Why did Synthetic OIL not solve the AXIS OIL Crisis?

The Axis suffered a colossal oil crisis in World War II. And today, we have two questions about this -
Kevin Dragos asked- How did coal-derived synthetic fuel affect Germany's overall fuel situation, and why could it apparently not sufficiently make up for the deficit of oil?
& Craig Walenta asked - At what point would German occupation of the Caucasus have materially impacted the Red Army's ability to fight the war?
Videos EVERY Monday at 5pm GMT (depending on season, check for British Summer Time).
- - - - -
BIBLIOGRAPHY / SOURCES
Full list of all my sources docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
- - - - -
SUPPORT TIK
Want to ask a question? Please consider supporting me on either Patreon or SubscribeStar and help make more videos like this possible. For $5 or more you can ask questions which I will answer in future Q&A videos. Thank you to my current Patrons! You're AWESOME! / tikhistory or www.subscribestar.com/tikhistory
If you like Stalingrad, you may also enjoy historian Anton Joly's KZbin channel "Stalingrad Battle Data". Link: / @armageddon4145
- - - - -
RELATED VIDEO LINKS
The REAL Reason why Hitler HAD to go to War in WW2 • The REAL Reason why Hi...
The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL • The MAIN Reason Why Ge...
FALL BLAU 1942 - Examining the Disaster of German’s second summer offensive • FALL BLAU 1942 - Exami...
My “Why I'm Passionate about HISTORY and What Got Me Into it” video
• Why I'm Passionate abo...
History Theory 101 • [Out of Date, see desc...
- - - - -
ABOUT TIK
History isn’t as boring as some people think, and my goal is to get people talking about it. I also want to dispel the myths and distortions that ruin our perception of the past by asking a simple question - “But is this really the case?”. I have a 2:1 Degree in History and a passion for early 20th Century conflicts (mainly WW2). I’m therefore approaching this like I would an academic essay. Lots of sources, quotes, references and so on. Only the truth will do.
This video is discussing events or concepts that are academic, educational and historical in nature. This video is for informational purposes and was created so we may better understand the past and learn from the mistakes others have made.
#WW2

[@tarnvedra9952]

Why didn't Manstein simply turned water into oil?

[@dfadgsadfga1816]

Hitler refused to let Manstein have any water as he insisted that Manstein subsist only on yaks milk. Thus, plainly, it was Hitler's fault and Manstein could have done it if mad man Hitler had let him. Praise be to Manstein.

[@VonRammsteyn]

Ho c'mon...Rommel's figure is far too much enlarged than Manstein's...Not to mention, patton's...

[@Waterflux]

Manstein turning water into oil? Whoahahahahahaha! :D He should have been sent to a polytechnical university instead of the Kriegsacademie instead. I can imagine Manstein in charge of a major conglomerate like the I.G. Farben or Bayers instead of Army Group South. In this hypothetical case, I wonder how Manstein the CEO would have affected World War.

[@EmmanuelGoldsteinINGSOC]

Der heilige Mannstein hätte auch einfach aus dem Nichts Öl materialisieren können... (wenn es ihm der böse Adi nicht verboten hätte und darauf bestanden hätte dass er für seine Sünden leidet)

[@DraigBlackCat]

He was too busy turning truth into whine

[@Spiz103]

The really crazy thing is that the entire axis shortfall of ten million tonnes a year translates to ~182,000 barrels a day. Germany's oil consumption today is about 2.3 million barrels a day, in peacetime. Shows how oil dependant our modern socities have become.

[@joebobhenrybob2000]

We have spent the last half century pulling oil out of the ground and turning it into lots of people, basically. I read an interesting paper awhile back - quite exhaustive and with numerous citations - explaining all the oil that went into everything in our civilization. ....and how it is not replaceable and how other things are not scalable. (a "substitute" exists, but by its mere existence it does not magically bless oil dependency away, because it cannot be SCALED UP to any meaningful degree ..and in the final analysis usually turns out to exist only due to the existence of the broader oil economy) Anyone talking about ending use of oil and coal is talking about genocide on a never before seen scale. Great Leap Forward and Holodomor killed tens of millions. This would kill billions. And our response is to hang lapel pins of virtue on ourselves that are evocative of, symbolic of, having a solution, and the moral symbol shall bless and save us, presumably. When someone preaches that we should just mindlessly flip the off switch, I say you first, you first. Climbing down gracefully and intelligently from the teetering peak we have reached would be the greatest civilizational achievement ever. If we think we don't have to, there are many thousands of nuclear fuel rods waiting to call our bluff and cook off into the atmosphere if we do it in any other way. When the Romans collapsed, it was just a matter of swamps and malaria coming back while some aqueducts fell apart.

[@BroadHobbyProjects]

@@joebobhenrybob2000 AKA, the Great Reset.

[@Justin-ShalaJC]

Honestly, I think it worked the other way around. They still did not understand how crucial and war ending a lack of oil is. So after LEARNING their mistakes, they NOW have 2,3 million. And still, that's actually not an insane amount of oil, Americans have 30 million in reserve. The German Military used most of their oil on the approach to The Soviets.. and ran out of 'enough oil to maintain an army'. By the time Germans reached the Vulga they had been using horses, not oil, and then eating or losing the horses grazing areas. So, who still thinks the Germans were an "Elite" force? No one. They sucked as an army, didn't understand modern warfare, and we're utterly destroyed by 17 year old Antifa like communist. I would be embarrassed to lose to the Soviets. Especially because, in the east, Germans had more men than the Soviets. And still lost.

[@Justin-ShalaJC]

@@joebobhenrybob2000 just imagine poor Israel, surrounded by enemies and yet chose the coastline of the Mediterranean instead of going inland and milking the teets of middle eastern oil.🛢️ That is how little we knew of the quantity we would end up using over time.

[@michaelzann9589]

@@joebobhenrybob2000 I whole heartedly agree.That has always been my question. Do you have a link for the paper that you read?

[@lutherburgsvik6849]

I guess the oil shortage is partly why they used horses to tow a significant portion of their artillery instead of half tracks.

[@TheImperatorKnight]

You are absolutely correct

[@_Abjuranax_]

Germany in WWI had also lost over 16 million horses and horsepower had replaced horses by WWII, so even they were not in great supply. Much of their transport and field kitchens relied on horses, and only the US could field entire mechanized Divisions.

[@allangibson8494]

@@_Abjuranax_ The British and Commonwealth forces were mechanised by the end of WW2.

[@TheLastSterling1304]

@@_Abjuranax_ Well the British could also. Those Universal Carriers were pretty useful.

[@Waterflux]

Not to mention, motorized units are no better off than foot-mobile units in places with poor road network surrounded by a plenty of mud. This was the case with the Soviet union during its spring and autumn seasons. However, the Ardennes operation also encountered a similarly horrible ground condition which played a big part in completely throwing off the German timetable. This operation required that 6th Panzer Army cross Meuse River by no later than the 18th or the 19th of December 1944, barely 3 days after the beginning of this operation. Because of the mud, panzer divisions lacked cross-country capability and were confined to roads and towns. Not surprisingly, this also led to very nasty traffic congestion.

[@robertalaverdov8147]

Synthetic refineries got nerfed with the 1941 update. And the developers forgot to put coal as a resource so they're completely broken. Worst Germany war ever! Will not replay scenario.

[@rickmoreno6858]

Just like they added fuel back to hoi4 we need to tell parafox to bring coal back, for that very reason!

[@ETAlnes]

@@rickmoreno6858 For the damn navies at the very least, also I think he already were referring to HOI4.

[@leroyhovatter7051]

Robert don't make the third time the charm son

[@sld1776]

Oh, please. Just build 14/4s with the right battalions and steamroll everyone with soft attack. Tanks are wasteful in SP.

[@DocTommy1972]

plus they inconveniently discovered oil in Germany AFTER the war. different replay value and powerup

[@Silly2smart]

Around 1943, the allies started bombing the huge synthetic complexes in their "Oil First" bombing campaign.

[@derekbaker3279]

Yes indeed, however the bombing of the Polesti oil production facilities (in Romania) & synthetic oil manufacturing elsewhere proved to be extremely costly for the 8th Air Force & R.A.F., so these raids could not be carried-out on a rwgular basis. Furthermore, I recall reading that repairs to these industries were carried out quickly & production eventually returned to normal. So, I wonder if the Allied bombing campaign significantly worsened Germany's oil crisis in 1943 and/or 1944... 🤔

[@midnatts-kornajoel2224]

Derek Baker axis lost at stalingrad

[@derekbaker3279]

@@midnatts-kornajoel2224 Yes, I know that. 🙂

[@norrij01]

Hitting the pinch points in production, like ball bearings, looks to have produced better results. Although killing off your experienced pilots and tank crews wasn’t a good path to sustainability.

[@derekbaker3279]

@phantom killer087 😁

[@davidolie8392]

The production of synthetic oil requires massive inputs of other forms of energy, primarily electricity. Germany had two major sources of electricity: hydroelectric and steam turbine (basically, coal-burning). Hydroelectric is pretty cheap once the costs of the infrastructure (dams) are covered, but it's not available everywhere. Otherwise Germany was burning coal to convert other coal into a more mobile form of fuel. The massive inefficiency is obvious.

[@davidolie8392]

@The Colonel Well, yes. If your objective is to subjugate other peoples rational economics must take the backseat.

[@davidolie8392]

@The Colonel Maybe so. Magical thinking can take anyone anywhere.

[@mikefay5698]

Apartheid South Africa was blockaded. They could get no oil. Sasol project turned coal to oil. S Africa had plenty coal. S African guerilla's tried to blow it up Sasol. Economy goes to the wall when neccesity rheigns!

[@mikefay5698]

@The Colonel Horses were the main method of transport for the Whermacht, plent of hay and oats!

[@mikefay5698]

@The Colonel People forget that WW1 was only 20 years past. The rear of the German and Red Armies depended on horses, even some Camels made it to Berlin.

[@coachhannah2403]

Also, too, the Germans were expending a huge percentage of the fuel driving that fuel to the hopelessly extended front lines.

[@norrij01]

Coach Hannah that problem seemed to sort itself out over time.

[@coachhannah2403]

Rockwell - OK, if by that you mean Germany collapsed back onto its supply lines, conjoined with the losses accrued to its mechanized forces in the field.

[@norrij01]

Exactly. Not a solution they were hoping for, but a solution nevertheless

[@coachhannah2403]

Miike Hunt - They tried. Not nearly enough engineers or construction staff. Barbarossa was run on a shoestring.

[@insideoutsideupsidedown2218]

They had the trains to take supplies to the depots, but were limited on the trucks and the fuel for the trucks to take the supplies from the depots to the front lines, and relied on horse. Logistical nightmare indeed.

[@sparkyfromel]

in his book "Achtung Panzer " written in 1937 , toward the end of the book , Guderian write than his doubts on the available supply of oil and rubber had been dispelled by learning of the ongoing progress in synthetic production of oil and buna rubber , it was in fact grossly optimistic

[@imswanronson3558]

Dude they should have just rolled the version back before Man the Guns so they wouldn't have to deal with the new fuel mechanic.

[@1Maklak]

That directly used oil for producing tanks and airplanes and ships and the "production stops after 20 resource dificit" rule still applied, so not having oil was still pretty bad.

[@imswanronson3558]

@@1Maklak AKCTUALLY

[@davidburroughs7068]

A pfennig was a German penny, worth 100 pf per mark, and during about '40-'45, they produced the Riechsmark and were also 100 pf per r.m. All replaced by the euro in about 2002, I think.

[@jangelbrich7056]

It is much more complicated, there had been a lot of consequent and even parallel currencies in Germany's history. Reichsmark (which replaced Rentenmark in 1924 which replaced Mark after 1923 hyperinflation) was replaced by TWO Deutsche Mark currencies in 1948 (sparkling the first Berlin crisis). In 1991 the East German Mark was abandoned for the West German Deutsche Mark, which was replaced by the Euro eventually.

[@finallyfriday.]

My grandfather was a chemist who developed this synthetic fuel in WW2. We never had an in depth conversation about it before he died but as I recall he said it was predominantly for V-2 rocket use.

[@damienparoski2033]

A Pfenning is one 100th of a Mark. It is the counterpart to the American penny.

[@TheExard3k]

just remember to add 70 years of inflation. Triple the oil prices while being on limited production isn't a good thing no matter the numbers

[@flappyhands6427]

Pfennig = penny. Surprised TIk was like 'whatever that is'

[@davidburroughs7068]

We will have to give him a penny for his thoughts ....

[@DraigBlackCat]

Be kind to TIK, he probably spends so long in the past he hasn't caught up with decimalisation and must still think we have 20 shillings, ie 240d (pennies), in the pound ;-)

[@damienparoski2033]

Here is some interesting data just for comparison. If we take a rough conversion of the German Mark to American Dollars (of about 2.5M=$1) we will find that the synthetic gasoline cost about 9.2¢ to produce while at the same time consumers were paying, in the US, about 4.22¢ per liter for oil derived gasoline.

[@davidrendall2461]

One of the driving factors in German jet aircraft development was they could be run on low grade kerosene. Easier and cheaper to make from synthetics.

[@mickmegson6241]

Standard Oil sold IG Farben the process for increasing octane ratings in low grade fuel before the war so even synthetic oil could be boosted.

[@amerigo88]

Also, the Jumo jet engines required about one fifth the labor and money to construct as compared to the late war German piston engines, so it was a win-win. The lack of high grade alloys meant short lifespans for the Jumo engines.

[@TheArklyte]

@@amerigo88 RELATIVELY short lifespans. We're talking about 25 hour *maintenance periods,* not full lifespan of the engine. It was the time when engine would be fully dissassembled and checked. So it was normal for engine to survive 2 such periods ie 50 hours or even 3 ie 75 hours. Meanwhile late war prop engines of Allies driven to their limit already had a lifespan of _only 100 hours._ So "unreliable" jet engine built without required materials could match to a half or more of lifespan of much more expensive prop engine.

[@hernerweisenberg7052]

They had to run on low octane fuel, they didn't choose to. For example the ~35l V12 DB605 engine with methanol-water injection from a late war BF-109 produced up to 2000hp with 87 octane fuel compared to the 27l V12 Merlin from a late war P-51 that could reach about the same ~2000hp useing 100 octane fuel. Postwar Merlins where equipped with the same MW injection system for racing and reached up to 3800hp!

[@kekistanimememan170]

@@hernerweisenberg7052 plus ideally you don’t want methanol or ethanol running in plane parts due the the fact both encourage water to get in the fuel and that’s gonna add to maintenance issues. Hell in peace time it would be an outright safety issue.

[@michaelmccabe3079]

This is why nuclear power is so cool- the waste heat from the reaction can power both the Fischer-Tropsch and Haber-Bosch processes.

[@TheKlink]

chp & heat recovery in general could really help the global energy market.

[@hailexiao2770]

Waste heat from nuclear reactors producing electric power isn't hot enough to power those reactions, except maybe as a preheater.

[@theterribleanimator1793]

How would you transport the heat to a haber-borsh reactor? Its not likeyou can just transport it with a couple of copper pipes and some hogh boiling point oil.

[@michaelmccabe3079]

@@theterribleanimator1793 There are lots of ways. It could be directly in the chamber, like a cauldron, or it could use the heated fluids like geothermal reactors do. These would be dual-purpose/integrated processes, rather than taking place in separate facilities.

[@Usammityduzntafraidofanythin]

Not only is NP low emission, but has the potential to be much cheaper than oil. It's the free market solution, but regulations are preventing progress!

[@brianstewart23]

Imagine if the oil in Libya had been discovered in the late 30s.

[@frapippo420]

Man, that would be a interesting scenario for a ucronia. Lybian oil is known to be of high quality, with very low sulfur residues, so it require less refining (this is the short version, it's probably more complicated than this). Fortunately, in our timeline, it was discovered only after the war...

[@kyokyodisaster4842]

Well, good for the allies! They just got more oil to win the war! Why not the axis? You say? Well, the transport of that oil field to the German mainland would have been nigh impossible do in major part to a increasingly heavy British blockade of German-Italian units in Africa... The allies would have then realized, due to their amazing spy-rings...that the oil there existed and then exploit the oil and ship it to the Soviet Union to continue to speed up the victory.

[@cleanerben9636]

For that to happen the Italians would have to not be useless.

[@Sigueme1]

The oil fields in Libya would’ve gotten bombed into the stone age, the Luftwaffe was hugely outnumbered once the US got into the war

[@Good_Things99]

That would be a Game changer for Axis...Hitler would've simply conquered Spain & Gibraltar with only 10% of Manpower from Operation Barbarossa...RN/RAF would've Evacuated Medeterian...Rommels Win Africa with unlimited supplies....Barbarossa would've won with More Panzer divisions and unlimited fuel Supplies

[@FrancescoDondi]

Amazing that despite the dirt cheap oil on international markets, Goering failed by more than a half his target stockpile of the crucial resource.

[@EndOfSmallSanctuary97]

Goering was an incompetent fool.

[@AFT_05G]

Coal was probably the shortest reason of Germany's ability to continue to war.Germany had vast amounts of hard coal in Silesia and brown coal in Ruhr.Greater Germany including Austria,Czechoslovakia,Alsace Lorraine and some territories of Poland had an amounts of some 500 million tons of coal output per year which was almost on par with USA's volume of production and vastly more than other countries.

[@nicholasbartonlaw341]

"The Prize" by Daniel Yergin has a good summation of the oil situation in WW2.

[@brettmcclain9289]

Thank you tik for talking about the economics factors of ww2 most historians have no clue about Economics and your prospective adds a lot to the field of history.

[@petrosros]

South Africa sustained it's economy for fifty years with synthetic oil, from 1948-1994.

[@joebobhenrybob2000]

I'm betting the synthetic fuel refinery was attached to an atomic power plant

[@lotus95t]

Any discussion of this subject without detailing the involvement of Standard Oil, General Motors, Ethyl Gasoline Corporation ( a joint Standard Oil / GM company) and Dupont, will leave a giant hole in the story. Without the help / involvement of the previously mentioned company's, German production of synthetic fuel, especially for aviation fuel, would have rendered that synthetic fuel practically unusable for military use.

[@giupiete6536]

Sure, aaaaaand it was also those corporations that were in large part responsible for the drop in natural oil fuel prices that made that synthetic production impracticable in terms of foreign trade. Would like to point out though that investing tax money in domestic production to avoid being dependent upon foreign trade is not socialist, it's what any sensible government does in any critical sector. Even as peacetime concerns between equal trading partners, every mark spent on imports is one that has to be made up by exports or foreign capital investment, quite aside from the negotiating barrel one is bent over when beholden to foreign production.

[@mikefay5698]

Germany had the worlds best Chemists!

[@lotus95t]

@@giupiete6536 You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

[@giupiete6536]

@@lotus95t Because Shipping, Chemical, Oil & Engineering companies increasing worldwide access to oil of course had nothing to do with the drop in the worldwide prices for same. Sure. Waiit, were you looking for people to jump on a bandwagon saying the US (& non German industry) was responsible for the Reich's ability to wage war? I've read those before.

[@lotus95t]

@@giupiete6536 You really are stupid. The discussion has nothing to do with the price of oil but of the company's I mentioned supplying tetraethyllead and other patented chemical additives and their formulation to Germany which allowed synthetic fuel to be formulated for use by the German military and especially for aviation fuel, which without the American fuel additives wouldn't have been possible. In fact Dupont was providing the German Air Ministry with tetraethyllead in 1939.

[@miam4u]

If you read the Oil book "The Prize" then you see that oil prices in the 1930's collapsed also because of the discovery of the Texas Permian basin, a huge reservoir of oil that was so prolific it meant the Texas Railroad Commission stepped in. This had a global impact even though VLCC tankers hadn't yet been built.

[@anandtoprani4513]

Thanks again for making such thorough use of my work. I’d be happy to send you samples of other things I’ve written.

[@theawesomesixes]

Hi TIK, big fan for a while now. Just wanted to say these Q&A style videos are great, particularly in the format they're currently in. I listen to them while playing strategy games, or convert them to mp3 and use as podcasts while driving to work etc. These long historiography type discussion videos that don't require visual attention (as oppose to battlestorm videos with maps and other graphics) are perfect. Keep up the good work!

[@daguard411]

Thanks. When I heard of synthetic oil I always thought of it going through a lab type process, you know, like in a clean scientific place with beakers, Bunsen burners and the like. Thanks for making the process known, because I had enough trouble reading my Dad's doctoral thesis let alone anyone else's.

[@briannewman6216]

It sounds like the EROEI for synthetic fuel was too low for the Germans to sustain a major war.

[@Bogdan36933]

I'm happy that I spend my time watching you , so rich content , you 're genius man , so proud of your hardwork ! 👍🏻

[@nukclear2741]

Well TIK, I'm proud to say that you are the first channel I've become a patreon for!

[@davidtsw]

Awesome to realize TIK has released another video.

[@softstone125]

This is one of the main reasons why I think now 1942 worse than 1941. Once, when i have seen statistics of the fuel balance of the USSR first time, I also began to realize the danger of the situation in the summer of 1942. Moreover, it’s not necessary for the Germans to take Baku, it’s enough to hold on and then assemble an air force to attack this oil fields - the Germans were very effectively durin air raids on GAZ plant in series of raids (1943), therefore, from attacks on for stationary, flammable and poorly covered by air defense targets similar effectiveness can be expected. I'm glad that such an idea will reach the English-speaking audience. Thanks.

[@evil1143]

Hitler would have been well aware of the issue before barbarossa let alone 1942.

[@derekbaker3279]

@@evil1143 🤔 Hmmm...I wonder if the German high command's 'war gaming' analysis & predictions included economic scenarios & not just military ones. 🤔

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Nice video From TIK about Axis Shortage of Oil during 2WW ...Excellent explaining of that disaster situation

[@whazzat8015]

Incredible thansk for the reference to Anand Toprani's work. Breathtaking !

[@KrzysztofDanielCiba]

Re: droping price of oil, wasn't it they have found huge oil fields in Texas and elsewhere so price for oil went down as global supply was much bigger than demand?

[@mickmegson6241]

That's true, also new oil reserves in Venezuela, Burma, Iran and Saudi Arabia meant there was a glut on the global market.

[@brianrockwood2018]

Yes, but you have to understand that before the 20's, there really wasn't that much of a demand for oil. Almost everything was run on coal, but that's not to say that people didn't know where to find oil. Once the gasoline engine was perfected, and was shown to run much more efficiently, and automobiles became cheap enough for people to actually afford, oil prospectors ALL rushed to start drilling at the same time, thus causing a huge influx of oil production worldwide, not just in the United States.

[@user_____M]

6,000,000 tons! never forget!

[@ED-es2qv]

Thanks Tik, you’re the first person I’ve heard explain what synthetic oil was made from.

[@trintym]

Excellent analysis TIK

[@ferrousallotrope]

Interesting video ! Also FWIW its pronounced hyd-ro-genation , which is just the process of adding hydrogen atoms to carbon-carbon bonds in an unsaturated compound. Keep up the good work !

[@gravyboat2370]

The Germans did actually make a coal powered plane !

[@alwoo5645]

They tried it but don't think it really worked. Powered coal ram jet.

[@LUR1FAX]

*Nyyyooooom, CHOO CHOO!*

[@edgerlozano9492]

I know im hella late but a good way to see how desperate they were is (i have heard of it but not researched it) lumber powered tanks

[@scratchy996]

@@edgerlozano9492 They had wood powered tanks, but they were used only for training, you couldn't send those into battle. They did have a diesel powered high altitude spy plane.

[@gregorymalchuk272]

@@scratchy996 The Germans had an entire government ministry called the "Ministry of Generators" which was dedicated to supplying plans and equipment to convert civilian, agricultural, and municipal vehicles and applications from liquid fuels go coal/wood gasifiers.

[@Axisjampa]

Ja! I arrived first. We need more TIK material. Great work man!!!

[@maincoon6602]

Another great video 👍🏻

[@82dorrin]

*Sees TIK notification* *Gives resigned sigh and clicks* It's a reflex at this point. I have no voluntary control anymore...

[@MetricImperialist]

Wow you clicked on the video... why do people insist on posting the same stupid garbage memes?

[@82dorrin]

@@MetricImperialist You must be new to KZbin.

[@MetricImperialist]

@@82dorrin I've been here a lot longer than you zoomer. The comments section used to be pure cancer but still fun. Somehow you morons managed to make it even worse with your unoriginal low-IQ spam. Why are you phishing for likes anyway? This isn't reddit. The internet was better without you scrubs.

[@loneeagle901]

@@MetricImperialist but... Is this really the case.. :v?

[@MetricImperialist]

@@loneeagle901 Yes. It's an unoriginal comment, they're everywhere. It's a slight variation of the 'I'm a simple man, I see the video, I click' meme. If people weren't allowed to 'like' comments, all this dumbass spam would disappear immediately.

[@EdMcF1]

'Pfennig' = German for 'penny', 'hydrogenation' = adding hydrogen to carbon and hydrocarbon molecules to make them into useful alkanes etc. for use as fuel in this case, also used to make margarine. Rothbard is fine on economics, but a nut job on wider history.

[@jamesb4789]

Contrary to most of the studies, the fuel supply was tight for most of the the war, but it was not critical until the US bombing campaign switched to the oil plants thanks to an spy ring run out of Sweden that fed detailed information to the Allies about what facilities were critical. Once the bombs found the right targets it started an oil collapse they never recovered from. The real problem with the synthetic fuels is the huge energy costs. And the fact that their process was incredibly dirty. The minerals and other contaminants in the low grade coal in German hands made the process wretchedly complex. I speak from some experience with working with synthetics and the newest processes have far higher yields.

[@solarfreak1107]

Do you have a source for this Swedish spy ring? It's fascinating to learn more!

[@LavrencicUrban]

GREAT VIDEO!

[@EdMcF1]

Chris Rea did a song about this 'Fuel if you think it's over.'.

[@deliezer]

According to Greg’s Airplanes and Automobiles, synthetic oil also had fewer aromatic compounds, which are needed for production of the highest quality fuels.

[@metaphorpritam]

Not for 'highest quality' so as to speak, but to raise the octane rating of the fuel. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

[@tommyodonovan3883]

That's the process used in the Alberta Tar Sands, the Bitumen is extracted from the Sand using steam injection, this Bituman is then infused with hydrocarbons extracted from the abundant Natural Gas. That is what makes it *Synthetic* fuel/Oil.

[@gregorymalchuk272]

With modern thermal and catalytic cracking, polymerization, hydrogenation, isomerization, and alkylation technologies, the point is totally moot. You can synthesize any octane booster you want. The Germans probably didn't have that much technology though.

[@deliezer]

@@tommyodonovan3883 Yes, and the point is that, with WW2 Chemical Engineering technology, synthetic fuels were not as good as natural fuels.

[@tveleruusk]

You want branched molecules rather than aromatics. Aromatics must be kept to a reasonable minimum as they coke up during consumption and create some dioxin emissions which are fairly harmful. That’s why some refineries actually have benzene saturation units to meet the modern gasoline spec. The point is valid though, as Fischer Tropsch produces mainly linear molecules so the synthetic crude must be processed further to increase the number of branched hydrocarbons. It’s not a major cost though.

[@spartiate567]

Excellent post. I have wondered about the synthetic oil issue and you have cleared up most of my questions here. A few details that are not really huge but still might be useful to you: One German fighter pilot reported that he switched to night fighter duty in 1943. There was a training program for day fighter pilots to switch to night fighting. It was designed to take 90 days. Due to fuel shortages in 1943, it took nine months. Another detail: One major expense of coal gasification was steel. The methods at that time took a very large number of steel vessels--to the point that the entire supply of steel in the 3rd Reich simply could not supply enough. Finally, I recently read that while the jet engines could burn many fuels, the best fuel available was synthetic. The engines could burn diesel fuel but with less efficiency. In a pinch they could burn gasoline, but with significantly reduced efficiency.Thanks again,Jay Maupin

[@viniciusbortoloso4678]

Thanks Tik

[@cas343]

Oooo I just finished Vampire Economy so I know this one :) (I won't spoil it)

[@georgepress1261]

Gri sha BBC

[@coelholukas]

You should go with Hitler's beneficiaries now.

[@VT-mw2zb]

Here are a few interesting/fun things about oil, diesel, avgas, and gasoline you might not know: - Germany problem is thermodynamics. If it wants fuel from coal, it need coal to run electricity generators to run conversion plants. that's expensive, but do able. - They have a shelf life. The lighter the distillation fraction they came from, the shorter the shelf life. For example: gasoline is the lightest and most volatile and its shelf life is about 3 months. Avgas and diesel is more stable and most will last only a year or so. Wars are rare, only once or so per one or two generations. This makes stockpiling ready fuel incredibly difficult. So if you want a war with any kind of endurance at all, you will need big stockpile of crude oil and refineries ready to ramp up the fuel supplies. These facilities are also essentially state-owned/funded/subsidised and cut off from the market. - Viewing from this lens, the synthetic fuel from coal can be a strategic resource since coal last essentially forever and even longer shelf life than crude oil. If all you have is coal and oil need to be imported; imports can be cut but coal + coal conversion plants + coal fired electricity generation, you can get enough fuel for some limited operation. Germany's problem is really a case of biting off more than they could chew. That setup will be perfectly viable for advance through well railroaded regions where supplies strain can be alleviated somewhat with coal-fired rail transports. Once they are not on rail country and had to use trucks; that's it. - One proposal from Wesley Clark, US. General for a strategy to make America energy independent was to ... holy shit, turn coal into liquid fuel. Well, that needs electricity. If you already have electricity, why not run cars on batteries? the only thing that is cannot be run with batteries are jet-powered aircrafts. So use the fuel to do that. America is already the largest oil production country in the world right now.

[@herrrobert5340]

Thanks for your post. That's some really interesting stuff right there.

[@Stormbringer2012]

The burden of electrical power could have been over come with dam building or even using coal. The Germans possessed an abundance of the stuff

[@solarfreak1107]

@@Stormbringer2012 Not really, they had a coal shortage trying to solve their oil shortage.

[@jayfelsberg1931]

I am impressed that you quite Murray Rothbard, one of most incisive economists that ever lived.

[@davidhimmelsbach557]

@TIK Putting my Chemist's hat on: the Germans went down the WRONG road WRT coal to liquids. They adopted HIGH PRESSURE conversion technology. This was an EPIC error. High Pressure tanks used exotic steels that Germany was short of. That was the hang-up. That's why coal-to-liquid was so expensive. It was the STEEL. This is the same steel that you needed for your tanks, submarines, surface fleet -- etc. The Correct solution was to use the LOW Pressure path. This is nothing more exotic than pure distillation to produce 'Coal Tars' -- BTW, a British technology that was more than a century old. The Americans perfected it by the 1920s -- and had patents issued. It, the American solution, was NOT a secret. It just didn't appeal to German chemists. They over designed their path to liquids. In the Low Pressure scheme, coal is distilled -- and the waste is not converted into liquids. It is merely shifted over to thermo-electric power plants and BURNED as is. This was an economic revolution -- if seized. In the 19th Century there was no-one to purchase the waste coal solids -- but the electric power industry changed that equation. Mere distillation produces one-barrel of liquids for each ton of coal. Germany was mining millions of tons of coal per year. The octane rating of distilled coal tar is virtually certain to be higher than the crap the Nazis were cranking out. The High Pressure route to liquids has never pencilled out for anybody.

[@scavenger6268]

Thankfully, Military history not visualized went into deeper depth of the messed up logistics that did not help the Reich in basic transport of well....literally anything to either civilians or its soldiers. Also interestingly like you he mentioned they had plenty of coal, but that they had neither the manpower or even modernized tools (or the ability to continuously modernize) to make up the lost production for their needs. Well at least we can learn from our enemy's mistakes.

[@_Abjuranax_]

Another problem was over engineering. Panther bearings where being made to last thirty years, when the tanks themselves would be lucky to last thirty days in some instances.

[@mikefay5698]

There was plenty of labour. Work it out! They wouldn't or couldn't feed them.

[@AFT_05G]

Well they had actually a decent manpower.

[@TheClanAdventures]

How much of a factor was the shale oil production in Austria, France and elsewhere. This form of oil production had been about for almost 100 years and was quite developed as a process by the 1930s/40s.

[@davidolie8392]

Elsewhere includes Estonia. Shale oil production was one reason why Hitler insisted on trying to hold the Baltic states in 1944 long after his strategic position there was viable.

[@m2heavyindustries378]

Sourses or refs for this????? Guess not

[@TheClanAdventures]

@@m2heavyindustries378 yeh the big heaps/hills off shale piled outside the village i live in. ever been to central scotland. or you could just google it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/fn-WlXWenrVmhZY

[@alwoo5645]

@@TheClanAdventures I didn't know that interesting

[@Adiscretefirm]

Quite well laid out explanation.

[@madometzap6888]

Hi, as usual fantastic work. What is the source of the "Axis oil crisis 1940-1941" chart? Toprani? Thanks.

[@stephenkneller9318]

TIK is correct when he states standard of living decreases during booms and increases during depression. This is due to Central Banks' interventions in the markets. Prior to the crash on Wall Street, several things played a part in this. First, England was attempting to return to the gold standard which it ended at the beginning of World War I. Like previous wars, the government decided to return to the same rate as when it stopped. The problem was, the Bank of England had drastically increased the amount of paper Pounds (fiat currency) to pay for the war effort. This caused the purchasing power of the pound to fall significantly lower than it was under the gold standard. The massive increasing in the economy due to the increased printing of fiat money, resulted in inflation of prices. As a result, consumers could buy less for the same amount of Pounds than before the gold standard was ended. (This is how the consumers' standards of living decreases during a boom.) Because there were far too many undervalued paper Pounds in circulation, when the government returned to the gold standard massive amounts of gold began to flow out of the Bank of England. This is because holders of paper Pounds could buy more gold than the Pound notes were worth. As a result of the gold loss, the problem became far worse in England and began to shutter the economy. Second, Benjamin Strong, the head of the New York Branch of the US Federal Reserve, and at the time the de facto "Chairman" of the Fed decided to intervene. (At the time there was no chairman. However, the NY Branch was the largest and most powerful and effectively led Federal Reserve monetary policy.) Strong decided to use several tactics to stem the gold flow from the UK. His primary one was to lower the interest rates. This allows banks to borrow money from the Central Bank cheaper. As a result, paper dollars (fiat currency) flows into the banks and into the markets. The banks drastically increased the amount of loans they offered in an effort to maximize profits from interest on those loans. All the major banks started doing this. The money flowed into the markets without any real controls on what the loans could be used for. Much of this money flowed into Wall Street as borrowers tried to make a quick buck themselves. Third, the US Treasury added to the inflation by offering to purchased Liberty Bonds at a higher interest rate. This too increased the amount of paper dollars in circulation and decreasing the dollar's purchasing power. Four, with all this money flowing into the markets, the purchasing power of the paper dollar dropped. This did temporarily help stem the flow of gold from the UK. (Also, Strong purchased Pound notes with US gold causing gold to flow back into the UK.) At this time, the Bank of England lowered its interest rates in an effort to kick start its economy. Gold immediately began flowing out of the U.K. again, causing its economy to further slow and enter into a depression. Five, despite moderate inflation due to the increased amount of paper dollars, once gold began to flow out of England again, prices began to fall in America. This was due to much of the money which was created going into loans used on the stock market and land and machinery purchases in farms across America. (Let us assume you want to buy a house. You need $5000 to purchase it and need a loan. However, you cannot secure a loan until you put your money in a bank for a while and then qualify for the loan. So you decide to open an account with the $1000 you do have. Under a fractional reserve banking system we currently have and they did then, the banks create new money through loans. If the bank must hold 10% of investments in reserve, and you deposit $1000, the bank can loan out $900 dollars of your money. The original $1000 is now $1900 dollars due to the loan.) As a result of the lower Federal Reserve interest rates, the banks borrowed more money (took loans) from the Fed. This new money was loaned out and flowed into the economy. Much of it was again deposited into the banks and loans out again, increasing the monetary supply and eroding the purchasing power of the dollar. Despite the supposedly booming economy, consumers could purchase less with each dollar. Their standard of living began to decrease. Six, the Federal Reserve began to worry about the massive increases of the stock market, knowing many of the investments were made with money loaned from banks due to the Federal Reserves own policies. Add to this the collapsing purchasing power of the Pound, Strong began to reverse course and raised interest rate. He was attempting to pull the excess pap dollars from the economy and tighten the availability of credit. This made things worse in the UK and the world in general. As a result, banks needed to pay off their loans to the Fed. The banks started to call in their loans. (Remember that $1000 you put into the bank and the bank could loan out $900, effectively turning $1000 into $1900? Assume the bank did loan out that $900 to another who invested it into the stock market. And also assume that his loan is called. He cashes out his stock and can only pay $500 to the bank. Your original $1000 now is only $600 due to the bad loan.) Seventh, as more loans are called in, banks begin to pay off their Fed loans. Bankruptcies begin to ripple across the economy, especially in state banks and the farming industry. But money lost to bankruptcies mean less money is returned to bank accounts used to make the loans. To Strong's credit, he was able to remove nearly all the excess paper money he injected into the economy prior to the stock market crash. However, growing numbers of bankruptcies are spreading across the economy. At the same time, the credit markets begin to seize up as banks try to stem the losses due to bad loans. As a result, the number of people investing in the stock market quickly drops. Investors spook and begin selling off stock at the highest prices. The stock market crashes, billions of dollars lost. Companies begin to declare bankruptcies further depleting cash reserves of banks due to loans. Those in the know start to remove their saving from banks just in case the banks reserves are insolvent. Remember, on bank runs, first come, first served. As more people panic, more come to the bank to get their money. (Remember your $1000 deposit which is now only $600 due to a bad loan? You rush the bank. When you finally get to the teller window and pull out your money, the teller hands you the last $400 left in the vault. You have lost $600 and the bank is out of business.) Bank collapses ripple across the country and people lose savings. Markets collapse. Prices begin to collapse as bankruptcies increase and product supply increases. Eight, people find themselves evicted from houses and farms because the cannot pay off their loans. People lose their jobs as companies collapse. Sales of all products decline as their stocks increase, causing prices to collapse farther. (You are lucky. Though your wages fall, as they would have at the time, you are able to keep your job. And though you lost $600 due to the collapse of your bank, you still have $400. You notice the cheap prices of houses at sheriff's sales as banks are willing to take pennies on the dollars from the few people who still have money to recover whatever money they can to prevent their own collapses. You grab your $400 dollars and head to one on a house you like. Since you are one of the few people with money, you buy the house at auction for $350. The depression has increased your standard of living. This is even more secure because you still have a job.) This is what happened and still happens. When the US housing market collapsed, the prices of all house fell. Many people who were smart with their money were able to upgrade their houses due to the collapse. Prior to that, they were stuck unable to purchase better housing. Look at Venezuala. The collapsing price of oil and the massive increases in their monetary supply resulted in the hyperinflation they are suffering through now. Look at the stagnant purchasing power of wages despite moderately increasing wages we are currently seeing now, despite a booming economy. TIK is 100% spot on. I suggest everyone read America's Great Depression to understand the mechanisms he is talking about. It is completely laid out in the book and is germane to this discussion.

[@aquilatempestate9527]

Hmmm I wonder where they got the patents and know-how for synthetic oil? (Definitely don't read Antony Sutton to find out)

[@QuizmasterLaw]

Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, these days known as DAAD.

[@allangibson8494]

The hydrocarbons synthesis process is also known as the Fischer-Tropsch process. The number of sch's should give you a clue on where it was invented.

[@andyf4292]

its the Germans, they pretty much invented half of chemistry and physics

[@DerekCully]

Standard oil cartel with IG faenen?

[@gregorymalchuk272]

Germans invented both the Bergius process, referred to here as direct hydrogenation of coal, and the Fischer-Tropsch process, the creation of synthetic crude from classified coal (or biomass or garbage).

[@billbolton]

German coal production in 1940 was 130 million tons, if it takes 22 tons to make a ton of oil that's about 6 million tons of oil, oil requirements for Axis controlled Europe, according to the video was 20 million tons, even if only 4.5 tons are needed to make a ton of oil the cost in coal to make the required oil is huge; coal is also required for steel production, electricity etc., other things essential to make the economy work and ensure the armies can be supplied. Oil is not easily substituted by coal.

[@AFT_05G]

German coal production was much more than 130 million with also lignites.They produced 277 million ton in 1914 with lignites(154 hard coal,coke and other types and 123 million tons of lignites).

[@billbolton]

@@AFT_05G Yes, reading some sources state a figure for coal and include in that 'brown coal' (lignites) or just coal, either way it takes a lot of effort by coal miners and in processing to replace oil with coal.

[@Singapore1942]

I worked as a chemist in the 80's (fuel crisis) on a synthetic fuel plant in the UK (at a major UK oil company) using German/South African technology from that era and it is very inefficient and required rare earth elements to make the catalyst from parts of the world under Allied control. It was a good experiment and we made from Avgas to Waxes. The modern technology is there but has been deliberately shelved for obvious geopolitical reasons.

[@altaiaurelius]

Rai Karklins obvious reasons like what?

[@Singapore1942]

@@altaiaurelius if you are an oil company why would you compete with yourself at much more expensive price, we can make synthetic oil, the global economy relies on the petro dollar and is happy fighting wars over it.

[@altaiaurelius]

Rai Karklins So perhaps governments could be the ones to lead the research on how to more efficiently produce synthetic fuel from corn/ethanol or nuclear energy? The global economy and its power players are terrifying when I read your account of this.

[@Singapore1942]

@@altaiaurelius there already is good enzyme technology for converting waste cellulose into ethanol. Just like with all renewable energy it is up against the military industrial complex Eisenhower predicted. The world economy thrives off wars in case you had not noticed. There is also technology to run cars of hydrogen using solar to split water, very simple, but resisted like crazy (honda).

[@mikefay5698]

@@altaiaurelius Pleny of oil maybe/

[@fko1]

See notification for new TIK video, grabs iPad and hides from wife and kids

[@user-jv3mm6vt6e]

Why?

[@Silly2smart]

One could easily argue that the low margins in the stock market ($1 could buy $10 of stock) was to blame. EVERYONE was buying leveraged stocks and when the first bump happened everyone started calling in the margins and the free flow of capital suddenly stopped.

[@derekbaker3279]

That makes perfect sense in peacetime markets, but once Barbarrossa failed, Germany was locked into a fight to the death against the U.S.S.R. . Given the stakes, why would prices, stocks, debt & deficits matter to Hitler & the O.K.C.? The only reason I can come up with iss that Germany still needed to purchase or trade for coal & minerals from Sweden, Finland & Norway, so it was necessary to have the German currency worth something. Otherwise, I don't understand why Germany vdidn't ignore the costs, upgrade/expand Romanian oil production facilities & produce as much natural & synthetic oil asxpossible. .

[@andrewlambert7246]

South Africa had a similiar situation as germany during aparthied. That is why the state owned company Sasol is an expert in the technology of converting coal into oil.

[@erikgranqvist3680]

A defecit also build up over time for as long as the war go on. If you start with to little of a resource, this problem will get much worse for as long as you dont get a product to cover for the need. Reserves will be depleted, missions and operations gets canned - and all this serve to build up a strategic weakness that will accelerate until the war is over. This goes fpr any conflict - be it armed, a trade war etcetera. And it can be applied to anything of strategic value.

[@stevenhoman2253]

Hence the vast quantities of horses used. Cars being towed by horses LOL

[@mikefay5698]

The first war used an immense ammount of horses mules and bullock's, managed to kill 20M men just the same. Only 20 odd years seperated them.

[@mrmuscle5288]

Hi Tik, I am a big fan of your videos! Albert Speer also mentions the synthetic oil situation in his book Inside The Third Reich.

[@hakdov6496]

Boynton Beach? Woot, I used to live there!

[@DonMeaker]

FischerTropsch process chemical engineers were brought to the US under project Paperclip, and plants were made in the US in the 1950s. Cheap oil made that process inefficient in the US too.

[@raposaraposa553]

Sometimes things are very simple. German soldier said: we knew we could not win, even before we got near Moscow. As my mother said: what are you going to do? Walk all the way to Siberia?"

[@raposaraposa553]

@The Nova renaissancei know that. However,, there are not enough Germans to hold even a part of that territory. And any normal person could see that. Just another proof that all generals and politicians are psychopaths.

[@SP3NTT]

Great take on the oil issue. But you missed the mark on the economic concepts in the 20's.

[@EndOfSmallSanctuary97]

Whenever TIK veers away from discussing battles, oil and food, he goes off the deep end and says a bunch of nonsense.

[@misterbeach8826]

TIK, keep up the good work. Bought the book of Toprani, thank you for the recommendation. Maybe add more quotes and infographics to the videos? And avoid the term "war" and similar terms in the video title if you do not want to be demonetized.

[@Principe6900]

A highlight video/reasoning!

[@Usammityduzntafraidofanythin]

3:50 - Hy-droj-eh-nay-shun Also, pfennig is 1/100 of a mark. I'm guessing it's like the penny

[@MusaMansu]

Funnily enough, the Italians were sitting on a sea of oil in Libya. The Axis could have used it.

[@zainkhan69420]

Were they able to dig for the oil though? Wasn't it too deep for technology at that time?

[@garywheeler7039]

It had not been "developed" or "produced" though. It was still deep underground.

[@MusaMansu]

I’m not sure, but I imagine that they could have accessed it if they’d started early enough. It would still take a few years to build the infrastructure (roads, rail systems, ports), refineries and technology necessary. An Italian geologist and cartographer named Arditi Desio found oil in the 1930’s.

[@MusaMansu]

I’m not sure that it was to deep. Libya managed to drill it about a decade later with far less money, resources and technical expertise. I agree that it would take a few years to build the infrastructure and equipment necessary to pump commercial amounts of it though.

[@trashman5710]

They would have to have shipped that oil back to Europe for processing. Which required more fuel that the italian navy didn't have, hence their navy staying in port for long periods of time.

[@DonMeaker]

The US Lend Lease provided 25% of the food required by Soviet Union during the war. The Russian word for Spam is "Spam".

[@Realkeepa-et9vo]

TIK and Libertertarian rants, name a more iconic duo

[@seththomas9105]

My uncle who was a Tanker in WWII remarked years ago about how they captured Luftwaffe airfields at the end of the war with rows of brand new planes sitting together, with no fuel or pilots. The troops knew in 1944/45 that the Nazis were out of gas, literally. The Nazis lost the war on Dec. 11, 1941.

[@erichvonmanstein1952]

With declaring war on World’s strongest economy and industrial power...

[@mikefay5698]

Too many pilots were lost, takes time to train them!

[@engelsteinberg593]

@UCbVaC1do_vc9IH9tkdUgFfQ (1) If you said that About the URSS you are a 1diot. (2) If you are refering to the USA, Germany no declared war in USA, USA declared war on Germany, Hitler just made it de jure.

[@charlesmaeger6162]

Agree. One author thinks that Germany lost the war with the fall of France. Hitler, after that, never doubted his strategic planning decisions.

[@mrniceguy7168]

Reminder that the Sudetenland is rightful Zimbabwean clay 🇿🇼

[@DzheiSilis]

Zimbabwe je serbska

[@knockhello2604]

What.

[@silverdeathgamer2907]

@@knockhello2604 Serbia is rightful Serbian clay.

[@mrniceguy7168]

Knock Hello You read that right

[@knockhello2604]

@@mrniceguy7168 ha funny meme 7th grader

[@Raptor747]

Since the "cost" of converting coal into oil is mainly in that it takes a lot of coal and time to do, and Germany was perfectly willing to burn through lots of its huge coal supplies to do this, the real issue was not the cost-inefficiency of the process (which was irrelevant to Germany, since it was at war and had lots of coal), but that they simply hadn't created ENOUGH infrastructure for the conversion process to create nearly enough oil to cover its needs. Now, maybe it was simply impossible for it to do so in the time that it had. But that was the crux of the problem, really. Germany created its own problems by going to war when it did.

[@lyndondowling2733]

Germany was looking into using jet engines running on powdered coal late in the War. A few designs had proceeded to the Drawing board stage.

[@AntonQvarfordt]

TLDR: It's super inefficient to make synthetic oil. They did it, but it just ultimately wasn't viable as a solution in the quantities that they needed it.

[@hendrikvanleeuwen9110]

'Why didn't synthetic oil solve the axis oil crisis?' Me: Thermodynamics! Okay, I'll shut up and watch the video now. (Ed sp)

[@ang47]

it was the fault of mad man Hitler

[@Alvi410]

Thermodynamically corret. One of the best types of correct.

[@TheLastSterling1304]

Limited resources and the law of diminishing returns sums it up.

[@THX-zk3qq]

Thermodynamics isn't terrible by some standards. According to one scientist after the war, on average it took about 1 ton of coal to synthesize 1 barrel of oil- about 7 times less. Assuming that's the lignite Germany usually used as feedstock, then it would have about 1/3 the energy density of its mass in oil. This would mean Germany was putting in 7 tons of coal for the energy equivalent of 3 tons of coal, or about 40% thermal efficiency. www.everycrsreport.com/files/20080327_RL34133_5320447491700d8c35c78624a956317f1baa8401.pdf (pages 8 and 16) At the same time, a diesel locomotive in WW2 had about 30% thermal efficiency (page 22 below): utahrails.net/pdf/EMD_567_History_and_Development_1951.pdf So the total thermal efficiency of a diesel locomotive in WW2 running on coal converted to synthetic oil is about 12%. Meanwhile, the very good steam locomotives had 6% thermal efficiency in WW2- the most efficient steam locomotive ever built had 12% efficiency (built by André Chapelon): www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Railroads/Railroad_Costs.htm (Data on the Big Boy taken from Kratville's book; it calculates to about 6% efficiency if coal was bituminous). So synthetic oil isn't always bad in thermodynamic terms- it looks good compared to a 6% efficient steam locomotive.

[@TheLastSterling1304]

@@THX-zk3qq It's not really that, it's more of the fact that Germany is using one critical resource to convert into another critical resource. You can't produce steel without coal.

[@DonMeaker]

Oil productive potential can be described as reserves, but also in terms of lifting cost. As the price goes down, fewer and fewer production fields can produce at costs lower than the price. There is also a lag between when the price changes, and the time that the production takes to catch up to the new price, either by turning on production, or shutting down production as the price drops.

[@kopazwashere]

I expected synthetic oil yield rate to be pretty low... I expected somewhere around 1:3~3.5 - didn't expect it to be that much.

[@tveleruusk]

It all depends on coal composition. Brown coal has a low carbon content due to significant ash, water and oxygen content. Ash is a passenger that comes out as slag from gasifiers, water eats up more energy (carbon) due to latent heat and need to thermally break H-O bond to generate the H2 for the Fischer Tropsch reaction, and oxygen tends to bind more carbon without producing much benefit. So thermodynamically, FT process is challenging. However, I am also surprised by the upper end figure. From memory, modern coal to liquids processes tend to have a HHV efficiency of 55-60%, so say 1930-40s plant had a 40% efficiency and the coal has roughly half of heating value per tonne vs the oil products it produces; this would imply roughly a 5:1 consumption ratio.

[@aquilatempestate9527]

People's Veto did a good recent video on the gauging whether the Germans could have gone South to get the oil, via Turkey. Worth a look folks.

[@ludvik3161]

He changed his name back to The Alternative Hypothesis

[@razedhunter8849]

I saw it too,it was fucking retarded

[@Br1cht]

If you sit at home and don´t care to check the terrain there..

[@011258stooie]

Thanks for the link, Aquila. Far better than listening to this twaddle.

[@razedhunter8849]

@@Br1cht or actually see the economic and infrastructure situation of the middle east and spain. That dude was the pinnacle of an armchair general

[@MrChelomo]

You'll want to take a look at Adam Tooze's "Wages of Destruction". He goes in depth about the food, energy and steel issues the 3rd Reich faced.

[@robertcooke9299]

Excellent book. Covers this well.

[@solarfreak1107]

Most surprising part of that book was when he mentioned Germany having a coal shortage. I thought that was insane.

[@jasontrauger8515]

TIK, was the problem of oil vs. its usage an issue of not preparing soon enough? Or, was it simply a case of using/needing too much?

[@AFT_05G]

USSBS is a good source too for analysing both branches of German war economy.

[@Prometheukles]

Hi TIK. As per your request. I found "The Prize" by Daniel Yergin a great source of information.

[@TheImperatorKnight]

Thank you!

[@Prometheukles]

@@TheImperatorKnight Gerne doch. Ist echt ein super Buch. zBsp geht er auch ziemlich ins Detail betreffend der japanischen Versuche synthetische Treibstoffe herzustellen.

[@misium]

Wait, did you say in booming economy, consumer's standard of living decreases and during depression increases (5:11)?

[@rogerhinman5427]

I"m not even going to pretend to know what's going on. It doesn't make any sense to me either. I know that those who were in farming during the Great Depression didn't have it so bad because people always need to eat. But if the capital goods corporations collapse then it would seem to me the consumer goods corporations supplied by them would as well leaving those workers in danger of unemployment.

[@misium]

@@rogerhinman5427 I learned to take TIK's economics with a large grain of salt. Looks like he read some things, had a few thoughts and now believes he's an expert. Oh, well, nobody's perfect...

[@fazole]

@@rogerhinman5427 He did say (quickly) that your std of living increases in a recession/depression IF you still have a job because prices decrease. The caveat is that IF you aren't unemployed--a very big if. However, the wealthy usually benefit by using their wealth to buy up cheap assets.

[@misium]

@@fazole Even if you stay employed I don't see how your salary would not decrease - with so many others to take your job for much less pay. There will always be a few wealthy winners - those who invested "right" before the crash and didn't lose. But in general the wealthy lose too - they bought all the crashed stock that is now worthless . However you slice it, saying the general standards of living increase during depression is just bonkers. How would that not give him pause is beyond me.

[@fazole]

@@misium Well, I guess it's a question of how much your salary decreases vs. how much asset prices decrease. I know a few people who bought property during the great recession because they had steady income and now that property doubled in price. I think TIK just sort of glossed over what he said.

[@derekbaker3279]

Fascinating discussion! I'm learning a ton here! Of course, it creates more questions too! lol Here's what I'm wondering: 1. The Germans had to know how serious the Soviet food crisis was. 2. So, they probably understood the crucial importance of preventing the Soviets from re-taking Ukraine. 3. Because of the worsening oil crisis, Hitler understood that large-scale offensive operations in multiple sectors along the Eastern Front would be an impossibility. So Hitler & the O.K.C. decided to carry-out one operation that would be 'high-risk/high-reward & would use as little fuel as possible. 4. So, Hitler looked for an opportunity to mount one operation that could potentially lead to a near-crippling defeat of the Red Army. This would become Operation Citadelle, and it would involve the Germans committing most of the equipment manufactured & personel recruited/trained during the winter of 1943/43 to the one operation. My question: What I am wondering is why, in the spring of 1943, the Germans didn't just strengthen their defences, locate extra divisions in reserve in Ukraine, then hold Ukraine until the food crisis precipitated the economic/political collapse of the Soviet Union? The only reasons I can think of are (a) despite increased production of war materials, and expanded recruitment & training, the Germans believed that they still wouldn't have had sufficient forces to maintain a stalemate on the Eastern Front, and/or (b) the Germans knew that it was only a matter of time before the air war in the west & a future land war in western Europe would require shifting of men, equipment & fuel away from the Eastern Front. This would ensure that the Soviets would be able to re-take Ukraine & take the initiative everywhere along the Eastern Front. Facts, analysis, opinions, and suggestions from anyone who reads this would be appreciated. 🙂

[@jhoncho4x4]

Another video about the effect and proliferation of wood gas generators, mounted to trucks and cars, would be interesting and has not had much discussion. Videos of Berlin streets, near and at the end of the war, show many vehicles driving around with the generation equipment mounted externally on the chassis. Seems to have become very common, as the war progressed to the late stages. Most of the german vehicles I seen actually driving, directly after the end of the war, had the equipment mounted since their was no fuel available for citizens.

[@murray1453]

Tooze covers the German economy in WW2, including synthetic fuel and rubber production, in "Wages of Destruction".

[@richardvernon317]

That will be the book that states that Bomber Harris really pissed on Speer's cornflakes.

[@alanpennie8013]

@@richardvernon317 Yep. Battle of The Ruhr (1943).

[@solarfreak1107]

Haha, it's ironic that trying to solve their shortage of oil, they then had a shortage of coal.

[@alexanderchenf1]

Yeah why? Synthetic oil’s supposed to last 10,000 miles - enough to Baku.

[@PhillyPhanVinny]

For your question in this video asking if the US or Venezuela was the worlds largest oil producer, the answer is the USA by a large amount. The US produced 180 million metric tons of oil in 1940. The next largest was Venezuela at 30 million MT followed by the USSR with 27 million MT of oil. After that ranks 4 and 5 were Iran and Indonesia with around 8 million MT per year.

[@robg9236]

I think you dropped several zeros. A large oil tanker would carry 10,000 tons.

[@PhillyPhanVinny]

@@robg9236 Sorry you are correct. I meant to put million at the end of each number. I'll edit my post thanks for pointing that out.

[@elbersantana6379]

the problem is that instead of focusing on producing synthetic oil, hitler wasted valuable resources on obsolete things like: 1. the Atlantic wall, which in many areas was more of a propaganda piece than really a defensive position, as the German machine guns took far more lives than those cannons etc that surrendered without firing. 2. the bomb v1 and v2, a waste that by itself, already made the Germans lose the war. 3. Holocaust logistics and resources 4. gustav cannon etc 5.The cover of the soldiers' water container was aluminum, and the gas mask case was iron, that's for more than 10,000,000 soldiers .6 Allied bombing was not prioritized, instead hitler continued with plans for the horten, arado, flying lighter; they did not even centralize the factories so that the luftwaff could protect them, instead of having to disperse the luftwaff throughout the erope, dividing the perimeter into many barriers and weakening their defensive capabilities .7 he wasted resources on a surface navy that couldn't be finished, instead of uboats from the start . the list of resources wasted is much longer, that and much more could have generated more synthetic fuel, making the luftwaff have no fuel to train pilots and defend factories. how many factories were destroyed by the mismanagement of resources. Hitler didn't even try to take over the Mediterranean oil wells after the fall of the france. And since the ussr could withdraw and cut off the gas supply at any time, the idea of ​​focusing every resource on synthetic gasoline was no mystery. And it only declared total war in 42 to 43, when the United Kingdom had already taken drastic measures since 41, the same Red Army and in the USA, drastic measures were taken, while the Germans tried to disassociate with v1 and v2, tigers etc etc.

[@elbersantana6379]

sorry for my english, it's not my language, but i'm trying

[@_Abjuranax_]

Japan literally went to war over oil as well. At the same time that Japan was screaming for oil, the US was using oil on its runways to keep the dust down. The Battle of the Bulge was also about capturing Allied fuel depots, as it did not have enough oil to continue the drive to split the Allies in two. Joachim Piper's plan to spearhead the assault was initially deemed as too risky to succeed. But his odds of success were greater than the overall battle plan, so Piper was allowed to proceed, and represented the greatest thrust into Allied lines. The Germans only had about a thousand tanks for the winter offensive, but it was the lack of fuel more than Allied resistance that eventually stopped them. And Piper was eventually forced to abandon his equipment and march back to Germany, along with his remaining men.

[@PhillyPhanVinny]

I don't agree at all that it was a lack of fuel rather then Allied resistance that stopped the German winter offensive in 1944. The Germans won the first few battles during that offensive when they were attacking green units not expecting to be hit with a major German offensive. But once the Germans started fighting more experienced US units the US units held the Germans back from advancing any further. The battle for Bastogne where the 101st Airborne and 10 Armored divisions is given a ton of attention during the battle of the Bulge that they rightfully deserve for greatly delaying the German attack plans but the US divisions outside of the bulge did just as much to hold the Germans in and prevent them from completing their goals. The Germans still had the fuel to move their armored units around even at the end of the battle when they started pulling the remainder of their armored units back to their starting line. And then also right from the start of the battle the US units prevented the Germans from taking many of the roads they wanted to use during their initial plans for the Winter offensive.

[@benwilson6145]

Piper was not the furthest Panzer advance, it was the 2nd Panzer and there advance was blocked by Monty moving the Third Army Group to stop them at the Meuse.

[@PhillyPhanVinny]

@@benwilson6145 I'm not sure what you are talking about there. There was no such thing as a 3rd Army group. The 21st Army Group was the most Northern Allied Army Group commanded by Monty which had the British 2nd army and Canadian 1st army in it and sometimes the US 9th army like during the Battle of the Bulge. Then there was the 12th Army group commanded by Omar Bradly which was made up of all US armies. South of that was the 6th Army group which was made up of US and French armies. And then in Italy was the 15th Army group which had a US and "British" army (the 8th army at this point was more made up of more international divisions then it was British divisions at this point) in it. When the Germans attacked it split the US 1st and 9th army off from 12th Army group HQ so Eisenhower put them under Monty's 21st army group. The US 1st and 9th armies held the north half of the bulge while Patton and the US 3rd army counter attacked from the South. Also the US 1st and 9th armies had already begun their counterattack from the North before they were put under Monty's command. Montgomery has been given a lot of criticism for what he said after the Battle of Bulge because he made it seem like in his post battle press conference that he saved the day when the US generals and their armies were already counterattacking before being put under his command. And the main counter attack by the US 3rd Army was not under Monty's command at all. Monty then had to issue a apology after this press conference and Churchill found it necessary in a speech to Parliament to explicitly state that the Battle of the Bulge was purely an American victory (Even though British troops did fight in the battle a bit). It would be like saying that the Battle of El Alamein was partially a American victory because some American fighters and bombers took part in the battle.

[@benwilson6145]

@@PhillyPhanVinny Sorry got the group wrong, it was the British 30 Corp (Guards Armored, 43rd, 51st and 53rd Divisions under General Horrocks).

[@Lasstpak]

Is there a particular reason why you mostly use the Austrian School of Economics as a source to describe history and working of the economy?

[@Lasstpak]

@AIFAHRA HORGGHRO Any historical KZbin channels that I regularly watch are as neutral as possible. Sure they might show some stuff that is slightly braised. That is not perfect. What is beyond not perfect is when you say that you should look at things from both sides. Criticise others that don't. Actually do look at both sides when it comes to pure military history. But when it comes to economic history you just throw everything overboard and go (this) school of thoughts because they are great.

[@Lasstpak]

@AIFAHRA HORGGHRO But that is against his principal of covering both sides. I am not saying to go and get Marxism. But at least Kensyen or Chicago. It is always the same. This Austrian school guy said that and he is the best. So no need to check other sources.

[@mikefay5698]

Because that's how the virus killed Capitalism. Yoddle ah heh dee!

[@Lasstpak]

@@mikefay5698 Okay

[@juankenon]

Because he's not an economist, he's read a few books to fill in the gaps. Since that doesn't pay his bills, I wouldn't expect him to read about the causes of the depression from a variety of sources.

[@tveleruusk]

A lot of the comments rightfully focus on the poor conversion efficiency of synthetic oil production, but it’s worth remembering that coal to liquids produces a synthetic crude that is mostly converted into final products without much further loss. Refining at the time was mostly topping refineries that converted perhaps 50-70% of the feedstock crude oil into light and medium refined products, with the rest being heavy heating oil, residue and refinery light gases used for internal power generation. Generally the major stumbling block is the sheer capital required to build the plants to produce synthetic fuel products. Much like EU is finding out with its green policies, even subsidised economics can only get you so far.

[@HistoryGameV]

Hey @TIK, any plans on covering German on-soil oil production? I have lived in the city of Celle, which is basically THE German oil town. Now just recently while doing some digging on German oil production in WW2 for a HoI4 mod I came across the remains of the attempts of the Nazis to increase oil production from the fields here in the 1940s. Apparently these plans only died in 1945 and were continued for some time in the 1950s, but never took off. Some of the buildings remain in a forested area around 25km from here. Currently it isn't financially sound to try to extract said oil, but apparently the deposits are quite large (compared to what we have here in other areas, North Sea not included). BTW the whole area was the main German fuel production center during WW1 and up to WW2. It covered the largest part of the civilian requirements pre-WW2. If you need any help if you ever want to cover this feel free to drop me a mail, I have some contacts to the official district historians.