233 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum, June 18, 2020”

  1. Earlier there was a discussion about the capacity factor of solar photovoltaic, giving 25% as the average for the US. Problem is the average is largely slanted toward the areas where the population does not live.
    Example, New Jersey, pro-solar, high subsidies, net metering and TREC’s. 3.2 GW installed statewide so far. Using the state capacity numbers versus production, the CF comes out to 15%.
    NJ sits in the megalopolis and has the highest state population density. It’s where the people live and where the demand happens.
    Today the PJM will peak at 107 GW at 5 PM. Today solar maximum radiation for much of the state is 200 w/m2. It’s cloudy with high chance of rain and that continues for the next 8 days in Jersey and is similar for much of the PJM region.

    1. You are right, the CF reported earlier (25.1%) was for utility grade PV from actual output at over 500 facilities and representing 97% of USA output.
      Clearly the the big utilities and solar project developers aim to put their production facilities in the sunniest locations, thus the very good CF numbers for the country-wide production.

      On the other hand, just as you wouldn’t want to spend money to put panels in the shade of a big tree, you would want to avoid spending money on panels to be placed in areas with mediocre annual solar potential- like the Northeast USA. Unless you had exhausted other methods of energy procurement.
      https://globalsolaratlas.info/map?c=24.367114,-102.128906,3

      And you wouldn’t put wind generators where it wasn’t a prime wind zone, of course.

      I think many people have trouble imaging the energy scenario beyond their local zone, like weather.
      Where I live it is not very windy, so I have to work to imagine how wind could be a significant power source. In Iowa or Wyoming, no imagination needed.
      Likewise, no imagination needed to see how Calif (or Texas, or a dozen other states) could run mostly on sun.
      And of course, there is transmission of electricity. Works pretty good.
      Just this week Cuomo called for transmission from Canada to allow more hydroelectric electricity import. And-
      https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/how-canadas-other-major-energy-export-could-light-up-new-england-states

      “How California became far more energy-efficient than the rest of the country-
      It’s not about luck. It’s about smart policy.”
      https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/5/31/18646906/climate-change-california-energy-efficiency
      This kind of result only happens when the citizens push hard on their leaders, and vote for leaders with good understanding and inclination.

      1. Grid tie is cheating. If I have a site that needs 4 9’s of uptime 24-7-365 the max load per 340 watt panel is 18 watts @ 30 degrees latitude. 5% CF. You have to size for short dark days in December and Jan. The PV panel often less than 25% of system cost. You could do more watts, but Battery cost/size would escalate. This is with more than 10 years of design life from a LFP Battery. For lighting systems, you CAN get 10 year Lead Acid battery life by not exceeding 10% average nightly discharge. LFP battery costs are falling and cheaper per kWh than any other chem.

        1. Our last lead-acid battery set lasted over 12 years (October 2007 – January 2020). The key is over-sizing the battery bank and PV production relative to average consumption. Automatic watering and/or careful maintenance are essential. Anyway, I retired the lead-acid batteries in early January, replaced by a nice set of LiFePO4 modules. I also updated our inverter-chargers and some other BOS stuff, all just before this Covid mess started.
          Of course, overall efficiency/conservation and gentle use of energy resources is essential, becomes habitual, in a successful off-grid lifestyle. Pretty sure American society will have to be forced into that mindset, but not at all hopeful that will occur in an orderly fashion. Western sense of entitlement and all that.
          Meanwhile, we’re in our 21st year of no-grid-tie living, doing fine,; no power bill, no water bill, no sewer bill, no mortgage, no debts. Seemed like a good foundation of a retirement plan, such as it is. My thoughts on that haven’t changed much.

          1. Lead Acid batteries are not what they used to be. Recycle lead in a storage battery will give mixed results. ICE starting batteries are not good energy storage, and everyone complains they have a shorter life now. The last HQ lead smelter in the US was shutdown in 2017.

        2. Longtimber- “Grid tie is cheating.”
          Ahh, I didn’t realize this was a game. If grid tie is cheating, then over 99% of people are cheating (legally). Some might call that reality.

          1. No argument there, it takes effort to time shift and if everyone is away during daylight can be time-consuming. but failing to prepare is preparing to fail.

      2. Interesting how you would choose a transmission line from Canada to Massachusetts via Maine that will essentially give no carbon emission reduction, permanently eradicate about 2400 acres of forest in Maine and impinge on many wetlands/streams.
        New Hampshire turned this line down, but Maine, despite many towns voting against it, appears to be permitting this. Quebec Power makes more money selling to Massachusetts than into Canada and Mass. gets to claim lower emissions (we can keep an eye on that).

        Another one to keep an eye on is New York state, they have a strong energy plan with a moratorium on new gas pipelines. Let’s see what they do in the future.
        New Jersey Energy Master Plan is a bit ambiguous, allowing natural gas (the big energy provider now) as part of their low carbon plan, so there is a lot of wiggle room. Of course NJ imports about 60 percent of it’s power. About 5.5% of NJ electric generation is “other renewable”.

        BTW, that “massive” Canadian power export claimed in the articles is just a few percent of the PJM grid (as a reference point ) and that new powerline will provide power equivalent to less than 1 percent of today’s peak.

        1. GF- I understand why you tend to be so very downcast on renewable energy. You live in a zone that is relatively unfavorable for low cost renewable energy.
          Stuck with coal is a rough position to swallow, especially for one such as yourself who is aware of the personal health issues and the destructive effects on the earth.
          I hated living where there is coal burning. Its bad for the soul.
          I’d be sour to be in that position, and I am when I consider that coal is being heavily used on this earth anywhere.

          But what you see locally is not the whole world. Some places are very favorable for renewable energy, and clean air. There is no coal burning in my region, for example.
          But it is all one world, and so any progress toward decarbonization and conservation that we can make in any region, is good for the whole.

          1. You really like to BS about me and eat up all that media hype. Show me the new renewable system in Canada that is supposed to reduce emissions.
            You can’t because there is none, it is just more profitable to sell power to the US than to Canadians, a shift of market and more ecodestruction plus pollution.

            Some people just can’t deal with reality.

            1. Not sure what you mean GF.
              So it goes.

              btw- I compared the ‘Global tilted irradiation at optimum angle’ for my location and Easton PA. I assume that Easton is similar to your locale when it comes to solar irradiation.
              2090 kwh/m2 (my area) vs 1689 kwh/m2 (easton)
              Its not as big a difference as one might have guessed.
              My solar PV breakeven is coming out at 6-7 years, all things accounted for.
              Even if it was double that, it would still be a great deal financially, for the environment, and for the soul.

              Panasonic VBHN330SA17 330w Mono Solar Panel-
              19.7% efficiency
              6.5% degradation at 25 yrs.

              Reality

            2. Yeah, maybe you are getting early onset dementia. Or just too involved in personal attacks to remember the subject was the Canadian hydro power being sold to Massachusetts.

            3. No personal attack intended, or accepted for that matter.
              Lets stay with content.
              The world is ugly enough without throwing more crap on the fire.

            5. Only downside to Panasonic/Sanyo Panels is a non standard size. ie. 1000 x 1600 mm. New ones are closer. otherwise, the higher voltage can be useful but can limit system design in cold climates.

      1. Yeah, Perth Amboy is fully developed. Northeast Jersey is almost one big city. Around here the large solar projects go on fields and forest.

        1. Gone fishing,

          The solar electricity generated displaces what type of fuel in Pennsylvannia, I would think either coal or natural gas. In most cases the utility scale solar is placed in a field rather than a forest, at least where I live, may be different down south.

          1. I don’t know if it would displace anything in Pa, a new high voltage transmission line from Pa. was recently completed to take up the increase in demand in NE New Jersey. Not sure if it would displace or just takes up some demand (for about 1000 houses, sort of).
            Keeping rates lower forces lower rates of NG and prevents efficiency gains and lifestyle changes. So maybe it’s slowing down more effective societal changes.

            Since it only produces strongly in the spring/summer near noon, it might just force cutbacks of the wind power in PA if it is windy that day. Those are decisions made at the grid level.

            So far it has generated nothing, since it has not been built yet.

            1. Gonefishing,

              I thought you were talking about an existing utility scale solar facility. In the US electricity net output has been flat for a decade, if that trend continues then output from wind, solar, or hydro displaces coal, natural gas, and nuclear net generation.

              I agree reducing electricity use is best, but reducing to zero will be relatively difficult in my opinion. 🙂

            2. The proposed sites in Perth Amboy from the article was the topic of discussion.

            3. Gone fishing,

              You said:

              Around here the large solar projects go on fields and forest.

              I thought you were in Pennsylvannia.

  2. Whats a solar developer?
    Here is just one of many-
    8 Minute Solar Energy-
    “In just 8 minutes, energy from the Sun reaches the Earth. We take it from there.”

    The work they do- ‘Developer to build 250-megawatt solar plant with 150 megawatt-hours of energy storage for two Northern California CCAs’, for example.
    With over 18 gigawatts (GW) under development, 8minute has one of the largest pipelines of solar and solar-plus-storage projects in the country [projects throughout California, Texas and the Southwestern United States], including more than 50 utility-scale projects in various stages.-
    https://www.8minute.com/solar-projects/

  3. As the world warms.

    CLIMATE CRISIS: ALARM AT RECORD-BREAKING HEATWAVE IN SIBERIA

    In May, surface temperatures in parts of Siberia were up to 10C above average, according to the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S). Martin Stendel, of the Danish Meteorological Institute, said the abnormal May temperatures seen in north-west Siberia would be likely to happen just once in 100,000 years without human-caused global heating.

    Marina Makarova, the chief meteorologist at Russia’s Rosgidromet weather service, said: “This winter was the hottest in Siberia since records began 130 years ago. Average temperatures were up to 6C higher than the seasonal norms.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/17/climate-crisis-alarm-at-record-breaking-heatwave-in-siberia

    1. We are having the most fucked up spring in northern New England. This is the fourth spring in five years in which we have had no rain. One expects a dry summer, but “dry summers” now start in May, even April. Temps in 90s for next four days. 45 deg. N.

      The apples are falling off my trees.

  4. Hello Ron,

    No worries over deleting my post on the oil thread.

    perhaps we need a twilight zone thread, then again perhaps not , this is a technical site after all not a Sci-Fi one 😉

    Forbin

    PS: different email address , I keep forgetting the old one is no longer valid as Talk Talk closed them down.

  6. Smart, or dumb as shit. Your choice.
    “President Donald Trump said some Americans might wear face masks not as a way to prevent the spread of coronavirus but as a way to “signal disapproval of him.”

    1. Smart, or dumb as shit.

      How on earth could anyone interpret that statement as smart?

      One reason the virus is spreading so fast is that so many people refuse to wear a mask. They refuse because they think Trump doesn’t want them to wear a mask. So when you see people who refuse to wear a mask, indoors in public places, you know two things about them.
      1. They are very likely a Trump supporter.
      2. They are definitely dumb as shit.

      1. There is now a correlation between the rate of growth of covid-19 and the level of Trump support: we see declines in places like NY and IL, while Texas and other rural/southern states are seeing strong growth.

        Sigh.

        1. Personally I like wearing mask RPE. It really brings out my eyes. So I got that going for me. I hope it becomes a more common behavior.

          1. Problem is, most of these selfish assholes have already passed their genes on.

  7. Not many surprises here.

    OVER-CONSUMPTION AND GROWTH ECONOMY KEY DRIVERS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES

    “The key conclusion from our review is that we cannot rely on technology alone to solve existential environmental problems — like climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution — but that we also have to change our affluent lifestyles and reduce over-consumption, in combination with structural change. During the past 40 years, worldwide wealth growth has continuously outpaced any efficiency gains.”

    https://phys.org/news/2020-06-overconsumption-growth-economy-key-drivers.html

    1. The comments at Phys.org are always inundated by anti-science trolls. You would think that such a forum would be great for discussion — not the case.

      1. That may be so but:

        DESPITE CLEAR SKIES DURING THE PANDEMIC, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ARE STILL RISING

        “The global trend of increasing levels of carbon dioxide has continued during the pandemic. The Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii recorded an increase of 2.4 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide (CO₂) to a total of 471.1 ppm in May 2020. It means the pandemic has had no direct impacts on reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.”

        https://phys.org/news/2020-06-pandemic-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html

        1. Doug Leighton:

          The linked story has me a little confused as it seems to mostly focus on drops in air pollution in West Java province.

          It mentions changes to some global measurements (NO2 down 7%, CO2 up 2.4 ppm).

          Then it focuses on the large number of fires burning in Indonesia.

          I’m not sure if the NO2 is down 7% just in Indonesia, or globally. The increase of CO2 is measured at Mauna Loa so that must be globally.

          I did find a USA Today story that quoted the UK NWS.

          “Our findings show that the annual average CO2 concentrations will still increase through this year, even though emissions are reducing,” a team from the United Kingdom’s National Weather Service said in a recent study, adding “This means that, although global emissions are smaller, they are still continuing – just at a slower rate. Additional CO2 is still accumulating in the atmosphere.”

          https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/11/fact-check-coronavirus-pandemic-isnt-slowing-climate-change/3090790001/

          1. Yeah the story is confusing but the Mauna Loa data is what matters most, IMHO. Note: April CO2 Apr. 2020: 416.18 ppm Apr. 2019: 413.52 ppm

            1. Yeah.

              I remember those days back when the CO2 concentration was 350 ppm.

              Now when i walk past our analyzer and see 410 ppm, it is a little jarring.

    2. Why are GHG emissions high? Why are ecosystems being destroyed? Why are species being extinguished and wildlife diversity being eliminated? The answer is simple: historically humans haven’t cared about these issues or have actively wanted to eliminate “nature”.

      How do we solve the problem? Well, as a society we have to decide we care about these issues. We don’t have to become poor. There’s no need to shiver in the dark, or punish ourselves with Puritan, monastic deprivation.

      We simply have to decide to aim directly at the problem: eliminate most GHG emissions, stop destroying wildlife, and then create large protected wildlife areas, etc. Indirect measures like wealth, growth, etc are irrelevant. It’s possible that there will be real trade offs, like meat eating, or maybe we’ll move to synthetic meat. But framing the issue like these guys do is unrealistic both in terms of achieving the stated goal as well as getting anyone to sign on to the project.

        1. Mostly. If we chose, for instance, to leave half the planet for wildlife that would take a lot of work, and people would have to live differently. But…would they be miserable? Heck, ask people who live in densely populated places like Singapore. They think life is pretty good, all in all.

          1. Nick, the human race does not make choices. I know you do not believe that, and will never believe that. Your worldview will not permit it. But nothing could be more obvious than the fact that the entire human race does not “choose” to do anything.

            We will never leave one damn acre to wildlife, except for the inside of the world’s zoos.

            Rather than asking, Can any group of forgers stay in ecological balance for an extended period of time? the real question should be Can EVERY group of forgers in a region stay in ecological balance? I believe the answer is unlikely, if not downright impossible. Once one group gets out of balance, competition will ensue.

            Steven A. LeBlanc, “Constant Battles”

            The world is made up of many different societies and cultures. They will all never agree on anything.

            1. Ron,

              There are a lot of things I could say to that, but here’s a simple one: I made my comment in reply to a reference to a group that thinks that we need to completely redesign our society from top to bottom in order to achieve our environmental goals. I replied that we can achieve more, with less ambitious and dramatic methods, by aiming directly for what we want.

              Doesn’t your comment apply 10 times as much to the original comment, with it’s complete redesign of society??

            2. Doesn’t your comment apply 10 times as much to the original comment, with it’s complete redesign of society??

              Of course it does. But I must admit I did not read it until now. It was way upstream, several replies in between.

              But I have read it now, I assume you are talking about Doug’s post. I would have the same reply.

              we also have to change our affluent lifestyles and reduce over-consumption, in combination with structural change.

              Bullshit, we are not going to do one goddamn thing other than that which we have always done. The idea that humanity can suddenly change its behavior is absurd, hilarious. Individuals can change. But humanity cannot change. Humanity will always behave in the manner humanity has always behaved. It is our innate behavior.

              Sorry, I did not mean to pick only on you Nick.

            3. What if a fundamental problem was our collective incapacity to recognize our very nature as a species?

            4. What if a fundamental problem was our collective incapacity to give a shit about our very nature as a species?

            5. If a culture values the living forest, the plants, the animals, the rivers because they obtain their basic needs from the landscape, then the landscape will be preserved and the young will be taught to preserve and value it.
              If a culture values synthetic products, entertainment, money and political power, that will be valued and taught to the youth. That is what will be preserved.

            6. That’s one hell of a book. I’m just finishing it. LeBlanc’s basic message: Humans have never lived in ecological “balance.” That’s a romantic myth. For example, we’ve saddled native Americans with a lie of their being “stewards” of the “environment,” which just dehumanizes them.

              We’re savage consumers and reproducers, all of us.

            7. Yes. And, “Rainforests once covered 14% of the earth’s land surface; now they cover a mere 6% and experts estimate that the last remaining rainforests could be consumed in less than 40 years. One and one-half acres of rainforest are lost every second with tragic consequences for both developing and industrial countries.”

              Did someone mention living in balance with Nature? On a different planet perhaps.

              https://rain-tree.com/facts.htm

            8. From the Amazon description: “ Ultimately, though, LeBlanc’s point of view is reassuring and optimistic. As he explains the roots of warfare in human history, he also demonstrates that warfare today has far less impact than it did in the past. He also argues that, as awareness of these patterns and the advantages of modern technology increase, so does our ability to avoid war in the future.”

            9. Nick, you simply fail to understand what the problem really is. It is not warfare but the destruction of the natural world due to overpopulation.

              Not only are human societies never alone but regardless of how well they control their own population or act ecologically, they cannot control their neighbors’ behavior. Each must confront the real possibility that its neighbors will not live in ecological balance but will grow its numbers and attempt to take resources from nearby groups. Not only have societies always lived in a changing environment, but they always have neighbors. The best way to survive in such a milieu is not to live in ecological balance with slow growth, but to grow rapidly and be able to fend off competitors as well as take resources from others.

              Steven LeBlanc: Constant Battles, Page 73

              That is what has already happened. That is why we are destroying the environment today. Wild Africa will soon be gone and nothing but masses of people will replace it. All the wildlife will disappear. We are not okay. There is no hope for Africa in the near term and no hope for the world in the long term.

            10. Ron,

              The writer of the quote above (likely the publisher, with the support of the book’s author) is that warfare (including competitive destruction of the environment) is our past, not necessarily our future. They said it, not me.

            11. I understand that Nick. But why did you post something about warfare when we were discussing the destruction of the environment. That being said, you wrote above. Bold mine:

              is that warfare (including competitive destruction of the environment) is our past, not necessarily our future. They said it, not me.

              No, no, no, they did not say that at all. That is nothing but your opinion, which is just wrong. It is not warfare that destroys the environment, it is overpopulation. There is no such thing as “competitive destruction of the environment”.

              A growing population of one tribe prevents warfare or invasion by another tribe. And that growing population is what causes destruction of the environment. Warfare is prevented but the destruction of the environment is increased.

            12. Hmm. Well, this is complex, and hard to manage in relatively short comments. So, let’s break things down into small bites:

              It seems clear to me that primitive civilizations don’t have good control of their fertility. That tends to cause overpopulation, which creates an incentive to try to expand your group’s territory, which creates war with neighbors. Is that what you’re talking about?

            13. Nick, What is a “primitive civilization”? Would you be referring specifically to China and India with their very large populations?

            14. A “primitive civilization” is one that relies on hunting and gathering or agriculture, with a low level of technology by today’s standards, a change in labor productivity per year of less than .01% and primitive forms of birth control, such as infanticide. There are some remnants of such civilization in rural areas of China and India but no, the term clearly does not apply to those countries.

              China has very good control of population growth, with a fertility level of 1.68. India has reasonably good control: it’s fertility in 2017 was at 2.24 (slightly above replacement) and dropping fairly quickly (at the current rate of decline it will hit the replacement level of 2.10 in 2021). Actually both countries are probably at lower fertility levels, as they both have a deficit of female births.

            15. No Nick, I am talking about the Territorial Imperative. That is the instinctive behavior of human beings to defend their territory to the death and try to take territory from others. It is still happening.

              In 1990 the conflict in Rwanda between the Tutsi and Hutu was basically a genocide. And it is still going on today between Rwanda and Burundi. And now it is spilling over into the Congo. It is basically caused by overpopulation. It will continue as the population of Africa increases. Africa will be a killing ground for the next half a century with millions of animals and human beings being massacred. And it will all be because of overpopulation.

              A large part of the diet in this section is basically “bushmeat”. That is monkeys, baboons, and even chimps and gorillas. Africa is being destroyed because of massive overpopulation.

            16. Africa is still very poor. It’s easy to understand that when people are desperately poor that they will do desperate things.

              But I haven’t noticed Arizona trying to annex any of California’s adjacent land. No one in New Jersey is trying to swipe some land from New York.

              There really is a point where people have enough, and they don’t feel the need to conquer their neighbors.

              Of course, at that point we start to have a real danger from boredom. I suspect a large part of the reason for Trump’s success is all the retirees and people on SS disability who are bored and looking for someone who’ll make a little mischief to entertain them…

      2. ‘The answer is simple: historically humans haven’t cared about these issues or have actively wanted to eliminate “nature”. ‘

        It would help a great deal if Rupert Murdoch and his band of merry men were not working overtime to convince their readers/listeners/viewers that these issues aren’t worth caring about and there’s no problem with eliminating “nature”. Australia (the country of Murdoch’s birth) provides a case study:

        The number of climate deniers in Australia is more than double the global average, new survey finds

        Australian news consumers are far more likely to believe climate change is “not at all” serious compared to news users in other countries. That’s according to new research that surveyed 2,131 Australians about their news consumption in relation to climate change.

        The Digital News Report: Australia 2020 was conducted by the University of Canberra at the end of the severe bushfire season during January 17 and February 8, 2020.

        It also found the level of climate change concern varies considerably depending on age, gender, education, place of residence, political orientation and the type of news consumed.

        Young people are much more concerned than older generations, women are more concerned than men, and city-dwellers think it’s more serious than news consumers in regional and rural Australia.

        15% don’t pay attention to climate change news

        More than half (58%) of respondents say they consider climate change to be a very or extremely serious problem, 21% consider it somewhat serious, 10% consider it to be not very and 8% not at all serious.

        Out of the 40 countries in the survey, Australia’s 8% of “deniers” is more than double the global average of 3%. We’re beaten only by the US (12%) and Sweden (9%).

        Out of the top 3, number one and number three are very heavily influenced by Murdoch owned media.

    3. Doug, I remember the ideas of over-consumption and population wrecking the world way back in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Seems like an age ago. People got it a little then most abandoned it at first chance.
      Enlightenment has merely oiled the way for more 19th century action and thinking. People grip onto their various security blankets and try to muddle through. But the majority of species are not doing well against the onslaught.
      I wonder when it will all bite us in the collective ass. Probably won’t see it coming or if we do, be powerless to stop it.

      There is one thing I do know, Nature is relentless and patient. It also plans for failure. Are we?

      1. ideas of over-consumption and population wrecking the world way back in the 1960’s and 1970’s… People got it a little then most abandoned it at first chance.

        Actually, US fertility rates dropped below replacement in 1972. Oil consumption, new home sales, car sales, washer/dryer sales, iron & steel sales etc., all plateaued in the 1970’s. On a per capita basis, they’ve declined.

        That’s one of the odd things about this discussion: zero growth (and even a bit of degrowth) in goods consumption is already here.

        1. Hint:
          We added 83 million people to the planet last year–
          The population of Germany.

        2. Nigeria on the path to achieve 1 Billion by 2050.
          We are a billion ton bulldozer that will take a hundred years to slow down.
          Is there a reverse gear?

        3. The US is not the world the last I checked. Plus energy and material consumption kept rising. The environment doesn’t care who or how many are doing it. Its the amount not the amount per that counts.

          1. Population growth rate for the World is slowing. Total fertility rate for World fell from 5 to 2.5 from 1965 to 2005, when the World average falls to 2.1 population growth gradually falls to zero, roughly a 20 year lag. If it falls to the average in OECD nations, roughly 1.75 poulation decreases. In South Korea and Japan total fertility rate is quite low maybe 1.5, it is also low in many European nations.

            GDP growth rates are much lower in OECD, as non OECD catches up their growth rates will also slow.

            The idea of unlimited desire for more consumption is a liberal myth from classical economics.

            1. First Dennis, global primary energy and consumption have been on the rise for a long time. Even if your assumption about population rise is true (it will be, but not due to fertility rate), several billion people are on track to greatly increase their consumption.
              Consumption and population do not correlate as there is about a 100 to 1 variation between those two across the globe which obliterates the per capita idea.

              But let us say that globally we end up with a “zero growth” situation. So what? In a world of overshoot the natural bank account is still being overdrawn every year. We can’t print resources and we can’t print life.

            2. Gone fishing,

              As population decreases, growth will become negative, real GDP will decrease and environmental impact will also decrease.

            3. As population decreases,…

              And what year is that supposed to happen?

              growth will become negative, real GDP will decrease and environmental impact will also decrease.

              Well no, that is not the way it will likely work out. As the population reaches or nears, 9 billion, the environmental destruction will increase. The water tables will become unreachable in many parts of the world. Hunger will cause most wild animals to be killed for food. More wood will be cut for fuel. More rivers will not reach the sea. More lakes will go dry. Deserts will expand.

              There will be anarchy in most of Africa and much of Asia. Slaughter and genocide will break out all over Africa, Asia, and even in parts of Eastern Europe.

              All I am saying Dennis, is that the current trends will continue as they have done for hundreds of years. There is no reason to believe things will dramatically turn around. Gail Teverberg knows that but believes God will step in and turn things around. She believes God will bail us out of this damn mess. But you believe in an even greater miracle. You believe it will happen without God’s help. 😉

            4. Ron,

              When population peaks depends on many factors, some demographers such as Wolfgang Lutz, believe that post secondary education for women is crucial to reducing population. In a nutshell, the more education a woman has, the fewer children she bears (on average). A scenario where education access for women is maximized has a peak in World population in 2050.

              Note that this is not a single solution suggestion. There are multiple problems that will require a multitude of solutions.

              The mantra that things will never change, just does not mesh well with history, things always change, would be far more accurate in my opinion.

            5. The mantra that things will never change, just does not mesh well with history, things always change, would be far more accurate in my opinion.

              Nope, human nature never changes. We will continue to do what we have always done. We have always lived to the very limits of our existence and we always will. We will continue to take resources from every other species. We always have and we will stop when there are no more resources to take from the wild. But we will continue to take territory and resources from our own species.

              I find it rather quaint that you believe human behavior will change.

            6. We have always lived to the very limits of our existence and we always will.

              If that were true, wouldn’t people in OECD countries be having as many children as they could? Wouldn’t people in the US and Japan be having 6 or 8 kids per family instead of the less than 2 kids per family they’re actually having?

            7. Nick, did it ever occur to you that most people realize their limits? If they thought that having more children would increase their wealth and well being, I am sure they would do exactly that.

              My mom and dad had 10 children, nine survived to adulthood. Dad was a sharecropper. Most all sharecroppers, as well as most all poor dirt farmers had many children. They were cheap labor. They were needed to work the fields. Nowadays they have mechanical farming and kids just don’t work the fields. So even poor farmers have fewer kids. They don’t add to the well being of the family.

            8. Ron,

              Okay so you’re saying people are rational, and can recognize when doing too much (like having many children) isn’t good for them? And therefore they can choose not to have big families.

              In the same way, they can recognize that destroying their environment isn’t actually good for them, and choose to preserve habitat, reduce GHG emissions, etc.

            9. Now you are getting ridiculous Nick. The question is not can they recognize they are destroying their environment but do they recognize they are destroying their environment. The answer is a big fat NO, they, (that is the average citizen of the word), haven’t a fucking clue as to what they are doing to their environment.

              If you doubt that just ask the average Trumpite. And realize that the average Trumpite is privy to many times the information that the average African or Asian has.

              What they are doing to the environment is part of their belief system, that is their worldview. A person’s belief system is not subject to reason or logic.

              People desire to believe what they desire to be true.

              Francis Bacon

              No one wants to believe that they are destroying their children’s and grandchildren’s natural inheritance. So they simply don’t believe it.

              People look out for themselves and their families Nick. They don’t give a flying fuck about anyone else. Of course I am speaking about the average citizen of the world, not you or I. 😉

            10. Well, Ron, I think we’re getting close to agreement.

              I think we agree that people can learn new stuff and make reasonably rational decisions. I think we also agree that people sometimes take a long time to learn new things, and that social structures (like Fox News and the US Republican party) can create enormous barriers, both to the dissemination of good information, and to social change.

            11. Well, Ron, I think we’re getting close to agreement.

              Well perhaps. But we still differ in one important point, the most important point.

              You seem to see the future of the world as a bed of roses. I see it as an absolute catastrophe.

            12. Dennis said, ” environmental impact will also decrease.”
              That is like saying that I only hit myself in the head 15 times a day instead of 20. Or only damage my house and car six days a week instead of seven. Your life would go into the toilet really quickly if you acted like that, but people act like that to the rest of life and to the environment in general,which is why it is suffering and dying at high rates.
              They put canaries in coal mines for a reason, though it was not fair to the canary in any way. The human race is like miners that ignore the dead canary.

            13. Gone fishing,

              Many things can be done to reduce environmental damage. You have suggested many that I agree with. As population declines and GDP declines environmental damage will also decline.

              I was not suggesting nothing else should be done, that seems obvious to me, but perhaps not to you, based on your comment.

            15. Gonefishing,

              No you seem to think you know what I think, but you are wrong. You often interpret the written word in ways that are the opposite of what is intended.

              Can you find the comment where I have said,

              ” that destruction of life is acceptable at a reduced level…”

              I have neither said nor implied as much.

              I prefer written pieces rather than audio or video.

            16. Sure Dennis, if you don’t want to listen to me or expert testimony, that is fine. If you can’t communicate your intentions or I can’t discern them, that is to be expected in this medium. I tend to follow lines of thought and patterns. I also look at subjects and actions from various, sometimes seemingly opposing points of view. In this very much hyped and agendized world that is often the only way to achieve some sense of reality and clarity.
              The thought patterns in the world, even within the US are highly fractured. Most views, even those that many declare as solutions, are defective, dysfunctional, and deadly.
              For those who listen and see.
              https://youtu.be/r1SKFLmOtPY

            17. Gonefishing,

              I agree that species loss is a problem, it is often unclear why you argue with those who agree with you.

              My point was very simple, I do not think that destruction of life on earth is a good idea, that is the opposite of what I believe.

              So what you seem to think that I seem to think is in fact the opposite of what I actually think. Read what is written, don’t add hidden intentions or agendas that don’t exist.

            18. The idea of unlimited desire for more consumption is a liberal myth from classical economics.

              First of all Dennis, you exaggerate wildly. Unlimited desire? I would not know how to even describe that. But the desire for a better life, the desire for a better life for yourself and your children is universal. But you seem to believe that the majority of the world’s people have… “almost”… everything they need or even want. Bullshit! Just google: “What percent of the world’s people live in poverty?”

              A shocking 80 percent of the world’s population survives on less than 10 dollars a day. That is almost 6 billion people living in poverty worldwide. There are a little over two billion children living in the world currently and half of those children live in extreme poverty every day.

              And regardless of your “ever slowing fertility rate” we are adding over 80 million people to the world’s population every year. And the vast majority of them are falling into that 80% listed above.

              That 80% will never get close to consuming the resources we in the developed world consume. Never because those resources do not exist.

              Dennis, I made the statement several years ago that you were “pollyannish”. That really pissed you off at the time. But Dennis, it is high time you realized that your worldview is totally unrealistic. Things are bad and getting damn worse every day. You are fond of saying that we cannot know the future. But the destruction of the natural world is not even slowing down Dennis. Why in God’s name do you have such confidence that this will all “someday” turn around and things will be just fine? After all, we cannot know the future.

            19. Ron,

              Just an alternative possibility which seems to be logical from my perspective.

              The point is that as poorer nations gradually become more wealthy (their economic growth rate is higher on average than the OECD average) their rate of growth will become slower. As a consequence the rate of damage to the environment will slow down. In addition it is likely that total fertility rate will continue the decrease that began around 1965 for the World average total fertility rate.

              Yes I agree that neither of us knows the future.

            20. $10 per day isn’t poverty:

              “ Living on less than $3.20 per day reflects poverty lines in lower-middle-income countries, while $5.50 a day reflects standards in upper-middle-income countries, the World Bank said in its biennial Poverty and Shared Prosperity Report, “Piecing Together the Poverty Puzzle.”

              The World Bank remains committed to achieving the goal of ending extreme poverty, defined as living on less than $1.90 a day, by 2030. The share of the world’s population living in extreme poverty fell to 10 percent in 2015, but the pace of extreme poverty reduction has slowed, the Bank warned on Sept. 19. ”

            21. I double dog dare you to actually live on 10 dollars a day for month or two and then say that you were not living in poverty. that is 10 dollars day for everything: food, shelter, water, medical care, transportation etc. ( no using your home, car, phone or any other acquired material good from your wealthy days just the clothes you have on.)

              your view on the poverty line might change.

            22. On the one hand, I believe this only includes the formal economy component of overall income, which becomes less important at lower incomes. On the other hand, these poverty lines aren’t my idea: they’re set by national governments, as reported by the World Bank.

        4. Much like cold blob bob fails to notice the weather outside of Kansas, Nick, too, suffers from a rather parochial analysis of the world’s problems.
          USA! USA! USA !

        5. Guys,

          GF was talking about the 60’s and 70’s. That was the US and some of Europe, it wasn’t Nigeria. No one in Nigeria in the 60’s or 70’s was worrying about overconsumption, and they aren’t worrying about it now.

          Geez. If Nigeria were more prosperous, it would have much lower population.

          Finally, this discussion started with Doug’s link to a presentation suggesting that “we also have to change our affluent lifestyles and reduce over-consumption”. Does anyone seriously think they were talking about Africa?!?!?

          1. The US is not the world Nick. And, WE is mankind. If the Amazon rainforest suffers WE suffer. WE are in the same boat and it’s a boat that is in deep shit.

            1. Doug, are you afraid that there is no consensus here on POB that mankind is facing some very serious problems?

              If so, I think I can reassure you – there is such a consensus. I promise, I won’t forget. I think most of the regulars here won’t forget, and we won’t need to be reminded in every discussion.

              For example, this thread was a more narrow discussion, about “affluent” societies with “overconsumption”, right? And, that doesn’t include Nigeria, right?

            2. LOL Actually, I was thinking about YOUR constant reminders about “exponential” growth of wind and solar power projects with the implication these “tech fixes” will somehow rescue the human species.

            3. Ah.

              Well, I didn’t intend to imply that wind and solar would address all of our problems. Let me say it again: I don’t think wind and solar will fix all of our problems. Does that help?

            4. “I don’t think wind and solar will fix all of our problems.”

              At this blog, it seems like you need to headline every entry with that statement so you don’t get attacked.

              Lets clarify it alittle more-
              W/S won’t solve the energy problem.
              W/S won’t solve the overpopulation problem.
              W/S won’t solve the ignorance or cruelty problem.
              W/S won’t solve the ‘make believe’ problem (religion).
              W/S won’t solve the deforestation or mass extinction problem.

              However,
              W/S can help with energy supply as we prepare for the next phase- the long decline.
              W/S can displace CO2 producing energy sources starting yesterday.
              W/S can make certain the regions of the much more energy resilient.
              W/S can empower people at the local scale, and can provide you with low carbon transport of cargo and people.

            5. Hickory,

              I agree with that, except…why do you feel that wind & solar can’t provide enough energy? As best as I can tell, there’s more than enough resource for any conceivable need, and it’s cheaper than fossil fuel (even without the cost of pollution, war, etc).

            6. Nick- “why do you feel that wind & solar can’t provide enough energy? ”

              Oh, there is a best case scenario where the world energy demand declines to a point where W/S could provide a lot of the required energy, after having grown in capacity for decades.
              But I don’t put much stock in this best case scenario being the one that pans out.
              I don’t see the global demand dropping off in a rapid timeframe with intentional effort. I don’t see the global will and intelligence to make a rapid transition.
              I see no intentional effort to roll back overpopulation, for example. Its all about perpetual growth, and without that its a path towards failure.
              Scenarios with a much higher likelihood of occurrence include extreme jolts in energy supply, economic disruption, failed states, and environmental calamity.
              Sorry to say.
              And as OFM has tried to point out many times, some places have better prospects than others. Some the luck of geography, some with better planning and reaction to changing conditions, and some with inherently better resilience among the people and culture.

            7. Hickory,

              Generating plants have a rough lifetime of around 30 years, which means that every 30 years it all has to be replaced.

              And wind & sun are cheaper than FF plants (and think of the trillions that would need to be spent on oil drilling over that period. – I seem to remember an IEA estimate of $30 trillion). What would stand in the way of simply replacing FF infrastructure with W&S, using the same money?

        6. “That’s one of the odd things about this discussion: zero growth (and even a bit of degrowth) in goods consumption is already here.”

          Nick,
          Certainly no zero growth of this (if no serious calamities happen within 30 years):

          The global stock of air conditioners in buildings will grow to 5.6 billion by 2050, up from 1.6 billion today – which amounts to 10 new ACs sold every second for the next 30 years

          Global energy demand from air conditioners is expected to triple by 2050, requiring new electricity capacity the equivalent to the combined electricity capacity of the United States, the EU and Japan today, stated a new report by the International Energy Agency (IEA).

          https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/power/global-energy-demand-from-air-conditioners-to-triple-by-2050/64174868

          1. Again…one more time…this discussion started with a report about “affluence” and “overconsumption”. In other words, that was about the OECD. This article on A/C is about the rest of the world, which is still developing: “as incomes and living standards improve in many developing countries, the growth in AC demand in hotter regions is set to soar.”

            So, OECD countries have stabilized their extractive goods consumption, and even reduced them on a per-capita basis. Which helps us realize that the “infinite growth” thing is not realistic – “hard” goods consumption growth comes to a stop in developed countries.

            Now, the article answers your question: “the IEA finds that through stringent minimum energy performance standards and other measures such as labelling, the average energy efficiency of the stock of ACs worldwide could more than double between now and 2050. This would greatly reduce the need to build new electricity infrastructure to meet rising demand….Setting higher efficiency standards for cooling is one of the easiest steps governments can take to reduce the need for new power plants, and allow them at the same time to cut emissions and reduce costs”

            1. OECD countries: because of climate change also in a lot of OECD countries the number of A/C’s is rising.

              “The easiest steps governments can take…..”

              A pity that there are quite a few ‘Trump-like ‘ governments. Trump tried to get more voters with the promise that coal mines would stay open, without telling them they would lose their health insurance.
              I wouldn’t have too much confidence in governments doing the right things for humanity, generally speaking.

            2. Yep – there are no guarantees.

              That’s why, if you care, you should be politically active.

  9. Energy consumption in the world is gradually on shift from spot source burning to electrification.
    Microgrids allow sharing and management of electricity at the local [neighborhood] level.
    Macrogrids allow sharing and management of the electricity at the regional/international level.

    In the USA the macrogrid system is fragmented, and far from optimal for the growing move towards distributed energy generation- numerous smaller sources.

    Here is a good writeup on the kinds of ideas people and organizations are putting forward for a grid upgrade. I suspect we will see consider grid infrastructure spending in this decade. Better grid equals less overall energy production and storage capacity needed-
    https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2020/6/20/21293952/america-national-power-grid-transmission-top-5

    And if you want to dive deeper- the protein of the meal is here-
    https://wiresgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ScottMadden_WIRES_Informing-the-Transmission-Discussion_2020_0113_FINAL.pdf

    1. There are interesting links within the article above, if anyone has interest in energy/CO2 options of various grid policy decisions, this is a very good analysis-
      https://www.vibrantcleanenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Future_cost-competitive_electricity_syst.pdf

      “Future Cost-Competitive Electricity Systems and Their Impact on US CO2 Emissions, funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and published in the Nature Climate Change journal, models the benefits of constructing a nationwide HVDC transmission network designed to tap into renewable and other low-carbon resources geographically dispersed throughout the country. Under such a network design, approximately 60 percent of U.S. power sector electricity could be generated from wind and solar resources alone. The study analyzes the emission reduction potential of the transmission network shown above under three scenarios…”

      I believe that deep (greater than 50m depth) offshore wind,which has huge potential off both the east and west coasts, was not included in the potential resource estimates.

  10. On “The US is not the world.” theme.

    MOST NEW FARMLAND COMES FROM CUTTING TROPICAL FOREST

    “Global agricultural expansion cut a wide swath through tropical forests during the 1980s and 1990s. More than half a million square miles of new farmland – an area roughly the size of Alaska – was created in the developing world between 1980 and 2000, of which over 80 percent was carved out of tropical forests… The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that to keep pace with increasing demand, global agricultural production will have to keep increasing, possibly even doubling by 2050. That would likely lead to millions of additional acres of tropical forest being felled over the next 40 years…

    The increasing demand for agricultural production stems in part from the ever-growing number of people on the planet, who all want to eat. Additionally, members of the growing middle class in emerging economies such as China and India are showing interest in eating more meat, which further intensifies demand. And incentives to grow crops for biofuel production have increased…

    As long as the human population on the planet continues to grow, the pressure to put food on the table, feed in the barnyard and fuel in the gas tank will continue to grow, too.

    https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/most-new-farmland-comes-from-cutting-tropical-forest/

    1. Acres of cropland per human individual is now 1/2 of that in 1960. About 0.6 acres.
      All of that land is the best land in the world for sustaining animals.
      For a glimpse of the rest of animals see here-
      http://www.onezoom.org/life/@cellular_organisms=93302#x264,y760,w1.0993

      It is estimated that about 97% of all land animal biomass is now comprised of
      Homo sapiens, along with their livestock and pets.
      The rest of the tens of of thousands of species are fighting for a token position
      among the residual 3% roster.
      They live on the rough land that we have not taken the the plow or chainsaw to, or paved yet.

      1. Yes, cows require land, water and food. Apparently, average amounts of meat consumption per person has doubled since the 1960s. And, it’s claimed cows contribute a third of world’s greenhouse gas emissions. But don’t worry, solar panels and wind farms will soon solve this minor problem. ?

        1. it depends on the kind of grasing you are using. A cow grasing in a meadow in Normandy has no impact on carbon dioxid level. The problem with the calculation you are quoting is that only the emissions of CO2 and CH4 are taken into account. Not the fact that what the cows are eating has been made with carbon dioxid extracted from the atmosphere. The herds of buffalos in Africa are not counted in the emissions of CO2 and CH4 because these herds are perfectly equilibrated with their environments and that’s logical. Then why not doing the same with the herds of cows? What is wrong with the human animal husbandry is the ways with which the animals are fed. It is clear that indoor raising is emitting more carbon dioxide because the food must be processed and brought to the animals while when cows are grasing, it is them which come to the meadow.

        2. Doug,

          Can you find the place where anyone has said that wins and solar solve all problems? It may help to reduce the use of fossil fuel, if it grows rapidly, in other words the 2/3 of carbon emissions (proportion of total carbon emissions from fossil fuel and cement from 1850 to 2018 was 68%) from fossil fuel might be reduced if fossil fuel use was reduced to zero.

          Other solutions will be needed to reduce land use change, reducing total fertility rate is one approach, planting trees, reducing urban sprawl, and better farming practices are other approaches to this problem.

          It is fairly clear there is not a single solution to all of the World’s problems, in fact it is self evident to every intelligent individual.

          Thanks though for pointing out the obvious. 🙂

      2. If land won’t be used for farms, it will be used for solar farms. Regardless, deforestation continues, continues, continues. I’m 42 and have watched North Carolina slowly-then-rapidly turn into a sprawled out, rainy clone of California. USA will eventually have 500 million people, 750, a billion, perhaps? I don’t think it’s out of the question.. Brazilian beef and lettuce will become the norm, I guess

        1. The answers are right in front of us and grow on their own if allowed. Yes it is against the techno religious who want to profit from mechanical drawdown of emissions. Over the last four decades we could have reversed the GHG trend with simple and inexpensive actions and policies. Instead we keep assisting the psychopaths in our demise. It is not ignorance we are up against, it is outright zealotry.

          1. Gone fishing

            Trees can be planted, and wind, solar, and hydro can be utilized to reduce carbon emissions, also eating fewer animal products and greater use of good building design and passive solar, better urban design, cradle to grave manufacturing, higher recycling rates, better farming practices are all excellent approaches.

            There is no one solution and nobody has proposed that there is, such a proposal would be an easy target.

            1. OK Dennis, how about you pay to have a few thousand trees planted or maybe more. Help preserve and protect natural areas. You seem interested in the environment, from a technical standpoint. But are you out there at night on the roads helping the salamanders and frogs get across without being obliterated by cars in the spring? Just one example.
              Are you using herbicides and pesticides?

            2. Personal actions is a good thing. It makes you feel good, and it sets an example for others.

              But….it can be a trap. Systemic change is needed, and that simply can’t be done by individuals. Often environmental advocates are challenged on their personal actions by conservatives who simply want to stop all progress, and are harassing the environmentalist.

            3. Nick, it’s not a feel good thing. Grow up. These actions and many like them are being done around the world by many people. Those actions directly assist and preserve species as well as actually drawdown carbon from the atmosphere, clean the water, etc. They do it now, in real time.
              If by systemic (which is usually associated with disease) you mean collective action then please inform me of any collective action that was not just a composite of individual actions. Or did not start out as actions and ideas of an individual or few individuals.
              The pseudo-environmental industrial actions often discussed on this blog are systemic. The logic is circular and self defeating. Industrialists and capitalists build destructive and harmful systems. Next other (or often the same) industrialists and capitalists build other systems that are less harmful, massively expensive and take decades (or in this case about one century) to have any real effect. In other words, the system that is doing the harm is now selling you things to somewhat counter the harm that the system continues to execute. Lots of money changes hands, people make huge profits on both sides and the dilemma continues. Meanwhile, most of the harm goes unstopped except by individuals and small collectives working with little money but doing effective real time work.
              There would be nothing left to “save” if it was up to the techno-green-industrialists.

              You speak of a trap, yes the self reinforcing industrial mechanical electric system has become a trap. Yet few want to examine ways out of it. The result is a heating planet, extinctions, wrecked environments, massively reduced populations, and more media BS than a person can stand.

              BTW, I was not challenging Dennis. That was a question to any and all. One that can be rhetorical, but one that each individual should examine. What is it that you are supporting? Machines or life?

            4. Hey Dennis, now do you understand why I think GoFish wipes with pine needles ?

        2. You are forgetting the roofs of the commercial centers and other commercial shoe boxes.

  11. Covid-19 new cases hit an all-time high of 181,000 yesterday. There were 55,209 in Brazil, 33,539 in the US, and 14,721 in India. Deaths are no longer declining either. The first wave is a long way from cresting.

    Dammit, if we would just stop testing we could get new cases down to zero. 🙁

    1. Texas, California and Florida are where the action is going to be. They are quickly outstripping Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey and Pennsylvania for the top spots. I’m staying home, even here in northern New England.

    2. Many people (including myself) have thought that the virus mortality rate would go down as global testing escalated, revealing many more asymptomatic cases than in Jan-March period when much of testing was focused on sick people.
      But, we are still seeing a global 5.2% death rate as of today.
      I had guessed we would be gradually seeing a death rate closer to 0.7%.
      No such luck, yet. Maybe after effective treatments come along.

      1. “…… Maybe after effective treatments come along.“

        Dexamethason treatment reduces the number of deaths by about 30%

    3. UK nurse John Campbell Phd. has a new video out on COVID-19 and vitamin D:

      Vitamin D hits the media

      He mentions the following (fairly sensationalist) headline:

      Terrifying chart shows how Covid-19 patients who end up in hospital may be almost certain to die if they have a vitamin D deficiency

      I also saw the following tragic story

      Healthy teenager who took precautions died suddenly of Covid-19

      Sorry to sound cold but this “healthy” teenager was far from healthy in my view. Firstly, from the pictures in the article he was obese, close to morbidly obese from what I can see. Secondly, he had very dark skin, suggesting that he may well have been severely vitamin D deficient. Thirdly, he was very much into video games which suggests that he did not spend much time outdoors in the sun. The video game angle also suggest a sedentary lifestyle despite his apparent love for basketball. One wonders how athletic this young man was considering the heft shown in the pictures. The article has little tit-bits suggest how not healthy his lifestyle was e.g.

      “In fact, Andre was the only family member who did not leave the house at all.”
      “”I can’t tell you how a perfectly healthy 16-year-old boy can be making his own peanut butter sandwich late Wednesday night,”
      “Although Andre had no underlying medical conditions, the first thing doctors discovered was that he had developed Type 1 diabetes — his blood sugar was a dangerous 1,500 milligrams per deciliter, more than 10 times normal.”

      Based on what is coming out on vitamin D, I would suggest that morbid obesity is an “underlying medical condition” and instead of eating a fruit or a carrot, this morbidly obese 16 year old made a peanut butter sandwich instead. Did he add jelly? Who knows?

      I am probably not getting enough vitamin D myself since, it is uncomfortably hot around here (32°C; Feels like: 38°C, humidity 57%) and I’m avoiding going out in the sun. Mangoes are still ripening and the little acerola cherry tree out in the yard is laden with ripe fruit so I’m doing fine for vitamin C which everybody knows I believe is also a big factor in immune system effectiveness.

      1. islandboy,

        In the shadow of trees vitamin D also will be produced, though the time needed is 2-3 times longer (own shadow must be no longer than body height)

  12. “A century ago, industrialists like Andrew Carnegie believed that Darwin’s theories justified an economy of vicious competition and inequality. They left us with an ideological legacy that says the corporate economy, in which wealth concentrates in the hands of a few, produces the best for humanity. This was always a distortion of Darwin’s ideas. His 1871 book The Descent of Man argued that the human species had succeeded because of traits like sharing and compassion. “Those communities,” he wrote, “which included the greatest number of the most sympathetic members would flourish best, and rear the greatest number of offspring.” Darwin was no economist, but wealth-sharing and cooperation have always looked more consistent with his observations about human survival than the elitism and hierarchy that dominates contemporary corporate life.“

    https://www.filmsforaction.org/news/survival-of-the-nicest/

    1. Yes, but society and civilization is mimicking the Tower of Babel. Even within the “highly advanced” US we can’t coordinate how to deal with a simple virus outbreak. So how can global threats be faced, other than in a piecemeal and counteractive way?

      1. we can’t coordinate

        That’s a little too strong. This administration was a mistake: Trump didn’t expect to win, his voters didn’t expect it, Hillary’s voters didn’t expect it, Bernie’s voters didn’t either. If everyone had realized what could happen…it wouldn’t have happened.

        And previous (and likely future) administrations would have handled this far better.

        1. Seems like many state governments dropped the ball too. They all have phones and computers, so can communicate instantly with their citizens and neighboring governments. They can and did take independent action.

  13. Need more UV-B for vitamin D? Not long to wait, it could increase rapidly due to global warming and deforestation. Downside, major extinction event. Not to worry though, we might have a few decades to solve this one.

    OZONE AND GLOBAL WARMING
    It has taken at least 30 years to unwind the public misconception that the ozone hole is causing global warming. Probably millions of people still believe that. The public heard of ozone loss first (leading to the Montreal Protocol of 1987) and then global warming afterward, more-or-less starting with James Hansen’s warning to Congress in 1988, but really coming to the public in the1990’s. The ozone hole does not cause global warming!

    But now this research stands that on its head, saying global warming can cause destruction of the ozone layer. It’s a complex chain of events. Over-simplified (and so not quite right) we can say: the death of forests and other plant life during a major warming led to a wave of nutrients from decayed plant life being washed into the sea. Life processing those nutrients led to the release of ozone-destroying chemicals into the atmosphere, letting more UV-B into the surface of the Earth, compounding extinction there.

    Nutrients were washed into the sea, and chlorine was released by marine organisms. That damaged the ozone layer, leading to mutation including tree spores. So the worst part of the extinction was “mutagenic” – the spores needed to reproduce a lot of plant life changed away from the survival patterns developed over very long time periods. Plants failed to reproduce, and animals that depended on those plants starved.

    So during a major warming, ozone became so depleted that many species went extinct from the effects of UV-B radiation. In a 2018 paper, Jeffrey Benca called that a “pulsed ozone shield weakening”.

    Here is an alarming warning from the Abstract of this new paper by Marshall et al:

    “ozone loss during rapid warming is an inherent Earth system process with the unavoidable conclusion that we should be alert for such an eventuality in the future warming world.”
    Marshall’s team also says: “the climate system around the D[evonian]-C[arboniferous] boundary had a reduced resilience in that it was more easily perturbed to extremes.” Are we in a similar situation now, with a climate of reduced resilience and a growing tendency toward extremes?

    Scientists have identified two periods of extinction as the Devonian period closed around 350 million years ago. The first was caused by a change in glaciation and big drop in sea level. The second was brought about by the warming and ozone depletion – which is the focus of this new paper, which explains the second period of mass extinction, the Hangenberg event, 359 million years ago.

    We discuss earlier research by Dutch scientist Henk Visscher’s group, who also found UV-B damage in fossil spores on Greenland. After Visscher’s Greenland discoveries, mutated spores from the end-Permian mass extinction event were found in many other parts of the world, confirming the results.

    “an international team of paleontologists led by Henk Visscher at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands sensationally claimed that the stratospheric ozone layer had been all but obliterated 251 million years ago, at the end of the Permian.”

    – The Emerald Planet, David Beerling, pg 95 (still a must read book to understand the dance between plants and the climate!!)

    Visscher and team called it “chronic environmental mutagenesis at the time of global ecological crisis”. The cause of that ozone depletion about 250 million years ago was vulcanism, a sustained eruption of the Siberian Traps emitting “hydrothermal organohalogens”. But the earlier crisis 359 million years ago did not bear the signals of volcanic causes. This brought Marshall’s team to examine what else could have cause the mutagenesis found in spores from the time of that mass extinction event, known specifically as the Hangenberg.

    A series of scientists, beginning with German paleontologist Otto Schindewolf, suggested mutagenic extinctions and ozone depletion have astrophysical causes, whether energy coming from a supernova explosion, or changes to solar winds and magnetic fields. This has not been ruled out, but is not necessary for the results found in the new paper by Marshall et al.

    We have to keep in mind that when these scientists are studying deposits in “Greenland” – the actual rocks at that time were located in a different array of continents, and was several degrees SOUTH, below the paleoequator, not at all our vision of the frozen north. Continents travel, floating around the globe over hundreds of millions of years. So get present-day “Greenland” out of your mind, to begin with.

    https://www.ecoshock.org/2020/06/from-extinction-to-climate-engineering.html

    Enjoy the show, also you might want to listen to the second half of the show, concerning climate manipulation and upcoming climate wars with possible horrendous errors. Bonus feature “20 reasons why Dr. Alan Robock thinks climate engineering is too dangerous, just like thermonuclear war. ”
    That too is in the near future, testing going on right now.

    1. Good source. That climate engineering (dangers of) segment rings the bell-
      Desperate measures- Climate engineering with Anna Abatayo
      18 minutes well worth everyone time to listen

  14. Bit early to write off coal, at least in India.

    INDIA EYES PRIVATE INVESTMENT TO OPEN 41 NEW COAL MINES

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched the auction of 41 coal mining blocks to private companies on Thursday, in a major shake-up to the sector which is dominated by state-controlled Coal India. Modi said the move would help reduce India’s reliance on energy imports and develop the eastern and central parts of the country. “People of these districts are aspiring for development but have lagged behind,” he said, adding 16 districts in these areas had “huge stocks of coal” but people had not been able to benefit from this mineral wealth. Modi said commercial mining would reduce the need for people to migrate far from their homes to seek employment, giving people jobs extracting and transporting coal. He said the country would spent $6.5bn on new coal infrastructure.

    https://www.climatechangenews.com/2020/06/19/india-eyes-private-investment-open-41-new-coal-mines/

    1. Meanwhile,

      JAPAN RACES TO BUILD NEW COAL-BURNING POWER PLANTS, DESPITE THE CLIMATE RISKS

      “It is one unintended consequence of the Fukushima nuclear disaster almost a decade ago, which forced Japan to all but close its nuclear power program. Japan now plans to build as many as 22 new coal-burning power plants — one of the dirtiest sources of electricity — at 17 different sites in the next five years, just at a time when the world needs to slash carbon dioxide emissions to fight global warming.”

      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/climate/japan-coal-fukushima.html

      1. Maybe we need a new soap opera for the TV crowd: As the World Warms. Of course we have our “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” component who will continue to rebel against reality no matter what science reports or, the monkeys who would rather “hear, see, and speak only good (news)”.

        “Averaged as a whole, the global land and ocean surface temperature for March 2020 was 1.16°C (2.09°F) above the 20th century average of 12.7°C (54.9°F) and the second highest in the 141-year record. Only March 2016 was warmer at 1.31°C (2.36°F). The 10 warmest Marches have all occurred since 1990, with Marches of 2016, 2017, 2019, and 2020 having a global land and ocean surface temperature departure from average above 1.0°C (1.8°F). The March 2020 global land and ocean surface temperature departure tied with February 2020 and December 2015 as the third highest monthly temperature departure from average in the 1,683-month record. Only February and March 2016, when a strong El Niño was present in the tropical Pacific Ocean, had higher temperature departures.”

        https://www.co2.earth/

          1. Looks like warm anomaly spots across most of the permafrost regions, west Africa, parts of Asia, Europe and Antarctica today.

            Not adding fuel to the fire. 🙂

            1. Sea level raise affects third world countries. We in the West, being sophisticated, highly educated, and rich, are ‘way to clever to build our cities in vulnerable spots, right?

              MIAMI’S PERILOUS FUTURE

              “The first step is figuring out how much sea-level rise there may be and when it’s coming — but even that isn’t easy, and there’s no one definitive number. The regional climate change compact predicts two to six feet of sea-level rise by the end of the century; a NASA scientist has said eight to 10 feet. One thing is certain, though: 20 percent of Miami-Dade County sits less than two feet above the sea. And by some estimates, the water could get that high in just 40 years.”

              https://www.ecowatch.com/miami-climate-change-2646218815.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1

            4. Miami is not going to be saved.
              It is not worth it.
              Houston? We will see.
              (not me, I’m way too old)

            1. Coming from southern California, it’s hard for me to find much sympathy for the people there. Some day they will figure out, to live a happy life, they need air conditioning.

            2. Daybeer: Aircon requires an energy supply to make and run, which can exacerbate emissions. Suggests they could rebuild to old Arabian passive cooling designs, but given the extremes of Northetn Siberia the architectural genre may need to be a blend of Arabian-Inuit, to give the best of both worlds.

            3. Daybeer:

              I would like to amend my list, as that was not something I had considered:

              Melting permafrost, melting sea ice, massive forest fires, and lack of air conditioning for all the suckers that live up there.

              Thanks.

            4. “Melting permafrost, melting sea ice, massive forest fires, and lack of air conditioning for all the suckers that live up there.”

              Are you suggesting these issues are only of concern to people who live in Siberia? I thought humans all had a stake in the health of planet Earth.

            5. Doug Leighton,

              Abrupt climate change is an existential crisis to all human life. The first three issues are nonlinear tipping points, the last was meant as a sarcastic reply to Daybeer’s boneheaded comment.

  15. A man with some wisdom recently wrote-
    ‘It is my firm conviction that the slow collapse of the world’s economy has already begun. This virus thing was the trigger that tipped things over the edge. The economy will wax and wane from here on out, with every dip getting a little lower and each recovery not quite reaching the level it did last time.’

    When you remove ‘financial’ [imaginary] assets from the scale, I think this scenario has a strong chance of playing out.
    Its the painful way to achieve degrowth (involuntary), although not as painful as a fast contraction.
    How else does a planet full of human come down off a condition of severe overshoot?

    Any grand scheme to reimagine and rebuild the economy in a ‘greener’ manner will require great sums of capital, as will bail out of 20th century industries, their workers, and their pensions. I don’t see that all getting done. Rust belt doesn’t quite capture the essence of whole picture.

    A Siddhartha once said something to the effect of- ‘its good to have low expectations’

    1. United we stand, divided we fall

      The leadership of the world has been paralyzed by owners of anaquated and fear of stranded assets. The oil industry decades ago should have diversified itself when healthy into clean abuntant energy sources. Instead they have bought congress and the political process to divide the country with lies.

      Maybe the best example of this is Mitch McConnell and the Senate over the last decade plus or the House and it’s conservative Tea party anti progress. Instead of leadership pointing the needed direction to the future. Leadership is paralyzed and hands survival of the economy over to the Federal reserve. Which only tool is to drown the economy in cheap money and continue down a failing path.

      The wealthy have bought in or lead the country with lies of “Make America Great Again” and wedge issues to paralyze constructive change.

      We have met the enemy and he is us.

  16. Sunday was the summer solstice, the longest day in the northern hemisphere and the longest night in the southern hemisphere. From here on in the sun will rise later and set earlier each day in the northern hemisphere with the converse being true south of the equator.

    I made a trip with a work crew to that town in the hills of the center of the island yesterday. The heat was oppressive with the breeze coming in through the windows of the vehicle feeling mildly warm rather than cool before we got into the hills. Makes one understand why people would want to live 2,000 feet (630 m) above sea level. High temperature of 88°F (31°C) as opposed to 94°F (34°C). With relative humidity above 80% it feels much hotter. The two months following the summer solstice are usually warmer than the months preceding it so, I’m not looking forward to the next two months!

    We also made a trip to the “second city”, the site of the larger of the islands two international airports last Friday to do some work near Doctor’s Cave Beach, one of the most popular beaches on Jamaica’s north west coast. The area is less than five minutes to the airport and is usually bustling with tourists. We only saw like a total of four “white people” walking by and they looked like they “live here” (not tourists). Come to think of it, I don’t remember hearing or seeing a single plane of any kind take off or land at the nearby airport, the busier of the islands two airports, handling the bulk of the tourist traffic. All of the hotels and attractions we passed along the way, closed or looking very desolate. No sign of all the ground transport (buses) that one usually sees ferrying tourists to and from the airport.

    A stark reminder of how what we often refer to as non essential activity, is very essential for those whose livelihoods depend on such non essential activity.

    1. Islandboy,

      Thanks so much for explaining Earth’s solstices to us. We look forward to you teaching us about the equinoxes which occur, I believe, when the Sun crosses the celestial equator. I’m fortunate to have a 10 year old Grandson who’s more than willing to impart this kind of information, others may not be as fortunate. ?

      BTW, if you want the technical definition: The summer solstice occurs when the sun is directly over the Tropic of Cancer. And, humans were “celebrating” this event (in Egypt) roughly 6,000 to 6,500 years ago, roughly a thousand years before Stonehenge was built in England.

      1. There is no actual Tropic of Cancer, it’s an imaginary line placed on maps. The summer solstice occurs when the sun reaches it’s most northerly apparent position of that particular year. This point varies with the 22.1 to 24.5 degrees deviance from the orbital plane over a 40,000 year time span.
        Or in astronomical terms it’s the northernmost limit of the ecliptic. 🙂

        1. An “imaginary line placed on maps.” If it’s a line on maps, how can it be imaginary? Lets just agree, the Tropic of Cancer is the most northerly circle of latitude on Earth at which the Sun can be directly overhead. Meanwhile, I’ll check with my Grandson on this; ‘way too technical for me. 😉

            1. Hickory,

              LOL Yes, I’ve been to places in Africa where the equator is marked with an “imaginary” line, one you could trip on. Bit hard to do on the ocean.

            3. Actually, I’ve never met anyone who believed that latitude “lines” were something other than a convenient geographical reference system to facilitate navigation, etc. But, I’ve never (yet) met anyone who thought the earth was flat either. Maybe Islandboy will enlighten us? ?

            5. “Mental constructs are simply the set of ideas and beliefs that we hold. While this seems easy on the surface, truth is that most mental constructs are so deeply ingrained in us, and backed up by so many experiences and emotional baggage, that we fail to see them as opinion, not facts”

              Interesting how some of the early “religions” had their holidays relating directly to celestial events (reality) yet Christianity grabbed them and related them to supernatural events or in the case of New Year’s day, moved it off of the newly religious winter solstice.

              Mental constructs which stem from imagination trying to map reality or just symbolic representations have taken on a reality for much of the population.
              Of course Doug knows all this, but do most people? Or do they just operate as if those things were real, giving them a secondary reality through action?

              All this secondary thinking makes it difficult to see and communicate about hard reality. It also dilutes hard reality in the minds of people.

      2. Is that what you call on explanation? I was merely making an observation. For those of us who are interested in renewable energy, it means that the amount of energy a given PV system will be able to harness, will change depending on where it is relative to the equator. That is another observation.

        I wonder why “humans were “celebrating” this event (in Egypt) roughly 6,000 to 6,500 years ago, roughly a thousand years before Stonehenge was built in England.”? For that matter, why did the Druids bother move many large stones, some weighing as much as 30 tons, a distance of some 20 miles to build Stonehenge? To think they did it all without the help of diesel powered cranes and trucks. With no records of how it was done, we can only guess how they did it. Maybe the activities of these ancient peoples were determined by the seasons and they realized that the sun is central to our existence.

        I firmly believe that the all the religious celebrations, centered very close to the December solstice and the New Year celebrations are founded on the observation of the December solstice by ancient peoples and may have their roots in worship of the sun. Failing an untimely demise, I am almost certain to witness the decline of world oil production ad a transition to some other form of energy. I’m betting it will mostly be solar energy, hence my observation of the solstices. The equinoxes I find less worthy of note, being halfway between the solstices. The solstices are more worthy of note to me than all the man made holidays put together.

        If I had remembered to post on Sunday I would have wished you all a happy summer solstice!

    2. Island boy, the seasonality caused by the earth’s fairly stable tilt is taken for granted by most people, but it is the basis of producing a very dynamic and diverse biome. The seasonality has imparted amazing capabilities and resilience to many species as they developed to migrate long distances or be capable of staying in place during the extreme seasonal changes away from the equatorial regions.

    3. IslandBoy, any idea of how much of Jamaican GDP depends on tourism?
      I read that in Hawaii it is about 21%.

      Unfortunately for those whose livelihood depends on it, ‘common man’ tourism is one of those sectors that will decline steadily in a scenario of chronic economic contraction (degrowth).

      1. From Wikipedia, “Tourism is tied with remittances as Jamaica’s top source of revenue.[38] The tourism industry earns over 50 percent of the country’s total foreign exchange earnings and provides about one-fourth of all jobs in Jamaica.”

        Depending on who you ask, the contribution to the island’s GDP is anywhere from 9% to 34%. Here’s a choice quote from our Minister of Tourism from a newspaper article from long before the days of COVID-18:

        One million tourists come to Jamaica in first nine weeks of the year

        “Look, it’s not just about contribution to GDP growth but more about value-added. Tourism has the highest value-added of all the industries, with it up 5 per cent on 2016/2017. We must study in more detail the impact tourism is having on related sectors like transportation, agriculture and manufacturing. By the time I get to budget, I should have some hard numbers on that.

        “I do think the true worth and value of tourism as a driver of economic activities within the country is being misrepresented. We want more people to be connected to the value chain and that is part of the purpose of understanding these numbers that have been presented, “ said the minister of tourism.

        Well, along comes COVID-19 and the Minister’s desire to study “he impact tourism is having on related sectors like transportation, agriculture and manufacturing”, should be pretty much satisfied. He wanted to put more of the island’s eggs in the tourism basket but, I have long disliked the idea of depending on the whims and fancies of people wealthy enough to take vacations in far away places for my livelihood. The irony is that for the last twenty years my income has largely depended on people being able to enjoy entertainment in fairly large groups.

        This COVID thing has just about wiped out all of that. Caelan might be interested to learn that this has presented me with opportunities to take advantage of training I undertook in solar PV some time ago. I have submitted a proposal to a client introduced to me by a fellow refugee from the entertainment industry and we should be submitting a detailed technical design to him in another few days. With any luck I will be able to make designing and installing PV systems my main source of income.

  17. The French Citizen’s Convention for the Climate has issued it’s 149 measures to « lower the french emissions of Greenhouse Gases of 40 % in 2030, in a spirit of social justice.

    The Convention is composed of 150 randomly chosen ordinary french citizens and one of the most ambitious experimentation of deliberative democracy and sortition to this day. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_convention_for_ecological_transition)

    After 9 month of work and more that 138 interview of experts, they voted a large pack of ambitious measures : https://www.democracy-international.org/final-propositions-french-citizens-convention-climate.

    The 29 June, the President Macron should announce what will be done of the propositions. The Citizen’s Convention for the Climate proposed a referendum to change the Constitution and recognizes the crime of ecocide.

  18. Ok, the line of ink on your map is real. However, I never came across the line on the earth itself.

  20. Community Solar getting on more peoples radar screens-
    https://cleantechnica.com/2020/06/22/new-us-solar-power-scheme-aims-at-invisible-middle/

    “The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that almost half of US households and businesses can’t put solar panels on their roofs, which is a lot of lost opportunity.”
    ‘The basic idea behind community solar is that multiple rate payers in a particular geographic area benefit from access to a solar project in the same general area, either directly or in the form of a purchasing program.
    For the Energy Department it all boils down to expanding solar power access to lots of people who can’t get their hands on actual rooftop solar panels, including renters and tenants.
    In fact, last February the Energy Department reaffirmed its goal of ensuring access to solar power for every US household by 2025, and community solar will play a big role in achieving that goal.’
    ‘“Community solar allows renters, tenants, and residents to access solar energy regardless of where they live or the suitability of their rooftop. This allows more people to offset monthly energy bills while increasing their community’s resiliency, enhancing workforce opportunities, and spurring economic development,” the Energy Department explains.’

  21. Novel way to make a point.

    RETIRED EASTHAMPTON ENGINEER BUILDS 30-FOOT-TALL ‘SEA LEVEL RISE RULER,’ PLANS TO DRIVE IT ACROSS THE EAST COAST TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE

    “I marked the 11- and 22-foot levels in red, because those indicate where our sea level would rise if only 5% or 10% of Antarctica and Greenland were to melt,” he said. “When people stand next to the flagpole and see how high that really is, it shows how legitimate and scary the reality of rising sea levels is.”

    https://www.masslive.com/news/2020/06/retired-easthampton-engineer-builds-30-foot-tall-sea-level-rise-ruler-plans-to-drive-it-across-the-east-coast-to-raise-awareness-about-climate-change.html

  22. Cartoon character?

    Despite the White House spin saying the president was joking, Donald Trump confirmed today he was not kidding about slowing down virus testing to keep the case numbers down.

    1. What the press hasn’t caught onto up until this point is that with Trump this stuff comes at you like water from a firehose and it is hard to drink it all in. To grasp its full implication you have to go back to the start of the pandemic in the U.S. When there were cruise ships wanting to dock with sick passengers and Trump didn’t want to let them do so because his numbers would go up. When the WHO offered an effective test developed in Germany, in essentially unlimited numbers and according to the cover story the CDC declined because of concerns about its reliability. Bullshit. Trump is basically taking a full page ad in the NYT telling us that this was done on his orders to keep the numbers down because “testing is two edged sword”. And then as the CDC began to get their testing act together they ran into mysterious road blocks that were chalked up to “contamination”. Again, I call bullshit. It reeks of interference from the boss. Because “testing is a two edged sword”. This is the real scandal as anyone with any knowledge of the exponential function understands. It is the early period of an outbreak of a pandemic that is critical. That is when the future is determined. That is when this fucking idiot sealed the fate of over 100,000 citizens.

      1. “And then as the CDC began to get their testing act together they ran into mysterious road blocks ”

        No the guys at the CDC made an rooky mistake when constructing the PCR primers….

        1. And the US restricted it to a single source.
          Cost at least 100,000 lives.

  24. Get Small.
    The Arcimoto Deliverator boasts a top speed of 75 mph, with 102 miles of range in the city, while offering an impressive 20+ cubic feet of cargo space for deliveries. Its slender form factor makes it well suited to navigating through city traffic and making the most of the cluttered city parking.

    Arcimoto survived the downturn and is gaining traction. Stock really popped.

    https://cleantechnica.com/2020/06/23/arcimotos-deliverator-paves-the-way-to-sustainable-deliveries-in-los-angeles-with-hyrecar/

  25. Here in the Caribbean we are in the middle of a huge Saharan dust storm that has made it’s way across the Atlantic Ocean, turning skies gray and reducing visibility to less than 5 miles. Grey hazy skies with no clouds is very weird. I can normally see the Blue Mountain Peak, the highest point on the island from the door of my apartment but, today I could barely make out the hills surrounding the city, just s couple of miles from my location. Coming soon to a location near you, if you’re in the southeastern US!

    Looking at some data from a couple of PV installations, peak power output appears to be down about 20%

    1. So if we wind up in a scenario where there’s a grey hazy plane of smoke particles fluttering around the globe, that offsets global warming?

      2. That is the current situation. For a short time, during the lockdown/shutdown, we got to see a semblance of what clear skies look like. That comes with the price of increased radiation impinging the surface.

      3. The experience of this dust cloud was weird. Everything was hazy. The sky was grey. Visibility was less than five miles. Still, it was very hot and “muggy”, almost stifling. I was somewhat surprised at how hot it was to be out in the sun, despite all the haze. I don’t know if it was infrared radiation penetrating the haze of just that the air mass carrying the dust was hot.

        PV system performance depends on the visible spectrum and the haze definitely had a measurable effect on the amount of visible light but, it also scattered the light. It is possible that the scattering is what prevented the observed PV output from being worse than it was. It would be interesting to hear an analysis from experts.

  26. Hardly news is it?

    AFFLUENCE IS KILLING THE PLANET

    “Even the cleanest technologies have their limitations and still require specific resources to function, while efficiency savings often simply lead to more consumption. [Meanwhile] affluent, powerful people and their governments have a vested interest in deliberately promoting high consumption and hampering sufficiency-oriented lifestyles. ”

    https://phys.org/news/2020-06-affluence-planet-scientists.html

    1. But we need all those poor people to make our tires, clothes, electronics, refrigerators, etc. How else will the affluent feel wealthy, other than having things that turn to junk in a few years? Then we need the poor people to recycle some of the stuff so the affluent can feel better about their stuff.

      I don’t think the civilized world would work very well without all those low carbon emitters. At least until self repairing and replicating AI driven machines can do the work.

  27. Don’t those stupid Russians know they should be building wind farms and installing solar energy panels up there?

    THE ARCTIC IS ON FIRE: SIBERIAN HEAT WAVE ALARMS SCIENTISTS

    “Persistently warm weather, especially if coupled with wildfires, causes permafrost to thaw faster, which in turn exacerbates global warming by releasing large amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that’s 28 times stronger than carbon dioxide…

    The key point is that the climate is changing and global temperatures are warming,” said Freja Vamborg, senior scientist at the Copernicus Climate Change Service in the U.K. “We will be breaking more and more records as we go. What is clear is that the warming Arctic adds fuel to the warming of the whole planet.”

    https://phys.org/news/2020-06-arctic-siberian-alarms-scientists.html

    1. Just another warm day in northern Siberia plus a very strange winter for the Arctic. Also, people are wondering how a climate model predicted the winter event.

      Spring 2020 brings rare ozone “hole” to the Arctic
      In the lower atmosphere, CFCs are inert, but exposure to ultraviolet light in the stratosphere breaks them down into more reactive gases. The process is accelerated within polar stratospheric clouds. Commonly known as noctilucent (“night-shining”) clouds, they only form at temperatures below -78°C. It rarely gets that cold in the Arctic, even in the winter. That’s why when we talk about “the ozone hole,” we generally mean the one that happens every spring over the South Pole, where that kind of extreme cold is widespread.

      But the winter of 2019-20 was highly unusual, explained Craig Long of NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center via email. “The cold temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere polar region were present all winter long without ‘weather’ disrupting the circulation pattern,” he wrote. “There have been previous years where part of the winter has been cold, 2010-2011 for example, but not for the entire winter. This winter is also interesting in that the stratosphere and troposphere [lower atmosphere] were coupled throughout most of the winter. By this I mean that the polar region (60°-90°N) had cold anomalies throughout the troposphere and stratosphere.”

      Abundant amounts of polar stratospheric clouds throughout the dark winter months created a much bigger reservoir of reactive CFC byproducts than usual. As the Sun returned through late February and early March, ozone destruction occurred rapidly.
      https://www.climate.gov/news-features/event-tracker/spring-2020-brings-rare-ozone-%E2%80%9Chole%E2%80%9D-arctic

      1. Meanwhile,

        “The temperature departures from average in Siberia this year are some of the highest of any area on Earth. Since January, the region has been running at least 5.4 degrees (3 Celsius) above the long-term average, according to a recent report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. According to Robert Rohde of Berkeley Earth, which monitors global temperature trends, Russia averaged a temperature anomaly of nearly 11 degrees (6 Celsius) above average for the January-to-April period.”

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/05/28/zombie-fires-burning-arctic-siberia/

        1. I guess this falls under the “sooner or greater than previously expected” category.
          That category will soon fill more volumes than an encyclopedia.
          Sediments from Siberian ponds and lakes show past temperatures of +16 to 24C.

  28. Apparently winter intrusions of water vapor into the Arctic are amplifying atmospheric downwelling radiation.

    The computed six winter average irradiance with all constituents included was 205.0 W m−2, close to the average measured irradiance of 206.7 W m−2, a difference of −0.8%. During this period, water vapor was the most important contributor to the irradiance. The computed average irradiance with dry gas was 71.9 W m−2. Separately adding water vapor, liquid, or ice to the dry atmosphere led to average increases of 2.4, 1.8, and 1.6 times the dry atmosphere irradiance, respectively. During the analysis period, 15 episodes of warm, moist air intrusions were identified. During the intrusions, individual contributions from elevated temperature, water vapor, liquid water, and ice water were found to be comparable to each other. These findings indicate that all properties of the atmospheric state must be known in order to quantify the radiation coming down to the Arctic surface during winter.

    https://journals.ametsoc.org/jcli/article/33/11/4555/345255/Contributions-to-the-Surface-Downwelling-Longwave

    To give you a comparative reference to the approximate 200 watts/m2 downwelling radiation found for January in Alaska, Svalbard showed similar January and February downwelling radiation with a +15 w/m2/decade increase.

  29. One out of every 136 people in the United States have tested positive for the Corona Virus.

    But… only one out of every 11 people have been tested.

    Of those tested, one in 12 tested positive for the Corona Virus.

    Soooo?????

    1. Ron,

      The testing is not random, typically people with symptoms, or who have been in contact with someone either know to be positive or suspected of having covid-19 are those who are tested.

      New York did a random sample test for covid antibodies and got a rate of about 13.4% statewide (a random sample of 12000 people).

      https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000007193800/watch-cuomo-news-conference-coronavirus.html

      Nationwide we just don’t know and rates of infection will depend on social behavior which varies from place to place.

      Also New York probably had more community spread than other places, so rates of infection might be lower elsewhere.

  30. Agriculture and Insects

    Intensive agribusiness is causing a global decline in insect populations with serious consequences for humans and the rest of nature.
    As the son of an agricultural worker in NE Scotland in the 1970s and 80s I recall the amazing abundance and diversity of insects and other types of nature in agricultural areas.

    We saw gigantic fish jumping for flies from clean, clear rivers; birds feeding mid-flight from mass migrations of flying insects; a hundred beautiful lacewings drawn to the glass of a well-lit bedroom window.

    When I see the barren industrial zones that agricultural areas in the UK and other economically developed nations have now become, I am filled with sadness and anger. This decimation is treated with a shrug of the shoulders by farmers, politicians, the agri-industrialists that supply the weapons of destruction, and the general public alike.

    https://theecologist.org/2019/may/01/agriculture-and-insects

    1. Visiting my Daughter in Italy a few years back we were at a farmers for some reason; I asked him: do you have swallows here. His reply: our barn used to be filled with them, swallows and no bugs. Then the EU bureaucrats told us we had to spray our barns with insecticides to eradicate bugs. Since that started, no more swallows.

      This made me sad and angry. For how long had that farmer and his ancestors had a (very) good life without being forced to spray their barn with poisons?

  31. The march on toward electrification of vehicles continues despite economic downturn.
    Tesla has booked over 650,000 orders for the Cybertruck (I hate the design personally), and news reports are that it will be built at a big new manufacturing facility outside Austin. The top 3 states for orders are Calif, Texas and Florida.
    But there will be lots of competition in the electric pickup market in the next 2-3 years-
    https://www.motortrend.com/news/electric-rodeo-we-round-up-the-upcoming-ev-pickup-trucks/

  32. The US Dept of Energy posts a tool on their website which calculates the cost of ‘fueling’ a vehicle with electricity vs gasoline.
    They call the electricity an eGallon for direct comparison to a petrol gallon.

    The average cost of gasoline in the USA is $2.25/gallon (as of March 21, 2020). To be equivalent in cost to electricity for propulsion of a similar vehicle, the gasoline would have to be priced at $1.15, or less.

    You can use the tool to compare these costs for each individual state as well.
    For example, in Ohio gasoline would have to be priced at $1.06/gallon to match the cost of an eGallon in that state.
    https://www.energy.gov/maps/egallon

    It will take well more than a decade for this price advantage to filter through the vehicle fleet of the world.

    And of course, the switch to electric vehicles will mean a hell of lot less carbon emitted in the majority of places in the world-
    How does your state make electricity?
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/24/climate/how-electricity-generation-changed-in-your-state.html

    Not only is petrol replaced with electricity (some of which is produced by low carbon sources such as hydro, nuclear, solar and wind) but propulsion by electricity requires only approx 1/3rd as much total energy as it does by internal combustion engines, for equivalent miles traveled.

    1. A FAQ about EVs and grid fuel sources:

      “What is the point of driving an electric car when the electricity is from fossil fuels?”

      The premise of the question is false: Even in a country like China, which is 55% coal, an EV can still run mostly on low-carbon power. An EV can charge on mostly or all wind, solar or nuclear even in a grid that’s dominated by fossil fuels.

      EVs can charge when low-carbon sources are at their peak: at night, or at noon. They are highly computerized, and most have much more storage than is needed for daily driving of 50 kms (in the US) or 30 kms in the EU or Japan: that means they can schedule charging at typical low-carbon times, or in response to utility price or DSM signals.

      Even where low-carbon sources are a low percentage of the grid, EVs can still seek them out. This will raise prices at those times and incentivize even more low-carbon power. If you want to accelerate the grid’s transition to low-carbon, you want EVs installed ASAP.

  33. So I would have saved less than $75 in fuel costs over the past year after spending over $25,000 for an electric car and power hookup. Sounds like a real bargain.
    Maybe we need a more stepped approach. Since e vehicles have a large initial carbon footprint, those who don’t drive a lot might want to keep their vehicles. Those who need to drive a lot might want to investigate more efficient types including e vehicles. Fastest /cheapest way to decrease energy use is to toss out the unneeded miles and trips plus fill the vehicle with people and or cargo.

    1. Herein lies the rub. “Norway has pursued its extreme EV support policy due to the seemingly mistaken belief that one can both fight climate change and maintain a car culture. Considering the limits of today’s personal vehicle technology and the limitations of public finances, the simultaneous pursuit of these two conflicting objectives is perhaps a well-intentioned folly.”

      https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Busting-The-Myth-Of-The-Worlds-Hottest-Electric-Car-Market.html#:~:text=The%20reality%20of%20Norway's%20EV,range%20by%20up%20to%2040%25.

    2. Used 2011 Leaf SL with 54k miles at $6000 near Pittsburg, range by EPA rating is 73 miles when new, likely degraded by 10% at most over 54k. Depends on how far you drive, if such a car makes sense.

      Chevy Bolt 2017 model with 45k about 19k, those have about 240 miles range.

      1. A family member called me the other night and told me they were buying a 2017 Chevy Bolt. Glad to see it happening. I hear the Bolt is a very good vehicle.

    3. Good points all.
      Yes, it does make sense to keep a current ICE vehicle that is in good shape, rather than rush out and purchase a new EV, but when it is time for a new one…
      Yes, it is always best to use less, and that pertains to air and road miles. No matter what kind of engine or motor.
      Yes, you can charge smartly, or just with solar as we do.
      Yes, your state may have a much better, or worse, energy mix, but you still get the huge energy efficiency advantage with electric (about 2/3rds).
      Yes, even plug-in hybrids can and will be useful during this transition decade.

      And yes, it will take quite a long time to replace the current world ICE fleet, but all the ingredients are now in place for the transition to occur. 10-20 years the transition will be near complete. Whatever is left of the global passenger and light cargo yearly mileage traveled will be very quiet, much lower in carbon emission, and much less dependent on the oil industry (excepting plastics and lubricants).

      No panacea, no cure for the overshoot, no cure for human behavior, but an improvement in many ways.
      And oh yeh, the vulnerability to peak oil effects is diminished.
      How much?
      Approximately 3 miles for every mile not traveled by burning petrol.

  34. WHY THE ARCTIC IS WARMING SO MUCH FASTER THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD

    “The record-breaking temperatures seen this summer in the Arctic are not a “one-off”. They are part of a long-term trend that was predicted by climate models decades ago. Today, we’re seeing the results, with permafrost thaw and sea ice and ice sheet melting. The Arctic has sometimes been described as the canary in the coal mine for climate breakdown. Well it’s singing pretty loudly right now and it will get louder and louder in years to come.

    https://phys.org/news/2020-06-siberia-arctic-faster-rest-world.html

    1. -Most major airports in Australia are located on reclaimed swamps, sitting only a few meters above the present day sea level. And the risk of sea level rise from climate change poses a greater threat to our airports than we’re prepared for.
      -Twelve of those airports — including hubs in Shanghai, Rome, San Francisco and New York — are less than 5 meters above sea level.
      -The worst floods in nearly a century in Kerala, India, killed more than 400 people last month, and the deluge caused Cochin Airport, a regional hub, to close for two weeks.

      ‘Sea level rise is a global story, and it affects every coastal nation. But in the coming decades, the greatest effects will be felt in Asia, thanks to the number of people living in the continent’s low-lying coastal areas. Mainland China, Bangladesh, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand are home to the most people on land projected to be below average annual coastal flood levels by 2050 (table 2). Together, those six nations account for roughly 75 percent of the 300 million people on land facing the same vulnerability at midcentury.’

      https://www.climatecentral.org/news/report-flooded-future-global-vulnerability-to-sea-level-rise-worse-than-previously-understood

    2. I see 3 weeks or less of cold freezing temperatures in the winter, oranges growing in the Carolina’s and peaches growing in Delaware as a acceptable trade for Siberia warming. Anyway, don’t the Ruski’s want to open ‘er up for development and get ‘er done?

  35. I just saw something on YouTube that was somewhat surreal. Vice president Mike Pence being the first person to address the audience after a new pick up truck was driven on to the stage at it’s press launch near Youngstown, Ohio at the former GM Lordstown plant. What made this surreal is that this pick up truck is a fully electric, full sized pick up truck from startup company Lordstown motors.

    I thought the Republican party and the Trump administration were firmly in the FF loving, global warming denial camp and here is VP Pence giving praises to an EV startup for creating jobs in Ohio!

    Lordstown Reveals Endurance Electric Pickup Truck

    1. The only way to make republicans accepting, and even enthusiastic, about alternatives to the fossil fuel/refinery/internal combustion engine industrial complex [FF-R-ICE]
      is for them to have a vested interest in the alternatives.
      For example,
      Texas will become a solar and wind powerhouse, and it will change the tune of that state.
      Cybertruck, to be built in Texas, will find republican buyers. The electric pickup truck, and the ability to self-fuel (via solar panels) will definitely attitudes.
      Wyoming is becoming a wind powerhouse, as coal finds a declining market share.

    2. There was a discussion in WH on how America can not afford to miss the boat on Batteries. I think it was said that Trump mentioned that the US should not miss the boat on storage like solar PV. MAGA should be also about not being left behind. Appears that someone takes eyes off the rearview mirror.
      An equity reset will be a whole new ball game in the energy sphere no matter which goons are in the White house.

  36. From Tony Seba et al, re-branded as RethinkX:

    https://www.rethinkx.com/humanity

    (includes links to the book, and lower down, to the executive summary)

    >> … during the next decade key technologies will converge to drive down costs and drive up capabilities by 10x or more. This is not, as others have predicted, another Industrial Revolution. We are undergoing a far more fundamental shift, turning our current extraction mode of production on its head. The impact: the fastest, deepest, most consequential transformation of human civilization in history, the opportunity to elevate humanity to unprecedented new heights of freedom and creation, as well as the risk of devastating destabilization and civilization’s collapse. <<

    At least they point out the risks! 🙂

    1. John —

      Apart from population overshoot, this is the problem, or one of them (we are kicking the can down the road)

      GOVERNMENT CLIMATE ADVISERS RUNNING SCARED OF CHANGE

      “Academics have done an excellent job in understanding and communicating climate science, but the same cannot be said in relation to reducing emissions. Here we have collectively denied the necessary scale of mitigation, running scared of calling for fundamental changes to both our energy system and the lifestyles of high-energy users…

      Many senior academics, senior policymakers, basically the great and good of the climate world have decided that it is unhelpful to rock the status quo boat and therefore choose to work within that political paradigm – they’ll push it as hard as they think it can go, but repeatedly step back from questioning the paradigm itself…

      On mitigation, the academic community and the CCC have collectively failed the political realm and civil society by tailoring conclusions to fit with what we judge to be politically palatable – all at the expense of scientific integrity…

      Many say that rapid and deep change is unrealistic – but it’s much more realistic than believing a fair and progressive society can survive with 3, 4 or even 5C of warming.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/26/leading-scientist-criticises-uk-over-its-climate-record

      1. Doug, this is all taking way to long. I am getting impatient waiting for alligators to reach Pennsylvania.
        Can’t one of our brain trusts turn some chickens into dinosaurs, just to make it interesting? Give the cows and pigs some exercise, you know. Get more subsidies to the ranchers. Make for great YouTube videos too.
        Plus, we could really see if a T Rex could only run 17 mph.

        At the least we should make the central regions of North America available to African animals, give them some breeding room. There are lots of things to eat, mildly toxic, but that is the breaks.
        Forget about those forests, they are dangerous and combustible.

        Amazon fires: what will happen if they keep burning?
        There have been a lot of fires in Brazil this year – about 76% more than there were during the same period last year. And just 48 hours after Brazil’s government put a ban on burning and land clearing, to help stop the fires spreading, satellite data found that 2,000 more fires started in the Amazon alone. The 2019 fires will have a big and long-lasting impact on the forest itself, and the wider world.
        Unlike other ecosystems – such as the African savannah, the Australian bush or the US conifer forests – which have evolved with fires over many thousands of years, the plants and animals living in the Amazon don’t have the traits needed to survive a big fire and regenerate after the blaze. This is because fires were not very common before humans settled in the area.

        The trees in the Amazon have relatively thin bark, so during a fire, the heat can seriously damage the cells inside the tree, which eventually kills it. Previous research in the Amazon has found that more than 40% of trees die up to three years after a fire. This means that the carbon stored in their trunks, branches and leaves is released into the atmosphere, either while the fire is burning, or later as the dead trees decompose.

        For example, when I conducted research in an area of the Amazon 30 years after it was burned by wildfire, I found that even after all that time, the forest stocked about one quarter less carbon than it did before the fires.

        This is mainly because most of the large, hardwood trees – which hold the greatest amount of carbon – died after the fire. And as the forest grows back, they are replaced by smaller trees, which are mainly softwood species. These smaller trees grow fast, but have a shorter lifespan (between five and 30 years) and don’t amass much carbon in their trunks.

        https://theconversation.com/amazon-fires-what-will-happen-if-they-keep-burning-122758

        So much for tree cover studies, small softwood is not the same as large hardwood. Tsk, Tsk. Details, details.

        So to save the forests we need to stack the cows in multi-story lots, maybe all those parking facilities that Tony Seba says will be defunct soon. Then we can give them feed grown in Alberta and Iowa instead of Brazil.
        There, world saved again.

    2. Well John
      Perhaps I’m am just too old (over 40, 40 is the new 30) to ReThink so thoroughly.
      From the Food and Ag tab-
      “By 2035, about 60% of the land currently being used for livestock and feed production will be freed for other uses. This represents one-quarter of the continental U.S. – almost as much land as was acquired during the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. The opportunity to reimagine the American landscape by repurposing this land is wholly unprecedented.”
      “By 2030, at least half of the demand for oil from the U.S. agriculture industry – currently about 150 million barrels of oil equivalent a year – will disappear.”
      “Farmland values will collapse by 40%-80%.”
      “The cost of modern foods and other precision fermentation products will be at least 50% and as much as 80% lower than the animal products they replace.”
      “The current industrialized, animal-agriculture system will be replaced with a Food-as-Software model, where foods are engineered by scientists at a molecular level and uploaded to databases that can be accessed by food designers anywhere in the world. This will result in a far more distributed, localized, stable, and resilient food-production system.”

      Algae Pizza?
      I’m a bit skeptic, but then again I never dreamed a such a mean fool as president either.

      https://www.rethinkx.com/humanity

      1. Hickory —

        “By 2035, about 60% of the land currently being used for livestock and feed production will be freed for other uses.”

        Is this what will happen or what you think (or want to believe) will happen? Where I live our local “Cattle Barron” immediately buys every piece of land that come up for sale and turns it into pasture. In his words: “There is an insatiable growth in the demand for beef; I can’t produce enough to satisfy my customers.”

        Meanwhile,

        14 STRAIGHT MONTHS OF RISING AMAZON DEFORESTATION IN BRAZIL

        • Deforestation in Earth’s largest rainforest increased for the fourteenth consecutive month according to data released today by the Brazilian government.
        • Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon is currently pacing 83% ahead of where it was a year ago.

        https://news.mongabay.com/2020/06/14-straight-months-of-rising-amazon-deforestation-in-brazil/

        1. No Doug,
          that quote is from the source that John shared.
          I’d be surprised as hell if that came to be.
          I see the human bulldozer plowing along, without any sign of deploying the brakes.

      2. Hickory, from your link. Bold mine:

        The knock-on effects for society will be as profound as the extraordinary possibilities that emerge. For the first time in history, we could overcome poverty easily. Access to all our basic needs could become a fundamental human right. But this is just one future outcome. The alternative could see our civilization collapse into a new dark age. Which path we take depends on the choices we make, starting today. The stakes could not be higher.

        Goddammit, every time I read something about “choices we make” I feel like screaming. You and I make choices. Humanity does not make choices. Humanity obeys its instincts. Does anyone in their right mind believe 8 billion people will make any kind of choice? We have been expanding our territory, taking food and resources from all other species for hundreds of years. Are we suddenly going to stop?

        We all are going to start eating less meat? Well, yes, but only when less meat is available to eat. We will stop cutting down the rainforest when it is all gone. We will stop destroying the environment when there is nothing left to destroy. The very idea that humanity in general will suddenly make a choice to change the ways of humanity is just absurd.

        1. I agree with you Ron.
          btw- I was just reposting a link posted by another, so that one such as you could refer to it.
          Glad to see you and Doug bring up these points.

          Regarding choices, we do differ however.
          We do make choices individually that add up to big changes sometimes. For example, a majority of individuals in Texas voted for Trump, but not in California. A majority of individuals in Calif have voted repeatedly for environmentally friendlier policies out in front of much of the rest of the country. This has resulted in a much smaller carbon emission footprint/capita than would have otherwise been, for example.
          Individuals decide whether to fight their personal tendency to be racist, or cruel, or glutinous.
          The leaders follow their voters, who are made up a many individuals.
          There is no ‘humanity-wide’ decision making process or governing body. Its the decision making and actions of many individuals that picks the course.
          Don’t get me wrong, I am not naive enough to be optimistic that the collective choices made will be timely or successful. Hell, just look where we are for proof of that.

  38. Just one question? Lots of people seem to think we should cut down on air-miles.
    Won’t that mean the aircraft doesn’t make it to it’s destination?
    After thinking about it and searching the academic knowledge base, apparently that would cut down on ticket sales too.

Comments are closed.