[Steve]

Telegram Post -

How is it possible that European countries, allowed themselves to become so dependent on Russia over the 30 years since the end of the Cold War? 


Here’s how: These countries are in the grips of a delusional green ideology that makes them incapable of understanding the hard realities of energy production. In fact the climate hoax was invented for this precise purpose amongst others.

• Europe produces 3.6 million barrels of oil a day but uses 15 million barrels/day
  
• Europe produces 230 billion m3 of natural gas a year but uses 560 billion m3
  
• Europe uses 950 million tons of coal a year but produces half that
  

♦️Russia produces 11 million barrels of oil per day but only uses 3.4 million

♦️Russia produces over 700 billion m3 of gas a year but only uses around 400 billion

♦️Russia mines 800 million tons of coal each year but uses 300

That’s how Russia ends up supplying about 20 percent of Europe’s oil, 40 percent of its gas, and 20 percent of its coal. 

The math is simple. 

https://t.me/LauraAbolichannel



[font=.SFUI-Regular]https://t.me/BenjaminFulfordWDSGroup/43838[/font]

[awakened53]

No Savings With ‘Green’ Energy: It’s 4 To 6 Times MORE Expensive

President Joe Biden keeps claiming that wind and solar energy are going to save money for consumers. But more government subsidies to “renewable energy” is a key feature of the White House anti-inflation strategy recently announced by Biden.
He probably got that idea from John Kerry, the administration’s climate czar, who recently claimed that “solar and wind are less expensive than coal or oil or gas.” Pete Buttigieg, the Biden Transportation secretary, makes the same claims about the thousands of dollars that motorists can save if they buy electric cars.
This couldn’t be more wrong.
Proponents of “green” energy boondoggles are often masters at playing with the numbers, because that is the only way that wind and solar electricity generation make any sense. Advocates such as Kerry love to focus on the low operating costs of solar and wind since they don’t require constant purchases of fuel. Ignoring the relatively short lifespan of solar and wind components, as well as the high initial investment, can make it appear as though solar and wind operate at lower costs than fossil fuels or nuclear power.
Let’s get the facts straight. The cost isn’t just what you pay at the retail level for gas or power. It also includes the taxes you pay to subsidize the power. A 2017 study by the Department of Energy found that for every dollar of government subsidy per BTU unit of energy produced from fossil fuels, wind and solar get at least $10.
That’s anything but a money saver.
The reason the subsidies are so high is that solar and wind have additional costs compared to their more reliable competition. “Green” energy sources are non-dispatchable, meaning their output can’t be changed to match demand. The wind doesn’t blow harder, and the sun doesn’t shine brighter, just because electricity use is peaking.
Conversely, fossil fuel entities—such as a coal plant—can ramp up generation when we need it most and ramp down when demand falls.
Read More: No Savings With ‘Green’ Energy: It’s 4 To 6 Times MORE Expensive