pull down to refresh

Trump is vocal that the Europeans GOTTA BUY MORE AMERICAN GAS.
The Europeans are vocal that evil dictator-supplier of gas is Bad Man™ and shouldn't supply the continent with gas (+ climate change eschatologists think it's morally reprehensible to take it/use it.)
And then were have this observation in the FT:
EU gas prices are roughly more than three times higher than in the US and have stubbornly remained more than double what they were before Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

I spot a trade: What gives?

I was under the impression that the problem was physically taking delivery of the LNG within Europe—i.e., the terminals that can anchor big American ships are few and are already maxed out in capacity. (Hopefully some engineering/in-the-know Stacker can correct me here).
Interesting too that the EU, all the political posturing aside, has increased its import of Russian LNG. I guess freezing = bad, so high-flying geopolitical nonsense go out the window. Apparently not, says the FT piece:
The underlying issue is the bloc’s inability to wean itself off cheaper Russian fossil fuels. Last year, EU companies imported record amounts of LNG from the country.
As with all such top-down, hand-wavy shit bureaucrats/politicians/thinktankers/journalists can come up with, reality is harder than empty words. There's no "weaning oneself off" involved; there's trade, and the physical nature of energy. End of.
Reading the news is fun, and bad for your health. ugh.

Just to clarify, the numbers for the imports of gas for Europe from US might have increased but the numbers fir the imports of gas from Russia hasn't declined in the same proportion. This means that Europe has actually limited its imports from other other sources than Russia.
Why they think they are winning by importing more gas from USA?
reply
not sure what your question is... wouldn't it be good, both for Americans and Europeans, if the EU imported more American gas...?
As for your observation, agreed. There's some hint in the article that there's been a substitution away from Russian oil and coal, and that the gas to some extent has replaced it
reply
I mean the imports of gas from Russia haven't declined, as you can see in my chart.
Your chart and news suggests that the gas imports from USA to Europe have increased.
Doesn't both of the above conclude that Europe is now importing less gas from other countries? This also means that Russia isn't as affected as is proclaimed.
reply
no, because of what I said above: substitution fr other sources. That was suggested in the FT article too
reply
Okay. I see it now. I clearly missed on the 'substitution for resources'.
reply
29 sats \ 1 reply \ @Aardvark 19h
Reading the news is fun, and bad for your health. ugh
Just my personal experience anyhow.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Shugard 18h
I was looking to find this comment! And here we are! Thank you for not letting me down @Aardvark
reply
I was under the impression that the problem was physically taking delivery of the LNG within Europe—i.e., the terminals that can anchor big American ships are few and are already maxed out in capacity.
I vaguely remember something about the fact that LNG has to be converted back to gas, and it's these facilities that are maxed in capacity. But the ship thing makes sense too, so likely a combination of these 2 (and maybe other factors)?
reply
14 sats \ 1 reply \ @Shugard 18h
But my feelings? Who is taking my feelings about climate change, terrorism and patriarchy into consideration?
reply
nobody, sir. People fueled by those "emotions" are no bueno
reply
When Putin invaded Ukraine, he certainly knew he would face sanctions, but the G7 did not expect Russia to stand firm. NATO made a completely wrong analysis of the geopolitical scenario and who suffers the consequences and the population
reply
Yes indeed
reply
Reading the news is fun, and bad for your health. ugh.
Really nice line 😂
reply