167 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum, November 1, 2019”

  1. If about 1/2 US crops are gone due to cold weather impacts should ethanol be discontinued for a year so people can eat?

    2. Just because it froze does not mean that the corn won’t get harvested. Sometimes the farmers don’t get around to harvest some of their fields till the ground is frozen solid. They expect some yield loss but often make up for it with lower moisture levels in the grain so they don’t need to spend as much energy to dry it down to 15%.

      But there is plenty of evidence that the corn crop will not be anywhere near as big as the USDA is projecting. Vast areas from Ohio to Nebraska did not get planted due flooding in the spring and many areas that did get planted still suffered from the far from ideal conditions due to flooding cold and cloudy spring and early summer and the early freeze prevented a lot of the corn and soy crops from filling out all the way. This lying by the USDA is making many grain farmers so furious that the USDA had to suspend one of their regular farm tours because of threats to their staff.

      The next issue will likely be higher levels of mycotoxins in the grain thanks to the cold rain and cloud cover. as well as lighter test weight meaning less nutrition in a ton of grain. So its kinda bad but not a 50% crop.

      But even with a smaller crop I’m thinking there will still be a big oversupply of corn and soy and that is the real bad news that is not making the headlines near enough, the fact that 1/4 of this planets hog population is now dead and there is no end in sight. The African Swine Fever is now in 50 countries on 3 continents and it basically kills every hog in every place that it invades partly due to the farmers sending all their hogs to the processor as soon as the virus is reported anywhere close by.

      1. I look forward to ‘digesting’ this report.
        A first glance, it seems like wild pipe-dreaming.
        Maybe there is some reality nuggets of truth to consider.
        Good food for thought.

        Not so sure-
        “By 2030, demand for cow products will have fallen by 70%…
        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. ”

        With advances in fields such as microbiology and biochemistry, there are incredible possibilities for certain. I wonder if ‘artificial’ food production such as they are envisioning can happen at a scale that could feed billions, as they are suggesting -call me skeptical on this aspect.

        1. Maybe you should confirm that with the tooth fairy, 😉

          BEEF MARKET SIZE WORTH $383.5 BILLION BY 2025 | CAGR: 3.1%

          “The global beef market size is expected to reach USD 383.5 billion by 2025, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc., exhibiting a 3.1% CAGR during the forecast period. Growing awareness regarding beef as a major source of protein is expected to drive the market.”

          1. Our favorite tooth fairy, Tony Seba is behind the RethinkX Food and Agriculture Report. He is saying that like the transport and energy businesses, food and agriculture are ripe for disruption.

            1. He’s right too. Decades of mollycoddling have left agriculture massively oversized and in no shape at all to deal with real competition. They’ve never really had competition before.

              Cheap protein isn’t even something anyone was planning for.

            2. “Cheap protein isn’t even something anyone was planning for.”
              I’m still waiting to understand how it will be cheap and abundant. None of these techniques comes with free input of raw material, energy or technical support (ex algae tanks, factory space, intellectual property fees, etc).
              The grazing of livestock on cheap land with rain and sun is hard to beat.

              Look at page 24- it shows have modern techniques in the past 100 yrs have made the cow (and other grazers) attributes less important or unique- fertilizer, internal combustion engine, refrigeration, chemical industry.
              All these things entail vast expenditures of fossil fuel, to replace the power of the livestock herd that came from simple grazing. We are about to lose that cheap energy input over the next 1-2 decades. Good luck making grazing animals obsolete. This earth is not some kind of unlimited Technotopia.

            3. – fertilizer, internal combustion engine, refrigeration, chemical industry. All these things entail vast expenditures of fossil fuel, to replace the power of the livestock herd that came from simple grazing. We are about to lose that cheap energy input over the next 1-2 decades.

              Well, electric motors are cheaper to build and power than ICEs. Electric motors may need batteries in remote locations, but not in factories. That also applies to refrigeration, which can use cheap renewable power.

              Chemicals don’t need fuel, just feedstock.

              Fertilizer is harder (though not impossible) , but does fake meat need fertilizer?

        2. Now they’ve got my attention- from page 16

          ” replicated a protein in platypus milk…,
          In the modern food production system, the file containing that platypus protein could be uploaded (as data), together with instructions for processing it (software), and made available to anyone, anywhere in the world”!

        3. Hickory —
          The document is a sales pitch for a fake meat company, so take it with a grain of salt. But they make some interesting points.
          For example some people might not prefer fake meat, but a lot of meat is use for dog and cat food. And a lot of beef is for prepackaged lasagne and other places where the meat quality is hard to notice. Also a lot of milk and egg protein goes into packaged baked goods. So the fake food people will find it easy to make a big dent in the market without consumers even noticing it, as soon as they get the price right.
          Also I really like the cube graphic.

  2. Volcanism worldwide has exceeded CO2/methane heating and now we have a mini ice age..

      1. My vote say’s IDIOT. Burning fossil fuels (and changes in land use) results in the emission into the atmosphere of roughly 34 billion tonnes of CO2 per year worldwide, 100 times more than maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes.

            1. Expecting idiot, very few people would doubt that a very huge volcanic eruption can alter the climate worldwide for several years. Not long enough to call it an ice age but long enough to cause problems worldwide, especially the first year after the eruption. And you don’t need to go back to 1600 to find such a volcano. Krakatoa in 1883 was such an eruption. But we haven’t had such an eruption in almost a century and a half.

              In the year following the 1883 Krakatoa eruption, average Northern Hemisphere summer temperatures fell by as much as 1.2 °C (2.2 °F).[12] Weather patterns continued to be chaotic for years, and temperatures did not return to normal until 1888.

              But volcanic eruptions are not altering the climate today and haven’t since 1883.

      2. Sometimes I think he sees himself as a comedic poet. If he is serious, its very sad.

      3. Hi Ron,

        You’re probably not dealing with a liar or an idiot.

        I’m seeing a dozen responses pop up like this one on other sites within a minute or two of posting a comment about climate or the answer to a climate question.

        This implies automation.

    2. Now, it is because Sol is entering a low phase of activity… which in itself may produce more volcano eruptions.

      The coming ice age may not be so mini, after all. It seems that different factors are compounding: declining magnetic field of Earth, lower Sun activity, volcanoes….

      Besides, the new planet, X/Nibiru, is set to arrive by 2022 and will be a pretty big one. See the newest article on the problem:

      https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.10103.pdf

      1. Lol

        Where in that paper does it mention the arrival of a planet in 2022?

        There is a good possibility of a planet far past the kuiper belt. But there is no way in hell it is swinging past the inner solar system. Probably ever.

        1. Discovering, not literally ‘ariving’. There is a new telescope in progress which is to be ready around 2022.

          It is supposedly a very dark planet, with the albedo of Moon range (very low).

      2. Now, it is because Sol is entering a low phase of activity… which in itself may produce more volcano eruptions.

        Naw, there is no evidence whatsoever that the solar minimum produces more volcanic eruptions.

        The coming ice age may not be so mini, after all. It seems that different factors are compounding: declining magnetic field of Earth, lower Sun activity, volcanoes….

        Yes, the magnetic field is declining. It may switch in the next few hundred years. The magnetic field switches, on average, every 200 to 300 thousand years. But the last switch was 780 thousand years ago. Another switch is long overdue. But there is no evidence that this switching was detrimental to life on earth. Most species survived and the switching of magnetic fields did not cause mass extinctions. There is no evidence that this switching caused more volcanic activity.

        The solar minimum occurs, on average, every eleven years. It does not cause more volcano eruptions.

        Besides, the new planet, X/Nibiru, is set to arrive by 2022 and will be a pretty big one. See the newest article on the problem.

        Woah now! Planet X has not been found, other than Pluto which was the first planet X. No other planet has been found. The PDF file you linked to did not support your claim that “Nibiru” was scheduled to arrive in 2022. In fact, the article did not mention any Nibiru whatsoever. No such planet has ever been discovered.

        Damn man, you just cannot go around making shit up in an effort to support your theory that an ice age is just about to arrive.

        1. 1. Well, whether Nibiru or X or Hercobolus or Vulcan, that are all names designating one object. Science tends to speak about X, and correctly so, since this is to be the tenth planet cruising around Sun.

          2. The planet is supposed to be discovered around 2022. I used ‘arrive’ metaphorically.

          3. No one really knows what and why is happening with magnetic field. If its decline rate grows, as at the moment, the switch will happen earlier than 200 000 years. It could happen already in 50 years. However, I don’t suppose they would tell us. The trailer of ‘2012’ movie said that in a case of a global, impending catastrophe (Earth crust shift in ‘2012’) goverments would not inform people. I suppose it is called ‘asymetry of knowledge’, isn’t it?

          4. Volcano eruptions may be connected through magnetic field to Sun. The magnetic field, both of Earth and Sun, screens out cosmic radiation, which may be causing eruprtions and earthquakes.

          5. The absence of evidence is not tantamount to evidence of absence.

          6. By ‘solar minimum’ I meant more prounoucned lower cycles, like that:

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

          7. Pluto is no more a planet. It was degraded in 2006. It is now a dwarf planet, or a big planetoide if you like so.
          https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33462184

          You could say this is the opposite operation to oil production vocabulary, where more and more things are oil now.

          1. The absence of evidence is not tantamount to evidence of absence.

            It’s true. For instance, I have no evidence proving that leprechauns are not in charge of the world bank and the IMF. But…I’m not worrying about it…

            1. Bad.

              There is evidence that someone else is in charge of IMF and WB and ‘else’ are not leprechauns, therefore that are not leprechauns.
              Princple of excluded middle it is, I suppose.

          2. 2. The planet is supposed to be discovered around 2022. I used ‘arrive’ metaphorically.

            Wow! I had no idea that they could schedule the discovery of something that has not been discovered. Anyway, I think you may be talking about the James Webb Telescope. I have no idea what they will look at, or for, first. But I doubt very seriously that they will give a very high priority to looking for Planet X.

            Anyway, you are trying to produce evidence of a coming Ice Age. There is absolutely no evidence of a coming Ice Age. None whatsoever, so why don’t you just give this nonsense up?

            1. There are some disturbing correlations.
              But, yes, it is all induction, so no evidence in a strict sense.

              Nevertheless, a massive planet on a far away orbit would probably periodically produce some disturbances among lesser planets. There is a theory that this ‘X’ planet periodically pushes comets in the direction of Sun. Comets may crash into Earth, like Shoemaker-Levy crashed into Jupiter, and other comets crashed into Sun. Those collisions happened because comets’ orbits unexpectedly changed.

              The next 30 years may be a time of heavenly troubles, so to say.

            2. The next 30 years may be a time of heavenly troubles, so to say.

              So to say? What does that mean? Anyway, If planet X is really out there, it is outside the Kuiper belt. That is because any planet inside the Kuiper belt would have been spotted years ago. But the point is, Neptune, which is just inside the Kuiper belt, has an orbital period of 164.8 earth years. Pluto, whose orbit swings directly through the Kuiper belt, though on an elliptical plane, has an orbital period of 248 earth years.

              So if planet X is out there, and headed directly toward us, it would lightly take at least 200 years to get here. So rest assured, nothing of that nature is going to happen in 30 years.

            3. Planet X power is of triggering nature…. As I said, it is supposed to release comets from Kuiper belt.

              It is frankly hard to say whether Planet X would be spotted if it is really such a dark one, and located in our Galactic plane, meaning surrounded by many stronger light sources. This is a contentious point around planet X, since the public takes for granted that it would have been already spotted, should it exist…. But this ‘granted’ is wholly unjustified.
              Big telescopes, where you get (or NOT) some alloted observation time, have very narrow observation fields, raw, unfiltered observation results being later combed by algorithms to find what they are looking for.

              Some say that the planet was indeed spotted, but has been kept secret ever since. Some things are of secret nature, like Saudi oil reserves. Knowledge is power. Denial of knowledge is even greater power.
              The hint: this piece of knowledge means POWER.
              This is not neutral knowledge. Not good. Something dangerous, then.

              BTW, what about educated conspiracy theorists?

            4. Some say that the planet was indeed spotted, but is has been kept secret.

              I have no doubt that some say that. Some say the earth is flat. But the idea that the planet has been spotted but kept secret is preposterous. Only an ignorant conspiracy theorist would believe such a dumb thing.

            5. “But, yes, it is all induction, so no evidence in a strict sense.”

              Ones mans ‘induction’ is everyone else’s [false assumption].

              No evidence is no evidence, strictly speaking.

            6. OK, ask yourself, Ron:

              What is evidence of a coming ice age?

              Do you know what you are speaking about?

              By claiming that ‘There is absolutely no evidence of a coming Ice Age. ‘ , you claim that you know what such evidence would be like. So?

              I am always happy to learn.

            8. Soooooo….
              Have a look at this:

              “The Role of Geomagnetic Field Intensity in Late Quaternary Evolution of Humans and Large Mammals” 29 May 2019, Reviews of Geophysics
              https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018RG000629

              Magnetic field variations are not so harmless, after all.

              For people without access to library database:

              Plain Language Summary

              The strength of Earth’s magnetic field in the past, recorded by rocks and sediments, provides a proxy for past flux of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) to Earth’s surface due to the role of the field in modulating stratigraphic ozone. About 40,000 years ago, mammalian fossils in Australia and Eurasia record an important die‐off of large mammals that included Neanderthals in Europe. In the Americas and Europe, a large mammalian die‐off appears to have occurred ~13,000 years ago. Both die‐offs can be linked to minima in Earth’s magnetic field strength implying that UVR flux variations to Earth’s surface influenced mammalian evolution. For the last ~200,000 years, estimates of the timing of branching episodes in the human evolutionary tree, from modern and fossil DNA and Y chromosomes, can be linked to minima in field strength, which implies a long‐term role for UVR in human evolution. New fossil finds, improved fossil dating, knowledge of the past strength of Earth’s magnetic field, and refinements in the human evolutionary tree, are sharpening the focus on a possible link between UVR arriving at the Earth’s surface, magnetic field strength, and events in mammalian evolution.

            9. Magnetic field variations are not so harmless, after all.

              Okay, now you are pissing me off. Don’t try to say that I said something that I clearly did not say. I said the switchings were not detrimental to life on earth. Most species survived and the switching of magnetic fields did not cause mass extinctions.

              Of course, removing the magnetic shield is harmful and many animals died as a result.
              But most survived. There was no mass extinction. There have been far too many of switchings to have had that effect. There would be no life left on earth is the magnetic pole switchings caused mass extenction.

            10. Actually, it looks like the most of larger animal life on LAND did periodically die (the article deals with mammals). Can we call it then extinction? If not, then what is extinction?

              There is a long continuity of life forms, but in water, not on land.

              I suppose, in the long term there is evolutionary premium for simple life forms. It is a bit like paper- stone-scissors game. Sometimes it is better to be scissors, sometimes it is better to be paper; sometimes it is better to be a human, sometimes it is better to be an amoeba. But it looks like amoebas may finally cash their premium in the future.

              ANSWER TO RON’s comment of 11/05/2019 at 5:32 pm:

              Anyway, it looks like we are overdue for mass extinction too. The last one was 66 milions years ago.

            11. Do the math. Mass extinctions happen approximately once every 26 million years though periodic extinctions happen more frequently. Magnetic pole switchings have happened, on average, every 200 to 300 thousand years. So there were, on average, over 100 magnetic pole switchings between every mass extinctions.

              Pole switchings are very harmful to life but they do not cause mass extinctions.

        2. “Damn man, you just cannot go around making shit up in an effort to support your theory that an ice age is just about to arrive.”

          Thats how he operates. Its much easier than reality.
          -‘The planet is supposed to be discovered’
          -‘The absence of evidence is not tantamount to evidence of absence’

          Mostly just false suppositions that lead him down false pathways.

          1. You simply do not like me.
            It sometimes happens. Especially with people, and with dogs.

            I operate mainly by heuristics, by the way. And I qualify everything which is NOT.

            1. “I operate mainly by heuristics, by the way.”

              That’s too bad that you ‘re so limited in your abilities.

            2. Heuristics are best for unknowns.

              Deduction I reserve for known unknows.

            3. OneOfEU said:

              “Heuristics are best for unknowns.”

              That’s what I said, and now you admit that any understanding is a big unknown to you.

            4. “I operate mainly by heuristics”

              By heuristics you mean falsehoods.

            1. Good question-
              because it is good practice at identifying fake news and blatant attempts at manipulation.
              I have little tolerance for it.
              It is important to call out bullshit wherever you see it.
              This guy reminds me a different version of trump.
              Same Tarot card-
              The Evil Salesman

  4. A significant freeze (28°F or colder for a few hours) will kill the whole plant, and any frost will act to defoliate plants, resulting in diminished grain filling for the seeds, especially on the upper half of the plants.

    And right now we are facing a crisis because less than half of all U.S. corn has been harvested.

    In fact, according to the latest USDA Crop Progress Report just 41 percent of all U.S. corn has been harvested so far…

    In its weekly Crop Progress Report, the USDA pegged the U.S. corn harvest at 41% complete, below the trade’s expectation of 48% and below a five-year average 61%.

    Minnesota is behind the most regarding picking corn: 22% vs. a 56% five-year average.

    https://thewashingtonstandard.com/record-low-temps-up-to-50-degrees-below-normal-threaten-to-absolutely-wreck-the-rest-of-the-harvest-season/

    1. And right now we are facing a crisis because less than half of all U.S. corn has been harvested.

      I seriously doubt that statistic. Do you have a link that supports that claim?

      Nevertheless, it means nothing. A frost or even freeze will not hurt any corn that is ready for harvest. The leaves and stalk are already dead and the corn is just waiting to be harvested. I know because I grew up on a farm and we raised corn and other grain as well as cotton. We often harvested corn after the first frost or freeze.

    2. Yeah, the farmers out in the Midwest are getting bookend screwed. First by the massive spring floods that delayed or eliminated planting. Now by the cold snap that reached down into Texas.
      Screw the corn crop, most of it goes into the slaughterhouse, the cars and crap processed food. Just one more highly inefficient toxic destructive system that needs to go away.
      The American diet and American ICE corn fed car needs to go away.

    3. And it doesn’t look like conditions will improve anytime soon.

      1. Meanwhile,
        RECORD LOW TEMPERATURES SET ACROSS EASTERN IDAHO

        https://www.localnews8.com/weather/record-low-temperatures-set-across-eastern-idaho/1137363257

        “The National Weather Service reports record low temperatures were set Wednesday morning across eastern Idaho.

        Officials say records were set in Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Burley and Challis.

        According to the weather service, temperatures were coldest ever on record for the month of October in Pocatello, Idaho Falls and Burley.

        For Pocatello, Idaho Falls, and Challis, officials say this is the earliest on record the area has ever hit zero degrees.“

    4. Last I saw corn harvest for usa was predicted at about 4% less than 2018.
      About 40% of the harvest goes for ethanol.
      A few less trips to walmart would be tolerated well by the overall economy.

      1. Global warming is causing lots of natural cycles to change which will impact us all.

        https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-04322-x

        Rainfall distribution is already causing long term droughts in some places and flooding in others.

        The reduced ocean currents could cause winters to come earlier and be harsher. Summer temperatures will probably be higher.

        https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49753680

        Crops could be hit both by too much heat and early freezing

        and sea level rise predictions are getting worse

        https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimdobson/2019/10/30/shocking-new-maps-show-how-sea-level-rise-will-destroy-coastal-cities-by-2050/#6a805424456c

        1. How To Talk To Kids About Climate Change
          Anya Kamenetz

          https://www.npr.org/2019/10/22/772266241/how-to-talk-to-your-kids-about-climate-change

          A few months ago, I was standing at the sink in the kitchen. Suddenly my daughter, who’s seven, said, “You’re lucky you got to have your adulthood before the planet was completely destroyed by climate change.”

          I didn’t know this was on her mind. I hadn’t spent all that much time talking to her about it.

          And the worst part, somehow, is that her voice wasn’t full of emotion. It was completely matter-of-fact. Like, oh well, we don’t have time to stop for ice cream, and I don’t get to grow up in a world with a functioning ecosystem.

          How do you comfort a child when the science suggests she’s correct?

          These six tips form a guide to parenting through a slow-motion emergency.

          1. Break the silence
          2. Give your kids the basic facts
          3. Get outdoors
          4. Focus on Feelings
          5. Take action
          6. Find Hope

          Here’s a suggested script, based on conversations with several educators and psychologists, that could be used for kids as young as four or five:

          “Humans are burning lots and lots of fossil fuels for energy, in planes, in cars, to light our houses, and that’s putting greenhouse gases into the air. Those gases wrap around the planet like a blanket and make everything hotter.

          A hotter planet means bigger storms, it melts ice at the poles so oceans will rise, it makes it harder for animals to find places to live.

          And it’s a really, really big problem, and there are a lot of smart people working hard on it, and there’s also lots that we can do as a family to help.”

        2. Ocean currents are becoming weaker due to weakening magnetic field.
          All ocean currents are weakening.

          Should global warming be responsible, the currents should be strenghtening, since higher temperature means more kinetic energy to discharge.

            2. Don’t feed the trolls. This account’s strategy is simply to undermine the forum by flooding it with nonsense. They don’t care if they win or lose arguments.

            3. Exactly, so too the other trolls. If left they will drive people away and turn this blog into a load of nonsense.

              NAOM

      2. The Amazon model of individual shipments of consumables to your door is environmentally unfriendly in its inefficiency, although the true environmental impact is pretty well obscured. Still, in reality, it’s a few less orders from Amazon you personally should be making per month, instead of a few less trips to Walmart.

        1. Why is individual shipment inefficient? In our neck of the woods, the average Amazon truck vehicle travel per package is perhaps 200 feet, while a trip to Walmart would be miles.

          And converting a commercial fleet like Amazon’s trucks to electric is a lot easier than converting 230M passenger vehicles…

        2. Bullshit.
          The guys who deliver to my house deliver a whole van load across the area. The dozens and dozens of cars, like the arsehole that was parked in the motorcycle/bicycle parking, that haunt the supermarket car parks carry 1 delivery each. 1 van or 50 cars? And electrifying 1 van will be a lot easier than 50 cars.

          Maybe supermarkets will have to sell off some of their unused parking space as deliveries take over from in-store shopping.

          NAOM

  5. Last year the Canadian wheat crop suffering snow fall before harvest and subsequently turned to alcohol during harvest. Was fit to eat by humans became fit to eat for cattle.

    1. Daily forecast =+3.32

      At least it is going to help vegetation grow taller, thicker, and more fruitful (as if in a commercial greenhouse)for a little while yet.

        1. Survivalist and Battisti are right.

          But it’s not the case that we won’t be getting in the corn crop this year.

          Ron’s right about it drying on the stalk in the field.

          There will be some minor losses, in relation to the supply of the crop,and a minuscule loss in relation to the size of the overall food supply………. THIS year in the USA.

          Some people in some other countries aren’t likely to be so lucky.

          And growing corn to make moonshine to burn in automobiles is the height of foolishness, from ANY point of view, other than that of people making money out of doing so. Unfortunately that includes a hell of a lot of people in the corn states, and they are disproportionately represented in the Senate, because of the two senators per state provision.

          1. Ron’s right about it drying on the stalk in the field.

            Modern-day corn harvesting equipment husks and shells the corn in the field as it is stripped from the stalk. Therefore it is impossible to harvest the corn until it is dead and dried in the field.

            Corn for canning, of course, must be harvested very early, while still green.

            1. We harvest it for silage while it’s green as well as for canning, freezing and fresh table fare.

              In my neck of the woods we probably grow more corn for silage than we do for grain, but farms are smaller and more diversified in my part of the country than in the corn states.

              Ron’s right, where corn is grown on the grand scale, it’s left to dry in the field.

              A flood or a bad wind storm can be a real problem, but so long as the corn is still standing, not much of it will be lost.

          2. I feel Dr. Battisti raises some very significant concerns. I’m leaning towards famine in the not too distant future. Perhaps one that will create a significant population bottleneck.

    2. Replied to your request for more info on the nuclear industry (“What’s the global outlook for new starts, decommissions, types, overall deliverables, that kinda thing.”) before I noticed that it was an old thread.
      Reply here again:

      tl;dr:
      Global nuclear capacity could start shrinking around 2025 (several assumptions, none of them unrealistic)

      https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/

      and subpages like: https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/WorldStatistics/UnderConstructionReactorsByCountry.aspx

      The nuclear lobbyists at the World Nuclear Association have comprehensive lists, but are overly optimistic, e.g.:
      http://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-a-f/china-nuclear-power.aspx

      Check the Wayback Machines archive for this URL to see HOW overly optimistic they are regarding future builds.

      A realistic and comprehensive look at the nuclear industry:
      https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/-The-Annual-Reports-.html
      Very worth a read.
      “lifetime projections” has the distilled answer to your question.

            1. He’s a big boy, he’ll survive. Have a sense of humor.

              Nogirlypantshere, let it go

  9. The preemptive electrical shutdowns in California during dry wind events is extremely disruptive to the economy, and no easy fix to the problem is available.
    The disruptions affects hospitals, major universities, transit, all sizes of businesses, and residential sectors.
    I speak as an observer who has recently experienced the issue firsthand.

    This electrical outage policy will take many years, perhaps well over a decade, to address.

    Examples of disruption-
    The local tunnel [Caldecott] connecting the oakland/berkeley area to the suburbs and commercial zone just to the east, carries about 180,000 cars/day. They had to rush in emergency diesel generators to keep the tunnel open- ventilation fans and lighting.
    The nearby Univ [#8 in the world for Nobel prize awardees] UCB- shutdown.
    Hospitals – evacuations and/or cancellation of all non-emergent procedures.
    Over 900,000 households powered down.
    Cell towers- many failed to maintain service due to lack of adequate electrical backup
    Water system pumps down- warnings to customers that supplies may only last a few days.

    These events will result in a huge incentive for deployment of local solar/battery systems in literally tens of thousands of locations. It is going to be a huge boost to this energy storage industry. Thats my take on it.
    Personally I’m hoping to get enough storage deployed before the next years season, to at least keep my work computer system rolling.

  10. Sometimes I’m glad I’m a back woods hillbilly. We have a HAND DUG well, with a pump in it of course, but the old windlass is still right there, and all it needs is a new rope…….. which is on hand, still in the wrapper, lol.
    Plus gravity feed water from an uphill spring.
    Plus a generator big enough to keep the refrigerator and freezer and so forth cold for no more than four or five bucks a day.

    But this link is the reason for this comment.

    https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/11/01/solar-electricity-can-retail-for-0-027-0-036-kwh-as-renewables-close-in-on-global-grid-parity/

    It’s not only storage capacity that people will be buying.

    The prices quoted in the link are for utility sized wind and solar farms, but as more contractors get into the business doing small systems, the labor component of home sized systems is going to shrink dramatically over the next decade or so, making having your own a no brainer in sunny California.

    1. “Sometimes I’m glad I’m a back woods hillbilly”
      Indeed. That makes many things simpler. Be thankful for your space.

  11. https://peakoil.com/consumption/the-first-map-of-americas-food-supply-chain-is-mind-boggling/comment-page-1#comment-711165

    Who ships and receives the most food, kilograms per year?
    In 2012, Los Angeles County both shipped (outflows) and received (inflows) more kilograms of food than any other U.S. county. Other California counties ranked highly in both categories.

    Outflow
    Los Angeles County, CA
    16.6b
    Fresno County, CA
    12.4b
    Stanislaus County, CA
    9.9b
    San Bernardino County, CA
    9.8b
    San Joaquin County, CA
    8.9b
    Merced County, CA
    8.9b
    Riverside County, CA
    8.7b
    Tulare County, CA
    8.0b
    Kern County, CA
    5.8b
    Maricopa County, AZ
    5.7b

    1. The data in the original paper includes all kinds of food transport, so if a county imports hogs from its neighbor to a slaughterhouse, it is an exporter, and then ships out pork, it is an exporter. Net food flow is not well demonstrated the way they did the study. Nonetheless, interesting.

      “Note the prevalence of self-loops in both the FAF and county results (see table 5). For example, the transfer of food from Los Angeles County, CA to Los Angeles County, CA is one of the largest links at the county scale. Note that the Food Flow Model estimates a flow of food, which occurs each time a commodity is transformed (i.e. corn into corn meal into biscuits). Cities are important food manufacturers who process food items from one form to another. This is especially true of Los Angeles County, whose food manufacturing industry produced nearly $16 billion in goods in 2012, the largest of any county in the United States (US Census Bureau 2015a). Further, Los Angeles brings in food from other countries and agricultural production hubs around the United States. In fact, the Los Angeles FAF zone is the second largest food importer behind only the New Orleans FAF zone. Together, the large food manufacturing presence and sizeable international imports explain why Los Angeles County is the largest self-loop at the county scale.”

      https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab29ae

    2. One of America’s biggest crops is lawns. Not very useful, and very expensive. but at least it doesn’t have to be moved around.

    3. I wonder how much food goes from A to B while the same type of food goes from B to A due to inefficiency and competition.

      NAOM

  12. Worldwide supply below 90 days consumption means third world riots due to price increases and democratic issues and credit payment failures as no work in a just in time economy is done. Obama had food issues in Africa and barely met demand with no reserves .

    1. Go back to Moscow, you aren’t fooling anyone. And practice your English.

        1. Hey dumb guy. They have installed an ‘ignore’ button with you and your buddies in mind. Adios, MF!

  14. The solar Juggernaut keeps rolling on in Australia:

    Rooftop solar smashes Australia installation record in October

    Rooftop solar installations have set a new record of 207MW in the month of October, beating the previous benchmark by 15 per cent and with new records set in four different states.

    “The national market smashes its previous record, and rises above the plateau we’ve been experiencing for the past 12 months,” says Warwick Johnston, the director of industry statistician Sunwiz.

    Johnston says the market is 39 per cent ahead of where it was last year, at more than 1.5GW, and will likely get close to the 2,000MW mark for the calendar year.

    The total amount of small-scale rooftop solar (installations of less than 100KW) in Australia is now 9.78GW, installed on more than 2.2 million homes and businesses.

    1. Meanwhile,

      Australia recently overtook Qatar to become the world’s largest exporter of gas. PRODUCING AND EXPORTING LNG IS DRIVING DRAMATIC GROWTH IN AUSTRALIA’S GREENHOUSE GAS POLLUTION. There are currently seven LNG production plants in Australia. By 2020, Australia will be operating ten LNG plants and potentially exporting more than 80 million tonnes of LNG per year.

      https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/australia-worlds-largest-gas-exporter/

  15. Excellent Der Spiegel article on the disruptive threat electric cars pose to the German automotive industry.

    https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/will-tesla-and-google-kill-the-german-car-a-1293415.html

    What will it mean for the automobile industry, the most important branch of German industry, on which 88,000 jobs are directly dependent and which supports an additional 900,000 jobs indirectly? It is far from alarmist to say that hundreds of thousands of jobs are in danger.

    1. Indeed.
      “By 2040, VW plans to cease manufacturing all cars that run on gasoline or diesel fuel. It’s the end of an era.”
      They are ten years behind, and ten years late. Should have the goal for 2030, at most.

      1. 2030 is much too early.

        Current battery technic is too wasteful to rollout really big. Come on, 1000 pound batteries for a normal car?

        Round about 2025 the next generation of batteries will be ready for mass production (Toyota and others), then the same battery is at 500 pound. Or double range for the interstate pilots. Or even useable for trucks, to drive a day worth on one charge.

        Before this, it’s more installing infrastructure and for white western eco or technic enthusiast. Or chinese city hoppers with short range. Cheap electric cars are only possible with the next generations of batteries – and they are in the pipeline, but not mass-producing-ready yet.

        Today battery producing technic is ressource-hungry and wasteful – it’s not improved technic for building gadget batteries. But it’s easy to roll out current tech to Gigafabs, instead of starting new with zero and build something better.

        This is done – but is will take some time. Especially ramp up time after 2025.

        Solid state battery – sulfur lithium battery – anorganic liquid battery. Several line with cell densities from 500 to 1000 Wh/kg – compared with the Tesla 3 batteries which have 250 Wh / Kg today.

        When 1000 is reached – then short and medium aviation can get electric, too.

        1. “2030 is much too early.”

          Every vehicle manufacturer who tells themselves this, will become bankrupt or purchased for pennies on the dollar, I believe.

        2. Judging the viability of BEV’s on the weight of the battery alone seems rather arbitrary to me. It feels like a delay tactic of saying, ‘not quite yet, but soon’.
          1,000 lbs after all, is the weight of the carbon dioxide produced simply by combusting a mere 51 gallons of petrol. We seem fine with that, but somehow it’s too much if it’s in a battery pack that will last 200,000 miles or more, and can be fully recycled?

          Sure it will be great when kWh/kg improves, and we can simply substitute lighter weight packs as that occurs, but they are energy dense enough now, for ground based transportation. Reducing the cost/kWh is more important at the moment, and that’s simply a matter of economy of scale. Tesla is already demonstrating this, and it is one of the ways that they are ahead of their competition.

          1. A S-Class Mercedes from the 70s was 3300 pound – much lighter. And it was the most heavy passenger car in Germany.

            And heavy means much ressources needed, and much energy needed to produce. They need heavy tires, more wear on the road, heavy frames for crash security.
            And this sums up to expensive. Things most cash-strapped people can’t buy.

            Sure, you have to start now. But the real numbers are only possible after some technical progress.

            There is lot of development going on, just something like:

            https://ride.tech/electric-and-hybrid/swiss-company-to-replace-li-ion-with-cheaper-non-flammable-battery/

            They aim for the 50$ / kwh battery – so the mass production can really start. It’s only one startup doing this, there are lot’s more development teams.

            At the moment it’s like as some new tech as introducing the Diesel-Engine: In the first 20 years every new model will be much better than the old one.

            1. “In the first 20 years every new model will be much better than the old one.”

              I agree, but any manufacturer who thinks they have more than ten years to make a near complete switch will be in the dust heap of history. Everyone, including tesla, is playing catchup.

    2. Nothing is forever.
      Panta rhei.

      The German way of life is not negotiable, after all.
      Yesterday I was listening to to some news from tourismus fair under the name “Zurück zum Postkutsche” (back to a mail coach). The tourismus ‘expert’ (Germany is a country where there is an expert for everything, Kleinstaterei (mindset shaped by living in multitude of small states) of past was replaced with Kleinstaterei of experts today) was pretty stressed. Actually he was very stressed (Germans have low tolerance of insecurity and ambiguity).
      ‘This is a very bad title. We cannot simply stop our life because of clima! Clima is not everything…. We have new planes, more fuel efficient etc’. The journalist agenda was that ‘mass tourismus is destructive for cities: Venice, Barcelona, Amsterdam….’ But it is clear that people are getting more and more insecure in Germany, more and more middle class people vote for AfD (something like right wing here).

      EVs are very expensive in Germany, 70 000 euro band, and the German consumer epxectations is that they should be able to go to their Spain vacation place on one battery charge. All these lies will finally lead to some anti-Green rebellion or something like that. Maybe someone do want that! I do wonder whether it would not be better to tell people that it is all about peak fossil fuels. Someone deliberately spins cogntive dissonances here…

      1. Consider German middle class incomes after taxes are lower than in USA – so the 70k electric cars are only for a few people.

        Most big cars here are company cars, normal people buy mostly used cars or cheap ones. So normal people can start buying electric cars when there are used ones for 5K €, with acceptable range.

        And don’t forget the spin, many enviromentals want to forbid cars for normal people alltogether, it’s this all or nothing sceme that can easy lead to revolts.

        I think you have this, too. Put together Trump and Sanders followers in one room…

        1. If Volkswagon can’t come up with $30-40K electric vehicles quickly and at high volume, they will become a small company, and Germany will be in severe recession/depression. They’ve got less than 7 years to be at full speed.

          1. From the paper the ID.3 is the best electric car in the 30-40k€ range you can buy in Germany. Tesla 3 is more in the 50-60k€ range here, so no need to compare these models.

            Production is starting now in this month. I hope it’s not as bumpy as Tesla, since VW knows producing cars – they have normally more problems with fancy electronic gadgets and apps.

            They’re starting with 30 / day now and testing them, planing to ramp up to 1500 / day end of next year. They’re converting an old factory, so changing from ICE to electric is more complicated than producing a new line of ICE cars.

            The ID platform can be used in different car types, busses and SUVs.

            They should manage this – producing the E-Golf was perhaps some kind of test for them.

            1. I hope vw does real well with the ID platform.
              One advantage that I believe European manufacturers have over American- on average European customers are more accepting of a lower range between charge up than Americans. Does sound true to you?
              This can make the whole equation much more favorable. It is so much easier to create an affordable and profitable EV with a 120 mile range, rather than 320 mile.

    3. A blow to electro-German dreams. Evo Morales, the incumbent president of Bolivia, suddenly removed Bolivia from a contract with Germany to produce Lithium in Bolivia.
      It is fun to observe how Germans are dumbfounded when struck by a country against whom they have no means of retaliation.

      Third World rising, in other words.

      A year ago….
      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-bolivia-lithium/germany-secures-access-to-vast-lithium-deposit-in-bolivia-idUSKBN1OB206

      And now:
      https://www.dw.com/en/bolivia-scraps-joint-lithium-project-with-german-company/a-51100873

      In other words: here comes the new global age of insecurity.

  16. Global Fertility Crisis has Governments Scrambling for an Answer
    By Andre Tartar, Hannah Recht, and Yue Qiu

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-global-fertility-crash/

    Population growth is vital for the world economy. It means more workers to build homes and produce goods, more consumers to buy things and spark innovation, and more citizens to pay taxes and attract trade. While the world is expected to add more than 3 billion people by 2100, according to the United Nations, that’ll likely be the high point. Falling fertility rates and aging populations will mean serious challenges that will be felt more acutely in some places than others.

    While the global average fertility rate was still above the rate of replacement—technically 2.1 children per woman—in 2017, about half of all countries had already fallen below it, up from 1 in 20 just half a century ago. For places such as the U.S. and parts of Western Europe, which historically are attractive to migrants, loosening immigration policies could make up for low birthrates. In other places, more drastic policy interventions may be called for. Most of the available options place a high burden on women, who’ll be relied upon not only to bear children but also to help fill widening gaps in the workforce.

    Government attempts to manage population growth are nothing new—consider the generous paid maternal leave of the Scandinavian countries or China’s recently rescinded one-child policy, each relatively effective in achieving its stated goal—but a new sense of urgency and even desperation is creeping into the search for ways to reverse the current trends. That said, achieving robust population growth is by no means the only contributor to economic growth—in some countries too-high fertility may actually be a drag on GDP, because of higher costs. But as these indicators suggest, it can be an important tailwind.

    To explore these demographic and economic shifts, Bloomberg analyzed fertility data for 200 countries and picked four that were outliers in some respect. Local reporters then interviewed one woman in each place about her economic and cultural forces that shaped her choice to have children—or not.

    1. I guess there are still loads o people who believe that infinite growth on a finite planet is a possibility. It could also be that they believe that the planet is so big that the human population can never grow large enough for us to “run out of space”. One wonders what planet they are living on?

      1. And, least we forget: The Aircon Dilemma.

        Buying an air conditioner is a common response to climate change, and air conditioners are uniquely power-hungry appliances: a small unit cooling a single room, on average, consumes more power than running four fridges, while a central unit cooling an average house uses more power than 15. Last year in Beijing, during a heatwave, 50% of the power capacity was going to air conditioning. The irony (of this feedback loop): warmer temperatures lead to more air conditioning; more air conditioning leads to warmer temperatures. The problem posed by air conditioning resembles the problem we face in tackling the climate crisis. If we’re not careful, the solutions that we reach for most easily can bind us closer to the problem.

        1. It was 89 degrees yesterday in Redding, CA.
          That is far north part of the state, near Oregon (for those who’ve never been).

    2. “Population growth is vital for the world economy. It means more workers to build homes and produce goods, more consumers to buy things and spark innovation, and more citizens to pay taxes and attract trade. ”

      Is this way of thinking relevant in a world where human population is perhaps 6 billion people into overshoot [beyond reasonable carrying capacity of the ecosystem]?
      Perhaps a more appropriate article would be titled-
      “Global Overpopulation Crisis has Governments Scrambling for an Answer”

    3. There are some suspicions that the decline of fertility may be due to electrosmog. Mobile phones and WiFi may be a pretty good contraceptive.
      Also, in the West the proportion of girls to boys among the new borns has increased during last years, and is currently like 6:4 for women…

      It seems that a male is a more fragile being, after all.

      1. in the West the proportion of girls to boys among the new borns has increased during last years, and is currently like 6:4 for women

        Where did this come from? Do you have a source?

        1. A private talk with a doctor who works in the ward in Vienna. He asked his doctor colleagues, and it seems to be a trend.

          However, it would explain the higher numbers of young women almost everywhere: universities etc, as well as gearing society towards female needs. There are simply more women!

          2. “The sex ratio for the entire world population is 101 males to 100 females (2018 est.)…In the United States, the sex ratios at birth over the period 1970–2002 were 1.05 for the white non-Hispanic population, 1.04 for Mexican Americans, 1.03 for African Americans and Indians, and 1.07 for mothers of Chinese or Filipino ethnicity.[15] Among Western European countries around 2001, the ratios ranged from 1.04 in Belgium to 1.07 in Switzerland,[16] Italy,[17] Ireland[18] and Portugal.”

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

            Please stop spreading misinformation.

            1. We are now in 2019, almost 2o years from 2001.
              Besides, that is a hypothesis based on accidental evidence, like most hypotheses, by the way, so nothing wrong with hypothesis building here. Nevertheless, should it be true, I do not believe it would be made official, as it would imply that something is seriously wrong with the enviornment. And you can always deny at the level of a ward or a city saying that it is accidental.
              Moreover, there are not many people who have full access to popualtion statistics on the national level, and thus could (and would) identify such a problem.

              TPTB propagate threats ONLY together with panacea (e.g. global warming and green energy) .

            2. hypothesis built is on false information is not worth repeating, unless you are intentionally spreading false information- seems to be your style.

            3. This is where a blog needs an active moderator, to ban trolls like this.

              I don’t blame Dennis for not wanting the responsibility, but…maybe someone would want to volunteer?

            4. Hey, we need a little comic relief once in a while. But more than anything else, we must admit there are idiots out there and they carry a powerful vote at the ballot box. If we cannot deal with their stupidity here, how can we deal with them on the open market?

            5. Ron,

              I’m willing to give most commenters the benefit of the doubt. And, some comments provide a useful teachable moment for lurkers.

              But this one is (as Alimbiquated said elsewhere) simply flooding the blog with nonsense. Much of it isn’t even vaguely believable and answering it is boring and a waste of time.

              Occasionally you do have to draw a line and say enough.

          3. Im Jahr 2018 sind in Österreich 84.804 Kinder lebend geboren worden. Nach Angaben der Statistik Austria waren davon 43.432 Buben, sie wogen durchschnittlich 3.379 Gramm und waren 50,9 Zentimeter groß. Die 41.372 Mädchen wogen demnach im Schnitt 3.255 Gramm und maßen 50,3 Zentimeter. Knapp 30 Prozent der Kinder kamen per Kaiserschnitt zur Welt.

            41K girls to 43K boys. Source: Kurier.at

            How do you block people here? The trolling is getting awful.

            1. There is an x next to name which can be used to hide the comments of those you would like to ignore. If nobody responds to those comments you won’t see anything. Usually people can’t resist responding to a really dumb comment.

  17. Back on planet Earth,

    CLIMATE CHANGE: ‘CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL’ EMERGENCY

    Released on the day that satellite data shows that last month was the warmest October on record, the new study says that that simply measuring global surface temperatures is an inadequate way of capturing the real dangers of an overheating world. So the authors include a range of data which they believe represents a “suite of graphical vital signs of climate change over the past 40 years”. These indicators include the growth of human and animal populations, per capita meat production, global tree cover loss, as well as fossil fuel consumption. Some progress has been seen in some areas. For example, renewable energy has grown significantly, with consumption of wind and solar increasing 373% per decade – but it was still 28 times smaller than fossil fuel use in 2018.

    “We have rising emissions, rising temperatures, and we’ve known this for 40 years and we haven’t acted – you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know we have a a problem.”

    THE IDEA OF TRYING TO INFLUENCE HUMAN POPULATION GROWTH IS HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL AND HAS BEEN DEEMED TOO HOT TO HANDLE BY UN NEGOTIATORS. THE AUTHORS SAY THAT LOOKING THE OTHER WAY IS NO LONGER AN OPTION.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50302392

    2. October 2019 was the warmest October? Going back to how far? 40 years? Now that must be a joke considering the planet is over 100 million years old. The timescale you are using to measure your changes is much to short.

      1. Speaking of time Perry,
        did you know that if you go back a little less than 300,000 generations, that you find yourself looking at your grandmother, who is the ancestor of not only all living humans, but also all living chimpanzees and bonobos.
        And consider that all of human agriculture time has been in just the last 400 generations.

        [this assumes average generation time 25 yrs, which is reasonable for both Homo and Pan species. And that agriculture is about 10,000 yrs old- it is in fact much younger in much of the world]

        “There’s a lot of debate about both temperatures and CO2 levels from millions of years ago. But the evidence is much firmer for the last 800,000 years, when ice cores show that CO2 concentrations stayed tight between 180 and 290 ppm, hovering at around 280 ppm for some 10,000 years before the industrial revolution hit. ”

        CO2 level now 405 ppm. Very inconvenient.

        https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-the-world-passed-a-carbon-threshold-400ppm-and-why-it-matters

      2. considering the planet is over 100 million years old.

        Wow! Your knowledge of the history of our planet is remarkable. Where did you learn such knowledge? Harvard? Christian fundamentalists believe the earth is only 6 thousand years. The Christian fundamentalists are off by about 4.54 billion years and you are off by only 4.44 billion years.

        Hey, you guys must think a lot alike.

      3. I can believe you’re from Houston but I would drop the ‘Smart’…

  18. PARIS CLIMATE PLEDGES ‘TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE’

    “Three-quarters of national commitments under the Paris climate accord to curb greenhouse gases will not even slow the accelerating pace of global warming, top climate scientists said Tuesday…

    Emissions of planet-warming gases must drop 50 percent by 2030 and to “net zero”—with no additional carbon entering the atmosphere by mid-century—if the Paris treaty’s goal of capping warming at 1.5 to 2.0 degrees Celsius is to be met, the IPCC concluded last year. And yet 2018 saw unprecedented global carbon pollution of more than 41 billion tonnes, two percent higher that 2017, also a record year…

    Just over half of greenhouse gas emissions from power, industry, agriculture and deforestation—the main drivers of global warming—came from four nations last year: China, the United States, India and Russia. Accounting for 13.1 percent of the total, the US has turned it back on the Paris deal.”

    https://phys.org/news/2019-11-paris-climate-pledges-late.html

    1. We’re going to burn my little girls world and let her dance in the ashes.
      So it goes…
      🙁

      1. but for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.

        1. “but for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.”

          Priceless….tragic beyond words, but priceless.

      2. My advice for you climate worry warts: stop concerning yourself about things that are fully out of your control and live for today, because you never know which one will be your last.

        1. Sorry, weather accounts for 1/3 of the content of the day’s news , so you won’t stop people talking about the climate either.

        2. But there are things which are within our control. We can reduce our personal carbon (and smog) footprint. We can influence others (personally, not on the internet) and help them reduce theirs. We can vote for leaders who promise to take meaningful action towards a sustainable economy, and not vote for them again if they don’t.

          Futile? Perhaps. But it beats the alternatives, in my opinion.

        3. I take it, Timothy, that you have no children.
          That, or you truly do only care about yourself.

        4. Well I do just as you say, Timothy,
          but climate change affects my health;
          specifically, my brain chemistry,
          and psoriasis.
          We really need to get our climate fixed up,
          if not for me,
          if not for you,
          then for all the other living creatures of the world.

  19. Australia’s main grid reaches 50 per cent renewables for first time

    Australia’s main grid – known as the National Electricity Market – broke through the 50 per cent benchmark for renewable energy in one trading period on Wednesday, the first time that half of net demand had been met by renewables.

    The milestone was reached at 1150 (NEM time, which is AEST), when the combined output of rooftop solar, large-scale wind, and large-scale solar reached 50.2 per cent of the near 25GW being produced on the main grid, which includes Queensland, NSW, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, but not Western Australia or the Northern Territory.

    Rooftop solar provided nearly half the renewables output, or 23.7 per cent, followed by wind (15.7 per cent), large-scale solar (8.8 per cent) and hydro just 1.9 per cent.

    The share of renewables might have been bigger were it not for four out of five solar farms in Victoria being constrained to 50 per cent of their output, along with the Broken Hill solar farm, and another solar farm in South Australia , Tailem Bend, was switched off due to low prices

    Indian coal generation plunges in faltering economy, but power from clean alternatives grows

    In the space of just a few days, India’s slowing economy has attracted the attention not only of the domestic press, but of international media including the Financial Times and an Economist special report, which noted that “with alarming speed, India has gone from being the world’s fastest-growing large economy to something more like a rumbling Indian railway train.”

    A host of economic indicators have received attention, ranging from the official (World Bank and Indian government growth downgrades) through indices such asFitch Ratings or LiveMint’s Macro Tracker, to the flippant but nonetheless informative (including the New York Times’ story on underwear sales, or Neilsen’s report of declining toothpaste purchases in rural India).

    To this list may be added an economic heavyweight: thermal coal.

    Having held up throughout the summer when other signs of a relative downturn were already apparent, the amount of thermal coal burned for power fell precipitously in September and October.

    So steep has been the decline that the annual increase in coal consumption by the power sector, which has averaged 6.3% or 27 million extra tons each year for the last 12 years, fell to zero not only for the financial year to date (Figure 1), but also for the full 12 months to 31 October 2019, compared to the previous year.

    When economies stumble, slackening electricity demand is a very common symptom. In India’s case, the current decline is quite specific to coal.

    Climate change emergency – 11,000 scientists say crisis accelerating, demand action

    More than 11,000 scientists from more than 150 countries have signed a joint declaration of a climate change emergency, citing 40 years of research showing the world is heading towards “untold human suffering” unless action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is taken.

    In a declaration, and an accompanying research paper published in the journal BioScience, the scientists outlined the observed impacts of climate change over the last 40 years, and said the scientific evidence justified the declaration of a major global crisis.

    “Scientists have a moral obligation to clearly warn humanity of any great existential threat and to ‘tell it like it is.’ On the basis of this obligation and the graphical indicators presented below, we declare, with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world, clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency,” the statement said.

    “Despite 40 years of major global negotiations, we have generally conducted business as usual and are essentially failing to address this crisis,” report author professor William Ripple of the Oregon State University added.

    “Climate change has arrived and is accelerating faster than many scientists expected.”

    The last story is the reason why the first two are important.

    1. Meanwhile,

      AUSTRALIA IS THE WORLD’S THIRD-LARGEST EXPORTER OF CO2 IN FOSSIL FUELS

      In other words, when Australian fossil fuels — primarily coal — are burned overseas, the amount of carbon dioxide they produce is higher than the exported emissions of nearly all the world’s biggest oil- and gas-producing nations, like Iraq and Kuwait.

      BTW: Australia’s dramatic expansion in LNG production and export is a major factor driving current and future emissions growth. Extracting, transporting and burning gas releases greenhouse gas pollution in the form of carbon dioxide and methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas (25 times more polluting than carbon dioxide). LNG is driving emissions growth because producing LNG for export requires large amounts of electricity. In addition, ‘fugitive emissions’ (emissions from gas leaks, venting and equipment purging) are released at all stages of the gas supply chain from extraction through to transport and production. Fugitive emissions in Australia have risen 41% since 2005. The dramatic growth in greenhouse gas pollution associated with LNG between 2015 and 2020 will effectively cancel out emissions reductions from Australia’s national Renewable Energy Target.

      https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-08-19/australia-co2-exports-third-highest-worldwide/11420654

      And, at home, Australia’s emissions have reached the highest on record, driven by electricity sector.

      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/09/australias-emissions-reach-the-highest-on-record-driven-by-electricity-sector

  20. Taboo topic, you say,

    CRITICS BLAST A PROPOSAL TO CURB CLIMATE CHANGE BY HALTING POPULATION GROWTH

    “Increasing by roughly 80 million people per year, or more than 200,000 per day, the world population must be stabilized—and, ideally, gradually reduced, reads the piece published in BioScience on Tuesday. Fewer people producing less in greenhouse-gas emissions could make some difference in the danger that climate change poses over time. But whether we end up with 9, 10, or 11 billion people in the coming decades, the world will still be pumping out increasingly risky amounts of climate pollution if we don’t fundamentally fix the underlying energy, transportation, and food systems.”

    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/614682/critics-blast-a-proposal-to-curb-climate-change-by-halting-population-growth/

    1. Could have a system like cap and trade.
      Each person get a automatic credit of one offspring (regardless of how many spouses they accumulate).
      They can sell the credit for market rate fees to a couple who wants to purchase.
      Exceeding the limit costs you big assets, credit rating, and food rations, along with forced relocation to a red state.

      1. Trying to coerce people would be an incredible waste of political energy, and it frames the problem in the wrong direction. The problem is that women are being coerced into having children, and we need to free them from that.

        It would be far, far easier to ensure that all women got a good education and birth control. Making child marriage illegal would also help (it’s legal in almost all US states).

        Even in the US, 50% of births are unplanned. Around the world, women are really, really ready to stop being forced baby factories.

        2. Yep, giving women equal political and economic rights would solve many problems.
          Unfortunately, we seem to be too primitive.

          1. Well now, hmmn, about women’s political and economic rights , as far as the USA goes,

            I will be the first to not only admit but solemnly swear that men have deprived women of equal rights in this country in the past.

            But it’s basically just pointing out the truth when I say that the only real reason NOW that they don’t have fully equal rights here is that a great many of them are dumb enough to vote R.

            Serves THEM right, lol, but it’s sad for all the rest of the women with better sense.

            Of course it’s just acknowledging the truth that men are even dumber than women, on the average, lol.

            1. It’s true – just because someone’s female doesn’t mean that they haven’t absorbed a lot of misinformation about what’s good for them. After all, they live in the same world as men, they watch the same stupid media, they listen to the same misinformed friends, etc. And both fathers and mothers transmit misinformation to both their sons and daughters.

              On the other hand, 54% of women voted for Clinton: if the vote had just been women Clinton would have won by a landslide.

            2. Clinton received 3 million more votes than Trump nationally.
              But obviously that is not an issue with our political system.
              Giving women equal political and economic rights would be interesting.
              All current data would be in the past.

        3. That is only half of it. A large part is the need for children to look after the elders. Society needs to move the burden from the children to the community so that the number of children is less important. Add to that, the demand for infinite consumer growth that needs to be curtailed.

          NAOM

          1. Some form of social security for elders certainly helps. But education (and women’s financial independence) seems to be more important:

            “One of the key reasons for the decline in fertility has been education, more precisely that of women.”

            https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/70220785.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

            It’s true that there are a number of factors, including reducing child mortality so that smaller families are safer. Here’s another discussion:

            http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/articles/10-causes-of-high-birth-rate-in-india-explained/2243

            And another:

            “Why is the fertility rate falling?
            The fall in fertility rate is not down to sperm counts or any of the things that normally come to mind when thinking of fertility.
            Instead it is being put down to three key factors:

            Fewer deaths in childhood meaning women have fewer babies
            Greater access to contraception
            More women in education and work”

            https://www.bbc.com/news/health-46118103

            2. As a new thread is up I won’t follow this further. There is no simple answer, it is a combination of answers. One that struck me is the re-education of men so they do not consider the number of children they have sired (with their wife and any girlfriends on the side) as an indicator of their fertility.

              There are many answers to the problem and we must remember that the solution mix for USA/Mexico/Africa etc (and the different areas in each) are all different..

              NAOM

Comments are closed.