Here in France, we are vulnerable to diesel shortages this winter (Middle East closed, Russia closed, America SPR's down to tank bottoms), and animal feed shortages for the winter (for cattle, pigs and chickens), wheat and grain shortages (import about 20 of our needs), and a diesel shortage could hit food deliveries to supermarkets. Also gas shortages for winter heating. All real issues.
Thank you for your comment. It’s true that France has made itself vulnerable to most of those dependencies. It does import diesel and protein meal, which is insane considering its position in ags markets. Winter gas is a live question as Europe phases out Russian gas entirely from 2027.
What does it lead to though? With open ports and no price cap, scarcity comes out as price rather than shortages or empty shelves. France usually outbids somebody else and the cargo arrives. Its citizens get the bill, not the queue. This winter will be a test to see if we can pay or join the queue.
Yours is the argument of market economics, and you are correct up to the point where genuine shortages occur.
For example, America boasts of being the largest exporter of fossil fuels in the world, and since it invaded Hormuz, its exports to Europe of aviation fuel and diesel have saved the summer season. Britain, for example used to inport 5% of those fuels from America and now imports 65%.
But America is close to 'tank bottoms' and soon will simply stop exporting. Even worse, Britain and everyone else isn't paying money for those imports, but is required to replace 1.2 barrels for every barrel imported! So American exports stop, and the rest of the markets are looking to replace them AND repay America!
Russia is not exporting, Chia is not exporting, Middle East, America,...... suddenly the markets have collapsed and no price point fixes the supply hole.
THAT is the probability for France this winter, and it is hard to see what might improve next year.
Marjorie, the essay’s strongest insight is that reassurance should not replace analysis; it should emerge from it. Showing capability, range, target logic, incentives, and escalation thresholds gives people something more durable than “don’t worry”: a method they can reuse. The essential distinction is between a threat being real and that threat being strategically relevant to a particular person or place. Fear collapses those categories. Good analysis separates them again.
Thank you, Marjorie. The distinction was already embedded in your essay; “strategically relevant” simply gives it a sharper analytical label. That is what makes the piece so useful: it offers readers a method for evaluating threats, not merely reassurance in the face of them.
Honestly, no where. I doub't I've surive the aftermath. I have good surival skills. I was raised on a farm. But the land is too worn now to sustain a hundred thousand wanna be hunters and gatherers from the cities. Better to be incinereated. Quick and painless. I know that's terribly fatalistic, but no radiation sickness for me either. Sorry to be a bummer.
Here in France, we are vulnerable to diesel shortages this winter (Middle East closed, Russia closed, America SPR's down to tank bottoms), and animal feed shortages for the winter (for cattle, pigs and chickens), wheat and grain shortages (import about 20 of our needs), and a diesel shortage could hit food deliveries to supermarkets. Also gas shortages for winter heating. All real issues.
Thank you for your comment. It’s true that France has made itself vulnerable to most of those dependencies. It does import diesel and protein meal, which is insane considering its position in ags markets. Winter gas is a live question as Europe phases out Russian gas entirely from 2027.
What does it lead to though? With open ports and no price cap, scarcity comes out as price rather than shortages or empty shelves. France usually outbids somebody else and the cargo arrives. Its citizens get the bill, not the queue. This winter will be a test to see if we can pay or join the queue.
Yours is the argument of market economics, and you are correct up to the point where genuine shortages occur.
For example, America boasts of being the largest exporter of fossil fuels in the world, and since it invaded Hormuz, its exports to Europe of aviation fuel and diesel have saved the summer season. Britain, for example used to inport 5% of those fuels from America and now imports 65%.
But America is close to 'tank bottoms' and soon will simply stop exporting. Even worse, Britain and everyone else isn't paying money for those imports, but is required to replace 1.2 barrels for every barrel imported! So American exports stop, and the rest of the markets are looking to replace them AND repay America!
Russia is not exporting, Chia is not exporting, Middle East, America,...... suddenly the markets have collapsed and no price point fixes the supply hole.
THAT is the probability for France this winter, and it is hard to see what might improve next year.
“Marjorie writes” beautifully, with intuitive and personal phrasing that touches the heart and makes sense in the brain.
Thank you 🤗
It sounds like your mother needs protection from the appalling discourses of French television.
I've been trying to turn my father away from those for years, to no effect so far...
Same! Fat chance for me too. So I've given up on the TV and settled for answering the questions afterwards.
Marjorie, the essay’s strongest insight is that reassurance should not replace analysis; it should emerge from it. Showing capability, range, target logic, incentives, and escalation thresholds gives people something more durable than “don’t worry”: a method they can reuse. The essential distinction is between a threat being real and that threat being strategically relevant to a particular person or place. Fear collapses those categories. Good analysis separates them again.
It does, and “strategically relevant” is a better phrase than anything I used.
Thank you, Marjorie. The distinction was already embedded in your essay; “strategically relevant” simply gives it a sharper analytical label. That is what makes the piece so useful: it offers readers a method for evaluating threats, not merely reassurance in the face of them.
Honestly, no where. I doub't I've surive the aftermath. I have good surival skills. I was raised on a farm. But the land is too worn now to sustain a hundred thousand wanna be hunters and gatherers from the cities. Better to be incinereated. Quick and painless. I know that's terribly fatalistic, but no radiation sickness for me either. Sorry to be a bummer.