255 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum”

  1. Last Open thread was also Non-petroleum, and people mainly posted in the North Dakota thread. I think we like fossil fuel open threads better.

  2. Anyway, another myth that should be put to rest (but it won’t).

    We humans are a violent species. About a third of the people can be described as violent because they sometimes resort to violence when faced with conflict. But this proportion of violent people is gender independent. Women are as equally likely to resort to violence. Many differences can be explained simply because men are a lot more likely to cause serious damage when they become violent. Women are more likely to cause serious damage to children, specially newborn.

    Time: The Surprising Truth About Women and Violence

    “Research showing that women are often aggressors in domestic violence has been causing controversy for almost 40 years, ever since the 1975 National Family Violence Survey by sociologists Murray Straus and Richard Gelles of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire found that women were just as likely as men to report hitting a spouse and men were just as likely as women to report getting hit. The researchers initially assumed that, at least in cases of mutual violence, the women were defending themselves or retaliating. But when subsequent surveys asked who struck first, it turned out that women were as likely as men to initiate violence—a finding confirmed by more than 200 studies of intimate violence.

    What about same-sex violence? The February CDC study found that, over their lifetime, 44% of lesbians had been physically assaulted by a partner (more than two-thirds of them only by women), compared to 35% of straight women, 26% of gay men, and 29% of straight men. While these figures suggest that women are somewhat less likely than men to commit partner violence, they also show a fairly small gap. The findings are consistent with other evidence that same-sex relationships are no less violent than heterosexual ones.”

    National Institute of JusticeFindings About Partner Violence From the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study, Research in Brief

    “Although both partners in a relationship did not always recall the same acts in precisely the same way, there was 70 to 80 percent agreement on whether physical violence occurred and on the extent of abuse. Risk factors in childhood and adolescence for male perpetrators of violence included poverty and low academic achievement. Female perpetrators of violence showed risk factors of harsh family discipline and parental strife. Both male and female perpetrators also had histories of aggressive behavior. The strongest risk factor for both male and female perpetrators and victims was a record of physically aggressive delinquent offending before 15 years of age. More than half the males convicted of a violent crime also physically abused their partners. About 27 percent of women and 34 percent of men reported that they had been physically abused by their partner. About 37 percent of women and 22 percent of men said they had perpetrated the violence.”

    Otago Daily Times: Children most often killed by mothers

    “New Zealand mothers kill more children than any other group in society and men are victims of domestic violence as often as women, a police investigation has found.

    The Family Violence Death Review, released today by police, found mothers were responsible for 45 per cent of children killed by domestic violence.

    The review of 95 family violence deaths involving 101 victims between 2004 and 2011 revealed some “inconvenient truths”, Family First national director Bob McCoskrie said.

    He said the statistics debunked the misleading popular perception “that women and children need to be protected from men”.

    “This gender focus is misleading,” Mr McCoskrie said.

    “If we’re really serious about reducing family violence, we need to talk about … our violent culture and the role alcohol and drugs play in fuelling this environment.”

    The Dunedin study clearly shows that a violent person can be predicted in some cases from kindergarten. Some children do not play by the rules and when confronted with conflict they resort to aggression. This type of behavior predicts very well a violent youth and a delinquent adulthood. This type of behavior is also seen in chimps. Some male chimps participate in killing raids to other clans, while others don’t. Perhaps having a percentage of violent individuals has been highly adaptative for humans as it appears to be for chimps.

    And women are equal to men in everything that matters, both good or bad.

    1. We humans are a violent species. About a third of the people can be described as violent because they sometimes resort to violence when faced with conflict. But this proportion of violent people is gender independent. Women are as equally likely to resort to violence.

      I’m not sure the data completely supports that assertion.

      http://www.originsportal.com/

      THE ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE WORKSHOP
      On April 5, 2014, The Origins Project convened an intimate transdisciplinary workshop at Arizona State University to discuss the nature, origins, and future of violence. Led by Harvard Professor of Psychology Steven Pinker, this workshop featured the world’s top scholars in deep discussion about the socio-cultural and neuro-biological forms of violence. Topics ranged from its evolutionary utility in primates and early humans to the success of nonviolent protests propelling wide scale social change. This private workshop was followed by a Great Debate public event at ASU Gammage Auditorium, Transcending Our Origins: Violence, Humanity, and the Future.

      https://goo.gl/Iwgzme

  3. Trumps Thursday night acceptance speech was firery, but I still prefer it in it’s original German.

    1. You wouldn’t have understood a single word.

      Today is Worldwide Shoot Somebody Day. Happened to be in Deutschland.

      2. Walter,

        Every day in America is shoot somebody day. What’s your point ?

        As of December 23, a total of 12,942 people had been killed in the United States in 2015 in a gun homicide, unintentional shooting, or murder/suicide.

        https://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/gun-violence-stats-2015/

        Unsecured guns have turned dozens of toddlers into killers — and many more into victims.

        The 114th Congress is still hesitant to engage with the gun issue.

        Guns are now ending as many American lives as cars.

        The vast majority of the nation’s gun violence does not look like Umpqua or Charleston or San Bernardino.

        Mass shootings — as measured by four or more people shot, regardless of total fatalities — have taken place in nearly 100 metro areas over the past 12 months.

        1. Suicides are 12.93 per 100,000.

          Amounts to just over 42,000 each year.

          http://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/

          http://www.globalthink.net/index.php?IDX=503#lbl503

          “Tradition?? The only good traditions are food traditions. The rest are repressive.”

          Killing of humans has been going on for a long time.

          Lizzy Borden took an axe and gave her mother forty whacks.

          The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it. – George Orwell

          1. … and ~ 20,000 of those suicides are committed using firearms (please read it on your own link), so what exactly is your point again?

            Sometimes your posts are mildly amusing, but this is not one of those times.

            1. I’m sorry for your loss and your friend. I understand. It can happen to anyone. Guns make it too easy.

          2. But amazingly, there are a lot more shootings per capita in gun happy America than in other comparable countries. It is not a worldwide phenomenon.

            It’s just another sad example of america letting corporate greed trump public interest. Tens of thousands of deaths a year to appease the gun manufacturers.

  4. China triples H1 solar installations to 20 GW

    Citing Wang Bohua, general secretary of the China Photovoltaic Industry Association (CPIA), the largest solar industry lobby in China, Xinhua reports that China has extended its lead over Germany as the world’s largest solar market in terms of cumulative figures.

    Wang said that developers of solar were compelled to complete installations ahead of a proposed reduction in the price paid for PV by grid operators, which after June 30 this year reduced below 1.0 yuan ($0.15) per kilowatt hour (kWh). This deadline created the first half rush, and leaves some commentators of the opinion that the second half of the year will see something of a “solar chill” as installation rates fall off a cliff…. [snip]

    Should the data be accurate then China has already reached its goal, set by the National Energy Administration (NEA), of installing 18.1 GW of new PV in 2016, with the CPIA calculating that new additions should hit 30 GW once rooftop and charitable installs in impoverished areas are taken into account.

    Solar power output in the country now stands at 3,300 Gwh, according to the National Statistics Bureau – a figure that represents just 0.7% of the country’s total power generation.

    Growth of solar PV capacity in China is nothing short of impressive. The easiest source for capacity over time is Wikipedia’s Growth of photovoltaics, which shows China as having a capacity of 70 MW in 2005. Adding 30 GW to the reported 43,060 MW would give over 70,000 MW, meaning capacity in China will have grown over 1000 times between the end of 2005 and the end of 2016! Looked at another way, in the first half of 2016 China will have installed more new capacity than exists in any single country outside of Germany, Japan and the US. If total installs hit 30 GW for 2016, in 2016 China will have installed more new capacity than exists in any single country except Germany and Japan.

      1. News Flash! Worldwide embrace of fossil fuels coming home to roost! Global economy and ecosystems crashing! Humans are just too fucking stupid to figure out a way to change!

        >Just saying

  5. PM gives UDC directive to create third city

    KINGSTON, Jamaica – Prime Minister Andrew Holness has mandated the newly installed board of the Urban Development Corporation (UDC) to make the creation of Jamaica’s third city a priority and part of its three core goals. This charge was given at the first meeting of the board held at the corporation’s head office in downtown Kingston, last Thursday.

    In a release from the UDC, Holness was quoted as saying a new city would help to alleviate the urban overflow from Kingston and reduce the burden on the capital’s infrastructure. He noted that the establishment of a third city would support the Government’s objective of having two-thirds of the Jamaican population living in urban centres.

    If the creation of this new city were along the lines of Masdar, the “sustainable” city being developed in the United Arab Emirates maybe it might work but, I’m afraid that the technocrats involved will be woefully unaware of Peak Oil and other Limits to Growth. Anybody have any thoughts on what the prospects are for major projects like this in a post peak world? Zero?

    1. Many opportunities to build more efficient and sustainable buildings in city areas have been lost in the last decade.
      The Chinese put up high rises like they were going out of style. Of course they often become uninhabitable if the power goes out.

    2. Masdar’s a bit of a bust last I heard.

      City’s need to grow organically to be livable. Of course they need some planning, but cities by decree just seem hollow.

      If there is any chance of success, then the planners have to design in resilience, extremely low energy demand, good transit infrastructure and make it walkable and bikeable.

      There is a small residential development being built in my municipality. The builder is putting in natural gas service to the homes. This in a province with lots of Hydro, no natural gas and emission reduction obligations to meet. Could have built the houses to PassivHaus standard and gone with mini splits for heating. Instead the future homeowner will be looking at expensive deep energy retrofits in a decade. I shake my head that we keep building in complications (high energy demand) when we should be building for resilience. These are expensive single family homes too.

      1. Bleh. I understand putting in the natural gas *service* — it’s a feature which might help sell the homes. However, there’s no excuse for building leaky, poorly insulated houses. Every house should be PassivHaus standard, period, no exceptions. It’s strictly waste to do anything else — it’s not as if the home buyer will say “Yeah, I like this house better because it’s leaky and drafty and poorly insulated.”

  7. “I see much less need for self-reliant people who can do everything themselves,

    …and much more need for self-reliant communities, where not everyone knows how to weave or farm, but there is clothing and food for all.

    There is still a deep prejudice in permaculture, as websites and emails show, that doing it all ourselves, and on our own land, is the most noble path. And insofar as our skills make us less dependent on corporate monopolies, developing the abilities that we think of as self-reliant is worth doing. However, the more we limit our lives to what we can do ourselves, the fewer our opportunities are. Each connection outside ourselves enriches us. When we create a web of interdependencies, we grow richer, stronger, safer, and wiser. Why would you not want to rely on others? To fully probe that would take us down a psychological rabbit-hole, but some of it is grounded in a belief that others are unreliable or unethical, and that we weaken ourselves by interdependencies. But the old saying ‘if you want a job done well, do it yourself’ simply shows poor management skills.

    If you’re still skeptical, I’ll resort to scripture: a quote from the Book of Mollison, Introduction to Permaculture, page two: ‘We can also begin to take some part in food production. This doesn’t mean that we all need to grow our own potatoes, but it may mean that we will buy them directly from a person who is already growing potatoes responsibly. In fact, one would probably do better to organize a farmer-purchasing group in the neighborhood than to grow potatoes.’ ” ~ Toby Hemenway

    “I just came across:

    …this article… by Toby Hemenway claiming that it is exceedingly difficult to cultivate even 70% of your calories unless essentially you are eating mostly potatoes and grains.

    After reading about various yields of temperate fruits and grains, and legumes and starches, it seems very reasonable to be able to meet greater than 70% of your caloric needs. Let’s assume your goal is to meet 100% of your caloric needs via a vegan diet.

    For me, I consume around 3000 calories a day, so I will need to produce 1 million calories a year.

    I have 5 acres of land.

    An apple tree will produce between 50 and 300lbs of apples depending on age and size, I think most fruit trees will bear similarly to this, 50 lbs of apples is around 12k calories. Eating only apples I would need about 83 apple trees yielding 50 lbs each, at the spacing I suggest, we could use full size trees and get 300lbs per tree and get 6.6 million calories… let’s spread those out over a whole acre so I can grow some more things, like various berries which produce 10k lbs per acre at about 200 calories per lb, a naive guess is that I could plant 100 berry bushes and get 6-15 lbs per bush, or sy 600 lbs of berries at 200 calories per pound average, or 120k calories. I can also grow beans through each of the berry bushes, although they might get shaded out, and beans up each of the trees. Lets say 4 plants per tree and 1 plant per bush. The yield of dry beans is 1-2oz per plant, so we can get 420oz of beans or 26 lbs of beans which is 55k calories.

    We can also choose to grow some grains, corn, squash and some tubers such as potatoes and sun chokes and without doing any calculation, we can probably get 250k calories from these…” ~ Jesus Martinez

      1. That’s the sense I get as well, and there seem to be many articles that support that contention too.
        Obviously, if or as more of the general population gets into farming, results will vary, depending on many factors, such as climate, water, soils, land and resource access, knowledge and skills.

    2. We can also choose to grow some grains, corn, squash and some tubers such as potatoes and sun chokes and without doing any calculation, we can probably get 250k calories from these…” ~ Jesus Martinez

      I used to think I agreed wholeheartedly with the late Dr. Albert Bartlett’s thinking that the greatest shortcoming of the human race was our inability to understand the exponential function.

      I am now convinced that that particular shortcoming, pales in comparison to our far greater shortcoming, which is our inability to grasp the functioning of complex non linear dynamic systems and networks. Especially the biological ones!

      How Trees Talk to Each Other
      Suzanne Simard

      https://goo.gl/Pddy2b

      That is but one example of why I roll my eyes every time I hear an ignorant engineer propose some stupid idea of how to fix things with some simplistic geoengineering solution!

      1. Fred, humans are well designed to kill plants and animals. They are also able to adapt to a wide range of climate conditions, making them an unstoppable invasive species. We have the brains necessary to do all that, but that does not mean we have the brains needed to run the world or even truly understand it. We do not play well with others.

        1. “superpredators”. Humans are at the top of our food web (apex predators), but we don’t control our own population. This generally causes ecological collapse and the extinction of the “superpredator” who behaves this way.

          Most animals at the top of the food web control their own population, usually through territoriality but sometimes through other means. This is what allows a stable ecology.

          We’ll see if we can make the transition.

      2. In order to be a part of nature (over the long term), we need to be a part of nature.
        Like the trees and mycellia. More integrated.
        We need to somehow work with and within it without seriously risking our relative comfort and demise, such that nature will make sure of if we ‘get it wrong’.

        And I don’t see solar electric photovoltaic panels or electric vehicles and electric cars or assorted ‘disruptive technology’ anywhere in that equation and existing in the pristine (permaculture?) neoforests, unless we can ‘figure it out’ in ways that work.

        But I don’t see that either, based in part on history and civilizations that included relatively lower, smaller-scale, biodegradable technology, far smaller populations, and more isolated areas of environmental degradation, compared with what we have today.

        The ostensible premise(s) behind Wilson’s ‘Half Earth’, incidentally, raises, at least for me, this unsettling point and conundrum as to whether we can or whether we will (or willingly) tragically and ironically, be self-relegated to a human zoo on the ‘other half’.

        “In Half-Earth, Wilson goes so far as to say most of Earth should be barred even from temporary human visitation, except from professional biologists like himself. Even if one shares Wilson’s rosy outlook on technology and the free market, his worldview is garbled: humanity must realize it is but one of many species within Earth’s biosphere and then immediately minimize its interaction with true wilderness (barring the scientists who get to study it); the human enterprise (broadly construed) is ecologically destructive but innovators and entrepreneurs can be relied upon to fix it. We are doomed by our own nature, except those of us who aren’t, and the only solution is to separate ourselves entirely from nature.” ~ Dayton Martindale

        “Mollison has said: ‘Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labor; and of looking at plants and animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single product system.’ ” ~ Wikipedia

        Incidentally, Fred, industrial agro and a lot of stuff that industrial civilization does is geoengineering, and equating, if that’s what you’re doing, geoengineering to what someone (Jesus Martinez) is apparently doing (small-scale permaculture) for himself, seems rather bizarre.

        “I’ll be sixty next month and hold a valid Class B commercial drivers license, I have had a license since I was 16. I have owned many ICE vehicles during that time. I very much like being able to get in my car to go wherever I may need to.” ~ FMagyar

        I don’t own a car.

        1. The ostensible premise(s) behind Wilson’s ‘Half Earth’, incidentally, raises, at least for me, this unsettling point and conundrum as to whether we can or whether we will (or willingly) tragically and ironically, be self-relegated to a human zoo on the ‘other half’.

          You have either not read his book or have a very poor understanding of what he is saying. He is very clear about what he means and it is about preserving biodiversity in very specific isolated hot spots while also simultaneously maintaining human use of the land over much of the planet. He most certainly is not talking about building a partition literally dividing the planet in half.

          As for the quote from me about driving it is as usual out of context and seems to neglect mentioning the fact that just because I said I liked the convenience of something doesn’t mean that I necessarily engage in said activity all the time. As a matter of fact I more often than not tend to walk or ride a bicycle. Given traffic patterns where I live, I might even end up taking the Metro Rail. My yearly driving is usually about 6,000 miles a year and my car is a 14 year old compact with a manual transmission and it gets about 35 mpg.

          BTW for the record I also like beer, ice cream and pizza but I my BMI is on the low end at 21.3 and my cholesterol is quite low as well. Maybe a few years from now you will quote my saying I like beer, ice cream and pizza and imply that I’m a fast food junkie…

          1. Hey, what happened to Jesus Martinez?

            Your particular response to my mention of your metal-and-plastic idiot-boxes you call cars seems to strongly suggest that Jesus probably wouldn’t like some of his efforts being somehow equated with geoengineering either.

            “He most certainly is not talking about building a partition literally dividing the planet in half.” ~ Fred Magyar

            LOL

            1. grains, corn, squash and some tubers such as potatoes

              Um, those crops are all generally industrially produced monocultures representing a miniscule fraction of potentially edible plants. They are therefore the antithesis of biological diversity and are highly prone to pathogens that can potentially wipe them out all at once! That’s what happened in Ireland during the potato famine and what is happening now with the Cavendish bananas all over the world.

              My point was only that people generally have a difficult time understanding understanding complex non linear dynamic systems!

              What any of that has to do with my car or driving habits is completely beyond me!

              BTW I don’t know Jesus Martinez or what he likes or doesn’t like but if you seriously think I was equating what he does with geoengineering than you have a very profound reading comprehension problem…

            2. It begins with each one of us, Fred.
              And like Jesus Martinez, you need to eat too, but maybe unlike you, Jesus appears to be attempting it himself. Attempting a certain aspect of local resilience at a far smaller scale, and learning what works and what doesn’t along the way in a more visceral, tactile, tangible, immediate way and natural setting.

              Good food, clean water, good soil, and stuff like that comes long before, say, an ‘over-complex supply-chained’, global-industrial crony-capitalist plutarchy-derived/driven solar photovoltaic panel; electric self-crashing car; assorted ‘uber disruptive technologies’; or a glorified Goodyear blimp for those kinds of things in the name of ‘Solar Impulse’.
              And all this in the face of an already-failing pseudoeconomy.

              Again, the ostensible premise(s) behind Wilson’s ‘Half Earth’, raises an unsettling point and conundrum as to whether we can live in relative harmony with natural systems, such that permaculture and assorted other, often similar, techniques are attempting, or whether we will (or willingly) tragically and ironically, be self-relegated to a human zoo on the ‘other half’.

              “In an ideal world I’d like to see both cars and fracking banned.” ~ wiseindian

              “Now, were talking!” ~ FMagyar

              Past time to walk the talk.

            3. Good food, clean water, good soil, and stuff like that comes long before, say, a global-industrial crony-capitalist plutarchy-derived solar photovoltaic panel; electric self-crashing car; an ‘uber disruptive technology’; or a glorified Goodyear blimp for those kinds of things in the name of ‘Solar Impulse’.

              Ok Caelan you are right, you win, I throw in the towel, I give up! Your world view is the one that finally saves the world!

              As for me I’m going over to the dark side, down to the store to get a six pack of beer and a pizza and then I’m going home to watch the the last leg of The Solar Impulse on it’s way to Abu Dahbi, piloted by the evil Dr. Bertrand Piccard and supported by all the global-industrial crony-capitalist plutarchy-derived solar photovoltaic panel powered technology!

              Cheers!

            4. Just to remind you who replied to my original comment (you), which was inspired and related to my interest in the feasibility of having enough calories in the context of local, small-scale, domestic gardening/farming and in transcending the already-existing geoengineering that is industrial agro.

              Permaculture already has a certain form of ethics encoded; your technoshit apparently does not. Not yet. If we can feed your technoshit (and those industrial agro crops you claim a concern with) through permaculture, or through some sort of similar filter, if, when and where it makes sense to do so, then we might have something.

              So I’d be– and am– more concerned about your technoshit and less about permaculture and its abilities, such as, for example, to potentially avert your suspected pseudoconcern for ‘geoengineering’.

              BTW, I’ll have true local community craft beer-and-pizza please, thanks. With extra heirloom tomatoes.

            6. I’ll look at your link later, thanks– it looks intriguing– and in the mean time, leave you with this, and wish you a splendid day:

              Civilizations decline/collapse, perhaps more often than not (ours may well be within the initial stages), and while I’m unsure what some might call some of them after the dust settles– I’ve heard, ‘Dark Ages’– I suspect that ‘Luddite’ would be charitable.

              Permaculture essentially means permanent culture and from what is understood, you can have pretty much anything you want in it, including missions to Mars, with the catch being that the culture has to be relatively permanent (care of Earth and care of people, etc.).
              That means growing up as a species and, for example, looking at and implementing technology, holistically, contextually and ethically, etc.– outside of a vacuum as it were.

            7. So I’d be– and am– more concerned about your technoshit and less about permaculture and its abilities, such as, for example, to potentially avert your suspected pseudoconcern for ‘geoengineering’.

              BTW, I’ll have true local community craft beer-and-pizza please, thanks. With extra heirloom tomatoes.

              Caelan, you just don’t get it! I think community, craft beer and heirloom tomatoes produced with permaculture techniques are just fine! However I think a lot of other things as well.

              BTW the the technoshit which you keep harping about is just one dimension of the world that we are speeding towards.

              This morning I listened live to a wonderful violinist and guitar player playing music at the control center in Monaco to Bertrand who is over Saudi Arabia in his solar airplane.

              Without BAU and civilization that would never have been possible but I also very clearly understand that our fossil fueled powered civilization has run its course and
              can’t and won’t continue. As do all the people who worked on the Solar Impulse project including many really good people from many different corporations, countries and cultures.

              Sorry that you feel you have to keep attacking me personally for reporting what I see in the world at large. To be clear I’m not trying to single handedly save the world with technology that is impossible! I’m just along for the ride like another 7 plus billion humans. I am a product of this civilization and these times I am aware of the good the bad and the ugly, that’s just the reality we all have to deal with.

              I do not live in a starkly black and white world I see many shades of grey.

            8. Good North American morning, Fred,

              “Without BAU and civilization that would never have been possible…” ~ Fred Magyar

              So what.
              Without this kind of morally-bankrupt BAU, there would likely be many more great things, and great things possible, like perhaps less extinct species and being on Mars by now and/or living lives of relative tranquility, beauty, leisure, equality, freedom, personal exploration and so forth, rather than, say, funding, via coercion, bombing campaigns in our names in foreign lands (and the asymmetrical warfare that may crop up as a result).

              Your comment’s typical hypocrisy and unsubstantiated nonsense, etc., aside, there is a distinct difference between, as you write, ‘the reality we all have to deal with’, and actively peddling it, while criticizing and/or blocking– and poorly at that– other things that attempt to transcend it.

              “So forgive my daily cognitive dissonance it’s still better than ODing on opiates or hanging myself…” ~ Fred Magyar

            9. Your comment’s typical hypocrisy and unsubstantiated nonsense, etc., aside, there is a distinct difference between, as you write, ‘the reality we all have to deal with’, and actively peddling it, while criticizing and/or blocking– and poorly at that– other things that attempt to transcend it.

              Forgive me Caelan, as I said you don’t understand much of what I have been saying if you seriously believe that I have been actively peddling anything. I haven’t!

              This is my last response to you about anything I find trying to have a discussion with you an excersise in futility, I will no longer waste any more of my time doing it.

              Fred out!

            10. Get it together, Fred.

              Your self-ascribed ‘cognitive dissonance’, would seem to at least partially explain the peculiarities and contradictions of some of your responses.

        2. As much time that you spend harping on permaculture, anarchy, Wuthering Heights, what not, ad infinitum, ad nauseam, I sure could use a lot of help pulling weeds and cultivating my 2 and 1/2 acres of garden.

          I would get much more done and you could finally learn a thing or two about a thing or two, maybe.

          I have much more land than 2 and 1/2 acres, but I have tenant farmers who can do more than I can, at my age, it is too much.

          Just one afternoon of work, then I suspect you’ll throw in the towel. har

          1. Quite the plug for your farm, Ronald. Where do I sign up?

            Just one afternoon of work, then I suspect you’ll throw in the towel. har

            Sounds like the compensation’s pretty good.

            Tell you what:

            Take your squatting ass off the commons and share it properly with your so-called ‘tenant farmers’ and myself; compensate me (at least initially) for reasonable misc costs (such as travel, etc.), and I’ll consider it. Where are you located? I’m in Nova Scotia.

            “As much time that you spend harping on permaculture, anarchy, Wuthering Heights, what not, ad infinitum, ad nauseam, I sure could use a lot of help pulling weeds and cultivating my 2 and 1/2 acres of garden.” ~ R Walter

            Many so-called weeds are or course edible and nutritious and fix nitrogen, and my ‘harping’, as you explain, seems pretty good, and seeing as this is a peak oil blog, so thanks. I suppose it would be similar to harping about harps, chords and melodies on a music forum, ay?

            “Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labor; and of looking at plants and animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single product system.” ~ Bill Mollison

            “Did you know that before the Industrial Revolution, the average person worked for about two or three hours a day? Studies from a wide range of pre-industrial civilisations show similar data– it takes only about fifteen hours a week to provide for all of our basic human needs. And that’s using hand tools.” ~ Walden Effect (online)

            “Using the data provided by the United State Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erik Rauch has estimated productivity to have increased by nearly 400%. Says, Rauch:
            ‘… if productivity means anything at all, a worker should be able to earn the same standard of living as a 1950 worker in only 11 hours per week.’
            …Since the 1960s, the consensus among researchers (anthropologists, historians, sociologists), has been that early hunter-gatherer societies enjoyed much more leisure time than is permitted by capitalist and agricultural societies…”
            ~ Wikipedia

            “The important thing to understand about collapse is that it’s brought on by overreach and overstretch, and people being zealots and trying too hard. It’s not brought on by people being laid back and doing the absolute minimum. Americans could very easily feed themselves and clothe themselves and have a place to live, working maybe 100 days a year. You know, it’s a rich country in terms of resources. There’s really no reason to work more than maybe a third of your time. And that’s sort of a standard pattern in the world. But if you want to build a huge empire and have endless economic growth, and have the largest number of billionaires on the planet, then you have to work over 40 hours a week all the time, and if you don’t, then you’re in danger of going bankrupt. So that’s the predicament that people have ended up in. Now, the cure of course is not to do the same thing even harder… what people have to get used to is the idea that most things aren’t worth doing anyway…” ~ Dmitry Orlov

            *Yawn, stretch* (scratches ass)…

    3. Caelan- what do you grow? Are your thoughts just theoretical musings, or do actually grow food?
      Perhaps you have a university degree on energy budgeting in agriculture, or maybe actually grow potatoes?
      “If you are not a farmer, are you at all qualified to to lecture on food production?”

      1. Hickory,
        Based on your comment, you may wish to re-read my own and/or its contained links, if you have not already, and mull it over.

        Whether this happens or not, I will nevertheless suggest that it looks like we will all need to start– like, now– doing things ‘for ourselves and communities’ again (rather than for governpimps or corporations), perhaps a lot like our ancestors, while making efforts at forming real communities and/or strengthening their bonds and stuff like that.

        That may mean, for many of us, learning how to farm/garden/build/craft/etc. and in ways that make, perhaps uncommon, sense, such as vis-a-vis resilience, fair sharing, and ethics.

    2. Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble.
      Fire burn and melt ground bubble.
      Cool it with nature’s blood.
      Then the harm is firm and good.

    3. No worries, Doug! It’s all gonna freeze up again with the coming ice age… any day now!

      1. Fred, it’s time to invest in ice harvesting again. Giant oil tankers full of ice sent south to cool their drinks and their food should be a great business soon. Might as well use it before we lose it. 🙂

        1….2….3…4…5…6… Changing the world.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_pb1G2wIoA

        1. “Like there’s actually a need for Greenland. You can get ice at the 7-Eleven.” ― Steve Kluger

          1. I guess if they pay for bottled water they will pay for frozen water.

            The ice trade during the 1800’s was hot stuff. Trade was worldwide, India, South America, Australia just a few of the examples.

            “At its peak at the end of the 19th century, the U.S. ice trade employed an estimated 90,000 people in an industry capitalised at $28 million ($660 million in 2010 terms),[a] using ice houses capable of storing up to 250,000 tons (220 million kg) each; Norway exported a million tons (910 million kg) of ice a year, drawing on a network of artificial lakes.”

            But alas, the fossil fueled refrigerators took over and the natural ice trade went away.

            1. So, you’ll be looking to buy shares in my ice venture? I’ve staked 1,000,000 acres of prime Greenland ice; not that inferior Antarctic stuff.

              NB: it’s near tidewater to minimize transport costs.

            2. No, I am setting up a construction company to build large underground ice storage facilities under cities and large towns. The ice acts to cool the city and is also a fresh water resource. Two for one. Want to be a supplier?

            3. But there is an ice age coming, there will be no need for your business!

            4. Fred, the underground storage is easily converted to hot water storage for heating.

            5. And with that CX23 adaptive input laser drive you can produce excess electricity off the turbo click loader

              I need another drink

            6. Sorry, unlike oil pipeline pumping, we can’t produce electricity from the pressure differentials. It’s gravity driven.
              However, the surface sunlight can be used to produce electricity.

    1. tt,

      I read the brief article found at your hyperlink. There was no there there.

  11. “For those who believe the theory that humans are causing catastrophic global warming, a central tenet is that the world is quickly moving away from the use of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal) and, within a few decades, will be completely converted to non-nuclear renewable energy sources.”

    Huh? The fact that something is happening, does not depend on certain people assuming it is being stopped, and I’m pretty sure nobody who studies climate change seriously thinks that such a solution is occurring at all (in terms of logical fallacies that is a straw man, red herring, non sequitur, argumentum ad ignorantiam and argumentum ad absurdum – any and all, take your pick).

    1. The fact that something is happening, does not depend on certain people assuming it is being stopped, and I’m pretty sure nobody who studies climate change seriously thinks that such a solution is occurring at all (in terms of logical fallacies that is a straw man, red herring, non sequitur, argumentum ad ignorantiam and argumentum ad absurdum – any and all, take your pick).

      Anonymous beat me to it! I was about to make almost the exact same comment verbatim. Talk about a mishmash of contradictions, wrong assertions and logical fallacies and all of that just in the opening paragraph… and its all downhill after that!

      One has to wonder if Mr. Lyman’s parents dropped him on his head when he was an infant.

      1. Looks like Kerry wants HFC refrigerants eliminated to prevent global warming. Not sure that will work. Should discuss that one on the Open Thread.

  12. Article about the Tesla 3…the end of the article documents the current/very near future Tesla 3 EV competitors (from major car makers, not garage-shop dreamers):

    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35940302

    Gotta love the single quotes around the word affordable. The average transaction price for light vehicles in the United States in the first quarter of 2016 was nearly $34,000.

    https://www.nada.org/2016Convention/EconomicForecast/

    Pop Quiz: how many times wold you need to change the oil, coolant, and transmission fluid on an EV? Yes, there is the eventual battery replacement…but routine maintenance should be minimal for EVs.

    Car dealers, JiffyLube, independent mechanics, etc. will hate that…they make a lot pf money from ICE preventative and reactive maintenance.

    1. Car dealers, JiffyLube, independent mechanics, etc. will hate that…they make a lot pf money from ICE preventative and reactive maintenance.

      Yup! As I’m sure the blacksmiths back in the day, hated those infernal combustion powered horseless carriages because there was no longer any need for horseshoes. Life can be a real bitch when they move your cheese!

    2. “…The cornucopian fantasy of ‘LOTS’ of rich Americans driving around in Leafs and Volts commuting to their ‘GOOD’ jobs, depends on our society turning a blind eye to the large swaths of the real poor in the world…” ~ FMagyar

      “Furthermore what makes you think those so called ‘GOOD’ jobs will continue to exist? Or the access to ‘EASY’ credit?

      Spec, I’d really like to see you and Nick without your rose colored BAU glasses and blinders on, taking a walk on the wild side in some of the poorer parts of the US and more importantly, the rest of the world. You guys really need to step outside of the Matrix for a little bit… Reality ain’t even close to what you guys imagine. But I realize neither one of want’s to hear that technology is not going to save the world you hold so dear!” ~ FMagyar

      “…I know that cars, ICE or EV of the type that most people think of when they say automobiles are simply NOT sustainable! What part of ‘unsustainable’ do people not understand?” ~ FMagyar

  14. Have not commented here in about a year and a half or more but read pretty much all the comments and have gotten a real education. Thanks to Ron as well as Dennis and all the guest contributors . I am still amazed at how many folks seem to think that we will somehow transition to a renewable future with many or even all our conveniences still intact. For some this may prove true but I feel the majority will be faced with a reality that is both shocking and unbelievable. I think the case has been well proven that if nothing else falling EROI will soon be catching up with the economic sytem. Perhaps it already has and most folks are simply clueless to the reasons why the economy seems no longer to work as it used to. Those who are at least somewhat aware of the consequences of resourse depletion and climate change seem to think that the renewables fairy will wave her magic wand at the very last minute and all will be well again. Some on here have taken steps toward a renewable energy future and like myself they know well some of the limits.

    Just a few thoughts, Philip

    1. I am still amazed at how many folks seem to think that we will somehow transition to a renewable future with many or even all our conveniences still intact. For some this may prove true but I feel the majority will be faced with a reality that is both shocking and unbelievable.

      Hey Philip, I think you are still stuck in the mindset that everyone on the planet lives a middle class American lifestyle and those who talk about transition expect that BAU will be maintained as is for everyone.

      IMHO, The real renewables revolution that is already taking place is for those two billion or so people who have not in the past had access to even basic electricity and now perhaps with a few solar panels, an electric bicycle some LEDs and a smartphone will suddenly have a lifestyle that royalty of yore could not have imagined.

      See: Solar Lights Eradicating Kerosene Lamps in Africa
      http://cleantechnica.com/2015/05/12/solar-lights-eradicating-kerosene-lamps-africa/

      In Uganda alone, the International Energy Agency estimates that 30 million people, or 80% of the population, live off the electrical grid. “Electricity is only available in the cities and main towns,” explained Alison Gallagher, SunnyMoney Uganda Operations Director. Gallagher added, “This forces families living off-grid to spend an average of USH 15,000 per month on kerosene for lighting.” Kerosene costs account for up to 25% of a family’s monthly income, and Gallagher pointed out that this money could be better used “to improve household nutrition, pay school fees or put towards new business opportunities.”

      Across the African continent, it is further estimated that over 600 million people do not have access to electricity. With a total population of nearly one billion, it is reported that there are likely 100–200 million kerosene lamps damaging the health, polluting the air, and wasting the precious money of families in rural African off-grid communities. From my own personal experience as a resident of a rural community in Egypt, that number is vastly underestimated, as kerosene lamps represent the standard light source during the frequent power outages that we experience here.

      For some middle class Americans who have been accustomed to living very high on the hog on energy dense fossil fuels for some time now, that kind of new reality, might indeed be quite a letdown.

      However let’s not forget that Americans represent only about 4% of the global population and have been consuming about 25% of global energy resources. Sooner or later something has to give but I don’t think it is yet time to feel sorry for Americans either. Times are changing and we will all have to deal with it one way or another.

    2. Phillip, the EROEI of oil is deceptive. About 40 percent of the energy is used to move, refine and distribute it (often in the form of natural gas or coal energy as well as components of the oil itself), then it is only about 20 percent efficient in the end use (ICE). So the energy returned is mostly waste. Also, a barrel of oil is not all transport fuel.
      PV is 80 to 90 percent efficient depending on inverters and length of transmission. While EV’s are 85 to 80 percent efficient.
      So we do not have to replace the energy of oil, but only about 10 to 15 percent of that to get the same distance on a vehicle, which I suppose is the primary purpose of oil.

      1. Correction (since I can’t edit for some reason):
        Should say “While EV’s are 85 to 90 percent efficient.”

      2. There are a multitude of problematic issues behind PV, many of which have been discussed at length hereon and elsewhere.

        1. Caelan, don’t believe everything you hear or read. Try to find the reality of it.

          1. “Caelan, don’t believe everything you hear or read.” ~ GoneFishing

            Which, alas, as you can see, happens to include your comment.

            “Correction (since I can’t edit for some reason):
            Should say “While EV’s are 85 to 90 percent efficient.” ~ GoneFishing

            Case in point. ^^
            Thanks for making it for me.

            6. I’m happy to play with the kids, sweetie, but I thought you would rather forget this conversation. So? What are you waiting for? ^u^

              To add some value to your cute nonsense; as you know, your EV toys have context beyond some kinds of myopic measurements, such as where and how they get their electricity; are manufactured and are shipped, etc..
              Fossil fuel still plays a leading role; PV’s don’t make EV’s.

              And at this point, I have my increasing doubts that the pseudoeconomy is in a situation where it will be able to ‘build out’. So much the better.

              Lollipop for you! ?

  15. problems posting past week

    Edit: Perhaps the computer has decided that my usual e-mail address is invalid??

  16. I knew some vietnamese immigrants to usa. The generation in their 30’s was 5′ tall at best. Those who came as children were about 5’6 as adults. The grandchild born here was just over 6′ by 18 years old.

    Point is that our footprint on this earth can be big, or massive depending on how we live.
    The external energy to fuel the well-nourished (overnourished?) person is probably something like 10-fold greater than the simpler/smaller/marginal diet.
    Using just shovels, and beasts of burden, and most of our waking hours as labor, we could sustain a large population without a high level of fuel input. More beans and beef for certain. More goat meat. Less cheese.
    But that would take going backward for something like 3-5 billion people who are used to getting their foodstuffs from stores- from a supply chain powered by fossil fuel. Going backward generally isn’t done voluntarily.
    Good soil, with water, is the greatest asset (and a strong back) in a world with scarce fuel.

    [speaking as a man who has had real dirt under his nails, who can smell soil in his dreams, and who has an inkling of the effect of soil ph on the bioavailablility of Fe to plant roots]

  17. World’s Most Efficient EV Yields Equivalent of 26,135 MPG.
    “On an Audi test track in Bavaria, the tiny project car toppled the previous Guinness record by chalking up 765.53 miles/kilowatt hours.

    That’s the equivalent of about 26,135 U.S. miles per gallon, which would theoretically allow the car to cover 6,808 miles on just one-quarter gallon (1 liter) of 95-octane gasoline.”
    http://www.hybridcars.com/worlds-most-efficient-ev-yields-equivalent-of-26135-mpg/

    Probably would not survive potholes or ice/snow but at least we know the boundary region of efficiency.
    Power consumption at 30 km/h on flat surface is 30W.
    I think some car manufacturers need to think out of the box a bit and produce some EV’s that get 300 mpg equivalent and some ICE’s that get 100 mpg. I know Volkswagen produced one, but doubt it was ever sold here.

  18. Point is that our footprint on this earth can be big, or massive depending on how we live.
    The external energy to fuel the well-nourished (overnourished?) person is probably something like 10-fold greater than the simpler/smaller/marginal diet.

    Perhaps we could resurrect Homo floresiensis and let them take over the world 🙂

      1. LOL!

        Not quite…

        http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-floresiensis

        Remains of one of the most recently discovered early human species, Homo floresiensis (nicknamed ‘Hobbit’), have so far only been found on the Island of Flores, Indonesia. The fossils of H. floresiensis date to between about 100,000 and 60,000 years ago, and stone tools made by this species date to between about 190,000 and 50,000 years old. H. floresiensis individuals stood approximately 3 feet 6 inches tall, had tiny brains, large teeth for their small size, shrugged-forward shoulders, no chins, receding foreheads, and relatively large feet due to their short legs. Despite their small body and brain size, H. floresiensis made and used stone tools, hunted small elephants and large rodents, coped with predators such as giant Komodo dragons, and may have used fire.

  19. I really like poking true believers of every sort with sharp sticks.

    The VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY rolls on , unstoppable.

    Emails, servers, Wassermanschultz, etc.

    1. The biggest fear that right wing advocates have is the fear that environmentalists will stop them from using the planet as a wreck room, dump and toilet.

      1. I won’t go so far as to say that is their BIGGEST fear, but I will agree it’s one of their biggest.

        I just get thoroughly sick and tired of everybody pretending Clinton and company are the victims of right wing propaganda.

        The truth always matters.

        I won’t lie for partisan purposes, but damned near every last D I know personally is either stupid enough to believe in Santa Claus, making it possible to believe Clinton is ethically acceptable, or else just cynically lying his or her ass off.

        I cannot FIND anybody who will actually look me in the eye, and tell me Clinton is ethically qualified, except some old women true believers, and a few professional liars, who can look ANYBODY in the eye and lie about ANYTHING.

        I do run into some young Clinton partisan women, not many, who are ignorant of her long term stinky fish and flip flop history, but I very shortly figured out that there is no point whatsoever in trying to get them to look into it.

        Mention Cattle Gate to one of them, even if she is a science major,meaning she is necessarily mathematically literate, and she goes into a defensive mode about as bad as if you were to ask her to have sex with you right on the spot.

        If it weren’t for diehard Clinton partisans flat out fucking refusing to ADMIT the truth, Sanders would be the nominee, and he could mop the floor with Trump.

        Clinton may lose, although I am of the opinion she will win, barring some more skeletons coming dancing out of her closet.

        I notice that you don’t defend her yourself, but make a remark to the effect that she is the lesser of two evils.

        1. “I notice that you don’t defend her yourself, but make a remark to the effect that she is the lesser of two evils.”

          I smell fear, it’s hanging in the air.

          I never mentioned Clinton and made no remark about her, nor about lesser of two evils. Those are your words, not mine.
          There was no mention of politicians or elections. I merely stated the psychology of right wing minds, they fear loss of control and profit from being forced to act ethically.

          You write like a right wing political hack. Have fun with your new leader. You do know who his old friends are, right?

          1. My new leader, if I had my way, would be Sanders.

            I have made numerous disparaging comments about Clinton , but did not say and have not said that Trump is a better choice for the WH , and can’t imagine saying so. I don’t feel much need to make such remarks about Trump himself in this forum, since there are others doing so.

            You AVOID discussing Clinton’s shortcomings, the same way fossil fuel nut cases avoid discussing global warming, or deny the reality of it, and environmental discussion.

            The usual technique when a defense of Clinton is called for is to attack the R party and Trump. That’s what you did, change the subject to the right wings shortcomings.

            I am not saying this is not a sound and appropriate strategy, and I hardly ever miss a chance to badmouth Trump myself by saying he is worse than Clinton.

            I have been on record here since way back when in saying that we need and will likely eventually have a Western European style health care system, and that we need and must have strong environmental legislation, since the HARD facts are that we ARE fucking up our only home, and that if we don’t reverse course , we are going to be in a HELL of a bad situation, permanently.

            My personal opinion is that my record indicates I am a person who goes where the facts lead me.The reason I believe we will get Euro style health care, meaning single payer or some variant thereof, is that the demographics are on leftish side of the political ledger. For the same reason I have great hopes that we will get strengthened environmental laws.

            Single payer European style health care works better.Only a partisan cynic or a person ignorant of the facts could possibly maintain otherwise.

            Only a cynical or ignorant partisan could deny that we are fucking up the environment, on the grand scale, and that the D party is better positioned to at least partially solve our environmental problems.

            How about you tell me this, in no uncertain words.

            Do you think Clinton was after protecting her PERSONAL privacy or hiding her many conflicts of interest in having a secret personal email server?

            Incidentally when you hit the nail on the head, but perhaps not squarely, in saying the right wing is mostly interested in trashing the earth, I AGREED with you, since that is in my estimation a rock solid truthful observation.

            Do you think she showed respect for the spirit of the law in having it?

            Do you think she displayed good judgement in risking the secrets of the country on her home brewed system which so far as we know, was looked after by a single man who seems to lack serious credentials as a cyber security guy?

            If you are MATHEMATICALLY literate, then go to the archives of the major papers which covered the Cattle Gate scam, and explain to us just how likely it is that she was able to do what she did HONESTLY?

            Note, the odds of that kind of success have been calculated at many millions to one AGAINST. Note that her broker was a crook in a place noted for crookedness, at a time and place when and where manipulating orders was easy.

            Note that while the governors wife, she had the head of the biggest company in Arkansas acting as her personal buddy and guru, which I respectfully suggest is the sort of thing that leaves my liberal friends foaming at the mouth in the case of R type politicians, but never seems to bother them if the politician in question is a powerful D.

            TRUMP is NOT my leader, and I am NOT a republican. There are damned few real conservatives left these days. I am a conservative, one who understands math and hard science, and have consistently said that the D party is substantially better on the environment, which is the key issue, the OVERRIDING issue, and that Trump is even worse than Clinton, imo, ethically.

            My personal opinion is than neither of them has the sort of judgement I want in a president.

            The best you can do to defend Clinton is to damn her with faint praise by saying she is not as bad as Trump. This is in effect what you are saying, and have said.

            I have already done that FOR you.

            I consistently advocate a pedal to the metal effort to build out renewables, improve efficiency standards, lower birth rates, etc, etc, day after day, here and elsewhere , but mostly using different handles.

            If this sort of advocacy sounds right wing to you, I give up, what would sound LEFTISH to you?

            The truth matters. I will stick to it, no matter what, even if it means being banned, which is not that big a deal.

            Before too long, I will be out with a book that tells the truth as I see it about everything I have ever commented on.

            Wrong I might be , but a cynical partisan or a true believing idiot I am not.

            There are a number of very intelligent people who post here, and I am making some deliberately provocative comments in hopes of drawing responses that actually deal directly and honestly with the points I raise.

            Such responses will see print ( electronically at least ) if I get any.

            Most likely I will have to give my book away, but it might be read by a few future leaders who will remember some things they find in it.

            1. Wow, some rant Old Farmer. Feel better now?
              Was that aimed at me? I was responding to “t”, not you. WTF.

            2. FWIW I’m quite sure we’re going into a shift where the existing two-party system will fall apart in favor of a new system. We have a particularly defective electoral system in the US, so it’s taking unreasonably long. In Spain, Greece, the UK, Portugal, Australia, Canada, and elsewhere you can already see the shifts in their political system; but they have systems which allow these shifts to happen more quickly and more obviously. Our system of first-past-the-post single-member gerrymandered districts delays and delays the inevitable change, which is bad.

  20. Debunking The Tesla Mythology

    Summary

    Tesla Motors is an overvalued trader’s vehicle.

    Tesla Motors business is selling bonds and shares, not cars.

    Tesla Motors is a science-fiction business that will not save the planet.

    Well hell, tell me something I didn’t already know.

    1. You forgot to add carbon credits. Their business is selling carbon credits.

    2. From the article:

      The Tesla cult

      Similar to many PR-driven politicians or business leaders, Elon Musk cleverly operates on the boundary of fiction and reality. Tesla Motors’ CEO is deploying an incessant stream of supposedly revolutionary or disruptive plans, concepts and forward looking ideas via social media and public appearances. Over time, what has become known as “The Tesla cult” has developed a near religious intensity – an “us-against-them” style of thinking, an “all-or-nothing” approach to investing, disregarding anything that questions the “revolutionary” and “disruptive” narrative…

      The dogmatic approach to the solar-battery nexus evokes of one of Abraham Maslow’s famous cognitive biases: “If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.”

      The notion to “save the planet” by way of isolated technological fixes “from above” is irrational – sustainability is a highly complex issue, an intricate amalgamation of societal, economical and environmental issues that require systemic thinking and proper research. Ever since the sustainable agenda was launched with the Gro Harlem Brundtland report in 1987, it became apparent that the problem of a sustainable future for all humankind is overly complex and that, in fact, simple preservationist actions on a local and regional level can accomplish far more in a shorter timeframe at lower cost to society and its citizens…

      Elon Musk, after failing with his first, released a second “secret master plan,” a collection of old and new ideas appropriated from various mobility and energy researchers’ playbooks and an apparently never ending supply of vintage Popular Mechanics back issues.

  22. Peak Oil Drum participants:

    This is the daughter of long-time Peak Oil Drum contributor ‘wimbi,’ known in his real life, which ended yesterday, as William Beale (obituary: http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/athensmessenger/obituary.aspx?pid=180772994).

    My mother and I would like to express our heartfelt thanks and appreciation for Peak Oil Drum as a deeply dedicated group of thinkers and doer’s whose concerns about the carbon footprint mirrored my father’s, and/or who engaged in vigorous ongoing debate on and about such concerns. I seldom saw my father in past years without his commenting on ‘his oil drum website’s latest remarks on such-and-such,’ with (of course!) sidebar opprobrium for those who opposed, and appreciation for those who agreed, with his own viewpoint. He did also acknowledge that every now and then he learned something from you all – and for those of us who knew him in real life, that was praise indeed!

    But regardless of the way in which any of you interacted with my father, the key was that he found here, as he seldom did anywhere else online or in real life, a like-minded group of visionaries and deeply engaged individuals. THANK YOU for all you contributed to his life, and with the hopes that his remarks have to some degree contributed to your own,

    – Wimbi’s daughter Faith

    P.S. Being a sad novice to this online framework, I couldn’t understand how to make this a separate thread, if indeed it is permissable that it be so. I trust the site’s moderators to extend these remarks to interested parties however that should best occur.

    1. Dear Faith,
      a very sad news indeed!

      I am certain he will be missed at these pages and this respected forum…
      May you and your family find strength and peace at this difficult time.

      RIP Wimbi.

      Petro

    2. Sad news indeed, even if he himself forewarned us.

      He was an independent thinker and a well of knowledge both theoretical and practical. I hope he had a good passing with family and friends. He will be missed in the forum.

    3. Faith,
      Thank you for informing us of your loss. The loss is all the greater because he was a special man, interesting, knowledgeable and dedicated to making a better place. My deepest sympathies to you and the rest of his family.
      He will be missed here.
      His vision will carry on.

    4. Thanks Faith. Your father was a gem, a diamond in the rough, an inspiration. He will be missed.

      1. Even though I knew him only via the net, I will miss Wimbi as if he were a long time personal friend and coworker.

        It was a privilege and an honor to know him, even at this remove.

        Be comforted. He lived a full and meaningful life, and will live on in the hearts of those who knew him.

      2. Hi Faith,

        Thanks for letting us know. I am deeply sorry for your loss. He was a great man, very wise, please pass along my condolences to your Mother and siblings.

        He will be missed by all here at Peak Oil Barrel.

    5. My condolences, Faith, and to your loved ones as well.

      A heartfelt thanks for letting us know about William’s passing and in sharing some of his offline presence from within a realm where souls all too often come and then disappear without a trace.

      I will get over my lament of his departure, and one that was too early for certain investigations, maybe collaborations.

      But he will live on in family and memory.

      See you on the other side, wimbi.

      ~ Caelan

    6. Dear Faith,

      My sincerest condolences to you and your extended family! Like most here I only knew your father through our interactions here on this site. However I considered him a kindred spirit and very much enjoyed multiple exchanges with him. May he RIP!

      Fred

    7. Dear Faith,

      Thank you for sharing, which enables us in turn to share your loss. I very much miss wimbi, and will miss his comments in the future.

    8. Faith, your dad was one of my favorite commenters. I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

      The world could use a lot more Wimbis, not one less.

      May he rest in peace, and may his example live on and multiply.

      Thank you for letting us know of his passing.

    9. Thank you for letting us know of your Father’s passing. He had forewarned us not long ago but I had hoped then that this day would be much further down the road.

      I learned a great deal from your father, we all did. It wasn’t just the knowledge he had to offer, and the experience of having done it, or had tried to do it, that made Wimbi special. It was also the gentlemanly tone that made his comments a pleasure to read.

      Our community here will miss him.

    10. Dear Faith,

      It is with a deep sense of loss that I read your post today. It was just the other day “wimbi” posted something about his son being around making preparations for his departure. While others bid him farewell, I did not, refusing to believe that our old pal was on the way out. Searching for the thread in which he posted it led me to something that he wrote on May 11th, ” Every now and then, we swap for our Honda we gave to granddaughter when we have to go (again, goddam it) to the big city hospital, like we did yesterday.” I guess I should have taken his words of departure in the spirit of the man. He was not known to engage in senseless frivolity or idle chatter.

      I believe I can speak for all of us here when I say we feel we have lost a kindred spirit who, shares with us a deep concern for the future of “spaceship earth”, the one home shared by all of mankind regardless of ethnicity, race, class, age, religion or political persuasion. From his obituary and his contributions here, he obviously led a meaningful and productive life to the very end. He was dedicated to the dissemination of knowledge and it is he, that got me interested in pyrolysis. I will remember him every time I use the retort kiln I plan on building.

      I join with the others who have thanked you for keeping us informed. In this strange place called the internet, people can disappear, never to be heard from again and you wonder if it is just that, they have left the online realm or that they have left the physical realm as well. My condolences to all who loved him. May he rest in peace. He will be missed by us all.

    11. I am very sorry to hear the news. I have enjoyed his comments and they have given me many things to think about My condolences to you and the family.

      NAOM

    12. Faith,

      Your father was a caring man with a sense of humor who shared his knowledge with us in the hopes of a better world. He will be missed here dearly and his spirit will continue to live with us. My heart pains for your family and wish you strength in the loss of your father.

    13. Respondents:

      Thank you so very much for all your kind words, remembrances and remarks. As a participant in several online forums myself, I know how unsettling it is when someone vanishes into the digital ether. I’m glad to have found a way to offer a glimpse of wimbi’s world off-line. My mother and the rest of the family are exceedingly grateful for the opportunity to hear some of the voices my Dad so frequently mentioned.

      There was a request for other links to wimbi’s writings elsewhere online. His obituary mentioned one of his favorite non-profits, Community Solutions of Yellow Springs Ohio, and they have created a nice memorial page with other links, for any interested: http://www.communitysolution.org/blog/2016/7/25/in-memory-of-william-beale

      With continuing gratitude for all the world’s many blessings, including the comfort of human interaction in all forms,

      – Faith

      2. I’ve just now returned from Norway where I went to attend the funeral of my wife’s brother; very sorry to hear about the loss of your Father faith.

        Doug

      3. Faith,

        I’m a little late to this thread, but I’m so sorry for your loss. I enjoyed Wimbi’s posts and discussions back on The Oil Drum and for some reason always thought he lived in Western Mass or perhaps upstate NY. I guess I wasn’t too far off. I especially enjoyed his descriptions of his alt-energy projects around the home, talk about solar, EVs, wood stoves, and the like. You are so thoughtful to connect with everyone here and pass along the news. I’ll check into the links you’ve included and read more.

        Peace to you and your family,

        Chris ‘POBox’ from Boston

    14. I am sorry for your loss.

      I enjoyed his posts and am glad to read about him. Obviously he was a very talented person who positively affected the lives of many people.

    15. I am sorry to hear of William’s passing. He was a frequent contributor of knowledge and experience that always made me, here in England, try to imagine what he had constructed and where he lived. I never see a Nissan Leaf (not that I see very many of them, at least not yet!) without thinking of Wimbi’s posts.
      My condolences to his family.

    16. Oh my.

      Sic transit gloria mundi.

      RIP Wimbi. You were a great addition to the conversation and will be missed.

      Dear Faith,

      You and your mother have my sincere condolences.

      The Wet One

  23. At Least 15 Killed, 45 Injured By Knife-Wielding Man In Japan

    Tyler Durden’s picture
    by Tyler Durden
    Jul 25, 2016 5:07 PM

    Mass killings have now become a daily thing. The latest attack however took place not in Europe, nor the US, but Japan, where national broadcaster NHK reports that a knife-wielding man has reportedly gone on a rampage at a facility for handicapped people in the city of Sagamihara, west of Tokyo. Police say 15 people are confirmed dead and 45 injured.

    to bad no one had a gun??to stop him, ok boys write your legislators we need to ban trucks and knives now? that should give you something productive to do, no mention of either in the constitution??

    1. There is something about the glib use of emojis that I find irritating. Particularly in a comment about the murder of a great many vulnerable people.

      2. AWS,
        i think you made reasonable assessment. It would ring a bit more honest had you or others on this forum spoke up about how insensitive the Potus is when he uses the death of innocent civilians and police officers to further his political agenda along with his left wing followers. The point is you can ban gun, you can ban trucks, you can ban knives and you can ban pressure cookers and you will still have people who will do harm to others. Looking back into our (US) history, it was only when we begin to excuse criminals (late 1960-70’s) and started the war on drugs that we began to have a huge increase in crime. The reason for this is simple, before that time we killed criminals, regularly and routinely. We did not turn them back on to our streets to prey on others. The focus on the instrument or tool the criminal uses is utter insanity, a left wing trait. As for tone deafness mention below, I plead guilty. This forum is like a cyber social club for many of you here who must need companionship, want their ideas discussed, need validation etc. I missed that. After several “attacks”? on me I began to find enjoyment in teasing the rather odd views many bloggers here hold, relative to middle American values. I don’t think any body here needs me telling them just how out of touch they are with traditional US values, they already know???I have no delusions that I can change anyones mind. The good news for me is that everyone I know in real life, in business, in our churches and our schools find my views very much in tune with their own. God I love Texas. ?

        1. Tea, I find your lack of sensitivity to the thousands of innocent Americans and their families who lose their lives to gun violence annually unconscionable. You can wrap yourself in the flag, your church, schools and traditional values for your need to sleep with your gun or ingrained fear. But most Americans don’t want to live in the 18th or 7th century anymore and want to improve the safety record of guns in our civilized society. The longer you fight common sense. The more severe you will find the blow back from your actions. There is middle ground to be had here. The train is leaving the station with or without you.

        2. You don’t understand the true causes of the crime wave in the 1960s, Texas Tea. You’re just making bogus rationalizations up to make yourself feel better… like most people do, so that makes you normal.

          The real cause is a shocker to most people, though it makes perfect sense if you know enough neurobiology.

          Read. Learn:

          http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/lead-exposure-gasoline-crime-increase-children-health

          This is probably the strongest and best-proven result ever found in the social sciences. It is fact. There are lots of additional corroborating studies; Rick Nevin’s website and the Mother Jones archive of “lead and crime” articles have links to more and more of them.

          This fact has upset both right-wingers (because it has nothing to do with genetics or punishment) and left-wingers (because the criminals are permanently broken and can’t be fixed; all we can do is prevent new ones from being created).

          We’re discovering that environmental toxins are far more important for human behavior than most people ever thought.

          Finally: Why are gun aficianados more paranoid, and more likely to go crazy and start murdering people, than other people are? Well, shooting ranges have airborne lead exposure significantly higher than the norm… if we switched to copper or composite bullets, in 20 years, the next generation of gun owners probably wouldn’t have nearly so many deranged lunatics. Until we do that, I have to assume that most gun fans are lead-poisoned and therefore predisposed to criminal activity. (We got rid of lead in birdshot decades ago, so bird hunters should be OK.)

  24. Yair . . . .

    A message to “texas tea”

    To folks outside the US you have no idea how juvenile, self centred, inward looking, stupid and immature your 4:26 PM post makes you appear.

    Cheers.

    1. Trust me scrub puller, there are quite a few of us within the US who feel the same as you. Even more so given the rather unfortunate timing and placement of his post. It sort of added a layer of insult to the injury many of us were already feeling due to the loss of our friend… I personally would have found his post to be of exceptionally poor taste even under the best of circumstances to find it here at this time is unconscionable!

      1. The problem is, there can never be a “right” or “wrong” time for a post like Texas Tea’s because our Constitutionally protected gun rights in America are under assault like no time before in history. I realize many of the routine commentators here come from the heavily Democratic parts of America, so I can appreciate that you aren’t able to comprehend how this whole issue simply cannot be set aside, not even for a single day. For if we did, we could enable success among the wide swath of liberals who want to outright ban ALL guns from American soil or establish an illegal and invasive government registry of gun owners.

        1. It’s only a matter of time when, not if, before gun violence reaches your own personal family. When that day comes you will have yourself to live with knowing you did nothing to help prevent it from happening.

          The problem is your selfish actions and cowardly fear

        2. You don’t have a clue about the state of gun rights. Gun rights were most heavily under attack in the 1960s when the Black Panthers were disarmed. I researched the history of the Second Amendment; it was copied from a provision in the English Bill of Rights, which was *specifically intended* to protect groups like the Black Panthers. Local community militias who were defending against abusive, armed agents of the central government from outside the community (in the 1660s, the King’s men; in the 1960s, the all-white police forces). That’s what the Second Amendment was actually for — it was intended to protect the rights of groups like the Black Panthers. And yet the government disarmed them anyway…

          You sound a little paranoid. Perhaps you’re somewhat lead-poisoned, which is known to cause paranoia; most of us in the US have some level of childhood lead poisoning, but the exposure depends on age and where you grew up — the primary cause of exposure was exposure to leaded gasoline exhaust and the dust which settled from the exhaust. See my post about lead poisoning, above. If you’re over 40 and under 70, your exposure was very bad.

    2. No need to make any distinctions as to outside or inside the US. It was crass and tone-deaf.

  25. Yair . . .

    After posting the rebuke to “texas tea” I read the sad news further up thread.

    wimbi and his constructive straight forward comments will be missed and my thoughts are with his family at this time.

  26. Yair . . . .

    Gotcha “Fred Magyar”, I appreciate the frank reply.

    “Paul Helvik”.

    How a normal civilised society could have an issue with a registry of gun owners is quite beyond the comprehension of the majority of most folks outside the US.

    As I have said on here before there is no place in civilian hands for military/law enforcement style weapons or hand guns.

    Cheers.

    1. Because the majority of American gun owners believe a gun registry would allow the government to track your every move and take away your guns whenever they want, thus infringing on the fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Also one of the reasons why many people own/collect guns is the ability to invoke the militia part of the Second Amendment and overthrow the government if necessary.

      1. Because the majority of American gun owners believe a gun registry would allow the government to track your every move and take away your guns whenever they want, thus infringing on the fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

        Too late Paul, in case you didn’t get the memo, your smartphone already does that, no gun registry needed. Get over it!

        Now I don’t suppose facts and data make any difference to you but here is an article that just popped up on the correlation of number of guns and death by guns.

        http://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gun-violence-united-states-america

        These three basic facts demonstrate America’s unique gun culture. There is a very strong correlation between gun ownership and gun violence — a relationship that researchers argue is at least partly causal. And American gun ownership is beyond anything else in the world. At the same time, these guns are concentrated among a passionate minority, who are typically the loudest critics against any form of gun control and who scare legislators into voting against such measures.

        1. I can respond to both your and HuntingtonBeach’s reply to me in a single response, and that is to say that modern America is quite clearly split into Liberal America and Conservative America. That article — along with comments like the ones HuntingtonBeach left — plainly come directly out of Liberal America, where all guns are seen as inherently scary and worthy of strict regulation without regard to the character of the person owning them. Meanwhile, in Conservative America, gun ownership is so common that most children are exposed to guns from a young age and learn to both respect and appreciate them. Case in point, I think Montana has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the country, if not the highest, yet few people get shot out here and crime is relatively infrequent. Especially compared to the urban warfare zones of places like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc. where because the attitudes and relationships toward guns are completely different, the outcomes are as well.

          If the libs are truly serious about doing something about the gun problems of Liberal America while at the same time ensuring no curtailment of rights in Conservative America, they would be wise to drop their rhetoric on the issue and suggest simply that a standardized and mandatory training period run by the states be required for gun ownership, similar to how obtaining a driver’s license involves going through a mandatory training period. I feel most responsible gun owners would not only go along with this, but welcome it, as many already encourage new owners to join a local gun club in order to learn proper safety and etiquette.

          1. Case in point, I think Montana has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the country, if not the highest, yet few people get shot out here and crime is relatively infrequent. Especially compared to the urban warfare zones of places like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc. where because the attitudes and relationships toward guns are completely different, the outcomes are as well.

            Really now?! That is absolute bullshit! Are you incapable of reading a graph or did you not even bother to look at the data?! Montana is second only to Wyoming in both gun ownership and death by guns.

            You may be entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts!

            1. Hi Fred,

              The chart being from Mother Jones would probably make most conservatives disregard it and assume it is not accurate.

              One would need to pull such a chart from an NRA publication (and I doubt one would find it there) or maybe from a Dallas newspaper for a conservative to trust it.

              Nobody believes facts anymore.

            2. Only an idiot would deny hard facts, regardless of the source, not even the NRA.

              It is quaint that you would argue that one can deny facts depending on the source. But you may be right, if those right wing idiots can deny scientific facts then they might deny hard data collected by the states themselves. But that would only mark them as blooming idiots.

            3. Nobody believes facts anymore.

              Especially ‘Liberal’ facts… 🙂

            4. I calculate 0.26 deaths per percent owned in Wyoming and 0.45 deaths per percent owned in New Jersey.
              The death rate in Wyoming for gun injuries is 16.2/100,000 while the death rate in NJ is 5.3/100,000.
              So having six times the ownership rate causes about three times increase in death rate.
              Cars beat guns as far as death rate.

              Here is a great site covering all the states with a wide range of causes as well as mapping for death rate. I noticed some interesting results.
              http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa/wyoming-firearms-death-rate

          2. Hi Paul,

            Your gun training suggestion is a good one, but probably it would be opposed by the NRA.

            What do you think of background checks (with no loopholes for gun shows or private sales)? How about limiting clip size to no more than 9 rounds?

            I have heard about the pack of wild dogs argument, but would suggest proper training on how to reload quickly and carrying lots of clips would solve that problem. Or avoiding the situation without plenty of well armed companions.

            Note that there is a large swath of the US that is not liberal or conservative (as you have defined them) and it is by far the majority, not well represented by either Trump or Bernie Sanders.
            The majority view is probably somewhere between the political views of George H. W. Bush (1988-1992) and Bill Clinton.

            1. The NRA under its lunatic leader Wayne LaPierre has consistently opposed any form of training requirement for gun ownership.

              This is probably because the NRA has degenerated into a front for gun *manufacturers*, who provide all its funding. They want to be able to sell more guns, and selling them to untrained, incompetent people is a lucrative market. It’s really pretty disgusting.

              The racist history of the NRA in recent decades is also disgraceful. They never stand up for black people who defend themselves with guns, not even the most legitimate and blatant cases.

          3. “strict regulation without regard to the character of the person owning them”

            Paul, I find your character in question. The Government needs to take your guns away from you. With statements like these:

            “I think Montana has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the country, if not the highest, yet few people get shot out here and crime is relatively infrequent.”

            Try reading the facts from GoneFishing link. Montana has the eighth highest deaths per 100,000 people of the 50 states. Also note, 19 of the highest 20 death rates are Conservative America Red states with the exception of New Mexico.

            “Meanwhile, in Conservative America, gun ownership is so common that most children are exposed to guns from a young age and learn to both respect and appreciate them.”

            Unsecured guns have turned dozens of toddlers into killers — and many more into victims. https://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/gun-violence-stats-2015/

            Nothing says dangerous to human life like Conservative America Red State Values gun lovers.

  27. Yair . . . .

    “Paul Helvic”

    [ Also one of the reasons why many people own/collect guns is the ability to invoke the militia part of the Second Amendment and overthrow the government if necessary.]

    I understand this and again such a course of action is beyond the comprehension of most folks outside the US . . . we see your constitution as being very flawed, the world has changed since it was written.

    Cheers.

    1. Fortunately for you and us, you do not have to live under our constitution. Win Win for everyone.

      1. +1

        Well said, Reno.

        My mother always said it was better to keep one’s mouth shut and let people think you were ignorant than to open your mouth and prove them right.

        Also, that it is bad manners to try to tell people their business when you don’t know what you are talking about.

        Lots of that on here.

        Jim

        1. “My mother always said it was better to keep one’s mouth shut and let people think you were ignorant than to open your mouth and prove them right.”

          Exceptionalism?

          Scrub’s Australian experience no doubt informs his view. It wouldn’t hurt to consider what others have done outside one’s own borders.

          Australia data shows gun controls a huge success 20 years after mass shooting

          By Byron Kaye and Wayne Cole, Reuters, Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:54am EDT

        2. Yair . . .

          “Cracker”

          I have no intention of telling folks their business, I just tell things as they are.

          As I have mentioned on here and other sites I have see otherwise normal and sensible young men turn into dickheads as soon as they wrap a rag around their head go on a pig hunt with taped back to back thirty round magazines.

          Military lookalikes can be like a mind altering drug and have no place in civilian hands.

          Cheers.

    2. Hi Scrub Puller,

      Given that most of the European descended folks living in Australia today were hauled there in chains, as convicts, by a brutal government, at about the same time we Yankees were having a hot little war to get RID of that SAME government HERE,…………

      Well, it sort of tends to leave a lot of us Yankees, both the northern and southern flavors, thinking that maybe we really should have the option, when all else fails, of taking matters into our own hands.

      1. Yair . . .

        Gotcha “Oldfarmermac”

        [Well, it sort of tends to leave a lot of us Yankees, both the northern and southern flavors, thinking that maybe we really should have the option, when all else fails, of taking matters into our own hands.]

        As you folks in the US say “best of luck with that”.

        Cheers.

        1. Hi Old Farmer Mac,

          I believe you have said in the past that thinking local militias might be able to overthrow the US government is pretty delusional.

          In that case I agreed with you.

          Is it your opinion that there should be no limitation on the right to bear arms?

          It seems the Supreme Court has ruled that any the right applies to “bearable arms”, so tanks and fighter jets are not ok, but fully automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenades and shoulder fired missiles would be ok.

          Does that make sense to you?

          The Court has held that the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding, and that this Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States.

          From

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_case_law_in_the_United_States

          1. Well, in the hands of an organized local community militia like the Black Panthers, I am totally OK with them having RPGs and shoulder-fired missiles. And tanks.

            I actually did look into the history of the Second Amendment and its predecessor in the English Bill of Rights. The groups they were trying to protect gun rights for were, essentially, the period equivalent of the Black Panthers. It was never supposed to be for individuals — but it was also very clear that the “militia” should not require any central government approval. It was about struggles between local communities and an unrepresentative and abusive central government. The Black Panthers, in other words.

            1. Hi Nathanael,

              I strongly disagree. We do not live in the 17th century.

              Are you ok with bioweapons and nuclear weapons as well, maybe we can make them shoulder fired so they are “bearable arms”? 🙁

              Note that anything available to the Black Panthers would be available to the Klu Klux Clan as well, perhaps they will be very careful and nobody would be hurt in the crossfire.

      2. yair…
        interesting perspective. Mine is/was since the times of the “wild west” too many U.S. citizens think problems are solved with guns. May be I should also be thinking since the times of the revolution, too many U.S. citizens think problems are solved with wars.
        Cheers

  28. I personally agree that TT’s sarcastic comment about knives and trucks being banned, coming on the heels of Wimbi’s wake among us here in this forum, was in extremely poor taste.

    I will give him the benefit of the doubt about this ,however, because maybe he posted it without reading anything upthread and didn’t KNOW the immediate subject was the passing of a friend. I occasionally post a link the same way, without looking upthread.

    But his sarcastic tone and use of emojis has the effect in my eyes of cheapening his argument, and making them crass and juvenile.

    Such subjects should be dealt with using language more appropriate to the occasion, and his remark has already done a hell of a lot more harm, among readers in this forum, to the cause of Second Amendment rights than he can possibly imagine.

    Apparently, obviously, TT is a true believing sort of guy, most likely a decent person, truly, but with blind spots that no amount of sunlight will ever illuminate.

    So far, unless I overlooked it, he has failed to acknowledge that fossil fuels deplete, and will eventually be in extremely short supply no matter what, etc. This sort of denial cannot be defended except on the basis of cynical partisanship.

    Personally , and I am sure I am not alone in this observation, I hold the flag of this country in great respect, even though I well know my country has done a lot of things it shouldn’t have done, and that this country will continue to do bad things in the future. Human beings can be pretty nice creatures, individually, but collectively, we are still naked apes.

    But using the flag as a litmus marker or challenge , over and over, like a kid with a spray bomb, to insinuate that if you disagree with him, has the effect of cheapening the flag in the eyes of EVERYBODY, excepting him of course.

    TT, you are not doing the cause of Second Amendment advocates a service in this forum.You come across like an insensitive and uncaring nincompoop. You need to think about the AUDIENCE before you make your little speeches.

    They would go over just FINE, locally, at the country store where I drink coffee with the other old farmers on winter mornings. You would fit right in.

    You would be one of the guys, one of whom is convinced there is enough oil off the coast of North Carolina to run the USA for a century, and another who is totally unaware that every drop of oil in Mexico is the property of the Mexican government. Another one drives a truck, and having seen lots of horsehead pumps sitting idle, is absolutely convinced they all belong to Exon and were idled years ago to keep the price of oil high. He changes the subject when you ask him why oil is cheap right now, if the big boys can control the price of it.

    Have you ever heard that ” The last refuge of a scoundrel is patriotism?” In this forum you are coming across as a redneck.

    I have a hard enough time defending a few conservative positions here, trying to do so rationally, rather than emotionally, without your help.

    Of course I understand that you don’t think I am a conservative, but actually what I am NOT is a big R republican.

    You are not the only person to make this mistake of course. Some others are convinced I am a TRUMP CHUMP because I point out the truth about both party’s leadership and how both parties are in the vest pocket of the big money industries, with banking being the biggest one of all.

    1. I am a gun owner, and am very concerned by the rhetoric about this issue from both sides.

      I just hope the concealed carriers, of which I am not, are making frequent trips to the practice range, and are handling their hand guns safely. It seems some think things happen like in the movies, that one can just shoot from the hip and always hit the intended target.

      It seems all are on one extreme or the other. Doesn’t seem there is anywhere for me, who likes to shoot trap and skeet, targets, and deer hunt during shotgun season, but is not in favor of every Tom Dick and Harry having an arsenal of military weapons with 30 round clips.

      But then again, look at this election. Extremes.

      Talk radio and the Internet is ruining this country, IMO. I have given up talk radio, and am trying to give up the net, but having trouble getting that done.

      Neither talk radio, nor the Internet is reality.

      1. It seems all are on one extreme or the other. Doesn’t seem there is anywhere for me, who likes to shoot trap and skeet, targets, and deer hunt during shotgun season, but is not in favor of every Tom Dick and Harry having an arsenal of military weapons with 30 round clips.

        That and good system of background checks would be just fine by me. I don’t hunt any more but have a few friends that do. I’ve never had a problem with that. I just think it is ridiculous to argue against facts and the facts are plain as day, the US compared to the rest of the world has the most privately held guns of all sorts and also the highest incidence of gun violence of any modern country, that fact is NOT a coincidence! BTW general gun violence aside the US also has the highest number of suicides by fire arms, roughly 20,000 a year.

        BTW one of my best friends is a top liver surgeon who has guns and not only regularly trains at a shooting range but also hunts, no problem as far as I’m concerned.

      2. People who conceal carry are not the ones you need to worry about.

        1. Any human has the ability to make a mistake or error with a gun. All reasonable efforts should be make to minimize gun violence. Vice President Dick Cheney shot Harry Whittington in the face.

          1. I think many all agree Vice President Cheney is a clear example of someone who should not be trusted with weapons of any kind, even before he shot that man after drinking

        2. Several years ago I was in Alaska filling up at a gas station, saw a young guy strutting around with a 9 mm automatic with an extra long clip. He was jabbering away as he filled up, and I got a queasy filling, thinking he was a little nuts. As it turns out when I’m in Alaska and I’m outside Anchorage I carry a really nice knife, it’s made of special high strength stainless. That guy made me so nervous I pulled the knife and told my son to take his rifle and get ready to shoot at that dude if he started drawing.

          I’m not anti gun, but a turkey packing a 9 mm with an extra long clip in a visible holster is sort of looking to get shot and killed. Nobody is about to let such a nutty character get him the drop.

      3. Hi Shallow sand,

        Well said. Guns for hunting and sports shooting are fine with the majority of Americans.

        Semi automatic weapons should have 9 round clips or less and should be registered with no loopholes.

        Don’t give up the net, you will be missed.

        1. Dennis.

          I think it is impossible to give up the net.

          However, discipline is needed.

          I am not on any social media, unless this and seeking alpha qualifies. I also email a few of my “oil and non-oil friends”.

          In another facet of my life, I deal with people who quite often abuse social media. I have many, many over the top stories.

          It seems that social media has caused lack of patience, lack of attention span and increased the “grass is greener” jealousies.

          The internet also seems to cause folks to spew stuff they wouldn’t have the guts to say to one’s face.

          OTOH, it has many, many benefits. Just have to be very disciplined. Not easy.

          1. You are not “stupid” enough to miss morons like me “fighting and disliking” you and your well head numbers here, are you?

            -In a serious note though, I second Dennis’ kind request to you:
            “Don’t give up the net…”!
            It reminds me of O.”Hazard”. Perry’s “Don’t give up the ship!”.

            Shallow, you belong here…. give up other stuff, not Ron’s site!

            Anyway, I really hope you do not go…. and I really look forward to your posts and questions in the future, EVEN when I do not “like” them!

            Be well,

            Petro

      4. Agree 100%, shallow. I thought I was alone being a moderate on the 2nd amendment.

      5. “But then again, look at this election. Extremes.” ~ Shallow Sand

        Did you catch the video of Hillary Clinton with what appeared to be some kind of brief neurological effect?

      6. “Doesn’t seem there is anywhere for me, who likes to shoot trap and skeet, targets, and deer hunt during shotgun season, but is not in favor of every Tom Dick and Harry having an arsenal of military weapons with 30 round clips.”

        Vermont. 🙂

  29. Thee EIA updated their Electric Power Monthly this afternoon with the data for May 2016. As usual the graph is below. Total generation was up, off it’s minimum for the year to date in April but, wind was down more than 8% of it’s April total and hydro was down slightly. Solar was up but, not enough to prevent “all renewables from declining by more than 1% in terms of percentage share of generation. Both coal and natural gas increased their share slightly.

    1. Hydro’s been way down due to droughts, which are caused by global warming. Solar is accelerating in deployment (still doubling every two years) but it’s starting from such a low base that it’s not obvious when you compare it to everything else.

  30. The graph for generation solar sources is below. Unlike the two previous years, when the slope of the ramp up in generation past March started to decline, the early ramp up has been sustained into April and May. It will be interesting to see what happened in June when the data for June comes out next month.

  31. Another interesting graph from the Electric Power Monthly is one I have posted before but, I will post again, this time amplifying the contribution from solar more, to try and get a feel for how greater generation from solar sources might affect the overall picture.

  32. Before anyone points out how misleading the graph above is, here it is again with both the left and right axis to the same scale and zeroed.

    1. Hi Islandboy,

      Was the Solar in the two charts (dashed lines) utility scale solar only? It would be interesting to look at all solar (including residential if the data is available), but you may have done that already in your chart.

  33. The Kaiser of Germany paid a visit to the King of Switzerland and asked the King what he would do if he would march a million man army through Switzerland. The King of Switzerland commanded a 500,000 man army, so the King’s answer was to the Kaiser: each man will shoot twice. The year was 1912, Wilhelm II was the Kaiser who made the brazen proposal. Other renditions of the story gives different numbers and names, nonetheless, the story is true.

    History shows that the Kaiser of Germany decided not to invade Switzerland, and I doubt that anyone is going to try.

    Here’s one: Switzerland is the oldest Republic and freest country in the world. It also has the distinction of having the highest per-capita gun ownership in the world. In contrast to the rest of Europe, which has highly centralised governments, Switzerland has a very weak central government.

    http://www.frontline.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&id=1724:switzerlands-strategy-for-survival

    Switzerland isn’t going to give up without a fight, no ifs ands or buts about it. Give that one some thought.

    Everyone knows that an army carries arms, guns, tanks, fighter jets, bombers of all kinds, nuclear weapons, smart bombs, drones, ICBM’s, all kinds of artillery, munitions, munition dumps, a lollapalooza of armaments. Includes hundreds of bases, well defended, to be sure. The Navy, the Airforce, the Army, the Marines. They’re armed and well they should be, they’re the army, the military, and that includes a department in the government, the Department of Defense, for instance. The one in the United States is headquartered at the Pentagon.

    Amazing stuff, if you really want to know.

    If used properly, an armed force will do the necessary damage. After General Sherman toured Atlanta, the place was burning, you have to save the village by burning the village. We all know that.

    He wrote a letter to Atlanta’s mayor at the time and informed him of his mission, it wasn’t a surprise.

    Had Atlantans been armed to the teeth like Switzerland, the story might have changed, but we all know what happened.

    An armed populace to provide for the common defense is one thing, allowing citizens to be armed for self defense is another, in allowing for anybody to carry a gun, you end up with a bad apple in the group now and then, happens every time. And then some damn, dumb fool like Dick Cheney shoots a lawyer. Always a bit of good news when something goes wrong. har

    Gun control laws were enacted in Germany, history will tell you that German Jewish intellectuals campaigned for the legislation for gun control. Guess what happened after that?

    Nowadays, the people in Israel are armed to the teeth, they learned their lesson.

    Besides, all it does is create a healthy black market and that will never change. Gun control does not work and the laws to control guns wreaks havoc. Gun control just plain doesn’t work. Smith and Wesson has a stock quote, from about three dollars to 29.95 usd. The proof is in the pudding, fear causes a rise in the purchase of firearms. More people are going to be killed, unfortunately.

    Imagine someone like Hillary Clinton commanding all the armed forces of the United States, control of all those guns. You get the chance to find out if she will. Imagine Donald Trump as Commander-in-Chief. You have the chance, by voting, you can choose one between the two, a cast vote is probably more dangerous than owning a firearm.

    Regardless, the campaign is underway.

    The brainwashing is complete, two morons are running for president, and it is OK with Americans.

    One is a Democrat, my deepest sympathy, the other a Republican, an ostracized, shunned, whipped to death dark horse, and a moron to boot. A downright scoundrel, no doubt about it.

    You will have at least 50,000,000 morons who own 300,000,000 fire arms voting for two morons who will be in charge of all the guns. har

    Alrighty then. Maybe I’m making stuff up, but it’s close enough.

    “There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America.”
    Otto von Bismarck

    1. I think you are hitting your stride RW. Very good perspective on what we do when we vote. I wonder this time around if write in votes will outnumber party line votes. That would tell a tale.

      1. Our own RW is beginning to remind me of HL Mencken, the sage of Baltimore, and he deserves a wider audience than he has here.

        I am never quite sure what he does or does not believe, but his stuff never fails to put a smile on my face.

    2. You don’t have a clue about Sherman’s march through Atlanta. The rich white slaver population was armed to the teeth, but fairly obviously the BLACK population was on the side of Sherman, and the poor whites were typically neutral. The slavers didn’t have a chance.

      Sherman’s Special Field Orders No. 120 notes the sitaution very clearly:

      “VI. As for horses, mules, wagons, &c., belonging to the inhabitants, the cavalry and artillery may appropriate freely and without limit, discriminating, however, between the rich, who are usually hostile, and the poor or industrious, usually neutral or friendly. ”

      This is the very fundamental reason why the Confederacy lost the Civil War: the Confederacy was a tiny group of rich slavers who were opposed by much of their *own* population.

      Saudi Arabia is armed to the teeth with piles of US weapons in warehouses, but the royals do not trust the population with the weapons…

      Switzerland is militarily secure largely because its population is *unified*, and partly because they have mountains. And yet they were conquered by Napoleon. Really their gun ownership is beside the point.

      1. white slavers

        Stereotype alert!

        News for you, the Cherokee also owned slaves. The Trail of Tears would have been a worse experience had not the Cherokee had some help, so their slaves went along for the ride. Cherokee slavers back then, for your information.

        The Choctaw made a good living tracking and hunting down runaway slaves.

        Native Americans were captured and enslaved by other native tribes, were shipped to the Caribbean, slavers everywhere you go, the business was thriving!

        In New Orleans, free blacks owned slaves.

        Black slavers too. Arab slave traders too. Enslaved white Europeans.

        It wasn’t just dumbass white slave owners like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, plenty of other people of other skin colors were in on the gig too, participated in the slave trade.

        http://newobserveronline.com/hidden-facts-about-slavery-in-america/

        I added the disclaimer Maybe I am making stuff up, but it is close enough.

        I’m guilty of making stuff up.

        However, when the facts are examined, an entirely different story emerges, not the redacted, revised version you were brainwashed to believe.

        It is difficult to cope, it can be done though.

        One more fact:

        In 1741, an 800-foot-long coffle of recently enslaved Sioux Indians, procured by a group of Cree, Assiniboine, and Monsoni warriors, arrived in Montreal, ready for sale to French colonists hungry for domestic and agricultural labor. And in 1837, Cherokee Joseph Vann, expelled from his land in Georgia during the era of Indian removal, took at least 48 enslaved black people along with him to Indian Territory. By the 1840s, Vann was said to have owned hundreds of enslaved black laborers, as well as racehorses and a side-wheeler steamboat.

        http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/01/native_american_slavery_historians_uncover_a_chilling_chapter_in_u_s_history.html

        Sorry for subverting the official story, it just ain’t true.

        Case closed. har

      2. Hi Nathaniel,

        You are sort of new here and may not yet realize that RW is our resident court jester and comic.

        It’s a safe bet he knows quite as much about the history of the USA as you do, unless perhaps you are a historian by profession.

        Incidentally, a hell of a lot of people who were sent here, or came here , as indentured servants, were auctioned just like slaves, and sometimes treated worse. This is not to defend slave owners from the moral pov, but rather just pointing out that you take better care of a car you own than you do one you rent.

        Farmers in the antebellum south often treated free laborers after the war a LOT worse than they did slaves. This was possible because there was a huge excess of people willing to work, FORCED to work just to eat. A slave who got hurt could be allowed to heal, a paid laborer could be dismissed to starve, the same way coal companies got rid of miners who got hurt on the job during the nineteenth and early twentieth century in this country.

        Being the descendant of poor people in the south, I know whereof I speak. My grandparents on one side knew old men and women who owned slaves, and worked free laborers after the war. Of course they have been dead for a long time now, and I am now an old man myself, but I heard the living history repeated, and have verified it by reading history myself.

        Incidentally there is a book titled The Redneck Manifesto which is part humor, part satire, part totally INCORRECT pc wise, etc, which I have just recently read, which has a LOT of info in it about the way laborers, especially indentured laborers, were treated in this country, both down south and up north. Folks interested in the history of race relations in this country will learn a hell of a lot from reading it. It’s documented.

        The world is a Darwinian place, unfortunately.

    3. “The Kaiser of Germany paid a visit to the King of Switzerland and asked the King what he would do if he would march a million man army through Switzerland. The King of Switzerland commanded a 500,000 man army, so the King’s answer was to the Kaiser: each man will shoot twice. The year was 1912, Wilhelm II was the Kaiser who made the brazen proposal. Other renditions of the story gives different numbers and names, nonetheless, the story is true.”

      The story is bogus.

      “Gun control laws were enacted in Germany, history will tell you that German Jewish intellectuals campaigned for the legislation for gun control. Guess what happened after that?”

      Please learn history. You are talking nonsense. The registration of guns after 1918 had not the goal to disarm the population but to get an overview how many armed men could be expected in case of war, the Reichwehr had only 115 000 men.

      And if you had a clue how the deportation of Jews was organized in 1939, you would not assume that a few handguns would have made a difference. Most people simply did not belive that there would be mass murder.

      1. Kaiser Wilhelm II did visit Switzerland. He also viewed the Swiss Army while he was there. Whether or not the conversation ever took place about the readiness of the Swiss Army and a German invasion of Switzerland with a million man army is a good question.

        It is a nice story and it gets a lot of exposure and print.

        If it is a pack of lies, then I learned something not true.

        However, left wing liberals existed during the Weimar Republic and did influence policy and legislation. If they weren’t a part of firearms legislation, then it is another lie. Left wing radicals can be blamed for anything, they’re always at fault. har

        Left wing radicals were hanging out during the Weimar Republic and the left does support gun control laws, so it could be true.

        https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/weimar-germanys-left-wing-intellectuals-by-istvan-deak/

        You know how historians lie all of the time. They can make stuff up and any idiot out there will believe it.

  35. CURRENT ATMOSPHERIC GREENHOUSE GAS CONCENTRATIONS LIKELY COMMIT TO WARMINGS GREATER THAN 1.5C OVER LAND

    “First, even if it was possible to keep carbon dioxide concentrations fixed at their current 400 parts-per-million concentration levels, then the planet would continue to warm towards new equilibrium higher temperatures. At present, the climate is out of equilibrium, with the oceans drawing down very large amounts of heat from the atmosphere. However this will decline as the planet is bought towards a stable climatic state…. Second, warming rates over land are far higher than those when averaged globally which include temperatures over the oceans. This is a feature observed in meteorological measurements and reproduced across a large suite of climate models.”

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160727090403.htm

    1. HOWEVER,

      WHY THIS CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENTIST STILL HAS HOPE

      “Global warming is no longer an anticipation. It is no longer something for children or grandchildren to worry about. This is it. We have created the global warming era, now. And yet, almost unnoticed, the tools to solve the issue have begun to appear. The deniers and delayers have lost simply because they could not hide the economic logic of addressing the problem, or convince entrepreneurs not to invent.”

      http://www.popsci.com/why-climate-change-scientist-still-has-hope

      1. Hey Doug,
        While many people deny anthropogenic climate change, it’s a tad tougher to deny gravity… though I’m sure a few will try 🙂

        https://sealevel.nasa.gov/resources/78

        Cool Animation!

        An animation showing “sea level fingerprints,” or patterns of rising and falling sea levels across the globe in response to changes in Earth’s gravitational and rotational fields. Major changes in water mass can cause localized bumps and dips in gravity, sometimes with counterintuitive effects. Melting glaciers, for example, actually cause nearby sea level to drop; as they lose mass, their gravitational pull slackens, and sea water migrates away. In this animation, computed from data gathered by the twin GRACE satellites since 2002, sea level is dropping around rapidly melting Greenland (orange, yellow). But near coastlines at a sufficient distance, the added water causes sea levels to rise (blue). The computational method is described in Adhikari et al. (2016, Geoscientific Model Development). And, these solutions are presented in Adhikari and Ivins (2016, Science Advances).

        1. Somewhere I recall reading that the actual sea level rise at Greenland due to ice sheet gravitational attraction is hundreds of feet. Of course this levels out far from Greenland. The zero point for sea level rise is about 1,000 miles from Greenland. So closer than 1000 miles sea level would actually fall (not counting other sources of melt). Scotland gets no change. The Scots do not like being short-changed.
          http://sealevelstudy.org/sea-change-science/whats-in-a-number/attractive-ice-sheets

    2. This idea of committed warming is not even an hypothesis as it has zero evidence supporting it.

      And actually its expectations run contrary to observations. If there was a significant amount of committed warming from the past 65 years of significant increase in CO2 emissions and atmospheric levels, the possibilities of there being a “Pause” in global warming like the one for most of the 21st century would be next to nil as the ever increasing committed warming would make it impossible. Also an ever increasing amount of significant committed warming would necessary cause an acceleration in global warming, that has not been observed. Therefore there’s no significant committed warming.

      Also the idea that the planet would continue to warm towards new equilibrium is plain wrong. There is no such thing as equilibrium temperatures. Temperatures have always been changing and they always will be. There is no such thing as equilibrium.

      Problem is every piece of alarmist climate claim is accepted without question, no matter how absurd. It is like the suspended disbelief of a religion. People just love religions, even the ones claiming to be atheists. Skepticism towards everything is our only vaccine.

      1. From someone (you) who, by your own admission, isn’t a climate scientist; nor who is publishing your real name or publications hereon; nor who others seem to be in much agreement with, I don’t buy it, and nor should anyone else, until such time as things get clearer.

        In the mean time– and ironically, given your comments– it would therefore seem important to err on the side of caution and treat the issue of anthropogenic climate change or anthropogenic global warming as being real, and act accordingly.

        1. For the same token,
          “it would therefore seem important to err on the side of caution and treat the issue of the existence of God and Heaven as being real, and act accordingly.”
          I suppose you must pray a lot.

          1. Your comment may involve a logical fallacy. Would you like to look it up?

            If your simple comment here is throwing a logical fallacy, incidentally, then this throws an additional blanket of doubt over all your comments related to anthropogenic climate change or anthropogenic global warming, as well as your capacity to interpret the research.

            1. The logical fault is to think that the precautionary principle can be applied without knowing how much damage the precautionary action can cause. It could indeed be higher that the supposed risk, since nobody is doing good cost/benefit analysis of the decarbonization and nobody knows how much global temperature can be affected by lowering CO2 emissions. Apparently not much.

              Lomborg’s research shows that Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100:
              Impact of Current Climate Proposals

            2. I don’t think that slowly turning off the spigots, so to speak, and everyone getting together and planting a whole lot of native vegetation and food forest gardens around the planet; coaxing native flora and fauna to thrive; and learning about how to best do it is going to do a whole lot of damage than continuing on with BAU and burning fossil fuel, such as in its cannibalization, that no one’s talking about, for alternative-energy buildout, with the notion that doing so is precautionary.

              I also don’t think you need scientists to figure that one out. Besides, scientists are used everywhere for all kinds of nefarious purposes. Maybe even here.

              Lastly, I doubt that our way of life is going to detrimentally affect practically everything else, but the climate. Why should the climate be immune?

              It is quite possible– and check out Longtimber’s recent link as an example– that so-called governments are toast and they know it and are simply running the program for as long as they can. And so I guess it will collapse/decline and so Paris Promises don’t really matter.

              And therefore, in that regard too, we might as well start looking at what I just mentioned, including permaculture and/or better, assuming we apes can.

              Or the mother of all collapses may really feel like it too.

            3. As a footnote and a bit of a reiteration, Javier, and such as if you agree with me for the most part; ask yourself, even if you truly feel you are right WRT anthropogenic climate change, if what you’re doing, such as hereon and maybe elsewhere like WUWT, is the right thing to do given the bigger picture.

              I believe in ethical lying or ethical omissions of truth, how about you?

            4. Caelan,

              We agree on many things, and protecting and enhancing natural areas is one of them.

              We also agree that the world is heading towards collapse in short order and that BAU is not only unsustainable but not the right answer.

              We also agree that we are running out of fossil fuels very fast and Peak Oil is a reality.

              But we fundamentally disagree about lying. Science is about the truth. Lying creates slaving chains while the truth will set you free.

              I agree that we have to reduce fossil fuel consumption and I agree that we have to explore and implement alternative energy sources. But I disagree that there is a catastrophic climate change in the making and that we are responsible for that. The climate hasn’t been better in 700 years and people should not be lied and scared about it.

            5. You and I are in France in a cafe during the WW2 occupation.
              We both know that there are two Resistors in back in the kitchen going over some plans. They have friends and family and whatnot.
              Some Gestapo or SS or whatever come in and ask if there are any Resistors hiding about.

              What do you tell them?

              You don’t have to lie per se if you don’t feel good about telling the nice visitors that there is no one like that in back.
              You just have to keep your mouth shut.
              Opening your mouth could get us all killed.

            6. Lomborg is a economist, not a climate scientist.

              ‘Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.’
              – Kenneth Boulding …

            7. Exactly. We need also economists looking into what we are deciding to do. Lomborg just applies accepted methodology to calculate the temperature change from the reduction in emissions planned, and then performs a cost/benefit analysis.

              Should we not know what we are going to pay for what we are going to achieve?

      2. Just curious Javier, is climate change the only area where you deny science? Do you believe in evolution? Do you believe the earth is 4.6 billion years old and that the universe is over 13 billion years old?

        I am just curious as to how you view other areas of science?

        1. Maybe he should consult with the Talking Snake?
          He hangs with the Rib Woman by the Magical Tree.
          (Climate denial is at this point is in the realm of the ideological crippled).
          The amount of energy and time devoted to this denial needs to be directed into something more productive.
          Lest move on— at this point reality is beyond our denial friends world.

        2. The rationale of a contrarian like Javier is puzzling to me. For contrarianism to work you have to focus on some detail of the science that you can try to correct. It never works to focus on too large a piece because, in general, the wisdom of the scientific crowd will get that part generally correct.

          I think of someone like the denialist Richard Lindzen who on his Wikipedia page is stated “Lindzen has been called a contrarian, in relation to climate change and other issues.[72][73][74] Lindzen’s graduate students describe him as “fiercely intelligent, with a deep contrarian streak.” “

          So what I do is look at what Lindzen has written and tried to find holes in that. That’s the soft, underbelly of these deniers. I think that they are so full of contrarian energy that they completely lose focus on doing the science correctly.

          This is an example of a first-principles rework of Lindzen’s lauded research on atmospheric physics (which has nothing to do with global warming, just the fundamentals of climate science):
          http://contextearth.com/2016/06/29/simplifying-laplaces-tidal-equations-for-qbo/

          If Javier reads this, I am sure he will come back and say that my work has not been “peer-reviewed”. Yet, whatever Javier is saying hasn’t been peer-reviewed either. Sure he can cite all sorts of other research, but that is still just an interpretation on his part.

        3. What do you mean by denying science, Ron? Was Alfred Wegener denying science when he defended almost alone that continents moved? Was Milutin Milankovitch denying science when he maintained an orbital theory of glaciations against scientific consensus? Was Barry Marshall denying science for maintaining that a bacterial infection was the cause of ulcers against scientific consensus that it was stress? There’s hundreds of examples if not thousands

          You mistake science, the advancement of knowledge by observation, experimentation, and the application of the scientific method, with the consensus belief of the time. History shows that often science advances through the challenge of consensus. And that challenging a scientific consensus is arduous and may take decades, because as Max Planck said: “Science advances one funeral at a time”. He was recently demonstrated right when research showed that star scientists block advancement in their fields:
          Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?

          So for a scientist, any scientist, to challenge scientific consensus (what you call to deny science) when there is evidence that does not support it, is the right thing to do.

          I am a scientists, so obviously I do not deny science. On climatology I question the scientific consensus based on research done and published on scientific journals by specialists, and based on my knowledge of the scientific method to analyze what the evidence demonstrates or doesn’t, and what parts are unproven assumptions.

          And answering your question, there is only other subfield of science where I have serious doubts that the current consensus is right, although I lack interest and probably capacity to look into it more closely. It is string theory.

          Going back to climatology, there is a crucial assumption that is unproven. That is that most of the warming experimented since the mid seventies is due to the increase in CO2. That assumption is held because we do not know what other factor could be responsible. The current consensus is built over lack of knowledge, not over solid evidence. If the scientific evidence published by specialists on which I base my contrary opinion is correct then modern warming is due in great part to natural causes and only partially to the increase in CO2 and therefore the increase in atmospheric CO2 will not lead to a catastrophic climate change.

          Time will tell. If I am correct climate change during the next two decades will show from moderate warming to moderate cooling as most natural factors are turning towards NO WARMING, and that will test the capacity of increased CO2 to induce more warming. CO2 hypothesis however defends that warming has to increase significantly. The rate of warming has to be higher than in the past with increased CO2.

          1. Most of the people spouting ideas similar to Javier are delusional. Note how Javier talks about Wegener and plate tectonics. I just mentioned the loony denier Richard Lindzen. He has a an entire media cult built around him suggesting that Lindzen is another Wegener :

            http://www.weeklystandard.com/what-catastrophe/article/773268

            “In a 2007 debate with Lindzen in New York City, climate scientist Richard C. J. Somerville, who is firmly in the “alarmist” camp, likened climate skeptics to “some eminent earth scientists [who] couldn’t be persuaded that plate tectonics were real .  .  . when the revolution of continental drift was sweeping through geology and geophysics.”

            “Most people who think they’re a Galileo are just wrong,” he said, much to the delight of a friendly audience of Manhattanites.

            But Somerville botched the analogy. The story of plate tectonics is the story of how one man, Alfred Wegener, came up with the theory of continental drift, only to be widely opposed and mocked. Wegener challenged the earth science “consensus” of his day. And in the end, his view prevailed.”

            1. As a geologist and geophysicist I was exposed to Wegener’s continental drift theory as a student, perhaps even in high school. The problem was he didn’t have an explanation for how drift could have occurred. Wegener proposed two totally different mechanisms: one was based on centrifugal force caused by the earth’s rotation, another was a tidal argument based on the gravitational attraction of the sun and moon. Both were proven inadequate and lead to skepticism in spite of his powerful geometric (and other) evidence. I recall profs saying Wegener’s theory needs a viable dynamical explanation before this idea can be embraced; which happened in the 1960s. It would have been nice if Wegener had lived to see a viable dynamical process discovered.

            3. AGW denier Richard Lindzen messed up on his theory of QBO, missing the fact that gravitational lunar tides are the synchronizing forcing agent.
              http://contextearth.com/2016/06/29/simplifying-laplaces-tidal-equations-for-qbo/

              And this too:
              Spring tides trigger tremors deep on California’s San Andreas fault

              which takes from this PNAS paper written by USGS scientists:

              Fortnightly modulation of San Andreas tremor and low-frequency earthquakes

              “Significance — The sun and moon exert a gravitational tug on Earth that stretches and compresses crustal rocks. This cyclic stressing can promote or inhibit fault slip, particularly at the deep roots of faults. The amplitude of the solid Earth tide varies over a fortnightly (2-wk) cycle, as the sun and moon change their relative positions in the sky. In this study, we show that deep, small earthquakes on the San Andreas Fault are most likely to occur during the waxing fortnightly tide—not when the tidal amplitude is highest, as might be expected, but when the tidal amplitude most exceeds its previous value. The response of faults to the tidal cycle opens a window into the workings of plate tectonics.”

              This is a chart representing the salient features of their argument. Stress builds up over time but the lunar tidal influence provides forcing excursions on ~two-week periods that can cause an earthquake.

              http://imagizer.imageshack.us/a/img922/6429/xviueJ.png

            5. The Coriolis force disappears at the equator so one can simplify the equations of flow considerably for behaviors such as QBO and likely ENSO.

              So the deal is that they forgot to simplify away the Coriolis force. Blame Richard Lindzen.

            6. I thought we were talking about continental drift, not weather.

            7. These are significant findings that show that the moon (and gravitational forces) has more effect on the earth than previously thought. What gets me is that this should not come as a surprise considering the moon’s strong influence on ocean tides. It’s almost as if scientists want to find more complicated mechanisms.

              The same can be said about climate change versus peak oil. Everyone seems to want to attribute the growth in alternate energy schemes on a way to mitigating climate change, whereas to me it’s obviously a reaction to a decline in fossil fuel supplies.

              Scientists have been proven smart in so many other ways so this odd viewpoint really has to do with these fields of study. I think there is something lacking in earth sciences education and research.

          2. I’m curious. Can anybody point me to to studies that deny global warming is happening that originate in the tropics? If the regions that such studies originate from also happen not to have any fossil fuel resources, that would make them more credible IMHO.

            AFAICT all the global warming denial is coming from people who live in temperate climates. These people have the luxury of getting a break from the heat during winter, when they actually have to use energy to provide heat, the absence of which can be fatal. It is sometimes difficult for one to divorce oneself from ones immediate surroundings and think about people in different climates.

            I live on a tropical island which is fortunate because islands benefit from a moderating influence of the ocean. The temperature of a moderately sized island can never be more than a few degrees higher or lower than the ocean around it so we never experience daytime temperatures much below 20°C in the “winter” and rarely go above 35°C in the summer. Today for example we are at 34°C (93°F) after an overnight low of 27°C (80°F).

            On larger landmasses there is no moderating effect of the ocean and that is why places on continents experience temperatures unheard of on islands. For example the today in Phoenix, Arizona it was 44°C (112°F) and the low is expected to be 32°C (89°F). In a heatwave temperatures can go higher than than that and depending on the humidity, weaker individuals (elderly) may die.

            I find it callous for people who are not at risk of dying from higher temperatures to be denying global warming. I think of people outside of the developed world, in places like Africa, the Middle East, India and Pakistan who, might not have access to air conditioning and are at risk of death in the event of a serious heatwave.

            1. There are no scientific studies published in journals that deny global warming, Islandboy.

              Global warming is a very well established fact. It has been taking place for 350 years.

              I also point to you that statistics demonstrate that a lot more people die from cold than from heat all over the world. Global warming has been saving lives for over three centuries now. I suppose it is useless if I also tell you that it is very well established that the main effect of global warming is to increase minimum temperatures at night and during the winter, and more in the North Pole than in the tropics (Arctic amplification), and not to raise temperatures at mid-day during the summer. It is quite obvious if you think about how CO2 works.

        4. No slow down in global warming.

          “A new study published online today in the journal Science finds that the rate of global warming during the last 15 years has been as fast as or faster than that seen during the latter half of the 20th Century. The study refutes the notion that there has been a slowdown or “hiatus” in the rate of global warming in recent years.

          The study is the work of a team of scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information* (NCEI) using the latest global surface temperature data.

          “Adding in the last two years of global surface temperature data and other improvements in the quality of the observed record provide evidence that contradict the notion of a hiatus in recent global warming trends,” said Thomas R. Karl, L.H.D., Director, NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information. “Our new analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century.” ”
          http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2015/noaa-analysis-journal-science-no-slowdown-in-global-warming-in-recent-years.html

          1. Only a problem, GoneFishing
            That reference is very controversial. This one is more recent and heavily criticizes Karl et al., 2015:

            Making sense of the early-2000s warming slowdown
            J.C. Fyfe et al. 2016. Nature Climate Change 6, 224–228.
            http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n3/full/nclimate2938.html

            “Our results support previous findings of a reduced rate of surface warming over the 2001-2014 period – a period in which anthropogenic forcing increased at a relatively constant rate.

            Newly identified observational errors do not, however negate the existance of a real reduction in the surface warming rate in the early twenty-first century relative to the 1970s-1990s.

            This slowdown is evident in time series of GMST and in the global mean temperature of the lower troposphere.

            Subsequent slowdown studies examined contributions from external forcing and observational uncertainty, as we discuss below. This important historical perspective is missing in recent critiques of research into the slowdown (for example, refs 4 and 9)

            Using overlapping windows to characterize the
            slowdown is preferable to the practise of defining the slowdown based on arbitrary start and end dates (for example, refs 4, 8 and 9).

            4. Karl, T. R. et al. Science 348, 1469–1472 (2015).”

            Look at the signatures of the Fyfe et al., 2016. Michael Mann, Ben Santer and other prominent climate alarmists. The Pause is scientific consensus.

          2. Here is a nice set of facts for those who don’t understand global warming and the role CO2 plays in the heating of the earth system.

            http://climate.nasa.gov/

            I find it a real riot when people don’t understand that while the northern hemisphere was on a 11,000 year decline in insolation, the glaciers melted back and the Arctic is losing ice at the rate of 13.4% a year. Since the irradiance is lower and we must put aside magic, the elephant in the room is greenhouse gas increases.

            6. “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

              NAOM

      3. Hi Javier,

        Equilibrium is a theoretical construct and nobody has ever denied that there is natural variability which can cause a “slowdown” is warming of average Global surface temperatures when more heat is absorbed by the deep ocean.

        The carbon dioxide in the atmosphere persists for a very long time and it takes about 400 years for the ocean to turn over so that the ocean temperature reaches some maximum temperature, ice sheet melt will also be likely to stabilize by 2500 under a scenario like RCP4.5 (the most realistic of the 4 scenarios, if my medium fossil fuel scenarios are correct).

        Fernando’s contention that the RCP8.5 scenario is unrealistic (with fossil fuel carbon emissions of 5000 Pg, when the likely resource is more would result in 1400 Pg of carbon emissions) I agree with, though he assumes an equilibrium climate sensitivity(ECS) which is too low in my view. An ECS of 3 C is more reasonable, and there is the possibility that with future feedbacks ECS might be higher than 3C rather than lower.

    1. Apparently Hitler does not understand startup or the new paradigm of internet/technology business.

      1. Russian and German intelligence agency’s are now using typewriters.

          1. They are using them now for obvious reasons.
            Found them somewhere.

        2. I hear they are also breeding carrier pigeons and plan on bringing back the pony express 🙂

    1. “Two separate indicators of climate change suggest that there is a risk of substantial cooling from 2017 onward.

      Great! That’s next year. I can’t wait!

      1. If it’s cooler next year at least that’ll prove climate change was nonsense, a hoax perpetrated by who, Obama?. Actually, I’m not sure who: perhaps those EV people or wind turbine guys or organic farmers or… Help me out here.

          1. Old memories: Arrhenius was at Uppsala University which I attended and where I met my wife; ‘course he was a bit before my time. Actually, quite a few scientists came from Uppsala. These included my hero, Hannes Alfvén, the reason I went to Sweden in the first place.

            1. Then you might like this:

              http://cadenzainnovation.com/news/swedens-battery-queen-strikes-again/

              Christina Lampe–Önnerud, founder of the battery company Boston–Power, has already been dubbed as one of Sweden’s most successful entrepreneurs. Now she’s starting a new company with the ambition to move the world from fossil to renewable.

              With an Obligatory reference to Uppsala University.

              “My professor at Uppsala University, Josh Thomas, one of the founders of Danionics. With my focus on energy storage and lithium ion batteries, I was one of the first who received patents in the field.

            2. Another Swede (women) pushing her way into a Man’s Domain. Shameful.

        1. Since Australia is in the southern hemisphere and it is moving north that means it is moving towards the equator so it should be getting even warmer… not cooling 🙂

  39. In the first half of 2016, China’s national average wind electricity curtailment reached 21%. In some of the most important wind provinces, such as Gansu and Xinjiang, it reached 45-47%.

    The original webpage is here: http://www.cec.org.cn/yaowenkuaidi/2016-07-28/156260.html

    I have translated the table into English. But it cannot be pasted here properly. I created a JPEG file. But it could be that the file size exceeded the limit here and so it did not allow me to upload.

    So I have stored it at the following site. Please click on the link below and see the table:

    http://redchinacn.net/data/attachment/portal/201607/29/080456rxyd6z607kdadxty.jpg

    Note that the original table uses Chinese quantitative units. Thus, in the table, the unit for installed capacity is “10 MW” and the unit for electric power generation or curtailment is 10 GWH.

      1. Yes the file size limit is under 50 Kb. However there are many things you can do to reduce the file size of an image. For example I converted your file which didn’t need the full color profile it had, to a true two bit black and white image and then saved it as a PNG file. It is now only a little over 30 Kb.

    2. Hi Political Economist,

      In the provinces with larger percentages of curtailment, is the issue a lack of adequate grid capacity or are the Wind turbines spaced too closely or possibly the wind speeds are occasionally too high to safely produce electricity?

      1. Dennis, I don’t have information about this. My best guess is that it’s primarily due to lack of grid capacity. In other words, wind has been built too rapidly relative to what grid/transmission can accommodate.

        The two provinces, Gansu and Xinjiang, also have substantial solar curtailment

    1. We are still with lithium Ion Japanese technology from the early 1990’s.

      Nothing else has been able to scale.
      It has been a while campers!

      1. Yes Duncan, and improvements on ICE engines are still being made after more than one hundred years. The new battery types have only been under research for a few years if that. Give them a little time, no one is going to accept the battery equivalent of an early ICE (177 cubic inch engine developing 20 horsepower). The new batteries do not have the luxury of a long growth period, they have to come to near maturity in a short time.

  41. This is in one sense WAY off topic, but entirely relevant to the overall discussion of what has happened, is happening, and will happen in our society.

    As Twain put it, it’s not what we know or don’t know that is so dangerous , but rather what we know that ain’t so.

    Sometimes our troubles are blamed on the real reasons, sometimes we blame them on the wrong reasons altogether.

    I have often remarked that I go where my intellect, such as it is, poor little thing, leads me. So I think we ought to have a single payer Euro style health care system, not because I am a DIM RAT, but because such systems have been proven to work better than the socalled free market system we have in the USA. FREE it certainly is not, and there is damned little real competition involved in it , since it has been captured by the people and businesses involved , and is operated along non competitive lines, leaving millions of people unable to afford the health care they must have, not only from a moral pov, but also to keep them productive tax payers rather than welfare tax eaters or criminals. Yes , there are people who turn to crime because they are unable to do much in the way of other work because of health issues. You don’t have to be very hale and hearty to sell some dope, all you need is a supplier, and a pistol to keep your customers from robbing you.

    I am not a stupid republican, because the R party is behind the eight ball on too many critical issues, the environmental question being the biggest one of all, the one that trumps all the others combined.

    But at the same time, the R party is right in my opinion on some things, for instance the education monopoly of which I was once a part.

    Now here is a column by Walter Williams which is enough to convince ME that we NEED competition in our school systems. The post office is all the better for having competition, it forced the post office to get its act together.

    You can’t believe every thing you read or see on tv or the net. We aren’t getting fatter year after year because we are eating fat laden foods for instance. We are getting fatter because we are eaten foods that have had some fat, often healthy fat, replaced by TONS of sugar and other carbs, not to mention excess salt. The proof is obvious in the national statistics, with lack of exercise playing a part too, no question.

    The failure of city school systems cannot be placed squarely on racial oppression, although that is the mantra repeated over and over again by the educational establishment, and by some pundits, most of whom have axes to grind.

    Read this and THINK a little.

    Venezuela is mostly in the mess it is because of self serving, insulated from reality government composed of people who look after themselves first, with the country itself being a mere afterthought.

    The same truth applies to our worst schools. There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of fixing them short of radical change.

    http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams072716.php3

    When I brought this up previously, some others remarked that vouchers and competition would leave the poor kids behind.

    I don’t want to come across as being TOO sarcastic, but the current system has ALREADY for all intents and purposes abandoned poor kids by the millions.

    How many other problems will we fail to solve because we allow interested parties to keep us in the dark about the real causes, and real possible solutions ????

    1. Mac,

      There’s no substance to that article. It simply points out that some problems in the black community are worse today, and then claims that it’s obvious that racial discrimination is weaker today than it was immediately post-WWII.

      That’s not obvious. The drug war is in many ways a war on the poor and black, and it’s been much, much worse over the last 30 years. For example, marriage rates are going to be much lower when many potential spouses are in jail, or are unemployed because…ex-felons are unemployable.

Comments are closed.