• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion.
    CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER

2020 Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
gangstonc said:
So, I guess Trump’s oil deal with SA and Russia didn’t work...
Click to expand...

Given the complete lack of demand at the moment, I'm not sure any size reduction/deal could've made a difference for these May contracts.

June contracts are at ~$21 a barrel (which is effectively what the price will be tomorrow), if we see a partial restart in the world economy over the next few weeks, oil prices might hold up going forward with the oil deal in place. However, the oil deal was a production cut of 10 million barrels, and ideally it would've been more like 20 million barrels to prop things up.
 
They can wheel and deal all they want on the output. The fact is there is nowhere to store it. Wish I could find a map of oil tanker locations just waiting offshore.
 
Jacob said:
Given the complete lack of demand at the moment, I'm not sure any size reduction/deal could've made a difference for these May contracts.

June contracts are at ~$21 a barrel (which is effectively what the price will be tomorrow), if we see a partial restart in the world economy over the next few weeks, oil prices might hold up going forward with the oil deal in place. However, the oil deal was a production cut of 10 million barrels, and ideally it would've been more like 20 million barrels to prop things up.
Click to expand...
And he filled up our strategic reserves at $30 a barrell.
 
This is honestly embarrassing.

P7GATNXONVGLHMSJPG6TL2CGBA.png
 
gangstonc said:
I’m too busy scooping rocks out of the ocean to combat the rising oceans to worry about corona.
Click to expand...
From an elementary physics stand point, I get where Mo Brooks was coming from. But he was clearly trying to trivialize rising oceans from anthropogenic climate change. He inadvertently and unintentionally made a good point about sediment polluting our waters and something needs to be done about it (it is actually the largest pollutant worldwide).
 
Kory said:
From an elementary physics stand point, I get where Mo Brooks was coming from. But he was clearly trying to trivialize rising oceans from anthropogenic climate change. He inadvertently and unintentionally made a good point about sediment polluting our waters and something needs to be done about it (it is actually the largest pollutant worldwide).
Click to expand...
He never mentioned pollution.
 
gangstonc said:
He never mentioned pollution.
Click to expand...
No. But you get people googling to see if he’s right or wrong will reveal it’s not just plastics that are killing our waters like many who have agendas against oil and gas will make you believe.

Sediment flux as he mentioned might be the most problematic issue for our water sources and oceans. He INADVERTENTLY brought attention to a serious issue.
 
Last edited:
Kory said:
No. But you get people googling to see if he’s right or wrong will reveal it’s not just plastics that are killing our waters like many who have agendas against oil and gas will make you believe.

Sediment flux as he mentioned might be the most problematic issue for our water sources and oceans. He INADVERTENTLY brought attention to a serious issue.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. As long as you agree it was a ridiculous comment that goes against science, I’m good.
 
gangstonc said:
Gotcha. As long as you agree it was a ridiculous comment that goes against science, I’m good.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah he’s flat out wrong. That’s why I said it was an elementary school idea of physics lol.

But if he thinks sediment flowing into our waters is serious enough to mitigate (albeit for wrong reasons such as sea level rise) go for it. I’ve done a lot of work in that field of environmental science and it’s way overlooked and largely anthropogenic pollution that can be remedied.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top