This is our daily post that is shared across Twitter & Telegram and published first on here with Kindness & Love XX on peace-truth.com/

#AceNewsRoom With ‘Kindness & Wisdom’ July.03, 2022 @acebreakingnews

Follow Our Breaking & Daily News Here As It Happens:

Net Zero Samizdat: The world’s best climate & energy bulletin: 29 June 2022:

1) Back to black: Europe’s real energy transition – from gas to coal
ING, 27 June 2022
 
2) King Coal makes comeback in Europe
Energy Intelligence Group, 28 June 2022

3) G-7 nations endorse investing in natural gas amid Russia crisis
The Hill, 28 June 2022
  

4) Political climate change: European Commission backs Norway’s offshore oil and gas industry
The Maritime Executive, 28 June 2022

5) UK sets out emergency plan to cut gas supplies to Europe
The Daily Telegraph, 29 June 2022

 
6) Lawrence Kudlow: Biden’s green strategy is in complete collapse, at home and globally
The New York Sun, 28 June 2022

7) Richard Alston: Beware existential angst of the climate alarmists
The Australian, 29 June 2022
 

8) Walter Russell Mead: End of the German Idyll
The Wall Street Journal, 27 June 2022

9) Big Brother is watching you: Electric cars should have tracking devices to monitor movements and raising taxes
The Daily Telegraph, 29 June 2022
 

1) Back to black: Europe’s real energy transition – from gas to coal
ING, 27 June 2022

European countries are being forced to revive coal plants to cut back their dependency on Russian gas. Poland and Germany are in the best position for that gas-to-coal switch.

Coal and nuclear power plants might come to the rescue.

Gas flows from Russia to Europe have been reduced to alarmingly low levels in recent days. On top of that, the LNG market is also tighter following an outage at the Freeport LNG export terminal in the US.

This has fuelled debate about how to reduce gas use in the EU. Previously we concluded that there is no silver bullet for sectors, but the power sector could play an important role. In this article, we look at to what extent the power sector can substitute gas-fired power plants with coal-fired plants (gas-to-coal switch) or nuclear power plants (gas-to-nuke switch).

Our main conclusions are:

Poland, and to a lesser extent Germany, can substitute gas use by gas-fired power plants by running coal plants at full capacity, provided that enough coal is available.

The Netherlands lifted the 35% production cap for coal plants which could substitute 46% of gas-fired power generation, if the four remaining coal plants are fully utilised.

France could fully substitute gas use in the power sector if it had its full fleet of nuclear power plants at its disposal. Unfortunately it has not, as 24 of the 56 nuclear reactors are shut down for maintenance. Hence, there is no room for a gas-to-nuclear switch.

Belgium could substitute one-third of gas use in gas-fired power plants by running the current seven reactors at full capacity. That is unlikely to happen as two reactors will be closed soon, one in 2022 and one in 2023. Without these reactors, there is no potential to substitute power from gas plants with power from nuclear plants. The decision to extend the life cycle of two of the remaining five reactors does not change that outcome.

The closure of the three remaining nuclear power plants in Germany later this year has eliminated the option for a gas-to-nuclear switch in the country.

We arrived at these conclusions by looking at the extra power generation from coal and nuclear-fired power plants for a set of European countries if these plants are fully utilised – that is if they run at full capacity – and provided that there is enough coal available. More details on this theoretical exercise can be found in the box at the bottom of this page.

Coal plants: burn baby burn

Current energy markets provide favourable economic conditions for coal-fired power generation. The so-called dark spread is a measure of the competitiveness of coal-fired power generation compared to gas-fired power generation and shows high-profit levels for coal plants.

But despite favourable economic conditions, coal plants are generating less than they can. Coal-fired power plants have been closed recently or were restricted to run at full capacity as a result of climate and energy transition policies.

Our analysis suggests that gas use from gas-fired power plants can be fully substituted by coal-fired power plants in Poland and Germany and to a very large degree in Portugal, Spain, and the Netherlands. In these countries, coal is an ‘easy’ answer to addressing energy security risks, despite the fact that it goes against global climate goals.

Poland and Germany could fully substitute gas use in the power sector by increasing coal-fired power generation

Potential extra coal-fired power generation as a percentage of current gas-fired power generation

Poland is the first European country that managed to top up its gas storage facilities. They are now 81% full as Poland was able to source a lot of LNG. Still, the 3.2 billion cubic metres (bcm) of stored gas is only a fraction of domestic gas consumption, at 21.3 bcm. The country is still vulnerable to prolonged gas disruptions.

Poland’s power mix is highly dependent on coal as the country started to switch to gas relatively late. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), the share of coal-fired power generation has come down from 94% in 2000 to 72% in 2020 on the back of more power generation from renewables and gas-fired power plants. Still, available coal capacity has not changed in the past 20 years and stands at ~30 gigawatts. By running coal plants at full capacity, Poland could easily phase out gas use in its gas plants.

Our analysis yields the highest number for Poland, at a stunning 230%. So if the country runs its coal plants at the maximum level seen in the past 20 years, it would generate an additional amount of coal power that is 230% higher than the power it currently generates from gas-fired power plants. With ample capacity, it might have room to export coal power to neighbouring countries to facilitate them in their pursuit to reduce gas dependency.

The intuitive answer to why this number is so high in Poland is easy: the fleet of coal-fired power plants is so much bigger than the fleet of gas-fired power plants, so it is relatively easy to substitute power and gas from gas plants.

However, this can only be used if enough coal is available. Currently, coal is scarce in Poland due to the embargo on Russian coal and under-investment by coal companies.

The German coalition intends to phase out coal plants in 2030 instead of 2038 when it entered office in November 2021. A gradual phase-out of lignite and hard coal power plants has already been started with Germany having run five ‘coal closer auctions’ so far in which owners of coal plants can bid on compensation for shutting down their power stations. Germany’s coal exit laws set a 15 GW maximum capacity target each for lignite and hard coal, with lignite closures following a set timetable. The most recent closures, however, have now been reversed due to the potential scarcity of natural gas arising from the Ukraine crisis.

If Germany fully utilises all of its coal plants, including the coal plants in the power reserve markets, it would generate around 100% more power than it produces with gas-fired power plants. In other words: it could substitute gas use from gas-fired power plants entirely, provided there is enough coal available. If one excludes the coal plants in the power reserve markets, the number drops to 59%.

The Netherlands operates four coal-fired power plants of which three are relatively large and new. The Dutch Urgenda court law required the Dutch government to lower emissions by 25% by 2020 onwards. In order to reach this target, the output of coal plants in 2022 was capped at 35% of full potential for 2022. This cap has been lifted as of 20 June, so that coal plants can substitute up to 46% of the gas use in gas-fired power plants, which are the dominant source in the Dutch power system.

Full story

2) King Coal makes comeback in Europe
Energy Intelligence Group, 28 June 2022

Old King Coal could make a comeback in some of Europe’s biggest power markets as governments ponder emergency measures designed to build up gas storage as Russian flows continue to drop.

With EU governments worried about possible energy rationing if storage proves inadequate, plans include relying more on operational coal and lignite units, bringing mothballed coal plants back into service for emergencies, and converting retired gas units to run on coal. The measures are deemed temporary, but some governments warn they could last a few years.

Coal-fired generation typically produces twice the carbon dioxide emissions of comparable gas-fired units and is much worse in terms of air pollutants and harmful particulates. Brussels nonetheless insists that greater short-term reliance on coal won’t compromise the longer-term EU goal of slashing greenhouse gas emissions at least 55% below 1990 levels by 2030 and going net-zero by 2050.

In its RePowerEU plan released in May, the European Commission had warned of a possible short-term increase in coal use as the bloc moved to pivot away from Russian gas, ending imports by 2027.

Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the UK, Denmark and Austria have all unveiled plans to use more coal if needed as they focus on injecting as much gas into storage as possible ahead of winter. The target is for EU storage facilities to be at least 80% full by Nov. 1.

Germany (Storage Currently 60.5% Full)

Germany, the continent’s biggest gas market — and its biggest importer of Russian gas — last week escalated its warning over gas supplies to the “alert” level, the second in a three-stage system to prepare EU countries for potential supply disruptions.

Officials are working on emergency laws that would allow roughly 9-10 gigawatts of idle coal and lignite capacity to return to service until 2024, replacing some of the 16% market share now held by gas. The country is home to seven of the EU’s 10 most polluting power stations, according to NGO Ember.

Utility RWE has said three 300 megawatt mothballed lignite units could be brought back on line in an emergency. Staffing could be a problem, so the company wants some workers to postpone retirement and is trying to recruit skilled workers.

Economy Minister Robert Habeck said laws allowing more coal use and less gas-fired generation should pass the Bundesrat — upper house of parliament — in early July. “That means, to be honest, more coal-fired power plants for a transitional period,” he said. “That’s bitter, but it’s almost necessary in this situation to reduce gas consumption. The gas storage tanks must be full in winter. That has top priority.”

The government says there are no plans to change the coal phase-out date, with the last units still earmarked for closure by 2030.

Italy (Storage Currently 57.2% Full)

Ecological Transition Minister Roberto Cingolani has said Italy, Europe’s second-biggest gas consumer, is ready to import more coal and rely more on coal-fired generation as gas is prioritized for storage rather than electricity generation.

Italy got roughly 5% of its electricity from coal and 40% from gas in 2021. Its sizable coal fleet could offset some of the gas-fired generation.

Netherlands (Storage 51.5% Full)

Climate Minister Rob Jetten says the Netherlands will temporarily lift a ban on coal-fired power stations operating above 35% of capacity, again to allow gas to be injected into storage and heat homes next winter. The country’s four remaining coal-fired plants were being underused to reduce emissions.

Austria (Storage 44.5% Full)

The government has struck a deal with utility Verbund to convert a mothballed gas-fired power station to run on coal for use in emergencies. It may have to implement emergency legislation to roll back a coal phase-out that saw the last unit at Mellach closed in April 2020. The unit was converted to run on gas before being mothballed, but could now be switched back to coal.

3) G-7 nations endorse investing in natural gas amid Russia crisis
The Hill, 28 June 2022

The Group of Seven (G-7) countries are endorsing investments in natural gas as many seek to reduce their dependence on Russian fuels.

In a communique issued on Tuesday, the group, which is made up of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the U.S., also backed increased deliveries of the fuel.

“In this context and with a view to accelerating the phase out of our dependency on Russian energy, we stress the important role increased deliveries of [liquified natural gas] can play, and acknowledge that investment in this sector is necessary in response to the current crisis,” their statement said.

The G-7 nations elaborated that in some cases, government investment in the gas sector can be “appropriate as a temporary response.”

The support for the fossil fuel comes as Russia has moved to cut off gas supplies to several countries when they have refused to pay for it in Russian rubles.

Russia has long been a major supplier of European gas, providing 40 percent of the gas consumed in the European Union in 2021.

However, the endorsement miffed climate advocates, who argue that the countries should be moving more towards energy sources that don’t contribute to global warming.

“Public support for gas infrastructure is not the climate presidency Joe Biden promised. Climate activists will not sit idly by while our tax dollars lock in another generation of extraction,” said a statement from Kate DeAngelis, international finance program manager for Friends of the Earth U.S.

“The G-7 countries are failing as true climate leaders by abandoning their Glasgow commitments and holding up LNG as an energy response,” DeAngelis said.

Full story

4) Political climate change: European Commission backs Norway’s offshore oil and gas industry
The Maritime Executive, 28 June 2022

In a remarkable shift in tone, the European Commission is expressing strong support for offshore oil and gas E&P off Norway, reflecting the rapid change in EU energy policy after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The EU is a major consumer of oil and gas, but it is not [known for encouraging more production as a matter of public policy. Historically, the European Commission has emphasized the bloc’s intent to reach net-zero emissions in the long term rather than its plans to secure a supply of natural gas in the short term. Denmark, the EU member state with the largest offshore oil and gas sector, has even pledged to phase out E&P altogether by 2050.

But Europe’s rapid disconnection from Russian energy is prompting a reorientation of priorities, particularly for pipeline natural gas, which is logistically difficult to replace. This is an urgent question ahead of the 2023-24 winter heating season: Russian state-owned energy company Gazprom has partially or fully cut gas supplies to customers in 12 EU countries, including a sharp 60 percent reduction in flow on the Nord Stream pipeline to Germany. The constriction of supply is driving up prices, and the benchmark Dutch TTF natural gas futures contract is up 300 percent year-on-year.

In this context, politically reliable Norwegian natural gas is most welcome in the EU. Norway has been producing gas at a high volume since the start of the year, and could supply about 100 TWh of extra gas (about six percent of annual EU imports from Russia) over the span of 2022.

The European Commission and the Norwegian government have announced plans to strengthen energy ties and promote offshore development for the long term. “The EU supports Norway’s continued exploration and investments to bring oil and gas to the European market,” said the EC and Norway in a joint statement. “Norway has significant remaining oil and gas resources and can, through continued exploration, new discoveries and field developments, continue to be a large supplier to Europe also in the longer term beyond 2030.”

Full story

5) UK sets out emergency plan to cut gas supplies to Europe
The Daily Telegraph, 29 June 2022

The UK will cut off gas supplies to Europe under an emergency plan that will be rolled out if the Russian energy crisis deepens.

Shutting down the so-called interconnector pipelines to the Netherlands and Belgium would be among the early measures under the plan, which could be triggered by National Grid if supplies fall further in the coming months, the Financial Times reports.

But European gas companies warned such a move would undermine a push for international cooperation in the face of Putin’s aggression and would exacerbate the energy crisis on the continent.

The supply cut-off would be part of a four-stage emergency plan that could also include rationing gas to large industrial users and urging households to reduce consumption.

Germany and the Netherlands have already triggered their own emergency plans after Russia slashed gas supplies to Europe, sparking fears of shortages this winter.

Morgan Stanley has now revised its forecasts to predict a recession in the eurozone in the fourth quarter of this year, citing the impact of lower gas flows from Russia as well as stubbornly high inflation.

The Government said it was “fully confident” about the security of energy supply heading into the winter, adding that a gas emergency was “extremely unlikely”.

6) Lawrence Kudlow: Biden’s green strategy is in complete collapse, at home and globally
The New York Sun, 28 June 2022

The G-7 meeting in Germany has made at least one key point absolutely clear: President Biden’s so-called energy transition to renewable fuels is a complete failure. Not just in the U.S.: Globally. An utter failure.

In Europe, countries are talking renewables, but they are also reopening coal plants. That’s because they can’t get enough Russian oil and gas supplies or what they can get is too expensive, or both.

Austria, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands — all are reopening coal plants. Their so-called green strategies? Shoved aside.

They made a transition alright: Back to the worst carbon polluters. The president of Nigeria, which is a big oil and gas producer, is berating the Europeans for thinking renewables will pave the way to industrial prosperity.

European Brent oil is running around $115; West Texas crude is about the same. Gasoline just under $5 is causing widespread political backlash and threatens economic recession. Mr. Biden’s green strategy is in complete collapse.

Most regrettably, the guy with a smile on his face is Vladimir Putin. The sanctions strategy has backfired on the U.S. and NATO. Mr. Putin’s making money hand over fist.

His ruble currency is at a pre-war high; it’s the pound and the euro that have been sinking out of sight. Mr. Putin has found new customers: China and India.

India’s Russian imports have moved to a million barrels a day in June from 30,000 barrels a day in February. When the Indian finance minister was asked why he’s doing this, and whether he’s undermining the western defense of Ukraine, he responded simply: “Everyone else is buying Russian oil, why shouldn’t we?”

Hate to say it, but he’s right. I hate to say this, but Mr. Putin has outsmarted the West.

If Mr. Biden had been willing to face reality and pull back on his war against fossil fuels by waving all his regulations and restrictions and sanctions on fracking, pipelining, refining, and so forth — if he had shown some flexibility in the face of skyrocketing energy prices and a political revolt at home — then it’s quite possible that energy supplies would be much greater today for all components and distillates. Prices also would be lower, or at the very least futures prices would be significantly lower.

All of which would’ve added relief to the West’s energy crisis. Lower prices would’ve hurt Vladimir Putin’s war machine financing. But Mr. Biden was stubborn, self-centered, and politically narcissistic. He has utterly failed to help the NATO coalition or to help ordinary working people.

All of this could have been mitigated, if not avoided, but for his stubbornness. Clinging to this idea of a 100 percent transition to renewables was craziness.

Now comes the craziest part of all. After gimmicks like a gas tax holiday, running down our strategic petroleum reserves (which are there for national security, not political price-fixing), and even debit card subsidies for gasoline, here’s the latest: Price controls. Yup, price controls. I’m surprised it took the socialists so long to get there.

Secretary Yellen is leading the way. The distinguished former Fed chairwoman who is married to a Nobel Prize winner is touting price controls on Russian oil. Really?

Wait: It gets better.

President Macron wants to go really big. He wants price controls on all oil producers. Russia, the Saudis, OPEC, probably Venezuela, maybe Iran. Who knows? Probably, his world oil price controls would mean — you guessed it — price controls on American oil, too. Right?

That’s only fair. Global oil price controls. Not on solar or wind, but on fossil fuels.

As I shut my eyes and lean back, I see Richard Nixon, Jerry Ford, Jimmy Carter. “Whip inflation now” — on a grand scale. It’s a global race to socialism. Never mind the obvious shortages, energy wars, or just plain stupidity of repeating an age old socialist mistake.

Then again, when you look around that G-7 table — Messrs. Biden, Trudeau, Scholz, Macron, Draghi, and Johnson — I don’t see much of a commitment to free-market capitalism. I don’t see any Reagans. I don’t see any Thatchers. I don’t see Milton Friedman. I don’t see Adam Smith. I don’t see the signers of the American Declaration of Independence.

Oh, wait a minute, that’s tomorrow’s special. This is just a tease. Tomorrow’s theme is, “Restoring Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

Works for me. Because Americans don’t see much life, liberty, or happiness right now. But I know a way out. And, yes, the cavalry’s coming. Woke, big-government socialism is dead.

From Mr. Kudlow’s broadcast on Fox Business News.

7) Richard Alston: Beware existential angst of the climate alarmists
The Australian, 29 June 2022

The term existential was popularised in the 20th century by French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, who believed that because there was no god, existence was absurd, life had no meaning and the individual therefore faced an existential crisis. In psychology, existential crises are inner conflicts characterised by the impression that life lacks meaning.

But in the climate wars a word that once had settled harmlessly in the realm of philosophy has become weaponised, wheeled out by climate catastrophists to herald imminent doom. Presumably it is a humanist alternative to a moral issue. In Australia the term increasingly is used “in terrorem”, as the lawyers say, to frighten the pants off the naive and the innocent. But what do the scaremongers mean by existential?

Are we talking now (clearly not), soon (whatever that means) or maybe someday, one day (when most of us will be long gone)? Does it mean the end of days, with the whole world wiped out, On the Beach style, or only in some more vulnerable areas?

The favourite scary example is rising tides among Pacific Islands, most of whose leaders seem to prefer immediate handouts for general budgetary purposes rather than practical assistance in mitigation. We are meant to assume the oceans will rise quickly and no one will respond – the old extrapolation trick.

Holland was once a major colonial power and The Netherlands is still a prosperous country. In the 14th century, the combined effects of soil subsidence and rising sea levels meant that without intervention it would soon be under water so it built a system of dykes that has survived to this day.

Technology is infinitely more sophisticated these days, so instead of wallowing in existential despair we should look for similar ways to solve the problem.

The alarmists, happy to label as climate deniers anyone who questions their theology, never explain the source of their dire apprehensions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the most authoritative body on the subject, nowhere mentions an apocalyptic scenario. Real experts do not blame climate change for increases in frequency or intensity of extreme weather events.

More than 20 years ago Prince Charles and Al Gore told us it was five minutes to midnight – that sounds like existential to me. Yet we are all still here. Tim Flannery finds plenty of time to publish books on the subject but never has time to argue the case publicly. He and his ilk can never find time to explain that whatever Australia does will make no difference to what they claim to be a global issue. Some alarmists can’t even use words to argue their case.

Blockade Australia seems to think criminal activity such as closing the Sydney Harbour Tunnel is persuasive. They want Australia to lead the way, to its economic detriment – the ultimate example of a self-inflicted wound from virtue signalling. Rhetorical overkill has proved remarkably successful in public debate. It is often said that in diplomacy words are bullets – the same could be said of politics, where extreme language can be influential. Words have power – they shape our beliefs, drive our behaviour and provoke emotional responses from others.

Most people don’t have time to research issues, let alone complex and confusing ones such as climate change. They therefore become vulnerable to doomsday proclamations. Ordinary citizens knew what was meant by global warming but when it seemed the planet had stopped warming for a period the topic became climate change, about which everyone could be concerned.

In September 2019 a survey of 30,000 people around the world found 48 per cent believed climate change would make humanity extinct. It seems people have an inherent need to worry about the future without necessarily relying on any serious factual information.

American Michael Shellenberger is a self-described environmental activist for 30 years and a compelling author. But he is fed up with “the exaggeration, alarmism and extremism which are the enemy of a positive, humanistic and rational environmentalism”.

He rebuts attempts in Australia to blame climate change for bushfires, which he largely attributes to human activities. In his view, “Climate alarmism, animus among environmental journalists and smoke that was unusually visible to densely populated areas appear to be the reasons for exaggerated media coverage”. He is concerned that the people who are the most apocalyptic about environmental problems tend to oppose the best and most obvious solution of dissolving them.

Remember that in 2009 the Greens opposed Kevin Rudd’s attempt to legislate a price on carbon, presumably because they wanted to continue to “enjoy the problem” and milk it for all it was worth. To date the Greens and teals have shown no concern for rising fuel and energy prices for consumers. If they are to become serious players they could start by urging Daniel Andrews to allow fracking, but this is unlikely because they need an energy crisis to rail against and remain relevant. They will much prefer to rely on inflammatory language so we should all be on our guard.

Richard Alston was minister for communications in the Howard government.

8) Walter Russell Mead: End of the German Idyll
The Wall Street Journal, 27 June 2022

Its industrial prowess, cheap Russian energy, and access to global markets are at risk. Germany looked normal over the weekend as a genial Chancellor Olaf Scholz welcomed the Group of Seven leaders and their guests to the luxurious Schloss Elmau in the Bavarian Alps. But those appearances are deceiving. Germany is facing its gravest challenges since the foundation of the Federal Republic following World War II.

This is very sudden. As recently as 2020, almost the entire world agreed with the smug German self-assessment that Germany had the world’s most successful economic model, was embarking on the most ambitious—and largely successful—climate initiative in the world, and had perfected a values-based foreign policy that ensured German security and international popularity at extremely low cost.

None of this was true. The German economic model was based on unrealistic assumptions about world politics and is unlikely to survive the current turmoil. German energy policy is a chaotic mess, a shining example to the rest of the world of what not to do. Germany’s reputation for a values-based foreign policy has been severely dented by Berlin’s waffling over aid to Ukraine. And German security experts are coming to terms with a deeply unwelcome truth: Confronted with an aggressive Russia, Germany, like Europe generally, is utterly reliant on the U.S. for its security. At a time when American foreign policy increasingly prioritizes Asia and isolationist sentiment among both Republicans and Democrats appears to be rising, if Donald Trump returns to the White House in 2025, German security will depend on his goodwill.

Mr. Scholz and his coalition government have responded to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Russia with a series of, by German standards, revolutionary changes. Germany is beginning to rearm. It is, with some false starts, sending weapons to Ukraine. It has taken the first steps toward energy independence from Russia, even at the cost of its ambitious climate agenda. Coal plants will lumber back to life, new gas-processing plants will be built, and Germany is asking Europe to delay decarbonization mandates that no longer seem realistic.

But the real work remains to be done. Modern Germany was above all an economic project. The collapse of the Third Reich left Germany morally devastated, physically wrecked and economically bankrupt. From the moment of its foundation in 1949, the country’s central goal was economic growth. That growth could repair the destruction of the war, promote Germany’s peaceful integration into Western Europe, blunt the appeal of communism, and build a national identity independent of the malignant fantasies of the Hitler era and the bombast of Wilhelm II. The hard work of the German people, the pragmatic policies of the political class, the skills and determination of German management, and the favorable international climate resulting from the development of the American-led world order took Germany to economic heights.

In recent years, the German economic miracle depended on a combination of industrial prowess, cheap energy from Russia, and access to global markets, particularly in China. Today every one of those pillars is under threat. German mastery of automobile technology through a century of engineering is challenged by the shift to electric vehicles. The chemicals industry, in which German technology has led the world since the 19th century, is coming under environmental challenges as global competition intensifies.

Those challenges are exacerbated by the loss of cheap and secure Russian natural gas. Green energy, despite massive German investment, will be unable to supply German industry with reliable and cheap power for a long time. In the meantime, the alternatives to Russian pipeline gas are expensive and controversial. Nuclear power gives Greens the willies; coal is unbearable; liquefied natural gas requires long-term commitments and massive capital expenditures.

Beyond that, Germany’s economic relationship with China is changing for the worse. China was long the ideal customer for German products. Its newly affluent middle class fell in love with German luxury cars. Its rapidly growing manufacturing sector voraciously consumed German machine tools and other capital goods. But China’s growth is decelerating. Its maturing industrial economy seeks to compete with high-end German producers, often based on tools reverse-engineered from German imports.

Those in the Biden administration who dream that Germany will wholeheartedly join a new global American crusade for values should keep their enthusiasm in check. Mr. Scholz may agree in the abstract with President Biden about the importance of liberal values and the danger of climate change, but his calculations must reflect the economic facts of German life. This naturally leads to thoughts about how to patch things up with Russia and China.

Mr. Biden’s job is not to sing hymns about Western values with Mr. Scholz; it is to make Berlin understand that U.S. security guarantees come at a price. Given the realities of American politics, Germany cannot count on continued American support unless it does more to back the U.S. at a time of grave and growing danger world-wide.

9) Big Brother is watching you: Electric cars should have tracking devices to monitor movements and raising taxes
The Daily Telegraph, 29 June 2022

Editor says …Sterling Publishing & Media Service Agency is not responsible for the content of external site or from any reports, posts or links, and can also be found here on Telegram: https://t.me/acenewsdaily and all wordpress and live posts and links here: https://acenewsroom.wordpress.com/ and thanks for following as always appreciate every like, reblog or retweet and free help and guidance tips on your PC software or need help & guidance from our experts AcePCHelp.WordPress.Com