Posts by Nancy Gomez26

slysurfer14 said:So you really think if you slap someone with sanctions, they won't just hit you right back...
it's all just "sanctions this, sanctions that," and then everyone starts crying when Russia decides to cut off the gas supply....

In reality, you're the only one here panicking over reduced gas shipments from Russia.

slysurfer14 said:Nobody’s making urea anymore because they have to save on gas, not even Yari, I guess.

It’s all perfectly clear now. If you read between the lines, the CEO basically admitted that at these current natural gas prices, producing fertilizer is a losing game if they want to remain competitive on the global market. As for your claim—where exactly are you getting this idea that nobody is manufacturing urea anymore?

From what I can gather, there’s quite a variety of nitrogen fertilizers available on the market right now. At the following wholesale rates.It seems to me that those folks over at the Petrokemija Board of Directors are simply sitting around, waiting for the Government to step in and bail them out.

The current situation remains predictably grim. We watch the wheels turn, yet nothing actually moves forward. It is a repetitive cycle of inefficiency that we have seen time and again in our own history. One might expect progress, but reality rarely aligns with such optimistic theories. Just more of the same. The user says:
Of course they work. Honestly, it feels like we could use a few sanctions ourselves.

We have spent years fruitlessly attempting to increase the presence of domestic goods on our own store shelves. Meanwhile, look at how Russia managed to solve that exact dilemma in just a matter of months.

The geopolitical chessboard moves once again, and the pieces are being shuffled by forces far beyond the reach of the average citizen. It’s a repetitive cycle. We see the same patterns of escalation and reaction, much like watching a slow-motion collision on a highway where everyone knows the crash is coming, yet no one touches the brakes. There is a certain exhaustion that comes with following these developments. One watches the shifting alliances and the tightening grip of international pressure, wondering if any of it actually changes the fundamental trajectory of global power. Much like a massive corporation trying to pivot its entire supply chain overnight—it’s messy, inefficient, and usually results in more chaos than clarity. We are told these measures will achieve specific outcomes, yet history suggests otherwise. Every time we implement new layers of Western sanctions, we simply watch the landscape reorganize itself around the obstacles. It is a game of cat and mouse played with billions of dollars and millions of lives at stake. It feels less like progress and more like a desperate attempt to maintain an old order that is already slipping through our fingers.

Perhaps we should just pick a fight ourselves. Provoke an international incident, trigger some heavy-handed Western sanctions, and let the resulting chaos force us to finally invest in our own domestic production. Given the current state of American agriculture, though, I suspect we’d be staring down the barrel of mass starvation almost immediately—provided we could even find enough bread to go around. Maybe.

slysurfer14 said:That’s why they pump out fertilizer in the summer. If they can't use the gas this year, they won't make a single gram... You think there's no big deal? Like, "Oh, we'll just buy it somewhere else for ten times the price"? Well, now prices have already jumped at least three times over...
So, how much do you think food prices are gonna spike because of this?.....

Where exactly are you getting this idea that they've stopped production or that they aren't planning to produce anything this year? There isn't a single notice about that on their official site:

https://exxonmobil.com/news

The situation remains stagnant. A predictable pattern of inertia. We watch the gears grind, yet nothing moves forward. It is much like watching a stalled engine in a Detroit factory—plenty of noise, plenty of smoke, but zero momentum. One begins to wonder if anyone is actually at the wheel, or if we are all just passengers in a vehicle with no destination. kaže:
It would be better to simply shut down ExxonMobil.

That much is already clear.😉

Postscript.

It’s coming. We all know it.

Perhaps even Russian.

The global fertilizer market is currently a volatile mess, much like a high-stakes poker game where the rules change mid-hand. We are seeing massive shifts in supply chains that have left many producers feeling incredibly exposed. It’s one thing to plan a season based on predictable costs, but quite another when geopolitical instability turns the entire landscape upside down. Take the current situation with gas prices and nitrogen production. It’s a domino effect. When energy costs spike, the cost of producing ammonia skyrockets, which immediately hits the farmer's bottom line. We saw this play out during recent supply disruptions, and frankly, it felt less like a temporary hiccup and more like a fundamental breakdown of the old stability we once took for granted. Then there is the issue of logistics and trade barriers. With various international tensions and shifting trade policies, getting essential nutrients from point A to point B has become an expensive headache. It isn't just about having the product; it's about whether it can actually reach the field without being swallowed by rising freight costs or blocked by sudden regulatory shifts. We are essentially watching a collision between old-school agricultural planning and a new, much more chaotic reality. For those on the ground, the margin for error has shrunk to almost nothing. You can't just rely on last year's playbook anymore; the math simply doesn't add up the same way it used to.

Decisions regarding such matters rest solely with the plant owners. As a consumer, I couldn't care less about the origin of my fertilizer. My preference would be to source it from an ExxonMobil facility, provided the price point and quality align with my requirements. However, if ExxonMobil doesn't have it in stock, I'll simply look elsewhere. I am under no obligation to maintain any sort of loyalty to them.
Just as a side note—back when we couldn't freely trade within the single market—fertilizer from an ExxonMobil plant was always more expensive for domestic consumers than it was for farmers in neighboring countries. It was a strange reality where retail prices (pre-tax) for that same fertilizer were actually lower in places like Canada or Canada than they were right here at home through the wholesaler. Once the unified market finally kicked in, the prices "leveled out." But there was a peculiar irony during those earlier years: even when that fertilizer was cheaper in Canada, it couldn't be imported back into the States to take advantage of the price gap. The reason? Customs duties. Since the product wasn't classified under the specific trade agreements of the time, even though it was produced locally, it hit those tariff walls. In the end, it just made everything more expensive for us.

slysurfer14 said:Breaking news from today:
Dow Chemical in Indianapolis isn't going to restart fertilizer production...
You have to explain what that means for fall planting, and eventually for food supply and prices too...

It's unbelievable how people can be so blind when they have perfectly good eyes...

Regarding the planting season, this could be significant, or it could be noise. Mineral fertilizers are global commodities; they move through international trade routes, meaning they can be sourced from other suppliers regardless of local shutdowns. On the other hand, if a major player like Dow Chemical is struggling to get lines running, we might see similar systemic failures among other manufacturers across the European Union. Then there is the matter of internal stability; even when gas supplies were consistent, this facility faced its own set of hurdles beyond just fuel availability. Generally speaking, when fully operational, Dow Chemical is one of the largest industrial gas consumers in the US. During peak demand periods—those bitter mid-winter stretches—they often throttle or halt production entirely just to ensure the grid remains stable for everyone else.

goldenowl73 said:Looks like Gerhard Schröder headed off to Moscow for his "annual getaway." Honestly, you can just tell this is classic Russian-style trolling—that signature blend of arrogance and blatant lying that our former German Chancellor has really mastered over the years.

Former #German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder Has arrived in #Moscow. "I’m just here for a quick little vacation." He even told a reporter that Moscow is actually a lovely city.

The whole chat went down right near the Rosneft headquarters, which makes sense since Schröder used to run the show there as chairman of the board. https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/...kDG30GNAxWFc-g

There is nothing mysterious about this. Since he is already in Moscow on "holiday," he will inevitably pick up his next set of instructions along the way.

Christian Torres3 said:Looks like the orcs in Lisičanska had quite the party. Word is there was some big meeting happening right when a HIMARS rocket decided to crash the festivities...

So, the missile just showed up uninvited to their little gathering? Such rudeness. Clearly, they were never taught any manners at home.

rowdyraven112 said:The team seems to have slept through the last two years. Clearly bears. ☕

Prices spiked because we switched from pipelines to shipping gas to LNG terminals, and those ships account for a massive chunk of consumption.☕
As far as I know, container shipping from China alone jumped 4x, making it pointless for some companies to even bother importing from China anymore. Also, alongside that table, he should’ve included a graph showing gas consumption during the lockdowns versus after. Producers likely started shutting down wells, and reopening them isn't cheap—nor is it easy.☕
Think about how many times people went to fill their propane tanks before the lockdowns compared to during them.

Chevron is more expensive because converting natural gas into an LNG state requires significant effort—you have to compress the gas and then freeze it. That entire process carries a cost because of the mechanical energy required and the advanced technology involved. While shipping costs have risen, LNG tankers can only transport LNG, and they typically operate under long-term contracts. These tankers actually consume the very LNG they carry, as some gas constantly evaporates to maintain low temperatures within the tanks; that gaseous phase serves as the fuel for the vessel. Because of this technical complexity, LNG will never be as cheap as piped gas. However, LNG offers flexibility regarding suppliers and buyers—something piped gas lacks. A pipeline creates a fixed link between a source and a consumer; if you want to switch sources or customers, you're looking at building an entirely new pipeline.

Bryan Booth82 said:Russian gas isn't even going to stop flowing entirely, though it’s almost certain we won't see the same massive volumes we had before the aggression began.
Beyond the fact that Russian gas used to be the cheapest option, some folks in Europe actually predicted back in 2015 that this exact scenario could play out—that we might find ourselves at the mercy of Russian blackmail. Yet, they somehow managed to dismiss that risk entirely, reducing the probability to zero percent.

The wake-up call has finally arrived, even for the nations that were caught sleeping deeply, such as the biggest consumer of Russian gas... Germany.

To think that they could ever rely on Russian gas for 50% of their needs again is nothing short of delusional.
Whether Russian gas imports drop to zero or hover around 20% doesn't actually change the big picture; the obvious goal for the next 1.5 to 2 years is clear enough.

Best regards,

Diversifying suppliers is, obviously, essential. It is a lesson some ignored, and now they are paying the price, though they likely won't make that mistake twice. It is a positive step that alternative routes are being developed (likely involving the entire European Union gas grid) alongside other sources. In the long run, this should lead to lower prices and increased supply security; it may even trigger the development of new deposits if prices remain high enough to justify exploration. In an ideal scenario, no single supplier should account for more than 30 percent of total requirements—ideally, that share should be even smaller.
Ultimately, attempting to conduct foreign policy by leveraging gas supplies against the Russians has backfired spectacularly. That is what happens when you run a business based on personal preferences rather than pragmatism.

All this chaos will eventually settle, and Russian gas will flow through those pipelines back into Europe once again. The price? That’ll be whatever two powers decide it should be, but it’ll likely remain the cheapest option on the market. We just don't know the timeline. It could happen in three months, or we might be waiting thirty years.

casualtiger2 said:Current status of gas storage in Europe (July 19, 2022) - Storage Data

European Union - 65 % (722 TWh; average consumption Nov 1, 2021 - Mar 1, 2022 ~ 6 TWh) /// July 19, 2021 - 53% (595 TWh)
At this rate—assuming we don't add a single drop more—the EU has enough gas for about 120 days of fall/winter usage.
Back in the fall of 2021, we hit a max capacity of 75%, whereas the low point in spring 2022 was 25%.

Portugal - 100 %
Poland - 98.14 %
United Kingdom - 92.72 %
Denmark - 83.78 %
Czech Republic - 75.96 %
Spain - 74.99 %
France - 72.54% (95.47 TWh)
Italy - 68.63% (132.76 TWh)
Belgium - 68.26 %
Slovakia - 66.71 %
Germany - 65.1% (158.19 TWh)
Netherlands - 60.8% (86.03 TWh)
Austria - 50.14 %
Canada - 47.27 %
United States - 44.43 %

It is an interesting observation: Northern Europe appears better prepared than the South (with the exception of Italy).

Bryan Booth82 said:Look, if that were actually true, why haven't they shut down every single pipeline heading toward the West? It's hard to believe they'd keep selling us gas just because they're suddenly worried about our heating bills this winter.

Just today, they announced they're going to go ahead and flow gas through Nord Stream 1 after all.
How does that work? If they truly didn't care whether anyone used their supply, they wouldn't be bothering to turn the valves.🤔
Best,

Russia is demonstrating goodwill through these gas deliveries. You clearly haven't learned a single thing yet.

Chloe Nguyen21 said:So he shows up to beg for weapons... I mean, it’s honestly kind of embarrassing for Russia, isn't it? To think a country facing all those sanctions actually ended up developing drones and missile systems that outclass their own... just pathetic, really.🤦

No. This was an official visit by someone—anyone, really—who needs to signal to the rest of the world that they haven't been completely abandoned. It’s a desperate attempt at optics. Since a trip to New York City is off the table—with Vučić having elegantly dodged that obligation—Tehran will serve as a perfectly acceptable substitute.

dustyowl29 said:For decades now, Algerian gas has been flowing straight into Italy and Spain via the so-called Maghreb–Europe Gas Pipeline—just take a look at the map...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...map-en.svg.png

If you study that map, you'll see gas coming from Nigeria too. That pipeline project has been sitting on the drawing board since the 1970s. It's still stuck in the planning stages. Just another grand promise that never quite arrives.

Joshua Myers432 said:Actually, they could. You just find a few of those pro-American enthusiasts, install a pro-US president, park two aircraft carriers off the coast, and 🎉

It would be a massive drain on both time and capital. Not to mention, such a forced approach to spreading democracy would likely alienate the very citizens you're trying to reach. If people are satisfied with their current regime—if life in the kingdom is stable—there is zero incentive to overhaul the system from the outside. And let’s face it: the monarch will remain aligned with American interests for a long time to come, simply because his entire throne depends on it.

Joshua Myers432 said:We should probably go over there and introduce some democracy, and fast.

There is neither a need nor any logic in imposing it from the outside—it never made sense to begin with. A people with that specific systemic framework wouldn't even know how to run a country.

Lisa Grant5 said:You could also look at it this way—if we used to sell something for 80 and now, even with a solid discount, we’re moving it for 100, then the "situation" is actually looking pretty good.😉

Sure. You could look at it this way: there was a time when crude traded for as little as a dollar a barrel, and now we’re looking at much higher figures, so why complain? If they find it profitable to sell at a discount, that's their business. It works for them, and frankly, it works for me too.

Joshua Myers432 said:Reuters reported that Saudi Arabia's imports have doubled compared to previous levels. Then Gojko jumps in with his little conclusion. So, what's your take? Why would Saudi Arabia suddenly double their oil imports all of a sudden?

It is simple math. They can buy it at a significant discount. As far as I am concerned, they didn't impose sanctions, so everything is fine by me. Everything stays fine as long as they secure that proper discount. Perhaps someone in Moscow will eventually wonder how we ended up in a position where we have to sell our product cheaper than everyone else. Or perhaps they won't.

dustytiger8 said:Where did she go after Chernobyl!?

Back then, Belarus took the brunt of it. But that’s always subject to the weather patterns and wind direction. Ukraine is simply too close to be playing those kinds of games.