Comments on: Where is the energy transition headed in 2015? https://energytransition.org/2015/01/where-is-the-energy-transition-headed-in-2015/ The Global Energiewende Fri, 13 Feb 2015 16:18:50 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.1 By: scotto https://energytransition.org/2015/01/where-is-the-energy-transition-headed-in-2015/#comment-4302 Fri, 13 Feb 2015 16:18:50 +0000 http://energytransition.boellblog.org/?p=7281#comment-4302 I hate to say it, but The Energy Collective has a far more credible explanation for the oil price drop:

http://theenergycollective.com/gregbothun/2192511/whats-driving-gasoline-and-oil-prices?utm_source=tec_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter

]]>
By: Tom https://energytransition.org/2015/01/where-is-the-energy-transition-headed-in-2015/#comment-4301 Thu, 05 Feb 2015 09:51:13 +0000 http://energytransition.boellblog.org/?p=7281#comment-4301 As a frequent reader of this site I have always enjoyed excellent argueing and weighing up of pros and cons. When reading this article the same question as my previous commentators came up to mind immediately even before reading through the comment section.

If there is any evidence or even any trace the US would promote low oil prices politically (for whatever reason), then pls. name them, f.i. name the tools or methods, f.i. applied tax brakes or whatever. And if there should be any evidence the US is doing this explicitly in order to hurt Russia or any other opponent, then pls. bring forward any supporting documents or note your argument is rather an assumption or opinion.

Even though I very much agree that we should see the Energiewende in a political light as well (energy has always been political) and I would like to see a much higher European energy independence (from Russia, but also in general), I think this article is rather weak.

On another note, I think a public discussion on the political impact of the Energiewende is of importance. Right now some voices call for higher defense budgets and the US has actually been asking Germany directly to step these up. “Investments” in military never pay off, they are always loss-making. At the same time fossil fuel imports from Russia continue big time in an even more destabilized political environment (Ukraine). Maybe investments in more energy independence and the Energiewende including reduced or ceased imports (true sanctions) could have more bang for the buck in terms of showing Russia a true commitment of the West to democracy and stability in Eastern Europe even though this alone would not stop current Russian imperialistic politics.

]]>
By: photomofo https://energytransition.org/2015/01/where-is-the-energy-transition-headed-in-2015/#comment-4300 Mon, 02 Feb 2015 14:58:27 +0000 http://energytransition.boellblog.org/?p=7281#comment-4300 Pretty opinion parade.

]]>
By: Greg https://energytransition.org/2015/01/where-is-the-energy-transition-headed-in-2015/#comment-4299 Sun, 01 Feb 2015 01:08:31 +0000 http://energytransition.boellblog.org/?p=7281#comment-4299 The US has been pumping as much oil as possible, because prices have been high, and oil/gas is the latest investment bubble after the housing boom. This is not a strategic geopolitical decision made by the government or the oil industry. To claim this is nothing but a conspiracy theory.

However I agree Saudi Arabia has made a strategic decision, not to reduce the export volumes. But this hurts the US domestic oil/gas sector more than it does Russia. My understanding is the US extraction prices are much higher than SA and Ru.

]]>
By: scotto https://energytransition.org/2015/01/where-is-the-energy-transition-headed-in-2015/#comment-4298 Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:37:32 +0000 http://energytransition.boellblog.org/?p=7281#comment-4298 It’s stated as a fact that the US is trying to damage Russia with low energy prices. This is hard to believe. Is there any evidence for this theory? Who made this decision, and by what mechanism is it enforced?

]]>