| 0 comments ]

Russia's "Sanction-Proof" Trade Corridor To India Frustrates The Neocons

Authored by Conor Gallagher via NakedCapitalism.com,

Russia, Iran, and India are speeding up efforts to complete a new transport corridor that would largely cut Europe, its sanctions, and any other threats out of the picture. 

The International North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) is a land-and sea-based 7,200-km long network comprising rail, road and water routes that are aimed at reducing costs and travel time for freight transport in a bid to boost trade between Russia, Iran, Central Asia, India.

For Russia, the “sanction-proof” corridor provides a major export channel to South Asia without needing to go through Europe. But Brussels and Washington, frustrated by their losing in Ukraine and inability to put much of a dent in the Russian economy, could lead them to take more desperate measures.

Read MoreLately, Estonia, which has a population smaller than Russia’s armed forces, has been making noise about causing problems in the Gulf of Finland, Estonian Minister of Defense Hanno Pevkur is talking about how Helsinki and Tallinn will integrate their coastal missile defense, which he says would allow the countries to close the Gulf of Finland to Russian warships if necessary. Estonia is also floating the possibility of trying to inspect Russian ships. From Asia Times:

 It is unlikely Estonia can carry out any inspections given that it only has two patrol vessels (EML-Roland and EML-Risto) and no other warships except some mine layers. But if Estonia even tried, it would create another friction point that Russia could exploit if it chose.

There is also a strategic element. With Finland joining NATO and already a de facto member, the Gulf of Finland becomes significantly more hostile for Russia and there will be growing pressure on Russian political leaders to take action against a rising threat to Russian security.

While Ukraine is far away, the Russians see NATO’s “ganging up” on Russia as a key issue for Russian security and stability. This brings the Baltic region into sharper focus because Russians see NATO trying to surround them and undercut their economic and military advantages.

It’s hard to take Estonia’s bluster seriously but equally difficult to put anything past the neocons in Washington and their adherents in the Baltics. Regardless, Russia would prefer a trade route with India that saves time and money and avoids Europe.

©Peter Hermes Furian

While NATO’s war against Russia has sped up the cooperation between Moscow, Tehran, and New Delhi, India and Iran are coming under various types of pressure that could delay full implementation of the corridor. And Azerbaijan, a key nexus in the INSTC, is a wildcard as it grows increasingly confrontational with both Iran and Armenia.

First the recent developments on the INSTC:

  • India is helping to develop the Shahid Beheshti Terminal at Iran’s Chabahar Port in cooperation with the Iranian government.

  • Iran and Russia recently signed a contract for Russia to build a cargo vessel for Iran to be used at the Caspian port of Solyanka, which is being developed jointly by the two nations as part of efforts to strengthen the Caspian Sea transportation network.

  • RZD Logistics, a subsidiary of Russian railway monopoly RZD, has begun regular container train services from Moscow to Iran to serve growing trade with India by transloading.

  • Rezaul Hasan Laskar, the foreign affairs editor at Hindustan Times, says the strategic Chabahar Port in  southeastern Iran has “become more important following its growing use” but that “it needs to be connected to Iran’s railway network.” Iran has accelerated that project, and with an investment boost from Russia, is speeding up the completion of the Astara-Rasht-Qazvin railway, another transport corridor that will connect existing railways of Russia, Azerbaijan and Iran to the INSTC.

In the meantime, most of the goods that Russia normally transported across the Baltic Sea to reach the North Sea port of Rotterdam now sail instead to India. Oilprice reports:

Russian crude oil loadings from Baltic ports are on track for a 50% hike from December to January, Reuters reports, citing its own data combined with trader insights.

Russian Urals and KEBCO crude oil loadings specifically from the ports of Primorsk and Ust-Luga will experience the increase, Reuters said, adding that the bulk of those loadings (some 70%) will head to India.

In December, Russia loaded 4.7 million tonnes of Urals and KEBCO from the Baltic ports, Reuters said, citing Refinitiv data.Russia now accounts for approximately 25% of India’s crude purchases, while some sources put it closer to 30%.

The increased trade with Russia is a primary driver bringing New Delhi and Tehran closer together – largely a result of Europe severing itself from Russia. According to Reuters, at the end of November Moscow sent India a list of more than 500 products it wants India exporting to Russia, “including parts for cars, aircraft and trains.” The report added:

Indian imports from Russia have grown nearly five times to $29 billion between Feb. 24 and Nov. 20 compared with $6 billion in the same period a year ago. Exports, meanwhile, have fallen to $1.9 billion from $2.4 billion, the source said. India is hoping to boost its exports to nearly $10 billion over coming months with Russia’s list of requests, according to the government source.

And with all the increased trade, New Delhi and Moscow are looking for more efficient supply lines. A study, conducted by the Federation of Freight Forwarders’ Associations in India, showed that INSTC will be 30 percent cheaper and 40 percent shorter than the existing routes. And according to the Russian Journal for Economics, freight traffic on the NSTC could reach 25 million tons by 2030, a 20-fold increase. For these reasons the NSTC is of vital importance to Russia, as well as a source of frustration for the neocons in DC and their foot soldiers in Europe.

Strangely enough, even if they found a way to sever the Russia-India link, Europe would have to find a new seller of oil. For months India has been getting Russian oil at a discount and selling it to the EU at substantial profits. According to Michael Tran, global energy strategist at RBC Capital Markets:

India is buying record amounts of severely discounted Russian crude, running its refiners above nameplate capacity, and capturing the economic rent of sky-high crack spreads and exporting gasoline and diesel to Europe. In short, the EU policy of tightening the screws on Russia is a policy win, but the unintended consequence is that Europe is effectively importing inflation to its own citizens. This is not only an economic boon for India, but it also serves as an accelerator for India’s place in the new geopolitically rewritten oil trade map. What we mean is that the EU policy effectively makes India an increasingly vital energy source for Europe. This was historically never the case, and it is why Indian product exports have been clocking in at all-time-high levels over recent months.

It’s not hard to see why India has steadfastly refused to join the sanctions parade on Russia despite pressure from the west and continues to pursue the NSTC.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is now dealing with a major infrastructure crisis, however.

The Adani conglomerate, which is led by Asia’s richest man who has very close ties to the Modi government, has lost billions in recent days following a report from New York City-based Hindenburg Research, which specializes in short-selling overhyped stocks. Adani owns everything from ports to coal mines and is heavily involved in all types of Indian infrastructure, which means the fallout could affect all corners of the economy – and Modi. Adam Tooze writes at Chartbook:

But what if the biggest promoter-political-capitalist of all were to come under unsustainable pressure? It is not only inequality and power imbalances that are at stake, but the financial stability of the Indian economy. …

Were Adani to find itself in real trouble, there can be little doubt that the real anchor would be the state. Adani’s rise and the fortunes of Modi and the BJP are closely tied. ..

A more serious risk is that the panic spreads from Adani throughout the financial markets, forcing the Modi administration to make painful choices. As Bloomberg reports the shock and anxiety is catching especially amongst global investors who may swiftly reevaluate their weighting of Indian assets.

It wasn’t exactly a secret that the Adani conglomerate was on shaky ground. As Tooze notes, Credit Suisse warned all the way back in a 2015 “House of Debt” report that “the Adani Group was one of 10 conglomerates under ‘severe stress’ that accounted for 12 percent of banking sector loans. Yet the Adani Group has been able to keep raising funds, in part by borrowing from overseas lenders and pivoting to green energy. ”

The widely cited Hindenburg investigation doesn’t just go after Adani, but it also argues his success is tied to the government (and Modi) supporting him nearly every step of the way. Modi is already dealing with the headache of the recently-released BBC documentary about the 2002 Gujarat riots that highlights a previously unpublished, two-decades-old British Foreign Office report claiming Modi was “directly responsible” for that communal riot during his tenure as Gujarat’s chief minister. Andrew Korybko, a Moscow-based political analyst believes the documentary is part of efforts to pressure Modi and writes: 

It’s suspicious that the previously unpublished British Foreign Office report was highlighted by state-run BBC over two decades after it was written, shortly after the New York Times (NYT) implied that externally exacerbating communal tensions will be the West’s Hybrid War means of punishing India for [defying the West on their anti-Russian sanctions], and around the time that India secured its rise as a globally significant Great Power. These observations suggest that the documentary’s timing wasn’t coincidental.

Modi remains highly popular, and a weak and divided opposition isn’t considered much of a threat, but the fallout from the Adani affair could change that. Just two weeks ago Adani was enjoying Davos and having discussions with Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev about petrochemical and mining projects in Azerbaijan. The West has also recently taken a great deal of interest in Azerbaijan’s energy future. From The Cradle:

On 7 December, 2022, the World Bank released a report titled “Azerbaijan: Towards Green Growth” in which the authors stated that the:

“Global transition towards a low-emissions economic model offers opportunities for Azerbaijan to be globally and regionally competitive. To make the best of it, Azerbaijan needs to focus on decarbonizing and diversifying the economy, bolstering innovation, and natural and human capital development.”

From this Green New Deal agenda, Azerbaijan would certainly receive funding, but in doing so, it would be handicapped from developing its vast resources or playing a positive role in either the Middle Corridor or the INSTC.

Five days later, the World Bank agenda was re-emphasized by USAID at a conference co-sponsored with the Azerbaijan-US Chamber of Commerce, the White House, and the Embassy of Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan, which is a key nexus of the NSTC, is threatening to throw a wrench in the plans as relations between Baku and Tehran deteriorate.

On Jan. 27, an attack by a gunman carried out at Baku’s embassy in the Iranian capital left the head of the embassy’s security services dead and two security guards injured. Azerbaijan has now evacuated the diplomatic post. The next day, just as Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken was beginning a visit to Israel and after CIA William J. Burns director just concluded a visit,  Israel launched a drone attack on Iran. Aside from its other implications, the Israeli attack will further strain Azeri-Iranian relations due to Baku’s close military relationship with Israel.

A more than month-long Azerbaijani blockade of ethnic Armenian-controlled territory is also causing concern in Tehran and Moscow as another conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan would be a major headache for the NSTC – although Russian-Iranian maritime connectivity across the Caspian Sea could bypass Azerbaijan.

Both Iran and Azerbaijan have held major military exercises on the countries’ border in recent months. During recent protests in Iran, Tehran blamed Baku for using ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran to destabilize the situation, which is something the neocons have long written about doing. The Middle East Media Research Institute, which is run by Israeli and American spooks, wrote as recently as November about using Azerbaijanis in Iran to further their goal of regime change:

In order to bring about regime change at home and contain Iranian expansionism abroad, Iran needs to be weakened from within. The international community therefore must engage Iran more effectively inside its borders through pursuing a “periphery strategy,” i.e., supporting the ethnic minorities found in its border regions. This will achieve two goals. First, ethnic minorities would finally enjoy the freedom and human rights they have been deprived of since the early 20th century. Second, this would deprive Iran of human and natural resources it needs to perpetrate its malign expansionism in the Middle East.

An array of democratic ethno-nations in the periphery of Iran would create a “great wall” around the country. This “wall” would stretch from the Kurdish areas of Northern Khurasan to the Persian gulf in the west including Azerbaijan, Kurdistan and Khuzistan as well as Balochistan in the southeast and would limit Iran’s access to the outside world and consequently end its geostrategic importance regionally and internationally.

For some idea of how this is playing out and the consequences, Responsible Statecraft writes:

The Iranian angle is certainly one of the key reasons behind the hawks’ enthusiasm for Azerbaijan. During the war in 2020, they cherished the dream that Azerbaijan’s military success would galvanize Iran’s sizable Azeri community against the government in Tehran. That naïve hope failed to materialize as Iranian Azeris are part and parcel of Iranian society. However, the anti-Iranian irredentist narratives gained popular currency within Azerbaijan to a degree not seen since the early 1990s. Websites with close links to the regime’s security apparatus and defense ministry issued open calls for “southern Azerbaijanis” to secede from Iran.

That was done in response to some outlandish anti-Azerbaijani remarks allegedly uttered by a retired Iranian diplomat and leaked to a Turkish newspaper. The diplomat in question, however, in no way represented the official position of the Islamic Republic. What followed — a seemingly coordinated incitement of anti-Iranian separatism in Azeri pro-regime media outlets — certainly looked like a massive over-reaction.

Pro-Azerbaijan hawks in Washington may thrive on fomenting such tensions, yet that in no way serves U.S. interests. A military conflict between Azerbaijan and Iran would suck in other countries, such as NATO ally Turkey, which would back Azerbaijan. It would most likely also involve Israel as Baku’s close ties with Jerusalem are seen as a serious threat in Tehran. Israeli officials occasionally behave as if they are keen to add fuel to the fire. The Israeli ambassador in Azerbaijan recently posed with a book of “fairy tales of Tabriz.” Given that Tabriz is the unofficial capital of Iranian Azerbaijan, many Iranians perceived this gesture as an endorsement of the Azeri separatist agenda. A regional vortex involving Iran and Israel would increase pressure from Congress on any U.S. administration to intervene on behalf of Israel.

Baku is closely aligned with Israel and Türkiye, but also maintains strong ties with Russia. Azerbaijan and Türkiye want a direct link across southern Armenia, which alarms Iran. This “Zangezur corridor” that Baku and Ankara want would connect Azerbaijan’s mainland territory to its Nakhichvan exclave that borders Armenia, Iran and Türkiye.

Such a corridor is a red line for Tehran as it would cut off Iran from Armenia and encircle northern parts of Iran by Türkiye and Azerbaijan, which scares Tehran because there are roughly 25 million Azeri-speakers in Northern Iran that might get some pan-Turkic ideas. Iran would also lose its land route through Armenia to the Caucuses.

Therefore, anytime there is fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia, which many observers think is on the verge of starting again, it threatens a wider war if Azerbaijan and Türkiye try to form their corridor, if Iran comes to the defense of Armenia, or if outside actors use it as an opportunity to pursue other goals.

Russia used to exert a calming influence on the region, but its preoccupation with Ukraine has diminished its willingness to intervene.  According to the Middle East Institute, the pressure on Iran’s government from inside and outside the country is helping lead to Baku and Tehran seeing each other’s actions as a threat and responding with quickly escalating countermeasures:

This self-reinforcing dynamic has created a spiral-like situation and increased the likelihood of conflict. A potential armed clash between Azerbaijan and Iran could have far-reaching consequences for the wider region that would likely draw in other powers, such as Turkey and Russia. It remains to be seen if cooler heads can prevail.

As former Indian diplomat M.K. Bhadrakumar wrote, “Azerbaijan is destined to play a key role in the great game in the period ahead.” It remains to be seen what that role will be. The neocons, who are quite good at manipulating others into quixotic wars, have dreams of using Azerbaijan to help topple the Iranian government, and unfortunately, Azerbaijan’s president has been compared to Sonny Corleone in “The Godfather.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 21:40
https://ift.tt/JVLbANG
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/JVLbANG
via IFTTT

Russia's "Sanction-Proof" Trade Corridor To India Frustrates The Neocons SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Start Of Bankruptcy Wave? Large Firm Filings Surge To 2010 Levels

The US has transitioned from more than a decade of quantitative easing to more recent quantitative tightening. QT will remain until the Federal Reserve is finished squashing inflation. However, such a massive paradigm shift in markets might result in a period of deleveraging among highly levered firms that were able to flourish during the QE era. 

New Bloomberg data shows large companies (at least $50 million of liabilities) filing for bankruptcy topped 20 this month, the highest in any other January dating back to 2010. Back then, 25 filings were seen as the economy was still reeling from the aftermath of the GFC.

There is no doubt after more than a decade of the Fed unleashing trillions of dollars of credit into the economy via QE, a generation of zombie companies is in the midst of a painful deleveraging event as credit is harder to come by in QT. 

QE has been one of the "biggest distortions came from keeping companies alive on life support that otherwise would have disappeared into insolvency," research firm Porter & Co. wrote on our contributor blog (read: "The Hidden Debt Bubble You Didn't See Coming"). 

This month's surge in large firm bankruptcies is set to continue, according to Damian Schaible, co-chair of the restructuring group at law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, who spoke with Bloomberg. He said:

"I think we're going to see continued increased filings in 2023.

"From a broader market perspective, it's pretty simple: We have a market filled with companies with historically high leverage — thanks to the easy money policies of the past decade — and a not-insignificant portion of that debt is floating rate."

This year, some of the most notable bankruptcy filings have been festive retailer Party City Holdco Inc, mattress maker Serta Simmons Bedding LLC, and cryptocurrency lender Genesis Global Holdco. 

There could be turmoil in the lowest-rated — CCC-rated credit space and hidden risks if a bankruptcy wave takes off from here. As shown below, distress debt is piling up. 

Even though some investors don't believe a hard landing is in the cards this year. The latest surge in large firm bankruptcies is an ominous sign of trouble ahead. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 21:20
https://ift.tt/SLkDxh4
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/SLkDxh4
via IFTTT

Start Of Bankruptcy Wave? Large Firm Filings Surge To 2010 Levels SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

"Approaching A Near-Term Ceiling" - SpotGamma On Market Positioning Into The FOMC

By SpotGamma

Summary:

Into the FOMC meeting and minutes Feb 1st, we believe the market is approaching a near term ceiling and downside opportunity exists in individual names which have recently been high performing or speculative (by buying put spreads).

Rationale for ceiling:

  • We believe the market has front-run a policy shift by the Fed
  • We have near term resistance at 4100 at our Call Wall with peak resistance at 4200
  • With current IV levels being low, and also under equivalent measures of realized vol, there is reduced fuel for a squeeze

Full note on implied volatility compression here.

Downside opportunity:

  • Specific names like ARKK and TSLA have had very strong recent runs
  • The entire QQQ complex is up 10% in January, fueled by short-covering and 0DTE options

Additional Context:

Implied volatility compression (1 month IV < 30 day Realized Vol) in the SPX has been a signal that has marked equity market tops over the past year. This IV compression is in play now after huge rallies in equities, particularly in “speculative” names like ARKK (+29% in January) and in tech (QQQ +10% in January). We believe that much of the force behind this rally was driven by the combination of short covering and ultra-short dated trading activity like 0DTE.

Along with sharp moves higher in tech, we’d also highlight that “value” stocks are back to all time highs.

Last week, IV further compressed as strong treasury auctions led to the MOVE index collapsing, which likely persuaded the VIX to touch 1 year lows of 18 on Friday. Note, too,  the MOVE Index is now at 100 - the same level it was into the August highs. It was then at Jackson Hole wherein a hawkish Powell marked a major interim high.

Linked to this, its clear that put demand is reflecting a much more sanguine environment ahead.

Our conclusion here is that if markets want higher out of FOMC, there may be a fairly limited rally due to the sharp moves already made YTD. At the end of the day, interest rates are ~4% higher than 1 year ago which should reduce equity valuations year over year, making upside over 4300 uncompelling.

We also believe that traders are positioned to expect this bullish impulse out of FOMC, which can drain upside momentum.  We therefore think that the best risk/reward positioning here into FOMC is to own puts/put spreads in the speculative/tech names which have rallied the most YTD. Any neutral to negative sentiment from the FOMC would likely hit those names asymmetrically.

More from Spotgamma here

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 20:20
https://ift.tt/xGz5pJS
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/xGz5pJS
via IFTTT

"Approaching A Near-Term Ceiling" - SpotGamma On Market Positioning Into The FOMC SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Heart, Vein Disease Deaths High In 25-To-44-Year-Olds

Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Diseases of the heart and veins claimed more lives over the past several years among American aged 25 to 44 than before the COVID-19 pandemic. Even with the pandemic waning, such deaths remain elevated.

An ambulance outside the Bellville Medical Center after dropping off a patient, in Bellville, Texas, on Sept. 1, 2021. (Francois Picard/AFP via Getty Images)

In 2020, the first year of the pandemic, deaths caused by circulatory diseases increased by about 15 percent in the 25 to 44 age group compared to the year before, according to death certificate data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In 2021, such deaths increased by more than 20 percent compared to 2019.

That means nearly 6,500 more deaths.

(ZH: Related)

It appears that the increase may have been caused by multiple factors.

COVID-19 sometimes causes complications in the circulatory system. It’s likely that some deaths, especially early on in the pandemic, were caused by COVID-19 but were misclassified on the death certificate.

Also, many people were likely diagnosed too late or not at all because they were afraid to go to a doctor during the pandemic.

However, diseases of the circulatory system continued to claim lives at a higher rate in this age group even in 2022, when the pandemic receded. In the first half of the year, such deaths were still more than 13 percent above the death toll for the first half of 2019, according to the CDC’s preliminary data.

In the 45 to 54 age group, such deaths increased in 2020–21 but seem to have since receded back to pre-pandemic levels.

In the 15 to 24 age group, such deaths have barely budged over the past five years.

A growing number of experts and studies have associated the COVID-19 vaccines with serious, even fatal conditions, including heart inflammation, or myocarditis. They suggest that the spike protein produced through the vaccination can cause blood clotting and inflammation.

“All cardiovascular conditions have gotten worse because of the vaccine and anything and everything that can go wrong with the heart has gone wrong with the heart as a result of these mRNA vaccines. There’s no doubt about it,” said Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a British cardiologist who has researched extensively the associations between the COVID-19 vaccines and heart issues.

Malhotra has argued that such issues should be presumed to be associated with the vaccines until proven otherwise. He initially supported the vaccines but changed his mind after his father’s cardiac arrest six months after vaccination.

Dr. Peter McCullough, a highly published American cardiologist, independently reached a similar conclusion.

When people are in a study or it’s in a post-marketing period in a brand-new drug, when someone dies within a few days, or certainly within 30 days of any new drug or injection, it is that drug until proven otherwise,” he told Epoch TV’s Jan Jekielek last month.

“If this was in a regulatory dossier, it could even be something that’s seemingly disconnected. Believe it or not, in clinical trials, if someone’s taking a drug and they have a car accident, it’s attributed to the drug, because the drug may have made them dizzy or foggy or what have you.”

The rollout of the vaccines also correlates with significant increases in other conditions, including eye problems, immune system issues, and, in some data, cancer, according to Josh Stirling, an insurance research analyst.

Overall, the vaccination correlates with increased mortality, according to Stirling.

“The more doses on average you have in a region within the United States, the bigger increase in mortality that region has had in 2022 when compared to 2021,” he recently told Jekielek in an interview for “American Thought Leaders.”

Stirling has argued that if the vaccine’s adverse effects are properly identified, they could be mitigated.

“If we were actually just screening for these people, the vast majority of these health issues, before they become catastrophic, could very easily be managed—not necessarily solved, but certainly managed with amazing medical advances and simple things like blood thinners, or changes in lifestyle,” he said.

Mortality in prime-age adults aged 18 to 64 substantially increased in 2020 and onward, even with COVID-19 deaths excluded, according to a Dec. 15, 2022, paper that attempted to account for COVID-19 deaths misclassified on death certificates.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 18:20
https://ift.tt/tF5ZTu6
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/tF5ZTu6
via IFTTT

Heart, Vein Disease Deaths High In 25-To-44-Year-Olds SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

US Job Opening Far Lower Than Reported By Department Of Labor, UBS Finds

When it comes to labor market data (or rather "data"), Biden's labor department is a study in contrasts (and pats on shoulders). One day we get a contraction in PMI employment (both manufacturing and services), the other we get a major beat in employment. Then, one day the Household survey shows a plunge in employment (in fact, there has almost been no employment gain in the past 9 months) and a record in multiple jobholders and part-time workers, and the same day the Establishment Survey signals a spike in payrolls (mostly among waiters and bartenders). Or the day the JOLTS report shows an unexpected jump in job openings even as actual hiring slides to a two year low. Or the straw the breaks the latest trend in the labor market's back, is when the jobs report finally cracks and shows the fewest jobs added in over a year, and yet initial jobless claims tumble and reverse all recent increases despite daily news of mass layoffs across all tech companies, as the relentless barrage of conflicting data out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (which is the principal "fact-finding" agency for the Biden Administration and a core pillar of the Dept of Labor) just won't stop, almost as if to make a very political point.

But while one can certainly appreciate Biden's desire to paint the glass of US jobs as always half full, reality is starting to make a mockery of the president's gaslighting ambitions, as one by one core pillars of the administration's "strong jobs" fabulation collapse. First it was the Philadelphia Fed shockingly stating that contrary to the BLS "goalseeking" of 1.1 million jobs in Q2 2022, the US actually only added a paltry 10,000 jobs (just as the Fed unleashed an unprecedented spree of 75bps rate hikes).

Then, it was Goldman's turn to make a mockery of the "curiously" low initial jobless claims, by comparing them to directly reported state-level WARN notices (mandatory under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act) which no low-level bureaucrat and Biden lackey can "seasonally adjust" because there they are: cold, hard, fact, immutable and truly representative of the underlying economic truth, and what they show is that - as the Goldman chart below confirms - layoffs are rising far faster than what the DOL's Initial Claims indicates.

More importantly, Goldman also found that WARN notices also track the JOLTS layoff rate: WARN notice counts remained elevated in late 2020 even as the layoff rate declined, but this likely reflects unusual reporting delays during the pandemic and the exclusion of layoffs at closing establishments in the JOLTS survey, which WARN notices capture provided firms remain in business. Not surprisingly, Goldman's tracking estimate based on December and January WARN notices for the large states covered not only shows that the recent drop in initial claims is unlikely, but that it is also consistent with a layoff rate of around 1.1%, higher than the 0.9% in the November JOLTS report.

And now, another core pillar of the US labor market is being dismantled, and it has to do with the Fed's favorite labor market indicator: the JOLTS report of job openings.

As UBS economist Pablo Villaneuva writes in a recent report by the bank's Evidence Lab group, Job openings in the JOLTS survey have not declined much since the March peak. Indeed, the BLS reports that openings were only 12% below the March 2022 peak in November and remain 48% above the pre-pandemic, 2019 average. This slight move downward has, as we noted recently, led to only a small decline in the vacancies-to-unemployment ratio, from 1.99 in March to 1.74 in November, still well above the 2019 average of 1.19.

Of course, such a high level of job openings is alarming to the Fed for the simple reason that it means Powell has failed at his mission at cooling off what appears to be a red hot jobs market; no wonder the Fed Chair has frequently flagged the high level of job openings as a sign of ongoing strength in the labor market. The bottom line, as UBS notes, is that "the BLS measure, although it has declined, remains historically high."

However, as in the abovementioned case of unexpectedly low jobless claims, there may be more here than meets the eye. According to Villanueva, "a range of other measures of job openings suggest normalization in the labor market—softening much more convincingly, often to pre-pandemic levels" - translation: whether on purpose or accidentally, the BLS is fabricating data. Also, the UBS economist flags, job openings are not a great indicator of current labor market conditions—they lagged the last two downturns in the labor market.

So what's the real story?

Well, as usual there is BLS "data" and everyone else... and as UBS cautions, other measures of openings tell a very different story: "Our UBS Evidence Lab data on job listings is weekly and more timely than the BLS series. The last datapoint is for the week of December 31. It shows openings down 30% from the March 2022 peak and only 25% higher than the 2019 average."

While BLS bureaucrats and Biden sycophants can argue UBS data is inaccurate, other longer dated series also indicate weaker openings. Take for example the NFIB Small Business Survey includes labor market measures that have correlated strongly with the JOLTS data over time but have weakened more sharply than the JOLTS measure in recent months. The percentage of small firms unable to fill open positions has a correlation of 0.95 with JOLTS openings since 2000. This series has declined 20% relative to the peak in May 2022 and is only 13% above the 2019 average. The NFIB series on percentage of firms with few or no qualified applicants tells a similar story.

Finally, the "Opportunity Insights" measure of openings (see here) is also below pre-pandemic levels.

So what's going on here?

As the UBS economist puts it, "in short, other surveys of job openings generally suggest that the BLS measure may be overstating labor market tightness. One reason to think the accuracy of the JOLTS data may have declined is that the sample shrank noticeably at the start of the pandemic. In 2019, the survey response rate was 60%. In December, it was 30%."

Or perhaps it's not gross BLS incompetence (or propaganda): maybe it's just a data quirk at key economic inflection points. As UBS observed in August, job openings tend to lag other labor market indicators. Ahead of the 2001 recession, the private sector job openings rate was still rising as private employment peaked and started printing negative. Again in 2007, as job openings were peaking, payroll employment in the revised data had slowed considerably, and job openings remained near their peak as employment was beginning to contract outright.

Whatever the reason for the discrepancy in this latest labor series, the bigger picture is getting troubling.

  1. We already knew that the employment as measured by the Household survey has been flat since March even as the Establishment survey signaled 2.7 million job gains since then. Shortly thereafter the Philadelphia Fed found that contrary to the BLS "goalseeking" of 1.1 million jobs in Q2 2022, the US actually only added a paltry 10,000 jobs in the second quarter of 2022. As such, the validity and credibility of the US nonfarm payrolls report is suspect at best.
  2. A few weeks ago, Goldman also put the credibility of DOL's weekly jobless claims report under question, when it found that initial claims as measured at the state level without seasonal adjustments or other "fudge factors" were running far higher than what the DOL reports every week.
  3. And now, we can also stick a fork in the JOLTS report, whose accuracy has just been steamrolled by UBS with its finding that job openings - a critical component of the US labor market and the Fed's preferred labor market indiator - are far lower than what the Dept of Labor suggests.

Bottom line: while it is obvious why the Biden admin would try hard to put as much lipstick as it can on US jobs data, the same data when measured with alternative measures shows a far uglier picture, one of a US labor market on the verge of cracking and hardly one meriting consistent rate hikes by the Fed.

Which, considering that in less than 24 hours the Fed will hike rates by another 25 bps, is extremely important, and we wish that we weren't the only media outlet to lay out the facts as the negative impact of continued policy error and tightening by the Fed will impact tens of millions Americans, not to mention the continued errors - whether premeditated or accidental - by the US Department of Labor. Alas, as so often happens, since nobody else in the "independent US press" is willing to touch the story of manipulated jobs data with a ten foot pole, it is again up to us to explain what is really going on.

The full UBS report available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 15:43
https://ift.tt/EZRqkrJ
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/EZRqkrJ
via IFTTT

US Job Opening Far Lower Than Reported By Department Of Labor, UBS Finds SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

BP Believes Oil Demand Will Peak Near 2030 As Shift To Renewables Accelerates

By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com,

Global oil demand is expected to peak between the late 2020s and early 2030s as the Russian invasion of Ukraine is accelerating investment in clean energy and governments are looking to bolster energy security with higher shares of renewables in the energy mix, BP said on Monday.

In one of the most closely-watched industry reports, the BP Energy Outlook 2023 with projections through 2050 says that oil demand falls over the outlook in all three scenarios as use in road transportation declines.

“Global oil demand plateaus over the next 10 years or so before declining over the rest of the outlook, driven in part by the falling use of oil in road transport as vehicles become more efficient and are increasingly fuelled by alternative energy sources,” BP said.

In the “New Momentum” scenario, BP’s one of three scenarios in the outlook reflecting “the current broad trajectory” of energy systems, global oil demand remains close to the current 100 million bpd by the end of this decade and drops to around 93 million bpd in 2035. The “Accelerated” scenario projects oil demand at 91 million bpd in 2030 and 80 million bpd in 2035, while the “Net Zero” scenario sees demand dropping to 85 million bpd in 2030, and further down to 70 million bpd by 2035.

The prospects for natural gas depend on the speed of the energy transition, according to BP’s outlook, which sees LNG trade growing in the near term, but the outlook becoming more uncertain after 2030.

The scenarios in Outlook 2023 have been updated to take account of the war, as well as of the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act in the United States, BP’s chief economist Spencer Dale said.

“Most importantly, the desire of countries to bolster their energy security by reducing their dependency on imported energy – dominated by fossil fuels – and instead have access to more domestically produced energy – much of which is likely to come from renewables and other non-fossil energy sources – suggests that the war is likely to accelerate the pace of the energy transition,” Dale said.

He also noted that “The scale of the economic and social disruptions over the past year associated with the loss of just a fraction of the world’s fossil fuels has also highlighted the need for the transition away from hydrocarbons to be orderly‎.”  

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 06:30
https://ift.tt/jrXG42q
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/jrXG42q
via IFTTT

BP Believes Oil Demand Will Peak Near 2030 As Shift To Renewables Accelerates SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Hedges: Ukraine, The War That Went Wrong

Authored by Chris Hedges via The Chris Hedges Report Substack,

NATO support for the war in Ukraine, designed to degrade the Russian military and drive Vladimir Putin from power, is not going according to plan. The new sophisticated military hardware won't help...

Empires in terminal decline leap from one military fiasco to the next. The war in Ukraine, another bungled attempt to reassert U.S. global hegemony, fits this pattern. The danger is that the more dire things look, the more the U.S. will escalate the conflict, potentially provoking open confrontation with Russia. If Russia carries out retaliatory attacks on supply and training bases in neighboring NATO countries, or uses tactical nuclear weapons, NATO will almost certainly respond by attacking Russian forces. We will have ignited World War III, which could result in a nuclear holocaust.

U.S. military support for Ukraine began with the basics — ammunition and assault weapons. The Biden administration, however, soon crossed several self-imposed red lines to provide a tidal wave of lethal war machinery: Stinger anti-aircraft systems; Javelin anti-armor systems; M777 towed Howitzers; 122mm GRAD rockets; M142 multiple rocket launchers, or HIMARS; Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles; Patriot air defense batteries; National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS); M113 Armored Personnel Carriers; and now 31 M1 Abrams, as part of a new $400 million package. These tanks will be supplemented by 14 German Leopard 2A6 tanks, 14 British Challenger 2 tanks, as well as tanks from other NATO members, including Poland. Next on the list are armor-piercing depleted uranium (DU) ammunition and F-15 and F-16 fighter jets.

Since Russia invaded on February 24, 2022, Congress has approved more than $113 billion in aid to Ukraine and allied nations supporting the war in Ukraine. Three-fifths of this aid, $67 billion, has been allocated for military expenditures. There are 28 countries transferring weapons to Ukraine. All of them, with the exception of Australia, Canada and the U.S., are in Europe. 

The rapid upgrade of sophisticated military hardware and aid provided to Ukraine is not a good sign for the NATO alliance. It takes many months, if not years, of training to operate and coordinate these weapons systems. Tank battles — I was in the last major tank battle outside Kuwait City during the first Gulf war as a reporter — are highly choreographed and complex operations. Armor must work in close concert with air power, warships, infantry and artillery batteries. It will be many, many months, if not years, before Ukrainian forces receive adequate training to operate this equipment and coordinate the diverse components of a modern battlefield. Indeed, the U.S. never succeeded in training the Iraqi and Afghan armies in combined arms maneuver warfare, despite two decades of occupation.

I was with Marine Corps units in February 1991 that pushed Iraqi forces out of the Saudi Arabian town of Khafji. Supplied with superior military equipment, the Saudi soldiers that held Khafji offered ineffectual resistance. As we entered the city, we saw Saudi troops in commandeered fire trucks, hightailing it south to escape the fighting. All the fancy military hardware, which the Saudis had purchased from the U.S., proved worthless because they did not know how to use it.

NATO military commanders understand that the infusion of these weapons systems into the war will not alter what is, at best, a stalemate, defined largely by artillery duels over hundreds of miles of front lines. The purchase of these weapons systems — one M1 Abrams tank costs $10 million when training and sustainment are included — increases the profits of the arms manufacturers. The use of these weapons in Ukraine allows them to be tested in battlefield conditions, making the war a laboratory for weapons manufacturers such as Lockheed Martin. All this is useful to NATO and to the arms industry. But it is not very useful to Ukraine.

The other problem with advanced weapons systems such as the M1 Abrams, which have 1,500-horsepower turbine engines that run on jet fuel, is that they are temperamental and require highly skilled and near constant maintenance. They are not forgiving to those operating them who make mistakes; indeed, mistakes can be lethal. The most optimistic scenario for deploying M1-Abrams tanks in Ukraine is six to eight months, more likely longer. If Russia launches a major offensive in the spring, as expected, the M1 Abrams will not be part of the Ukrainian arsenal. Even when they do arrive, they will not significantly alter the balance of power, especially if the Russians are able to turn the tanks, manned by inexperienced crews, into charred hulks.

So why all this infusion of high-tech weaponry? We can sum it up in one word: panic.

Having declared a de facto war on Russia and openly calling for the removal of Vladimir Putin, the neoconservative pimps of war watch with dread as Ukraine is being pummeled by a relentless Russian war of attrition. Ukraine has suffered nearly 18,000 civilian casualties (6,919 killed and 11,075 injured). It has also seen  around 8 percent of its total housing destroyed or damaged and 50 percent of its energy infrastructure directly impacted with frequent power cuts. Ukraine requires at least $3 billion a month in outside support to keep its economy afloat, the International Monetary Fund’s managing director recently said. Nearly 14 million Ukrainians have been displaced — 8 million in Europe and 6 million internally — and up to 18 million people, or 40 percent of Ukraine’s population, will soon require humanitarian assistance. Ukraine’s economy contracted by 35 percent in 2022, and 60 percent of Ukrainians are now poised to live on less than $5.5 a day, according to World Bank estimates. Nine million Ukrainians are without electricity and water in sub-zero temperatures, the Ukrainian president says. According to estimates from the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 100,000 Ukrainian and 100,000 Russian soldiers have been killed in the war as of last November.  

“My feeling is we are at a crucial moment in the conflict when the momentum could shift in favor of Russia if we don’t act decisively and quickly,” former U.S. Senator Rob Portman was quoted as saying at the World Economic Forum in a post by The Atlantic Council. “A surge is needed.”

Turning logic on its head, the shills for war argue that “the greatest nuclear threat we face is a Russian victory.” The cavalier attitude to a potential nuclear confrontation with Russia by the cheerleaders for the war in Ukraine is very, very frightening, especially given the fiascos they oversaw for twenty years in the Middle East.

The near hysterical calls to support Ukraine as a bulwark of liberty and democracy by the mandarins in Washington are a response to the palpable rot and decline of the U.S. empire. America’s global authority has been decimated by well-publicized war crimes, torture, economic decline, social disintegration — including the assault on the capital on January 6, the botched response to the pandemic, declining life expectancies and the plague of mass shootings — and a series of military debacles from Vietnam to Afghanistan. The coups, political assassinations, election fraud, black propaganda, blackmail, kidnapping, brutal counter-insurgency campaigns, U.S. sanctioned massacres, torture in global black sites, proxy wars and military interventions carried out by the United States around the globe since the end of World War II have never resulted in the establishment of a democratic government. Instead, these interventions have led to over 20 million killed and spawned a global revulsion for U.S. imperialism. 

In desperation, the empire pumps ever greater sums into its war machine. The most recent $1.7 trillion spending bill included $847 billion for the military;  the total is boosted to $858 billion when factoring in accounts that don’t fall under the Armed Services committees’ jurisdiction, such as the Department of Energy, which oversees nuclear weapons maintenance and the infrastructure that develops them. In 2021, when the U.S. had a military budget of $801 billion, it constituted nearly 40 percent of all global military expenditures, more than the next nine countries, including Russia and China, spent on their militaries combined.

As Edward Gibbon observed about the Roman Empire’s own fatal lust for endless war: “[T]he decline of Rome was the natural and inevitable effect of immoderate greatness. Prosperity ripened the principle of decay; the cause of the destruction multiplied with the extent of conquest; and, as soon as time or accident had removed the artificial supports, the stupendous fabric yielded to the pressure of its own weight. The story of the ruin is simple and obvious; and instead of inquiring why the Roman Empire was destroyed, we should rather be surprised that it had subsisted for so long.”

A state of permanent war creates complex bureaucracies, sustained by compliant politicians, journalists, scientists, technocrats and academics, who obsequiously serve the war machine. This militarism needs mortal enemies — the latest are Russia and China — even when those demonized have no intention or capability, as was the case with Iraq, of harming the U.S. We are hostage to these incestuous institutional structures. 

Earlier this month, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, for example, appointed eight commissioners to review Biden’s National Defense Strategy (NDS) to “examine the assumptions, objectives, defense investments, force posture and structure, operational concepts, and military risks of the NDS.” The commission, as Eli Clifton writes at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, is “largely comprised of individuals with financial ties to the weapons industry and U.S. government contractors, raising questions about whether the commission will take a critical eye to contractors who receive $400 billion of the $858 billion FY2023 defense budget.” The chair of the commission, Clifton notes, is former Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), who “sits on the board of Iridium Communications, a satellite communications firm that was awarded a seven-year $738.5 million contract with the Department of Defense in 2019.”

Reports about Russian interference in the elections and Russia bots manipulating public opinion — which Matt Taibbi’s recent reporting on the “Twitter Files” exposes as an elaborate piece of black propaganda — was uncritically amplified by the press. It seduced Democrats and their liberal supporters into seeing Russia as a mortal enemy. The near universal support for a prolonged war with Ukraine would not be possible without this con.

America’s two ruling parties depend on campaign funds from the war industry and are pressured by weapons manufacturers in their state or districts, who employ constituents, to pass gargantuan military budgets. Politicians are acutely aware that to challenge the permanent war economy is to be attacked as unpatriotic and is usually an act of political suicide. 

“The soul that is enslaved to war cries out for deliverance,” writes Simone Weil in her essay “The Iliad or the Poem of Force”, “but deliverance itself appears to it an extreme and tragic aspect, the aspect of destruction.”

Historians refer to the quixotic attempt by empires in decline to regain a lost hegemony through military adventurism as “micro-militarism.” During the Peloponnesian War (431–404 B.C.) the Athenians invaded Sicily, losing 200 ships and thousands of soldiers. The defeat ignited a series of successful revolts throughout the Athenian empire. The Roman Empire, which at its height lasted for two centuries, became captive to its one military man army that, similar to the U.S. war industry, was a state within a state. Rome’s once mighty legions in the late stage of empire suffered defeat after defeat while extracting ever more resources from a crumbling and impoverished state. In the end, the elite Praetorian Guard auctioned off the emperorship to the highest bidder. The  British Empire, already decimated by the suicidal military folly of World War I, breathed its last gasp in 1956 when it attacked Egypt in a dispute over the nationalization of the Suez Canal. Britain withdrew in humiliation and became an appendage of the United States. A decade-long war in Afghanistan sealed the fate of a decrepit Soviet Union.

“While rising empires are often judicious, even rational in their application of armed force for conquest and control of overseas dominions, fading empires are inclined to ill-considered displays of power, dreaming of bold military masterstrokes that would somehow recoup lost prestige and power,” historian Alfred W. McCoy writes in his book, “In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power.” “Often irrational even from an imperial point of view, these micro-military operations can yield hemorrhaging expenditures or humiliating defeats that only accelerate the process already under way.” 

The plan to reshape Europe and the global balance of power by degrading Russia is turning out to resemble the failed plan to reshape the Middle East. It is fueling a global food crisis and devastating Europe with near double-digit inflation. It is exposing the impotency, once again, of the United States, and the bankruptcy of its ruling oligarchs. As a counterweight to the United States, nations such as China, Russia, India, Brazil and Iran are severing themselves from the tyranny of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, a move that will trigger economic and social catastrophe in the United States. Washington is giving Ukraine ever more sophisticated weapons systems and billions upon billions in aid in a futile bid to save Ukraine but, more importantly, to save itself.

*  *  *

The Chris Hedges Report is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/31/2023 - 02:00
https://ift.tt/xcfAaGp
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/xcfAaGp
via IFTTT

Hedges: Ukraine, The War That Went Wrong SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Rep. Maxine Waters Calls GOP House Members "Domestic Terrorists"

Authored by Naveen Anthrapully via The Epoch Times,

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) has characterized Republican lawmakers as “domestic terrorists” and “extremists,” insisting that she hopes people won’t continue to elect them, a statement that attracted criticism from Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.).

Waters was asked about the prospect of police reform in Congress during an interview for “Ayman” on MSNBC on Saturday.

She called GOP members of Congress the “Marjorie Taylor Greene Republican caucus” and insisted that she doesn’t expect any police reform on the federal level.

“We have these right-wing conservatives who are, you know... we have domestic terrorists in the House of Representatives. These people are extremists,” she said.

“So I am not optimistic that that is the way that it is going to happen until the people of this country really decide that they do not want it, and they are not going to elect people who act in the fashion that they act.”

In March of last year, Waters was one of three Democrats who sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office asking for a review of how “domestic violent extremists” and “homegrown violent extremists” fund their activities.

Boebert criticized Waters for her comments.

“Maxine Waters says that we have House Republicans who are domestic terrorists,” Boebert posted on Twitter on Monday. “Interesting, as I don’t remember anyone in the House who has called for more violence than Maxine Waters.”

In April 2021, Waters told protesters to “get more confrontational” and “make sure that they know that we mean business” if the officer accused of killing of George Floyd in 2020 was acquitted.

Constructing a Threat of Domestic Terrorism

Since Jan. 6, 2021, domestic terrorism has been pushed by the mainstream media as a widespread threat facing the United States.

In September, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) revealed information from an FBI whistleblower who alleged that the FBI was “manipulating” case files related to the Jan. 6 Capitol breach to make it seem like America has a bigger domestic terrorism problem than it actually does.

“The manipulative casefile practice creates false and misleading crime statistics,” the whistleblower alleged, according to Jordan.

“Instead of hundreds of investigations stemming from a single, black swan incident at the Capitol, FBI and DOJ officials point to significant increases in domestic violent extremism and terrorism around the United States.”

According to the whistleblower, a Washington task force identifies “potential subjects” related to the Jan. 6 case and possible locations where they might reside. The task force then sends “information packets” to several local field offices around the country, asking them to open investigations.

As a result, even though the multiple field offices are only investigating a single incident, it creates the illusion that these threats are present in jurisdictions across the nation, Jordan said.

In testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in July, Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen admitted that the rising domestic terrorism cases over the previous two years can mostly be traced to a single incident—the Jan. 6 breach.

“That number does include the Jan. 6 cases, and there, of course, we have over 800 arrests of individuals—not all of them are characterized as domestic violent extremists, to be clear, but many are,” Olsen said. “Those do account for at least a significant portion of that jump over the past two years in the number of investigations.”

Left-Wing Domestic Terrorism Push

In March 2022, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) touted the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021 as necessary to combat “white supremacists.”

The push to link conservatism with domestic terrorism is penetrating schools as well. In September 2021, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) wrote a letter to the Department of Justice calling for an investigation into parents under domestic terrorism laws.

The parents had attended school board meetings to object to school policies like COVID-19 restrictions and the teaching of critical race theory, which the NSBA equated with “domestic terrorism.”

The letter argued that “America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat.”

The organization subsequently apologized for the letter.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/30/2023 - 21:00
https://ift.tt/bgE6HY0
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/bgE6HY0
via IFTTT

Rep. Maxine Waters Calls GOP House Members "Domestic Terrorists" SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Tesla Model S "Spontaneously" Erupts In Flames On California Highway

President Biden's green new world of more electric vehicles on US highways might result in increasing lithium fires -- if that's because of a crash or perhaps a 'spontaneous' battery fire.

The latest incident occurred on Saturday when a Model S "spontaneously" burst into flames on a California freeway. 

On Saturday, the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District tweeted footage of a Tesla Model S engulfed in flames. 

"The fire was extinguished with approx 6,000 gallons of water, as the battery cells continued to combust," the fire department said. 

Several years ago, we pointed out one Tesla fire took at least 20 tons of water to extinguish. For some context, it only takes 3 tons of water to put out a gasoline car fire. 

Traditional fire extinguishers, such as foam and water, are ineffective at extinguishing lithium fires. A class-D dry powder extinguisher is certified for combating battery fires, though many fire departments across the country are not prepared to fight battery fires

Tesla states in a firefighting manual that "large amounts of water" are needed to extinguish a car battery fire. It even said these fires could last as long as 24 hours. 

Someone might need to explain to Biden and his administration that the shift to EVs isn't as 'ESG-friendly' as it's perceived to be.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/30/2023 - 20:40
https://ift.tt/7OScgDq
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/7OScgDq
via IFTTT

Tesla Model S "Spontaneously" Erupts In Flames On California Highway SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend