Today’s Energy Crisis Is Very Different from the Energy Crisis of 2005

Back in 2005, the world economy was “humming along.” World growth in energy consumption per capita was rising at 2.3% per year in the 2001 to 2005 period. China had been added to the World Trade Organization in December 2001, ramping up its demand for all kinds of fossil fuels. There was also a bubble in the US housing market, brought on by low interest rates and loose underwriting standards.

Figure 1. World primary energy consumption per capita based on BP’s 2022 Statistical Review of World Energy.

The problem in 2005, as now, was inflation in energy costs that was feeding through to inflation in general. Inflation in food prices was especially a problem. The Federal Reserve chose to fix the problem by raising the Federal Funds interest rate from 1.00% to 5.25% between June 30, 2004 and June 30, 2006.

Now, the world is facing a very different problem. High energy prices are again feeding over to food prices and to inflation in general. But the underlying trend in energy consumption is very different. The growth rate in world energy consumption per capita was 2.3% per year in the 2001 to 2005 period, but energy consumption per capita for the period 2017 to 2021 seems to be slightly shrinking at minus 0.4% per year. The world seems to already be on the edge of recession.

The Federal Reserve seems to be using a similar interest rate approach now, in very different circumstances. In this post, I will try to explain why I don’t think that this approach will produce the desired outcome.

[1] The 2004 to 2006 interest rate hikes didn’t lead to lower oil prices until after July 2008.

It is easiest to see the impact (or lack thereof) of rising interest rates by looking at average monthly world oil prices.

Figure 2. Average monthly Brent spot oil prices based on data of the US Energy Information Administration. Latest month shown is July 2022.

The US Federal Reserve began raising target interest rates in June 2004 when the average Brent oil price was only $38.22 per barrel. These interest rates stopped rising at the end of June 2006, when oil prices averaged $68.56 per barrel. Oil prices on this basis eventually reached $132.72 per barrel in July 2008. (All of these amounts are in dollars of the day, rather than being adjusted for inflation.) Thus, the highest price was over three times the price in June 2004, when the US Federal Reserve made the decision to start raising target interest rates.

Based on Figure 2 (including my notes regarding the timing of the interest rate rise), I would conclude that raising interest rates didn’t work very well at bringing down the price of oil when it was tried in the 2004 to 2006 period. Of course, the economy was growing rapidly, then. The rapid growth of the economy likely led to the very high oil price shown in mid-2008.

I expect that the result of the US Federal Reserve raising interest rates now, in a low-growth world economy, might be quite different. The world’s debt bubble might pop, leading to a worse situation than the financial crisis of 2008. Indirectly, both asset prices and commodity prices, including oil prices, would tend to fall very low.

Analysts looking at the situation from strictly an energy perspective tend to miss the interconnected nature of the economy. Factors which energy analysts overlook (particularly debt becoming impossible to repay, as interest rates rise) may lead to an outcome that is pretty much the opposite result of the standard belief. The typical belief of energy analysts is that low oil supply will lead to very high prices and more oil production. In the current situation, I expect that the result might be closer to the opposite: Oil prices will fall because of financial problems brought on by the higher interest rates, and these lower oil prices will lead to even lower oil production.

[2] The purpose of the US Federal reserve raising target interest rates was to flatten the growth rate of the world economy. Looking back at Figure 1, the growth in energy consumption per capita was much lower after the Great Recession. I doubt that now in 2022, we want even lower growth (really, more shrinkage) in energy consumption per capita for future years.*

Looking at Figure 1, growth in energy consumption per capita has been very slow since the Great Recession. A person wonders: What is the point of governments and their central banks pushing the world economy down, now in 2022, when the world economy is already barely able to maintain international supply lines and provide enough diesel for all of the world’s trucks and agricultural equipment?

If the world economy is pushed downward now, what would the result be? Would some countries find themselves unable to afford fossil fuel energy products in the future? This might lead to problems both in growing and transporting food, at least for these countries. Would the whole world suffer a major crisis of some sort, such as a financial crisis? The world economy is a self-organizing system. It is difficult to forecast precisely how the situation would work out.

[3] While the growth rate in energy consumption per capita was much lower after 2008, the price of crude oil quickly bounced back to over $120 per barrel in inflation-adjusted prices in the 2011-2013 time frame.

Figure 3 shows that oil prices immediately bounced back up after the Great Recession of 2008-2009. Quantitative Easing (QE), which the US Federal Reserve began in late 2008, helped energy prices to shoot back up again. QE helped keep the cost of borrowing by governments low, allowing governments to run larger deficits than might otherwise have been possible without interest rates rising. These higher deficits added to the demand for commodities of all types, including oil, thus raising prices.

Figure 3. Average annual oil prices inflation-adjusted oil prices based on data from BP’s 2022 Statistical Review of World Energy. Amounts shown are Brent equivalent spot prices.

The chart above shows average annual Brent oil prices through 2021. The above chart does not show 2022 prices. The current Brent oil price is about $91 per barrel. So, oil prices today are a little higher than they have been recently, but they are nowhere nearly as high as they were in the 2011 to 2013 period or in the late 1970s. The extreme reaction we are seeing is very strange. The problem seems to be much more than oil prices, by themselves.

[4] High prices in the 2006 to 2013 period allowed the rise of unconventional oil production. These high oil prices also helped keep conventional oil production from falling after 2005.

It is difficult to find detail on the precise amount of unconventional oil, but some countries are known for their unconventional oil production. For example, the US has become a leader in the extraction of tight oil from shale formations. Canada also produces a little tight oil, but it also produces quite a bit of very heavy oil from the oil sands. Venezuela produces a different type of very heavy oil. Brazil produces crude oil from under the salt layer of the ocean, sometimes called pre-salt crude oil. These unconventional types of extraction tend to be expensive.

Figure 4 shows world oil production for various combinations of countries. The top line is total world crude oil production. The bottom gray line approximates world total conventional oil production. Unconventional oil production has been rising since, say, 2010, so this approximation is better for years 2010 and subsequent years on the chart, than it is for earlier years.

Figure 4. Crude and condensate oil production based on international data of the US Energy Information Administration. The lower lines subtract the full amount of crude and condensate production for the countries listed. These countries have substantial amounts of unconventional oil production, but they may also have some conventional production.

From this chart, it appears that world conventional oil production leveled off after 2005. Some people (often referred to as “Peak Oilers”) were concerned that conventional oil production would reach a peak and begin to decline, starting shortly after 2005.

The thing that seems to have kept production from falling after 2005 is the steep rise in oil prices in the 2004 to 2008 period. Figure 3 shows that oil prices were quite low between 1986 and 2003. Once oil prices began to rise in 2004 and 2005, oil companies found that they had enough revenue that they could start adopting more intensive (and expensive) extraction techniques. This allowed more oil to be extracted from existing conventional oil fields. Of course, diminishing returns still set in, even with these more intensive techniques.

These diminishing returns are probably a major reason that conventional oil production started to fall in 2019. Indirectly, diminishing returns likely contributed to the decline in 2020, and the failure of the oil supply to bounce back up to its 2018 (or 2019) level in 2021.

[5] A better way of looking at world crude oil production is on a per capita basis because the world’s crude oil needs depend on world population.

Everyone in the world needs the benefit of crude oil, since it is used both in farming and in transporting goods of all kinds. Thus, the need for crude oil rises with population growth. I prefer analyzing crude oil production on a per capita basis.

Figure 5. Per capita crude oil production based on international data by country from the US Energy Information Administration.

Figure 5 shows that on a per capita basis, conventional crude oil production (gray bottom line) started declining after 2005. It was only with the addition of unconventional oil that crude oil production per capita could remain fairly level between 2005 and 2018 or 2019.

[6] Unconventional oil, if analyzed by itself, seems to be quite price sensitive. If politicians everywhere want to hold oil prices down, the world cannot count on extracting very much of the huge amount of unconventional oil resources that seem to be available.

Figure 6. Crude oil production based on international data for the US Energy Information Administration for each of the countries shown.

On Figure 6, crude oil production dips in 2016 – 2017 and also in 2020 – 2021. Both the 2016 and the 2020 dips are related to low prices. The continued low prices in 2017 and 2021 may reflect start-up problems after a low price, or they may reflect skepticism that prices can stay high enough to make continued extraction profitable. Canada seems to show similar dips in its oil production.

Venezuela shows a fairly different pattern. Information from the US Energy Information Administration mentions that the country started having major problems once the world oil price started falling in 2014. I am aware that the US has had sanctions against Venezuela in recent years, but it seems to me that these sanctions are closely related to Venezuela’s oil price problems. If Venezuela’s very heavy oil could really be extracted profitably, and the producers of this oil could be taxed to provide services for the people of Venezuela, the country would not have the many problems that it has today. The country likely needs a price between $200 and $300 per barrel to allow for sufficient funds for extraction plus adequate tax revenue.

Brazil’s oil production seems to be relatively more stable, but its growth has been slow. It has taken many years to get its production up to 2.9 million barrels per day. There is also some pre-salt oil production just now getting started in Angola and other countries of West Africa. This type of oil requires a high level of technical expertise and imported resources from around the world. If world trade falters, this type of oil production is likely to falter, as well.

A large share of the world’s oil reserves are unconventional oil reserves, of one type or another. The fact that rising oil prices are a real problem for citizens means that these unconventional reserves are unlikely to be tapped. Instead, we may be dealing with seriously short supplies of products we need for operating our economies, including diesel oil and jet fuel.

[7] Figure 1 at the beginning of this post indicated falling energy consumption per capita. This problem extends to more than oil. On a per capita basis, both coal and nuclear energy consumption are falling.

Practically no one pays any attention to coal consumption, but this is the fuel that allowed the Industrial Revolution to start. It is reasonable to expect that since the world economy started using coal first, it might be the first to deplete. Figure 7 shows that world coal consumption per capita hit a peak in 2011 and has declined since then.

Figure 7. World coal consumption per capita, based on data from BP’s 2022 Statistical Review of World Energy.

Many of us have heard about Aesop’s Fable, The Fox and the Grapes. According to Wikipedia, “The story concerns a fox that tries to eat grapes from a vine but cannot reach them. Rather than admit defeat, he states they are undesirable. The expression ‘sour grapes’ originated from this fable.”

In the case of coal, we are told that coal is undesirable because it is very polluting and raises CO2 levels. While these things are true, coal has historically been very inexpensive, and this is important for people buying coal. Coal is also easy to transport. It could be used for fuel instead of cutting down trees, thus helping local ecosystems. The negative things that we are being told about coal are true, but it is hard to find an adequate inexpensive substitute.

Figure 8 shows that world nuclear energy per capita is also falling. To some extent, its fall has stabilized since 2012 because China and a few other “developing nations” have been adding nuclear capacity, while developed nations in Europe have tended to remove their existing nuclear power plants.

Figure 8. World nuclear electricity consumption per capita, based on data from BP’s 2022 Statistical Review of World Energy. Amounts are based on the amount of fossil fuels that this electricity would theoretically replace.

Nuclear energy is confusing because experts seem to disagree on how dangerous nuclear power plants are, over the long term. One concern relates to proper disposal of spent fuel after its use.

[8] The world seems to be at a difficult time now because we don’t have any good options for fixing our falling energy consumption per capita problem, without greatly reducing world population. The two choices that seem to be available both seem to be far higher-priced than is feasible.

There are two choices that seem to be available:

[A] Encourage large amounts of fossil fuel production by encouraging very high fossil fuel prices. With such high prices, say $300 per barrel for oil, unconventional crude oil in many parts of the world would be available. Unconventional coal, such as that under the North Sea, would also be available. With sufficiently high prices, natural gas production could be raised. This natural gas could be shipped as liquefied natural gas (LNG) around the world at great cost. Additionally, many processing plants could be built, both for supercooling the natural gas to allow it to be shipped around the world and for re-gasification, when it arrives at its destination.

With this approach, food costs would be very high. Much of the world’s population would need to work in the food industry and in fossil fuel production and shipping. With these priorities, citizens would not have time or money for most things we buy today. They likely could not afford a vehicle or a nice home. Governments would need to shrivel in size, with the usual outcome being government by a local dictator. Governments wouldn’t have sufficient funds for roads or schools. CO2 emissions would be very high, but this likely would not be our most serious problem.

[B] Try to electrify everything, including agriculture. Greatly ramp up wind and solar. Wind and solar are very intermittent, and their intermittency does not match up well with human needs. In particular, one of the world’s primary needs is for heat in winter, but solar energy comes in summer. It cannot be saved until winter with today’s technology. Spend enormous amounts and resources on electricity transmission lines and batteries to try to somewhat work around these problems. Try to find substitutes for the many things that fossil fuels provide today, including paved roads and chemicals used in agriculture and in medicine.

Hydroelectricity is also a renewable form of electricity generation. It cannot be expected to ramp up much because it has mostly been built out already.

Figure 9. World consumption of hydroelectricity per capita, based on data from BP’s 2022 Statistical Review of World Energy.

Even if greatly ramped up, wind and solar electricity production would likely be grossly inadequate by themselves to try to operate any kind of economy. In addition, at a minimum, natural gas, shipped at very high cost as LNG around the world, would likely be needed. Also, huge quantity of batteries would be needed, leading to a short supply of materials. Huge quantities of steel would be needed to make new electrical machines to try to replace current oil-power machines. A minimum 50-year transition would likely be needed.

I am doubtful that this second approach would be feasible in any reasonable timeframe.

[9] Conclusion. Figure 1 seems to imply that the world economy is headed for troubled times ahead.

The world economy is a self-organizing system, so we cannot know precisely what form changes in the next few years will take. The economy can be expected to shrink back in an uneven pattern, with some parts of the world and some classes of citizens, such as workers versus the elderly, doing better than others.

Leaders will never tell us that the world has an energy shortage. Instead, leaders will tell us how awful fossil fuels are, so that we will be happy that the economy is losing their usage. They will never tell us how worthless intermittent wind and solar are for solving today’s energy problems. Instead, they will lead us to believe that a transition to vehicles powered by electricity and batteries is just around the corner. They will tell us that the world’s worst problem is climate change, and that by working together, we can move away from fossil fuels.

Again, the whole situation reminds me of Aesop’s Fables. The system puts a “good spin” on whatever frightening changes are happening. This way, leaders can convince their citizens that everything is fine when, in fact, it is not.

NOTE

*If the US Federal Reserve raises its target interest rate, central banks of other countries around the world are forced to take a similar action if they do not want their currencies to fall relative to the US dollar. Countries that do not raise their target interest rates tend to be penalized by the market: With a falling currency, the local prices of oil and other commodities tend to rise because commodities are priced in US dollars. As a result, citizens of these countries tend to face a worse inflation problem than they would otherwise face.

The country with the greatest increase in its target interest rate can, in theory, win, in what is more or less a competition to move inflation elsewhere. This competition cannot go on indefinitely, however, because every country depends, to some extent, on imports from other countries. If countries with weaker economies (i. e. those that cannot afford to raise interest rates) stop producing essential goods for world trade, it will tend to bring the world economy down.

Raising interest rates also raises the likelihood of debt defaults, and these debt defaults can be a huge problem, especially for banks and other financial institutions. With higher interest rates, pension funding becomes less adequate. Businesses of all kinds find new investment more expensive. Many businesses are likely to shrink or fail completely. These indirect impacts are yet another way for the world economy to fail.

About Gail Tverberg

My name is Gail Tverberg. I am an actuary interested in finite world issues - oil depletion, natural gas depletion, water shortages, and climate change. Oil limits look very different from what most expect, with high prices leading to recession, and low prices leading to financial problems for oil producers and for oil exporting countries. We are really dealing with a physics problem that affects many parts of the economy at once, including wages and the financial system. I try to look at the overall problem.
This entry was posted in Energy policy, Financial Implications and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2,262 Responses to Today’s Energy Crisis Is Very Different from the Energy Crisis of 2005

  1. postkey says:

    “With the latest increase in the personal consumption deflator at 6.2% (in the year to September), it is clear that real money balances (i.e., the increases in nominal money adjusted for the rise in prices) are being squeezed. Despite the bounce in US share prices from early November lows, the medium-term message has to be further and intensifying strains in balance sheets, and more weakness in asset prices. A major downturn in house prices, and a wider recession, are inevitable. The accompanying video shows that the contraction in real money balances now being experienced is the most severe since the Volcker double-dip recession of the early 1980s. The monetary environment is radically different from that little more than two years ago. Is it necessary to recall that the US economy was jolted by an increase in M3 money of over 18% in a mere four-month period, from February to June 2020? That rate of increase in four months would – if maintained for a full year – have generated a Latin-American-style increase of almost 66%!”?
    https://mailchi.mp/525cc5a407e3/which-economic-thoughtcomes-out-best-from-the-last-decade-1336671?e=260ed9002a

  2. CTG says:

    There is the “truth” and the “inconvenient truth”. COVID-19 exposes it all and even on OFW, it seems that only a handful of people on OFW (or even perhaps in the world?) can take “inconvenient truths”.

    It is a coping mechanism for eople not taking, understanding or believing in ” inconvenient truths”. They need it to survive.

    There are various degrees (from low to high) on this coping mechanism.

    Norm and the masses (or collective) refuse to even acknowledge the most basic stuff like COVID, vax, 9-11, etc. Their coping mechanism shuts them immediately and refuse to even listen to a sentence. This applies to those who are highly educated at all.

    The next level (of coping mechanism) are those who knows that everything is wrong with COVID but refuses to even listen one work or sentence on “hoaxes and conspiracies” like moon landing, flat earth, etc. They will tell you on front “NO, I AM NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO THE FLAT EARTH THING AT ALL” and they will use their fingers to close their ears. As an educated person, why not give it a thought and listen to what others say? If they are wrong, you can refute them or just stay quiet. Is it wrong to get grant them 10 minutes to tell you something? Does it mean that you are biased against learning something new? It is like going to attend a seminar on “get rich quick” just to learn how they operate. You enjoy the food provided and learn how they operate but you just don’t invest in them.

    See, I have come to a conclusion “that is how humans operate”. Talk to those who are aware of the CONVID fiasco, you will know that everyone has a different coping mechanism and with this coping mechanism, there is just no way they WANT to learn the inconvenient truths. There are only a handful of people who have a very low or non-existent coping mechanism.

    Take my cat-in-the-roof thing. Family mentioned that it is not possible. It goes like this : Teleportation is not possible. No, we are not in a simulation and the cat cannot be put there by the creator of the simulation. Then, explain to me how it is possible.,well maybe there are some holes that the cat can go through, well there are no holes at all in the house… silence For me with no coping mechanisms, it is fascinating to see that many “impossible things” happen and the people just brushed it away

    Toba Supervolcano – trust all the literature? The same “lieterature” (sic) that said that COVID is dangerous and vaccines are safe? Trust the MSM saying that during the hunter-gatherer, the tribes can be as big as 100 people? No one questions that number criticially? If it is 10 people per tribe, at 7000 people left after the supervolcano, that means that there are only 70 tribes worldwide that they have to meet up and procreate? Read up on genetic defects on in-breeding.

    Seriously, the coping mechanism is doing great.

    Watch the old movie Truman Show. It is available on Netflix. We are in an inverse Truman Show. Instead of one person who is unaware, on this planet, it is only a few who are aware. See how “weird things” triggered Truman to find out the inconvenient truth and how sharp and critical thinking made him realise that everything is a charade (he does not believe his own MSM either). People surrounding him said “nah… what you see is nothing, don’t bother” but he felt that he needs to know the truth…

    • Fast Eddy says:

      The gnawing question is …

      Would norm be considered a circus animal – or a barnyard animal…

      norm what sort of technical training did you have to write Rayburn manuals?

    • drb753 says:

      Some things are more reliable than others. The Toba volcano is believable. You do not want to believe things where a profit or geopolitical interest intervenes. If you wish, the science of 9/11, as presented on the New York Times, the science of vaccines, and the science of cholesterol (the latter underpinning the very profitable statin market), all share the same origin.

      Looking at the latter, there are sufficient papers not touching the main topic, to figure out what is going on. Papers directly addressing the main question (people with high cholesterol live longer than those with low cholesterol) mysteriously disappear into the memory hole, whereas limited papers (but those with high cholesterol die more often of heart attacks) receive tens of thousands of citations. In the memory hole, they are joined by many papers on vaccines on the impossibility of 9/11 videos.

      Toba does not affect markets or geo-political considerations.

  3. Kim says:

    Questions often arise here in the comments as to the nature of The Powers That Be. We ask, what are their motives? Do they know what they are doing? What kind of future are they working towards? Do they have the general best interest at heart? Or are they all simply blundering fools?

    To determine this, we might also ask, what is in the hearts of the people who rule us? What inspires them? What is acceptable to them and what is not?

    As leaders, what do they regard as a good and proper target for their patronage?

    What do they regard as “art and culture”?

    And then when we find out, we might ask, are they simply insane?

    Perhaps, fellow commenters, we should stop thinking of them as “stupid” and face the fact they they are evil?

    The following link is definitely not safe for work.

    Seriously.

    https://strangesounds.org/2022/11/francois-henri-pinault-ceo-of-balenciagas-parent-company-owns-an-auction-site-selling-child-sex-mannequins-with-erect-penises-vaginas-and-anuses-instead-of-mouths-or-noses.html

    • I expect that the people are not evil. They are looking out for themselves, and they probably believe that what they are doing will have benefits (of some kind) for mankind. Politicians want to keep order and to get re-elected, for example. The very wealthy may have other goals, including more wealth for themselves. They may want to reduce population, longer term, for example.

      • drb753 says:

        People are both evil and not evil. Population reduction will happen regardless. The elites have a basic difference compared to regular people like your family or neighbors, in that they regard most of humanity as livestock (it is also specified in the religious book of the dominant ethnic group among western elites). That may be evil but it does not change the fact that the population is now going to decrease.

        MHO: let them (current elites) deal with this unsolvable energy problem. We have to be patient but all the perversion of values, crimes against truth and family, usury, construction of an alternate reality, will get punished and disappear along with the people most responsible for it. But this will be a secondary concern in the coming decades, perhaps at the level of climate change. The main concern is the end of industrial civilization. We should keep our priorities straight. Coping with the end of civilization comes first, second and third.

      • NomadicBeer says:

        “I expect that the people are not evil.”

        You are making a very weird but common mistake. You assume that other people are like you – this is called empathy and most of us have it.

        But there is an enormous amount of data out there, from history to psychology that shows that some people really are evil (technically psychopaths).

        Unless you are willing to deny history, biology and human nature you have to accept that psychopaths exist.

        So, why do you deny reality? I am not flippant, just frustrated. What will take to convince you of the reality? Have you watched any documentary on any genocide in the history?

        Sorry but I am at a loss for words. Are you that scared that you have to believe everyone is nice?

        At this point, I give up on humans…

  4. moss says:

    Several days back I alluded to the outcome of a credit market collapse, a vortex into which currencies/asset prices/credit instruments gyrate against each other beyond previous measured records such that the chart would look like a seismic reading. It’s what happens in crashes down, but gyrations upwards can astonish also. OK I asked about post this, what the world might look like.
    We might or not have the internet vern suggested
    Fortuitiously, Prof Hudson online published

    “MH: The exponential mathematics of interest-bearing debt makes debt crises inevitable. That has been the case for thousands of years. The expansion path of debt is more rapid than that of the underlying “real” economy.

    “At some point, either debts will have to be wiped out – annulled – or countries will fall into debt peonage to the creditor powers, just as within creditor nations the economy is polarizing between the creditor One Percent and the increasingly indebted 99 Percent.”

    unz.com/mhudson/interview-with-almayadeen-tv-lebanon

    He’s suggesting the possibility of countries falling into peonage. Why would creditor powers stop at countries. Not corporations? Not individuals? Foreclosing on collateral is going to be the name of the game in a time of Toba event markets.

    Do we have any historians here of the aftermath of the Black Death, the 1340s period? European prices of labour shot straight up, and asset prices collapsed along with commodities. There was a UK/Euro/Med financial collapse from credit default on Venetian banks

    http://american_almanac.tripod.com/pbgbardi.htm

    Tomorrow morning, could sufficient control be maintained while collateral was seized and restructuring into a peonage was implemented? It’s certainly another alternative from ROF worth considering. The Roman Republic latifundia were reasonably at peace for many decades prior to 100BC

    So, agamemnon, do we dust off our copies of The Republic?

    dawn.com/news/1723773/govt-struggles-for-118bn-tranche

    • You ask some good questions.

      We certainly seem fairly close to a debt bubble collapse. With it would go an asset price collapse and probably a commodity price collapse.

      I thought the rise in the price of labor came after a significant die-off in the population. Labor became scarcer, so worth more.

      Countries are hoping that they can somewhat start over using their own digital currencies, instead, if there is a major problem with the debt market. This would allow control over the spending of individuals. (No spending if something not permitted is posted on Facebook, for example.) But I am doubtful that international trading would work. And adding new debt would likely be a problem.

      “Banned” suggested that Russia’s new approach would seem to be a new system based on a basket of currencies, weighted by resources, if I understood correctly. Such an approach might work, if debt is no longer treated as an asset.

      With respect to peonage, I suspect oil and other resources might be extracted from a country, to at least partially pay back debt. Debt is so absurdly high, though, it is hard to see that more than a tiny share of debt could be paid back.

      • moss says:

        It was my impression that the Black Death spread in a wave across Europe for east to west, having originated in the Wuhan labs of Gengis Khan. It was introduced to Europe through the Yuan entrepot at Trezibond on the Black Sea and carried all over the Med by the Venetians and although it spluttered about for centuries it was the initial wave that caused the massive dieoff

        Many, many, many countries don’t have the oil and other resources which I imagine is the reason the IMF is stitching up where it can debtor licenses, privatizations, labour impoverishment, so I fully agree Gail that “debt is so absurdly high, though, it is hard to see that more than a tiny share of debt could be paid back.” Maybe repayment is not the objective but seize the collateral. If they can crash the market prices they can sell it to their cronies for a song. Like Russia when Yeltsin took over. Dmitri Orlov wrote marvellously about this way back. And we all know who made away with all the money in that one.

        But there are other possibilities to RoF, and latifundia … Kulm suggests house prices will never go down and it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that the Fed, BoJ BoE SNB ECB all print out the wazoo and turn it into Weimar. Let everyone off the hook for their debts and send the lenders to the cleaners? Nah, can’t see it short of le deluge 1793

    • It strikes me that the new EU rules adversely affecting farmers are going to work toward disbanding the EU. There will be increasing dissent. More countries will want to leave the EU, ASAP.

  5. Herbie Ficklestein says:

    Some, like Withnail, may find this of interest, I did!
    How Much Were Gold Coins Really Worth During the Middle Ages?
    https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2020/03/18/how-much-were-gold-coins-really-worth-during-the-middle-ages/

    People in Europe during the Middle Ages really did use gold coins, but gold coins were much rarer and much more valuable than they are often portrayed in modern fantasy games and novels. Daily commerce in Europe during the Middle Ages was conducted not with gold coins, but rather with silver and bronze coins. In fact, most ordinary people during the Middle Ages probably rarely even saw gold coins.
    ….people’s lives in the Middle Ages were so different from our lives today, it is hard to make comparisons in terms of purchasing power.
    The raw metal value of a Byzantine nomisma in modern United States dollars
    Some Byzantine aristocrats are said to have had thousands of nomismata. If my livestock conversion is correct and a Byzantine aristocrat had two thousand nomismata, that would be equivalent to something like $800,000 in today’s money. If my construction worker conversion is correct, then two thousand nomismata would be equivalent to something like eight million dollars. In any case, Byzantine
    aristocrats were definitely extraordinarily wealthy.

    ….

  6. Agamemnon says:

    Sodium batter is less energy dense but maybe it’s more useful.
    The big question is how much energy does it take to produce alt energies?

    https://cleantechnica.com/2022/11/24/byd-may-begin-sodium-ion-battery-production-in-2023/

    • A bigger concern is how many weeks or months does the alternative energy have to be stored, to be truly useful. The scale of the quantity to be stored becomes enormous, if solar energy has to be stored from summer to winter to take care of winter heating needs. Even wind energy likely requires months of storage to smooth out supply. Loss of energy on the “roundtrip” is an issue as well.

    • Withnail says:

      This is all nonsense I’m afraid. There are no sodium batteries. There will be no sodium batteries.

  7. ivanislav says:

    Two pages back, Vern posted a preprint study that showed IgG4 levels increase dramatically with vaccination and particularly after the third dose.
    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.07.05.22277189v1.full.pdf

    After a quick Google Scholar search for “Covid IgG4”, I find this publication from a year ago showing that absolute IgG4 levels and IgG4/IgG1 ratio both correlate with death in Covid patients.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461218/

    This begs the question whether the vaccines and boosters will move patients into the high-risk pool as IgG1 and IgG3 levels drop post-vaccination (as paper 1 shows). Correlation of IgG4 with death does not prove causation, so one can’t draw certain conclusions. However, it does seem to be cause for concern, especially since IgG4’s tolerizing action provides a clear mechanism for disease enhancement.

    • Replenish says:

      “Repeated vaccination with the same nocive, highly inflammatory protein is inducing quite a few changes in the global immunological landscape, first, the B Cell responses in the vaccinated changed, and second, and most important of all. Their IgG class-switched from an inflammatory response to a less inflammatory one. This is still by far the most important piece of information in regard to what is to come, especially if there is a high expression of a certain chimeric Galectin…”

      https://hiddencomplexity.substack.com/p/immunity-imprinting-and-poor-new

  8. All is Dust says:

    Here we go, this should put the chat amongst the pigeons

    https://m.twitch.tv/videos/1660073740

    JJ’s thesis is the powers that be are on a quest to collect as much genetic information from the human race as possible before our numbers start declining. This is based on his low infection fidelity model, where most virus particles are junk because of poor RNA copying. Therefore, there cannot be a mass infection coronavirus based pandemic as any RNA virus is a poor candidate for such an outcome. For example, he cites the 4 people who caught a virus in a bat cave in 2012 and they went on to infect precisely zero people. In other words, the whole pandemic was a con (which I am guessing most here know).

    All the best

    • D. Stevens says:

      Are they collecting DNA samples with the swab tests? I wonder how many did those. Think they were required for travel. Most people I know of use the home tests which are disposable. Not sure how vaccines fit into a covert DNA collection program. I was unable to watch because twitch is blocked for me.

      • All is Dust says:

        Either that, or they plan to do so in the future. I think his position at the minute is that they are just setting up the conditioning, with the view to roll out the data harvesting within the next 10 years.

        For me, it was the point that it isn’t possible for corona virus to be a global pandemic candidate – i still think it is about behavioural science and eugenics (as opposed to genetic information harvesting), but it was interesting to hear a different line of reasoning draw the same conclusion on RNA viruses.

      • All is Dust says:

        D. Stevens,

        I think my response to you has been struck down by the web gods.

        He wasn’t sure if they are collecting genetic information now, or whether they are just conditioning people so that such information can be extracted within the next 10 years with minimum fuss.

    • I listened to the first few minutes of this. The speaker does not really start until something like 2:45 or 3:00. Somewhere around 12:00 he gets to why the genetic material is supposedly needed. He starts with a slide like this:
      https://ourfiniteworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Why-AI-Needs-a-Genome-1024×482.png
      The is related to Artificial Intelligence and trans-humanism. This is over the top for me.

      I suppose the idea is salvation through more and more complexity. Of course, complexity takes energy. I stopped watching at this point. The whole video is over 2.5 hours long. Maybe someone with more patience than I have can offer some insights into anything that this fellow is talking about. I can see why he talks about having trouble getting tenure at universities.

    • please tell us who the powers that be

      ———-happen to be?

    • MM says:

      I am 100% sure nobody would ever dare to clone me.
      So what.

  9. Herbie Ficklestein. says:

    Of the long Covid patients she has seen, only 2 out of 50 who have applied for SSDI have been approved so far, she said.

    To date, the Social Security Administration has flagged about 44,000 disability claims nationally that include Covid as one of the medical conditions, according to agency spokeswoman Nicole Tiggemann, making up just 1% of all disability applications the agency has received.
    To be approved, “a person must have a medical condition or combination of conditions that prevents the individual from working and is expected to last at least one year or result in death,” Tiggemann said.
    “Disability evaluations are based on functional limitations that affect an individual’s ability to work, not a diagnosis,” she added.

    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/11/30/long-covid-patients-share-their-struggle-with-disability-coverage.html

    I never really got better’ — long Covid patients share their struggle with ongoing symptoms and the health-care system
    Although the Biden administration is looking at ending the public health emergency over the next few months, many who get sick but survive Covid suffer from enduring health problems, studies show. And currently, as many as 23 million Americans have what’s considered long Covid, according to recent estimates from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. As many as 4 million people are likely out of work due to the illness, a separate report from the Brookings Institution found.

    • If Biden wants another way to fund out-of-work individuals, this could be it. In fact, he could add vaccine injured as well, as long as they didn’t mention the cause. But I suppose Social Security Disability Insurance is already at a high point. Adding more payees, when funding mostly would have to come from taxpayer supplied funds, would be a problem.

      • banned says:

        SS disability
        Contact SS disability lawyer
        Pay SS disability lawyer
        SS disability lawyer tells you what your injury is.
        SS disability lawyer files claim
        claim is denied
        SS disability lawyer takes it to court
        Voila your on the dole
        Yes this is draining the SS fund and fast

  10. Fast Eddy says:

    There is good reason that this substack coined the terms “slow kill bioweapon” and DEATHVAX™. The four main eugenics pillars of these Modified mRNA experimental gene therapies are cancer, prion-based diseases, heart diseases, and micro clotting. The ferret, rat and mice studies of years ago gave us critical insights into the potential deadly adverse reactions while concurrently establishing that these technologies do not protect against any viruses and ultimately confer negative immunity. This is why Modified mRNA therapies never made it to human trials, until the “pandemic” EUA scam that is.

    Lots of good stuff hear (if you are unvaxxed):

    https://www.2ndsmartestguyintheworld.com/p/micro-clotting-one-of-the-primary

    • From the article:

      The symptoms of Long COVID seem to be exactly what one would recognize as being caused by micro clots and poor circulation: fatigue, memory issues, lightheadedness and dizziness, tingling in the extremities, etc. Likewise, as more and more “silent strokes” occur, a patient’s health would likely deteriorate and the decline would be blamed on whatever major organ fails first. Thus, leading to what we are seeing; surging excessive death rates around the world with a variety of named causes, rather than one largely underlying, cause…micro clotting.

      Since all genetically modified humans (GMH) have been medically transformed into spike protein factories that are indefinitely manufacturing potentially trillions upon trillions of these cytotoxic spikes, those that did not die within the first five months are nonetheless for all intents and purposes the living dead. Many of these GMH’s will claim that they “feel fine”, but they are essentially akin to those that are walking around with undiagnosed stage 4 cancer, except that they are metastasizing systemic micro clots that at some point “suddenly” result in SADS, or any of the other alleged Long COVID symptoms.

      • banned says:

        Has any research been done that documents how long a jab turns one into a spike protein replicator? Any research into consistency of said spike protein production- levels? Is there a point where the spike proteins are flushed from the system?
        Can spike protein levels be measured? Im really tripping on this.

        The foxy latina gal gave me a awesome smile at my lame joke today. Age appropriate even. Im pretty sure she is jabbed. This is messed up.
        “hey baby are you like jabbed no big deal we can still text if you are.”
        Everyone understands about asking about STDs. This is worse.
        “uh did you volunteer to turn yourself into a GMH spike protein replicator? yes? oh i forgot something. be right back.”

        messed up

        Beggars cant be choosy.

        • ivanislav says:

          “Can spike protein levels be measured?”

          I don’t recall what measurement method was used, but I do recall a papers that measured spike protein levels both in covid patients and vaccinees. Covid patients had average blood levels of 72 picograms/ml and vaccinees were 47 picograms/ml. Severe covid patients had up to 2 nanograms/ml.

          Disclaimer: All these numbers are the product of my fallible recollection.

        • It sounds like you are asking, “How long after vaccination does shedding occur?” I am sure someone else here would have a better answer than I do.

  11. New this morning, but not really a “done deal” yet.

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-agrees-60-barrel-price-cap-russian-seaborne-oil-eu-diplomat-2022-12-01/

    EU agrees $60 a barrel price cap on Russian seaborne oil -EU diplomat

    European Union governments tentatively agreed on Thursday on a $60 a barrel price cap on Russian seaborne oil – an idea of the Group of Seven (G7) nations – with an adjustment mechanism to keep the cap at 5% below the market price, an EU diplomat said.

    Poland, which had pushed for the cap to be as low as possible, has until 1500 GMT to agree to the deal, which would need to be approved by all EU governments in a written procedure by Friday, the diplomat said.

    We will see if it actually goes through. Or, it could evaporate, like the idea of a natural gas price cap at a very high level.

    • I see the WSJ titles a similar article, EU Asks Members to Set Russia Oil-Price Cap at $60.

      • Rodster says:

        So what happens if Russia says FU to the EU? Are western leaders really that dumb?

        • Withnail says:

          Don’t they realise that with all the sanctions Russia doesn’t even have much use for dollars any more.

          Giving Russia another reason not to sell the West oil seems like a terrible idea.

      • houtskool says:

        They should try a cap on asylum seekers. We don’t have the gas to heat our own homes. The EU is a clown only circus.

    • MM says:

      It does not make sense to pay a single Dollar for a Russian Barrel of oil.

      • Withnail says:

        It does if we need oil, which we do, and Russia is willing to sell it. Do you prefer to starve and freeze?

        • MM says:

          I do not see any connection of “I need Russian oil” and “payment” for Russian oil at all,
          In case of questions. I kindly ask my neighbors to send their sons.
          I deserve it because without croissants in the morning I can not deliver the work for my boss.

  12. Mirror on the wall says:

    Sad. Anyone fancy a tin of cat food heated on the radiator, or spoons of it heated over a candle, for dinner? Surreal Britain in 2022….

    > British families are ‘eating PET FOOD’ and ‘heating meals on radiators and candles’ as households struggle amid cost-of-living crisis, charity warns

    A community worker with 20 years’ experience said people are being forced to eat pet food while others are heating their food on radiators due to the ongoing cost of living crisis.

    Speaking of the experiences he has witnessed, told BBC Wales: ‘I’m still shocked by the fact that we have people who are eating pet food,’ he said.

    ‘[There are] people who are trying to heat their food on a radiator or a candle.

    ‘These are shocking kind of stories that are actually the truth.’

    He discussed how people are not being paid enough to afford basic needs and essentials all should have access to.

    The Pantry, where Mr Seed works, is a Community Trust-funded facility that aims to reduce food poverty in Cardiff and provide affordable food and household essentials to over 160 locals.

    Soaring food and energy costs have been labelled the main cause of the latest surge, with the Office for National Statistics estimating that the average UK household is now paying 88.9 per cent more for heating and lighting than last year.

    New inflation figures show that the price of household staples such as milk, butter, cheese, meat and bread increased by up to 42 per cent last month – the highest rates since 1980.

    Experts believe that by the end of the year, the average family will have spent £4,960 in the supermarket in 2022 – £380 more than 2021. A poll published this morning revealed that 85% of people are ‘worried’ about the rising cost of living – up from 69% in January.

    The idea of Christmas dinner has become a worrisome burden for many British families as new data by household finances app Nous.co revealed that a fifth of families in the UK say they are going to ask their guests to pay towards their Christmas dinner.

    Along with cutting costs on food, people were planning to spend more than a third (36.3%) less on presents this year and one in three (33%) also said they could not afford to splash out like they have previously.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11490023/British-families-eating-PET-FOOD-heating-meals-radiators-rising-costs-struggles.html

  13. Jackson says:

    Vaxxed and boosted herd member explaining Bayes’ theorem to us silly unvaxxed . . . Gail, what is your opinion?
    https://twitter.com/EliotJacobson/status/1598321210500468736

    • What Professor Elliot misses is the fact that the likelihood of catching Covid seems to be higher for the vaccinated than the unvaccinated, for all age groups other than the very young (11 and under) and for all vaccinated statuses, except “within the last three months.” Check out sheet 2 of 4 from this website. https://www.walgreens.com/healthcare-solutions/covid-19-index

      Professor Jackson’s example is very misleading because the vaccinated generally do not have lower Covid rates than the vaccinated. The vaccine damages their immune system, so their risk tends to be higher, after a very short initial period after a booster.

      For example, if we look at the ages 45-64, we find the following percentages of the people who came in for testing (for any reason, such as going to visit elderly relatives, in anticipation of an upcoming medical procedure, need a test for work, or feeling possible symptoms), we find the following:

      Unvaccinated 32.7% positive
      Last dose >= 12 months 39.5%
      Last dose 9 to 11 months 45.2%
      Last dose 6 to 8 months 37.1%
      Last dose 3 to 5 months 36.6%
      Last dose < 3 months 27.6% The "benefit" of the booster is very small, and of very short duration. Long term, the vaccinated come out worse than the unvaccinated. The vaccine doesn't really act like a vaccine. It acts more like the shots people take to prevent allergic reactions. A person's body learns not to fight off the virus. This is not a beneficial response, in the long run.

  14. reante says:

    Am I imagining things or is “died after a short illness” the new “died suddenly?”

  15. Student says:

    (Voxnews.info – Italy)

    Over the past hours, it was reported that Multiple Letter bombs have been delivered around the Kingdom of Spain to key facilities.
    The letter bombs either exploded or have been intercepted
    It includes:
    – The Embassy of Ukraine
    – An arms manufacturer factory in Zaragoza which sent weapons to Ukrainian Armed Forces
    – An arms manufacturer factory in Madrid which sent weapons to Ukrainian Armed Forces
    – A Pan-European/European Union-owned Satellite Centre located inside
    – NATO’s Torrejón Air Base, just outside Madrid
    – The Office of Spanish Social-democrat Prime-Minister Pedro Sanchez
    – The Headquarters of the Ministry of Defense of the Kingdom of Spain

    https://voxnews.info/2022/12/01/pacchi-bomba-a-sorpresa-in-tutta-la-spagna/

    (El Pais – Spain)

    ‘The envelopes with pyrotechnic material addressed to Sánchez, Robles and the Ukrainian ambassador were sent from Spain.
    A sixth incendiary envelope was found at the U.S. Embassy in Madrid. The Audiencia Nacional investigates the authorship of these shipments.’

    https://elpais.com/espana/2022-12-01/interceptado-un-tercer-sobre-con-explosivo-en-la-base-aerea-de-torrejon.html

    • Mirror on the wall says:

      Very odd. It is not really clear who did it or why. UKR was quick to blame it on the Russian state, which seems extremely unlikely.

      • Random acts of violence. No notes to explain why, it would seem. People are frustrated now, but it is hard to believe that this is one way the frustration would play out.

        • Student says:

          I remember that after the terrorist attack in Antocha Station in Madrid in 2004, Spain decided to left the military coalition for the invasion of Iraq.
          I don’t know if it could be a similar pattern.
          In Spain there are various internal groups and regions who are against the central power and the central power is against them.
          I talked in the past with Spanish people and they remember well that western Countries invaded Iraq for a claim of weapons of mass distruction that proved to be false…
          Spain is in energy crisis like other EU Countries and they have now Italy in competition for Algerian gas .
          We will see what will happen.

    • Replenish says:

      We are looking for the next transitional Event(s) to fulfill foreign policy.

      NS2 pipeline attack, Istanbul Attack.. Letter Bombs to Embassies?

      Spain/NATO/EU say we will not be deterred in Ukraine.

      Anthrax attacks, 9/11 and lead up to the Iraq War..

      Project for a New American Century (PNAC) says we need “a new Pearl Harbor” to unlock the Middle East.

      Fauci and Bright are on video before C-19 saying we need an Event to stoke public fear and attract funding for a universal flu vaccine. Bright serves as whistleblower to stigmatize Trump’s focus on therapeutics. Bright and Biden repeat the term “Dark Winter” stoking fear of the virus.

      Fauci and Company leave a long email, patent and funding chain to Wuhan lab off-shoring Gain of Function research. Fort Dietrich (reported source of Anthrax strain blamed on Iraq) and WIV are mentioned as possible sources of the leaked lab virus early in the pandemic.

      All Roads Lead to Dark Winter..

      “Then, at the end of the exercise, a “prominent Iraqi defector” emerges who claims Iraq had arranged the bioweapons attack “through intermediaries,” which is deemed “highly credible” even though “there is no forensic evidence to support this claim.” Iraq officially denies the accusation, but vows to target the U.S. in “highly damaging ways” if the U.S. “takes action against Iraq.” It is thus unsurprising that, as will be shown later in this report, key participants in Dark Winter would heavily promote the narrative that Iraq was to blame for the 2001 Anthrax attacks. Other participants, including Robert Kadlec, would then become involved in the FBI’s “sabotaged” investigation once the Bureau began to focus on a domestic, as opposed to an international source.”

      https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/04/investigative-series/all-roads-lead-to-dark-winter/

      • Scaring people seems to be high on the list of approaches used in the current effort to get along with less oil and other energy per capita. Scaring people involves little direct energy use, and it seems to have long residual effect. I still see a lot of customers in the grocery store wearing masks.

  16. Herbie Ficklestein. says:

    Surprisingly, we have someone that sounds as if he posts here at OFW!

    Edge of Extinction: Oil and Water Don’t Mix
    2,018 views · 21 hours ago…more

    Nature Bats Last
    18.6K

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_y78CCfZf4Q&t=18s

    Guy speaks of Peak Oil, financial collapse and the end of Industrial activity!
    What more can he point out to us all here we that we already have discussed?
    Suppose everything is interconnected in our network…

    • Guy McPherson seems to have a new occupation. His prior occupation seemed to be preaching climate alarmism. Now, the blurb mentions that he teaches an audio course in Conservation Biology, and this video seems to be related to it.

      Guy starts out by talking about oil and water. He says that they don’t mix. He then says that our ability to adequately get use of them is falling rapidly. From there, he seems to go into Peak Oil theory. I didn’t watch further.

      Guy interviewed me once. He has been around in the Peak Oil world what seems like forever. He has spoken at some of the same conferences that I have spoken at.

  17. Herbie Ficklestein. says:

    For those following this unraveling, skimmed through this and surprisingly found it rather entertaining and applaud SBF for his wiggling in his replies. Rather wordy but boils down to no intent, was not aware, could have…ect..
    This SBF may evade doing serious criminal time if there is no tangible evidence of intentional wrongdoing.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/01/business/dealbook/sam-bankman-fried-dealbook-interview-transcript.html

    Not sure if he was supplied beforehand of the questions beforehand.
    Imagine the CB and the Fed will take note when it’s their turn on the stand.

    • “Not aware; no intent to defraud.” Great approach if you can make it work!

    • Withnail says:

      Nothing is going to happen to him. Crypto is completely unregulated. There will be no criminal case.

    • Hubbs says:

      This too shall pass. Like all the Russiagate and Clintongate scandals.

      SBF could be getting backing and protection by Deep State- not only to funnel money through his FTX scam to Democrat candidates and other corrupted officials on the take through Ukraine, but as a distractor/disrupter to cryptocurrencies- to argue for creation of CDBC, for our benefit of course. LOL. Kind of like how mass shootings are “needed” to promote the gun control agenda.

      Now that SBF has been exposed and the elections are over, and the Ukraine War is militarily non-salvageable by Ukraine (failed plan B, whereas Plan A had been to destroy Russia economically with sanctions which also appears to have failed so far) will this SBF guy be useful? Or will he have prepared a “dead man’s switch” to counter blackmail the Deep State if they ever think about trying to Clintonize him? He’ll skate. Our justice system is so corrupt nothing will happen I bet. So what is plan C? Global economic collapse? Through what weapon? A new virus, new climate threat? Food and energy supply disruptions?

      I have even thought about the off-the-wall possibility that the Globalists are trying to keep up with threats of gun control to encourage more people to arm themselves, thus when food and gas shortages hit, the citizenry will be well equipped for their self destruction. They always push gun control but manage to leave the doors open just enough so that people like Clinton, Obama and Biden manage to preside over the biggest gun buying sprees in history. And the treasure trove of weapons left behind in Afghanistan and diverted weapons from Ukraine- can be disseminated throughout European countries to destabilize them. A few rounds fired upon both sides in the Maidan protests sure went a long way in disrupting things.

      What if this Russian winter offensive that is supposed to occur once the ground has frozen and the tanks can roll against what now appears is a depleted Ukrainian force doesn’t happen? What happens instead if a new DMZ kind of gels along the current lines? Not enough energy and materials for either side to deliver a decisive blow? The argument I get from viewers on Gonzalo Lira’s interview with Alex Mercouris yesterday, Scott Ritter, Douglas Macgregor etc. is that Russia will definitely make its move in the coming weeks to demilitarize Ukraine in one overwhelming strike- because Russia is facing an existential threat. So will the Dnieper River boundary provide any more meaningful “existential” protection than a farther western boundary?A few hundred miles is meaningless in the days of missiles, drones, and aircraft that can span a thousand miles easily, while the conventional supply lines to support occupying ground forces are very costly to maintain. Although it a stalemate along the current lines would be the best outcome, it appears it is unlikely. But if I were a Russian or Ukrainian soldier, I wouldn’t mind being posted along a DMZ even if it meant being there for a 1 year deployment. Better one year standing guard duty than one minute of actual combat.
      But if nothing happens, that would be a sign that both sies now realize they can not sustain any more conflict. Maybe the same dilemma with the China vs Taiwan. Like two drunks who are now too drunk to fight each other despite all their threats. In a strange way, this would be a signa that maybe supplies and transport of energy and materials have reached critical supply deficiencies globally.

Leave a Reply