We just sent Putin a billion $$

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Please have a look around and if you like what you see, please consider registering an account and joining the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

11C1P

Yellow Jacket
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
223
Points
188
Location
North Dakota
United-States
We're using Ukraine as the go between though. Putin is skyrocketing the price for gas to the Ukraine, so we are sending them a billion dollars to help pay for the gas. At least we aren't selling them any of our own gas, that would just be crazy. Much better to just dump more money we don't have into the pockets of another madman just like we did with Hussein & Noriega in the 80's and so many others.
 
And Putin is gleefully taking it all. Soon he will give it all back, and when he does, you will be hard pressed to find the bottom of the crash. He is amassing a war chest, courtesy of the babies in power here, that he WILL use to DESTROY us.

We would be better off doing nothing, and even better off using Putin to OUR advantage, like selling OUR oil at the high prices while Putin shoots himself in the foot. Any good businessman will tell you SELL into price increases and to BUY when prices drop. If any of the quarterwits on the Hill even used a few neurons in their brains, that is what would be happening. Putin would then have NO OPPORTUNITY to build a war chest to destroy us.
 
The skies in the western 1/2 of our state our currently lit up with them burning off the excess gas that no one wants to allow them to ship overseas and they've run out of room to store. It pisses me off to no end to see all that potential profit literally going up in flames, especially when one of the main things stopping it is the environmentalnuts who don't want pipelines, refineries built or ships to transport it. Much better just to burn it off into the atmosphere 24/7 for years and years.
 
I have been watching he Ukraine theing with great interest. For many hundreds of years, this region has waffled back and forth between Russia and independent region. Why it is suddenly within the providence of the brand new [relatively anyway] EU or even the USA to interfere, I cannot figure out. I do know that if the Russian section of Ukraine goes from this separation to being a powerhouse, and the EU dominated side gets strip mined of assets by the IMF [a guaranteed event IMHO] we'll see some dramatic contrast that will open the eyes of Greeks, Turks, Italians and Spaniards. They will finally see the Euronannycrats for what they are and separate themselves from the Union immediately.

The entire EU project was dreamed up by the very same assholes responsible for the worlds financial mess and revolves around nothing other than money. It has not a single thing to do with freedom, trade, movement within the EU or any other such nonsense. It was all about redistributing the poor of Europe throughout Europe so the weight of social programs was borne more or less equally by all the countries in Europe, rather than entire depressed countries like the Balkans, Romania, et. al., bearing their own weight for their own poor decision making and bad legislation.

One look at the British Roma infestation is pure testament to the complete and utter failure of the EU idea. The Roma do not want jobs. Period. They want to suck the teat and live off the largesse of the richer nations of Europe. I challenge you to name just one Roma individual that has done a single solitary beneficial thing that the rest of the world applauded. Just one.

See what I mean?
 
Last edited:
I have been watching he Ukraine theing with great interest. For many hundreds of years, this region has waffled back and forth between Russia and independent region. Why it is suddenly within the providence of the brand new [relatively anyway] EU or even the USA to interfere, I cannot figure out. I do know that if the Russian section of Ukraine goes from this separation to being a powerhouse, and the EU dominated side gets strip mined of assets by the IMF [a guaranteed event IMHO] we'll see some dramatic contrast that will open the eyes of Greeks, Turks, Italians and Spaniards. They will finally see the Euronannycrats for what they are and separate themselves from the Union immediately.

The entire EU project was dreamed up by the very same assholes responsible for the worlds financial mess and revolves around nothing other than money. It has not a single thing to do with freedom, trade, movement within the EU or any other such nonsense. It was all about redistributing the poor of Europe throughout Europe so the weight of social programs was borne more or less equally by all the countries in Europe, rather than entire depressed countries like the Balkans, Romania, et. al., bearing their won weight for their own poor decision making and bad legislation.

One look at the British Roma infestation is pure testament to the complete and utter failure of the EU idea. The Roma do not want jobs. Period. They want to suck the teat and live off the largesse of the richer nations of Europe. I challenge you to name just one Roma individual that has done a single solitary beneficial thing that the rest of the world applauded. Just one.

See what I mean?


So if a previous "owner" of your house barged in and said that this house belonged to him because it had been in his family longer than you've been around you'd be ok with that? I will go out on a limb and guess you'd want someone to throw his ass out on the street in a new york minute. If you think we should just let bullies take over democracies or fledgling democracies that are struggling towards freedom and independence, I don't think you should be inclined to ask for any help when someone comes to take your property. See what I mean?
 
11C1P,
Russia did not barge in, they held a vote in the Crimea and decided they wanted to be part of Russia and not the EU.
 
11C1P,
Russia did not barge in, they held a vote in the Crimea and decided they wanted to be part of Russia and not the EU.

If you believe 98% of the people voted for that, then you must also believe all those other elections held at the point of a gun like in N. Korea and Iraq under hussein where they get similar numbers. If someone sent troops into TX then held an "election" that says they are now part of Mexico are you just going to accept that? We didn't even let states that wanted to secede from the U.S. without being invaded do so. When they roll into the Ukraine, I'm sure there will be another "vote" and all these people will vote overwhelmingly to be under Russian rule.
 
Soo........we should g3et involved in yet another war? With Russia? In their own back yard?

I seem to remember that both Napoleon and Hitler made exactly the same, nation bankrupting decisions.

I am not saying this is necessarily right, just that it's none of our damn business. i do however, stand by the statement that Crimea will be far, far better off under Russian rule than Ukraine will be under EU - IMF control. And I believe it will be by a huge margin. Like I said, for the EU-IMF this is all about asset mining and stripping the people of whatever remains of their money. One look at Greece should tell the tale.
 
The skies in the western 1/2 of our state our currently lit up with them burning off the excess gas that no one wants to allow them to ship overseas and they've run out of room to store. It pisses me off to no end to see all that potential profit literally going up in flames, especially when one of the main things stopping it is the environmentalnuts who don't want pipelines, refineries built or ships to transport it. Much better just to burn it off into the atmosphere 24/7 for years and years.

I thought this argument was put to rest long, long ago. How exactly do you propose to get the NG there?

edited to add the infrastructure required is incredibly complex, and certainly not profitable
 
Last edited:
Soo........we should g3et involved in yet another war? With Russia? In their own back yard?

I seem to remember that both Napoleon and Hitler made exactly the same, nation bankrupting decisions.

I am not saying this is necessarily right, just that it's none of our damn business. i do however, stand by the statement that Crimea will be far, far better off under Russian rule than Ukraine will be under EU - IMF control. And I believe it will be by a huge margin. Like I said, for the EU-IMF this is all about asset mining and stripping the people of whatever remains of their money. One look at Greece should tell the tale.


Yes clearly the only option is all out war. :flail:
 
I thought this argument was put to rest long, long ago. How exactly do you propose to get the NG there?

edited to add the infrastructure required is incredibly complex, and certainly not profitable

Sure, it's too hard to build a pipe line and boats. (even though they do it already for a plenty healthy profit) So if you think something would be difficult you say don't bother? Glad you weren't around when they build Hoover dam or started the space program, or signed the Declaration of Independence, or planned the D-day invasion, and on and on.
 
Sure, it's too hard to build a pipe line and boats. (even though they do it already for a plenty healthy profit) So if you think something would be difficult you say don't bother? Glad you weren't around when they build Hoover dam or started the space program, or signed the Declaration of Independence, or planned the D-day invasion, and on and on.

I am going to give you the same answer DCFuser gave me; you need to get a science book and read it, so you can understand physics. You cannot move liquid NG the same way you move oil by boat.
 
I am going to give you the same answer DCFuser gave me; you need to get a science book and read it, so you can understand physics. You cannot move liquid NG the same way you move oil by boat.


You can tell me that the sun revolves around the earth by your "science" but that does not make it so. It would be you that needs a science book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LNG_carrier

http://www.coselle.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_gas_pipelines

http://www.enterpriseproducts.com/operations/NglPipelinesServices.shtm
 

So some guy spouting off that the technology doesn't exist PROVES that it doesn't. Well then I say Australia doesn't exist either! I guess despite all the evidence that it does, means it doesn't. Then an article that says if because they don't have enough rail or pipeline to move the oil along with the feds & some states not allowing drilling production will go down. What a shocker! Even though that makes my point for me that we need to build more pipelines and increase rail capacity and allow for more drilling to help the economy you point to it as proof it won't help. Oh wait, I forgot you think the technology doesn't exist. Tell all the people at your next flat earth society meeting I said hi. :noevil:
 
This has turned in to a pretty informative thread. The Coselle System is very promising, as it takes NG on board in it's gaseous phase, does a HP phase change on-board, allowing the gas to be transported as a liquid, but then uses the system sort of in reverse to off-load the cargo as a gas.

I am someone that believes we are allowing far, far too much gas to simply flare off at a well head in the interests of a few who want to simply squeeze a few dollars out as fast as possible. America needs to start looking at our natural resources more like a national property, rather than allow them to be stripped off by the highest paying lease holder to do with what they will.

To just flare off billions and billions of dollars worth of gas because we don't have enough pipeline is criminal and should be stopped. Instead of rushing in and raping an entire region as fast as it can be done, we need to consider construction of infrastructure to recover every single BTU of energy before we let a bunch of roust-abouts to drag up in a gaggle of pick-up trucks and go as fast as they can.

That the practice of flaring gas is still permitted makes me furious. Russia no longer permits the practice, and now controls a huge percentage of energy resources across Europe. If we had policy in place requiring that companies invest in the infrastructure to handle the expected quantities of non-renewables, and forbid the flaring of finite resources such as Nat Gas, we would be better as a nation.
 
Last edited:
So some guy spouting off that the technology doesn't exist PROVES that it doesn't. Well then I say Australia doesn't exist either! I guess despite all the evidence that it does, means it doesn't. Then an article that says if because they don't have enough rail or pipeline to move the oil along with the feds & some states not allowing drilling production will go down. What a shocker! Even though that makes my point for me that we need to build more pipelines and increase rail capacity and allow for more drilling to help the economy you point to it as proof it won't help. Oh wait, I forgot you think the technology doesn't exist. Tell all the people at your next flat earth society meeting I said hi. :noevil:

so you call people names you don't agree with? Nice! Actually, I was trying to point out that it was too expensive to transport gas across the ocean (for a profit) and the fact that we are destroying our own environment in the pursuit of NG (fracking). But never underestimate the ignorance of the cornicopians, they will always find a way to promote business as usual....until they can't. Which is looking more and more like the very near future....the meme that technology will save us is why we are in overshoot NOW....:wave:
 
so you call people names you don't agree with? Nice! Actually, I was trying to point out that it was too expensive to transport gas across the ocean (for a profit) and the fact that we are destroying our own environment in the pursuit of NG (fracking). But never underestimate the ignorance of the cornicopians, they will always find a way to promote business as usual....until they can't. Which is looking more and more like the very near future....the meme that technology will save us is why we are in overshoot NOW....:wave:

Actually you don't seem to know whether you're shot, fucked or snake-bit. First you said it's too difficult to do things with natural gas like pipelines and shipping. Then you said the technology doesn't even exist due to "science" Now you've decided to pronounce it "too expensive" How cost effective is it handing Putin billions just to keep him sending gas to the Ukraine? The cost may currently still be high to transport it, but as demand goes up and the more ships they add, the profit margins will increase. I don't know what names I called you except maybe a flat earther, but when you keep saying something doesn't exist, when it clearly does, it seems about the nicest thing I could call you really. :flushed:
 
You cannot move liquid NG the same way you move oil by boat ?

Im a bit confused ........

http://www.rivieramm.com/publications/lng-world-shipping-3

There seems to have been a fair amount of risk money spent on LNG terminals and boats,
suggesting there has to be ways of liquifying ( at source? ) in order to be able to subsequently ship the stuff.

I cheerfully admit to not knowing anything about LNG (-:
 
You cannot move liquid NG the same way you move oil by boat ?

Im a bit confused ........

http://www.rivieramm.com/publications/lng-world-shipping-3

There seems to have been a fair amount of risk money spent on LNG terminals and boats,
suggesting there has to be ways of liquifying ( at source? ) in order to be able to subsequently ship the stuff.

I cheerfully admit to not knowing anything about LNG (-:

Don't cloud "science" with facts. :judge:
 
the fact that they flare off the gas in ND tells us something though .........

N.D. isn't the only place that flares off nat gas. There are at least a couple reasons they do it. Not enough room to store it, and it's just worth enough like oil/gas is to bother building a bunch to try and hold it all. If they started making a lot more vehicles that ran off it, and power plants then the demand might make it worth storing. There isn't enough capacity to ship it either. The farmers here were on the news bitching about the oil companies hogging all the rail capacity driving up shipping prices and making harvested crops sit here in bins, silos and on the ground. Very little pipeline capacity to move it and doesn't look like any new pipelines will be built at least while barry is wasting space at the white house.
 
I don't know how many members here read Mish, but he posted a very relevant video just a little while ago that I want to share here. It is a video discussing transportation and distribution of LNG and should prove at the very least, informational:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/arms-of-behemoth-interesting-video-on.html

Now why would they build a big boat that can do all that? It would be hard to do that. Not to mention it just isn't possible, and if it was, it would be expensive so they should just stop now.:paperbag:
 
Take the quiz fellas..

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-01/guest-post-absurdity-us-natural-gas-exports

If you honestly believe that the US is suddenly going to be able to go toe to toe with Russia on natural gas exports, you've fallen for some of the most ridiculous propaganda ever espoused by the MSM.

If you think Putin turning off the gas completely or us paying billions for him to keep it trickling in to the Ukraine is effective, and we can't ship it there for a profit you've fallen for some of the most ridiculous environmentalist and anti-capitals propaganda ever espoused.

They are literally burning the stuff off cause most of the heavily populated areas don't use nat gas for power, so demand in this country is fairly low. Not to mention few vehicle here run of nat gas. Here is a pic of the bakken with all that light coming from one of the LEAST populated parts of our state, most of the population is in the east. That light is the flares!

Bakken.Marble.Annotated.png


ND-580x3281.jpg



EDIT: BTW submitting a link written by a character from a crappy movie is pretty sketchy form of back up IMO.
 
Last edited:
Looks like they might be making some headway in getting the govt. to get on board. Now if barry would only start approving pipelines & new refineries.

[ame="http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000266292"]ConocoPhillips' future really bright: CEO - CNBC[/ame]
 
How is that environmentalist propaganda? Nothing in there discounts natural gas as a viable energy source. It explains why US prices are artificially low.

If we've got so much natural gas, why are we importing it? I'm guessing you didn't even read the article because the idea that we could switch to nat gas without billions in infrastructure spending is preposterous. Let alone be able to export it and "save" Europe.

As for bashing zerohedge, you must be new here. Zerohedge is really good.

In fact.. they had another article pop up today that shows how Europe just folded on this issue.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-11/putin-tells-europe-pay-ukraines-gazprom-bill-or-else

We have to be realistic and not base our opinions on nationalistic propaganda. We do not have the ability to compete with Russia in the natural gas arena. We consume more nat gas than we produce and import an absolute shit load every year. Obama signing a gas deal wont fix this.
 
Oh.. and ANOTHER post that links to a financial times article..

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...rom-due-nat-gas-exports-nonsense-cheniere-ceo

Charif Souki, Cheniere’s chief executive, said that the idea of his company’s exports alone liberating Europe from Russia’s Gazprom was “nonsense” and that only six to eight of 20-plus proposed rival export projects were “real”.

...


The east-west stand-off over Ukraine has sparked a political debate over whether the US should loosen its energy export restrictions so Europeans can buy liquefied natural gas, or LNG, from America’s shale energy boom.



Asked if Cheniere’s terminal could rescue eastern European countries from their dependence on Russia, Mr Souki said: “It’s flattering to be talked about like this, but it’s all nonsense. It’s so much nonsense that I can’t believe anybody really believes it.”

Mr Souki said the only ones he considered to be real were the six to eight that had started a separate process – which he said entailed $100m in costs – of gaining permits from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or Ferc, which assesses environmental and safety standards.

“Until somebody tells me they’re willing to spend $100m, I don’t consider them real,” he said.

Mr Souki said he had no control over where his customers would sell that LNG. “I’m pretty sure they will be opportunistic and, if they need it for their home market, they will take it for their own markets and, if they don’t need it, it will go somewhere else.”

But what does the CEO of Cheniere know?
 
How is that environmentalist propaganda? Nothing in there discounts natural gas as a viable energy source. It explains why US prices are artificially low.

If we've got so much natural gas, why are we importing it? I'm guessing you didn't even read the article because the idea that we could switch to nat gas without billions in infrastructure spending is preposterous. Let alone be able to export it and "save" Europe.

As for bashing zerohedge, you must be new here. Zerohedge is really good.

In fact.. they had another article pop up today that shows how Europe just folded on this issue.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-11/putin-tells-europe-pay-ukraines-gazprom-bill-or-else

We have to be realistic and not base our opinions on nationalistic propaganda. We do not have the ability to compete with Russia in the natural gas arena. We consume more nat gas than we produce and import an absolute shit load every year. Obama signing a gas deal wont fix this.

How do you not know that environmentalists are always blocking ALL forms of energy? They even block the wind power they once said they would be happy with! Not to mention the govt. doesn't block the importation of gas/oil like it messes with the exports. We could easily be 100% non dependent on foreign oil/gas if the govt. & enviro wackos. Yes, I tend not to trust articles written by people who won't put their name to them. If it's some kind of whistleblower, maybe, but not some nobody spouting off about stuff that people know isn't true. Whether you like the technology or not, and whether you'd rather hug trees or bitch about profit margins, the fact is the technology to transport gas DOES exist, and it CAN be done at a profit. Is it possible some rodents & birds might have to relocate a few miles cause of it? Yes. Does that bother me? No. Will us shipping gas to europe solve all the worlds problems, or all of eurposes problems, certainly not but it will definitely help. Keep drilling!
 
Oh.. and ANOTHER post that links to a financial times article..

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...rom-due-nat-gas-exports-nonsense-cheniere-ceo







But what does the CEO of Cheniere know?

Thank you, your own guy agrees.

Quote :
Mr Souki said the only ones he considered to be real were the six to eight that had started a separate process – which he said entailed $100m in costs – of gaining permits from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or Ferc, which assesses environmental and safety standards.

“Until somebody tells me they’re willing to spend $100m, I don’t consider them real,” he said.

Tell the feds to get out of the way and voila! Gas companies used to get huge govt. breaks for research, exploration, and building new facilities. Now they have to pay billions just to have environmental impact studies done, and go through committee and on and on.
 
The loony left enviro-wackos are at it again. Since before I was born, these nut jobs have been saying that oil will run out in 20-50 years and that we've hit "peak oil", yet the peak keeps going up & up. They continually find more sources of oil & new ways to extract previous deposits thought to be unreachable. The idea that natural gas will run out in 50 years is so laughable, I think I could sue for cracking a rib. They keep storing more and MORE nat gas here, all while still burning off tons of the stuff. Even though we have the DAPL finished (finally) they aren't using the freed up rail capacity to ship any nat gas out. This has to be part of an effort by the oil companies to keep cars, power plants & all other manner of things from running on it. It burns MUCH cleaner than gasoline, but I imagine since for the most part it comes out of the ground pretty much ready to use, they can't point to refiner costs or other refiner issues to jack up the price. We need a Henry Ford of nat gas cars to come on the scene & make a good, affordable car that will use clean burning nat gas & then hopefully the masses will see the light.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/ticking-timebomb-when-will-the-worlds-natural-resources-run-out/ss-BBMUmxi?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout#image=1

.
 
Back
Top Bottom