Link: https://www.politico.eu/article/u-s-energy-chief-chris-wright-slams-eu-talk-of-cutting-u-s-lng/

"Washington would “never” weaponize energy exports."
Yeah, right. Let's trust the word of the Epstein government.

US says "Our leadership rapes children and murders our own innocent people in the street. Constitutions, courts and the rule of law get in the way of billionaire child fucking and the systematic dismanteling of civil and human rights. Join our dystopia and you too can be raped and murdered by career criminals. You can trust us.

Fuck Politico, Axel Springer and Döpfner. Don't share, don't click.

Like Washington did not weaponise compute chips and trade.

https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/55154354

They mean like what they did to NS2 using Ukrainians?

Thanks for the warning. I agree with the sentiment for these link. Bad behaviour should not be rewarded. Is there an alternate way to access the text?

NS2 was a mistake. We shouldn't be reliant on Russian gas either. Especially not now.

Yeah, you can archive the article with archive.org (.org is still safe, it has nothing to do with .is, .today etc).

I have no idea who blew up ns2 nor have any interest in speculations. It would be important to know, but without any convincing evidence this just distracts people from more important stuff. At some point we'll know. Whatever has happend, AFAIC it was the right outcome for the wrong reasons.

If I read headlines like that I always have the Civ5 NPC diplomacy animations in my head. Also lots of recent news also could be those bad Civ5 NPC reactions.

Not true. Cutting reliance on gas - of whatever origin - is of the utmost importance. I mean anything energy related. Natural gas has other uses besides burning it to generate power, not talking about that. Renewables + energy storage tech are good enough substitutes that should prevent any new investments in last century's tech.

Renewables + energy storage tech are good enough substitutes

Solar and wind are already significantly cheaper just in cash terms than any other form of energy generation. Hydroelectric, geothermal, and tidal are more expensive than gas but offer none of the carbon drawbacks once construction is complete. Nuclear is significantly more expensive, has significant drawbacks in terms of waste management and the carbon cost of construction is very high but is "always on".

Basically, there is neither an environmental case for fossil fuels and there's no longer an economic one either, and the gap is widening each year as battery and generation technology advances.