Play Nice The NM Devil's Chessboard Thread - Part II

Remove this Banner Ad

 
Rayzorwire said:
Did read recently that the US has nowhere near the amount of essential tech workers they need to operate these factories.

Considering we're talking about an administration which wasn't functional enough to make sure it had enough ammo in the pipeline to go starting wars, not having anywhere near enough trained technicians required to run the factories, but building them anyway, because they had to be seen to be doing something, is probably just one of a batch of 'minor oversights' they're more than capable of pulling off between now and then! ;)
Click to expand...
AFAIK They are owned by the companies operating the plants in Taiwan so I imagine they'll just fly the workers to the US the day before China invades.
 
Spain recognising Palestine lol.

The same Spain that jailed elected Catalan politicians relatively recently? That fought a long dirty war over the Basque Country?

The Spain that still has African outposts?
 

Log in to remove this ad.



Odd he hasn't made one about Netanyahu being charged, perhaps the acclaimed human rights lawyer is still drafting his prose.
 
The Warlord said:
Spain recognising Palestine lol.

The same Spain that jailed elected Catalan politicians relatively recently? That fought a long dirty war over the Basque Country?

The Spain that still has African outposts?
Click to expand...


What the Moroccans have managed to record Sanchez and his colleagues getting up to has compromised their government to a huge degree.

I see them being part of this move on Palestine's behalf more as stemming from the past vote (2014? where only two members of the entire parliament voted against) and it being seen as the will of all parties rather than any great gesture from Sanchez.

It's as safe as it gets in terms of policy - and popular. The only question really was how long they were gong to wait, giving them a nice party boost before the Euro elections.
 
Right up there in terms of scary articles, can't say I was aware all fossil fuels are that radioactive...been either very well hushed up or I'm an ignoramus...


More Radioactivity Than at Chernobyl​


Just the other month I visited an abandoned fracking waste treatment plant on a large U.S. river where unknowing local kids had been partying. It was littered with beer cans and condoms and parts of it were more deeply contaminated with radioactivity than most of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. I was there with a former Department of Energy scientist and his Geiger counter issued a terrifying alarm — at around 2 milliroentgens per hour. He had samples tested at a radiological analysis lab and discovered the radioactive element radium to be 5,000 times general background levels.

It’s all right there in the industry’s own research and reports. And this is the beauty of science, an incredible record of our world and its ways laid out across time, and like a sacred language, it moves through time, collecting new bits and building. One can go back to 1904, when a 25-year-old Canadian graduate student named Eli described “experiments with a highly radioactive gas obtained from crude petroleum.” Or 1982, when a report of the American Petroleum Institute’s Committee for Environmental Biology and Community Health stated: “Almost all materials of interest and use to the petroleum industry contain measurable quantities of radionuclides that reside finally in process equipment, product streams, or waste.”

Radium, they warned, was “a potent source of radiation exposure, both internal and external,” while the radioactive gas radon and its polonium daughters “deliver significant population and occupational exposures.” Radon is America’s second leading cause of lung cancer deaths and naturally contaminates natural gas. Which means it is being emitted out of home stoves in parts of the country at levels high enough to generate public health risks, and over time, cancer and deaths. The 1982 American Petroleum Institute report concluded: “regulation of radionuclides could impose a severe burden on API member companies.”

And they have triumphed, as the radioactivity brought to the surface in oil and gas development was never federally regulated and remains unregulated. The industry was granted a federal exemption in 1980 that legally defined their waste as nonhazardous, despite containing toxic chemicals, carcinogens, heavy metals and all the radioactivity. As the nuclear forensics scientist Marco Kaltofen has told me: “With fossil fuels, essentially what you are doing is taking an underground radioactive reservoir and bringing it up to the surface where it can interact with people and the environment.”




Goes on to talk about 'polonium pipelines' in all the US networks...
 
Rayzorwire said:
Heh, yeah, the article did assume Taiwan would still have to be staffing its own factories. ;)
Click to expand...
The company, TSMC, is owned by typical American investment companies with their usual network of shares in each other. For example the popular boogey boys, Blackrock and Vanguard, hold shares in it as well as holding shares in other instituational investors in TSMC. Nearly all of them...
 
Rayzorwire said:
Right up there in terms of scary articles, can't say I was aware all fossil fuels are that radioactive...been either very well hushed up or I'm an ignoramus...


More Radioactivity Than at Chernobyl​


Just the other month I visited an abandoned fracking waste treatment plant on a large U.S. river where unknowing local kids had been partying. It was littered with beer cans and condoms and parts of it were more deeply contaminated with radioactivity than most of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. I was there with a former Department of Energy scientist and his Geiger counter issued a terrifying alarm — at around 2 milliroentgens per hour. He had samples tested at a radiological analysis lab and discovered the radioactive element radium to be 5,000 times general background levels.

It’s all right there in the industry’s own research and reports. And this is the beauty of science, an incredible record of our world and its ways laid out across time, and like a sacred language, it moves through time, collecting new bits and building. One can go back to 1904, when a 25-year-old Canadian graduate student named Eli described “experiments with a highly radioactive gas obtained from crude petroleum.” Or 1982, when a report of the American Petroleum Institute’s Committee for Environmental Biology and Community Health stated: “Almost all materials of interest and use to the petroleum industry contain measurable quantities of radionuclides that reside finally in process equipment, product streams, or waste.”

Radium, they warned, was “a potent source of radiation exposure, both internal and external,” while the radioactive gas radon and its polonium daughters “deliver significant population and occupational exposures.” Radon is America’s second leading cause of lung cancer deaths and naturally contaminates natural gas. Which means it is being emitted out of home stoves in parts of the country at levels high enough to generate public health risks, and over time, cancer and deaths. The 1982 American Petroleum Institute report concluded: “regulation of radionuclides could impose a severe burden on API member companies.”

And they have triumphed, as the radioactivity brought to the surface in oil and gas development was never federally regulated and remains unregulated. The industry was granted a federal exemption in 1980 that legally defined their waste as nonhazardous, despite containing toxic chemicals, carcinogens, heavy metals and all the radioactivity. As the nuclear forensics scientist Marco Kaltofen has told me: “With fossil fuels, essentially what you are doing is taking an underground radioactive reservoir and bringing it up to the surface where it can interact with people and the environment.”




Goes on to talk about 'polonium pipelines' in all the US networks...
Click to expand...
I did know that about fracking residues. Probably heard it about hydrocarbons at some point and forgot.
 
Fracking and shale is a rort anyway.

This is some of the text (hopefully) of this article that i can't access...

Wall Street calls time on the shale revolution

US fracking has survived dramatic price wars before but the latest shock is different
www.ft.com www.ft.com

Its nearly 15 years old and if you see the list of fracking and shale bankruptcies that happened before the US stepped in to replace the gas that can't flow thru nordstream ....

Wall Street calls time on the shale revolution

US fracking has survived dramatic price wars before but the latest shock is different

A decade of shale drilling has transformed US energy. The country’s oil output has more than doubled, cutting its dependence on foreign supplies, while an abundant supply of cheap natural gas has enticed power plants to switch from dirtier coal and helped lower US carbon emissions.

US oil production, just 5.5m barrels a day in 2011, is now a world-leading 13m b/d. Pipelines and other infrastructure have sprouted across the coast of the Gulf of Mexico to support a surging oil-export trade. If the US were a member of Opec, it would be among the cartel’s biggest exporters.

But this revolution is under threat, as US drillers are being pushed into the front line of a new price war declared in early March at Opec’s Viennese headquarters by Russia and Saudi Arabia — a fight launched just as the coronavirus pandemic arrived to cripple global oil demand at the same time.

The latest price shock, which has more than halved the cost of oil since the start of the year to under $30 a barrel, has further exposed a shale sector that depends on constant cash infusions and the dwindling faith of investors.

Shale is unusual in the oil business because of its high decline rates: a typical well produces prolifically for a year before output drops steeply in the second and then settles into a modest and diminishing flow rate thereafter.

Just to hold US shale production steady year after year, let alone increase it, requires ever more wells to be drilled. Of more than 14,000 new wells that had been expected this year, 85 per cent were needed to match last year’s level. All that drilling in 2020 was forecast to cost more than $100bn, according to Rystad Energy, a consultancy.

...

The short-term impact on oil-producing states will be significant, as rigs are idled, their crews are sacked, hotel occupancy drops, and restaurants close, compounding the broader economic shock anticipated from the coronavirus pandemic.

Shale has been through a price war before and survived. That was in 2015-16, when Saudi Arabia, alarmed at the spectacular production surge in the US, opened its taps to drive down prices and break the Texan upstarts.

US production then fell 1m b/d. But the Saudi assault winnowed out the weaker shale producers and left a more cost-efficient business behind. When the kingdom and Russia reversed course and started cutting supply in 2017 to prop up prices, the shale sector roared back to life, adding more than 4m b/d in the years that followed.

This time, however, could be different for three reasons. First is coronavirus, which by wiping out millions of barrels a day of oil demand this year and driving crude prices to multiyear lows has demolished the business models for capital-intensive producers like those in the shale patch.

Second, Russia may prove a stronger adversary for shale producers than Saudi Arabia. Moscow is motivated both by anger at US sanctions on its own energy sector and a desire to recapture market share. The Russian government says its financial reserves will let it endure a price below $30 per barrel for up to a decade — a fight that may therefore last even longer than the virus.

The third reason is Wall Street. US investors were already unhappy with shale’s business model and the long-term outlook for fossil fuels well before the latest oil price collapse.

Many lenders say they will not return even if oil prices recover. “This industry has been a junkie hooked on access to capital, whether equity or development, that’s driven uneconomic growth over the past decade,” says Mr Portillo.

Many US shale companies will soon hit a debt wall and bankruptcy risks in the shale patch have risen sharply, say rating agencies.

Supermajors such as ExxonMobil and Chevron both still plan large oil output increases in Texas’s Permian basin in the coming years. Further consolidation in the distressed shale sector is likely and business that re-emerges will be more efficient. But its foreign rivals in the oil world — and its bruised backers on Wall Street — are not about to let it rise unchecked again.


So when I saw this it was accompanied by a comment that had wtte of "the only way we can make this profitable is to destroy our competitors production capacity."

Here we are 14 years later and thats been the story of most of the intervening time.
 
****, sorry wrong article...

It’s been only two months since I last -again – addressed the shale industry, but apparently it’s still not clear enough what a predatory scheme it is. Today, Bloomberg adds even more fuel to the fire. If you want to know how the combination of slip-sliding legal standards and ultra-low interest rates has perverted the US – and global – economy, you need look no further than shale.


The central point the Bloomberg article evokes is simple: does the difference between proved reserves, probable reserves and possible reserves (or resource potential), as reported by oil and gas extraction companies, constitute a lie? And the answer is just as simple: no, it doesn’t. But that’s not where the issue ends, it’s where it begins.


That is, if the difference between the two gets too wide, – potential – investors in company stocks and bonds are not getting the information they are entitled to. The industry may claim, as in the article, that investors are aware of the discrepancy inherent in the numbers, but that’s at best true for most investors, and the bigger ones. Still, the companies shouldn’t be able to use that as some unlimited excuse to claim whatever they wish. Because they can basically throw out any number they want in front of investors, no matter what it’s based on, and it’s legal.



And while there may be a kernel of truth in this bit …


“They’re running a great risk of litigation when they don’t end up producing anything like that,” said John Lee, a University of Houston petroleum engineering professor who helped write the SEC rules and has taught reserves evaluation to a generation of engineers. “If I were an ambulance-chasing lawyer, I’d get into this.”
Click to expand...

… there’s also something missing. By the time investors can start any litigation, chances are the companies involved may be long gone. The greater public, and some of the investors, may be fooled, but the industry people themselves? They know about the depletion rates typical of shale wells, of the fact that few wells ever make their owners any real profit, and of the $500 billion(!) the industry lost over the past 5 years.


The shale industry runs on debt, not on energy. And as long as these companies can issue junk bonds at low rates, they will. But that doesn’t mean they will ever be profitable. For their owners, sure, they’re raking in dough like it’s Halloween candy, but for investors in those bonds things don’t look so rosy. Shale is a Ponzi.


And US law allows it to grow. One set of reserves gets presented to the regulator (SEC), and an entirely different one to the investor. One company, Rice Energy, tells investors it has 27 times as many reserves as it tells the SEC.


We’re Sitting on 10 Billion Barrels of Oil! OK, Two


To count as proved reserves to the SEC, companies must have “reasonable certainty” that the oil and gas will be extracted from existing wells and those scheduled to be drilled within five years. [..] The forecasts are based on fuel prices, geology, engineering and the performance of nearby wells. Planned wells must be economically and technically viable.
Click to expand...

Whereas forecasts for investor presentations are based on a combination of hopium, wishful thinking, media savvy, creative accounting and pure fantasy. This is ‘justified’ by saying: ‘everybody knows we lie, so who cares if we lie’. Except that it’s not legally a lie.


No such rules apply to appraisals that drillers pitch to the public, sometimes called resource potential. In public presentations, unregulated estimates included wells that would lose money, prospects that have never been drilled, acreage that won’t be tapped for decades and projects whose likelihood of success is less than 10%.
Figures the company executives cite during presentations “are used in the capital allocation process, and are a standard tool the investment community understands and relies on in assessing a company’s performance and value …” [..] The presentations rarely explain how the drillers calculated the figures. The numbers sometimes change from one presentation to the next.
Click to expand...

On account of thorough research by the companies, no doubt.


… companies use their own variation of resource potential, often with little explanation of what the number includes, how long it will take to drill or how much it will cost. The average estimate of resource potential was 6.6 times higher than the proved reserves reported to the SEC …
Click to expand...

And 6.6 times is really lowballing it when it comes to some of these firms:


Lee Tillman, chief executive officer of Marathon Oil, told investors last month that the company was potentially sitting on the equivalent of 4.3 billion barrels in its U.S. shale acreage. That number was 5.5 times higher than the proved reserves Marathon reported to federal regulators. Such discrepancies are rife in the U.S. shale industry. Drillers use bigger forecasts to sell the hydraulic fracturing boom to investors and to persuade lawmakers to lift the 39-year-old ban on crude exports.
62 of 73 U.S. shale drillers reported one estimate in mandatory filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission while citing higher potential figures to the public, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Pioneer’s estimate was 13 times higher. Goodrich’s was 19 times. For Rice Energy, it was almost 27-fold.
Denver-based Cimarex Energy is one company that doesn’t report a different number to investors than it does to the SEC. “We want to have things on the books that are part of our near-term drilling plans,” Karen Acierno, a Cimarex spokeswoman, said in an interview. “A lot of people appreciate our conservative nature, a lot of investors.” Cimarex shares are up 19% in the past year.
The investor presentation by Rice Energy shows 2.7 billion barrels. Rice, which went public in January, reported 100 million barrels to the SEC in March, records show. At Pioneer Natural Resources, the number they cite to potential investors has increased by 2 billion barrels a year in each of the last five years – even as the proved reserves it files with the SEC have declined. The rising number is “a game changer for this company,” said Sheffield, the CEO. “It’s a game changer for this country.”
Click to expand...

No kidding, there, Mr. CEO.


Investors poured $16.3 billion in the first seven months of the year into mutual funds and exchange-traded funds focused on energy companies, including drillers that create fractures in rocks by injecting fluid into cracks to enable more oil and gas to flow out of the formation. That’s almost twice as much as in the same period last year, bringing total assets to $128.2 billion, according to New York-based Strategic Insight. [..]
Lee, the University of Houston professor, said in an interview that he’s alarmed by the inconsistent and overly optimistic estimates published by shale companies. “If a lot of people get burned – and I think a lot of people can and will be burned – by these numbers in the investor presentations, there may be a push by investors to get the SEC to do something about it … ”
Click to expand...

Horse, meet barn. The SEC won’t do anything, and it cannot change the law anyway, until these companies are dead broke and their owners longer liable for anything at all.


The US shale industry presents itself to investors as something it is not: it hugely overestimates its reserves, it carries incredible amounts of debt, there is cash flow but it doesn’t even begin to cover expenses, and its wells, which cost $8-20 million a piece to drill, even on average deplete faster than you can say ‘Christmas next year’.


Meanwhile, politics and media sing the Hossanah of energy independence, which in turn makes oil and gas prices slump to such a degree that shale becomes even less viable than it -obviously to us – already is. But as long as you’re legally allowed to overstate your reserves 27-fold, you can squeeze this balloon for another year or so, right.


It all makes me think that if people don’t see through this nonsense, they get what they deserve and perhaps need in life. But as always, it’s the little people who will end up paying up. And I don’t like that one bit. And if this is what America has become, a giant Ponzi, someone should raise their voice before it gets completely out of hand. If this kind of spiel is legal, there’s something deeply wrong with the law.

The other one is from about the time of covid.
 
ferball said:
I did know that about fracking residues. Probably heard it about hydrocarbons at some point and forgot.
Click to expand...


I don't recall hearing it mentioned in any of the environmental debates on whether or not permissions should be granted.

Would be interesting if given the choice, rather than knowingly expose ourselves to so many toxins and radiation from fossil fuels for the better part of a century and counting, paying so many hundreds of billions for the privilege, the Australian public voted for a nuclear reactor driven electrification system back in the 50's, along with mass electrification of our transport and industrial systems.

The switch to where we need to be now and into the future would have been far easier, our bottom line far better, security is debatable, but genuine 'mutual destruction' deterrence would make a formidable case for.

The main case against that I can see (beyond the obvious making ourselves more of a target), is that AFAIK, it's still the case that no nation has successfully fully decommissioned a nuclear power plant. Again, AFAIK, the Brits have come closest and gave up where they stopped because the costs were so far beyond reach to be impossible.

Happy to be corrected on any of that, been a long time since I seriously looked into it. :thumbsu:
 
ferball said:
heck, sorry wrong article...

It’s been only two months since I last -again – addressed the shale industry, but apparently it’s still not clear enough what a predatory scheme it is. Today, Bloomberg adds even more fuel to the fire. If you want to know how the combination of slip-sliding legal standards and ultra-low interest rates has perverted the US – and global – economy, you need look no further than shale.


The central point the Bloomberg article evokes is simple: does the difference between proved reserves, probable reserves and possible reserves (or resource potential), as reported by oil and gas extraction companies, constitute a lie? And the answer is just as simple: no, it doesn’t. But that’s not where the issue ends, it’s where it begins.


That is, if the difference between the two gets too wide, – potential – investors in company stocks and bonds are not getting the information they are entitled to. The industry may claim, as in the article, that investors are aware of the discrepancy inherent in the numbers, but that’s at best true for most investors, and the bigger ones. Still, the companies shouldn’t be able to use that as some unlimited excuse to claim whatever they wish. Because they can basically throw out any number they want in front of investors, no matter what it’s based on, and it’s legal.



And while there may be a kernel of truth in this bit …




… there’s also something missing. By the time investors can start any litigation, chances are the companies involved may be long gone. The greater public, and some of the investors, may be fooled, but the industry people themselves? They know about the depletion rates typical of shale wells, of the fact that few wells ever make their owners any real profit, and of the $500 billion(!) the industry lost over the past 5 years.


The shale industry runs on debt, not on energy. And as long as these companies can issue junk bonds at low rates, they will. But that doesn’t mean they will ever be profitable. For their owners, sure, they’re raking in dough like it’s Halloween candy, but for investors in those bonds things don’t look so rosy. Shale is a Ponzi.


And US law allows it to grow. One set of reserves gets presented to the regulator (SEC), and an entirely different one to the investor. One company, Rice Energy, tells investors it has 27 times as many reserves as it tells the SEC.


We’re Sitting on 10 Billion Barrels of Oil! OK, Two




Whereas forecasts for investor presentations are based on a combination of hopium, wishful thinking, media savvy, creative accounting and pure fantasy. This is ‘justified’ by saying: ‘everybody knows we lie, so who cares if we lie’. Except that it’s not legally a lie.




On account of thorough research by the companies, no doubt.




And 6.6 times is really lowballing it when it comes to some of these firms:




No kidding, there, Mr. CEO.




Horse, meet barn. The SEC won’t do anything, and it cannot change the law anyway, until these companies are dead broke and their owners longer liable for anything at all.


The US shale industry presents itself to investors as something it is not: it hugely overestimates its reserves, it carries incredible amounts of debt, there is cash flow but it doesn’t even begin to cover expenses, and its wells, which cost $8-20 million a piece to drill, even on average deplete faster than you can say ‘Christmas next year’.


Meanwhile, politics and media sing the Hossanah of energy independence, which in turn makes oil and gas prices slump to such a degree that shale becomes even less viable than it -obviously to us – already is. But as long as you’re legally allowed to overstate your reserves 27-fold, you can squeeze this balloon for another year or so, right.


It all makes me think that if people don’t see through this nonsense, they get what they deserve and perhaps need in life. But as always, it’s the little people who will end up paying up. And I don’t like that one bit. And if this is what America has become, a giant Ponzi, someone should raise their voice before it gets completely out of hand. If this kind of spiel is legal, there’s something deeply wrong with the law.

The other one is from about the time of covid.
Click to expand...


Oh yeah, 'tight' oil has been yet another case of government subsidised snake oil selling in the US, hot on the heels of Obama's biofuels boondoggles.

OPEC is pretty bad too with the corrupt overestimated reserves.

The more 'proven reserves' (proven by State geologists!) a member has, the more quota to pump they receive. When your national budget is so heavily dependent on petroleum and related exports, there's more than a little incentive for members to get creative when it comes to the amount of barrels expected to be extracted from a 'proven reserve.'
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I have a friend who lived in the bush in the NT on the Finnis river. The river is radioactive because of Rum Jungle mine. Believe it or not there is actually a report that was made about how badly radioactive it is but the author can't release it because of confidentiality agreements.

While he was up there his Gf became pregnant and the kid was born with a ring chromosome and ended up with hydrocephalus. She'd be in her early 20s now but has all sorts of development issues may not even be around any more as I haven't seen him since before covid.

Maybe it was a fluke but I reckon it was because of the uranium mine.

But yeah ... at least its a publicised risk. You can mitigate it by breeding away from areas with high levels or uranium mining waste.

I dunno the extent of fossil fuel radioactivity but some tailings from CSG mining are radioactive because of their exposure to radioactivity. Coal seams are dewatered to release the gas and the water contains radioactive stuff that is dissolved or suspended in it. At one point around Tara in Qld the water was just sprayed around all over the joint. Unbelievable.
 
Rayzorwire said:
What the Moroccans have managed to record Sanchez and his colleagues getting up to has compromised their government to a huge degree.

I see them being part of this move on Palestine's behalf more as stemming from the past vote (2014? where only two members of the entire parliament voted against) and it being seen as the will of all parties rather than any great gesture from Sanchez.

It's as safe as it gets in terms of policy - and popular. The only question really was how long they were gong to wait, giving them a nice party boost before the Euro elections.
Click to expand...

Please explain?
 
Rayzorwire said:
Right up there in terms of scary articles, can't say I was aware all fossil fuels are that radioactive...been either very well hushed up or I'm an ignoramus...


More Radioactivity Than at Chernobyl​


Just the other month I visited an abandoned fracking waste treatment plant on a large U.S. river where unknowing local kids had been partying. It was littered with beer cans and condoms and parts of it were more deeply contaminated with radioactivity than most of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. I was there with a former Department of Energy scientist and his Geiger counter issued a terrifying alarm — at around 2 milliroentgens per hour. He had samples tested at a radiological analysis lab and discovered the radioactive element radium to be 5,000 times general background levels.

It’s all right there in the industry’s own research and reports. And this is the beauty of science, an incredible record of our world and its ways laid out across time, and like a sacred language, it moves through time, collecting new bits and building. One can go back to 1904, when a 25-year-old Canadian graduate student named Eli described “experiments with a highly radioactive gas obtained from crude petroleum.” Or 1982, when a report of the American Petroleum Institute’s Committee for Environmental Biology and Community Health stated: “Almost all materials of interest and use to the petroleum industry contain measurable quantities of radionuclides that reside finally in process equipment, product streams, or waste.”

Radium, they warned, was “a potent source of radiation exposure, both internal and external,” while the radioactive gas radon and its polonium daughters “deliver significant population and occupational exposures.” Radon is America’s second leading cause of lung cancer deaths and naturally contaminates natural gas. Which means it is being emitted out of home stoves in parts of the country at levels high enough to generate public health risks, and over time, cancer and deaths. The 1982 American Petroleum Institute report concluded: “regulation of radionuclides could impose a severe burden on API member companies.”

And they have triumphed, as the radioactivity brought to the surface in oil and gas development was never federally regulated and remains unregulated. The industry was granted a federal exemption in 1980 that legally defined their waste as nonhazardous, despite containing toxic chemicals, carcinogens, heavy metals and all the radioactivity. As the nuclear forensics scientist Marco Kaltofen has told me: “With fossil fuels, essentially what you are doing is taking an underground radioactive reservoir and bringing it up to the surface where it can interact with people and the environment.”




Goes on to talk about 'polonium pipelines' in all the US networks...
Click to expand...

The US has some shocking areas. Pretty sure Monsanto still has towns they bankroll to store all their waste too.
 


Al Qaeda famously never wanted its own state.

It led to massive internal ructions.


It is also why when Daesh declared the Caliphate it was such a big deal.
 
The Warlord said:


Al Qaeda famously never wanted its own state.

It led to massive internal ructions.


It is also why when Daesh declared the Caliphate it was such a big deal.
Click to expand...

Also, not all Palestinians are terrorists.
 
ferball said:
Also, not all Palestinians are terrorists.
Click to expand...

Its quite funny idiots going "well, guess this proves terrorism works!" after Ireland recognised Palestine.

Like der, how do you reckon the Irish got most of their country back off the Brits?

And how did the Israelis fight against the Brits too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The acurate one
Is this where all the shit threads go to fade Into obscurity.
Replies
9
Views
574
SonofSamsquanch
SonofSamsquanch
Gasometer
Toast Motor Sport Thread - 4 or 2 wheels
Replies
6
Views
507
Gasometer
Gasometer
kool kangas
The good old days
Replies
0
Views
180
kool kangas
kool kangas
goalieboy82
Toast the answer to life the universe and everything
Replies
14
Views
653
koshari
koshari
The acurate one
I’m on the train!!
Replies
19
Views
760
Gasometer
Gasometer
Gasometer
Toast I’m on the Plane! - Real time travel
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
koshari
koshari
Gasometer
News The Rain and Floods
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
216
Views
8K
Orange Peanut
Orange Peanut

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top