104 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum, Nov 11, 2022”

  1. I have posted a new essay on my website The Fine-Tuned Universe

    I would like to hear your response. But please respond there, not here on this blog. Thanks. The below is how it starts. It’s called “The Culling of the Virgins.”

    A year or so ago I wrote a short essay on the Biblical chapter, Numbers 31. That is where God tells Moses to take vengeance upon the Midianites. I hoped to use the essay in a book or perhaps publish it on a website.
    After completing the essay, I emailed it to my oldest son, Rusty, for his criticism. (Rusty is a materialist, that is he believes nothing exists except the material world.) I was stunned by his reply:

    “No, no, no, Dad, far too graphic. That is shocking; You just cannot write stuff like that.”

    So, I took his advice and deleted the essay.

    Then today began thinking about all the shocking stuff in the Bible, the genocide, the drowning of all the world’s people, including toddlers, babies, and animals in a flood, the eternal burning of unbelievers in hell fire… Then I thought of a line I had read many years ago:

    .Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it.
    Thomas Paine: The Age of Reason

    Dammit, I thought. That chapter is one of the most shocking things I have ever read. If it is okay for that story to be published in the Bible, just why can’t I just try to explain how it all must have gone down or had to go down? If a person can just read about something happening without thinking about the details of how it had to happen, then that person is not being honest with him/herself. they can just imagine that nothing really nasty happened, but not all that bad. They just say to themselves, “nothing else to report here, so let’s move on.” A lie by omission.

    No, hell no, I will publish this essay. Sure it is horribly shocking. But what the Bible said happened was shocking. This is presented as the holy work of God; therefore, it is only fair that if they say it happened, then it is only fair that we can try to describe the events as they surely must have happened.

    I decided to rewrite the essay. But make no mistake, this essay is not intended to be an appeal to reason. It is intended only to shock.

    Again, if you have a response, please post it on that blog, not this one.

    1. The one person I know who got out of Xianity was triggered by looking at the horrible people around her, not at the actual religion.

      1. Levantine Bronze Age tribal dogma courtesy of some goat herding war criminals; have never understood the appeal of it.

      2. The violence associated with it is or was real enough, although the actual details aren’t accurate.
        But read about one or two fatal auto accidents, or wars, so long as they don’t involve you personally, and you’ve read about them all.

      1. Crypro currencies are a faith based movement. The true believers lost faith, and now the sky is falling.

      2. I’ve always thought that the idea of the unknown whales, those who hodl millions of BTC, etc., generated when it was virtually free, becoming the new powers-that-be and restructuring the world’s organized forces (ala the nine unknown men, the Illuminati, etc.) would be intolerable and be put to death by those who do wield the hammers necessary to prevent such an unacceptable insubordination.

  4. Wind and Solar are cheap, except when the sun sets and there is no wind.

    The cost of solar panels and wind turbines has fallen to the point that the electricity they produce is about on par with coal and gas.

    However what happens when the sun sets and there is little wind over a 2 thousand mile high pressure system?

    https://www.severe-weather.eu/mcd/powerful-high-pressure-system-dominates-europe-new-year-mk/

    These large areas of low wind happen on a regular basis, with other low wind systems effecting most of the continent.

    https://energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&stacking=stacked_absolute_area&week=41
    At 7pm on the 11th of October you can see there is zero solar and of the 65,000 Mw of installed Wind, it is producing only 2,300Mw.

    You can pick almost any week, where there are one or two days of low wind.

    https://energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&stacking=stacked_absolute_area&week=27

    https://energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&stacking=stacked_absolute_area&week=02

    There are 3 solutions to the poor performance of wind and solar.
    1. Retain 95% of your coal, gas and oil power stations at a massive additional cost to businesses and families.
    2.Build a nuclear fleet and then you can forget about wind and solar.
    3. Build enough battery storage to power a country for at least 24 hours out of a 36 hour lull in wind.

    Remember you have to hope that the next 3 days are really windy to recharge all those batteries and cars.

    The cost projections of battery storage for just 6 hours is eye watering.

    https://www.lazard.com/media/451882/lazards-levelized-cost-of-storage-version-70-vf.pdf

    The reality of storing say 40,000Mw multiplied by even a day is as far away today as it was 20 years ago when I first had a conversation with a wind and solar advocate.

    1. Charles,

      See following 20 minute Tony Seba video

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsnkPLkf1ao

      The lowest cost solar, wind, and battery system overbuilds solar and wind capacity by 3 to 5 times demand for electricity and minimizes needed storage. Also note that most people travel an average of 30 to 40 miles per day and many BEVs can store 250 to 350 miles of travel when fully charged so they only need to charge on average about one to 1.5 times per week. When battery storage is needed cars that can be connected to a home in a bidirectional manner (as is the case for the Ford F150 EV) the vehicle can act as part of the battery storage system. Also there are other types of energy storage, for heating excess power during high wind and solar periods could be used to heat water with a heat pump and the water could be stored in a large superinsulated tank. This water could be circulated in a baseboard water circulation system similar to the type used for many boiler heating systems (at least in the US) that are currently fired with natural gas, propane, or distillate fuel.

      1. Dennis

        You are obviously a very rich man.
        Do you know any poorer people at all?
        In my world, my friends are struggling to pay all the bills, mortgage and food. They don’t have £15,000 for solar panels and a backup storage system.

        The most well off are buying electric cars, the majority are not, they simply cannot afford to.

        https://www.smmt.co.uk/vehicle-data/car-registrations/

        Also if you power your house with your car and the wind lull is 2/3 days as it often is you will not have the range to get to work. If there was just one town of say 50,000 people which ran along the lines you talk about I would be optimistic. There is not a single town in Europe or America that runs on solar and wind without nearly 100% gas and coal backup.

        1. We are dependent on fossil fuels today. However we don’t have to be dependent on them forever. Utility scale (not rooftop) solar and wind is already the cheapest source of electricity. We are in the early stage of mass producing cheap batteries for grid backup (liquid metal flow, iron oxide, Sodium ion, etc). In most of the world it is not possible for a house to be off grid. However it is possible for a utility to get most of its electricity from sun and wind with battery backup (SWB grid).
          I agree with you that until we make the transition, we need fossil fuels.

        2. Charles,

          The talk is about the future not the present. From what I have read, a fully charged Ford F 150 lightening could power a home for 3 days, as to getting to work, it depends on how long the drive is, a commute might be only 15 miles round trip, no power is needed while at work, just plug in and power up the house when you get home.

          Obviously nobody is doing 100% wind, solar, and battery now, the point is that it can be done and will be cheaper to do so.

          I take it as given that fossil fuel will be needed until this becomes a reality, solar has been growing at 23%/year and wind is growing at 13%/year, so they will take a large share of electricity output pretty quickly. Currently these are the low cost source of electricity and they are becoming cheaper. Future growth may accelerate.

    2. Gas, oil, and coal come out of holes in the ground.

      I can’t prove it, but I strongly suspect that within a very few years, the obvious fact that wind and solar power will have destroyed a substantial portion of the market for fossil fuels will have the FOLLOW ON EFFECT of the prices of the same being FAR LOWER than they would otherwise be.

      Cut the demand for a given commodity ten percent, and the price of it, everything else held equal, and the price of that commodity will decline significantly. In some cases the price might even crash at the wholesale level.
      I’ve yet to run across any work done by economists or other professionals who take this into account.
      Any modeling they might do will of course necessarily be highly subjective….. nobody knows how high or low the prices of fossil fuels may go a decade down the road, or even next year.

      But taking depletion into account, I’m willing to bet that we will soon be SAVING A LOT MORE than we are spending on renewable energy, on a collective basis….. simply due to lower demand resulting in lower prices.

      Then there’s the national security issue to be considered…… the countries that are pushing hardest to go renewable are mostly the ones at the greatest risk of being blackmailed by Russia and OPEC countries.

      And of course there’s the climate issue.

      But I hardly even bother with talking about that when dealing with people who are bad mouthing renewables on the basis of day to day costs.

      I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Charles owns two vehicles…….. one that burns a lot of gas, and one that’s really easy on gas, and that he justifies owning the smaller one on the basis of saving money on gasoline.

      I have two for this very reason myself.

      1. OFM

        There is not need for this childish reaction just because I am telling you some very basic facts.
        Perhaps you could explain to us all what happens at 6pm, when demand is highest, there is no solar and there is a two day lull in the wind. Demand requires 70,000 Mw per hour and wind is producing 2,000Mw/h or if Germany doubles their wind turbines 4,000Mw/h or perhaps they can quadruple wind power and it is producing a fantastic 8,000Mwh?
        These are real practical adult questions that need to be addressed.
        P.S. most of the time I use the train

      2. OFM

        These are simple facts, when demand requires 70,000Mwh and wind is providing 2,000 Mwh then there is a real problem. Which requires many adults to find a solution.

        1. Hello Charles,
          **Attention ALL site readers here** Exxon has revised their peaking graph!!!!!!
          According to Exxon Mobil, we will be peaking in **world** crude oil production around the year **2032 ** (was 2040 for many years prior to this). The fourth graph at:
          https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/energy-and-innovation/outlook-for-energy/energy-supply#Liquids says their current analysis has shifted to much sooner than later.
          Their peak has moved this year to around 2032. (hold a ruler just above tight oil -natural gas liquids line) anything below that line is used in making gasoline, kerosene, diesel, JP-4 (airplane fuel), etc. You all might be right after all (Hi Ron, Dennis, Mike, etc. etc. etc.!!)

          Some are predicting natural gas will peak as soon as 2035.

          Charles: These are real natural limits. “Which requires many adults to find a solution.” What are YOU going to do??? As a suggestion, I would find the blog of John Michael Greer and read his book “The Long Descent”, The Club of Rome’s “The Limits to Growth”, and a number of DIY books and resources. Somewhere in all that is where we will be heading; like it or not.

          In Australia, Musk has installed a number of battery storage units to stabilize their grid. We can do the same thing here and use our transmission lines to distribute electricity to areas lacking sufficient solar and wind generation and for those that use electricity at night which will be from such battery banks.

          In winter and really cold times, we may have to set our thermostats very low and use public transportation (maybe walk???). How unselfish will we be to one another????

          Hope this helps.

    3. Charles yes the intermittency must be taken into account and planned for.
      To downplay this factor is naive.
      The big Utilities of the world who are making the long-term investment decisions are not naive on this.
      You can learn a lot by following where the energy project investment money is going.

      There will be different answers for different places.
      Some places like the US have plenty of Nat Gas and they will keep up that industry as wind and solar is built big.
      Others, like Poland for example, will rely heavily on domestic Coal and Wind- [they do have a very good wind reserve].
      Some places will work hard ( and spend lots of dough) to build nuclear up. Take note that the biggest nuclear energy country over the past 4 decades is struggling mightily with reliability/production this year- France.

      These are just a few examples of the various combinations places will use.
      Keep in mind that energy storage industry will be innovating strongly over the next few decades. Even hydrogen as energy storage will become a big deal. And no- it not cheap, but it is far better than no energy.

      In regard to “Retain 95% of your coal, gas and oil power stations at a massive additional cost to businesses and families.”
      Its going to be even more expensive to not add solar and wind. Much, much more expensive.
      “UK Wind Power Hits a Record, Easing Reliance on Expensive Gas”
      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-26/uk-wind-power-hits-a-record-easing-reliance-on-expensive-gas
      By 2030 UK plans to deploy enough offshore wind to equal the annual output 22 nuclear reactors (1000MW standard). Try to achieve that with nucs!
      https://www.offshorewind.biz/2022/04/07/uk-to-raise-2030-offshore-wind-target-to-50-gw-slash-project-approval-times/

      Here is a website that allows you to keep track of some of the goings on in the electric utility sector-
      https://www.utilitydive.com/
      And storage.
      https://www.energy-storage.news/

    4. Charles —
      Wind and solar are going to kill other forms of electricity generation. The hot water to electricity industry exists because it makes money, and when it stops making money it will cease to exist.

      That’s how markets work.

      The oil industry is raking in cash like never before, but electricity companies are not. They will never be able to compete against producers with zero marginals costs, so they will lose their financial backing. Nuclear plants are a financial mess already and only running them at night is not a viable solution. It’s already happening.

      The question is not whether this is a good idea. The question is whether it’s happening. The answer is yes it is. So buckle up.

      1. Alimbiquated

        In Europe there isn’t a free market. Electricity retailers have to buy wind and solar first no matter what the price. That is why for the last 10 years German and Dutch domestic customers paid the highest rates of almost any other country. The highest wind and solar output the highest bills.

        Fact the cheapest electricity was made by coal power stations built over 15 years ago.

        If batteries and solar are so cheap have you got a solar roof and battery storage?

        1. I don’t have solar because all the solar installers in Germany are completely booked. I have been waiting for months for a contractor. Total solar capacity growth in Germany is over 10% per year.

          Wholesale electricity prices in Germany are very low, often negative. As a result, Germany has been a large net exporter of electricity for some time. There was a short period of high prices in September, when people were panicking about Putin’s erratic behavior, but prices have fallen again.

          There has been a small increase in the percentage of electricity generated by coal, but not enough to replace the fall in gas production. Solar produces about half again as much electricity as gas.

          Retail prices are kept high to prevent waste.

          Your claim that coal is cheaper is simply outdated, as is your claim that coal plants were built 10-15 years ago. You seem to be stuck in the 90s.

  5. Hickory

    This is exactly what I am talking about.

    https://www.energy-storage.news/vistra-wins-miso-interconnection-exemption-for-illinois-coal-to-battery-storage-projects/

    “Joppa would be converted from housing a 948MW coal-fired plant and 239MW gas-fired plant and Edwards from 560MW of coal-fired generation, with Vistra planning a 37MW BESS at each site.”

    A 948MW plant being replaced by a 37MW battery that runs out after 8 hours, we are in trouble.

    The UK has built 30,000Mw of wind and some hours it is prodecing 800Mw, you can double and triple and quadruple those numbers and you would still be nowhere close.

    There is a reason why Germany burns vast amounts of coal and gas, because wind and solar fail too often.

  6. Charles- I do agree with the point made about expense.
    Any path from here on out is going to be expensive for most people.
    The world now has the dual task of simultaneously paying for ever increasingly expensive fossil fuel, while at the same time spending a large amount on the deployment of alternative generation capability [nuc, wind, solar, hydro]
    Add to that the need for purchase of more efficient machines like EV’s, heat pumps, building retrofit, and energy storage
    and you’ve got a big problem.

    That is why it has been pointed out that we are in for an increasing disparity of energy availability in the world- some regions/people with relative abundance and others in energy poverty.

      1. Post it again. So long as it’s not outlandish, obscene or too personal, it’s not likely to be deleted.

        Now tell me……… what’s your solution to depletion?
        If you want to pretend that fossil fuel depletion is not a real problem, that’s your privilege. You’re entitled to your personal opinion but not your personal “facts”.

        And tell me what you would saying, and how you would be voting, if you happened to be living anyplace in Western Europe as of today.

        Would you like to be at the mercy of OPEC and Russia for your fossil fuel supply?

        If you’re not willing to answer these questions, you’re wasting my time, and everybody else’s time.
        We’re now getting over ten percent of all our electricity here in the USA from wind and sun.
        Think about saving ten percent of what we spend on coal and gas annually……. and multiply that by twenty five or thirty.

        1. OFM

          The solution to depletion needed to start 50 years ago with every house and building being built to the highest insulation standard, such as in Norway. External blinds to remove most need for air conditioning. That would have saved 30% to 40% of all coal and gas burned.

          US govenment should have instituted a constantly inproving fleet efficiency target and had a tax system such as in UK.

          https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables

          Using that money to subsidize a nationwide public transport system. Many people in Holland do not need to drive.

          https://www.holland.com/global/tourism/information/public-transport/taking-the-bus-tram-or-metro.htm

          The highest car taxes in the world Singapore

          https://dollarsandsense.sg/no-nonsense-explanation-on-why-cars-in-singapore-are-so-expensive/

          equals the best public transportation system and public transport uses the least amount of energy in digging out material to make the vehicle to energy used per passenger.

          The US is addicted to car driving and many in the US are in for a big shock

          1. Starting fifty years ago, or a hundred years ago, wouldn’t have solved the depletion problem. It would however have had the effect of delaying the built in fossil fuel depletion crisis.

            Keeping it pedal to the metal ( trucker’s colloquial expression meaning hard and steady on the job) on building out the renewables industries, and the conservation industries as well of course, is the KEY to delaying the depletion problem until it’s no longer an existential problem.

            Renewable energy will work, especially for transportation, far better, and far more economically, for most people, than any hare brained discussion of impossibilities such as giving up country and suburban living. That’s simply NOT going to happen, except where it’s already the norm…… due to historical circumstances and geographical limitations.

            Everybody I know of personally, and I read VERY WIDELY, who is a renewable energy supporter also believes in conservation. Childish, if you wish to use this word, applies both ways.

            Mass transit just does not work in most places in the USA. We don’t have time machines, and we aren’t going to turn the clock back a hundred years and build out this country all over again.

            Yes, in a place like the Netherlands, you can ride a bicycle, no problem. It’s twelve miles to the closest supermarket from my house……. and the road is up and over some high steep hills. People who live five, ten, fifteen miles out in the suburbs have most of their net assets or life savings invested in their homes. There ISN’T any available decent and AFFORDABLE housing in our cities….. or any VACANT housing of that description anywhere in most of Western Europe, to the best of my knowledge.

            Take a look at the BIG PICTURE. Renewable energy, and electric personal vehicles WORK in most parts of the world. Mass transit works only in densely populated and fairly large cities.

            Now as far as lots of people in the USA being in for a big shock, in relation to their auto centered lifestyle, I agree totally.

            But I have a literal million dollar view, maybe a ten million dollar view, if I could move my house to a big prosperous city. I have landscaped grounds that would be buried under apartments housing at least a couple of dozen people in the Netherlands.

            And yet as money and class go in the USA, I’m just barely within the lower limit of what’s usually considered middle class in terms of money.

            I’m not giving it up. If I live long enough, I will be driving an electric car, and charging it with my own solar panels. If I don’t, my next car will be a sixty mpg model. I’ll drive less.

            The rental value of my place, the residence only, out in the boonies, is less than a thousand a month. I know a number of people who pay five or six times as much for an apartment, lol.

            Gasoline, even at ten bucks a gallon, would be a lifestyle bargain for me, and for upwards of a hundred million, probably more, of my fellow citizens. Half of Western Europe would fit comfortably inside the states of Texas and California.

            We’re going renewable, because depletion can only be DELAYED.
            You haven’t answered any questions.
            You’re just trolling, basically saying the same things over and over again, but you do come up with some talking points.

            I congratulate you on being far more articulate than most fossil fuel trolls.

            1. OFM- I’d like to offer a different view on the points raised by Charles.
              I’m glad he is engaged in conversation with folks here, like you.
              He raises the topic of important constraints (like intermittency or affordability).
              I think he has plenty to learn to get up to date on the current energy scenario, but at least he actively exploring the space.

              Many of his concerns are an expression of the energy insecurity that most people are starting to experience.
              His position seems to be that all spending should be directed to coal and nuclear production. As someone living in the UK I think he has not yet understood just how big the wind energy reserve offshore is. Anyone in UK with a concern about energy supply, and with a clear eye of the overall landscape, would be a huge advocate for offshore wind energy for their country.

              All countries have very tough choices, and most have considerable opportunities as well.

              Charles- something to study if you are interested in exploring your countries options
              1- https://gwec.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/United-Kingdom_Offshore-Wind-Technical-Potential_GWEC-OREAC.pdf
              2- https://globalwindatlas.info/en

            2. OFM

              So you are willing to continue buying gasoline at $10 a gallon what a hypocrite.

              You like most people not prepared to do what is needed to prevent global warming.

            3. Charles- very few humans who live in the modern world are not hypocrites on energy, and many other issues.
              OFM brings a huge load of wisdom and common sense to the table.
              You’d be smart to listen more to those who have been thinking on these things for longer than you have.

        2. The US got 10.8% of it’s electricity from solar and wind for the month of August 2022, up from 9.23% a year earlier. So far YTD for 2022 the US is running at 15.1% of it’s electricity from wind and solar with the peak month being April at 20.45%. The peak month for solar production in 2014 was August at 2.846 Twh while the peak month for 2022 was June at 21.989 TWh (see graph below).

          If solar continues to grow at anything close to recent rates we should be looking at anywhere between 100 TWh and 200 TWh by 2030. Solar output has doubled in roughly three years. If it doubles again by 2025 we should be seeing some serious downward pressure on mid day electricity prices by the summer of 2025.

          1. Yes.
            ‘Picking up steam’ so to speak.
            The new government policy on energy transition is a welcome boost.
            Long overdo, but the republican obstructionist platform to energy transition attempts has been very difficult to overcome….like their rejection of evolution.

  7. Energy Cornucopia- “the belief that there is enough matter and energy on the Earth to provide for the population of the world, appears adequate to give humanity almost unlimited room for growth”

    Or something along those lines.
    Don’t confuse someone like me who thinks we should have got on with a serious push into fossil fuel alternatives over 4 decades again (to give enough time to get some of the job and innovation underway before the hurt) with being a ‘cornucopian’.
    Big distinction here- I would be shocked if an energy transition will happen in time and at scale
    to avoid a hastening of peak population- then decline,
    to avoid climate destabilization, and
    to avoid geopolitical destabilization (worse than we have seen since the 60’s).

    If the humanity population magically downsized by a large amount like back where it was in last mid-century I might be convinced to think there was a chance for some stability in the system.

    1. Hi Hickory,
      I’m with you all the way.

      “Big distinction here- I would be shocked if an energy transition will happen in time and at scale
      to avoid a hastening of peak population- then decline”

      I usually go farther, saying that my personal belief is that in general terms humanity is in for a crash and burn scenario. I used to believe given the combined effects of resource depletion, growing population and ecological destruction, including climate troubles, that industrial civilization would pretty much cease to exist, and that the handful of us who survive will necessarily revert back to an eighteenth century lifestyle at best.

      But over the last few years I have come to believe that some people in some countries can continue to enjoy a modern industrial civilization lifestyle…….

      I believe this primarily because the renewable energy industries are growing so fast that they CAN be scaled up sufficiently, in combination with conservation measures, to carry the load.

      Fast falling birth rates are the clincher in my estimation.

      Countries that are ahead of the curve in terms of renewables, lucky enough to still have ample ( if properly husbanded ) natural resources, that are strong enough to defend themselves, that have declining birth rates, etc, have at least a fair to good shot at pulling thru more or less whole in terms of keeping the lights on, food in the stores, and cops on the streets.

      I count myself DAMNED lucky to be a Yankee, southern flavor, because the USA is probably the best positioned country in the world to pull thru more or less whole………. IF we’re lucky enough to have decent leadership over the next couple of decades.

      For his own sake I hope Charles lives in a country well able to defend itself, with ample reserves of fossil fuels, because hot resource wars are built into future history……

      Given that he is apparently UNWILLING to recognize such obvious facts even as the people of Ukraine are in a life and death struggle to drive the Russians out of their country………….

      And ………. that

      He’s OBVIOUSLY smart enough to recognize such obvious truths as we have been discussing here for years, I’m convinced he’s trolling.

      Maybe he’s a Russian or a Russian asset, or maybe he just has money in the fossil fuel industry, or maybe he’s an articulate right wing American of the sort that opposes anything the Democrats are FOR, such as renewable energy.

      1. Charles is British. See these two sentences from a post of his further up.

        “In my world, my friends are struggling to pay all the bills, mortgage and food. They don’t have £15,000 for solar panels and a backup storage system. “

    2. My local newspaper said the world population will pass 8 billion today! Yay?

  8. CHINESE SCIENTISTS ARE SOUNDING THE ALARM ON TOXIC MUD FLOWING FROM ASIA WATER TOWER

    More signs pointing the way at what’s ahead. I was a little shocked to read that the water quality has been monitored only a relatively short time.

    I’m reminded of the saying: ’the solution to pollution is dilution’. And the reverse is true: as the dilution decreases, the pollution increases.

    https://www.tibetanreview.net/chinese-scientists-are-sounding-the-alarm-on-toxic-mud-flowing-from-asias-water-tower/

  9. Fossil fuels are a time bomb, and humans are entitled to stop them. That is the argument of How to Blow Up a Pipeline, a book by Andreas Malm calling for activist groups like Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion to adopt radical tactics against the fossil fuel industry, including property damage.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/podcasts/2022/11/14/a-radical-antidote-to-climate-despair

    It is not an instructional book. The title just sounds that way. The topic is an argument regarding the moral permissibility of vandalism.

  11. Its pretty simple.
    A region would be the big fool to
    -delay on massive buildout of solar if they have good solar reserve, or
    -delay on massive buildout of wind if they have good wind reserve.

    Its no more complicated than that. The price of electricity generated is very good compared to the alternatives.
    The longer they delay on getting the job up to full effort, the less is their chance of avoiding energy poverty and all that goes with that.

    If anyone wants to know how look up the wind or solar resource of any particular site in the world, I can give links to excellent online atlas’s.

    Each country is going to have to decide whether they want to go whole hog on nuclear. If so, better get underway since the first new one planned and approved will take 10-20 years to commission. And they better have excellent national credit/savings/spare income to apply to the massive financial effort required.

  12. WORLD’S POPULATION HITS 8 BILLION

    The 8 billionth person was born somewhere in the world on Tuesday, according to UN projections. The population milestone was reached owing to a gradual increase in the average human lifespan, accomplished through improvements in medicine and public health. It took just 12 years for the world population to grow from 7 billion to 8 billion people, but the UN projects it will take 15 years to reach 9 billion people, a milestone expected to be reached by 2037.

    1. Hi Doug,
      I wish I could offer more than just sympathetic words about your health, but we’re the old folks now.

      As a matter of fact, except for three uncles, and one aunt, I’m now the oldest person left in my own family, to the best of my knowledge. One of the uncles and the aunt won’t last more than another year or two, and very close to ninety. The younger uncle is over eighty.

      But hey, we have some good memories, don’t we?

      I would insist on getting favorable odds, something like three to two, or even better, three to one, before I would take a bet on the global population reaching nine billion.

      The Four Horsemen, Death, Famine, War, and Conquest will soon be running wild.

      I don’t see the more civilized and prosperous countries being willing, or even ABLE, to keep them in check, given over population, one time gift of nature resource deletion, climate troubles, and DOMESTIC to be dealt with on their own home turf.

      Once something goes really wrong, say for instance a long lasting mega drought in one of the primary bread baskets, the resulting troubles will spread like a wild fire in a high wind.

      Such troubles are not IF’s. They’re WHEN’s.

      1. OFM —

        “I wish I could offer more than just sympathetic words about your health, but we’re the old folks now.”

        No problem, my original prognosis was to be dead 10 years ago. If I make 83 with a usable brain (which seems possible) I will have reached the average life span of my ancestors; what more can you expect than that? No sympathetic words needed; yes we’re old folks now. I just wish we could have left planet Earth in a decent state for all the wonderful critters who live here.

  13. I had a chat with my sister in the UK this past Sunday evening. She was telling me that she’s been watching a documentary series on the BBC, “Frozen Planet II” narrated by Sir David Attenborough. Her conclusion is that we are all fscked.

    The documentary outlines the repercussions of disappearing ice on global civilization. One particular aspect she found particularly scary was all the major rivers in Europe and Asia that are fed by glaciers and what will happen to those rivers when the glaciers recede away to nothing.

    Here is link to a trailer:

    Sir David Attenborough: The Future Of Our Frozen World | Frozen Planet II | BBC Earth

    The last spoken words in the trailer are Sir David Attenborough saying:
    “We can do it.
    It’s within our power to do it.
    We can do it.
    We must do it.
    Then, there will be a future for the planet.”

    I disagree with his last sentence. The planet’s not going anywhere. It will be just fine. Whether there will be anything bigger than a cockroach living on it is another matter.

    Somehow I don’t think Charles has been watching this series.

    1. Well, things aren’t moving in the right direction. Population overshoot is perhaps the biggest problem unless there are climate tipping points that have already been passed which make most of these conservations academic. Of course a rapidly warming Arctic doesn’t bode well for our future but the oceans aren’t in a great state either.

      GLOBAL CARBON EMISSIONS AT RECORD LEVELS WITH NO SIGNS OF SHRINKING

      The growth in fossil emissions this year is largely due to higher oil and coal use — particularly oil, as the aviation industry is strongly bouncing back from the pandemic. Coal emissions have also increased this year in response to higher natural gas prices and shortages in natural gas supply. There is the possibility that coal emissions this year will be higher than the historical peak in 2014. Another major source of global CO₂ emissions is land-use change — the net balance between deforestation and reforestation. Roughly 4.0 billion tons of CO₂ will be released overall this year (NB: uncertainties are higher for land-use change emissions than for fossil CO₂ emissions).

      https://phys.org/news/2022-11-global-carbon-emissions.html

    2. I would like to add that I was able to give my sister a little bit of optimism by pointing out to her how fast renewables have been growing and how wrong the forecasting agencies have been about this growth. My angle was that, if they have been so wrong with their projections for renewable growth in the past, their projections for future CO2 emissions may be equally wrong on the upside and that the future may not be as bad as projected if we continue with “pedal to the metal” growth in renewables.

      The hopelessness projected by some people tends to make people throw up their hands, give up hope and not try to do anything to try and mitigate global warming (greenhouse gas emissions). That is counterproductive. I sometimes wonder if that is that aim of the naysayers, to try and maintain a sense of hopelessness so that people don’t try to take any actions that would change the status quo. Watch the young people though. They have their whole lives ahead of them and cannot afford to do nothing. They will have to cope with the effects of global warming so it is in their interests to try and do something to reduce the magnitude of the effect.

    3. ISLANDBOY

      You have zero knowledge of what my views are, zero.

      There are realists, optimists and dreamers and you border on the latter. I remember several years ago you stated quite clearly that China coal consumption had peaked due to their investment in wind, solar etc.

      https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jan/17/chinas-coal-production-hit-record-levels-in-2021

      Someone at the time told you that China electricity consumption was still rising fast and that wind and solar would be nothing like enough to reduce coal consumption.

      https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/china

      China burned more coal in one month than the United Kingdom will in 40 years.

      You were wrong and will continue to be wrong because you cannot even bring yourselve to look long enough at how difficult the problems we face are.

      1. CHARLES —

        Islandboy is a cornucopian. He style is to cherry pick some data, or imagine it, and paint a rosy picture. Ignore him. Instead, read the comments and publications of climate scientists, the guys who must justify their comments to their peers.

        1. Um, no, climate scientists must justify their comments to the organizations, activists, and corporations that fund the grants that allow them to even be scientists in the first place.

  14. So, Cop27 host Egypt is increasing its use of mazut — a polluting heavy fuel oil— in 20 power plants, to free up gas for export to Europe. This would be funny if it weren’t tragic.

    ‘COMPLETE CONTRADICTION’: EGYPT BURNS DIRTIER FUEL TO SELL MORE GAS TO EUROPE

    The Egyptian government announced it would ration gas use and replace it with other fuels at home. At a press conference in August, prime minister Moustafa Madbouly said Egypt expected to export 15% of its gas production. The main alternative fuel is mazut, a blend of heavy hydrocarbons that contains toxins like sulfides and heavy metals. It can be broken down to produce diesel.

    https://www.climatechangenews.com/2022/11/15/complete-contradiction-cop27-host-egypt-dirty-fuels-sell-more-gas-to-europe/

    1. I don’t think that this kind of fuel use should be all at surprising.
      Its what a world of 8 billion does.
      If you’ve got high grade energy source you use that,
      and if not you resort to various grades of
      tar, of coal, of wood, of hay, of human or animal labor.

      Unprepared. Willingly uninformed (willful ignorance?).
      Inertia of the Great Whirlpool.
      As it Goes.

      1. Well put! And in a slightly longer time frame your summary also applies to all the other non-renewable resources contributing to our current comfortable existence ( including the lions share of materials used in the harvesting of renewable energy)

  15. I try hard to keep an open mind, and if I say so myself, I’m one of the relative handful of people who are not only willing to change their minds about long held beliefs……. I’m one of the even smaller number of people who are willing to admit doing so, lol.

    So it’s easy for me to question the current consensus beliefs of various other people, even up to the beliefs of entire professions, such as those of the economists.

    You will hear a dozen, or a hundred, economists and pundits basing their predictions of the future on the demographic shift to an old population lacking sufficient numbers of younger workers and consumers.

    There can be no doubt that this will be a very real problem.

    But there’s a hell of a lot to be learned, and UNDERSTOOD, from reading history. I’m no more than an armchair historian, but I read all kinds of history, the history of technology, of war, of resources, of religion, politics, you name it, even some of the history of art.

    You can spend hours looking for any SERIOUS open minded discussion of the old folk population problem, and find damned little worth reading.

    I’ve some personal knowledge of the historical change in the USA from being a country dominated by small farmers to one where in the farmers moved to town and took jobs in the factories. My great grandparents were what are typically called subsistence farmers, and my grand parents generation worked off the farm only sporadically. My own father was a full time farm hand when he was very young. He landed a job in a factory in town, and thereafter farmed part time.

    There’s only a couple of full time farmers left in my extended family now. Most of the rest are professionals, and the remainder are trades people.

    Given that the boomers have already inherited an unimaginably huge fortune, and will soon be leaving it to their own children, after doubling and tripling it, well……

    There’s actually going to be a SURPLUS of good housing, if the existing housing stock is well maintained. The fifties vintage cracker box I owned back in the eighties is in PERFECT condition now, and upgraded with all the modern conveniences including a heat pump, lol. It’ll last another hundred years, easily, if it’s kept up.

    We aren’t going to need a million miles of new roads, or millions of new houses, or hospital buildings, or shopping malls or sports stadiums or container ships.

    The population WILL peak and decline, one way or another, and it will do so within the next couple of decades unless I’m very badly mistaken. Some BAD shit is sure to happen that will make it so.

    The younger people will find other things to do…. just what I can’t say for sure, but it won’t be manufacturing endless quantities of throw away junk for an ever growing population.

    I’m an old fart now. If the welfare state doesn’t look after me, I will spend what I have, and hopefully it will be enough to pay somebody to look after me, if I’m unable to do so myself. If I don’t have enough, well, damn, guess what?

    I’ll just die a little sooner, that’s all.

    Most of our economists, and most of our pundits, and most people, are utterly incapable of thinking outside their comfort zone.

    Of all the very real problems we’re looking at, I would rank the old age population bulge well below the issues typically discussed here in this forum.

    This rant was brought on by checking out some of the links posted here this time around, one of which includes the population budge as a problem worth of discussion right along with resource depletion. THAT’S a joke imo.

    1. One small rebuttal to this is that real estate prices very widely by region. I am not compelled to think that will be any different in the future. Perhaps there will be a great regional shift of people as our economy changes over the coming decade. If you follow the logic of GPD and % population being agricultural as inversely correlated, the midwest will again be the place to be not the coasts. One wild card in this is immigration. We have the ability to offset the declines to population that you propose by mass immigration. Who knows maybe we could both be wrong if we send them straight to the fields in the midwest…

      https://www.visualcapitalist.com/world-population-2100-country/

      Now in a future world where resources could be much harder to come by, the “new” housing stock will probably be nothing like what there is now and most certainly be more expensive by whatever metric is used.

  16. UN Secretary General warns of a global food shortage NEXT YEAR and most people won’t let this news ruin their day.

  17. The 2022 Global Carbon Budget report gives nine years of current emissions before we breech 1.5 degrees. A Carbon Brief report puts it more like six. We are moving back towards coal, methane is accelerating (probably coming from wetlands so difficult to address), permafrost melt is accelerating and we are about to have an El Niño with more ocean heat content available to come out than ever before. On the other hand we are entering a recession/depression which may be the first sign of the end of global economic growth. So, overall, rate of growth of CO2 concentrations could go either way, but without doubt the amount in the atmosphere is going to keep going up at a far higher rate than the “net zero” pathways require.

    With the fossil fuel infrastructure already built we are committed to over 1.7 and each new well or coal mine will drive us above that (all at 50% probability). Presumably using the Carbon Brief methods would give closer to 2 degrees.

    https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/14/4811/2022/

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-what-the-tiny-remaining-1-5c-carbon-budget-means-for-climate-policy/

    Here is some realism from Gwynn Dyer (though I’ll reserve judgement on his fusion optimism), who looks healthier than he has for a long time, so maybe he’s cut back on the booze a bit.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A1FJJgDDu4

    And on related subjects, particularly resource limits, this chap is good: https://medium.com/@thehonestsorcerer/the-end-of-growth-df4f19c28a1c and a new free book worth reading https://eacpe.org/content/uploads/2022/11/We-are-Demanding-Too-Much-by-John-Scales-Avery.pdf (not as long as it looks with lots of references, notes and illustrations)

    Also I missed it at the time but Herman Daly died last month. A very important economist, much more so than the Neo-liberals who win Nobel prizes.

  18. Gasoline is about 30 to 40% of oil use (a bit more in USA, less in Europe), so maybe 10 to 12% of fossil fuels and a bit less of a proportion of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. I think even the most optimistic wouldn’t expect more than half of the ICEs that use it to be replaced by EVs before we run out of oil, there is just not a big enough supply chain to provide all the materials required fast enough. In addition producing the vehicles increases fossil fuel use, and nowhere near all the power the EVs use is fossil free. So all the kerfuffle, brilliant minds, tax breaks, virtue signalling advertising, endless and never to be resolved discussions and environmental destruction surrounding personal EVs is to save fewer emissions than we are likely to see drop in the coming depression.

    Compare that with moving to public transport within and between the urban centres of the world. Not only do you get much lower emissions per passenger mile, you get much lower materials use as the car industry shrinks away, less road construction and maintenance (maybe some road lanes turned over to light transit), reduced air travel, more city spaces as car parks disappear, improved infrastructure, fewer tire nanoparticles, etc. We can only survive with an energy intensity, at best, like the first half of this century when hardly had cars, we used buses, trains, trams, bicycles and footwear. With the low ERoI battery backed renewables (the much trumpeted “renewables provide lots of jobs” is actually exactly why they can’t support our present civilisation’s structure) and the limited sizes of both the pile of essential minerals and the shovel to move them (to stretch the oil tap/tank metaphor) something closer to the Middle Ages might be more likely.

    But is this ever discussed – hardly at all. And I don’t see why it should be, it doesn’t fit at all with what humans and human culture have evolved to become. However that does not make any less distasteful the hypocritical cant and special pleading of some proponents in pretending that EVs are intended to save the planet’s climate, they aren’t, they are intended to save happy motoring BAU for their drivers. The worst is when saving money and saving the world are tied together. Carbon emissions are correlated with consumption, unless you shred the money you save or, perhaps better, work less or get rid of rent paying assets so as not to earn it in the first place, then there is no benefit.

    1. Exactly

      Globally we spend $3 trillion per year to get this.

      https://www.mylondon.news/news/west-london-news/revealed-staggering-total-size-west-11946779

      https://innovationorigins.com/en/tomorrow-is-good-less-asphalt-to-solve-the-traffic-jam/

      If all that money were spent on public transport every single town and village could be connected with trolleybuses over a period of 15 years.

      https://www.sustainable-bus.com/trolleybus-tramway/trolleybus-market-zero-emissions/

      Interconnecting to electric trains and highspeed trains and powered by wind, solar and tidal power.

      Fact is most so called peak oilers and global warmers on this website want more of this

      https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environment-impact

        1. Dennis,

          Do you take these forecasts seriously ?

          I certainly don’t, unless we have terminal decline in world real GDP for the dates on the x-axis then maybe a small chance.

          The y-axis for goodness sakes, you can almost guarantee we will hit 30 Mt CO2 eq by 2030. Even if we stopped all emissions now there is a lag effect which means we could still hit the 30 mark, which they totally ignore. Their models are beyond fantasy.

          My 2 cents on the COP meetings, nothing but tax payer/corporate funded holiday for bureaucrats and business interests. What have been the result of the the past COP meetings ? Look at the respective GHG emissions chart and plot the meetings on it. All the evidence one needs to see at what bullshit is going on.

          1. Meanwhile,

            WAR CAUSING HUGE RELEASE OF CLIMATE WARMING GAS

            “The war has led directly to emissions of 33 million tons of greenhouse gases that warm the Earth’s atmosphere, claimed Ruslan Strilets, Ukraine’s environmental protection minister. The figure was calculated by counting emissions including from forest fires and agricultural fires, as well as the oil burnt after attacks on storage depots. Mr Strilets also claimed that rebuilding Ukraine will cause significantly more emissions, up to 49 millions tons of carbon dioxide.”

            https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-63625693

          2. Iron Mike,

            Somewhere between APS and NZE seems reasonable to me. I expect land transport will move to electric and electricity output will move to 100% wind solar and batteries. Much of the building and water heating could be reduced using heat pumps, cutting energy use for those needs by roughly a factor of 3, eliminating fossil fuels cuts energy use by roughly a factor of 2.

            There are lots of changes coming in the next 10 to 15 years. Twenty-seven years is a long time.

            1. Dennis,

              So you think GHG emissions will peak between now and 2030, is that correct ?

              Correction from my last comment i meant we will hit 50 Mt eq CO2 not 30.

            2. Iron Mike,

              Much depends on the speed of the transition to wind solar and batteries for energy and the speed of the transition to electric transport (including public transport powered by electricity), for the 2022 to 2030 period, the APS scenario looks more likely, then I think the curve will bend and run parallel to the NZE projection (that is what I mean when I say we will be between the two scenarios.) It certainly is possible that things go slower than my best guess, and of course then I would be wrong as usual.

              In short my best guess is that peak CO2 emissions will be before 2030, on CO2 equivalent perhaps not because the warming planet may lead to natural methane releases which have been running high lately. I am less clear on CO2 quivalent projections.

              Those charts have a scale of Millions of tonnes of CO2, they do not represent CO2 equivalent.

              Title of chart is:

              CO2 from the energy sector and industrial processes, GEC Model scenarios compared to IPCC scenarios with a temperature rise of 1.5°C and 2.0°C in 2100

            3. Dennis,

              Thanks regarding the scale of the y-axis. I disagree with you on this. We won’t see peak GHG emissions for decades in my opinion, its too non-linear and many tipping points may already have been breached.

            4. Iron Mike,

              I have not kept up with the latest science on climate change, I expect that there will be a peak in CO2 emissions by 2030, there are other greenhouse gases and I agree there are likely to be nonlinear responses. My understanding is thet the gray lines on those charts come from the Sixth Assessment report and it is also my understanding that those scenarios come from experts in the field.

              Some progress is being made, though not nearly enough see for example

              https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2022/08/climate-impacts-of-the-ira/

              Also from Real Climate see

              https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/08/we-are-not-reaching-1-5oc-earlier-than-previously-thought/

              I get much of my knowledge on climate science from the climate scientists that post on Real Climate.

          3. I had been thinking of Oct 3, 2037 as Peak Global Combustion day, but its a guess. Not based on some incredible calculation and foresight.
            Many variables at play besides just supply of the various fossil fuels, especially
            the level of generalized global prosperity/poverty,
            how quickly/slowly policies are adjusted,
            how much cooperation on energy between countries there is, or is not.

    3. I am a hypocrite because I want everyone else to use public transport.
      But not myself.

      I would use public transport if there was no alternative.
      I have dramatically decreased the amount of annual miles traveled compared to earlier times.

      I suspect that the worlds industries and people could decrease total miles traveled by 50% without breaking civilization, or maybe 90%.
      High prices might help work us toward that decline.

      “1% of people cause half of global aviation emissions.”
      Never flying is the biggest step anyone can take to rapidly decrease their miles traveled.
      Hopefully aircraft travel will become unaffordable to all soon.

        1. In the US, public transportation is a utopian pipe dream that ends up a dystopian nightmare in practice because of all the undesirables of society it attracts. It’s just not safe.

        2. Using public transport on friday or saturday evening is an – ahm – mixed blessing.

          Good because you can have a drink or two more and it’s cheaper than a taxi.

          Bad because you can perform sozio-cultural-studies about the behaviour of certain classes of population.

          My all time favourite was some arabic boys practicing knife combat in the middle gangway of the tube. I avoid these times as much as possible.

          PS: Public transport is fast only in central megacities, compared to the other chaos. And even there, a simple motor scooter will be faster for most ways.

      2. Hickory

        And there goes all the tens of millions of jobs in aircraft designing and manufacturing, jobs in hotels and restaurants that depend on tourists, jobs in all the airports and airlines.

        Aviation accounts for only 2% of global emissions.
        Lithium mining is already causing major environmental destruction multiplying that by 80 times to electrify all cars, vans and lorries does not bare thinking about.

        Some wisdom

        1. Charles. If anyone expects the world to somehow remain unchanged as fossil fuel depletion unfolds,
          then they will have a very tough time matching up their expectations with what actually happens.

          Some industries will disappear, and others will flourish.
          You seem to want to hang on by your fingernails to a past that is in its final chapters.

          1. Pot kettle

            Hickory you are the one who said you would not use public transport. That is really hanging on by your finger nails.
            Electrified public transport would reduce oil consumption by 20 million barrels per day. Lorries could also take power from overhead cables reducing oil demand by another 20 million a day. This conversion would not cost any jobs.
            Yet you wish the airline industry to fold along with tens of millions of associated jobs.

            Anyway most people will continue to fly on holiday regardless of what you think.

            It is the poorest who will not be able to buy the diesel and petrol they need. That means the poorest countries will be unable to afford to import oil. It has already started to happen.

            1. “It is the poorest who will not be able to buy the diesel and petrol they need. That means the poorest countries will be unable to afford to import oil. It has already started to happen.”
              Absolutely, and tragic as hell. The poorest of us are the canary in the coal mine on fossil fuel depletion, on greenhouse climate destabilization, and on food insecurity.

              My point on the airline industry is an example of the kind of luxury or optional things that will be changing for most of humanity. ‘Normal’ things of life that many have come to rely on or expect will become less affordable or reliable as the fossil solar energy runs down.

  20. I follow earthquakes and there were about 14 earthquakes within a few miles of each other near Mentone, Texas all with magnitudes greater than 2.0 and one at 5.3. 3 to 5 miles below the surface. They were all within 16 hours of each other.
    https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?extent=31.5465,-104.09597&extent=31.6696,-103.84312&listOnlyShown=true

    This area is 80 miles northwest of Fort Stockton, Texas and 24 miles WSW of Mentone, Texas. The only thing I could find is something about Resolute Energy. Any info.

  21. Is the probable imminent demise of Twitter about to be a black swan event? Combined with all the other layoffs ongoing in Silicon Valley, sure seems like its shaping up to be.

    1. Following Elon’s example I will require all of my employees to commit to hardcore sicko mode or package out.

    2. I found this on Twitter this morning. as posted by Zaid Rahman.
      “Number of software engineers at:
      WhatsApp: 75
      Instagram: 300 (at 1b DAUs, now ~1k)
      Reddit: 600
      Tesla: 200 (+100 on AutoPilot)
      TikTok: 1,000 (outside China)
      Zoom: 1,500
      Twitter: 3,000+ (until recently)
      (Rough estimates from LinkedIn)”

      Sounds like Twitter was massively over-staffed.

      1. I find twitter useful for following a bunch of talking heads and publications that I like; Art Berman, The Atlantic, Unicorn Riot, whatever. Second amendment LGBTQ Twitter is kinda lit; as is the #disability crowd; lotta peeps getting gripped up.

    3. I’ve offered Elon $44.00 for Twitter (all of it, not per share).
      I know that sounds high…

  22. This is a link well worth passing on to anybody and everybody you may talk to about renewable energy, fossil fuel depletion, etc.

    It’s an easy read, and it is written in a style that won’t automatically turn off fossil fuel believers.

    https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-us-electricity-comes-from-wind-power/?utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=Paid&utm_campaign=General&utm_content=Windpower_DesktopInterests&dicbo=v1-08bde8624db94271a8fce5d7c815642e-000c0d87573c5cf1352b50453371064f3f-gntggyzqmq2wcljume3ggljumvsdollcge3tallggrqtgy3dhe3wcmrxgu

    1. Yes, and it is a profound moment as they note that in the USA renewables generate more electricity than from coal.

    2. Thanks OFM

      I am not particularly worried about the ability for the US to achieve some goals in the energy transition, like getting a grid based on 70-80% renewables in many states. There is far too much potential for renewables and resources to make things happen. What we have experienced in Europe, as a consequence of the percieved energy shock due to the war, is a remarkable ability to collectively shrink energy usage across all categories. It takes a form of purpose most likely in the form of trying to reduce the impact of high energy prices (electricity especially, but also all forms of fuel) and a policy to overcome the problems connected to the energy shock, to create the necessary discipline. If the purpose is regarded as pressing, I suspect there are loads of possibilities to shrink energy usage going forward. But that is probably easier to pull off in organised, well off, countries to a larger degree.

    1. Last year it was a bit more than 7 million electric and hybrid cars produced. Projectory this year is (4.3 x 2) about 9 million. Despite a lot of problems with supply chains and geopolitical concerns. So it is safe to say that we will hit a higher high in the next 10 years, probably touch 15 million a year at some point. It has to be said that the numbers are scewed due to the far larger number of small chinese electric cars coming into the market. And that is very much needed. Traffic congestions in large chinese cities with associated pollutions are best solved by small electric cars. Better for everyone. The latest signals from China seems to suggest that they are content with being the number 1 hub in the world for producing cheap products necessary for the energy transition. Better for everyone if that is the thinking coming from Beijing.

  24. Morning trivia.

    INDIA POWER BINGES ON COAL, OUTPACES ASIA

    “Use of coal globally, including in power generation, has grown since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February sent prices of other fossil fuels surging, derailing efforts to transition to cleaner fuels. But the increase in India’s coal-fired power output has outstripped its regional peers, data from the government and analysts showed. The European Union was the only region where coal-fired power output grew at a rate faster than India.”

    https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/india-power-binges-coal-outpaces-asia-2022-11-18/

    1. Meanwhile, on CO2,

      Nov. 17, 2022 417.37 ppm
      Nov. 17, 2021 415.02 ppm
      1 Year Change 2.35 ppm (0.57%)

      Now, lets hear from the Greenwashers.

Comments are closed.