Open Thread Non-Petroleum, February 22, 2019

180 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum, February 22, 2019”

1. https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-reaches-breakthrough-compromise-to-approve-lng-export-facility/548992/
   Energy Dominance Baby – Positive for US Solar – NG Price is the Master Factor in PV Distributed Energy deployment. – It’s hard to make the case for PV Systems when NG is basically a waste stream.

   1. It’s hard to make the case for PV Systems when NG is basically a waste stream.

      A rather ironic choice of words! I of course think that is backwards thinking but I’m of the opinion that we shouldn’t dump wastes in our atmosphere… go figure!

   2. “It’s hard to make the case for PV Systems when NG is basically a waste stream”
      Easy as pi.
      Depends on if you want a somewhat livable planet or a mostly dead one. There is the case, now the jury can deliberate.

      1. Here on POB, most get that at current burn rates NG is but an unsustainable bridge fuel and Central Gen is malice. The media has been effective in pushing the 100 years of Natural Gas Supply Story. In the Sunshine State, everywhere you look, you see Nat Gas distribution for the last mile being tunneled. So the masses just know as a fact that PV is unnecessary and UGLY to boot. That just the way it is … and it will take a crisis for attitudes to change.

         1. It’s fine for Nick, and others, to babble on about how we can easily power the world with (rooftop) solar units but well they do this total world oil consumption continues to increase: average almost certain to exceed 100 million barrels per day in 2019. Meanwhile, world LNG trade is expected to more than double, from about 12 Tcf in 2012 to 29 Tcf in 2040. Liquefaction capacity is occurring mainly in Australia and North America, where a multitude of new projects are planned or under construction. Can’t blame Russians or Arabs. Sorry Greta.

            1. FEDERAL REGULATORS PLAN SPEEDIER REVIEW OF ALASKA GAS PROJECT

               Environmental studies of plans for a natural gas pipeline running south from Alaska’s Arctic, a project that has been proposed for decades, will require a little less time than earlier estimated, federal officials said on Thursday. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in Federal Register notice to be published Friday, said it has revised its schedule for completion of an environmental impact statement for the gas project. The final EIS is expected to be completed by Nov. 8, 2019, a bit earlier than the Dec. 1, 2019 date in FERC’s previous schedule, the notice says.

            2. Exercise and careful eating is good for you, and yet many people don’t exercise or eat well.

               Do you heap scorn on people who try to encourage good habits, because they haven’t yet succeeded with everyone?

      2. Easy as pi

         Well, one could quibble about the easy part 😉

         https://arachnoid.com/lutusp/pi.html

         The Mathematics of Pi

         1. Fred, you used to be an educator, still are, I guess. Who else is there to herd all the nincompoops posting on this Blog and keep us from falling into some intellectual vacuum or other?

            I have a question for you, from my Grandson. In the US are High School students required to learn foreign languages and if so which one(s). I told him you probably must learn a minimum of Spanish since there are so many Hispanics in the US, just like we normally learn French. I think my Daughter asked him what languages he was planning on learning before university.

            1. I have a question for you, from my Grandson. In the US are High School students required to learn foreign languages and if so which one(s)

               I actually had to look that up! I wish I hadn’t…

               Only 20% of US kids study a language in school – compared to 92% in Europe

               Ten states and the District of Columbia have foreign language graduation requirements for high school students, 24 states have graduation requirements that can be met either with foreign language classes or other non-language coursework, and 16 states have no graduation guidelines concerning foreign language education.

               The languages that are generally offered are Spanish, German, French, or Mandarin.

               Sad!

               1. Thanks. I’ll tell him you didn’t know which WAS true, 😉 and suggest he learn Spanish and French; Spanish because it’s such a widely spoken language and French because all the rest of us speak it and we can have a couple of French only days every week.

               2. Full disclosure: I went to an American high school and I cheated. I took Spanish but given that I already spoke fluent Portuguese I didn’t have to put in a whole lot of effort 😉

                  BTW, if you already have one romance language under your belt the others are not all that hard to master.

                  I also took Latin but never really considered it part of language instruction. Though it certainly came in handy later!

                  Cheers!

               3. Mandarin…

               4. Hmmm, Mandarin and Spanish, the two most spoken languages, a good mix. Spanish + French can be confusing and French is not very widely used. The following article may be of use and supports divergent languages.

                  http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20190219-how-to-learn-a-language-in-an-hour-a-day

                  NAOM

               5. But Spanish is more widespread—-
                  However, English is the universal language.

               6. @Hightrecker
                  Well, as the original question indicated a USA schooling I presume English is the primary language and am referring to the new languages to be learned but as languages spoken
                  #1 Mandarin
                  #2 Spanish
                  …
                  Big gap
                  …
                  #3 English
                  …
                  Big gap
                  …
                  The rest

                  NAOM

               7. I have heard that the most common language is badly spoken english….

            2. DougL,

               (Dewey-eyed view into the past:)

               My high school, back when we did our homework by pressing symbols into clay tablets, you may recall, offered French, Spanish, German, and Latin. I don’t remember if there was a language requirement for graduation but there was for anyone on the college-prep track.

               I took four years of Latin, of course, and it has been of inestimable benefit to me over the decades.

               1. Synapsid —

                  Yeah, I did the Latin as well, it was pretty much requited for the “science elective” crowd. But, unless you were going to become a priest no one that I met ever tried speaking it so in my book, Latin doesn’t count. Mind you, I did study scientific Russian at uni and couldn’t speak it either (though, unlike Latin, it did do my career a lot of good).

                  God, it all seems so long ago!

               2. I graduated from a California high school in 1961. In those days there was a “college prep” path that required 2 years of foreign language. I took Spanish, still can say a few words in a pinch. My daughters graduated in 2000 (twins). Both took French but I doubt they retained a word of it.

                  In about 2010 one of my daughters found out she could get a pay raise by learning enough Spanish to pass a simple test. She took a night school class and won her raise in less than 3 months. Did the French help? I dunno.

                  Years ago I had an Israeli friend who told me that if you spoke 3 languages you were trilingual. If you spoke two languages you were bilingual and if you spoke only one, well, you were an American.

               3. Years ago I had an Israeli friend who told me that if you spoke 3 languages you were trilingual. If you spoke two languages you were bilingual and if you spoke only one, well, you were an American.

                  LOL!
                  The way I heard it, if you speak more than three you are a polyglot and if you speak only one you are a gringo!
                  😉

               4. DougL,

                  Yes, it was taught as a book language. Handy for later work with other Romance languages, though, and even Germanic ones.

                  Oddly in a way it was during my first year in grad school that I reconnected with a kid-hood interest in (I kid you not) Quaternary palynology particularly as applied to learning about glacial floras at high northern latitudes–the technique was developed first in Sweden and then developed further in Denmark. The geology department at the school turned out to be poor at the time and I wandered across the green to the biology building to sit in on an ecology course being taught by, as it happened, the palynologist who had brought that very field of research from Denmark to the US, and all else followed.

                  The reason I mention it is that almost all the research at the time on what they called tundra steppe (steppe tundra hereabout or, as I prefer, Dale Guthrie’s coinage: Mammoth steppe) had been done by Soviet botanists and all their literature was in Russian. As it happened, there were two Quaternary palynologists in North America who could read the Soviet literature, and thanks to the US Navy having decided that I could best serve my country by becoming a Russian linguist, I was one of them. The other, Dave Matthews, was at the Canadian Geological Survey. I’ve had a wonderful time with the Mammoth steppe and its inhabitants ever since the 1970s.

               5. +10

               6. Some kids these days don’t even seem to know Body language.

               7. Interesting, if true.

                  I’m 75 years old and on the high end of the autistic spectrum and I still don’t understand body language.

         2. “Biblical references (such as they are) usually assign Pi the value of 3.”

            That may explain why certain lawmakers wished to define pi as 3.

            NAOM

         3. Fred, maybe you didn’t get the humor. To deal with an irrational statement one can use an irrational number.

2. Fred, this article will warm your heart,

   GREAT BARRIER REEF: ONE MILLION TONNES OF SLUDGE TO BE DUMPED

   “Australia plans to dump one million tonnes of sludge in the Great Barrier Reef. Despite strict laws on dumping waste, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) gave the go-ahead. A loophole was found – the laws don’t apply to materials generated from port maintenance work. It comes one week after flood water from Queensland spread into the reef, which scientists say will “smother” the coral…”

   https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-47330830

   1. My brother had a dive gig there—
      He sold it, and back to Guam.
      Seems like a good move—-

   2. Hey, we’ve been killing coral reefs in South Florida with sand from beach replenishment projects for years. Not to mention what happened when they dredged the port of Miami a couple years ago!
      You know, it’s really hard to kill off coral reefs with only ocean warming, ocean acidification, agricultural and industrial runoff, etc… You really need a good dose of sand and sludge on top of everything else to finish them off once and for all! I’m surprised it took the Aussies this long to figure that out.

      But thanks for cheering me up!

      1. Nothing to worry about, according to McPherson we die this year. Or is it next year. One of the two. Or is it later? Still he thinks we will be gone before the corals.
         Use your six to sixteen months well. Oh, that is over already. Well, maybe next year.

         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esGQn1TlVNg

         1. Extaordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
            https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Guy_McPherson

            1. No shit sherlock! How much evidence do you want?! BTW, Rational wiki, is anything but rational!

               Whatever anyone thinks of McPherson, here is a mainstream scientific paper. I doubt you will read it, let alone understand it but go ahead and try to refute it if you can!

               https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017RG000559

               Methane Feedbacks to the Global Climate System in a Warmer World

               Polar ecosystems are warming faster than anywhere else on the globe (Christensen et al., 2013). Global climate models predict up to an 8°C rise in mean annual temperature in polar regions by 2100, compared to a global average of 1.4–5.8°C (Allan et al., 2014; Camill, 2005). Estimates of net CH4 emissions from permafrost ecosystems are consistently between ~4–17 Tg CH4 yr−1 (or 1–7% of total annual natural CH4 emissions) (Kirschke et al., 2013; Walter Anthony et al., 2016; Wik et al., 2016). Although at present these emissions are low on the global scale, they are predicted to rise due to permafrost thaw, which leads to increased substrate availability for methanogens and the potential release of trapped CH4 (Blanc‐Betes et al., 2016; Leibman et al., 2014; Lupascu et al., 2012; Schuur et al., 2015; Zona et al., 2016).

               Permafrost ecosystems are currently considered a net C sink, taking into account CH4 emissions and the CO2 sink of tundra ecosystems (Kirschke et al., 2013; Parmentier et al., 2013; Schaefer et al., 2011). As a result of rising temperatures driving permafrost thaw, it is estimated that tundra ecosystems will shift toward a net C source by the mid‐2020s (Schuur et al., 2015).

               Bold mine.

               1. And here is how the science contradicts itself, saying net C source by 2300. No need for denial, we have 100 years or more according to this NASA backed paper.
                  How can scientists be taken seriously when their research resembles the climate hydra models?

                  Detecting the permafrost carbon feedback
                  Greening trends driven by high-latitude warming and CO2 fertilization have led to amplification of the contemporary C cycle, characterized by increasing photosynthetic C uptake during the short growing season and increasing respiration of recent labile soil C during the cold season (Mack et al., 2004; Piao et al., 2008; Randerson et al., 1999; Graven et al., 2013; Forkel et al., 2016; Wenzel et al., 2016; Webb et al., 2016). Our simulations of C–climate feedbacks with interactive terrestrial biogeochemistry and soil thaw dynamics indicate this trend continues mostly unabated in NHL ecosystems. However, sustained warming over the next 300 years drives accelerated permafrost degradation and soil respiration, leading to widespread shifts in the C balance of Arctic ecosystems toward long-term net C source by the end of the 23rd century. Also, 6.8 million km2 of land impacted in Siberia and North America will produce an integrated C source of 90 Pg C by 2100 and 120 Pg C by 2200. Our projected permafrost C feedback is comparable to the contemporary land use and land use change contribution to the annual C cycle.

                  https://www.the-cryosphere.net/12/123/2018/

               2. And here is how the science contradicts itself, saying net C source by 2300.

                  Yes, BUT there are multiple caveats, so it is not necessarily a direct contradiction of the science and given that we are dealing with biogeochemical processes and geological time scales an error bar of a hundred years plus or minus is not something that should give us much comfort, if any. The science is still saying that sooner or later there is a high risk that permafrost thawing will ultimately contribute an additional source of C on top of already existing sources. My unscientific hunch is that methagenic bacteria will do quite well in an environment that is warming and moist and rich in newly available C! Just another potential feedback in a long list…

                  From the Abstract

                  It is imperative to understand and characterize mechanistic links between talik, permafrost thaw, and respiration of deep soil C to detect and quantify the permafrost C feedback. Here, we use the Community Land Model (CLM) version 4.5, a permafrost and biogeochemistry model, in comparison to long-term deep borehole data along North American and Siberian transects, to investigate thaw-driven C sources in NHL (> 55∘ N) from 2000 to 2300. Widespread talik at depth is projected across most of the NHL permafrost region (14 million km2) by 2300, 6.2 million km2 of which is projected to become a long-term C source, emitting 10 Pg C by 2100, 50 Pg C by 2200, and 120 Pg C by 2300, with few signs of slowing. Roughly half of the projected C source region is in predominantly warm sub-Arctic permafrost following talik onset. This region emits only 20 Pg C by 2300, but the CLM4.5 estimate may be biased low by not accounting for deep C in yedoma. Accelerated decomposition of deep soil C following talik onset shifts the ecosystem C balance away from surface dominant processes (photosynthesis and litter respiration), but sink-to-source transition dates are delayed by 20–200 years by high ecosystem productivity, such that talik peaks early (∼ 2050s, although borehole data suggest sooner) and C source transition peaks late (∼ 2150–2200). The remaining C source region in cold northern Arctic permafrost, which shifts to a net source early (late 21st century), emits 5 times more C (95 Pg C) by 2300, and prior to talik formation due to the high decomposition rates of shallow, young C in organic-rich soils coupled with low productivity.

                  Bold mine

               3. Yes, they pad their analysis with some undefined possibilities. The point is, how will the government officials read this? As a most likely minor problem due to a long time window and near neutral emissions.

                  You do realize the low magnitudes of what they assert? 0.6 Pg per year on average emission which is supposedly balanced by plant growth to a 0.07 Pg per year. No problem.

                  No attempt to partition C types has been made which is a grave error of up to 2 magnitudes.

                  I do not read about any effects from loss of Arctic sea ice or of the loss of snow (which is occurring twice as fast in the spring as loss of ice).
                  There is already an increased concentration of methane in the Arctic region relative to the rest of the planet. When that region is 8C to 10C by 2100 how will that have changed?

                  The inputs to the Arctic are vast. There is ocean heat from the south, warm air from the south, decreasing albedo, increasing winter warming from GHG long wave radiation, increasing GHG from permafrost melting, warm water into the Arctic Ocean from river systems and decreasing ice cover.
                  Once the ice cover is gone the ocean surface will heat up much faster without the hear buffer from the high albedo ice and it’s heat of fusion (80 to 1 ratio X albedo change factor). That will cause self feeding feedbacks between the land snow (reducing), the permafrost and the Arctic Ocean.

                  BTW, sediment samples of Arctic lakes have shown past temperatures of 24C above current temps.

               4. From the J.F. Dean paper presented by Fred
                  “Taking these “climate‐carbon feedbacks” into account, the GWP of CH4 rises to 34 over a 100 year timeframe and 86 over a 20 year timeframe”
                  Of course in 20 years the amount of methane in the atmosphere is 1/4 the original, yet the actual amount keeps rising.

                  Now add on the sub-arctic regions which produce natural methane from ponds and lakes, increasing with warming. Next add on the rising number of ponds and lakes that are not completely freezing in the winter ( an exponential rise).

               5. Maybe I can pour a little more of those highly volatile hydrocarbons on the already burning fire started by Alex Palti’s request for extraordinary evidence! Though I highly doubt he is interested in any actual evidence!

                  https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/19/2015/2019/

                  Abstract

                  The Nordic Centre of Excellence CRAICC (Cryosphere–Atmosphere Interactions in a Changing Arctic Climate), funded by NordForsk in the years 2011–2016, is the largest joint Nordic research and innovation initiative to date, aiming to strengthen research and innovation regarding climate change issues in the Nordic region. CRAICC gathered more than 100 scientists from all Nordic countries in a virtual centre with the objectives of identifying and quantifying the major processes controlling Arctic warming and related feedback mechanisms, outlining strategies to mitigate Arctic warming, and developing Nordic Earth system modelling with a focus on short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs), including natural and anthropogenic aerosols.

                  The outcome of CRAICC is reflected in more than 150 peer-reviewed scientific publications, most of which are in the CRAICC special issue of the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. This paper presents an overview of the main scientific topics investigated in the centre and provides the reader with a state-of-the-art comprehensive summary of what has been achieved in CRAICC with links to the particular publications for further detail. Faced with a vast amount of scientific discovery, we do not claim to completely summarize the results from CRAICC within this paper, but rather concentrate here on the main results which are related to feedback loops in climate change–cryosphere interactions that affect Arctic amplification.

               6. Fred
                  I am deeply concerned about the possibility that climate change already committed by FF use up to now may trigger positive feedback out of control.
                  Loss of arctic albedo in summer and CH4 from permafrost and oceanic clathrates are the 2 main suspects. It is possible that even West Antarctic ice cap is in danger of fast melting. Lucky enough that Greenland ice cap cannot simply slide into ocean,
                  being kept on land by mountain chains in both east and west.
                  The humankind is unknowingly proceeding in a giant test on Earth climate sensitivity to GHG .
                  This may endanger the lowlands over the world and produce food insecurity.
                  To use an understatement, the politics of the last 2 years is in almost complete denial of the problem, as probably as large parts of world population.
                  All this being said, fear mongering from McPherson does not help, it may only undermine the credibility of scientific community.
                  I hope that transition to EV and renewable energy ( solar + large scale batteries … ) may be fast enough to defuse climate change time bomb.
                  Anyway, it is good to counter FF depletion.
                  Of course, governments should wake up to stronger regulation. Sooner the better to steer the civilization out of this mine field.
                  Desperation cannot help.

               7. Duly noted. My point regarding McPherson was simply that mainstream science is giving us major warnings as it is. We can disregard those warnings at our peril.

                  I don’t know which is worse, rationalwiki or McPherson.

                  Cheers!

               8. What do you not like about rationalwiki?

                  I took a quick look at the section on climate change – it seemed sensible enough.

               9. CO2 temperature forcing is logarithmic, instead of linear, and we’ve already reached the point of the equation where there are diminishing returns. Therefore, my conclusion is feedback loops simply don’t have the potential for the kind of “out of control” calamities you state.

               10. What do you not like about rationalwiki?

                   For starters, the fact they are not transparent about the source of their funding.

                   Go ahead and do some digging and report back what you find. Perhaps it’s just me!

               11. TonyMax,
                   Got any solid info to back up your assertion about feedback loops lacking the muscle to escalate the warming trend?

               12. Tony Max,

                   CO2 forcing is indeed logarithmic but that is connected to the rate of the warming going on. What matters is the balance between how much IR emitted by the Earth is absorbed by CO2 in the lower atmosphere, and how much IR is radiated away to space high up in the atmosphere where CO2 molecules are widely enough spaced for it to escape.

                   Our warming atmosphere has expanded, and the level where IR can escape to space is higher up as a result; higher means colder and colder leads to less emission of IR, so the warming in the lower atmosphere now exceeds the cooling high aloft. The rate of emission of IR to space has been found from satellite data to have decreased over time; DougL mentioned this a week or so back.

                   So we have the warming down here, and more CO2 will continue to absorb more IR down here, and warming will continue.

               13. https://www.quora.com/Is-RationalWiki-a-trustworthy-source

               14. Toni Max.
                   .

                   

               15. GoneFishing,

                   Now add on the tropical wetlands in west-central Africa, the Amazon basin, and SE Asia and Indonesia.

                   There’s a reason that in the very early Holocene, when Northern Hemisphere ice sheets still dominated the climate up there, there was a notable methane spike.

3. GRETA THUNBERG TELLS EU: YOUR CLIMATE TARGETS NEED DOUBLING

   She also responded to criticism from political leaders, who included Theresa May, over skipping lessons. “If you still say that we are wasting valuable lesson time, then let me remind you that our political leaders have wasted decades through denial and inaction.”

   https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/21/greta-thunberg-tells-eu-your-greenhouse-gas-targets-are-too-low

4. In the meantime, the band plays on, and the stewards rearrange the deck chairs, metaphorically speaking.

   Doom eight comments in a row, depending on how you read them.

   So how about some MUSIC?
   https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/22/tech/virgin-galactic-test-flight-space/index.html

   1. Why settle for a pathetic Virgin-Galactic sub-orbital flight when for a few bucks more you can have the real thing? In 2007, Microsoft co-founder Charles Simonyi joined the space tourist club for the first time. He paid $25 million for a 13-day trip. Simonyi enjoyed the flight so much, he did it a second time. Simonyi returned to the International Space Station in 2009, this time paying a reported $35 million for the flight. He even bought the Soyuz capsule from that mission and donated it to a museum. I wonder what Greta thinks about this level of profligate waste?

      1. I wonder what Greta thinks about this level of profligate waste?

         She just gave this speech I think it pretty much sums up her thoughts.
         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVeYOPJZ8oc

         Continuation Q&A with European Journalists
         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzH1OuqvaAg
         Climate activist Greta Thunberg: “I hope Angela Merkel doesn’t think we are Russian spies”

   2. Doom eight comments in a row, depending on how you read them.

      Nah, not doom. Just realism.

   3. Doom eight comments in a row, depending on how you read them.

      Same shit, different day, right?

      1. I guess I should have put a sarc alert on that eight doom comments in a row, lol.

5. More music?
   https://electrek.co/2019/02/22/teslas-solar-panel-gigafactory-panasonic/

   The solar industry may actually continue to grow the way Tony Seba believes the electric car market will grow.
   I know, too little too late, the ship of civilization is way out to sea, and sinking in a storm of pollution and corruption, etc, but a few of us may make it safe to port via lifeboats.

6. On the last thread someone whose name you would recognize said-
   “Yeah, about 85% of oil can be replaced with batteries.”

   Not sure whether to laugh or cry.
   They were serious and they vote.

   1. Ah, but it’s true. Now, I should have said “burning of oil for transportation” instead of just “oil”. But if you don’t burn oil, it’s not as much of a problem, pollution-wise, and non-transportation oil burning is relatively small – some electrical generation that should be replaced with solar ASAP, and a bit of space heating that’s also relativley straightforward to electrify.

      You might ask where the power comes from. Well, EVs are a perfect match with wind and solar. They’re an enormous benefit to building a reliable grid: they provide demand right when it’s needed. Got too much wind power at night? Charge then. Too much solar at noon? Then charge at noon. They can be a UPS for the house, and probably for a neighborhood.

      The synergy of EVs with the grid helps wind and solar enormously.

      1. “The synergy of EVs with the grid helps wind and solar enormously.” ~ Nick G

         The problem is when canned hypothetical synergies bump into vast natural ones that some people might not see because they’re too busy gazing at their technological navels– and often paid to do so.

         Take EV’s, the grid, wind and solar (and related technodetritus)– scaled even further up too– and then throw them out there in the wild and then see what happens. Humility?

      2. Nick is our in house eternal optimist, and while he sort of annoys me sometimes, with his tendency to see the bright side, and virtually ignore the dark side, there’s good reason to believe he has a more or less accurate vision of what the future holds in terms of energy technology and practice.

         It’s just that he’s a prophet before his time, as I see things. I don’t believe the ice is dead yet, nor that it will be obsolete so long as some oil is still available at prices equivalent to maybe eight or ten bucks per gallon , in present day Yankee dollars, maybe even twenty bucks per gallon. Maybe there will be alternative sources of motive power other than batteries, maybe not.

         I think that cars that are considered obsolete in virtually every respect, and illegal as hell, to be built new, here in the USA or Western Europe, will continue to be built and sold in other parts of the world, for another thirty or forty years, so long as oil enough to run them is available.Such cars don’t have sophisticated engines or transmissions or suspensions or brakes, etc….. but they will still get you where you need to go.

         And it’s altogether possible that they will be a LOT cheaper than an equivalent comparable electric car…… even forty years from now. Sure they’ll pollute.

         I doubt the people who want them will really give a hoot, so long as they are cheap enough.

         There are people here who know a LOT more than I do, or ever will, about a LOT of things. But I’m the only regular with a hillbilly hands on redneck giterdone whatever it takes perspective, having grown up in that sort of environment.

         A ten horsepower lawn mower engine is enough to power a really light car at the speeds typical of heavy city traffic…….. and it will make a really light two seater fore and aft minicar go forty or more , on a smooth level road. Maybe even sixty, if it’s well streamlined.

         And you can buy such engines at retail, brand new, with warranty, for under four hundred bucks. I ‘m guessing they could be delivered by the truckload to a car factory for two hundred bucks.

         Now tell me again about how cheap you think batteries might be, eventually, you guys.

         I’m perfectly open to the argument that a very small ( compared to the ones in today’s electric cars with decent range) battery, a TINY battery, would be enough to run my hypothetical two seat fore and aft light car forty or fifty or even a hundred miles per day. So maybe such cars will be cheaper than cars with ten horsepower lawn mower engines. They for sure will be cheaper to run when oil hits two hundred bucks, lol.

         Check this out. It’s as likely as anything, in a resource constrained world, to be the future of personal transportation. Just add the optional side panels for cold weather and wet weather use.

         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlrE670JXFc

         1. A few thoughts.

            – I appreciate your compliments. OTOH, they were a bit…left handed. You’ve written quite a lot about the value of not insulting people (or talking about them personally, or their motivations, etc, rather than simply their ideas or arguments), but you tend to forget that people follow what you do, not what you say. You’ve got to lead by example…

            – I think that “optimist” doesn’t fit all that well. I try to avoid forecasts, and emphasize what CAN by done, not what WILL be done. OTOH, I think if you were to go back to what I wrote 10 or 15 years ago on The Oil Drum, you’d find that the stuff I said has stood the test of time quite well. Far better than the great majority of the stuff said by way of disagreement with me in those (long!) threads where I debated ideas.

            Actually, the biggest forecast error I can remember was not anticipating the full impact of LTO. I suspected that the power of price incentives would mean that Bakken oil would be developed to a greater extent than most people anticipated, but I still underestimated it’s impact. I thought that oil prices would stay above $100 more or less permanently. Of course, I wasn’t alone in missing that trend.

            – Yes, there are 10’s of millions of small, cheap, practical EVs on the road today. They’re called scooters, or E-bikes, etc. OTOH, if you want something safer and more weather proof, I think people will tend to go with something that looks a lot like current passenger vehicles.

            – Oil is obsolete right now. But…that doesn’t mean it will go away overnight. EVs are superior, but TPTB are slowing them down in every way they can, and, more importantly, they’re concealing the enormous costs of ICEs.

            It’s similar to leaded gasoline or leaded paint, or mercury thermometers. They’re obsolete, but they’re still in use around the world, and they’re still poisoning people. How do you get rid of poisonous products, especially in other countries? It’s a big challenge, which needs a lot of creative thinking.

   2. “” We choose to go to the Moon ” is the famous tagline of a speech about the effort to reach the Moon delivered by U.S. President John F. Kennedy to a large crowd gathered at Rice Stadium in Houston, Texas on September 12, 1962. The speech was intended to persuade the American people to support the Apollo program, the national effort to land a man on the Moon.”

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

      Hello Hickory, for the second time this week I’m either disappointed or don’t understand your comment, which isn’t very clear of making your point. In the late 50’s and early 60’s my father dragged his ass everyday to work for Rockwell building cruise missiles. About a year later after the presidents speech of September 12, 1962 , Rockwell had won a contract to build the Apollo space capsule and he continued dragging his ass to work to help send man to the moon.

      Myself in the 60’s, I would look forward to every Wednesday night to watch the latest new episode of Star Trek. I was mesmerized by all the technology in the show and my father would tell me it will never happen. Little did he know that my Tricorder and Commutator would be the same device called a smartphone.

      My point is, there are some that can see what the future can be from the present and there are some that can not. Nick simply sees a lot of todays technology and can envision the possibilities of the future. Than there are others like Caelan who are followers that are influenced by special interest propaganda and struggle with evolution.

      Nick is simply pointing out that our transportation using gasoline and diesel can be replaced with cheap battery technology. He is not Carnac the Magnificent.

      We can choose to save plant earth. I’m not interested in being a Caelan.

      1. Hi HB,
         If you were referring to the comment regarding
         “Yeah, about 85% of oil can be replaced with batteries.”
         My point of contention is simply that batteries are not a source of energy (such as wind, oil, or sun). Batteries can store energy derived from a source.
         I suspect Nick knows that.
         But there are many naive voters (readers) out there who are poorly educated and can take such statements as gospel.

         1. Yeah, I thought that might be your concern. That’s why I added that 2nd paragraph about power sources.

            It’s tough to write in a succinct and pithy way – there are always details that would be good to address. Maybe I should add footnotes(!).

            Now, if you’re a follower of Ayn Rand, you may believe that you can power civilization by pulling static electricity out of the air, as was done by the hero of Atlas Shrugged…

            1. Sorry for my prior rude entry Nick.

               1. Well, thank you! No problem.

7. Energy Patterns

   “Some of my replies have not gone through, so there is no real discussion in that kind of environment.” ~ Caelan MacIntyre

   “For starters, you need to respect the anonymity of commenters who wish to remain anonymous.” ~ Euan Mearns

   That you respond this way in this context actually seems to betray your real agenda WRT nuclear (and other) narrative(s), in part by suppressing comments/commenters that threaten them.

   What do you think? Think I’m onto something?

   Here’re two of my missing comments in context:

   “Studies, based on DATA and MEASUREMENT in and around the Fukushima Daiichi power station, have DETECTED small amount of Pu clearly coming from the reactors/fuel pools… but at levels comparable with the plutonium that is ALREADY found all over planet Earth, thanks to the 100s of nuclear explosions.” ~ roberto06

   “Oh lovely… That just helps support my position on nuclear energy. Thanks, Roberto Kersevan.” ~ Caelan MacIntyre

   ——

   “This fleeting fossil-fueled/nuclear-powered crony-capitalist plutarchy era is an exception in our history as a species.
   As such, it doesn’t look like it will be anything near permanent going forward, to put it very mildly and may already be collapsing and/or declining as we speak.

   We are essentially a tribal/small-scale species, totally out of scale and context with the status-quo, and, to boot, and along with the rest of the living planet, likely in severe fundamental ‘cognitive dissonance’, so to speak, with it. What could possibly go wrong?! 😀

   Also, collapse of civilizations appear the rule, rather than the exception.

   Likewise with extinction.

   Wisdom in these contexts would seem to mean getting along with nature, rather than ramming some remarkably-blinkered notions of energy overcomplexity (that we don’t even need) down everyone’s throats, come hell or high water.

   K.I.S.S. (Nukes are nowhere near simple.)

   ‘…all forms of organization, regardless of how democratic they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop oligarchic tendencies, thus making true democracy practically and theoretically impossible, especially in large groups and complex organizations. The relative structural fluidity in a small-scale democracy succumbs to ‘social viscosity’ in a large-scale organization. [Accordingly] …democracy and large-scale organization are incompatible.’ ~ Wikipedia, entry, ‘Iron Law of Oligarchy’

   ‘Why do complex societies become vulnerable to the very kinds of stress which, at an earlier time in its history, the society in question would simply shrug off? Tainter’s answer lies with complexity, itself, and the law of diminishing returns. As a society becomes more complex, greater complexity becomes more costly. The escalation of complexity becomes increasingly difficult to maintain, until it finally becomes impossible.’ ~ Jason Godesky” ~ Caelan MacIntyre

   ——

   “[to Paul]…I have two specific questions for you:

   1) what are your exact scientific qualifications which elevates you to the position to judge over us?
   2) what qualifications do you require to become a climate scientist?

   …I have a BSc in geology… I went on to complete a PhD in isotope geochemistry…

   Who are you?” ~ Euan Mearns

   “Paul, you and others are now in moderation. I suspect this will be your last comment here. Sorry… You don’t really seem interested in learning but to simply undermine those presenting data (i.e. facts) that are not aligned with your own belief system.

   Best Euan” ~ Euan Mearns (same thread)

   “I like to say that I also breathe, eat and sleep for a living and try to enjoy life inasmuch as is possible given the significant global mass of relatively-myopic and overspecialized ‘professionals’, etcetera, selling themselves, their planet and its lifeforms out, and dragging me along for the ride.” ~ Caelan MacIntyre

   The Order of Death

   1. Sample

      

8. Here’s a minor suggestion that would help everybody jump in and out and follow the conversation easier and faster.

   Just address your comment to someone in particular, or several someones.

   I almost always do this, and so do a couple of others.

   We could all follow the conversation easier and faster, and ignore replies to comments by people we don’t want to bother with as well.

   1. OFM- good idea.

      Anyone interested in energy innovation-
      One project under development is a wind energy device completely different from a stationary turbine. They call it a kite. It is tethered, and flys under its own power up to its orbit where it shift to energy production mode. Interesting project. Imagine this kind of thing on a remote hilltop, great plains, or out on bodies of water, perhaps.
      Makani. [I think Fred or GF may have brought this up before]

      http://americanjobsproject.us/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-California-Offshore-Wind-Project.pdf

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An8vtD1FDqs

      direct all followup questions/comments to Fred.

   2. @OFM
      I tend to do that when it gets complicated but it is a bit OTT for simple follow ons, best for the more intricate threads.

      NAOM

9. https://peakoil.com/alternative-energy/the-worlds-largest-battery-to-power-the-permian
   quote from Comments:
   “Folly? We’ve been centralizing power since year 1”

10. This article on EV is dedicated to IslandBoy-
    https://cleantechnica.com/2019/02/23/electric-cars-are-about-to-absolutely-demolish-gasmobiles/

    example-
    https://cleantechnica.com/2019/02/22/kia-e-niro-review-with-240-miles-of-range-i-repeat-there-is-no-more-excuse-to-not-own-an-electric-car/

    1. Kia is very popular around here so I will need to keep my eyes open.

       NAOM

       1. That Hyundai Kona EV looks very good, as well.

          1. Sabritas are using a Hyundai hybrid truck for deliveries though I know nothing further on that.

             NAOM

    2. Thanks? It seems cleantechnica is anxious not to end up with egg on their face if/when the EV transition gets started in earnest. The first article is basically an acceptance of Tony Seba talking points. It is getting harder to dispute some of the ideas Seba has been promoting. When you look at cars like the Nissan Leaf, that has seen a greater than twofold increase in range since it’s introduction in late 2010, without any appreciable increase in price, it’s hard not to imagine that in a few more years, EVs with decent range will reach cost parity with ICE driven cars.

       I’m getting this sneaky feeling that we will see something big in terms of tipping points before 2019 is out. It could be something from Tesla or some other entity.

       1. No need for the question mark. My remark intended no sarcasm [I know its rare]. I share your hope for a tsunami of change towards EV.
          I’m keeping my fingers crossed for a battery breakthrough, since the rest of the package is here and now.
          The only other ingredient needed is peak oil.

          1. I’m keeping my fingers crossed for a battery breakthrough,

             We all have, from the early 1990’s till now.

             It has been a while—–

             1. Making more progress than Fusion Power!

                1. That is always 20 years away-
                   1950 or 2019.
                   Kinda like the speed of light.

          2. Just wasn’t sure your dedicating the article to me was a complement or a backhanded complement. Did not want to be thoughtlessly thanking you for an insult. My apologies for doubting your sincerity.

             The only other ingredient needed is peak oil.

             Give it a little while! Coming right up!

11. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/musk-calls-hydrogen-fuel-cells-stupid-but-tech-may-threaten-tesla.html

    I don’t see it happening for at least twenty years, maybe fifteen if there are near miracle breakthru’s in fuel cell and hydrogen storage costs.

    The problem is the lack of H2 fueling distribution pipelines, etc, and H2 filling stations .

    The caption on the lead picture says it all.

    A customer fills a car with hydrogen at a TrueZero fueling station in Mill Valley, California. The state is spending more than $2.5 billion in clean energy funds to accelerate sales of hydrogen and battery vehicles. That includes $900 million earmarked to complete 200 hydrogen stations and 250,000 charging stations by 2025.

    That’s over a thousand times as many charging stations, lol.

    Damned near every homeowner can have his own personal charging station, ample to meet everyday needs, for no more than a thousand bucks or so,two thousand at the upper limit if it requires a lot of digging and carpentry to put back stuff that has to be ripped out to install the wires, if he has a car port or garage, and lives outside places like NYC, where electricians have a strangle hold on the customer, and can charge higher rates than surgeons in my part of the world, lol.

    But having said this much, if hydrogen storage gets cheap enough, it could just about wipe out demand for stationary batteries…… depending on how much it costs to manufacture pure H2 and deliver it.

    Batteries such as the ones in today’s electric cars seem to have a round trip energy efficiency of eighty percent or so, depending on what you include and exclude from the analysis. It may be tough for hydrogen to beat that, because stripping it out of water will eventually require using wind and solar power to supply the necessary energy.

    1. OFM- “It may be tough for hydrogen to beat that, because stripping it out of water will eventually require using wind and solar power to supply the necessary energy.”
       Hydrogen production from wind and solar may become a useful mechanism to capture energy at remote sites that have great production potential, but no electrical connection (stranded asset).
       For example, there are some great wind spots on mountains, or in remote areas of Wyoming, or offshore, that can’t be developed because there is no grid in the area. And thousands of such solar spots in the SW.
       Hydrogen storage of the energy produced at such sites for occasional transport to a hub may become feasible.
       http://www.itm-power.com/news-item/stranded-wind-energy

       Another possible use for stranded wind is described here
       https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=slick-sheet-project/wind-energy-ammonia-synthesis

       1. Hi Hickory,

          Great point! And thanks for the links. I’m adding them to my files.

          I’m putting some time into discovering all the known and possible uses of otherwise surplus wind and solar electricity so as to include them in my own site, or maybe a novel, with commentary, pro and con , eventually.

          The cost of wind and solar power will both continue to fall for some time yet, then eventually hit an all time low, once significant further improvement in efficiency and manufacturing and installation costs hit rock bottom, barring altogether new tech. Just how low the costs can go is anybody’s guess, but locating wind and solar farms where ever the resource is best can cut the cost by half or more, compared to so so locations such as Virginia.

          You are probably right, it may be worthwhile to build wind and solar farms and electrolysis plants in the back of the boonies, someday, and deliver H2 via pipeline from such locations cheaper than delivering electricity via high voltage lines.

          If H2 is cheap enough, there will be a virtually unlimited market for it.

          But I’m thinking it’s likely that the first such plants will be built in places where there are lots of people, but still plenty of room for them, because wind and solar farms are very likely going to be overbuilt by a factor of two or three, based on high production days, so that there will still be enough juice available almost every day, with the last little bit supplied by existing fossil fuel or maybe water power generating stations, as necessary.

          If the cards fall this way, then there will be ample surplus juice a lot of days, which can be used to produce H2 and desalinated water, both of which can be readily stored. Other uses may be to charge up water or stone reservoirs supplying both heat and cooling to various customers ranging from home owners to hospitals. Adding thermal storage capacity is pretty cheap if it’s designed in from the start.

          Other possible uses of dirt cheap solar and wind juice may include supplementing natural gas or coal fired industrial furnaces or boilers, which are used to provide process heat in many industries.

          Dirt cheap electricity will probably be available at least half the time within another twenty five to thirty years or so. People will figure out ways to make good use of it in ways that will surprise the hell out of us.

          Maybe our grandchildren will find ways to use it to recycle sewage, extracting the NPK in it, and separating the metals and other contaminants as well, to SELL, with the end product being potable water.

          Or manufacture super insulation, maybe made out of glass bubbles in a vacuum, bonded into some sort of foam, ready to cut the sheets to size, or maybe just spray the foam into the wall cavities of new buildings, etc.

          1. Yes indeed. Lots of possibilities.
             Imagine a barge or stationary platform offshore where it is very windy, with one of these
             Makani Wind Kite units setup like a helipad.
             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An8vtD1FDqs

             They could be making hydrogen and or water, which could offloaded to a service boat every couple weeks.

             And the idea of a farm being able to make it own ammonia is hard to beat.

             1. They could be making hydrogen and or water, which could offloaded to a service boat every couple weeks.

                Here’s how Orkney does it…

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rybpaqhg5Qg

                Orkney ‘Surf n Turf’ | Fully Charged

                1. Great example of the potential.
                   They are in they early stages (of replacing all the fossil energy), but far ahead of the pack.

                2. Note that is 1 of 3 and all 3 should be watched to see where Orkney is going. BTW, the government/parliament referred to is, most likely, not the UK but the Scottish parliament. My fear is that a Brexit would destroy these projects as much of the funding is European. Maybe Brexit would trigger a new move for Scottish devolution to rejoin Europe.

                   NAOM

          2. wind and solar farms are very likely going to be overbuilt by a factor of two or three, based on high production days, so that there will still be enough juice available almost every day, with the last little bit supplied by existing fossil fuel or maybe water power generating stations, as necessary.

             The last little bit would likely be provided from H2 that was generated on days with surplus. Underground H2 storage is very cheap.

    2. Anyone – do modern fuel cells need catalysts and, if so, what are the current trends?

       NAOM

12. https://electrek.co/2019/02/22/teslas-solar-panel-gigafactory-panasonic/
    Tesla does not Understand Quality by Process control consistency. Panasonic does. Dr. Deming Disciples
    +Approaching 20% eff.
    + 125mm cells more durable – less prone to microfractures
    – Non Standard Voltage / current
    – Non Standard size
    – You will never be able to buy one from Tesla – but you can for a Premium from Panasonic
    – Non-Standard size means you can never find another when a tree flys into it.
    Assisted a contractor replacing 18 panels in a megawatt system at a VA Hospital in 4 hours. It could have been weeks with non-standard panels. Shooting into the air is a pass time in the hood across the Interstate. Maintenance in PV Arrays is low, but not zero.

    1. “Shooting into the air is a pass time in the hood across the Interstate.”

       Hmmm, I hadn’t thought about that for my long term solar plans. It can be a bit like downtown Baghdad, here, on New Years.

       I’m trying to find a good web site for how to set up homebrew solar systems, in particular behind the meter split phase. Any that you can recommend. I just just seem to find opinionated blogs and forums of conflicting suggestions.

       NAOM

       1. There is a wholesale solar supplier [that sells to individuals as well] that has a pretty good website-
          https://www.wholesalesolar.com/solar-information/diy-solar

          1. Thanks, but that is mostly about selling packages. What I am looking for is about the nitty gritty of how to do it and not biased to a commercial system.

             NAOM

       2. Use emphase micro inverters. IQ series. Simple as pi

          1. Need to have a backup option for when the grid is out (can be up to 3 days), can’t do that on Enphase unless there is a site out there that gives good explanations on how to do that. IE need to switch panels from grid to off grid, no batteries to start but may add them later. Also it is trying to hook onto a 120-0-120 supply. Really what I need is a web site that gives good explanations for how to do all these things, too many are like Hickory’s suggestion that describe things for the layman then say ‘We can do it all for you’ which is no use to me, their thing about wiring diagrams was pretty much ‘This is what one looks like but don’t worry we will provide one (once you pay and pay)’. I know the basics and have the skillz to do the work but it is getting the details right and matching local needs not some spanky US/Cali muck up.

             NAOM

    2. Anybody, WTF is does this line mean? It’s from the comment above by Longtimber.

       Tesla does not Understand Quality by Process control consistency. Panasonic does. Dr. Deming Disciples

       Does in mean Tesla panels are a different size and won’t fit industry standard rack systems, or wire up to existing inverters, or WHAT?

       The rest of the link is fine print in charts, and barely legible to me BARELY, most of it.

       I’m a big fan of standardization, because it means things are easy to work on , and when buying parts you have more choices, other than “dealer only”. This can mean BIG savings, because dealers who have you by the “short hair” often mark up parts as much as three or four hundred percent. The last time I needed a headlight for a late model car that was dealer only, it was almost four hundred bucks. A year later, I could get one aftermarket, excellent quality, for less than seventy bucks.

       I occasionally work on big trucks, and because there’s lots of standardization, they’re actually much easier to work on that cars, except the individual components are bigger and heavier.

       If Tesla panels are incompatible with industry standards, to the extent there ARE industry standards, I’ll buy some other brand, when I buy some for myself.

       1. Maybe this will help
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming
          Panasonic, being a Japanese company, are probably attuned to his methods.
          https://www.google.com/search?num=30&gl=us&hl=en&pws=0&gws_rd=cr&q=Process+control+consistency
          There are a few helpful items there and the suggestion seems to be that Telsa is not doing its controls right. The Chinese may be sticking to loose standard sizes but Tesla are going in a slightly different direction maybe because of the American idea of designing out the prospect of users getting replacements from other vendors. If you view the image and zoom it is just legible that the voltages are very different to Chinese and other panels with a 96 cell rather than the 72 that is usually seen.

          NAOM

       2. Panasonic is probably the world’s best producer of high quality, cheap, large volume electronics components. They build more, better and cheaper. By quality I mean defective parts per million (lower is better).

13. Standard panel is 60 cell. 156mm cells in a 6×10 layout. Thats roughly 1000 x 1600mm or 1 meter x 1.6m The 96 cell panel is wider. So will not fit standard rail lengths. Lots of these will have micro inverters or optimizer so voltage not a big deal. You have dozens of choices of standard size panels.

14. Hi Anybody,
    I’ve asked this question before, without ever getting any body here to commit his opinion to print.
    How long will it be before you can go to any large city, or good sized town, in the USA, and buy an electric bike from a dealer that keeps them in stock, and has parts, and a qualified mechanic on site?

    You can buy lawnmowers and chainsaws this way in any two stoplight town in the country, unless it’s in a desert, lol.

    I find it hard to believe that a first quality, durable electric bike should necessarily cost more than a couple of grand, including all the basic features, with an excellent warranty as well. I know batteries are still expensive, but the rest of it….. generally under a hundred pounds of very simple parts, nothing nearly as sophisticated as the run of the mill parts of a car. And you have to buy a REALLY nice car, a top of the line luxury status symbol car, for it to cost a couple of thousand bucks per hundred pounds.

    But I’m guessing the price will stay up there, and there will only be dealers in big cities, until electric bikes are truly mass marketed, in this country at least.

    I want one, but for four or five grand, I can buy all the gasoline I’m likely to use for personal transportation for five to ten years, and I already have a car, which I would have to keep in any case.

    1. Hey OFM. I have half d0zen businesses within a ten mile radius of where I live that sell and service affordable ebikes. Less than $1500.00. My non electric bamboo bike cost me more than that.

       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW5jDuqhwm0
       10 Cheapest Electric Bicycles You Can Afford (Review of Bikes Starting at $699)

       Or you can build your own with off the shelf components.
       I like what this guy did.
       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISR8pKoIa5k
       Dewalt 20v x 6 Electric Bike part 8 finished 60v 900w

    2. I’ll commit to three yrs.

       But you don’t really need a dealer in your town.
       This outfit oout of Seattle has been getting very good traction and reviews- RadpowerBikes
       I’ve seen 3 on the streets in my hilly neighborhood.
       about $1500 for a good bike, with free shipping to lower 48
       https://www.radpowerbikes.com/pages/2019

15. How the conch stock went bust

    An imminent ban on the once-flourishing conch industry from which Jamaica earned as much as US$600 million in foreign exchange per annum has placed the industry on the brink of collapse.

    The Government announced a sudden close season to take effect from March 1, 2019 to January 31, 2020.

    The rationale for the drastic decision was informed by a comprehensive assessment of the conch population on the Pedro Cays, conducted last November. It showed conclusively that the crustacean had been overfished, almost to the point of no return.

    For Jamaica, the situation is so bad that one year might not be enough for the population replenishment in the Pedro Cays, our primary harvesting area for the largest export of queen conch from the Caribbean, for a resumption anytime soon.

    “It’s bad, very bad,” André Kong, director of fisheries, confirmed when The Sunday Gleaner sought answers.

    Reading the complete article, one has to ask, are humans smarter than yeast? Do we not learn from the experiences of others?

    When faced with the choice of allowing for some income tomorrow versus securing maximum income today, far too often the answer is, “f–k it!”.

    1. This situation has been and is being repeated. The difference is that unlike the passenger pigeon, some alarm bells ring at the government level just before eradication allowing a possible recover. However it does not take into account the interrelated bio-system functionality or the additional stresses of climate change/toxin load.

       1. However it does not take into account the interrelated bio-system functionality or the additional stresses of climate change/toxin load.

          Crustacean living in mollusk shell!
          .

          

    2. It showed conclusively that the crustacean had been overfished, almost to the point of no return.

       I realize it may be a bit too much to expect that whoever wrote that article would at the very least know that a conch is a mollusk!

       But if that weren’t bad enough, how do we deal with a deliberate, non stop and well funded campaign of anti renewables propaganda targeted at the ignorant masses?!

       This little gem showed up in my information feed this morning. It is worth a read just for the exercise of identifying the misconceptions and wishful thinking about the long term continued dependence on coal, oil and NG. Forget for a moment whether or not renewables can or cannot power civilization as we know it. Never mind that continued CO2 emissions in and of themselves may drastically change the climate, making civilization moot. Forget all that and just answer the basic question, what is the plan B of these people if and when peak fossil fuels start to have an impact?!

       https://www.inforum.com/opinion/columns/975349-Grande-Green-energy-is-not-dependable

       Grande: Green energy is not dependable

       Dispatchable. It’s a word that legislators in St. Paul should keep in mind as they debate a 100 percent renewable energy mandate by 2050. They should pay attention to the experience of some of their constituents just a few weeks ago. In late January, Xcel Energy notified their customers to drop their thermostats to 60 degrees due to the cold weather and strain on their system. Due to the weather, wind and solar were not available so the demand on natural gas made dispatching power difficult.

       The lessons learned during our recent cold snap should take some wind out the sails of those pushing away from traditional, carbon-based energy sources. The recent experience shows that the claim that renewables will be available during extreme heat or cold are false. But the green pull is strong.
       

       BTW, if dropping their thermostats to 60 degrees due to the cold weather and strain on their system is considered an insurmountable hardship during a weather emergency, then these people are in for a very rude awakening when the full impacts of peaking fossil fuels start to hit!

       Yeah, FUCK IT!

       1. Those not willing to learn, end up learning the hard way. Or at least their children will for them.

          1. My father used to say “If you don’t listen then you’re gonna feel”.

       2. I realize it may be a bit too much to expect that whoever wrote that article would at the very least know that a conch is a mollusk!

          The reporter was actually a high school, schoolmate of mine, so I will make sure I inform him of the distinction the next time I run into him! We were in the same year but, not the same class and IIRC he did not take any science classes past grade nine. I think he was more into the arts.

          As far as the linked opinion column goes, I think their plan B is to cross that bridge when they get to it, despite not even trying to build a bridge they will be able to cross.

          

          1. As far as the linked opinion column goes,

             Opinion?! When we make comments here, for better or for worse, we often express our opinions. I highly doubt that Bette Grande was merely expressing her un biased opinion.

             Bette Grande

             Bette Grande is a research fellow for energy and pension issues at The Heartland Institute. Prior to coming to Heartland, she served as a North Dakota state representative from 1996–2014, representing the 41st district.

             Grande holds a Bachelor of Science degree in education from the University of North Dakota. She has been married to her husband Don for 34 years, and they have three adult children and one grandson. Born and raised in Williston, North Dakota, Grande’s family operates a multiple-generation family business in the Williston Basin, which is located in the heart of the Bakken formation.

             Care to guess what that family business might be?

             1. I should have put “opinion” in quotation marks!

                research fellow for energy and pension issues at The Heartland Institute.

                Koch Industries money at work!

16. Sigh: Guess this goes into the BAU file.

    CANADA ENERGY REGULATOR GIVES NOD TO PACIFIC PIPELINE

    Canada’s energy regulator renewed its support on Friday for a controversial oil pipeline to the Pacific, saying the risks to endangered whales from increased tanker traffic were “justified.” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government ordered a review of the Trans Mountain Project taking into account its impact on killer whales after the Federal Court of Appeal blocked it over concerns for the marine mammals. The National Energy Board (NEB) said the project would have “significant adverse environmental effects” on the whales and an oil spill could have equally horrendous impacts on the marine environment. But it concluded “that they can be justified in the circumstances, in light of the considerable benefits of the project and measures to mitigate the effects.”

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2019-02-canada-energy-pacific-pipeline.html#jCp

    1. Meanwhile, further north: (Was someone talking about getting off fossil fuels?”

       STATE SAYS NORTH SLOPE OIL AND GAS ACTIVITY IS AT ITS HIGHEST LEVEL IN 20 YEARS

       “Over roughly 16 years, Willow could bring about $7 billion in revenue to Alaska, the state estimated. Pikka, on state land, could be worth about $10.5 billion during that length of time.”

       https://www.adn.com/business-economy/energy/2019/01/23/state-says-north-slope-oil-and-gas-activity-is-at-its-highest-level-in-20-years/

       1. “Over roughly 16 years, Willow could bring about $7 billion in revenue to Alaska, the state estimated. Pikka, on state land, could be worth about $10.5 billion during that length of time”

          As my neighbor says, “WSHTF money will be worthless. There will be blood in the streets.”

          Enjoy your wealth for now.

       2. What’s a little CO2 anyway, it’s just a trace gas for Christ’s sake.

          EARTH MAY BE 140 YEARS AWAY FROM REACHING CARBON LEVELS NOT SEEN IN 56 MILLION YEARS

          “Total human carbon dioxide emissions could match those of Earth’s last major greenhouse warming event in fewer than five generations, new research finds. A NEW STUDY FINDS HUMANS ARE PUMPING CARBON DIOXIDE INTO THE ATMOSPHERE AT A RATE NINE TO 10 TIMES HIGHER THAN THE GREENHOUSE GAS WAS EMITTED DURING THE PALEOCENE-EOCENE THERMAL MAXIMUM (PETM), A GLOBAL WARMING EVENT THAT OCCURRED ROUGHLY 56 MILLION YEARS AGO.”

          https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190220112221.htm

          1. If that happens, the earth will once again go through an oil and fossil fuel forming period.

       3. That should just about offset the cost of infrastructure damage caused by melting permafrost! NOT!

          https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2017/04/melting-permafrost-predicted-to-cost-trillions-of-dollars-in-infrastructure-damage/

          Melting permafrost predicted to cost trillions of dollars in infrastructure damage

          Arctic warming could have cumulative net costs from 2010-2100 of between $7tr (£5.5tr) and $90tr, the report estimates, with the harm exceeding any benefits such as easier access for oil and gas exploration and shipping.

          Penny wise, pound foolish…

          1. Nature’s way to deindustrialize while taking over the carbon output at the same time. Neat trick.

             1. Neat trick

                Yeah, Nature can be kinda sly that way!

                https://www.sciencealert.com/finally-we-know-what-killed-sea-life-in-the-deadliest-mass-extinction-in-history

                Apparently Nature wasn’t all that happy with the slow way things unfolded during the Permian-Triassic Extinction Event and had to bring us in to help speed things up a little this time around!…

                Cheers!

                1. Hmmm, interfering with nature is not good.
                   Which means that “pro-renewable/pro- nature as it is” people are first on the list to go. When will the mobs turn on us and burn or drown us as they did to the “witches”.
                   Or will we just suddenly disappear in a version of the Kristallnacht?
                   Or even worse, we will be ignored.
                   Those people against air travel may be high on the list. 🙂

    2. The National Energy Board (NEB) said the project would have “significant adverse environmental effects” on the whales and an oil spill could have equally horrendous impacts on the marine environment.

       Here’s the bad news, compared to ocean acidification due to global CO2 emissions from burning 100 million barrels of oil a day, those effects are minor!

       1. This is awful to watch unfold. Abandon all hope as hell on earth creeps out of the depths of the earth through all the holes they drilled.

    3. I said here a good while back that turning down new pipelines to deliver and or process that oil via the Gulf infrastructure we already have is place was a major mistake, on environmental,national security, and good neighborly relations grounds, because such pipelines to the Pacific WOULD be built, otherwise.

       Environmentalists here could have traded ten acre of sensitive pipeline route for a hundred equally sensitive acres, to be preserved forever, for free, a mile or two or fifty miles off the route. A thousand acres for fifty thousand elsewhere, because the such land is available cheap, out in the boonies, and could have been added to the park system, state and national.

       Now our enemies, real, potential, or imagined, will have access to it that we cannot control, short of armed high seas naval actions, during a time of international high tensions, or actual war.

       We gave up something of a big stick for an environmental twig, not to mention that the R’s used this issue to help mop the floor with the D’s shortly afterwards.

       1. I sympathize wit your POV: I’m not sure that suppressing tar sands production should be the highest priority for environmentalists. I suspect that trying to promote alternatives to oil consumption would be a better use of their energy (pun intended).

          But…I don’t really get the idea that access to Canadian oil is valuable for national security. Canadian oil pollutes more than other oil sources; it still is imported oil; and in the event of a hot war the US military will have more than enough fuel to operate.

          The real security harm of imported oil is the financial impact, and that’s the same whether the oil is from Canada or KSA.

17. [the project would have “significant adverse environmental effects” … could have equally horrendous impacts on the wetland and woodland environment. But it concluded “that they can be justified in the circumstances, in light of the considerable benefits of the project…]

    And thus yet another airport was built.

18. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Po80nVKg6uw
    One thing I will say about this guy is that he is even better endowed with chutzpah than Elon Musk.

    Less than two dozen employees, and maybe a couple of prototype trucks, and he says he can be delivering before the year is out. IF he manages it, his truck will me a haywired conventional truck converted to electric. Not something I would want to put big money into, given that there won’t be any assurance of spare parts,etc, down the road.

    1. 2020 JEEP GLADIATOR STAKES A CLAIM IN THE INCREASINGLY POPULAR (AND PROFITABLE) TRUCK SEGMENT

       Powering the new Jeep Gladiator is a 3.6-liter V6 with 285 horsepower, with an available 260-hp 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V6 arriving in 2020.

       1. EcoDiesel = Oxymoron!

          1. Hi Fred,

             I’m no expert, especially when it comes to new models, but I’m not so sure NEW diesels, most of which come with a system that injects a special chemical into the exhaust stream are any dirtier than ordinary engines, when everything else is held equal.

             This is because a diesel has an advantage in terms of energy efficiency, and while it may produce more of some pollutants, doing the same amount of work, driving the same vehicle, it burns less fuel, and therefore produces less pollution in total.

             Having said this much, I would never buy a new car or pickup truck with a diesel, because the extra cost up front is way out of line with what the typical owner can save on fuel, and when a diesel gives trouble…… you better be sitting down when you hear what it’s going to cost to fix it.

             And in dollars and cents terms……. a diesel is actually costs more for fuel than a comparable gasoline model these days…. because diesel for now, and maybe for a long time to come, is about forty to fifty percent more expensive per gallon than gasoline.

             So a given trip in a gasoline vehicle actually costs LESS right now… the diesel fuel advantage used to be huge, in terms of fuel economy, but new gasoline engines have closed the gap more than halfway in terms of miles per gallon.

             Bottom line, unless you are running a machine hard, long hours, day in and day out, for YEARS, choosing diesel is a money loser.

             But in heavy duty applications, diesels generally outlast gasoline engines by a factor of two or three at least. That’s not because gasoline engines are inherently inferior.

             Industrial diesels are simply built to much higher standards, which is why they cost so much more up front.

             Buyers should be forewarned that most of the diesels that are being put into cars and pickups are NOT proven models built by proven manufacturers, and a hell of a lot of them are going to break down just as fast or faster than the gasoline engine that cost thousands less…… and with gasoline cheaper than diesel… costs less to drive.

             1. I’m no expert, especially when it comes to new models, but I’m not so sure NEW diesels, most of which come with a system that injects a special chemical into the exhaust stream are any dirtier than ordinary engines, when everything else is held equal.

                True! My sister, in Germany, has a brand new VW diesel station wagon, courtesy of the company she works for. It has the technology you mention. I wasn’t all that impressed with it, to say the least.

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2mD-yYgiJs
                What is AdBlue and what does AdBlue do? GreenChem AdBlue4You

                But for what it is worth, ECO-ICE would be just as oxymoronic, IMHO!

19. Doug’s comments above are all the more reason this should have happened ten years ago:

    China’s New Energy Vehicle Production Up 186%

    Up, up and away.

    China’s new energy passenger vehicle wholesale volume in January, 2019 totaled 91,175 units, surging 186% year on year (YoY), while dropping 43% month on month (MoM), according to the China Passenger Car Association (CPCA).

    Last month, the BEV sales leaped 268% from a year ago to 72,175 units, yet still 44% less than that of the previous month. The sales of all-electric cars and SUVs skyrocketed 177% and 1134% over a year earlier respectively to 48,611 units and 23,403 units.

    The PHEV sales presented a YoY increase of 55% with 19,000 units sold in January. Of that, SUV sales substantially jumped 86% to 12,061 units and the car sector held the other 6,939 units with a YoY growth of 20%.

    The percentage of BEV sales in Jan. edged down to 79% in 2019 from 81% in 2018. Accordingly, the proportion of PHEV sales in Jan. climbed to 21% this year from 19% a year ago.

    I have opined before that China is going to be “ground zero” for EV deployment. The greater Chinese population does not have a history with personal or family ownership of cars as is the case with many developed countries. Without this history, the romanticization of the automobile and the ICE that exists among gear-heads in the western world should be far less prevalent. Against this background, the average Chinese consumer is likely to be sold on the convenience of home charging and the lower maintenance and running costs of EVs as opposed to notions of speed and power promoted by ICE proponents. In addition the average Chinese consumer, lacking a history with conventional automobiles should have less preconceived notions of what a car should be. In other words what western consumers see as inconveniences of owning an EV, Chinese consumers getting their first car will just view as normal aspects of owning a car, having never experienced ICE ownership. On top of all that, there is the very recognizable smog problem.

    A significant factor in Chinese auto-manufacturing is that that their production appears to be primarily for the domestic market. I believe that the Chinese central planners have decided that there is little prospect of displacing established global car brands on the world market any time soon and have decided instead to focus the national effort on “New Energy Vehicles”. If China develops a leadership position in battery electric vehicles they could pose a significant problem for the established global brands.

    On another front, if the Chinese government takes the threat of global warming seriously, they need to put in place policies to stop the export of coal burning power plants. In my neck of the woods two proposed coal electricity generation plants have been floated, dangling the carrot of industrial developments that need the electricity that the proposed plants would generate.

    Jamaica says Chinese company would build coal plant to power proposed transshipment port

    KINGSTON, Jamaica – Jamaica’s works minister says a Chinese company wants to build its own coal-fired plant to generate power to build a hoped-for $1.5 billion port project.

    China Harbor Engineering Co. wants to develop a transshipment port in a swath of southern Jamaica that would lure the deep-drafting ships expected to start using the Panama Canal when its expansion is completed.

    It aims to build an industrial park, container terminal, logistics zone and shipping berths to accommodate “post-Panamax” vessels carrying a bigger share of regional cargo, much of it from China.

    A second proposal was floated but faced some serious push back:

    Jamaica must say no to coal-powered plant!

    Our nation is in danger. The 1,000-MW coal-fired plant to be built by the Chinese company Jiuquan Iron & Steel at Nain, St Elizabeth, has too many negatives associated with it and should not be presented to the Jamaican people as a fait accompli.

    The Government says it will create 3,000 jobs, include bauxite mines, an alumina refinery, a local electricity network, and more, but the danger is the fuel to be used. It will be powered by coal!

    The most recent news on this development seems to have come from the government news agency:

    JISCO to Spend $3 Billion on Industrial Park and Special Economic Zone at Nain

    Chairman of the JSEZA, Metry Seaga, provided details during a media briefing at the Authority, Waterloo Road, St. Andrew, on Wednesday (June 20).

    Mr. Seaga said the park’s phased development will involve the establishment of a bauxite/alumina refinery and an electricity plant to power this and other businesses that are set up; and a smelter that will underpin JISCO’s focus on manufacturing aluminium and its by-products locally.

    “I think it is important that we, as Jamaicans, understand the game changer that this is going to be. It is going to transform, not only St. Elizabeth, but all the towns around it. Most importantly, this has the backing of the Government of the People’s Republic of China. This is real and we are going to make it happen,” the Chairman said.

    Meanwhile, Mr. Seaga, who indicated that this is part of a wider project targeting housing developments, said JISCO has given an undertaking that liquefied natural gas (LNG) will be utilised to generate power.

    I am somewhat intrigued but not surprised by the fact that the developers are choosing to go the expedient route of FF powered electricity generation, despite the fact that Nain is nestled in a valley between two mountains that are the site of Jamaica’s best wind resources and home to the island’s only commercial wind farms (total about 100MW). I would much rather the Chinese export some of their renewable energy technology to the island and take advantage of the abundant renewable energy available. Hopefully this may yet happen.

    1. Note on Chine MoM figures for January. China celebrates New Year in January and many businesses close for 1-2 weeks, that can cut MoM figures. It needs to be compared against last January’s MoM but, given the growth of the industry, a comparison may not be all that valid.

       NAOM

20. https://electrek.co/2019/02/22/egeb-europe-california-ford/

    From this link
    Bill Wehrum was formerly a utility lobbyist before joining the EPA under Trump as an assistant administrator. That’s no secret. But a new report from Politico reveals “the nation’s biggest coal-burning power companies” paid Werhum’s former firm “millions of dollars to fight a wide range of Obama-era environmental rules.”

    “Twenty-five power companies and six industry trade groups agreed to pay the firm a total of $8.2 million in 2017 alone,” the report notes. Utility companies Duke Energy, Southern Co., and AEP were all major contributors to the firm.

    Documents show Wehrum met with power industry clients in 2017 “to lay out a road map for attacking the very policies he now oversees.

    1. Well, what a surprise. Draining the swamp has ended up diverting a few more rivers into it and shipping in alligators by the truckload.

       NAOM

21. For those interested, 2018 World Atlas of Desertification is out, and can be downloaded.
    At first blush, it looks to be an excellent study. Its a big download, so get started and then go turn your compost pile, clean your PV’s, or sharpen your blades.
    Desertification may be the primary manifestation of global warming that leads to economic (and civil) disruption around the world, likely more so than flooding.
    https://wad.jrc.ec.europa.eu/download

22. Yet another new company trying for the HOLY GRAIL of automobiles
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjDLwnTyybo

23. Despite all the excitement surrounding electrified and autonomous cars, something keeps telling me that two or three generations down the road, people are going to reorganize society in such a way that most of the traveling we do these days will be unnecessary, and considered a chore to be avoided.

    Just the time savings alone, from having work and housing located properly, could knock your socks off.

    1. True, nice as some cars are, people spend too much of their lives in them and working for them.

24. https://truthout.org/articles/judge-in-monsanto-roundup-trial-is-already-hindering-testimony/

25. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/siberia-toxic-black-snow-reveals-toll-coal-mining-180971525/

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/where-world-anthropocene-180960241/

    https://www.smithsoniansecondopinion.org/climate-change/are-you-optimistic-about-earths-future-180964375/

26. 1 out of 3 Koreans diagnosed with latent tuberculosis

    http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2019/02/119_264265.html

    Natures way of telling you—-

27. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=yaWa61AyT3g
    Trump Doesn’t Like Memorandums of Understanding

    Shit! We can’t call this POTUS a moron, because that is simply profoundly demeaning to all existing morons!

    1. And yet, the majority of Republicans approve of this president.
       You ready for 4 more years?

       1. Do we have a choice?

       2. There’s clearly reason to be optimistic for 4 more years. Since the start of the year, his approval ratings among independent voters have been climbing to the point where they are now at the highest level of his presidency so far. I think the booming economy, low gas prices, and the Democrats’ embrace of socialism is giving him a decent level of strength for now.

          

          1. Since the start of the year, his approval ratings among independent voters have been climbing to the point where they are now at the highest level of his presidency so far.

             Yeah, all the way up to a whopping 38% !

             https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

             Donald Trump Job Approval by Party Identification

             2019 Feb 1-10 Republicans 89% Independents 38% Democrats 5%
             2019 Jan 21-27 Republicans 88% Independents 32% Democrats 5%
             2019 Jan 2-10 Republicans 88% Independents 31% Democrats 6%

             1. Hi Fred,
                Take heart, and help spread this link.
                https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/24/youre-fired-america-has-already-terminated-trump?CMP=share_btn_tw&fbclid=IwAR1G1-8wr9-0saPlsh4Hhk9O8yqvhFoltCZY5RUanqmBKIsnoFlBUS8rY04

                I think it’s ok to post the entire piece here, considering it’s already widely copied, but if Dennis thinks he should delete it, that’s ok, I can just repost the link itself, or he can do that.

                The Guardian won’t mind at all!

                Robert Mueller’s soon-to-be-delivered report will begin months of congressional investigations, subpoenas, court challenges, partisan slugfests, media revelations, and more desperate conspiracy claims by Donald Trump, all against the backdrop of the burning questions: Will he be impeached by the House? Will he be convicted by the Senate? Will he pull a Richard Nixon and resign?
                Trump faces a legal reckoning – but are his worst troubles yet to come?
                Read more

                In other words, will America fire Trump?

                I have news for you. America has already fired him.

                When the public fires a president before election day, as it did Jimmy Carter, Nixon and Herbert Hoover, they don’t send him a letter telling him he’s fired.

                They just make him irrelevant. Politics happens around him, despite him. He’s not literally gone but he might as well be.

                It’s happened to Trump. The courts and House Democrats are moving against him. Senate Republicans are quietly subverting him. Even Mitch McConnell told him to end the shutdown.

                The Fed is running economic policy. Top-level civil servants are managing day-to-day work of the agencies.

                Isolated in the White House, distrustful of aides, at odds with intelligence agencies, distant from his cabinet heads, Trump has no system to make or implement decisions.

                His tweets don’t create headlines as before. His rallies are ignored. His lies have become old hat.

                Action and excitement have shifted elsewhere, to Democratic challengers, even to a 29-year-old freshman congresswoman too young to run.
                Trump is wrong about the wall but he might have picked the right fight
                Lloyd Green
                Read more

                Don’t get me wrong. He’s still dangerous, like an old landmine buried in the mud. He could start a nuclear war.

                Yet even America’s adversaries just humor him. Kim Jong-un and Xi Jinping give him tidbits to share with the American public, then do whatever they want.

                Why did America fire him? If the nation were to write him a letter informing him he’s no longer president, it would go like this:

                Dear Mr President,

                While many of us disagree on ideology and values, we agree on practical things like obeying the constitution and not letting big corporations and the wealthy run everything.

                Your 35-day government shutdown was a senseless abuse of power. So too your “national emergency” to build your wall with money Congress refused to appropriate.

                When you passed your tax bill you promised our paychecks would rise by an average of $4,000 but we never got the raise. Our employers used the tax savings to buy back their shares of stock and give themselves raises instead.

                Then you fooled us into thinking we were getting a cut by lowering the amounts withheld from our 2018 paychecks. We know that now because we’re getting smaller tax refunds.

                At the same time, many big corporations aren’t paying a dime in taxes. Worse yet, they’re getting refunds.

                For example, GM is paying zilch and claiming a $104m refund on $11.8bn of profits. Amazon is paying no taxes and claiming a $129m refund on profits of $11.2bn. (This is after New York offered it $3bn to put its second headquarters there.)

                They aren’t breaking any tax laws or regulations. That’s because they made the tax laws and regulations. You gave them a free hand.

                You’re supposed to be working for us, not for giant corporations. But they’re doing better than ever, as are their top executives and biggest investors. Yet nothing has trickled down. We’re getting shafted.

                Which is why more than 75% of us (including 45% who call ourselves Republicans) support Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s proposed 70% tax on dollars earned in excess of $10m a year.

                And over 60% of us support Elizabeth Warren’s proposed 2% annual tax on households with a new worth of $50m or more.

                You’ve also shown you don’t have a clue about healthcare. You promised us something better than the Affordable Care Act but all you’ve done is whittle it back.

                A big reason we gave Democrats control of the House last November was your threat to eliminate protection for people with pre-existing conditions.

                Are you even aware that 70% of us now favor Medicare for all?

                Most of us don’t pay much attention to national policy but we pay a lot of attention to home economics. You’ve made our own home economics worse.

                We’ll give you official notice you’re fired on 3 November 2020, if not before. Until then, you can keep the house and perks, but you’re toast.

                Respectfully,

                America.

                I’m personally ready to bet three to one that Trump, if he’s still around, will lose, if he runs a second time.

                1. “At the same time, many big corporations aren’t paying a dime in taxes. Worse yet, they’re getting refunds.

                   For example, GM is paying zilch and claiming a $104m refund on $11.8bn of profits. Amazon is paying no taxes and claiming a $129m refund on profits of $11.2bn. (This is after New York offered it $3bn to put its second headquarters there.)”

                   Kinda makes me wonder what the people of America think they won when they won the cold war. The cold war was fought on the backs of, and paid for with the blood and treasure of, the American people. It seems to me the spoils of victory were handed over glad-faced to the rulers of the American Corporate Oligarchy. Kinda pathetic. People get the government they deserve.

28. There has been some discussion of inflation, deflation and money supply in the petroleum only thread.

    There is some reason, how good it might be is impossible for me to judge, to believe that there is SOMETHING sort of akin to a deep state, when it comes to the price of oil. Read Watcher’s comments in the other thread to see what I mean. In a nutshell, to me, it means that there is reason to believe various powerful governments, without ever saying WHY, are willing to spend megabucks in cash or kind propping up the oil industry……..
    because an oil supply crisis would bring the entire economic house of cards that is the modern world economy crashing down like the three little pigs house of sticks when the big bad wolf blows on it. This could explain for instance, at least in part, why the banking industry in the USA has been so reckless about loaning money to the tight oil companies that aren’t going to pay it back.

    But I’m not interested in discussing conspiracies.

    What I do want to talk about is what the consequences will be if oil prices do go up, to say over a hundred bucks, and stay there.

    WILL this be enough to crash the Japanese economy?

    Will it be enough to crash the world economy?

    HOW FAST would the price of oil have to go up such that there would be little or nothing that various governments could do to soften the blow, and keep local economies on their feet?

    My personal opinion is that while adaptation to high oil prices is entirely possible, in the middle and long term, nothing to very little can be done in the short term, meaning less than four or five years, to do anything other than print more money.

    By nothing to very little, I mean that rationing is only a stop gap measure, price controls are only a stop gap measure, even raising fuel tax is only a stop gap, in the SHORT term, and anyway, in a time when people are out of work, raising fuel taxes is not politically viable.

    1. Some of our big trading partners are much larger percentage importers of oil, having no domestic production of significance. Japan, Germany (and much of the EU), Korea, Taiwan, as examples.
       They will struggle heavily with this scenario. Europe growth is already tenuous.

    2. WILL this be enough to crash the Japanese economy?

       Will it be enough to crash the world economy?

       Who knows? 😉

       https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Japan-Eyes-Microgrid-Startup-In-Renewable-Push.html

       Japan Eyes Microgrid Startup In Renewable Push

       Although blockchain was originally invented to serve as the public transaction ledger for Bitcoin, the revolutionary technology’s potential functions reach far beyond the world of cryptocurrencies. Blockchain has been widely buzzed about for several years now due to its potential to vastly overhaul the global energy sector, but so far the industry has been slow to adopt the new technology on a large scale. Now, Japanese independent power producer Marubeni has partnered with Brooklyn-based blockchain tech startup and self-proclaimed “transactive energy company” LO3 Energy to start a pilot project in Japan.

       The energy producer and tech startup will be using blockchain technology to create a virtual energy marketplace connecting multiple power production facilities owned by Marubeni (a mix of traditional and renewable) with offices and factories across Japan. This pilot project will simulate real energy transactions in order to experiment with the viability of using this framework to ultimately develop a complete, commercially successful network.
       
       For what it’s worth, I’m still much more concerned about global ecosystems collapse than I am about anything else! Having said that, there is no doubt that the global energy system is in the throes of massive disruption! How all that eventually shakes out is anybody’s guess but my hunch is that fossil fuels will be a consistently declining participant in the global energy mix!

       Cheers!

    3. I have come to the conclusion that, all else considered, low oil (energy) prices are good for politicians, especially those that espouse free market principles. Politicians that support free market policies can always claim that it is the free market at work when prices are low such as Thatcher and Reagan back in their heyday. IIRC even in my neck of the woods there was an economic boom that the then “free market” friendly administration claimed was the result of their policies during the same time frame that Thatcher and Reagan were riding high.

       As far as I can tell, high oil prices act as a form of redistribution of wealth on steroids and it goes like this. When oil prices rise, typically prices of other FF are affected as well since oil is often either a factor in the extraction and most times, the transport of all fuels. At any rate since oil comprises a very high portion of transportation fuels and a significant proportion of economic activity involves the movement of goods and/or people economies end up diverting resources that could be used for other purposes to pay for fuels (energy). In the economy that most people operate, transportation is a key factor since workers have to travel to their jobs and food and other consumer items must be brought to the consumers. So what ends up happening during periods of high oil prices is that more money ends in the hands of the oil producers and that same “more money” means less money for anybody not in the business of producing, refining and distributing oil. Money (wealth) is thus diverted from non oil producers to oil producers. The big problem is that, in an oil based global economy, the oil producers are but, a tiny fraction of the economy so this transfer of wealth is from the many to the few.

       Watcher’s thoughts indicate that what the US administrations, starting from the Obama years are doing, is giving a disguised middle finger to the oil producers while claiming to support them. When it is considered that roughly ninety percent of global oil production comes from outside the US, much of it from countries that the US has no reason to be allied with other than for their oil (here’s looking at the Middle East, Africa and Latin America), the US has more to gain from keeping oil prices low. The mechanism being used (Watcher’s) is particularly crafty since it provides liquidity essentially from thin air to fund the US tight oil industry, providing jobs and cash to oil service companies and oil field workers, while providing that little bit of surplus oil on the world markets to keep prices low and harm producers outside the US.

       The fact is that the companies in the tight oil business are generally racking up huge losses and debts at the same time that they are making it much more difficult for guys like Mike from the oily side to make a decent living. According to the doctrine of Watcher, all of that does not matter. All that matters is that the sheeple have their cheap gas. When time comes to settle the debts that continue to grow, they will all be waved away using magic tricks like QE!

       Which brings me to my support for renewable energy. Renewable energy, solar PV in particular, has the promise of placing the means of production of energy, in the hands of the many. When battery powered vehicles are factored in, it extends the production of energy from just electricity to transportation as well. This is a very big deal and probably why Charles Koch and his ilk are so determined to demonize renewable energy and EVs. If (when) the general public becomes aware of the paradigm shift that renewables and EVs represent and start to act on this awareness, it will be “game over” for the wealth redistribution mechanism that the oil business represents.

29. Positive thoughts to go with your Monday morning coffee.

    EXPLAINING THE INCREASE IN COAL CONSUMPTION WORLDWIDE

    “This is an alarming trend, because despite increasing international awareness of the risks of global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions, some major economies are unable to substitute their coal-based electricity with less carbon-intensive energies. Indeed, coal is mainly used for electricity production, with two-thirds of world consumption going to electricity production; this proportion rises to three-quarters if China and India, which traditionally have more widespread uses, are excluded; the rest of consumption goes to industry (mainly steel). Coal remains the most polluting source of energy: it generally emits twice as much CO₂ as natural gas, its main competitor.

    Worldwide, coal consumption for electricity generation is almost growing at the same rate as the electricity consumption (2.8% per year versus 3% per year between 2000 and 2017). As a result, the share of coal in the power mix has almost remained steady for the past 20 years around 40%. Even if it has only decreased by two points since 2010 (see Figure below), coal is still the most widely used energy source for electricity generation in the world.”

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2019-02-coal-consumption-worldwide.html#jCp

    1. And, as for the so called Free World leader:

       ENERGY-RELATED CARBON EMISSIONS ROSE IN US IN 2018:

       “Analysts estimate that energy-related CO2 emissions grew 3.4 percent from 2017 to 2018, which would be the largest increase in the United States since 2010.”

       Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2019-01-energy-related-carbon-emissions-rose.html#jCp

       1. Heh! Maybe we won’t even have to depend on tipping points and feedbacks to get to an RCP 8.5 scenario after all!
          Cheers!

          BTW, in case anyone misses him, our old friend, Javier, has a guest post at What’s up With That, on strong Arctic Ice Growth this year! And no, I won’t provide a link!

          1. “And no, I won’t provide a link!”

             Thanks. We owe you Fred.

             BTW: “In January 2019, a pattern of high-altitude winds in the Arctic, better known as the polar vortex, weakened, sweeping frigid air over North America and Europe in the second half of the month. ARCTIC SEA ICE EXTENT REMAINED WELL BELOW AVERAGE, but temperatures in the far north were closer to average than in past years.”

             https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

             1. I see Arctic Sea Ice Extent is running below 2011-2012 and the volume is above the trendline.

             2. This graph is proof that Javier is right!
                http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2019/02/Figure-3.png

          2. We would have to back off quickly to get back down to RCP 8.5.

             1. That would be funny if it weren’t flirting with the truth!

          3. FredM and all,

             Tamino at Open Mind has responded, to put it lightly, to this today.

             1. LOL!

                Craig Austin | February 25, 2019 at 2:14 pm | Reply
                All the graphs on WUWT are linked to the original research source, the graphs shown here are mystery sourced, if this can be corrected it should be.

                [Response: I make my own graphs. The data used are here:
                ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/daily/data/
                ]

    2. Indias coal consumption peaks each yr in the fall (when hydro then starts to pick up).
       From fall 2016 to fall 2018, peak went form 51 to 56 Mill tonnes. Thats close to 10% increase.

       https://indiapowerreview.com/indian-coal-production-dispatch-stocks-consumption-february-2019-update/

30. Not sure if this was posted in the past, but China is not waiting for a “battery breakthrough”.

    China added as much battery-storage capacity in 2018 as all previous years combined
    China’s battery ambition can be seen in the speed at which the country is adding battery-storage capacity. At the start of 2018, China had an operational battery-storage capacity of 389 megawatts (MW). By August, China had added another 340 MW of additional capacity. That’s why the China Energy Storage Alliance (CNESA) declared 2018 to be “one of the most significant years yet for the industry.”

    Further, neither of these figures include another energy-storage technology: electric-vehicle batteries. In 2017, CNESA estimates that China built 40 GWh worth of batteries for electric cars and buses. That accounts for the batteries in more than 50% of all electric vehicles sold globally in the same year

    https://qz.com/1371099/china-added-as-much-battery-storage-capacity-in-2018-as-all-previous-years-combined/

    1. There is a lot to be said for central economic planning, especially when it is conducted with appropriate (long range) goals in mind.

31. As they say, Business before Pleasure:

    EU COMMITTEE SHELVES CLIMATE CONCERNS TO OPEN US TRADE TALKS

    “The EU is preparing to negotiate two trade agreements with the US, contrary to pledges to only strike deals with countries committed to the Paris Agreement.”

    https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/02/20/eu-committee-shelves-climate-concerns-open-us-trade-talks/

    1. Technically the US hasn’t officially withdrawn yet so it is still committed. Also they may be looking to a future post Trump!

32. For a long time I read everything I could by such people as managed to escape from behind the Iron Curtain, so as to better understand the BIG PICTURE.

    One thing that consistently happened in the lives of these people is that they could read only the state supported and controlled media, they couldn’t get anything else.

    But the ones with critical thinking skills, meaning virtually all of these escapees, were able to read between the lines and figure out a great many things, in terms of what was true and false, and what was deliberately hidden, or at least overlooked.

    One defector in particular had his falling scales experience when his training as an officer included management of contagious diseases, by way of quarantine. He was allowed to read about the very few instances of western countries imposing quarantines, but the mass media in the USSR mentioned basically NOTHING at all about quarantines inside the USSR.

    But as an officer, he was privy to several such quarantines, one or two of them ongoing at that very time. This straw broke the camel’s back. He realized then that it was the soviet bloc that was backward, rather than the western bloc. No more scales, and not too much longer after that, he flew out in his fighter, making it to a NATO air port. I don’t remember which one or his name now.

    I don’t follow Fox News, but I check it occasionally, based on the premise that one should know his enemies, lol.

    And anybody who reads it, who has good critical thinking skills, can figure out a lot of things, things that Fox generally lies about.

    Fox generally has nice things to say about NASA for instance, except when NASA is doing climate science. It’s good rah rah far the MAGA , We’re number one idiot crowd.

    Here’s a link about ice bergs in Antarctica, a big one , about to calve. Reading it has to at least put a little inkling of a question in the mind of a person who has swallowed the propaganda about Antarctica ice mass growing.

    https://www.foxnews.com/science/nasa-concerned-as-iceberg-twice-the-size-of-new-york-city-is-about-to-break-off-from-antarctica

    And in this link, there’s another link enclosed, that goes to an AGU article about the possibility of the whole ice sheet melting.

    I wonder how many people , collectively, will experience the Paul on the road to Damascus experience, having the scales fall from their eyes, as the result of actually thinking about what they read on FOX. It won’t be many, as a percentage, maybe one or two or a handful, out of a hundred, in a year or over a period of years, but in total, it could be a fairly substantial number of people.

33. Gives new meaning to “Making a Difference” doesn’t it? When I was her age most of my thoughts involved girls or rockets that would fly ever higher (without exploding before they left the ground).

    SWEDISH STUDENT LEADER WINS EU PLEDGE TO SPEND BILLIONS ON CLIMATE

    The European Union should spend hundreds of billions of euros combating climate change during the next decade, its chief executive said on Thursday, responding to a Swedish teen who has inspired a global movement of children against global warming. In a speech alongside 16-year-old Greta Thunberg in Brussels, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker also criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for suggesting climate change was “invented” and “ideological”.

    “In the next financial period from 2021 to 2027, every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards action to mitigate climate change,” Juncker said of his proposal for the EU budget, which is typically one percent of the bloc’s economic output, or one trillion euros ($1.13 trillion) over seven years.

    “Unite behind the science, that is our demand,” Thunberg told a plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). “Talk to the scientists, listen to them.”

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-teen-activist-idUSKCN1QA1RF?fbclid=IwAR3TMrFamr4sffwY6KIfveB4vqW1mznPYOL0_kaQ27_jx6-iCX78osCEMs8

    1. Meanwhile, in the US we have this.
       Dianne Feinstein rebuffs young climate activists’ calls for Green New Deal – video

       https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2019/feb/23/dianne-feinstein-rebuffs-young-climate-activists-calls-for-green-new-deal-video

       She says she has been doing this for 30 years! Maybe she needs to have a chat with Greta Thunberg…

       1. Well, of course she was correct. She said, speaking from experience, its not going to get enough votes in the senate as the bill, and the senate, currently stand.
          She is anything but naive.
          By and large, Californians have approved the job she does.

          1. Well, of course she was correct. She said, speaking from experience, its not going to get enough votes in the senate as the bill, and the senate, currently stand.

             She may indeed be correct based on her experience within the US political context, but the kids are telling her that, not only not is that not a good enough reply, but that both she and her attitude are a big part of the problem and that she is out of touch with reality.

             In any case, now contrast her response with:
             SWEDISH STUDENT LEADER WINS EU PLEDGE TO SPEND BILLIONS ON CLIMATE

             Something is very seriously wrong with the US political system!

       2. My Dad used to say: “Some people have 30 years experience, others have one year’s experience 30 times. Sounds like Dianne Feinstein fits into the latter class.

       3. Just watched the video. The kids “get it”. They realise that the people running the show at the moment will not live to see the worst of global warming, while they most likely, will. Amazing to hear the even the pre-teens with very articulate arguments!

          1. “Amazing to hear the even the pre-teens with very articulate arguments!”

             Depends how you raise em. My 10-year-old home schooled Grandson can (almost) beat me at chess and I’m currently teaching him 2-D calculus. He will be fluent in two foreign languages by the time he’s 15 and is already a competent pianist. That’s assuming doesn’t die skiing or rock climbing first.

       4. I don’t have any children but, I cannot imagine what it must be like to be faced with a young person who is the fruit of your loins and is worried,scared and depresssed about a future that you don’t appear to care about.

          1. Trust me, it’s even worse when you do care about the future. What are you supposed to tell them then?

             1. Tell them what you’re doing to make the future better.

                Ask them what they’d like to do, and tell them you’ll help them do it.

Comments are closed.