• zout@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 days ago

    Yes, and it can still be vetoed by our union friends from Slovakia or Hungary. Hell, even my own government in the Netherlands may try to sabotage this, since we’ve got the most worthless bunch of idiots ever in charge.

    • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Lukoil in the USA is American owned (as a franchise) and operated and does not use Russian oil. We don’t import any Russian oil to the US. Some money does go overseas but Lukoil is (nominally) a private company so seems to have avoided sanctions. Overall I’d say there are bigger fish to fry.

  • ant1guns444@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Maybe now the germans could impose emission quotas to their industry

    (They won’t. They will just burn more coals)

  • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    It is part of a strategy to unload their dollar holdings. Basically buy natural gas from the US.

    The value of a dollar is about to be beaten into the ground

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      It is part of a strategy to unload their dollar holdings.

      Ya gotta have the currency in order to spend it. If a Nation runs out of USD while they still need NG (or anything else traded in USD) then they’re going to have a bad time.

      The value of a dollar is about to be beaten into the ground.

      Possibly but the U.S. Federal Reserve has the ability to blackhole a LOT of dollars and if the inflows exceed their ability then the price of NG will climb until it balances.

      If you doubt me then line up this chart of US NG Exports with this chart of USD DXY. The effect predicted by the strategy isn’t visible.

      Frankly I’m not sure there’s enough NG demand in the world to tank the USD via purchases.

      • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        The goal is not to tank the dollar but unload it in a way that is most politically and economically beneficial to the EU.

        • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s a pretty fancy way of saying “We are going to use our money to buy things we need.” I mean that’s sorta to be expected.

          It’s also not a comment on “value of the dollar is about to beaten into the ground”. There doesn’t seem to be a basis to support the theory that purchasing too much NG will cause the US Dollar to decline in value.

          The USD will likely decrease in value but it will happen because of Republican stupidity, not due to mass purchases of goods from US companies.

          • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Completely agree that the purchasing alone would not drive the value of the dollar down but the change in policy reflects a global loss of trust in the dollar.

            Being a reserve currency, means most of its value is in the global trust in it being a “stable” store of value.

            Trust is quick to destroy and very slow to build. No country unloading their position wants the value to crash but they all are actively starting to unwind their dollar positions.

      • bacon_pdp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Economies change slowly. To eliminate the demand for Russian Natural gas on that time scale means that they are going to have to import it from somewhere else.

        Economically speaking the only move that justifies that price premium is if one wanted to unload their Dollar position and the time frame needed to do so would align with their fossil fuel reduction timetables.

        It is not about them moving to a new reserve currency but unwinding the current position in a way that aligns economically and politically for their own countries.

      • OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        There is a theory that the USD as global currency is at risk of being replaced due to BRICS. Often the RMB is posited as the successor to the dollar, but I don’t think it is possible to use a currency that is not openly traded, nor for which we have insight into how its value is set (not derived by the market, but set by the country itself) as a vehicle for secure, stable exchange of value.

        Of course, the current administration is doing a good job of running the USD down, but even with that I don’t see how any other currency can replace it for the foreseeable future…

        Full disclosure, I am not an economist

  • mriswith@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I wish lemmy was less like reddit, and that commenters actually skimmed the articles or knew anything about the situation beyond the headlines.

    But hell, here goes, I’ll try to use small words and explain things for you guys:

    • If they instantly turned it off without a replacement, a lot of people would have died. And even if a country government tried, their own citizens would riot over the idea that old people would die.

    • Coal is already banned.

    • Oil imports have dropped from 27% to 3%

    • In 2021 the gas accounted for 45% of imports in the EU, now it’s 19% and the plan is to have it at zero by 2027.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      So it’s been 3 years and their plan is another 2.75 years away.

    • celeryfc@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s been a big influx of users from Reddit and with it came the low effort one liner zingers and people allergic to reading the linked articles.

      I do really like how a lot of people here post articles give a summary below their link. While it’s definitely not required, it is super helpful and makes it harder for people to just form opinions and start blabbing in the comments based on a headline.

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Things get a little shittier for awhile every time there’s a mass migration, but it seems like most communities do a decent job holding newbies to a higher standard than reddit (read: any standard). Eventually Lemmy gets better again.

        • bampop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          I suspect it may inevitably end up like Reddit. The problem IMO is comment visibility. Even if you’re not trying to farm karma, people like their comments to be visible. Everyone wants to have their voice heard. And it seems that short “zinger” comments and jokes are the most effective way to make that happen. The current community does support high effort quality comments well, but I think as we get diluted with more users it’s a slippery slide. I hope I’m wrong.

          • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            I think the rest of us need to apply pressure against that trend. I try to call out assholes in a civil fashion, at least so it makes it harder to be one, and I don’t upvote comments that don’t add to the conversation. I can’t downvote them since I’m on blahaj, so downvote them extra hard for me!

        • NostraDavid@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          This only works if the influx of new users stay relatively low. See the Digg Exodus of how reddit got fucked up because Digg expelled their users too fast.

      • Obi@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m definitely guilty of not opening the article pretty often, and I really love when posters put a summary/highlights/entire article when it’s small in the body of the post. I actually do read/skim these pretty consistently vs opening and reading every single article in the feed.

  • Artyom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    This is so funny cuz it actually has the potential to bankrupt Russia, all because they chose to invade a nation that represents at best marginal economic power.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Russia chose to invade a nation that had recently discovered large reserves of natural gas - more than enough to supply Europe’s needs while they transitioned to alternatives - and that sat astride the pipeline that Russia uses to provide their gas to Europe. Even though Russia has not proved capable of conquering all of Ukraine, their occupation of the Donbas region has prevented Ukraine from becoming a viable natural gas competitor in the European market and kept their primary source of revenue alive, at least in the short term.

      • itsprobablyfine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        If we actually manage to pull it off it’s a pretty decent disincentive. Invade neighbor for resources? No one will buy those resources from you.

        Obviously not sufficient on its own, but seems like a good place to start.