow them inside, but next weekend we'll properly plant them).
As to the defence issue, well, I meant it like this: you and I have our lines in the sand, and I'm convinced that 95% (or more) of people will back off, if they see that you're willing to die for these stances. Most people are quick to claim 'undying' allegiance to 'the next thing', but in my experience, if push comes to shove, since virtually all of this is but propaganda-derived, they don't have anything 'to die for'.
I have my convictions, lines in the sand, and the like, my friend. What's perhaps even more important, I also know who and what I'd die for--most people don't, which is your and my advantage.
Very good. I had a feeling you can work this out mindfully.
I suggest doing the greenhouse last. Its a time consumer, time better spent getting a decent main frame design in place and then start working on enhancing soil life. Don't bring in animals until the land can feed them. Count your steps, the tasks that require the most visits are closest to the house.
The first thing is learn to make aerobic compost, find a horse owner nearby, horse manure is easiest to work making this special product.
I won't do more other than finishing the frame, no outdoor planting this week.
As to the soil life, I have a lot of seasoned horse and sheep manure in store, which will tide us over until the compost heaps are progressed far enough (i.e., for next year).
Aerobic compost is much different and exceedingly better. But ok, do it the "normal" way for "normal" results.
Thanks for bringing my attention to Peter's stack.
As to the matter at hand, well, I doubt most people will put these things together: after all, complacancy and insouciance reign supreme, and Mr. Birol's been on the record (as Rick Larson also said) about this for 2+ decades, as far as I'm aware of it.
Do read the NRK piece carefully: Norway has 2 refinieries that are capable of refining crude oil; now, if you venture over to SBB (State Statistics Bureau), you can see that importation of petroleum fuels is needed:
Gasoline and road diesel (excl. bio.), all in ktonn (source in Table 3)
Production: 6,343 vs. imports: 1,608 vs. exports: 4,475
https://www.ssb.no/en/energi-og-industri/energi/statistikk/produksjon-og-forbruk-av-energi-energibalanse-og-energiregnskap
Yes, biofuels could make up for the difference, but where does the 'biofuel' come from? What's the EROI?
Basically, I do suspect that Norway would be quite well-positioned, generally speaking, but I fear that the powers-that-be won't allow for it.
You know, I think Norway is a good 'survival candidate' with even the slightest, tiniest bit of forethought, thrift, and self-control. Unfortunately, like elsewhere in the spoiled 'West', these qualities are in very short supply.
I recall you mentioned Chris Martenson's notion of 'the remnant' a few weeks ago in one of your comments. I do think it's a valid hypothesis, and if Mr. Birol is correct, we'll soon find out anyways, won't we?
That latter aspect is one that worries me most: it's not even the piss-poor quality of politicians and media people--it's as if they've all resigned themselves to this seemingly unavoidable 'fate'.
Makes me wonder what happened to notions, such as 'a better future' or the like. Or if these people are either misanthropes and/or clinically depressed, even though, thanks to whatever shit they ingest to get them going each day, they just lurch from day to day.