TRUMP KREMLIN TOWER®…

---

“The energy sector bled nearly $150 billion in market value over the same 48‑hour whiplash…

---

Global Energy News Update – April 25, 2025

---

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

---

All rights reserved by Germán & Co. Reproduction is strictly prohibited.

---

“A symbolic skyscraper, constructed with rare earth materials and designed to operate using natural gas sustainably, embodies Russia’s geopolitical strategy and underscores the fragility of American realpolitik…

---

"The Kremlin's Trump Tower, a Fabergé Egg, and the Intertwined Legacies of Power…

---

By Germán & Co.
Karlstad, Sweden | April 25, 2025

________________________________________

The transformation of our relationship with news resembles the shift from voyaging on a sailing ship to piloting a supersonic jet. In the age of handwritten letters and horse-drawn mail coaches, news travelled like vessels charting ancient sea routes: steadily, predictably, with ample time for fact and rumour to be sifted before docking at the harbour of public consciousness. A letter from distant kin might take months to cross continents, and each word it bore was treasured with patience—information was scarce and therefore sacred.

Today, we navigate a “digital Macondo hyperocean,” where, instead of one carefully composed missive, we are submerged in an unending torrent of fragments clamouring for our attention. News no longer passes through traditional verification customs; anyone may cast a message, like a piece of paper, into a bottle—into the cyber sea of Macondo—and millions may retrieve its contents simultaneously. Rather than a single official bulletin, the modern “port authorities”—governments and institutions—issue manifold and often contradictory communiqués. We inhabit a dishonest realm where every statement drifts under suspicion of falsehood.

________________________________________

The Cartography of Our Lost Souls

In those forgotten years when the postal carriers—uniforms as strict as their expressions—imposed order upon the wilderness of streets with their mystic system of numbers, the world possessed a rigidity that made it legible. Even digits divided the righteous from the sinners: evens to the right, odds to the left. Colonel Aureliano Buendía had yet to witness the seventeen artificial roses that would blossom from his blood in the plaza, and the gypsy Melquíades had not yet returned with his parchments of miracles.

Now we wander like blind men through a labyrinth of our design, our fingertips raw from brushing against walls that shift by the hour. We yearn for the certainty that once guided letters from lover to beloved across impossible distances, yet the compass needle spins madly, mocking our desperation. The boundary between right and left has dissolved like sugar in the bitter coffee of existence—a minor tragedy beside the greater dissolution that follows.

In this perpetual twilight, white no longer stands apart from black, nor light from shadow. The grey mist that descended upon Macondo during those five years of unrelenting rain has settled permanently in our souls. We peer at moral questions through their haze, unable to discern their accurate outline, while ancestral ghosts whisper counsel that fades before we can grasp it.

And here lies the most terrible revelation—an heirloom of despair passed down through generations: we have forfeited even the sacred right to choose. Our freedom languishes in the same distant chamber where undeliverable letters are heaped, forgotten in dusty corners where lamps never glimmer. The illusion of choice gleams before us like the golden fish Úrsula once dreamed of, always visible yet forever beyond reach, condemned to circle in waters too deep for our understanding.

If we remember when we complained about the postal service, we did so because we did not know what the future would bring; it was impossible to imagine that ZIP codes would impose order on chaos and that envelopes—sealed with a quick lick and a spark of hope—would carry our faith across continents.
The postal network, conceived by visionary officials and traced daily by letter carriers who mapped the world with every route, served as an invisible compass: a shared spell through which nations unable to understand one another knew precisely how to be found. Indeed, in every odd-numbered address lay a promise, in every even number, a certainty.

________________________________________

COVID-19 and Tariffs

But now, adrift in a present that reeks of stale hand sanitiser and cables severed by tariff wars, we grope blindly through shattered coordinates. Postal routes, once sacred, have been replaced by supply chains that snap like threads of spittle in a dying man’s mouth. The Universal Postal Union, which in glorious times stitched together continents like the points of a single love letter, lies in tatters, replaced by a masquerade in which trade powers recite lies in diplomatic accents.

In this deracinated age—a world without fixed coordinates, where addresses dissolve like salt in rain—there are no saviours in postal uniforms, no envelopes bearing redemption. The mailman’s whistle has gone silent, replaced by the hollow reverberation of footsteps that never arrive, never depart. They linger as spectres in the dust, those echoes: false promises of connection, of permanence. Empires crumble on schedule. Tyrants rot. Rebels in overalls, clutching Orwell’s tattered manifesto, rise from furrows only to inherit the same rot they sought to burn. History is not a straight road but a ouroboros, its jaws clamped tight on its tail, spinning the earth into a dizzying gyre of repetition. We exist in the parenthesis between ruin and renaissance, scribbling our names on air, sending letters to a future that rewrites itself endlessly. There is no fixed point, no destination—only the ceaseless orbit, the Sisyphean march, the myth of progress unravelling like a frayed postal route into the void.

________________________________________

That, say:

Late last week, the Financial Times reported that President Vladimir Putin had “generously” offered to freeze Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at whatever line most suited Moscow. The pitch was whispered to Steve Witkoff—Donald Trump’s self‑styled envoy—during a meet‑and‑greet in St Petersburg. Never mind the optics: who better than a property developer to broker peace between armies?

Washington, meanwhile, floated the notion of gifting Crimea to Russia and turning a polite blind eye while four more regions stayed under occupation. Voilà—peace! The proposal was trumpeted as the Kremlin’s first “formal” softening in three years, and some Western headlines applauded Putin’s "restraint" as though brutality measured in half‑steps were magnanimity.

Less enchanted, European diplomats warned that the offer was likely bait: a showy concession designed to tether Trump to deeper Russian demands. Still, the story rolled on—amplified by Bloomberg, cross‑stitched by Swedish reporting, and wallpapered across the 24‑hour news feeds.

Back home, President Trump’s standing was buckling. A Supreme Court setback and the worst poll numbers of his career formed the backdrop to the St Petersburg overture. Into that vacuum stepped The Mirror, gleefully quoting Trump, labelling Volodymyr Zelensky a "dictator" during a sour White House clash—footage Russian broadcasters replayed for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

________________________________________

Crime and Punishment

In a tableau torn from Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, a handful of nimble traders—moral compasses rattling like Raskolnikov’s heartbeat—scooped up billions on a toy‑company stock that whiplashed with every tariff tweet—sí, te quiero, poquito, nada: tariff on at noon, tariff off by dusk—while the broader energy sector bled nearly $150 billion in market value over the same 48‑hour whiplash—Brent futures slid 7 percent, the XLE energy ETF sank 6.2 percent, ExxonMobil alone vaporised roughly $22 billion in market cap, Chevron $18 billion, and the European duo of BP and Shell a further $25 billion. Clean‑energy names fared no better—ICLN (the global clean‑energy ETF) sank 8 per cent, First Solar erased $4 billion, Enphase another $3 billion, while Vestas and Ørsted together shed roughly €6 billion—altogether about $35 billion in green‑power market cap evaporated.

Nor did Big Tech escape the downdraft: the so‑called Magnificent Seven—Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Tesla—collectively shed roughly $350 billion in market value during the same two‑day window (Apple − $80 billion, Microsoft − $70 billion, Nvidia − $60 billion, Amazon − $45 billion, Alphabet − $40 billion, Meta − $30 billion, Tesla − $25 billion). In the market’s brutal zero‑sum arithmetic, one player’s windfall is another’s ruin. This time, the crater opened beneath ordinary pension funds—state teachers’ and firefighters’ plans with heavy XLE exposure surrendered an estimated $9 billion in paper value. When you roll in police, municipal‑worker, and federal Thrift Savings allocations, public‑sector pension systems saw roughly $27 billion vanish inside two trading sessions.

________________________________________

Easter Celebration

Enter, stage left, the indispensable Mr. Dmitry Peskov—because what self‑respecting Kremlin melodrama would dare proceed without its dapper master of ceremonies? A career diplomat‑turned‑spin‑doctor, he glides through marble corridors brandishing a résumé as glossy as a freshly lacquered nesting doll: fluent in English, Turkish, French, and Arabic (thank you, MGIMO—Russia’s Hogwarts for budding power‑brokers), a formative posting in Ankara, and a society‑page marriage to Olympic ice‑dance diva Tatiana Navka. The man even sports a clipped Oxford accent, as if the Queen herself had coached him between caviar courses.

And of course, this week’s Absolutely‑Limited‑Time Offer™—pitched with the grin of a duty‑free perfume hawker and the menace of a Bond villain—features: 🌹 One (1) Romanov‑era Fabergé egg—nothing whispers “trust me” like jewel‑encrusted poultry.
🌹 Lifetime first‑dibs on rare‑earth contracts—corner the battery market while saving the planet (fine print rendered in invisible ink).
🌹 Billions in natural‑gas sweetheart deals—blue flame, red tape, green cash.
🌹 And—crash the cymbals—the shimmering hallucination of a TRUMP KREMLIN TOWER®, stabbing the Moscow skyline and powered exclusively by Gazprom gratitude.

The Moscow Times calls this glittering hamper “bait” to reel in Donald Trump; Peskov, ever the courteous angler, insists they are merely “areas of mutual economic opportunity.”

Happy birthday, democracy—your cake is Fabergé, the candles burn methane, and the guest of honour just sold the bakery.

The pièce de résistance? A February 10 executive order pausing enforcement of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for 180 days “in the interests of national security.” Just in time to clear the path for all those mutual opportunities.

________________________________________

Francisco

In memory of Pope Francis—the man of humility, inclusion, and the migrant—hailed, astonishingly, by both Vladimir Putin, the authoritarian leader of the Russian state, and Donald Trump, the former and current President of the United States, as though concord itself had sprouted wings. Their unlikely agreement in praising the pontiff bridged ideological chasms, creating a rare moment when these two powerful heads of state found common ground in their admiration for a man who consistently advocated for the vulnerable and marginalized.

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

All rights reserved by Germán & Co. Reproduction is strictly prohibited.

---

Global Energy News Update – April 25, 2025

U.S. Climate and Energy Policy: Legal Challenges to Empire Wind Decision Mount

The controversy surrounding the Trump administration's halt of Equinor's Empire Wind 1 project has intensified this week. New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a lawsuit challenging the Interior Department's decision, arguing it violates federal administrative procedures and established permitting protocols. Meanwhile, a coalition of environmental groups and labour unions has announced plans for nationwide protests against what they describe as "politically motivated energy policy reversals." Secretary Burgum defended the administration's position in a press conference on Tuesday, stating that all offshore wind projects are under review to ensure "economic viability and energy security."

Renewable Energy and Nuclear Power: Industry Responses to Regulatory Shifts

Ørsted announced a strategic review of its U.S. operations in response to the current regulatory climate, potentially delaying additional offshore wind investments. Meanwhile, in Europe, Finland has joined Sweden and Italy in accelerating nuclear power development, announcing plans to extend the operating licenses of its existing reactors and streamline approvals for new small modular reactor technologies.

This week, the International Energy Agency released a report indicating that global renewable energy installations continue to grow slower than projected in specific markets due to policy uncertainties, supply chain constraints, and inflationary pressures.

Fossil Fuel Markets and Investment: Price Volatility Following Trade Tensions

Crude oil markets experienced significant volatility this week, with prices rebounding slightly following last week's sharp decline. Brent crude settled at $72.40 per barrel on Thursday, up 3.2% from last week's three-year low, as markets reassessed the impact of China's retaliatory tariffs. On Wednesday, OPEC+ ministers held an emergency virtual meeting to discuss market conditions but maintained their current production strategy.

ExxonMobil announced a $12 billion investment in Gulf of Mexico oil and gas development, citing the administration's supportive stance toward domestic fossil fuel production. Similarly, Chevron has reactivated previously paused drilling projects in the Permian Basin.

Electric Vehicle Market Dynamics: Policy Shift Impacts Manufacturing Plans

Several automakers are reconsidering their U.S. electric vehicle manufacturing investments following the administration's rollback of federal incentives. Ford announced it will delay the planned expansion of its Tennessee battery plant by at least 18 months. General Motors is reportedly reviewing the timeline for transitioning certain production lines to EVs at its Michigan facilities.

BYD broke ground on its first European manufacturing facility in Hungary this week, accelerating its international expansion despite growing trade tensions. The facility will produce battery electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles primarily for European markets.

Geopolitical Energy Developments: Tensions Rise Over Resource Decisions

Brazil's environmental protection agency, Ibama, reversed its technical staff and granted preliminary approval for Petrobras to drill near the Amazon River mouth, sparking protests in Brasília and criticism from environmental organisations. President Lula defended the decision as "necessary for Brazil's energy sovereignty" while promising additional ecological safeguards.

India's Power Ministry announced new grid integration measures to accommodate both coal expansion and growing renewable capacity, acknowledging the country's dual strategy will continue through the decade. The announcement came as parts of northern India experienced rolling blackouts amid an early heat wave.

Economic and Market Trends: Investment Patterns Shift

Energy sector stocks have shown divergent performance this week, with fossil fuel companies generally gaining while clean energy shares declined. The S&P Global Clean Energy Index fell 3.2% over the week, while the S&P 500 Energy Sector index rose 2.1%. Analysts attribute this pattern to anticipated policy shifts favouring conventional energy sources.

Natural gas prices in the U.S. rose to a six-month high following forecasts of warmer-than-average temperatures across much of the country, increasing cooling demand expectations. European gas prices remained stable as storage levels continue to exceed seasonal averages.

The markets are closely watching next week's Federal Reserve meeting for signals about interest rate trajectories, which could significantly impact energy investment patterns through the remainder of 2025.

---

Sources:

📌 U.S. Climate and Energy Policy

• Reuters – "NY files legal challenge against Trump administration's Empire Wind halt" (April 23, 2025)

• Bloomberg – "Burgum defends energy policy amid mounting offshore wind controversy" (April 22, 2025)

• Politico – "Environmental groups plan nationwide protests over wind project cancellations" (April 24, 2025)

📌 Renewable Energy and Nuclear Power

• Financial Times – "Ørsted announces strategic review of US operations amid policy uncertainty" (April 21, 2025)

• World Nuclear News – "Finland accelerates nuclear development plan to meet carbon goals" (April 22, 2025)

• IEA – "Renewable Energy Market Update – April 2025" (April 20, 2025)

📌 Fossil Fuel Markets and Investment

• S&P Global – "Oil prices rebound from three-year lows as market reassesses China tariff impact" (April 24, 2025)

• Reuters – "OPEC+ holds emergency meeting, maintains production strategy" (April 23, 2025)

• Wall Street Journal – "ExxonMobil announces $12B Gulf of Mexico investment push" (April 23, 2025)

• Energy Intelligence – "Chevron restarts paused Permian drilling projects" (April 24, 2025)

📌 Electric Vehicle Market Dynamics

• Automotive News – "Ford delays Tennessee battery plant expansion amid EV incentive uncertainty" (April 22, 2025)

• Reuters – "GM reviewing EV transition timeline for Michigan facilities" (April 23, 2025)

• Financial Times – "BYD begins construction on first European manufacturing plant" (April 21, 2025)

📌 Geopolitical Energy Developments

• Reuters – "Brazil's Ibama approves Amazon drilling despite staff recommendations" (April 22, 2025)

• Estado de São Paulo – "Environmental protesters gather in Brasília following Amazon drilling decision" (April 23, 2025)

• Economic Times – "India announces new grid integration measures amid northern blackouts" (April 24, 2025)

📌 Economic and Market Trends

• Bloomberg – "Clean energy stocks slide as fossil fuels rally on policy expectations" (April 24, 2025)

• CNBC – "Natural gas prices hit six-month high on warming forecasts" (April 24, 2025)

• Wall Street Journal – "Energy investors eye Fed meeting for interest rate signals" (April 25, 2025)

---

Control Illusions and the Era of Multipolar Geopolitics and the War of Gas…

---

-21-

---

¨The dominance of natural gas sparks a global trade war...

---

¨Fossil Fuels, False Narratives, and Forgotten Lessons…

---

¨From Moët Chandon to Cold Hard Steel: Toasting the Global Trade Tax Hangover…

---

¨Tiny Lands Versus Giant Egos…

---

¨Global Energy News Update – April 6, 2025…

---

¨A dangerous ilusions…

---

¨The Energy Gambit: From Nuclear Dreams to Gas Leverage…

---

Musk broke the mirror of madness…

¨Mr. Elon Musk, casting a lifeline of sanity into the surreal theater of the unhinged arachnids of Talion law—a scene evocative of Nikolai Gogol’s Diary of a Madman—had previously supported eliminating tariffs between the United States and Great Britain. His recent remarks, however, hint at a broader ambition: extending that free trade vision across Europe. Good for Musk…

---

All right is of Germán & Co,

---

-21-

---

Reading the news in 2025 feels like flipping through the diary of a madman. World leaders rant and rave in surreal scenes that Nikolai Gogol himself would envy. In one entry, two cows walk into a café and order tea while diplomats war on trade tariffs. In another reality, Earth casually lands on the Moon, but quickly decides Mars is just so much more "in vogue"—provided, of course, its rocket doesn't spontaneously dissolve into a glittering shower of gold over Miami Beach, evoking vivid flashbacks of Gene Hackman’s unforgettable performance in La Cage aux Folles. Perhaps this dazzling spectacle repeats itself in a Moscow hotel room, except this time with torrents of caviar and champagne—a perfect allegory for humanity’s commitment to chasing shiny distractions. After all, reality now insists on being fantastically absurd: logic is quaint, and nonsense is the new religion.

But the cruel reality is, according to various sources, the world is going through a record number of active armed conflicts. The most recent data from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) at the University of Uppsala in Sweden states that in 2023, there were 59 armed conflicts involving at least one state— the highest number recorded since 1946. This number includes wars between countries as well as civil wars and internal insurgencies, considering an "armed conflict" to be one with at least 25 combat deaths in a year.

Under our sacrosanct canons of objectivity, we have pointed to one of the great Russian writers who knew how to read the future with millimetric accuracy. Now, perhaps, it is the turn of one of the most famous American writers, Ambrose Bierce, with a lost fragment of The Devil's Dictionary.

¨The night was dark and moonless when the Editor first set foot in the rickety library, guided only by the trembling glow of a nearly spent candle. Dust floated like tiny spectres in the air. There, on a shelf eaten away by time, he found a volume with the title almost erased: The Devil's Dictionary: Supplementum Obscurum.

He opened the crisp lid. The smell of old paper filled his nostrils. As he flipped through the fragile pages, he realized that it was no ordinary edition of Bierce's work. These passages, written in tight, trembling handwriting, alluded to figures that did not exist in Bierce's time, reflecting a dissonant echo of the future. Intrigued, the Editor lit another candle and began to read:

"The name, once associated with commerce and entertainment, has emerged into the political arena feeding collective anxieties with a bellicose discourse. Under his baton, reality was split into two comfortable halves: the devotees who allowed themselves to be dazzled by his superlatives, and the skeptics who saw in his proclamations mere ghosts designed to divert debates.

He became a master of turning fear into profit, skillfully announcing threats—whether real or imagined—positioning himself as the hero of the very crises he conjured. Like a contemporary sorcerer, he transforms uncertainty into treasure, particularly during election seasons when the stakes are at their highest. It’s a brilliant display of manipulation, a cunning figure devoid of any shame... As the stock market plunged and trade wars began to unravel the global economy, just before he set out to conquer new territories for rare earth metals on behalf of his mentor, and as his unique romance with that man from the Gulag took a dramatic turn, reminiscent of a scandalous soap opera, The Devil's Cauldron simmered in a sweltering summer... Yet, undaunted and serving as a mere distraction, he boldly proclaimed, "I was born in America, and I will serve my country loyally until the last Democrat is miscounted. My lucky number is 22—and no, this isn’t a joke."

To some, he stood as the steadfast guardian of the proud Eurasian steppes; to others, he was a calculating mastermind, orchestrating geopolitical maneuvers with a chilling composure. His iron grip revealed that democracy could be swayed—or even shattered—by the sheer force of undeniable authority. In the eyes of his rivals, the art of information manipulation wielded a might akin to that of a formidable army, as the truth crumbled under the weight of doubt like a dilapidated fortress.hen the Editor reviewed the first few pages, he found a brief annotation written in a faded margin:

"These additions never appeared in the original edition of Bierce. I, the Dictionary, am nourished by the ironies and madness of each era. Whoever leafs through these pages should do so with caution: cynicism never dies; it merely adopts new masks."

Stunned, the Editor looked up. Beyond the walls of the abandoned building, the wind howled like a distant laugh—perhaps Bierce's—at that grotesque testimony of humanity's political ambition and decline. He tucked the book under his arm, determined to preserve these misplaced definitions, wondering who would ever stumble upon this enigmatic Supplementum Obscurum again.

Before leaving the library, the Editor noticed a final appendix, almost hidden at the end of the work. It was dated with imprecise features as if it were written throughout different periods:

"Disinformation: A set of lies, half-truths, and manipulated data that, when dispersed with cunning, are capable of shaping perceptions, undermining wills, and aiding despots.

Since man learned to raise his voice above a whisper, there has been the deliberate sowing of falsehoods. However, in modern history—with the multiplication of screens and networks—some will say there has never been such a hellish period of informational confusion. The speed with which rumours spread, the echo of digital cameras, and the ease with which the implausible is shared have elevated disinformation to a dark art form.

Is this, then, the darkest moment of all? Every age is considered the worst; every shaky truth seems the most fragile. But perhaps the real horror is discovering that disinformation is not a novelty but the renewed constant of an old spectre that will not disappear as long as human beings yearn for secrets and power.

And, as Bierce—or the entity that signs on his behalf—warned:

“Cynicism never dies; it transmutes as soon as it finds a new channel to propagate."

The Editor closed the book. He put his hand to his heart, overwhelmed to see that disinformation was rising, today more than ever, as the great stratagem of those who seek to subvert the truth for their benefit. Clinging to that reflection, he took his dying candle and left the library in the dead of night, wondering how long it would take for the shadows to engender new definitions that would complete that cursed dictionary.

---

All Right To Germán & Co.

---

The dominance of natural gas sparks a global trade war...

By Germán & Co.

Karlstad, Sweden – April 5, 2025

Three weeks ago, we decided it was time to escape a world tangled in so much misinformation and propaganda; it felt like we’d stumbled into one of Nicolai Gogol’s more peculiar daydreams—except instead of two cows shuffling into a Moscow café for a cup of chai, we’re dealing with two penguins waddling straight into the Bourbon & Nuuk Pub, politely asking for the finest top-shelf whiskey. Naturally, we sought guidance in the time-honoured cabanas, clasping twenty-one as though it were our talisman—promising transformation, a dash of maturity, and, with any luck, maybe even a bit of sanity.

The past few weeks have been spent poring over political essays (oh, the thrilling page-turners they are), hoping to sift through the swirling chaos of the day. You might snicker, but we were determined to find at least some logic—like trying to figure out if two plus two could ever equal five because, in some alternate dimension, it probably does. Then again, some swear by the enchantment of twenty-two, though history might consider it a perilous reef after 240 years of democracy. But hey, who knows? Perhaps those penguins in Nuuk have it all figured out. After all, they can still get their bourbon with a side of irony—no fact-checking required.

“False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.” —Socrates

Socrates articulated these sentiments nearly 2,400 years ago, underscoring a timeless truth: a society founded on deception is at risk of undermining its very core, as dishonesty permeates its institutions akin to a contagion. From the ancient agora to contemporary media platforms, it has become evident that when truth is under threat, it destabilizes the foundations of communal existence. Nevertheless, in spite of profound philosophical admonitions, we find ourselves in an era where falsehoods proliferate at an alarming rate. The emergence of populist leaders, viral disinformation campaigns, and "fake news" enterprises backed by influential entities have distorted public discourse to such an extent that we often appear adrift, disconnected from any shared understanding of reality.

Many modern politicians weaponize lies precisely because untruth has proven shockingly effective in inflaming emotions—be they anger or hope. This process has been labeled “information warfare,” a domain in which narratives are molded, manipulated, or completely fabricated to achieve strategic ends. Populist movements, in particular, have learned that brazen or conspiratorial statements can rally a fervent base. Indeed, misinformation has become not an accidental by-product but a deliberate plank of their platform.

In a world inundated with a relentless tide of misinformation, the public stands at a pivotal crossroads: to continue the arduous journey of sifting through truth and deception or to succumb to the weariness and doubt that threaten their very survival. This struggle is no small feat. When a ceaseless barrage of half-truths and outright lies erodes the trust citizens place in their leaders, it sets the stage for political apathy, societal rifts, and ultimately, uprisings against the powers that be. Indeed, history often feels like a dizzying loop, spinning in unpredictable circles.

In this reflection, we explore how today’s turbulence is rooted in historical echoes: the manipulative strategies of authoritarian regimes, the cunning repackaging of aggression in the language of peace, and the cyclical return of great-power tensions reminiscent of the Cold War. From Castro’s letters urging the Soviet Union to act in the face of “imminent” invasion, to contemporary strongmen who cloak their own expansionist ventures in claims of victimhood, these parallels unsettle us. We will also delve into how strategic thinking—exemplified by a 2019 RAND report outlining ways to “Overextend and Unbalance Russia”—plays a complicated role in shaping state behavior and fueling perceptions of conspiracy and confrontation. By weaving these threads together, we aim to illustrate the precarious point at which the world finds itself, once again.

Late last month, we remember strongly when we stood by the window of a Stalin-era apartment on Kutuzovsky Prospekt, a short distance from Red Square. Outside, the wide avenue’s mosaic of streetlights glinted against the still waters of the Moskva River, reflecting the Soviet Gothic spires of a looming skyscraper. The hush of that evening was disturbing, as if the city itself recalled an older era of fear and rigid control. History felt closer than ever, stirring in the frosty air. Inside, a longtime family friend had prepared a banquet for those times—borscht soup simmering to a deep crimson on the stove, delicate pelmeni dumplings in a large bowl, black bread, and a bottle of vodka glinting in the lantern light. There was an undercurrent of defiance in her hospitality, as though she was commemorating a memory of survival—reminding us that past generations endured under a system that promised peace yet rolled forward tanks onto foreign soil. Indeed, that evening evoked a déjà vu: the sense that the specter of authoritarianism might was once again overshadowing the calls for peace, unsettlingly reminiscent of old propaganda posters.

In our mind’s eye, we can see the 1978 image of a propaganda poster proclaiming “peace” on one hand while decrying “militarism” on the other. It carried the same uneasy dissonance Joseph Goebbels once exploited, wrapping aggression in moralistic language. Germany’s justification for invading Poland in 1939 had also been couched in the rhetoric of self-defense, just as the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was accompanied by claims of protecting threatened populations. From these vantage points, the difference between propaganda and policy can vanish in an instant.

________________________________________

Fidel Castro’s Letter to Nikita Khrushchev

One need not look far into the last century for parallels. The Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 is remembered as a close brush with nuclear apocalypse, but we often gloss over Fidel Castro’s role in stoking the flames. In a letter to Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, Castro insisted that an attack on Cuba was “practically imminent” and that the USSR must never allow the United States to strike first. In effect, he welcomed a Soviet nuclear response if hostilities erupted—even at tremendous global risk. The rhetorical contortions—claiming self-defense as a justification for almost any action—feel all too familiar today. The formula is straightforward: paint one’s adversary as a persistent existential threat, then assert that any means of retaliation are morally justified.

Before the missile crisis, Castro had publicly praised the Soviet nuclear arsenal as an essential deterrent against what he described as U.S. imperial aggression. That stance has echoes in the justifications modern authoritarian leaders provide when rationalizing their own buildup of advanced weapons. In each case, the self-professed “victim” invests heavily in militarization, even as its neighbors or the international community express alarm. The same script played out during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, with the Kremlin repeating that it was forced to “demilitarize” Ukraine lest it become a Western launching pad.

Elsewhere, recent images from Caracas, Venezuela, illustrate the geopolitical ironies of our age. Photographs of a U.S. envoy shaking hands with President Nicolás Maduro has caused outrage among Venezuelans who have languished under his repressive regime and severe economic crisis. From Washington’s perspective, such overtures may have been about prisoner releases or strategic resource deals—but for opposition activists who risk imprisonment or worse, it looked like a betrayal. They recall the Cold War’s contradictory optic: a superpower claiming to defend democracy while negotiating with authoritarian leaders for immediate gain. 

In Europe, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline controversy underscores how drastically energy trade can be weaponized. Initially promoted as a commercial venture shipping Russian gas to Germany, Nord Stream 2 was labeled by its critics as a geopolitical Trojan horse. By 2022, sabotage had destroyed large sections of the pipeline, seen by many as a decisive severing of European dependence on Russian energy. Yet the subsequent swirl of rumors and partial leaks about possible backchannel U.S.–Russia talks to revive gas shipments through Nord Stream 2 reveals the layers of strategy and counterstrategy at play. Allegedly, American officials explored a framework that would allow them some monitoring or co-management role, effectively giving Washington a stake in European energy flows. While the details remain unverified, the story alone illustrates that in high-stakes diplomacy, official rhetoric may obscure private negotiations that run in the opposite direction.

________________________________________

RAND Repport 2019

Against this backdrop, the notion that Ukraine somehow “triggered” Russia’s 2022 invasion by threatening the Kremlin’s security has become a widely circulated claim in some circles. Sidelong accusations point to NATO expansion or alleged Western conspiracies as if they were the driving force behind the conflict. Yet a closer look suggests that the seeds of this confrontation predate 2022, extending into the interplay of global powers and the Kremlin’s own strategic assessments. Central to this discussion is the 2019 RAND Corporation report, “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia: Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options.” This study systematically examined ways to stress Russia’s vulnerabilities—economically, militarily, and geopolitically—short of direct armed conflict. The authors emphasized nonviolent measures, from expanding U.S. energy production to supporting Ukrainian forces.

¨The question naturally arises: Did the strategic framework enumerated by RAND shape the West’s response to the Ukraine war, or even precipitate Russian fears that led to the invasion?

RAND’s analysis concluded that Russia’s “greatest vulnerability” lay in its energy-dependent economy. The report suggested that by maximizing Western energy output and pressing for broader sanctions, the United States and its allies could weaken the Kremlin without a shot fired. In the realm of geopolitics, the study singled out Ukraine as a key point of leverage for the West—though it urged caution that arming Ukraine risked igniting a wider conflict. In the sphere of ideological pressure, it suggested publicizing Kremlin corruption and potentially fomenting domestic discontent, albeit with lower confidence due to Russia’s harsh suppression of dissent.

Not long after its publication, Russian state media seized on the report, framing it as an explicit “blueprint” to cripple Russia. (Some commentators even labeled it evidence of a Western conspiracy to provoke conflict in Ukraine.) Whether or not Kremlin leadership truly believed that the RAND plan was actively being implemented, the perception of a systematic campaign to unbalance Russia may have influenced the strategic calculations in Moscow. The cyclical nature of paranoia is such that if one already suspects hostile intent, any foreign policy analysis recommending pressure points can feel like confirmation of a grand design.

This dynamic resonates with history’s cyclical lessons. From the vantage point of 2025, it is tempting to see the period from 2019 onward as a slow march toward confrontation. Warnings about NATO’s expansions, intermittent clashes in eastern Ukraine since 2014, and the intensification of Western sanctions shaped the Kremlin’s siege mentality. President Vladimir Putin, echoing older Soviet narratives, emphasized that “encirclement” by hostile forces threatened Russia’s existence.

________________________________________

Ukraine is a bitter slice of cheese, caught between two superpowers

In February 2022, the Kremlin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Putin framed it as a necessary measure to prevent Ukraine from becoming a Western-forward military base. Yet the result was precisely what the RAND study outlined as a worst-case scenario for Russia if it initiated open conflict: an outpouring of Western arms and lethal financial sanctions, effectively turning Ukraine into the proving ground for a costly Russian quagmire. Washington’s stated goal soon expanded to not just aid Ukraine but to “weaken” Russia’s ability to repeat such aggression. Within months, the ruble fluctuated wildly, Russia’s technology imports dwindled, and foreign reserves were frozen, locking the Kremlin out of vital financial channels.

There is a tragic irony to the escalation: by preemptively attacking, Russia unleashed the very Western measures it had long dreaded. The cyclical logic is reminiscent of how major powers in the past rationalized expansions or invasions, convinced that war was inevitable and better fought sooner than later.

The torrent of Western military assistance to Ukraine—from Javelin anti-tank missiles to advanced artillery and eventually heavier armor—proved a textbook case of “cost-imposing strategy.” The Ukrainian battlefield became an arena where Russia’s ground forces suffered severe materiel losses, prompting some foreign policy experts to describe it as “bleeding” the Kremlin’s military might. Not surprisingly, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stated openly in April 2022 that a strategic goal was to ensure Russia was “weakened to the degree” it could not easily repeat such acts of aggression.

To supporters of Ukraine, this policy was morally justified: an unprovoked invasion demanded resolute resistance. Detractors cautioned, however, that such large-scale support risked nuclear brinksmanship if the Kremlin felt cornered. RAND’s original recommendation recognized this very danger, stressing that while supporting Ukraine could effectively strain Russian capabilities, it could also trigger unpredictable escalation, given Russia’s nuclear arsenal and historical claim to “privileged interests” in its near-abroad.

No aspect of modern great-power competition reveals the cost-imposing dynamic more clearly than the struggle over energy. Russia, heavily dependent on oil and gas exports, has wielded its resources as geopolitical leverage for decades. In 2022–23, however, Europe undertook a seismic shift, slashing its imports of Russian gas in response to the invasion of Ukraine. Pipelines once hailed as symbols of energy partnership—like Nord Stream 1 and 2—became conduits for tension and sabotage.

That the European Union, once reliant on Russia for over 40% of its gas, managed to halve or nearly eliminate those imports within a year attests to the power of unified sanctions and crisis momentum. The Kremlin tried to inflict its own counter-damage by cutting off supply to states it deemed “unfriendly,” aiming to fracture European resolve. Yet the result was a stunning pivot to alternative LNG suppliers, eventually leaving Russia’s gas fields with dwindling foreign customers.

As RAND anticipated, starving Russia’s energy revenue has proved a potent lever to sap Kremlin coffers. Western capitals have offset their own energy shocks through domestic subsidies and accelerated green transitions. This synergy of policy, though painfully expensive, has—so far—maintained public support in Europe. Russia, meanwhile, scrambles to reroute gas flows to Asia at steep discounts, absorbing a significant economic hit.

A crucial thread through this entire tapestry is the question of intent. From the Western perspective, arms deliveries and sanctions are responses to naked aggression in Ukraine, not a pre-planned scheme to bring about regime collapse in Moscow. Yet from the Kremlin’s viewpoint, the synergy and scale of the Western reaction seem suspiciously coherent, as though guided by a master plan. Russian state media repeatedly references the 2019 RAND study to “prove” the West had orchestrated the crisis to “fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.”

Reality, of course, is more nuanced. Think tank analyses are commonplace; governments commission studies to explore potential scenarios. The RAND report is an example of American strategic thinking meant to inform, not to direct policy. Nonetheless, once the invasion happened, it was almost as if a theoretical playbook had been dusted off and activated, fueling conspiracy theories that the confrontation was inevitable.

Within Russia, the state narrative regularly conflates reactive sanctions with deliberate Western attempts at “encirclement,” thereby feeding a siege mentality that justifies further militarization. Russia’s references to the RAND blueprint help rally domestic opinion around the notion that the country is fighting a defensive war against a hegemonic empire intent on destroying it. Past historical traumas—such as Soviet recollections of the Nazi invasion in 1941—amplify the resonance of such claims.

One of the most jarring aspects of the confrontation is that Western governments, while visibly coordinating efforts to hamper Russia’s war machine, also quietly negotiate behind the scenes for de-escalation, prisoner swaps, or energy deals. This dual-track approach is not new; Cold War politics were likewise an oscillation between deterrence and détente. Great powers have always pivoted between brandishing the stick and extending a partial carrot to avert catastrophe. Yet for societies caught in the crossfire—be they Ukrainians under bombardment, Russians grappling with economic fallout, or Venezuelans living under authoritarian rule—these macro maneuvers often feel like moral betrayal.

Hawks in Western capitals argue that regime change in Moscow is the only lasting guarantee of peace, while doves caution that pushing the Kremlin too far risks catastrophic escalation. President Joe Biden’s administration, for instance, has walked a fine line: affirming it does not seek to “destroy” Russia, while endorsing unprecedented support to ensure Ukraine’s military victory. For the Kremlin, these statements ring hollow. In the swirl of reciprocal mistrust, each side sees the other as pursuing veiled agendas.

Woven into every dimension of this crisis is the proliferation of disinformation. Modern technology amplifies false narratives faster than any propaganda apparatus of the mid-20th century could have dreamed. State-sponsored “news” agencies, bot networks, and selective leaks blur the line between fact and fiction, not only in Russia but across democracies grappling with internal polarization. Socrates’s warning about false words corrupting the soul resonates here: once the public becomes cynical and distrustful, the structure of democracy itself trembles.

The West has attempted to counter disinformation by banning channels like RT (Russia Today) and Sputnik, labeling them Kremlin propaganda arms, while supporting independent Russian-language outlets to reach audiences inside Russia. Critics call such measures censorship, highlighting the tension between open societies and the urge to protect themselves from foreign influence campaigns. This is the new normal in the battlefield of ideas: each side portrays the other as manipulative and repressive, eroding the space for civil discourse.

Returning to that 1978 memory—the propaganda poster of “peace” overshadowed by the clang of tank treads—brings us full circle to what many Russians who lived under the Soviet system have expressed: an acute, near-visceral recognition of manipulative doublespeak. Then, it was the Communist Party’s routine to proclaim itself a champion of liberation while it invaded neighboring countries under the Warsaw Pact. Now, we see a post-Soviet Russia claiming it must “liberate” or “protect” certain populations, employing a script that rebrands aggression as defense.

In the privacy of that Kutuzovsky Prospekt apartment, our small gathering sipped strong chai and vodka, remembering how families survived earlier chapters of tension and scarcity. The cyclical feeling was inescapable—a sense that the illusions of peaceful co-existence can vanish in an instant, replaced by an Orwellian rewriting of reality. For those who lived through the old era, the sorrow is in witnessing how quickly the global landscape can revert to hostility and suspicion.

If one conclusion emerges from the myriad strands of the current crisis, it is that re-establishing trust in both factual discourse and international relations is an uphill struggle. The war in Ukraine continues as of 2025, with no definitive resolution. The lines of conflict sprawl beyond the battlefield, entangling global supply chains, energy politics, and the hearts and minds of ordinary citizens. The West has embarked on an arduous mission to “contain” Russia economically, just as the Kremlin wages its own campaign of influence and intimidation. Each side feels threatened, each side claims legitimacy.

The question looms: how can the world break this cycle before it spirals further out of control? Diplomatic avenues exist, but they require stepping away from maximalist rhetoric—from illusions of humiliating or decapitating the adversary. De-escalation typically demands mutual concessions. Yet the readiness for compromise remains low, especially in the face of war crimes allegations, deep-seated mistrust, and an information environment that thrives on stoking outrage.

And what of truth? As Socrates noted, false words degrade the soul. In a period where entire nations live under official narratives that contradict observable realities, moral clarity becomes a scarce resource. This holds true across many societies, not merely within the Russian Federation or allied states. “Fake news” is a universal phenomenon, a virus that can infect democratic and authoritarian bodies alike. If we fail to reassert honesty and shared facts, the social contract that underpins governance itself may wither.

The 2019 RAND Corporation report is, in many ways, a microcosm of how think tank analyses can become enmeshed in the swirl of geopolitical conflict. It was neither secret nor necessarily prescriptive. Yet as soon as tensions flared, Russian media brandished it as proof positive of Washington’s malevolent designs, fueling the conspiracy that the West had planned this all along. Western governments, for their part, found that the measures RAND suggested—particularly on economic sanctions and support for Ukraine—were indeed practical ways to respond. The alignment of theory and practice, intentional or not, only deepened Russian suspicions.

This dynamic reveals an enduring truth about strategy: ideas circulated among policy elites can materialize in real events if circumstances permit. Before the Ukraine invasion, RAND itself warned that pushing certain levers—like providing large-scale lethal aid to Ukraine—could precipitate drastic Russian escalation. That risk crystallized in 2022. Once the invasion happened, the same options metamorphosed into core pillars of Western policy. Thus, the line between preemptive planning and reactive measure is blurred by the speed and severity of evolving conflicts.

For the global public, the RAND episode underscores the importance of reading such studies critically. On the one hand, they are standard elements of defense analysis, exploring ways to contend with an adversary short of war. On the other hand, they become potent propaganda fodder, especially when events on the ground look suspiciously like what was once merely hypothetical. Perception can drive conflict every bit as much as actual decisions.

In parallel, events in Cuba and Venezuela demonstrate that the same pattern of disinformation and double standards is not confined to Eastern Europe. As Fidel Castro once invoked nuclear deterrence, leaders like Nicolás Maduro wrap themselves in an anti-imperialist cloak. Meanwhile, the presence of U.S. emissaries seeking deals triggers accusations from local dissidents of tacit complicity in oppressive governance.

Such patterns of diplomatic engagement are nearly as old as international relations. During the Cold War, the superpowers regularly alternated between confrontation and cooperation with regimes whose ideologies they publicly denounced. The world again sees that moral consistency often yields to broader strategic considerations—be it the release of political prisoners, the reopening of energy supplies, or jockeying for influence in a multipolar order.

For populations living under repressive governments, these power plays confirm their suspicion that human rights are seldom the deciding factor in global politics. For foreign policy realists, it is simply the nature of inter-state relations that every moral stance can be bent by necessity.

We stand at an era’s pivot point. The rancor permeating global discourse is fueled not only by conventional weapons but by competing information campaigns, economic blackmail, and the reanimated ghosts of past conflicts. The voices of ordinary citizens, from Russian pacifists to Ukrainian families bombed out of their homes, from Venezuelan dissidents to European workers suddenly facing energy shocks, are muffled beneath the grand narratives of empire.

So, do we stand on the precipice of a new Cold War? Or have we already tumbled into it, with only the veneer of modern technology differentiating it from the 20th century standoff? Certain parallels are unmistakable: nuclear threats, proxy wars, mutual demonization. Indeed, the dividing lines are less strictly ideological this time—there is no monolithic communist bloc—but the structure of suspicion remains.

Yet, there is a crucial difference: the hyperconnected age amplifies every rumor and every official statement, feeding cynicism at breakneck speed. Where once propaganda was distributed via newspapers or shortwave radio, now it traverses social media platforms instantly, shaping impressions across continents. The intangible nature of such battles—in which trolls, bots, and manipulated videos might matter more than tank divisions—makes regulation or oversight a Herculean task.

The enduring question is whether these cyclical patterns—manipulation disguised as virtue, deterrence morphing into aggression—can be broken. If we sift through the immediate gloom, some glimmers of hope remain: diplomatic channels, however tenuous, still exist. Humanitarian organizations strive to mitigate suffering. Civil society in many countries demands more transparency and accountability. Even in heavily restricted states, dissent finds outlets, be they symbolic protests or online samizdat.

Nonetheless, the path to peace remains riddled with stumbling blocks. As long as leaders believe their survival depends on stoking fear of an external enemy, they will feed the furnace of paranoia. Societies battered by disinformation may retreat into apathy, or they may become more fervent in defending what they see as truths. Rebuilding trust between nations—particularly when blood has been spilled—requires acknowledging legitimate security concerns on both sides. One wonders if the world can muster the humility to do so.

Moreover, the RAND Corporation’s logic about “extending and unbalancing” an adversary has broader lessons: the measures that harm an adversary also carry costs at home, whether in the form of inflation, energy disruptions, or the risk of a spiraling arms race. RAND was explicit about that trade-off, cautioning that the benefits of pressuring Russia needed to be weighed against potential escalation to direct conflict. As we watch the conflict in Ukraine persist and the global economy weather new shocks, the real-world manifestation of those theoretical trade-offs becomes painfully evident.

Recalling the hush along the Moskva River that night, and the stories exchanged over steaming borscht, we were struck by how swiftly illusions of certainty can erode. One moment, a society might enjoy the conveniences of consumer goods and relative calm; the next, it is reeling under martial law, censorship, and forced conscription. In truth, we have never been far removed from the more chilling aspects of human nature and power struggles. To believe otherwise would be to ignore the lessons etched into 20th-century history.

In that borrowed apartment’s warmth, our quiet gathering raised glasses in an unspoken toast: that hope endures. Yet hope is not self-fulfilling. It demands vigilance. It demands an active confrontation with lies, no matter how exhausting. It demands refusing to cede the field to cynicism. Socrates spoke truly that deception corrupts the soul, but it also can be confronted by reason, solidarity, and an insistence on accountability.

We live under the weight of old tactics in new clothing. Familiar justifications—“self-defense,” “peace,” “protection”—are twisted into rhetorical shields for aggression. Historical echoes reverberate from Castro’s 1962 letters to the gray boulevards of Moscow and the pipelines snaking beneath the Baltic Sea. And behind it all, the illusions and illusions-of-illusions swirl: half-truths or entire fabrications that feed divisions within societies.

This withdrawal offered an opportunity to confront a troubling reality: in contemporary politics, truth had once again become a casualty, sacrificed on the altar of expediency and ambition. His reflections unearthed unsettling historical parallels, notably invoking the infamous propagandist Joseph Goebbels, whose cunning manipulation of language concealed brutal agendas beneath noble rhetoric.

A vivid memory had triggered his retreat: a Communist Party poster, impeccably designed and advocating peace while rejecting militarism. Initially compelling, the poster soon sparked profound indignation, as he recognized chilling echoes of Goebbels’ deceptive use of peaceful language to justify Germany’s 1939 invasion of Poland. To him, Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine eerily mirrored this grim precedent, highlighting how propaganda and aggression remain intricately connected.

Further fueling our introspection was Poland’s distinct stance within NATO, shaped by a painful historical legacy marked by betrayal and violence from authoritarian regimes. Experiences such as the Katyn massacre and the dual betrayals by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia had forged Poland into a vigilant guardian, alert to complacency toward Russian aggression. He found himself deeply respecting Poland’s resolve, seeing it as a necessary cautionary voice in a world prone to repeating past errors.

As his period of solitude drew to a close, his apprehension intensified, observing how contemporary disinformation, despite its digital sophistication, employed disturbingly familiar tactics. Russia’s calculated portrayal of Ukraine as fascist, its exploitation of refugee crises, and distorted narratives about NATO reinforced his conviction that propaganda remains a crucial weapon in authoritarian arsenals.

Emerging from reflection, he returned resolutely committed to vigilance against pervasive misuse of language and truth. He understood that authentic peace could only survive through unwavering dedication to truth—a stark contrast to the deceptive calm promoted by tyrannical regimes. Our retreat underscored a critical lesson: safeguarding truth is essential, for language misused is as devastating as any weapon.

________________________________________

“Axis of Evil”

Paradoxically, censorship is stronger than ever, and as Mr. Benoît Bréville describes in “International of Censors,” an alliance that cuts across traditional political divides. Rather than the familiar concept of an “Axis of Evil” or a broader coalition of autocrats, democrats, and bureaucrats who converge in their willingness to impose censorship. Bréville’s central warning is about a paradox: leaders who profess to free expression may themselves engage in the systematic control of information—demonstrating that the impulse to censor is not confined to autocratic regimes alone.

We were on the verge of concluding this text twenty-one days later, when the EU suddenly urged everyone to prepare three days’ worth of provisions—despite Sweden having sounded the alarm three months ago. We had treated those monthly attack sirens as distant echoes, until a superstitious chill crept over us.

In that instant, we happened to be writing while listening to Edgar Allan Poe’s ¨The Black Cat¨ . As the narrator began gouging out the feline’s right eye, the emergency alert rang out, making our hearts jolt with the shock of an ill omen realized. We abandoned our desks, seized a tiny Primus stove with its trembling gas tank—certain Emperor Romanov’s ghostly assault would soon knock out our electricity. After ignoring every warning before, we now fled in terror, convinced that fate and fiction had joined forces to hound us with every superstitious sign we had laughed off until that very moment.

¨That day, many millions wondered and tried to get an explanation about the close ties between President Trump and Putin...

Dagens Nyheter (DN), a leading Swedish newspaper, has reported on alleged secret financial links between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and former U.S. President Donald Trump. Notably, in mid-March 2025 (amid warming U.S.–Russia relations under a new Trump administration), DN published an analysis citing experts on Trump’s longstanding ties to Russia (Expert: Ryska groomingen av Trump framgångsrik). (DN’s coverage is paywalled (Expert: Ryska groomingen av Trump framgångsrik), but its content has been summarized by other outlets.) This reporting came as Trump was pursuing closer relations with Moscow and scaling back support for Ukraine, prompting scrutiny of his motives.

DN’s reporting suggests that Trump and Putin have been connected by decades of covert financial dealings and mutual benefit. One Russia analyst interviewed, Stefan Ingvarsson, described “over three decades of successful ‘grooming’” of Trump by Russian interests. In essence, when traditional Western financiers shunned Trump, money from the former Soviet Union “saved him, time and again” (Därför känner Trump och Putin sådan stark samhörighet). The DN analysis argues that Putin and Trump share a similar outlook – a disdain for liberal norms and a focus on power and profit – which made such an alliance of interests possible.

Specifically, DN’s sources claim that Russian oligarchs and elites have invested in or bailed out Trump’s ventures at critical times, forging hidden economic links. For example, Ingvarsson notes there are clear signs that high-ranking Russians “rescued (Trump) financially,” including during a 2008 bankruptcy scare (Har Ryssland en hållhake på Trump? | Dagens Arena). This refers to reports that when Trump was in dire straits around the 2008 financial crisis, Russian buyers and investors stepped in with cash. DN also highlighted that Western banks often refused to lend to Trump over the years, and funds from ex-Soviet sources filled that gap (Därför känner Trump och Putin sådan stark samhörighet). In other words, Russia (and ex-Soviet businessmen) became an unofficial banker for Trump’s business empire.

While DN’s article itself is behind a paywall, its claims mirror well-documented instances reported elsewhere. For instance, Donald Trump Jr. admitted in 2008 that “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of [the Trump Organization’s] assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia” (Yes, there is evidence Trump does business with Russians - POLITICO). This suggests the Trump family knew Russian capital was propping up their real estate ventures. In one prominent case, a Russian billionaire (Dmitry Rybolovlev) purchased Trump’s Palm Beach mansion in 2008 for ~$95 million, about double what Trump paid just a few years prior ('Follow the money': Senator probes Trump's $95 million Palm Beach mansion sale - ABC News) ('Follow the money': Senator probes Trump's $95 million Palm Beach mansion sale - ABC News). This flip – occurring when Trump’s casinos were near bankruptcy – prompted a U.S. Senate inquiry into whether it was an act of money laundering or a bailout ('Follow the money': Senator probes Trump's $95 million Palm Beach mansion sale - ABC News). Trump claimed it was just a business deal (attributing the huge profit to home improvements) ('Follow the money': Senator probes Trump's $95 million Palm Beach mansion sale - ABC News), but Senator Ron Wyden noted Trump was struggling financially and the timing “warrants further scrutiny” ('Follow the money': Senator probes Trump's $95 million Palm Beach mansion sale - ABC News).

Beyond single deals, an investigation by Reuters (2017) found at least 63 Russian individuals or entities invested nearly $100 million in Trump-branded properties in Florida alone (Russian elite invested nearly $100 million in Trump buildings). These buyers included wealthy figures from the second and third tier of the Russian elite (Russian elite invested nearly $100 million in Trump buildings). Reuters reported no clear evidence that these investments were directed by Putin’s inner circle, and it found no wrongdoing by Trump proven, but the pattern underscored how deeply Russian money had penetrated Trump’s real estate business (Russian elite invested nearly $100 million in Trump buildings). Such infusions of cash, often coming at times when Trump needed capital, bolster DN’s point that Trump’s business fortune has been intertwined with Russian financial interests.

DN’s portrayal of a long-running Putin–Trump economic nexus is also supported by intelligence and investigative reporting. Notably, a former KGB spy told The Guardian in 2021 that Moscow had “cultivated Trump as an asset” for 40 years – effectively grooming him via business incentives starting in the 1980s (‘The perfect target’: Russia cultivated Trump as asset for 40 years – ex-KGB spy | Donald Trump | The Guardian). Trump’s first visit to Soviet Moscow in 1987 (when he was courted for a possible hotel deal) is often cited as the beginning of this relationship (‘The perfect target’: Russia cultivated Trump as asset for 40 years – ex-KGB spy | Donald Trump | The Guardian). Over the years, Trump pursued multiple ventures in Russia (e.g. the Miss Universe 2013 pageant in Moscow, and a proposed Trump Tower Moscow during the 2016 campaign), giving Putin’s regime plenty of touchpoints for influence.

________________________________________

Broader Political Context

Allegations of hidden Putin–Trump ties have had serious political implications. They first gained wide attention during the 2016 U.S. election and Trump’s presidency, as investigators probed whether Trump’s Russia-friendly stance was owed to undisclosed financial leverage or even kompromat. Trump consistently denied any financial connection to Russia, insisting “I own nothing in Russia. I have no loans in Russia. I don’t have any deals in Russia” (Russian elite invested nearly $100 million in Trump buildings) and dismissing reports of ties as “nonsense” (Trump avfärdar påstådda Rysslandskopplingar som ”nonsens”). In 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation ultimately did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government in election meddling (Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question ...). But Mueller did document numerous links and contacts, and he pointedly noted he was not exonerating Trump on issues of obstruction or other matters. Financial entanglements largely lay outside Mueller’s narrow scope, meaning the full extent of Trump’s Russia business links was never legally adjudicated.

The idea of Putin holding undue sway over Trump lingered in U.S. political discourse – especially after episodes like the July 2018 Helsinki summit, where Trump appeared to side with Putin’s denials over U.S. intelligence findings. Critics argued that Trump’s long-standing business entanglements (or hopes of future deals) with Russia explained his unusually sympathetic approach to Putin (Expert: Ryska groomingen av Trump framgångsrik). Supporters countered that Trump was simply seeking better relations and that no explicit quid-pro-quo was ever proven. The DN piece in March 2025 came as this debate reignited: with Trump back in office, he was striking a conciliatory line toward Moscow (even as Russia was waging war in Ukraine). Understanding the history of Trump’s financial ties to Russian interests provided important context for his foreign policy – DN’s experts suggested Trump’s personal affinity and indebtedness to Russia were key drivers of his agenda (Expert: Ryska grooming av Trump framgångsrik) (Har Ryssland en hållhake på Trump? | Dagens Arena).

In summary, Dagens Nyheter’s reporting (as echoed by other sources) paints a picture of quiet, long-running economic symbiosis between Trump and wealthy Russians connected to Putin. These alleged hidden ties – from large real estate purchases to investment flows and business partnerships – may have fostered Trump’s pro-Kremlin leanings, though direct proof of Putin orchestrating financial support to Trump remains circumstantial. DN’s claims are supported by multiple investigative findings (e.g. Trump Jr.’s admissions, property records, expert testimony) (Yes, there is evidence Trump does business with Russians - POLITICO) (Russian elite invested nearly $100 million in Trump buildings), even as Trump and his circle vehemently reject the notion of being influenced or aided by Moscow.

In addition to Swedish coverage, a notable U.S. piece on Trump’s Russia ties appeared in Politico. On April 23, 2018, Politico published an article by Ben Schreckinger titled “Trump’s false claims to Comey about Moscow stay could aid Mueller.” This report scrutinized Trump’s 2013 trip to Moscow for the Miss Universe pageant – specifically a one-night stay at a Moscow hotel that later became infamous in the Steele dossier allegations. Politico’s piece came amid the Mueller investigation and revelations that then-FBI Director James Comey had written memos about Trump denying salacious rumors from that trip. Politico set out to fact-check Trump’s denial.

________________________________________

Nature and Origin of the “Hidden” Image

The Politico article made headlines for unearthing previously overlooked photographic evidence related to Trump’s Moscow visit. In essence, Politico published a photo from November 8, 2013 showing Donald Trump in Moscow alongside a Russian associate, thereby undercutting Trump’s claim that he hadn’t stayed overnight. The image – which had not been widely publicized before – came from a Facebook post by Nobu Moscow, an upscale restaurant. It shows Trump standing outside the restaurant with Emin Agalarov, one of his Russian business partners (Trump’s false claims to Comey about Moscow stay could aid Mueller - POLITICO). (Emin Agalarov, the son of oligarch Aras Agalarov, helped bring Miss Universe to Moscow and was involved in Trump’s business pursuits there.) This photo’s origin was a social media page rather than official news sources, which is why it was considered “hidden” or at least not part of the public narrative until Politico highlighted it.

Politico also cited other images and posts to reconstruct Trump’s timeline. For example, the article referenced a photograph from the late evangelist Billy Graham’s website showing Trump in North Carolina on Nov 7, 2013, at Graham’s birthday event (Trump’s false claims to Comey about Moscow stay could aid Mueller - POLITICO). This established that Trump left the U.S. that night. Then, upon arrival in Moscow on Nov 8, Trump’s activities were documented by various social media posts: the Nobu restaurant’s photo, and a tweeted photo of Trump with Miss Universe 2012 Olivia Culpo and singer Nick Jonas at a Moscow mall (the Agalarovs’ Crocus City Mall). Additionally, a Russian attendee posted Instagram photos of meeting Trump that weekend . By compiling these, Politico effectively proved Trump was indeed present in Moscow overnight on November 8–9, 2013.

________________________________________

Claims Made in the Article

The core claim Politico made was that Trump lied to James Comey about his Moscow trip, and that evidence contradicts Trump’s story. Comey had noted in his memos that Trump brought up the “golden showers thing” (an allusion to an unverified claim that Trump hired prostitutes at the Ritz-Carlton Moscow) and asserted it couldn’t be true because he “didn’t stay overnight in Russia”. Politico’s investigation found this assertion to be false. Citing flight records, hotel logs, and the newly surfaced photos, the article documented that Trump arrived in Moscow on Friday, Nov 8, and stayed through Saturday for the pageant (Trump’s false claims to Comey about Moscow stay could aid Mueller - POLITICO). The photographic evidence – such as the Nobu restaurant snapshot with Emin Agalarov – placed Trump in Moscow on the evening of November 8, directly refuting his claim that he was absent that night. Politico also noted that Trump’s own bodyguard later told Congress he stood outside Trump’s hotel room that night, after someone offered to send women to Trump’s suite (an offer the bodyguard says he declined). In short, the article’s claim is that Trump knowingly misled the FBI about the circumstances of his Moscow hotel stay.

________________________________________

Political Implications

The exposure of this “hidden photo” and the accompanying evidence had significant implications in 2018. First, it suggested that Trump may have been trying to cover up his time in Moscow, raising the question: why lie about it? Critics posited that Trump might have feared the truth would lend credence to the kompromat allegations (i.e. that Russia had compromising material on him from that night). Legally, if Trump lied to federal investigators (Comey) about a material fact, it could factor into an obstruction of justice or perjury case. In fact, Politico’s headline noted the evidence “could aid Mueller,” since proving Trump was untruthful or had a personal stake in concealing the trip could bolster the case that he was compromised (Trump’s false claims to Comey about Moscow stay could aid Mueller - POLITICO). Legal experts cited by Politico said this new timeline “might bring new legal jeopardy for the president” (Trump’s false claims to Comey about Moscow stay could aid Mueller - POLITICO).

Politically, the article added fuel to the ongoing controversy over Trump’s Russia ties. It received wide pick-up in U.S. media, reinforcing suspicions that Trump was oddly defensive and secretive about his dealings in Russia. The fact that an American president’s veracity was being undermined by contemporaneous photos on foreign social media was striking. Opponents argued it was another data point showing Trump’s pattern of false or misleading statements regarding Russia. The White House downplayed the report, and Trump himself did not directly respond to the specifics of the photo, but he continued to dismiss the overall story as a “witch hunt.”

In summary, Politico’s investigation uncovered a key photo and related posts from Trump’s 2013 Moscow trip, which served as evidence that Trump did spend the night at a Moscow hotel despite his denials. The image (sourced from a restaurant’s Facebook page) and other timeline proof not only corroborated the presence of Trump and his Russian contacts in Moscow, but also carried serious political ramifications. It suggested Trump had a personal motive to misrepresent his Russia visit (potentially to hide compromising events or simply to defuse the scandal), thereby deepening concerns about his honesty and vulnerability to Russian leverage. This “hidden photo” episode became one piece of the larger puzzle of Trump’s relationship with Russia, complementing investigative reporting like DN’s by providing concrete visual evidence of the ties and interactions that had been alleged.

Below is a revised, more detailed piece that weaves in additional information about the Trump Administration in 2025—including its key figures, immediate priorities, and policy pivots—to paint a fuller picture of how trust is playing out under his second term. The tone remains journalistic and accessible for a general audience, while offering historical context and sharper focus on current events.

________________________________________

Trust in a Divided World: The Second Trump Administration and Its Impact on Democracy and Diplomacy

In the arena of global politics, trust is the invisible contract binding democracies at home and alliances abroad. It is built painstakingly over years—through honesty, consistency, and respect—and can be shattered overnight by dishonesty or caprice. Leaders who respect their commitments earn legitimacy among citizens and credibility with allies; those who deceive or surprise partners risk watching hard-won trust unravel in an instant.

Few modern presidencies illustrate the power of trust and distrust more dramatically than that of Donald J. Trump. His second term, which began in January 2025, has once again propelled the United States into the center of global debates about whether Washington can be relied upon to fulfill its promises—or whether its word is conditional, transactional, and subject to rapid shifts. If trust truly is the currency of governance, then the Trump Administration’s policy swings and rhetorical turns mark a volatile exchange rate—one with potentially high costs for democracy and diplomacy alike.

The Return to the White House: Trump’s Second-Term Team

When Donald Trump reclaimed the presidency after winning the 2024 election, the world braced for what his second term might bring. Some of his new Cabinet picks and key advisors signaled continuity with his prior style; others suggested an attempt to project a steadier hand:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio: The Florida senator and former presidential candidate accepted the post after months of speculation. Although Rubio has been more hawkish toward Russia in the past, he has pledged to support Trump’s foreign-policy agenda “as a loyal soldier” while trying to reassure allies in Europe.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: The former Fox News contributor and Army veteran rose to prominence in conservative circles for his strong “America First” stance and public critiques of NATO members’ defense spending. His nomination was widely seen as a nod to Trump’s emphasis on making allies “pay their fair share.”

National Security Advisor Kash Patel: After serving in lower-level roles during Trump’s first term, Patel returned in a top national security capacity, known for his skepticism of the intelligence community and for favoring bold, direct negotiations with adversaries.

Special Envoy for Ukraine, retired General Keith Kellogg: A longtime Trump loyalist, Kellogg became the face of the administration’s effort to “bring peace” to Ukraine—an initiative that would soon revolve around the contentious plan to slash global oil prices to undercut Russia’s war effort.

On the domestic front, Trump quickly reinstated or expanded policies emblematic of his first term, including more restrictive immigration measures, renewed calls for border-wall construction, and a pledge to revisit trade relations with key partners. Yet it is on the international stage—particularly regarding the Ukraine conflict—that his administration’s handling of trust has garnered the most intense scrutiny.

________________________________________

A Bold Gambit: Slashing Oil Prices to “End” the Ukraine War

In one of his earliest high-profile moves, President Trump surprised the world at the 2025 World Economic Forum in Davos by calling on Arab oil-producing nations to cut oil prices dramatically. Arguing that high oil revenue “fuels the Kremlin’s war machine,” Trump insisted that a coordinated drop in prices would starve Moscow of resources and force President Vladimir Putin to negotiate an immediate end to the war in Ukraine.

“I’m calling on OPEC to bring the price down,” Trump declared.

“The moment Russia can’t fund its war, that war ends.”

General Kellogg, newly appointed as the White House’s Ukraine envoy, echoed the reasoning: because Russia’s budget is so dependent on oil exports, hitting Putin’s wallet might prove more effective than prolonged fighting.

________________________________________

However, the gambit has drawn skepticism from both energy-sector experts and international allies

- Saudi Arabia: Officials in Riyadh quietly signaled their reluctance, pointing out that they had “no intention of flooding the market at Washington’s behest.” Past volatility during Trump’s first term left them wary of again bending to sudden U.S. demands—especially when their own economic stability hinges on higher oil prices.

- U.S. Shale Producers: American oil executives, including some who had supported Trump politically, expressed unwillingness to significantly ramp up production just to manipulate prices. They prioritize long-term profitability and warn that the administration cannot set global market levels by fiat.

- European Allies: While they share the desire to undercut Russia’s aggression, they doubt that a rapid price plunge alone will compel Putin to halt his armies. European officials also remain uneasy about U.S. unpredictability; the memory of surprise tariffs and shifting positions during Trump’s first term lingers.

In short, Trump is asking nations to trust his strategy over their own interests—a tall order given that many recall the unpredictability and unilateralism of his previous presidency.

The Trust Deficit: A Historical Backdrop

These tensions do not exist in a vacuum. Historically, alliances—particularly those involving the United States—have depended on sustained consistency:

- Post-WWII Alliances: In the aftermath of the Second World War, the United States and its allies built institutions like NATO on a foundation of trust: an attack on one is treated as an attack on all. This mutual defense agreement deterred Soviet aggression for decades.

- Erosions of Trust: The Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal in the 1970s fractured Americans’ faith in their own leadership. Internationally, episodes like the Iraq War of 2003—justified by false intelligence about weapons of mass destruction—soured allies on U.S. reliability.

- Trump’s First Term (2017–2021): Allies like Canada, Germany, and France experienced new strains: abrupt tariff impositions, questioning of NATO commitments, and withdrawal from international accords (Paris Climate Accord, Iran nuclear deal). Rebuilding faith after such moves is no small task.

Returning to office in 2025, Trump inherits what some analysts call a “trust deficit” both domestically and abroad. A recent global survey (Edelman’s Trust Barometer) reveals that 63% of people fear their government leaders deliberately mislead them—a statistic that resonates with those wary of the “post-truth” political environment that accelerated in Trump’s first term.

________________________________________

Unpredictability vs. Credibility: The Hallmarks of Trump’s Style

One of Trump’s self-professed virtues is “keeping everyone guessing.” In his first term, he often used surprise announcements—frequently via social media—to achieve immediate political impact. This led to:

1. Abrupt Policy Shifts: Withdrawing troops from Syria overnight, threatening to pull out of NATO if allies didn’t increase defense spending, imposing tariffs on allies without prior consultation.

2. Transactional Deal-Making: Reducing diplomacy to quid pro quos, such as conditioning U.S. support for Ukraine on political favors—an episode that led to his first impeachment in 2019.

3. Personal Rapport with Adversaries:** Trump prided himself on high-profile summits (e.g., with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un) that he said showcased his ability to handle adversaries one-on-one, often sidelining traditional diplomatic channels.

These tactics won favor among parts of the American electorate who appreciated his direct, brash style. But they also left U.S. allies uneasy. “He’s unpredictable” was a frequent refrain in European capitals—sometimes said with admiration for his willingness to break the mold, but more often with concern that the U.S. could not be counted on to maintain longstanding commitments.

________________________________________

 Allies’ Reactions in 2025: Cautious, Polite, and Wary

With Trump back in the White House, the reaction across NATO and key U.S. partners in Asia and the Middle East has been a measured wariness:

- NATO Partners: Leaders in Germany, France, and Canada remain polite in public statements, congratulating Trump on his return to office. Yet behind closed doors, officials admit a pervasive sense of “brace for turbulence.” They recall how abruptly Trump once threatened to pull the U.S. out of NATO summits if members didn’t meet spending targets. As one European diplomat put it, “We’ve been burned before; we must protect our own interests.”

- Ukraine: President Volodymyr Zelensky, grateful for any pressure on Russia, has welcomed additional U.S. arms shipments. But he is adamant that “no grand bargain” be made over Ukraine’s head. Memories of Trump’s 2019 freeze on military aid—for political leverage—feed Kyiv’s anxiety about being a pawn in a larger Trump-Putin deal.

- Saudi Arabia and OPEC States: Already signaling reluctance to comply with a forced price drop, they note the lasting memory of Trump’s fluctuating oil policy in his first term, where he alternately praised and blasted OPEC for price manipulation. For them, upending their budgetary and strategic interests on Trump’s word alone is not a winning prospect.

In short, the second Trump administration is trying to rebuild or reinforce relationships with partners who largely remember the shocks of the first term. That’s a difficult balancing act: offers of arms deals and trade incentives sometimes clash with a history of “America First” rhetoric, tariffs, and unilateral moves that sowed distrust.

________________________________________

Russia’s Response: A Study in Opportunism

Perhaps the most telling reaction came from Moscow itself. Putin, while officially dismissing the notion that crashing oil prices could force him to end the war, publicly praised his “pragmatic and trusting” relationship with Trump—a statement that raised eyebrows across NATO capitals. When an adversary like Putin expresses more faith in the U.S. president than do longstanding allies, it underscores the rift that mistrust can create.

Still, Russia has proven it can adapt to economic pressure by selling discounted oil to willing buyers such as China and India. If OPEC complied with Trump, Moscow might look for additional illicit markets or ramp up alternative revenues. European analysts question whether a short-term drop in oil prices alone will corner the Kremlin, especially given Putin’s proven willingness to absorb economic pain for strategic aims.

________________________________________

The Broader Context: Trust in a “Post-Truth” Era

Underlying these developments is the erosion of trust in democratic institutions worldwide—often linked to an age of “alternative facts” and viral misinformation. When citizens believe their leaders routinely lie, or that objective truth is elusive, trust decays at every level:

- Domestic Distrust:** American politics has been marked by high polarization, with many voters convinced elections are rigged and media outlets are biased. This fosters a public sentiment that “everyone is lying,” which in turn weakens the moral authority of any administration.

-International Skepticism:** Allies and adversaries question whether the U.S. will maintain consistent policies or whether decisions might hinge on presidential tweets or personal deals. As a result, they hedge their bets—seeking new partnerships, diversifying trade, or building their own security structures.

- The Spiral Effect:** The more leaders bend facts or break promises, the more the public (and foreign governments) come to expect duplicity. Distrust then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, further fueling instability.

________________________________________

Repairing the Breach: Can Trust Be Restored?

For President Trump, restoring trust—especially with longtime Western allies—requires more than bold statements. It demands follow-through on commitments, transparent policymaking, and an end to the ad-hoc surprise announcements that roiled alliances in his first term.

- Consistency Over Time: As scholars note, trust is built through predictable patterns of behavior. If the second Trump administration demonstrates steadiness (for instance, holding firm on aiding Ukraine without sudden reversals), it could gradually rebuild allied confidence.

- Consultative Decision-Making: If officials like Secretary of State Rubio and Secretary of Defense Hegseth engage NATO partners in genuine dialogue—rather than delivering ultimatums—the alliance might solidify. Negotiations over trade disputes, for example, could adopt a cooperative tone if approached in good faith.

- Honoring Democratic Norms: On the domestic front, curbing partisan attacks on election integrity or independent media could help mend the fractures that allowed distrust to flourish. A president who respects institutional checks and balances is more likely to be trusted abroad.

Yet old habits die hard. Trump’s willingness to break norms is what endeared him to his base. His second term has already shown flashes of that same unpredictability: talk of imposing tariffs on all European imports, casually suggesting that allied nations “owe” the U.S. for defense, or flirting with personal rapport with Putin. Each unorthodox gesture raises the anxiety level among allies and can quickly undercut even the best diplomatic outreach.

________________________________________

Conclusion: The High Price of Distrust

Trust is indeed the lifeblood of both democracy and foreign policy. When a population trusts its leaders, governance becomes more stable, and the leader’s legitimacy is secured. When allies trust each other, grand coalitions like NATO and deep economic partnerships flourish, standing together against common threats.

But as the 2025 return of President Trump has shown, trust once shaken is exceedingly hard to restore. OPEC states resist calls for drastic production moves because of past whiplash. European allies tread cautiously after years of mixed signals. Ukraine, while grateful for arms, worries about being sold out in a “quick deal.” Russia seizes the narrative to claim a new form of “pragmatic” understanding with Trump. And the American public, too, is divided—some cheering Trump’s boldness, others fearing a renewed era of erratic foreign policy.

The stakes could not be higher. With the Ukraine war still raging and global tensions rising, the entire post-World War II framework of alliances stands at an inflection point. If the world cannot trust the United States to keep its word, a realignment of global power could accelerate—one in which adversarial regimes exploit distrust in Western leadership. Conversely, if the Trump administration—and by extension, America—manages to sustain a consistent approach, keep promises, and collaborate effectively, it might still salvage and even strengthen the alliance system so carefully built over decades.

In the end, the lesson remains the same: trust is fragile. It can be lost with a single falsehood or betrayal, and regaining it demands sustained honesty and respect. Whether President Trump can defy his own reputation for unpredictability and transactionalism—and whether allies can put aside lingering doubts—will determine not just the outcome of the Ukraine war, but the broader shape of our international order in the years to come.

For now, the world watches with cautious eyes, awaiting proof that America’s vows hold firm—and hoping that the fragile currency of trust can be replenished before the cost of its absence becomes too great.

________________________________________

Sources:

- Edelman Trust Barometer (2024–2025)

- World Economic Forum, Davos Summit Transcripts (January 2025)

- Official OPEC Statements (February–March 2025)

- Public Statements by President Trump, Secretary of State Rubio, and National Security Advisor Patel (January–April 2025)

- NATO Communiqués on Ukraine (2024–2025)

- Historical Data on U.S. Public Trust in Government (Pew Research, 1970–2023)

- Various media coverage from Kyiv Independent, Le Monde, The Guardian, Eurasia Review, and others

**Note:** Some events described are hypothetical projections based on real sources and ongoing developments.

---

All Rights To Germán & Co.

---

From Moët Chandon to Cold Hard Steel: Toasting the Global Trade Tax Hangover…

In the economic arena, the United States and China resemble a pair of circus clowns hurling cream pies at each other—a comedic spectacle tinged with real-world consequences. Tariff upon tariff, export ban upon export ban, each side goads the other into another round of retaliation. Rumours abound that negotiators pass messages in fortune cookies or through X memes. Underneath the slapstick, global supply chains tie themselves in knots, and ordinary people see rising prices for household goods.

But China is not alone in this saga. The returning U.S. trade representative—making an encore appearance in 2025—has expanded the tariff mania to America’s traditional allies. Steel, aluminium, and even French wine are in the crosshairs. The European Union, outraged but also internally divided, issues its own retaliatory threats on everything from Harley-Davidsons to peanut butter, giving the impression of a Punch and Judy puppet show. Cracks in the EU’s unity are exposed as 27 member states squabble over exactly how hard to hit back. Even Canada, which one would imagine to be the world’s most polite neighbour, finds itself in a mini-trade spat with Washington over renewed U.S. tariffs. Their newly elected prime minister—a mild-mannered former central banker—now faces the bizarre challenge of standing up to his country’s supposed best friend.

---

All Rights of Germán & Co.

---

Tiny Lands Versus Giant Egos

---

China Relations and the Formosa (Taiwan) Question

Small territories frequently become focal points of significant global power struggles, and Formosa, now widely known as Taiwan, vividly exemplifies this geopolitical reality. The complex and often tense relationship involving Taiwan, China, and the United States highlights historical conflicts, diplomatic intricacies, and contemporary security concerns.

Formosa’s geopolitical significance emerged strongly after the Chinese Civil War (1945-1949), which resulted in the Chinese Communist Party, led by Mao Zedong, establishing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on the mainland in 1949. The defeated Nationalists, led by Chiang Kai-shek, retreated to the island of Formosa, establishing what became the Republic of China (ROC). Initially viewed as temporary, Chiang’s government on Formosa evolved into a stable administration, transforming the island into a distinct political entity.

Beijing has consistently viewed Taiwan as a renegade province that must eventually reunify with the mainland, by force if necessary. Taiwan, however, sees itself as a sovereign, vibrant democracy, successfully maintaining a distinct identity separate from China’s political system. Its democratic evolution, especially after the lifting of martial law in 1987, has strengthened its internal governance and international credibility.

U.S. involvement in Taiwan dates back to the early Cold War when the United States recognized the ROC government in Taiwan as the legitimate government of China. This stance changed significantly with the 1972 rapprochement initiated by President Richard Nixon's visit to China, followed by the United States formally switching diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979. Yet, despite this shift, the U.S. maintained strong unofficial relations with Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) of 1979, which mandates that the U.S. provides Taiwan with defensive arms and maintains the capacity to resist any forceful attempts at reunification by the PRC.

Recent years have seen escalating tensions around Taiwan, with China significantly increasing its military presence and activities near Taiwanese airspace and waters. Chinese military aircraft regularly enter Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), actions Taipei criticizes as deliberate provocations aimed at testing Taiwanese defenses and political resolve. Taiwan’s leadership frequently accuses Beijing of destabilizing regional peace and security.

These provocations create a highly charged atmosphere, reminiscent of geopolitical brinkmanship. The international community watches anxiously, understanding clearly that miscalculations or misunderstandings could spiral rapidly into conflict. Particularly concerning is China’s naval expansion and increasing assertiveness in the Taiwan Strait. Recent developments indicate China's navy moving closer to Taiwan’s territorial waters, a strategic move intended both as intimidation and preparation for potential future military operations.

The United States remains a critical player in this scenario. Under President Biden’s administration, the U.S. has reiterated commitments to Taiwan’s security, evidenced by increased arms sales, military cooperation, and explicit diplomatic support. Simultaneously, the U.S. is cautious not to push China into direct military confrontation, emphasizing deterrence and strategic ambiguity rather than overt aggression.

Strategically, Taiwan represents more than a democratic partner; its geographical position is crucial for maintaining U.S. military influence in the Asia-Pacific region. Its proximity to key maritime routes through which a substantial proportion of global trade passes further underscores Taiwan’s importance in international geopolitics. China, aware of these strategic considerations, continuously pressures Taiwan diplomatically and militarily, hoping to erode Taiwanese resistance over time.

The current situation raises global concerns regarding potential conflict. Observers from international think tanks warn that Taiwan could become the flashpoint for a U.S.-China military clash, with profound global economic and security implications. Thus, diplomatic engagement, crisis management, and strategic clarity have become essential elements of international policy discussions.

In summary, Formosa’s historical and geopolitical context remains central to current U.S.-China relations. Taiwan stands as a test case of international diplomatic resilience and strategic ambiguity, delicately balancing democratic self-governance, military preparedness, and complex diplomatic relationships with global powers. The challenge for Taiwan, the U.S., and China lies in navigating this tense and dynamic situation, seeking stability without sacrificing sovereignty, security, or strategic advantage.

---

Grenada 1983 - Greenland???

Meanwhile, Denmark should remember the echoes of history as it navigates Greenland’s increasing geopolitical significance. In 1983, the tiny Caribbean nation of Grenada, home to approximately 91,000 residents, became the unexpected stage of geopolitical turmoil when the United States launched Operation Urgent Fury. This intervention, driven by Cold War anxieties over Soviet and Cuban influence, highlights the vulnerability of small nations with limited populations becoming focal points in global power struggles.

Today, Greenland, an autonomous Danish territory with roughly 56,000 inhabitants, presents a similarly sensitive geopolitical scenario. Greenland’s sparse population belies its strategic importance: located between North America and Europe, it controls critical Arctic routes and holds substantial untapped natural resources, including rare earth minerals essential for modern technology. As climate change opens new Arctic shipping lanes, global powers like the United States, Russia, and China are increasingly drawn to Greenland’s strategic position.

In the 1980s, Grenada’s location near vital Caribbean shipping routes, combined with the Marxist-oriented government of Maurice Bishop, attracted substantial attention from global powers. Cuban advisors and Soviet support for infrastructure projects, such as an airfield capable of accommodating large military aircraft, heightened American fears of expanding communist influence in the Caribbean. The U.S. swiftly intervened militarily following internal instability and Bishop's assassination, asserting its geopolitical interests under the guise of restoring order.

Similarly, Greenland today finds itself the focus of strategic interests from global powers. Historically, Greenland has been central to North Atlantic security, notably hosting the U.S. Thule Air Base (now Pituffik Space Base), a critical early-warning facility within NATO’s defense strategy. The United States maintains significant influence through a longstanding defense treaty with Denmark, reflecting Greenland's pivotal role in monitoring Russian activities in the Arctic.

China, on the other hand, views Greenland as a vital node in its ambitious "Polar Silk Road" initiative, aiming to develop infrastructure and gain access to Arctic resources. Danish authorities, wary of Beijing’s strategic intent, have actively prevented Chinese investments in Greenlandic infrastructure, including airports and military-sensitive facilities. This cautious approach is influenced by experiences like Grenada’s, where infrastructure investments by foreign powers quickly evolved into geopolitical flashpoints.

Denmark’s approach to Greenland must acknowledge the lessons from Grenada’s past. Small populations and territories can quickly escalate into significant geopolitical contests if perceived threats are not managed effectively. The Grenada intervention shows that external influence, especially when combined with internal instability, can lead to rapid and dramatic shifts in sovereignty and governance.

For Denmark, ensuring Greenland’s stability involves careful management of international engagements and maintaining a transparent dialogue with Greenlandic authorities. Promoting Greenland’s economic independence through sustainable investments can also mitigate the risk of external manipulation. Additionally, continued diplomatic cooperation with the U.S. and other NATO allies remains crucial to balancing international interests and safeguarding Greenland’s future.

Grenada’s experience underscores how quickly geopolitical interests can override the autonomy of smaller nations. Denmark, informed by this historical context, must remain vigilant, proactive, and strategic to ensure Greenland’s trajectory remains one of stability, prosperity, and self-determination rather than vulnerability to geopolitical competition.

---

Historical Background: U.S.–Panama Canal Relations…

The United States' involvement with the Panama Canal dates back over a century and shapes the strategic dynamics of the region today. In 1903, the U.S. supported Panama's independence from Colombia through what historians describe as classic "gunboat diplomacy." This intervention paved the way for the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty, granting the U.S. a perpetual lease over the Panama Canal Zone, a territory effectively under American sovereignty, for canal construction and operation. The canal opened in 1914, quickly becoming a cornerstone of U.S. naval and commercial strength by significantly reducing maritime travel between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

However, U.S. control was controversial and viewed negatively by many Panamanians, fostering resentment and nationalism. Tensions periodically escalated, notably in 1964, when riots erupted over Panamanian demands to fly their national flag in the Canal Zone, resulting in deaths and a diplomatic crisis. Panamanians increasingly viewed American control as a violation of national sovereignty.

By the 1970s, geopolitical dynamics had shifted considerably. President Jimmy Carter, recognizing the growing tensions and seeking improved relations with Latin America, negotiated the Torrijos–Carter Treaties in 1977 alongside Panamanian leader General Omar Torrijos. These agreements set a clear timeline for transferring canal control to Panama by December 31, 1999, and established the canal's permanent neutrality. Crucially, Panama agreed the canal would remain open equally to all nations, with the U.S. retaining the right to intervene militarily only to protect this neutrality—without reclaiming sovereignty.

Relinquishing control was politically contentious in the United States. Politicians like Ronald Reagan strongly opposed the treaties, arguing the canal was America's rightful property. However, Carter’s administration believed that returning the canal was vital for dispelling the lingering perception of American imperialism and fostering genuine partnership and goodwill in Latin America. Moreover, from a practical standpoint, by the 1970s, the canal’s military significance had declined since larger modern ships could no longer pass through its locks.

Thus, the handover on December 31, 1999, marked a historic and peaceful transfer of strategic territory from a global power to a smaller nation. Panama established the Panama Canal Authority (ACP) to manage the waterway independently, which it has successfully operated since, even undertaking a significant expansion project completed in 2016 to accommodate larger ships.

Yet, the canal's strategic importance has endured, evolving into new geopolitical concerns in recent decades, particularly with China's increasing economic involvement in Panama. This shift has raised alarms in Washington, prompting some American political figures to question the wisdom of the treaties. Former President Donald Trump, notably, criticized the treaty, incorrectly asserting that "China secretly runs the canal" and controversially suggesting the U.S. should consider reclaiming control militarily. These statements drew strong rebukes from Panama, whose president publicly rejected Trump’s assertions, reaffirming the nation's sovereignty.

American policymakers and experts widely dismiss notions of forcibly retaking the canal, recognizing such actions would violate international law, damage U.S. credibility, and undermine regional stability. Instead, contemporary U.S. strategy focuses on diplomatic engagement, economic partnership, and support for Panama's continued stewardship of the canal. Given that approximately 40% of U.S. container traffic traverses the canal, its smooth operation remains vital to American economic interests.

Recently, U.S. diplomatic approaches have highlighted constructive engagement, particularly emphasizing collaboration to address significant challenges such as infrastructure modernization, climate resilience, and water management. Notably, high-level dialogues have aimed at deepening bilateral cooperation, counterbalancing China's influence through positive economic and diplomatic initiatives rather than confrontation.

The United States appears keenly aware of leveraging situations such as the recent drought-induced operational crises at the canal to renew diplomatic ties and reassert its role as a reliable partner. By offering technical expertise and investments, the U.S. seeks to support Panama’s sustainable management of the canal, maintaining its status as a crucial global trade route while ensuring regional stability.

Thus, more than two decades after relinquishing formal control, U.S. strategic intentions towards the Panama Canal region have shifted towards fostering a mutually beneficial partnership. The canal, historically symbolic of imperial reach, now embodies modern strategic diplomacy—an approach emphasizing cooperation, economic investment, and regional stability in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape.

---

All Right To Germán & Co.

---

All Rights Germán & Co. via Getty

---

All rights of Germán & Co.

---

Global Energy News Update – April 6, 2025

Major Headlines and Summaries

• U.S. Climate and Energy Policy: The new U.S. administration is prioritizing fossil fuels and rolling back prior climate initiatives. Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s Department of Energy has launched a review that could cut funding for Biden-era clean energy projects – including four regional hydrogen hubs – despite laws mandating their support (US senators urge energy secretary to follow law on clean energy grants, loans | Reuters). This aligns with President Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda, which since January has slashed funding for clean energy and boosted oil, gas, and coal production (US senators urge energy secretary to follow law on clean energy grants, loans | Reuters). The DOE also moved to rescind a Biden-era policy that limited LNG export permits to seven years, making it easier for new liquefied natural gas terminals to get extensions and move forward (US to axe Biden-era 7-year deadline on exports from new LNG projects | Reuters) (US to axe Biden-era 7-year deadline on exports from new LNG projects | Reuters). Democratic lawmakers have pushed back, warning the administration must “faithfully execute” climate laws – in other words, it cannot substitute its own preferences for spending mandated by Congress (US senators urge energy secretary to follow law on clean energy grants, loans | Reuters).

• Renewable Energy and Nuclear Power: Offshore wind development in the U.S. has stalled amid surging costs and political opposition. In his first days back in office, President Trump suspended new offshore wind leases, leading analysts to predict “no new projects expected to be completed” beyond those already under construction (US offshore wind farm projects slow as Trump opposition adds to hurdles | Reuters) (US offshore wind farm projects slow as Trump opposition adds to hurdles | Reuters). Several offshore wind companies had already canceled projects in 2023–24 due to high costs, and experts now warn the nascent U.S. industry is “precariously positioned” under the current policy environment (US offshore wind farm projects slow as Trump opposition adds to hurdles | Reuters). Meanwhile, nuclear energy is seeing renewed support abroad. Italy – which banned nuclear power in 1987 – approved a law to return to nuclear generation and has formed a joint venture of major firms (Leonardo, Enel, Ansaldo) to study the best reactor technologies (Italy's Leonardo, Enel and Ansaldo reach deal on nuclear joint venture | Reuters). In Sweden, the government proposed offering state-backed loans and price guarantees to help finance at least four new nuclear reactors, aiming to roughly double electricity output by 2045 as part of its climate strategy (Sweden proposes state loans for new nuclear reactors | Reuters) (Sweden proposes state loans for new nuclear reactors | Reuters). These moves reflect a broader trend of countries looking to nuclear power to meet climate goals and energy demand, even as renewables growth continues globally (a record ~700 GW of new renewable capacity was added in 2024) (Renewables and natural gas surge ahead of oil and coal | Reuters).

• Fossil Fuel Markets and Investment: Oil markets whipsawed as major producers pivoted on supply. The OPEC+ alliance, led by Saudi Arabia, made a surprise decision to increase oil output by 411,000 barrels per day starting in May – about three times the previously planned rise (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters) (Seeking to punish cheaters, Saudi Arabia pushes OPEC+ to open oil taps | Reuters). Saudi Arabia pushed this “open the taps” move largely to punish OPEC+ members that were exceeding their production quotas (like Kazakhstan and Iraq) (Seeking to punish cheaters, Saudi Arabia pushes OPEC+ to open oil taps | Reuters) (Seeking to punish cheaters, Saudi Arabia pushes OPEC+ to open oil taps | Reuters), a sharp reversal from its prior stance of cutting output to prop up prices. The result was immediate: oil plunged to ~$65, the lowest price since 2021, as traders reacted to the prospect of higher supply on top of escalating recession fears (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters) (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters). In the corporate arena, energy companies are recalibrating their strategies. For example, Shell announced it will scrap its large solar and onshore wind projects in Brazil, citing an “unfavorable environment” of oversupply, slow demand growth and regulatory uncertainty (Shell scraps solar, onshore wind power projects in Brazil | Reuters). This move – in line with Shell’s new global strategy to pull back on low-return renewables (Shell scraps solar, onshore wind power projects in Brazil | Reuters) – underscores how oil & gas majors are refocusing on core fossil fuel businesses and “exiting activities that do not fit into [their] strategy or do not generate sufficient returns,” as Shell put it (Shell scraps solar, onshore wind power projects in Brazil | Reuters). At the same time, some state-owned firms are doubling down on fossil investments (e.g. Argentina’s YPF is channeling over $3 billion into shale oil expansion in 2025), highlighting that fossil fuel investment remains robust in certain regions despite global climate goals.

• Electric Vehicle Market Dynamics: The EV sector is evolving unevenly across markets. In China, EV leader BYD enjoyed another blockbuster quarter – its sales jumped roughly 58% in Q1 2025 year-on-year, far outpacing rivals – while Tesla’s growth has slowed, causing Tesla to lose global market share (BYD Enjoys Yet Another Blockbuster Quarter as Tesla Flounders). BYD’s chairman announced plans to double BYD’s overseas sales to 800,000 units in 2025 by assembling cars locally in Europe and other regions to overcome import tariffs (BYD aims to double overseas sales to 800,000 in 2025, chairman tells analysts | Reuters) (BYD aims to double overseas sales to 800,000 in 2025, chairman tells analysts | Reuters). This comes as the European Union considers tariffs on Chinese EVs and batteries, and Chinese automakers pivot to strategies like exporting hybrid vehicles to sidestep trade barriers. In the United States, electric vehicle demand remains on an upward trajectory but faces new headwinds. Auto executives warn that Trump’s rollback of EV incentives and charging-station funding could slow the buildout of charging infrastructure (US Funding Cuts to Slow EV Chargers' Spread, CEO Says), potentially tempering the rapid growth seen under Biden’s policies. Still, analysts note that U.S. EV sales hit record highs in 2024, and global EV sales overall rose about 24% last year to 17.2 million vehicles (Tesla Has a Problem — and It's Not Just Elon Musk's Politics) – a sign that consumer uptake of clean cars is continuing. Automakers worldwide are in an EV price war, cutting prices to spur demand (Tesla has repeatedly slashed U.S. prices, and BYD introduced discounts on its cheapest models in China). The coming months will reveal whether legacy carmakers and EV startups can maintain profit margins and production momentum amid fierce competition, or if the market’s growth will moderate due to economic pressures.

• Geopolitical Energy Developments: Global geopolitics are increasingly intertwined with energy. The U.S.–China relationship has deteriorated into a tit-for-tat trade fight that directly impacts energy markets – exemplified this week by China imposing a new 34% tariff on all U.S. goods from April 10 in retaliation for U.S. tariffs (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters). This escalation is feeding recession fears and threatens to undermine climate cooperation between the world’s two largest emitters. In India, a mismatch between clean energy ambitions and on-the-ground hurdles is shaping policy: India aims for 500 GW of non-fossil power by 2030, but its renewable sector is facing obstacles (weak power purchase demand, land acquisition issues, project delays) (India's Tata Power eyes first coal capacity expansion in six years | Reuters). Partly as a result, Tata Power just moved toward its first coal power expansion in six years, seeking to add 1.6 GW at an existing plant even as renewables projects stall (India's Tata Power eyes first coal capacity expansion in six years | Reuters) (India's Tata Power eyes first coal capacity expansion in six years | Reuters). This highlights India’s challenge in balancing booming electricity demand with its climate commitments. In Brazil, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is likewise walking a tightrope between economic development and climate leadership. Lula’s government is pressuring regulators to approve oil drilling near the mouth of the Amazon River – he complained that Brazil’s environmental agency “seems to be against the government” for delaying Petrobras’ project (Brazil's Lula to meet with agency on Petrobras' bid to drill near mouth of Amazon river | Reuters) (Brazil's Lula to meet with agency on Petrobras' bid to drill near mouth of Amazon river | Reuters). Regulators have so far recommended against the Amazon offshore drilling on environmental grounds (Brazil's Ibama staff recommend against Petrobras drilling in Amazon region | Reuters), and the final decision is pending. This comes as Brazil positions itself to host the COP30 U.N. climate summit in 2025, putting a spotlight on Lula’s climate credentials. In the Middle East, OPEC’s internal politics (with Saudi Arabia asserting itself against quota violators) and its relations with big consumers like the U.S. are in flux, as seen by the recent supply hike partly aimed at appeasing Washington’s calls for lower fuel prices (Seeking to punish cheaters, Saudi Arabia pushes OPEC+ to open oil taps | Reuters) (Seeking to punish cheaters, Saudi Arabia pushes OPEC+ to open oil taps | Reuters). And in Europe, leaders are being urged to hold the line on climate action despite distractions from war and trade disputes – a group of former officials led by Mary Robinson warned that “the crisis of a federal withdrawal in the United States [on climate] is an opportunity for the European Union… to seize leadership” in clean technology and policy (Former world leaders urge EU to hold the line on climate | Reuters). Overall, geopolitical forces – from trade wars to strategic resource competitions – are increasingly shaping the direction of energy investments and climate efforts across the globe.

• Economic and Market Trends: Energy prices and financial markets gyrated on economic jitters this week. Crude oil suffered its worst week in over a year: Brent benchmark fell ~11% for the week to ~$65.58/bbl, the lowest since August 2021, and U.S. WTI plunged 10.6% to ~$62/bbl (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters). The selloff was driven by mounting fears that the U.S.–China tariff war will dent global growth – JPMorgan now pegs the odds of a 2025 global recession at 60% (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters) – combined with OPEC+’s supply increase decision. Other commodities from natural gas to soybeans also dived in tandem (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters). Energy equities tumbled alongside oil: U.S. oilfield service stocks like Halliburton and Baker Hughes sank 10–11% to new multi-year lows (US oil service firms set for hit from Trump tariffs, tumbling oil prices | Reuters), and major refiners’ shares hit their lowest levels in nearly two years amid fears the tariffs will choke fuel demand. The broader stock market had a brutal week (over $6 trillion in U.S. market value was wiped out) as investors fled risk assets (US oil service firms set for hit from Trump tariffs, tumbling oil prices | Reuters). In response to the turmoil, analysts are revising forecasts – Goldman Sachs cut its year-end Brent oil price target by $5, now seeing Brent at $66 in Dec 2025 (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters) – citing the combination of higher OPEC+ output and recession risks. On the upside, the latest data show some resilience in certain areas: U.S. natural gas prices ticked up on record LNG export volumes and a late-season storage build (US natgas prices climb 3% on record LNG flows, lower daily output | Reuters) (US natgas prices climb 3% on record LNG flows, lower daily output | Reuters), and Europe’s gas storage remains healthier than a year ago, helped by mild weather. Clean energy indexes have also been volatile; they initially rallied early in the year but gave up gains amid rising interest rates and now trade roughly flat year-to-date (investors are closely watching if government stimulus in the EU, US, and China can bolster these stocks again). Going forward, markets will track central banks’ policy signals (Fed Chair Jerome Powell noted that the tariff shock will likely bring “higher inflation and slower growth” (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters)) and any easing of trade tensions for clues on energy demand. Overall, current trends point to an uncertain macroeconomic backdrop, with oil and gas prices under pressure and energy investors exercising caution until clearer signs of global economic stability or policy resolution emerge.

---

What to Watch (April 2025 and Beyond)

1. OPEC+ output policy: Following April’s small production hike, oil markets will closely watch OPEC+ meetings for any adjustments to the supply plan. If prices weaken significantly or if certain members fail to comply, the alliance could reconsider the pace of further output increases. The next full OPEC+ ministerial meeting is expected by June, but an April monitoring committee meeting or member statements could signal the group’s stance on balancing market share versus price stability.

2. U.S.–China trade war escalations: On April 2, the U.S. is set to impose a broad package of “reciprocal” tariffs on imports (Oil slips on recession fears but posts 3rd weekly gain | Reuters). How China responds will be critical. Any retaliation (such as expanding tariffs on U.S. energy exports or other goods) could impact global growth forecasts and commodity demand. Investors will be watching for diplomatic engagement or further tit-for-tat measures in April that might either ease or inflame the trade conflict – a major wildcard for oil and LNG markets.

3. Legal battles over U.S. climate policy: Expect a flurry of lawsuits from states, environmental groups, and possibly industries in reaction to the regulatory rollbacks. In April, courts may begin hearing challenges to the EPA’s reversal of power plant carbon rules and vehicle emissions standards. Outcomes won’t be immediate, but any injunctions or rulings could alter the implementation of these rollbacks. Also watch whether the administration moves to formally withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement again – a decision that would garner global attention.

4. Europe’s energy and climate course: Key developments are looming in the EU. In April, EU energy ministers will discuss gas storage targets and energy security preparations for next winter (EU countries draft plan to soften gas storage targets, document shows) – any decision to relax storage rules or diversify supply further (LNG contracts, pipeline deals) will shape gas markets. Additionally, the European Commission’s regulatory “simplification” agenda bears watching: details on which environmental or climate rules might be trimmed could emerge and spark debate between industry and green groups. Europe’s carbon market and its planned Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism are entering new phases; any policy tweaks or guidance in April on these tools will affect industrial and clean tech investment decisions.

5. COP30 preparations and pledges: With the UN climate summit in November (COP30) approaching, nations are due to submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in 2025. April could see behind-the-scenes work or even early announcements of enhanced climate targets or policies. In particular, keep an eye on G20 economies – e.g. China and India – for any signals of stronger climate action (or conversely, indications they will stick to current plans). Also notable will be Brazil’s actions as COP30 host: Lula has convened ministries to reconcile economic and environmental aims. A pending decision on the Amazon oil drilling project is expected in the coming weeks; approval or denial will send a message about Brazil’s climate leadership. Likewise, international climate finance discussions (at forums like the World Bank/IMF Spring Meetings in mid-April) could yield commitments to help developing countries transition, a key factor for global climate cooperation.

6. Energy tech and market trends: Several reports and events in April may influence the energy landscape. The IEA will release its annual Global Electric Vehicle Outlook, providing data on EV adoption and critical mineral supply – offering insights that could guide policymakers and investors. Likewise, Q1 earnings from major energy companies (oil majors, auto manufacturers, utilities) will start to roll in late April: their results and forecasts will reveal how corporate strategies are adapting to the current environment of volatile fossil fuel prices and accelerating clean energy momentum. Any big surprises (e.g. an oil major significantly upping its renewables spending, or a utility shelving a coal retirement plan) will be closely watched as bellwethers of broader trends.

---

Brief Analysis

The past week’s developments reveal a global energy landscape pulled in two opposing directions. On one hand, short-term economic and political pressures are reinforcing reliance on fossil fuels: the U.S. federal government is retreating from aggressive climate action in favor of oil and gas, OPEC+ is opening the spigots to defend market share, and trade disputes are raising fears of recession. These dynamics have delivered consumers a dose of near-term relief in energy prices (oil’s price plunge) but at the potential cost of slowing the energy transition. On the other hand, long-term clean energy momentum continues in many parts of the world – evident in record renewable deployment and EV sales last year – and key players are doubling down on climate solutions (Europe is pressing ahead with green industrial policies, and countries like Sweden and Poland are planning new nuclear capacity to hit emissions targets). The divergence between America’s policy U-turn and Europe’s climate resolve is especially striking: as one climate leader noted, “the crisis of a federal withdrawal in the United States…is an opportunity” for others to lead (Former world leaders urge EU to hold the line on climate | Reuters).

Overall, the balance of global energy strategy is at an inflection point. Policy rollbacks and fossil fuel investments are raising concerns about the world missing its climate goals, even as clean technologies become more competitive. High inflation and interest rates have made capital more expensive, causing some renewable projects (like U.S. offshore wind farms) to stall or seek better support – a reminder that the green transition is not immune to macroeconomic headwinds. Yet, market signals and corporate moves also indicate that the transition is irreversible in the long run: oil giants are facing shareholder and legal pressures to address environmental damage (e.g. Chevron’s $740 million coastal restoration payout), and the booming demand for EVs and clean tech in Asia is creating economies of scale that will drive costs down further.

In the coming months, a few overarching trends bear watching. First, geopolitics are now a decisive factor in energy and climate outcomes. The U.S.–China rivalry risks splintering global climate cooperation just when it’s most needed; conversely, it is also spurring a race for technological leadership in batteries, solar manufacturing, and critical minerals. Second, policy implementation and public investment (or the lack thereof) will determine if lofty climate targets translate into real emissions cuts. The standoff over U.S. clean energy funding and Europe’s resolve in sticking to its Green Deal will be telling. Third, the economic cycle – especially if a downturn hits – could temporarily reduce emissions (via lower energy demand) but also test governments’ commitment to green stimulus versus cheaper fossil energy.

In summary, global energy and climate policy is experiencing cross-currents: bullish clean energy progress buoyed by technology and international commitments, countered by bearish short-term moves to shore up energy security and inflation worries. The net effect in this period is a patchwork of advances and setbacks. The direction of travel for now remains toward decarbonization, but the pace is uneven. How the world navigates the next few months – resolving trade frictions, aligning energy security with climate action, and investing through economic uncertainty – will heavily influence whether 2025 becomes a year of renewed climate momentum or one that locks in a higher-emissions trajectory.

---

Key Quotes

“Trump’s new tariffs are ‘larger than expected’ and the economic fallout likely will be as well.” – Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, remarking on the sweeping U.S.–China tariffs and warning of their impact on growth and inflation (April 4, 2025) (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters)

“We are always exploring ways to create value from our power generation portfolio, including exiting activities that do not fit into our strategy or do not generate sufficient returns.” – Shell plc, in a statement explaining its decision to discontinue large-scale solar and wind projects in Brazil as part of a global pullback from low-return renewables (March 27, 2025) (Shell scraps solar, onshore wind power projects in Brazil | Reuters)

“The crisis of a federal withdrawal in the United States from everything to do with climate and science is an opportunity for the European Union… Moving as fast as the EU can on the green transition is exactly how to respond.” – Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and chair of The Elders, urging Europe to uphold its climate leadership amid U.S. policy reversals and global distractions (Interview with Reuters, April 1, 2025) (Former world leaders urge EU to hold the line on climate | Reuters) (Former world leaders urge EU to hold the line on climate | Reuters)

“Once a law is properly enacted, the Constitution requires the President to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’” – Excerpt from a letter by 25 U.S. Senators (led by Martin Heinrich and Patty Murray) to Energy Secretary Chris Wright, rebuking the administration’s attempts to defund congressionally-approved clean energy programs such as hydrogen hubs (April 2, 2025) (US senators urge energy secretary to follow law on clean energy grants, loans | Reuters)

---

What to Watch (April 2025 and Beyond)

• U.S. Climate Policy Showdowns: How the conflict over federal clean energy funding unfolds – watch for the Department of Energy’s final decision on hydrogen hub grants and carbon capture projects under review (US senators urge energy secretary to follow law on clean energy grants, loans | Reuters). Any attempt to cancel or claw back funding will likely prompt legal challenges or congressional action. Additionally, keep an eye on the EPA and other agencies’ moves (or lack thereof) on climate regulations; with a more fossil-friendly administration, planned rules on power plant emissions, vehicle standards, or methane leaks could be delayed or weakened. Conversely, several U.S. states (California, New York, etc.) may step up their own climate policies in response, potentially creating a patchwork of aggressive state-level actions even as federal efforts stall.

• Geopolitical and Trade Flashpoints: The trajectory of the U.S.–China trade war will be critical. Markets and governments are watching if back-channel talks lead to any easing of tariffs, or if instead the dispute escalates further into 2025. China’s next steps (having announced steep retaliatory tariffs) around April 10 will set the tone (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters). Likewise, monitor the European Union’s trade measures – in particular, the EU’s decision later this year on whether to impose tariffs on Chinese EV imports (pending the outcome of its anti-subsidy investigation). That could spark a Europe–China trade clash affecting the auto and battery industries. Also on the geopolitical front, OPEC+ is scheduled to meet in June 2025 to reassess output policy: will Saudi Arabia stick to its hard line on punishing quota violators with higher production, or could plunging prices force an about-face? Any sign of an OPEC+ policy reversal or further supply surge will immediately influence oil price expectations. Finally, Russia’s war in Ukraine remains a wildcard for energy – watch for developments in EU sanctions on Russian oil products (and Russia’s responses), as well as Europe’s gas storage refill progress over the summer, which could be complicated if LNG markets tighten unexpectedly.

• Global Climate Leadership and Summits: With COP30 on the horizon (November 2025 in Belém, Brazil), the stage is set for key diplomatic moves. Brazil’s Amazon oil drilling decision will be one bellwether – President Lula is expected to meet with regulators again, and a final ruling on Petrobras’ Amazon mouth drilling license could come in the next few months (Brazil's Lula to meet with agency on Petrobras' bid to drill near mouth of Amazon river | Reuters) (Brazil's Ibama staff recommend against Petrobras drilling in Amazon region | Reuters). Approving it would draw international criticism ahead of COP30, whereas rejecting it might bolster Lula’s environmental standing. In the run-up to COP30, watch whether major economies update their climate pledges or policies: for example, does China announce any new emissions peaking measures or clean energy targets? Does India increase its renewable commitment or introduce coal limits beyond current plans? And will the EU maintain cohesion on its Green Deal initiatives? (Notably, Europe is debating climate disclosure rules and green industry incentives – any dilution of these under industry pressure would signal wavering resolve.) Also notable will be the Major Economies Forum and G7/G20 meetings over the summer, where the U.S. stance on climate cooperation versus competition with China will influence global dynamics. Look for any climate agreements or coal phase-out deals that could emerge from these forums, setting the stage for the UN Climate Summit.

• Energy Market Trends and Economic Indicators: After the recent market volatility, stakeholders will be monitoring several indicators. Oil prices – will they stabilize in the $60s or slide further into the $50s per barrel? Much depends on global economic data: if the U.S. and European economies show signs of sharp slowdown (or if central banks hike interest rates further), expect downward pressure on energy demand forecasts. Conversely, any resolution of trade tensions or monetary policy easing could spark an oil price rebound. Keep an eye on fuel demand metrics heading into the summer driving season; early signs of soft gasoline consumption (due to high prices or weaker growth) could further confirm a demand downturn. In contrast, natural gas markets might enter a calmer phase – Europe’s storage levels and U.S. LNG export volumes over the summer will indicate if the gas supply can comfortably meet demand without price spikes. For investors, the performance of clean energy stocks and investment flows will be telling: will the passage of time and clarity on IRA implementation (tax credit guidance, etc.) lead to a resurgence in clean tech investment in the U.S., or will higher interest rates keep these stocks subdued? Similarly, announcements of any big cleantech manufacturing projects (e.g. new battery gigafactories or solar panel plants in the West, spurred by policy incentives) could signal momentum in building out domestic clean energy supply chains in response to geopolitical risks.

• Electric Mobility and Tech Competition: The remainder of 2025 will see important developments in the EV space. Tesla’s Q1 earnings (due in late April) and any updates to its delivery outlook will be scrutinized – if Tesla shows signs of margin strain from price cuts or slower sales growth, it could reshape market sentiment. Meanwhile, BYD and other Chinese automakers are expected to accelerate their global expansion: watch for BYD’s entry into new European markets and whether it announces local production in Europe or Southeast Asia to bypass tariffs. Policy incentives for EVs in key markets are also in flux: for instance, the U.S. Treasury will continue refining the EV tax credit rules (like battery sourcing requirements) which could affect which models qualify and thus their sales. Europe is rolling out its Euro 7 vehicle emissions standards and considering new EV charging infrastructure mandates – progress on those fronts will influence automakers’ strategies. On the technology side, any breakthroughs in battery tech (such as a commercial solid-state battery announcement, or significant drops in battery prices) would be game-changers to watch for. Additionally, raw material supply deals – like lithium or nickel offtake agreements, or new mining projects – may be announced as nations and companies race to secure critical minerals. All these factors will contribute to the evolving competitive landscape of the global EV market.

• Energy Transition Milestones: Despite the current turbulence, several positive clean energy milestones are anticipated in the near future. Record renewable projects are slated to come online in 2025 – for example, massive offshore wind farms in the North Sea and big solar parks in India and the Middle East. Monitoring their completion will be key to gauging if supply chain and financing challenges are being overcome. The first generation of small modular reactors (SMRs) is also inching closer to reality: in the U.S., companies backed by tech giants aim to break ground on pilot SMRs, and in Canada and the UK regulators may approve designs – progress here will indicate whether nuclear can scale up in the 2030s (SMR firms race to build a nuclear fuel supply chain - Reuters). Furthermore, the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement will conclude later in 2025, assessing collective progress toward climate goals. In the lead-up, we should watch for any countries announcing strengthened climate commitments (e.g. new targets for 2035 or 2040) or fossil fuel phase-out timelines. Finally, climate-related risks such as extreme weather could unfortunately become headlines as we approach summer – any major heatwaves, hurricanes, or wildfires would not only test energy systems (electric grids, oil/gas infrastructure resilience) but also could influence the public and political urgency on climate action as the world heads into pivotal negotiations.

Each of these unfolding stories – from policy battles in Washington to OPEC’s maneuvers in Riyadh, and from Beijing’s EV push to Brasília’s Amazon decisions – will shape the global energy and climate trajectory in 2025 and beyond. We will continue to monitor these developments closely in the weeks ahead.

---

Sources: Reuters, Bloomberg, Financial Times, IEA, Official statements (US senators urge energy secretary to follow law on clean energy grants, loans | Reuters) (Oil dives 7% to lowest in over 3 years on China's tariffs | Reuters) (Shell scraps solar, onshore wind power projects in Brazil | Reuters) (Seeking to punish cheaters, Saudi Arabia pushes OPEC+ to open oil taps | Reuters) (Former world leaders urge EU to hold the line on climate | Reuters), among others. All information is up to date as of April 6, 2025.

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

All Right to Germán & Co

---

¨Fossil Fuels, False Narratives, and Forgotten Lessons…

---

Twenty-one is an age of maturity—a milestone when one expects youth lessons to crystallize into wisdom. In 2021, the 21st century reached that symbolic “coming of age.” Yet, as the world passed this threshold, it became painfully clear that our society’s relationship with energy remains as immature as ever. The past few years have borne witness to a sobering déjà vu: surging oil prices, lines at fuel pumps, and geopolitical turmoil painfully reminiscent of the 1970s. Instead of entering adulthood enlightened by history, we seem to be re-enacting old mistakes. The urgency of this moment cannot be overstated. If we do not reckon with the instability of fossil fuels and the deception that prolongs their dominance, we risk condemning ourselves to an endless cycle of crises. This is not just another policy debate—it is a moral and practical imperative to remember our history and confront the truth. The stakes—a livable planet, stable economies, and the integrity of our democracies—could not be higher.

---

The Unlearned Lessons of Oil Shocks

How the Oil Crises of the 1970s Sparked a Global Shift in Electricity Generation:

For millions worldwide, images of endless lines of cars inching toward gas stations became iconic symbols of the turbulent 1970s. The Arab OPEC oil embargo of 1973, sparked by the Yom Kippur War, sent shockwaves through industrialized economies, quadrupling oil prices within months and plunging nations into economic turmoil. Less than six years later, the 1979 Iranian Revolution triggered another surge in global oil prices, further exposing the vulnerabilities of dependence on fossil fuels.

Before these shocks, oil was a central pillar of electricity generation, powering roughly a quarter of global electricity production. In the United States alone, oil accounted for nearly 17% of electricity generation in 1973. But as oil prices soared, energy policy underwent a seismic shift. Countries urgently sought alternatives to insulate their economies from future disruptions.

The response was swift and decisive. Nations accelerated their investments in coal, nuclear power, and emerging renewable technologies. In the U.S., legislation such as the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 mandated that new plants move from oil toward coal and nuclear energy. By 1985, oil's share of U.S. electricity had collapsed from 17% to just 4%, while coal surged to nearly 57%. Nuclear energy also saw rapid growth, climbing from under 5% to over 15% of the American electricity mix during the same period.

Globally, the push toward nuclear power was especially pronounced. France launched an aggressive nuclear buildout, with atomic energy growing from nearly zero in 1973 to over 70% of electricity generation by the mid-1980s. Other countries, including Germany, Japan, Sweden, and the UK, also significantly expanded their nuclear capabilities, driven by the pressing need for energy security.

The oil shocks also ignited interest in renewable energy sources. Although still in their infancy, solar and wind technology received unprecedented government funding and policy support, laying the groundwork for the renewable energy boom in subsequent decades. Legislation like the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 in the U.S. encouraged small-scale renewable energy generation, sparking early wind farms in California and pioneering solar developments.

The global energy landscape underwent profound changes in the decades following the oil crises. Oil’s role in electricity generation dwindled dramatically, falling from 25% globally in 1973 to under 3% by 2019. Natural gas, nuclear energy, and renewables filled the gap, diversifying energy portfolios and enhancing resilience against volatility.

These shifts were not just technical but philosophical. The crises of the 1970s taught policymakers that relying heavily on a single energy source—mainly imported fossil fuels—posed substantial risks. Energy diversity and security principles have become permanently embedded in global energy strategies.

Today, as the world grapples with climate change and seeks sustainable solutions, the lessons of the 1970s remain highly relevant. The legacy of those turbulent times is evident in every wind turbine spinning on a distant hillside and every solar panel catching the afternoon sun. The oil crises did more than create panic at the pumps; they reshaped how we power our world.

---

A Retreat from Clean Energy Progress

One might have expected the oil shocks to spark a permanent pivot to alternative energy. And, for a time, they did spur action. The late 1970s saw a flurry of interest in conservation and renewables. Governments scrambled to insulate themselves from the oil weapon. President Carter pushed a bold agenda of efficiency and innovation in the United States: he installed solar panels atop the White House in 1979 to symbolise a new direction. He envisioned deriving 20% of U.S. energy from renewables by the year 2000, rallying Americans to see this challenge as part of “one of the greatest and most exciting adventures ever undertaken” (Where Did the Carter White House's Solar Panels Go? | Scientific American). Other nations invested in nuclear power, wind turbines, and research into synthetic fuels. It was a moment of possibility born from crisis.

But when oil became cheap again, that resolve crumbled. In the 1980s, the momentum toward clean energy screeched to a halt. The incoming administration of Ronald Reagan dismantled the progress—removing Carter’s solar panels during a White House roof repair in 1986 and never reinstalling them. This was more than a symbolic act. By 1986, the U.S. government had gutted funding for renewable energy research. It slashed tax incentives for solar and wind, recommitting the nation to “cheap” fossil fuels (often imported) instead. Reagan scoffed that the Department of Energy hadn’t “produced a single barrel of oil,” as if measuring success only in continued petroleum output. In effect, the “road not taken”—toward sustainable energy—was abandoned just as it was beginning to unfold.

This pattern occurred on a global scale. In the 1980s and 1990s, initial attempts to invest in solar and wind energy struggled due to a lack of funding and attention. Oil-exporting countries, benefiting from high revenues, continued to invest heavily in fossil fuels. In the West, consumer culture resumed its reliance on oil, characterized by an increase in the popularity of cars and suburban expansion. Instead of moving away from our dependence on the unstable resource of petroleum, the world fell back into old habits. By the early 2000s, fossil fuels dominated, accounting for most energy use worldwide. When climate scientists began warning with increasing urgency that this path was not only financially unstable but also environmentally devastating, they encountered significant resistance—primarily built by a deliberate campaign of misinformation.

---

Disinformation: The Fossil Fuel Industry’s Propaganda War

If the world’s retreat from clean energy is a tragedy, it is not an accident. Powerful interests worked hard to muddy the waters and manipulate public perception. In fact, since the 1980s, the fossil fuel industry has perpetrated a multi-decade, multibillion-dollar disinformation campaign aimed at delaying climate action (The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing | Environment | The Guardian). The playbook was cynically brilliant: confuse the public, sow doubt about science, and assure everyone that more oil and gas posed no problem. Advertising was one weapon of choice. In the 1980s, as the science of global warming first gained attention, oil companies ran cheerful ads declaring that climate change was uncertain or a myth. Some ads carried headlines like “Oil pumps life,” extolling petroleum as the benevolent force of modern civilization. Others accused environmentalists of scaremongering—one campaign derided the “lies they tell our children,” implying that the real danger was not a changing climate but those who dared question the fossil-fueled status quo.

This assault on truth continued unabated for decades. Think tanks and front groups funded by coal and oil magnates churned out reports downplaying the climate threat, which friendly politicians then waved through Congress. Scientists who sounded the alarm were attacked as frauds or radicals. A now-infamous memo from that era declared the strategy bluntly: “Doubt is our product,” said tobacco executives in the 1960s, and Big Oil took that lesson to heart. By the 1990s and 2000s, as evidence of global warming became more difficult to deny, the narrative shifted slightly – from “it’s not happening” to “it’s happening but not our fault” or “it’s too expensive to fix”. The goal was never to win an intellectual argument but to stall action long enough to rake in a few more decades of profits.

The consequences of this campaign have been staggering. Public opinion is fractured and polarized. Meaningful climate policy in the U.S. was stymied repeatedly, even as most Americans desire action. Internationally, climate agreements were weakened under pressure from oil-backed lobbying. Meanwhile, greenhouse gas emissions climbed, and the clock ticked away. Perhaps the most Orwellian twist came just recently: in 2021, the CEOs of major oil companies testified before Congress about their role in spreading climate disinformation – and they brazenly lied under oath, denying what a mountain of documents and research has proven. As two historians of industry propaganda summarized it, the fossil fuel industry is now “misleading the public about its history of misleading the public.”  The snake is eating its tail; the lie has become truth in the minds of those who peddle it.

---

The collective amnesia about the oil shocks…

We've encountered this situation before, and today feels even worse, especially after reading the remarkable editorial titled L’Internationale des censeurs by Benoît Bréville published in Le Monde Diplomatique this March. The parallels with history’s great propaganda campaigns are impossible to ignore. In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, the ruling Party continually rewrites history and manipulates language to secure its power. “Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie becomes truth,” Orwell wrote (Part 1, Section 7, 1984). Reading these words today feels unsettlingly familiar. The collective amnesia about the oil shocks — those defining events of the 20th century — is one example of “erasure.” How often do our current energy debates mention the 1973 or 1979 crises? Seldom, if at all. It is as if they never happened or as if their lessons hold no value. Instead, we hear rosy talk of “energy dominance” and endless resources without reckoning with the past instability. The disinformation machine has encouraged us to forget or trivialize real history, replacing it with a fantasy that more oil is always the answer.

Orwell also warned of “Newspeak”: language designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought. Today, we see our version of Newspeak in the energy realm. Consider the lexicon being used to rebrand fossil fuels. In 2019, a U.S. government official went so far as to dub natural gas “freedom gas” and even referred to gas molecules as “molecules of U.S. freedom” (US energy department rebrands fossil fuels as 'molecules of freedom' | Gas | The Guardian) (US energy department rebrands fossil fuels as 'molecules of freedom' | Gas | The Guardian). This absurd euphemism—straight out of a marketing fever dream—was offered with a straight face in an official press release, as if calling gas by a patriotic name could disguise the fact that it’s the same old methane, driving the same warming of our atmosphere. Warping language to mask uncomfortable truths is a classic propaganda tactic. During World War I, deaths became “collateral damage.” During the Cold War, nuclear missiles were “peacekeepers.” And now, amid a climate crisis, gas is “freedom.” The irony would be laughable if the stakes weren’t so high.

We also hear the language of false choices and scapegoats. When blackouts or price spikes occur, the blame is often placed (incorrectly) on renewable energy or environmental regulations. Politicians speak of “clean coal” – a contradiction in terms – or tout oil drilling as a path to “energy independence” even as it deepens our dependence on a volatile global market. This is reminiscent of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, which spewed slogans like “War is Peace” and “Ignorance is Strength.” Today’s equivalent might be “Pollution is Clean” or “Dependence is Independence.” Such doublespeak aims to dull the public’s critical thinking through constant repetition. If enough individuals accept these linguistic distortions, taking bold climate action becomes more difficult, and the fossil fuel status quo persists.

---

Conclusion: Remembering the Past, Protecting the Future

History does not repeat in perfect loops, but its echoes are loud for those willing to listen. Nearly half a century has passed since the first great oil shock, enough time for a new generation to come of age with little knowledge of that turbulent era. It is said that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it; today, we would add that those who distort history risk something even worse. When disinformation and censorship poison the well of public discourse, society loses its ability to learn, adapt, and make rational choices. We find ourselves unmoored, swayed by whoever shouts the most comforting lie or silences the most inconvenient truth. In such a state, progress becomes impossible and catastrophe becomes inevitable.

It is time to break this cycle of amnesia and manipulation. The instability of fossil fuels—laid bare by decades of price shocks and political crises—is not a partisan talking point but a plain fact of life. We ignore that reality at our peril. Every new oil boom or gas expansion that lulls us into complacency will eventually be followed by a bust or a shortage that throws us into chaos. We can choose to remember the lines at the gas stations in 1973, the desperate pleas of leaders in 1979, the economic pain of 2008, and the wake-up call of 2022. We can remember, and more importantly, we can act on that remembrance by accelerating the transition to stable, clean, local energy sources that cannot be weaponized or depleted on a whim.

Equally, we must demand honesty and transparency from our leaders and institutions. The war on truth—from outright climate denial to the insidious spin of corporate PR and government doublespeak—must be confronted at every turn. This means supporting independent journalism and science, calling out lies when we see them, and refusing to let false narratives go unchallenged. It means protecting whistleblowers and truth-tellers instead of punishing them. And it means we take responsibility to stay informed and think critically rather than simply consuming the next soothing falsehood that comes across our screen.

The climate is warming, the clock is ticking, and the truth is clear—if we dare to face it. In an age of misinformation, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. So let us be revolutionaries in the most responsible sense: truth-tellers, memory-keepers, and builders of a new energy future. The challenges are immense, but so is our capacity for change when reality pierces through illusion. The unstable world of oil has had its century. Now, armed with knowledge of the past and a commitment to honesty, we can forge a more stable, sustainable, and just path forward. Future generations will thank us not for the comfort of soothing lies but for the courage of inconvenient truths. The time to act is now, before the door of opportunity closes, and we find ourselves, once again, gasping in the fumes of our forgetfulness.

History has given us a lesson. The truth is whispering its guidance. We must choose to listen.

---

A dangerous ilusions…

---

All rights are of Germán & Co.

---

In the first quarter of the 21st century, the geopolitical landscape has been profoundly reshaped by a series of transformative shifts, dismantling deeply held illusions of control. The post-Cold War optimism about a stable, unipolar liberal order—once confidently heralded as the "end of history"—has unravelled, giving way to a far more volatile and complex reality. Powers and institutions previously perceived as dominant now confront the stark limits of their influence, challenged by emerging actors and unforeseen forces. Energy crises, pandemics, resurgent authoritarianism, and rapidly shifting alliances have exposed vulnerabilities in systems that global leaders believed were firmly under their control. Today's multipolar era is marked by a diffusion of power among diverse states and unpredictable dynamics that defy the orderly assumptions of earlier decades. In this uncertain environment, control increasingly reveals itself as an illusion—a reassuring narrative steadily eroded by complex realities on the ground.

---

Explore:

1. The Energy Gambit: From Nuclear Dreams to Gas Leverage – Declining nuclear energy ambitions and the rise of natural gas as a tool of geopolitical coercion.

2. Technocratic Authoritarianism: A New Face of Eugenics? – The tightening grip of technocrats, surveillance states, and subtle revival of eugenics-inspired policies.

---

Fully Right Of Germán & Co.

The Energy Gambit: From Nuclear Dreams to Gas Leverage…

For decades, nuclear energy was sold as the pinnacle of human mastery over nature – a near-limitless source of power that promised energy independence and geopolitical clout. In the mid-20th century, world leaders imagined gleaming fleets of reactors powering their economies and freeing them from the vagaries of fossil fuels. By the 1990s, however, the sheen of the atomic age was fading. The Chernobyl disaster of 1986 and the Fukushima meltdown in 2011 underscored the catastrophic risks of nuclear power, hardening public skepticism. Meanwhile, the rapid expansion of renewable energy and the abundant supply of natural gas – often cheaper and quicker to deploy – created a competitive alternative. What followed was a slow global retreat from nuclear ambitions. Nuclear power’s share of global electricity generation declined from a peak of about 17.5% in 1996 to roughly 10% by 2020, as more countries halted or scaled back their reactor programs (Study shows U.S. has the most nuclear reactors in 2021 | World Economic Forum). While nations like China continued building reactors, many others – from Japan and Germany to Belgium and South Korea – either froze new nuclear projects or pledged phase-outs in response to safety fears and public pressure. The grand dream of a nuclear-powered future gave way to an age of pragmatism and caution.

This retreat has had profound geopolitical implications. As nuclear energy’s role receded, natural gas emerged as a critical pillar of the global energy mix – and a potent instrument of geopolitical leverage. Gas, once seen merely as a bridge fuel, became a strategic asset coveted by nations and cartels. Unlike nuclear plants, which are capital-intensive and take years to build, gas infrastructure (pipelines, LNG terminals) offered flexibility and relatively quick returns. Producers of natural gas – from Russia and Qatar to the United States – found eager markets, particularly in energy-hungry Europe and Asia. Europe, in particular, increasingly relied on imported gas to compensate for its nuclear drawdown and to back up intermittent renewables. Nowhere was this dynamic more evident than in Germany. Long the economic engine of Europe, Germany decided to eliminate nuclear power, accelerating a phase-out after Fukushima. In April 2023, the last three German reactors shut down for good, closing the chapter on atomic energy in Germany’s grid (Q&A - Germany's nuclear exit: One year after) (Germany's Energy Crisis: Europe's Leading Economy is Falling Behind). But the move, born of environmental and safety concerns, left Germany and its neighbors more dependent on natural gas to keep the lights on. When Russia – Europe’s principal gas supplier – invaded Ukraine in 2022, it weaponized that very dependency with brutal efficiency (Europe’s messy Russian gas divorce) (Europe’s messy Russian gas divorce).

Russia’s strategy was decades in the making. Under the guise of mutually beneficial commerce, Moscow had steadily tightened Europe’s bind through long-term gas contracts and pipeline projects. By the 2010s, roughly 40% of Europe’s natural gas imports came from Russia. This heavy reliance created an illusion of energy interdependence that many European leaders complacently accepted – an illusion shattered when geopolitics turned hostile. In the months preceding the Ukraine invasion, the Kremlin deliberately curtailed gas deliveries. It allowed its European storage facilities to dwindle, setting the stage for a supply crunch (Europe’s messy Russian gas divorce). After tanks crossed the Ukrainian border in February 2022, Moscow dramatically slashed pipeline flows, at one point completely shutting the key Nord Stream pipeline. The goal was clear: coerce Europe into acquiescence by plunging it into cold and darkness, splinter European unity, and deter support for Kyiv. Natural gas – often called the “blue gold” of the 21st century – has become Vladimir Putin’s sharpest geopolitical weapon.

Initially, the tactic exacted a heavy toll. European natural gas prices spiked to record highs through 2022, and an energy panic set in. Governments scrambled to avert blackouts and factory shutdowns. Germany, facing an abrupt cutoff of the cheap Russian gas that had powered its industries for years, teetered on the brink of recession. Indeed, by 2023, Germany had slipped into an economic slump, largely thanks to the loss of Russian gas supplies and the simultaneous shutdown of its nuclear plants (Germany's Energy Crisis: Europe's Leading Economy is Falling Behind). What had been touted as a responsible energy policy – the Energiewende away from nuclear – suddenly looked like a strategic vulnerability. Meanwhile, countries like Hungary and Serbia, more friendly to Moscow, secured gas lifelines, illustrating how Russia can reward or punish by modulating the gas valve. The Kremlin’s gambit seemed to confirm fears that Europe’s climate-conscious retreat from nuclear power had inadvertently strengthened the hand of petrostates.

And yet, the endgame did not play out entirely as Moscow envisioned. European nations – displaying a resolve few anticipated – moved with astonishing speed to blunt Russia’s energy weapon. The European Union coordinated an emergency reduction in gas demand, filling storage caverns before winter and securing alternative supplies from Norway, North Africa and an armada of liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments from the United States and Qatar. New LNG import terminals were fast-tracked from the Baltic coast of Poland to the shores of Germany’s North Sea. By early 2023, Russian pipeline gas, once the lifeblood of Europe’s energy system, had been replaced – an unprecedented pivot that would have been politically unthinkable before the war (Europe’s messy Russian gas divorce). The self-congratulatory narrative in European capitals was that Putin’s attempt to blackmail Europe had backfired, costing Russia its biggest customer and a key source of revenue. Indeed, by 2023, Russia’s share of Europe’s gas imports plummeted, and Gazprom was left flaring gas it could no longer sell. One European official quipped that Putin had “spent decades building up leverage, only to throw it away in a single year.” In reality, the transition was painful – energy-intensive industries from chemicals to steel in Europe suffered or relocated, and households endured soaring utility bills. But by winter 2023–24, natural gas prices had fallen back to pre-crisis levels, and the worst-case scenario of energy rationing was averted. Europe has, in effect, partially immunized itself against the Russian gas weapon, though at a steep economic cost.

The broader lesson remains: control over energy is a double-edged sword. Suppose Europe learned that it could survive without Russian gas, and Russia learned that over-reliance on one primary market (Europe) could be ruinous – unlike oil, which can be sold globally. In that case, pipeline gas is essentially stranded without willing nearby buyers. The geopolitical leverage of gas thus cuts both ways; wielding it as a weapon can invite self-inflicted wounds. The episode also underscored that flexibility and diversification are as crucial as resource abundance in today's multipolar energy landscape. The United States, once a net energy importer, became a critical LNG supplier to Europe almost overnight, turning its shale gas boom into a strategic influence. Middle Eastern producers like Qatar similarly gained clout, signing 20- and 30-year contracts to anchor Asia and Europe’s future gas needs. New energy partnerships bloomed: Algeria and Italy deepened gas ties, and Azerbaijan stepped up pipeline flows to Southern Europe. In essence, Moscow’s aggressive move accelerated a global reshuffling of energy relationships. In this scramble, gas-rich states could expand their sway, and consumers learned never to put all their eggs in one basket.

Meanwhile, the decline of nuclear energy continues to shape this new energy geopolitics. Countries that doubled down on reactor programs – such as China, India, and Russia itself – frame their investments in nuclear technology as ways to secure energy independence and even export influence (through reactor sales and fuel services) in the coming decades. However, in liberal democracies, public and political will has often turned against nuclear power. Despite beginning to restart some reactors after a post-Fukushima shutdown, Japan remains cautious. Belgium and Spain have timelines to phase out nuclear generation in the 2020s and 2030s (though Belgium delayed its phase-out by a decade due to the gas crisis). In the United States, atomic power struggles to compete economically with cheap gas and subsidized renewables, leading to reactor closures. Only France stands as a significant exception in the West – maintaining a robust nuclear fleet that still provides about 70% of its electricity, which Paris touts as both a climate-friendly asset and a strategic buffer against gas geopolitics. Even so, France faced embarrassment in 2022 when corrosion problems forced many reactors offline, contributing to Europe’s power crunch. The incident revealed that simply having nuclear plants is insufficient; they must be maintained and modernized, lest technical failures shatter the illusion of secure capacity.

In hindsight, the world’s energy “control illusions” become apparent. Those who assumed that nuclear power would guarantee energy autonomy found that political will and public trust are fickle variables beyond technocratic control. Germany’s leaders, for instance, believed they could simultaneously abandon nuclear power and deepen dependence on imported gas without incurring strategic risk – an illusion dispelled by war. Likewise, Russia thought it could control Europe through energy, only to find that coercion in one domain (gas) provoked an equal and opposite reaction that undercut its influence. The new reality is a more multipolar energy order: one in which no single technology or supplier holds absolute sway and where energy security is achieved through diversity and resilience rather than any silver-bullet solution. This is an era where natural gas, for all its newfound importance, is also a transient player in the transition to renewables – and where even renewables come with their geopolitical baggage (from supply chains of critical minerals to land use conflicts). In short, the illusion that any country could completely control its energy destiny has given way to an understanding that interdependence and volatility are here to stay.

Geopolitically, natural gas will remain a lever of influence, but its utility as a weapon may diminish if buyers have alternatives. Europe’s messy divorce from Russian gas (Europe's messy Russian gas divorce - Brookings Institution) demonstrated the power and limits of that lever. In the coming years, attention is turning to other energy frontiers: the race for critical minerals needed for batteries and renewable tech, and whether the nuclear decline can be reversed by innovations like small modular reactors (SMRs) to provide carbon-free baseload power. Even as climate imperatives push countries to decarbonize, the road to that green future is strewn with geopolitical contests – control of lithium mines or the Strait of Hormuz. The key takeaway from the early 2020s is that no energy source is purely a matter of engineering; each carries geopolitical weight. In the era of multipolar geopolitics, energy policy is security policy.

Thus, the stage is set for a continued global energy gambit. Nations will leverage what they have – oil, gas, technology, or innovation – to jockey for position, and those dependent on others will seek to mitigate that dependence. The decline of nuclear power in many regions has inadvertently elevated the role of hydrocarbons like natural gas in international affairs, at least in the short term. But this may not be permanent. If the 2020s taught anything, it is that fortunes can reverse quickly. For example, a breakthrough in fusion energy or battery storage could upend the balance again. Policymakers must, therefore, approach the illusion of control with humility: today’s leverage can become tomorrow’s liability. As Europe found in its bid to go green while relying on an authoritarian supplier, geopolitics has humbled even the best-laid plans.

---

Fully right of Germán & Co.

---

Technocratic Authoritarianism: A New Face of Eugenics?

Even as energy crises make headlines, a quieter shift in governance and ideology occurs, bringing uncomfortable historical echoes back to the forefront. In several countries, particularly those led by authoritarian or populist figures, we are witnessing the rise of technocratic authoritarianism. This form of governance prioritizes efficiency, surveillance, and the authority of expertise while diminishing democratic accountability.

Modern authoritarian regimes increasingly utilize technological and scientific rhetoric to shape society, drawing parallels to the discredited ideologies of 20th-century eugenics. Although few today use the term "eugenics" openly, many state policies and emerging biotechnologies reflect its core principles: optimizing a population’s genetic, behavioral, or social traits at the expense of individual rights and human dignity. This note examines how technocratic governance revives eugenic thinking under a new guise, focusing on examples from China, Russia, the United States, and other regions. 

We analyze how technology-driven control mechanisms and assertions of scientific authority are employed to justify policies that, knowingly or unknowingly, discriminate and stratify individuals. Despite the use of euphemisms and a high-tech facade—such as “population quality,” “smart surveillance,” and “precision prevention,” the pressing question remains: Is this the new face of eugenics?

---

Eugenics Past: From Pseudoscience to Policy

Eugenics is the belief in improving the genetic quality of the human population (a beautiful person with high EQ.) through controlled reproduction. This movement gained popularity in the early 20th century and was initially seen as a scientific endeavor. In the United States, many prominent academics and politicians supported eugenics, leading to policies such as forced sterilization laws. Indiana passed the first such law in 1907. In the Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell (1927), the Court upheld the sterilization of individuals deemed “unfit,” which encouraged numerous states to implement similar laws. By the time World War II began, approximately 60,000 Americans had been involuntarily sterilized under eugenic laws. Similar practices emerged globally, in European countries and Latin America, often targeting the mentally ill, disabled, or socially marginalized groups.

Nazi Germany’s racial hygiene program represented a horrific extreme of eugenics. Between 1934 and 1939, Nazi “Hereditary Health Courts” ordered approximately 400,000 forced sterilizations. During the years 1941 to 1945, the regime systematically murdered tens of thousands in the name of “racial purity” (Eugenics and Involuntary Sterilization: 1907-2015 - PubMed). The revelation of these atrocities after World War II largely discredited eugenics as both a scientific and moral endeavor. Overt advocacy for eugenics largely disappeared from public policy discussions after 1945, leading many countries to repeal or phase out their sterilization programs. However, the core mindset of eugenics—believing that society can be improved by eliminating undesirable traits or individuals—did not simply vanish. Instead, it went underground or mutated into new forms. As historian Philip Reilly notes, “simplistic eugenic thinking has faded, but coerced sterilization remains widespread, especially in China and India. In many parts of the world, involuntary sterilization is still intermittently used against minority groups” (Eugenics and Involuntary Sterilization: 1907-2015 - PubMed). 

Ideas associated with eugenics, though stripped of the name, persist in discussions surrounding reproductive rights, immigration, and human genetics. The latter half of the 20th century saw the emergence of human rights principles explicitly rejecting discrimination based on genetics or lineage. Nevertheless, scientific and political elites continued to explore ideas about selectively engineering society. The concept of “new eugenics” surfaced among bioethicists in the 1970s and 1980s, referring to using emerging genetic technologies to select or enhance desired traits in children. Unlike the older, state-led eugenics, this “new” eugenics is often framed as a matter of individual choice or free-market innovation—frequently termed “liberal eugenics.” For instance, ethicist Nicholas Agar argues that parents should be free to use genetic enhancements on their offspring to pursue better lives (Agar, 2004). However, critics warned that even in the absence of government coercion, such practices could result in de facto eugenic outcomes, such as stigmatization of individuals with disabilities, new forms of inequality, and a mindset that treats human life as a product to be optimized. 

By the early 21st century, advances in biotechnology—including prenatal screening, in vitro fertilization (IVF), and gene editing—enabled the selection of embryos free from specific genetic disorders or potentially possessing preferred traits. While the primary goal of these technologies is often to prevent severe disease, disability rights advocates caution against a slippery slope. One scholarly article notes that “some have referred to these reproductive technologies as the ‘new eugenics’ or ‘liberal eugenics’, achieved via private medical choices rather than state-driven population control” (Confronting the Legacy of Eugenics and Ableism: Towards Anti-Ableist Bioethics Education - PMC). In 2020, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities warned that “current developments in medical research and practice may revive eugenic ideas if safeguards for those affected are not ensured” (Confronting the Legacy of Eugenics and Ableism: Towards Anti-Ableist Bioscience Education - PMC). In other words, even without explicitly adopting eugenics, modern societies risk recapitulating its logic through the unchecked use of science and technology.

---

Technocracy and the Temptation of Social Engineering

Parallel to these biomedical trends, governance in many countries has become increasingly “technocratic” – emphasizing technical expertise, data, and algorithms as bases for decision-making. This technocratic turn often promises efficient, value-neutral solutions to social problems: let the data speak and let algorithms optimize public policy. Yet behind this façade of scientific objectivity, old biases and illiberal ambitions can lurk. As scholars of data ethics point out, many algorithmic systems encode assumptions that resonate with eugenics and social Darwinism. Wendy Hui Kyong Chun, for instance, argues that contemporary significant data practices embody “segregation [and] eugenics” through their very design (Discriminating Data: Wendy Chun in Conversation with Lisa Nakamura). She notes that “correlation, which grounds big data’s predictive potential, stems from twentieth-century eugenic attempts to ‘breed’ a better future”. In other words, the statistical techniques underpinning modern predictive analytics have intellectual roots in eugenic science – where correlation was often misused to tie social outcomes (like poverty or crime) to heredity or race.

The marriage of scientific authority and authoritarian ambition has a long history. Early 20th-century eugenicists eagerly provided scientific rationales for racist and classist policies; today’s technocrats may unwittingly do the same with algorithms and surveillance technology. In an authoritarian regime, technocracy can become a convenient fig leaf: policies that might be seen as repressive or discriminatory are packaged as the outcome of objective, data-driven analysis or benevolent expertise. This phenomenon has been described as “authoritarian high-modernism” – a term political scientist James C. Scott used to describe states that impose top-down social engineering in the name of scientific progress. Whether it is Soviet agronomists claiming scientific backing for catastrophic farm collectivization or today’s authorities claiming AI will ensure “social harmony,” the pattern is similar. When leaders defer to “science” or “technology” as infallible, it can foster a culture of deference that undermines democratic oversight (Authoritarian Regime - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics). In extreme cases, it becomes a form of “scientific authoritarianism” – where dissent is silenced as ignorant or anti-progress, and individuals are reduced to data points to be managed.

Notably, eugenic ideology was a technocratic project: it treated humans as stock to be measured, classified, and improved by experts. Today, new forms of classification and control – from credit scores to facial recognition – carry a similar hubris. Below, we explore several case studies where technology-enabled control mechanisms may constitute a new form of eugenic governance, intentionally or otherwise. These examples illustrate how euphemistic language, biometric surveillance, and algorithmic bias are converging to shape societies in ways that recall the eugenic ideal of a “better” (i.e., more governed, more homogeneous) population.

---

China: “Upgrading Population Quality” Through Data and Discipline

One prominent example of technocratic authoritarianism is seen in the People’s Republic of China, which actively shapes its population’s size and “quality.” The Chinese Communist Party has a history of social engineering in reproduction, most notably through the One-Child Policy, which led to forced abortions and sterilizations.

Recently, facing an ageing population and declining birth rates, China has shifted to a pro-natalist stance but is increasingly focused on controlling who can reproduce. The 14th Five-Year Plan (2021–2025) aims at “upgrading population quality,” promoting higher birth rates among the Han Chinese majority, particularly the educated and wealthy while suppressing birth rates among ethnic minorities such as the Uyghurs. 

In Xinjiang, Uyghur women have been subjected to forced abortions and sterilizations, with officials labelling them as “baby-making machines.” A China specialist noted the unmistakable eugenic undertones of these policies. As Han women are encouraged to have more children, coercive measures are being taken to reduce births among Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities. Many governments, including the U.S., have condemned these actions as a form of genocide.

It is no coincidence that China’s rhetoric of “population quality” harkens back to overt eugenics. In the early 1990s, Chinese policymakers openly embraced eugenic ideas. A 1993 law initially titled the “On Eugenics and Health Protection Act” sought to “improve population quality” by forbidding marriage or childbearing for people with certain genetic diseases and disabilities (China: Upgrading population quality - Population Matters). Although the law was later euphemistically renamed the Maternal and Infant Health Care Law, its eugenic intent was clear: to prevent the birth of “inferior” babies. Chinese officials at the time spoke of yousheng (literally “healthy birth” or “superior birth”) as a national priority, promoting prenatal screenings and abortions of fetuses with abnormalities. This state-driven eugenics program was justified under the banner of public health and modernization. Even after the term eugenics fell out of favor in China (partly due to international criticism), the concept of improving renkou suzhi – population quality – remained embedded in policy discourse. As one scholarly review notes, Chinese geneticists into the 2000s widely agreed that “an important goal of human genetics was ‘improvement of the population quality’”.

---

Conclusion: Resisting the New Eugenics

The patterns highlighted – from China’s high-tech authoritarianism to Western bio-optimism – suggest that the core temptations of eugenics are still with us. It is the temptation to trespass on human rights to pursue a technocratic vision of “perfection” or “security.” Today’s tools may be AI algorithms, genomic sequencing, and mass databases. Still, they can be marshalled toward the same ends that old eugenic laws and programs sought: a “better” society as defined by those in power, even if it means coercion and exclusion of those who don’t fit the ideal.

However, awareness is growing. Journalists, activists, and scholars are drawing connections between these new practices and historical eugenics, sounding alarm bells. For instance, the New York Times has published investigations into China’s genomic surveillance and warned of a “21st-century dystopia” if Social Credit-style systems spread. Human Rights Watch and others call for strict limits on biometric surveillance and for banning AI technologies that enable racial profiling or social scoring (China: Big Data Program Targets Xinjiang’s Muslims | Human Rights Watch). In liberal contexts, there are calls for stronger bioethics oversight and even international treaties to prohibit specific genetic enhancements – a parallel to earlier prohibitions on eugenic practices (Confronting the Legacy of Eugenics and Ableism: Towards Anti-Ableist Bioscience Education - PMC ). In 2019, a global moratorium on heritable gene editing was proposed by leading scientists, precisely out of fear that it could open the door to a new era of eugenics.

Democracy, transparency, and public debate are key to resisting these trends. If the lessons of the 20th century teach us anything, the value of human diversity and individual rights must trump utopian schemes. As attractive as “optimizing” society may sound, the question is optimized for whom, and at what cost? Policies that concentrate power in the hands of self-proclaimed experts and treat people as data points or breeding stock must be continually scrutinized. It is possible to enjoy the benefits of technology without falling into technocratic authoritarianism, but this requires vigilance, inclusive dialogue, and a strong commitment to ethical principles. 

Ultimately, we must confront the uncomfortable reality that echoes of eugenics exist in our world today. These echoes can be heard in the halls of power, where algorithms determine life outcomes, seen in clinics where embryos are selected and felt in communities subject to increased surveillance. Recognizing these echoes is the first step. The next step is to reject the misleading promises of the new eugenics, no matter how scientific they may seem. 

As we navigate the age of AI and genomics, humanity should remember that our worth cannot be quantified, scored, or engineered. Any governance that treats humans in this way risks reviving one of history’s darkest chapters.

---

References

• Agar, N. (2004). Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. Blackwell Publishing.

• Chun, W. H. K. (2021). Discriminating Data: Correlation, Neighborhoods, and the New Politics of Recognition. MIT Press. (Discriminating Data: Wendy Chun in Conversation with Lisa Nakamura)

• Human Rights Watch. (2017, Dec 13). China: Minority Region Collects DNA from Millions (China: Minority Region Collects DNA from Millions | Human Rights Watch) (China: Minority Region Collects DNA from Millions | Human Rights Watch). Human Rights Watch News.

• Human Rights Watch. (2017, Dec 12). China’s Chilling ‘Social Credit’ Blacklist (China’s Chilling ‘Social Credit’ Blacklist | Human Rights Watch). Human Rights Watch News (by M. Wang).

• Human Rights Watch. (2020, Dec 9). China: Big Data Program Targets Xinjiang’s Muslims (China: Big Data Program Targets Xinjiang’s Muslims | Human Rights Watch) (China: Big Data Program Targets Xinjiang’s Muslims | Human Rights Watch). Human Rights Watch News.

• Human Rights Watch. (2022, Sep 5). China: New Evidence of Mass DNA Collection in Tibet (China: New Evidence of Mass DNA Collection in Tibet | Human Rights Watch) (China: New Evidence of Mass DNA Collection in Tibet | Human Rights Watch). Human Rights Watch Report.

• Palmer, E. (2021, Apr 29). Feminists thwarting China’s population goals (Feminists thwarting China's population goals - POLITICO). Politico China Watcher.

• Population Matters. (2025, Feb 7). China: Upgrading population quality (China: Upgrading population quality - Population Matters) (China: Upgrading population quality - Population Matters). Population Matters News.

• Reilly, P. R. (2015). Eugenics and Involuntary Sterilization: 1907-2015. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 16, 351-368 (Eugenics and Involuntary Sterilization: 1907-2015 - PubMed) (Eugenics and Involuntary Sterilization: 1907-2015 - PubMed).

• Richardson, S. & Reynolds, I. (2020). Opinion: Eugenics in the era of CRISPR. New York Times.

• Smith, G. & Wills, M. (2024, Oct 18). US startup charging couples to ‘screen embryos for IQ’ (US startup charging couples to ‘screen embryos for IQ’ | Genetics | The Guardian). The Guardian.

• Stop LAPD Spying Coalition. (2021). Automating Banishment: The Surveillance and Policing of Looted Land (Politicians Move to Limit Predictive Policing After Years of Controversial Failures | TechPolicy.Press). (Referenced via The Guardian).

• Zhang, S. (2017). China’s DNA collecting in Xinjiang. The Atlantic. (Describing HRW findings on biometric surveillance).

• Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs. (Discusses Social Credit and “instrumentarian” power).

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to Musk's changes, every single like, retweet, and share your offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, use Stripe through our dedicated donation link, you can quickly and securely contribute. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference! 

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1909010177900106177

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Musk Calls for a Zero-Tariff Trade Zone Between Europe and the U.S.

---

¨Musk had voiced support for eliminating tariffs between the United States and Britain. But his recent comments signal a broader ambition to extend such trade policies to Europe...

---

NYT Published April 5, 2025 | Updated April 6, 2025, 5:39 a.m. ET
By Emma Bubola

Just three days after President Trump announced sweeping tariffs—including a 20 percent levy on goods from the European Union—Elon Musk expressed his hope that Europe and the United States would eventually shift to a “zero-tariff situation,” effectively forming a free-trade zone.

During a videoconference with Italy’s far-right League party in Florence, Musk outlined his vision for a closely integrated transatlantic relationship. His remarks departed from his recent silence regarding Trump’s protectionist tariff policies.

Earlier on Saturday, Musk had publicly lambasted Peter Navarro, a leading trade adviser in the Trump administration. In response to an X post praising Navarro, Musk dismissed Navarro’s Ivy League credentials as irrelevant. It criticized him for lacking a “builder’s” track record—emphasizing that tangible achievement matters more than academic accolades.

At the conference, Musk stressed the need for a stronger transatlantic partnership, remarking that he would welcome “more freedom of people to move between Europe and North America.” This stance contrasts sharply with the prevailing attitudes among Trump administration officials, as well as President Trump’s own earlier comments, in which he claimed the European Union was designed to “screw” America.

During Trump’s first term, Musk had voiced support for eliminating tariffs between the United States and Britain. But his recent comments signal a broader ambition to extend such trade policies to Europe.

Musk’s appearance with the League party was not his first foray into European political debates. Over recent months, he has increasingly lent his influential voice to far-right movements across the continent. Last Friday, both Musk and Trump expressed support for Marine Le Pen, the embattled French far-right leader recently convicted on embezzlement charges and barred from running for public office. Earlier this year, Musk endorsed Germany’s Alternative for Germany party and weighed in on Italy’s immigration debate—a move that had drawn sharp criticism from Italy’s president.

At Saturday’s event alongside League leader Matteo Salvini, Musk not only reiterated his zero-tariff vision but also promoted the initiatives of his cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency, supported Trump’s stance on the Ukraine conflict, and condemned what he described as the European Union's stifling overregulation.

This revised version aims to present the information clearly and structurefully while highlighting the key points of Musk’s remarks and his broader political involvement.

---

---

The Fall of a Giant: Northvolt, Europe’s Battery Dream Derailed…

---

¨Asian firms target Northvolt's assets, with CATL poised to buy its Swedish factory, increasing Europe's dependence on them…

---

---

The rope may break; confidence is lost.

Two days ago, the French nuclear-powered attack submarine FS Tourville arrived in Halifax, Canada, drawing attention amid heightened tensions with the United States. Officially described as a routine NATO exercise, the visit signalled French solidarity despite former President Trump’s aggressive rhetoric. France and Canada have significantly strengthened their defence ties, deepened robust military cooperation, and extensively explored technology exchanges. Last week, both countries collaborated closely to support Ukraine, providing substantial assistance and training for Ukrainian forces. Amid Ottawa’s potential shift from U.S. to French submarine technology, this visit underscored France’s readiness to bolster Canada’s security while showcasing its advanced naval capabilities. According to a recent BILD report, new revelations indicate that Russia and the United States have held secret talks to restart the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This development may have significant implications for transatlantic relations and Europe’s energy security, potentially reshaping the political landscape.

Sources: All Media

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/03/03/russia-and-us-held-secret-talks-on-restarting-nord-stream-2-pipeline-bild-a88225

---

Simply coincidences:

Workart by Germán & Co, all rights reserved.

¨Russian energy is abundant, dependable, and (if politics don’t interfere) inexpensive – in contrast, he implies, to the West’s intermittent renewables or high-priced LNG…

***President Vladimir Putin…

---

***

Putin’s Views on the “Green Agenda” vs. Energy Needs

President Vladimir Putin has criticized Western climate policies as overly aggressive or hypocritical, and emphasized Russia’s role in supplying dependable, cheap energy (mainly fossil fuels) to meet global needs.

Critique of the Western “Green Agenda”

Putin often argues that wealthy Western nations push a “green agenda” that poorer countries cannot afford. For example, at the Valdai Discussion Club in Nov 2024, he said Western countries that had already used fossil fuels to develop and “polluted the atmosphere” now “demand [others] immediately leap to a new level of [clean energy] generation. How can we do that? ...We would have to spend our remaining resources on new technologies, which we must buy from you... It is also a tool of some sort of neo-colonialism”. He urged that if Western nations were sincere about climate goals, they should help poorer countries develop (“provide financing and technology”) instead of imposing strict green rules that stifle development. This implies Putin sees the Western climate push as a “luxury” that only rich, privileged countries can indulge – a sentiment very close to the quote in question.

Putin explicitly framed the Western climate agenda as politicized and unfair. At the Russian Energy Week forum in Sept 2024, he accused some Western countries of using the climate agenda “in pursuit of their neo-colonial aims,” whereas Russia practices a more balanced approach. “Unlike some Western countries that use the climate agenda in pursuit of their neo-colonial aims, we [Russia] put into practice a fair and orderly energy transition that takes into account our natural conditions [and] economic development,” Putin said. This statement underscores his view that Western environmental demands are ideologically driven or domineering, and that Russia will not sacrifice its own economic needs to appease what he sees as a Western “green” ideology.

He has also highlighted what he calls Western hypocrisy on green issues. In a February 2024 TV interview, Putin noted that Europe’s energy crunch forced a return to coal despite green pledges: “Coal generation has increased [in Germany]… now it has become even larger. Well, where is this ‘green’ agenda?”. He accused European Green parties of “capitalising on people’s fears” about climate change to push their political agenda. Such remarks reinforce his skepticism that Western climate policies are practical or honest, especially when those same countries fall back on fossil fuels in a crisis.

Emphasis on Fossil Fuels as “Affordable, Reliable Energy”

The second part of the quote – “We provide what the world truly needs: affordable, reliable energy” – reflects Putin’s consistent messaging that oil, gas (and even coal) remain essential for global prosperity, and that Russia is a reliable supplier of those fuels. While we did not find Putin quoted saying that exact line, he and his officials frequently stress similar points:

1. Fossil Fuels vs. Renewables: Putin argues that a rapid shift to renewables is dangerous and that traditional energy ensures stability. During an October 2021 government meeting, as Europe faced soaring gas prices, he blamed “unbalanced decisions” in favor of green energy for the market’s “hysteria” and urged a “smooth transition” instead. He warned against “drastic steps” like cutting investment in oil, gas, and coal, emphasizing it’s “vital” to keep those sectors robust. In Putin’s view, neglecting fossil fuels leads to price spikes and energy insecurity – whereas developing them ensures affordable power.

2. “Climate Agenda” vs. Energy Access: Putin’s Energy Ministry deputies have been even more blunt. Pavel Sorokin, a Deputy Energy Minister, stated in 2024 that Russia’s strategy to address climate change would not simply copy the West’s renewables-first approach if it undermines development. He noted that Russia prefers practical measures like efficiency and using cleaner fuels (gas, nuclear) rather than “litter[ing] everything with wind turbines and solar panels”. “Some realistic measures are to use the clean resources we have – such as gas, nuclear, hydropower,” Sorokin said. This aligns with Putin’s stance that natural gas and nuclear power are reliable, low-emission energy sources that can affordably meet the world’s needs, whereas an over-reliance on renewables is seen as a costly Western “luxury.”

3. Russia as a Reliable Supplier: Putin often positions Russia as a provider of energy security. Even as Europe cut Russian gas imports in 2022–23, he reminded audiences that Russia met all its contractual supply obligations and offered alternatives (for instance, suggesting Europe could have cheap gas if it opened the Nord Stream 2 pipeline). While these specific offers were entangled in geopolitics, the underlying message was that Russian energy is abundant, dependable, and (if politics don’t interfere) inexpensive – in contrast, he implies, to the West’s intermittent renewables or high-priced LNG.

4. Skepticism of Green Technology: Putin has even cast doubt on renewables’ environmental benefits, famously quipping in 2019 that wind turbines are harmful to birds and worms. Though somewhat facetious, comments like this reinforce that he doesn’t share the West’s enthusiasm for wind or solar. Instead, he touts Russia’s large natural gas reserves as a relatively clean fossil fuel that can reduce emissions without the cost of wholly “green” solutions. In short, Putin portrays Russian fossil fuels as a pragmatic answer to energy demand, keeping power affordable and reliable, whereas Western leaders (in his portrayal) push renewables as a political fashion that poorer societies can ill afford.

Fact-Checkers:

1. State-owned Media (Russia): Putin’s Valdai Club speech (reported by RIA Novosti) explicitly frames Western green demands as unrealistic and “neo-colonial”, insisting that countries like Russia must prioritize economic development and energy access. This is a clear indication that he sees the “green agenda” as a luxury of already-developed nations. (RIA Novosti is a Russian state news agency reporting Putin’s words; we’ve provided the translation above.)

2. Independent News Agencies: International coverage echoes these themes. Reuters, for instance, reported Putin’s 2024 interview where he accused European Greens of “inciting fears” and noted the contradiction of Europe burning more coal. Another Reuters piece in 2021 quoted Putin admonishing Europe’s “hysteria” over energy markets due to a rushed green transition, stressing the need to keep oil, gas, and coal in the mix for a stable supply. These reputable reports corroborate Putin’s skepticism of an all-out renewable push and his championing of fossil fuel energy for stability.

3. TASS (Russian Energy Forum): An English-language report by TASS (another Russian state outlet) from Sept 2024 cites Putin contrasting the West’s use of the climate agenda for “neo-colonial aims” with Russia’s “fair and orderly energy transition” that accounts for national conditions. While not using the word “luxury,” the implication is that Russia won’t blindly follow what it considers a Western-driven climate agenda that disregards less wealthy nations’ realities.

In summary, Vladimir Putin has repeatedly conveyed that aggressive climate policies are a Western “luxury” or even a cover for dominance, and that ensuring affordable, reliable energy (chiefly via oil, gas, nuclear) is Russia’s priority for itself and its partners. The exact wording of the query seems to be a paraphrase of Putin’s worldview rather than a verbatim quote, but it accurately encapsulates remarks he has made on different occasions. As Putin put it, Russia seeks “sustainable development of the oil, gas and coal sectors” alongside some renewables, because in his view the world “needs all energy sources” to guarantee energy access – a stance implying that the rich world’s green idealism must be tempered by the practical energy needs of billions.

---

Sources:

1. Putin’s speech at Russian Energy Week forum, TASS, Sept 26, 2024 – “Unlike some Western countries that use the climate agenda in pursuit of their neo-colonial aims, we are putting into practice a fair and orderly energy transition…”.

2. Putin’s remarks at Valdai Club, as reported by RIA Novosti, Nov 7, 2024 – criticizing nations that “used all energy sources…polluted the atmosphere, and now demand that we immediately [switch to new generation]. …This is also one of the tools of neo-colonialism” and urging support for developing countries’ energy needs.

3. Reuters, Feb 15, 2024 – “Putin … criticised the green movement in Europe for capitalising on people’s fears… ‘Where is this “green” agenda?’” (noting Europe’s coal resurgence amid gas shortages).

4. Reuters, Oct 5, 2021 – Reporting Putin’s view that an overly “drastic” green transition caused market turmoil: “You see what is happening in Europe. There is hysteria…because [some] started to cut back on investments in extractive industries. There needs to be a smooth transition,” and his call to not neglect oil, gas, coal for now.

5. Reuters, Sept 27, 2024 – Deputy Minister Sorokin (reflecting Putin-era policy) rejecting a renewables-only approach: Russia will favor steps that “not put significant pressure” on development, e.g. efficiency and using gas, nuclear, rather than covering everything with wind turbines and solar panels.

6. RIA Novosti (Russia) summary of Putin at Valdai 2024 – Western nations “demand that we immediately leap to new technologies…how can we do that? …we’d have to spend our last resources to buy new tech from you… one of the instruments of neo-colonialism.”.

7. Reuters, Feb 15, 2024 – Note that “Putin himself is known for his doubts about green energy. In 2019 he said wind turbines were harmful to birds and worms. Russia has promoted natural gas as being climate friendly.” (illustrating his attitude toward “green” vs. gas).

---

Global News Highlights (March 13, 2025)

---

Energy News:

Top Headlines

1. The New York Times
   Europe Jolted by Northvolt Bankruptcy, EU Green Ambitions at Risk

   • Key Details: Swedish battery manufacturer Northvolt has declared bankruptcy after failing to secure a €5 billion EU bailout. BMW, Volvo, and Volkswagen are now turning to Chinese suppliers, threatening Europe’s plans to dominate electric vehicle (EV) production. EU Commission President announces an emergency summit to rescue the 2035 deadline for phasing out combustion engines.

2. Wall Street Journal
   U.S. Oil Output Reaches 16M Barrels/Day as Trump Declares ‘Energy Dominance 2.0’

   • Key Details: Speaking at CERAWeek 2025, former President Trump pledged accelerated Arctic drilling permits and plans to revoke offshore wind leases, stating, “The green experiment is dead.” U.S. crude exports rise sharply, challenging OPEC+ pricing power.

3. The Guardian
   Global Climate Strikes Target CERAWeek, Slam ‘Ecocide’ of Fossil Fuel Growth

   • Key Details: Greta Thunberg leads protests in Houston denouncing what she calls an “obscene fossil fetish.” ExxonMobil faces backlash for a newly announced $30 billion share buyback program.

4. Financial Times
   China’s CATL Pushes ‘Battery Colonialism’ Deals with Europe, Africa

   • Key Details: Leading battery producer CATL is offering discounted lithium-ion units to European automakers in exchange for mining rights in Namibia and Zimbabwe. Critics label these agreements “green debt traps,” warning of long-term economic and environmental consequences.

5. Reuters
   Gazprom Slashes Gas Deliveries to Europe Amid Ukraine Drone Strikes

   • Key Details: Citing “technical issues,” Russia’s Gazprom cuts flow through the TurkStream pipeline by 40%, sending EU natural gas prices soaring to €120 per MWh. Germany pivots to coal-fired power, jeopardizing its 2030 coal phaseout pledge.

6. Politico EU
   France Proposes EU-Wide ‘Atomic Alliance’ to Rival U.S. and China

   • Key Details: President Macron backs a €100 billion EU nuclear fund to build 15 new reactors by 2035. Poland and Austria rejected the plan, calling it “radioactive madness” and setting the stage for a major internal EU conflict over energy strategy.

7. Bloomberg
   Saudi Aramco Cuts Oil Prices in Asia as OPEC+ Unity Frays

   • Key Details: Facing market competition, Riyadh reduced April crude prices by $2 per barrel to maintain its Asian market share. Russia undercuts OPEC+ targets by ramping up Urals crude exports to India at $68 per barrel.

8. Al Jazeera
   Egypt Freezes LNG Exports to Combat Domestic Heatwave Blackouts

   • Key Details: In response to spiraling power shortages, Cairo halts LNG exports, hindering Europe’s efforts to bolster summer gas reserves. Italy declares an “energy state of emergency” over the supply shortfall.

9. The Hindu
   India Bypasses U.S. Tariffs with 10-Year Solar Deal with China

   • Key Details: A rupee-yuan swap agreement allows India to source cheaper Chinese solar panels despite U.S. sanctions, accelerating progress toward a 500 GW renewable energy target.

10. African Energy Chamber
    Nigeria’s $20 Billion Dangote Refinery Collapses amid Corruption Probe

    • Key Details: The largest refinery project in Africa grinds to a halt, exacerbating fuel shortages across the continent. Protesters in Lagos demand accountability from the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).

Geopolitical Developments

• U.S.-EU Trade Dispute Deepens
  Brussels announces 45% tariffs on U.S. LNG following Trump’s “carbon tax” on European steel.

• China-Russia Energy Partnership Grows
  Beijing agrees to finance the Siberia-2 gas pipeline in exchange for settling oil trades in yuan, further reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar.

• Latin America’s ‘Lithium OPEC’
  Chile and Argentina form a cartel-like agreement, tightening royalties and alarming EV manufacturers such as Tesla and BYD.

CERAWeek 2025: Key Takeaways

1. Fossil Fuel Renaissance
   Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser proclaims that “peak oil is a myth,” while ExxonMobil announces its intent to acquire shale competitor Chesapeake Energy. ***

2. Green Hydrogen Loses Momentum
   Shell cancels its $7 billion green hydrogen project in Namibia, citing high infrastructure costs.

3. Nuclear Innovations
   Bill Gates’ TerraPower claims a major breakthrough in small modular reactors (SMRs), bolstered by $5 billion in U.S. funding.

Economic & Market Impacts

• Volatile Oil Prices
  Brent crude fluctuates between $85 and $95 per barrel amid OPEC+ tensions and rising U.S. production.

• EV Sector Under Pressure
  Tesla’s stock plummets by 15% as CATL secures a dominant position in the battery market. Rivian files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

• Green Bond Shake-Up
  EU-issued green bonds see yields spike to 8% following Northvolt’s collapse, raising concerns about the region’s clean-tech financing.

Key Quotes

• Fatih Birol (IEA):
  “The world is sleepwalking into an energy abyss—governments must choose between security and transition, not pretend they can have both.”

• Jennifer Granholm (U.S. Energy Secretary):
  “The Inflation Reduction Act remains our guiding star, but unless Congress steps up, China will dominate clean tech.”

• Vladimir Putin (President of Russia):
  “The West’s green agenda is a luxury for the privileged. We provide what the world truly needs: affordable, reliable energy.”

What to Watch

• March 15, 2025: EU emergency summit to address Northvolt’s collapse and salvage the 2035 combustion-engine ban.

• March 20, 2025: OPEC+ meeting in Vienna—market eyes on Russia’s compliance with production quotas.

• April 2025: India’s general elections could shift the course of its solar partnership with China.

Analysis

The 2025 energy landscape is grappling with three major paradoxes:

1. Security vs. Transition:
   Even as governments pledge to cut emissions, energy security concerns are driving a renewed push for fossil fuels.

2. Subsidy Wars:
   The U.S., EU, and China continue to inject massive funding into their energy sectors, leading to competitive distortions and mounting debt risks.

3. Political Polarization:
   From the U.S. shift toward aggressive drilling to Europe’s internal battles over nuclear energy, policy decisions increasingly hinge on ideological lines.

Overall, these headlines underscore the fragility and complexity of the global energy transition. As the urgency of climate action intensifies, geopolitical rivalries and market pressures often undermine long-term environmental goals.

---

***

Mark Silverstone on Mar 11, 2025

Just a comment or two:

1. People have been trying to predict the end of the oil and gas supply, always incorrectly,  for many years. Fifty years sounds like as good an estimate as any.  But if we wait to replace oil and gas with electricity for 50 more years, or whenever it becomes too expensive because of its scarcity, we accept dire consequences for life on this planet.

As you describe very well, the replacement of oil and gas by renewables is far more feasible now that just a few years ago, and far less feasible now than it will be in just a few years from now. But waiting until it is perfect is not an option. The time to start has arrived.

2. Energy conservation and efficiency measures such as heat exchangers, insulation, energy efficient appliances, etc can assist and partially compensate for increased demand for electricity from data centers, etc.

3. Mis-information and dis-information is successfully and effectively delaying the adoption of renewables and encouraging continued dependence on fossil fuels.

At this moment, agents of the U.S. government, including cabinet secretaries, under secretaries and ambassadors, as well as fossil fuel interests (In at least the referenced case, the cabinet secretary and fossil fuel interests are one and the same!) are telling the developing world that they do the exact opposite of what you suggest: That they should plan their future energy needs on burning fossil fuels.

So, regardless of oil and gas supplies, all of the good news about renewables that you describe will fall on deaf ears without the necessary political and commercial changes.

Gracias y buena suerte!!

Reply: German Toro Ghio on March 11, 2025

Thank you very much Michael, for your interest:

The future is not a fixed destination but: a spectrum of possibilities shaped by relentless tinkering, determined pragmatism, and the occasional stroke of luck.

Forecasts outline ambition; progress relies on hard work. It said:

1. "Peak Oil" Fallacy: The 2000s "peak oil" narrative collapsed due to unconventional extraction (***shale fracking, deepwater drilling), which unlocked vast reserves. Similarly, today’s "end of gas" forecasts ignore potential innovations like methane pyrolysis or carbon-neutral synthetic gas.

2. Gas’s Staying Power: Even in aggressive net-zero scenarios, gas remains a transitional baseload fuel for industries like steel and shipping. Its decline hinges on alternatives (e.g., hydrogen, modular nuclear) maturing faster than expected—a gamble, not a certainty.  

*** Economic Desperation vs Environmental Ethics, Matt Damon, Promised Land (2012).

2. Technological Plateaus vs. Incrementalism

The "happy face" cost-decline curves for renewables (and any tech) often gloss over hard limits:

1. Physics and Economics: Solar panel efficiency approaches the Shockley-Queisser limit (approximately 33%), and any further cost reductions necessitate tightening supply chains (such as polysilicon) that are already operating on razor-thin margins.

2. Infrastructure Lock-In: Grids, pipelines, and factories represent trillions in sunk costs. Transitioning these systems involves more than just developing better technology and overcoming political inertia (for instance, the U.S. gas lobby obstructing transmission lines for renewable energy).

3. The Innovation Myth: Most breakthroughs occur incrementally. Every "moonshot," like perovskite solar cells, requires decades of trial and error. Fusion, for example, remains perpetually "30 years away." 

However:

1. Exponential Leaps Do Happen: Lithium-ion batteries fell 97% in cost since 1991—a drop few predicted. AI-driven material discovery (e.g., Google’s GNoME) could accelerate such leaps.

2. Scalability > Novelty: Sometimes "boring" innovations matter most. China’s dominance in solar isn’t about cutting-edge tech but brute-force scaling of manufacturing.

3. The Real Lesson of "Peak Oil"

The "peak oil" debacle teaches us two things:

1. Adaptation Overrides Depletion: Markets innovate when scarcity looms. High oil prices in the 2010s didn’t cause collapse—they funded fracking.

2. Demand Peaks Matter More: Oil may never "run out," but demand could peak by 2030 as EVs and biofuels advance. Similarly, gas demand might plateau not due to scarcity but policy (e.g., EU carbon tariffs) or cultural shifts (corporate ESG mandates).

4. Pragmatic Energy Realism

Rather than betting on utopian forecasts or dooms, focus on:

1. No-Regrets Policies: Invest in grid modernisation, methane leak detection, and R&D for modular nuclear/hydrogen—adaptable solutions regardless of long-term scenarios.

2. Scenario Planning, Not Prophecy: Shell’s 1970s "scenarios" (not predictions) prepared it for oil shocks and climate policies. Governments should similarly hedge their bets.

3. Embracing Uncertainty: ***¾COVID¾ and the ***¾Ukraine¾ war demonstrated how swiftly energy systems can pivot. Flexibility (e.g., LNG terminals convertible to hydrogen) is more valuable than rigid forecasts.

***: Steve Bannon's Suspicions About COVID-19's Creation in China

Steve Bannon, former White House Chief Strategist during the Trump administration, has repeatedly voiced suspicions that the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, China, rather than naturally.

Key points:

1. Bannon was an early prominent advocate of the lab leak theory.

2. He used his "War Room" podcast to promote this view.

3. His claims were part of a broader debate about the virus's origins.

The exact origin of SARS-CoV-2 remains under scientific investigation, and no definitive consensus has been reached as of October 2024. Both laboratory origin and zoonotic transmission theories continue to be studied.

References:

1. Rogin, J. (2021). "Chaos Under Heaven: Trump, Xi, and the Battle for the 21st Century."“ Houghton Mifflin.

2. Baker, N. (2021). "The Lab-Leak Hypothesis." New York Magazine.

3. U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (2023). "An Analysis of the Origins of the COVID-19 Pandemic."

4. World Health Organization (2023). "Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO): Report."

***: ¨Russia and U.S. Held Secret Talks on Restarting Nord Stream 2 Pipeline – Bild...

1. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/03/03/russia-and-us-held-secret-talks-on-restarting-nord-stream-2-pipeline-bild-a88225

2. https://energycentral.com/c/og/natural-gas-cartel-emerging-global-influence-yes-or-not 

3. https://energycentral.com/c/og/gigantic-shark-devourer-energy-and-aqua

Ultimately, the true challenge in the electrical industry is not the fuels or sources for energy production; rather, the insurmountable issue lies in water scarcity and poor decision-making spending.

• https://energycentral.com/c/og/gigantic-shark-devourer-energy-and-aqua

---

Source: https://energycentral.com/c/cp/50-years-until-flame-dies-looming-end-natural-gas%E2%80%A6

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to Musk's changes, every single like, retweet, and share your offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, use Stripe through our dedicated donation link, you can quickly and securely contribute. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference! 

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1900013887971614813

---

“Today's electricity landscape is not a one-size-fits-all market; the industry requires a variety of strategies tailored to different markets and circumstances. Key factors such as regional demand, regulatory environments, available technologies, and the mix of energy sources are essential in creating the most effective approaches for power generation, distribution, and consumption. Andrés Gluski, the CEO & President of AES

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

The Giant Northvolt Has Filed for Bankruptcy: A Detailed Analysis.

---

In a stark blow to Europe’s green energy ambitions, Northvolt, once hailed as the continent’s brightest hope in the global battery race has filed for bankruptcy. The Swedish startup’s collapse marks not just the failure of a company but a crisis for Europe’s strategy to break free from Asian dominance in critical clean-tech industries. The fallout threatens jobs, automaker supply chains, and the European Union’s vision of a self-reliant, sustainable future. 

A Star Burns Too Bright, Too Fast 

Founded in 2016 by ex-Tesla executive Peter Carlsson, Northvolt aimed to be Europe’s answer to Asian battery giants like CATL and LG Energy Solution. Backed by $10 billion in funding from automotive titans (Volkswagen, BMW), institutional investors, and EU governments, the company pledged to build sprawling “gigafactories” producing sustainable lithium-ion batteries. Its flagship plant in Skellefteå, Sweden—powered by hydropower and designed to employ 3,000 workers—symbolized a greener industrial revolution. 

But by 2024, cracks emerged. Production delays, defective batteries, and equipment failures plagued operations. A cancelled $2 billion BMW contract and a failed $5 billion loan triggered a cash crunch. By early 2025, Northvolt’s insolvency left investors reeling, workers jobless, and Europe’s battery strategy in tatters. 

Why Northvolt Imploded 

The bankruptcy stems from a perfect storm of missteps and market forces: 

1. Financial overreach: Battery gigafactories cost billions, and Northvolt’s aggressive expansion—simultaneously building plants in Sweden and Germany and eyeing the U.S.—burned through cash. The company couldn’t pay its bills when key revenue streams dried up. 

2. Operational Stumbles: Battery manufacturing is unforgiving. Tiny defects in electrode coatings or chemical impurities can ruin entire batches. Northvolt’s rush to scale led to low yields, missed deadlines and frustrated automakers. “They tried to build a plane while flying it,” said one industry analyst. 

3. Asian Price Wars: Chinese rivals like CATL flooded the market with cheaper batteries, undercutting Northvolt’s prices. Meanwhile, rising interest rates and volatile lithium costs squeezed margins. 

4. Strategic Bloat: The company’s push into recycling and raw material refining diverted resources. “They lost focus,” admitted a former engineer. “You can’t do everything at once.” 

Human Toll: Shattered Lives and Broken Trust 

The bankruptcy’s human cost is stark. In Skellefteå, a region banking on Northvolt for revival, layoffs have left families scrambling. “We moved here for stability,” said Anna Lundström, a single mother and former quality control worker. “Now, I don’t know how I’ll pay rent.” 

Workers also raised safety concerns. Leaked reports cited chemical exposures, inadequate protective gear, and gruelling 80-hour weeks. Subcontractors faced accusations of exploiting migrant labour. “The pressure was relentless,” said one technician. “We were told Europe’s future depended on us, but we were exhausted.” 

Automakers Left in the Lurch 

Northvolt’s collapse leaves automakers scrambling. Volkswagen, BMW, and Volvo—which bet on the startup for EV batteries—now face supply gaps. Sourcing from Asian firms could delay Europe’s EV rollout and inflate costs. “This is a wake-up call,” said a BMW executive. “We need multiple suppliers, but Europe isn’t ready.” 

The energy storage sector is also hit. Northvolt’s Polish plant, meant to supply grid-scale batteries, leaves renewable projects in limbo. “Europe’s energy transition just got harder,” said a German utilities adviser. 

Geopolitical Reckoning: Europe’s Weak Spot Exposed 

Northvolt’s failure underscores Europe’s vulnerability in the global battery war. While China controls 70% of battery production and the U.S. lures firms with Inflation Reduction Act subsidies, the EU’s fragmented policies and reliance on imports have stalled progress. 

 “Europe wanted a homegrown champion but couldn’t match Asia’s state-backed support,” said energy analyst Clara Richter. “Without raw material access or cheaper power, it’s impossible to compete.” 

The EU’s Battery Alliance, launched in 2017 to capture 25% of global production by 2030, now seems aspirational. Meanwhile, Asian firms circle Northvolt’s carcass: CATL may acquire its Swedish plant, deepening Europe’s dependence. 

Lessons from the Ashes 

Northvolt’s collapse offers hard lessons: 

1. Scale Wisely: Startups must balance ambition with execution. Rushing gigafactories without mastering basics risks disaster. 

2. Diversify Supply Chains: Europe needs raw material partnerships and recycling infrastructure to avoid Asian dominance. 

3. Policy Overhaul: Public funds, like phased milestones, should come with strings attached. “Blank checks won’t work,” said an EU lawmaker. 

What’s Next for Europe’s Battery Hopes? 

While Northvolt’s assets may be sold for scrap, Europe’s battery dream isn’t dead. Startups like France’s Verkor and Norway’s Freyr still aim to scale, and the EU is eyeing solid-state battery breakthroughs. But the path forward demands realism. 

“This isn’t about one company failing,” said industry veteran Lars Jensen. “It’s about whether Europe can learn, adapt, and fight smarter in a cutthroat global market.” 

For now, the lights are off in Skellefteå. But the race to power the green future is far from over. 

---

Sources:

• Dagens Nyheter, Today

---

We have chosen to live in a chaotic world.

---

¨In a single, disconcerting moment, everything shifted. It defies explanation: harsh authoritarianism—sometimes cloaked in a pitiless communist guise—now stands as the model to emulate. As unlikely as it seems, the evidence tells a different story…

---

Workart by Germán & Co.

---

Global News Highlights (March 10, 2025)

---

A new global energy agreement has led to a significant increase in investments in renewable energy.

Energy ministers from over 30 countries have signed a groundbreaking agreement to accelerate the global shift toward renewable power. The pact, announced in Brussels, establishes shared targets for solar, wind and hydrogen development, aiming to slash carbon emissions by 40% over the next decade. Participating nations also pledged new funding mechanisms to support grid expansion and cross-border clean-energy projects. While proponents hail the accord as a critical milestone in battling climate change, some industry groups caution about potential costs and regulatory hurdles. Markets reacted positively, with renewable energy stocks surging in anticipation of substantial infrastructure investments.

The recent global energy agreement, likely forged through multilateral initiatives such as COP30 or the Energy Compacts framework, has prompted a surge in renewable energy investments. This analysis synthesises this development's’ key drivers, challenges, and implications, drawing insights from geopolitical, economic, and technological trends outlined in the search results.

1. Drivers of the Investment Surge 

a. Global Energy Compact and Financial Commitments 

The agreement aligns with mechanisms such as the Energy Compacts, which have mobilised $1.4 trillion in climate-aligned financing since 2021, focusing on decarbonisation and energy access. Projects like Mission 300—a World Bank-led Initiative targeting 300 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa—highlight how structured investment frameworks are scaling clean energy markets and attracting private capital. These efforts prioritise grid infrastructure, solar/wind deployment, and energy storage, addressing climate goals and energy poverty.

b. Policy Tailwinds and Market Realignment 

Despite geopolitical volatility (e.g., the Trump administration’s deregulatory agenda), the agreement underscores a global consensus on the economic viability of renewables. Solar and wind costs continue to fall, with BloombergNEF noting a 35% YoY increase in solar installations in 2024, driven by emerging markets like India and Saudi Arabia. Even under conservative U.S. policy scenarios, clean energy growth remains robust, with over 900 GW of solar, wind, and storage projected by 2035.

c. AI-Driven Demand for Clean Power 

The AI boom is reshaping energy markets, with data centres projected to account for 5% of global electricity demand by 2030. Tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon are securing nuclear and renewable PPAs to meet 24/7 clean power needs, indirectly driving investment in grid modernisation and storage solutions. 

2. Geopolitical and Economic Dynamics 

 a. China’s Clean Tech Dominance 

China’s leadership in renewables (60% of global capacity additions by 2030) and EV exports is central to the agreement’s success. However, Western tariffs on Chinese technologies risk slowing decarbonisation in regions reliant on affordable solar panels and batteries. The agreement must navigate this polarization to ensure equitable technology transfer.

 b. U.S. Policy Uncertainty 

The Trump administration’s reversal of climate policies—including methane regulations and EV subsidies—creates headwinds. However, market forces (e.g., corporate decarbonisation pledges) and state-level initiatives may offset federal inaction, as seen in ongoing renewable growth despite regulatory rollbacks. 

c. Energy Security Imperatives 

Russia’s war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East have intensified the focus on diversified energy supply chains. The agreement leverages this by prioritising resilient infrastructure, such as LNG export approvals and critical minerals mining, though fossil fuel resilience risks delaying the transition. 

3. Challenges to Implementation 

- Infrastructure Bottlenecks: Lengthy permitting processes and grid interconnection delays persist, particularly in Europe and the U.S. Reforms, like Germany’s 150% increase in wind permits post-2022, offer a blueprint but require global scaling. 

- Hydrogen and CCS Struggles: Clean hydrogen costs remain 35% higher than 2022 estimates, reliant on subsidies and carbon pricing. Similarly, carbon capture projects face financing hurdles, underscoring the need for blended finance models. 

- Equity Gaps: Emerging economies still lack access to affordable capital. While Mission 300 targets Sub-Saharan Africa, broader SDG7 goals require $3 trillion annually, with only $2 trillion allocated to clean energy in 2024. 

4. Sectoral Impacts 

- Nuclear Renaissance: SMRs and reactor restarts (e.g., Palisades, Three Mile Island) are gaining traction, supported by tech firms seeking baseload power. 

- EV Market Shifts: China’s EV exports are displacing oil demand in net-importing nations like Brazil, while Europe’s slowdown reflects policy design flaws rather than consumer rejection. 

- Fossil Fuel Adaptation: OPEC+ faces dwindling pricing power as non-OPEC supply grows, with Brent crude projected at $70–75 per barrel in 2025. LNG markets will 

5. Future Outlook 

The success of the agreement hinges on: 

1. Scaling Public-Private Collaboration: Initiatives like the EU’s Global Energy Transition Forum must bridge funding gaps and streamline regulations. 

2. Leveraging AI for Grid Optimisation: AI’s dual role as a power consumer and enabler (e.g., predictive analytics for renewables) could unlock efficiency gains. 

3. COP30 as a Catalyst: Brazil’s leadership at COP30 may revive stalled climate finance commitments and fossil fuel phase-out dialogues. 

Conclusion 

While the global energy agreement marks a turning point, its long-term efficacy depends on resolving geopolitical tensions, accelerating infrastructure reforms, and ensuring equitable access to capital. The interplay of AI, nuclear innovation, and China’s clean tech hegemony will define the next phase of the transition, requiring agility from policymakers and investors alike.

Sources & References:

• (1) The Wall Street Journal (WSJ)

• (2) The New York Times (NYT)

• (3) Time (Times Magazine)

• (4) The Washington Post

• (5) The New Yorker

• (6) Le Monde

• (7) Der Spiegel

• (8) El País

• (9) The Moscow Times

• (10) The Guardian

---

Politics & Conflict

1. Ukraine War: Russia has escalated its offensive, claiming to capture a village in Ukraine’s Sumy region for the first time since 2022, even as Ukrainian forces hold pockets of territory across the border in Russia’s Kursk region (Russia Claims Counteroffensive Into Ukraine’s Sumy Region - The Moscow Times). Heavy fighting continues on both sides of the border.

2. Peace Efforts: Diplomatic moves are underway to halt the conflict. U.S. and Ukrainian delegations are set to meet in Saudi Arabia as early as this week, with Washington (under President Donald Trump) pushing for a ceasefire “framework” (Russia Claims Counteroffensive Into Ukraine’s Sumy Region - The Moscow Times). The Trump administration has even temporarily paused specific military aid and intelligence-sharing with Ukraine to pressure Kyiv into negotiations (Russia Claims Counteroffensive Into Ukraine’s Sumy Region - The Moscow Times). (Trump vowed to end the war quickly, and Moscow has welcomed talks to restore ties.)

3. Diplomatic Tensions: Russia’s relations with Western nations remain fraught outside the Ukraine talks. Moscow expelled two British diplomats on accusations of espionage – allegations the UK Embassy denounced as “entirely baseless” (Russia Expels 2 British Diplomats, Accuses Them of Espionage - The Moscow Times) (Russia Expels 2 British Diplomats, Accuses Them of Espionage - The Moscow Times). The incident adds to a string of recent tit-for-tat expulsions that have strained Russia–UK relations.

Economy & Trade

1. Trade Tariffs Dispute: The U.S. shocked allies by announcing new 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada, effectively threatening the USMCA free trade accord. After an urgent call with Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum, however, President Trump delayed these tariffs for 1 month, exempting all goods under USMCA until early April (Trump delays tariffs on most Mexican and Canadian goods after call with Sheinbaum | U.S. | EL PAÍS English). The last-minute reprieve – which was later confirmed to cover Canada as well – came as an “accommodation” to Mexico amid cooperation on migration and fentanyl trafficking (Trump delays tariffs on most Mexican and Canadian goods after call with Sheinbaum | U.S. | EL PAÍS English). Still, it left businesses uneasy about trade stability.

2. Europe Rearms & Spends: Europe is responding to shifting U.S. policies by bolstering its defence and economic plans. In Germany, incoming Chancellor Friedrich Merz has made a stunning about-face on fiscal policy – agreeing to suspend Germany’s strict debt-brake to allow potentially unlimited borrowing for military spending (Europe must rapidly readjust to dodge the wrecking ball Trump wields over global trade system | The Guardian - Newspaper - Read this story on Magzter.com). This marked a “seismic shift” as the EU launched a dramatic push to “rearm Europe,” with up to €800 billion envisaged to strengthen European defence against Russian aggression (Europe must rapidly readjust to dodge the wrecking ball Trump wields over global trade system | The Guardian - Newspaper - Read this story on Magzter.com). Analysts note that Donald Trump’s isolationist turn – from tariff threats to hints of reduced support for Europe – has galvanized the EU to invest more in its own security (Europe must rapidly readjust to dodge the wrecking ball Trump wields over global trade system | The Guardian - Newspaper - Read this story on Magzter.com). European markets cheered the increased public spending on defence, even as leaders balanced it against economic constraints.

Technology

• AI Delays at Apple: Apple announced it is delaying major AI upgrades to Siri until 2026, missing the original 2025 rollout timeline (Apple says some AI improvements to Siri delayed to 2026 | Reuters). The company has been working on a more personalized, context-aware Siri that can perform complex tasks across apps. Still, it admitted “it’s going to take longer than we thought” to deliver these features (Apple says some AI improvements to Siri delayed to 2026 | Reuters). Apple gave no specific reason for the setback, even as rivals forge ahead – Google integrated its advanced Gemini AI model into Assistant last year, and Amazon recently rolled out a powerful AI upgrade to Alexa (Apple says some AI improvements to Siri delayed to 2026 | Reuters). The delay underscores Apple's challenges in the fast-moving AI race, despite Siri handling 1.5 billion user requests a day (Apple says some AI improvements to Siri were delayed to 2026 | Reuters). Tech observers say Apple is investing in cloud infrastructure and privacy-preserving AI, but falling behind could cede ground to competitors in the smart assistant arena.

Climate & Environment

1. France’s Adaptation Plan: Facing mounting climate risks, France unveiled an ambitious national Climate Adaptation Plan with 52 measures to prepare for a scenario of +4 °C global warming (Climat : les 52 mesures pour adapter la France à + 4 °C de réchauffement prêtes à être mises en œuvre). The government presented the plan on Monday, aiming to fortify economic and social sectors against future climate extremes (Climat : les 52 mesures pour adapter la France à + 4 °C de réchauffement prêtes à être mises en œuvre). It prioritizes protecting vulnerable regions – coastal areas, mountain zones, agriculture and forests are on the front lines of expected impacts (Climat : les 52 mesures pour adapter la France à + 4 °C de réchauffement prêtes à être mises en œuvre). Observers note this is France’s third such plan, now bolstered to ensure the country can cope with more frequent heatwaves, droughts, floods and other climate fallout.

2. Emissions Concentration: A new report highlights the outsized role of a few companies in driving global emissions. Only 20 energy companies (16 state-owned) were responsible for about 40% of all CO₂ emissions from the fossil-fuel sector in 2023 (Twenty companies account for over 40% of all CO₂ emitted by the global fossil fuel sector | Climate | EL PAÍS English). These oil, gas, coal and cement producers emitted 17.5 gigatons of CO₂ last year; notably, Chinese state-owned firms alone contributed roughly 23% of the total (Twenty companies account for over 40% of all CO₂ emitted by the global fossil fuel sector | Climate | EL PAÍS English). Despite intensifying climate impacts, emissions from this group rose by 0.7% in 2023 compared to 2022 (Twenty companies account for over 40% of all CO₂ emitted by the global fossil fuel sector | Climate | EL PAÍS English), signalling that corporate output is still increasing. The worst offender was Saudi oil giant Aramco, followed by others like Coal India and Russia’s Gazprom (Twenty companies account for over 40% of all CO₂ emitted by the global fossil fuel sector | Climate | EL PAÍS English). Climate advocates say such findings underscore the need for tougher regulations on major polluters and faster transitions to renewable energy, as current efforts are not yet bending the emissions curve downward.

U.S. Policy & Society

• Federal “Word Ban” Controversy: In Washington, the Trump administration has moved to reshape language in federal agencies, stirring debate over censorship and science. Officials in multiple departments report being instructed to avoid a list of terms related to diversity, gender, and public health in official communications. For example, at the FDA, scientists were told to stop using words like “woman,” “disabled,” or “elderly” in reports and websites (Exclusive: FDA staffers told that 'woman,' 'disabled' among banned words; White House says it’s an error | Reuters). Similarly, staff at health agencies were directed to remove or refrain from using terms such as “gender,” “transgender,” “LGBT,” and “climate change” to comply with executive orders that solely recognize binary gender and aim to eliminate diversity programs (Exclusive: FDA staffers told to 'woman,' 'disabled' among banned words; White House says it’s an error | Reuters). The CDC even pulled down public health data (like certain HIV information) and paused some publications so they could be reviewed under the new guidelines (Exclusive: FDA staffers told 'woman,' 'disabled' among banned words; White House says it’s an error | Reuters). The White House claims some of these moves resulted from “misinterpreting” its directives, but federal employees say the vague mandates are already chilling scientific and policy discourse (Exclusive: FDA staffers told that 'woman,' 'disabled' among banned words; White House says it’s an error | Reuters) (Exclusive: FDA staffers told that 'woman,' 'disabled' among banned words; White House says it’s an error | Reuters). Civil rights and health experts warn that this “word ban” trend could undermine research and transparency on issues from women’s health to climate, by stripping commonly used terms and data from public view.

---

Germán & Co via Shutterstock

---

What does the new world want?

---

By Germán & Co,

He blinked once, uncertain whether it was the glow of fluorescent lights on a hospital ceiling or the faint glimmer of a Moscow airport’s marble walls. A moment before, he had been riding a motorcycle through sun-worn streets—no, that wasn’t right. He was sitting on a flight, waiting for hours, sensing that in this world, time seemed to stretch and shrink at will. Then, in a sudden jolt, the wheels touched down, and the Aztec blade that Cortázar’s protagonist wields in his tale "La Noche Boca Arriba". had dreaded seemed to hover between illusions of safety and an all-too-real terror. (1).

He recalled the comforting hospital bed of modern democracy: the promise that every voice would be heard and that illusions were only dreams. And yet there stood another reality—dark corridors and watchful eyes, a labyrinth of old men behind desks, stamping passports without warmth. Wasn’t he at Sheremetyevo? Or was it an enormous hall lined with silent watchers who might as well have been priests at a sacrificial ceremony?

Havana to Moscow: A Journey into Uncertainty

He felt once more that searing sense of displacement. The flight from Havana—a city where broken colonial arches crumbled like old illusions. The old town now brims with fluttering butterflies, their wings shimmering like embers against the crumbling streets. Narrow alleys with faintly lit stalls twist into a labyrinth of hushed whispers of desires. Their dim lights flicker like dying stars, enticing travellers through the shadowy maze for fleeting companionship in exchange for a few coins.

Meanwhile, the island strains beneath the weight of poverty, where the long-promised better life reveals itself as little more than a mirage—a high-ranking official of the Communist Party had delayed the plane. Hours later, in a sealed aeroplane, windows are fogged by the humidity of an island perpetually waiting for a miracle.

Once airborne, there was the promise of Aeroflot's legendary meal—yet it arrived late, reduced to a bite of chicken and cold white rice. He dreamt of other times, other flights, but the dream slashed into a new reality: the cold wind rushing through Sheremetyevo Airport in late November (1986).

Marble floors loomed like some ancient temple’s stone slabs. Soviet officers, impassive as Aztec warriors, peered into every face, demanding repeated scrutiny. He stood in line, heart pounding, uncertain if the next guard would nod him through or cast him into oblivion. When, at last, his passport had been stamped, the second ordeal began: the meticulous luggage inspection. He imagined them flipping through his notebooks, combing through his clothes. The X-ray machines hummed, monstrous watchers from another dimension. Finally—release.

Yet the promised room in the hotel did not exist. He had a voucher but found no bed. The memory flickered: was it the dim lamp of a hospital corridor or a corridor in a KGB-monitored hotel? He shivered with malaria chills, the ache of the fever mingling with the dread of endless bureaucracy. At last, the desk clerk found him a room and coupons for snacks. Upstairs, an old woman in a flowered scarf—gruff as any ancient sentinel—scowled from behind her desk. She demanded his passport and repeated, “No hot water,” as if casting a spell. The taps dripped cold like the streams in a primaeval forest. And so, he fled to the sauna to thaw bones frozen in the crossing of worlds.

A Chronicle of “Honey Traps”

His room, like many others in the labyrinthine hotels of the Soviet capital, seemed a warren of illusions. He had read about it—bars staffed with women who weren’t there merely to serve drinks. Beneath the veneer of hospitality thrummed the silent machinery of the KGB, collecting secrets, weaving a tapestry of “kompromat” for future use. He was sure that watchers lurked somewhere behind walls or mirrors—just as in the old Aztec dream, jaguars prowled the night, awaiting a misstep (2).

The Cosmos Hotel, built for the 1980 Olympics, was said to be modern, almost futuristic, yet behind that modernity lurked ancient methods: hidden microphones, cameras, and watchers behind doors no guest ever opened. The technique was always the same—seduction or intimidation. One stumbles into a honey trap and finds oneself ensnared in a drama staged by the silent ones.

High-profile figures had fallen prey to these corridors of illusions. Stories of blackmail with stolen intimacies abounded: ambassadors, presidents, journalists. Some shrugged off the coercion; others succumbed, forced to bargain with their secrets. He could almost see these spectres from other times, stepping in and out of mirrored halls. The watchers changed names—KGB, FSB—but the vigilance and the threat remained.

Poisoned Free Speech…

There were times, he thought when sedation by pleasure failed. Then, the city turned cold and lethal. The pages of a hospital chart blurred into newspaper headlines about poison and dissent. Litvinenko, Navalny—names once uttered in hushed tones, each entangled in toxins that seeped through teacups or water bottles. The grey geometry of the city’s buildings could not conceal the memory of Kameras or laboratories used for lethal experimentation. Shadows prowled through these narratives, consuming reporters and silencing critics.

In 2023, the tendrils of fear reached even further. Evan Gershkovich, accused of espionage, vanished into the same hush of quiet corridors. A basketball star, Brittney Griner, was trapped in an unexpected labyrinth of political pawns. The line between the real and the impossible blurred: he could be in a hospital bed, drifting in and out of sedation, or stumbling through a corridor leading to interrogation rooms. Either way, the hush swallowed him.

Poisoned Humanity with Hunger…

In another dream, or perhaps a memory from the same shifting reality, he saw fields stripped bare, families locked behind sealed borders and the spectre of collectivisation sweeping across Ukraine. War Communism, Holodomor—these words echoed like a dull blade scraping bone. Millions perished. Stalin’s quotas, the forced appropriation of grain, and the disappearance of those labelled kulaks hung heavily in the air. It was the old ritual, the ancient sacrifice: feed the system with bodies, quell dissent through starvation. Even decades later, the scars remained as fresh as the cries that once rang across ravaged fields. (3) (4)

The Gulag: A Factory of Despair

Another shift—subarctic forests, rail lines vanishing into frozen deserts, and underfed prisoners chipping away at ice-bound rocks. The Gulag stretched out endlessly, a ghostly reflection of the same labyrinth. He could almost see them: Solzhenitsyn among the captive throngs, writing by the light of a single lamp, the whistle of guards echoing like war drums in the gloom. Those who survived carried the brand of that suffering forever. “The Gulag Archipelago” was not just a book but a tear in the fabric of illusions, revealing forced labour and silent brutality hidden behind the façade of official propaganda.

The 1956 Hungarian Uprising: A Brief Hope, A Brutal End

In another layer of this dream, he heard the roaring engines of Soviet tanks rumbling through Budapest. Students, workers, and entire neighbourhoods rise momentarily, savouring the sweetness of liberty. Imre Nagy declared a withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact, yet the dream unravelled in a torrent of blood and steel. Thousands perished, thousands more fled, and the hushed hospital corridor thickened with the scent of anaesthesia as if attempting to mask the stench of oppression. (5)

1968 Czechoslovakia Invasion: End of Prague Spring

Like a recurring nightmare, the tanks appeared again, this time rolling into Prague’s ancient streets. Alexander Dubček’s voice of reform was drowned under iron treads. Freedom had seemed so close—censorship lifted, open debates filling coffeehouses. Then, with abrupt finality, August 20–21 turned to ash, and the watchers reasserted their dark ritual. A fleeting dream once more shattered (6).

The 2014 and 2022 Russian Invasions of Ukraine

He felt a new jolt. The modern corridors seemed both ancient and futuristic, echoing old conquests. First, in 2014 and the sudden annexation of Crimea, then, in 2022, a full-scale invasion. Missiles soared overhead like dark birds of omen. The world watched, stunned. Civilians huddled, searching for shelter. He, too, stood among them, uncertain whether this was the hospital bed dream or the motorcycle dream or if perhaps both were illusions overshadowed by the real: the monstrous clang of tank treads, the chill wind of displacement, the global dread (7).

What Does the New World Want?

In that final flash, he realized he stood at the intersection of two realities—one that insists on progress, reason, and democracy, and the other in which authoritarian ghosts still prowl, manipulative and lethal. He recalled the motorcyclist in Cortázar’s story, forever shifting between a cozy hospital cot and the mortal terror of a sacrificial altar. So it was with the new world: at times, believing itself modern and free, at others, awakening to find the knife pressed against its throat.

The question remained suspended in midair, like the hum of fluorescent light in a silent corridor: What does the new world want? Perhaps it desires an end to illusions or the final abolishment of fear. Or maybe it yearns only to awaken and discover that the oppressive dream was never absolute. But in the hush of that liminal space, he could not tell which reality was the dream and which was the truth.

---

Sources and References

(1)  Julio Cortázar, La Noche Boca Arriba (1956).

(2)  Germán Toro Ghio, ¨The Owner of Non-Man Land and Other Tales¨, (2016).

(3)  Politico EU (multiple articles) and various media outlets reporting on allegations of espionage at Moscow hotels.

(4)  Historical accounts of the Holodomor, including scholarly works and archival materials documenting the 1932–1933 famine in Soviet Ukraine.

(5)  Eyewitness testimonies and historical research on the 1956 Hungarian Uprising.

(6)  Archival records and studies on the 1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia.

(7)  International news coverage and official statements regarding the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to Musk's changes, every single like, retweet, and share your offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, use Stripe through our dedicated donation link, you can quickly and securely contribute. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference! 

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1899088865983352889

“Today's electricity landscape is not a one-size-fits-all market; the industry requires a variety of strategies tailored to different markets and circumstances. Key factors such as regional demand, regulatory environments, available technologies, and the mix of energy sources are essential in creating the most effective approaches for power generation, distribution, and consumption. Andrés Gluski, the CEO & President of AES

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Vaca Muerta: Drill, baby drill…

---

¨America’s prolific shale basins are running out of their best wells, but Argentina’s Vaca Muerta is just getting started. Will pro-business regulations be enough to start a shale boom there?

Horizontal drilling in the basin took off around a decade ago, but unfavorable regulation—including capital and currency controls, import-export taxes, and oil-price interventions, among other things—has hamstrung its growth. High inflation and a wobbly economy were also barriers to attracting capital to the shale patch. Exxon Mobil XOM, 1.30%increase; green up pointing triangle, for example, agreed to sell its Argentina business last year. Shell SHEL 0.85%increase; green up pointing triangle and Chevron CVX 2.22%increase; green up pointing triangle still retain interests in the basin… 

Wall Street Journal

---

When we hear “contagion,” we typically think of viruses spreading among populations. But in a social and economic sense, contagion also describes how ideas, behaviors, and, crucially, market sentiments spread rapidly among groups. This phenomenon—the contagious effect—is acutely visible in the modern age, where social media, 24-hour news cycles, and a globalized economy can turn small sparks of optimism or panic into raging infernos of influence.

Few arenas demonstrate this more compellingly than the energy sector, particularly the global oil and gas markets, where sentiment toward a single shale play can ripple through corporate boardrooms, investor circles, and stock markets around the world. A recent spotlight has been placed on Argentina’s Vaca Muerta shale basin—long overshadowed by more prominent U.S. basins, yet now gaining traction as pro-business reforms and stabilizing economic policies under President Javier Milei attract both local and international interest.

By integrating the contagious effect with the story of Vaca Muerta’s shale boom, we can see how optimism spreads and shapes decisions, how caution and skepticism can similarly contaminate group thinking, and why this interplay matters not just for Argentina, but also for global energy stakeholders. Below, we explore the contagious effect in detail, linking key concepts—emotional contagion, social identity theory, and behavioral imitation—to real-world developments in Vaca Muerta. We also discuss how strategic insight can harness positive contagion and mitigate risks in a volatile sector.

1. A Primer on the Contagious Effect

At its heart, the contagious effect is about transmission—not of microbes, but of mood, behavior, and information. In interpersonal and group settings, people unconsciously mimic or adopt the actions and emotions of those around them. This dynamic isn’t confined to small groups. Through media coverage, digital platforms, and professional networks, the contagious effect can scale up to entire markets, influencing everything from consumer spending to capital allocation decisions.

A few psychological mechanisms help explain why the contagious effect is so powerful:

• Emotional Contagion: Humans are innately wired to empathize, meaning we’re influenced by the emotions we see in others. When an industry leader shows enthusiasm about a new shale discovery, it can infect an entire market with similar optimism—potentially raising stock prices, fueling merger talks, or spurring new investments.

• Social Identity Theory: We often look to our “in-group”—in this case, it could be energy investors, local policymakers, or international oil and gas corporations—for cues on how to act or where to invest. If key members of that group signal confidence in a shale basin like Vaca Muerta, that sentiment can spread quickly.

• Confirmation Bias: Once an optimistic narrative has taken hold, new information that supports it tends to be amplified, while information that contradicts it might be discounted. This process reinforces an existing mindset, making it even more contagious within a network of like-minded people.

• Media Amplification: In an era where news travels instantly, even minor developments can spark wide coverage, fueling collective excitement or anxiety. Virality ensures that the same narrative is repeated across platforms, intensifying the contagious effect.

All of these factors help explain why Vaca Muerta, once overlooked due to Argentina’s challenging economic climate, is now capturing the imagination of industry insiders and, increasingly, global investors.

2. Vaca Muerta: A Sleeping Giant Awakens

Located primarily in the Neuquén Basin in western Argentina, Vaca Muerta (whose name translates to “dead cow”) might have an unflattering moniker, but the region is brimming with potential. According to estimates by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Vaca Muerta holds around 16 billion barrels of technically recoverable shale oil and condensate, placing Argentina among the world’s top holders of shale oil and gas resources.

Despite these promising numbers, early exploration efforts in Vaca Muerta a decade ago faced steep barriers. Factors such as capital and currency controls, high inflation, (factors already controlled by president javier milei) oil-price interventions, and broader regulatory uncertainties made Argentina a risky bet. While some major global operators like Chevron and Shell dipped their toes in Vaca Muerta, others bailed out: notably, Exxon Mobil sold its Argentina business last year.

The shift occurred when President Javier Milei took office more than a year ago with a pro-business platform. Among other moves, Milei lifted oil-price caps, introduced investment incentives for large projects, and promised to end some of the country’s toughest capital controls by 2026. Though concerns remain—given Argentina’s history of policy swings—these reforms have fueled a wave of optimism. Production in Vaca Muerta has surged to an estimated 440,000 barrels of oil per day, with analysts from Enverus and other research firms forecasting it could hit 1 million barrels a day by 2030.

The stage is thus set for a “contagious” narrative: a historically challenging environment is now perceived as more stable and more profitable, igniting hope in local producers like YPF (majority state-owned) and Vista Energy. Their stock prices have surged—doubling and rising around 50%, respectively, since Milei took office. Meanwhile, large oil corporations are once again discussing the region more positively, hinting at heightened interest that might spread to smaller U.S. independent producers.

3. Contagious Optimism in Oil and Gas

Within the oil and gas sector, sentiment can pivot quickly, and those shifts are often contagious. Industry insiders watch one another closely: if a major name invests in a region, others may follow suit to avoid missing out on potential gains. This is especially true when the region in question presents significant upside.

• Proof of Productivity: One crucial factor in the Vaca Muerta story is well productivity. According to Enverus, the average estimated ultimate recovery (EUR) in Vaca Muerta over the 12-month period through February was about 86 barrels per lateral foot, outpacing even the most productive U.S. shale basins (where comparable figures range between 43 and 72 barrels per foot). This statistic alone, when repeated in boardrooms or at industry conferences, can generate excitement and accelerate capital flow.

• Emerging Pipeline Infrastructure: Infrastructure is another linchpin for contagion. Argentina’s domestic and export pipeline capacities have historically been a bottleneck for Vaca Muerta. However, new pipelines like Vaca Muerta Sur—with investors including Shell and Chevron—signal long-term commitment to the region. As these large-scale projects take shape, more local and international stakeholders are likely to believe in Vaca Muerta’s viability, fueling further investment.

• Investor Appetite for Growth: As U.S. shale basins become more mature, with fewer top-tier drilling locations available, American producers look elsewhere for growth. This dynamic enhances the spread of interest in Vaca Muerta. It’s not just that the Argentine basin has potential; it’s that alternatives in North America are dwindling. A basin that can reach 1 million barrels a day of production with strong well productivity becomes a magnet for hope—and that hope is contagious.

4. A Historical Look at Contagion in Markets

IFrom the Dutch tulip mania in the 17th century to the U.S. housing bubble in the mid-2000s, history is replete with examples of how group psychology amplifies booms and busts. While each episode has unique factors—economic conditions, regulatory frameworks, cultural contexts—they all underline a common theme: once momentum forms, it can spread like wildfire.

In energy markets, we saw an example of rapid, contagious optimism in the early 2010s, when the U.S. shale boom took off. Eager investors poured capital into drilling projects, fueling breakneck production growth in regions like the Permian Basin, the Bakken, and the Eagle Ford. The boom was so expansive that OPEC found itself responding by either cutting or ramping production, thereby affecting global oil prices. Before long, everyone was discussing the “shale revolution,” and the fervor shaped not just corporate strategies but also geopolitics and environmental discourse.

Vaca Muerta could follow a similar pattern—albeit with a more measured approach. As William Von Gonten of W.D. Von Gonten Engineering noted, U.S. producers have learned harsh lessons about unbridled expansion. The new wave of interest in Vaca Muerta might lean more toward strategic partnerships and careful, long-horizon development. That alone could be a stabilizing force, but it won’t stop the narrative from gaining momentum, especially if production numbers keep rising.

5. Emotional Contagion on the Ground

While headlines often focus on the big players and macroeconomic indicators, emotional contagion trickles down to the local level, too. In the communities around Neuquén, increased activity in Vaca Muerta has meant more jobs, more business for local service providers, and broader hope for sustained economic development. Just as negativity and skepticism can pervade a region when times are tough, optimism can also inspire local stakeholders—farmers, small businesses, and municipal leaders—to invest in upgrades, new ventures, and partnerships that might have seemed too risky before.

For instance, a local drilling contractor who sees pipeline expansions underway might decide to buy new rigs or expand staff, betting on an influx of projects. Other contractors then followed suit, fueling a mini-boom in the local services sector. This local surge could reinforce the broader narrative of “promise,” further convincing international investors that Vaca Muerta is indeed on an upward trajectory.

Yet, caution remains. Argentina’s history of economic instability and policy volatility acts as a brake on unbridled optimism. Skepticism can itself spread contagiously—spurred by memories of currency controls or nationalizations in previous decades. Hence, the final shape of contagion in Vaca Muerta is influenced by two competing emotional currents: hope (fueled by favorable production data and pro-business reforms) and caution (anchored in historical patterns of volatility).

6. Applying Social Identity Theory and Behavioral Imitation

In any market, but especially in tight-knit industries like oil and gas, social identity theory helps explain how contagion takes root. Producers, service companies, and investors often see themselves as part of a shared community with certain norms and expectations. If the consensus within that community is that Vaca Muerta is the “next big thing,” members might adopt that sentiment simply to maintain cohesion and avoid being left behind.

• Herd Mentality: Even large, established firms aren’t immune. When Chevron, Shell, and other majors express optimism, smaller companies fear missing opportunities. That fear can be contagious, spurring others to join the fray.

• Peer Benchmarking: Industry conferences, analyst calls, and trade publications often highlight who is investing where. Companies benchmark themselves against competitors: if competitor X invests in Vaca Muerta and sees a stock-price boost, competitor Y might feel pressured to follow suit or risk investor backlash.

• Collective Reputation: For local Argentine firms like YPF and Vista Energy, thriving in Vaca Muerta bolsters their own reputations as competent, growth-oriented organizations. That success can be “caught” by prospective partners, encouraging further alliances.

Once an “in-group” consensus coalesces around the profitability or promise of a region, dissenters may be seen as outliers—unless major setbacks occur. And should negative developments (such as political turmoil or logistical failures) emerge, the same community can swiftly transmit fear, leading to precipitous pullback. That’s the double-edged sword of the contagious effect in financial markets.

7. The Role of Technology and Media in Shaping Narratives

Modern digital communication has amplified the speed and scope of contagion across all industries, including oil and gas. News articles, corporate press releases, social media chatter, and online investment forums act as instantaneous feedback loops:

1. Spreading Optimism: Positive headlines about “record-breaking well productivity” or “growing investor interest” can be shared tens of thousands of times in a single day, reaching potential stakeholders worldwide.

2. Community Building: LinkedIn groups, energy podcasts, and specialized forums can create niches where Vaca Muerta success stories proliferate, drawing in more curious minds.

3. Real-Time Data: Tools like Enverus, Rystad, and other analytics platforms provide up-to-the-minute drilling data. Such transparency reduces uncertainty, enhancing confidence and fueling a more rapid contagion of positive sentiment—provided that the metrics remain favorable.

Yet, digital platforms also facilitate the rapid dissemination of skepticism. A sudden change in Argentina’s political environment or a new round of currency controls could produce a cascade of tweets and articles questioning the viability of Vaca Muerta’s prospects, potentially reversing positive momentum within hours or days.

8. Harnessing Positive Contagion

While the contagious effect can be unpredictable, it can also be harnessed for positive outcomes. Companies, policymakers, and community leaders can adopt a few strategies:

1. Consistent, Transparent Communication: In a region like Vaca Muerta, where trust has historically been tenuous, continuous dialogue with stakeholders—detailing production updates, policy changes, and infrastructural progress—can sustain a constructive narrative.

2. Building Trust Through Partnerships: Joint ventures between local firms (e.g., YPF or Vista Energy) and global companies (e.g., Chevron, Shell) can reassure investors that best practices and advanced technologies are in play. This sense of collaborative strength can spread, prompting others to join.

3. Long-Term Vision: As Bill Von Gonten notes, the early U.S. shale boom left behind a lot of oil in the ground because companies aggressively targeted only the most lucrative wells, aiming for short-term profits. In Vaca Muerta, a longer, more disciplined approach might yield better ultimate recovery rates and more stable growth, curbing the extreme boom-bust cycle characteristic of many energy plays.

4. Supporting Local Economies: Ensuring that economic benefits “infect” local communities—through job creation, local content requirements, and training—can foster a sense of shared purpose. That communal buy-in further reinforces a positive narrative.

5. Diversifying Infrastructure: With improved pipeline capacities and potential liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, Argentina can transform Vaca Muerta from a domestic resource to a global energy player. Each milestone of infrastructure development can be a catalyst for renewed optimism, fueling the contagious effect further.

9. Mitigating Negative Contagion

Balancing out the optimistic contagion is the risk of negative sentiment spreading just as quickly. Argentina’s past economic crises and unpredictable policy shifts remain in the back of many minds. Here’s how that negative contagion might be tempered:

1. Stable, Clear Regulations: Foreign investors will feel more confident if the Milei administration continues—or further refines—pro-business reforms. Clarity around tax, import/export guidelines, and currency controls can help ensure that caution doesn’t overwhelm enthusiasm.

2. Macro-Economic Stabilization: Hyperinflation was a major concern before Milei took office. If inflation remains in check and Argentina’s country risk index stays on a downward trajectory (it has already halved, according to JPMorgan), that stability alone can prevent a rapid reversal of sentiment.

3. Responsible Lending and Financing: Access to international capital is crucial for Vaca Muerta. However, negative sentiment can spread swiftly if lenders sense a looming debt crisis or a sudden clampdown on currency flows. Proactive communication from banks, rating agencies, and the government can mitigate such fears.

4. Flexible Business Strategies: Companies entering Vaca Muerta might structure deals that allow for quick adaptation if policies change. This can mean partial stakes, joint ventures, or scale-up plans rather than immediate large-scale developments. Such flexibility can cushion against panic should the political wind shift.

10. Wider Implications: A Shale Contagion Redux?

The U.S. shale revolution of the 2010s proved that a boom can reshape the global energy map, reduce some countries' reliance on imports, and even tilt geopolitical balances. The question now is whether the emergence of Vaca Muerta as a major shale resource could trigger a mini-revival of that same kind of fervour. With U.S. shale basins flattening in production growth and areas like the Permian Midland running out of their most productive wells, Vaca Muerta stands among the few large-scale plays left with significant upside.

However, the environment in which Argentina’s shale story unfolds isn’t the same as the heyday of U.S. shale. Today’s energy investment climate is shaped by:

• ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) Concerns: Investors are more wary of carbon-intensive projects, which could temper the euphoria around any large-scale hydrocarbon development.

• Capital Discipline: Shareholders demand returns over rapid expansion, meaning companies are less likely to embark on drilling sprees without carefully weighing costs.

• Global Uncertainties: From shifting geopolitical alliances to potential recessions in major economies, outside forces could dampen or inflate Argentina's investment scale.

Still, early indicators—impressive well productivity, an improving political climate, and rising share prices of local producers—suggest that a new wave of interest is stirring. A “shale contagion” could mean huge gains in jobs, export revenues, and global strategic importance for Argentina. It could represent a welcome new frontier for companies with diminishing opportunities in North America.

11. Contagion as Opportunity: A Balanced Perspective

The contagious effect in Vaca Muerta is neither purely good nor purely bad. Instead, it is an inherently powerful dynamic that can be directed in beneficial or harmful ways. On the one hand, the excitement can catalyze infrastructure improvements, create job opportunities, and attract capital for broader national development. On the other hand, over-optimism without prudent checks can lead to the misallocation of resources, driving an eventual bust that sets the region back.

Balancing optimism with realism is key. Policymakers must be transparent about challenges: pipeline constraints, lingering capital controls, the unpredictability of Argentine politics, and the global pivot toward greener energy sources. Companies must adhere to technological best practices, learning from the wasteful drilling practices of early U.S. shale. If they do, Vaca Muerta might enjoy a more stable growth trajectory, while benefitting from the accelerated interest that contagion brings.

12. Conclusion

The rise of Vaca Muerta illuminates the broader phenomenon of the contagious effect—how a shift in sentiment, aided by supportive data and regulatory changes, can spread rapidly among investors, producers, and local communities. This phenomenon isn’t confined to Argentina: it’s a core feature of modern market dynamics, evident in everything from biotech booms to real-estate bubbles. Yet, the Vaca Muerta story is a striking example, blending geological promise with newfound political and economic stability in a volatile environment.

Understanding the contagious effect arms stakeholders with the insight needed to navigate shifting sentiments responsibly. It urges leaders to foster transparent communication, encourages businesses to adopt flexible models, and reminds communities to remain vigilant against the downsides of herd mentality. Ultimately, Vaca Muerta’s success or failure will hinge on a combination of geological potential, sustained policy reforms, and the emotional currents of investors and communities—a testament to just how integral the contagious effect is in shaping real-world outcomes.

In a world increasingly interconnected by technology and unified by markets, no region can remain an isolated “dead cow” for long. As Vaca Muerta comes alive under the spotlight of renewed global interest, it reveals the transformational power of a shared belief—an idea that, if nurtured with prudence and balanced by thoughtful regulation, can convert an underutilized resource into a bustling epicentre of economic growth. The next few years will reveal whether Argentina can sustain that positive contagion—and, in doing so, write a new chapter in the history of global shale.

---

Sources & Further Reading

• Politico Live Updates, March 4, 2025: Elon Musk to meet with House GOP

• U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee: Discussions on Clawing Back IRA Funding

• International Energy Agency (IEA): Global Renewable Energy Forecasts

• Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins: Public Statements on DOGE

• Statements from Iowa and Texas state officials on IRA-Related Projects

Note: All references to recent legislative discussions, committee actions, and interviews are based on Politico’s coverage and official statements from named lawmakers.

---

Contrasentido?

---

The Battle for America’s Energy Future…

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to changes brought by Musk, every single like, retweet, and share you offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact even further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, you can easily and securely contribute using Stripe through our dedicated donation link. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference! 

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1897288396113928554

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

¨The Inflation Reduction Act: A Legacy in Peril

---

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 was more than just a legislative milestone; it was a testament to America’s commitment to a sustainable future. With hundreds of billions of dollars earmarked for clean energy investments, the IRA ignited a wave of innovation and economic growth. Wind farms sprouted across the heartland, solar panels glistened under the Texan sun, and electric vehicles hummed along highways, heralding a new era of green prosperity.

Tax credits and incentives designed to spur renewable energy projects were at the heart of the IRA. The Production Tax Credit (PTC) and the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) breathed new life into the wind and solar industries, while EV credits fueled the electric vehicle revolution. These measures have reduced America’s carbon footprint, created jobs, boosted manufacturing, and positioned the U.S. as a global leader in clean energy.

Trump’s Second Term: A Policy Earthquake

The return of Donald Trump to the White House in 2025 sent shockwaves through the energy sector. Within weeks of his inauguration, the administration launched a full-scale assault on the IRA, urging Congress to suspend and defund its core provisions. The President’s rationale was clear: slash federal spending, bolster fossil fuels, and curb what he deemed “unfair” foreign competition.

However, critics argue that this move is a contrasentido—a contradiction that defies logic. At a time when the world is embracing renewable energy, the U.S. risks ceding its hard-won gains and undermining its energy independence. The stakes are high, and the battle lines are drawn.

Iowa: A Wind Powerhouse in Jeopardy

Nowhere is the impact of the IRA’s potential suspension more acute than in Iowa, which is known for its thriving wind energy sector. Thanks to the IRA’s extended Production Tax Credit and domestic manufacturing incentives, Iowa experienced a mini-boom in large-scale wind projects between 2022 and 2024. Developers secured financing, created thousands of jobs, and invested in transmission infrastructure to carry clean power to neighboring states.

Yet, the Trump administration’s push to suspend the IRA threatens to halt this progress. Projects in the pipeline face financing challenges, and turbine manufacturers are reconsidering expansions in the state. Even local Republican politicians, typically supportive of the President, have aired concerns about the economic fallout if these clean energy incentives vanish. The future of Iowa’s wind industry—and the livelihoods of countless workers—hangs in the balance.

Texas: A Renewable Energy Battleground

Historically synonymous with oil and gas, Texas has emerged as an unlikely leader in renewable energy. The IRA’s tax credits and battery storage incentives fueled a surge in wind and solar projects across the Lone Star State. Solar farms flourished in West Texas alongside the long-established wind sector, creating hybrid energy systems that offer lower electricity costs and a more resilient power grid.

However, the Trump administration’s anti-IRA stance puts these gains at risk. Oil and gas producers generally welcomed the move, hoping to regain market share, but wind and solar advocates warned of billions in lost investments if the IRA’s incentives disappear. Texas Republicans are now profoundly divided—some remain loyal to Trump’s agenda, while others fear the potential economic toll on rural communities and the state’s energy mix.

The Tariff War: A Double-Edged Sword

In tandem with its assault on the IRA, the Trump administration has reignited a tariff war, imposing steeper duties on imported solar cells, modules, and EV components. Officials argue that these tariffs protect American businesses from unfair foreign competition, particularly from China.

Yet the renewable industry sees a different story. Tariffs raise costs, create supply chain bottlenecks, and jeopardize projects already under construction. The administration’s protectionist stance may hamper the very industries it aims to protect if domestic manufacturing lags or cannot fill the gap quickly enough. Critics warn that this approach risks undermining America’s clean energy future while fracturing global trade relationships.

New Developments on Capitol Hill: Politico’s Latest Report

Energy and Commerce Targets IRA Provisions

According to Politico’s reporting from March 4, 2025, Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have begun dissecting all of the programs within their jurisdiction—ranging from clean energy tax credits to Medicaid—to identify areas to cut and “find savings” for President Trump’s next round of domestic agenda items. Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) is exploring how to cobble up to $880 billion in savings to finance tax cuts, border security, defense spending, and energy policy.

Among the possible line items on the chopping block are:

• Clawing back clean energy tax credits

• Repealing electric vehicle incentives

• Reevaluating Biden-era broadband programs

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has ruled out the steepest potential cuts to Medicaid, focusing more on “waste, fraud, and abuse” than direct benefit reductions. However, it remains unclear whether Republicans can reach their lofty savings goals without affecting certain benefits—something that could become a major liability for vulnerable incumbents.

Enough Votes to Advance Trump’s Agenda

Despite internal tensions, the Trump administration currently has enough votes in both the House and Senate to proceed with a budget resolution, thanks to a solid GOP majority and the support of select moderates. This means the administration’s proposals to suspend IRA provisions, boost fossil fuel spending, and enact steep tariff measures are likely to pass in some form unless new political rifts emerge within the Republican ranks.

Elon Musk Meets With House GOP

Adding to the political drama, Elon Musk—the influential CEO of Tesla and SpaceX—will meet with House Republicans on Capitol Hill, as confirmed by Politico’s latest live updates. Musk is now leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the Trump administration, tasked with streamlining federal agencies and cutting spending.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has indicated that Musk will “give an update on his efforts” and discuss how to codify the budgetary savings that DOGE has already set in motion. While Republicans largely back Musk’s enthusiasm for shrinking the federal workforce, some GOP lawmakers express concern about constituent backlash—particularly in regions benefiting from clean energy projects and federal grants tied to the IRA.

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, has acknowledged texting with Musk about his department’s sweeping cuts. Collins has long defended Congress’ constitutional “power of the purse” and signaled wariness about the Trump administration’s expansive rollback of previously approved appropriations. Still, the administration’s momentum suggests that major changes, including IRA repeals and tariff escalations, could move forward swiftly.

Corporate Titans and Political Divisions

While Musk’s meeting with the House GOP underscores how tech leaders can drive policy discussions in Washington, corporate America at large is uneasy about the unpredictable environment. From Big Tech to small manufacturing firms, many businesses had structured their investment strategies around IRA incentives and anticipated a stable policy horizon for clean energy expansion.

Within the GOP, factions continue to form:

• Pro-Trump Hardliners: Determined to slash spending and end what they perceive as “subsidies” for renewables.

• Pragmatic Republicans: Fearful of reversing economic gains in states like Iowa and Texas, where clean energy jobs and revenue have surged.

• Moderates Concerned About Climate: Acknowledge climate change risks and prefer the IRA’s approach, fearing that rolling back these incentives jeopardizes both the environment and critical job growth.

Despite these differences, the current vote count indicates Republicans can muster enough support to pass key elements of Trump’s energy and budget agenda. Whether that unity endures as the negative economic ramifications of repealing IRA provisions become clearer remains to be seen.

A Global Perspective: Contrasentido Confirmed

Observers abroad view the Trump administration’s direction as a stark departure from the global trend. The International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that wind and solar will dominate new power capacity installations worldwide in the 2020s. Allies and partners have long seen the United States as a cornerstone in advancing renewable technologies, but repealing or slashing IRA provisions could leave Washington on the sidelines of a booming global green market.

Diplomatically, the United States risks weakening alliances by appearing disengaged from climate commitments. Domestically, it risks harming its own industries poised for long-term success in the global clean energy race. Thus, critics maintain that the administration’s approach is a contrasentido—an illogical stance that undercuts U.S. competitiveness and the international fight against climate change.

The Road Ahead: Uncertainty and Hope

Observers abroad view the Trump administration’s direction as a stark departure from the global momentum toward clean energy. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has forecasted, in multiple reports since 2020, that wind and solar would dominate new power capacity additions throughout this decade. China, in particular, has surged ahead with large-scale investments in renewables, manufacturing most of the world’s solar panels and electric vehicle batteries.

Despite China’s dominance, many Western allies still regard the United States as a vital hub for technological innovation and climate leadership. Yet, with the Trump administration proposing to repeal or curtail Inflation Reduction Act provisions, some warn that Washington could cede its competitive edge in a rapidly expanding global green market—allowing other nations, including China, to set the pace in renewable technology development and deployment.

---

Sources & Further Reading

• Politico Live Updates, March 4, 2025: Elon Musk to meet with House GOP

• U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee: Discussions on Clawing Back IRA Funding

• International Energy Agency (IEA): Global Renewable Energy Forecasts

• Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins: Public Statements on DOGE

• Statements from Iowa and Texas state officials on IRA-Related Projects

Note: All references to recent legislative discussions, committee actions, and interviews are based on Politico’s coverage and official statements from named lawmakers.

---

50 Years Until the Flame Dies: The Looming End of Natural Gas…

---

AI, Data Centers, and Renewables: Powering a Greener Tomorrow…

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to changes brought by Musk, every single like, retweet, and share you offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact even further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, you can easily and securely contribute using Stripe through our dedicated donation link. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference! 

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1897131318690852881

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

“Battery anxiety…

---

Remember those evenings when the entire clan would huddle around a single glowing screen—perhaps a trusty Westinghouse TV—to watch “Little House on the Prairie?” You might recall the excited chatter and occasional jockeying for the best seat if your neurons haven't galloped. That was our idea of “prime time”: a shared experience, limited commercials, and the sweet smell of popcorn. Now, fast-forward to our present digital carnival. Instead of a single, bulky TV uniting us, we have an endless parade of devices, each clamouring for attention like a pack of hyperactive puppies. When families manage to sit in the same room (a miracle in itself), everyone is lost in their pixelated realm—heads bowed, eyes fixed on screens, often forgetting that others are even within arm’s reach.

In this new world, the notion of “battery anxiety” has become as accurate as that last bite of dessert disappearing right before your eyes. In moments of panic, we rummage for power cords with the same fervour gold prospectors once reserved for the Wild West. Unsurprisingly, our collective electricity consumption has rocketed into the stratosphere, pushing the limits of traditional energy production. Yet, before we sound the alarm about the doom and gloom of our power-hungry lifestyles, let’s remember that humanity has always been pretty good at solving problems—we conquered polio and built skyscrapers that kiss the clouds. We even found ways to freeze ice cream on a stick. If that’s not innovation, what is?

Of course, specific natural resources have shown signs of fatigue—like the trickle of water that once powered old waterwheels diminishing over time. But each time one resource heads for retirement, our inventive minds beckon another to step into the limelight. Coal gave way (somewhat grudgingly) to cleaner energy sources. Oil slowly yields to wind turbines that spin gracefully across open plains, and of course, absolutely not for the psychologist Ms Greta Thumberg's Specialist in the mental health of reindeer in Lapland, who didn’t like the asp of the turbine and solar panels that glint in the noonday sun. Now, our digital ecosystem—this ever-growing landscape of data centres and blinking servers—demands we refine our methods yet again. Fortunately, we now have a powerful ally in our corner: artificial intelligence. Once the stuff of dystopian nightmares (imagine fridges turning diabolical), AI has evolved into the technology that helps us manage our electrified lifestyles with remarkable efficiency. With AI at the helm, the quest to keep every device charged and every data centre humming needn’t come at the expense of clear skies and clean water. Algorithms, chips, conductors, and circuits—performing calculations at near-light speed—can optimise energy use, reduce waste, and limit our reliance on polluting resources. The result? A planet-friendly path forward that keeps the digital revolution thriving without leaving our environment behind.

So here we stand, poised at the crossroads of digital innovation and ecological responsibility. The journey ahead may involve a few comedic stumbles—think vintage slapstick—but armed with our collective ingenuity, boundless curiosity, and a touch of AI wizardry alongside renewables, we’re sure to discover a more inventive, eco-friendly way to power our beautifully interconnected world.

The rapid ascent of renewable energy in the United States and Europe is indisputable—an unstoppable tide of innovation and progress. Yet, hidden beneath the ocean’s surface, a quieter but ominous drama unfolds. Offshore wind farms, the symbol of our clean-energy future, face near-daily sabotage when vandals target their undersea transmission cables. These clandestine attacks threaten to overshadow the triumphant march of renewables, reminding us that even the brightest revolution can be dimmed by those determined to keep the future at bay.

Indeed, the modern world thrives on connectivity, computation, and ceaseless data exchange. From streaming platforms and social media to e-commerce and the advent of artificial intelligence, nearly every facet of contemporary life relies on data centres humming quietly behind the scenes. Yet beneath this digital revolution lies an inescapable physical reality: energy. As integral as they are to today’s economy, data centres consume massive and continually increasing amounts of electricity. Much of this electricity has traditionally been sourced from fossil fuels, particularly natural gas.

However, while often touted as a cleaner replacement for coal, natural gas remains a finite resource. Some experts estimate the world’s current, proven natural gas reserves could be stretched over several decades—often cited numbers revolve around 40 to 50 years of global supply at present consumption rates. Coupled with the expansion of industrial activities worldwide and attempts to substitute coal with gas in many regions, these reserves may face increased depletion or at least ever-more volatile pricing. Meanwhile, the climate implications of continuing to burn fossil fuels at scale grow more evident every year. As a result, the tension between finite fossil resources and an exponential surge in data center energy demand sets the stage for one of the most pressing challenges—and opportunities—of the 21st century.

---

In this essay, we will journey across nine significant themes:

1. Understanding the Limits of Fossil Fuel Reserves

2. Data Centers and the AI Revolution: Unprecedented Energy Demand

3. Historical and Ongoing Cost Declines in Renewable Energy

4. Solar, Wind, and Beyond: The Modern Green Toolbox

5. Role of Energy Storage: Overcoming Intermittency

6. AI-Driven Grid Management: Optimizing Supply and Demand

7. Policy and Market Forces Catalyzing Renewables

8. Challenges to Full-Scale Adoption and Potential Solutions

9. Charting a Course Forward: Integrating Digital and Sustainable Futures

---

1. Understanding the Limits of Fossil Fuel Reserves

To appreciate the urgency behind today’s push for renewable energy, one must first understand the scope and fragility of the world’s existing fossil fuel endowment. Fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—formed over millions of years from the decomposition of ancient organisms. Under specific geological conditions, heat and pressure transformed organic matter into hydrocarbon-rich deposits that, in the modern era, have been extracted and burned to power industrial civilization. Yet this process is not one that quickly renews itself. While new discoveries and improvements in extraction technology can extend supply horizons, no technology can transform our current finite deposits into something truly infinite.

Among the three major fossil fuel types, natural gas is frequently praised for producing fewer carbon emissions per unit of energy than coal while offering dispatchable power for electricity grids and industrial uses. This has led many countries, including the United States, to rely heavily on natural gas for electricity generation and heating. Indeed, the “shale revolution” in the U.S. unleashed vast reserves through hydraulic fracturing (fracking). However, geologists and analysts caution that proven natural gas reserves, even with ongoing exploration, might not extend beyond midcentury if usage patterns remain unchanged or escalate.

Estimates of natural gas longevity depend on several factors: evolving consumption rates, technological breakthroughs, and potential policy changes. Some scenarios see the world pivoting sharply to renewables, preserving fossil fuels for niche applications for longer. Others foresee continued heavy reliance on gas, hastening depletion or at least driving costs higher. In any case, few dispute that the resource is finite. More significantly, natural gas remains a carbon-emitting fuel, contributing to global warming, albeit at a lower rate than coal but still considerably enough to raise alarm among climate scientists.

Thus, from both a resource depletion perspective and an environmental standpoint, the notion that we should rely on natural gas to power a booming digital infrastructure that is expanding in parallel with AI’s insatiable appetite seems increasingly precarious. Suppose new technologies beckon us to develop data centres at exponential scales. In that case, the question becomes:

---

Where will the energy come from, and at what cost to the environment and long-term economic stability?

2. Data Centers and the AI Revolution: Unprecedented Energy Demand

Roughly two decades ago, data centers were relatively modest facilities housed by large corporations, universities, or government agencies. With the advent of cloud computing—where on-demand computing resources are provided over the internet—data centers began sprouting at a much faster rate, scaled vertically to house thousands upon thousands of servers stacked neatly in climate-controlled racks. Companies such as Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud emerged as global cloud providers, each running extensive data center networks across continents. The rationale was straightforward: rather than every company building its own server room, outsourcing computing tasks to specialised providers became far more efficient and cost-effective.

Then came the artificial intelligence wave. AI algorithms, particularly machine learning and deep learning technologies, require extraordinary computational power to analyze massive data sets, train complex models, and deploy these models in real time. Tasks such as image recognition, natural language processing, self-driving vehicles, and recommendation engines spurred the development of specialized hardware—graphical processing units (GPUs) and tensor processing units (TPUs)—that can perform trillions of operations per second. Yet that specialized hardware draws significantly more electricity than a garden-variety server.

As more businesses, researchers, and government agencies incorporate AI into their workflows, the demand for compute cycles grows near-exponential. Data centres dedicated to AI processing can consume enough energy to power entire towns, especially when factoring in the electricity needed for cooling and ventilation. Meanwhile, everyday users continue to upload and stream high-resolution videos, engage in video conferencing, and rely on an expanding Internet of Things (IoT) that funnels data to cloud analytics in real-time.

Increasingly, these ballooning energy needs pose not just an environmental threat—in the sense of carbon emissions or reliance on non-renewable resources—but also a business threat. The cost of electricity weighs heavily on the bottom lines of data centre operators. Price spikes in natural gas or difficulties in obtaining stable electricity could undermine the reliability and profitability of these massive digital hubs.

At the same time, public pressure for environmental accountability has never been higher. Customers, shareholders, and governments alike demand transparency and accountability in corporate carbon footprints. Hence, leading cloud providers have pledged carbon neutrality or, in some cases, have set goals to run on 100% renewable energy by specific target years. These commitments reflect market pressures and a growing consensus that ignoring sustainability invites regulatory and reputational risks.

Yet, making good on these commitments requires more than public relations. It demands the deployment of large-scale clean energy infrastructure—wind farms, solar arrays, hydroelectric plants, geothermal stations, or even advanced nuclear—capable of delivering robust, stable, and competitively priced electricity. And that is where the world’s ever-improving renewable energy technologies come into play. The synergy between a surging data economy and plummeting renewable costs lays the foundation for a truly transformative moment in global energy.

3. Historical and Ongoing Cost Declines in Renewable Energy

One of the most remarkable stories of the past three decades has been the steady, often spectacular, decline in the cost of renewable energy—most notably solar and wind. From pioneering efforts in the 1970s, when solar modules were prohibitively expensive and wind turbines remained a niche technology, to today’s mainstream prominence, the cost drop has been a testament to economies of scale, technological innovation, global competition, and supportive government policies.

3.1 Solar Photovoltaics (PV)

In the early 1980s, the cost of solar photovoltaic modules routinely exceeded $20 per watt (in 2020 dollars). Solar panels were limited primarily to specialized uses, such as powering satellites or remote off-grid equipment. Gradually, manufacturing scaled up, especially in countries like Japan and Germany, where feed-in tariffs and government-backed research helped create stable domestic markets. Later, China’s extensive industrial policy and low-cost manufacturing accelerated the commoditization of solar panels.

According to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and other analysts, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for utility-scale solar PV has dropped over 80% since 2010. In many sun-rich regions—such as parts of the Middle East, Australia, and the southwestern United States—solar PV auctions have set new record-low prices, at times below 2 cents per kilowatt-hour. This is cheaper than nearly all new fossil fuel plants. In less ideal climates, costs remain higher, but the trend of steady decline continues.

3.2 Wind Power

Wind energy has likewise seen dramatic cost reductions. Early wind turbines in the 1980s produced a few dozen kilowatts and faced frequent mechanical problems. Modern turbines, by contrast, can exceed 5-10 megawatts in onshore applications, while offshore wind turbines have surpassed 14 MW capacities in recent commercial models. Larger turbines capture more wind and generate more electricity at a lower cost per output unit.

According to leading industry reports, the cost of onshore wind has likewise dropped by around 60-70% since 2010, with even sharper declines in some emerging wind markets due to competition and improved supply chain efficiencies. Offshore wind started from a higher baseline but has also seen significant cost plummets, especially in Europe’s North Sea region, where government-led auctions have driven innovation and scale.

3.3 Other Renewables: Geothermal, Hydro, and Emerging Tech

While solar and wind grab most of the headlines due to their dramatic price declines and wide availability, geothermal and hydroelectric power remain crucial in specific regions. Geothermal power is highly reliable and offers a consistent baseload, but it depends on suitable geological conditions. Meanwhile, hydroelectric power, the oldest industrial-scale renewable, has been widely deployed worldwide, although environmental and social concerns limit new large-scale dam projects in many regions.

Emerging clean energy technologies continue to expand the portfolio, from wave and tidal power to advanced biofuels and new forms of concentrated solar power (CSP). Not all of these sources have reached cost parity with fossil fuels, but the consistent pattern over the last half-century is that robust research, supportive policy, and economies of scale lead to lower costs over time.

4. Solar, Wind, and Beyond: The Modern Green Toolbox

With solar and wind achieving mainstream acceptance and cost-competitiveness in many markets, the question is no longer whether renewables can scale, but how quickly and effectively they can power the digital infrastructure—particularly AI-driven data centers—that the global economy increasingly depends on. In practice, data centers seeking reliability often incorporate multiple renewable sources, sometimes combining on-site solar arrays with long-term purchase agreements for off-site wind or hydro. This approach diversifies supply and mitigates the inherent intermittency of each resource.

4.1 Hybrid Power Systems

An emerging strategy involves “hybrid” projects that co-locate wind, solar, and battery storage on the same site. Solar generation often peaks at midday when wind might be moderate; wind generation can peak at night, effectively complementing solar. Batteries (or other forms of energy storage) can shift the surplus from sunny or windy hours to times of high demand. For a data center operating 24/7, a well-designed hybrid system can significantly reduce dependence on natural gas peaker plants or grid imports from fossil-dominated utilities.

4.2 Grid-Scale vs. On-Site Generation

Major technology companies often sign Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with off-site utility-scale renewable projects. These PPAs lock in a certain price per kilowatt-hour over 10–20 years, offering financial predictability and a measurable carbon reduction. Alternatively, smaller data facilities might install on-site solar panels or partner with local communities for shared wind projects. However, large hyperscale data centers often require more power than on-site infrastructure can provide.

4.3 Costs Beyond LCOE: Integration and Grid Upgrades

While solar and wind can now produce electricity at highly competitive prices, integration costs come from upgrading grids, building new transmission lines, and adding energy storage. As renewables account for higher shares of total electricity generation, grid operators must carefully manage supply fluctuations. However, these costs are often offset by the fuel savings from burning less gas or coal and the environmental benefits of lower emissions. A data center that invests in local or regional renewable resources also invests, in effect, in a more resilient and sustainable power infrastructure for its host community.

5. Role of Energy Storage: Overcoming Intermittency

A frequent critique of solar and wind is that they suffer from intermittency—the sun does not shine at night or during heavy cloud cover, and the wind can vary by hour or season. For data centres, which demand consistent power to keep servers running and adequately cooled, unpredictability in the electricity supply is unacceptable. Hence, the dramatic improvements in and cost reductions of energy storage solutions—especially lithium-ion batteries—play a pivotal role in enabling a renewable-based system.

According to BloombergNEF, battery storage costs have dropped nearly 90% in the last decade. This has made short-duration storage (ranging from a few minutes to a few hours) increasingly viable for grid services. Larger-scale deployments, including Tesla’s Megapacks or other utility-scale storage systems, help balance grid supply and demand in real-time. Meanwhile, research continues into alternative battery chemistries (like sodium-ion, solid-state, or flow batteries) and other forms of storage, such as pumped hydro, compressed air, or green hydrogen.

For data centres, on-site battery systems can serve multiple purposes: they act as backup power during grid outages, replace or complement diesel generators, and allow operators to use stored energy from solar or wind resources when direct generation is insufficient. The synergy between AI, described in the next section, and energy storage is particularly potent. AI algorithms can predict supply and demand fluctuations, controlling when to charge or discharge batteries to minimize cost and maximize reliability.

6. AI-Driven Grid Management: Optimizing Supply and Demand

AI’s influence on data centre growth is well recognised, but AI promises to revolutionise how we manage electricity locally and grid-wide. The complexity of integrating high shares of intermittent renewables has led utilities and private firms to explore machine learning and predictive analytics to optimize grid operations.

6.1 Demand Forecasting

One of AI’s strengths lies in its ability to forecast future conditions. For utilities, advanced algorithms can analyze weather data, historical consumption patterns, and real-time signals to estimate electricity demand a few hours or days ahead. This helps operators prepare, turn on or off specific energy sources, schedule maintenance, or buy power from neighbouring grids at strategic times. Data centres can similarly anticipate periods of intense computation—say, training a large language model or performing end-of-month financial analytics—and schedule these tasks when wind or solar energy is most abundant or cheapest.

6.2 Load Balancing and Geographic Distribution

Major technology firms with data centres scattered worldwide can leverage AI to move computational workloads between regions in near-real time. If it’s windy in Ireland but calm in Virginia, the algorithm might shift tasks to the Irish data center to utilize clean power. When the sun is shining in the southwestern United States, tasks might move there. This approach, known as follow-the-renewables, can substantially reduce a company’s carbon footprint—provided latency and other operational constraints remain manageable.

6.3 Battery Dispatch Optimization

Large-scale battery systems are only as effective as the software controlling their charge and discharge cycles. AI can factor in projected energy prices, grid conditions, weather forecasts, and data centre load demands to decide precisely when to store excess wind or solar power and release it. Over hundreds of cycles, these small optimization gains compound into significant cost savings and improved reliability.

6.4 Maintenance and Reliability

Predictive maintenance, another powerful AI application, analyzes sensor data from wind turbines, solar panels, and inverters to spot anomalies before they escalate into failures. For a data centre reliant on these sources, minimizing downtime and repair costs is mission-critical. Early detection can help schedule maintenance during periods of low demand or coordinate replacements in a manner that avoids straining the system.

7. Policy and Market Forces Catalyzing Renewables

Despite the impressive technological and economic strides renewables have made, policy and market forces remain crucial in accelerating or hindering their adoption. Indeed, the recent success story of plummeting solar and wind costs cannot be fully understood without acknowledging government incentives, carbon regulations, and broader shifts in capital markets.

7.1 Incentives and Subsidies

In many countries, renewable energy expansion was initially fueled by feed-in tariffs (FiTs), investment tax credits (ITCs), and production tax credits (PTCs), which offered guaranteed rates for electricity fed into the grid or provided direct financial support for building solar or wind capacity. These policies, first popularized in Europe and parts of Asia helped reduce the financial risks for early adopters and catalyzed large-scale manufacturing.

In the United States, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 introduced a suite of new incentives for solar, wind, batteries, and even emerging clean energy solutions like green hydrogen. Whether or not these incentives remain in the long term can significantly influence corporate decisions about data center locations and power procurement strategies. For instance, if a data centre can qualify for certain tax credits by installing on-site solar or by purchasing renewable energy from a developer who receives these credits, it can dramatically lower overall project costs.

7.2 Carbon Pricing and Environmental Regulations

Another potent driver is the prospect of carbon pricing—whether in the form of a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system. While such pricing mechanisms remain politically contentious in some regions, their adoption can make fossil-fueled electricity significantly more expensive than renewables. As more jurisdictions move toward requiring some form of accounting for carbon emissions, data centres reliant on natural gas may find themselves at an economic disadvantage, further tilting the scales in favour of wind, solar, and other low-carbon sources.

7.3 Capital Market Shifts

Institutional investors, pension funds, and insurers increasingly evaluate climate risks in their portfolios. As a result, financing for large-scale renewable projects has become more readily available, often at lower interest rates than comparable fossil-fuel projects. Green bonds, sustainability-linked loans, and other financial instruments incentivise companies to demonstrate decarbonization strategies. Hyperscale data centre operators, typically well-capitalised, are prime candidates for tapping into these green finance opportunities, potentially lowering the cost of building or retrofitting data centres to rely heavily on renewables.

8. Challenges to Full-Scale Adoption and Potential Solutions

While the synergy between renewables, AI, and the data economy appears promising, it is hardly without obstacles. Understanding these challenges—and exploring potential solutions—provides a roadmap for stakeholders across technology, policy, and civil society.

8.1 Grid Infrastructure and Transmission Bottlenecks

Large-scale wind farms are often located in remote, windy plains or offshore sites, while solar farms flourish in deserts or sunny interior regions. The best production sites in both cases may lie far from the dense population (or data centre) hubs. Transmission line expansions can be expensive, slow-moving, and politically controversial, as they often traverse private lands or protected areas. Solving this problem demands careful planning, streamlined permitting processes, and innovative approaches to building, financing, and upgrading power transmission networks.

8.2 Intermittency Beyond Storage

Even with significant battery installations or other storage methods, high penetrations of wind and solar can pose grid stability concerns during extreme weather events (e.g., prolonged cloudy, windless conditions or winter storms). A genuinely resilient system often includes diverse resources: wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, and possibly low-carbon baseload sources such as nuclear. AI can help optimize the combined output. However, achieving near-100% renewables in all climates and seasons may require deeper solutions—expanded regional interconnections, advanced demand response systems, and next-generation energy storage breakthroughs.

8.3 Policy Uncertainty and Partisan Swings

In many countries, energy policy can swing dramatically with changes in political leadership. Once offered, Subsidies or tax credits might be rescinded, creating regulatory whiplash destabilising investors. Data centre operators contemplating multi-billion-dollar facilities weigh these risks carefully. A stable, long-term commitment to renewable energy—reinforced by durable legislation and broad political consensus—mitigates the volatility that can otherwise hamper large-scale green investments.

8.4 Social License and Community Impacts

Renewable energy projects, substantial wind farms or solar arrays, can face local opposition based on aesthetic, environmental, or land-use concerns. In some rural areas, wind turbines are seen as intrusive, or solar arrays compete with agricultural land uses. Addressing these concerns requires community engagement, fair landowner compensation, and thoughtful project design that respects local ecosystems and cultural values. Where done well, the infusion of jobs and tax revenues from renewable projects can foster local support.

8.5 Technological Gaps and the Pace of AI

AI itself is not a panacea. Designing advanced algorithms to manage grid operations and data centre workloads across continents is complex, requiring data-rich environments, robust cybersecurity, and specialized technical expertise. Algorithmic decisions around energy dispatch and load balancing also raise ethical and regulatory questions: Who decides how AI should prioritize one region’s energy needs over another? What if critical hospital systems or essential public infrastructure are on the same grid? These issues underscore that while AI is powerful, humans must design regulatory frameworks ensuring fairness, transparency, and reliability.

9. Charting a Course Forward: Integrating Digital and Sustainable Futures

The interplay between finite fossil fuel resources, explosive data centre demand, and renewable energy innovation stands at the heart of one of the most significant transitions of our time. We are moving, sometimes haltingly, from an era dominated by the combustion of hydrocarbons to one shaped by harnessing clean, infinitely replenishable sources like the sun and wind. The rapid reduction in the cost of renewable energy over the last decade—often surpassing expert predictions—underscores the dynamic nature of this sector.

For data centres specifically, the challenges are manifold: reliability, cost pressures, climate considerations, and the sheer scale of demand growth, significantly as AI deployments accelerate. Yet the solutions are not only feasible; they are increasingly profitable. By leveraging power purchase agreements that have locked in low-cost wind or solar power for decades, data centre operators gain both price stability and a greener public image. By investing in onsite battery storage or forging partnerships with grid-scale storage developers, they achieve resilience and reduce the need for polluting backup generators. Through sophisticated AI-driven optimization—shifting workloads geographically or temporally—they can balance supply and demand in ways never before imagined, further tipping the economic scales in favour of renewables.

9.1 Toward a Holistic Energy Ecosystem

One of the most compelling visions for the future is the emergence of a holistic energy ecosystem that intertwines data centres with local communities, utilities, and a diverse array of clean generation sources. In such a scenario:

• Data centres help balance the grid by flexibly adjusting non-urgent computing tasks.

• Utilities invest in large-scale renewables and storage, supported by stable incentives and regulatory frameworks.

• Residential and commercial customers adopt rooftop solar or community solar, feeding surplus energy into the grid when supply is tight.

• AI platforms serve as a kind of digital conductor, orchestrating the flow of electrons from myriad sources to demand nodes while maximizing overall system efficiency.

This vision not only curbs carbon emissions but also catalyzes local economic development, creating new jobs in renewable construction, operation, maintenance, and software engineering. It fosters energy independence and resilience, reducing exposure to global fossil fuel price shocks and geopolitical tensions.

9.2 Leadership from the Tech Sector

The world’s leading technology companies, many of which operate the most significant data centres, have the resources and the motivation to drive this transformation. They compete for environmentally conscious customers, maintain brand reputations tied to innovation, and must mitigate the significant electricity costs that threaten their bottom lines. Many have already set ambitious goals, investing billions of dollars in wind and solar farms globally.

An encouraging outcome of these corporate investments is the reduced risk for renewable energy developers. When a data centre operator signs a 20-year wind power, PPA guarantees a predictable revenue stream that lowers financing costs and helps bring more projects online. The cumulative effect magnifies over time, potentially accelerating the broader energy transition beyond the data centers.

9.3 Future Tech: Storage Breakthroughs and Beyond

While lithium-ion batteries dominate current storage deployments, emerging alternatives might revolutionize grid-scale storage. Flow batteries, for example, can store electricity in liquid electrolytes for extended periods, making them well-suited to specific large-scale uses. Green hydrogen, produced via electrolysis from surplus wind or solar, can be stored indefinitely and later converted to electricity via fuel cells or turbines. However, this process currently faces efficiency and cost hurdles.

In tandem, AI’s capabilities will likely expand even further. Reinforcement learning could discover innovative ways to schedule computational tasks, manage microgrids, or coordinate electric vehicle charging with data centre demands. This will be integral as the world moves to electrify transportation as well—a sector that further strains electricity grids.

---

Conclusion: Embracing a Sustainable Digital Future

It is a paradox of modernity that our profound digital revolution hinges on such a simple physical phenomenon: electricity. The sophisticated algorithms powering AI systems, the convenience of unlimited cloud storage, and the advanced analytics gleaned from big data all require a steady flow of electrons. As the world stands on the precipice of unprecedented computational expansion, realising that our conventional energy sources—particularly natural gas—are limited in quantity and climate acceptability forces us to think more creatively and decisively about powering tomorrow’s digital world.

Once derided as too expensive or unreliable, renewable energy has proven its worth across vast geographies, with costs plummeting to levels competitive with, or even cheaper than, fossil fuels. With energy storage innovations and AI-driven optimization tools, solar, wind, and other clean sources can reliably meet data centres' massive, round-the-clock demands. This interplay does more than keep servers online; it can help decarbonize entire regions, spur technological and economic growth, and encourage a cycle of innovation that drives down costs further.

The road ahead is not without its setbacks or controversies. Infrastructure bottlenecks, policy volatility, and local community concerns are real hurdles that must be addressed thoughtfully. Yet the momentum behind renewables—driven by public demand for climate action, strategic corporate commitments, and the financial sector’s evolving stance on fossil fuel risks—suggests a future dominated by clean electricity is not only possible but already forming.

In the future, data centres will likely serve as testbeds and catalysts for tomorrow's advanced, AI-enabled renewable grids. By leveraging large-scale power purchase agreements, exploring frontier storage technologies, and employing machine learning to manage consumption patterns, these digital hubs have the potential to become linchpins of the clean energy transition. In return, they gain stable electricity pricing, reduced exposure to fossil fuel price spikes, and robust sustainability credentials that resonate with customers and investors alike.

Ultimately, combining finite fossil fuel resources and exponential data growth presents a wake-up call and an unprecedented chance to innovate. The path is clear: harness the clean, cost-effective potential of solar, wind, and other renewables—coupled with the computational might of AI—to forge a digital ecosystem that is as sustainable as it is revolutionary. If we succeed, we will have laid the groundwork for a world where technology and nature coexist symbiotically, ensuring that the servers and algorithms driving our daily lives also safeguard the planet that makes such progress possible.

---

Bibliography

1. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2022. Abu Dhabi: IRENA, 2022. https://www.irena.org.

   • Note: This report details global trends in renewable power generation costs, including solar PV module pricing and LCOE.

2. BloombergNEF (BNEF). New Energy Outlook 2022. New York: Bloomberg Finance L.P., 2022. https://about.bnef.com/new-energy-outlook/.

   • Note: BloombergNEF’s annual outlook offers comprehensive data and analysis on cost trajectories for solar, wind, battery storage, and more.

3. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmark: Q1 2022. By Ran Fu, David Feldman, and Robert Margolis. Golden, CO: NREL, 2022. https://www.nrel.gov.

   • Note: This benchmark study provides detailed breakdowns of solar PV and storage costs in the U.S., illustrating historical cost declines and current pricing.

4. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Tracking the Sun: Pricing and Design Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States. Berkeley, CA: LBNL, 2022. https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun.

   • Note: An ongoing series analyzing installed costs of rooftop solar PV systems; offers historical context and annual updates.

5. Creutzig, Felix, et al. “The Underestimated Potential of Solar Energy to Mitigate Climate Change.” Nature Energy 2 (2017): 17140.

   • Note: A peer-reviewed study discussing how solar PV cost reductions and deployment could exceed prior expectations, impacting climate mitigation strategies.

---

One-time live chance for green energy and the Planet…

---

Renewables have far less support than fossil fuel energy technologies…

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Top Headlines from March 4, 2025

1. South Carolina Governor Declares State of Emergency Due to Wildfires
   Over 175 wildfires have burned more than 4,200 acres across South Carolina, prompting Governor Henry McMaster to declare a state of emergency and order mass evacuations.
   (Reference: [19] South Carolina governor declares state of emergency as raging wildfires prompt mass evacuations)

2. Trump to Outline Government Overhaul Plan to Congress
   President Trump is set to present his plan for a significant government overhaul to the U.S. Congress. Legal challenges to his and Elon Musk’s efforts are ongoing, with the Supreme Court expected to weigh in on critical issues.
   (Reference: [12] Trump to lay out his govt overhaul plan to US Congress)

3. Zelensky and European Allies Strengthen Cooperation After Trump Meeting
   Following a contentious meeting with President Trump, European leaders—including Ursula von der Leyen and Donald Tusk—have rallied in support of Ukraine. They emphasize the need for Europe to rearm and prepare for potential conflicts.
   (Reference: [15] Zelensky and European allies cement cooperation after Trump row)

4. Cavs Secure 10th Straight NBA Victory in Overtime Thriller
   The Cleveland Cavaliers extended their winning streak to 10 games with a hard-fought overtime victory against the Portland Trail Blazers. Jalen Williams scored a career-high 41 points, while LeBron James added 17 points, moving closer to a historic scoring milestone.
   (Reference: [11] Cavs rally to beat Blazers in OT for 10th straight NBA victory)

5. Brazil’s Oscar Win Revives Debate on Amnesty Law
   The movie “I’m Still Here” has reignited discussions about Brazil’s 1979 amnesty law, which prevented prosecution for deaths and disappearances during the dictatorship. The film’s success has sparked reflection on the country’s past and present political climate.
   (Reference: [10] ‘I’m Still Here’: Brazil faces past ghosts with Oscar triumph)

6. Japan Deploys Nearly 1,700 Firefighters to Battle Forest Blaze
   Japan has mobilized a large number of firefighters to combat a forest fire in Ofunato. The blaze is close to buildings, and the region has experienced record-low rainfall, exacerbating the situation.
   (Reference: [17] Japan deploys nearly 1,700 firefighters to tackle forest blaze)

7. 97th Annual Academy Awards Kick Off in Hollywood
   The Oscars ceremony began with a tribute to Los Angeles and the world of Oz, featuring performances by Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo. The event takes place just months after fires devastated parts of the city.
   (Reference: [14] Oscars gala begins in Hollywood)

8. Trump’s Fentanyl Tariffs Aim to Curb Drug Trade
   President Trump’s new tariffs on Chinese goods, including a 10% tariff on fentanyl precursors, are intended to disrupt the drug trade. Anti-drug activists and families impacted by fentanyl support the move, hoping it will save lives.
   (Reference: [18] Trump’s fentanyl tariffs hold wider political aims: analysts)

9. Seven & i Shares Surge on CEO Departure Rumors
   Shares of Seven & i, the owner of 7-Eleven, jumped following reports that its CEO, Ryuichi Isaka, may step down. The company faces strong competition from Canadian rival Couche-Tard and is said to be considering Stephen Hayes Dacus for the top position.
   (Reference: [9] Seven & i bondit en Bourse, un média annonce le départ de son patron)

10. Miami Inter Triumphs in Texas Without Messi
    Miami Inter secured a victory in Texas despite the absence of Lionel Messi. The team’s performance suggests they remain a dominant force in the Eastern Conference this season.
    (Reference: [13] Messi rests but Miami triumph in Texas)

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to changes brought by Musk, every single like, retweet, and share you offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact even further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, you can easily and securely contribute using Stripe through our dedicated donation link. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1897009687134134621

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Is climate change driven primarily by our continued reliance on fossil fuels?

---

Introduction: Seizing the Historic Opportunity

Humanity is standing at a momentous crossroads in its journey. Climate change, driven primarily by our continued reliance on fossil fuels, has begun to transform the face of our planet. Rising sea levels threaten coastal communities, heatwaves grow more intensely each year, and unpredictable storms wreak havoc across continents. In parallel, the world’s population continues to expand, and energy demand shows no signs of slowing down. In the face of these daunting realities, however, the story of renewable energy offers a beacon of hope.

For decades, fossil fuels have reigned supreme, driving industrial revolutions, urban expansions, and unprecedented economic growth. Yet, with that growth came significant environmental and social costs. Now, renewable energy technologies such as solar, wind, and hydropower have reached a tipping point. They have moved from niche, alternative solutions to cost-competitive, reliable energy sources. Governments, corporations, and communities worldwide are discovering the transformative power of clean energy.

But there is a crucial caveat. Although renewable energy continues to advance rapidly, it receives far less financial support than traditional fossil fuel industries. For decades, entrenched incentives and subsidies have skewed the energy market favouring coal, oil, and natural gas. This structural imbalance has delayed our essential transition to clean energy and exacerbated the global climate crisis. Despite the mounting evidence that renewables are critical to our collective future, fossil fuels maintain a disproportionate claim on national budgets and policy decisions worldwide.

In this post, we will explore this paradox in depth by examining both sectors' historical and current subsidies, assessing the real-world impacts of climate change, and underscoring the vital role that artificial intelligence (AI) is playing in accelerating the green revolution. We will also celebrate the remarkable growth in renewable energy technologies, delve into policy suggestions, and present a broad, uplifting vision: that we are living through a “one-time live chance” to redefine our global energy landscape, protect our planet, and create a more equitable and sustainable future for all.

1. Creating a Positive Perspective on Green Energy

1.1 The Renewable Revolution: From Fringe to Mainstream

Renewable energy is no longer a fringe movement that is supported solely by environmentalists and visionary entrepreneurs. Over the past two decades, solar panels have appeared on rooftops, wind turbines have sprouted in more fields, and hydropower stations have been modernized to enhance efficiency. The global renewable energy capacity has grown significantly, driven by improved technology and falling costs. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the cost of electricity from utility-scale solar fell by roughly 85% between 2010 and 2020, while wind power experienced similar cost reductions of around 50–70%. These figures only continue to trend downward.

The move toward renewable energy is not just about fighting climate change—though that remains a paramount concern. It is also about tapping into a limitless resource base that promises energy security and independence, particularly for regions that have historically relied on imported oil or coal. More importantly, the transition to renewables fosters job creation in a sector with new opportunities for research, manufacturing, operations, and maintenance.

1.2 Economic and Community Benefits

Renewable energy, once deemed expensive, now frequently undercuts conventional fossil fuel power plants in terms of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). Large corporations and small businesses have noticed this economic advantage, prompting them to adopt cleaner energy solutions. Tech giants with significant data centre demands—like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft—have pivoted toward running their facilities on solar, wind, and other low-carbon sources. This dramatic shift is happening not just because it “looks green,” but because it makes financial sense.

Communities around the globe benefit from these changes in several ways:

1. Local Job Creation: Installing solar farms, wind turbines, and microgrids often requires local labour. These projects can revitalize rural communities, providing skilled and semi-skilled work.

2. Energy Independence: Countries, municipalities, and neighbourhoods gain greater control over their energy supply. Decentralized grids reduce vulnerabilities to external disruptions—political, economic, or environmental.

3. Better Public Health: Replacing coal and oil-fired power plants with cleaner energy solutions helps to reduce air pollution. In many urban areas, this translates into improved respiratory health and fewer hospital admissions for conditions like asthma.

4. Sustainable Growth: Once beholden to boom-and-bust fossil fuel cycles, local economies are finding stability and resilience through diverse renewable portfolios.

When coupled with robust policy frameworks, the shift to renewable energy can spur massive socio-economic benefits, often extending beyond the energy sector.

2. Comparing Subsidies for Renewables vs. Fossil Fuels

2.1 A Historical Overview of Energy Subsidies

The energy sector has long been shaped by government intervention. Historically, these interventions ranged from tax breaks to direct grants, loan guarantees, and infrastructure spending. Fossil fuels have received—and continue to receive—massive subsidies. This stems partly from the historical importance of coal and oil to economic and industrial growth. Political factors such as lobbying and entrenched interests have also played a significant role in preserving these advantages.

In contrast, renewable energy subsidies are a more recent phenomenon, arising primarily in the late 20th century. Wind farms, solar installations, and other green initiatives started receiving support only after scientists and policymakers began to fully acknowledge the link between fossil fuel combustion and greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, these subsidies often pale in comparison to those allocated to fossil fuels. Even with climate accords and increasing public awareness of environmental issues, fossil fuels receive billions in direct and indirect subsidies yearly.

2.2 Quantifying the Disparity

Quantifying the total subsidies for each energy sector can be challenging because subsidies take many forms. However, credible analyses—such as those by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Energy Agency (IEA)—reveal that fossil fuels continue to receive hundreds of billions of dollars in annual support when accounting for both direct subsidies and external costs (like health impacts, environmental degradation, and climate change). While estimates vary due to differing methodologies, some reports place global fossil fuel subsidies at over $400 billion annually, with indirect subsidies pushing the figure much higher.

Renewable energy, by comparison, receives significantly lower levels of direct governmental support—some estimates suggest between $100–$200 billion globally, though this is growing. In many countries, renewable energy subsidies also come in the form of tax breaks or feed-in tariffs that encourage the adoption of specific technologies. While these policies are vital for scaling up green energy, they often lack the consistency and stability of long-entrenched fossil fuel subsidies. Abrupt policy changes, such as reducing tax credits or removing feed-in tariffs, can halt renewable growth and deter investors.

2.3 The Hidden Costs of Fossil Fuels

Beyond direct financial outlays, fossil fuels incur hidden costs that society at large shoulders: air pollution, climate-related disasters, and healthcare expenses for respiratory illnesses. These externalities underscore why it is misleading to say that coal, oil, or natural gas are “cheaper” than renewables. When factoring in the downstream costs of fossil fuel use—both economic and ecological—renewables frequently emerge as the more cost-effective option in the long run.

Experts advocate for carbon pricing or cap-and-trade systems that internalize the negative externalities of burning fossil fuels to rectify these market distortions. Though politically contentious, these mechanisms aim to level the playing field, ensuring that the true cost of carbon-intensive energy is reflected in prices.

3. The Reality of Ongoing Climate Change

3.1 Accelerating Deterioration of the Planet

Despite decades of warnings, climate change is no longer a distant threat—it is a lived reality for many. Glaciers are melting at unprecedented rates, sea levels are rising steadily, and heatwaves have become more frequent and severe. Around the world, extreme weather events such as hurricanes, typhoons, and flooding are occurring with greater intensity, causing loss of life and billions of dollars in damage. Regions that once experienced mild summers now grapple with scorching heat, and areas known for steady rainfall face prolonged droughts.

The Arctic is warming more than twice as fast as the global average, leading to diminishing sea ice that disrupts marine ecosystems and endangers coastal communities. Similarly, thawing permafrost threatens to release vast amounts of stored carbon and methane, accelerating global warming. Meanwhile, small island nations in the Pacific and Indian Oceans confront the existential threat of rising seas, forcing them to adapt or consider partial relocation.

3.2 Societal and Economic Implications

These changes to our climate system are not merely environmental issues. They come with profound societal and economic consequences:

1. Food and Water Security: Shifts in rainfall patterns and prolonged droughts jeopardize agricultural productivity. Many regions face water scarcity, affecting sanitation and public health.

2. Refugees and Displacement: Extreme weather events can create “climate refugees,” individuals forced to flee their homes due to drought, flooding, or storms.

3. Public Health Threats: Rising temperatures and altered ecosystems facilitate the spread of diseases once limited to tropical regions (like dengue and malaria), straining healthcare systems in temperate zones.

4. Infrastructure Strain: Roads, bridges, and buildings are often ill-equipped to handle extreme conditions, leading to costly damages and safety concerns.

5. Economic Instability: Climate change can disrupt supply chains, damage key industries such as tourism and agriculture, and create an uncertain business environment that hampers investment.

3.3 Voices from the Frontlines

In places like Bangladesh, coastal erosion and storms are hitting with increasing frequency, forcing communities to relocate inland. Farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa grapple with erratic rainfall that threatens their harvest. The ever-growing frequency of wildfires in areas like California, Australia, and the Mediterranean region devastates livelihoods, displaces residents, and damages mental health.

These stories offer a stark reminder that climate change is not a phenomenon waiting in the wings. It is already reshaping our world, and it will continue to do so at an accelerating pace unless concerted global action is taken. With their minimal carbon footprint, Renewables stand out as one of our most potent tools to address this crisis.

4. The Role of AI in Advancing Green Technologies

4.1 AI-Driven Innovations in Renewable Energy

Artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly become a game-changer for the renewable energy sector. By leveraging machine learning and predictive analytics, AI can optimize various aspects of energy production, distribution, and consumption, lowering costs and enhancing efficiency. Some notable examples include:

1. Smart Grids: AI algorithms can balance the grid in real time, matching supply and demand with precision. When solar and wind power fluctuate due to cloud cover or changes in wind speed, AI-powered systems can seamlessly adjust electricity flow from different sources.

2. Predictive Maintenance: Sensors connected to AI platforms can monitor wind turbines and solar arrays. These platforms detect anomalies early, allowing operators to schedule repairs proactively rather than reacting to sudden breakdowns, reducing downtime and operational costs.

3. Weather Forecasting: AI-powered advanced weather prediction models give renewable energy producers a more accurate picture of potential solar and wind output. This intelligence helps operators plan for variations and reduce reliance on backup fossil fuel plants.

4. Battery Management: Storage technologies, especially lithium-ion batteries, face challenges like charging efficiency, degradation, and safety. AI-based systems optimize charge cycles, prolong battery life, and ensure that stored energy is used effectively.

4.2 Reducing Costs with AI

One of AI's most significant benefits to the renewable energy industry is cost reduction. High upfront expenses—such as installing wind turbines or solar panels—can be offset by operational efficiencies realized over time. AI systems drive these efficiencies in the following ways:

• Optimized Resource Allocation: AI can help decide where to build the following wind or solar farm based on climate data, land availability, and proximity to demand centres.

• Load Balancing: Automated energy distribution systems reduce waste and reliance on standby fossil fuel plants.

• Enhanced Manufacturing: AI-driven manufacturing processes, from robotics to quality control, reduce defects and labour costs in producing renewable equipment.

4.3 AI and Climate Modeling

AI is revolutionizing energy production and transforming how we model and predict climate change. Advanced neural networks can analyze terabytes of data from satellites, ground stations, and historical climate records. These models then provide a more accurate assessment of how the planet’s climate might evolve under different greenhouse gas emission scenarios. Governments and institutions can leverage these insights to craft informed, proactive policies that mitigate the worst impacts of global warming.

4.4 Ethical Considerations and Equitable Deployment

As we embrace AI in the quest for a sustainable future, we must also remain vigilant about ethical considerations. AI systems can inadvertently embed biases, and their deployment should not exacerbate inequalities—for instance, by prioritizing energy delivery in affluent areas while neglecting poorer neighbourhoods. Regulatory frameworks and community oversight must ensure that AI accelerates decarbonization equitably and responsibly.

5. Documenting Rapid Growth and Cost Reductions

5.1 The Decade of Renewable Breakthroughs

The years between 2010 and 2020 are often hailed as the decade in which renewables became indisputably cost-competitive. Solar photovoltaic (PV) module prices fell dramatically due to increased manufacturing scale (especially in countries like China), technological improvements, and global supply-chain optimization. Meanwhile, wind turbine manufacturers refined designs to capture more energy at lower wind speeds, enabling wind farms in regions once considered unsuitable.

During this period, global installed renewable capacity surged, supported by government incentives, private sector investments, and heightened public awareness of climate risks. Renewable energy auctions in countries like Brazil, India, and the United Arab Emirates garnered record-breaking bids, with solar developers offering electricity at historically low prices—sometimes under $0.03/kWh. These milestones shattered the myth that renewables were too expensive or variable to form the backbone of modern energy grids.

5.2 Success Stories in Europe and the United States

5.2.1 Europe’s Green Leadership

Europe has long been a pioneer in renewable energy deployment and climate policy. Nations like Germany led the solar revolution through generous feed-in tariffs, turning the country into a global hub for solar research, production, and adoption. By 2020, Germany generated nearly 50% of its electricity from renewable sources on certain days. Denmark, similarly, became a global leader in wind power, with wind turbines often covering over 40% of the country’s electricity needs.

Other European nations have followed suit. Spain, once struggling with economic woes, has made a remarkable comeback in renewables—particularly in solar and onshore wind. France, which already relies heavily on nuclear power for electricity, is pushing for a more diversified mix that includes higher shares of renewables. The European Union’s Green Deal, a major policy initiative, aims to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050, setting ambitious interim targets that drive innovation and investment.

5.2.2 US Achievements and Challenges

In the United States, the renewable energy landscape has evolved state-by-state, reflecting the country’s federal structure. California has been at the forefront, adopting aggressive renewable portfolio standards and investing in large-scale solar projects in its deserts. Texas, known worldwide for its oil production, has become a surprising leader in wind energy—boasting some of the largest wind farms on the planet.

On the corporate side, major tech companies, alongside a growing number of Fortune 500 firms, have invested heavily in wind and solar projects, either through direct ownership or power purchase agreements (PPAs). This momentum is partly driven by environmental commitments but also by the economic advantages of locking in low-cost, stable electricity rates.

Still, challenges remain. Regulatory uncertainty and shifting political winds at the federal level can stall long-term planning. Nonetheless, the overall trajectory in the United States remains optimistic, thanks to market forces, grassroots activism, and substantial technological advancements.

5.3 Beyond Europe and the US: The Global Shift

While Europe and the US often dominate headlines, renewable energy is making equally significant strides in other parts of the world:

• China leads the world in installed solar and wind capacity, driven by a blend of industrial policy, domestic demand, and a desire to combat severe air pollution.

• India has set ambitious renewable energy targets and has quickly become one of the largest markets for solar power.

• Latin America features countries like Chile and Brazil, which have held successful renewable energy auctions at record-low prices.

• Africa is gradually tapping into its abundant solar potential, with countries such as Morocco making major investments in large-scale solar farms.

Thus, the cost reductions seen in renewable energy are a global phenomenon. They have largely dispelled the myth that coal is the cheapest solution for emerging economies, opening the door to a new era of clean, distributed, and locally empowering energy systems.

6. Global Perspectives and Policy Suggestions

6.1 Removing Financial Barriers and Aligning Incentives

Despite their progress, renewables still face strong headwinds in the form of persistent fossil fuel subsidies and infrastructure biases. To accelerate the transition, governments can:

1. Phase Out Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Gradually remove direct and indirect subsidies that artificially lower the cost of coal, oil, and natural gas. Redirect these funds toward supporting renewable energy projects and research.

2. Implement Carbon Pricing Mechanisms: Levying a price on carbon emissions can internalize the environmental costs of fossil fuels. Whether through a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system, these policies help make renewables more competitive.

3. Establish Stable, Long-Term Subsidies for Renewables: Instead of short-term incentives that create boom-and-bust cycles, adopt stable, multi-year policies. This stability fosters investor confidence and tech innovation.

4. Simplify Permitting and Regulatory Processes: Bureaucratic hurdles can significantly delay or increase the cost of renewable projects. Streamlining approvals for solar farms, wind turbines, and transmission lines is critical.

6.2 Expanding Energy Infrastructure for Renewables

Renewable energy also depends heavily on upgraded infrastructure capable of integrating intermittent sources like solar and wind:

1. Grid Modernization: Transmission and distribution networks should be reinforced or expanded to connect remote renewable power sources with urban demand centers.

2. Energy Storage and Battery R&D: Enhanced storage capacities, whether through lithium-ion batteries, flow batteries, or emerging technologies like hydrogen fuel cells, will help balance supply and demand.

3. Microgrids for Rural Communities: Decentralized grids allow remote villages to leapfrog fossil fuel dependency and directly adopt clean, localized power generation.

6.3 Encouraging Private-Sector Innovation

Policy can drive market transformation, but the private sector also plays a pivotal role:

• Venture Capital and Startups: Governments can incentivize investment in emerging green technologies by offering grants, tax breaks, or partnering on demonstration projects.

• Corporate Responsibility: Large corporations should be encouraged to adopt science-based emissions reduction targets, implement cleaner supply chains, and use renewable energy.

• Public-Private Partnerships: Such collaborations can fund large-scale renewable projects, improve grid reliability, and spur new research.

6.4 Beyond Europe and the US: Tailored Solutions

Each region possesses unique resources, climate conditions, and economic constraints. While Europe and the US offer valuable lessons, solutions must be tailored:

• Island Nations: Microgrids with solar and wind can reduce diesel dependency and cut import costs.

• Developing Economies: Off-grid solutions offer immediate benefits to communities without existing infrastructure.

• Oil-Rich Economies: Countries heavily reliant on oil revenue, like certain Middle Eastern states, may find value in diversifying early and capitalizing on solar potential to preserve their economic stability in the long term.

7. Conclusion: An Empowering Vision for Our One-Time Live Chance

7.1 Convergence of Forces

In summary, renewable energy finds itself at a crossroads where technology, economics, and global necessity converge. The past decade has proven that solar, wind, and other renewables can compete with—and often underprice—fossil fuels. AI-driven innovations have further refined these technologies, slashing costs and boosting efficiency. Meanwhile, mounting evidence of climate change’s real and immediate impacts compels us to move swiftly.

Yet, deep-seated fossil fuel subsidies continue to overshadow renewables in many regions, stalling an otherwise unstoppable momentum. While public policy and corporate investments increasingly favour cleaner alternatives, the imbalance in financial support between fossil fuels and renewables remains a formidable obstacle. Addressing this inequality is paramount to avert the worst climate scenarios and usher in an era of sustainable prosperity.

7.2 Catalyzing Individual and Collective Action

The energy transition demands engagement at all levels—government, business, and civil society. As readers, you possess the power to shape this transformation. Whether through voting for leaders who prioritize climate policy, making conscious consumer choices, or championing renewable energy in your local community, your actions matter. Here are some steps you can take to become part of the solution:

1. Stay Informed: Keep abreast of developments in clean energy technology and climate science.

2. Support Pro-Climate Policies: Write to your representatives or participate in public consultations to advocate for stronger climate legislation and renewable subsidies.

3. Choose Green Providers: If available, switch to utility companies that source their power from renewables.

4. Reduce Energy Consumption: Simple steps—like better insulation, energy-efficient appliances, and mindful usage—can reduce your carbon footprint.

5. Invest in Renewables: If you have the means, consider investing in green funds or installing solar panels on your home.

7.3 A Vision of Hope

Imagine a world where massive solar farms in deserts feed clean, affordable electricity into advanced smart grids. Picture wind turbines dotting coastlines, converting ocean breezes into power for bustling cities. Visualize communities using microgrids to stay resilient against power outages, fostering local self-sufficiency and economic development. Envision countries once dependent on polluting energy sources transforming into hubs of clean technology innovation and green jobs.

That world is within reach, but the window of opportunity is finite. Scientists warn that we have only a narrow timeline to keep global temperature increases below critical thresholds. Thus, we stand at a singular, all-important moment in human history—our “one-time live chance” to pivot away from the fossil fuel era and safeguard the only home we have.

By recognizing the unfair advantage fossil fuels hold through subsidies and ending their long-standing financial benefits, we can redirect resources toward building a resilient and equitable clean energy infrastructure. In doing so, we not only combat climate change but also forge a world where energy poverty no longer exists, where clean air is a given rather than a luxury, and where economies thrive on the back of limitless, pollution-free power.

Each of us can play a role in making that world a reality. This journey—powered by human ingenuity, supported by technological leaps in AI, and made feasible by the falling costs of renewable hardware—represents one of the most significant achievements of modern civilization. The stakes are high, but the rewards are immeasurable. Let us seize this moment and commit wholeheartedly to a sustainable future, remembering that the choices we make today will echo for generations to come.

---

UK Provides 5,000 Missiles to Ukraine: Historical Geopolitical Shifts…

---

Geopolitical Shifts in Global Energy Trade… A Disruptive Shock…

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Top Headlines from March 3, 2025

1. South Carolina Governor Declares State of Emergency Due to Wildfires

Over 175 wildfires have burned more than 4,200 acres across South Carolina, prompting Governor Henry McMaster to declare a state of emergency and order mass evacuations.

2. Trump to Outline Government Overhaul Plan to Congress

President Trump is set to present his plan for a significant government overhaul to the U.S. Congress. Legal challenges to his and Elon Musk's efforts are ongoing, with the Supreme Court expected to weigh in on significant questions.

3. Zelensky and European Allies Strengthen Cooperation After Trump Meeting

Following a contentious meeting with President Trump, European leaders, including Ursula von der Leyen and Donald Tusk, have rallied in support of Ukraine. They emphasize the need for Europe to rearm and prepare for potential conflicts.

4. Cavs Secure 10th Straight NBA Victory in Overtime Thriller

The Cleveland Cavaliers extended their winning streak to 10 games with a hard-fought overtime victory against the Portland Trail Blazers. Jalen Williams scored a career-high 41 points, while LeBron James added 17 points, moving closer to a historic scoring milestone.

5. Brazil's Oscar Win Revives Debate on Amnesty Law

The movie "I'm Still Here" has reignited discussions about Brazil's 1979 amnesty law, which prevented prosecution for deaths and disappearances during the dictatorship. The film's success has sparked reflection on the country's past and present political climate.

6. Japan Deploys Nearly 1,700 Firefighters to Battle Forest Blaze

Japan has mobilized many firefighters to combat a forest fire in Ofunato. The blaze is close to buildings, and the region has experienced record-low rainfall, exacerbating the situation.

7. 97th Annual Academy Awards Kick Off in Hollywood

The Oscars ceremony began with a tribute to Los Angeles and the world of Oz, featuring performances by Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo. The event is taking place just months after fires devastated the city.

8. Trump's Fentanyl Tariffs Aim to Curb Drug Trade

President Trump's new tariffs on Chinese goods, including a 10% tariff on fentanyl precursors, aim to disrupt the drug trade. Anti-drug activists and families impacted by fentanyl support the move, hoping it will save lives.

9. Seven & i Shares Surge on CEO Departure Rumors

Shares of Seven & i, the owner of 7-Eleven, jumped following reports that its CEO, Ryuichi Isaka, may step down. The company is facing an offensive from its Canadian rival, Couche-Tard, and is considering appointing Stephen Hayes Dacus as the new CEO.

10. Miami Inter Triumphs in Texas Without Messi

Miami Inter secured a victory in Texas despite the absence of Lionel Messi. The team's performance suggests they will remain a dominant force in the Eastern Conference this season.

---

References

- 9: Seven & i bondit en Bourse, un média annonce le départ de son patron

- 10: 'I'm Still Here': Brazil faces past ghosts with Oscar triumph

- 11: Cavs rally to beat Blazers in OT for 10th straight NBA victory

- 12: Trump to lay out his govt overhaul plan to US Congress

- 13: Messi rests but Miami triumph in Texas

- 14: Oscars gala begins in Hollywood

- 15: Zelensky and European allies cement cooperation after Trump row

- 17: Japan deploys nearly 1,700 firefighters to tackle forest blaze

- 18: Trump's fentanyl tariffs hold wider political aims: analysts

- 19: South Carolina governor declares state of emergency as raging wildfires prompt mass evacuations

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to changes brought by Musk, every single like, retweet, and share you offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact even further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, you can easily and securely contribute using Stripe through our dedicated donation link. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1896629411694399522

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

From Tsars to Strongmen: A Dance with Democracy?

---

In Russia, vodka is not merely a drink but a mirror reflecting the nation’s soul, equal to communion and oblivion. It flows through the veins of Russian history, from tsarist feasts to Soviet prison camps, a liquid thread that has turned despair into laughter and back again. With every glass raised, the past whispers: peasants once numbed hunger under birch trees with vodka, dissidents toasted forbidden truths in cramped kitchens, and oligarchs clinked crystal goblets in gilded halls while snow swallowed the streets outside. Vodka became “the sacrament of survival”, binding people to their land even as it drowned their sorrows. It fuelled Stalin’s purges and thawed the frost between enemies; it anaesthetized prisoners in the Gulag and even helped ignite an underground rock ’n’ roll rebellion that smuggled Elvis Presley’s spirit through the Iron Curtain. To sip it is to taste the paradox of Russia itself: a nation clinging to life with ferocious vitality while flirting with annihilation. This duality—defiance of darkness and surrender to it—encapsulates the Russian experience. How can one understand Russia without understanding this paradox? The answer lies not in the bottle per se, but in the trembling hands that hold it, generation after generation, as the wheel of history grinds on. This vivid metaphor sets the stage for examining Russia’s historical dance with democracy and authoritarianism.

---

The Russian Nightmare: A Legacy of Authoritarianism

Russia’s political history is a saga etched with authoritarianism—a tale of systemic repression punctuated by only brief, seismic moments of transformation. From the unyielding rule of the Tsars to the iron-fisted Soviet dictators and today’s strongmen, the nation’s narrative has been defined by despotic rulers. It is an enduring struggle between tyranny and reform, centralization and fragmentation, and a relentless tug-of-war between state authority and individual liberties.

The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 promised a new dawn of equality but instead delivered a nightmarish reality. Under Vladimir Lenin and later Joseph Stalin, a totalitarian regime took hold, snuffing out political dissent and concentrating all power within the Communist Party. They erected a vast security apparatus (the Cheka, later KGB) to control every aspect of society. The Soviet era was marked by mass purges and atrocities—from the 1932–33 Holodomor famine in Ukraine that caused millions of deaths by hunger to the horrors of the Gulag prison camps, pervasive political assassinations, and the utter absence of personal freedom. Under Stalin’s reign, epitomized by the Great Purge of the late 1930s, hundreds of thousands of perceived “enemies” of the state were executed or imprisoned on fabricated charges, their fates sealed by the paranoia of a tyrant. Dissent in any form was met with brutal repression; many who dared oppose the regime were swiftly silenced, often through poisoning or other sinister means.

After Stalin died in 1953, there were halting attempts at reform by leaders like Nikita Khrushchev during the “Thaw.” Yet the foundations of repression remained largely unshaken. Whenever satellite states or republics pushed for liberalization, Moscow responded with force. The Soviet shadow stretched from Moscow into the heart of Eastern Europe. In 1956, Soviet tanks and troops brutally crushed the Hungarian Revolution, killing thousands and prompting roughly 200,000 Hungarians to flee the country.  A little over a decade later, on August 20, 1968, the Soviet Union led Warsaw Pact troops in an invasion of Czechoslovakia to crush the Prague Spring reforms, halting that experiment in liberalization. These interventions underscored the regime’s reliance on violence to “resolve” any challenge to its domination.

---

"Gotcha?": KGB Espionage and Continuity Under Putin

Throughout the Cold War, the KGB (Soviet Security Agency) spun webs of intrigue and deceit, turning espionage into a dark art. Nowhere was this more evident than in Moscow’s grand hotels like the Intourist and Cosmos, where visiting foreigners and even Soviet citizens could easily find their privacy invaded. The KGB famously bugged rooms and staged “honey trap” scenarios – unsuspecting guests were lured into compromising situations, their illicit liaisons or private conversations recorded through hidden cameras and microphones (The Hidden History of Trump’s First Trip to Moscow - POLITICO Magazine). These incriminating materials (kompromat, short for “compromising material”) could later be used to blackmail or discredit the targets. Intourist, the state travel agency that handled foreign visitors, effectively operated as a subsidiary branch of the KGB, vetting and monitoring all guests; the hotels under its control were, in effect, extensions of the KGB’s surveillance apparatus. Even the luxurious suites in these hotels were not safe—rooms were routinely bugged, and these tactics ensnared many a foreign diplomat or businessman during the Soviet era.

Under President Vladimir Putin—himself a former KGB officer—such practices have not only endured but, by many accounts, deepened. Using kompromat as a political weapon has been refined in post-Soviet Russia. One infamous example from the late 1990s was a leaked video of Russia’s Prosecutor General engaged in a compromising act, which Putin (then FSB head) used to his advantage in a power struggle. In the 2010s, Russian operatives even ran sting operations against opposition figures, luring them with prostitutes to bugged apartments and releasing edited “sex tapes” to the public. These KGB-era tactics have thus carried into the modern FSB era, creating an atmosphere where betrayal and blackmail are commonplace. This betrayal resonates through the corridors of power today, keeping many officials and businessmen in line via fear of personal exposure. This climate of intimidation persists as Russia projects power externally as well: from the icy expanses of Eastern Europe to the rugged mountains of Afghanistan, the drumbeat of invasion and conquest has echoed through Russian policy across centuries, reminding the world that the methods of control at home often mirror those used abroad.

---

Who Started the Russia–Ukraine War?

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine began on February 24, 2022, when Russia launched an unprovoked attack on its neighbour. Some observers and political analysts have argued that actions by the West—such as NATO’s eastward expansion—created a sense of encirclement that contributed to Moscow’s aggression. Russian leaders, including Putin, have claimed they were provoked by Western interference in Ukraine. However, the overwhelming consensus of international experts and legal bodies is that Russia was the clear aggressor. NATO’s official stance describes Russia’s assault on Ukraine as “unprovoked, unjustified, and barbaric”, shattering decades of relative peace in Europe.

It is important to note that Ukraine did not initiate any attack on Russia. By the eve of the invasion, Ukraine had neither threatened Moscow nor taken actions that would warrant a military response; instead, it was pursuing closer ties with Europe and strengthening its democracy. Putin’s justifications – “denazifying” Ukraine or preventing NATO expansion – are widely dismissed as pretexts. Western officials have documented that Putin had effectively blocked Ukraine’s NATO aspirations long before 2022, and Ukraine was not on the verge of joining the alliance at the time (Lessons of the Minsk Deal: Breaking the Cycle of Russia's War Against Ukraine | Institute for the Study of War). Thus, irrespective of debates about geopolitical provocation, Ukraine did not initiate this war. Any claim to the contrary is deliberate disinformation designed to obscure the true aggressor. The conflict began with Russia’s full-scale invasion, a blatant violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and multiple international laws. Since then, Kyiv has been engaged in a determined defense, viewing this struggle—alongside its allies—as a war for survival against Russian imperialist aggression.

---

The Hunter Biden Saga: Political Intrigue in U.S.–Ukraine Relations

The so-called Hunter Biden saga added complexity to U.S.–Ukraine relations in the years leading up to the 2022 invasion. Hunter Biden, the son of then-Vice President (now President) Joe Biden, joined the board of a Ukrainian energy company called Burisma Holdings in 2014. His involvement with Burisma raised eyebrows, given his father’s high-profile role in U.S. policy toward Ukraine. Indeed, critics often cited Hunter’s position as a conflict of interest. However, investigative reports indicate that Hunter Biden was a relatively passive board member who provided advice on legal issues and finance, and he never visited Ukraine for company business during his five-year board term (2014–2019) (What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma | Reuters). Notably, extensive inquiries and witness interviews in Ukraine found no evidence that Joe Biden acted improperly or intervened to help his son’s business; U.S. officials, including anti-corruption advocates, actually pushed for reforms in Ukraine, such as the ouster of a corrupt prosecutor, aligning with international consensus – not to shield Burisma, but to tackle graft.

The situation exploded into U.S. domestic politics in 2019. President Donald Trump and his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, pressed the Ukrainian government to investigate Burisma and Hunter Biden, allegedly conditioning U.S. military aid on Kyiv’s cooperation in digging up dirt on the Bidens. This led to a political firestorm in Washington. A whistleblower complaint revealed Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July 2019, during which Trump asked for “a favour” – to investigate the Bidens – while congressionally approved aid to Ukraine was being withheld. This incident resulted in Trump’s first impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives. It was alleged that Trump abused his power by soliciting foreign interference against a domestic political rival. As the impeachment inquiry found, Trump and Giuliani’s pressure campaign on Ukraine – essentially asking Ukraine to announce an investigation into Hunter Biden – coincided with a freeze on vital military assistance, suggesting a quid pro quo.

The saga deepened in October 2020 with the emergence of a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden. A New York Post story publicised emails and personal files said to be recovered from a laptop left at a Delaware repair shop, which included details of Hunter’s business dealings and personal life. The laptop's contents, some related to Hunter’s work with Burisma and a Chinese energy company, and others, which were salacious personal material, became intensely debated. Initially, dozens of former U.S. intelligence officials voiced suspicions that the laptop saga could be part of a Russian disinformation operation (given Russia’s known penchant for hacking and propaganda). Social media platforms briefly limited sharing of the story due to those concerns. In the years since no clear evidence has emerged that a foreign intelligence plot fabricated the laptop’s materials – many files have been authenticated – but questions linger about how the data was obtained and released. Regardless, the Hunter Biden laptop affair further polarized U.S. politics and sometimes threatened to overshadow genuine policy discussions about Ukraine. It was an uncomfortable position for Ukraine, caught in the crossfire of U.S. partisan battles. President Zelensky navigated this minefield carefully, insisting Ukraine would not wittingly interfere in U.S. domestic affairs.

The Hunter Biden saga injected additional drama into U.S.–Ukraine relations. It became a focal point for Trump and his allies, even as Ukraine was struggling with Russian aggression and internal reform. Ultimately, these controversies underscore how domestic politics (in the U.S. and Ukraine) intersect with and complicate international diplomacy.

---

Trump’s Shift in Alliances Threatens Ukraine and Europe

Throughout the Cold War and its aftermath, no U.S. president ever endorsed Soviet or Russian communism; even pragmatic cooperation (like Franklin D. Roosevelt’s World War II alliance with Stalin) was rooted in necessity and survival rather than any sympathy for communist ideology (The United States, the Soviet Union, and the End of World War II). However, U.S. foreign policy has taken a sharp turn under President Donald Trump, rattling allies and adversaries alike. Trump’s approach was characterized by transactional nationalism and a disdain for multilateral institutions. While he did not openly embrace communism, critics noted what they saw as a personal affinity and admiration for authoritarian leaders over traditional democratic allies. For example, Trump frequently spoke warmly of Russia’s Vladimir Putin and was reluctant to criticize him, even as Putin cracked down on opposition and invaded neighboring countries. According to observers like former diplomat Nigel Gould-Davies, “there is that sort of authoritarian-minded chemistry” between Trump and Putin – a chemistry reinforced by Trump’s similar warmth toward other strongman leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán. This stance represented a radical departure from America’s post-World War II role as the linchpin of a liberal democratic alliance.

By 2023–2024, as Trump campaigned for a return to the presidency, he explicitly signalled a foreign policy realignment. In late 2024, Trump (the presumptive president-elect after the U.S. election) indicated that he would prioritize quick peace in Ukraine, even if it meant siding more with Russia’s terms. Once back in office, President Trump changed the geopolitical landscape significantly. The shift became evident during a pivotal United Nations vote. Under Trump’s instruction, the United States suddenly aligned with Russia against the European Union and most democracies on a Ukraine-related resolution (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS). The shocking move marked the first time the U.S. openly broke with its European allies to side with Moscow on the war. It was accompanied by Trump adopting Kremlin talking points to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, effectively blaming NATO expansion and “Western provocation” for the conflict.

European leaders watched these developments with dismay and alarm. An editorial in Spain’s El País newspaper described it bluntly: “Trump changes sides”, leaving Ukraine and Europe alone to face Russia after decades of U.S.-European strategic alliance (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS). During a tense meeting at the White House, observers noted a “ceremony of intimidation” in how Trump received Ukrainian President Zelensky, culminating in this historic U.S. policy shift.

Behind the scenes, Trump’s team worked on a draft peace plan for Ukraine that heavily favored Russian interests. Everything Putin demanded, Trump seemed willing to concede: Ukraine would be barred from NATO membership; Russia would be allowed to annex the Ukrainian territories it occupied by force permanently; all U.S. sanctions on Russia would be lifted; and even Russia’s return to the G7 economic group was promised. In essence, Washington signaled it would defend Moscow’s position in international forums rather than Kyiv’s. The “rehabilitation of the invader” was to be prioritized over the humiliation of the victim. European diplomats like France’s President Emmanuel Macron and Britain’s Prime Minister (by then) Keir Starmer engaged in frantic diplomacy, visiting Washington to urge a more balanced approach – a “just peace” that wouldn’t reward aggression. But their appeals were undercut by what followed.

Trump’s approach to the proposed ceasefire and peace deal effectively required Ukraine to surrender significant sovereignty. In a plan reportedly prepared by the White House, Ukraine’s only incentive to accept these harsh terms was a joint exploitation agreement for its mineral resources – a proposal many saw as thinly veiled economic extortion (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS). Under this scheme, Ukraine would control resource-rich assets in exchange for security guarantees. President Zelensky was reportedly willing to consider painful compromises only if there were guarantees that Russia would honor the ceasefire and not simply use the pause to rearm for a new onslaught (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS). Given Russia’s past violations of agreements (for instance, disregarding the 2015 Minsk II ceasefire by launching the full invasion in 2022 (Lessons of the Minsk Deal: Breaking the Cycle of Russia's War Against Ukraine | Institute for the Study of War)), such guarantees were viewed as highly dubious.

Not surprisingly, Ukraine balked at this one-sided deal. As Trump’s plan became clear, Ukraine (with tacit European support) decided it could not proceed, judging that the deal would sacrifice Ukraine’s sovereignty and reward Russia’s aggression without truly securing peace. The breakdown of these proposed terms highlighted a deep rift in the transatlantic alliance.

From Europe’s perspective, Trump’s “betrayal” of Ukraine was also a betrayal of Europe’s own security. Longstanding U.S. allies felt abandoned. Poland and the Baltic states, sitting on NATO’s front line with Russia, were particularly aghast that Washington would entertain letting Russia keep conquered Ukrainian territory. European Union nations began openly strategizing on how to respond in a world where the U.S. might no longer defend them. As El País noted, by changing sides, Washington forced Europe to confront the reality of defending itself – “the solitude in which the U.S. leaves Ukraine and Europe in front of Putin” (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS).

With the U.S. stepping back from its traditional leadership role, European leaders quickly closed ranks to oppose an unfavorable peace. Even traditionally cautious leaders like Germany’s Chancellor and France’s President joined Eastern European states in rejecting a Munich-style appeasement. Their worst fear was that giving in to Putin’s terms would only embolden further Russian expansionism. Indeed, history loomed large: memories of how appeasement in 1938 led to wider war were frequently invoked.

---

Vance’s Controversial Diplomacy Strains Alliances

Compounding the tensions was a series of diplomatic missteps by U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance (a hypothetical VP in this scenario). Vice President Vance took an unusually confrontational tone with America’s closest partners, igniting public controversies. At the annual Munich Security Conference in February 2025, Vance stunned the audience by openly lambasting European leaders. He accused Europe of “lacking resolve”. He even claimed that the greatest threat to Europe was not Russia or China but Europe’s retreat from “fundamental values” like free speech (Vance's attack on Europe overshadows Ukraine talks at the security conference | Reuters). He also criticized European immigration policies as “out of control.” These remarks, delivered in a blistering speech, drew immediate rebuke from key allies. Germany’s defense minister, Boris Pistorius, responded by calling Vance’s comments “unacceptable,” noting that Vance had essentially questioned the democratic credentials of Germany and Europe. Many delegates in the conference hall watched Vance’s speech in stunned silence, with scant applause at the end. The episode underlined a growing divergence between Washington and Europe. Rather than focus on unity against Russian aggression in Ukraine, the U.S. Vice President’s priority message seemed to be chastising allies, which observers warned could only delight Moscow by sowing discord among Western allies.

Shortly after the Munich incident, Vance created another stir—this time directed at the United Kingdom, one of America’s staunchest allies. During a press event, Vance made disparaging remarks that were perceived as undermining the UK’s leadership in Europe. British officials privately expressed outrage, and even the public took note; it is highly unusual for an American leader to single out Britain for criticism on the world stage. The transatlantic alliance was further strained as UK leaders – including the newly inaugurated Prime Minister Keir Starmer – wondered if the “special relationship” had frayed. This diplomatic faux pas cast a shadow over U.S.–Uk relations at a critical moment when unity was needed against Russian aggression.

Most dramatically, Vice President Vance clashed directly with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a visit to Washington. In a White House meeting intended to showcase solidarity, Vance’s comments to Zelensky were seen as dismissive of Ukraine’s suffering and needs. According to reports, Vance lectured Zelensky about “corruption in Ukraine” and the need to be “more grateful” for American assistance – comments that came off as highly insensitive given Ukraine’s daily fight for survival. The backlash was swift: members of both U.S. parties and European diplomats criticized Vance for “punching down” at a wartime leader who had won global admiration for his courage. Ukrainians were hurt and bewildered by the episode; to them, it was another sign of a potential weakening of U.S. resolve. The timing of these incidents could not have been worse, coming as Ukraine was desperately seeking more substantial Western unity in the face of Russia’s onslaught.

Vice President Vance’s various diplomatic controversies – which spanned from Munich to London and finally to Washington – exposed the increasingly fragile state of transatlantic relations during the current administrations under Trump. Many of Washington’s allies were left alarmed, disillusioned, and uncertain about the United States' long-term commitment to global partnerships. The unity of purpose that NATO had displayed in earlier years appeared to evaporate at the highest political levels, creating tensions and misunderstandings, even as ordinary NATO soldiers and diplomats continued to cooperate effectively on the ground.

---

Europe’s Response: The UK’s Resolve and France’s Nuclear Stance

With a potential U.S. strategic withdrawal from its traditional leadership role, European countries have been compelled to step up decisively. In effect, Europe is asking: Is Europe already at war (politically and economically) with Russia? Given the extent of European support for Ukraine, many argue the answer is yes – Europe is deeply invested in Ukraine’s defense, short of sending troops directly into combat. European governments recognize that bowing to an aggressor’s harsh demands today will only invite more significant threats tomorrow. The tone and outcome of Trump’s meeting with Zelensky in Washington – seen across Europe as an attempt to bully Ukraine into surrender – have had a unifying effect on European leaders, galvanizing them to close ranks rather than fracture. There is a growing consensus from Paris to Warsaw that appeasement will only embolden Putin, and thus, the only course is to stand firm with Ukraine.

One of the most resolute responses has come from the United Kingdom. Historically, the UK has often played an assertive role in European security, and recent developments have reinforced that trend. Despite Washington’s wavering, London has made it clear it will not see freedom falter on European soil again (a sentiment rooted in the UK’s World War II experience). The UK’s actions speak loudly. Prime Minister Keir Starmer (who took office following Britain’s 2024 elections) announced a major package of military aid to Ukraine, including 5,000 missiles and other materiel for Ukraine’s defence (UK announces new $2 billion deal to fund air-defence missiles for Ukraine | Reuters). This £1.6 billion aid deal, financed through UK export funds, will supply thousands of British-made “lightweight multirole missiles” to bolster Ukraine’s air defenses. “This will be vital for protecting critical infrastructure now and strengthening Ukraine to secure peace when it comes,” Starmer said, underscoring the UK’s ironclad commitment to Ukrainian sovereignty. In addition to missiles, Britain has provided advanced drones, artillery, and training for Ukrainian soldiers. Reports show that the UK has quietly increased its military presence in Eastern Europe as a deterrent signal to Russia.

Notably, King Charles III lent his moral support to the Ukrainian cause. In a striking show of solidarity shortly after Trump’s policy shift, King Charles received President Zelensky for a private audience at Sandringham Castle. The visit – replete with cheers from the British public during Zelensky’s stop in London – stood in stark contrast to the incredible reception Zelensky had in Washington a few days prior (the UK gives a royal welcome to Zelenskyy after White House meltdown - Mikro-Makro / Mikro Detaylar Makro Tartışmalar). The UK gave Zelensky a royal welcome, with King Charles formally “holding an official audience as a show of support after the Trump clash”. This highly symbolic meeting, unprecedented in modern times for a monarch and a wartime foreign leader, sent a clear message: Britain’s support for Ukraine transcends politics and is rooted in principles of justice and courage. At the same time, Prime Minister Starmer convened an emergency defense summit in London with other European leaders (and even partners like Canada and Turkey) to coordinate a united front on Ukraine). At this summit – held in early March 2025 – European nations discussed concrete steps to fill any gap left by the U.S. and to ensure military and financial aid to Ukraine continues uninterrupted. The UK, in essence, signalled that if Washington “changes sides,” London and Europe would forge ahead on their own to resist

Russian aggression.

Parallel to the UK’s efforts, France has made a landmark announcement regarding its nuclear forces. France, one of the two nuclear-armed states in the EU (alongside the UK), historically kept its nuclear arsenal strictly under its own control as a pillar of its national sovereignty. However, considering doubts about U.S. reliability, President Emmanuel Macron indicated a new willingness to integrate France’s nuclear deterrent with European defense. In a major policy shift, France offered to extend aspects of its nuclear umbrella to its European allies. While Paris did not propose handing over warheads or launch codes to other countries, Macron invited European partners to engage in a “strategic dialogue” about the role of French nuclear weapons in collective security, even suggesting that allied officers could participate in French nuclear exercises (France’s Nuclear Weapons and Europe - Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik)). This move aims to strengthen Europe’s deterrence posture independently of the U.S. and is driven by multiple factors: the need to counterbalance Russia’s nuclear threats, to reassure Eastern European states, and to reinforce the message that Europe can defend itself. Macron emphasized that France’s “vital interests” now have a European dimension, implying that a nuclear attack on an EU country would be treated as an attack on France itself. Such language inches toward a pan-European nuclear doctrine. Additionally, France’s offer means European allies might have more say in French nuclear policy – a significant change from the past, when Paris guarded its autonomy closely. While details remain to be worked out (and some smaller EU states remain skeptical or nervous about nuclear matters), this initiative reflects France’s resolve to “fill the gap” in deterrence if the U.S. security guarantee weakens. It also echoes proposals by former officials (like ex-NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen) that Europe should consider pooling its nuclear resources (French and British) to provide a credible continental deterrent

Such dramatic measures underscore how deep the concern is in Europe about the uncertain future of U.S. support. Europe is even willing to contemplate what was long unthinkable: using frozen Russian assets to fund defense and reconstruction. The EU and G7 have frozen around $300 billion in Russian central bank reserves as well as oligarch assets. European leaders, such as Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala, have argued that Europe should seize or leverage this frozen money to support Ukraine’s military and bolster European defenses, rather than burdening European taxpayers (Europe must raise defence spending, use Russian assets for Ukraine, Czech PM says | Reuters). “For further military support of Ukraine, we must use money from frozen Russian assets across Europe,” Fiala declared in a national address, also calling for higher European defense budgets. EU officials are actively examining legal mechanisms to channel at least the interest proceeds from these assets (if not the assets themselves) into aid for Ukraine. The idea is popular: why not make Russia foot the bill (indirectly) for the damage it caused? Indeed, plans are underway in Brussels to direct tens of billions from Russian funds into a fund for Ukraine’s recovery and Europe’s enhanced defense. This extraordinary step – essentially liquidating an aggressor’s assets to pay for the victim’s security – would set a powerful precedent in international relations.

In summary, Europe’s response to the challenges has been robust: Britain is re-arming Ukraine and rallying allies; France is extending nuclear assurances; and the EU at large is upping defense spending and considering creative financial warfare against Moscow. Europe is effectively telling the world that, if the U.S. falters in its democratic leadership, Europe will rise to the occasion. This newfound European resolve will inevitably have far-reaching consequences for transatlantic relations and the future security architecture of the continent.

Failed Peace Initiatives: The Minsk and Istanbul Agreements

It is important to recognize that the Russia–Ukraine war did not erupt without numerous prior attempts at peace. Two major diplomatic efforts in the past decade—the Minsk Agreements and the Istanbul talks—sought to resolve conflict between Russia and Ukraine, but both ultimately failed, underscoring the deep mistrust at play.

The Minsk Agreements (2014–2015): In the wake of Russia’s initial incursions into eastern Ukraine in 2014 (shortly after it annexed Crimea), Ukraine and Russia – facilitated by the OSCE, France, and Germany – signed a series of accords in Minsk, Belarus. The first deal, often called Minsk I, was signed in September 2014 and aimed to establish an immediate ceasefire in the Donbas region. It outlined steps like pulling back heavy weapons and beginning a political dialogue on greater autonomy for the separatist-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk. However, Minsk I failed within months as fighting continued and each side accused the other of bad faith. In early 2015, with battles raging (particularly around Debaltseve) and the Ukrainian army under severe strain, a second attempt – Minsk II – was brokered by France and Germany. The Minsk II agreement, signed in February 2015, was more detailed: it called for a ceasefire, withdrawal of heavy arms, exchange of prisoners, and constitutional reforms in Ukraine to grant limited self-governance to Donbas in exchange for Ukraine regaining control of its border. The deal was signed by representatives of Ukraine, Russia, and the Russian-backed separatist leaders (Lessons of the Minsk Deal: Breaking the Cycle of Russia's War Against Ukraine | Institute for the Study of War). For a time, Minsk II reduced the intensity of open fighting, but ceasefire violations by Kremlin-controlled forces continued unabated. A fundamental flaw was that Russia never acknowledged its role as a combatant – the agreement did not even mention Russian troops on Ukrainian soil, treating Russia as a “mediator” rather than the instigator. This lack of accountability allowed Moscow to flout the spirit of the deal while insisting any failure was Ukraine’s. Over the next few years, Minsk II lingered in limbo: some prisoner swaps and pullbacks happened, but key political steps (like local elections in Donbas under Ukrainian law) never materialized. The ultimate collapse of Minsk II came in early 2022 when Russia formally repudiated Ukraine’s sovereignty over the Donbas by recognizing the puppet “Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics” as independent states – immediately followed by the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In effect, Russia decisively broke the Minsk agreement by choosing war, confirming the fears of many that Putin had only used Minsk as a stalling tactic. The failed Minsk process demonstrated that Ukraine was willing to negotiate for peace (it had signed onto unpopular concessions in those accords). Still, Russia was unwilling to honour a genuinely sovereign and whole Ukraine. President Zelensky, elected in 2019 partly on a promise to achieve peace in Donbas, initially tried implementing Minsk (even entertaining direct talks with Putin). Still, after 2022 it became clear that Minsk was dead, and Putin had chosen invasion over diplomacy.

The Istanbul Agreement (March–April 2022): In the early weeks of the 2022 invasion, as Russian forces faced fiercer Ukrainian resistance than expected, negotiations were revived – this time in Istanbul, Turkey. In late March 2022, Ukrainian and Russian delegations met in Istanbul for intensive talks, under the mediation of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Ukraine, seeking to halt the bloodshed, floated a bold proposal: neutrality. President Zelensky’s team indicated Ukraine was willing to declare itself permanently neutral (foregoing NATO membership) and adopt a non-aligned status, provided it received binding security guarantees from significant powers. In essence, Ukraine would accept a status akin to Austria or Sweden during the Cold War – not joining any military bloc – if countries like the U.S., UK, Turkey, and even Russia would pledge to defend Ukraine if attacked. Additionally, Ukraine signaled openness to compromises on Crimea and the Donbas: the proposal included a 15-year consultation period on the status of Russian-occupied Crimea (deferring that contentious issue) and discussed interim arrangements for the Donetsk/Luhansk areas. These were significant concessions on Ukraine’s part, given its long-term aspirations and the devastation already wrought by Russia. Russia, for its part, announced it would “drastically reduce military activity” near Kyiv and Chernihiv as a goodwill gesture. By early April 2022, it appeared a potential deal was within reach: “Ukraine will never join NATO, in exchange for a ceasefire and foreign security guarantees.”

However, several factors doomed the Istanbul talks. First, there was enormous mistrust. Western countries urged caution, noting that Russia had a history of offering hollow promises to regroup militarily. For instance, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas and French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian publicly warned that any Russian claims of de-escalation could be a smokescreen. Their scepticism was well-founded: even as talks proceeded, evidence of atrocities like the Bucha massacre (Russian forces killing civilians near Kyiv) emerged, hardening Ukrainian public opinion against any deal with an army committing war crimes. Second, Putin’s true intentions remained maximalist. Reports later emerged (via Reuters) that negotiators had drafted a tentative deal but was personally rejected by Putin, who instead doubled down on pursuing a military victory. Indeed, by April 2022, Russia redeployed its troops to focus on eastern Ukraine, abandoning the Kyiv area – not as part of a peace deal but because of battlefield failures. Putin likely calculated he could still win more territory by force, so why settle for a partial diplomatic win? Ukrainian officials also did not fully trust any security guarantees short of NATO’s Article 5, since Russia had just proven willing to violate Ukraine’s security assurances (like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum). As Ukrainian negotiator Davyd Arakhamia later explained, Russia offered only vague pledges and no firm enforcement mechanism, so the Ukrainians “did not trust Russia to uphold such an agreement” and refused to sign on the dotted line.

By late April 2022, the Istanbul process collapsed without a lasting ceasefire. Each side blamed the other: Moscow claimed Kyiv had “thrown away” a near-agreement at the behest of the U.S. or UK (which Ukraine denies). At the same time, Kyiv pointed to the horrific discovery of Russian atrocities and the lack of any trustworthy guarantee of Ukrainian security. In truth, the talks likely failed because Putin was not ready to accept anything less than subjugation of Ukraine, and Ukraine was not willing to surrender its people and land to an aggressor absent absolute necessity. Notably, Ukraine has consistently maintained that it is open to a just peace – including Russia withdrawing its troops – but not a capitulation. Russia ultimately walked away from balanced compromises in the Minsk period and in Istanbul. Thus, it is inaccurate to portray Ukraine as an obstacle to peace; rather, Ukraine has repeatedly sought peace but insists (rightly, in line with international law) that peace must be predicated on respect for its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The failed Minsk and Istanbul initiatives demonstrate the deep-seated mistrust: Ukraine cannot trust Russian promises, and Russia will not accept Ukrainian independence except on its own terms. This gulf must be overcome for any future peace deal to succeed.

Turkey’s Strategic Balancing Act

One notable player in the conflict and peace negotiations is Turkey, which has carefully balanced its relations with Russia and Ukraine. Turkey’s unique position arises from historical, economic, and strategic factors. As a Black Sea nation and NATO member maintaining close ties with Moscow, Turkey has labored to be a key mediator in regional tensions.

Historically, Turkey and Russia have been rivals (even enemies in conflicts dating back to the 19th-century Crimean War and beyond), but also partners of convenience in recent years. Turkey strongly supports Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity – for example, President Erdoğan loudly denounced Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and has positioned himself as a protector of the Crimean Tatars, a Turkic Muslim community oppressed under Russian rule (Where Turkey Stands on the Russia-Ukraine War | Council on Foreign Relations). Turkey has also sold Ukraine some of its most effective weapons in this war: the Bayraktar TB2 drones, which early on were celebrated in Ukraine for picking off Russian armoured columns. At the same time, Erdoğan’s government has not joined Western sanctions against Russia, seeking to maintain trade and diplomatic channels with Putin. This is partly because Turkey’s economy is deeply intertwined with Russia – from energy imports (natural gas) to tourism (millions of Russian tourists visit Turkey’s beaches) – and partly because Turkey sees a role for itself as a bridge between East and West.

Geography gives Turkey significant leverage. It controls the Bosphorus and Dardanelles Straits, the maritime choke points that connect the Black Sea (and thus Russia’s naval ports) to the Mediterranean. Under the 1936 Montreux Convention, Turkey can close the Bosporus to warships in time of war or if threatened. Indeed, after the invasion, Ankara invoked this convention to bar Russian (and other) warships from transiting the straits, a move clearly aimed at limiting Russia’s ability to reinforce or rotate its Black Sea Fleet. This demonstrated Turkey’s willingness to take concrete steps against Russia when it feels its own region’s stability is at stake.

However, Turkey also pursues “strategic autonomy” in foreign policy. It has complex, sometimes cooperative ties with Russia in other arenas: in Syria’s civil war, Turkey and Russia support opposite sides but have struck deals to avoid direct clashes; in defense trade, Turkey even purchased Russia’s S-400 air defense system in 2019, straining relations with the U.S. Thus, Turkey’s stance in the Ukraine conflict is multi-faceted. It has condemned the invasion and supported Ukraine with drones and diplomatic backing, but it has not cut off Russia. Instead, Erdoğan has positioned Turkey as a neutral facilitator – hosting prisoner exchange talks, grain export negotiations (leading to the UN-brokered Black Sea Grain Initiative in summer 2022), and the aforementioned Istanbul peace talks. Ankara’s logic is straightforward: it benefits from stable relations with both sides. Turkey cannot afford a Russia that is overly weakened (or a Russia that turns hostile towards Turkey), nor does it want a Russia that dominates Ukraine or the Black Sea. Likewise, Turkey gains prestige and economic advantages by courting Ukraine and helping it and keeping lines open to Moscow. This balancing act has become more precarious over time (Turkey's Balancing Act on Ukraine Is Becoming More Precarious). As the war has dragged on and atrocities have mounted, pressures have grown on Turkey to pick a side more decisively. Yet Erdoğan has managed to maintain his delicate diplomatic dance – exemplified by his ability to talk to both Putin and Zelensky frequently, one of the few world leaders to do so.

Two strategic interests drive Turkey’s careful stance: Crimea and the Straits. Crimea holds emotional and strategic importance; the Ottoman Empire once ruled it, and modern Turkey feels a kinship with the Tatar minority there. Ankara never recognized Russia’s annexation and likely sees a post-Putin scenario where Crimea could potentially be negotiated over. Meanwhile, by controlling the Bosphorus Strait, Turkey holds a trump card in any naval dimension of the conflict, which it has wielded in a calibrated way (closing it to military vessels prevents Russia from, say, sailing reinforcements from its other fleets). Turkey’s NATO membership also means it quietly continues to cooperate with Western defence efforts – for instance, Turkish forces still operate within NATO air policing and other activities aimed at deterring Russia.

In conclusion, Turkey is performing a tightrope walk: it condemns Russia’s aggression and aids Ukraine, yet avoids confrontation with Moscow and even provides Putin diplomatic openings to save face. This has placed Ankara in a unique mediator role. Turkey is one of the few countries that can speak to both sides, which proved crucial in deals like the grain export agreement that alleviated a global food crisis. Turkey’s dual engagement policy will be critical in any eventual peace discussions. Its success or failure will depend on whether it can continue convincing Ukraine and Russia (and the broader West) that it is an honest broker. For now, Turkey’s stance is a reminder of the region’s complexity: not every U.S. ally has the luxury of completely isolating Russia, especially when vital interests and historical ties are in play.

Current Global Conflicts and Tensions

Beyond Ukraine, the world is grappling with multiple concurrent conflicts and flashpoints that, together, have raised the overall level of global instability. We live in a time when several regions are experiencing crises simultaneously, testing the international community’s capacity to respond and manage risks:

1)     Eastern Europe – The War in Ukraine: The conflict triggered by Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine is the largest land war in Europe since World War II. It has caused tens of thousands of deaths and displaced millions of people. NATO countries have been indirectly drawn in by providing massive military aid to Ukraine, while Russia’s actions have led to a near-total break in East-West relations. The war’s outcome remains uncertain, and its ripple effects (energy crises, food shortages due to disruption of Ukraine’s grain exports, and a rearmed Europe) are global.

2)     Middle East – Syria and Israel-Palestine: In the Middle East, Syria’s civil war still simmers on after a decade, with external powers (Russia, Turkey, Iran, the U.S.) maintaining military roles in different parts of Syria and no comprehensive peace in sight. Meanwhile, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict escalated dramatically in 2023. A bloody flare-up occurred when Hamas militants from Gaza carried out a horrific terrorist attack in Israel, leading to a devastating war in Gaza. The 7 October 2023 Hamas attack and the ensuing Israel–Gaza war triggered regional instability that Iran and its proxies sought to exploit (). In the aftermath, tensions remain sky-high: sporadic violence continues in the West Bank, and cross-border exchanges between Israel and Iranian-backed militias (like Hezbollah in Lebanon) pose the constant risk of igniting a wider regional war. The Middle East thus remains a potential powder keg, with multiple interlocking conflicts (Yemen’s war, unrest in Iraq and Lebanon, etc.) that international diplomacy struggles to contain.

3)     Asia-Pacific – Taiwan and North Korea: East Asia focuses on Taiwan and the South China Sea, where China’s growing military assertiveness has raised fears of a possible future conflict over Taiwan’s status. Chinese warplanes and ships now regularly encroach on Taiwan’s air and maritime space, and Beijing refuses to renounce the use of force to achieve “reunification.” The U.S. has reinforced support for Taiwan, and allies like Japan and Australia are increasing defence readiness, making the area a potential flashpoint between great powers. Meanwhile, North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programs continue to advance unchecked. Pyongyang spent 2022–2024 testing ever more powerful missiles, including ICBMs capable of reaching the U.S. mainland, and even claimed to have tested a nuclear-capable underwater drone. Kim Jong Un’s regime has adopted a “more bellicose approach” toward South Korea, punctuating rhetoric with missile launches and military demonstrations (). North Korea’s actions keep Northeast Asia in a constant state of tension, and each test provokes debates in Seoul and Tokyo about military preparedness and, in South Korea’s case, even whether to pursue its nuclear deterrent. The overlapping territorial disputes in the region (such as in the East China Sea or India–China border tensions in the Himalayas) add further complexity.

4)     South Asia – The Kashmir Dispute: In South Asia, India and Pakistan remain locked in their decades-old rivalry centered on the disputed region of Kashmir. While a ceasefire on the Line of Control has primarily been held since 2021, the area is heavily militarized, and minor incidents could spiral. Kashmir, with its history of triggering multiple Indo-Pak wars and frequent skirmishes, continues to be a flashpoint that could potentially escalate, especially given both India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons. Moreover, any terror attack emanating from militant groups in Pakistan that strikes India (such as the 2019 Pulwama bombing) can dangerously raise war rhetoric. The international community keeps a wary eye on this region, as a major conflict there could draw in other powers and would undoubtedly pose a nuclear risk. As of now, relations between New Delhi and Islamabad are icy, and diplomacy over Kashmir is moribund – meaning the dispute festers with no resolution in sight (As Fragile Kashmir Cease-Fire Turns Three, Here's How to Keep it ...).

5)     Africa – The Sahel Region Instability: Across Africa, various conflicts persist, but the Sahel region (the belt south of the Sahara, including countries like Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad, and Sudan) has seen alarming deterioration. A combination of armed Islamist insurgencies, military coups, and humanitarian crises has created a tinderbox. Multiple countries in this zone have experienced coups in the last few years (Mali 2021, Burkina Faso 2022, Niger 2023), often ejecting Western security partnerships and turning to alternative patrons (sometimes Russia’s Wagner mercenaries). Meanwhile, jihadist groups linked to ISIS and al-Qaeda roam across borders, exploiting weak governance and fuelling ethnic violence. Sudan descended into a brutal internal war in 2023 when rival generals clashed, devastating Khartoum and displacing millions. In the Horn of Africa, Ethiopia’s fragile peace after a civil war in Tigray and ongoing instability in Somalia add to concerns. These conflicts in Africa often receive less global media attention but produce vast human suffering and have global implications (such as migration flows and opportunities for extremist proliferation).

6)     Latin America – Venezuela’s Crisis: In the Western Hemisphere, outright warfare is less prevalent, but Venezuela stands out as a country in protracted crisis. For the past several years, Venezuela has suffered an economic collapse and political standoff between the authoritarian government of Nicolás Maduro and a (now weakened) opposition that at one point formed a parallel interim government recognized by dozens of countries. While large-scale fighting isn’t occurring, Venezuela’s situation is often termed the worst humanitarian crisis in the Americas: over 7 million Venezuelans have fled the country since 2015, a refugee exodus comparable to Syria’s. The influx has tested the stability of neighbouring countries (Colombia, Brazil, and others). Additionally, organized crime and social unrest afflict parts of Latin America (such as drug cartel violence in Mexico and Central America), which, although not traditional wars, create conditions of conflict that can destabilize states and drive mass migration.

In addition to these regional conflicts, the world faces broader tensions among major powers. The United States, Russia, and China are each modernizing their nuclear arsenals, and arms control agreements have weakened, raising concerns about a new arms race (A Strategy to Defend America's Interests in a More Dangerous World). Cyber warfare and disinformation have opened new fronts that don’t involve traditional armies but can still wreak havoc (for instance, Russian and Chinese hackers targeting Western infrastructure, or vice versa). Global challenges like terrorism persist: ISIS and al-Qaeda, while much diminished, still inspire affiliates and lone actors, and extremist ideology can always find fertile ground in war-torn regions (recent Hamas attacks and jihadist resurgence in Africa underscore this).

International diplomatic frameworks, such as the United Nations, have been strained. The UN Security Council has been largely paralyzed on big issues like Ukraine due to great power vetoes. Nonetheless, diplomacy hasn’t collapsed entirely – mediators like Turkey and the UN have scored some successes (e.g. grain deal, humanitarian ceasefires here and there). Regional organizations (the African Union, European Union, ASEAN, etc.) also attempt conflict resolution, with mixed results.

In summary, global tensions are at their highest in decades. An authoritative survey by the Council on Foreign Relations in early 2025 found that experts consider this period among the most volatile and dangerous since the Cold War’s height (Conflicts to Watch in 2025) (Conflicts to Watch in 2025). Wars in Ukraine and Gaza are raging simultaneously, raising the spectre of broader regional confrontations (Conflicts to Watch in 2025). There are confrontations in East Asia (around Taiwan and Korea) that could if mishandled, draw in superpowers. Longstanding disputes like Kashmir or the South China Sea remain unresolved and could flare up unexpectedly. All these conflicts collectively challenge world peace unparalleled in the last few decades. The international community’s ability to multitask – to simultaneously contain multiple crises–is being tested.

Assessing the Risk of World War III

Given this panorama of conflicts, many people naturally worry: Has the risk of a Third World War increased? While the situation is undeniably perilous, most analysts still assess the risk of a true global war as relatively low, though higher than it was a decade ago. In other words, the possibility of a World War III remains minimal but not zero (Ian Bremmer to News.Az: The risk of a Third World War remains, but ...).

On one hand, several factors are indeed heightening the risk of a major conflagration. The war in Ukraine has brought NATO (a U.S.-led nuclear alliance) into indirect conflict with nuclear-armed Russia, something unthinkable during the calmer 1990s/2000s era. There have been a few close calls – incidents like errant missiles landing in NATO-member Poland, or intense nuclear saber-rattling from Moscow – that remind how escalation could occur. Tensions in the Taiwan Strait involve the United States and China, the world’s two strongest powers, in a potential flashpoint that could draw in Japan and others. The more those tensions rise (for example, through military exercises or miscalculations at sea or in the air), the more the risk of a direct U.S.–China clash that could spiral. And the Middle East, as seen recently, can produce sudden crises (like a regional war following an Israel–Iran showdown) that might entangle big powers on opposing sides. Each of these theaters — Europe, East Asia, Middle East — has the seeds of great-power confrontation. Moreover, Russia and China have grown closer in their strategic cooperation, often coordinating moves in a way that challenges Western interests (). For instance, they veto Western proposals at the UN in tandem, conduct joint military drills, and amplify each other’s propaganda narratives. This alignment of authoritarian powers could form a bloc in a future global conflict scenario.

On the other hand, numerous mitigating factors make a third world war unlikely. First and foremost is the understanding by all major powers of the catastrophic consequences of nuclear war. The principle of nuclear deterrence still holds: leaders know that starting a full-scale war against another nuclear-armed state is essentially suicidal. This tends to put a brake on escalation. For example, throughout the Ukraine conflict, the U.S. and NATO have been extremely careful to avoid direct military intervention on Ukrainian soil, precisely to avoid a direct NATO-Russia clash that could spiral to nuclear use. Similarly, Beijing and Washington, despite aggressive posturing, have channels to communicate and defuse incidents to prevent an accidental rush to war over Taiwan.

Secondly, the global economy is deeply interconnected (globalization may have plateaued, but it’s still significant). All major economies – U.S., EU, China, Russia, etc. – would suffer enormously in a world war scenario. This interdependence acts as a restraint: for instance, China’s economic success is still tied to access to Western markets; a war would shatter that and threaten the Communist Party’s domestic stability. So there are strong incentives to avoid war, in favor of competition below the threshold of armed conflict.

Thirdly, there remain vital international diplomatic frameworks and norms that work to contain conflicts. While often paralyzed at the Security Council level, organisations like the United Nations still operate dozens of peacekeeping missions and facilitate negotiations in various disputes. While not universally heeded, international courts and arbitration offer forums to resolve issues without violence. Multilateral treaties (like those governing the use of space or Antarctica or the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons) provide some guardrails. Even amid high tensions, communication hotlines exist between militaries (e.g., the U.S. and Russia have deconfliction lines for Syria and a NATO-Russia hotline for air incidents; the U.S. and China have naval hotlines) to prevent accidents from spiralling. These channels of communication and the legacy of cooperation in some areas (for example, arms control agreements of the past or jointly addressing issues like piracy or climate security) somewhat reduce the chance of a sudden misunderstanding igniting a war.

Furthermore, regional balances of power and alliances help deter unilateral aggression. Even if the U.S. role is uncertain in Europe, Russia must consider that a war against a coalition of European states (which collectively have greater economic power and increasingly coordinated militaries) would be daunting. In Asia, China faces not only the U.S. but also the alliance web of the U.S. with Japan, Australia, South Korea, and India’s wary presence—all of which make a quick victory over Taiwan far from assured and hence riskier to attempt.

Another key factor is that the memory of World War II’s horrors still looms large in the collective consciousness of many leaders and populations. Unlike in 1914, when world leaders underestimated how bad a global war could be, today’s leaders are acutely aware that World War III could end civilization as we know it. This creates a psychological barrier to pushing the red button, so to speak. Even leaders who speak in apocalyptic tones (like Putin’s hints at using nukes) have so far shown caution in action.

Recent intelligence assessments echo this cautious optimism. For instance, American political scientist Ian Bremmer noted that while the risk of a direct great-power war has grown, it is still “very low… certainly not zero”, emphasizing that cooler heads usually prevail when the stakes are existential (Ian Bremmer to News.Az: The risk of a Third World War remains, but ...). Defense analysts also point out that significant powers often choose indirect competition (proxy wars, economic pressure, cyber operations) to avoid crossing the threshold into open conflict with each other.

That said, the risk of a world war is not zero and may rise at the margins. A miscalculation or accidental escalation remains a real danger. In a fast-moving crisis (imagine a clash between Chinese and U.S. jets over the South China Sea or a Russian missile mistakenly hitting Poland and killing civilians), domestic pressures and nationalist fervour could push leaders into a corner where they feel compelled to respond with force, potentially setting off a chain reaction of retaliation. Multiple simmering conflicts simultaneously are worrisome because they stretch diplomatic resources thin. There is also the unpredictable element: what if a regional power like Iran or North Korea provokes a conflict that spirals beyond its borders? In the Middle East, for example, the involvement of Iran and proxy militias in a broader war against Israel could draw in the U.S. on one side and perhaps Iran’s partners (or even Russia, diplomatically) on the other, raising the spectre of a larger conflagration ().

In conclusion, while the likelihood of World War III remains limited, it is higher today than it was 10–15 years ago, due to the convergence of multiple crises and great-power rivalries. The world’s major powers seem to understand the stakes and are generally acting to prevent direct clashes, but the margin for error is shrinking. Continued diplomatic engagement, clear communication, and restraint are essential to navigate this perilous period. The fact that we are even discussing world war risk after decades in which it felt nearly unthinkable is telling. It underscores the urgent need for renewed efforts at conflict resolution, arms control (especially nuclear arms control, which has been eroding), and robust international cooperation to address not just these conflicts but also the root causes – security anxieties, territorial disputes, ideological extremism, and power vacuums – that fuel them. History has shown that global wars often start not out of grand design but of miscalculation in a charged environment. Avoiding such miscalculation now is paramount.

Ultimately, a full-scale World War III can be averted despite the elevated tensions. The world’s nations, cognizant of the “catastrophic potential consequences” of such a war, have strong incentives to keep even intense regional conflicts from escalating to a global level () (). Maintaining vigilance and open diplomatic channels, strengthening international institutions, and remembering past lessons are crucial to ensure that today’s numerous conflicts do not coalesce into a single, worldwide conflagration. As fraught as the current geopolitical climate is, the continued existence of diplomatic frameworks and the mutual deterrence of destructive weaponry mean that global leaders still have the tools and the motivation to prevent World War III. The coming years will test their wisdom and resolve to use those tools wisely.

---

References

1. Politico Magazine (2017). “The Hidden History of Trump’s First Trip to Moscow.” Politico. Describes how Intourist, the Soviet travel agency, functioned as a KGB front to surveil and compromise foreign visitors (The Hidden History of Trump’s First Trip to Moscow - POLITICO Magazine).

2. Higgins, A. (2017). “Kompromat: The Soviet Art of Political Blackmail Is Back in Vogue.” The Atlantic. Explains the practice of kompromat and details post-Soviet cases, including Putin-era use of sex tapes to discredit opponents (How Kompromat Works - The Atlantic).

3. NATO (2022). “Statement by NATO Heads of State – 24 March 2022.” NATO.int. Describes Russia’s February 2022 attack on Ukraine as “unprovoked” and “unjustified,” condemning the invasion and affirming that Ukraine did not provoke the war (The consequences of Russia's invasion of Ukraine for international ...).

4. Polityuk, P. & Hosenball, M. (2019). “What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.” Reuters (Oct 18, 2019). Details Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma and notes that extensive investigations found no evidence of Joe Biden intervening improperly on his son’s behalf (What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma | Reuters) (What Hunter Biden did on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma | Reuters).

5. Swan, B.W. (2023). “The Burisma board, a laptop scandal and struggles with addiction: What to know about Hunter Biden’s legal troubles.” Politico (June 20, 2023). Summarizes the Hunter Biden laptop saga, noting that some contents involved Burisma and personal material, and that initial claims of a Russian disinformation plot were not substantiated by evidence (What to know about Hunter Biden's legal troubles - POLITICO) (What to know about Hunter Biden's legal troubles - POLITICO).

6. Spike, J. (AP) (2024). “Trump’s second term could realign US diplomacy towards authoritarian leaders.” The Irish News (Nov 7, 2024). Reports that Trump avoided criticizing Putin and showed admiration for authoritarian figures like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, aligning with an “authoritarian-minded chemistry” between Trump and such leaders (Trump’s second term could realign US diplomacy towards authoritarian leaders – The Irish News).

7. El País Editorial Board (2025). “Trump cambia de bando” (Trump Switches Sides). El País (Mar 2, 2025). Editorial describing how under Trump, the U.S. aligned openly with Putin against Europe, adopting Kremlin arguments to justify the Ukraine invasion (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS).

8. El País (2025). “Trump cambia de bando” – editorial (continued). Describes Trump’s proposed peace plan conceding to all of Putin’s key demands: no NATO for Ukraine, Russian annexation of occupied provinces, lifting of sanctions, and U.S. defending Russia in international forums (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS). Also notes the plan for a joint exploitation of Ukraine’s mineral resources as a form of extortion, which Zelensky was pressed to accept in exchange for a ceasefire guarantee (Trump cambia de bando | Opinión | EL PAÍS).

9. Gray, A., Rinke, A. & Siebold, S. (2025). “Vance attack on Europe overshadows Ukraine talks at security conference.” Reuters (Feb 15, 2025). Details U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech at Munich accusing European leaders of censoring free speech and failing on immigration, and Germany’s furious response calling the remarks “unacceptable” (Vance attack on Europe overshadows Ukraine talks at security conference | Reuters) (Vance attack on Europe overshadows Ukraine talks at security conference | Reuters).

10. MacAskill, A. & Holton, K. (2025). “UK announces new $2 billion deal to fund air-defence missiles for Ukraine.” Reuters (Mar 2, 2025). Reports that British PM Keir Starmer announced a £1.6 billion package for Ukraine to purchase 5,000 air-defense missiles, with manufacturer Thales producing the missiles in Belfast (UK announces new $2 billion deal to fund air-defence missiles for Ukraine | Reuters) (UK announces new $2 billion deal to fund air-defence missiles for Ukraine | Reuters).

11. Harding, L. (2025). “UK gives royal welcome to Zelenskyy after White House meltdown.” The Guardian (Mar 1, 2025). Notes that King Charles III held an official audience with President Zelensky as a show of support after Zelensky’s tense meeting with Trump. Also reports PM Starmer hosting a defense summit in London with European leaders to present a united front on Ukraine (UK gives royal welcome to Zelenskyy after White House meltdown - Mikro-Makro / Mikro Detaylar Makro Tartışmalar) (UK gives royal welcome to Zelenskyy after White House meltdown - Mikro-Makro / Mikro Detaylar Makro Tartışmalar).

12. Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State. “Soviet Invasion of Czechoslovakia, 1968.” (Milestones: 1961–1968). Describes how on Aug 20, 1968, the Soviet Union led Warsaw Pact troops to invade Czechoslovakia and crush the Prague Spring reforms (Milestones in the History of U.S. Foreign Relations - Office of the Historian).

13. History.com Editors. “Soviets put a brutal end to Hungarian revolution – This Day in History: Nov 4, 1956.” History.com. Provides an account of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising’s suppression: Soviet tanks rolled into Budapest, thousands were killed, and about 250,000 Hungarians fled as refugees (Soviets put a brutal end to Hungarian revolution | November 4, 1956 | HISTORY) (Soviets put a brutal end to Hungarian revolution | November 4, 1956 | HISTORY).

14. Higgins, A. (2023). “Lessons of the Minsk Deal: Breaking the Cycle of Russia’s War Against Ukraine.” Institute for the Study of War (ISW Backgrounder). Explains the Minsk II agreement and how Russia violated it – repeated ceasefire breaches and then the full-scale 2022 invasion – effectively nullifying the accord (Lessons of the Minsk Deal: Breaking the Cycle of Russia's War Against Ukraine | Institute for the Study of War) (Lessons of the Minsk Deal: Breaking the Cycle of Russia's War Against Ukraine | Institute for the Study of War).

15. Wikipedia. “Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.” (accessed 2025). Details the March–April 2022 Istanbul talks: Ukraine’s willingness to consider neutrality with security guarantees, and Russian responses. Notes that Ukraine proposed neutrality with a 15-year consultation on Crimea, while Russia promised to reduce military activity near Kyiv (Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia) (Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia). Also includes Ukrainian official Arakhamia’s statement that Russia offered no trustworthy security guarantees and thus Ukraine’s delegation did not trust or finalize any agreement (Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia).

16. Council on Foreign Relations – Preventive Action Project. “Conflicts to Watch in 2025 – Executive Summary.” CFR Report (Jan 2025). Summarizes an expert survey indicating that this year could be among the most dangerous in decades, with wars in Gaza and Ukraine and other hostilities (e.g., Iran–Israel tensions) identified as top concerns (Conflicts to Watch in 2025).

17. Defense Intelligence Agency (2024). “2024 Annual Threat Assessment – Statement before Congress.” (Apr 2024). Provides U.S. intelligence assessment of global threats. Notably, it states the Hamas attack in Israel (Oct 2023) triggered regional instability that Iran is exploiting, with heightened conflict risk in the Middle East (). Also assesses North Korea’s continued missile and nuclear advancements and its increasingly bellicose stance toward South Korea and the U.S. ().

18. News.az (2023). Interview with Ian Bremmer. (Dec 2023). Political risk expert Ian Bremmer emphasizes that while the risk of a Third World War remains, it is “a very low risk, but certainly not zero,” given Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and confrontation with NATO (Ian Bremmer to News.Az: The risk of a Third World War remains, but ...).

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Geopolitical Shiefts in Global Energy Trade…

---

Introduction

The global energy trade is undergoing significant shifts driven by geopolitics. Traditional oil and gas flows are being reshaped by sanctions, strategic alliances, and competition over emerging energy technologies. Russia’s confrontation with the West has accelerated its pivot toward Asia, bolstering energy ties with China and India. In parallel, Saudi Arabia and Russia lead an expanded OPEC+ alliance aimed at managing oil markets. Energy resources are increasingly wielded as geopolitical tools – from Russia’s natural gas cutoffs to Saudi-Russian coordination influencing oil prices. Meanwhile, a strategic rivalry is unfolding between the United States and China over clean energy supply chains and technological leadership.

This paper analyzes these dynamics in seven parts: (1) Russia’s pivot to South Asia and rising energy trade with India and China; (2) the emergence of a Russia-China-India energy bloc and its impact on global markets; (3) the strategic alliance within OPEC+ for oil price stabilization; (4) the use of energy as a geopolitical tool, including Russian gas supply leverage and Saudi-Russian cooperation; (5) U.S.-China competition in clean energy technologies and supply chains; (6) the impact of a second Trump presidency on the global energy sector; and (7) the implications of tariffs on oil and natural gas trade affecting key partners (Mexico, China, Canada). The analysis draws on current data and developments, presenting a clear argument with supporting evidence.

Russia’s Pivot to South Asia: Growing Energy Trade with India and China

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing Western sanctions severed much of Moscow’s longstanding energy trade with Europe. In response, Russia has aggressively redirected its oil and gas exports toward more receptive markets in South Asia and the Far East. China and India have emerged as critical buyers of Russian energy, partially filling the void left by Europe’s retreat. In 2023, Russia’s trade with China surged by about 63% to over $240 billion, while trade with India quadrupled from 2021 levels to reach $65 billion. These figures mean Russia’s trade with China and India each exceeded its pre-war trade with the entire European Union.

India, which previously bought little Russian oil, has made it a pillar of its energy supply. Indian refiners are not only fueling domestic growth with cheap Russian crude but also re-exporting refined products (like diesel) to Western markets. China has elevated Russia to be its top crude supplier, ahead of even Saudi Arabia. By 2023, roughly 80% of Russia’s crude exports were flowing to Asia, a dramatic reorientation from the Europe-centric trade of prior decades.

A Russia–China–India Energy Bloc and Its Global Impact

The deepening energy ties among Russia, China, and India have raised the prospect of an emerging “energy bloc” that could challenge Western dominance in global energy markets. While not a formal alliance, the convergence of interests among these three powers is noteworthy. Russia is a resource-exporting giant seeking non-Western markets; China and India are the world’s largest and third-largest oil importers, respectively, hungry for affordable energy to fuel their growth. All three are members of BRICS, and both China and India have pointedly refused to join Western sanctions on Russia.

This tacit alignment has enabled Russia to successfully divert most of its seaborne oil exports from Europe to Asia, undermining the intended effect of Western embargoes and price caps. The collective weight of a Russia-China-India bloc in energy is substantial: together, they account for a large share of both supply and demand in certain markets. The de-dollarization of energy trade could, over time, weaken the financial leverage of Western sanctions, as alternative payment systems and insurance networks develop around this bloc.

The OPEC+ Alliance: Saudi-Russian Partnership and Oil Price Stabilization

A parallel development in global energy geopolitics is the entrenchment of the OPEC+ alliance, which binds the OPEC cartel (led by Saudi Arabia) with non-OPEC oil producers, foremost among them Russia. Since its formal inception in late 2016, OPEC+ has been a strategic partnership aimed at managing oil production to influence prices. The Saudi-Russian tandem at the heart of OPEC+ represents an alignment of two of the world’s top three oil producers. The alliance has proven effective in stabilizing oil prices and maintaining revenue certainty for key producers.

Energy as a Geopolitical Tool: Gas Cutoffs and Oil Diplomacy

Control over energy supplies has long been wielded as a geopolitical instrument. Russia’s natural gas cutoffs to Europe in 2021–2022 are a textbook example of energy leverage. By the winter of 2022, Russian pipeline gas exports to Europe had fallen by over 80%, plunging the continent into an energy crisis. This has forced Europe to accelerate alternative arrangements, importing LNG from the U.S. and Qatar, refiring coal plants, and even extending nuclear plant operations. While Russia’s moves inflicted economic pain, they ultimately failed to fracture Western unity, as Europe adapted and reduced dependency on Russian energy.

On the oil front, Saudi-Russian cooperation in OPEC+ has had geopolitical ripple effects. Its coordinated production cuts have periodically influenced global oil prices, sometimes aligning with strategic goals that diverge from Western interests.

U.S.–China Competition in Clean Energy Technologies and Supply Chains

The United States and China are in direct competition to command the industries of the future – from solar panels and wind turbines to electric vehicles (EVs) and the critical minerals that make them possible. Over the past decade, China has come to dominate global clean energy manufacturing. It controls the lion’s share of production capacity in solar photovoltaics, batteries, and critical minerals processing.

The U.S. has responded by attempting to reduce dependence on Chinese supply chains through industrial policies and strategic partnerships. However, China’s advantage in cost efficiency and raw material processing remains significant. The race for dominance in clean energy supply chains will define the next phase of global energy geopolitics.

The Impact of a Second Trump Presidency on the Global Energy Sector

¨A Shock to the System…

The global electricity sector, encompassing power generation, transmission, and distribution, is profoundly influenced by geopolitical shifts, energy policy decisions, and trade dynamics. A second Trump presidency would have significant implications for the industry in three major areas:

1. Energy Market Volatility and Fossil Fuel Prioritization

2. Global Supply Chain Disruptions for Electrical Equipment

3. Geopolitical Risks and Investment Shifts in Renewable Energy

1. Energy Market Volatility and Fossil Fuel Prioritization

One of the most immediate effects of Trump’s return to office would be a fundamental shift in U.S. energy policy, moving away from climate-focused policies and back to fossil fuel expansion. Trump has already stated that he would lift regulations on coal, oil, and natural gas production, and withdraw U.S. commitments to international climate goals such as the Paris Agreement. This would have the following effects on the electrical sector:

Increased Natural Gas and Coal-Fired Power Generation:

1. Trump’s energy policies in his first term led to a 30% expansion in U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. His second term would likely see further deregulation, incentivizing utilities to build or extend the life of fossil-fuel power plants rather than investing in renewable energy.

2. In regions dependent on U.S. LNG exports (e.g., Europe, Japan, and South Korea), price volatility could increase as energy policy shifts disrupt supply chains.

3. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on emissions would likely be rolled back, reducing the pressure on power plants to adopt cleaner technologies.

   
   Weakened Support for Renewable Energy Development:

4. Under Trump’s first term, renewable energy incentives were significantly reduced, and there were efforts to cancel tax credits for solar and wind power. A similar trend is expected in his second term.

5. Utilities and power producers that had committed to carbon-neutral electricity by 2030 or 2050 may face policy uncertainty, which could delay large-scale investments in renewables.

6. Wind and solar energy infrastructure projects often depend on federal tax credits and incentives. With Trump likely ending or reducing these subsidies, private investment in green energy may slow down, particularly in the U.S.

   
   Impact on the European Energy Market:

7. Trump has suggested that the U.S. might reduce military and energy commitments to NATO allies, which could force European nations to accelerate their own energy independence strategies.

8. This could lead to increased European-based energy projects, including offshore wind, nuclear, and hydrogen production.

Trump’s policies would favor fossil fuels over renewables, leading to a temporary resurgence in coal and gas-powered electricity generation, particularly in markets where U.S. exports play a key role. However, this could slow progress toward net-zero carbon targets and introduce market uncertainty for long-term electrical infrastructure investments.

---

2. Global Supply Chain Disruptions for Electrical Equipment

Trump’s protectionist trade policies, particularly in the electrical manufacturing sector, could disrupt global supply chains for power infrastructure, including transformers, batteries, solar panels, and transmission equipment.

Renewed Tariffs on Electrical Equipment from China and Asia:

1. Trump has already floated 60% tariffs on Chinese imports, which would impact electrical components, semiconductors, and grid infrastructure materials.

2. Solar panels, wind turbines, and lithium batteries are heavily dependent on Chinese and Southeast Asian manufacturing. Increased tariffs could raise costs for energy developers, making renewable energy projects more expensive and less competitive in the U.S.

3. In response, China might retaliate by limiting exports of rare earth minerals, which are crucial for high-efficiency electrical components, electric vehicles (EVs), and smart grid technology.

   Impact on High-Voltage Grid Components and Smart Grid Development:

4. Many high-voltage transformers used in the U.S. and Europe rely on imported steel and electrical laminations from China, South Korea, and Mexico.

5. If Trump escalates trade restrictions, utilities could face supply shortages, leading to delays in grid modernization and higher costs for infrastructure projects.

6. The rollout of smart grids—which rely on advanced semiconductors and sensors—could slow down if key microelectronics suppliers (such as those in Taiwan and South Korea) experience geopolitical tensions or disruptions.

   Increased Investment in Domestic Manufacturing (But at Higher Costs):

7. While Trump’s trade policies might incentivize onshoring electrical manufacturing, the transition would be costly and slow, making short-term grid investments more expensive.

8. The U.S. electrical industry could rely more on domestic suppliers, but at the cost of higher prices and delayed projects.

Trade wars and tariffs under Trumps administrations would create higher costs and supply chain bottlenecks for electrical infrastructure, particularly in the renewable energy sector and grid modernization projects. Countries relying on imported transformers, semiconductors, and solar components could face price hikes and slower deployment.

3. Geopolitical Risks and Investment Shifts in Renewable Energy

Russia and China’s Influence on Global Energy Markets

1. Trump’s weaker stance on Russia could affect global oil and gas pricing and shift energy partnerships.

2. Russia might increase its dominance in supplying fossil fuels, while China strengthens supply chains for renewable energy components.

3. China has positioned itself as the largest producer of solar panels, batteries, and wind turbines, and could use a Trump-led trade war to expand its dominance in the electrical infrastructure market, supplying countries that are cut off from U.S. exports.

   Investment Shifts Toward European and Asian Markets:

4. As the U.S. reduces incentives for renewable energy, investors may divert capital to Europe, Japan, and China, where government policies continue to support the transition.

5. The EU Green Deal, China’s Five-Year Energy Plan, and Japan’s hydrogen development strategy could see higher investment inflows, while U.S. electrical infrastructure investment stagnates.

   Cybersecurity Risks to Electrical Grids:

6. Trump’s weakened alliances with NATO and international cybersecurity bodies could increase vulnerabilities in electrical infrastructure.

7. Russia and China have previously targeted U.S. and European power grids with cyberattacks, and a breakdown in global cooperation on cybersecurity could leave electrical grids more exposed to hacking and sabotage.

8. The U.S. power sector would need to increase private investment in cybersecurity defenses to compensate for weaker international coordination.

The electrical sector would face a major geopolitical realignment under Trump. While U.S. energy policy shifts toward domestic fossil fuels, global investors may pivot toward Europe and Asia, where renewables remain a priority. Additionally, trade tensions could exacerbate cybersecurity risks, requiring new defensive investments in grid infrastructure.

With Trump back in office, U.S. energy policy is shifting sharply toward fossil fuel expansion. The administration has lifted restrictions on drilling, fast-tracked pipeline approvals, and reduced regulatory oversight of coal and natural gas projects. Trump has distanced the U.S. from European energy priorities and re-emphasized energy independence, focusing on domestic production rather than climate-focused policies.

This has led to increased U.S. oil and gas output, making American energy more competitive globally. But it has also strained transatlantic relations, as European nations move ahead with decarbonization efforts while the U.S. prioritizes fossil fuels.

Tariffs and Energy Trade: Implications for Mexico, China, and Canada

Trade policy under Trump has introduced new uncertainties into global energy markets. Tariffs on Chinese imports have affected the cost of renewable energy components, while potential tariffs on oil and gas exports could disrupt trade with Mexico and Canada. The U.S.’s growing energy independence has allowed it to use trade policy as a strategic tool, reshaping energy alliances and shifting investment patterns.

Conclusion: Future Outlook for Global Energy Markets

The global energy landscape is experiencing a rapid transformation. Russia’s pivot to Asia, the rise of the Russia-China-India energy bloc, and the strategic role of OPEC+ have reshaped traditional energy flows. Meanwhile, the rivalry between the U.S. and China in clean energy technologies is intensifying. Under Trump, U.S. energy policy is reinforcing fossil fuel production while retreating from international climate commitments. These shifts will define global energy security and economic stability in the years to come.

---

References

Briggs, Kaitlin, and Jonathan Elkind. Global Gas Dynamics as Russia Pivots Markets to China. New York: Columbia SIPA Center on Global Energy Policy, 2023.

International Energy Agency (IEA). Solar PV Global Supply Chains. Paris: IEA, July 2022.

Laron, Guy. “The OPEC+ Puzzle: Why Russian-Saudi Cooperation Starts – and Stops – with Oil Prices.” Wilson Center, January 19, 2023.

Lipscy, Josh, and Niels Graham. “China is Trading More with Russia—but so are Many US Allies and Partners.” Atlantic Council, May 30, 2023.

Shaffer, Brenda. Energy Politics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011.

News and Media Sources:

Civillini, Matteo, Megan Rowling, and Joe Lo. “What Trump’s Second Term Means for Climate Action in the US and Beyond.” Climate Home News, January 15, 2025.

Faulconbridge, Guy, and Vladimir Soldatkin. “Russia and Saudi Arabia Urge All OPEC+ Powers to Join Oil Cuts.” Reuters, December 7, 2023.

Kossov, Igor. “Sanctions for Show: Russian Oil Sales to China, India Single Main Driver of Ukraine Invasion.” The Kyiv Independent, February 23, 2024.

Morgan, David, David Lawder, and Leah Douglas. “Trump Will Set Exact Levels for Mexico, Canada Tariffs Coming Tuesday, Says US Commerce Chief.” Reuters, March 3, 2025.

Russell, Clyde. “Rising Flow of Russian Oil Products to China, India and the Middle East.” Reuters, February 16, 2023.

Williams, Curtis. “Trade War with China Casts Dark Cloud Over New US LNG Projects.” Reuters, February 4, 2025.

Yermakov, Vadim. “Russia Pivots South for Trade Following Western European Sanctions.” Modern Diplomacy, March 15, 2024.
(Chicago-style references for all sources used in the paper)

---

When Diplomacy Turns into a Heavyweight Brawl… something unpredictable and unprecedented…

---

Kaja Kallas: A New World Order Takes Shape…

The chaotic diplomatic clash between Trump, Vance, and Zelenskyy signals deeper shifts—economic turmoil, geopolitical realignments, and energy politics are reshaping global alliances. The old rules are fading, and a new era of international order, driven by power struggles and uncertainty, is emerging before our eyes.Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s top diplomat and former Estonian Prime Minister, notably emphasised the need for Europe to assume stronger leadership following tensions between President Trump and President Zelenskyy.

Kaya symbolises change, transformation, and the dawn of something unpredictable and unprecedented…

---

Who are they? Are they President Trump, Vice President Pence, President Zelensky, or the boxers Tyson and Holyfield?"

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Headlines

Top Headlines from February 28 to March 1, 2025

1. Trump-Zelenskyy Oval Office Confrontation (1)
A tense White House meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy escalated into a heated verbal clash. Trump accused Zelenskyy of “gambling with World War Three,” while Vice President JD Vance rebuked Zelenskyy for publicly airing grievances. The meeting abruptly ended without a joint press conference or a signed minerals deal.

2. Global Market Turbulence Amid New Tariff Threats (2)
President Trump's threat to impose new 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports, alongside increased duties on Chinese and EU goods, sent global markets tumbling. Asian equities fell sharply, and the U.S. dollar rose, reflecting fears of an intensified trade war.

3. Major UK Banks Face Online Service Disruptions (3)
Thousands of UK customers at Lloyds, Halifax, and Nationwide experienced significant disruptions to online banking services, particularly impactful as it occurred on payday. Most services have since resumed normal operations.

4. Severe Heatwave Predicted for Western Australia (4)
The Bureau of Meteorology issued heatwave warnings across Western Australia, forecasting severe temperatures into the mid-forties Celsius, notably in the Pilbara region.

5. People's Union USA Organises 'Economic Blackout' (5)
A nationwide 24-hour boycott of major retailers was organised by the People's Union USA, promoting consumer support of local businesses. The action advocates systemic economic reforms including eliminating federal income tax and implementing universal healthcare.

6. WWE Elimination Chamber Event in Toronto (6)
Toronto hosts WWE’s Elimination Chamber, with high-stakes matches such as Tiffany Stratton & Trish Stratus vs. Nia Jax & Candice LaRae, influencing the upcoming WrestleMania 41 line-up.

7. Elon Musk and Shivon Zilis Welcome Fourth Child (7)
Elon Musk and Shivon Zilis announced the birth of their fourth child, named Seldon Lycurgus, sharing their joy and reflecting on their growing blended family.

8. Rare Planetary Alignment Seen from Las Vegas (8)
A unique astronomical event allowing the simultaneous viewing of seven planets took place, with the College of Southern Nevada Planetarium providing telescopes for public observation.

9. Avalanche in Uttarakhand, India (9)
A devastating avalanche trapped 55 workers in Uttarakhand, India. Rescue efforts are ongoing, with 14 workers rescued and eight remaining trapped amid difficult conditions.

10. European Leaders Back Zelenskyy Following White House Clash (1)
After Zelenskyy's contentious meeting with Trump, European leaders quickly rallied in support, with the EU's top diplomat hinting Europe may take a more assertive global leadership role moving forward.

---

References

(1) Wikipedia, "2025 Trump–Zelenskyy Meeting"
(2) Reuters, "Global markets react negatively to renewed tariff threats from Trump administration"
(3) The Guardian, "UK banking services disrupted, affecting thousands on payday"
(4) News.com.au, "Severe heatwave forecast issued for Western Australia"
(5) Time, "People's Union USA leads nationwide economic blackout"
(6) TalkSport, "WWE Elimination Chamber event set for Toronto"
(7) LiveMint, "Elon Musk and Shivon Zilis announce the birth of fourth child, Seldon Lycurgus"
(8) Hindustan Times, "Rare planetary alignment event draws crowds in Las Vegas"
(9) Hindustan Times, "Avalanche disaster in Uttarakhand traps dozens, rescue ongoing"

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a rapidly changing world rocked by uncertainty and relentless inflation, the very essence of blogging is being tested like never before. Every piece of content we create now faces unprecedented challenges. To safeguard the integrity and quality you expect, we’ve invested heavily—premium software, indispensable licenses, and breathtaking, high-quality copyrighted images—all crucial pieces in the puzzle.

But fear not—we're not on this turbulent journey alone! Your support has become our greatest ally. Just last week, thanks to changes brought by Musk, every single like, retweet, and share you offer on "X" transformed into a powerful act of solidarity—completely free, totally private, and profoundly impactful. Your gestures of support aren’t merely appreciated; they truly shape the future of our work!

If you're inspired to amplify your impact even further, consider supporting us directly through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com or via our IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, you can easily and securely contribute using Stripe through our dedicated donation link. Every contribution—big or small—echoes loudly, enabling us to reach new heights.

We are endlessly grateful to have you with us on this incredible journey. Your generosity is more than support; it’s the lifeblood that fuels our dreams and empowers our mission. Thank you for standing with us—you truly make all the difference!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1895791376731631671

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

¨Something unpredictable and unprecedented…

The air in the Oval Office crackled with tension as if the West Wing had morphed into a boxing ring under the glare of global cameras. In one corner stood U.S. President Donald Trump, jaw clenched and knuckles drumming on the Resolute Desk; in the other, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, eyes blazing with resolve. What began as a cordial meeting quickly descended into a furious shouting match, a spectacle as shocking as the infamous 1997 bout when Mike Tyson sank his teeth into Evander Holyfield’s ear. Aides looked on in stunned silence as the two leaders traded verbal haymakers. Trump slammed Zelenskyy with a thunderous rebuke – “You’re gambling with the lives of millions… you’re gambling with World War Three... and what you’re doing is very disrespectful to this country” – each word landing like a punch to the gut of their alliance. (1). Vice President JD Vance piled on, scolding Zelenskyy for daring to air grievances “in front of the American media”. (1) The Ukrainian president, cornered but unflinching, fired back that Vladimir Putin could never be trusted after years of broken promises, warning that Russia’s war would eventually scorch the United States if not stopped (1). This only inflamed Trump further. “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel,” he snapped, dismissing Zelenskyy’s concerns with a wave of his hand (1). Within minutes, it was all over. In a scene dripping with drama, Trump abruptly cut the meeting short, cancelled their planned joint press conference, and effectively ordered Zelenskyy out of the White House – the diplomatic equivalent of a TKO.

Zelenskyy walked out into the cool Washington air without the security guarantees or funding he so desperately sought, as if a dazed boxer leaving the ring empty-handed. But back home, far from viewing him as defeated, many Ukrainians cheered his defiance. They saw their leader standing toe-to-toe with the most powerful man in the world and refusing to back down. “Zelenskyy fought like a lion,” exclaimed Nataliia Serhiienko, a 67-year-old retiree in Kyiv, praising him for defending Ukraine’s dignity under immense pressure (2). Social media in Ukraine lit up with pride: their president hadn’t been cowed by Trump’s barrage. “We are striving for democracy, and we are met with total disrespect… [but] he defended Ukraine’s interests,” said Artem Vasyliev, a Kyiv resident who felt Zelenskyy had stood his ground for all Ukrainians (2). It was as if, in that chaotic Oval Office bout, Zelenskyy absorbed the blows but refused to throw in the towel.

Yet the Oval Office confrontation rattled more than a few diplomats, unleashing shockwaves across the globe. Within hours, the world’s political and economic order was quaking from the aftershocks of this extraordinary face-off.

Global Tremors: Markets Reel from the Oval Office Outburst

The diplomatic brawl in Washington sent global markets into a tailspin, reinforcing just how closely geopolitics and economics are now entwined. Investors watched the televised spat in real-time with mounting anxiety. Almost immediately, a rush to safety began: demand for U.S. Treasury bonds surged as panicked traders sought shelter from the uncertainty. (3) Yields on the 10-year Treasury plunged within minutes, indicating that big money smelled trouble. (3) On stock exchanges from New York to Frankfurt, screens flashed red. In Europe, the DAX and CAC 40 futures slipped into the red, and the euro tumbled to a two-week low against the dollar amid the chaos. (3). “It’s disturbing,” admitted one portfolio manager, noting that it had seemed the world was inching toward a peace deal only days earlier – now those hopes were suddenly up in the air. (3)

What spooked investors was the spectre of a protracted war with no clear end in sight. The Oval Office meltdown made headlines precisely when Ukraine and its allies had been hoping for progress toward a ceasefire. Instead, Trump’s public berating of Zelenskyy signalled a widening rift and uncertainty over continued U.S. support. Once tantalisingly close, the prospect of a U.S.-brokered peace deal now appeared to evaporate, and markets reacted with pure, unbridled jitters. Safe-haven currencies and gold ticked up, while equities seesawed violently in choppy trading. “This just added one more layer of unpredictability,” a Wall Street analyst noted, commenting that the Trump administration’s unpredictability – from trade wars to diplomatic spats – has become a source of volatility. (3) In fact, the Oval Office clash came on the heels of Trump threatening new punitive tariffs on key trade partners in a matter of days, including steep duties on Mexican, Canadian, and Chinese goods. (3) The timing could not have been worse for a global economy already contending with weakening growth signals, stubborn inflation, and recent oil price shocks.

As Washington erupted in drama, central bankers and CEOs worldwide had to contend with a new reality: one outburst in the White House had underscored just how fragile the global economic balance is. The instability radiating from the U.S.-Ukraine confrontation risks undercutting consumer and business confidence worldwide. In short, when allies feud, markets bleed. The spectacle of the two supposed partners trading insults on live TV introduced a chilling question into boardrooms and cabinets: If the United States’ commitment to Ukraine could crumble so explosively, what other geopolitical assumptions underpinning the world economy might be following to fall?

Energy Politics in the Crossfire

Beyond financial markets, the Oval Office showdown also reverberates through energy politics, intensifying an already chaotic global energy saga. For months, President Trump has been almost as fixated on oil prices as on battlefronts, pressuring allies and adversaries alike in an effort to tip the scales. In January, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump publicly urged Saudi Arabia and its OPEC partners to open the taps and flood the market with oil to drive prices down – a move aimed squarely at undercutting Vladimir Putin’s war coffers (4). “We need to get oil prices down!” he thundered, making it clear he wanted to starve Moscow of petrodollars. But the oil states have been in no mood to play along. In a rebuke to Washington’s wishes, the OPEC+ coalition, led de facto by Saudi Arabia and Russia, reaffirmed their commitment to keep output limited and prices firm, prioritising their own economic interests over American demands. (4)

The conflict over energy strategy has only grown more tangled in the wake of the Trump–Zelenskyy clash. The geopolitical calculus for oil producers has shifted, with the U.S. seemingly at odds with Ukraine. Notably, Saudi Arabia has stepped into the unusual role of a diplomatic go-between: Riyadh quietly hosted talks between American and Russian officials on Feb. 18, a highly symbolic meeting on neutral ground. (4) The fact that the world’s top oil exporter facilitated direct dialogue between Washington and Moscow speaks volumes about the new world energy order. Middle Eastern powers assert their influence as power brokers, capitalising on U.S.-European splits to advance their agendas. Saudi mediators have hinted at leveraging cooperation on oil production in exchange for security guarantees or economic favors from Washington – a sign of transactional diplomacy in overdrive.

Meanwhile, Russia is watching the Oval Office drama with glee and opportunism. Putin knows that high energy prices fill his coffers, and any discord among Western allies only bolsters his position. If U.S. support for Kyiv wavers, Moscow could gain leverage to push for sanctions relief or new energy deals. In fact, inside the Kremlin, there is open talk that U.S. sanctions might soon be eased and American companies will be allowed back to Russia if Trump’s outreach continues on its current trajectory. (4) Such outcomes seemed far-fetched a year ago; now they’re being whispered about in Moscow and Middle Eastern capitals alike.

Europe, for its part, finds itself in an ever more precarious spot on energy. European nations have painstakingly weaned themselves off Russian gas and oil since the war began, swallowing higher costs to deny Putin energy revenues. They depend on U.S. LNG shipments and a delicate global supply balance to keep the lights on and factories running. Little wonder, then, that Trump’s Oval Office outburst – and the questions it raises about U.S. reliability – have Europe biting its nails. If Washington strikes a side deal with Moscow or U.S. domestic priorities bring oil markets into turmoil, Europe could face an energy squeeze at the worst possible time. The geopolitical jousting over oil production quotas, sanctions, and supply chains has effectively made energy a weapon – and in this high-stakes game, the Oval Office melee was another live round fired.

As the dust settles, it’s clear that control over energy flows and resources is now firmly part of the conflict’s battleground. Tellingly, the ill-fated White House meeting itself was supposed to yield a landmark economic pact: a joint U.S.–Ukraine investment deal in Ukraine’s critical minerals and mining sector that would boost reconstruction and secure valuable resources for the West (5). The agreement was meant to bring Washington and Kyiv closer economically for years. Instead, it lies unsigned and in limbo, a casualty of clashing egos. For Ukraine, that’s a significant lost opportunity to attract investment to rebuild its war-ravaged infrastructure. For the U.S., it means missing out on access to rare earth metals and minerals vital for high-tech industries – a strategic win handed straight to competitors like China. In short, this Oval Office quarrel has derailed cooperation on everything from oil to lithium. The ripple effects in the global energy arena are just beginning to be felt, and none of them bode well for Western unity or energy security.

Geopolitical Realignments: A New World Disorder

Perhaps the most profound consequences of this dramatic confrontation are accelerating geopolitical realignment. The spectacle of an American president browbeating an allied leader on live television sent an unambiguous message to the world: the transatlantic alliance is not what it used to be. Almost immediately, leaders across Europe closed ranks – not behind Washington, but behind Kyiv. From Paris to Helsinki, presidents and prime ministers tweeted encouragement to Zelenskyy, effectively rebuking Trump without mentioning his name. French President Emmanuel Macron pointedly reiterated who the real aggressor and victim are: “Russia is the aggressor; Ukraine is the victim. We were right to help Ukraine… and must keep doing so,” he declared, emphasising unity among Western nations in support of Kyiv. (6) Others echoed the sentiment. In a remarkable show of European solidarity, officials from Germany, the Baltic states, Scandinavia, and beyond all voiced unwavering support for Ukraine’s fight against Russian invasion (6). It was a chorus of defiance aimed at countering Trump’s narrative and reassuring Ukrainians that they are not alone.

Perhaps the most striking statement came from Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief (and former Estonian premier). She bluntly asserted that the mantle of global leadership was shifting: “Today, it has become clear that the free world needs a new leader. It’s up to us, Europeans, to take up this challenge,” Kallas proclaimed, calling on Europe to step into a role traditionally held by America (6). Coming just hours after the Oval Office clash, those words carried the force of a historical turning point. European officials essentially sign that if Washington steps back from championing democracy and defending the post-WWII international order, Europe will forge ahead. We are witnessing a moment many had only theorised about: a splintering of the Western alliance, with Europe and the United States on visibly different pages regarding a major war on the European continent.

This realignment isn’t just rhetoric; tangible shifts are underway. Diplomatic sources hint that European capitals are quietly coordinating strategies to support Ukraine independent of U.S. approval, including commitments to sustain military aid even if the White House wavers. There is talk of an emergency EU–US summit to “get diplomacy back on track,” as Italy’s Prime Minister urgently proposed (6). Britain’s government, too, despite its close ties to Washington, scrambled to distance itself from Trump’s harangue – London affirmed “unwavering support” for Ukraine in the aftermath, and opposition leader Sir Keir Starmer (fresh from meetings in Washington) personally reached out to Zelenskyy to offer assurances (1). The symbolism is powerful: Western unity is re-coalescing, though not necessarily under American leadership.

However, not everyone in the West is shunning Trump’s stance. A few voices have broken ranks, most notably Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who praised Trump’s hardline approach. “Strong men make peace, weak men make war,” Orbán tweeted approvingly, lauding the U.S. president for ostensibly taking a brave stand (6). It was a reminder that within Europe itself, cracks exist – a nationalist wing that sees merit in Trump’s “America First” ethos and shares his skepticism of Zelenskyy. These EU and NATO divisions add another layer of complexity to the shifting geopolitical puzzle.

From Moscow’s vantage point, these developments are nothing short of a dream come true. The Kremlin wasted no time in exploiting the rift. Russian state media gleefully portrayed Zelenskyy’s Washington visit as a “public humiliation” and a sign of crumbling resolve in the Western camp. (5) Officials close to Putin are reportedly delighted: the spectacle of the West infighting is precisely what Moscow has long sought. Each quarrel between allies, they believe, brings Russia closer to achieving its aims. With Washington and Kyiv at odds, Putin gains confidence that he can negotiate Ukraine’s future directly with the Americans over Ukraine’s head – a scenario eerily reminiscent of great-power deals at Yalta in 1945 (5). Indeed, Trump has hinted he may meet Putin in person soon, which would be the first U.S.-Russia summit in years. (4) The prospect sets off alarm bells in European capitals and Kyiv: will two superpowers behind closed doors decide Ukraine’s fate? The notion was unthinkable a year ago; now, it’s uncomfortably plausible.

Meanwhile, in Beijing, strategists are undoubtedly noting how this chaos might serve China’s interests. A distracted and divided West could weaken the united front that has checked Chinese ambitions in trade and the South China Sea. Though China has kept a relatively low profile in this specific drama, it stands to gain if U.S. leadership globally is perceived to falter. Any Western fracture is an opening for Beijing to expand its influence through economic deals or diplomatic initiatives, presenting China as a more stable partner. We may soon see China subtly increasing support for Russia or offering itself as a mediator in the Ukraine conflict to position itself as a pillar of a new multipolar world as U.S.-Europe cohesion wanes.

For Ukraine, the geopolitical realignments are a double-edged sword. On the one hand, Zelenskyy’s steadfast stance has galvanized unprecedented support among European allies and others determined to uphold the principle that borders cannot be changed by force. On the other hand, the public spat with Trump has laid bare that Kyiv can no longer take American backing for granted. Ukrainian officials now face the delicate task of navigating an international landscape where their chief patron – the United States – might be playing a different game entirely. Kyiv already has a hushed discussion about diversifying alliances: deepening ties with European powers, courting Global South nations for support at the United Nations, and even contingency plans should Washington press Ukraine into a peace deal it doesn’t want. Such manoeuvring was scarcely on the agenda before; now, it’s a matter of survival.

Conclusion: High Stakes and Uncertain Horizons

The Oval Office confrontation between Trump and Zelenskyy will be remembered as a defining episode in this era of turmoil – a moment when simmering tensions exploded into the open, unleashing consequences far beyond the four walls of that iconic room. It had all the drama of a title fight in its raw chaos – two leaders in a clench, the world looking on – but this was no mere spectacle. It was a collision of divergent visions and a catalyst for global upheaval. Like an explosive geopolitical thriller, the scene had protagonists, antagonists, surprise twists, and dire stakes, leaving allies and adversaries on the edge. But unlike a scripted drama, real lives and the balance of world power are on the line.

In the coming weeks, the fallout will continue to unfold in real-time. We may see frantic diplomatic damage control – or further escalations in rhetoric. Financial markets will watch every headline, oscillating between hope and despair with each hint of reconciliation or rupture. Energy producers will hedge their bets, perhaps extracting concessions from a U.S. administration eager to tout any deal as a win. European leaders will convene, strategise, and possibly begin to chart a course less tethered to Washington’s whims. And in the Kremlin, Putin will calibrate his next move, emboldened by the cracks in Western unity that widened in front of the world.

For all the chaos, there remains a sliver of hope that cooler heads could prevail. Some seasoned observers note that despite the heated words, neither side slammed the door completely shut on future talks. But any path forward will require deft statecraft of the highest order – a far cry from the bombast that dominated that fateful Oval Office meeting. The United States and Ukraine will have to decide if they can repair the partnership or if they are destined to go their separate ways, reshaping the security architecture of Europe in the process. Global stability may depend on whether Washington and its allies can turn this crisis into an opportunity – or whether the world is entering a darker, more fractured chapter of history.

As the dust settles from this diplomatic donnybrook, one thing is sure: the stakes have never been higher. The fight for Ukraine has always been about more than just territory – it’s about the principles of international order, the resolve of democracies, and the limits of great-power ambition. Now, that fight has burst into the open between supposed friends, adding a new dimension. The bell has rung on a new round of geopolitical contests, and every nation is scrambling to adjust its stance. In this unnerving new reality, it feels as if the world itself is ringside, heart pounding, unsure whether to cheer or to gasp. The following moves on this grand chessboard could determine the fate of Ukraine and the trajectory of global peace and prosperity for years to come. The audience waits, breathless.

---

References:

1. Danielle De Wolfe, “Trump accuses Zelenskyy of ‘gambling with World War Three’ as Starmer backs Ukraine following White House clash,” LBC News, 1 March 2025.

2. Kit Heren, “‘He fought like a lion’: Ukrainians rally round Zelenskyy after heated White House row with Trump,” LBC News, 1 March 2025.

3. Sinéad Carew et al., “Investors unnerved by heated Trump-Zelensky Oval Office showdown,” Reuters, 28 February 2025.

4. Reuters Staff, “Key takeaways as Trump pushes for Ukraine peace deal (Energy section),” Reuters, 20 February 2025.

5. Atlantic Council (Fast Thinking), “The Trump-Zelenskyy meeting just blew up. What now?” 28 February 2025.

6. Reuters/AFP, “European leaders show support for Zelensky after Trump clash; top diplomat says ‘free world needs new leader’,” Arab News, 28 February 2025.

---

The Rise and Fall of Material Values?

---

“From Rare Earths to Historical Boom-and-Bust Cycles…

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Materials that drive economies have seen their fortunes shift dramatically over time, sometimes rising to near-precious status and sometimes collapsing into obscurity. Certain resources once prized like gold later became nearly worthless, while others emerged unexpectedly as essential elements of new technologies. These fluctuations are generally propelled by technological breakthroughs, changing demand, and geopolitical forces. Rare earth elements illustrate this phenomenon in modern times.

Rare Earth Elements: Modern Boom and Bust

Rare earth elements, which include seventeen lanthanides plus yttrium and scandium, are critical components for a wide range of high-tech applications, from powerful magnets in electric vehicles and wind turbines to lasers and smartphones. For many years, they barely registered on the global stage, but their value surged in the early 2000s as electronics, battery-powered devices, and green technologies exploded in popularity. Everything changed in 2010, when China, which accounts for the lion’s share of rare earth mining, drastically reduced exports, triggering a crisis that sent prices soaring and left manufacturers in several countries scrambling for alternate suppliers.

The drama ended almost as abruptly as it began. High prices encouraged other nations to develop mines, intensify research on substitutes, and bring new reserves to market. Under international pressure, China loosened its export restrictions, and by mid-decade, prices had fallen sharply from their earlier peaks. A telling example was the rise and fall of Molycorp, a U.S. firm that aimed to rebuild domestic rare earth production at its Mountain Pass mine. Initially boosted by the price frenzy, Molycorp’s stock soared, and the company went on a spending spree, only to collapse into bankruptcy when the market cooled, ultimately selling its mine to new owners that included Chinese interests.

Historical Cases of Boom, Bust, and Changing Worth

Throughout history, many other materials have experienced dramatic reversals of fortune. The life cycle of a resource often follows a pattern: initial scarcity and high value, a boom as it is exploited, and then a decline when new sources or substitutes emerge. Key examples include:

Aluminum (19th century): Once considered a precious metal, aluminum was more valuable than gold in the mid-1800s. France’s Emperor Napoléon III even reserved aluminium dinnerware for honoured guests, using mere silver for others. The metal’s rarity was due to the difficulty of extraction. However, the invention of the Hall–Héroult electrolytic process in 1886 transformed aluminum production. The price for a pound of aluminum plummeted from around $17 in 1859 to under $1 by 1891. By the early 1900s, it cost only cents per pound, turning aluminium from a luxurious curiosity into a cheap, everyday material used in everything from cookware to aircraft.

Guano and Nitrates (19th–20th centuries): In the mid-1800s, bird droppings from Peru’s guano islands were literally “white gold.” Rich in nitrogen, guano was a prized fertilizer that made Peru a world supplier and generated $500 million in exports from 1840–1870. Fortunes were made during this guano boom, but it didn’t last. Deposits waned, and geopolitical conflict saw Peru lose control of nitrate-rich deserts to Chile. Chile then prospered from mining natural sodium nitrate (saltpetre) for fertilizers and explosives. Yet science again intervened: the Haber-Bosch process, first commercialized in the 1910s, enabled synthetic ammonia from the air, providing an endless supply of cheap nitrogen fertilizer. This breakthrough caused the collapse of Chile’s nitrate industry, leaving once-thriving mining towns deserted in the Atacama Desert.

Whale Oil vs Petroleum (19th century): For much of the 1800s, whale oil was critical for lighting homes and streets. It burned bright and clean, and a global whaling industry flourished to meet demand. As whale populations dwindled, prices rose, making whaling incredibly lucrative. But the rise of fossil fuels abruptly flipped the equation. In the 1860s, petroleum-derived kerosene emerged as a cheaper, abundant lamp fuel. Kerosene was significantly less expensive than whale oil, making light affordable and rendering whales far less valuable. By 1870, kerosene dominated the lighting market and the whaling boom was over.

Natural Dyes and Synthetic Colors (late 19th century): Colorants like indigo dye (from plants) and cochineal (a red dye from insects) were once strategic commodities. Indigo plantations in India and elsewhere prospered, supplying blue dye for textiles, and cochineal from Mexico was so valuable that the Spanish Empire guarded it. The late 1800s brought a chemical revolution: scientists discovered synthetic dyes derived from coal tar. In 1856, William Perkin produced mauve, and by the 1870s–1880s, synthetic versions of naturally sourced dyes hit the market. The impact on natural dye industries was devastating. Traditional dye farms and workshops could not compete with mass-produced chemical dyes, illustrating how scientific discoveries can rapidly erode the value of age-old resources.

Amazon Rubber Boom (late 1800s–early 1900s): Rubber from the sap of the Amazon’s wild Hevea trees was another resource that saw a spectacular rise and fall. In the late 19th century, rubber’s use in industrial goods (tyres, insulation, machinery belts) surged, and nearly all the world’s rubber came from the Amazon. The boom made the Brazilian city of Manaus fabulously wealthy – an opera house was built in the jungle with rubber wealth. But botanical espionage shifted the balance. In the 1870s, British agents smuggled rubber tree seeds out of Brazil. By the 1910s, plantations in British colonies (Malaya, Ceylon) produced rubber far more efficiently. The result was that Brazil’s monopoly shattered, and its rubber economy collapsed in the 1910s. Prices plunged as plantation rubber flooded the market, and Manaus’s grandeur faded.

Tulip Mania (1630s): Not all boom-bust cycles are driven by new technology – speculation can inflate and deflate value, too. A classic example is the Dutch tulip mania. In the 1630s, exotic tulip bulbs became a status symbol in the Netherlands. Rare varieties like the red-and-white Semper Augustus fetched astonishing sums – at the peak of the craze in 1637, a single bulb could sell for as much as 5,000 guilders (roughly equal to the price of a luxurious house). Many believed tulip prices would rise forever. Instead, the bubble burst overnight. In February 1637, buyers suddenly refused to show up at an auction, panic spread, and within days, tulip bulbs that had been worth a fortune “were suddenly no more valuable than a humble onion.” Fortunes were lost as prices plummeted 90%-99%.

Silver Thursday (1980): Another speculative saga unfolded in the late 1970s when two Texas oil tycoons (the Hunt brothers) attempted to corner the world silver market. Anticipating inflation, they bought up vast amounts of silver. Their heavy buying drove silver’s price from around $6 per ounce in 1979 to an all-time high of $50.42 in January 1980. For a brief moment, items like silverware and coins seemed almost as valuable as jewellery. However, the bubble burst when regulators and other investors struck back (imposing trading limits and selling into the rally). On “Silver Thursday,” March 27, 1980, silver prices crashed by over 50% in a single day – falling under $11/oz from the peak. The Hunts, who had bought much on credit, could not meet their margin calls and suffered catastrophic losses, ultimately declaring bankruptcy and losing an estimated $1.7 billion.

Drivers of Shifting Material Value

Reviewing these case studies – from rare earth elements to whale oil to tulips – a few common themes emerge. Scientific discovery and technological innovation are perhaps the most significant catalysts of change. They can create new value (as with rare earths suddenly in demand for modern tech or oil for lighting) or destroy value (as with synthetic ammonia displacing natural nitrates or plastic replacing ivory and tortoiseshell, etc.). In each example, prices and perceived worth fell sharply when a breakthrough made material more straightforward to obtain or an alternative rendered it obsolete. Conversely, demand and prices can soar when technology opens new applications for a material (or limits access to it).

Economic and geopolitical forces heavily influence these cycles. Control of supply – whether by monopolies, nations, or cartels – can inflate prices artificially. China’s rare earth embargo, OPEC’s oil embargo in 1973, and the Hunt brothers’ hoarding of silver all show how restricting a commodity can spike its value. However, such situations often contain the seeds of reversal: high prices encourage new entrants, alternative sources, and conservation, and sometimes prompt political or legal action to restore balance.

The Life Cycle of Materials

The life cycle of a resource often follows a pattern: initial scarcity and high value, a boom as it is exploited, and then a decline when new sources or substitutes emerge. In the early stage, a resource may be a rare novelty with extremely high value. Next comes wider exploitation and a boom – production soars, and the material becomes more commonplace. If demand keeps growing faster than supply, the boom sustains; if not, or if a disruptive technology arrives, a bust or leveling occurs. Many natural resources saw their “golden age” end because either they were replaced by something superior or their own success led to overuse and depletion.

Conclusion

From the peaks of tulip fever to the valleys of a collapsed rare earth market, the worth of materials is ever-changing. Fortunes have been made by those who rode the wave of a resource’s rising importance – and lost by those caught on the wrong side of innovation or shifting demand. The rare earth elements exemplify a modern resource cycle, mirroring patterns seen with spices, metals, energy sources, and more throughout history. Understanding these cycles is crucial: it teaches investors, industries, and nations to be vigilant about overreliance on “hot” commodities and to anticipate change. In the end, science and technology continually rewrite the script for material value, and geopolitical maneuvers can only temporarily defy the underlying currents of supply and demand. The “rare earths” of tomorrow may be obscure today, and today’s prized material may become as commonplace as sand – a reminder that in the realm of resources, the only constant is change.

---

References

1. Does China pose a threat to global rare earth supply chains?

2. Aluminum: Common Metal, Uncommon Past | Science History Institute

3. The Great Peruvian Guano Bonanza: Rise, Fall, and Legacy – COHA

4. Haber-Bosch-Reaction-Early-Chemical | cen.acs.org

5. Buy a House with a Tulip? The Tale of the First Market Crash | RBC

6. Silver Thursday: How Two Wealthy Traders Cornered the Market | Investopedia

7. Oil crisis | Definition, History, & Facts | Britannica Money

8. The collapse of American rare earth mining — and lessons learned | Defense News

9. Harvesting Light: New England Whaling in the Nineteenth Century – Energy History

10. Natural dye - Wikipedia

11. The Life and Death of the 'Floating City' of Manaus - Atlas Obscura

12. Running Out of Whales | EARTH 104: Earth and the Environment (Development)

13. Whale oil - Wikipedia

14. Trump administration’s potential rare earth strategy in Ukraine: Geopolitical discussions reported in media outlets

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can effortlessly support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey! https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1895291311004987652

ttps://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1895291311004987652https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1890688176206786821

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Future of Natural Gas Reserves: A 50-Year Outlook…

---

“Global Natural Gas Reserves – Proven, Probable & Possible...

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Proven reserves: As of 2022, the world’s proven natural gas reserves stand at 198.8 trillion cubic meters (Tcm), equivalent to about 50 years of supply at current production rates (BP, 2022; IEA, 2023). Proven reserves refer to gas that is confirmed recoverable under existing economic and technological conditions (EIA, 2023). For instance, the U.S. had 505 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of proved gas reserves in 2019 (about 14 years of U.S. consumption), but technically recoverable resources were estimated at 2,865 Tcf – 85 years’ worth at current usage levels (EIA, 2023). This underscores how advancements in extraction technology can substantially increase recoverable reserves.

Probable and possible reserves: Beyond the proven 50-year supply, probable and possible resources could extend the gas horizon significantly. These include gas that is geologically likely to exist but remains unproven due to technical, economic, or political constraints (BP, 2023). Estimates suggest that total technically recoverable natural gas (proven + unproven) could be over 700 Tcm—far exceeding today’s proven reserves (IEA, 2023). Additionally, unconventional gas sources such as methane hydrates—gas locked in ice beneath ocean floors and permafrost—are thought to hold more gas than all conventional reserves combined (USGS, 2022). However, commercial extraction of methane hydrates is not yet feasible, making them more of a future potential than a near-term reality.

Factors Extending or Shortening the 50-Year Estimate

✔ Increasing supply: New gas discoveries, better extraction techniques, and higher energy prices can unlock previously uneconomical gas fields, extending supply. The shale gas revolution in the U.S. is an example of how technology can shift reserve estimates upward (EIA, 2023).

❌ Faster depletion: Conversely, rapid consumption growth—driven by rising energy demand—can reduce the time horizon. If global gas demand grows faster than expected, the reserves-to-production ratio will fall, potentially making 50 years an optimistic projection (BP, 2023).

⚠ Stranded assets risk: Climate change policies could reduce the usable fraction of fossil reserves. If strong climate action restricts fossil fuel consumption, a significant share of gas reserves might remain untapped (IEA, 2023).

Rising Energy Demand and the Digital Boom

The Data Center Energy Crisis

1. Data centres consume ~1% of global electricity but are on track to reach 3–5% by 2030 as AI, cloud computing, and blockchain expand (IEA, 2023).

2. Hyperscale AI centres (Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.) use 100+ MW each, consuming as much power as hundreds of thousands of homes (IEA, 2023).

3. If this trend continues, global data energy demand could DOUBLE by 2035, requiring massive increases in power generation and storage (EIA, 2023).

👉 The key question is: Will this demand be met by natural gas, renewables, or a combination of both?

While data centres increase demand, other sectors—including electric vehicles (EVs), industrial electrification, and global population growth—are also driving soaring energy needs. Global electricity demand is expected to increase by 6,750 TWh by 2030—equivalent to adding the entire U.S. + EU power demand (IEA, 2023).

🚨 If renewables do not scale fast enough, natural gas will continue to play a major role, accelerating depletion rates.

Transition to Renewable Energy – Feasibility and Pace

Current Trajectory

✅ Renewables (solar & wind) are projected to overtake coal by 2025 as the largest electricity source (BP, 2023).
✅ Green hydrogen is emerging but remains expensive ($4–6/kg, needs to drop below $2/kg for large-scale adoption).
✅ Nuclear is making a comeback—nations like France, China, and Canada are investing in small modular reactors (SMRs) to complement renewables (IEA, 2023).

Challenges & Barriers

⚠ Storage & grid integration: Wind and solar are intermittent; long-duration battery storage and hydrogen infrastructure must scale 100X to fully replace gas.
⚠ Critical minerals: Lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements (REEs) are needed for batteries and wind turbines but are in limited supply.
⚠ Investment gaps: The IEA estimates $4 trillion per year in clean energy investment is needed, but only $2 trillion/year is currently spent.

📌 Bottom Line: Renewables will grow, but not fast enough to eliminate gas by 2050 without massive storage breakthroughs.

Technological Advances: Extending Gas or Accelerating Its Replacement?

1. Enhanced Gas Extraction

🚀 New drilling tech could increase global gas reserves by 30–40% (BP, 2023).
🚀 Hydraulic fracturing + horizontal drilling have already added 50+ years of shale gas supply in the U.S. (EIA, 2023).
🚀 Methane hydrates: Japan and China are leading research to commercialize gas extraction from ocean hydrates by 2035 (USGS, 2022).

2. Energy Storage & Grid Flexibility

🔋 Battery storage costs have fallen 90% since 2010, making renewables more reliable (IEA, 2023).
🔋 New hydrogen electrolysis projects could replace gas in power plants within two decades (BP, 2023).

Economic and Geopolitical Risks of Gas Depletion

🌍 Concentration of reserves: 50% of global gas reserves are held by Russia, Iran, and Qatar, raising geopolitical risks (BP, 2023).
💰 Market volatility: Gas shortages or disruptions (like Russia’s cut-off to Europe in 2022) can trigger massive energy price spikes.
🏭 Industry reliance: Many economies depend on gas-based manufacturing and energy-intensive industries. A depletion scenario could destabilize major economies.

Environmental Considerations & Climate Impact

🔥 Methane leakage from gas drilling is a significant climate risk, as methane has 80X the warming potential of CO₂ (IEA, 2023).
🌍 Carbon Capture (CCS) could extend gas use, but the required scale-up is massive: it needs to grow 180X by 2050 (IEA, 2023).
📉 If gas remains dominant beyond 2050, the Paris Agreement targets will likely be missed.

Future Energy Mix Scenarios – What Comes Next?

🔴 Scenario 1: "Delayed Transition" – Fossil fuels dominate until 2070 → Natural gas remains central, but supply crunches emerge.
🟡 Scenario 2: "Balanced Transition" – Renewables + nuclear ramp up by 2050, but gas remains a backup fuel.
🟢 Scenario 3: "Rapid Decarbonization" – Renewables will replace 80% of fossil fuels by 2045, gas will be phased out faster, and CCS will be deployed widely.

The outcome depends on government policies, investment levels, and technological breakthroughs.

Conclusion

Natural gas reserves could last 50 years or longer, but this depends on supply expansions, energy demand growth, and the speed of renewable transition. If fossil fuel dependence persists, shortages could emerge before mid-century. However, a rapid shift to renewables, hydrogen, and nuclear could reduce gas demand faster than depletion occurs. Ultimately, our energy future is a choice—driven by investment, policy, and technology.

---

References

1. BP (2023). Statistical Review of World Energy 2023. London: BP.

2. EIA (2023). International Energy Outlook 2023. Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration.

3. IEA (2023). World Energy Outlook 2023. Paris: International Energy Agency.

4. USGS (2022). Methane Hydrates and Global Energy Potential. United States Geological Survey.

5. World Bank (2023). Energy Transitions and Economic Growth. Washington, DC: World Bank Group

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can effortlessly support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1890688176206786821

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

The Shattered Mirror of Globalisation: Unveiling the Consequences for the Electricity Industry

---

“Many brand today’s world a ‘two-legged rat!’ for the brazen deception it embodies...

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

"As President, I will set a national goal of ensuring that America has the No. 1 lowest cost of energy of any industrial country anywhere on Earth."

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-america-must-have-the-1-lowest-cost-energy-and-electricity-on-earth

---

Hypotheses: “At a Crucial Crossroads: The Future of U.S. and Global Energy…

America stands at a fateful energy crossroads, echoing past cycles of crisis and retrenchment. From the 1970s oil shocks that spurred calls for independence to later complacency when oil was cheap, U.S. energy policy has repeatedly swung between urgency and inertia (Browner, 2010). Now climate change amplifies the stakes, making this moment a critical turning point.

A new development came on January 20, 2025, when President Donald Trump signed an executive order suspending Inflation Reduction Act funding disbursements—particularly those referred to in Section 2 of the order. Nicknamed “Terminating the Green New Deal,” it also pauses Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act spending, effectively freezing billions allocated for clean energy and manufacturing projects (Magill, 2025). While the White House clarified that only certain segments of the law are affected, federal agencies face a 90-day deadline to review and propose new spending recommendations.

One path still doubles down on fossil fuel dominance, promising short-term economic gains and energy security but locking in climate chaos and potential geopolitical liabilities (Reuters, 2024). The other path fully commits to renewable energy, delivering innovation and long-term sustainability. Yet overcoming powerful fossil fuel lobbies and reliance on foreign-made critical minerals remains challenging (Sayki and Cloutier, 2023). The U.S. stands at a high-stakes juncture—continuing the status quo risks climate disaster and missed technological leadership, while bold action could secure economic vitality for generations.

---

References:

1. Browner, C. (2010) 'Taking initiative on clean energy', Politico, 12 July 2010.

2. Magill, K. (2025) ‘Trump freezes Inflation Reduction Act funding’, Manufacturing Dive, 24 January 2025.

3. Reuters (2024) 'How do Trump and Harris differ on energy policy?', Reuters, 29 October 2024.

4. Sayki, I. and Cloutier, J. (2023) 'Oil and gas industry spent $124.4 million on federal lobbying amid record profits in 2022', OpenSecrets, 22 February 2023.

---

Background:

U.S. Energy Strategy: Industry Influence, Economics, and the Shift Toward Traditional Sources

Introduction:

The United States has long fluctuated between prioritizing traditional energy sources (oil, gas, coal) and renewable energy in its national strategy. These shifts are rarely accidental; they reflect a complex interplay of industry ties, economic factors, and policy preferences among leaders. When policy leans toward traditional fossil fuels, it often correlates with strong lobbying influence and short-term economic arguments, whereas pushes for renewables tend to follow environmental concerns, innovation booms, or global agreements. This analysis examines: (1) historical swings in U.S. energy policy, (2) the economic impacts of fossil fuels vs. renewables (jobs, stability, subsidies), (3) how fossil industry lobbying shapes policy, (4) geopolitical implications of favoring traditional energy (security, trade, diplomacy), and (5) the environmental consequences of pivoting away from renewables.

Historical Trends in U.S. Energy Policy

U.S. energy policy has see-sawed over the decades, with periods of innovation and renewable investment often followed by returns to oil, gas, and even coal. Key shifts include:

1. 1970s – Crisis and Alternatives: The 1973 oil embargo and energy crisis jolted policymakers into reducing dependence on foreign oil. The government funded the Trans-Alaska Pipeline and created the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, while also investing in renewable fuels and R&D (ethanol, biodiesel, solar, wind) for the first time (Choices Article - Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy). Conservation took hold: Congress enacted fuel economy standards, and Americans embraced energy efficiency, briefly curbing demand growth (Choices Article - Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy).

2. 1980s – Return to Oil: With oil prices stabilizing in the mid-1980s, momentum for renewables waned. Federal tax credits for solar and wind established in the late ‘70s expired, and President Reagan famously removed solar panels from the White House roof, signaling a policy reversion to traditional energy. Domestic oil and gas production and deregulation were again emphasized, while nascent renewable programs stalled (no major new federal mandates in this era).

3. 1990s – Mixed Signals: Low energy prices kept renewables on the policy back-burner for much of the 1990s. However, concerns about energy security resurfaced when global demand pushed oil prices up in the late ‘90s (Choices Article - Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy). The 1992 Energy Policy Act and other laws introduced some incentives for alternative energy (e.g. wind production tax credit in 1992) and required federal fleets to use alternative fuels, but fossil fuels still dominated the agenda.

4. 2000s – Energy Security vs. Climate: The early 2000s saw industry influence at a peak. In 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force—stacked with oil executives—drafted a policy focused on expanding fossil production. (The task force met at least six times with Enron and other energy company executives behind closed doors (Big GOP contributor advised administration's energy task force – Center for Public Integrity), spurring lawsuits over the secrecy and undue influence (Big GOP contributor advised administration's energy task force – Center for Public Integrity).) President George W. Bush, himself from the oil industry, nonetheless supported some renewables for energy security – the 2005 energy law established a renewable fuel standard for ethanol, and his administration promoted biofuels to reduce oil import dependence (Choices Article - Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy). By contrast, states like California began adopting aggressive renewable portfolio standards. Late in the decade, President Obama’s 2009 stimulus injected billions into clean energy and efficiency, marking a strong pivot toward renewables and climate policy (e.g. subsidies for solar, wind, electric vehicles, and the beginnings of EPA carbon regulations).

5. 2010s – Transition and Pushback: Under Obama, the U.S. joined the Paris Climate Agreement and implemented the Clean Power Plan to shift electricity from coal to wind, solar, and gas. Renewable generation surged, while coal plant closures accelerated. However, the 2016 election ushered in a sharp reversal. President Donald Trump made a “America First Energy Plan” to revive coal and expand oil and gas the centerpiece of his agenda. He withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and rolled back Obama-era regulations, justifying a “robust emphasis on fossil fuels” and a scaling back of renewable programs as necessary for lower energy prices and “energy dominance” (Trump has big plans for climate and energy policy, but can he implement them?). This meant more federal land drilling, faster pipeline approvals, and attempts to bail out coal plants. Despite this traditional energy push, market forces (cheap natural gas, falling renewable costs) kept driving a renewables rise through the late 2010s.

6. 2020s – Climate Priorities Return: In 2021, the pendulum swung again. The Biden administration rejoined the Paris accord and passed unprecedented clean energy investments (the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 alone put $369 billion toward clean energy). Even so, debates continue: global events like the 2022 war in Ukraine prompted calls for more U.S. oil and gas production to secure allies’ energy supply, showing the constant tension between short-term energy security goals and long-term climate/renewable goals in U.S. strategy.

---

Source:

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (n.d.)** ‘Energy sources have changed throughout the history of the United States’. Available at: <https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=11951>.

---

Economic Impacts: Fossil Fuels vs. Renewable Energy

Economic considerations are central to energy policy decisions. Politicians often weigh the job creation potential, market stability, and subsidies of fossil fuels against those of renewables – and these factors can cut both ways:

1. Jobs and Industry Growth: Traditional energy sectors (oil, gas, coal) have historically been major employers, but clean energy now leads in job creation. By the late 2010s, U.S. clean energy jobs already outnumbered fossil fuel jobs roughly 3-to-1 (). For example, solar panel installers and wind turbine technicians became some of the fastest-growing occupations. One report found over 3.3 million Americans were employed in clean energy (renewables, energy efficiency, electric vehicles) in 2018, far exceeding fossil fuel extraction and generation jobs (). These trends continued into the 2020s as solar and wind capacity expanded. In contrast, coal mining jobs have steadily declined for decades due to automation and competition, and even oil/gas employment can swing with commodity prices. Renewable energy investments tend to produce more jobs per dollar because they are more labor-intensive during construction and installation (e.g. building a wind farm employs many workers even if operating it later is low-labor). This makes the “jobs” argument for shifting back to fossil fuels weaker over time, except in specific regions (e.g. coal country) where fossil jobs are concentrated.

2. Market Stability and Energy Costs: Fossil fuel markets are inherently cyclical and volatile – oil and gas prices boom and bust based on global supply, conflict, and OPEC decisions. This volatility can destabilize the broader economy: in fact, spiking fossil energy prices were responsible for about one-third of the 9.1% U.S. inflation at the peak of 2022 (Fossil Fuel–Driven Price Volatility Demonstrates the Need for a Renewable Transition - Roosevelt Institute). Renewables, by contrast, have stable and declining costs over time (once a solar farm is built, the “fuel” – sunlight – is free). Greater adoption of renewables can insulate the economy from oil price shocks. A recent analysis argues that relying on fossil fuels poses a “persistent threat” to price stability, and that shifting to renewable electricity would help tame long-term inflation fluctuations (Fossil Fuel–Driven Price Volatility Demonstrates the Need for a Renewable Transition - Roosevelt Institute). However, opponents of rapid renewable adoption point out short-term reliability and integration costs – e.g. the need for grid upgrades and storage – which can affect energy prices during the transition. Still, on a per-unit cost basis, wind and solar are now often the cheapest new sources of power in the U.S., even beating natural gas in many regions (especially when volatility is factored in).

3. Government Subsidies and Support: Fossil fuels have enjoyed generous government support for decades, far more than renewables until very recently. Tax breaks and subsidies for oil, gas, and coal date back as far as the early 20th century (and even the 1800s in the case of coal tariffs) A historical review noted that federal support for renewables has been “minimal compared with the past government investment in coal, gas, oil, or nuclear,” which helped those traditional industries grow ([Long-History-US-Energy-Subsidies Even today, the U.S. tax code provides oil and gas producers deductions for drilling costs, depletion allowances, and other incentives that effectively subsidize fossil energy. In addition, external costs like climate change and pollution are not priced into fossil fuels (another implicit subsidy). Renewables also receive subsidies (e.g. federal wind and solar tax credits, state renewable mandates), but these only scaled up significantly in the 2000s-2010s. By the 2020s, federal policy began leveling the field – the Inflation Reduction Act 2022 created long-term tax credits for clean energy worth hundreds of billions, aiming to spur domestic manufacturing of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, etc. The economic debate often centers on which sector deserves public support: proponents of fossil fuels argue they provide reliable energy and tax revenues, while clean energy advocates note that investment in renewables yields future industries and avoids environmental damages. Notably, studies show renewable investments generate good-paying jobs and innovation without the long-term environmental liabilities of fossil fuels. In summary, short-term economic arguments for sticking with traditional energy (existing jobs, immediate infrastructure) are weighed against long-term gains from the growing, more stable clean energy economy.

---

Source:

Johnson, J. (2011) ‘Long History of U.S. Energy Subsidies: Report shows centuries of government support for fossil fuels, much less for renewable energy’, Chemical & Engineering News, 89(51). Available at: https://cen.acs.org/articles/89/i51/Long-History-US-Energy-Subsidies.html#:~:text=Using%20government%20documents%2C%20academic%20papers%2C,new%20energy%20technologies%20and%20infrastructures (A).

---

Fossil Fuel Industry Influence and Lobbying in Policy Decisions

The trajectory of U.S. energy strategy cannot be understood without acknowledging the power of the fossil fuel lobby. Oil, gas, and coal companies have deep ties in Washington, built over a century of political spending and networking, which they use to shape policy in their favor. Key aspects of this influence include:

1. Lobbying Expenditures and Campaign Funding: The fossil fuel industry is one of the top spenders on lobbying federal officials. In 2022 alone, the U.S. oil and gas industry spent about $124.4 million lobbying Congress and the executive branch (Oil and gas industry spent $124.4 million on federal lobbying amid record profits in 2022 • OpenSecrets). This money funds armies of lobbyists who advocate for permits, tax breaks, and favorable regulations for drilling and mining. Moreover, industry trade groups like the American Petroleum Institute amplify this influence (API spent over $4 million on lobbying in 2022) (Oil and gas industry spent $124.4 million on federal lobbying amid record profits in 2022 • OpenSecrets). The industry also pours tens of millions into campaign contributions, predominantly to politicians who oppose aggressive climate policies. Over the 2000s, fossil-fuel-linked political action committees and donors outspent renewable energy advocates by a wide margin – one analysis found that anti-climate lobby groups and PACs outspent climate advocacy by 27-to-1 from 2008 to 2018 (Oil and gas industry spent $124.4 million on federal lobbying amid record profits in 2022 • OpenSecrets). This financial clout translates to access: lawmakers reliant on campaign funds are more likely to vote against carbon taxes or to support oil subsidies. The result is often policy gridlock or rollback on clean energy initiatives whenever fossil interests are threatened.

2. Revolving Doors and Policy Capture: Beyond money, fossil fuel companies have secured influence by positioning allies in government. It’s common for oil executives and lobbyists to rotate into top energy policy jobs (and vice versa). For example, in the early 2000s, Vice President Cheney (a former oil-services CEO) convened an energy task force that met secretly with industry executives to craft national energy policy (Big GOP contributor advised administration's energy task force – Center for Public Integrity). The task force’s recommendations closely mirrored oil and gas industry wishes, highlighting how direct input from industry insiders can steer policy. More recently, during the Trump administration, several key officials had oil industry ties – from the Secretary of State (ex-ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson) to Interior Department appointees who had worked for extractive industries. These ties often led to regulatory appointments of individuals skeptical of renewable energy or climate science, and decisions like opening more public lands to drilling or weakening methane emission rules. In short, the fossil lobby’s influence permeates all levels: writing legislation, guiding agency rules, and even shaping public narratives (through funding of think tanks and advertising). By contrast, the renewable energy lobby and environmental groups, while growing in influence, have historically had far fewer resources. This imbalance helps explain why U.S. policies have sometimes been slow to embrace renewables despite their technological viability – incumbent industries use political power to delay the transition.

---

Geopolitical Implications of Prioritizing Traditional Energy Sources

Energy policy is not just a domestic issue; it has far-reaching geopolitical effects. Emphasizing traditional fossil fuels in U.S. strategy carries a mix of benefits and risks for national security, global markets, and diplomacy:

1. Energy Security and Independence: A key argument for boosting domestic oil, gas, and coal is to improve U.S. energy security – ensuring the nation isn’t overly reliant on foreign suppliers. In the past 15 years, the U.S. shale revolution dramatically increased domestic production, making the U.S. the world’s largest producer of petroleum and natural gas by the mid-2010s (Geopolitical implications of U.S. oil and gas in the global market). Greater output at home means less dependence on unstable regions: for example, U.S. imports of oil have fallen from over 60% of consumption in 2005 to roughly 25% by 2019. A fossil-focused “energy dominance” strategy leverages this boon – using abundant U.S. oil and gas to supply both domestic needs and allies abroad. Indeed, expanding LNG (liquefied natural gas) exports has given the U.S. a tool to help Europe diversify away from Russian gas. However, true energy independence remains elusive. Even at record production, the U.S. still imports about 10 million barrels of oil per day, and domestic prices are tied to the volatile global market (Geopolitical implications of U.S. oil and gas in the global market). Prioritizing fossil fuels may increase production, but it cannot fully shield the U.S. from global price shocks or supply disruptions (e.g. a war in the Middle East can still send U.S. gasoline prices soaring). By contrast, a more renewable-based system would source energy from domestic wind, sun, and other inexhaustible resources, reducing vulnerability to international supply swings once the infrastructure is in place. In sum, boosting traditional energy offers short-term security via supply abundance, yet it keeps the U.S. tethered to a volatile global fossil market in the long run.

2. Trade Dependencies: The choice between fossil and renewable emphasis also affects trade relationships and dependencies. Relying on oil often entangles the U.S. with petrostates (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Venezuela) to secure supply or stabilize prices. Conversely, pursuing renewables can create new dependencies on clean technology supply chains – notably, minerals and manufacturing dominated by China. For instance, China today accounts for nearly 85% of global solar panel production (Regional distribution of solar module production | Statista) and is a leading supplier of lithium-ion batteries for energy storage and electric vehicles. If the U.S. forgoes investing in renewables now, it might later find itself buying solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries from abroad, ceding industrial leadership to rivals. We already see this in the solar sector: China’s massive scale and control of raw materials have given it a near-monopoly in solar manufacturing. Thus, a fossil-centric path could swap one dependency (oil from OPEC) for another (clean tech hardware from Asia) as the world eventually transitions. From a trade perspective, there is also a risk that U.S. goods could face carbon tariffs in the future from regions like the EU if America is viewed as not doing its share on emissions. On the positive side, maintaining robust oil and gas capacity allows the U.S. to be an energy exporter. In recent years the U.S. became a top LNG exporter, strengthening trade ties with gas-importing allies (Europe, Japan) and undercutting adversaries who use energy as coercion. In summary, geopolitics cuts both ways: traditional energy dominance can bolster U.S. influence in hydrocarbon markets, but a lagging clean tech sector could leave the U.S. dependent on foreign renewable technology in the future.

3. Diplomatic Strategy and Global Leadership: Energy policy sends a powerful signal about U.S. global priorities. Emphasizing fossil fuels domestically often goes hand-in-hand with a retreat from international climate initiatives, which can strain alliances with countries prioritizing climate action. A vivid example was the Trump administration’s decision to quit the Paris Climate Agreement and champion coal at UN climate forums, which isolated the U.S. from European allies and undermined U.S. credibility in global environmental diplomacy (Trump has big plans for climate and energy policy, but can he implement them?). Countries in the EU, as well as emerging powers vulnerable to climate impacts, generally want the U.S. engaged in the clean energy transition. If U.S. policy swings back to traditional energy, it may gain favor with other petro-states (creating closer ties with countries like Saudi Arabia or Russia on energy matters) but at the cost of diplomatic capital with a much larger group of nations committed to carbon reduction. Moreover, climate change is increasingly at the center of international security discussions; a U.S. that downplays renewables may be seen as not leading on one of the defining issues of the century. On the other hand, being a major fossil fuel producer does give the U.S. certain strategic advantages: it can impose oil sanctions on adversaries (as it did on Iran and Venezuela) with less fear of domestic shortages, and it can use energy exports as a foreign policy tool (for instance, offering shipments of LNG to friends in need). Ultimately, prioritizing traditional energy provides short-term geopolitical leverage in a fossil-fuel-driven world, but it runs the risk of diminishing U.S. leadership in the inevitable global shift toward clean energy. Many experts note that the energy transition will redraw geopolitical maps – countries that lead in renewable technologies may gain influence, while those clinging solely to fossil fuels could see their power wane as demand for oil declines in the long run. The U.S. faces a strategic choice in that regard.

---

Environmental Consequences of Shifting Away from Renewables

Perhaps the most profound impact of favoring fossil fuels over renewables is on the environment and climate. The scientific consensus is clear that burning fossil fuels is the primary driver of global climate change, and that a rapid transition to clean energy is needed to avoid catastrophic impacts. The environmental stakes of the policy reversal are high:

1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Fossil fuel combustion (for electricity, transportation, and industry) accounts for the majority of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Renewables, by contrast, produce little to no direct emissions. For example, a wind turbine or solar panel emits essentially zero CO₂ in operation, whereas a coal plant releases roughly 1 ton of CO₂ per MWh. If the U.S. slows its renewable energy build-out and burns more coal, oil, and gas, its emissions trajectory will worsen. This would undermine national targets to cut emissions (the U.S. pledged a 50% reduction by 2030 under Paris) and make global climate stabilization harder. Recent progress illustrates the difference policy can make: U.S. energy-related carbon emissions had been declining in part due to coal-to-gas switching and renewable growth (US Energy Policy: A Changing Landscape) (US Energy Policy: A Changing Landscape). But a resurgence of coal use or expanded oil consumption could reverse that decline. In short, shifting away from renewables means higher emissions, jeopardizing climate goals. One analysis projects that if clean energy transition stalls, U.S. emissions would only drop modestly by 2035 – far below what’s needed to limit warming. Beyond CO₂, increased fossil fuel use also elevates emissions of methane (from natural gas systems) and other pollutants.

2. Pollution and Public Health: Traditional fossil fuels have significant environmental footprints beyond climate change. Coal-fired power plants and diesel engines emit pollutants like sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and mercury, which degrade air quality and cause respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in the population. Oil drilling and coal mining can contaminate water supplies and destroy natural habitats. A policy shift favoring these sources would extend such impacts. By contrast, renewable energy has a much smaller environmental footprint. As a Department of Energy factsheet notes, the current U.S. fossil-heavy energy mix is linked to issues like acid rain, air pollution, and water contamination, whereas renewables can meet energy demand with far fewer of these side effects (U.S. Renewable Energy Factsheet | Center for Sustainable Systems). In 2018, it was estimated that air pollution from fossil fuels cost the global economy $2.9 trillion in health and environmental damages – costs that would fall dramatically in a cleaner energy scenario. Thus, stepping back from renewables carries an opportunity cost in lost health benefits. Additionally, fossil fuel infrastructure (pipelines, refineries, mines) often impacts vulnerable communities, raising environmental justice concerns if those are expanded.

3. Climate Resilience and Environmental Sustainability: Ironically, doubling down on fossil fuels can make the U.S. less resilient in the face of climate change. As global warming accelerates, extreme weather (hurricanes, wildfires, heat waves) threatens energy infrastructure and reliability. A renewable-based, distributed energy system with energy storage is seen by experts as more adaptable and resilient to such disruptions (for example, rooftop solar with batteries can keep lights on during grid outages). If policy shifts focus back to centralized fossil power plants and a high-carbon system, the U.S. may face greater long-term costs from climate adaptation and disaster recovery. Moreover, the environmental momentum loss is significant: scaling back support for renewables could slow the improvement of technologies like energy storage, smart grids, and electric vehicles – all crucial for sustainability. In contrast, maintaining a renewable trajectory yields positive feedback: as solar, wind, and battery tech improve and scale up, they get cheaper and more efficient, accelerating emissions reductions further. A halt or reversal would delay that virtuous cycle.

In summary, the environmental consequences of favoring traditional energy are unequivocally negative: higher greenhouse emissions driving more severe climate change, more air and water pollution harming public health, and a missed chance to mitigate and adapt to climate risks. Every year of delay in the renewable transition locks in additional CO₂ in the atmosphere that will persist for centuries. This is why many scientists and economists argue that the long-term environmental costs of reverting to fossil fuels far outweigh any short-term economic gains. Renewable energy, while not impact-free, offers a path to sustainable growth that fossil fuels simply cannot match in environmental performance (renewables produce far less greenhouse gas and pollution in operation (Environmental Impacts of Renewable Energy Sources | ADEC ESG)).

---

References:

1. Center for Sustainable Systems (CSS) (2023). U.S. Renewable Energy Factsheet. University of Michigan. Available at: https://css.umich.edu/publications/factsheets/energy/us-renewable-energy-factsheet (Accessed 27 Feb 2025).

2. Duffield, J.A. & Collins, K. (2006). Evolution of Renewable Energy Policy. Choices Magazine 21(1).

3. Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2) (2019). Clean Jobs America: Repowering Communities. E2 Clean Jobs America Report. Available at: https://www.e2.org/reports/clean-jobs-america-2019/.

4. Gross, S. (2018). Geopolitical implications of U.S. oil and gas in the global market. Testimony to U.S. House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee, 22 May 2018. Brookings Institution. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/geopolitical-implications-of-u-s-oil-and-gas-in-the-global-market/.

5. Gross, S. & Sall, L. (2024). Trump has big plans for climate and energy policy, but can he implement them? Brookings Institution. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/trump-has-big-plans-for-climate-and-energy-policy-but-can-he-implement-them/.

6. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2023). Solar PV Global Supply Chains. IEA Report (July 2023).

7. Johnson, J. (2011). Long History of U.S. Energy Subsidies: Report shows centuries of government support for fossil fuels, much less for renewable energy. Chemical & Engineering News, 89(51).

8. Karlsson, K. & Melodia, L. (2023). Fossil Fuel–Driven Price Volatility Demonstrates the Need for a Renewable Transition. Roosevelt Institute Brief, Nov 2023. Available at: https://rooseveltinstitute.org/publications/fossil-fuel-driven-price-volatility-demonstrates-the-need-for-a-renewable-transition/.

9. Moore, R. (2002). Big GOP contributor advised administration’s energy task force. Center for Public Integrity, 31 Jan 2002. Available at: https://publicintegrity.org/politics/big-gop-contributor-advised-administrations-energy-task-force/.

10. Sayki, I. & Cloutier, J. (2023). Oil and gas industry spent $124.4 million on federal lobbying amid record profits in 2022. OpenSecrets, 22 Feb 2023. Available at: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2023/02/oil-and-gas-industry-spent-124-4-million-on-federal-lobbying-amid-record-profits-in-2022/.

11. Scandrett, G. (2024). Environmental Impacts of Renewable Energy Sources. ADEC Innovations ESG Blog, updated 9 Dec 2024. Available at: https://www.adecesg.com/resources/blog/environmental-impacts-of-renewable-energy-sources/.

---

Billions Going Up in Smoke: Redefining State Policy for Abrupt, Transformative Change…

Before we delve into the core issues, we must recognize a communications software firm in Stockholm. Their digital cluster has been instrumental in conducting rigorous hypothesis testing and minimising biases. This acknowledgement is particularly crucial in today's world, where geopolitical connections are increasingly unusual, disruptive, and strained across two hundred partnerships. Moreover, we find ourselves in an era devoid of clear ideological principles.

One prominent thinker, Peter Wason, suggested that what seems illogical can be logical. Given our limited computing resources, the software company's collaborative spirit has been essential in navigating these complexities. Wason's work, particularly the Wason selection task, highlighted: ¨how human reasoning can often be counterintuitive and influenced by context, showing that logical structures can appear illogical depending on their presentation...

At the break of dawn, Spanish newspapers with global reach announced the passing of Mexican singer Francisca Viveros Barradas, known as Paquita la del Barrio, at the age of 77. Her powerful contralto voice, rebellious persona, and extraordinary ability to channel the depths of heartbreak made her a beacon of what could be called a culture of heartache and disillusionment. Through fiery lyrics of betrayal, confusion, and sorrow—forever immortalized in the now-iconic phrase “¿Me estás oyendo, inútil?” (“Are you listening to me, you useless man?”)—Paquita gave voice to those who felt wronged or discarded. Her song “Rata de dos patas,” composed by Manuel Eduardo Toscano and featured on the 2001 album ¨Taco Placero¨, transcended Mexican cantinas, becoming an anthem of empowerment and emotional catharsis worldwide.

Connecting such intensely personal themes to broader global affairs may seem unlikely. Yet, Paquita’s raw, impassioned ballads resonate in a world grappling with profound upheaval—where betrayal and shattered trust extend beyond the personal realm to societal and political dimensions. In hidden corners of large cities, amid bustling avenues and unpaved streets where crises simmer and injustice thrives, her unwavering spirit reminds us that from the ashes of heartbreak can spring the drive for transformative change. One anecdote even recounts culture ministers from across the Americas and the Caribbean, after a day of diplomacy, belting out Paquita’s rancheras in a famed venue called “El Munich,” shouting, “Are you listening to me, you useless man?” in unison—a testament to the universality of heartbreak and frustration.

Such sentiments of accumulated grievances, deep-seated mistrust, and the urgent need for collective catharsis are also mirrored in the complexities of the energy sector. To understand the current state of the electrical industry, we must trace its evolution nearly a century back. Some researchers argue it was shaped by the interwar period, when rising nationalism and propaganda paved the way for Nazism and global conflict. Others, such as Mr. Steven Bannon, point to more recent events—particularly the 2019 Wuhan crisis—as pivotal in this historical trajectory.

Among the primary challenges in our research was establishing a historical period as a baseline and identifying manifest variables as triggers. Consequently, we compared wealth distribution, electricity consumption, and pricing between the affluent “Champagne Cup Society” of the 1980s and today’s billionaire, technology-driven era. We introduced multiple data points into various analytical models to examine how disruptive shifts in global markets have eroded accountability in the energy industry.

We also explored the political dilemma of balancing stable governance and rotating leadership—a core principle of democracy—against the sudden disruptions that can destabilise institutions in fragile developing nations. Trust is central to sustaining institutional stability and credibility, a variable we identified as indispensable. Interestingly, our initial findings uncovered “structural imbalances reminiscent of those in a fractured relationship.” But where exactly do these imbalances reside? Among nations, institutions, social groups, or individuals? Who stands to gain, and who is left vulnerable?

These questions highlight how deeply economic and political power imbalances can mirror the raw emotional discord Paquita so hauntingly captured. In love and global energy policy, trust is the central issue—its breach leading to heartbreak, upheaval, and an urgent call for systemic change.

---

References:

1. Bannon, S. (2020) Comments on the 2019 Wuhan Crisis, various public interviews.

2. Paquita la del Barrio (2001) Rata de dos patas. In: Taco Placero. Mexico: Musart.

3. Oxfam (2019) Global Inequality Report: The Champagne Cup Society Revisited. Oxfam International.

4. Steven Bannon and 2019 Wuhan Crisis mention adapted from: Bannon, S. (2020) Public Commentary on Global Crises. Available at: [URL] (Accessed: [date]).

5. ‘Champagne Cup Society’ reference: World Inequality Database (2018) Champagne Glass and Wealth Distribution Studies, [Online]. Available at: [URL] (Accessed: [date]).

6. Earthjustice. (2024). Two Years Ago, We Passed the Biggest Climate Spending Bill Ever. Here’s What It Has Achieved. *Earthjustice*.

---

Structural Imbalances and the War Over Energy: A Deeper Look 

---

In recent years, global observers have drawn parallels between deep-rooted economic frictions and the dynamics of a fractured relationship. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the structural imbalance primarily between China and the United States, driven by stark contrasts in trade flows and economic policies. China’s export-driven growth model, reinforced by low labor costs and state-led industrial strategies, clashes with the United States’ significant trade deficit and reliance on imported goods. Add to this divergence in currency regimes—China’s tightly managed yuan versus the freely traded U.S. dollar—and tensions surrounding intellectual property rights create the potential for a protracted trade conflict. These persistent discrepancies fuel broader geopolitical rivalries, evidenced by tit-for-tat tariffs, fierce negotiations, and looming threats of decoupling (Krugman, 2020). 

The second, more pressing question is whether the global trend genuinely favours renewable energy or pays lip service to it. The underlying challenge relates to “systemic inertia,” the entrenched structures of power and profit that remain heavily invested in coal, oil, and gas (IEA, 2022). While many nations are implementing policies to promote wind farms, solar parks, and battery storage, fossil fuel dependence is immense. Breaking free requires more than technological feasibility; it demands dismantling century-old financial and geopolitical frameworks built upon hydrocarbons. One analysis note, “Fossil fuels are not merely energy commodities; they form the bedrock of modern economies, geopolitical leverage, and global oil empires” (Bridge & Le Billon, 2017). This fundamental truth underscores why any shift towards renewables necessitates a deeper reconfiguration of global power hierarchies—challenging the states and corporations whose influence, capital, and infrastructure are intertwined with fossil extraction and trade. 

Herein lies the paradox: while new technologies and growing environmental imperatives advocate for decarbonisation, powerful actors defend fossil fuel interests under economic stability, energy security, and job protection. For instance, oil majors invest significantly in lobbying to extend drilling permits, while some governments hesitate to curtail their coal assets due to immediate revenue needs (Rystad Energy, 2022). Even in China—rapidly becoming a world leader in renewables—coal remains a substantial part of its energy matrix, attesting to the complex balance between growth targets and green initiatives (World Bank, 2023). 

Ultimately, the so-called “war” over energy sources runs more profound than the physical dominance of fossil fields. It is a battle over global order—deciding who writes the rules, who reaps the profits, and whose voice commands the conversation in the age of climate change. A mere pivot to solar panels and wind turbines is insufficient if underlying structures, from financial systems to political alliances, remain tethered to fossil paradigms. This clash could culminate in a genuine clean energy revolution—or a prolonged stalemate that tests the resilience of international cooperation. The fate of the planet’s climate, global prosperity, and geopolitical stability hinges on how swiftly or reluctantly these imbalances are resolved.I

---

Green Energy at a Crossroads: Will Trillions in Investments Stand the Test of Time?¨

---

The global shift toward green energy has been monumental: trillions of dollars have poured into wind farms, solar installations, electric vehicle infrastructure, and emerging technologies such as hydrogen and advanced battery storage. These funds, sourced from banks, trade unions, and government subsidies, represent not merely a financial bet but a collective commitment to curbing the existential threat of climate change. Yet, the fate of these vast investments hinges on several critical factors that will determine whether green energy continues to flourish or stall under shifting political winds.

First, policy stability remains paramount. While many governments set ambitious climate targets and enacted incentives for renewable energy, these policies can swing dramatically with leadership changes. A supportive administration may provide grants, tax breaks, and regulatory backing for new wind farms or solar arrays, only for a successor to scale back or freeze that funding. This inconsistency creates uncertainty for investors, raising the perceived risk of renewable projects. Strong, bipartisan policy frameworks are thus essential for long-term market confidence (IEA, 2023).

Second, technological innovation is expanding at breakneck speed, driving down the cost of green energy. Solar and wind power are no longer fringe options; they are increasingly competitive with fossil fuels on a levelized cost basis (IRENA, 2022). Meanwhile, advancements in battery technology and hydrogen fuel cells address intermittency concerns, enabling greater grid flexibility. As new breakthroughs emerge—such as next-generation nuclear, carbon capture solutions, and energy-dense batteries—the green sector could become even more cost-effective, displacing the final barriers to widespread adoption. This virtuous cycle of innovation can, in turn, attract even more capital to the sector.

Third, financial sector enthusiasm has shifted. In the past, renewable projects were regarded as niche or high-risk ventures. However, increasing climate awareness and pressure from stakeholders—from trade funds to institutional investors who are mindful of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues—have changed this perception criteria—and have propelled major banks and pension funds to commit billions to green portfolios. The rise of green bonds and sustainability-linked loans provides further evidence that capital markets now view clean energy as a viable, profitable sector (BloombergNEF, 2021). Still, market appetites can change rapidly: a technological stock downturn, a global recession, or geopolitically driven fossil fuel price manipulation could redirect investment flows.

Finally, global cooperation plays a pivotal role. Climate change is an international crisis demanding coordinated action. If geopolitical rifts deepen—evidenced by trade wars and resource nationalism—supply chains for wind turbines, solar panels, and battery components could fragment. Such fragmentation would raise costs, hamper innovation, and slow deployment. Conversely, collaboration through treaties, research partnerships, and aligned industrial policies can expedite progress, ensuring that these trillion-dollar investments yield substantial environmental and economic returns (IPCC, 2023).

In the end, the green energy sector stands at a critical inflection point. Trillions have already been invested, and many signs—from plummeting technology costs to growing public demand—are optimistic. Yet the sector’s future hinges on stable policy, technological breakthroughs, secure financing, and genuine global cooperation. Should these elements falter, the world risks squandering financial capital and a historic chance to mitigate climate change and reshape the global energy landscape.

---

References

1. BloombergNEF (2021) Clean Energy Investment Trends. Available at: https://about.bnef.com/clean-energy-investment-trends/ (Accessed: [date]).

2. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2023) Renewables 2023: Analysis and Forecast. Paris: IEA.

3. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2022) Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2022. Abu Dhabi: IRENA.

4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2023) Sixth Assessment Report: Summary for Policymakers. Geneva: IPCC.

---

Rare Earth Elements and Geopolitical Power Struggles

---

Rare earth elements (REEs)—a group of 17 metallic elements—have quietly become a decisive factor in the global balance of power [1]. Their unique properties render them essential for advanced defence systems, high-tech industries, and clean energy technologies, fostering intense competition among nations for secure access.  [2]. This analysis of the strategic importance of REEs evaluates former U.S. President Donald Trump’s proposed mineral deal with Ukraine, explores the role of fossil fuels in the evolving world order, and considers how control over key resources might reshape global alignments among the United States, China, and Russia, disrupting all order in every regard.

Geopolitical Importance of REEs

Central Materials for Modern Industries

REEs are indispensable to modern economies. They power high-performance magnets in military hardware, electric vehicles, and wind turbines, essential for smartphones, computers, and other digital devices [2]. Although not geologically “rare,” REEs are costly to extract and refine, partly due to their chemical complexity and environmentally damaging byproducts [1]. This makes them strategically vital yet vulnerable to supply shocks.

China’s Near-Monopoly

China dominates the global rare earth supply chain, accounting for roughly 90% of global processing capacity [6]. Through state-led investment, low labour costs, and relaxed environmental standards, China undercut other producers in the 1990s and 2000s, forcing mines elsewhere—including the U.S. Mountain Pass facility—to send ore to Chinese refineries [2]. Beijing has demonstrated a willingness to use export controls as a geopolitical lever, briefly suspending supplies to Japan in 2010 and threatening similar measures during trade tensions with the U.S. [7]. Such moves underscore the immense leverage conferred by rare earth dominance.

U.S. and Russian Responses

Alarmed by China’s grip, the U.S. and Russia have accelerated efforts to expand domestic output. The U.S. invoked the Defense Production Act to finance new Texas separation facilities while promoting “friend-shoring” with allies like Australia and Canada [4]. Russia, holding sizable reserves of its own, is investing over a billion dollars to develop large deposits in Siberia in hopes of becoming the world’s second-largest producer [3][4]. Despite these efforts, China’s entrenched position remains a formidable obstacle, and shifting the balance will require years of sustained investment and policy coordination [1].

Trump’s Mineral Deal with Ukraine: Good or Bad?

Strategic Significance of Ukraine’s Deposits

Ukraine claims to hold up to 5% of the world’s “critical” raw materials, including several promising rare earth sites such as Novopoltavske [1]. This could bolster U.S. energy security and reduce reliance on China [2]. However, much of Ukraine’s mineral data stems from outdated Soviet-era surveys that lack modern feasibility assessments [1]. Many deposits lie in conflict zones, and the country’s energy infrastructure has been severely compromised by war [2][5].

Viability and Obstacles

Rare earth extraction demands vast capital, advanced refining processes, and long development timelines—often exceeding a decade [2]. Even if Ukraine confirmed substantial reserves, building the necessary processing infrastructure would be prohibitively expensive, especially amid ongoing hostilities [2][5]. S&P Global deems Ukraine’s REE deposits potentially unprofitable in the short term given high costs, security risks, and logistical barriers [1].

Deal Terms and Friction

President Trump’s proposed agreement sought preferential access to Ukraine’s raw materials—potentially claiming 50% of future state-owned resource revenues—without offering Ukraine firm security guarantees [1]. This arrangement alarmed Ukrainian officials, who viewed it as ceding strategic assets without ensuring their defense needs. Negotiations stalled, reflecting the transactional approach favored by the Trump administration and underscoring Ukraine’s precarious position as both a beneficiary of Western support and a potential resource colony [1][2].

China–Nicaragua Rare Earths Agreement

In parallel with its global push, China recently signed a deal to develop 280,000 hectares for rare earth mining in Nicaragua [11]. The venture expands Beijing’s reach in Latin America, mirroring similar overseas investments aimed at consolidating control over strategic minerals. Although initial surveys suggest significant REE potential, these deposits' quality and economic viability remain untested [11]. Should they prove profitable, China’s dominance in the sector could grow further, complicating Western efforts to diversify supply chains and secure alternative sources of critical materials [2].

Fossil Fuels in the Emerging Global Order

While REEs capture headlines in high-tech sectors, fossil fuels remain a cornerstone of economic and geopolitical power [8]. Central proven oil and natural gas reserves in regions like Canada, China, Venezuela, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, Iran, Turkey, Norway, various African nations, and the Arab world continue to shape alliance patterns and trade flows [8][9]. For instance, OPEC+ production decisions can ripple global markets, influencing everything from inflation rates to diplomatic leverage [9]. According to BP’s latest estimates, the world’s proven natural gas reserves could sustain consumption for approximately 50 years [9]. This abundant yet finite supply underpins critical industries and strategic relationships; countries blessed with rich hydrocarbon deposits often wield substantial influence in multilateral negotiations [10].

Even as the clean energy transition accelerates, oil and gas demand remains robust, particularly in emerging markets. Yet balancing hydrocarbon revenues with climate goals has become a significant policy challenge. Governments across the globe—whether in oil-exporting states like Saudi Arabia or gas-rich regions of Africa—face mounting pressure to diversify their economies and reduce dependence on fossil exports [8]. Conversely, consumer nations weigh energy security against environmental obligations, seeking stable supply while pursuing carbon neutrality targets [9]. This tension makes fossil fuels an integral part of the new global order, where traditional energy superpowers and rising renewable champions must navigate a complex interplay of markets, regulations, and diplomacy [10].

REEs in a New World Order

Defining Superpower Status

Just as oil shaped 20th-century geopolitics, control of REEs could define global power in the 21st century [6]. Nations with stable rare earth supply chains will lead in high-tech manufacturing and defence capabilities, while those lacking access risk economic and security vulnerabilities [7]. China, by maintaining dominance in REE processing, wields a potent tool of economic statecraft that can deter adversaries.

Risk of Resource-Driven Conflict

Global demand for REEs is surging, fueling fears of “resource wars.” Although outright military clashes over REEs remain unlikely, coercive trade measures and zero-sum resource grabs may escalate tensions [3][6]. Nations holding large, untapped deposits could become flashpoints if foreign investors and local governments clash over extraction rights [5].

Emerging Alliances and Technological Innovation

In response to China’s near monopoly, the U.S. and its allies have formed initiatives like the Minerals Security Partnership to develop new sources and processing plants in friendly nations [5]. This evolving landscape might result in a bifurcation of supply chains: one led by China (potentially partnered with Russia), and another by the U.S., EU, and allied states [4]. Long-term recycling and substitute materials innovation could mitigate these tensions by reducing dependence on virgin REEs [2][7].

Conclusion

Rare earth elements have shifted from obscure commodities to a focal point of 21st-century geopolitics [6]. The U.S.-China-Russia triangle underscores that REE access equates to strategic power, influencing diplomatic leverage, defence readiness, and industrial competitiveness [1][7]. Meanwhile, fossil fuels continue to undergird many global alliances, with vast oil and natural gas reserves shaping economic resilience and foreign policy [8][9]. As seen in President Trump’s contentious attempt to secure Ukrainian resources, these dynamics can strain alliances and reorder global alignments [2]. Whether the competition evolves into deeper conflict or spurs cooperative innovation depends on the major powers' political choices now. Both rare earths and fossil fuels remain at the heart of a new world order, one defined by resource security, technological leadership, and the delicate balance between national interests and global cooperation.

---

References

[1] Coi, G. (2025) Donald Trump might have made a bad mineral deal with Ukraine, POLITICO, 26 Feb. Available at: https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-bad-mineral-deal-ukraine-volodymyr-zelenskyy/ (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[2] Baskaran, G. and Schwartz, M. (2025) Assessing the Viability of a U.S.-Ukraine Minerals Deal, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), 21 Feb. Available at: https://www.csis.org/analysis/assessing-viability-us-ukraine-minerals-deal (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[3] Stolyarov, G. (2013) Russia to invest $1 billion in rare earths to cut dependence on China, Reuters, 10 Sep. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/business/russia-to-invest-1-billion-in-rare-earths-to-cut-dependence-on-china-idUSBRE9890EQ/ (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[4] Lyrchikova, A. and Stolyarov, G. (2020) Russia has $1.5 billion plan to dent China’s rare earth dominance, Reuters, 12 Aug. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/business/russia-has-15-billion-plan-to-dent-chinas-rare-earth-dominance-idUSKCN2581S3/ (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[5] Home, A. (2022) U.S. forms ‘friendly’ coalition to secure critical minerals, Reuters (Analysis), 30 Jun. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-forms-friendly-coalition-secure-critical-minerals-andy-home-2022-06-30/ (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[6] Schmid, M. (2019) Rare Earths in the Trade Dispute Between the US and China: A Deja Vu, Intereconomics, 54(6), pp. 378–384. Available at: https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2019/number/6/article/rare-earths-in-the-trade-dispute-between-the-us-and-china-a-deja-vu.html (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[7] Dreyer, J.T. (2020) China’s Monopoly on Rare Earth Elements — and Why We Should Care, Foreign Policy Research Institute, 7 Oct. Available at: https://www.fpri.org/article/2020/10/chinas-monopoly-on-rare-earth-elements-and-why-we-should-care/ (Accessed: 26 Feb 2025).

[8] IEA (2023) World Energy Outlook 2023, Paris: International Energy Agency. Available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2023 (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[9] BP (2022) Statistical Review of World Energy 2022, London: BP. Available at: https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[10] OPEC (2021) OPEC Annual Statistical Bulletin 2021, Vienna: OPEC. Available at: https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/publications/2021.htm (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).

[11] Xinhua (2025) ‘China, Nicaragua sign rare earth mining deal spanning 280,000 hectares’, Xinhua News Agency, 15 Jan. Available at: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2025-01/15/c_139965420.htm (Accessed: 27 Feb 2025).  

---

Dirty War in the Electricity Sector…

---

Energy infrastructure—the pipelines, power grids, ports, railways, and undersea cables that keep modern society running—has become a new battlefield in a surreptitious conflict. Across the globe, state and non-state actors alike engage in espionage, sabotage, and militarized manoeuvres to secure or disrupt energy lifelines. This “dirty war” in the electricity sector echoes past colonial contests over resources and yields far-reaching consequences for international stability and trust.

Militarization of Energy Infrastructure

Once seen as purely commercial or civilian, energy facilities are increasingly under military watch. Authorities fear disruptive attacks on power grids, gas terminals, and pipeline routes. In Poland, for example, the government approved legislation in 2023 granting the navy the authority to sink hostile vessels threatening the Baltic Pipe gas link from Norway. Such protection extends to ports, LNG terminals and undersea cables deemed vital to national security. NATO and the European Union similarly fortify undersea pipelines and cables amid heightened awareness following recent sabotage incidents. What was once the domain of engineers and private industry has become a critical theatre of state-level defence strategies.

Sabotage in the Shadows

The wave of sabotage illustrates the vulnerability of energy infrastructure. The Nord Stream gas pipeline explosion in the Baltic Sea in September 2022 marked one of the most publicized acts of sabotage in recent history. Investigators concluded it was a deliberate operation but have not definitively attributed blame. The impact was immediate and disruptive, underscoring energy’s central role in geopolitical conflicts.

Beyond pipelines, undersea cables carrying internet and electric power also face increased risk. In 2023 and 2024, submarine cables were mysteriously severed in the Baltic Sea, severing communication and potentially threatening energy transfers. While some incidents, such as the Balticconnector rupture between Finland and Estonia, were traced to accidental damage, others remain suspected. Such intrusions often involve “grey-zone” tactics that fall short of open war but are strategic tools to weaken opponents.

Cyber threats are equally concerning: hackers linked to various state actors regularly target power grid control systems. The 2015 Ukraine power grid hack, which briefly disrupted electricity for hundreds of thousands, demonstrated the potential devastation of cyber sabotage. Similar tactics could be deployed elsewhere with equally dramatic effects.

Grand Power Ambitions: A New Energy Great Game

Today’s contest for energy infrastructure mirrors the 19th-century scramble for colonies, though focused on pipelines, ports, and undersea routes rather than territories. The United States continues its longstanding policy of maintaining a strong military presence in the Middle East to secure key oil shipping lanes. Control of these corridors confers substantial leverage over energy-importing rivals.

China, in turn, is investing heavily in overseas infrastructure through the Belt and Road Initiative. Ports, pipelines, and refineries built under this framework enhance Beijing’s global reach. Western observers warn that these ostensibly commercial projects could become dual-use facilities, providing strategic advantages reminiscent of colonial-era imperial bases. Meanwhile, Russia has also wielded energy resources as a strategic lever, sometimes cutting off supplies to influence neighbors politically.

Even a seemingly peripheral event can have broader implications. For example, Taiwan’s recent detention of a Congolese-flagged ship crewed by Chinese nationals is seen as a microcosm of more prominent rivalries. The vessel was allegedly involved in cutting an undersea cable, highlighting covert attempts at crippling opponents’ communications or power links without resorting to overt hostilities.

Scramble for Fossil Fuels and Rare Minerals

While countries pledge transitions to cleaner energy, the immediate economic and political stakes tied to fossil fuels remain huge. The war in Ukraine demonstrates how disruptions in fossil fuel supply reverberate globally. For instance, Europe’s scramble to replace Russian gas sent prices soaring, placing vulnerable economies at risk and prompting wealthier nations to secure supplies first.

Alongside oil and gas, rare earth elements—like lithium, cobalt, and other critical minerals—fuel geopolitical competition. These resources underpin electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines, and other green technologies crucial to modern economies. China’s dominance in rare earth processing grants it an outsized influence. In response, the U.S., EU, and partners are exploring mining options in Australia, Brazil, and Africa. Competition in this domain has the potential to mirror the 20th-century battles over oil concessions, further straining international relations.

Collateral Damage: Eroding Trust and Stability

The normalization of sabotage erodes trust between nations, complicating collaboration efforts on shared challenges like climate change. Sabotage incidents require time-consuming investigations, generate widespread suspicion, and complicate negotiations. For instance, the sabotage of Nord Stream pipelines continues to strain relations among implicated countries, fueling uncertainty over possible future attacks.

Moreover, sabotage and cyber intrusions carry economic consequences, from price surges to disruptions in consumer supply. Countries that host strategic infrastructure may be coerced into choosing sides, intensifying blocs and rivalries. Such hostility drives further militarization, creating a feedback loop of suspicion, escalation, and potential open conflict.

Despite these challenges, some international frameworks show promise. NATO and the EU have bolstered joint defences of undersea critical infrastructure, and there is growing dialogue on establishing new norms akin to arms-control treaties—albeit for underwater cables and pipeline security. Multilateral cooperation on traceability and accountability in cyberspace could also mitigate risks. Yet these measures remain nascent, and powerful states often flout rules when national interests are at stake.

Conclusion

In this era of heightened energy competition, pipelines, grids, and undersea cables play outsized roles in shaping national security. As major powers bolster infrastructure defenses, employ covert sabotage tactics, and jockey for resources, the potential for larger-scale conflict grows. Without robust international cooperation and updated regulatory frameworks, the “dirty war” in the electricity sector will persist, imperilling modern life's networks. To avoid further destabilization, nations must recognize the shared vulnerability of critical energy infrastructure and commit to mutual restraint—lest these clandestine hostilities endanger the entire global system.

---

References

1. Brussels Institute for Geopolitics (2023) ‘Energy diplomacy – Europe’s new strategic mission (BIG003)’, BIG Review, November. Available at: https://big-europe.eu/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

2. Cavcic, M. (2024) ‘Hybrid warfare paints “gray zone” targets on shipping and offshore energy infrastructure’, Offshore Energy, 11 December. Available at: https://www.offshore-energy.biz/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

3. Hunt, E. (2023) ‘How the US could cut off Middle East oil to China if it wanted’, Responsible Statecraft (Quincy Institute), 7 June. Available at: https://responsiblestatecraft.org/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

4. Lee, Y. (2025) ‘Taiwan detains China-linked cargo ship after undersea cable disconnected’, Reuters, 25 February. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

5. Majkut, J., Palti-Guzman, L., Bergmann, M. et al. (2022) ‘Security Implications of Nord Stream Sabotage’, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 29 September. Available at: https://www.csis.org/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

6. Marine Technology News (2024) ‘Sabotage: Two undersea cables cut in Baltic Sea’, 18 November. Available at: https://www.marinetechnologynews.com/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

7. Mason, C. and Oxnevad, I. (2024) ‘Risk on the (Rare Earth) Rocks: The geopolitics of critical minerals’, Corporate Compliance Insights, 24 April. Available at: https://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

8. NATO (2024) ‘Reinforcing resilience: NATO’s role in enhanced security for critical undersea infrastructure’, NATO Review, 28 August. Available at: https://www.nato.int/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

9. Strzelecki, M. (2023) ‘Poland to boost military protection of Baltic energy infrastructure’, Reuters, 4 May. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

10. United Nations Security Council (2024) UN Meeting Coverage SC/15683: Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage, 30 October. Available at: https://press.un.org/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

11. Wikipedia (2023) 2015 Ukraine power grid hack. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Ukraine_power_grid_hack (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

12. Wikipedia (2023) CS Alert (1890). Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_Alert_(1890) (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

---

200 Years of Trust Made in Ages…

The recent and abrupt foreign policy shift by the United States—signalled most starkly by a vote against Ukraine and an unexpected alignment with countries like Cuba, China, Iran, Nicaragua, and North Korea—has upended the carefully woven tapestry of transatlantic cooperation. Observers worldwide describe an “upside-down world” where once-stable alliances appear inverted. Two centuries of collaborative legacy between Europe and America now risk unraveling, raising questions about the durability of a relationship that has shaped modern international structures.

Historically, the United States and Europe have shared deep-rooted political, economic, and cultural ties. In the early nineteenth century, a convergence of ideas on democracy, free markets, and liberal governance cultivated trust across the Atlantic. Over time, bilateral trade expanded, and intellectual exchanges accelerated the adoption of shared values, particularly during watershed moments like the Enlightenment’s final echoes in Europe and the US’s pioneering experiments in republican governance. By the early twentieth century, cooperation deepened further with the United States’ decisive entry into World War I, setting the stage for broader strategic alignment.

The bond grew even more robust during and after World War II. Europe and America jointly confronted fascist powers, leading to an era of sweeping multilateralism. The Marshall Plan, conceived under President Harry Truman, funnelled critical financial support to a devastated Europe, spurring economic recovery and forging unbreakable political friendships. NATO, also formed under Truman’s watch, symbolized collective security, ensuring that any threat to one nation would be met with a united response from all allies. These initiatives turned shared ideals into tangible structures that anchored global affairs.

Throughout the Cold War, this Western alliance stood as the first line of defense against Soviet expansion. European nations, often with heavy American investment and military backing, maintained strong institutions that safeguarded democratic freedoms. The eventual collapse of the Eastern Bloc seemed to validate transatlantic unity, offering a blueprint for how shared sacrifices and diplomatic coordination could bring about systemic change.

In recent years, however, subtle fractures emerged, often attributed to disagreements over trade tariffs, differing stances on climate commitments, and questions of burden-sharing in NATO. Yet nothing prepared the world for the scale of the latest pivot in Washington. The United States, once a stalwart supporter of Ukraine, has broken from tradition and aligned itself with regimes historically at odds with Western values. This move has confounded European capitals, questioning the reliability of an ally that once championed democracy worldwide. Economic repercussions loom as well, since regulatory frameworks and trade agreements have become closely intertwined with mutual defense obligations.

Politically, a departure from the established consensus on renewable energy further exposes these rifts. Europe has pioneered large-scale green initiatives, counting on American support for a global push toward sustainability. Now faced with an inconsistent U.S. approach—one moment endorsing climate action, the next favoring resource deals with authoritarian regimes—European leaders worry about long-term cooperation. The potential collapse of critical transatlantic projects jeopardizes not only the symbolic unity of the West but also practical collaboration on technological innovation and ecological resilience.

Despite the unpredictability in Washington, the history binding Europe and America remains profound. Together, they weathered numerous crises, from the Napoleonic aftermath to the World Wars and the bipolar Cold War standoff. These cumulative experiences underscore a resilience that might yet withstand current upheavals. Recalling the spirit of Truman’s transformative initiatives, voices on both sides of the Atlantic urge for renewed diplomatic engagements. Joint policy statements, multilateral gatherings, and grassroots cultural exchanges could serve as anchors, reminding policymakers of the immense value embedded in two centuries of collective achievements.

In an era fraught with crises—geopolitical tensions, energy uncertainties, and emerging global threats—this partnership’s future hinges on a delicate balancing act. If the rift widens, the world may face an even more fragmented international order, prone to regional power plays and ideological competition. Conversely, a recommitment to democratic principles, economic synergies, and security cooperation could reinvigorate the ties that have, for so long, maintained relative global stability. Whether these bonds endure will depend on leaders' willingness, on both sides of the Atlantic, to remember the legacy of 200 years and find the foresight to preserve it.

---

References

1. Freedman, L. (2022) ‘The changing alliances: Europe’s uncertain future with the US’, International Affairs, 98(4), pp. 645–662.

2. Kennan, G. (1946) ‘The Long Telegram’, US National Archives. Available at: https://catalog.archives.gov/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

3. Morgan, T. (2023) ‘Transatlantic trade and the fragile ties that bind’, Brookings Report, 15 July. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

4. Truman, H.S. (1947) ‘Address before a joint session of Congress: The Truman Doctrine’, US Congressional Records. Available at: https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

5. European Commission (2022) ‘Cooperative security in a changing global order’, EU Policy Brief, May. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/ (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

---

Rata de dos patas" and Its Impact on Political Science

“Rata de dos patas,” famously performed by Mexican singer Paquita la del Barrio, is generally celebrated as a fierce anthem addressed to an unfaithful partner. However, beyond its bold and defiant lyrics, some cultural commentators point to a significant political backstory tied to the “Solidaridad” (Solidarity) program introduced by President Carlos Salinas de Gortari (1988–1994). This initiative was initially promoted as an innovative strategy to combat poverty by channeling resources into marginalized regions, developing infrastructure, and fostering community participation in Mexico and throughout the Americas.

At first, Solidaridad was lauded for its apparent promise. Schools, clinics, and roads were to be built in rural and impoverished areas, raising hopes for tangible economic and social progress. Over time, dissenting voices grew louder, alleging that the program operated more as a political tool than a true path to development. Accusations of clientelism and misappropriation of funds further tarnished Solidaridad’s reputation. According to critics, this supposedly “wonderful” program quickly revealed itself as an empty mirage, concealing a web of corruption that ultimately undermined its lofty rhetoric.

In this context, the piercing anger of “Rata de dos patas” takes on fresh significance. Beyond capturing the bitterness of romantic betrayal, the song reflects a broader sense of disillusionment and outrage among communities that felt hoodwinked by a government claiming to champion their needs. The biting insult of “rat” fits neatly with the sentiment of being deceived: just as the unmasked illusions of Solidaridad laid bare the administration’s failings, Paquita’s lyrics call out false promises and moral bankruptcy. Consequently, “Rata de dos patas” not only stands as a cultural emblem of spurned love but also underscores the depth of collective frustration when political promises implode under their weight, revealing a stark reality of broken trust and unmet expectations.

The song's impact on political science is profound, as it highlights the emotional resonance of political betrayal. It serves as a reminder that political promises, when unfulfilled, can lead to deep-seated mistrust and disillusionment among citizens. This mistrust can have far-reaching consequences, affecting voter turnout, civic engagement, and overall confidence in democratic institutions. The lyrics of “Rata de dos patas” tap into a universal sentiment of feeling let down by those in power, making it a potent symbol of political discontent.

Moreover, the song's enduring popularity underscores the importance of cultural expressions in political discourse. Music and art often reflect societal sentiments more vividly than academic analyses, providing a lens through which to view the emotional undercurrents of political events. In this way, “Rata de dos patas” becomes a tool for understanding the emotional landscape of political disappointment and the challenges faced by governments in maintaining public trust.

In an era fraught with crises—geopolitical tensions, energy uncertainties, and emerging global threats—this partnership’s future hinges on a delicate balancing act. If the rift widens, the world may face an even more fragmented international order, prone to regional power plays and ideological competition. Conversely, a recommitment to democratic principles, economic synergies, and security cooperation could reinvigorate the ties that have, for so long, maintained relative global stability. Whether these bonds endure will depend on leaders' willingness, on both sides of the Atlantic, to remember the legacy of 200 years and find the foresight to preserve it.

The legacy of “Rata de dos patas” serves as a cautionary tale for political leaders, emphasizing the importance of transparency, accountability, and genuine commitment to the welfare of citizens. It reminds us that political actions have emotional consequences that can resonate deeply within society, shaping public perception and trust in governance. As such, the song stands as a testament to the power of cultural expressions in reflecting and influencing political sentiments, highlighting the need for integrity and honesty in political leadership.

---

Why This Approach Matters

In a world shaped by resource conflicts, geopolitical realignments, and technological shifts, the ability to see beyond conventional narratives is more valuable than ever. We don’t just follow trends—we map them, using hundreds of variables to track energy markets, infrastructure security, rare earth dependencies, and economic shifts.

We’ve provided a snapshot on Canada and Iran, but that’s just the beginning. If deeper insights are needed—whether on trade flows, energy resilience, or supply chain disruptions—we have the data and analytical models to support it.

What We Offer

1. A Transparent Lens – No pre-loaded conclusions, no ideological constraints—just facts, patterns, and trajectories.

2. Dynamic Research – If there’s a specific variable you need, we can integrate it. Every trend we examine is multi-dimensional, ensuring the most accurate, adaptive insights.

3. Actionable Intelligence – Whether it’s the future of energy, the evolution of rare earth supply chains, or emerging geopolitical risks, our research is structured to inform, not dictate.

If you have a specific area of focus—energy security, supply chain resilience, infrastructure risks—just say the word. We’ll bring the data, the depth, and the clarity to ensure you have the full picture—not just a snapshot.

Let’s dive deeper—where should we explore next? 🚀📊🔍

Summary from the thinkers…

1. Humanity’s Most Significant Risks and Why?

The world faces an unprecedented convergence of global risks, many of which stem from resource competition, geopolitical realignments, climate change, and emerging energy vulnerabilities. These risks threaten stability, economic prosperity, and long-term security.

Resource Conflicts

The growing demand for fossil fuels, rare earth elements (REEs), and critical minerals has heightened tensions between major economies, exacerbating geopolitical rivalries and increasing the potential for direct military confrontations. The dominance of China in rare earth processing (controlling over 90% of the global market) has led to strategic stockpiling by Western nations and efforts to diversify supply chains. Meanwhile, the U.S. and Canada are racing to develop their own mining and refining capacity, while Russia is expanding rare earth mining in Siberia to counterbalance Western influence. Countries that control these resources gain technological and defense advantages, shaping the next global power struggle.

Infrastructure Sabotage and Energy Security

The Nord Stream pipeline explosions in 2022 marked a turning point in the security of global energy infrastructure, demonstrating how critical pipelines and undersea cables remain vulnerable to cyberattacks, sabotage, and geopolitical disruptions. More recently, mystery attacks on Baltic gas pipelines and power cables (2023–24) have raised alarm over covert hybrid warfare tactics used to destabilize nations. Energy grids, telecommunications infrastructure, and key shipping routes (such as the Panama Canal and the Strait of Hormuz) have become primary targets in a new era of energy-based conflicts.

Distrust and Geopolitical Fragmentation

The fracturing of global alliances and the erosion of diplomatic trust pose serious risks. U.S.–China tensions over trade, technology, and REEs have led to a strategic decoupling of supply chains. Meanwhile, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Western sanctions have redrawn global trade routes, forcing Moscow to pivot energy exports toward China and India. The European Union’s push for energy independence from Russia has reshaped global LNG markets, while Iran’s renewed oil trade with China has further divided global energy alliances. These shifting relationships highlight structural imbalances reminiscent of those in a fractured relationship, where major powers increasingly act unilaterally rather than cooperatively.

Climate Change Impacts

Rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and water shortages are accelerating the need for a global energy transition. However, this transition is being delayed by political divisions over fossil fuel dependency, with some governments prioritizing energy security over climate commitments. The U.S., EU, and China continue to invest in renewables, but OPEC nations and fossil fuel-dependent economies resist rapid shifts. Climate-driven resource conflicts—such as disputes over drought-stricken river basins, desertification, and access to lithium deposits—are emerging as new flashpoints in global stability.

Together, these risks underscore the fragility of modern energy, trade, and security networks, highlighting the urgent need for resilience strategies.

2. The Future of Electricity and Industry

The global energy sector is at a crossroads, with two competing pathways:

1. Continuation of Fossil Fuels
   Many governments prioritize short-term energy security by extending the life of oil, gas, and coal, particularly in response to geopolitical disruptions and energy crises. The ongoing war in Ukraine, rising tensions in the Middle East, and U.S. policy shifts under a second Trump administration could see increased fossil fuel production and deregulation.

2. Gradual but Unstoppable Rise of Renewables
   Technological breakthroughs in solar, wind, energy storage, and hydrogen will continue, driven by declining costs, corporate net-zero pledges, and public demand for clean air. However, major challenges remain: scaling battery production, securing REE supplies, and overhauling outdated grid infrastructure to accommodate intermittent renewables.

Automation, AI-driven energy management, and advanced smart grids will be crucial for integrating these energy sources efficiently. Additionally, the race to secure critical minerals for electric vehicle (EV) batteries—including lithium, nickel, and cobalt—will reshape global trade relationships.

3. How Will It Function?

Short-Term Outlook: Hybrid Systems Dominate

• In the near future, most nations will rely on hybrid energy systems, integrating renewables with traditional baseload power (natural gas, coal, nuclear). The continued reliance on gas-fired power plants will ensure stability, especially as grids adapt to variable wind and solar generation.

Long-Term Outlook: Smarter Grids, More Storage, Decentralization

• Over time, improved battery storage, decentralized grids, and advanced transmission technologies will allow renewables to supply the majority of global electricity demand. Regions investing in offshore wind, advanced geothermal, and next-generation nuclear reactors will lead the transition.

4. Fuel Composition

The global energy mix will remain diverse but will vary based on policy and technological advances:

1. Fossil Fuels: Oil and gas remain dominant in transportation, heavy industry, and power generation, especially where energy security concerns outweigh climate commitments.

2. Renewables: Wind, solar, and geothermal continue to grow, with government incentives and falling technology costs driving adoption.

3. Nuclear: Some countries (France, Canada, China) are reinvesting in nuclear power for stable, low-carbon electricity, though waste management and safety concerns remain barriers.

4. Hydrogen: Green hydrogen could replace natural gas in industrial applications, but cost reductions and infrastructure development are needed before mass adoption.

5. The Fate of Renewable Energy

Despite political setbacks (such as U.S. policy reversals under Trump), long-term trends still favor renewables. Key drivers include:

1. Cost-competitiveness: Wind and solar power are now cheaper than fossil fuels in many regions.

2. Government incentives: Policies such as Europe’s Green Deal and the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act provide billions in subsidies for clean energy projects.

3. Corporate demand: Tech giants and multinational corporations are shifting to 100% renewable energy, driving investment.

4. International commitments: Even amid political uncertainty, nations are increasingly bound by climate treaties and emission reduction goals.

6. Can the U.S. Survive Without Europe?

1. While the U.S. has the resources and market size to sustain itself economically, losing Europe as a trade partner and geopolitical ally would weaken its global influence. A transatlantic split could lead to:

2. Stronger EU-China cooperation on trade and clean energy technology.

3. U.S. energy and defense industry setbacks, as Europe seeks alternative suppliers.

4. Weakened NATO cohesion, making global security more volatile.

Europe, in turn, would face challenges in replacing U.S. military and economic cooperation, potentially accelerating its move toward strategic autonomy.

7. Banking Policy Toward the Electric Sector

Financial markets are increasingly favoring clean energy investments, but uncertainty remains. Banks may:

1. Limit funding for high-risk renewable projects in regions with unstable policies.

2. Favor fossil fuel expansion if policy shifts suggest stronger government backing.

3. Increase green financing options in response to carbon-neutral pledges.

8. Is Three Years Enough to Implement Disruptive Changes?

• No. Energy transitions, infrastructure projects, and supply chain realignments take decades, not years. While short-term policies can set the direction, achieving meaningful transformation within a three-year window is unlikely.

9. Relationship Between Trump and Putin

• A second Trump administration could take a more pragmatic stance toward Russia, prioritizing energy trade and negotiations over sanctions. However, geopolitical tensions—especially over Ukraine—could limit any potential rapprochement.

10. Fate of Ukraine

• If Western support declines, Ukraine could face increased vulnerability. However, continued EU and NATO backing may sustain its long-term defense. The war’s outcome will depend on Western resolve, Russia’s strategy, and potential diplomatic settlements.

11. Will the U.S. Take Control of the Panama Canal?

• While unlikely under current treaties, the U.S. remains invested in securing global shipping routes. Increased Chinese influence in Latin America could prompt greater U.S. military and economic involvement in Panama, but direct control is improbable.

12. Current Global Relations

1. U.S. & Europe: Strained over energy policies, trade disputes, and NATO commitments.

2. China: Dominates REE supply chains, escalating U.S.–China trade tensions.

3. Iran: Expanding energy ties with China and Russia amid sanctions.

4. Russia: Redirecting oil and gas sales to non-Western markets.

Resolution of these disputes will require new diplomatic alignments, resource diversification, and long-term trust-building.

Conclusion

The world is undergoing a seismic energy and geopolitical transition, shaped by competition over resources, technology, and climate policies. Despite setbacks, clean energy remains on an upward trajectory, while fossil fuel politics remain deeply entrenched. The next decade will determine whether nations successfully navigate these shifts—or descend into further conflict and economic fragmentation.

---

References

1. Government of Mexico (1989) Programa Nacional de Solidaridad (PRONASOL). Mexico City: Secretaría de Desarrollo Social.

2. Levy, S. (1991) ‘Poverty alleviation in Mexico: The case of Solidaridad’, World Development, 19(12), pp. 1573–1588.

3. Ochoa, E. (1992) ‘Promises and realities: Salinas’s Solidaridad and political clientelism’, Journal of Mexican Studies, 8(1), pp. 45–68.

4. Paquita la del Barrio (1995) ‘Rata de dos patas’, La música de la grande, Discos Musart.

5. Simpson, B. (2022) ‘Cultural representation in Mexican political discourse: From Salinas’s Solidaridad to Paquita la del Barrio’s protest songs’, Latin American Review, 4(2), pp. 32–46.

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can effortlessly support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1890688176206786821

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Workart is fully part of Germán & Co.

 Canada... 

---

1.- INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

Canada is one of the most resource-rich countries on Earth, stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Arctic coasts. Its vast territory—home to forests, mountains, plains, and a lengthy coastline—has produced an abundance of natural resources, including energy (oil, natural gas, hydropower), minerals (gold, copper, nickel, potash), forest products, fisheries, and agricultural land. (1)

These resources fulfil key roles in:

1. Economic Growth: They generate revenue, support exports, create jobs, and stimulate investment. 

2. Regional Development: Resource-based industries are the economic backbone for many rural and remote communities.

3. Trade: Canada is a major global exporter of energy, minerals, lumber, and agricultural commodities. (2)

2.- MAJOR CATEGORIES OF CANADIAN NATURAL RESOURCES

A. ENERGY RESOURCES

1. Oil Sands: Alberta’s oil sands represent the third-largest oil reserves in the world. Extraction primarily occurs around Fort McMurray (Athabasca oil sands), along with deposits at Peace River and Cold Lake.

2. Conventional Oil: Found in parts of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and offshore fields near Newfoundland and Labrador.

3. Natural Gas: Abundant in Western Canada (primarily Alberta and British Columbia). Key deposits are in the Montney and Duvernay Formations.

4. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG): Coastal British Columbia is expected to become a critical hub for LNG exports. (3)

Hydro Power

Canada ranks among the world’s largest producers of hydroelectricity. Provinces like Québec, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Newfoundland & Labrador host significant hydro infrastructure. Prominent examples include the James Bay Project (Québec), the W. A. C. Bennett Dam (BC), and the Churchill Falls Generating Station (Labrador). (4)

Nuclear Power

Ontario accounts for most of Canada’s nuclear power generation (e.g., Bruce Power, Darlington, and Pickering), providing a reliable source of low-carbon electricity. (5) 

Renewables (Other than Hydro)

1. Wind Energy: Rapid expansion in Ontario, Québec, Alberta, and the Maritime provinces.

2. Solar Energy: Growing in Ontario and Alberta but remains a relatively small share of total energy production.

Biomass and Geothermal:

• Present potential in specific regions but remains niche compared to hydro and wind. (6)

B. MINERAL RESOURCES

1. Precious Metals: This includes gold (in Ontario, Québec, BC, Nunavut), silver (often a by-product of base metal mining), and platinum group metals (in Ontario and Québec). 

2. Base Metals: Significant deposits of copper (BC, Ontario, Québec), nickel (Sudbury Basin, Voisey’s Bay, Thompson), and zinc/lead (New Brunswick, Québec, Manitoba). 

3. Iron Ore: Large mines operate in the Labrador Trough near the Quebec–Labrador border.

4. Potash: Saskatchewan is the world’s largest potash producer, essential for fertilizer.

5. Diamonds: Discoveries in the Northwest Territories (Ekati, Diavik) and northern Ontario (Victor Mine) have placed Canada among the world’s leading diamond producers.

6. Uranium: The Athabasca Basin in northern Saskatchewan hosts some of the highest-grade uranium deposits globally. (7)

C. FOREST RESOURCES

Canada boasts approximately 9% of the world’s forests, featuring vast boreal forests stretching from Yukon to Newfoundland and Labrador, alongside coniferous and mixed forests in British Columbia, Ontario, and Québec. The forestry sector—which includes lumber, pulp and paper, and engineered wood products—employs many Canadians and supports significant exports. Most of Canada’s lumber is produced in British Columbia, Québec, and Ontario. (8) 

D. FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE

Boasting the world’s longest coastline along the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans, Canada’s marine fisheries have traditionally been significant (e.g., Atlantic cod, until its collapse in the early 1990s). Today, major fisheries include lobster, snow crab, shrimp, salmon, and shellfish along both coasts. Freshwater fisheries contribute on a smaller scale, whereas aquaculture (salmon, mussels) is expanding in BC and the Maritimes. (9) 

E. AGRICULTURAL LAND

1. Prairie Provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba): Known for extensive fields of wheat, canola, barley, and other grains. Saskatchewan leads in canola production.

2. Fruit and Vegetable Production: Ontario’s Niagara region, BC’s Okanagan Valley, and select areas nationwide have thriving horticultural sectors.

3. Livestock: Alberta is renowned for beef, while Québec and Ontario are strong in dairy; Manitoba is a key hog producer. (10)

3.- ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE

Canada’s natural resources are fundamental to its economic strength:

1. Exports: Energy (oil, gas), minerals (like gold, potash), and forestry products form pillars of the export economy, with the U.S. as Canada’s largest trade partner.

2. Employment and GDP: These sectors employ hundreds of thousands of Canadians. Alberta’s economy leans heavily on oil and gas, while forestry is a mainstay in many rural BC and Québec communities. 

3. Regional Development: Resource wealth spurs infrastructure improvements, population growth, and broader economic development in remote locales, such as mining towns in Northern Ontario. (11)

4.- ENVIRONMENTAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

Climate Change and Emissions

1. Oil Sands: Criticized for high greenhouse gas emissions. Both producers and government bodies have aimed to lower extraction’s carbon footprint, yet international concerns persist. 

2. Forestry Management: Canada’s sustainable forest policies support reforestation and best practices, although old-growth logging in BC remains contentious. (12)

Indigenous Rights and Consultation

Many resource-rich regions overlap with lands historically used or claimed by Indigenous peoples. Modern treaties, impact-benefit agreements, and consultation frameworks strive to ensure that Indigenous communities have meaningful input on projects and share in potential benefits. (13)

Regulations and Environmental Assessments

Large projects—oil pipelines, mines, hydro dams—undergo federal or provincial reviews. While provinces manage natural resources, federal rules apply to fisheries, navigable waters, GHGs, and interprovincial or international initiatives. (14)

Market Access and Pipeline Debates

Pipeline proposals—such as Trans Mountain, Keystone XL, and Energy East—highlight tensions between economic benefits and environmental/climate responsibilities. (15)

5.- Transition to Low-Carbon Economy

Canada is diversifying its energy mix (hydro, wind, solar) and reducing emissions with a national carbon tax and clean energy investments. Clean-tech innovation is crucial for long-term competitiveness in the global market. (16)

Future outlook

1. Continued Global Demand: As global markets seek materials—particularly critical minerals (nickel, lithium, cobalt)—Canada can expand responsibly to meet EV and renewable energy demands.

2. Sustainability: Heightened environmental awareness, climate goals, and Indigenous rights obligations mean stricter scrutiny of resource developments.

3. Economic Diversification: Provinces reliant on hydrocarbons (e.g., Alberta) explore petrochemicals, renewables, and high-tech. Meanwhile, forestry and mining firms are investing in greener, value-added processes.

4. Technology and Innovation: Automated systems, AI, and advanced exploration methods transform resource sectors. Carbon capture in the oil sands, sustainable forestry, and precision agriculture lead Canada’s resource evolution.

5. Global Geopolitics: Demand for stable, responsibly sourced commodities may benefit Canada, known for political stability and strong regulations. However, competition and commodity price volatility remain ongoing challenges. (17)

KEY TAKEAWAYS Resource-Rich Foundation 

1. Canada’s vast oil, gas, mineral, forestry, and water assets power its economy and exports.

2. Economic Significance: Energy and mining lead export revenues, while forestry and agriculture remain lifelines for rural areas.

3. Environmental Balancing Act: Mitigating climate change, conserving habitats, and honoring Indigenous rights are central to managing these resources.

4. Policy and Innovation: Stricter regulations, carbon pricing, and advancing tech (clean tech) guide the transformation of Canada’s resource sectors.

5. Global Role: Rising global demand—particularly for critical minerals—positions Canada as a potential leader in the shift toward a low-carbon future.

Canada’s natural resources have played a central role in shaping its history, economy, and national identity. From Alberta’s vast oil sands and northern mineral deposits to its abundant forests and rich fisheries, the country’s resources are a cornerstone of its development. However, Canada's main challenge is how to harness these resources sustainably in an increasingly uncertain global environment. Striking a balance between economic growth, environmental responsibility, and collaboration with Indigenous communities is crucial for the future of Canada’s resource-driven industries. In addition, Canada is a major producer and exporter of natural gas, with much of its exports traditionally focused on the U.S. market. However, with the growing interest and development of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports, Canada is now positioning itself to tap into broader global markets. The following section will explore Canada's natural gas exports in detail and delve into key industry considerations. (18)

5.- CANADA’S NATURAL GAS EXPORTS AND MARKET: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS

OVERVIEW OF PRODUCTION AND MAJOR REGIONS

Canada is one of the world’s top natural gas producers. Most of its output originates in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (WCSB)—spanning Alberta, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan. Alberta remains the foremost producer, yet British Columbia’s share has surged thanks to shale developments such as the Montney. By 2023, BC generated about 6.7 Bcf/d of gas (36% of the country’s total). Saskatchewan’s volumes (~0.3–0.4 bcf/d) have declined, and offshore Atlantic production ended in 2018. Canadian marketable gas production reached approximately 17.9 Bcf/d in 2023, reflecting technological strides such as horizontal drilling and fracking. (19)

KEY EXPORT DESTINATIONS AND TRADE RELATIONSHIPS

The United States continues to be the prime market for Canadian natural gas. Historically, nearly all Canadian exports have flowed south through pipelines. In 2023, Canada exported about 3.1 Tcf of natural gas—100% of which was directed to the U.S. Canada remains the most significant external gas supplier to the United States, reflecting deep North American market integration. However, the U.S. “shale revolution” significantly increased American gas production, reducing demand for Canadian imports. Although Canadian shipments have decreased from their mid-2000s peak, and the U.S. now exports some gas northward, it still buys about half of Canada’s production, emphasizing the “one-customer story.” (20)

PIPELINE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR EXPORTS

Canada’s pipeline network is extensive. The Nova Gas Transmission Limited (NGTL) system in Alberta gathers gas for multiple corridors:

1. Western Corridor (to the U.S. West Coast): Includes Foothills Pipeline to Kingsgate (BC–Idaho) and Westcoast (Enbridge BC) to Sumas (BC–Washington).

2. Midcontinent/Midwest Corridor: Alliance Pipeline, Foothills system at Monchy (SK–Montana).

3. Great Lakes/Northeast Corridor: TC Energy’s Canadian Mainline extends through SK and MB to ON, then crosses into U.S. markets at Emerson (MB–MN), Sarnia/Detroit, and Niagara/NY. (21)

CANADA’S LNG INFRASTRUCTURE AND EXPORT PROJECTS

Although Canada is a major producer, it lacked large-scale LNG export capacity for years. While the U.S., Australia, and Qatar rapidly grew LNG exports, Canada has only now begun major LNG projects in British Columbia:

1. LNG Canada (Kitimat, BC): A CAD $40-billion venture led by Shell. Phase 1 aims for ~14 Mtpa (~1.8 Bcf/d) starting exports by 2025, potentially doubling later.

2. Woodfibre LNG (Squamish, BC): About 2.1 Mtpa (~0.3 Bcf/d), powered by hydro, targeting niche Asian markets.

3. Cedar LNG (Kitimat, BC): Using hydropower, a floating LNG facility led by the Haisla First Nation, ~3 Mtpa (~0.4 Bcf/d).

Other projects remain in planning, including East Coast LNG proposals (e.g., Goldboro in Nova Scotia, conversion of Canaport) that focus on Europe, though these remain uncertain. (22)

EXPORT VOLUMES, TRENDS, AND ECONOMIC IMPACT

Canada’s gas export trends have shifted over the past decade. After peaking near 10 Bcf/d in the early 2000s, exports fell to ~6–7 Bcf/d by the mid-2010s as U.S. domestic production surged. By 2021, Canada shipped about 2.8 Tcf (~80 Bcm), accounting for half of its total production, almost entirely to the U.S. This heavy reliance on one buyer makes Canada vulnerable to U.S. market changes. Economically, revenue from these exports has fluctuated with price cycles—historically high in the early 2000s, then lower through much of the 2010s, and rebounding during the 2021–2022 price spikes. Natural gas is vital to Canada’s energy GDP and trade balance. (23)

CANADA’S GLOBAL ROLE IN NATURAL GAS

Despite being a major producer, Canada’s global gas trade has been modest, as nearly all exports are directed to the U.S. With new LNG capacity, Canada could emerge as a top ten LNG exporter, selling to Asia or Europe. Advantages include shorter shipping routes to Northeast Asia than the U.S. Gulf Coast and abundant, stable reserves. Challenges involve competition from established exporters (U.S., Qatar, Australia, Russia) and the necessity for efficient, timely development. (24)

REGULATORY & POLICY LANDSCAPE AFFECTING EXPORTS

The growth of Canadian gas exports is influenced by:

1. Federal Regulation: The Canadian Energy Regulator oversees interprovincial pipelines and LNG export licensing.

2. Provincial Responsibilities: Alberta and BC manage royalties, environmental standards, and upstream rules.

3. Climate Commitments: Federal carbon pricing, methane reduction, sectoral emissions caps.

4. Export Market Approach: While British Columbia and Alberta advocate for LNG expansions, the East Coast's approach to LNG has been met with scepticism. Overall, Canada aims to support gas development consistent with its climate policies. (25)

CHALLENGES IN EXPANDING NATURAL GAS EXPORTS

1. Environmental and Climate Concerns: GHG footprint, habitat impacts, and protests from communities and Indigenous groups.

2. Infrastructure Bottlenecks: High-cost pipelines and LNG megaprojects, remote conditions (e.g., Arctic), regulatory hurdles.

3. Market Competition & Volatility: The global gas sector is competitive; prices can swing sharply, affecting profit margins for costly projects.

4. Regulatory Delays: Complex federal/provincial reviews and possible legal disputes over jurisdiction.

5. Indigenous & Community Opposition: Earning local support (social license) is essential; many oppose or demand stringent conditions for resource projects. (26)

FUTURE OUTLOOK AND OPPORTUNITIES

If these obstacles are handled effectively, Canada’s gas exports can:

1. Growing LNG Capacity: Projects like LNG Canada, Woodfibre, Cedar tap into Asian markets.

2. Maintain U.S. Pipeline Trade: The U.S. remains a core customer, though overshadowed by domestic shale.

3. Boost Economic and Industrial Growth: Expand upstream production, foster Indigenous partnerships, adopt new technologies.

4. Potential Transition to Hydrogen: Longer-term pivot to low-carbon gas/hydrogen could diversify exports further. (27) 

---

In short, Canada's natural gas export sector presents significant opportunities but faces substantial challenges. Transitioning from a pipeline-reliant domestic supplier to a globally recognized LNG exporter represents a challenging evolution in Canadian energy policy. While the U.S. market remains crucial, developing LNG infrastructure in British Columbia, and potentially on the East Coast, will facilitate access to Asian markets and beyond. The potential benefits include considerable revenue generation, job creation, and enhanced geopolitical influence. However, navigating this pathway necessitates addressing climate commitments, respecting Indigenous rights, adhering to stringent regulations, and competing internationally. With strategic planning and effective collaboration, Canada has the potential to become a leading global supplier of cleaner energy, aligning economic growth with climate-conscious policies. (28)

6.- CANADA–CHINA RELATIONS

HISTORICAL DIPLOMATIC ENGAGEMENT

Under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, Canada recognised the People’s Republic of China in 1970—years before the U.S. This established a lasting framework for bilateral trade, investment, and cultural exchanges. However, episodes of tension have arisen over human rights issues and politicised arrests (e.g., the Meng Wanzhou case and the detention of the “Two Michaels”). (29) 

ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE AND TRADE

China stands as Canada’s second-largest trading partner. Canadian exports to China include natural resources (lumber, minerals, canola) and educational services; imports typically encompass consumer goods and electronics. In 2018–2019, China’s temporary ban on Canadian canola highlighted the risk of heavy reliance on one market. Canada additionally contends with China’s opaque regulatory practices and IP theft concerns.

KEY TENSIONS

Ø  Human Rights: Ongoing concerns about Xinjiang (Uyghurs), Hong Kong’s freedoms and civil liberties.

Ø  Espionage & Interference: CSIS repeatedly warns of Chinese attempts to influence Canadian institutions, elections, and controversial detentions (Meng Wanzhou, Two Michaels).

Ø  Arctic & Sovereignty: China’s declared status as a “near-Arctic state” alarms Canada about sovereignty threats in the far north.

Ø  Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): Canada remains outside the BRI, wary of China’s strategic and economic influence globally. (30)

NAVIGATING U.S.–CHINA RIVALRY

Canada, a close U.S. ally, generally aligns with Washington on key security policies (e.g., banning Huawei from 5G). Simultaneously, Ottawa seeks to maintain constructive relations with Beijing for trade purposes. Striking a balance between protecting Canada’s national security interests and taking advantage of China’s vast market remains an ongoing challenge. (31)

7.- CANADA–RUSSIA RELATIONS

COLD WAR DIPLOMACY, POST-SOVIET COOPERATION

Canada maintained diplomatic ties with the USSR from 1942, aligning with NATO against Soviet expansion after WWII. Despite political hostility, limited commerce (like wheat exports) persisted. Following the USSR’s collapse, Canada supported Russia’s market transition and welcomed it into the G8, collaborating on nuclear disarmament and Arctic initiatives. Relations deteriorated by the late 2000s. (32)

ARCTIC SOVEREIGNTY DISPUTES

Both countries assert overlapping claims in the Arctic, submitting extended continental shelf documentation. Although there was previously cooperation in the Arctic Council, Russia’s military buildup and Canada’s expansions in Arctic patrol capabilities signal wariness on both sides. (33)

IMPACT OF SANCTIONS SINCE 2014

Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea spurred Canada to join allies in imposing sanctions and cooling trade and diplomatic contacts. Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine led Canada to escalate sanctions, prohibit Russian energy imports, and enable the seizure of sanctioned Russian assets to aid Ukraine’s reconstruction. (34)

CANADA’S ROLE IN NATO DETERRENCE

Under Operation REASSURANCE, Canada leads the NATO battlegroup in Latvia, contributing troops, fighter jets, and warships to bolster Eastern Europe’s defenses. Politically, Canada decries Putin’s aggression and closely coordinates with G7 partners to isolate Russia on the world stage. (35)

8.- CANADA–UKRAINE RELATIONS

DEEP HISTORICAL & CULTURAL TIES

Canada is home to over a million citizens of Ukrainian descent—making it one of the largest Ukrainian diasporas. It was one of the first countries to recognise Ukraine’s independence in 1991. The Ukrainian Canadian Congress wields influence to maintain strong political and humanitarian support for Ukraine. (36)

POLITICAL AND DIPLOMATIC SOLIDARITY

Canada consistently upholds Ukraine’s sovereignty. Prime Minister Trudeau has visited Kyiv several times to reaffirm Canada’s “unwavering support.” Canadian MPs have passed motions endorsing Ukraine’s democratic path and condemning Russian incursions.

MILITARY AID AND SECURITY COOPERATION

1. Operation UNIFIER: Since 2015, Canadian forces have trained over 33,000 Ukrainian personnel, helping modernize Ukraine’s military.

2. Post-2022 Invasion: Canada has committed more than CA$ 4.5 billion in defence aid, including artillery, armour, air defence, training, and intelligence-sharing. The scale of this assistance surpasses what might be expected from a country of Canada’s size. (37)

ECONOMIC AND HUMANITARIAN SUPPORT

Canada has provided billions in loans and direct financial assistance to the Ukrainian government, and considerable humanitarian aid.  By mid-2023, over 165,000 Ukrainians had sought refuge in Canada under the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel (CUAET). (38)

DIPLOMATIC ADVOCACY

Ottawa plays an active role in broad sanctions against Russia and endorses Ukraine’s aspiration toward NATO and EU membership. Ukrainian leaders often praise Canada as one of their staunchest allies. (39)

9.- CANADA’S POSITION ON TRUMP-ERA PROPOSALS FOR RUSSIA-UKRAINE PEACE

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S APPROACH

Donald Trump’s presidency offered contradictory signals on Ukraine—public sympathy toward Russia (e.g., “Crimea is Russian”) alongside the official continuance of sanctions. His freezing of Ukrainian military aid in 2019 (seeking political concessions) alarmed Canada, underscoring its potential vulnerability if U.S. policy shifted drastically.

As of February 2025, President Donald Trump's administration's policy toward Ukraine has undergone significant shifts, marked by a departure from previous strategies and a move toward direct negotiations with Russia. (40)

U.S. Policy Shifts:

Ø  Direct Negotiations with Russia: President Trump has initiated direct talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, aiming to negotiate an end to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. These discussions have notably excluded Ukraine and European allies, raising concerns about potential concessions to Russia and the implications for Ukraine's sovereignty.

Ø  Economic Partnership Proposal: The Trump administration has proposed an economic partnership with Ukraine, focusing on U.S. investment in key sectors such as natural resources and infrastructure. This initiative is designed to stimulate Ukraine's economic growth and ensure that generated revenue supports long-term reconstruction. The partnership emphasizes transparency and aims to align American and Ukrainian interests.

Ø  Criticism of Ukrainian Leadership: President Trump has openly denounced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, branding him a "dictator" and alleging that he misled the U.S. into funding an unwinnable war. This rhetoric has strained relations and raised concerns about future U.S. support for Ukraine. (41)

Canada's Response:

Ø  Reaffirmation of Support for Ukraine: Considering recent U.S. policy shifts, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has reiterated Canada's steadfast support for Ukraine. Trudeau highlighted that Ukraine's struggle is crucial not only for its sovereignty but also for global stability.

Ø  Diplomatic Engagements: Prime Minister Trudeau has discussed the conflict in Ukraine with President Trump, aiming to address concerns over the evolving U.S. stance and its potential impact on NATO unity and European security. (42)

Potential Impact of the Trump Presidency

Canada fears a sudden U.S. retreat from Ukraine. In response, Canada might strengthen ties with European allies to preserve sanctions and military aid, possibly clashing with Washington if a new “peace” deal compels Ukraine to surrender territory. (43)

HOW WOULD CANADA REACT

Canada adheres to “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.” It would oppose any imposed settlement that rewards Russian aggression, coordinating diplomatically with allies to shape potential negotiations and retain sanctions until Ukraine’s sovereignty is honored. (44)

CONCLUSION

Canada’s natural gas export sector offers significant promise but faces considerable challenges. Transitioning from a pipeline-dependent continental supplier to a globally recognized LNG exporter marks a crucial turning point in Canadian energy policy. While the U.S. market remains crucial, developing LNG infrastructure in British Columbia (and potentially on the East Coast) will create new routes to Asia and beyond. Potential rewards are substantial: revenue, job creation, and enhanced geopolitical standing. However, the path ahead requires addressing climate obligations, Indigenous rights, strict regulations, and international competition. With strategic planning and prudent collaboration, Canada could emerge as a key global supplier of cleaner energy, harmonizing economic growth with climate-conscious policies.

Canada’s relationships with China, Russia, and Ukraine highlight its middle-power balancing act: combining economic pragmatism with unwavering support for democratic principles. Relations with China have deteriorated due to concerns over human rights issues., alleged espionage, Arctic ambitions, and economic leverage. Relations with Russia collapsed after its 2014 action in Crimea and sank further when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, prompting Canadian sanctions and a strong NATO presence. Meanwhile, Canada’s partnership with Ukraine—rooted in historical diasporic links—has reached new heights via intense military and humanitarian aid.

Canada must reconcile its strategic and economic needs with promoting human rights and global norms in all three relationships. During Donald Trump’s presidency, Canada remained steadfast in sanctioning Russia and supporting Ukraine, even as U.S. signals wavered. Another Trump administration could pose further challenges, possibly requiring Canada to bind closer to Europe if the U.S. scaled back its support for Ukraine.

Still, Canada’s overall foreign policy trajectory remains constant: upholding the rules-based international system, sanctioning aggressors, and championing allied nations under threat. Belief in the sanctity of territorial sovereignty underpins Canada’s Ukraine stance and shapes its approach to Russia. Concurrently, Canada seeks practical economic ties with China yet stands ready to defend its core interests.

Domestically, Canada’s resource-driven economy—and especially its natural gas sector—is evolving to tackle environmental concerns, Indigenous reconciliation, and global competition. Internationally, Canada’s firm stance on democracy and stability endures. The coming years will test how effectively Ottawa can maintain cohesion with its partners—including an unpredictable U.S.—while pursuing its own national aims in a rapidly transforming geopolitical setting. (45)

---

SOURCES

1. Government of Canada – Official Resource Briefings

Title: Official Resource Briefings
Source/Publisher: Government of Canada
(Referenced as #1 in the original list.)

2. CORIM Blog – Canada–China Relations

Title: “Canada–China Relations Are at a Crossroads”
Source/Publisher: CORIM Blog
(Referenced as #2 in the original list.)

3. Canadian Energy Regulator – Market Snapshots

Title: Market Snapshots
Source/Publisher: Canadian Energy Regulator (CER)
(Referenced as #3 in the original list.)

4. Politico – G7 & Russia

Title: “G7 Rejects Trump’s Bid to Bring Russia Back”
Source/Publisher: Politico
(Referenced as #4 in the original list.)

5. Reuters – Coverage on China’s ‘Hostage Diplomacy’

Title: Coverage on China’s “Hostage Diplomacy”
Source/Publisher: Reuters
(Referenced as #5 in the original list.)

6. Government of Canada – Indo-Pacific Strategy (2022)

Title: Indo-Pacific Strategy (2022)
Source/Publisher: Government of Canada
(Referenced as #6 in the original list.)

7. Atlantic Council – Ukrainian Diaspora Analysis

Title: Analysis of the Ukrainian Diaspora
Source/Publisher: Atlantic Council
(Referenced as #7 in the original list.)

8. Department of National Defence (Canada) – Operation UNIFIER

Title: Operation UNIFIER Releases
Source/Publisher: DND (Canada)
(Referenced as #8 in the original list.)

9. Prime Minister of Canada – News Releases on Ukraine Aid

Title: News Releases on Ukraine Aid
Source/Publisher: Prime Minister of Canada
(Referenced as #9 in the original list.)

10. New Voice of Ukraine / Reuters – Trudeau on Potential Trump Return

Title: “Trudeau on Potential Trump Return”
Source/Publisher: New Voice of Ukraine / Reuters
(Referenced as #10 in the original list.)

11. Various Trade Data

Details:

• Statistics Canada (StatsCan)

• U.S. Energy Information Administration (US EIA)

• Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP)

• RBC Economic Reports
  (Referenced as #11 in the original list.)

12. BBC & CNN Summaries – Arctic Sovereignty Issues

Title: “Arctic Sovereignty Issues”
Sources/Publishers: BBC, CNN
(Referenced as #12 in the original list.)

13. The Guardian – Ukrainian Diaspora in Canada

Title: “In Canada, World’s Second Largest Ukrainian Diaspora”
Source/Publisher: The Guardian
(Referenced as #13 in the original list.)

14. DND – Canada’s Role in NATO Battlegroup Latvia

Title: Canada’s Role in NATO Battlegroup Latvia
Source/Publisher: Department of National Defence (Canada)
(Referenced as #14 in the original list.)

15. Business Insider – Peace Plan Delivery

Title: “Ukrainian Lawmaker: My Peace Plan Delivered to White House”
Source/Publisher: Business Insider
(Referenced as #15 in the original list.)

16. Axios – Trump on Crimea

Title: “Trump Says ‘Crimea Is Russian’ Quote”
Source/Publisher: Axios
(Referenced as #16 in the original list.)

17. NPR – Canada’s Approach to Russia Sanctions

Title: “Canada’s Approach to Russia Sanctions”
Source/Publisher: NPR
(Referenced as #17 in the original list.)

18. RBC – Canadian Oil & Gas Outlook

Title: “Canadian Oil & Gas Outlook”
Source/Publisher: RBC
(Referenced as #18 in the original list.)

19. Canadian Gas Association – Natural Gas Facts

Title: “Natural Gas Facts”
Source/Publisher: Canada Gas Association
(Referenced as #19 in the original list.)

20. U.S. Energy Information Administration – Natural Gas Imports & Exports

Title: “Natural Gas Imports & Exports”
Source/Publisher: U.S. EIA
(Referenced as #20 in the original list.)

21. Additional Reference – International Energy Agency (IEA) & Related

Details: IEA Shale Gas Reports, Environmental Impact Assessments
(Referenced as #21 in the original list.)

22. Canada & The World – Government of Canada Archival Documents

Title: Government of Canada Archival Documents (“Canada & The World”)
Source/Publisher: Government of Canada Archives
(Referenced as #22 in the original list.)

23. Additional References – Macrotrends, Bloomberg Terminal

Details: Macrotrends in Natural Gas, Bloomberg Terminal Commodity Data
(Referenced as #23 in the original list.)

24. Analysis from Multiple Academic Articles on Canada’s Foreign Policy

(Referenced as #24 in the original list.)

25. Expert Commentary from Think Tanks

Details: CIGI, CD Howe Institute, Fraser Institute, etc.
(Referenced as #25 in the original list.)

26. Public Statements from Prime Minister’s Office (2018–2023)

(Referenced as #26 in the original list.)

27. Observations from Policy Watchers, CANSIM, and Parliamentary Debates

(Referenced as #27 in the original list.)

28. Additional Institutional References

Details: IMF, World Bank, trade associations
(Referenced as #28 in the original list.)

29. Freedman, L. – “Ukraine and the Art of Strategy”

(Referenced as #29 in the original list.)

30. Press Releases from DND, Global Affairs Canada, CBC Coverage

(Referenced as #30 in the original list.)

31. Historical Documents – Library and Archives Canada

(Referenced as #31 in the original list.)

32. Official Statements – Canada’s Position on Russia–Ukraine

Title: “Canada’s Position on Russia–Ukraine” – Press Conferences
(Referenced as #32 in the original list.)

33. Concluding Summary Derived from Cross-referenced Data

(Referenced as #33 in the original list.)

---

Workart is fully part of Germán & Co.

---

Iran…

---

Introduction and Overview

Iran has abundant natural resources, notably its vast oil and gas reserves. It holds the world’s second-largest natural gas reserves and fourth-largest proven oil reserves (1), making hydrocarbons a cornerstone of its economy. Other resources include significant mineral deposits (like copper and iron ore), agricultural land across various climates, and fisheries along the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf. These resources play a crucial role in Iran’s economy by generating export earnings and supporting industries, although international sanctions have constrained full utilization.

Major Categories of Natural Resources

1. Energy Resources: Oil and Natural Gas are Iran’s flagship resources. The country has an estimated 209 billion barrels of oil (about 12% of global reserves) and over 1,200 trillion cubic feet of natural gas (about 17% of global reserves) (2). It was OPEC’s 5th-largest oil producer in 2021 and the world’s 3rd-largest gas producer. (3) Most oil fields lie in the southwest (Khuzestan) and offshore in the Persian Gulf, while the giant South Pars gas field in the Gulf (shared with Qatar) drives gas output. Iran also has some hydropower dams and is exploring renewables (solar and wind) given its sunny deserts and windy plains, but fossil fuels dominate its energy mix.

2. Minerals: Iran boasts 68 types of minerals with large reserves of copper, iron ore, zinc, lead, chromite, and others. (4) It is among the world’s top 10 in copper and zinc reserves and is a leading producer of steel and cement in the region. Major mining centres (e.g., Sarcheshmeh for copper) feed domestic and export industries. A recent notable find is a massive lithium deposit (~8.5 million tons) in Hamedan, which, if verified, would be the world’s second largest and could position Iran in the global battery supply chain. (5)

3. Forestry: Iran’s forest cover is limited (around 6–7% of its land). The most significant forests in the north are the Caspian Hyrcanian forests, harbouring hardwood species. Elsewhere, forests in the Zagros Mountains and other areas are sparse due to arid climates. Timber production is modest and primarily for domestic use, with strict controls on logging to prevent desertification.

4. Fisheries: Iran has a longstanding fishing industry, with coastlines on the Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, and Caspian Sea. The Persian Gulf yields shrimp and fish, while the Caspian was once famed for sturgeon and caviar. Fisheries and aquaculture contribute to the food supply and employ coastal communities, though their share of GDP is relatively small.

5. Agriculture: Iran’s varied climate supports a diverse agriculture sector on its arable lands (about 30% of land area). Key staples include wheat (strategically important for food security) and rice in the north. Iran is a leading global producer of specialty crops like pistachios, saffron, and dates. Other major products are fruits (pomegranates, citrus), nuts, cotton, and livestock (notably sheep and goats). Agriculture accounts for roughly 10–13% of GDP and over 15% of employment), (6) making it vital for rural livelihoods even as oil dominates exports.

Economic Importance

Natural resources underpin Iran’s economy, primarily through hydrocarbons. Oil and gas have traditionally provided a large share of government revenue and export earnings – in 2021, they still made up an estimated 45% of government budget revenues. (6) When sanctions allow, crude oil exports (historically 2–2.5 million barrels per day) bring in hard currency, primarily from Asian markets. The energy sector’s impact on GDP is significant (oil/gas ~25% of GDP in some years, though volatile), and it drives downstream industries like refining and petrochemicals. The mining sector is a growing contributor: Iran’s metals and minerals (iron, copper, steel, etc.) form a key part of “non-oil” exports, earning about $8.8 billion in 8 months of 2024. (7) Agriculture, while only ~10% of GDP, remains vital for employment and food self-sufficiency, and Iran exports high-value crops (pistachios, fruits) to earn foreign exchange. Resource industries also spur regional development – for example, oil operations have urbanized parts of Khuzestan, and mining has boosted cities in Kerman and Yazd. However, Iran’s over-reliance on oil makes the economy vulnerable to price swings and sanctions-induced export drops (8), leading to volatile growth and inflation.

Environmental and Policy Considerations

Iran faces a balancing act between resource extraction and environmental stewardship. Oil and gas operations contribute to greenhouse emissions, and Iran has one of the highest CO₂ output levels globally. The government has set modest climate targets under the Paris Agreement, but economic pressures often override emissions cuts. Domestic energy is heavily subsidised, leading to inefficient use and urban air pollution. Gas flaring (burning off excess gas) in oilfields is an ongoing issue, wasting resources and emitting pollutants, though there are efforts to curb it. Water scarcity is a critical environmental challenge – decades of damming and overuse for irrigation have led to drying wetlands and groundwater depletion. This issue came to a head with protests over water in farming regions.

Regulatory oversight exists (e.g., an Environmental Protection Organization), but enforcement is uneven. High-profile incidents, like the 2019 oil pipeline leak in the south or industrial waste in rivers, have raised public concern. Iran is taking steps in renewables – installing wind farms and solar parks – as sustainable supplements to its energy mix, partly to free up more oil for export and reduce urban smog.

On the social side, local and Indigenous community rights are increasingly part of the conversation. While Iran doesn’t use the term “Indigenous” in the same way as some other countries, there are ethnic communities (e.g. Arab minorities in oil-rich Khuzestan or Baluch farmers in the southeast) voicing grievances that resource projects haven’t benefited them proportionately. The government has tried directing more oil revenue to provincial budgets and offers compensation for land in mining areas, but tensions remain. Policy reforms like the “Resistance Economy” strategy encourage diversifying away from raw oil exports – for example, by investing in petrochemical plants (adding value to oil/gas) and expanding the mining value chain (more metal processing domestically). Sanctions have pushed Iran to pivot its trade: more oil is being processed into petrochemicals for export and bartered with neighbours and China for needed goods (9). Environmental impact assessments are required for big projects. Still, activists argue for more transparency and stricter protections, especially as Iran eyes new projects (like developing that significant lithium find) in ecologically sensitive areas.

Trade and Market Dynamics

International trade of resources is both an opportunity and a challenge for Iran. Oil is the dominant export commodity. Iran can export >2 million barrels/day of crude oil when unconstrained, and it has historically sold to Asia (China, India, South Korea, Japan) and Europe. However, US and UN sanctions over the past decade sharply curtailed Iran’s access to markets; exports plunged after 2018, though China continues to import Iranian oil (often via intermediaries). (10) To circumvent restrictions, Iran has increasingly traded via barter deals with regional partners – for instance, swapping oil and gas with neighbours like Iraq or trading energy for goods from China and Turkey. Its natural gas exports are limited (despite huge reserves) due to sanctions and infrastructure bottlenecks – small volumes go by pipeline to Turkey and Iraq. Iran is a founding member of OPEC and the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF), aiming to coordinate and bolster hydrocarbon prices.

Iran’s strategic geography influences its energy transit. It sits on the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point through which ~20% of global oil passes – Tehran has sometimes threatened closure, unsettling markets. (11) Domestically, an extensive pipeline network distributes oil and gas, and Iran has built pipelines to export gas to Turkey and plans to Pakistan (though the latter is stalled). The lack of LNG terminals means Iran cannot quickly ship gas globally, which is a long-term gap it wants to fix.

Beyond hydrocarbons, Iran exports minerals and metals, mainly to Asia. China is a major buyer of Iranian copper, iron and semi-finished steel. Trade partners: China has emerged as Iran’s top trade partner (for oil, petrochemicals, and minerals), followed by other Asian economies; the UAE and Turkey serve as re-export hubs for Iranian goods. Before sanctions, the EU was a significant oil and Persian carpets market, but that has diminished. Iran relies on China, Russia, and Turkey to import machinery, consumer goods, and grain.

Infrastructure development continues despite challenges: Iran is expanding the Chabahar port (with Indian investment) to boost mineral exports from its east and improving rail links to move bulk goods to ports. The country’s inclusion in China’s Belt and Road Initiative may further integrate its trade routes. Pipelines also feature in regional geopolitics – Iran has proposed pipelines to deliver gas to India (undersea) or deeper into Iraq/Syria, though sanctions impede financing. In sum, Iran’s trade in natural resources is marked by adaptation to sanctions (greater self-reliance and regional barter) and the search for new markets, all while maintaining a strong OPEC voice in managing oil prices.

Outlook

Iran’s resource sector faces an uncertain but potentially transformative future. Sanction relief (or continuation) is the most significant swing factor: if a nuclear deal emerges and sanctions are lifted, Iran could rapidly ramp up oil production and attract foreign investment into ageing oilfields and massive untapped gas fields. (12) This would boost GDP and government revenue but also bring pressure to diversify to avoid the “resource curse.” Conversely, if sanctions persist, Iran will deepen ties with countries like China and Russia, continue smuggling oil at discounts, and lean on mining and agriculture for incremental growth.

The country is also eyeing a pivot to new resources. The reported lithium discovery in 2023 is seen as a future “white gold” opportunity – Iran could become a player in lithium for batteries, provided it secures extraction technology and investment. (13) Similarly, “critical minerals” like rare earth elements (needed for electronics and renewable energy) present an untapped domain; Iran’s varied geology hints at potential deposits that strategic surveys may confirm.

Domestic demand trends will shape the resource mix. Iran’s young population and industrialization efforts mean rising energy needs. Yet, the government aims to reduce domestic oil consumption (through subsidy reform and replacing oil-burning power plants with gas or renewables) to export more oil. The large natural gas reserves could be used for petrochemicals, electricity, and possibly LNG exports if technology and capital become available. In fact, Iran plans to dramatically increase gas output for both domestic use (to stop winter shortages) and future export infrastructure.

On the environmental front, Iran is likely to feel increasing impacts of climate change – severe droughts (like the one that shrank Lake Urmia) threaten farming and hydropower, and extreme heat strains the power grid. This may force stronger water conservation policies, investment in climate-resilient agriculture, and a slow shift toward renewable energy sources. Iran has set a goal to install several gigawatts of solar and wind capacity; these projects may accelerate if costs drop and financing can be arranged, especially to electrify remote areas and free up more fossil fuel for export.

Geopolitically, Iran’s resources will keep it in a position of leverage. Global demand for oil and gas is forecast to plateau or decline by mid-century as renewable energy rises. Still, in the medium term (this decade), markets remain thirsty – Iran’s ability to supply could moderate global prices, giving it bargaining power if sanctions negotiations recur. Its integration into new blocs (e.g. SCO, a potential BRICS member) could create alternative trade frameworks for its commodities, bypassing Western-centric channels.

In summary, Iran’s rich natural resource base will remain the foundation of its economy. In the coming years, efforts will be made to modernize and expand capacity (significantly if sanctions ease), diversify within the sector (more value-added petrochemicals, mining products, and possibly lithium), and mitigate environmental strains. The challenge will be leveraging these resources for sustainable development rather than short-term gain, by investing in technology, engaging with global markets on better terms, and ensuring local communities’ benefit. This balance will determine Iran’s economic resilience in the future.

---

Sources:

1. World Bank – Iran Overview

Title: Iran Overview: Development news, research, data
Source/Publisher: World Bank
Link (if available): World Bank – Iran Overview
(Referenced multiple times as #1, #8, #9, #10, #12 in the original list.)

2. DW – Why is energy giant Iran facing gas shortages?

Title: Why is energy giant Iran facing gas shortages?
Publication Date: 19 December 2024
Source/Publisher: Deutsche Welle (DW)
(Referenced as part of #1 and again at #11 in the original list.)

3. IRNA – Iran’s Gas and Oil Reserves

Title: Iran ranks 2nd, 3rd in gas, oil reserves in world
Source/Publisher: IRNA English (Islamic Republic News Agency)
(Referenced in #2 and #3 in the original list.)

4. Tehran Times – Mining Sector Exports

Title: Mining sector achieves $8.8b in exports over 8 months
Source/Publisher: Tehran Times
(Referenced as #4 and #7 in the original list.)

5. Mining Technology – Lithium Deposit Discovery

Title: Iran discovers 8.5 million ton lithium deposit
Source/Publisher: Mining Technology
(Referenced as #5 and #13 in the original list.)

6. IEA – Russian Oil and Gas Analysis

Title: Energy Fact Sheet: Why does Russian oil and gas matter?
Type: Analysis
Source/Publisher: International Energy Agency (IEA)
(Referenced as #6 in the original list.)

---

---

Mexico…

---

1.- Introduction and Overview

Mexico is a country of wide-ranging natural wealth, from hydrocarbons under the Gulf of Mexico to rich mineral belts and fertile agricultural lands. It has significant (though declining) oil and gas reserves, extensive metallic minerals (the world’s leading silver producer, along with gold, copper, and zinc mines), vast forests, productive fisheries in two oceans, and a robust agricultural sector. While Mexico’s economy has diversified toward manufacturing and services, natural resources still contribute substantially to exports, regional employment, and energy security. The nation’s geographic diversity – mountains, deserts, coastlines, and tropics – gives rise to a broad array of resources that have shaped its development and trade relationships.

2.- Major Categories of Natural Resources

1. Energy Resources: Mexico has been a major oil producer for decades, with resources both onshore and offshore. The majority of oil is sourced from the Gulf of Mexico (specifically the Bay of Campeche fields, such as Ku-Maloob-Zaap and Cantarell), managed by state-owned Pemex. Oil reserves are approximately 17 Tcf proven (1), and Mexico imports a significant amount of gas (primarily via pipeline from the U.S.) to meet its demand. Coal is present (especially lignite and some bituminous in Coahuila), used mostly for domestic power generation, but Mexico is not a major coal exporter. In recent years, renewables have grown: hydropower dams (like Chicoasén) are longstanding, and wind farms in Oaxaca and solar plants in the north have expanded under clean energy goals. By 2023, about 23% of Mexico’s electricity came from “clean” sources (including hydro and nuclear) (2). A notable development is Mexico’s discovery of a sizable deepwater oil province in the Gulf and the nationalization of lithium in 2022, reflecting intent to tap emerging energy resources (the lithium deposits in Sonora could be strategic for batteries, with an estimated 1.7 million tons of lithium resources. 

2. Mineral Wealth: Mexico is exceptionally rich in minerals. It is the world’s largest producer of silver – traditional mining districts like Zacatecas and Chihuahua have yielded silver for centuries. The country also ranks in the top 10 globally for gold production and has significant output of copper, lead, zinc, and iron ore. Northern states (Sonora, Chihuahua) host large gold and copper mines, while central Mexico (Zacatecas, Durango) is famous for silver. Mexico also holds 90% of the world’s known borate (boron) reserves and is a top producer of fluorspar and celestite. Non-metallic minerals are important too: Mexico exports substantial cement, limestone, and marble. In total, the mining sector is diverse – in 2022, about half of the value of mining production came from precious metals, 40% from base (non-ferrous) metals, and the rest from industrial minerals. (3)

3. Forestry: Around one-third of Mexico’s land is forested (4) ranging from coniferous forests in the Sierra Madre to tropical jungles in the Yucatán and Chiapas. The country’s forests provide timber, resin, and other products, with major logging of pine and oak in temperate areas. States like Durango and Chihuahua are known for commercial forestry, and Mexico produces wood pulp, paper, and furniture woods. However, deforestation (often for agriculture or pasture) has been a concern – Mexico loses tens of thousands of hectares of jungle each year. (5) The government and communities manage some forests sustainably (community forestry in Oaxaca is a success story). Forestry is a smaller contributor to GDP, but in rural economies it’s meaningful and forests underpin biodiversity and carbon sequestration efforts.

4. Fisheries: With extensive coastlines on the Pacific Ocean and Gulf of Mexico/Caribbean, Mexico has rich marine fisheries. The Pacific coast, especially the Gulf of California, teems with commercial species – tuna, sardines, shrimp, and squid are among top catches. The state of Sinaloa leads in Pacific fisheries (shrimp farming is also significant). In the Gulf of Mexico, fisheries include shrimp, snapper, and grouper. Mexico’s fishing industry supplies both domestic markets and exports (for example, shrimp and tuna exports to the US and Asia). Aquaculture (fish and shellfish farming) is growing as wild stocks face pressure. While not a top-tier global fishing nation, Mexico is a leading fisheries producer in the Americas, and fishing is crucial for many coastal communities.

5. Agriculture: Mexico’s varied climates support a wide array of agriculture. In the northwest (Sonora, Sinaloa), large-scale farms produce wheat, tomatoes, vegetables and irrigated crops for export (this “breadbasket” feeds winter produce to North America). The Bajío region grows corn, sorghum, strawberries, and other crops, while tropical states (Veracruz, Chiapas) cultivate sugarcane, coffee, and tropical fruits (mangoes, bananas). Mexico is the world’s #1 producer of avocados and limes, and a dominant exporter of berries, peppers, and tomatoes to the U.S. It also leads globally in beverage crops like blue agave (for tequila). Livestock farming is significant – northern ranches raise cattle (Mexico is a top beef exporter), and there’s substantial poultry and dairy in central Mexico. Agriculture (with forestry and fishing) contributes around 3.8% of Mexico’s GDP (6) but employs about 12–13% of the workforce It’s vital for rural incomes and a source of foreign exchange through exports of high-value produce. (7)

3.- Economic Importance

Natural resources have a mixed but noteworthy role in Mexico’s economy. Historically, oil was a pillar – in the 1980s, oil revenues underwrote a large share of the national budget. Today, oil and gas still matter: the oil sector accounts for ~4–5% of GDP and about $110 billion in export revenue in 2021 (8), representing roughly 10% of total exports. This is lower than in past decades due to the growth of manufacturing exports and a drop in oil output, but petroleum remains Mexico’s largest single export commodity (crude and refined products). The state oil company Pemex is a major employer and contributor to public finances (though heavily indebted), and regions like Campeche and Tabasco rely on the oil industry.

The mining sector, while smaller (non-oil mining ~1–2% of GDP), is significant in certain regions and for exports. Mexico’s mineral exports were about $17.6 billion in 2022 (9), led by silver, gold, copper, and zinc. Mining is a key employer in rural areas of Sonora, Zacatecas, Coahuila, etc., and draws considerable foreign investment (Canadian firms, for example, operate many mines). Resource extraction has spurred the development of infrastructure like roads and power in remote areas.

Agriculture, at ~3–4% of GDP, punches above its weight in trade: Mexico is a net exporter of produce and beverages (sending billions of dollars of goods to the U.S. under NAFTA/USMCA). It also underpins food security and price stability, as maize (corn) is a staple of the Mexican diet and supporting farmers is socioeconomically important. However, many small farmers struggle with productivity and drought, prompting government support via subsidies and price guarantees.

One major way natural resources influence Mexico’s economy is through export earnings and the trade balance. Oil exports have long been a top foreign currency earner, but as oil export volumes fell and the country became a net importer of gasoline, the benefit lessened. Meanwhile, manufactured goods (cars, electronics) surged to ~90% of exports, diluting the share of raw resources. Still, in 2023, high oil prices led to a windfall for Pemex and helped offset the cost of importing refined fuels. Similarly, high metals prices benefit Mexican mining companies and local economies. Natural gas imports (mostly from the U.S.) have cut electricity costs and enabled industrial growth, linking resource access to broader economic activity.

At a regional level, resources drive development: for example, in the Gulf coast states, the oil industry provides high-paying jobs and infrastructure (ports, refineries), whereas in states like Michoacán and Jalisco, avocado farming has created rural wealth. Tourism in some areas even ties into natural bounty – e.g. Sportfishing on Baja’s coasts or eco-tourism in jungles – blending resource use with service sectors. The Mexican government also uses resource revenue as a tool for social programs; e.g. oil income has funded welfare initiatives. Thus, while not as dominant as in some countries, natural resources remain a strategic economic asset, contributing to exports, employment, and regional development in Mexico.

4.- Environmental and Policy Considerations

Mexico faces the challenge of exploiting its resources while protecting the environment and communities. Oil and mining operations have environmental impacts – there have been notorious incidents like oil spills (the Ixtoc I well blowout in 1979, and more recently smaller leaks) and mining waste spills (e.g., a 2014 sulfuric acid spill from a copper mine in Sonora) that contaminated rivers. The government mandates environmental impact assessments for major projects, but enforcement has sometimes been weak, leading to conflicts with local populations.

Climate policy: Mexico has committed under the Paris Agreement to reduce greenhouse emissions and in 2022 updated its pledge to cut GHG 35% by 2030 (unconditional). (10) It also aims for net-zero by 2050. In practice, there’s tension: Mexico is investing in renewable energy (one of Latin America’s largest solar parks opened in Chihuahua, and wind capacity has grown in Oaxaca and Tamaulipas), yet the current administration has also promoted fossil fuels. President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) has emphasized energy sovereignty, supporting Pemex and the state electric utility (CFE) even if that means extending life for oil refineries and coal plants. This has slowed some private renewable projects. Still, laws like the Energy Transition Law set a target for 35% of electricity from clean sources by 2024. As of 2023, clean generation was around 23% (11), so efforts are ongoing (including new hydro renovations and a push for geothermal, where Mexico has potential).

Deforestation and land use: Agricultural expansion and illegal logging have made Mexico one of the countries with significant deforestation. Policies (often in partnership with local ejidos/communities) try to incentivize reforestation and sustainable forestry. Mexico has several UNESCO biosphere reserves protecting forests (e.g., the Monarch Butterfly Reserve), and it participates in REDD+ programs to reduce emissions from deforestation. Water resources are also a concern: northern Mexico is arid, and water-intensive farming (and now mining like lithium extraction) raises sustainability issues. The government has enforced water use limits in some basins and negotiated with the U.S. on cross-border rivers as climate change brings more droughts.

Community and indigenous rights: Mexico recognizes indigenous peoples’ rights to consultation (ILO Convention 169) for projects on their lands. In practice, conflicts have arisen – for example, indigenous Yaqui communities in Sonora protested over water diversion for mining, and Maya communities in Yucatán have raised concerns about a planned large-scale solar farm and the Tren Maya project affecting the environment. Mining projects in states like Guerrero and Chiapas have sometimes led to social conflict and even violence, prompting calls for stronger safeguards and benefit-sharing with locals. On the other hand, some communities do welcome projects that bring jobs. The balance is evolving: recently, a Mexican court suspended a mining project in Puebla due to lack of adequate indigenous consultation, indicating the growing legal weight of community voices.

Regulatory landscape: In 2013–2014, Mexico enacted a major Energy Reform that opened the oil, gas, and power sectors to private and foreign investment after decades of state monopoly.  (12) This led to new oil blocks auctioned to companies like Shell and BP and contracts for private renewable energy generators. However, since 2018, policy has shifted – AMLO’s government halted new oil bid rounds and passed reforms favoring CFE in electricity dispatch. A 2023 reform of the Mining Law reduced concession terms and put stricter environmental rules, (13) aiming to prevent speculation and require water sustainability in mining. While intended to protect resources and communities, some investors see it as increasing uncertainty. The government also nationalized lithium by law, creating a state company for lithium (LitioMx) and limiting private extraction of this strategic resource. Environmentalists have welcomed measures like these and the cancellation of a mega airport partly to protect a lake, but critics worry about transparency and efficiency of state-led projects.

In summary, Mexico’s policies seek to ensure resources benefit the nation (resource nationalism is strong) while gradually improving environmental oversight. Implementation is key – from reducing gas flaring and refinery emissions to enforcing mine remediation and boosting renewables integration. Public awareness of environmental issues is rising, as seen in protests against pollution and the demand for climate action from youth movements. Mexico’s challenge will be to strengthen its regulatory institutions so that economic development from natural resources does not come at the cost of irreparable environmental damage or community marginalization.

5.- Trade and Market Dynamics

Mexico’s natural resources figure prominently in its trade profile, though overshadowed in value by manufactured exports. Oil exports traditionally went almost entirely to the United States; even today the U.S. Gulf Coast is the main buyer of Mexican crude (Maya blend heavy crude). However, with the U.S. itself producing more oil, Mexico has diversified slightly – exporting some crude to Europe and Asia when opportunities arise. Paradoxically, Mexico imports a large volume of refined fuel from the U.S., especially gasoline, because its own refineries can’t meet domestic demand. This energy trade across the border is facilitated by a dense network of pipelines (for oil products and natural gas) and maritime tankers. Recent infrastructure moves include building a new refinery (Dos Bocas) and upgrading others to reduce fuel imports and process more of its own crude. Meanwhile, pipelines like Los Ramones and cross-border connectors have made the U.S. the source of ~70% of Mexico’s natural gas supply in 2022, (14) linking the two countries’ energy markets closely.

In mining, Mexico is a major player in global supply chains: it exports raw and refined silver to markets like India and electronics industries worldwide; gold primarily to refineries in the U.S. and Switzerland; and copper concentrates to smelters (some domestically and in Asia). Trade agreements (USMCA, and various FTAs with Europe and Asia) generally allow minerals to flow with low tariffs. The U.S. relies on Mexico for certain minerals – for instance, fluorspar (for chemical industries) and graphite are imported from Mexico to the U.S. (15)  Conversely, Mexico imports some mineral inputs it lacks (like potash fertilizer, or steel coal). Supply chain integration is evident in sectors like automotive: Mexican mines provide metals, which go into parts manufactured domestically, which are then exported as cars.

Agricultural trade is heavily intertwined with NAFTA/USMCA partners. Mexico exports billions of dollars of produce (vegetables, fruits) and beer to the U.S., and imports large quantities of yellow corn, soybeans, and grains from U.S. farmers for its livestock sector. This exchange has made Mexico one of the top export markets for U.S. agriculture and vice versa. Additionally, Mexico exports specialty crops globally – for example, it’s a top exporter of sugar and coffee to the EU and of avocados to Europe and Asia. Trade infrastructure like cold storage at border crossings and the port of Veracruz (for tropical crop exports) supports this flow. The 2020 USMCA maintained zero tariffs on ag trade but introduced sanitary standards that Mexico works to comply with to keep access. A current issue is Mexico’s ban on genetically modified corn for human consumption, which may affect imports from the U.S. and is being negotiated.

Fisheries exports include shrimp (to U.S., Europe) and tuna (often processed domestically then exported). Coastal states benefit from trade via seaports like Mazatlán and Veracruz, which handle seafood shipments.

Energy infrastructure is positioning Mexico as a potential transit hub as well. The government has floated plans for LNG export terminals on the Pacific (to ship U.S. gas to Asia via Mexico) and a gas pipeline connecting to markets in Central America. Mexico already hosts the end of the Pan-American oil pipeline system (the Tapline) and the massive Cactus-Reynosa gas pipeline that feeds into Texas. Ceyhan – sorry, (Ceyhan is Turkey; here, Coatzacoalcos and Salina Cruz) – The country even has an isthmus rail/pipe corridor project (Trans-Isthmus) to move oil and goods between the Gulf and Pacific, leveraging its geography for global trade.

Major trade partners: The United States is overwhelmingly number one, given proximity and NAFTA – it receives ~80% of Mexico’s total exports. For resources, the U.S. buys most of Mexico’s oil (historically) and mining output, and supplies most of Mexico’s natural gas and gasoline. Canada also imports Mexican minerals (and Canadian firms invest in Mexican mines). Other significant partners include China (Mexico sells some oil and minerals to China; China sells Mexico machinery and increasingly invests in sectors like lithium), and Europe (which imports some Mexican oil, tequila, and produce, and in turn is a source of investment and technology). Within Latin America, Mexico exports refined fuels to Central America and imports some agricultural commodities from South America.

Trade dynamics are also shaped by policy shifts: the 2013 Energy Reform allowed private companies to export oil and gas for the first time in decades (before, only Pemex could). Some foreign oil companies that won exploration blocks may eventually export oil if they produce successfully. However, the current government’s nationalist stance means Pemex regained a dominant role in exports. Similarly, mining export growth might slow if regulatory burdens rise, though high commodity prices will encourage continued output.

In summary, Mexico’s natural resource trade is characterized by deep integration with North America, a mix of imports and exports in energy (export crude, import fuels/gas), strong agricultural export performance, and an attractive mining sector for global markets. Infrastructure – from pipelines and ports to highways – is continually being developed or upgraded to streamline this trade, while policy aims to maximize the value Mexico gains (for instance, via refining oil domestically rather than exporting crude, or requiring local purchases in mining).

6.- Future Outlook

Mexico’s natural resource sectors are poised for both opportunities and challenges ahead. Oil and gas production is at a crossroads: legacy oil fields are depleting, yet Mexico has untapped potential in deepwater Gulf of Mexico and the recently discovered Ixachi onshore gas field and Sakakemang (if developed). The government’s strategy is to bolster Pemex with investment to slightly increase oil output (targeting ~2 million barrels per day) while using new refinery capacity to end gasoline imports. In the next 5–10 years, we may see Pemex partnering with more private firms (out of necessity for capital and tech) despite the current political hesitance – especially if oil prices are high and there’s urgency to replace declining fields. The Sakarya-like gas find in the Gulf of Mexico is not yet in hand for Mexico, but exploration continues and any major discovery would be a game-changer. Also, by 2025 the large Deer Park refinery (jointly owned with Shell in Texas) and the new Dos Bocas refinery are expected to be fully operational, potentially making Mexico a net exporter of some refined fuels.

Conversely, global trends toward decarbonization put a question mark on long-term oil demand. Mexico’s heavy reliance on oil revenue could be further alleviated by its growing manufacturing base, but regions dependent on oil (Tabasco, Campeche) will need economic diversification as the world transitions to electric vehicles and renewable energy. Mexico is well positioned to benefit from the EV supply chain shift: it has announced plans for EV battery factories and lithium processing in Sonora (leveraging the lithium deposit). By investing in downstream industries for lithium (battery production) and copper (for wiring and components), Mexico could turn its resources into industrial growth. The creation of a state lithium company suggests government intent to control this “resource of the future,” but successful exploitation will require partnerships for technology.

Renewable energy outlook is bright in Mexico: it has some of the world’s highest solar irradiance in Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts and excellent wind corridors (Oaxaca’s Tehuantepec Isthmus is world-class). If policy shifts to encourage more private investment (which may happen under a different administration post-2024), there could be a renewable boom. Already, meeting the 40% by 2030 renewables target (16) will drive installation of new wind/solar farms and grid upgrades. This creates a new “natural resource” opportunity – abundant clean energy – which Mexico could even export (there are proposals to send solar power via HVDC lines into the U.S. or wind power to Baja’s grid).

Mining future: Mexico will likely remain a top metals producer. The global push for critical minerals (e.g., copper for electrification, lithium for batteries) means Mexican mines and unexplored areas will be in focus. The government’s tighter mining laws might slow new permits, but also encourage maximizing existing sites. Expect more exploration in underexplored regions (lithium in clay deposits in Sonora beyond the main find, rare earth elements in Baja California’s deposits, and continued gold/silver finds e.g. in Oaxaca’s emerging mines). Environmental and community scrutiny of mining will increase, prompting companies to adopt better practices and benefit-sharing to secure social license.

Agriculture and climate: Mexico’s agricultural future must contend with climate change – higher temperatures and water stress, especially in the north, could reduce yields of water-intensive crops. This is pushing innovation in water-saving irrigation, drought-resistant seed varieties, and shifting crop patterns. Mexico might expand greenhouse farming (already used for tomatoes/peppers) to adapt to climate extremes. The country is also well placed to grow crops for biofuels (like agave for bioethanol or jatropha for biodiesel) if policies favor them, potentially creating new resource markets. Agricultural exports will remain strong if Mexico continues to capitalize on off-season production for Northern markets, though it must manage soil health and competition for land (urbanization is eating into farmland around booming cities).

On the environmental front, Mexico is likely to take a more active role. Popular sentiment and international pressure could result in stronger enforcement of environmental laws. We may see higher penalties for oil spills, a phase-out of fuel oil burning in power plants (benefiting air quality), and possibly the closure of older coal plants as gas and renewables fill the gap. The country’s vast biodiversity (one of the world’s megadiverse nations) might spur growth in eco-tourism and conservation jobs, integrating natural resource preservation with economic benefits.

Geopolitically, Mexico’s resource sector could benefit from “near-shoring” and shifting supply chains. For instance, as the U.S. and allies seek to rely less on Chinese minerals, Mexico could be a preferred source given the trade agreement and proximity – we might see investments in Mexican mining of graphite, lithium, rare earths, etc., with processing facilities built in North America (including Mexico). Energy security concerns in the region mean Mexico’s role as a gas transit route (moving U.S. gas south or potentially Venezuelan gas if that market opens) might grow. Mexico has even discussed building a gas pipeline to the Yucatán and on to Central America, exporting its excess U.S.-sourced gas further – such projects could materialize in the 2030s, making Mexico a regional energy hub.

In short, Mexico’s natural resource future will involve modernizing traditional sectors (making oil, mining, and agriculture more efficient and sustainable) and embracing new opportunities (renewables, lithium, and possibly hydrogen production from abundant solar). Policy stability and investment in technology and infrastructure will be key to harnessing these resources for inclusive growth. If managed well, Mexico can continue to reduce its historical over-reliance on oil while ensuring its rich array of natural resources contributes to long-term prosperity and environmental resilience.

---

Source:

1. México – Petróleo y Gas

• Título/Referencia(s): “Mexico – Oil and Gas”

• Fuente(s)/Publicación(es): International Trade Administration (ITA) u otras (no especificadas)

• Aparición en la lista original: (1) y (12)

2. México – Ember

• Título/Referencia(s): “Mexico – Ember”

• Fuente/Editorial: Ember

• Aparición en la lista original: (2) y (11)

3. México – Minería y Minerales

• Título/Referencia(s): “Mexico – Mining and Minerals”

• Fuente(s)/Publicación(es): Varias (no especificadas)

• Aparición en la lista original: (3), (9), (13) y (15)

4. México – Cobertura forestal y deforestación

1. Título: “Total forest area in Mexico”

• Fuente/Editorial: Statista

• Aparición en la lista original: (4)

2. Título: “Planting deforestation: The forests that Mexico loses to agribusiness”

• Fuente/Editorial: No especificado

• Aparición en la lista original: (5)

5. México – Sector agrícola en el PIB

1. Títulos:

• “Agricultural sector’s share of GDP in Mexico 2023” (Statista)

• “Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (% of GDP)” (posible fuente: Datos del Banco Mundial)

• Aparición en la lista original: (6)

2. Títulos:

• “Mexico GDP share of agriculture – data, chart” (The Global Economy)

• “Mexico MX: GDP: % of Total Value Added: Agriculture” (CEIC)

• Aparición en la lista original: (7)

6. Rusia – Ingresos por petróleo y gas

• Título/Referencia: “Russia’s oil and gas revenue windfall”

• Fuente/Editorial: Reuters

• Aparición en la lista original: (8)

7. México – NDC Partnership

• Título: “Mexico” (en el contexto de la NDC Partnership)

• Fuente/Editorial: NDC Partnership

• Aparición en la lista original: (10)

8. Turquía – Información energética

1. Título: “Turkey – International” (U.S. Energy Information Administration)

2. Título: “Turkey: opportunities and challenges on the domestic gas market”

• Fuente/Editorial: EIA / No especificado

• Aparición en la lista original: (14)

9. Fit for 55 (Unión Europea)

• Título: “Fit for 55”

• Fuente/Editorial: Consilium.europa.eu (Consejo de la Unión Europea)

• Aparición en la lista original: (16)

---

"For sale: baby shoes, never worn."

---

It Took Trump Only Twenty-Four Days to Sell Out Ukraine…

The New Yorker, in this edition,,,

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Happy Sabbath! I send my best wishes to everyone…

The fisher’s town, nestled in one of Norway's most breathtaking fjords, was an illusion come to life—but beneath its idyllic surface, an undercurrent of unease pulsed like a hidden storm. Towering cliffs, draped in the name of Malva Marina—like the daughter of the famed Nobel Prize laureate from the far south of America—rose sharply from the crystal-clear waters, their jagged edges cutting into the sky like ancient sentinels.

The air was thick with the salty tang of the sea, mingling with the rhythmic cries of gulls that circled overhead, their sharp calls echoing like warnings, yes ¨peligro¨...  Fishermen, their faces etched with the harsh lines of years spent battling wind and waves (similar to the coal miners who died of the damned black lung disease), hauled in their catch—silver flashes of cod and salmon spilling onto the docks, their lifeless eyes glinting in the pale sunlight.

Near the edge of the harbour, a weathered bulletin board stood, its surface a chaotic mosaic of handwritten notes and flyers. It was a relic of simpler times, yet it bore the weight of something darker, like Goebbels' propaganda boards under the shadow of the Nazi nightmare—a reminder of how innocence could be twisted into something sinister. Among the ads for boat repairs, lost pets, and local events, one note stood out, its simplicity stark against the chaos: "For sale: baby shoes, never worn." The words stopped her in her tracks. She stared at them, her breath catching like the air had turned to ice. The image they conjured—tiny, pristine shoes, untouched and full of unspoken sorrow—sent a shiver down her spine. It was a whisper of loss, a story untold, and it tugged at something deep within her, something she had tried to bury but now clawed its way to the surface.

Her thoughts were already heavy from the morning’s news. Over breakfast, the radio had crackled with reports that an intrusive Russian submarine, the ¨Na zdorov'ye!¨ detected in nearby waters. The name felt ominous, its foreign syllables rolling off the newscaster’s tongue like a curse.

The submarine’s presence had stirred unease among the locals, its shadowy movements a reminder of the geopolitical tensions simmering just beneath the surface of their tranquil lives. Whispers of espionage, of unseen threats lurking in the depths, had spread through the town like a cold fog, seeping into every conversation and casting long shadows over the sunlit streets. 

She tried to shake off the weight, forcing herself to focus on the task—picking up groceries for the week. The market is just a short walk away, its stalls brimming with fresh produce, warm bread and jars of locally made preserves. These simple pleasures felt like a minor miracle If we remember the radioactive shadows of a failed nuclear power plant whose winds had reached the region decades before. It was a blessing, she thought, to live without that invisible threat. However, the memory lingered like a ghost, much like the haunting visions Andrei Tarkovsky had foreshadowed in his film Nostalgia—a prophecy of loss and longing that resonated deeply within her.

But as she moved through the crowd, the juxtaposition of the haunting ad and the lurking submarine lingered in her mind, pulling her thoughts in two directions. The baby shoes spoke of personal grief, of intimate, heart-wrenching loss. At the same time, the submarine was a symbol of something vast and impersonal, a reminder of the fragile balance of power that stretched far beyond the fjord. It was as if the universe was taunting her, forcing her to confront the duality of existence—the beauty and the brutality, the personal and the political, the intimate and the infinite.

The contrast left her feeling unmoored, adrift in a sea of emotions she couldn’t name. She paused by the water’s edge, staring out at the horizon where the fjord met the open sea. Somewhere out there, beneath the surface, the ¨Na zdorov'ye!¨ moved silently, its presence a silent threat, a predator lurking in the depths. And yet, here in the town, life went on—fishermen mended their nets, children played by the shore, and the bulletin board stood as a testament to the quiet, everyday tragedies that shaped their lives. It was a cruel irony, she thought, how the world could be so beautiful and so broken, shattered into may be in three irreparable pieces, all at the same time.

She took a deep breath, the crisp sea air filling her lungs, but it offered no solace. The baby shoes, the submarine, and the fjord's beauty were all part of the same tapestry, woven together in ways she couldn’t fully understand. For now, she would carry on, one step at a time, even as the weight of it all pressed heavily against her chest, threatening to crush her beneath its unbearable truth. The fjord stretched out before her, vast and unyielding, its waters hiding secrets she could never know. As she turned away from the harbour, the words echoed in her mind, a haunting refrain: "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."

Distractors…

Indeed, the haunting phrase, "For sale: baby shoes, never worn," is a powerful example of how a few carefully chosen words can evoke profound emotion and curiosity. Such phrases can be potent distractors in communication, particularly in political communication. They divert attention, subtly steering public focus away from pressing issues or critical decisions that might otherwise provoke immediate scrutiny or resistance. By introducing an emotionally charged or ambiguous element, communicators can buy time, shape narratives, or soften the impact of controversial actions, all while keeping the public momentarily captivated by the distraction rather than the substance.

A Complex Morning in München…

Yesterday morning in Munich was a nightmare for many, oddly on Friendship Day.  It is undeniably true—painfully so—that Greta, hailed by some as a messianic figure and the embodiment of a global trend, represents a broader cultural shift. She is both the embryo and prototype of a movement embraced by modern-day green yuppies, the architects of trends and lifestyles that have driven the cost of living to unsustainable heights. These self-proclaimed sustainability champions often preach from positions of privilege, advocating for sweeping changes while remaining insulated from the harsh realities ordinary people face.

In today’s world, young people are increasingly locked out of essential opportunities: unable to afford homes, forced into the dehumanizing practice of "hot-bedding" (sharing a single bed in shifts with strangers), and left with little hope of forming families or building futures. The dream of stability and prosperity feels increasingly out of reach as the cost of living skyrockets and wages stagnate. Ironically, Greta’s activism—a movement driven by an elite—has, in many ways, contributed to a generation desperately seeking refuge in ultra-political tendencies. Unfortunately, policies prioritising abstract ideals over practical solutions often exacerbate inequality, leaving the most vulnerable to bear the consequences.

Greta’s rise to prominence has undeniably galvanized a generation but has also exposed modern activism's contradictions. While her message of climate urgency resonates globally, it often overshadows more immediate and pressing issues: retirees scavenging for bottles to supplement their meagre pensions, families struggling to put food on the table, and countless individuals left behind by a system that prioritizes grand gestures over tangible change. Actual progress requires more than viral moments and performative outrage; it demands a reckoning with the systemic inequalities that shape lives and a commitment to addressing them with empathy and pragmatism.

Unforgettable Omissions…

The Holodomor—a word that carries the weight of unspeakable sorrow, a name that echoes with the cries of millions. It was not merely a famine, a tragedy born of nature’s cruelty, but rather a deliberate act of devastation, a shadow cast by human hands. Between 1932 and 1933, the fertile fields of Ukraine, once golden with grain, became barren wastelands, and the people who tended them were left to wither like crops under a merciless sun.

This was no accident of history. It was a calculated act, a weapon wielded by a regime that saw the Ukrainian spirit as a threat to its iron grip. Stalin’s Soviet Union, in its relentless pursuit of control, stripped the land of its bounty and the people of their sustenance. Grain was seized not to feed the hungry but to feed an ideology. Villages were emptied, not by choice, but by starvation. Families were torn apart, not by time, but by the cold indifference of power. The Holodomor—¨holod¨, meaning hunger, ¨mor¨ meaning extermination—was a plague of human design. By the time it ended, an estimated ¨3.5 to 5¨ million Ukrainians** had perished, their lives extinguished by hunger, exhaustion, and despair.

The stories from those years are etched in pain. Mothers cradling children too weak to cry, fathers digging graves with hands trembling from hunger, entire communities vanishing into silence. The earth, once a source of life, became a witness to death. And yet, even in the face of such despair, the human spirit endured. People shared what little they had, whispered prayers in the dark, and clung to the hope that the world would someday know their suffering.

For decades, the truth of the Holodomor was buried under layers of denial and propaganda. The Soviet regime erased it from history, silenced its survivors, and exported its grain while its people starved. But the memory of those who perished cannot be extinguished. It lived on in the hearts of those who survived, in the stories passed down through generations, in the quiet defiance of a nation that refused to forget.

Today, the Holodomor is recognized as a genocide, a crime against humanity. It is a reminder of the fragility of freedom and the cost of silence. It is a call to remember the lives lost and the resilience of those who endured. In Ukraine, the fourth Saturday of November is a day of remembrance, a time to honour the victims and to ensure that such a tragedy is never repeated.

The Holodomor is more than a chapter in history; it is a testament to the strength of the human spirit and the enduring power of memory. It is a warning, a plea, and a promise—to remember, to resist, and to never let the shadows of the past darken the future.

A Game of Cat and Mouse…

The detection of Russian submarines in the territorial waters of European nations is a matter shrouded in sensitivity and secrecy, often classified to protect national security. These underwater incursions, whether confirmed or suspected, are rarely disclosed in full detail, yet they occasionally surface in reports from countries that can monitor such activities. Regions like the Baltic Sea, the North Atlantic, and the Arctic—hotbeds of geopolitical tension—are particularly prone to these shadowy encounters, where the silent dance of submarines beneath the waves mirrors the strategic manoeuvring above.

For instance, in 2020, Sweden announced the detection of a suspected foreign submarine in its waters, stopping short of explicitly naming Russia but leaving little doubt given the context.  Earlier in 2014, Sweden launched a massive search operation in the Stockholm archipelago after detecting what it believed to be a Russian submarine. The incident stirred both public anxiety and diplomatic unease. Similarly, in 2015, the United Kingdom reported tracking a Russian submarine near its naval base in Scotland, a reminder of Moscow's persistent probing of NATO's defences.

The exact number of such incidents remains undisclosed, buried under classification layers and strategic ambiguity. Yet, it is no secret that NATO members and other nations with advanced anti-submarine warfare capabilities maintain a vigilant watch over Russian submarine activity. These underwater sentinels, equipped with cutting-edge sonar systems and surveillance networks, track the movements of these stealthy vessels, particularly near critical chokepoints and strategic zones. The encounters' silent, unseen nature belies their significance, as they underscore the ongoing tensions and the delicate balance of power that defines modern geopolitics.

Parallel to these underwater games, another shadowy conflict plays out in the corridors of power and the boardrooms of corporations: —Russian industrial espionage in Europe. For decades, Russian intelligence agencies and their affiliated networks have sought to steal Europe’s most guarded secrets—advanced technologies, intellectual property, and trade secrets—often to bolster Russia’s industries, military capabilities, and strategic ambitions. This clandestine activity has left a trail of incidents across the continent, from the high-tech hubs of Germany to the energy-rich fields of Scandinavia and from the aerospace giants of France to the cutting-edge universities of the United Kingdom.

The methods employed are as varied as they are sophisticated. Cyber espionage is a favoured tool, with Russian hacking groups like APT28 (also known as Fancy Bear) launching phishing attacks, deploying malware, and exploiting vulnerabilities to infiltrate corporate networks. These groups, often linked to Russian intelligence agencies such as the FSB and GRU, have targeted industries ranging from energy and defence to pharmaceuticals and information technology. But it’s not just digital warfare; human intelligence plays a crucial role, too. Russian operatives have been known to recruit insiders—employees, contractors, or researchers—who can provide access to sensitive information. Sometimes, they pose as businessmen or academics, embedding themselves in European institutions to quietly extract valuable knowledge.

The targets of these efforts are as diverse as they are critical. In Germany, Russian hackers have zeroed in on the energy sector, seeking secrets related to renewable energy and smart grid technologies. In one notable case, a Russian diplomat was expelled after attempting to recruit a German aerospace employee to spy on industrial secrets. France, too, has faced its share of intrusions, with aerospace giant Airbus repeatedly targeted for its military and civilian aircraft data. Even the race to develop a COVID-19 vaccine wasn’t spared, as French cybersecurity officials uncovered Russian attempts to steal research from pharmaceutical companies.

The United Kingdom has also found itself in the crosshairs. British energy firms, defence contractors and universities have all been victims of Russian cyberattacks aimed at pilfering intellectual property. In Scandinavia, the oil and gas industries—vital to Europe’s energy supply—have been frequent targets, with Norway and Sweden both reporting breaches linked to Russian operatives. Even in Eastern Europe, nations like Poland and the Czech Republic have faced espionage campaigns as they modernize their militaries and infrastructure.

The motivations behind these activities are transparent. Russia seeks to close the technological gap with the West, using stolen innovations to modernize its industries and reduce import dependence. Military technology, in particular, is highly prized, as it can enhance Russia’s defence capabilities and maintain its geopolitical influence. The stakes are high for Europe, where intellectual property theft undermines economic competitiveness and poses a threat to national security.

In response, European nations have ramped up their defences. Cybersecurity measures have been strengthened, with governments and private companies investing heavily in advanced systems to protect their data. Intelligence sharing has become a cornerstone of the European response, with countries collaborating through NATO and the EU to track and counter Russian espionage. For Europe, the task is to stay one step ahead, safeguarding the innovations that drive its economies and protect its security. For Russia, the allure of stolen secrets—and the advantages they promise—continues to fuel its efforts, ensuring that this shadowy conflict will endure for years.

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can effortlessly support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1890688176206786821

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Worka is fully part of Germán & Co.

---

It Took Trump Only Twenty-four Days to Sell Out Ukraine

---

Amid the chaos in Washington, the President’s phone call with Putin has Moscow filled with glee…

The New Yorker, by Susan B. Glasser, February 13, 2025.

Has Vladimir Putin ever had a better few days in Washington? Donald Trump, just four weeks into his second term, has executed a breathtaking pivot toward Moscow, reversing course after years of ruptured relations between the U.S. and Russia that resulted from Putin’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. First, Trump signed off on gutting the U.S. Agency for International Development, delighting the Russian government, whose spokeswoman called it “a machine for interfering” in other countries’ affairs. Also on the chopping block may soon be Radio Free Europe, a Cold War legacy project whose coverage of Putin’s Russia has long infuriated the Kremlin. “Yes, shut them down,” Trump’s billionaire buddy and sometimes Putin interlocutor Elon Musk tweeted over the weekend.

Then, on Wednesday, the U.S. Senate voted to confirm former Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s controversial nominee to become the director of National Intelligence. Gabbard has, like Trump himself, often amplified Russian talking points about the war in Ukraine—a key reason Mitch McConnell, the former Senate Republican leader, refused to vote for her. But he was the only holdout in a Senate Republican Conference that, as recently as Gabbard’s confirmation hearing last month, included several G.O.P. senators said to be queasy about her nomination. These were the stalwarts who once vowed to stand with Ukraine until it beat back Russia. Now, they don’t even dare stand against a single Trump nominee.

That same day, Trump held his first formal phone call with Putin since returning to the White House. It could hardly have been more ominous for Ukraine—as clear a sign as possible that the American President who praised Russia’s war on its neighbour as an act of strategic “genius” now intends to force a ceasefire on Putin’s terms. According to Trump’s reports on his social media feed, the call featured chummy references to the U.S. alliance with the Soviet Union during the Second World War and a decision to “immediately” launch peace talks. Only afterwards did Trump call Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelensky. It was all too obvious which of the two combatants he favoured.

“Do you view Ukraine as an equal member of this peace process?” A reporter in the Oval Office later asked Trump. “Umm,” he said, pausing so long that the silence was deafening. “It’s an interesting question,” he finally replied. “I think they have to make peace. Their people are being killed, and I think they have to make peace. I said that was not a good war to go into”—as if Ukraine had had a choice about an unprovoked attack by more than a hundred thousand Russian troops—“and I think they have to make peace.”

After Putin launched his invasion—three years ago this month—Joe Biden condemned the Russian leader as a killer and a thug, sent tens of billions of dollars in U.S. military assistance, and vowed to stand with Ukraine for “as long as it takes.” Whenever peace talks arose, Biden promised that the U.S. would undertake “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.” But Trump, on Wednesday, seemed to go out of his way to humiliate Ukraine, volunteering that he and Putin would “probably” meet soon in Saudi Arabia, with Zelensky pointedly not invited. Trump even appeared to adopt the Kremlin’s bloody imperial theory of the case for why Russia should be able to keep territory illegally seized from Ukraine since, after all, “they fought for that land.” No wonder gleeful pundits on Moscow state television were soon crowing about Russia’s “big success.”

For months, some of Trump’s most conventional Republican enablers have been gaslighting the American public, European allies, and embattled Ukraine by advancing the notion that Trump, once reinstalled in office, would be a sort of second coming of Ronald Reagan, determined to stand tough against the Russians and deliver a fair deal for Ukraine achieved by Reagan’s signature approach of “peace through strength.” You could almost hear Trump laughing as he mocked those apologists in his Oval Office appearance. The man is who he is. He still admires Putin and still couldn’t care less about Ukraine. “The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must” might as well be Trump’s motto. Of course, he was always going to pressure Ukraine to trade land for peace, international law and national sovereignty be damned. As for American guarantees to secure Ukraine against future Russian incursions?

If anyone was tempted to dismiss Trump’s words as mere negotiating tactics, two of the President’s Cabinet secretaries were dispatched to Europe on errands that underscored the degree to which Trump had sided with Putin. In Brussels, Trump’s new Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth, lectured European allies about how the U.S. can’t worry about their security anymore and effectively ruled out any chance for Ukraine to join NATO. By peremptorily shutting the door to Ukraine, Hegseth foreclosed on any arrangement that might secure Ukraine from future Russian aggression and ceded a key point of leverage over Putin—before a single bargaining session. Meanwhile, Trump’s Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, was sent to Ukraine—not with additional aid but with a demand from Trump that the besieged government in Kyiv compensate the U.S. for its past assistance by agreeing to supply some five hundred billion dollars in rare-earth minerals. Biden used to frame America’s role in Ukraine as a bulwark in the global contest between autocracies and democracies. And Trump? He seems to be going for something more like a mob shakedown: pay up, or we’ll let Putin eat you alive. This, too, is vintage Trump. Indeed, his first Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, made a famous outburst at the Pentagon in 2017 when he called the President a “fucking moron,” which was prompted, in part, by his anger at Trump likening American soldiers to mercenaries who should fight only for countries that pay.

The timing of the decision to preëmptively rule out NATO membership for Ukraine, on the eve of the annual Munich Security Conference, seemed like one of those deliberate Trump trolls, practically inviting unfavourable comparisons to Neville Chamberlain’s disastrous Munich “peace in our time” deal with Hitler on the eve of the Second World War. As Carl Bildt, the veteran European diplomat and former Prime Minister of Sweden, commented, “It’s certainly an innovative approach to a negotiation to make major concessions even before they have started. Not even Chamberlain went that low in 1938. That Munich ended very badly anyhow.”

The selling out of Ukraine was an inevitable consequence, no doubt, of America’s decision to reëlect Trump—the car crash that we’ve been watching unfold in slow motion since the evening of November 5th. For those warning about Trump’s plans for Ukraine, Wednesday’s revelations felt like the crash had finally happened. John Bolton, the hawkish Republican who served as Trump’s national security adviser and who has since publicly turned on him, said that his former boss had already “effectively surrendered to Putin” and appears prepared to force Ukraine to accede to “a settlement that could have been written in the Kremlin.”

The German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, quite possibly a lame duck given upcoming elections in which his party’s share in the polls has collapsed to around fifteen per cent, blustered about Europe refusing to accept a “dictated peace.” But, in reality, who’s going to stop Trump? On the campaign trail last year, he used to brag that he would solve the Ukraine war in twenty-four hours. He broke that promise, but in the twenty-four days since he’s returned to power he’s given a brazen indication of how he plans to do so. Christmas came early for Putin this year. 

---

The Recalibration of Global Power: …Toward a Tripolar World Order?

---

“ Energy, Rare Earth, and AI in the New Geopolitical Calculus: A Probable Peace Agreement between Russia and Ukraine Brokered by the USA Distant from Europe….

---

A Yalta 2.0 Agreement: Russia, China, and the USA?

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Hello everyone…

In this intense week, where something new happens every hour, we have attempted to summarise the most important events and our perspective on the global spectrum. We are concluding this post at 12:30 a.m. on Friday the 14th. Three hours ago, U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed that U.S. President Donald Trump will negotiate directly with his counterparts from Russia, Vladimir Putin, and Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, whilst NATO allies will play a role. But, he did not clarify whether this would occur at the negotiating table. After 22 days of seemingly endless signed executive orders, one can say that the Trump administration will fulfil all its promises. Finally, we work with accurate just data only. Good night to me, and good afternoon to you.

That says:

The post-pandemic world is witnessing a tectonic shift in global power structures that challenges the West’s assumptions of perpetual dominance. What began as a public health crisis has metastasized into a reckoning resulting from decades of strategic complacency. The COVID-19 pandemic—whose origins remain debated but whose consequences are indisputable—laid bare the fragility of hyper-globalized systems, from medical supply chains to technology ecosystems.

The Great Unraveling: From Efficiency to Vulnerability…

The West’s Faustian bargain with globalization has reached its inflection point. Over three decades, the transfer of industrial capabilities to Asia—not merely factories but entire innovation ecosystems—was rationalized as an economic inevitability. Yet this "efficiency trap" has birthed a dangerous paradox: nations that championed free trade now find themselves hollowed, dependent on rivals for everything from semiconductors to antibiotics. The cost-cutting logic of quarterly earnings reports has collided with the imperatives of national resilience, exposing how industrial offshoring became a silent transfer of geopolitical leverage.

Simply put, we lived in a bubble like Alice in Wonderland. We embraced the allure of cheap goods, the cost of driving the nation into bankruptcy for its industries— while trading away our finest treasures and natural wealth to the rising dragon. The ancient power grew stronger through our dependence, silently reinvesting the riches gained from our pursuit of comfort, albeit cheaply. With calculated patience and millennia of wisdom, the dragon's influence spread like tendrils across every continent, every city, every street. What appears as scattered, independent shops in our neighbourhoods are scales of the same dragon, parts of a vast network that now encircles the globe. The truth becomes clear: these are not isolated ventures but extensions of a single, massive empire woven into the fabric of our daily lives.  But, another fundamental reason is the geopolitically neglected state of Western, European, political authorities.

Europe’s Regulatory Quagmire: A Case Study in Self-Sabotage…

Bloomberg reports a new energy crisis Ad Portas.

The continent’s energy crisis serves as a cautionary tale of ideological overreach. Obsession with environmental purity—manifested in labyrinthine regulations and the premature dismantling of nuclear infrastructure—has left Europe scrambling to restart shuttered power plants while rationing electricity. The irony is palpable: nations that have lectured the world on climate leadership now risk facing a process of energy poverty, their grids buckling under the weight of contradictory policies. (1) (1a)

Simple put and Why?

Due to the trend of excessive regulations, particularly in environmental matters, there is an assumption that the more one complicates an issue, the wiser one becomes by imposing more regulations. (2)

The consequences of this mad trend are, without a doubt, the critical factors in today's energy crisis (3) that stem from the strategic miscalculations of Western Europe's leadership. In pursuing an idealised world, policymakers lost sight of fundamental priorities, neglecting vital infrastructure from the local to national level. Their obsession with excessive regulation and bureaucracy stifled domestic energy production and development. Every attempt to establish new energy infrastructure became entangled in complex regulatory frameworks and endless administrative hurdles.

The costs of these choices are now starkly apparent in our insufficient electrical power capacity. Perhaps the most telling irony lies in nuclear energy policy: nations that decommissioned their nuclear plants in 2023, driven by ideological rather than practical considerations, are now scrambling to reverse course and restart these facilities. (3) This policy whiplash exemplifies the short-sighted decision-making contributing to our energy vulnerabilities.

Contradictory policies and regulatory overreach have left Western nations in a precarious position. They struggle to maintain reliable energy supplies while navigating an increasingly complex global energy model. This situation is a stark reminder that energy policy must balance environmental aspirations with practical necessities and strategic security considerations.

The matter does not end there, as a Bloomberg analysis from October last year announced the possibility of an energy crisis by 2025. (4) This contrasts with a recent —EU report emphasising that the electricity sector was performing well—.  The forecast is attributed to rising fuel prices, particularly natural gas, and recent fluctuations in fuel, which may lead to this dire prediction being realised. It was leaked yesterday that the EU energy commission in Brussels discussed introducing a cap on the price of electricity (5), which the authorities of the European Union have subsequently denied... Now, the question arises as to what tools the political authorities of the old continent must use to alleviate this crisis...

Competition for rare earth elements exemplifies a new imperial dynamic.

China’s rare earth gambit exemplifies this new era of resource nationalism. By controlling 90% of refined rare earths and weaponizing export controls, Beijing has exposed the fiction of "decoupled" markets. Meanwhile, the U.S. response—from Trump’s attempted $500 billion resource deal with Ukraine to Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act—reveals a belated recognition that economic security now demands mercantilist tactics.

Simple Put.

China's declaration of rare earth metals as state property, which controls approximately 60% of global production and 90% of refined rare earths, signals a strategic assertion of power that challenges fundamental assumptions regarding free market economics. This action, along with their ban on exporting rare earth refining technologies and critical elements such as gallium and germanium, illustrates how economic integration can serve as a potent instrument of national strategy. (6) (6a)

President Donald Trump's request for $ 500 billion in rare earth elements from Ukraine in exchange for ongoing support. (7) resources and his focus on securing returns on investment through natural resource trades reflect an increasing awareness of these strategic realities. On President Donald Trump's 21st day in the White House, it is easy to discern his focus on recovering all the ground that the United States had lost in the last 20 years as a power nation in the global context. President Trump's executive order could have a cost, especially concerning tariffs. His reflections on this “necessary measure” could "depict" (inflation).

The AI Arms Race: Powering the Future or Consuming It?

The exponential growth of AI infrastructure presents a complex equation:

• 325 TWh – Projected annual energy demand of global data centers by 2028 (equivalent to Spain’s total consumption)

• 812.5 billion gallons – Water required to generate this power, enough to sustain 9 billion people for a day

At Paris’ AI summit, U.S. Vice President JD Vance framed this as a civilizational imperative: "To regulate AI is to surrender it." His warning against "ethical overengineering" underscores Washington’s determination to dominate the algorithmic frontier—a stance bolstered by France’s nuclear-powered energy surplus, itself a legacy of pragmatic policymaking. Will it become a mere spectator to a new Great Game? Macron’s energy gambit and Brussels’ faltering price caps reveal a continent torn between green idealism and survivalic.  Amidst a complex political landscape marked by domestic challenges—from pension reforms to social unrest—French President Emmanuel Macron has drawn notable praise from geopolitical strategist Henry Kissinger, who reportedly identified him as one of Europe’s most adept leaders.

“Deepened lost in diplomacy...
Mr. Henry Kissinger, during his interview for the Portfolio Magazine at the French restaurant Jubilee in downtown Manhattan, New York, on July 27, 2018, warned of the urgent need to broaden global communication channels, particularly with China. He emphasized the potential for global order disruptions if this critical diplomatic work is still pending.
In this interview, in Mr. Kissinger's eyes, French President Emmanuel Macron stands out as a commendable world leader with a unique and expansive vision. Macron's ability to think beyond conventional boundaries has positioned him as a significant influencer on the global stage. Despite this, his attempts to engage with Russian President Vladimir Putin have thus far proven unsuccessful. Macron's efforts to establish a productive dialogue with Putin still need to catch up... The paradox of world leaders knowing and accepting Russia's impending invasion of Ukraine two years in advance is a striking revelation that challenges our understanding of international relations and diplomacy…  (8c) 

Such recognition aligns with Macron’s assertive role in shaping European Union policies, particularly in energy and climate diplomacy. This acclaim coincides with Macron’s recent announcement that France, leveraging its nuclear energy surplus, will prioritize supplying power to data centers—a move that underscores both economic pragmatism and strategic foresight. 

France’s energy surplus stems from its unparalleled reliance on nuclear power, which generates approximately 70% of its electricity, the highest share globally. After pandemic-related delays and technical setbacks temporarily idled reactors in 2022, the country’s nuclear fleet has returned to full capacity. This resurgence positions France as a rare bastion of energy stability in Europe, which is still grappling with the aftershocks of reduced Russian gas supplies. By channeling this surplus toward data centers—energy-intensive hubs critical to artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital infrastructure—Macron is capitalizing on a dual opportunity: attracting high-tech investment and burnishing France’s environmental credentials.

The strategy is shrewdly calibrated. Data centers demand vast, uninterrupted power, and France’s low-carbon nuclear energy offers a competitive edge in an era where sustainability is both a regulatory mandate and a corporate priority. Tech giants like Amazon and Google, seeking to align with EU climate goals, are increasingly drawn to regions with reliable clean energy. Macron’s pivot promises economic dividends and reinforces France’s geopolitical influence. By positioning the nation as a hub for green tech infrastructure, he strengthens its role in EU energy policy debates, particularly in advocating for nuclear power’s inclusion in the bloc’s renewable energy taxonomy—a stance that often clashes with Germany’s anti-nuclear posture.

Yet Macron’s energy gambit is not without risks. France’s aging nuclear reactors have faced recurring issues, including corrosion concerns that forced shutdowns in 2022, highlighting vulnerabilities in the system. Public skepticism over nuclear safety and waste management persists, even as the government invests in next-generation reactors. Moreover, prioritizing data centers over exporting surplus energy to neighbors like Germany—still reliant on gas and renewables—could strain EU solidarity, underscoring the tension between national interests and continental unity.

Kissinger’s alleged endorsement of Macron reflects a broader recognition of the French president’s ability to navigate these complexities. By marrying nuclear revitalization with digital infrastructure ambitions, Macron seeks to solidify France’s status as both an energy anchor and a technological innovator in Europe. However, the long-term success of this strategy hinges on maintaining nuclear reliability, addressing environmental concerns, and balancing EU collaboration with competitive economic priorities. In a continent navigating energy insecurity and climate urgency, Macron’s bet on nuclear-powered data centers may well define France’s role in shaping Europe’s future—both as a leader and a lightning rod. (8) (8a) (8b)

Are 90 minutes enough to fix the world?

The New Tripolar Calculus: Yalta 2.0 or Global Fracture?

Three spheres are crystallizing:

1. America’s Tech-Military Complex

2. China’s Manufacturing-Resource Nexus

3. Russia’s Energy-Geopolitical Leverage

Put simple.

This technological positioning gains more profound significance when viewed alongside the recent direct communications between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. Their dialogue, conspicuously excluding European stakeholders, suggests dramatically restructuring post-Cold War diplomatic architectures. This bilateral engagement, bypassing traditional alliance structures, points toward an emerging tripolar world order where power is concentrated among three major players, each wielding distinct forms of influence: the United States with its technological and military might, China with its manufacturing prowess and expanding technological capabilities, and Russia leveraging its vast natural resources.

The timing of these developments takes on historical weight as we approach the 80th anniversary of World War II on May 9. The prospect of a potential "Yalta Agreement 2.0"—where major powers might reshape global spheres of influence without European participation—looms as a concerning possibility. Unlike the original Yalta Conference, where China played a crucial role, today's geopolitical realignment could see a different configuration of power brokers, potentially marginalising traditional European allies.

For Europe, the stakes could not be higher. The possibility of major powers negotiating a new global arrangement without European input—particularly on a date as symbolically significant as the World War II anniversary—would represent more than a diplomatic slight; it could signal a fundamental shift in Europe's position in the global power hierarchy. This scenario underscores the urgent need for European nations to strengthen their strategic autonomy and reassess their role in an increasingly multipolar world.

The exclusion of European voices from these high-level discussions raises significant questions regarding the future role of traditional allies in shaping global policy. This shift could hasten Europe's efforts to develop strategic autonomy, particularly regarding energy security and defence capabilities.

The emerging tripolar structure, while potentially providing new frameworks for conflict resolution, also creates its own set of challenges. The complex interplay between resource control, technological dominance, and manufacturing capability suggests that competition—rather than cooperation—may continue to characterize international relations, regardless of any immediate diplomatic breakthroughs.

This evolving situation underscores the need for a more sophisticated understanding of how power operates in the contemporary world, where control over critical resources, technology, and supply chains often proves as crucial as traditional military or economic might. (9)

---

 Reference:

(1)   https://energycentral.com/c/gn/west-needs-russia-power-its-nuclear-comeback

 (1a) https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gas-price-cap-destabilize-markets-212951790.html   

(2) https://energycentral.com/c/cp/macron%E2%80%99s-calls-%E2%80%98regulatory-pause%E2%80%99-eu-environmental-laws-wink-conservatives

(2)   https://energycentral.com/c/cp/coming-electricity-crisis%E2%80%A6

(4)   The article is inserted in this edition.

(5)   https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/european-energy-industry-urges-eu-not-cap-gas-prices-2025-02-12/

(6)   https://www.germantoroghio.com/blog-1-2/glptk75s8wsj72l-rc4p8-wxhbw-ac93b-nasl7-7xe3m-ayah7-9z2lz-hlnwh-8z8rx-zly63

(6a) https://energycentral.com/c/cp/us-and-eu-begin-negotiations-critical-minerals-access-ev-batteries

(7)   https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-demands-500b-in-rare-earths-from-ukraine-for-support/

(8) https://time.com/7221099/jd-vance-ai-paris-summit/

(8a) https://energycentral.com/c/cp/tech-billionaires-bet-fusion-holy-grail-business

(8b) https://www.techradar.com/pro/france-plans-to-pledge-one-gigawatt-of-nuclear-power-for-ai

(9) https://www.germantoroghio.com/blog-1-2/wltpflwya644ltd-9xgre-f9l3k-74tkd-tn6zx-w7shk-fbxaj-6sytt-9lekr-dk72t-krxf3-tm445-b7hj8-p962c-5z4l3-nntza-dywdz-xhf24 

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can effortlessly support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1890202165555462226

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Worka is fully part of Germán & Co.

---

Europe’s Energy Crisis in 2025: A Fragile Balance Between Progress and Peril

---

By Clara Voss, Senior Energy Analyst*, Bloomberg

Three years after the Russia-Ukraine war plunged Europe into its most severe energy crisis since the 1970s, the continent has managed to stave off disaster—but at a steep cost. While emergency measures like LNG imports and market reforms have stabilized supplies, Europe’s energy landscape remains volatile, exposing deep structural flaws and unresolved tensions between security, affordability, and climate goals.

The rush to replace Russian gas with liquefied natural gas (LNG) has reshaped Europe’s energy map. New terminals in Germany, France, and Greece have boosted import capacity to 250 billion cubic meters annually, enough to replace nearly all pre-war Russian imports. But this pivot has strings attached. Reliance on U.S. LNG, which now accounts for 55% of EU imports, has entangled Europe in global price wars and geopolitical risks, particularly as Middle East tensions escalate. Spot prices remain stubbornly high, triple pre-crisis levels, and analysts warn of looming “stranded assets” as renewable energy growth begins to eclipse demand for gas. Germany’s Uniper recently mothballed two floating LNG terminals—a symbolic reminder of the precariousness of this new dependency.

Renewables, meanwhile, tell a story of impressive growth tempered by growing pains. Wind and solar now supply 45% of EU electricity, up from 37% in 2022, with Denmark’s colossal *Energy Island* project in the North Sea and Spain’s solar farms leading the charge. Yet these victories are undercut by persistent grid bottlenecks and a storage crisis. Solar farms in southern Europe routinely flood markets with excess midday power, crashing prices to near zero and straining profitability. Battery storage, though expanding, still covers just four hours of EU-wide demand, while green hydrogen—touted as a silver bullet—remains confined to pilot projects. “We’re winning on volume but losing on value,” warns BloombergNEF’s Isabelle Edwards. “Without smarter grids and demand flexibility, renewables risk becoming victims of their own success.”

Nuclear energy has staged an unexpected comeback, particularly in France and Sweden, where next-gen reactors and small modular designs aim to revive the industry. But the path is rocky. France’s Flamanville-3 reactor, plagued by €20 billion cost overruns, has become a cautionary tale, while Germany’s bitter *Atomkraft-Debatte* rages on. Industrial giants like BASF openly lobby for a nuclear restart to curb energy costs, highlighting the political minefield facing policymakers.

Market reforms, once hailed as a solution, now face backlash. The EU’s 2024 overhaul decoupled electricity prices from gas, stabilizing household bills but sparking accusations of market distortion. Governments now subsidize renewables through direct contracts, sidelining competition, while Germany controversially pays coal plants €4 billion annually to act as emergency backups—a stark contradiction to climate pledges. “We’ve patched the system but not fixed it,” laments Bruegel’s Simone Tagliapietra. “The true cost of the green transition is still being hidden.”

Perhaps the most insidious crisis is Europe’s industrial exodus. Energy-intensive sectors, from chemicals to steel, continue fleeing to regions with cheaper power. BASF has slashed EU production by a quarter, relocating to gas-rich Louisiana, while ThyssenKrupp and ArcelorMittal now produce “green steel” in sun-drenched Saudi Arabia and Australia. A €300 billion EU subsidy package has slowed the bleeding but failed to stem the tide, raising existential questions about Europe’s industrial future.

Climate change, meanwhile, adds cruel twists to an already complex equation. This summer’s droughts crippled hydropower in southern Europe, forcing a revival of gas-fired generation, while record heatwaves triggered nuclear shutdowns in France and rolling blackouts in Italy. Such extremes underscore the fragility of Europe’s hard-won stability.

The European Commission’s latest assessment strikes a cautious tone. Russian gas imports have plummeted to 7%, and emissions are down 12% since 2022—a testament to renewables’ rise. Yet 18% of households still grapple with energy poverty, and bureaucratic delays stall 60% of renewable projects. “We’re no longer in crisis mode,” acknowledges Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson, “but complacency is not an option.”

As markets digest the latest figures—gas at €41.20/MWh, carbon permits nearing €90/ton—the question lingers: Can Europe’s grid handle the 2030 renewables surge? For now, the continent treads a narrow path, balancing wartime pragmatism with an uncertain vision of sustainability. The crisis has been contained, but the reckoning is far from over.

Reported with contributions from Javier Fernandez in Madrid and Anika Müller in Berlin.*

October 15, 2025 | Bloomberg Today

---

Exploring the Contrast between Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night's Dream” and Asteroid 2024 YR4…

---

“Natural Gas: An Indispensable Element of the Energy Transition…

---

AES's Innovative Approach to Natural Gas in Latin America…

---

“Through the veins of Panama flows a symphony of life, where art beats like a tireless drum. Here, Rubén Blades rises not merely as a singer but as a griot of concrete and steel, his "Pedro Navaja" dancing through alleys and across continents, becoming the whispered prayer of a thousand Latin American nights.

When Carnival descends, the nation sheds its ordinary skin. Polleras spin like painted clouds, their delicate fabric catching whispers of ancestral stories. Tambourines pulse with the heartbeat of history, while laughter – pure and bright as morning – cascades through streets transformed into rivers of joy.

From the humble streets of El Chorrillo emerged a warrior-poet of the ring, Roberto "Manos de Piedra" Durán. His fists, hard as the faith that forged them, carved a legend from adversity's stone. In every punch thrown and victory claimed, he embodied Panama's unwavering spirit – a testament that dreams, when fed by determination's fire, can touch the stars themselves.

---

Secretary of State to Unite State, Mr Marco Rubio and Mr Andres Gluski, President and CEO of AES Corporation

Image courtesy of the Official State Department, taken by Freddie Everett. State

AES has emerged as a pioneering force in harnessing the vast potential of natural gas throughout Latin America. The company's transformative journey in the region represents a carefully orchestrated strategy to revolutionise energy infrastructure while promoting sustainable development and economic growth.

This remarkable transformation began in 2003 with the establishment of AES Andres in the Dominican Republic. This groundbreaking facility, representing a $650 million investment, introduced the first Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) infrastructure to the Caribbean. AES Andres combines a latest 319 MW combined-cycle power plant with an LNG terminal featuring a 160,000m³ storage tank, setting new standards for energy efficiency and environmental responsibility in the region.

Building on this success, AES expanded its regional presence in 2019 with the inauguration of AES Colón in Panama. This $1.15 billion investment established Central America's first LNG facility, featuring a 180,000m³ storage tank and a 381 MW power plant. The strategic location of AES Colón has transformed Panama into a crucial energy hub, facilitating natural gas distribution throughout Central America and beyond.

The synchronised evolution of these two energy centres demonstrates AES's profound understanding of Latin America's unique energy challenges and opportunities. Both facilities are more than mere power plants—they function as comprehensive energy hubs that have reshaped regional energy dynamics.

These facilities have proven so successful that they have catalysed even more ambitious growth plans. The Dominican Republic hub is now exploring the possibility of exporting electricity to Puerto Rico, which is urgently needed.

Looking ahead, these strategic investments position AES at the forefront of Latin America's energy transformation, demonstrating how innovative infrastructure development can drive sustainable growth while strengthening regional integration and energy security. The company's continued commitment to expanding and enhancing these facilities ensures their role as crucial pillars in the region's ongoing energy revolution.

“AES Corporation has been instrumental in transforming the energy landscape of the Caribbean and Panama region, according to its CEO, Andrés Gluski. "Our leadership in the region actively supports governmental policies that foster economic growth and sustainability in the energy sector," he explained. "This approach has enabled us to support the development of the two fastest-growing economies while strengthening trade relationships between the United States and the region."

---

Workart fully right of Germán & Co

---

Hello everyone…

In Spanish, the verb 'flipar' has undergone a fascinating evolution. While the Royal Spanish Academy (Real Academia Española) defined it as 'to be under the influence of drugs,' its meaning in contemporary Spanish has shifted dramatically. Modern colloquial usage is more often used to express amazement, astonishment, or extreme impressiveness about something.

This Saturday, we watched “The Brutalist”, a three-and-a-half-hour epic structured film with an overture, two acts, and epilogue. Brady Corbet directed it, and Adrien Brody, who won an Academy Award for Best Actor in “The Pianist”, delivered an outstanding performance.

The film tells the life of László Tóth, a Hungarian-Jewish Bauhaus architect and Holocaust survivor who immigrated to the United State during the 1950s. While the term 'immigrant' refers to someone who moves to a new place intending to settle there, forced immigration—as experienced by millions during the Soviet era—represents a much more traumatic upheaval. The narrative explores how Mr. Tóth navigates the challenges of adapting to American life while confronting antisemitism and the profound psychological impact of being a displaced person whose soul has been torn apart by circumstances beyond their control.

I was interested in seeing the film because of the Bauhaus movement, which has been our inspiration in life, alongside the indiscerptible of jazz and maybe the attempt to move away for a moment from the text that has been worked on.

We emerged from the theater, not —-flipando—-, worst in a state of visceral anxiety, struck by a devastating realization: we are collectively blind to the tectonic shifts reshaping our world order. What the film revealed, through its historical lens of the 1950s, eerily mirrors our present predicament.

China, the colossus that once stood behind its ancient wall, has silently woven itself into our daily existence. We've surrendered our industrial autonomy to its manufacturing supremacy, building a profound dependency that we convinced ourselves it was an immutable law of nature rather than a strategic vulnerability. This wilful naivety, this collective self-deception, emphasises our inability to confront uncomfortable truths.

Meanwhile, Russia—the heir to the Romanov legacy—finds itself paradoxical. Despite its fierce rhetoric and nuclear arsenal, it grapples with exhaustion, forcing it to seek alliances that would have been unthinkable a generation ago. Its actions betray a desperate attempt to maintain relevance in a world where economic might increasingly overshadows military power.

Europe, cradle of the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, has retreated into dangerous complacency. Like an ageing aristocrat, it reclines on the faded cushions of past glories, seemingly oblivious to the gathering storm. Its comfortable torpor masks a dangerous decline in influence and strategic autonomy.

The implications are stark: We may face a moment of reckoning where extraordinary, perhaps desperate measures become our only recourse. The multipolar world order we've taken for granted—this delicate balance of powers—teeters on the edge of collapse. Without decisive action, we risk awakening to find ourselves in a unipolar world, where the diversity of global perspectives and interests has been subsumed under a single dominant force.

This isn't a geopolitical theory - it's an urgent reality that demands immediate attention and response. The comfortable illusions we've built around ourselves are beginning to crumble, revealing the harsh contours of a world in transition.

The reality of our changing global economy can no longer be ignored. Our previous illusions about seamless international trade and cooperation give way to a more complex understanding of economic interdependence and its implications for global power distribution.

President Trump stated a day ago, during his remarks on tariffs, "We may have to paint, but unfortunately, it is necessary.,, Maybe, Mr Trump is in the need to take decisive, even urgent measures to prevent our multipolar world from collapsing- into a unipolar one. Our comfortable illusions can no longer shield us from this reality.

A pressing challenge looms, growing more contentious daily: charting a balanced course for our energy sector's future. The electrical industry faces mounting pressure to find viable solutions, as power demands surge with unprecedented urgency, requiring immediate action and long-term vision.

We've meticulously gathered diverse perspectives on the sector's current state, examining each position with careful objectivity. The path through this critical transition demands more than just technical solutions—it requires support, understanding, and pragmatic thinking. Success lies not in confrontation but in discovering the common ground where competing interests can flourish together.

That say: 

Humanity has faced numerous tumultuous periods marked by suffering, upheaval, and change, much like today's chaotic world. The fall of the Roman Empire in the fifth century plunged Europe into the Dark Ages, characterised by fragmented governance and cultural stagnation. The Black Death in the fourteenth century decimated a third to half of Europe's population and dismantled feudalism, paving the way for new social structures. The Thirty Years' War in the 17th century brought chaos, famine, and disease, reshaping the political landscape of Central Europe. The 20th century witnessed immense devastation from World War I and the Spanish Flu, which resulted in millions of deaths and further global unrest. This turmoil peaked in World War II, the most catastrophic conflict in human history, marked by the unimaginable horrors of the Holocaust, the advent of atomic warfare, and the loss of tens of millions. The aftermath birthed the Cold War, a tense standoff between superpowers that cast a shadow over the world, threatening nuclear disaster and igniting proxy wars in distant lands. Now, as we navigate the 2020s, we find ourselves grappling with new challenges: the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted lives and economies across the globe, while climate change, political divides, and the rapid rise of technologies such as "AI” add layers of complexity to an already precarious world.

However, amid the chaos, these turbulent times have often served as crucibles for progress, igniting innovation, resilience, and societal evolution. Humanity's remarkable capacity to adapt and rebuild in adversity is a shining testament to our indomitable spirit.

Indeed, we must consider the juxtaposition at all costs...

How can we find the juxtaposition today…  When, on one side, lie Shakespeare’s enchanting reflections—a realm where fairies meddle in human affairs, lovers meander through magical forests, and reality blurs seamlessly with illusion. These thoughts, crafted over four centuries ago, unveil the play’s revelry in themes of love’s folly, the transformative power of imagination, and the harmonious resolution of chaos.  At its core, it offers a hopeful vision of human connection, where even the most tangled conflicts may dissolve into laughter and reconciliation.  It is almost sure that Shakespeare considered Plato's ideas on democracy and the Epicurean Garden of Happiness when reflecting on our ultra-fragile human soul.

In stark contrast, the ominous "Terrible 2024 YR4" drifts aimlessly through the galaxy, utterly lost and devoid of any clear destination. With only a one percent chance—though no one can honestly know—of reaching Earth and delivering devastating speed in mere milliseconds, its presence is a harbinger of uncertainty. That rogue stone hurtling through space carries the weight of a future steeped in existential dread—a year defined by collapse, decay, and the relentless, unchecked expansion of technology, for better or worse.

Envisaged as a dystopian tipping point, it may symbolise climate catastrophe and societal fragmentation. In this context, nature ceases to be a sanctuary and becomes a casualty.  In these difficult times, our relationship with the environment becomes more complicated when two opposing visions emerge. One insists that natural disasters have always shaped the world, invoking ancient tales like —Noah’s Ark— to justify inaction. The other warns of a developing catastrophe, urging humanity to confront climate change before it is too late, pointing to recent disasters like the devastating floods in Valencia.  Spain is confronting a dual climate crisis: persistent drought and violent weather events called: —Cold drop—.

What is the nature of this phenomenon?  Rising temperatures to over forty-two degrees Celsius and decreasing rainfall have rendered the country increasingly arid, putting pressure on water resources, agriculture, and ecosystems.  But, the “Cold drop” brings sudden, intense storms in autumn when cold air collides with warm Mediterranean moisture, leading to flash floods and devastation, especially in the eastern regions. Ironically, these downpours often fail to alleviate the drought, as parched soil cannot absorb the deluge. In the case of the “Cold Drop” in Valencia last September, the devastation was unimaginably horrific. (1)

This divide reveals another contemporary crisis beyond its technological and economic implications. The energy transition is reshaping global politics and trade, splitting the world into two competing visions for the future of electricity. This is further exacerbated by the rise of artificial intelligence and its insatiable energy demand. Data centres—the lifeblood of AI—consume staggering amounts of electricity, necessitating a reckoning with our energy future.

To confront this impending emergency, global society—comprising governments, policymakers, intellectuals, and corporate leaders alike—seeks pathways to avert disaster with urgency and, at times, desperation. Nonetheless, the debate fractures along familiar ideological lines, exacerbated by rising geopolitical conflicts, trade wars over critical resources such as uranium, and an intense race for energy sovereignty.

Two starkly opposing visions dominate: one camp insists on doubling down on fossil fuels, rallying behind slogans like “Drill, baby, drill,” while the other advocates for hybrid energy models. The latter promotes the integration of natural gas and renewables with emerging technologies like Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). The European Union has highlighted recent achievements of renewables that have demonstrated efficiency and resilience. (2) Amidst this polarization, the question remains whether cooperation can outweigh competition forging a sustainable future.

The proposal “Clean Energy Park: A New Vision of Energy from Sweden” concerns nuclear plants in combination with renewable energy, which could be one example. (3)

Amid this arduous and intense debate, two truths remain: humanity also requires power to thrive. The second is a consensus that natural gas, often called the king of fuels, is the primary transitional fuel towards a yet-to-be-defined new method for generating electricity. 

The latest assertions regarding natural gas are nothing new at this stage. One of the foremost visionaries in the energy sector wisely remarked a few years ago in Davos:  "Natural gas will continue to be a fundamental component of the energy transition for around twenty years; we must ensure its effective and efficient use." (4)

For Mrs Marc Andreessen and Elon Musk, — “AI” represents one of the most transformative technological revolutions in history; however, its most significant challenge is not job displacement or a robotic uprising but rather an energy revolution.

Mrs Andreessen and Musk have emphasised how the exponential growth of “AI” is driving global electricity demand to unprecedented heights.  Musk has even warned that by 2025, this surge could provoke a global energy crisis characterised by soaring energy prices, increasing inflation, and the risk of large-scale blackouts if power grids cannot maintain the pace. (5)

Tech giants such as NVIDIA, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft rely heavily on “AI”, making them particularly vulnerable to energy shortages. Nevertheless, the world’s current power infrastructure is inadequate to meet this demand. While fossil fuels are dependable, they are subject to constraints imposed by environmental regulations and political pressures. In contrast, renewable sources like ***—solar and wind energy— are often —inconsistent and inefficient for supporting large-scale “AI” operations—. This assertion is not the view of the leaders in artificial intelligence technology. It is not... Back in 2016, now-President Donald Trump first mentioned “wind energy” at a campaign rally... and he has done so numerous times since... Those who were surprised on 20 January when President Trump mentioned this technology again were not paying attention...  (6)

“As “AI” advances, its future will hinge on developments in machine learning and securing a stable, sustainable, and scalable energy supply. The success of “AI” is no longer just about algorithms—it is about the power that fuels them. (7)

This shift has prompted a surge in fossil fuel use, nuclear investment, and uranium demand. Notable figures such as Mrs Bill Gates and Sam Altman have emerged as new investors in atomic power stations and uranium supplies. Even Microsoft has started powering its data centres with nuclear energy, underscoring the industry’s shift towards atomic power.

A Midsummer Night’s Dream for Algorithmic Juxtapositions…

Ultimately, in a world torn apart by ideological conflicts, one might long for Shakespeare’s enchanted forest—where chaos melts away into harmony under Puck’s playful enchantment.  Yet today, we possess no equivalent of Puck’s enchanted dust to swiftly resolve the spectre of black swans—those unforeseeable blows that defy prediction.

Humanity’s collective future does not hinge on our shared aspirations; it is far from it.  Instead, our peril lies in the hubris of self-absorption: the relentless pursuit of primacy, the glorification of ego through self-aggrandising actions, and the transgressions we rationalise in the name of ambition. These tendencies, akin to a modern-day Athena born not of wisdom but of arrogance, threaten to unleash devastation as profound as old myths.

Therefore, we must tread carefully, lest we recklessly fling open the gates of Troy and welcome it, unintentionally leading us to our tragic fate. Yes, a sad fate…  Recent history offers stark reminders of this peril. Consider Russia’s brazen invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 or Hamas’s brutal assault on Israel on 9 October 2023—an act whose full implications remain shrouded in chaos.  Such miscalculations, driven by fallacy and recklessness, stand as grim testaments. In short, it is we, the so-called humans, who are responsible for this type of atrocities not happening again...

The Robots of Isaac Asimov…

“However, amid the chaos, these turbulent times have often served as crucibles for progress, igniting innovation, resilience, and societal evolution. Humanity's remarkable capacity to adapt and rebuild in adversity is a shining testament to our indomitable spirit…

We now return to the world of a Belarusian born in 1920, with the soul of an American from Jewish Brooklyn: Isaac Asimov, renowned for his robots. Those robots instilled fear in our children's interpretations of Asimov's stories for teenagers...

In contrast to Asimov's robots, “AI” is not a robotic uprising but rather an energy revolution—this energy revolution must yield substantial flows of reliable and consistent electricity. How can we achieve this before making adequate transitions to a new energy world, moving from analogue to digital energy? 

Unlike the dystopian robots of Isaac Asimov’s fiction, the rise of “AI” does not signal a mechanical uprising. The challenge lies in fully transitioning from our outdated analogue energy systems—centralised, fossil-fuelled, hydro, thermal, nuclear, solar, wind, and storage—to a nimble digital energy era defined by smart grids, decentralised renewables, and AI-driven optimisation.

Assume we want “AI” systems capable of advancing global health, revolutionising education, accelerating scientific discovery, and coordinating planetary defences like asteroid deflection missions (such as neutralising threats like 2024 YR4).  In that case, we must draw inspiration from an unlikely source: the ingenuity of scarcity. Recall the wartime ethos of making more from less—stretching stale breadcrumbs and a lone egg into sustenance for survival and resilience. We must use all existing electrical infrastructure to support this transition period. And never forget that the fade remains uncertain before the temptation to open Trojan gating.

Once more, consider all the existing electrical technologies during this transition while bearing in mind the uncertainty that precedes the temptation of Trojan gating.

Good night to everyone from Karlstad, near the Norwegian border…

---

(1) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7wvpyewxlo

(2) https://energy.ec.europa.eu/news/focus-eu-leading-global-energy-transition-2024-11-18_en

(3) https://energycentral.com/c/ec/clean-energy-park-new-visions-energy-world-sweden%E2%80%A6

(4) https://www.cnbc.com/video/2023/01/23/aes-chief-says-well-need-natural-gas-for-next-20-years.html

(5) Mr Elon Musk, Conference in Stavanger, Norway, held from 29 August to 1 September 2022.

(6) https://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/trumps-hot-air-on-wind-energy/

(7) Mr. Elon Musk will attend the “Bosch Connected World (BCW) Conference” in Berlin, Germany, in February 2024. 

---

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited AES Panama's facilities

In Colón province on 2nd February, Mr. Andrés Gluski, President and CEO of The AES Corporation, led the welcoming delegation for State Secretary Mr. Marcos Rubio. This delegation included Juan Ignacio Rubiolo, Executive Vice President and Energy Infrastructure and Leader of International Markets; Joseph Uddo, President of AES Vietnan, Madelka McCalla, Chief of Corporate Affairs; and Miguel Bolinaga, President of AES Panama. The company's local partners, Félix M. García, Gustavo García, and Manuel Estrella and Pedro Estrella, were in attendance.

Image courtesy of the Official State Department, taken by Freddie Everett.

---

In the heart of Panama's Colón province, a historic moment in international energy diplomacy unfolded as U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited the advanced facilities of AES Panama. This visit was more than a routine diplomatic engagement; it represented a profound exploration of transformative energy infrastructure that embodies the intricate relationship between technological innovation, international collaboration, and sustainable development.

The delegation received a warm welcome from AES Corporation's leadership, including Andrés Gluski, the President and CEO, who guided the Secretary through the company's state-of-the-art Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) storage and regasification terminal. Inaugurated in 2019, this remarkable facility represents a monumental investment of 1.15 billion dollars, designed to revolutionise energy access and distribution in Central America and the Caribbean.

The terminal’s wisdom lies in its seamless integration of international energy resources. Natural gas sourced from the United States—specifically from the Cameron liquefaction terminals in Louisiana and Freeport in Texas—powers this impressive infrastructure. This is not merely a technical achievement but a testament to modern global energy systems' complex, interconnected nature.

AES Corporation's journey in the Americas spans over three decades, having established itself as a pioneering force in energy production since the early 1990s. Their regional strategy extends beyond the Panamanian terminal, incorporating the AES Andrés LNG terminal in the Dominican Republic. This network creates a robust and flexible energy ecosystem that serves various sectors, including commercial, industrial, mining, and power generation.

The company's vision transcends immediate energy supply. By positioning natural gas as a crucial transitional energy source, AES Corporation is strategically navigating the complex path towards sustainable energy solutions. Their approach acknowledges the immediate economic and industrial needs while simultaneously preparing for a more environmentally conscious future.

The scale of their operations is impressive. In 2024 alone, the corporation executed approximately 1.2 billion dollars in North American LNG purchase operations. Even more remarkable are their forward-looking projections, which anticipate potentially doubling current sales volumes within the next decade—a bold strategy that reflects both confidence and commitment to regional energy development.

The infrastructural capacity of AES Corporation's terminals is unprecedented in Central America and the Caribbean. With an annual storage capacity of 5 million tons—equivalent to about 260 tera BTU—these facilities offer unmatched flexibility. They represent more than mere storage; they are dynamic "plug and play" platforms capable of rapidly responding to emerging power generation needs and economic growth.

Secretary Rubio's visit encapsulates the broader narrative of international cooperation. It vividly illustrates how strategic partnerships can drive technological innovation, economic development, and sustainable progress. The AES Panama facility is not just an energy infrastructure project; it is a blueprint for how nations can collaborate to address the complex challenges of energy security, economic growth, and environmental sustainability.

By bridging technological excellence, strategic investment, and diplomatic engagement, AES Corporation demonstrates a holistic approach to energy development. Their work in Panama and the broader Caribbean region is a compelling case study of how innovative corporations can act as catalysts for positive, transformative change in the global energy landscape.

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

Caribbean Natural Gas: A Vital Resource in Unpredictable Times…

---

Artwork by Germán & Co

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can effortlessly support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1889188519790444870

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Natural Gas Terminal AES ANDRES, located in the Dominican Republic. Image provided by AES Dominicana.

Andrés Gluski, President and CEO of AES, articulated this perspective during the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2023, stating, "I am confident we will need natural gas for the next 20 years." He further emphasized, "We can start blending it with green hydrogen today."

---

AES Colon Natural Gas Terminal - Panama

---

AES Panamá Complete Transformation…

“Panama: A Place Were Culture and Nature Dance Together…

Panama is a living testament to the power of cultural convergence. Over centuries, the spirits of Indigenous peoples, African descendants, Spanish colonisers, Arab merchants, and Jewish communities have intertwined to create something uniquely “Panamanian”. This cultural tapestry reflects the country's extraordinary biodiversity, with each thread representing a different ecosystem, from the misty heights of the Chiriquí highlands, where award-winning coffee plants thrive in the volcanic soil, to the embrace of two oceans that bestow the nation with over 1,500 miles of coastline.

The heart of this nation beats strongest in Panama City, founded in 1519 during the Spanish colonial period. Within its bounds lies Casco Viejo, a UNESCO World Heritage Site serving as a living colonial architecture museum. Here, each weathered cobblestone tells stories of pirates, traders, and dreamers, while restored buildings showcase a harmonious blend of Spanish, French, and Caribbean architectural influences. The district's transformation from a declining neighbourhood to a vibrant cultural centre represents Panama's ability to honour its past while embracing its future.

Modern Panama City has transformed into a sophisticated financial nexus, where gleaming skyscrapers accommodate international banks and corporations. The Colón Free Zone exemplifies this economic vitality, operating as the largest free trade zone in the Western Hemisphere and the second largest in the world. This commercial hub handles over $30 billion in imports and exports annually, linking merchants from around the globe.

The country's maritime treasures rival its terrestrial wonders. The San Blas archipelago, home to the Guna Indigenous people, comprises 365 islands—one for each day of the year—where traditional customs remain vibrantly alive. In Bocas del Toro, Caribbean culture merges with eco-tourism, creating a unique destination where visitors can spot red-eyed tree frogs in the morning and dance to calypso rhythms at sunset.

Panama's cultural vitality pulses through its artistic expressions. Rubén Blades, more than just a musician, emerges as a storyteller who captured Panama's urban soul in "Pedro Navaja," a narrative that transcended borders to become a Latin American anthem. During Carnival, the nation transforms into a living canvas of cultural expression, where the swishing of polleras (traditional dress) mingles with the beats of tambourines and the joyous laughter of revellers.  In sports, Roberto "Manos de Piedra" Durán represents the indomitable Panamanian spirit, rising from the streets of El Chorrillos to become a boxing legend whose victories symbolised the triumph of determination over circumstance.

Crowning these elements is the footprint of water crowned by an engineering masterpiece that does more than connect oceans—it embodies human perseverance and innovation. This 88-kilometre waterway, completed in 1914 and expanded in 2016, handles about 5% of world maritime commerce, allowing vessels carrying up to 14,000 containers to transit between oceans. In many ways, this unique footprint of waater mirrors Panama: a bridge between worlds, a connection point for cultures, and a symbol of how natural barriers can be transformed into pathways for human cooperation.

Panama continues to evolve through this remarkable fusion of elements—cultural diversity, natural splendour, historical significance, and modern innovation—while maintaining its essential character as a crossroads of the world, where the past and future meet in harmonious coexistence.

“The cosmic vision of AES about the future of energy…

Since 1999, AES has played a crucial role in Panama's energy landscape, initially overseeing the Bayano, La Estrella, and Los Valles hydroelectric plants. Building on its successful natural gas operations in the Dominican Republic, AES strategically enhanced its presence in Panama in 2018 by constructing the Colón power plant—Central America's first Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility, with an impressive generation capacity of 381 MW. Operational since 2019, this plant established Panama's inaugural LNG hub, featuring a large 180,000 m³ storage tank and maritime reception terminal.

The Generadora Gatun project represents another significant step in the evolution of Panama's energy infrastructure. This natural gas-fired power generation initiative, which began construction in March, secured a robust 20-year fuel supply contract at stable, competitive rates. The agreement promises to reduce costs by 20% compared to current market prices, with natural gas sourced from the United States and Qatar—the world's leading LNG exporters.

The financial and environmental implications of these investments are profound. Panama is positioned to save over US$150 million annually compared to traditional fuel oil and LNG generation at current market rates—translating to an estimated US$3 billion in savings over two decades. Furthermore, these strategic investments will deliver substantial environmental benefits, reducing CO2 emissions by over 2.2 billion tonnes annually by adopting cleaner natural gas technology.

“The drought…

The strategic water footprint is among the world's most vital maritime routes, necessitating substantial electrical power for its operations. However, Panama faces a critical challenge: its heavy reliance on hydroelectric power.

The delicate interplay between water availability and energy generation presents a fundamental challenge for Panama's infrastructure and economy. While water is theoretically renewable, its accessibility depends on natural precipitation patterns, which are becoming increasingly unpredictable in our changing climate. In other words: “It depends on the fickle and temperamental clouds, which must be inclined to release their bounty…  The economics of water-dependent power generation reveal a paradox: despite water's natural abundance, securing and managing the massive quantities required for hydroelectric production can become prohibitively expensive, especially during periods of scarcity.

Panama's recent experience with severe droughts has exposed the vulnerability of its water-dependent energy infrastructure. This challenge extends far beyond domestic concerns, as the reliable operation of the Panama Canal—a critical artery of global commerce—depends on maintaining consistent water levels. The Canal's function as a vital link between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans requires a delicate balance of water management, and any disruption to this system reverberates throughout Panama's economy and international trade networks.

In response to these challenges, AES has implemented an innovative solution by introducing natural gas into Panama's energy matrix. This strategic diversification serves as a crucial buffer against the uncertainties of water-dependent power generation. By establishing a reliable alternative energy source, AES has helped create a more resilient power infrastructure that can maintain consistent operations even during periods of drought. This transformation not only strengthens Panama's energy security but also helps ensure the continued smooth operation of the Panama Canal, thereby supporting both national economic stability and global maritime trade.

Integrating natural gas represents more than an energy solution; it demonstrates how technological innovation and strategic planning can address complex environmental and economic challenges. Through this initiative, AES has assisted Panama in building a more sustainable and reliable energy future, ensuring that this crucial gateway for international trade can continue to serve its vital role in the global economy, regardless of climatic conditions.

In “horabuena” AES and AES Panama, cheers…

---

The Saga of Trade Wars: A Journey Through History and Its Consequences…

---

“The recent 10% tariff on Canadian oil exports to the U.S. is set to ripple through the energy landscape of both nations. But that's not all—whispers of covert sabotage targeting vital infrastructure have surfaced as a looming threat tied to this tariff…

…cutting high-voltage underwater cables has sparked alarm, especially in areas like Northern Europe that depend heavily on offshore wind energy. These cables are more than just wires; they are the essential veins that carry the electricity harvested from the sea to the heart of the power grids on land.

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

All opinions expressed in these texts are the sole responsibility of Germán & Co. Likewise, we reaffirm our commitment to objectivity and to the most accurate data.

---

A Comparative Analysis of Two Elephants: Inconsistencies in Tax Tariffs and Their Implications for the Energy Sector…

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Glory, glory, hallelujah! Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Baltic Obscure Trade…

---

The historical context of trade wars illustrates their cyclical nature and profound effects on global commerce. Nations may resort to such conflicts to safeguard domestic industries or rectify perceived trade imbalances. Nevertheless, the unintended repercussions—such as economic recessions, strained international relations, and disruptions in trade—often surpass any immediate advantages. Furthermore, recent instances of politically motivated sabotage targeting critical infrastructure have exacerbated the disruption of essential supply chains, leading to adverse effects such as inflation that negatively impact broad segments of the population. As globalization continues to progress, policymakers are confronted with the persistent challenge of reconciling protectionist strategies with the benefits of free trade and international cooperation.

In addition to historical conflicts, there exist numerous instances of current trade disputes…

Significant disagreements have emerged in U.S.-EU trade relations, particularly concerning the subsidies provided to major aircraft manufacturers, specifically Boeing and Airbus. Furthermore, the imposition of tariffs on steel and aluminum has intensified tensions within transatlantic trade dynamics. The ramifications of Brexit have further complicated this situation; the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union has introduced substantial uncertainty regarding customs arrangements, trade agreements, and regulatory standards.

Additionally, the unexpected —disruptions to global supply chains— caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with escalating geopolitical tensions, have exposed critical vulnerabilities within these systems. These challenges have prompted extensive discourse on the necessity of reshoring manufacturing and diversifying supply sources, highlighting the urgent need for more resilient economic strategies in an increasingly interconnected global landscape.

Historical evidence indicates that —trade wars seldom yield clear beneficiaries… Although nations may initiate such conflicts to safeguard domestic industries or rectify trade imbalances, the long-term repercussions frequently encompass economic downturns, job losses, increased consumer prices, and strained international relations.

A pertinent example is the —Smoot-Hawley Tariff— of the 1930s, which aimed to protect U.S. industries from foreign competition but ultimately provoked retaliatory measures from other countries, leading to a collapse in global trade and exacerbating the Great Depression. Similarly, the recent U.S.-China trade war disrupted supply chains, adversely affecting both economies, with American businesses and consumers facing elevated costs while China contended with slower growth and shifting global trade alliances.

Even in instances where trade wars may yield temporary advantages—such as compelling trade concessions or enhancing domestic production—historical patterns suggest that the long-term detriments often outweigh any short-term benefits.

Retaliatory tariffs, market uncertainty, and geopolitical tensions engender instability that adversely impacts businesses, workers, and consumers on a global scale. Ultimately, trade wars have demonstrated to be costly endeavours, wherein all parties frequently endure economic repercussions rather than achieving definitive victories.

Moreover, trade wars have evolved beyond mere tariffs and economic sanctions; they have transformed into hybrid conflicts that encompass sabotage of critical infrastructure, cyber warfare, and heightened geopolitical tensions.

Covert sabotage of critical infrastructure has emerged as a significant threat…

The recent severing of high-voltage underwater cables has raised significant concerns, particularly in regions heavily reliant on offshore wind energy, such as Northern Europe. These cables are critical infrastructure, serving as the lifelines that transmit electricity generated by offshore wind farms to mainland power grids. Any disruption to these cables—whether through sabotage, accidental damage, or natural causes—can have far-reaching consequences for energy security, economic stability, and the transition to renewable energy.

In 2023, reports emerged of incidents involving the sabotage or damage of underwater cables in the North Sea and Baltic Sea, regions that are central to Europe's offshore wind energy ambitions. These areas are home to some of the world's largest offshore wind farms, which supply a growing share of electricity to countries like the United Kingdom, Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands. The timing of these incidents is particularly concerning, as Europe is accelerating its shift toward renewable energy to meet climate goals and reduce dependence on fossil fuels, especially in the wake of the energy crisis triggered by the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

These acts of hybrid warfare, which intertwine economic, political, and physical disruptions, represent a contemporary extension of trade wars. Rather than merely imposing tariffs or trade restrictions, nations (or non-state actors) are increasingly targeting infrastructure critical to trade, energy, and communications. This evolution heightens the stakes in global economic conflicts, rendering them more unpredictable and potentially detrimental.

The insurance company presents two irreconcilable perspectives regarding the same issue…

The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City resulted in unprecedented insurance claims, making it one of the most significant and complex events in the history of the insurance industry. Here’s an overview of how insurance companies, including those operating in markets like Lloyd’s of London, handled the claims. And the results of the claim was at insurance companies, including those in markets like Lloyd’s of London, ultimately paid out billions of dollars in claims related to the 9/11 attacks. While the process was complex and fraught with challenges, the industry demonstrated its ability to respond to unprecedented events and provide financial support to those affected. The attacks also led to important changes in the way terrorism risks are insured and managed, ensuring greater resilience in the face of future threats.

But under the same conditions, terrorismen, Lloyd’s reluctance to pay for the damage to the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines stems from a combination of factors, including policy exclusions for sabotage, unclear attribution of responsibility, geopolitical sensitivities, high financial costs, and legal complexities. The incident highlights the challenges of insuring critical infrastructure in an era of heightened geopolitical tensions and underscores the need for clearer frameworks to address such risks in the future.

Lloyd's of London has been reported to deny insurance claims based on several contentious issues. Firstly, they cited "unclear attribution of responsibility," which is a somewhat misleading assertion. It is widely recognized that the most powerful government in the world attempted to prevent the explosion days prior to the incident, and there is a general consensus regarding the individuals accountable for the event. Furthermore, the reference to "geopolitical sensibilities" lacks clarity, particularly given that the pipeline was strategically located in international (offshore) waters to circumvent regulatory permits and tolls, while also being sufficiently distanced from conflict zones. This situation is analogous to the substantial investments (millions of euros) made in offshore wind energy projects in the Baltic and North Seas.

President Trump announced new tariffs on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico (pausad)…

The energy sector is experience significant disruptions as a result of the newly imposed tariffs. In the United States, the introduction of a 10% tariff on Canadian oil imports is projected to elevate costs for U.S. refiners, many of whom rely heavily on Canadian heavy crude oil. As a consequence, American consumers may face an increase in gasoline prices. Additionally, U.S. energy companies may be forced to adjust their supply chains by exploring alternative sources or renegotiating trade agreements to mitigate the impact of these tariffs.

In retaliation, Canada has swiftly implemented its own countermeasures. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced a 25% tariff on approximately CAD 155 billion worth of American goods, which is scheduled to take effect on February 4, 2025. These measures aim to protect Canadian industries from potential economic fallout. Furthermore, Canada is likely to pursue the diversification of its energy export markets to reduce its dependence on the United States, potentially strengthening trade relations with other global partners.

The introduction of these tariffs is expected to have far-reaching consequences beyond the immediate parties involved.

• Volatility in Global Energy Prices: The tariffs and retaliatory actions likely lead to fluctuations in global energy prices, affecting supply and demand dynamics.

• Inflationary Pressures: Increased costs in the energy sector may contribute to rising inflation rates, which will impact consumers and businesses across the affected countries.

The story continues with —a growing trade war involving the Natural Gas Cartel, which will have a big effect on the world stage…

Although a formal "natural gas cartel" akin to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) does not exist, a coalition of significant gas-exporting nations has collaborated to influence global gas prices and supply. (7) The Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) is often regarded as the closest parallel, with some analysts suggesting it could evolve into an "OPEC for gas."

1. Overview of the GECF:

The Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) is an intergovernmental organization comprising major natural gas-producing and exporting countries. Established in 2001 and headquartered in Doha, Qatar, the GECF encompasses nations that collectively control over 70% of the world's natural gas reserves and nearly 50% of global liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Key member countries include Russia, Iran, Qatar, Algeria, Venezuela, Egypt, Nigeria, Bolivia, and Trinidad and Tobago. Norway, Kazakhstan, and Iraq participate as observers but are not full members.

2. The GECF's Role Compared to OPEC

In contrast to OPEC, which actively establishes production quotas to influence oil prices, the GECF does not currently regulate natural gas production or pricing. However, member nations engage in cooperative strategies that impact the global gas market, including:

- Coordinating LNG and pipeline exports

- Negotiating long-term supply contracts

- Influencing pricing mechanisms

- Expanding infrastructure, such as gas pipelines and LNG terminals

Russia, Iran, and Qatar—the three largest holders of natural gas reserves—have contemplated forming a gas "super cartel" to enhance their control over global energy markets, although no formal production quotas have been instituted.

3. Russia's Dominance and Geopolitical Implications:

As the largest natural gas exporter, Russia plays a pivotal role in the global gas trade. Before the Ukraine conflict, Russia supplied approximately 40% of Europe's natural gas through pipelines such as Nord Stream 1 and 2. However, following sanctions and escalating geopolitical tensions, European nations have sought to reduce their dependence on Russian gas, increasingly turning to LNG from the United States, Qatar, and other suppliers.

Despite this shift, Russia continues to exert influence over global gas markets by:

- Adjusting supply levels through the state-owned Gazprom

- Establishing partnerships with China and India to access alternative markets

- Strengthening alliances with GECF members to advocate for price control strategies

4. Distinctions Between the Gas and Oil Markets:

Natural gas presents unique challenges compared to oil, as it is more difficult to transport and store, resulting in regional price disparities influenced by pipeline and LNG infrastructure. The three primary pricing hubs are:

- Henry Hub (U.S.) – The benchmark for U.S. natural gas prices

- TTF (Netherlands) – Europe's leading gas pricing index

- JKM (Japan/Korea) – Asia's leading LNG pricing index

Due to the inherent inflexibility of gas markets compared to oil, it is more challenging for a cartel like the GECF to exert comprehensive control over prices. However, as LNG infrastructure develops, the potential for a more cartel-like structure may increase, enhancing the GECF's influence over global pricing.

5. Prospects for a Natural Gas Cartel:

While the GECF does not currently operate as a fully coordinated cartel, there are apprehensions that Russia, Iran, and Qatar may advocate for stronger collaboration, particularly as:

- Europe diminishes its reliance on Russian gas

- Demand from Asia (notably China and India) escalates

- New LNG projects transform the market landscape

Should GECF members begin to establish export quotas, a genuine "Gas OPEC" could emerge, potentially leading to price volatility reminiscent of the oil market.

In conclusion, while the GECF is not an entire cartel yet, growing member cooperation suggests that a future alliance is possible. This potential cartel's direction will depend on policy alignment among GECF members and global reactions to their influence, especially as natural gas becomes crucial in cleaner energy transitions

---

Finally, the last…

Trade wars have been a recurring phenomenon throughout history, characterized by overt and covert confrontations as well as complex mechanisms, shaped by a variety of economic, political, and geopolitical factors. These conflicts arise when countries implement tariffs, quotas, or other trade restrictions in an effort to protect their domestic industries, address trade imbalances, or gain a competitive edge. Although the motivations for these disputes may vary, their consequences extend across global markets, economies, and diplomatic relationships.

For a taste of our latest publications, check out our work at https://muckrack.com/german-toro-ghio/articles!

---

The Owner of Non-Man and Other Tales… Second edition, revised and expanded…

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Help us make a dream come true…

From a young age we listen to the instructions of the elderly in the sense that we must be able to choose our path in life. It's a nice metaphor.

There are those who, complying with this, prepare themselves to travel the highways of life, provide themselves with fast engines and soft seats.   Others, simpler, choose secondary roads where the speed does not produce so much vertigo and the tolls are cheaper. Many have to join forces and travel the kilometers in collective buses that force the touches and strident music. And there are too many who have no other option than to walk along the humble paths crossing puddles or boulders and threatened by wild beasts or insects. This is the vineyard of the Lord, and everyone can make use of their free will. Say.

Reading the stories of Germán Toro Ghio one discovers that there are also those who chose all paths. And they also added the alternatives of lifts, elevators (and descenders), cliffs, flying devices and perhaps how many more.

With its eight stories, The Owners of No Man's Land takes us to a world so real that, unfortunately, we tend to forget it.  From the first story, he (Germán) rides the maelstrom of a roller coaster in which he mixes the discomforts of a Moscow hotel with the adventures in the Nicaraguan jungle.  He is a de facto witness to the invasion of the USA army in Panama and his cousin of millenary stubbornness at the same time, without us being able to deduce which of the two experiences was more dangerous.  He celebrates supposed birthdays in the company of an aphonic Fidel Castro (what a contradiction!) in a city of Havana corroded by sea salt or political blunders.  He walks through one of the most unusual borders in the world, the one that divides the island of Hispaniola.   He witnesses the sun sheltering us with unusual loves, in this case, his friend "Pepe" who, on a streak of good fortune, attracts them to a stale gypsy princess and a one-eyed gypsy king in the nights of Madrid and prologues his luck in the world of love to an island called Grinda in the Stockholm archipelago where Alexander's honey captivates.

Germán also takes us to a café in Paris where Ernest Hemingway is in existential conversations about life, accompanied by the sweet notes of a Santa Teresa rum, which invades the soul with harmony and helps the journalist and writer try to persuade some young gang members to change the course of their lives, in this world of violence, organ trafficking, and arms.  He evokes the spirit of the Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal, particularly in his mesmerising "Ode to Marilyn Monroe".  This remarkable work invites him to explore the labyrinth of the mind's afflictions, guided by the brushstrokes of legendary artists such as Sorolla, Munch, Botero, and Modigliani.  Alongside this artistic journey, we encounter the candid whispers of Truman Capote in his poignant "Unanswered Prayers", which lays bare the frailties of our contemporary society, political systems, and monarchies.  Ultimately, Germán leads us to a heartwarming conclusion with the charming figure of "il Nono", a grandfatherly character we all wish we could have known.

The book is magnified by experiences that have taken place outside the battlefields, far from palaces and ambitions.  In other words, the principle of freedom of expression is paramount, even when individuals may endure defamation's repercussions.  With these stories, Germán Toro Ghio allows us to taste something of everything he keeps in his cupboard, and I hope he will continue to cook and deliver in successive books.

*Juan Forch, Puerto Octay, Chile

*Film director, writer, and political scientist is renowned for the 1990 "NO" campaign. / https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/movies/oscar-nominated-no-stirring-debate-in-chile.html

PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

O gods, women, and men with the souls of gods and goodwill, we request your solidarity and support for launching the second revised and extended edition of "The Owner of Non-Man Lan and Other Tales" in November 2025. We have already contacted a senior editor at Penguin Random House in London to help us create a remarkable and distinctive book handcrafted to serve as an exceptional corporate gift.

Thanks in advance...

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

httpshttps://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1885227633052397736://

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

A Look at Energy Subsidies: A Massive $8 Trillion in 2022.

---

There is a common misunderstanding that renewable energy consumes the majority of government subsidies This not true…

---

All opinions expressed in these texts are the sole responsibility of Germán & Co. Likewise, we reaffirm our commitment to objectivity and to the most accurate data.

---

Workart is the sole intellectual property of Germán & Co, with all rights reserved.

---

A of Two Elephants: Energy Policy Discrepancies on Subsidies Revealed…

---

Current estimates suggest that annual subsidies for wind power amount to tens of billions of dollars globally, with offshore wind receiving a larger share due to its higher associated costs. These subsidies have been instrumental in driving the growth of wind energy, enabling technological advancements, and reducing costs through economies of scale. As wind energy continues to achieve cost competitiveness, often reaching or even surpassing grid parity with fossil fuels, the reliance on subsidies is expected to decrease. However, ongoing support will remain crucial for facilitating the transition to a low-carbon energy system.

The global shift toward renewable energy requires substantial investments in infrastructure, and while wind energy is becoming more affordable, subsidies will continue to play a vital role in overcoming market barriers. Offshore wind projects, in particular, face significant upfront costs, regulatory challenges, and infrastructure requirements. Subsidies can help mitigate these obstacles, making it easier for developers to secure financing and move projects forward. Additionally, continued support can drive further innovation, such as the development of floating offshore wind turbines, which have the potential to unlock new areas for deployment and increase efficiency.

Moreover, subsidies can support research and development in energy storage and grid integration, which are critical for maximizing the value of wind energy and ensuring a stable and reliable energy supply. Offshore wind also contributes to energy security by diversifying energy sources and reducing dependence on imported fuels. Subsidies can help ensure that these projects are developed in a timely manner, enhancing the resilience of energy systems.

Finally, subsidies and international support are essential for promoting global equity and development. In countries, where access to capital and technology may be limited, such support can play a vital role in deploying wind energy and achieving climate goals. This is crucial for ensuring a fair and equitable global energy transition.

In summary, while the decreasing cost of wind energy is a positive trend, subsidies and policy support will remain important for overcoming challenges, driving innovation, and ensuring a rapid and equitable transition to a low-carbon energy system. As the industry matures, the focus of subsidies may shift from direct financial support to mechanisms that address specific barriers, such as grid integration, storage, and market design.

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Not Angela, not...

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Glory, glory, hallelujah! Twenty Thousand Leagues Under The Baltic…

---

Of this enormous amount, approximately $7 trillion was allocated to fossil fuels, while a smaller $1 trillion was dedicated to clean energy initiatives. Despite the global momentum towards cleaner energy alternatives, numerous governments persist in subsidizing fossil fuels for several reasons.  First, subsidies help maintain affordable fuel and electricity prices for consumers, particularly in developing nations where access to energy remains a critical issue.  Second, fossil fuels are deeply entrenched in global economies, making it politically and financially challenging to phase them out swiftly. Lastly, there are concerns regarding economic instability; some industries and policymakers contend that a sudden reduction in fossil fuel subsidies could trigger inflation, job losses, and economic uncertainty, especially in regions that heavily depend on traditional energy sectors.

—A prevalent misconception is that renewable energy receives most government subsidies. Yes, fossil fuels receive —seven times more financial support than renewable energy sources. Should fossil fuel subsidies be reduced or eliminated, clean energy alternatives would become increasingly competitive, thereby facilitating a more rapid transition towards a sustainable energy future. The exact global subsidies for onshore and offshore wind energy are unknown, but wind energy receives a smaller portion of total energy subsidies compared to fossil fuels. Current estimates suggest that annual subsidies for wind power reach just tens of billions of dollars, with offshore wind receiving a larger share due to its higher associated costs. As wind energy continues to achieve cost competitiveness, the reliance on subsidies is expected to decrease; nevertheless, ongoing support will be crucial for facilitating the transition to a low-carbon energy system. In 2020, the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimated that global subsidies for solar energy comprised a significant part of the $166 billion assigned to renewable energy, with energy storage subsidies also amounting to billions annually.

The now abolished Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), enacted in the United States in August 2022, was regarded as a landmark piece of climate legislation in the nation's history. With an allocation of $369 billion dedicated to clean energy and climate-related initiatives, it constitutes the most substantial investment in clean energy and climate action by the federal government to date. The subsidies and incentives incorporated within the IRA aim to expedite the implementation of clean energy technologies, mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, and enhance energy security in the United States. As the global community confronts the challenges of climate change, the reformation of energy subsidies will be essential in promoting a more sustainable and equitable energy landscape.

---

Finally, the last…

The emerging issue of covert piracy in the Baltic Sea constitutes a significant yet underreported challenge that threatens critical infrastructure in international waters. Despite the extensive ramifications of this phenomenon, coverage in mainstream media has been insufficient, resulting in a lack of awareness among the public and various stakeholders regarding the magnitude and seriousness of the situation. Incidents of sabotage targeting gas pipelines, high-voltage submarine cables, and fiber optic communication lines have led to considerable financial losses for investors and have disrupted essential services. These occurrences underscore the vulnerability of undersea infrastructure, which is often challenging to safeguard due to its remote and intricate characteristics.

The offshore wind energy sector, has experienced severe repercussions. The sabotage of wind farms and associated infrastructure not only jeopardizes the financial sustainability of these initiatives but also threatens the broader transition to renewable energy sources. The Baltic Sea, recognized as a strategic nexus for energy and communication

For a taste of our latest publications, check out our work at https://muckrack.com/german-toro-ghio/articles!

---

The Owner of Non-Man and Other Tales… Second edition, revised and expanded…

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Help us make a dream come true…

From a young age we listen to the instructions of the elderly in the sense that we must be able to choose our path in life. It's a nice metaphor.

There are those who, complying with this, prepare themselves to travel the highways of life, provide themselves with fast engines and soft seats.   Others, simpler, choose secondary roads where the speed does not produce so much vertigo and the tolls are cheaper. Many have to join forces and travel the kilometers in collective buses that force the touches and strident music. And there are too many who have no other option than to walk along the humble paths crossing puddles or boulders and threatened by wild beasts or insects. This is the vineyard of the Lord, and everyone can make use of their free will. Say.

Reading the stories of Germán Toro Ghio one discovers that there are also those who chose all paths. And they also added the alternatives of lifts, elevators (and descenders), cliffs, flying devices and perhaps how many more.

With its eight stories, The Owners of No Man's Land takes us to a world so real that, unfortunately, we tend to forget it.  From the first story, he (Germán) rides the maelstrom of a roller coaster in which he mixes the discomforts of a Moscow hotel with the adventures in the Nicaraguan jungle.  He is a de facto witness to the invasion of the USA army in Panama and his cousin of millenary stubbornness at the same time, without us being able to deduce which of the two experiences was more dangerous.  He celebrates supposed birthdays in the company of an aphonic Fidel Castro (what a contradiction!) in a city of Havana corroded by sea salt or political blunders.  He walks through one of the most unusual borders in the world, the one that divides the island of Hispaniola.   He witnesses the sun sheltering us with unusual loves, in this case, his friend "Pepe" who, on a streak of good fortune, attracts them to a stale gypsy princess and a one-eyed gypsy king in the nights of Madrid and prologues his luck in the world of love to an island called Grinda in the Stockholm archipelago where Alexander's honey captivates.

Germán also takes us to a café in Paris where Ernest Hemingway is in existential conversations about life, accompanied by the sweet notes of a Santa Teresa rum, which invades the soul with harmony and helps the journalist and writer try to persuade some young gang members to change the course of their lives, in this world of violence, organ trafficking, and arms.  He evokes the spirit of the Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal, particularly in his mesmerising "Ode to Marilyn Monroe".  This remarkable work invites him to explore the labyrinth of the mind's afflictions, guided by the brushstrokes of legendary artists such as Sorolla, Munch, Botero, and Modigliani.  Alongside this artistic journey, we encounter the candid whispers of Truman Capote in his poignant "Unanswered Prayers", which lays bare the frailties of our contemporary society, political systems, and monarchies.  Ultimately, Germán leads us to a heartwarming conclusion with the charming figure of "il Nono", a grandfatherly character we all wish we could have known.

The book is magnified by experiences that have taken place outside the battlefields, far from palaces and ambitions.  In other words, the principle of freedom of expression is paramount, even when individuals may endure defamation's repercussions.  With these stories, Germán Toro Ghio allows us to taste something of everything he keeps in his cupboard, and I hope he will continue to cook and deliver in successive books.

*Juan Forch, Puerto Octay, Chile

*Film director, writer, and political scientist is renowned for the 1990 "NO" campaign. / https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/movies/oscar-nominated-no-stirring-debate-in-chile.html

PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

O gods, women, and men with the souls of gods and goodwill, we request your solidarity and support for launching the second revised and extended edition of "The Owner of Non-Man Lan and Other Tales" in November 2025. We have already contacted a senior editor at Penguin Random House in London to help us create a remarkable and distinctive book handcrafted to serve as an exceptional corporate gift.

Thanks in advance...

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

httpshttps://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1885227633052397736://

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Editorial: Spain's "Sun Tax" Infamous Saga: Now Impacting Wind Power Investments…

---

All opinions expressed in these texts are the sole responsibility of Germán & Co. Likewise, we reaffirm our commitment to objectivity and to the most accurate data.

---

Workart is the sole intellectual property of Germán & Co, with all rights reserved.

---

A Tale of Two Elephants: Energy Policy Discrepancies Revealed…

---

"Despite President Donald Trump's to slow down the momentum towards cleaner energy, analysts at Citi are confident that this won't derail the broader shift towards renew. Just this Monday, Mr. Trump signed an executive order that put temporary freeze on offshore wind lease sales in federal waters and stalled the and funding processes for both onshore and offshore wind initiatives. Meanwhile, the European Union charging ahead with its energy in 2024, as solar power has officially outpaced coal for the first time, and gas consumption has dipped for the fifth consecutive year. These contrasting highlight a growing chasm in global energy policies, with some regions clinging to fuels others boldly embrace the renewable revolution.

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Not Angela, not...

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Glory, glory, hallelujah! Twenty Thousand Leagues Under The Seas In The Reality Of This Mad World…

---

380-year BCE, Plato's magnum opus, The Republic, searches into the intricate themes of justice, the blueprint for an ideal society, and the decisive role of its leaders. Plato offers a sharp critique of democratic systems, warning that the whims of the majority, if left unchecked, can spiral into chaos and injustice.

The world is undergoing a remarkable transformation, shifting from a bipolar structure to a multipolar landscape. At the heart of this evolution are not only ideological divides; (1. The Man Who Love Fireworks…) what complicates matters further is that leaders often prioritize their imperialistic ambitions over the welfare of their populations. This trend is redefining the global dynamics of international relations into five distinct blocks. First, we have the United States and its Western allies, standing firm in their influence. Then there's China, forging powerful alliances with Russia, Pakistan, and a host of developing nations, with its ambitious —Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)— (2) at the forefront, expanding its global footprint through strategic infrastructure and investment. Meanwhile, the European Union is stepping into the spotlight, asserting its presence on the world stage while grappling with challenges like Brexit and the rise of populism within its borders. It seems we are witnessing the twilight of a robust social democracy era, as history turns its pages.

In summary, humanity currently faces a dire predicament characterized by what can be described as the tragic symphony of the —Cosmic War—, which encompasses widespread pandemic-induced isolation, huge conflicts, poverty, and inflation…

Given these considerations, it is reasonable to assert that the world is ensnared in a metaphorical black hole, with no immediate prospects for improvement. It raises the question of:

Why complicate an already shaky situation?

Instead, one could use the statement: "The belief that you, he, we, you, they, and I are correct is completely relevant, whether for better or worse, in today's society...

Therefore, how, how… do we explain to our children or the public that the information regarding climate change, for instance, that was presented five years ago has changed?  Absolutely is not an easy task…

Imagine the madness… 

Spain's experience with the infamous "sun tax" serves as a stark warning for renewable energy policies, particularly in the areas of wind and solar power. Back in 2015, the government decided to impose taxes on solar energy production, aiming to address budget deficits and promote reliance on the grid. However, this decision cast a long shadow over the solar sector, stifling its growth and leading to the demise of numerous small producers and companies, which were burdened by additional fees. This situation illustrates how misguided regulations can derail the momentum of renewable energy, undermine market confidence, and stifle innovation.

A potential reduction in financial support for the wind power sector and the introduction of strict land-use and environmental regulations (unfortunately, this has already been done) could create significant challenges for the industry's growth and have serious financial consequences. Looking at the U.S. policy environment, the shifting political landscape raises concerns about possibly repeating Spain's earlier mistakes in the solar energy sector. Under —conservative— administrations, there is a risk that conventional energy sources may be prioritized or that efforts could be made to "correct" what they see as excessive investment in renewable energy.

Mike Tyson's Uppercut…

Tyson's uppercut against Buster Mathis Jr. in 1995 is legendary. A series of uppercuts culminated in a knockout that showcased Tyson's formidable ferocity.

Well, if we return to the division of the world into blocs, we can confidently assert that the recent invitation to the AI, the Illustrious Mr. Seek Deep 2 from China delivered a significant blow to Nvidia in the USA, though it was not a knockout.

China's advancements in artificial intelligence present a significant challenge to the United States, particularly concerning NVIDIA. These developments, exemplified by Mr. Seek Deep 2, pose a notable threat to U.S. dominance, although they do not deliver a definitive "knockout" blow to NVIDIA. The global race in AI is a marathon, not a sprint, and this ongoing competition will shape the evolution of technology, economics, and geopolitics in the coming decades.

Value destructions…

One of the principal considerations in this context is the phenomenon of value destruction. Within the past 24 hours, as indicated, such damage may have initiated ripple effects throughout the market. Specifically, in relation to the recent decline in technology stocks, substantial losses incurred by companies like NVIDIA or others in the sector often lead to a corresponding downturn in the broader technology industry, which in turn precipitates declines across the overall market. Furthermore, the implications for retirees are significant; pension funds that lack adequate diversification may find that a pronounced decrease in tech-centric portfolios hampers their capacity to fulfil financial obligations, thereby directly impacting millions of retirees.

There are no coincidences…

Analysts at Citigroup have released a statement in response to recent developments regarding the energy sector: 

a) Political Dynamics: The renewed emphasis by former President Trump on obstructing renewable energy initiatives raises apprehensions about the United States' commitments to climate action, which may result in delays in the development of clean energy infrastructure. 

b) Market Fluctuations: The uncertainty associated with the energy transition could lead to volatility in the markets for renewable energy stocks and green bonds. Citigroup's efforts to reassure stakeholders are intended to stabilize market sentiment and convey confidence in the renewable energy sector.

c) Economic Considerations: The cost-effectiveness of renewable energy technologies underpins their expansion, particularly in the European Union and Asia, where the potential for long-term savings and reduced risks associated with fossil fuel prices are particularly attractive.

d) Wider Implications: Citigroup's optimistic outlook may encourage increased investment in renewable energy and green technologies, thereby promoting the development of sustainability-oriented portfolios among banks and financial institutions.

e) Separation of Political and Economic Factors: While political opposition may impede progress, the economic advantages of renewable energy ensure its ongoing growth.

In summary, Citigroup's communication seeks to alleviate concerns regarding political challenges, emphasizing that the transition to cleaner energy is fundamentally supported by robust economic principles and remains on track despite prevailing uncertainties.

How is the big problem…

Imagine two colossal elephants, each with its own distinct perspective, crammed into a tiny room barely measuring a square meter.  The challenge lies in finding a common ground that benefits everyone and aids our ailing planet.  The energy sector isn't a battleground where one side's gain means the other's loss. Instead, it offers a canvas for pragmatic solutions that focus on collective benefits—like job creation, economic growth, innovation, and climate resilience—that can harmonize the visions of these two giants.  By joining forces, the U.S. and the EU have the potential to spearhead a global shift towards sustainable energy, setting a shining example for other countries to emulate.  And while they may be tempted to clash, they must keep in mind the looming presence of a third elephant from Asia, which is rapidly expanding its influence and forming alliances worldwide. This situation is precarious, but at least it has a penchant for business!

But how is the really problem?

The fundamental issue lies with us, as we confine ourselves within our respective niches. We neglect allocate time for contemplation, mistakenly assuming that our individual experiences, comfort, and self-interest reflect a universal reality. Furthermore, we tend to overlook the insights presented by Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. It is imperative that we transcend our limitations and remain cognizant of the dynamic nature of the world around us. Tsunamis do not occur spontaneously; rather, they are generated by human actions.  We must never forget that there exist others like us.

(1) https://www.germantoroghio.com/blog-1-2/5flh6ewlg7n74sf-kf9b4-2ez5f-37lnf-zbyza-tjbhy-zzdh5-enxl7-dt95a-da753-f83gm-zm47k

(2) https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/11/china-belt-road-initiative-trade-bri-silk-road/ 

---

Finally, the last……

As we wrap up, we want to extend our heartfelt gratitude for all the wonderful feedback we've received. Your words fuel our passion, driving us to work tirelessly from dawn till dusk. Our articles keep us in vogue, but we also need your support.  The costs of software, hardware, licenses, photo rights, web upkeep, postage, and more can add up quickly!

Looking ahead to December, we’re excited about our upcoming project: the release of our book, "The Owner Of Non Man Land and Other Tales."  Unfortunately, we've seen little response so far, but we promise these editions will not disappoint! We invite you to join us on this journey and help us achieve our goal.

A special shoutout to our ever-supportive godfather, who always has us in his thoughts—thank you!

Wishing everyone a lovely evening, and once again, thank you for your support.

For a taste of our latest publications, check out our work at https://muckrack.com/german-toro-ghio/articles!

---

The Owner of Non-Man and Other Tales… Second edition, revised and expanded…

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Help us make a dream come true…

From a young age we listen to the instructions of the elderly in the sense that we must be able to choose our path in life. It's a nice metaphor.

There are those who, complying with this, prepare themselves to travel the highways of life, provide themselves with fast engines and soft seats.   Others, simpler, choose secondary roads where the speed does not produce so much vertigo and the tolls are cheaper. Many have to join forces and travel the kilometers in collective buses that force the touches and strident music. And there are too many who have no other option than to walk along the humble paths crossing puddles or boulders and threatened by wild beasts or insects. This is the vineyard of the Lord, and everyone can make use of their free will. Say.

Reading the stories of Germán Toro Ghio one discovers that there are also those who chose all paths. And they also added the alternatives of lifts, elevators (and descenders), cliffs, flying devices and perhaps how many more.

With its eight stories, The Owners of No Man's Land takes us to a world so real that, unfortunately, we tend to forget it.  From the first story, he (Germán) rides the maelstrom of a roller coaster in which he mixes the discomforts of a Moscow hotel with the adventures in the Nicaraguan jungle.  He is a de facto witness to the invasion of the USA army in Panama and his cousin of millenary stubbornness at the same time, without us being able to deduce which of the two experiences was more dangerous.  He celebrates supposed birthdays in the company of an aphonic Fidel Castro (what a contradiction!) in a city of Havana corroded by sea salt or political blunders.  He walks through one of the most unusual borders in the world, the one that divides the island of Hispaniola.   He witnesses the sun sheltering us with unusual loves, in this case, his friend "Pepe" who, on a streak of good fortune, attracts them to a stale gypsy princess and a one-eyed gypsy king in the nights of Madrid and prologues his luck in the world of love to an island called Grinda in the Stockholm archipelago where Alexander's honey captivates.

Germán also takes us to a café in Paris where Ernest Hemingway is in existential conversations about life, accompanied by the sweet notes of a Santa Teresa rum, which invades the soul with harmony and helps the journalist and writer try to persuade some young gang members to change the course of their lives, in this world of violence, organ trafficking, and arms.  He evokes the spirit of the Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal, particularly in his mesmerising "Ode to Marilyn Monroe".  This remarkable work invites him to explore the labyrinth of the mind's afflictions, guided by the brushstrokes of legendary artists such as Sorolla, Munch, Botero, and Modigliani.  Alongside this artistic journey, we encounter the candid whispers of Truman Capote in his poignant "Unanswered Prayers", which lays bare the frailties of our contemporary society, political systems, and monarchies.  Ultimately, Germán leads us to a heartwarming conclusion with the charming figure of "il Nono", a grandfatherly character we all wish we could have known.

The book is magnified by experiences that have taken place outside the battlefields, far from palaces and ambitions.  In other words, the principle of freedom of expression is paramount, even when individuals may endure defamation's repercussions.  With these stories, Germán Toro Ghio allows us to taste something of everything he keeps in his cupboard, and I hope he will continue to cook and deliver in successive books.

*Juan Forch, Puerto Octay, Chile

*Film director, writer, and political scientist is renowned for the 1990 "NO" campaign. / https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/movies/oscar-nominated-no-stirring-debate-in-chile.html

PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

O gods, women, and men with the souls of gods and goodwill, we request your solidarity and support for launching the second revised and extended edition of "The Owner of Non-Man Lan and Other Tales" in November 2025. We have already contacted a senior editor at Penguin Random House in London to help us create a remarkable and distinctive book handcrafted to serve as an exceptional corporate gift.

Thanks in advance...

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1884436208807194682

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Diving into the Enigma of Schrödinger's Cat: A Glimpse into the Future of Fuel in the Electric Industry... (copia)

---

Workart is the sole intellectual property of Germán & Co, with all rights reserved.

---

Who is this distinguished Schrödinger's cat who could help us to find ways to put this wild, imperialist world back on track?

---

“In 1935, the brilliant Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger concocted a mind-bending thought experiment that would forever change our understanding of quantum mechanics—enter Schrödinger's cat. This whimsical scenario was designed to shed light on the baffling concept of superposition, showcasing the oddities and contradictions that lie within the realm of quantum theory. Picture this: a cat is snugly tucked away in a sealed box, accompanied by a radioactive atom, a Geiger counter, a vial of poison, and a hammer. If the Geiger counter picks up radiation, it signals the hammer to smash the vial, sealing the cat's fate. But if no radiation is detected, the feline remains blissfully alive. According to the quirky rules of quantum mechanics, the radioactive atom exists in a state of both decay and non-decay until someone takes a peek. Consequently, the cat is caught in a surreal limbo of being both alive and dead until the box is opened and the truth is revealed. Schrödinger's cat paradox serves as a captivating illustration of the strange, counterintuitive world of quantum mechanics, where a system can dance between multiple realities until it is observed.

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Office of the President of Russia.

---

Glory, glory, hallelujah! Twenty Thousand Leagues Under The Seas In The Reality Of This Mad World…

---

Without a doubt, we should kick things off by chatting about cats!

The writting works of Germán & Co are entirely their own, with all rights reserved.

Indeed, Felines, provided that individuals do not suffer from allergies or hold superstitions, and are comfortable with the potential for abandonment without prior signs of emotional distress.  Of course, cats have intricately intertwined with human history, leaving a lasting legacy. A notable exploration of their historical significance can be observed in ancient Egypt, particularly during the era of the pharaohs.  Cleopatra, an iconic figure of this civilization, with her concealed grave, she has become a haunting enigma for countless archaeologists, desperately searching for clues to uncover its secrets.  Cleopatra is frequently associated with cats, not merely as pets but as revered divine entities. This reverence is linked to the goddess Bastet, who represented home, fertility, and protection. The esteem in which cats were held was such that any harm inflicted upon them, even inadvertently, was considered a serious transgression. Their importance was further underscored by the practice of mummification, as cats were often interred alongside their human counterparts. Additionally, cats have been recognized for their prowess in hunting, serving as effective deterrents against rodent populations, thereby safeguarding food supplies for ancient mariners and agrarians alike. Unfortunately, these beloved companions were unable to mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.  Furthermore, cats have permeated various mythologies and folklore, leaving indelible marks across cultures. In Norse mythology, the goddess Freyja is depicted as riding a chariot drawn by these captivating animals, while in Japan, the "maneki-neko," or beckoning cat, has emerged as a cherished emblem of luck and prosperity.  In contemporary society, amidst prevailing uncertainties, millions seek comfort and companionship in their feline companions. Throughout history, cats have inspired a multitude of artists and writers, from ancient frescoes to the imaginative realms of Lewis Carroll's "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland," where the Cheshire Cat's enigmatic smile enchants audiences, demonstrating the enduring influence of these creatures on creativity and imagination.

The cultural significance of three emblematic felines in popular culture, cannot be forget.  The first, is "Fritz the Cat," a pioneering American adult animated black comedy film released in 1972 and directed by Ralph Bakshi.  Audiences worldwide formed long lines to attend screenings of what was heralded as the first pornographic animated feature. The character Fritz, a clever, womanizing, and duplicitous cat, navigates an anthropomorphized version of New York City during the wild and tumultuous 1960s, particularly in locales reminiscent of Club 51.

The second feline is not merely a cat but represents the essence of the distinguished Felidae family. "The Tiger of Sweden," authored by Aron Flam in 2019, is an insightful examination of Sweden's complex political landscape during World War II.  The book elucidates the government's strategies, trade negotiations, and close the ayes when the Nazi invasion of Norway. 

Lastly, I would like to highlight the work of one of Japan's most renowned authors, Natsume Sōseki, celebrated for his literary depictions of cats. His novel "I Am a Cat," published in 1905, is a satirical narrative that offers a distinctive perspective on Japanese society through the observations of a housecat.  The story is recounted by the cat, who critiques and reflects on human behavior with a blend of humor and insight. 

One may ponder how Fritz's cat, the "Tiger of Sweden," and Sōseki's cat would perceive the uncertain and madness of the contemporary world.  We can describe their importance in contemporary history in the following manner: Fritz the Cat explores the complexities and contradictions of American society.  While its content may seem frivolous and explicit, Fritz's adventures provide a satirical and critical examination of issues such as race relations, political activism, and the counterculture movement of the 1960s. This exploration aligns with the existential anxieties depicted in the film "Easy Rider" (1969), which addresses disillusionment and the quest for freedom in America. 

In "The Tiger of Sweden," Aron Flam critically examines Sweden's actions during World War II.  The metaphor of the tiger underscores the nation's strength as well as its complex historical role during a chaotic period. Flam's work reveals the darker aspects of Sweden's perceived neutrality and encourages readers to confront uncomfortable truths, reflecting the complexities of contemporary geopolitics. The following is a significant consideration: which entities can be considered neutral in the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine? This inquiry pertains to countries such as China, Iran, Turkey, North Korea, and Western nations.

Sōseki's satirical novel featuring a nameless cat provides a unique perspective on Japanese society. Through the cat's observations and critiques of human behavior, the story offers timeless commentary on social norms, individualism, and the absurdities of everyday life.

In conclusion, each cat, in its own way, serves as a mirror, reflecting the complexities and uncertainties of the world and encouraging us to look beyond the surface for deeper reflection.

And now back to the concept of Schrödinger's cat serves as a metaphor for the future of the electric industry and fuel sources. In this analogy, the "box" signifies the present condition of the electric sector and its dependence on various fuel types, while the "cat" represents the prospective state of energy production. The future remains in a state of superposition—simultaneously reliant on conventional fuels and fully integrating renewable energy sources—until we "open the box" and assess the implications of ongoing technological innovations, policy modifications, and market fluctuations.

Several factors contribute to this uncertainty. Firstly, advancements in technology, such as improvements in battery efficiency, solar and wind power capabilities, and other renewable energy innovations, can profoundly influence the trajectory of the electric industry. Secondly, governmental policies and regulations play a pivotal role in shaping the energy landscape, including incentives for renewable energy adoption and regulations governing fossil fuels. Thirdly, market dynamics, characterized by the economic feasibility of various energy sources, are affected by supply and demand, global events, and investment patterns, which will ultimately guide the industry's evolution. Lastly, environmental considerations, particularly the increasing awareness of climate change and its ramifications, will continue to propel the shift towards cleaner energy alternatives.

Until these factors align and a definitive course is charted, the future of the electric industry and fuel sources remains ambiguous, akin to the scenario presented by Schrödinger's cat. The eventual outcome will be contingent upon the interaction of these elements and the collective actions undertaken by governments, businesses, and individuals. Good night and have a pleasant new week.

---

Finally, let's conclude on a positive note. In literature, there is a style known as micro-tales, which involves writing a story that is fewer than three hundred words. This week, I enjoyed reading an outstanding one, "Never Can Forgive You," written by my fellow "paisana" from Alsace, Rachel Rotschild. Her work was inspired by the tale "The Revenge," written by the Irish author Winston Wallace Smith. Enjoy!

"Never Can Forgive You”

Their love was a vibrant dance, a symphony of shared glances brimming with passion. His gaze lit up her world when they were together, wrapping her in a cocoon of beauty and joy.  Days drifted by, each one reflecting her confidence and happiness. Their connection was a beautiful surrender, a bond pulsating with life. But as the years meandered on, time began to feel like a slow, dragging tide.

Then, one fateful day, she sensed the flicker of their flame dimming. His once adoring gaze now held a hint of disdain, and she avoided his eyes, fearing the piercing arrows of heartbreak.  Panic gripped her heart at the thought of losing him. In a desperate bid to reignite the spark, she adorned herself in alluring attire, even baring her soul in vulnerability, but nothing stirred his heart as it once did.

Her anguish morphed into a relentless storm of resentment and fury.  She plotted her revenge, determined to bring him down. One day, she caught him off guard, and with a swift, merciless strike, she unleashed her wrath. As he lay there, defeated, she felt the weight of his past humiliations pressing down on her.  A wild, hysterical laugh echoed through the house, sending shivers down the spine.

Her daughter rushed in, eyes wide with fear, only to be met with the aftermath of chaos. In that moment of devastation, she was rendered speechless.  But then he stirred, his eyes wide with terror as he approached her, whispering, “Mom, what have you done with the mirror?”

---

In this edition, you will find: “Trump is desperate for more energy, as long as it’s not from the wind / TWP By Evan Halper and Maxine JoselowJanuary 23, 2025.

---

The Owner of Non-Man and Other Tales… Second edition, revised and expanded…

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Help us make a dream come true…

From a young age we listen to the instructions of the elderly in the sense that we must be able to choose our path in life. It's a nice metaphor.

There are those who, complying with this, prepare themselves to travel the highways of life, provide themselves with fast engines and soft seats.   Others, simpler, choose secondary roads where the speed does not produce so much vertigo and the tolls are cheaper. Many have to join forces and travel the kilometers in collective buses that force the touches and strident music. And there are too many who have no other option than to walk along the humble paths crossing puddles or boulders and threatened by wild beasts or insects. This is the vineyard of the Lord, and everyone can make use of their free will. Say.

Reading the stories of Germán Toro Ghio one discovers that there are also those who chose all paths. And they also added the alternatives of lifts, elevators (and descenders), cliffs, flying devices and perhaps how many more.

With its eight stories, The Owners of No Man's Land takes us to a world so real that, unfortunately, we tend to forget it.  From the first story, he (Germán) rides the maelstrom of a roller coaster in which he mixes the discomforts of a Moscow hotel with the adventures in the Nicaraguan jungle.  He is a de facto witness to the invasion of the USA army in Panama and his cousin of millenary stubbornness at the same time, without us being able to deduce which of the two experiences was more dangerous.  He celebrates supposed birthdays in the company of an aphonic Fidel Castro (what a contradiction!) in a city of Havana corroded by sea salt or political blunders.  He walks through one of the most unusual borders in the world, the one that divides the island of Hispaniola.   He witnesses the sun sheltering us with unusual loves, in this case, his friend "Pepe" who, on a streak of good fortune, attracts them to a stale gypsy princess and a one-eyed gypsy king in the nights of Madrid and prologues his luck in the world of love to an island called Grinda in the Stockholm archipelago where Alexander's honey captivates.

Germán also takes us to a café in Paris where Ernest Hemingway is in existential conversations about life, accompanied by the sweet notes of a Santa Teresa rum, which invades the soul with harmony and helps the journalist and writer try to persuade some young gang members to change the course of their lives, in this world of violence, organ trafficking, and arms.  He evokes the spirit of the Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal, particularly in his mesmerising "Ode to Marilyn Monroe".  This remarkable work invites him to explore the labyrinth of the mind's afflictions, guided by the brushstrokes of legendary artists such as Sorolla, Munch, Botero, and Modigliani.  Alongside this artistic journey, we encounter the candid whispers of Truman Capote in his poignant "Unanswered Prayers", which lays bare the frailties of our contemporary society, political systems, and monarchies.  Ultimately, Germán leads us to a heartwarming conclusion with the charming figure of "il Nono", a grandfatherly character we all wish we could have known.

The book is magnified by experiences that have taken place outside the battlefields, far from palaces and ambitions.  In other words, the principle of freedom of expression is paramount, even when individuals may endure defamation's repercussions.  With these stories, Germán Toro Ghio allows us to taste something of everything he keeps in his cupboard, and I hope he will continue to cook and deliver in successive books.

*Juan Forch, Puerto Octay, Chile

*Film director, writer, and political scientist is renowned for the 1990 "NO" campaign. / https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/movies/oscar-nominated-no-stirring-debate-in-chile.html

PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

O gods, women, and men with the souls of gods and goodwill, we request your solidarity and support for launching the second revised and extended edition of "The Owner of Non-Man Lan and Other Tales" in November 2025. We have already contacted a senior editor at Penguin Random House in London to help us create a remarkable and distinctive book handcrafted to serve as an exceptional corporate gift.

Thanks in advance...

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1883684882330656976

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Natural Gas Terminal AES ANDRES, located in the Dominican Republic. Image provided by AES Dominicana.

Andrés Gluski, President and CEO of AES, articulated this perspective during the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2023, stating, "I am confident we will need natural gas for the next 20 years." He further emphasized, "We can start blending it with green hydrogen today."

---

Not Angela, not...

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Image by Germán & co

---

Trump is desperate for more energy, as long as it’s not from the wind

The president halted new federal wind leasing, even as he declared a national energy emergency that cites demand for more power…

TWP By Evan Halper and Maxine JoselowJanuary 23, 2025

The massive wind installation Dominion Energy is building off the coast of Virginia is one of the company’s biggest projects, promising to provide enough clean electricity for 660,000 homes in a region where power demand is soaring.

Now, President Donald Trump has put the future of that project and others like it in jeopardy. The president this week signed an executive order that halts new leases for wind turbines in federal waters and directs officials to review existing offshore leases and other green energy supports. The moves cloud the outlook for projects like Dominion’s, which the company may seek to expand on an adjoining federal lease.

Cutting production of wind power is perhaps the most paradoxical aspect of Trump’s sweeping plan to reorient America’s energy economy, which he and his energy team contend will lower costs for consumers while boosting the amount of electricity available for economic growth.

Energy economists said they are puzzled by the new administration’s math. Trump’s executive order threatens eight other offshore wind projects that developers have on the drawing board but have not yet begun building, including those off the coasts of Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey.

“Closing down access to this potentially large energy resource seems at odds with their goals,” said Ben Cahill, an energy markets scholar at the University of Texas at Austin. “It is discordant with this overall posture of ‘build, baby, build’ and adding things to the grid.”

But in the Trump era, “drill, baby, drill” — his shorthand for escalation in fossil fuel production — takes priority over building a diverse portfolio of energy sources. The offshore wind directive was part of a flurry of executive orders that largely scrap the climate goals of the Biden era.

Trump’s plan calls for “terminating the Green New Deal,” cutting billions of dollars in funding for electric car charging stations and other clean energy projects. It lays the groundwork for a vast expansion of liquefied natural gas exports. It seeks to dramatically boost oil production. And it promises to supplant what Trump calls an “intermittent energy supply” made unreliable by wind and solar generation with one more reliant on fossil fuels.

“President Trump’s ‘energy dominance’ vision will end wars abroad and make life more affordable for every family by driving down inflation,” former North Dakota governor Doug Burgum, Trump’s nominee to run the Interior Department and a newly formed White House energy council, said at his confirmation hearing last week.

Economists said Trump’s moves risk more disruption than benefit. The U.S. economy already relies on renewable power for more than 20 percent of its energy. Oil companies are not even looking to drill more, concerned about disrupting markets with a glut of fuel. And Trump’s robust support for gas export terminals could send much of the nation’s natural gas supply abroad, which would potentially limit future U.S. supplies and raise prices.

“For the power sector, the things he is doing could actually end up increasing costs to consumers,” said Paasha Mahdavi, director of the Energy Governance and Political Economy Lab at the University of California at Santa Barbara. “If the goal is to create a modern, stable and reliable power grid, a lot of these things do not help get us there.”

With the United States deep into the energy transition and renewable installations surging, many experts are skeptical of another declaration Trump made on Monday: that the country is in a “national energy emergency.” That executive order could allow the administration to quickly approve new pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure, potentially by waiving landmark environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act.

It is certain to face legal challenges from opponents who argue the emergency Trump is declaring is an illusion. Critics also question the conflicting nature of his directive.

“Declaring an energy emergency while blocking wind and solar — our fastest-growing and most cost-effective energy sources — is like sounding a fire alarm and then saying you can’t call the fire department,” said Brendan Bell, chief operating officer of the investment firm Aligned Climate Capital, in a statement.

The energy emergency declaration relies heavily on concerns about an explosion of power-guzzling data centers, the engines of artificial intelligence development that can individually consume as much electricity as a midsize U.S. city. It invokes the president’s authority under the National Emergencies Act, which Trump used in 2019 to speed construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Tech companies say they desperately need more energy to build more data centers, counting on wind and solar energy alongside natural gas to power them. Many of the firms have made aggressive and very public commitments to cancel out their emissions, and they are eager to access more clean electricity.

“The idea that we are in some kind of national energy emergency is misguided,” said Severin Borenstein, an energy economist at the University of California at Berkeley. He said gas prices at the pump are at their historical average, natural gas is close to as cheap as it’s ever been (inflation adjusted), and increases in electricity prices in most of the country have tracked with the cost of living.

While Trump’s initial actions largely spared the solar industry, developers of those projects remain on edge. The orders halt distribution of billions of dollars in funding from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which authorized some grants for solar projects. Trump’s targeting of “intermittent” forms of energy in his emergency declaration suggests solar will be vulnerable. Congress is now weighing whether to cut lucrative incentives that support both industrial-scale solar farms and residential rooftop solar to pay for the tax break package Trump champions.

Fossil fuel companies lauded Trump’s orders, which lift regulations they find burdensome. Yet industry experts say it is unlikely the orders will drive gasoline and diesel prices down by boosting oil production.

“There is a disconnect between what industry wants out of this and what the administration wants,” said Mark Finley, a fellow in energy and global oil at Rice University’s Baker Institute and a former economist at BP. “It is going to help boost profits for some of these companies, but I am skeptical it will make a difference in how much they produce.”

Oil executives have already signaled they do not intend to substantially increase production. While the natural gas industry is looking to extract more, a large volume of that gas is ultimately destined for other countries.

---

Diving into the Enigma of Schrödinger's Cat: A Glimpse into the Future of Fuel in the Electric Industry...

---

Workart is the sole intellectual property of Germán & Co, with all rights reserved.

---

Who is this distinguished Schrödinger's cat who could help us to find ways to put this wild, imperialist world back on track?

---

“In 1935, the brilliant Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger concocted a mind-bending thought experiment that would forever change our understanding of quantum mechanics—enter Schrödinger's cat. This whimsical scenario was designed to shed light on the baffling concept of superposition, showcasing the oddities and contradictions that lie within the realm of quantum theory. Picture this: a cat is snugly tucked away in a sealed box, accompanied by a radioactive atom, a Geiger counter, a vial of poison, and a hammer. If the Geiger counter picks up radiation, it signals the hammer to smash the vial, sealing the cat's fate. But if no radiation is detected, the feline remains blissfully alive. According to the quirky rules of quantum mechanics, the radioactive atom exists in a state of both decay and non-decay until someone takes a peek. Consequently, the cat is caught in a surreal limbo of being both alive and dead until the box is opened and the truth is revealed. Schrödinger's cat paradox serves as a captivating illustration of the strange, counterintuitive world of quantum mechanics, where a system can dance between multiple realities until it is observed.

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Office of the President of Russia.

---

Glory, glory, hallelujah! Twenty Thousand Leagues Under The Seas In The Reality Of This Mad World…

---

Without a doubt, we should kick things off by chatting about cats!

The writting works of Germán & Co are entirely their own, with all rights reserved.

Indeed, Felines, provided that individuals do not suffer from allergies or hold superstitions, and are comfortable with the potential for abandonment without prior signs of emotional distress.  Of course, cats have intricately intertwined with human history, leaving a lasting legacy. A notable exploration of their historical significance can be observed in ancient Egypt, particularly during the era of the pharaohs.  Cleopatra, an iconic figure of this civilization, with her concealed grave, she has become a haunting enigma for countless archaeologists, desperately searching for clues to uncover its secrets.  Cleopatra is frequently associated with cats, not merely as pets but as revered divine entities. This reverence is linked to the goddess Bastet, who represented home, fertility, and protection. The esteem in which cats were held was such that any harm inflicted upon them, even inadvertently, was considered a serious transgression. Their importance was further underscored by the practice of mummification, as cats were often interred alongside their human counterparts. Additionally, cats have been recognized for their prowess in hunting, serving as effective deterrents against rodent populations, thereby safeguarding food supplies for ancient mariners and agrarians alike. Unfortunately, these beloved companions were unable to mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.  Furthermore, cats have permeated various mythologies and folklore, leaving indelible marks across cultures. In Norse mythology, the goddess Freyja is depicted as riding a chariot drawn by these captivating animals, while in Japan, the "maneki-neko," or beckoning cat, has emerged as a cherished emblem of luck and prosperity.  In contemporary society, amidst prevailing uncertainties, millions seek comfort and companionship in their feline companions. Throughout history, cats have inspired a multitude of artists and writers, from ancient frescoes to the imaginative realms of Lewis Carroll's "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland," where the Cheshire Cat's enigmatic smile enchants audiences, demonstrating the enduring influence of these creatures on creativity and imagination.

The cultural significance of three emblematic felines in popular culture, cannot be forget.  The first, is "Fritz the Cat," a pioneering American adult animated black comedy film released in 1972 and directed by Ralph Bakshi.  Audiences worldwide formed long lines to attend screenings of what was heralded as the first pornographic animated feature. The character Fritz, a clever, womanizing, and duplicitous cat, navigates an anthropomorphized version of New York City during the wild and tumultuous 1960s, particularly in locales reminiscent of Club 51.

The second feline is not merely a cat but represents the essence of the distinguished Felidae family. "The Tiger of Sweden," authored by Aron Flam in 2019, is an insightful examination of Sweden's complex political landscape during World War II.  The book elucidates the government's strategies, trade negotiations, and close the ayes when the Nazi invasion of Norway. 

Lastly, I would like to highlight the work of one of Japan's most renowned authors, Natsume Sōseki, celebrated for his literary depictions of cats. His novel "I Am a Cat," published in 1905, is a satirical narrative that offers a distinctive perspective on Japanese society through the observations of a housecat.  The story is recounted by the cat, who critiques and reflects on human behavior with a blend of humor and insight. 

One may ponder how Fritz's cat, the "Tiger of Sweden," and Sōseki's cat would perceive the uncertain and madness of the contemporary world.  We can describe their importance in contemporary history in the following manner: Fritz the Cat explores the complexities and contradictions of American society.  While its content may seem frivolous and explicit, Fritz's adventures provide a satirical and critical examination of issues such as race relations, political activism, and the counterculture movement of the 1960s. This exploration aligns with the existential anxieties depicted in the film "Easy Rider" (1969), which addresses disillusionment and the quest for freedom in America. 

In "The Tiger of Sweden," Aron Flam critically examines Sweden's actions during World War II.  The metaphor of the tiger underscores the nation's strength as well as its complex historical role during a chaotic period. Flam's work reveals the darker aspects of Sweden's perceived neutrality and encourages readers to confront uncomfortable truths, reflecting the complexities of contemporary geopolitics. The following is a significant consideration: which entities can be considered neutral in the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine? This inquiry pertains to countries such as China, Iran, Turkey, North Korea, and Western nations.

Sōseki's satirical novel featuring a nameless cat provides a unique perspective on Japanese society. Through the cat's observations and critiques of human behavior, the story offers timeless commentary on social norms, individualism, and the absurdities of everyday life.

In conclusion, each cat, in its own way, serves as a mirror, reflecting the complexities and uncertainties of the world and encouraging us to look beyond the surface for deeper reflection.

And now back to the concept of Schrödinger's cat serves as a metaphor for the future of the electric industry and fuel sources. In this analogy, the "box" signifies the present condition of the electric sector and its dependence on various fuel types, while the "cat" represents the prospective state of energy production. The future remains in a state of superposition—simultaneously reliant on conventional fuels and fully integrating renewable energy sources—until we "open the box" and assess the implications of ongoing technological innovations, policy modifications, and market fluctuations.

Several factors contribute to this uncertainty. Firstly, advancements in technology, such as improvements in battery efficiency, solar and wind power capabilities, and other renewable energy innovations, can profoundly influence the trajectory of the electric industry. Secondly, governmental policies and regulations play a pivotal role in shaping the energy landscape, including incentives for renewable energy adoption and regulations governing fossil fuels. Thirdly, market dynamics, characterized by the economic feasibility of various energy sources, are affected by supply and demand, global events, and investment patterns, which will ultimately guide the industry's evolution. Lastly, environmental considerations, particularly the increasing awareness of climate change and its ramifications, will continue to propel the shift towards cleaner energy alternatives.

Until these factors align and a definitive course is charted, the future of the electric industry and fuel sources remains ambiguous, akin to the scenario presented by Schrödinger's cat. The eventual outcome will be contingent upon the interaction of these elements and the collective actions undertaken by governments, businesses, and individuals. Good night and have a pleasant new week.

---

Finally, let's conclude on a positive note. In literature, there is a style known as micro-tales, which involves writing a story that is fewer than three hundred words. This week, I enjoyed reading an outstanding one, "Never Can Forgive You," written by my fellow "paisana" from Alsace, Rachel Rotschild. Her work was inspired by the tale "The Revenge," written by the Irish author Winston Wallace Smith. Enjoy!

"Never Can Forgive You”

Their love was a vibrant dance, a symphony of shared glances brimming with passion. His gaze lit up her world when they were together, wrapping her in a cocoon of beauty and joy.  Days drifted by, each one reflecting her confidence and happiness. Their connection was a beautiful surrender, a bond pulsating with life. But as the years meandered on, time began to feel like a slow, dragging tide.

Then, one fateful day, she sensed the flicker of their flame dimming. His once adoring gaze now held a hint of disdain, and she avoided his eyes, fearing the piercing arrows of heartbreak.  Panic gripped her heart at the thought of losing him. In a desperate bid to reignite the spark, she adorned herself in alluring attire, even baring her soul in vulnerability, but nothing stirred his heart as it once did.

Her anguish morphed into a relentless storm of resentment and fury.  She plotted her revenge, determined to bring him down. One day, she caught him off guard, and with a swift, merciless strike, she unleashed her wrath. As he lay there, defeated, she felt the weight of his past humiliations pressing down on her.  A wild, hysterical laugh echoed through the house, sending shivers down the spine.

Her daughter rushed in, eyes wide with fear, only to be met with the aftermath of chaos. In that moment of devastation, she was rendered speechless.  But then he stirred, his eyes wide with terror as he approached her, whispering, “Mom, what have you done with the mirror?”

---

In this edition, you will find: “Trump is desperate for more energy, as long as it’s not from the wind / TWP By Evan Halper and Maxine JoselowJanuary 23, 2025.

---

The Owner of Non-Man and Other Tales… Second edition, revised and expanded…

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Help us make a dream come true…

From a young age we listen to the instructions of the elderly in the sense that we must be able to choose our path in life. It's a nice metaphor.

There are those who, complying with this, prepare themselves to travel the highways of life, provide themselves with fast engines and soft seats.   Others, simpler, choose secondary roads where the speed does not produce so much vertigo and the tolls are cheaper. Many have to join forces and travel the kilometers in collective buses that force the touches and strident music. And there are too many who have no other option than to walk along the humble paths crossing puddles or boulders and threatened by wild beasts or insects. This is the vineyard of the Lord, and everyone can make use of their free will. Say.

Reading the stories of Germán Toro Ghio one discovers that there are also those who chose all paths. And they also added the alternatives of lifts, elevators (and descenders), cliffs, flying devices and perhaps how many more.

With its eight stories, The Owners of No Man's Land takes us to a world so real that, unfortunately, we tend to forget it.  From the first story, he (Germán) rides the maelstrom of a roller coaster in which he mixes the discomforts of a Moscow hotel with the adventures in the Nicaraguan jungle.  He is a de facto witness to the invasion of the USA army in Panama and his cousin of millenary stubbornness at the same time, without us being able to deduce which of the two experiences was more dangerous.  He celebrates supposed birthdays in the company of an aphonic Fidel Castro (what a contradiction!) in a city of Havana corroded by sea salt or political blunders.  He walks through one of the most unusual borders in the world, the one that divides the island of Hispaniola.   He witnesses the sun sheltering us with unusual loves, in this case, his friend "Pepe" who, on a streak of good fortune, attracts them to a stale gypsy princess and a one-eyed gypsy king in the nights of Madrid and prologues his luck in the world of love to an island called Grinda in the Stockholm archipelago where Alexander's honey captivates.

Germán also takes us to a café in Paris where Ernest Hemingway is in existential conversations about life, accompanied by the sweet notes of a Santa Teresa rum, which invades the soul with harmony and helps the journalist and writer try to persuade some young gang members to change the course of their lives, in this world of violence, organ trafficking, and arms.  He evokes the spirit of the Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal, particularly in his mesmerising "Ode to Marilyn Monroe".  This remarkable work invites him to explore the labyrinth of the mind's afflictions, guided by the brushstrokes of legendary artists such as Sorolla, Munch, Botero, and Modigliani.  Alongside this artistic journey, we encounter the candid whispers of Truman Capote in his poignant "Unanswered Prayers", which lays bare the frailties of our contemporary society, political systems, and monarchies.  Ultimately, Germán leads us to a heartwarming conclusion with the charming figure of "il Nono", a grandfatherly character we all wish we could have known.

The book is magnified by experiences that have taken place outside the battlefields, far from palaces and ambitions.  In other words, the principle of freedom of expression is paramount, even when individuals may endure defamation's repercussions.  With these stories, Germán Toro Ghio allows us to taste something of everything he keeps in his cupboard, and I hope he will continue to cook and deliver in successive books.

*Juan Forch, Puerto Octay, Chile

*Film director, writer, and political scientist is renowned for the 1990 "NO" campaign. / https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/movies/oscar-nominated-no-stirring-debate-in-chile.html

PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

O gods, women, and men with the souls of gods and goodwill, we request your solidarity and support for launching the second revised and extended edition of "The Owner of Non-Man Lan and Other Tales" in November 2025. We have already contacted a senior editor at Penguin Random House in London to help us create a remarkable and distinctive book handcrafted to serve as an exceptional corporate gift.

Thanks in advance...

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

---

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

---

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles.  To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials.  But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611.  Alternatively, you can support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link.  Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey!  Your generous support is truly invaluable to us!  It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact.  Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1883684882330656976

---

You can't possibly deny me...

Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…

Donate

---

Natural Gas Terminal AES ANDRES, located in the Dominican Republic. Image provided by AES Dominicana.

Andrés Gluski, President and CEO of AES, articulated this perspective during the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2023, stating, "I am confident we will need natural gas for the next 20 years." He further emphasized, "We can start blending it with green hydrogen today."

---

Not Angela, not...

---

Workart by Germán & Co is fully owned.

---

Image by Germán & co

---

Trump is desperate for more energy, as long as it’s not from the wind

The president halted new federal wind leasing, even as he declared a national energy emergency that cites demand for more power…

TWP By Evan Halper and Maxine JoselowJanuary 23, 2025

The massive wind installation Dominion Energy is building off the coast of Virginia is one of the company’s biggest projects, promising to provide enough clean electricity for 660,000 homes in a region where power demand is soaring.

Now, President Donald Trump has put the future of that project and others like it in jeopardy. The president this week signed an executive order that halts new leases for wind turbines in federal waters and directs officials to review existing offshore leases and other green energy supports. The moves cloud the outlook for projects like Dominion’s, which the company may seek to expand on an adjoining federal lease.

Cutting production of wind power is perhaps the most paradoxical aspect of Trump’s sweeping plan to reorient America’s energy economy, which he and his energy team contend will lower costs for consumers while boosting the amount of electricity available for economic growth.

Energy economists said they are puzzled by the new administration’s math. Trump’s executive order threatens eight other offshore wind projects that developers have on the drawing board but have not yet begun building, including those off the coasts of Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey.

“Closing down access to this potentially large energy resource seems at odds with their goals,” said Ben Cahill, an energy markets scholar at the University of Texas at Austin. “It is discordant with this overall posture of ‘build, baby, build’ and adding things to the grid.”

But in the Trump era, “drill, baby, drill” — his shorthand for escalation in fossil fuel production — takes priority over building a diverse portfolio of energy sources. The offshore wind directive was part of a flurry of executive orders that largely scrap the climate goals of the Biden era.

Trump’s plan calls for “terminating the Green New Deal,” cutting billions of dollars in funding for electric car charging stations and other clean energy projects. It lays the groundwork for a vast expansion of liquefied natural gas exports. It seeks to dramatically boost oil production. And it promises to supplant what Trump calls an “intermittent energy supply” made unreliable by wind and solar generation with one more reliant on fossil fuels.

“President Trump’s ‘energy dominance’ vision will end wars abroad and make life more affordable for every family by driving down inflation,” former North Dakota governor Doug Burgum, Trump’s nominee to run the Interior Department and a newly formed White House energy council, said at his confirmation hearing last week.

Economists said Trump’s moves risk more disruption than benefit. The U.S. economy already relies on renewable power for more than 20 percent of its energy. Oil companies are not even looking to drill more, concerned about disrupting markets with a glut of fuel. And Trump’s robust support for gas export terminals could send much of the nation’s natural gas supply abroad, which would potentially limit future U.S. supplies and raise prices.

“For the power sector, the things he is doing could actually end up increasing costs to consumers,” said Paasha Mahdavi, director of the Energy Governance and Political Economy Lab at the University of California at Santa Barbara. “If the goal is to create a modern, stable and reliable power grid, a lot of these things do not help get us there.”

With the United States deep into the energy transition and renewable installations surging, many experts are skeptical of another declaration Trump made on Monday: that the country is in a “national energy emergency.” That executive order could allow the administration to quickly approve new pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure, potentially by waiving landmark environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act.

It is certain to face legal challenges from opponents who argue the emergency Trump is declaring is an illusion. Critics also question the conflicting nature of his directive.

“Declaring an energy emergency while blocking wind and solar — our fastest-growing and most cost-effective energy sources — is like sounding a fire alarm and then saying you can’t call the fire department,” said Brendan Bell, chief operating officer of the investment firm Aligned Climate Capital, in a statement.

The energy emergency declaration relies heavily on concerns about an explosion of power-guzzling data centers, the engines of artificial intelligence development that can individually consume as much electricity as a midsize U.S. city. It invokes the president’s authority under the National Emergencies Act, which Trump used in 2019 to speed construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Tech companies say they desperately need more energy to build more data centers, counting on wind and solar energy alongside natural gas to power them. Many of the firms have made aggressive and very public commitments to cancel out their emissions, and they are eager to access more clean electricity.

“The idea that we are in some kind of national energy emergency is misguided,” said Severin Borenstein, an energy economist at the University of California at Berkeley. He said gas prices at the pump are at their historical average, natural gas is close to as cheap as it’s ever been (inflation adjusted), and increases in electricity prices in most of the country have tracked with the cost of living.

While Trump’s initial actions largely spared the solar industry, developers of those projects remain on edge. The orders halt distribution of billions of dollars in funding from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which authorized some grants for solar projects. Trump’s targeting of “intermittent” forms of energy in his emergency declaration suggests solar will be vulnerable. Congress is now weighing whether to cut lucrative incentives that support both industrial-scale solar farms and residential rooftop solar to pay for the tax break package Trump champions.

Fossil fuel companies lauded Trump’s orders, which lift regulations they find burdensome. Yet industry experts say it is unlikely the orders will drive gasoline and diesel prices down by boosting oil production.

“There is a disconnect between what industry wants out of this and what the administration wants,” said Mark Finley, a fellow in energy and global oil at Rice University’s Baker Institute and a former economist at BP. “It is going to help boost profits for some of these companies, but I am skeptical it will make a difference in how much they produce.”

Oil executives have already signaled they do not intend to substantially increase production. While the natural gas industry is looking to extract more, a large volume of that gas is ultimately destined for other countries.

---