Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
"Confidence in German economy falters as Russia sanctions take their toll"
"Europe's standoff with Russia has affected the region's largest economy after economic confidence in Germany nosedived unexpectedly, fuelling fears the eurozone's weak recovery will be snuffed out."
"I would suspect that investing in LNG facilities and importers in the EU might be a winner here."
Seems to me that some weeks ago I posted a link & comments on a LNG pipeline currently being built across France to Germany. I'll see if I can dig it up.
Edit: Yes, here it is:
"We can keep shale gas, our new-found national treasure of inexpensive energy, mainly for domestic consumption. This would have the benefits of restoring some degree of industrial competition with the rest of the world, thus providing some additional employment for American workers, reducing our carbon footprint, and generally reducing costs to American consumers.
Or, we can export huge quantities to Europe or Asia, (sarcasm) providing a much-needed source of additional enrichment for the energy industry.(/ sarcasm)
But of course it isn't that simple: thanks to Russia's expansionist adventures in the Ukraine, there is a strong and understandable sentiment for making Europe less dependent upon Russian natural gas. It will come as no great surprise when our feckless congress begins to loudly shout for American energy exports to save the world from Putin. Anyone not in agreement will be painted as an enemy of freedom, democracy, and the American way.
Little or no discussion will explore the question of why Europe itself seems to be in no hurry to explore or exploit shale gas deposits there. That exploration is currently "on hold" until Europe is satisfied that fracking poses no great risk of environmental disaster. The general European attitude is, as usual, to let America take the chances and pay the freight.
This article from Reuters is interesting. "New French gas pipeline to offer Germany alternative supply". Really? Let's see now... if France doesn't allow fracking, there certainly won't be a lot of extra gas there. Oh, I see: the French are building new LNG terminals! Where do you suppose that gas is going to come from?"
For the previous post, with it's associated comments and replies, go here..
I recall that Norway has been asked to be a supplier, too; in addition to what they may already provide. I recall from an early 1990's article, I believe; about the possible problems with the NG lines that were being built from Russia to the Euro area (passing through Ukraine) and "IF" there was a "problem" and the ramifications. Guess the area is in the problem circumstance presently. @Old_Joe ........."you have mail", as the AOL voice states.
Is the "N" word...Nuclear...still pollutionally incorrect? I don't think more wind mills is the short term answer to EU energy needs. Idle nuclear plants might be the intermediate term solution until additional LNG facility come on line. I believe even dirty coal may get a boost here.
WSJ article: Rising Coal Use Clouds Europe's Future
Comments
Thank you.
A related story; Euro Zone general info.
And the deflation thing, still.....
Not yet time to sell some of those bonds, eh???
As Ed Sullivan used to say; "It's a really big show!"
Take care,
Catch
Edit: Yes, here it is:
"We can keep shale gas, our new-found national treasure of inexpensive energy, mainly for domestic consumption. This would have the benefits of restoring some degree of industrial competition with the rest of the world, thus providing some additional employment for American workers, reducing our carbon footprint, and generally reducing costs to American consumers.
Or, we can export huge quantities to Europe or Asia, (sarcasm) providing a much-needed source of additional enrichment for the energy industry.(/ sarcasm)
But of course it isn't that simple: thanks to Russia's expansionist adventures in the Ukraine, there is a strong and understandable sentiment for making Europe less dependent upon Russian natural gas. It will come as no great surprise when our feckless congress begins to loudly shout for American energy exports to save the world from Putin. Anyone not in agreement will be painted as an enemy of freedom, democracy, and the American way.
Little or no discussion will explore the question of why Europe itself seems to be in no hurry to explore or exploit shale gas deposits there. That exploration is currently "on hold" until Europe is satisfied that fracking poses no great risk of environmental disaster. The general European attitude is, as usual, to let America take the chances and pay the freight.
This article from Reuters is interesting. "New French gas pipeline to offer Germany alternative supply". Really? Let's see now... if France doesn't allow fracking, there certainly won't be a lot of extra gas there. Oh, I see: the French are building new LNG terminals! Where do you suppose that gas is going to come from?"
For the previous post, with it's associated comments and replies, go here..
I recall from an early 1990's article, I believe; about the possible problems with the NG lines that were being built from Russia to the Euro area (passing through Ukraine) and "IF" there was a "problem" and the ramifications. Guess the area is in the problem circumstance presently.
@Old_Joe ........."you have mail", as the AOL voice states.
WSJ article:
Rising Coal Use Clouds Europe's Future
online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304450904579367074233771140