85 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum, April 25, 2002”

      1. It will be fascinating to watch. At the moment they’re fining He Who Shall Not Be Named $10K per day. That doesn’t seem like enough to force compliance…

  2. WHAT RUSSIAN MILITARY DISLOYALTY MEANS FOR THE WAR IN UKRAINE

    “Military mutinies and defections continue to mark this conflict. Mutinies, in this context, are the blatant disregard of orders handed down from Russian military leadership or unauthorized actions, such as running one’s own Colonel over with a tank”

    https://politicalviolenceataglance.org/2022/04/25/what-russian-military-disloyalty-means-for-the-war-in-ukraine/

    From what I understand Russia has, over the course of the last several weeks, deployed about 120 battalion tactical groups to Ukraine. That’s about 65% of its BTG’s. Of that 65% that has been deployed, approx 25% of it has been destroyed. It will take decades to repair & rebuild. And what does Putin get if he “wins”; The Troubles, but the size of France?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

    1. One of the problems of Putin as dictator is military, too: He keeps his best equiped army parts around Moscow to avoid a coup.
      Many dictator do this, since the antique. The guard always stays with the king. And the guard has all the good stuff and is payed much better (to make bribing more difficult).

      But this lowers the military punch a regime has – as seen now. Some tactics like a Blitzkrieg at the capital can’t be done with underequiped, undersupplied and unmotivated B or C class units.

      Now he moves in the artillery and conventional bombs. Old school, slow and maximum bloody. Kills many civilians for every enemy soldier.

      1. It’s beginning to look like the Ukrainians might actually send the Russians home with their tails between their legs, assuming the West continues to supply ample aid.

        Eulenspiegel has a good grasp of the way dictatorships work, of how they stay in power.

        Putin’s personal safety depends on a hard core of supporters wearing police and military uniforms who are well cared for, and who know their own personal welfare is directly tied to his remaining in power.

        Right and wrong mean next to nothing to such people. They’ll do whatever they think is necessary to protect Putin, and therefore themselves, to the bloody end.

    2. S, thanks for that first link. While a military coup seems unlikely, best hopes for continued mutinies and defections.

  3. So Musk controls Twitter.

    This could turn out to be a turning point, for better or for worse, in terms of what happens here in the USA, and ultimately, the world.

    I don’t think trump would ever have managed to get to the WH except for the fact he had outfits like Fox supporting him, and Twitter allowing him to spout an endless stream of lies and hate speech, etc.

    So………. I admire Musk for his vision as business man. He’s either one of the luckiest or smartest ever in that respect,or both. I think both.

    But I’m not impressed with him as an individual.

    What sort of policies will he put in place at Twitter?

    I’m afraid to even guess, except to predict that there will be surprises.

    Allowing trump back on could be the straw that breaks the back of American democracy.

    Any and all opinions as to what he might do will be greatly appreciated.

    1. Have you read the Trump stuff sometimes?

      I did – the most was silly rumbling and ununderstable gibbish. And every entry had 1000s of replies, where stuff could be read like on this forum.

      When I write garbage here (and don’t get deleted), there will be clarifications short after.

      That’s how democracy works, not by engaging a ministerium of truth (minitruth) to zertificate anything before publishings.

      The limits will be the US laws – if someone goes over them, you can call in law enforcement. And that’s good.

    2. And yet another dangerous moment in the history of human culture.
      I won’t pretend to understand that man.

      1. Think what that 44 G could have done for the poor.

        Twitter is a sewage pipe.

        1. Indeed. A 44 billion dollar vanity investment in an online ghetto of sentimentality. I wonder what this blog’s comments section would bring?

  4. Long time I have updated on India . Read this . More than 50% of the total workforce of 900 million (more than the population of USA and EU combined ) have stopped looking for jobs . 800 million survive on 5Kg wheat/ rice + 1Kg chickpeas per month rationed free by the government . Overshoot in real time .
    https://indianexpress.com/article/business/majority-of-indias-900-million-workforce-stop-looking-for-jobs-7886245/#:~:text=About%2021%20million%20disappeared%20from,job%2C%20according%20to%20the%20CMIE.

    1. Most projections show India population hitting a peak in the 2050’s, and then very slowly declining.
      The number of children has already peaked, or plateaued more accurately.
      Between energy shortage, global warming, food shortages, and poverty
      the risks for poor outcome seem huge and growing,
      despite average GDP/capita being more than 4-fold increased compared to 20 yrs ago.

      Coal and Dal

  5. Coal is dead you say?

    COAL STILL TOP THREAT TO GLOBAL CLIMATE GOALS

    “The number of coal-fired power plants in the pipeline worldwide declined in 2021, but the fossil fuel most responsible for global warming still generated record CO2 emissions… The worldwide operational fleet of coal-fired power grew in 2021 by 18 GW, and as of December an additional 176 GW of coal capacity was under construction — about the same as the year before.”

    https://phys.org/news/2022-04-coal-threat-global-climate-goals.html

    1. Meanwhile, here at home.

      US 2021 COAL PRODUCTION ESTIMATES TO RISE 14.5% ON YEAR

      The EIA said “the increase in production reflects greater electric power sector demand for coal. Higher natural gas prices make coal more economically competitive relative to natural gas for electricity generation dispatch.” Total consumption, including by petcoke plants and retail, is estimated at 569 million st in 2021 and 536.8 million st in 2022, up from 477.3 million st in 2020. Coal is expected to have the second-largest generation share in 2021 by making up 23.6% of US power generation and 21.8% in 2022, compared with 19.9% generated from coal in 2020.

      https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/coal/070721-us-2021-coal-production-estimates-to-rise-145-on-year-eia

      1. Yep, coal is bouncing back a bit, with high NG prices.

        But…it’s a dead cat bounce. It peaked in 1988 at 58% of electrical generation, and the long term trend is continuing decline.

      2. Hi Doug,
        I fear you are right about coal, and the climate as well.
        But I continue to hope and believe that while a HARD overshoot crash is built in, it’s far more likely to be piecemeal, in time and place, than sudden and world wide.

        There’s just about zero hope, barring extraordinary good luck and leadership , in my estimation, for the large majority of the people in countries such as India and Egypt.

        But countries such as the USA and Canada can hopefully weather the crash while maintaining at least the abc’s of a modern industrial life style. We may have to go to micro mini short range electric cars, eat chicken only on Sunday, etc, but we can live over that.

        Once the shit is really in the fan, the people who seem to think a GLOBALIZED economy is ESSENTIAL will come to understand that they are wrong.

        Leviathan’s, nation states, as big and rich and powerful as the USA, Canada, etc, can supply themselves with virtually everything that’s ESSENTIAL.
        The small number of things that we can’t produce domestically, such as a few particular minerals, we can continue to buy from other countries.

        If it’s absolutely necessary, we could support the local people to any extent necessary to enable them to keep on producing, so that they can supply us, and get some things they can’t produce themselves, from us. That support could extend to troops on the ground….. and to trading food and medical supplies for the minerals, etc.

        ( There is one HELL of a difference between occupying a country to control it politically, or to engage in nation building, etc, and simply killing anybody who gets in the way in a limited area, a mining complex and the road to the nearest seaport. We have never made a habit of that but if our own survival were on the line, we could, easily. Beyond that, the locals would almost dead sure be damned glad to see us so long as we’re passing out food, clothing, etc, from the trucks going TO the mines. )

        In the end, there’s pretty much ZERO real reason why we should HAVE to buy computer chips, etc, from any country other than our ALLIES. We can build the factories, and the machines needed in them, if we once make up our minds we must.

    2. Here’s the source of the report that your source is describing.

      https://globalenergymonitor.org/

      It looks like a useful resource, but it appears to have one big omission: it doesn’t track the actual amount of coal burned, or the actual CO2 emissions. Coal plant utilization has crashed in recent years. World coal combustion peaked in 2014, and despite a small resurgence in 2021 that trend seems to be continuing.

      1. Nonsense. Number of new plants planned fell last year, but coal-generated electricity rose by 9% to record high.

        1. Do you have a source for that?

          I’ve seen an estimate from IEA for power from coal (not actual coal consumption). The IEA is pretty bad at projections…

          1. Among many others, Wood Mackenzie’s Asia-Pacific head of coal Rory Simington said global demand for coal would grow until 2026, driven by new coal-fired power stations coming online in China and SE Asia. “I see a conflict between short-and-medium term demand for coal, which is still increasing, and the longer-term decline we expect,” Mr Simington said. “China has said it won’t finance any overseas coal plants, but they’re financing quite a lot in China and coal production and consumption there is on a bit of a tear.”

            1. That’s odd. He says “I see a conflict between short-and-medium term demand for coal, which is still increasing, and the longer-term decline we expect,”.

              Please note that he says demand for coal is still increasing. Which implies that he thinks that it has been increasing in the recent past. And yet…according to BP’s data it’s been declining since 2014. Maybe it went up significantly in 2021. It would make sense, with an unexpected economic recovery, and underutilized coal providing a swing resource. And yet, we don’t have actual data that says so.

              Instead we have projections, which from the IEA have been remarkably unreliable when it comes to the transition away from FF. “Many” people seem to be relying on the IEA…

              Show me the data!

            2. Nick,

              See

              https://ember-climate.org/insights/research/global-electricity-review-2022/

              The data from this source says power generation from coal increased in 2021 to a new peak.

              Data at link below

              https://ember-climate.org/insights/research/global-electricity-review-2022/#supporting-material-downloads

              Chart for coal power electricity generation in TWh for World.

              As Doug said the increase in 2021 was 9% above the 2020 level and 2.1% above the previous peak in 2018.

            3. It should be no surprise to anyone that coal utilization will continue to rise in a scenario where oil and gas supplies are constrained (geologic or human factors),
              since deployment of energy replacements from alternatives such as nuclear, solar, wind, hydro
              are not keeping pace with energy demand.
              It takes long time and money and intention to get the replacement job done at scale.
              People/countries will depend on coal when experiencing any energy shortfall, regardless of climate concerns.
              Peak Global Combustion (all sources) is not visible on the near horizon.

            4. Dennis,

              That data differs sharply from that used by BP and the IEA. BP says that coal peaked in 2014: here’s their data, below. Even IEA’s projection is for a new peak in 2022, not in 2021.

              Any idea where Ember gets their data?

              Here’s BP:
              2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
              Production 150.84 161.85 163.71 166.66 166.07 161.85 153.33 157.2 165.17 167.86 159.61
              Consumption 151.21 158.47 159.08 161.97 162.5 158.64 156.61 157.4 159.26 157.64 151.42

            5. Nick,

              I do not know the source of their data, but note that BP data is through 2020 only. The chart is TWh of electricity produced with coal rather than the quantity of coal burned. I would agree the amount of coal burned is the more important factor as that is the source of the emissions.

            6. Dennis,

              I suppose it makes some sense to report energy produced from coal, as tonnage could also be misleading because different grades of coal have different levels of energy. Energy might correlate reasonably well with CO2 produced.

              BP does say that they adjust for thermal efficiency, which would be important for places like Germany and China which have aggressively shut down older less efficient plants. So, maybe their data is ok…

  6. Why the West is turning against Mohammed bin Salman

    “Elizabeth Shackelford, an ex-diplomat and think tank fellow, makes the case for abandoning the crown prince to face an uncertain future. She reminded American policymakers of Saudi Arabia’s dark past, invoking the usual US grievances. From religious radicalism to discrimination against women, the author abandoned all diplomacy and encouraged her country to shun MBS.”

    https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/saudi-arabia-mohammed-bin-salman-west-turning-against

      1. HICKORY —

        Another good piece on Mohammed bin Salman by Graeme Wood in the April 2022 issue of The Atlantic.

  7. Richer countries that are dependent on food and energy imports actually have a fairly good shot at freeing themselves from both these liabilities in some cases.

    Doing so will be painful as hell, but the technology is there, assuming the people are willing to pay for implementing it.
    And the question is going to be phrased this way.

    It’s not a question of can we afford it, but can we afford to be without it?

    Consider what’s happening in the Netherlands for instance, and in Israel.

    Here’s one example of a way farm land can still be just about as productive as ever, while still using it to generate solar electricity. Labor costs go up of course, but not very much, and the land between the rows of solar panels in this field could still be used to produce vegetables using smaller equipment such as my family used up until we retired. The wholesale cost of such veggies wouldn’t likely be more than twenty percent, max, higher than producing them using bigger equipment, and the wholesale or farm gate price of veggies is typically no more than one third the retail price at the supermarket.

    https://www.pv-magazine.com/2022/04/26/japans-first-vertical-agrivoltaic-project/

    Search greenhouse production Netherlands. It’s a mind blower. I didn’t really expect to see this being cost competitive anytime soon other than for specialty ( and basically useless ) crops such as flowers and a few herbs because open land is still so cheap, and the capital costs of building and equipping the greenhouses is so high.

    But it works when land is scare enough, and there’s money enough, and skilled people to make it happen.

    Search greenhouse food production and Netherlands and you will get a LOT of hits.

    Times have passed me by, lol.

    1. Deployment of solar on prime farmland is not my favorite idea,
      however the Japan example is a good one- solar doesn’t have to be deployed wall to wall.
      ‘Wall to wall’ solar installation on roof tops makes sense,
      but on farmland or grazing land very wide spacing is feasible and could be designed to minimize disruption of crop or livestock yields.
      Lots of creative innovation is going to be coming in this field, literally.

      Consider a state like Iowa which has about 25 million acres of high grade cropland, with roughly 10 million of those acres devoted to corn for ethanol production. If solar PV was deployed in wide spacing on just 1% of that land the net energy output from the land would equate to right about three times as much energy as from the corn ethanol alone. This 1% coverage is only 26 panels/acre.

      1. The efficiency of mounting solar panels vertically is really bad. Ratings for solar cells normally are stated with the sunlight perpendicular to the cell surface. Normally the optimum angle for a fixed system (non-tracking) is the latitude of the installation. Some of the loss would, in the real world, be mitigated by the fact that the cells wouldn’t need much cleaning but overall it’s a really inefficient way to use cells. Conceivably in a location with very good insolation it would be more cost effective to raise the cells into the air and use them to shade the cows, or goats or pigs-whatever.

        1. Certainly true JJHM, and the information I provided about energy production with the Iowa example assumed optimal tilt installation.

    2. I didn’t really expect to see this being cost competitive anytime soon other than for specialty (and basically useless ) crops such as flowers…

      Yeah, I was surprised to see that Dutch greenhouses can grow potatoes at a competitive price.

    3. Dutch agriculture is extremely competitive for vegetables as well. It saves land, but also water, fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides. It’s a wet country, but they say they use a tenth as much water to grow tomatoes as the do in California. That is another reason why charging more for water in the American West is a good idea. It is also a labor saver, because harvesting happens indoors. The use parasitic wasps instead of pesticides, and pump in carbon dioxide bought from local power plants. Because they have no wind and carefully control water and light, the plants amazingly productive.

      1. >Netherlands is world number two in agricultural exports by using greenhouses and new technology

        Each acre in the greenhouse yields as much lettuce as 10 outdoor acres and cuts the need for chemicals by 97 percent.

        The Netherlands is a small, densely populated country, with more than 1,300 inhabitants per square mile. It’s bereft of almost every resource long thought to be necessary for large-scale agriculture. Yet it’s the globe’s number two exporter of food as measured by value, second only to the United States, which has 270 times its landmass…

        …These climate-controlled farms enable a country located a scant thousand miles from the Arctic Circle to be a global leader in exports of a fair-weather fruit: the tomato. The Dutch are also the world’s top exporter of potatoes and onions and the second largest exporter of vegetables overall in terms of value. More than a third of all global trade in vegetable seeds originates in the Netherlands…

        …With demand for chicken increasing, Dutch firms are developing technology to maximize poultry production while ensuring humane conditions. This high-tech broiler house holds up to 150,000 birds, from hatching to harvesting.

        The soaring cost of grain to feed animals? “Feed them grasshoppers instead,” he says. One hectare of land yields one metric ton of soy protein, a common livestock feed, a year. The same amount of land can produce 150 tons of insect protein.
        The conversation rushes on to the use of LED lighting to permit 24- hour cultivation in precisely climate-controlled greenhouses. It then detours to a misconception that sustainable agriculture means minimal human intervention in nature.

        https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/09/netherlands-is-world-number-two-in-agricultural-exports-by-using-greenhouses-and-new-technology.html
        –
        Holland now grows 35% of it’s vegetables in greenhouses and are second only to the US in food exports.
        Here is a nice report on what they are doing…
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J9f59usLfI&t=213s
        The report also shows mushrooms growing at a vertical farm that produces 1% of US mushrooms.

  9. Ford Reveals Another Electric Truck In The Works; CEO Says Gearing To Disrupt Tesla’s EV Dominance

    6:36 am ET April 27, 2022 (Benzinga) Print

    Ford Motor Co (NYSE: F) CEO Jim Farley said on Tuesday the legacy automaker aims to challenge Tesla Inc (NASDAQ: TSLA) as it looks to boost its lineup of electric-vehicle offerings.

    What Happened: Ford is on track to deliver over 2 million electric vehicles a year by 2026 and is working on another electric pickup, Farley said at the product launch event for the electric F-150 Lightning pickup being held at the Rouge Electric Vehicle Center at its Dearborn, Michigan plant.

    “We’re already pushing dirt down in Blue Oval City in Tennessee for another electric pickup truck that’s different from this one,” Farley said.

    “We have every intention of being the number one electric pickup maker and then with the huge investments of $50 billion in EVs, battery manufacturing, and our expanded lineup —which you have not seen yet— we plan to challenge Tesla to become the top EV maker in the world.”

    Ford had last year said it is expecting to produce 600,000 electric vehicles a year by the end of 2023, twice its original plan.

    In comparison, Tesla delivered nearly a million cars in 2021.

    The automaker on Tuesday began commercial production for the Lightning trucks. F-150 Lightning is Ford’s first big move towards electrification after it launched the Mustang Mach-E in December 2020.

  12. Is the EU past expiry date ? The very premise ( never ending prosperity ) has hit the wall .
    https://medium.com/future-vision/the-european-union-was-a-construct-of-infinite-prosperity-7a401c225171
    And I quote:

    Turning and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity
    The article is by Norman Pagett , author of ” The end of more ” .

    1. International economic cooperation,meaning for the most part international trade, is without a doubt one of the best things ever……… until the day comes when you find out you’re not trading with your friends.

      https://finance.yahoo.com/news/half-built-solar-project-shows-154525439.html

      It’s sure as hell nice to get solar panels at a fraction of the true cost of making them, if they truly are being dumped at a loss.

      But if we accept the premise that China has been and is dumping solar panels ( and lots of other goods, so far as that goes) then we have to wonder WHY.

      And the obvious WHY must be that China is deliberately trying to cripple or actually destroy such industries in other countries……. leaving China in control of the world markets in these industries.
      Once a given country has enough capacity to dominate such an industry, it can get to the point that any other country simply cannot compete……. because dumping can force smaller newer players OUT.

      Remember what Rockefeller said while he was running a small companies out of the oil business, while building his own into a more or less defacto monopoly.

      Paraphased, make them SWEAT until they go broke. Then we pick up their assets for a few cents on the dollar.

      I’m as green, and as liberal, as most people with a few working brain cells. One thing that scares the crap out of me is that most liberals just don’t seem to get it, until their nose is rubbed in it. We’re aggressive animals. Some of us will always want to take control, no matter the cost.

      The way I see it is that anyone who is not SCARED by any particular country, and a really powerful potential enemy, having so near total control of such a critical industry is either asleep or naive as hell.

      We’re damned if we do, and we’re damned if we don’t.

      We can’t afford to continue to pay for the expansion of China’s industrial base, at the expense of our own and that of our allies, not if we expect to remain prosperous and free, long term.

      A lot of us seem to believe it’s not only ok but SMART to make a ton of money by outsourcing this, that, and damned near everything else.

      No…… there comes a day when such people eventually discover that the people they thought they owned, OWN THEM.

      And we can’t afford to slow down the growth of our our domestic renewable energy industry.

      Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.

      1. OFM:
        The sad truth is that only the smallest fraction of folks who call themselves patriots or those who call themselves “green” will chose to buy something that is 10% more expensive than a similar item even if the latter is made by the devil himself. One of the worst aspects of the US promotion of, and aggressive involvement in, open markets is the failure to take into account the actual cost to industry of health and safety legislation in the US. That single failure may have doomed many promising industries in this country.

        1. Hi JJHam,
          You’re right of course.
          The people of this country, taken as a whole, are incapable of thinking ahead.

        2. JJHMAN —
          I’m surprised to hear the claim that nobody is willing to pay more depending on the source, considering how popular expensive organic groceries are. Here in Germany organic vegetables can cost twice as much as regular vegetables, but they are quite popular.

          It’s also worth noting that about 5-10% of most rich country populations are vegetarians and ecological considerations are a common motivation.

          1. That doesn’t say much for the Germans, as “organic” farming is basically a scam.

            http://skepdic.com/organic.html

            and

            https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/11/15/the-great-organic-food-fraud

            There are numberless ways industrial agriculture could either reform itself or just go away in favor of smaller, local operations, but following organic ideology is not one of them. Their savaging of the science of recombinant DNA techniques is enough reason to toss them into the waste bin of history.

            1. Indeed!
              If it’s not from a family farm, it’s not organic.
              That goes for seeds as well.
              Getting certified ‘organic’ takes time and money and doesn’t check for things like earthworms, bees, and butterflies.

          2. In everyday conversation, saying nobody wants something or will do something is pretty much the same thing as saying only ten percent want that something or will do it.

            Nuance, the accompanying wave of the hand, is lost in written communications.

  13. OFM , give someone enough rope to hang himself or herself
    in British English
    to allow someone to accomplish his or her own downfall by his or her own foolish acts . ( Oxford Dictionary )
    The Chinese board and street game is called Mah Jong , what is the board game in the USA ? None . It is all video games and virtual games . Virtual is what it is , virtual . So when reality hits how well prepared are you ?

    1. If you mean the rhetorical you, we’re really close to being Fxxxxd, but there’s still a slim chance we will wake up and get our collective act together.

      And we might succeed in doing so, even after we suffer some really serious problems such as seeing some major industries shut down.

      I’m personally about as well prepared as an old fart with very little money can be.
      Considering all the things that might go wrong, and probably will go wrong, and maybe sooner rather than later, the one nice bright spot in being old is that I probably won’t live to see the worst.

      1. Your last paragraph is a perfect encapsulation of our situation right now: We do all we can here in Maine to be as self-sufficient as possible (which is not really possible), growing food, staying at home, being aware of the big picture. But my husband is completely reliant on what another commenter here called “opulent tertiary medicine.” And I’m not that far behind. All our efforts are for NOUGHT.

        1. We’re all worm food, in the end.
          My father is approaching the century mark, and taking care of him is pretty much a full time around the clock job now.

          When you’re looking at the end, it’s easy to see why so many people WANT to believe in eternal life, lol.
          I wish I could offer more than a word of understanding.

          1. Hope I didn’t make it sound like he’s near death’s door! He’s out cutting firewood at the moment, lol.

  14. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/27/russia-doubles-fossil-fuel-revenues-since-invasion-of-ukraine-began

    Importing critical resources from potential enemies is pretty much the same thing as allowing a potential enemy to hold a gun to your head.

    LOTS of people seem to believe that since China has historically been a peaceful country, in terms of adventures outside her borders, she’s peaceful by nature.

    Nothing could be farther from the truth.

    China has historically been peaceful in terms of waging war on other countries for a very simple reason…….. the inability to to so, up until the country began to industrialize, which came about roughly during and after WWII.

  16. It would be great if anybody who is seriously into the production side, and knows the details, would take the time to explain just what is going on at the federal level in terms of speeding up or slowing down the production of crude for the last couple of years.

    1. This is my first encounter with the clouds “tipping point” theory, and that’s watching Paul Beckwith quite often.

      Adding in the methane+CO2 combo towards that 1,200ppm number, considering how close that we are to that threshold, I would say that should trigger the maximum amount of alarms and lead to extremely aggressive countermeasures.

      1. As long as those “extremely aggressive countermeasures” don’t involve higher taxes or increase the amount of government interference and overreach in the lives of ordinary citizens.

        1. No, there’s no need for higher taxes: steeply higher fuel and utility taxes on fossil fuels could be rebated back to taxpayers.

          Also efficiency measure like CAFE and appliance and housing standards already exist: making them more stringent would just save consumers money.

        2. One great way to save energy in America would be to make it legal to build apartment buildings in cities. Most American cities have byzantine laws restricting construction of apartment building to <10% of their land area. This forces people to live spread out, making it hard to get anything done without wasting a lot of fuel.

          In a freer real estate market cities would be much denser, as seen in Europe and Asia.

      2. “and lead to extremely aggressive countermeasures.”

        Are you referring to geoengineering?

        1. That would certainly be closer to an adequate response vs. OMG HIGHER TAXES!! or MORE APARTMENT BUILDINGS!! I mean, humanity is clearly doomed considering how dominant the opinions expressed by H. Diamond and Alim are. But I would be talking about a species-wide response where economic activity is retooled towards the goal of reducing carbon emissions and away from profit.

  18. This short, civil debate over the issue of coal mining in Great Britain beautifully encapsulates the tragedy of the human situation right now.

    This is what happens when you do nothing for forty years. You end up stuck, continuing down the cul-de-sac until the very terminus.

    In the broad view, we are no different than other organisms–including yeast.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-jGYcIRoW0

  19. The new world, India style-
    “A record-breaking “heat dome” across northwest India has worsened a severe shortage of coal for power generation and raised the risk of blackouts at hospitals in New Delhi, according to government statements…
    The high temperatures, which began in March, have driven up power demand from air conditioning units, worsening a critical shortage of the coal that is used to generate power for New Delhi and other nearby cities….
    March was the hottest March in more than a century in northwest India, and April is poised to set records too…
    India has boosted the output of coal and cancelled 753 passenger trains to free up rail track to move it, officials said on Friday, as the government scrambles to overcome its worst power crisis in years…India has urged its states to step up coal imports for the next three years to build up inventories and satisfy demand…

    1. I assume some folks here have read “The Ministry for the Future”? We’re getting closer to that scenario every year.

    1. Russian troops in the occupied city of Melitopol have stolen all the equipment from a farm equipment dealership — and shipped it to Chechnya, according to a Ukrainian businessman in the area.

      But after a journey of more than 700 miles, the thieves were unable to use any of the equipment — because it had been locked remotely.

      Over the past few weeks there’s been a growing number of reports of Russian troops stealing farm equipment, grain and even building materials – beyond widespread looting of residences. But the removal of valuable agricultural equipment from a John Deere dealership in Melitopol speaks to an increasingly organized operation, one that even uses Russian military transport as part of the heist.

      CNN has learned that the equipment was removed from an Agrotek dealership in Melitopol, which has been occupied by Russian forces since early March. Altogether it’s valued at nearly $5 million. The combine harvesters alone are worth $300,000 each.

  22. California runs on 100 per cent renewables, briefly, for first time ever

    Less than two weeks after notching up a record 97.6% of instantaneous renewables on its grid, California has passed a major new milestone, with 100% of the state’s electricity supplied by renewable sources for a short period over the weekend.

    According to the California Independent System Operator, the milestone was achieved within a 15 minute period between 2.45pm and 3pm on Saturday April 30, California time, marking the first time ever the massive state has been powered entirely by renewables.

    Such levels have become common in smaller grids such as South Australia, but the milestone in California – one of the world’s biggest economies and biggest grids – is hugely significant.

    1. Its a good trend, and there is no coal in the mix.

      One little item that isnt highlighted too often is
      just how much of total energy consumption is supplied by various sources, rather than just electricity.

      In Calif that last year of full data [2019]
      78% of annual energy consumption- in trillion BTU’s- is fossil fuel.
      28% of total energy consumption was non fossil,
      with wind and solar providing 8% of total energy.
      Its a nice start.

      1. Friendly reminder for those just tuning in: ~60% of fossil fuel energy consumption performs no useful work but is unutilized heat, and is termed ‘rejected energy’.

        Replacing fossil energy with renewable energy is not a 1 to 1 replacement.

      2. Hickory,

        That is one of my itches trying make comments about this. Most fossil fuels (hopefully cheap enough) generate heat, that is very useful in a lot of circumstances. But not if you do not got efficiencies regarding motion (transportation) or heat (heat pumps). The low hanging fruits are electrical transportation and heat pumps. How much of consumption can it relieve? A lot. So, if I am to give some (relatively) neutral input; I would say that an electric car would give 2.5 times the energy efficiency in optimal conditions (given that electricity can be directed mostly towards motion). A lot less in certain circumstances. Even in the cold north in the winter – it is proven that the efficiency will be like 1.8-2.2 given a heat pump in the car. The second low hanging fruit is heat pumps. I do not know too much about how much efficiency is compared to an electric heater compared air to air heat pumps, or the more costly and longer lasting ground based heat pumps (any comments in this forum pro/contra would be helpful in this regard).

        But, as you hint in your post; getting rid of the most difficult part of fossil consumption is going to painful. It is going to happen, but not be to painful until we reach a certain threshold (50%…60%…70%..; who knows?) We certainly have not seen anything yet in that regards. It should be possible to bring global consumption down quite a bit. I doubt the years prior to 2030 would be the worst.
        (Thanks for your your post btw – I always enjoy them).

        1. Agree.
          Electric transport, heat pumps, building insulation
          are the places to start.
          It will take 100% effort to get part way there.

  23. I ranted up above about the risks of globalization, and short term thinking about making a lot of money by exporting basic industries.

    In the early days of this practice, you think you own the people who are making your stuff for you……… and you do, as a practical matter. You still own the merchandising operations, the warehousing, you control the brand names and the advertising……..

    But in the end, the people who own the manufacturing industries own YOU, because the factories are inside their borders, and the people who know how to run them, from janitors to R and D engineers, are there too. The skilled workers of all sorts are there.

    And pretty soon, these new owners start using their own brand names, and putting their merchandise in big box stores, and advertising the crap out of their brand names, and then……. your remaining local industries are starved for skilled workers, and for the infrastructure that supports a manufacturing industry.

    The small city next door to me used to have three flourishing industrial supply stores…. and you could get damned near anything you might want locally the same day, and just about everything else, if it could be had in a major city, the next day.

    All three closed when we outsourced the local textile and furniture industries for the most part.

    Automobiles may well be the next industry that can’t compete against imports here in the USA.

    https://www.autoevolution.com/news/china-thanks-tesla-the-asians-will-take-it-from-here-187774.html

    1. And yet people almost always will purchase a less expensive version of a product,
      whether it is potatoes from across the river, copper from over the mountain, or a computer from across the sea.

  24. >Netherlands is world number two in agricultural exports by using greenhouses and new technology

    I subscribe to the theses that greenhouses can be used to increase productivity in a substantial way. Given enough energy. In Norway, there is a discussion when it comes to this theme. Right now, in this agriculture unfriendly country, we are self sufficient of products like onion, cucumber, halfway tomatoes, most herbs and even potatoes/turnips potentially ; the last mentioned was the nr.1 life saver in the northern hemispheres historically.

    The electricity price in southern Norway is now +100-150% compared to a year ago. That impacts the greenhouse growers. In addition they need natural gas to some extent to generate enough CO2 for the plants to grow. Efforts has been made to electrify as much as possible. The dilemma is who has the economy of scale to deliver the above mentioned vegetables cost effective. UK, Netherlands, Denmark are more climate friendly (milder and more agricultural friendly). But Norway provide the natural gas through exports and net export electricity through cables for the foreseeable future.

    But the main point stand. You could utilise energy, in principle making renewable electricity a major share of it, and some natural gas in order to generate CO2, and the right soil, in order to dramatically improve productivity rather drastically for certain health promoting agricultural products.

    1. Its a very good point.
      Greenhouse production of food is energy expensive.
      Netherlands (as of 2018) gets 90% of its energy from fossil fuel
      [natural gas (42%), oil (37%), coal (11%)]

      “Indeed, greenhouses are a very energy extensive sector in the Netherlands and take up almost 80% of all energy that is used for agriculture. Greenhouses still use mainly fossil fuels for lighting, heating, and fertilizers. ”

      If you dream of a world of unlimited energy after fossil fuels, and a world of artificial environments and food production, and people with videos that show a past when they could walk out amongst the natural world, then the greenhouse world may be right up your alley.

      note- I think the greenhouse sector of agriculture is great, on limited scale. Good way to start tomatoes that you then transplant out when it gets warm enough, and applications like that. Quaint notion, I know.

      1. Times change.
        It’s true that it takes enormous amounts of electricity to run greenhouses, especially so in a country with long cold nights, during the winter months.

        But a substantial portion of this energy cost is offset by savings in transportation costs of the foods produced, and by reduced losses to insects, storms, drought, etc.

        It’s possible, maybe even likely, that a couple of decades down the road large scale greenhouse production will be competitive at scale for some staple crops, such as potatoes or maybe even apples grown on dwarf trees strung on trellises. It’s hard to say just how far geneticists can go with shortening up the growing cycle, especially if they can do some genetic engineering.

        Electricity is potentially going to be dirt cheap, off peak, as we overbuild wind and solar so as to have enough power on days the weather doesn’t cooperate.

        I’m thinking it’s going to be possible, and practical, to grow crops using this otherwise surplus electricity anytime it’s available, and cut back to a bare minimum holding pattern when it’s not.

        Crops can be bred to be drought resistant, heat resistant, disease resistant, etc. I don’t see any real reason why potatoes can’t be bred to tolerate low light conditions a substantial portion of the time, and grow like wildfire when the lights are bright.

        And let us not forget that it’s not only energy that’s in short supply.

        We are fast using up Mother Nature’s one time gifts such as high grade phosphate deposits, the sort that are easily mined and conveniently located…… so as to avoid the necessity of importing phosphates from enemies real or imagined.

        For now it’s just not economically and politically possible to recycle human wastes at an affordable cost in either economic terms or political terms.

        The sewage is in one place and the farms are typically far away, and concentrating the nutrients in sewage so as to transport them to farms is too expensive.

        BUT if the local sewage treatment plant could simply pipe water that needs cleaning of nitrogen, phosphorus , potassium and the lesser nutrients to greenhouses…… well you get a two for one.

        Almost everybody in a modern country is now accustomed to the the knowledge that the water coming out of the tap is recycled water…. maybe half of it being sewage water a few weeks or days previously.

        Overcoming the reluctance to eat food grown using sewage sourced nutrients won’t be all that big a problem. There are people fighting a rear guard action to prevent it, but they’re pretty much in the same position as people fighting to stop the transition to electric cars and renewable electricity……… a losing position.

        It will be possible in some cases to heat greenhouses with otherwise wasted heat from various industrial processes.

        The potential savings, other than in terms of energy for lights, and materials needed to construct greenhouses are simply enormous. And greenhouses, once built, last a VERY long time…. indefinitely with some maintenance work if they’re built mostly out of glass and composites such as fiberglass, or aluminum, or even galvanized steel.

        A substantial portion of the water can be recycled, nutrients lost to runoff can be reduced by ninety nine percent, and the need for pesticides per unit of production can be slashed by anywhere from fifty to ninety five percent.

        Yields per acre on an annual basis can be anywhere from double to quadruple, sometimes even eight to ten times higher.

        But greenhouses don’t yet pencil out for staple foods, except in rare cases.

Comments are closed.