Search

Notices

Peak Gas In China

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-03-2023 | 05:50 AM
  #141  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Default

Originally Posted by CBreezy
Is it really that painful for you to like what someone who isn't your political persuasion did?

Well, is this any better?

Winner of Nobel Prize for Physics gets “canceled” from a prestigious event for saying, “I don’t believe there is a climate crisis” (msn.com)
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 06:27 AM
  #142  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,480
Likes: 1,051
Default

Could you have chosen a more obvious strawman?
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 06:56 AM
  #143  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Default

Originally Posted by CBreezy
Could you have chosen a more obvious strawman?
I'll answer your question to my question with another question.

Is it really that painful for you to dislike what somebody of your political persuasion did?


Bous point. See what I did there?
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 06:58 AM
  #144  
Banned
 
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
Default

what even is this website? Holy moly
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 07:04 AM
  #145  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,480
Likes: 1,051
Default

Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
I'll answer your question to my question with another question.

Is it really that painful for you to dislike what somebody of your political persuasion did?


Bous point. See what I did there?
That isn't even remotely relevant. In one, a member of the opposite party did something you would have been cheering if it had been your own party. You can say "I'm glad he did that and support it."

As to your question, I don't think a quantum physicist without any published research in atmospheric science or climate modeling has any business speaking as an expert in climate models in the first place. Just like you would have no business speaking about trains at a train symposium.
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 07:12 AM
  #146  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
what even is this website? Holy moly
I agree...it's click bait. But it does provide a small glimpse into interesting things that one can then go fact check if they care to. Kinda like I try to fact check things that "acknowledged experts" say if/when I can.
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 07:22 AM
  #147  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Default

Originally Posted by CBreezy

As to your question, I don't think a quantum physicist without any published research in atmospheric science or climate modeling has any business speaking as an expert in climate models in the first place. Just like you would have no business speaking about trains at a train symposium.
You might have a possible explanation. But, then I would certainly wonder "Why the heck was he invited to speak in the first place?" Maybe he just invited himself ?

Seems like someone let Fauci make policy decisions that effected a myriad of facets of American life that he had no business speaking about. So, it appears it's acceptable if they back up one's ideology but unacceptable if they are contrary to one's leanings? That's the point.
Reply
Old 09-03-2023 | 03:15 PM
  #148  
DeltaboundRedux's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 2,906
Likes: 159
From: Enoch Powell Enthusiast
Default

Originally Posted by MiserDD
Back in the early 1800’s people up north wanted cotton and they said about the same things of the slaves in the south who were forced to pick it. It doesn’t “work for them” it’s their only option.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/21...-human-rights/
No one here is a professional writer, historian, or economist, so I just want to make sure I understand your point:

Are you comparing an economic “comparative advantage” (a “term of art”) with institutionalized multi generational chattel slavery?

(I mean, write whatever you want, but I’ll just back off and politely say “I disagree with your analysis.” The Uyghur situation is a sliver of China’s output and while wrong, it’s more of an ethnic cleansing issue not a cost cutting matter. It isn’t a fair example of the overall growth of China.)
Reply
Old 09-26-2023 | 09:17 AM
  #149  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Default

Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey
It’s been greed plain and simple. Companies did not want to invest in their own infrastructure, in this case refineries. They put off heavy maintenance, not a new one built in decades. The big manufacturers are even off loading their refineries to other companies to get them off their books.

All of this has been happening long before ESG investing came along.
Just want to tap in and provide some actual facts.

There have been 8 brand new refineries built in the last decade.

of the older refineries.....

The #3 refinery in Lake Charles LA est. 1977 had original capacity of 6,500 B/CD Today it's capacity is 135,000B/CD(barrels per calendar day). Yes, you read that correctly! That's a 2,100% increase in capacity

The #2 refinery in Corpus Christi TX est. in 1977 had original capacity of 15,000 B/CD Today it's capacity is almost 300,000BCB That's a 2,000% increase in capacity

The #1 refinery capacity in Garyville LA est. 1976 had original capacity or 200,000 B/CD. Today it's capacity is 600,000 B/CD. That's a 300% increase in capacity.

So, with regard to," Companies did not want to invest in their own infrastructure, in this case refineries.".... I am gonna have to give your whole post 5 Pinocchio's .....IOW, total BS.

Is your post lifted from KJP White house brief?

Last edited by Buck Rogers; 09-26-2023 at 09:46 AM.
Reply
Old 09-26-2023 | 09:52 AM
  #150  
Line Holder
Veteran: Navy
5 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 280
Default

Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
Just want to tap in and provide some actual facts.

There have been 8 brand new refineries built in the last decade.

of the older refineries.....

The #3 refinery in Lake Charles LA est. 1977 had original capacity of 6,500 B/CD Today it's capacity is 135,000B/CD(barrels per calendar day). Yes, you read that correctly! That's a 2,100% increase in capacity

The #2 refinery in Corpus Christi TX est. in 1977 had original capacity of 15,000 B/CD Today it's capacity is almost 300,000BCB That's a 2,000% increase in capacity

The #1 refinery capacity in Garyville LA est. 1976 had original capacity or 200,000 B/CD. Today it's capacity is 600,000 B/CD. That's a 300% increase in capacity.

So, with regard to," Companies did not want to invest in their own infrastructure, in this case refineries.".... I am gonna have to give your whole post 5 Pinocchio's .....IOW, total BS.

Is your post lifted from KJP White house brief?
You got me. I should have said no new “major” refineries have been built in a couple decades. Even the Chevron CEO says the same thing.

Chevron CEO Mike Wirth does not expect anotheroil refinery to be built in the United States ever again, due to federal government policies. The last significant refinery built in the United States was in 1976. (A small refinery came online in 2020 in North Dakota).


There have been plenty of small
refineries built. Mostly niche refineries that refine special blends or product. Lots of those were built during the shale boom because refining shale is very difficult.

I never said they did zero investment is the last 40 years. Like I said previously times, they gotta come down and refurbish. It’s good they increased capacity, they had to. It’s a lot cheaper than building a whole new major refinery.

You still haven’t countered the initial point: refining is our bottleneck.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
whalesurfer
Cargo
8
08-06-2017 06:26 PM
captain_drew
Cargo
2
02-09-2016 06:54 PM
jungle
Money Talk
14
05-18-2012 05:28 AM
APC225
United
7
02-27-2012 08:55 PM
Diesel 10
Cargo
1
10-14-2005 04:53 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices