Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lithuania signs US deal to replace Russian gas
Yahoo! ^ | 28 February 2015 | AFP

Posted on 03/01/2015 6:28:08 PM PST by WhiskeyX

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: WhiskeyX

And Bart Stupid has a piece of paper that says Obamacare won’t fund abortion. Oops, I mean Stupak. Any agreement with Obama is as vacuous as a frat in a dust storm.


21 posted on 03/02/2015 1:17:26 AM PST by Organic Panic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mosesdapoet

Biden is another Kleptocrat not all that different than Putin and his Russian gangs. It is no wonder that the Biden family zeroed into a deal with the East European kleptocrats, regardless of their pseudo-political affiliations. None of that changes the legitimate interests of the Ukrainians, Lithuanians, and other former Soviet occupied governments to defend themselves against another Russian conquest and looting.


22 posted on 03/02/2015 1:49:29 AM PST by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TLI

The importance of Burisma is greatly exaggerated by various sources with agenda. As their webpage says their average daily production is 12300 BOE. That makes yearly production in cubic meters into 12300*365/6.29*1000 = 713,751,000 m^3. Ukrainian production in 2011 was 19,800,000 m^3 so that makes Burisma’s share 713751000/19800000000*100 = 3.6%

Articles calling it the biggest private gas producer in Ukraine are misleading you as you certainly get a different idea than 3.6% production share.


23 posted on 03/02/2015 4:00:00 AM PST by Krosan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mosesdapoet

Ukraine has sizeable shale oil depostits?

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Real-Reason-Shell-Halted-Its-Ukrainian-Shale-Operations.html

I’ve read of a few companies persuing gas in their shale, with poor results, but not much about oil.


24 posted on 03/02/2015 4:44:03 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: biff
The EIA estimates that the US has 87 years of natural-gas supply at current and projected rates consumption and discovery.

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=58&t=8

An acquaintance who works for AGL says the projected supply is more like 250 years.

25 posted on 03/02/2015 5:40:04 AM PST by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg

Do you believe other government figures such as unemployment?

I know all about the figures but I also see all the NG power plants being built because of the decimation of the coal powered plants as well as industrial demands if we ever experience a recovered economy.

I have been in and around the awl bidness for all of my 65 years and it would not bother me a bit if NG went to $20.00/1000 but it would absolutely decimate the average consumer. Just look at the folks in the northeast that have no other choice than heating oil.


26 posted on 03/02/2015 6:30:49 AM PST by biff (Et Tu Boeh-ner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Re Ukraine oil & gas deposits
All I know is from what some reported but there’s an expert that reports on this kind of thing in FR’s. That’s you ! And why I included you in my reply.


27 posted on 03/02/2015 7:40:42 AM PST by mosesdapoet (Some of my best rebuttals are in FR's along with meaningless venting no one reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg
An acquaintance who works for AGL says the projected supply is more like 250 years.

The number of years really comes down to "at what price?"

We won't stop using oil/gas because there is none left, it will be because the alternatives are finally cheaper. That may come with lower cost alternatives, higher cost oil/gas, or most likely a combination of both.

28 posted on 03/02/2015 9:25:01 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: thackney

“The number of years really comes down to “at what price?””

Of course, this is correct, but the estimates (whether it is 87 or 250 years) are based on current and projected consumption and discovery which, in turn, are based on current and expected future price. In theory, the last cubic foot of natural gas consumed should be *very* expensive relative to the cheapest alternative fuel.


29 posted on 03/02/2015 9:45:55 AM PST by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: biff
“Do you believe other government figures such as unemployment?”

I think that the government estimates of the standard concepts of unemployment are fairly accurate, despite a few, scattered incidents of deliberate wrongdoing at the enumerator level. The big problem is with the increasing irrelevance of the standard U-3 measure of unemployment that gets most of the MSM headlines every month.

“I know all about the figures but I also see all the NG power plants being built because of the decimation of the coal powered plants ...”

Not to mention the hamstrung nuclear power industry. My point was simply that we are awash in proven, carbon-based energy reserves. This has major implications not only for our future economic well-being but also for our foreign policy and national security. If only our feckless President would get out of the way ...

30 posted on 03/02/2015 10:31:33 AM PST by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg

I do not believe any numbers published by the government since the democrats have taken it over. Not the Dept. of Labor, Energy, Revenue, Social Security or any of them. Anybody that does is a fool.

The hell with the implications our petroleum has for foreign policy, we need to use it for us, the citizens of this country. The europeans have pizzed on us for far too many years and they have had decades to deal with their own energy needs. Now that they have made their beds with Putin in the Kremlin then let them sleep with him. We do not owe them squat.


31 posted on 03/02/2015 9:09:15 PM PST by biff (Et Tu Boeh-ner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: biff
“The hell with the implications our petroleum has for foreign policy, we need to use it for us, the citizens of this country. The europeans have pizzed on us for far too many years and they have had decades to deal with their own energy needs. Now that they have made their beds with Putin in the Kremlin then let them sleep with him. We do not owe them squat.”

I agree. Our sudden oil riches will (or should, if we use them wisely) make us better off in the future and, as a bonus, less dependent on risky foreign sources of energy.

32 posted on 03/03/2015 6:06:42 AM PST by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson