EU Carbon Permits May Suffer More Drops This Week on Russia Sanctions; Oil Seen Rising (1)

–Note this more recent comment

Comment by By Mathew Carr, Feb. 27, 2022

European Union carbon permits may fall tomorrow (Monday) and later in the week because Russian banks and companies fearing sanctions will seek to liquefy any assets they hold that can be easily sold before the sanctions hit.

On Saturday, a group of nations including the United States and the EU moved to block certain Russian banks’ access to the SWIFT international payment system in a signal to Moscow to back off from its military “operation” in Ukraine.

The various banks will face sanctions over time (the timing does not immediately seem clear).

Also “we commit to imposing restrictive measures that will prevent the Russian Central Bank from deploying its international reserves in ways that undermine the impact of our sanctions,” the countries said (see press release copied below).

The EU carbon market is one of the biggest EU markets after the euro. Factories with Russian ownership are among those that receive a large portion of their allowances for free under the program (and they are generally receiving allowances for 2022 this month — so more than a year before they are handed in). The value of the virtual certificates has more than doubled in the past year.

Carbon futures already plunged more than 8% on Thursday, recovering slightly Friday. See this CarrZee story and this.

Crude oil is seen rising to $135 / barrel: ICIS.

I’m after views on what will happen with Dutch natgas prices tomorrow. Please send to

See also …China and India don’t denounce Russia.

(More to come)


Joint Statement by Nations here:

Joint Statement on Further Restrictive Economic Measures


We, the leaders of the European Commission, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States condemn Putin’s war of choice and attacks on the sovereign nation and people of Ukraine. We stand with the Ukrainian government and the Ukrainian people in their heroic efforts to resist Russia’s invasion. Russia’s war represents an assault on fundamental international rules and norms that have prevailed since the Second World War, which we are committed to defending. We will hold Russia to account and collectively ensure that this war is a strategic failure for Putin.

This past week, alongside our diplomatic efforts and collective work to defend our own borders and to assist the Ukrainian government and people in their fight, we, as well as our other allies and partners around the world, imposed severe measures on key Russian institutions and banks, and on the architects of this war, including Russian President Vladimir Putin.

As Russian forces unleash their assault on Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities, we are resolved to continue imposing costs on Russia that will further isolate Russia from the international financial system and our economies. We will implement these measures within the coming days.

Specifically, we commit to undertake the following measures:

First, we commit to ensuring that selected Russian banks are removed from the SWIFT messaging system. This will ensure that these banks are disconnected from the international financial system and harm their ability to operate globally.

Second, we commit to imposing restrictive measures that will prevent the Russian Central Bank from deploying its international reserves in ways that undermine the impact of our sanctions.

Third, we commit to acting against the people and entities who facilitate the war in Ukraine and the harmful activities of the Russian government. Specifically, we commit to taking measures to limit the sale of citizenship—so called golden passports—that let wealthy Russians connected to the Russian government become citizens of our countries and gain access to our financial systems.

Fourth, we commit to launching this coming week a transatlantic task force that will ensure the effective implementation of our financial sanctions by identifying and freezing the assets of sanctioned individuals and companies that exist within our jurisdictions. As a part of this effort we are committed to employing sanctions and other financial and enforcement measures on additional Russian officials and elites close to the Russian government, as well as their families, and their enablers to identify and freeze the assets they hold in our jurisdictions. We will also engage other governments and work to detect and disrupt the movement of ill-gotten gains, and to deny these individuals the ability to hide their assets in jurisdictions across the world.

Finally, we will step up or coordination against disinformation and other forms of hybrid warfare.

We stand with the Ukrainian people in this dark hour. Even beyond the measures we are announcing today, we are prepared to take further measures to hold Russia to account for its attack on Ukraine.

Reuters here:

U.S., allies target ‘fortress Russia’ with new sanctions including SWIFT ban

By Steve Holland

John Chalmers

 and Daphne Psaledakis

U.S., UK, Europe, Canada to block Russian access to SWIFT

Register now for FREE unlimited access to


BRUSSELS/WASHINGTON, Feb 26 (Reuters) – The United States and its allies on Saturday moved to block certain Russian banks’ access to the SWIFT international payment system in further punishment of Moscow as it continues its military assault against Ukraine.

The measures, which will also include restrictions on the Russian central bank’s international reserves, will be implemented in the coming days, the nations said in a joint statement that also vowed further action to come. read more

“We will hold Russia to account and collectively ensure that this war is a strategic failure for Putin,” the leaders of the European Commission, France, Germany, Italy, Great Britain, Canada and the United States wrote.

“Even beyond the measures we are announcing today, we are prepared to take further measures to hold Russia to account for its attack on Ukraine,” they added.

The move comes after the United States and its allies slapped sanctions this week on major Russian banks as well as on Russian President Vladimir Putin himself, among others, as Moscow’s forces pushed into the heart of Ukraine toward Kyiv…..(see link above)

Photo by Anna Tis on


  1. Carbon Trading is a scam, a shell game, a shrill game of slight of hand without Scientific Merit built by sly profiteers to hide the real costs and the real motivations of ‘The Big Green Propaganda Machine’.

    I have spent the last 15 years doing independent research on the Environment. I am a Staunch Environmentalist. Yet my views are somewhat counterintuitive. I am anti-propaganda. It’s our job, collectively, to eradicate pollution, Globally, not just from our own back yard. I dig down sometimes where it hurts the establishment. Honesty means taking the counterintuitive view, even if that crosses swords with established thinking. Saving the planet from all of man’s destruction must remain – Goal One. As an Adamant Naturalist, I disassociate from both Climate Change Deniers and the Environmentalist Collective. False and deceptive activism is prevalent in both camps – An evolved, contemporary, Scientific perspective must rule.

    Batteries, Renewable Energy and EV’s

    The Ultimate in Environmental Destruction and

    ‘Carbon Allowances’ . . . A one Trillion Dollar Scam . . .

    What is a battery? Tesla said it best when he called them ‘Energy Storage Systems’. They do not make electricity inside . . . they store electricity produced somewhere else. Primarily by coal, uranium, natural gas, bio-fuel or diesel-fueled Electric Power Plants. Therefore, to say an Electric Vehicle (EV) is a Zero Emission vehicle is not even remotely true! Since about forty percent of the electricity generated in the United States comes from coal-fired generating stations . . . you could say that forty percent of the EVs on the road are Coal-Powered . . . Interesting . . . OH, and let’s not forget OHM’s law on resistance . . . at least 28% of the electricity produced is lost as Heat getting the electricity to EV batteries. At least 128-kwh of electricity is produced for every 100-kwh used. Average US CO2 emissions per kwh from ALL sources including line loss and charging EV’s is 1.19 lbs. per kwh. At least 15% MORE CO2 Per mile driven. (PDF) Tesla Versus Toyota Camry | Jim Le Maistre –

    Einstein’s formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a five-thousand-pound gasoline-powered automobile one mile as it does an Electric Car. The only question remaining is what produces that power? Again, it does not come from the battery. The battery is only the storage system, like any gas tank in those gas-powered cars.

    There are two types of batteries, rechargeable, and single-use. The most common single-use batteries are household batteries like A, AA, AAA, C, D. 9V, or lantern batteries. These ‘Dry-Cell Batteries’ use zinc or manganese or lithium or silver oxide, or zinc and carbon to store electricity chemically. Please note . . . they all contain highly toxic, heavy metals. ‘Rechargeable’ batteries for Electric Cars are only different internally by way of their contents and they are re-chargeable, usually lithium-ion or nickel-metal oxide or nickel-cadmium.
    Americans use three billion of these two types of battery every year. The vast majority do not get recycled. Most end up in landfill sites. California is the only state requiring all batteries be recycled. When we throw our small, used batteries into the trash, this is what happens to them. The battery continues to run down long after it can no longer power a smoke alarm, toy or light . . . we think of them as dead. Well, that is not true. They continue to leak small amounts of electricity. Then, as the chemicals inside run out of electricity, pressure builds inside the battery’s metal casing, and eventually, they rupture. Then, those ‘toxic heavy metals’ left inside will ooze out. The ooze is environmentally toxic. All that ooze that will leak from every battery into every landfill. The only difference with rechargeable EV batteries or tool batteries . . . they take longer before they end up in the landfill.

    For those of us who are getting all excited about Electric Cars and the ‘Green Revolution’, We must ALL take a much closer look at Batteries and Wind Turbines and Solar Panels and EV’s. These technologies all share environmentally destructive ‘Embedded Costs’, that rarely ever get discussed. Everything manufactured has two costs associated with them, ‘Embedded Costs’ and ‘Operating Costs’ . . . both must be examined by their merits . . . and by their failures . . .

    One Lithium-Ion battery in one Electric Car weighs about 1,000 lbs. They each contain at least 25 pounds of lithium, 60 pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and about 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic. In those batteries there are about 6,800 individual lithium-ion cells.

    This should concern us all ! These toxic components all come from mining. While manufacturing each Electric Car battery, we process about 25,000 pounds of brine to make the lithium. 30,000 pounds of cobalt ore. 5,000 pounds of nickel ore, and 25,000 pounds of copper ore. All told, we dig up 85,000 Lbs of the earth’s crust . . . for just . . . ONE . . . Electric Car Battery . . . To store 100 kwh of Electricity that took 128 kwh of production.

    Let that one sink in . . . Oh, did we mention toxicity, disease or child labor. 68% of the world’s Cobalt, a very important part of every EV battery, comes from the Congo. Their mines have no pollution controls. Furthermore, they employ children who often get sick and even die from handling this toxic material. Should we take these diseased children into account as part of the cost of driving an electric car? . . . Dam straight . . . we must!

    The ‘Embedded Costs’ come from Energy use producing those components as well. Embedded Costs also come from environmental destruction, pollution, radiation, disease, child labor, and the inability to recycle those Used Batteries or Wind Turbine Blades or Solar Panels. No Excuses!

    Solar Panels, the main problem with them is the Heat and the chemicals needed during processing using the ‘Czochralski Method’ turning all that silicate into the silicon used to make these panels. Producing pure Silicon requires the processing of raw silicate. Including the 1,425o C Heat required to melt the quartz crystals, usually by burning coking coal or gas. The Glass covers are made by heating sand, soda ash and limestone to the incredibly high temperature of 1,700o C with gas. What about the CO2 going up the chimneys where that quartz or that glass was melted? Then, ilica, we use hydrochloric acid, Sulfuric Acid, Nitric Acid, Hydrogen Fluoride, Trichloroethane, and Acetone. Do we recycle that waste? What happens to all the ‘left-overs’ from using these highly toxic chemicals? Solar Panels need gallium-arsenide, copper-indium, gallium-diselenide, and cadmium-telluride. All of which are highly toxic even radioactive. Furthermore, Silicon dust is a hazard to workers where silicone is made and where it used. Oh, and last, the Silicone infused Solar Panels cannot, as yet, be recycled. What happens to all the by-products from making and processing all these chemicals? Furthermore, it has been suggested that the energy input to build solar panels exceeds their energy output in their productive lifetime.

    Wind Turbines, these are The Ultimate in Embedded Costs and Environmental Destruction. Each one weighs about 1,688 tons (equivalent to 23 houses) and they contain 1,300 tons of concrete and 295 tons of steel for the masts (Concrete and Steel = 15% Global CO2). 3.5 tons of copper, 48 tons of iron, 24 tons of fiberglass Then there are the rare earth minerals . . . 800 lbs. of neodymium-boron per turbine, praseodymium, and dysprosium. The leaching into the environment from tailings ponds, the radiation released into the environment and the mining of these minerals are all Embedded Costs. Where are all the calculations for all of these in The Environmental reports? Each blade weighs 81,000 pounds and will last about 15 to 20 years, then, it must be replaced. Oh, we cannot recycle used blades yet either! That is why we see them lying on the ground at wind farms after they have been replaced. What about the coal burned and electricity used at all the production facilities processing these essential components and the CO2 generated during their production? Somehow is this ‘Green Magic’ without pollution, because it will be used to produce Green Energy? Not likely! It all gets brushed under the ‘Big Green Rug’ and seems irrelevant because ‘It’s for a Good Cause’ . . . Absolutely NOT !!

    There may be a place for these technologies in our economy, but first we must look beyond the myth and The Propaganda of the ‘Zero Emissions’ Lies, long before we declare them ’Emissions Free’. EV’s, Wind Farms and Solar Farms will be abandoned, once the full story of ALL the Embedded Environmental Costs for processing, manufacturing, building infrastructure, replacing components and recycling become part of the up-front analysis. We ALL should take a good hard look at what we are being Told is . . . ‘Green Technology’ . . . What are ‘The Embedded Costs’ of Going Green? . . . Sadly, no one ever seems to ask! . . . Why Not? . . . Where are the governments in all of this? . . . Where is the Media? . . . Where is the Public Outrage?

    OK . . . That said, now . . . What Is Carbon Emissions Trading?

    Emissions trading, sometimes referred to as ‘Cap and Trade’ or ‘Allowance Trading’, is an approach to reducing pollution. This system was designed to protect ‘Human Health’ and ‘The Environment’. Emissions trading programs have two key components. 1 . . . to limit or put a cap on pollution, and, 2 . . . To provide ‘Tradable Allowances’ equal to the limit that authorized ‘Allowance Holders’ can use so they can emit a specific quantity of a pollutant (one ton of CO2). This limit governs how environmental targets, set by governments, can be met. ‘Tradable Allowances’ provide some flexibility for ‘Emissions Generating Companies’ to set their own ‘Compliance Path’ within government guidelines. These ‘Allowances’ can be bought or sold on ’Carbon allowance markets’. These programs are referred to as ‘Market-Based Carbon Emissions Trading Exchanges’.

    The Kyoto Protocol of 1997 and the Paris Agreement of 2015 were International Accords laying out the international CO2 emissions goals. The Paris agreement was ratified by all except six countries. These ‘agreements’ have given rise to all the international Emissions targets and all the regulations supporting them.

    With these new regulations in place, the pressure on businesses to find ways to reduce their ‘Carbon Footprint’ has grown. Most of today’s solutions involve the buying and selling of credits on ‘Carbon Markets’. What the carbon markets do is turn CO2 emissions into a commodity by creating a price for CO2 emissions. Emissions fall into one of two categories. Carbon Credits or Carbon Offsets, and they can both be bought or sold on a ‘Carbon Market Trading Exchange’. These ‘Exchanges’ are seen as a simple idea that provide market-based solutions to a complex problems.

    What are Carbon Credits and Carbon Offsets?

    The terms are frequently used interchangeably, but carbon credits and carbon offsets operate on different mechanisms. Carbon Credits, also known as Carbon Allowances, work like ‘Permission Slips’ for Excess Polluters. When a company buys a carbon credit, usually first from the Government then from ‘Carbon Markets’, they gain permission to generate One Ton of CO2 Emissions. With carbon credits, carbon revenue flows vertically from companies to Regulators. Companies who end up with ‘Excess Credits’ like Electric Car companies and Wind Farms or Solar Farms they can sell them to excess polluters for a profit $$$.
    How are carbon credits and offsets created?

    Organizations with operations that reduce the amount of carbon already in the atmosphere, say by planting more trees or investing in renewable energy like Wind Farms, Solar Farms, Bio Fuel or Electric Cars have the ability to issue carbon offsets in an ‘Open Market’. . . for profit $$$.

    The offset advantage: New revenue streams

    There’s one more big advantage of carbon offsets. If you’re the company selling them, they can be a significant revenue stream! The best example of this is Tesla. Yes, that Tesla we all know and love, the electric car maker, who sold Carbon Credits on the ‘Market-Based Carbon Emissions Trading Exchanges’ to the tune of $518 million in just the first quarter of 2021. That is over 2 Billion dollars worth of credits because their automobiles are declared ‘Emissions Free’ . . . Emissions Free? . . . With what we learned above? . . . is that so . . .??

    Herein lies the rub . . .

    ‘Carbon Allowances’ are A One Trillion Dollar Scam

    Carbon Trade is Already Covering the Equivalent of One Half of World Energy Emissions of $1 Trillion
    Intercontinental Exchange Inc. (ICE) has said that trading in ‘Carbon Allowances’ has reached a record volume in 2021 on its various markets — the volume of Buying and Selling reached the equivalent of about one half of ALL global energy emissions. A total of 18 billion tons of ‘Carbon Allowances’ were traded in 2021. Equivalent to an estimated 1 trillion in US dollars. ICE trades by far the biggest market share in the Global market, although other exchanges including the European Energy Exchange (EEX) also handle sizable volumes, as well.

    This is a reflection of how companies are using these markets to manage and price their ‘Climate Risk’, as well as meet their ‘Compliance Obligations’. The traded contracts have included a record 15.2 billion tons of EU carbon allowances and a record 2.4 billion tons of California carbon allowances as well as 346 million tons of Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative allowances. Then also, following its launch in May 2021, there is the new 255-million-ton U.K. carbon allowances.

    This year ICE will be expanding their carbon credit markets to value and support the preservation of ‘natural assets’, as well as launching their first carbon futures index on contract to provide access to the global cost of emissions in one trading instrument. This from . . . Gordon Bennett, Managing Director of Utility Markets at ICE.

    Who will stand against this injustice? . . . Who will go on the record? . . . Where is the Media?

    The Truth . . . The Environment as a subject is, Explosive! You speak against its Edicts at your Peril. Accept the truth as prescribed from upon high, or suffer the Scorn and the Ridicule among your peers. Not to mention by society as a whole. When that one stone gets overturned proving Collusion and Willful Deception. The un-scientific foundations supporting the Environmental Movement since its inception will render it . . . Null.

    Sadly, to date, no self-respecting Media Representative wants to risk the Ire of their Peers or the Mandarins ruling the Environmental Movement or The Purveyors of Globalization in our New Social Construct. For they are ‘Brothers-in-Arms’, so to speak. Who wants to be the ONE to open Pandora’s Box? . . . It would be like pulling Hans Brinker’s finger from the Dyke or Killing the Goose that Lays the Golden Egg . . . The old adage . . .

    There are none so blind as those who will not see . . .

    Adamant Naturalist
    Jim Le Maistre
    Aldergrove BC
    Copyright 2022

Leave a Reply