American Politics

[Tiny 12]

The USA, Canada, Australia (probably including your beloved South Australia) and Russia all emit more CO2 per capita than other developed countries. That's because they occupy large areas and people are more spread out. Furthermore people in developed countries, like the USA, consume more energy and thus emit more CO2 per capita than people in developing countries. We have air conditioning, cars, etc, that many in developing countries, like China, don't have. Our economies and GDP's are larger -- we produce more.

I'm reading that South Australia's CO2 emissions in 2022 were 15.8 million tons, and the population is 1.82 million. So that would be 8.7 tons per person, or the 30th highest emitter, per capita, out of 208 countries in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ons_per_capita

It is doing better than the averages for Canada, the USA, Russia and Australia, which are all in the top 20. And South Australia's total annual emissions would have been 10 million tons higher in 2022 if it were at the Australian average. Given that world emissions are about 37 billion tons per year, South Australia, all on its own, was able to reduce world CO2 emissions by 0. 03%! Wow! That's going to make a huge difference in global warming.

[SubCmdr]

Yeah, he may work with EV's. He knows more about them than anybody on this board, including you and SubComdr, who in turn know a lot more than the rest of us do

EV's are on my list of consideration for my next vehicle. But I want a SUV. I'm even considering an electric scooter. But I have to investigate the logistics of charging it up. Scooters get between 80 - 100 MPG so I'm not sure how much of a contribution an electric scooter would actually make.

My take on renewable is they should be the priority. Oil should be reserved for products like aviation and the production of materials. I am not ready to fly in an electrically powered airplane just quite yet. LOL!

[Tiny 12]

Slow your roll, did someone just say "...beautiful clean coal"? (...kkkk!)

Uh, no. Nobody here said that, or believes it. Or this, "Your nostalgia, for those bygone days, when the coal industry, would boldly try to bamboozle, hoodwink and greenwash coal, with a huge campaigns, calling it "clean coal", are all but a laughable faded memory. ".

Wow! Hey look everybody! U.S. flaring and venting fell to an 18-year low in 2023, after decades and decades, and took them well over a hundred years, of venting toxic methane plumes into our breathable air, to figure it out. Look at you, being so proud!

Yes, if you go to sleep in a room that contains 100% methane and no oxygen, you will die. Otherwise methane is not toxic.

Sounds like you're itching for a medal? Or is it just a cookie? How about a pat on the back? Or how about another 100 years to have natural gas at zero 0% flaring and zero 0% CO2 emissions. Now thats something worth hanging your hat on in 3025? Duh!

So while flaring rates have come down, and its good that the industry is capturing more associated gas, places like North Dakota and Wyoming, have flare rates, as high as 31.6%, and signaling there are no guarantees they'll never remain low. But who really cares, when you have S+W+B and nuclear (if that reactor/SMR industry ever gets its act together).

• Look Natural Gas is always going to have:
  flaring issues and problems,
  methane leaking problems (80x more potent than CO2),
  burn and emit CO2 gas emissions and last but not least,
  (my fav.) have the dubious honor, of being 50% cleaner than coal (and only when there are no methane leaks)

I'm reading that "flaring rates", as you put it, in Wyoming and North Dakota are in single digits. If I step onto a section of land in North Dakota or wherever with one producing well, and that well is flaring gas, then the "flare rate" is 100%. That doesn't change the fact the total for the USA is a measly 0. 5%. Methane is coming down. Yes, regulators should clamp down on that, and they are.

Again, perfect is the enemy of good. The world can spend many trillions and go to net zero carbon in a hurry. But if instead we approach this rationally, and just spend a fraction of the money we would have spent otherwise on things like malaria, micronutrients, vaccinations (sorry Elvis), education and the like, the world will be a much better place.

Disregarding the preceding, global warming actually has saved lives.

https://unherd.com/newsroom/bjorn-lo...ll-save-lives/

(my fav.) have the dubious honor, of being 50% cleaner than coal (and only when there are no methane leaks)

Let's face it, Tiny 12, when your only claim to fame is, being a cleaner burning fuel than coal, by 50%, that's not saying much!

Tiny 12, "clean burning natural gas", really? (...kkkk!) Ahhh!...you crack me up! And here I thought Elvis 2008, was the one, with the funny bone. Or do you guys share it, every other post?

Ridiculous. I could argue that natural gas is 10X or 100X cleaner burning than coal, and would be closer to the truth than you are.

You're mistaken perhaps for the same reason you underestimate the level of air pollution in China. Particulate matter is the biggest contributor to mortality from air pollution. Coal produces around 100 X more particulates per kilowatt hour than natural gas. Coal plants also produce 90 X more sulfur dioxide and 5 X more NOx compounds. Yes, coal does produce about 2 X more carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide however is a colorless, odorless, nontoxic gas that doesn't contribute to dirty air. Admittedly, like methane, if you fall asleep in a room with only CO2 and no oxygen, you will die.

Thanks, those are pretty good charts! If anything they do reinforce my argument that the U.S./Europe, have been burning huge amounts of fossil fuels for decades longer than China.

• *Note: It was only as recent as 2007, where China began emitting more CO2 then the U.S.

So IMHO, China isn't doing that badly, when you consider and take into account that the USA is 4x smaller, but emits 2x as much in relation to, it's population size, to that of China's.

The USA, Canada, Australia (probably including your beloved South Australia) and Russia all emit more CO2 per capita than other developed countries. That's because they occupy large areas and people are more spread out. Furthermore people in developed countries, like the USA, consume more energy and thus emit more CO2 per capita than people in developing countries. We have air conditioning, cars, etc, that many in developing countries, like China, don't have. Our economies and GDP's are larger -- we produce more.

That said, the USA accounts for about 13% of global carbon emissions and about 26% of global GDP. Compare to China, which has 31% of worldwide CO2 emissions and accounts for about 18% of global GDP.

That's the Great President Joe Biden, for you, almost to a fault. Too often, he goes out of his way to, include and accommodate, all Americans to the best of his ability. This will be the one thing, I would definitely not miss, if your American Fuhrer, puts that kibosh on the IRA. Still a huge fan of the IRA, BTW!

But talk about a pipe dream. Both direct air capture (DAC) and carbon capture and storage (CCS), are once again (I have to admit), masterfully crafted, snake-oil, smoke and mirrors boondoggles, designed to transfer wealth, from taxpayers pockets to the oil-n-gas robber barons.

But I guess when you've had 100+ years to practice the grift of funneling gov't/taxpayers into your own pockets, it is not hard to see, that after 100+ years, it's NOT the art of flaring, that oil-n-gas firms have perfected, but "the art of the oil-n-gas gov't subsidy grift" (...kkkk!)

The U.S. energy industry emits about 5 billion metric tons of CO2, annually and yet somehow in the next several years and A NEW carbon capture industry is going to magically emerge and ramp up, to tackle 5-billion tons, throughout the states, annually?

I know you're sensitive about me "changing" your posts, so I'll point out it was me that highlighted "Great President Joe Biden" above. I agree with you 100% about Direct Air Capture. The Great President Joe Biden and democrats shouldn't have made the tax benefits so lucrative for this expensive, unproven technology that oil and gas and other companies want to pursue it.

Carbon capture and storage, from sources like flu gas, however holds more promise.

[SubCmdr]

Then, you were right to elect crazy shameful Trump who is one more danger for our world. Never forget, his dictator friend Putin who hold his balls in hand, attacked Ukraine and stole lands, after Crimea and trying to fuck elections in Georgia, Romania and Moldavia. And now, USA president just trying to rob poor Ukraine. Such shameful USA. My big respect for Ukraine led by Zelensky and 0 respect for fat Trump, now image of USA.

Bro, I don't agree with your opinions that much. But I had a visceral negative reaction to the Oval Office Performance by POTUS.

He is in my opinion a: punk ass ***** sitting up in the White House with his thumb on the nuclear button acting more like a gangster than a US President. He appears to be on his knees in front of Putin. It is a crying shame. I am embarrassed for me and my fellow Americans.

We need Obama, Clinton, Bush Sr. hell even Regan back!

We are on the path to dictatorship if the courts and congress do not put a check on dis mother fucker!

[Tiny 12]

Thanks for that. I am glad to see how much flaring in North Dakota is down now. When I was in Pecos, Texas, I was told Carlos Slim was building a natural gas pipeline to Mexico, and I was like damn that is one smart mo fo. It was actually a group he was involved in but that is a smart investment. Areas around Pecos were flaring and honestly it was the first time I had seen much of it in Texas. At that time, Pecos was producing so much oil and gas so quickly that they were having trouble transporting it.

No shit! The Waha interconnection point of gas pipelines is close to Pecos. For over half of 2024, you could get people TO PAY YOU to take gas at Waha, over $3. 00/ MMBTU from time to time. The current price is $. 04/ MMBTU, compared to $3. 84/ MMBTU at the Henry Hub in Louisiana.

Thing about Spidy is I grew tired of his constant name calling and saying nothing in his posts. When it has come to the energy discussion, he still brings his usual partisan hip checks but at least this time he is bringing facts and knowledge to his credit. Maybe it is not fair, but I am suspicious as to why. LOL.

Yeah, he may work with EV's. He knows more about them than anybody on this board, including you and SubComdr, who in turn know a lot more than the rest of us do.

I don't think he works for, say, an NGO that's promoting zero net carbon. He doesn't know much about oil and gas production and taxation, or coal.

[Spidy]

Only 0.5% of natural gas produced in the USA is flared.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=62383

Wow! Hey look everybody! U.S. flaring and venting fell to an 18-year low in 2023, after decades and decades, and took them well over a hundred years, of venting toxic methane plumes into our breathable air, to figure it out. Look at you, being so proud!

Sounds like you're itching for a medal? Or is it just a cookie? How about a pat on the back? Or how about another 100 years to have natural gas at zero 0% flaring and zero 0% CO2 emissions. Now thats something worth hanging your hat on in 3025? Duh!

So while flaring rates have come down, and its good that the industry is capturing more associated gas, places like North Dakota and Wyoming, have flare rates, as high as 31.6%, and signaling there are no guarantees they'll never remain low. But who really cares, when you have S+W+B and nuclear (if that reactor/SMR industry ever gets its act together).

• Look Natural Gas is always going to have:
  • flaring issues and problems,
  • methane leaking problems (80x more potent than CO2),
  • burn and emit CO2 gas emissions and last but not least,
  • (my fav.) have the dubious honor, of being 50% cleaner than coal (and only when there are no methane leaks)

Let's face it, Tiny 12, when your only claim to fame is, being a cleaner burning fuel than coal, by 50%, that's not saying much!

Thanks to clean burning natural gas, USA CO2 emissions are down by 20% since 2007. China's are up by 70%. They were up in China by 5% from 2022 to 2023.

Thanks, those are pretty good charts! If anything they do reinforce my argument that the U.S./Europe, have been burning huge amounts of fossil fuels for decades longer than China.

• *Note: It was only as recent as 2007, where China began emitting more CO2 then the U.S.

So IMHO, China isn't doing that badly, when you consider and take into account that the USA is 4x smaller, but emits 2x as much in relation to, it's population size, to that of China's.

Tiny 12, "clean burning natural gas", really? (...kkkk!) Ahhh!...you crack me up! And here I thought Elvis 2008, was the one, with the funny bone. Or do you guys share it, every other post?

Your nostalgia, for those bygone days, when the coal industry, would boldly try to bamboozle, hoodwink and greenwash coal, with a huge campaigns, calling it "clean coal", are all but a laughable faded memory.

Remember those days of greenwashing coal, ...NO! Well, I sure do! As your clean burning gas barb, had me laughing so hard, from way back-in-the-day, to as early as 2018, when idiots like your American Fuhrer refers to it as "....beautiful clean coal" (...kkkk!)

Your Financial Times article describes tax subsidies for carbon capture in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). I thought you were a big fan of the IRA? The only oil company that's gotten a significant tax benefit from carbon capture so far is Oxy. And "significant" is stretching it. They've got one project in West Texas that removes a small amount of carbon dioxide from the air. Yes, other oil companies have plans on the drawing board. Hopefully the Republicans will kill this stupid tax subsidy as it relates to direct air capture. Direct air carbon capture is extremely expensive compared to other types of carbon mitigation. And it will do very little to reduce carbon in the atmosphere.

That's the Great President Joe Biden, for you, almost to a fault. Too often, he goes out of his way to, include and accommodate, all Americans to the best of his ability. This will be the one thing, I would definitely not miss, if your American Fuhrer, puts that kibosh on the IRA. Still a huge fan of the IRA, BTW!

But talk about a pipe dream. Both direct air capture (DAC) and carbon capture and storage (CCS), are once again (I have to admit), masterfully crafted, snake-oil, smoke and mirrors boondoggles, designed to transfer wealth, from taxpayers pockets to the oil-n-gas robber barons.

But I guess when you've had 100+ years to practice the grift of funneling gov't/taxpayers into your own pockets, it is not hard to see, that after 100+ years, it's NOT the art of flaring, that oil-n-gas firms have perfected, but "the art of the oil-n-gas gov't subsidy grift" (...kkkk!)

The U.S. energy industry emits about 5 billion metric tons of CO2, annually and yet somehow in the next several years and A NEW carbon capture industry is going to magically emerge and ramp up, to tackle 5-billion tons, throughout the states, annually?

Just more silly clean coal hubris from oil-n-gas industry, when the simply answer to our growing CO2, problem, is to buildout S+W+B, quicker, faster and cheaper. Then circle-back, a few years down the road, at which point perhaps the DAC tech (CCS ??) has been properly developed.

When cosmonauts look down from their space station at Earth, they say the brightest spot they see is not a metropolis in America or Europe. It is the oil fields of Western Siberia, where thousands of wells flare off the natural gas they produce in giant wasteful torches. A single flare at the Portovaya LNG facility in Russia is estimated to produce more black carbon than the entire country of Finland.

Hey Elvis 2008, that must be Tiny 12's methane fueled "clean gas", your Russian cosmonauts, are witnessing from space! (...kkkk!)

MAGA News Flash! It's not just Russia! As satellites have repeatedly exposed methane plumes in U.S. Oil-n-Gas fields, proving that American oil and gas companies can pollute and light-up the earth, to be seen from space, with the best of them. And no doubt honoring their astronauts, in true MAGA "American Exceptionalism" form.

Elvis 2008, I've decide, I'm giving Tiny 12, a grade of B+, on his awkward attempt at greenwashing natural gas, as "clean burning gas", although I did enjoy the laugh, it wasn't on par with your Fuhrers "...beautiful clean coal"

[EihTooms]

Uh yeah, cutting federal spending and having a goal to balance the budget would bring down borrowing costs and inflation, and it is nice to see someone give cutting government costs something more than lip service.

Loony Tooms, I have gone over this before. If companies are raising earnings, the federal budget deficits are under control, and the market goes up, then you have a government presiding over a healthy economy. That was the case under the market boom with Clinton. With Obama, there was some earnings growth but the Fed and Obama administration were pushing money into the market. With Biden, market stimulus was at record levels.

So do not tell me how rich you are when you are buying all your shit with a credit card, and Biden was using the nation's credit card like a drunken meth snorting sailor.

And with Biden, we had record deficits and decades high inflation. The market currently is priced for less than 2% inflation and zero interest rates. The chances that anyone could push it higher is crazy. In fact, unless we see a balanced budget, inflation way down, and earnings up, all you are doing by pushing market prices higher is blowing a bubble.

Trump has been in office 5 weeks now. The only way you can get the market up in 5 weeks is through very unhealthy means which means using market prices to judge Trump now is patently unfair but what else is new? You have been blaming all these market issues on Trump before he even got into office.

Chainsaw Musk isn't cutting spending anywhere. He's firing people who, when it is time to pay the piper and Blue States have to pull Red States out of this mess as usual, will cost everyone more!

A "goal" to do what? A stated "goal" from a blatantly obvious con man liar who keeps saying one of the worst economies of all time, his, was "the Greatest in the History of the World", that "we got billion and billions of dollars from China in my trade war because other countries pay the tariffs I impose" is not taken by anyone with a brain as a realistic "goal" but only one more of the 30,000 plus documented lies spilling out of his pie-hole every day.

It does not fool investors and real business entrepreneurs when real money is on the line.

Only dumb MAGA Repub hillbillies fall for that crap.

Markets are forward-looking. They most certainly can rise quickly on certainty in the prospect that competent leadership will do the right thing for the economy. That is why Biden's post-election rally was one of the greatest of all time while Trump's has been one of the worst. And that is despite the fact that there was night and day difference between the total crap, seemingly insurmountable for years conditions Biden inherited from Trump vs the Envy of the World Economy and historically strong and solid conditions Trump inherited from Biden.

Good god. There is still not one shred of evidence that Bitcoin loves Trump more than it loved Biden. And that was one of the most demonstrably optimistic, no-brainer, sales pitches for choosing Trump over anyone else.

See the chart below for Biden's last day in office, after which con man Trump and all of his supposedly "pro bitcoin" Cabinet and Staff were lined up with all their lofty "goals" for Bitcoin to really take off!

Compare to the chart for election day 2024.

Compare to chart for Biden's inauguration. Or as close as I could slide it.

Compare to chart for Biden's election day win.

[Elvis 2008]

Only 0.5% of natural gas produced in the USA is flared.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=62383

Thanks for that. I am glad to see how much flaring in North Dakota is down now. When I was in Pecos, Texas, I was told Carlos Slim was building a natural gas pipeline to Mexico, and I was like damn that is one smart mo fo. It was actually a group he was involved in but that is a smart investment. Areas around Pecos were flaring and honestly it was the first time I had seen much of it in Texas. At that time, Pecos was producing so much oil and gas so quickly that they were having trouble transporting it.

To your credit, you've been making economic, not moral arguments. So, perhaps unlike Elvis, I don't believe you're guilty of what Bjorn Lomborg said in a recent Financial Times interview, about people people with financial interest in causes like climate change: "Potential catastrophes are fundraising tools. I make up a scary scenario. Now give me all your money."

Thing about Spidy is I grew tired of his constant name calling and saying nothing in his posts. When it has come to the energy discussion, he still brings his usual partisan hip checks but at least this time he is bringing facts and knowledge to his credit. Maybe it is not fair, but I am suspicious as to why. LOL.

[Elvis 2008]

Today, on 2. 28.2025, Trump has finally admitted being the asset of Vladimir Putin. There is no, I repeat, no other way to interpret this. The scene was staged, the Trump and Vance roles -- rehearsed, the insults, unheard of for any head of state -- slung, and the rest is history. My God, America!

I've never been more embarrassed by any US president even including this one.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Trump speaks to Putin and says that Putin hates Zelensky, and Zelensky hates Putin, and in your mind, Trump is sucking Putin's dick. I could see your interpretation of events a mile away. With Democratic douches, the only thing you can say about Putin is that he sucks.

Given that is your mindset, do you have a peace deal that you can offer up that does not involve Putin? Or is it just more dead bodies, more debt, and more empty slogans (we are with Ukraine until they achieve victory, whatever the fuck that means)?

[Sirioja]

Christ on a stick! Let's all die already. All this waiting and watching for the nukes to destroy us all. It's boring. And I'm sick of tired of my useless, pointless, old ass life. I want to die, but you know what's better than just me dying? Knowing everybody else will be dead too.

But, but, but, wait. I'm talking to you life, or destiny, fate of god or Satan, or whatever you want to call it. Just let me have one last trip to Bangkok to get my fuck on, and then destroy the world.

Then, you were right to elect crazy shameful Trump who is one more danger for our world. Never forget, his dictator friend Putin who hold his balls in hand, attacked Ukraine and stole lands, after Crimea and trying to fuck elections in Georgia, Romania and Moldavia. And now, USA president just trying to rob poor Ukraine. Such shameful USA. My big respect for Ukraine led by Zelensky and 0 respect for fat Trump, now image of USA.

[Newton York]

Christ on a stick! Let's all die already. All this waiting and watching for the nukes to destroy us all. It's boring. And I'm sick of tired of my useless, pointless, old ass life. I want to die, but you know what's better than just me dying? Knowing everybody else will be dead too.

But, but, but, wait. I'm talking to you life, or destiny, fate of god or Satan, or whatever you want to call it. Just let me have one last trip to Bangkok to get my fuck on, and then destroy the world.

[Tiny 12]

Funny, how your article on air pollution/quality index (AQI), is like 10 years old. BTW, I was only comparing the largest cities.

Annoyingly, any current and/or up-to-date AQI informational comparisons (in 2023/2024) of current AQI, in China's larger cities, is unavailable and or very spotty at best. However, most older data points, do indicate that Beijing vs. New York, for example, had NY's AQI, as being 3x better. But oddly had Beijing on par with NY for noise pollution...go figure!

So, while I was incorrect in my opinions on China's air quality, it is interesting to note, that many journalists and video bloggers with boots-on-the-ground, on recent 2024/2025 scouting trips to China's largest cities (Beijing, Chongqing, Shanghai, Shenzhen), swear up and down, they feel the air/noise quality and pollution is cleaner and better than back home...go figure!

If China has reached peek coal (in 2024), the AQI might be is something worth watching, if my assumption of this inverse correlation, makes any sense?



On the contrary, you fail to even understand the point I was making and your 32 year old article, only serves to prove my point.

Again, allow me to reiterate, that the production, transmission, storage and consumption of fossil fuels, has the majority of it, being burnt off as waste heat, and is the very definition of INEFFICIENT and can't compete with ELECTRICITY. Take for example, something like 60-65% of an ICE vehicle's fuel, is burnt off, as waste heat and/or CO2 emissions, in the operation of the vehicle.

If you didn't understand, I was actually talking about the myriad of ways fossil fuel waste heat energy is lost, when getting fossil fuels from "the ground" at point A, to "the consumption" use case end point B. But I think, a thank you is in order, as your 32 year news piece, ONLY make mys point, w/r to just how inefficient the industry is...so "Thank You!" for that!

When natural gas is produced as a byproduct of oil drilling, it is called associated gas. In the U.S., the percentage of natural gas that is associated gas, varies by region and over time, and is only estimated to be around 30-40% of total natural gas production.

Yes, flaring is a waste of energy resources and a major climate issue. So while not perfect and a VERY INEFFICIENT use of resources, it persists due to economic, technical, and regulatory challenges. The reducing of flaring, does however, require the oil companies to have better infrastructure and spend the capital (if they truly wanted to), in order to capture any or more associated gas for use, instead of flaring it.

Just don't rant and appeal to your illogical MAGA gullible sensibilities, and tell me flaring releases CO2, which is better than methane...(...kkkk!)


Don't worry about China, like Norway, their decarbonization efforts are are doing just fine, and I'll be sure to revisit that AQI challenge, in several years from now. Although, I think India has a long way to go, its the U.S. decarbonization efforts you should be concerned and worried about...under your American Fuhrer, it's a fucking DISASTER!

China Carbon Emissions:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/a...y?country=~CHN

USA Carbon Emissions:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/a...y?country=~USA

Thanks to clean burning natural gas, USA CO2 emissions are down by 20% since 2007. China's are up by 70%. They were up in China by 5% from 2022 to 2023.

China's decarbonization efforts are nothing compared to Norway's. China has 300 coal fired power plants under construction, permitted or awaiting permitting, totaling 243 gigawatts of capacity. It began construction on 70 gigawatts of new capacity in 2023. For comparison, total capacity from all sources (coal, nuclear, solar, etc.) in France is 148 gigawatts.

https://globalenergymonitor.org/press-release/chinas-coal-power-spree-could-see-over-300-coal-plants-added-before-emissions-peak/
https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/electricity_production_capacity/

Thanks for the education on associated gas.

As Elvis says, oil and gas producers don't build the main pipelines. Other companies do that.

Only 0.5% of natural gas produced in the USA is flared.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=62383

Perhaps flaring would be even less if American Fuhrers like Joe Biden and Democratic Party governors and representatives hadn't held up construction of pipelines. Biden's moratorium on issuance of permits for LNG facilities probably played a part in slowing development of pipelines from the Permian Basin. Before pipeline investors could count on demand for the gas. Now they know they have the risk of stranded assets when Democrats return to power.

There are a lot of mini Fuhrers in Washington D.C. who believe they have the right to take away the livelihoods of people in places like Texas and Wyoming who work in the oil and gas industry. All for the sake of cutting worldwide CO2 emissions by a fraction of a %. If Californians and New Yorkers want to ban oil and gas production in their states, they have every right to do so. But they shouldn't impose their standards on the rest of us.

To your credit, you've been making economic, not moral arguments. So, perhaps unlike Elvis, I don't believe you're guilty of what Bjorn Lomborg said in a recent Financial Times interview, about people people with financial interest in causes like climate change: "Potential catastrophes are fundraising tools. I make up a scary scenario. Now give me all your money."

[Tiny 12]

I see they got you gullible MAGA cultists, totally fooled! (...kkkk!) Which is not surprising, coming from the billionaire sympathizers, big oil and gas and big pharma billionaire apologists!

As if lower taxes, tax credits, Master Limited Partnerships (MLPs, created specifically under the Internal Revenue Code Section 7704, for energy infrastructure, in the oil and gas sector) and other such tax loopholes, weren't made specifically for the oil-n-gas industry and are just really "subsides", by any other accounting another name. Call it what you want, it's all just lipstick on a pig!

Oil companies line up for billions of dollars in subsidies under US climate law
https://www.ft.com/content/28b3a8d9-...6-7b848b3fe700

Biden Cuts Fossil Subsidies, But Oil and Gas Still Lines Up for Billions
https://www.theenergymix.com/biden-c...-for-billions/

Biden budget targets U.S. fossil fuel subsidies
https://www.reuters.com/business/ene...es-2023-03-09/

And my favorite:

Fossil fuel subsidies are proving harder to end than first thought
https://www.npr.org/2021/12/14/10640...-first-thought

Those headlines say it all!

Those headlines are bull shit. Reagan's changes in the tax law mostly removed the motivation for oil and gas producers to set up Master Limited Partnerships. They're common for pipelines and other midstream companies though, and for companies that own real estate like apartment and office buildings. Do they really provide substantial tax benefits now that the federal corporate tax rate was cut from 35% to 21%? In the long term, not a lot. In the short term, if they keep expanding, MLP investors benefit from the depreciation write offs. IMO, in order to treat all industries fairly and equally, it would be a good idea to either (a) open up the MLP structure to other industries or (b) eliminate the MLP structure for companies that start up in the future.

Your Financial Times article describes tax subsidies for carbon capture in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). I thought you were a big fan of the IRA? The only oil company that's gotten a significant tax benefit from carbon capture so far is Oxy. And "significant" is stretching it. They've got one project in West Texas that removes a small amount of carbon dioxide from the air. Yes, other oil companies have plans on the drawing board. Hopefully the Republicans will kill this stupid tax subsidy as it relates to direct air capture. Direct air carbon capture is extremely expensive compared to other types of carbon mitigation. And it will do very little to reduce carbon in the atmosphere.

Same for your second article, from Energy Mix, it's largely about the same issue, Biden's tax subsidies. As to the EOR tax credit and the credit for gas produced from marginal wells described in the article, yes, they should be done away with. The amount the USA Treasury "loses" to these tax credits is minimal.

I've already covered intangible drilling costs and percentage depletion, the main bogeymen in the Reuters article. While yes, IDC results in less revenue to the Treasury in the short term, in the long term the company pays the same amount of tax. There's no difference between it and the way R&D or Section 179 depreciation are handled for other industries. And again, the percentage depletion allowance, which is only available to small oil and gas producers, should be done away with.

As to the tax advantages / disadvantages for foreign oil and gas income described in your NPR article, that cuts both way. Yes, oil and gas are exempt from the GILTI tax imposed in the Republican's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. However, under IRC section 907, oil and gas companies cannot utilize tax credits for foreign taxes paid to the extent that other companies have. The GILTI tax was designed to force tech and pharmaceutical companies from parking patents and the like in tax haven countries. The amount raised by GILTI from a capital intensive business like oil and gas wouldn't be that significant anyway.

The headlines lie. Again, take into account severance taxes and the gasoline tax, and oil and gas companies pay more than their fair share.

[Xpartan]

Today, on 2. 28.2025, Trump has finally admitted being the asset of Vladimir Putin. There is no, I repeat, no other way to interpret this. The scene was staged, the Trump and Vance roles -- rehearsed, the insults, unheard of for any head of state -- slung, and the rest is history. My God, America!

I've never been more embarrassed by any US president even including this one.

[Sirioja]

Trump is just a robber, Vance just a duck, trying to fuck poor Ukrainians and make business with criminal dictator, his friend who hold his balls, Putin. All my respect and support to Zelensky who has real balls, not only a small size, to resist to them not to make his citizens fucked by USA. Zelensky is fully legal according to Ukraine constitution and also supported by most Ukrainians to defend Ukraine, when Trump who fucked USA constitution and capitol, is a real shame and the most unrespectul for USA. I wish others than Trump and his gang, will support Zelensky and Ukraine who were attacked by Putin. When USA lost for economics versus Europe and China, when Europeans don t want to buy shit foods and lower level cars, other than taxes, Trump tries to rob the poor and make business with the worst. Real shame in front of the world.