Oil Tanker Rates Climb As Traders Shun Russian Vessels
Since Russia invaded Ukraine, many Western countries have banned Russian crude imports. Now, however, countries and companies are shunning the use of Russia’s massive fleet of oil tankers, which has driven up tanker rates, according to Bloomberg.
Shipping analyst Peder Nicolai Jarlsby at Oslo-based Fearnley Securities wrote that Sovcomflot PJSC, a state-controlled company with the largest Aframax-class fleet in the world, has been shunned by global oil traders. The result is fewer oil tankers available to haul crude, which has pushed up tanker rates.
Rising freight costs add to inflationary headwinds for the energy market that will only boost costs for refineries and, in return, continue to increase the costs for producing crude products, such as gasoline and diesel.
Even though Aframaxes are one of the smallest oil tankers (move about 700,000 barrels), Sovcomflot’s “largely untouchable” fleet is driving up daily rates for larger tankers as well, such as very large crude carriers, or VLCCs.
The analyst said VLCCs are replacing Aframaxes as there is greater demand for the shrinking number of available vessels.
And there could be more bullish catalysts ahead for tanker rates, as the next round of US and EU sanctions could be imminent.
“Were Europe to escalate its sanctions to a formal ban on Russian oil, then more exports would likely sail to Asia, further eroding the availability of ships as they will have to travel further,” the analyst noted.
As the war in Ukraine drags on, impending Western sanctions could make the availability of tankers decline even further, which would continue to add to inflationary pressures.
Europe is not going to achieve a competitive energy transition with the current interventionist policies. Europe does not depend on Russian gas due to a coincidence, but because of a chain of mistaken policies: banning nuclear in Germany, prohibiting the development of domestic natural gas resources throughout the European Union, added to a massive and expensive renewable rollout without building a reliable backup.
Solar and wind do not reduce dependency on Russian natural gas. They are necessary but volatile and intermittent. They need backup from nuclear, hydro, and natural gas for security of energy supply. Dependency on these backup sources rises in periods of low wind and little sun, just when prices are highest.
“Solar goes to zero for twelve hours a day, and that is guaranteed. The wind blows sometimes, and sometimes it does not, also guaranteed. They both depend on weather, which is 100% out of human control. They are on their best day a supplement,” wrote a Navy pilot follower.
Batteries are not an option, either. It is impossible to build an industrial-size network of enormous batteries; the cost would be prohibitive and the dependency on China (for lithium, etc.) to build them would be even more of a problem. At current prices, a battery energy-storage system of Europe’s size would cost more than $2.5 trillion, according to an MIT Technology Review paper, massively more expensive than any other alternative.
The added cost of a battery grid plus the distribution and transmission network would make household bills soar even further.
Inflation was already out of control in Europe before the invasion of Ukraine was even a risk. Consumer price inflation in Spain was 7.6 percent, in Portugal it was 4.2 percent, and in Germany, 5.1 percent. Euro area consumer price inflation was 5.8 percent.
In the face of the impact on prices and energy from the invasion of Ukraine, we must remember:
Europe was already in an energy crisis in 2020 and 2021, with the cost of CO2 permits soaring and wholesale electricity prices reaching record-high levels by December 2021.
Europe does not “depend on Russian gas.” It is codependency. Russia needs Europe to export, and Europe has no cheaper alternative. Let us remember that Russian gas is much cheaper than any other realistic alternative.
The long-term contracts signed with Gazprom are closed at prices that can be up to ten times lower than some of the current alternatives. The 150 billion cubic meters that Europe imports from Russia can be replaced with liquefied natural gas from Norway and the North Sea, the United States, Algeria, Qatar, or Israel, but it will be much more expensive.
The only alternative to Russia is to show that European countries have diverse and cheap sources of supply. If Russia sees that European governments ban nuclear power, prohibit the development of indigenous gas reserves, intervene in imports, and add massive CO2 taxes, Russian authorities will know that there is no competitive alternative, and that European industry and consumers will collapse due to the rising cost of energy
European governments should think hard about misguided policies when the continent has been saved this winter by natural gas imported from the United States produced with fracking, a technology that has been banned in Europe.
Europe wants cheap and abundant energy, but politicians demonize nuclear, gas, and oil. All the interventionist proposals that are put forward by European politicians entail a higher cost for long-suffering consumers.
Natural gas flows all the time and is cheap and abundant. It cannot be substituted with renewables that are intermittent, volatile, and unpredictable. The example of Germany is clear. After investing massively in renewables and doubling bills for consumers, it depends more on lignite coal and Russian gas to guarantee supply. Germany has had to reactivate coal plants after spending more than $200 billion in subsidies and renewables!
All technologies are necessary, and renewables are key, but they are not the alternative because they need natural gas backup while the technology is developed, as it is still in its infancy. Let’s not forget that installing renewables involves a huge cost in networks. Who will lower bills if the fixed cost of networks is increased by the $150 billion we estimate are needed to strengthen distribution and transmission networks?
All the “magical” alternatives that interventionism sells mean going from depending on Russia to depending on China. Where are we going to get the silicon, aluminum, rare-earths, copper, lithium, etc. necessary for those massive magical investments announced?
Demonizing nuclear energy has left Europe in the hands of expensive and volatile alternatives. The energy transition must be considered with an understanding of the importance of security of supply and competitiveness. We need all technologies, without ideological bias. We need solar, wind, natural gas, hydro, oil, and nuclear, or we will go from crisis to crisis, and always paying more.
It is absurd to maintain the hidden tax scheme of CO2 emissions during an unprecedented crisis. Governments must use this income to reduce citizens’ bills.
Border taxes on oil products and natural gas are not taxing producers; they are taxing consumers in European countries. Whoever believes that the taxes that have been announced will be paid by Qatar, Nigeria, or Brazil has a serious problem of economic understanding.
A true energy transition must be competitive, reliable, and cheap, not a tax-collection and looting machine. It must consider all technologies. More industry and less politics. More competition and less ideology.
Craig A. Schmeckpeper, a former physical education teacher in Nebraska’s North Bend Elementary School, has been charged with child abuse not resulting in serious injury. The incident happened in a P.E. class in which police said Schmeckpeper pinned a student’s arms behind his back before telling the rest of the class to line up and hit the boy while he held him. Schmeckpeper reportedly said “free hits” and “free punches” as students walked by.
Pope In Strongest Statements Yet Kisses Ukrainian Flag While Decrying “Massacre Of Bucha”
Pope Francis during his weekly Wednesday audience condemned what he called “the massacre of Bucha” and kissed a Ukrainian flag he was given, in the firmest statements he’s issued thus far in the war – which is a clear condemnation of Russian actions.
“Recent news from the war in Ukraine, instead of bringing relief and hope, brought new atrocities, such as the massacre of Bucha,” Francis told a large audience in the Vatican, while welcoming Ukrainian refugees on the stage.
“Stop this war! Let the weapons fall silent! Stop sowing death and destruction,” the Pope stated in his address. Directing remarks to a group of Ukrainian refugees in the audience, he added: “These children had to flee in order to arrive in a safe land. This is the fruit of war. Let’s not forget them and let’s not forget the Ukrainian people.”
“They are victims whose innocent blood cries out to heaven and implores an end to this war. Let us silence the weapons, let us stop sowing death and destruction,” the Pope added.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said over 300 civilians were killed – many which he said had their hands tied behind their backs and were tortured – in an event which triggered more EU and US sanctions this week.
Both Russia and China have rejected the Western narrative, with Moscow describing it as a false flag which occurred when Russian troops weren’t present in the town and as Ukrainian forces retook it. China has urged that facts on the ground need to be independently verified before accusations are made – though the foreign ministry called images coming out of Bucha “deeply disturbing”.
A Kremlin spokesperson on Wednesday turned the accusations around, saying it was the “Kiev regime” responsible for slaughtering civilians in Bucha, in order to draw in direct NATO military support. According to state media, Maria Zakharova said:
“There is so much evidence of the innocence of the Russian side that we should close this topic,” Zakharova said, noting that the discourse should be changed into “directly accusing the Ukrainian regime and all those assisting it.”
She referenced the “Bucha fake” and said the West wants and open and shut case without any examination of evidence. At the same time the Kremlin has said the West is ignoring instances of Russian troops being tortured by Ukraine forces.
“The discussion in the UN Security Council showed that our Western colleagues shied away from analysing the flagrant inconsistencies in the footage from Bucha that was shown by their media”, Zakharova said. “They were not going to discuss anything from that footage, they simply made their accusatory statements and wanted to close the topic.”
Craig A. Schmeckpeper, a former physical education teacher in Nebraska’s North Bend Elementary School, has been charged with child abuse not resulting in serious injury. The incident happened in a P.E. class in which police said Schmeckpeper pinned a student’s arms behind his back before telling the rest of the class to line up and hit the boy while he held him. Schmeckpeper reportedly said “free hits” and “free punches” as students walked by.
Former French intelligence chief Pierre Brochand warns that unless Europe and France radically change their policies on mass immigration, civil war could break out, asserting, “all multicultural societies are doomed.”
Brochand, who served as director of the French DGSE from 2002 to 2008, made the comments during an interview with French newspaper Le Figaro.
“All ‘multicultural’ societies are doomed to more or less deep rifts,” warned Brochand, adding, “In such a situation, it happens that minorities are violent winners, and majorities placid losers.”
The negative impact of mass immigration on France can no longer be dismissed because it is “increasingly difficult to prevent the French from seeing what they see,” and also because “a breakthrough personality has suddenly appeared in the formulaic world of politics that has encouraged them to open their eyes,” said Brochand.
The ex-intel chief predicts that if Emmanuel Macron wins the presidential election and fails to massively alter his approach to immigration, civil war could ensue.
“This gradual upheaval of the French population, if not the only challenge we face, is the only one that directly threatens civil peace on our territory,” said Brochand, warning that Muslim migrants and others from outside of Europe have developed a “spirit of post-colonial revenge.”
France’s former intelligence chief warns against possible civil war due to mass immigration
“France and Europe must abandon mass immigration and radically change their immigration policies, warned Pierre Brochand…” https://t.co/xLGAmOELeJ
He also warned that the migrant population’s significantly higher birth rate and the fact that younger generations born of immigrants are “even less integrated with French society than their parents,” threatens the fabric of French society.
Brochand says the only solution is that proposed by French presidential candidate Eric Zemmour, namely “remigration,” incentivizing or otherwise mandating that millions of migrants return to their home countries.
Asked if it was too late, Brochand responded, “In any case, it is very late. Let us face it: We are no longer dealing with dispersed individuals, that is to say, so many ‘special cases,’ each in search of a better future, but with diasporas.”
“A diaspora is an entity, formed by immigrants and their descendants — including, crucially, French nationals — who are grouped together and whose numbers reach a critical mass sufficient for social pressure to encourage the perpetuation of the beliefs and ways of life of the countries of origin, with which relations remain tense,” explained Brochand. “This way, more or less closed foreign enclaves are spontaneously formed that turn their backs on the host country and its customs.”
Brochand’s conclusion is bother sobering and somber.
“All my accumulated experiences make me foresee a dark, and even very dark, future for our children and grandchildren. At best, they are heading toward an unsuspected collapse of their quality of life (an implosion); at worst, we are leading them to terrible confrontations (an explosion). Most likely, there will be a combination of the two amid growing confusion.”
As RemixNews reports, Brochand made the remarks amidst yet another wave of migrant riots afflicting metropolitan areas of France.
“Since last week, the cities of Sevran and Aulnay-sous-Bois in the suburbs of Paris have been the scenes of true urban guerrilla warfare, and similar scenes have been seen in Villeurbanne and Vénissieux, in the suburbs of Lyon. Each time, it is incidents between police officers trying to enforce the law and violent multi-recidivist criminals that were the initial cause of riots, shootings, and multiple fires, with ambushes set up against the police squads called in as reinforcements.”
A recent poll released last year by Harris revealed that the majority of French people are concerned about “European, white and Christian populations being threatened with extinction” as a result of “Muslim immigration.”
Despite this, Emmanuel Macron is expected to be successful in securing a second presidential term later this month.
Bill Introducing ‘Mandatory Vaccination’ For All Germans Over 60 Expected To Pass
The COVID pandemic has largely subsided in Europe (although health authorities have warned about an uptick in cases caused by subvariants and hybrid variants of the omicron strain). But this hasn’t stopped German lawmakers from pushing for a new law that would legally require people age 60 and older to be vaccinated.
But that’s not all. The deal struck by members of Germany’s ruling “stop sign” coalition, which includes Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democratic Party, the Greens and the ‘classical liberal’ Free Democrats, also includes an option for making COVID shots mandatory for everybody age 18 and older.
That second provision will depend on how the next wave of the pandemic develops during the fall, according to Bloomberg, which cited a local report.
According to other provisions in the proposed law, the government would initially try to “encourage” the unvaccinated to voluntary submit to inoculation (Germany still has millions of unvaccinated citizens, not unlike the US). Fortunately, even if the proposal becomes a law (it’s due for a vote on Thursday), it will also include provisions that would reverse the situation if enough people receive their COVID shots voluntarily before the summer.
Lawmakers told Bloomberg that the goal of the proposal is “effective prevention.”
“We are united by the goal of effective prevention through the highest possible level of basic immunity for all adults for the fall, because in this way we can prevent the health system from being overwhelmed,” they added.
Germany is still recording more than 200,000 cases and more than 300 deaths from the virus on most days. But with more than 75% of its population vaccinated, the pressure on the country’s health-care system has significantly lessened since the depths of the pandemic.
Most western countries have strongly opposed mandatory vaccination requirements (although the Biden Administration in the US has attempted to force millions of workers to either get vaccinated or risk losing their jobs before the Supreme Court to declare Biden’s executive orders unconstitutional). But Chancellor Scholz has decided that mandatory vaccination is permissible, so long as the Bundestag grants its blessing.
Another lawmaker said compulsory vaccination for all Germans over 60 will help the German economy remain “free” during the fall wave. Whether that’s true or not remains to be seen.
Next Term, the Supreme Court will decide an important case on Miranda rights, Vega v, Tekoh. The basic question in Tekoh is whether there can be a civil remedy for a Miranda violation. In Chavez v. Martinez, back in 2003, a badly-splintered Court held that the law is not violated if a police officer obtains a confession in violation of Miranda that is never actually admitted in Court. It’s the admission in court of the unwarned statement that is the problem, the various opinions concluded, not the obtaining of the statement alone. In the words of Justice Kennedy’s partial concurrence, without the admission of the statement there is no “completed constitutional violation actionable under 42 U. S. C. § 1983.”
Tekoh raises a follow-up question: If an unwarned statement is wrongfully admitted, is that a completed violation actionable under 42 U. S. C. § 1983? And if it’s actionable, who is responsible for it?
I would have thought that the first question was definitively resolved by Dickerson v. United States, which concluded that Miranda is “a constitutional decision of this Court [that] may not be in effect overruled by an Act of Congress.” If Miranda is a constitutional decision, and the constitutional wrong is the admission of the unwarned statement, then logically doesn’t the admission of the unwarned statement have to be a constitutional violation?
No, says Vega, the officer who obtained the statement. Vega says that Dickerson never explicitly stated that Miranda violations are actually constitutional violations. In Vega’s view, this means that Miranda is just a constitutionally-inspired prophylactic rule of evidence, not an actual constitutional rule. As a result, he argues, admission of an unwarned statement can be a subject of a motion to suppress, but it cannot lead to liability under § 1983. Echoing the dissenters in Dickerson, Vega presents Miranda as just a made-up rule that is not part of the real Constitution—and certainly not part of the Constitution as originally understood.
Professor Oliver and his co-authors argue that Miranda v. Arizona was more a return to Framing-era interrogation practices than something entirely novel. Around the time of the Framing, he claims, the common law voluntariness test for the admission of confessions was much more restrictive than it became in the 20th century. In the Framing era, magistrates routinely gave legal warnings to a person about to be interrogated that he had a right to remain silent and that their evidence would be used against them. The warnings were thought necessary, Oliver argues, as a way to meet the very strict voluntariness rule then in place. Only when a person was told of his rights, the thinking went, could a subsequent statement be deemed truly voluntary.
This thinking will ring a bell to modern criminal procedure ears: It’s the basic theory of Miranda. What happened, Oliver argues, is that courts loosened the voluntariness test in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Warnings were then dropped, as they were no longer needed to make sure statements were voluntary. (Almost everything was voluntary under the new voluntariness test; who needs warnings?) But the new looser voluntariness test then led to brutal interrogation practices in the 20th century. And then the Warren Court, entirely unaware of this history, responded to those brutal interrogation practices by devising what it thought was a new idea for how to ensure the voluntariness of confessions: Introduce the requirements of legal warnings.
As Oliver tells it, Miranda inadvertently returned to something akin to what it was in the Framing era without actually realizing it:
Miranda-like warnings were part of the historical practice of interrogations. Under the Framing Era voluntariness test, as a practical matter, warnings were often essential to admit a suspect’s confession. As the Court often looks to Framing Era practices to understand the original public meaning of the Constitution, this often-overlooked set of practices provides considerable historical support for Miranda warnings as a constitutional protection.
Although the brief doesn’t put it this way, the picture drawn hints at a rich irony. The living constitutionalists behind Miranda stumbled upon a rule similar to what was employed in the Framing era, while the originalists who excoriate Miranda are unknowingly insisting a made-up 20th century rule.
Full disclosure: I have spoken with Professor Oliver about the case and reviewed a draft of the brief.
