280 thoughts to “Open Thread, September 12, 2018”

  1. One of the big electric charging station makers for the home EV market is selling a charger (over 6000 now in CA) that can work in conjunction with the grid operators to supply energy to the grid when conditions are favorable. The home owner would be selling energy at the peak times if they had excess and preferred to.
    Once this grows to a large scale, the mechanism will serve as a big battery for the grid

    https://www.utilitydive.com/news/emotorworks-provides-caiso-with-30-mw-of-dr-through-smart-ev-charging/532110/

  2. I think NO current SAE CCS charge port car can export. The leaf with it’s ChadeMo can present the HV DC to the Terminals. The Utilities must have a big Role in the Standards development. They did the same thing with Grid Tie PV – ZERO UTILITY without the UTILITY. This is such a screw-up. However, Solar 2.0 is coming to market. Both Huawei Fusion and Enphase IQ8 will make Pure Power without the Grid or Toxic Batteries. True Battery Agnostic design. You can power or charge any battery with the right size system.
    https://ez-ev.com/tips/chademo-supercharging-dc-fast-charging

    2. Maybe auto manufacturers want to limit charge/discharge cycles which shorten battery life. Seems to me the looming cobalt shortage makes old lead acid batteries a better device to store grid electricity

      1. Fernando, stick to whatever engineering you were licensed to do, because you are completely out of your depth with anything related to 21st century battery chemistry and its applications in current technology.

        If you had at the very minimum bothered to watch the panel discussion in the linked video you would at least be aware of the fact that there is no need to limit charge/discharge cycles, quite the contrary it is actually beneficial to the life of the battery to be integrated into a large grid and be charged and discharged.

        And if you were even minimally up to speed on recent developments in
        Li-on battery tech, you would know that the most advanced batteries need only minimal amounts of Co! So you can cross that one off your list of concerns,

        As for old lead acid batteries making a better device to store grid electricity, that comment is, well, to put it rather bluntly, totally laughable!

        Now perhaps you already know all of this and you are just yanking our chains but if not, and you have retired as a petroleum engineer, perhaps you should take up crochet as a hobby! Because you sure as hell don’t know squat about the state of the art in renewables, battery chemistry, battery tech, microgrids, distributed networks, etc!

        On the other hand should you decide to learn some new things there are a number of free online courses at MIT dealing with Li-ion battery chemistry and materials science, that I could recommend.

        Who knows this might whet your appetitite!

        http://news.mit.edu/2018/new-way-find-better-battery-materials-0326
        A new way to find better battery materials

        Design principles could point to better electrolytes for next-generation lithium batteries.

        David L. Chandler | MIT News Office
        March 25, 2018

      2. Cobalt is not necessary for Stationary storage. It’s used in Traction to give 20-30% extended range. I speculate LFP or LiFePo4 ” Lithium Iron Phosphate” production will grow 100 fold in 5 years. Cobalt chem is unlikely to scale 5-10 x larger than current. The most Robust Storage Battery may be NiFe — aka. Edison Battery. My Grandfather had them on his boat for decades. The Last Lead smelter in North America was shut down in Nov 2014. Lead cannot be recycled into another quality storage Battery. Every Lead Battery system I’ve worked on cost of Energy stored exceeds .50 /kWh for several reasons. Lead Acid chem is super non linear Voodoo. If it’s not at 2.1 +/- 5% volts per cell it’s in a state of accelerated decay. It’s future for energy storage is history. Lithium chem thrives in a partially charged environment that would quickly kill a Lead Acid Battery. This is critical for Energy management. Utility eChem Storage will most likely be done with flow batteries the size of buildings. Not with e toothbrush Batteries.. ie 18650’s. The eBuss business is growing rapidly and is Cobalt free. BYD and Proterra is building thousands of ebusses per week.

        1. How do you see competition between phosphate for batteries and phosphate for fertiliser?

          NAOM

          1. “How do you see competition between phosphate for batteries and phosphate for fertiliser?”

            There are a few orders of magnitude difference, no issue in realioty, and the battery maker should easily be able to pay better price.

          3. Maybe it’s time to find ways to recover the phosphates before they run off into our waterways and produce toxic algal blooms… There has to be a better way!

            http://stormwater.wef.org/2018/01/study-combat-toxic-algal-blooms-focus-phosphorus/

            Study: To combat toxic algal blooms, focus on phosphorus
            The results of an experiment spanning nearly a half-century at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD; Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) claim that if water stewards want to stem the growth of harmful algal blooms, they should focus on phosphorus rather than nitrogen.

            The discovery, made by the same research organization credited with identifying phosphorus as a main driver of algal bloom formation in the 1970s, could change the logic behind municipal pollution prevention approaches.

            And I just can’t wait to hear what happens to the hog farm waste lagoons after 5 days of catastrophic flooding in the Carolinas.

            https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/09/11/646790793/hog-farmers-scramble-to-drain-waste-pools-ahead-of-hurricane-florence

            Just inland from the North Carolina coast, right in the path of Hurricane Florence, there’s an area where there are many more pigs than people. Each big hog farm has one or more open-air “lagoons” filled with manure, and some could be vulnerable to flooding if the hurricane brings as much rain as feared.

            1. Maybe use kelps that are selected for high phosphate uptake and farm them around outflows?

              NAOM

            2. Yeah, I happen to be a big fan of kelp farming but it doesn’t work everywhere.

              For example in the fresh waters of the Great Lakes or even along the coast of Florida where the ocean is much too warm.

              But there may be other algaes or aquatic plants that could do the trick. Anything along those lines would be a step in the right direction.

            3. Here in Finland gypsum has been tested on fields with good results, it seems to combine with phosphates and runoff has been diminished. May depend on soil quality and other stuff. Farmers can use existing machinery for spreading it, but otoh transport from long distances causes additional costs…

            4. The issue with Gypsum is radioactivity from naturally occurring Uranium and Thorium in the base rock.

              NAOM

          2. There’s where the Investor Utility CENTRAL GRID model breaks down. We install Rooftop PV for under a Nickel per LCOE kWh. Lots of recognition that 50% of the population will die off within 2 weeks of Grid Collapse. This is by design. The Grid cannot function with a 1% fuel shortage. IMO – All critical personal infrastructure should function with unregulated DC. Freezers, Lighting, comm, Water, Hot Water, etc. It’s not hard to do, but all the normal gear in North America you can just forget.

  3. Some food for thought,

    MAKE YOUR DAUGHTER PRACTICE MATH. SHE’LL THANK YOU LATER.

    A large body of research has revealed that boys and girls have, on average, similar abilities in math. But girls have a consistent advantage in reading and writing and are often relatively better at these than they are at math, even though their math skills are as good as the boys’. The consequence? A typical little boy can think he’s better at math than language arts. But a typical little girl can think she’s better at language arts than math. As a result, when she sits down to do math, she might be more likely to say, “I’m not that good at this!” She actually is just as good (on average) as a boy at the math — it’s just that she’s even better at language arts.

    In the international PISA test, the United States ranks near the bottom among the 35 industrialized nations in math. But girls especially could benefit from some extra required practice, which would not only break the cycle of dislike-avoidance-further dislike, but build confidence and that sense of, “Yes, I can do this!” Practice with math can help close the gap between girls’ reading and math skills, making math seem like an equally good long-term study option. Even if she ultimately chooses a non-STEM career, today’s high-tech world will mean her quantitative skills will still come in handy.

    All learning isn’t — and shouldn’t be — “fun.” Mastering the fundamentals is why we have children practice scales and chords when they’re learning to play a musical instrument, instead of just playing air guitar. It’s why we have them practice moves in dance and soccer, memorize vocabulary while learning a new language and internalize the multiplication tables. In fact, the more we try to make all learning fun, the more we do a disservice to children’s abilities to grapple with and learn difficult topics. As Robert Bjork, a leading psychologist, has shown, deep learning involves “desirable difficulties.” Some learning just plain requires effortful practice, especially in the initial stages. Practice and, yes, even some memorization are what allow the neural patterns of learning to take form.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/07/opinion/stem-girls-math-practice.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FMathematics&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=collection

    1. All learning isn’t — and shouldn’t be — “fun.” Mastering the fundamentals is why we have children practice scales and chords when they’re learning to play a musical instrument, instead of just playing air guitar. It’s why we have them practice moves in dance and soccer, memorize vocabulary while learning a new language and internalize the multiplication tables. In fact, the more we try to make all learning fun, the more we do a disservice to children’s abilities to grapple with and learn difficult topics.

      Yeah, but there is a bit more to the story!

      https://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity/transcript?language=en
      Ken RobinsonatTED2006
      Do schools kill creativity?

    2. Good comment, Doug.

      I used to teach math in high school for awhile and really struggled with a few issues. The biggest problem were new (required) texts that tried to put real life spins on word problems, and by real life I mean using multi-ethnic names etc instead of just worrying about the problem and required formula. So, what happened was that all students struggled as there was a whole scad of required reading and very little math being done. The word problem might be an entire paragraph, and students were left wondering what was even asked? If a kid had trouble reading guess what? They would also have trouble doing math!!

      My solution? I found old texts in the bookroom and made my own lessons. I also found lots of resources online. I found that lower grades…grade 8 and even grade 9ers actually hungered for practice in the form of worksheets. I instituted something I called “Worksheet Wednesday” where kids worked at big tables. Each table had a resident whiz who would help 3-4 others and explain away confusion…..or try to. If the lesson was proceeding well they worked at their own stuff, often higher grade materials. I had 30+ kids so could only spare a minute or two with every question and this really really helped with learning. Plus, the helpers felt like a million bucks and raised their stature in class (deservedly so). Students that struggled didn’t feel like a spotlight was shining on them when they asked their peers for help. The rest of the week was a more accepted/current version of standard curriculum but because of peer experts students felt free to ask others for explanations when I was busy. It made for a good learning environment. The classses were pretty noisy some days, but really enjoyable to be there.

      To your comment. My biggest struggle was that many many students did not know basic math facts. I’m talking rote times tables to 12X12; and/or being able to chunk problems and do mental math. I would send notes home and call parents about it telling them we did not have time to catch up what should have been learned by grades 4-5. During parent/teacher interviews I often said things like, “_______ tells me she wants to go into nursing. But we have a problem because she doesn’t know her multiplication facts. She has to practice this at home and know it without pause. If ______ doesn’t learn her X tables she won’t be able to do fractions. She won’t understand them. If she can’t do fractions she will struggle with algebra and her last academic math class will likely be grade 9, and even that might be iffy. If she can’t do academic math she cannot go on to a science degree and that means no nursing career.” I was usually more pleasant about it, but that is the jist of it. Do you know how many parents drilled their children with fractions to catch them up? None. I even bought them flash cards. I supplied math games. Those particular parents did not ensure their children even learned the basics, and were the first to blame the _______ (fill in your best blank).

      My favourite math class was teaching dummy math grade 12. (sorry, that’s what we called it in private…but the formal term was Math Essentials). I always assigned a project in lieu of the dreaded final exam. My last year teaching I had students design and draft a ‘tiny house’, then figure/price out all materials (on their own time), cost out labour, come up with a final purchase price, estimate mortgage financing expenses, then come up with a hourly wage to be able to afford to purchase same house…after all payroll deductions, of course. (Including local property purchase). I gave them a couple of weeks and it was a blast. One of my favourite students, a very artisitic girl who was failing misreably, absoutely excelled at this project because she could draw while doing math. This was before tiny houses were trendy. I had read about one in Mother Earth News. Before tiny houses existed I used ski cabins or vacation cottages. Not only did kids learn basic essential math, many started to realize they needed a decent job and started to get the lead out with their school work. It was a very positive experience for me and I feel great pleasure when I run into the same kids as successful adults.

      regards

      1. Takes me back to my school’s maths. We had two teachers who took a class each for the whole 2 years of 6th form. Year 1 teacher A, 28 pass 2 fail, year 2 teacher B, 2 pass 28 fail. Repeat cycle. Oh, the 2 passes in B had 2 years private tuition.

        NAOM

    1. I think those anti-climate change bible thumpers better start praying to the Ba-Jesus, asking for mercy after their 2016 vote.

    2. Florence is Category 3 and quickly weakening due to high shear and dry air. At landfall she could be a Category 1 storm. I fear this is yet another example of the mainstream media overhyping the situation.

      2. 1) lower wind speed but much bigger.
        2) It has to cross a nice hot gulf stream.
        3) It has only recently rebuilt the eye wall

        NAOM

        1. I was watching CNN and they interviewed the mayor of Huntington Beach? and she said 35% of residents were staying home and riding it out. key word here? Beach. Key concept? Storm surge? Wild cards? Wind and rain.

          Unbelieveable.

          1. 83′ waves on top of a high storm surge, glad I am down here not there!

            NAOM

          2. Yeah, 150 mph winds, survivable in the right structure. 10 ft. storm surge, a lot of dead people… People are stupid!

          3. Life’s tough. It’s tougher when you’re stupid.

            North Carolina didn’t like science on sea levels … so passed a law against it

            https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/12/north-carolina-didnt-like-science-on-sea-levels-so-passed-a-law-against-it

            Duncan Idaho/HT once made the comment:

            “Global Warming denial could be a natural feedback loop to stabilize a collapsing ecosystem.
You have a large part of homo sapiens going into a apoptosis like response to promote death to save the overall organism.”

        2. True, NAOM, slowed some but extended the size of the storm. Cat 2 with 400 mile width of tropical storm winds as it hit the coast.
          Hope they are wrong about the length of time over the coast and the amount of rainfall.

      4. At landfall she could be a Category 1 storm.

        Even if that is true the problem is going to be massive storm surge and flooding from rainfall. Especially because the storm is likely to stall near the coast. So we are looking at very large scale flooding events throughout the region. And flooding is much more deadly than wind speed!

        This is a deadly storm by any measure and to suggest otherwise is quite irresponsible!

        BULLETIN
        Hurricane Florence Advisory Number 55
        NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL AL062018
        1100 PM EDT Wed Sep 12 2018

        …FLORENCE WEAKENS A LITTLE MORE…
        …LIFE-THREATENING STORM SURGE AND RAINFALL STILL EXPECTED…

        A Storm Surge Warning means there is a danger of life-threatening
        inundation, from rising water moving inland from the coastline,
        during the next 36 hours in the indicated locations. For a
        depiction of areas at risk, please see the National Weather
        Service Storm Surge Watch/Warning Graphic, available at
        hurricanes.gov. This is a life-threatening situation. Persons
        located within these areas should take all necessary actions to
        protect life and property from rising water and the potential for
        other dangerous conditions. Promptly follow evacuation and other instructions from local officials.

        And that is NOT hype!

        To make matters even more interesting…

        Hurricane Florence Is Headed Straight for North Carolina’s Nuclear Reactors

      5. Well, good luck. I doubt we will be hearing from you after the storm though I hope we do.

        NAOM

      6. I think it is fantastic that nowadays we get early advise several days before hurricanes hit. Scientists efforts to understand hurricanes translate into thousands of lives saved every year in Asia and America.

        That sometimes the alarm turns out to be exaggerated is a very small price to pay. The precautionary principle at work.

        Perhaps if we reduce our CO₂ emissions hurricanes won’t grow in strength. That’s what the same scientists that are saving those lives tell us.

        1. Agreed about the value of the forecasting.
          Wish I had even 2 minutes warning before the next big quake on the western coast.
          Right now my dog is still sleeping soundly in the afternoon sun, so safe for the next 10 seconds?

        2. Some of these guys would buy ‘open on impact’ parachutes as they wouldn’t believe anything bad until the sudden stop.

          NAOM

  5. Tell me how anyone would allow their kids to go anywhere near a Roman Catholic priest (or any priest/minister for that matter). One can only wonder what the true number of assaults was.

    GERMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS ‘ABUSED THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN’

    More than 3,600 children in Germany were assaulted by Roman Catholic priests between 1946 and 2014, a leaked report has revealed. The study was commissioned by the Church itself and was due to be published on 25 September. According to the report, some 1,670 clergymen in Germany committed some form of sex attack on 3,677 minors, German outlet Spiegel Online reported.

    According to the new study, only 38% of the alleged perpetrators were prosecuted with most facing only minor disciplinary procedures, German media said. About one in six cases involved rape. Most of the victims were boys, and more than half were aged 13 or younger. Predatory clerics were often moved to new communities, where no warning was issued about their actions.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45500072

    1. I guess they should have been less worried about the “witches” and seen the devils in priest’s clothing. This can’t be anything new.

      1. Well, this guy was sentenced to a life of penance and prayer, and forbidden from having contact with former parishioners. Big fucking deal. The firing squad would have been too good for this clown.

        CHILE CHURCH SCANDAL: ‘HOW I ESCAPED THE PRIEST WHO ABUSED ME FOR DECADES’

        “Today Fernando Karadima is 88. He lives in a convent set in extensive gardens located in an up-market district of Santiago. In 2011 the Vatican found him guilty of sexually abusing minors, sometimes by force. He was sentenced to a life of penance and prayer, and forbidden from having contact with former parishioners, or from performing any public act of ministry.”

        https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-45486176

        1. Nailed by the scrotum above the main door to the town cathedral would be my suggestion.

          1. That’s just a joke – these people need treatment early on, the real evil comes from the Trump like narcissists and psychopaths in the upper church echelons that enable and mask the behaviour for “the good of my career and feelings of power”, sorry that should be “the good of the church”.

          2. “Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.”
            Denis Diderot

            Not much has changed since then…

            1. Government and religion will not go away, they are too deeply knit into our culture. They can change and will change but they do not go away.
              What could go away somewhat is the power of the wealthy and their corporations over government and over the public. That can be controlled.
              Science and engineering is tolerated because it is useful in developing weapons and advancing the power of the wealthy.
              Too much reality is not acceptable in the culture and the corptocracy. Civilization operates on a human construct promulgated by fear and propaganda. Reality is something else.

              “Truth is like an acid, anything you put in it dissolves.” Yuval Harari

    1. With an ARM RISC processor, a 55-nanometer die shrink, and 5-million logic gates, Enphase’s “Swift” ASIC will make the upcoming IQ8 the most-intelligent and commercially successful microinverter on the planet, and the only one capable of providing battery-less, offgrid-backup-microgrid resiliency.

      OK! How exactly does it provide offgrid-backup-microgrid resiliency?! Look Ma! No Batteries! The article doesn’t say anything about how it works!

      Edit: Apparently what it does is allow solar panels to power a home when disconnected from the grid even if the system doesn’t have battery storage. Well that’s great but that only works while the sun is shining and you still need battery backup at night or on cloudy days.

      1. You have to design to utilize PV watt-hours during the day. Lets say 85% PV Direct and 15% stored. Most important is that you can remove the Battery during the day and all works fine. PV watt hours cheap – Storage not. If you store energy thermally, all other loads CAN use very few watt-hrs. When you overbuild PV, your biggest issue is how to make best use with the watt-hrs during the long summer days. A 80 gal hotwater heater stores several powerwalls worth of energy. eChem storage is full a couple of hours after the sun comes up even on cloudy days.

        1. You have to design to utilize PV watt-hours during the day. Lets say 85% PV Direct and 15% stored. Most important is that you can remove the Battery during the day and all works fine. PV watt hours cheap – Storage not.

          No doubt! My only point was that you still need some form of storage even with this system.

          And storing energy as either hot water or ice makes perfect sense.
          That plus a small battery backup.

          Cheers!

          1. Storage is getting cheaper all the time and new battery tech is on the way.
            Even so, maybe I am just biased or too dumb to know better, but it seems to me that battery storage of power from renewable energy (wind/solar) is far, far cheaper than using the atmosphere as a toilet for fossil fuel power.
            I know it’s not classical economics but, in my own delusional way, I like to system think and take into account a lot more of the world than just simple minded profit and loss.
            Batteries could be ten times more expensive and still far cheaper than burning fossil fuel for backup. There is no real economic comparison between fossil fuel energy and using solar and wind energy. It’s a false assumption based on pay a little less now (which is not even true) so we can pay huge amounts later. The ultimate credit card on the future, rapidly becoming the present. Suckered again!!!

            BTW – the idea and implementation of using power during the day when the sun shines and keeping battery needs low came out of the 1970’s pushed by a bunch of hippie amateurs and some scientists and engineers that didn’t mind being on the fringe of society.
            Just because we have better control circuits now and better batteries does not mean we couldn’t have done it decades ago. Europe is ahead of the US in implementation of this but still not doing enough.

            1. Agree with most of your points!

              I know it’s not classical economics but, in my own delusional way, I like to system think and take into account a lot more of the world than just simple minded profit and loss.

              Unfortunately that means you are part of about 0.01% of the population that can even think. And ‘Systems Thinking ‘ is a rather advanced skill set that an even smaller subset of those people have mastered!

              BTW, Most economic theories are slightly better than astrology or voodoo!

            2. I don’t pretend to have mastered system thinking just maybe have gone further into it than most. The deeper I go the scarier things get so I throttle back a bit to keep my sanity.
              One thing I found out is that the Mad Hatter’s party is not at the bottom of the rabbit hole. It surrounds us on the surface.

              “BTW, Most economic theories are slightly better than astrology or voodoo!”
              I would be ROFL if it wasn’t so true. I look on classical economics as a camouflaged trap, humans are great at building traps even for themselves, maybe especially for themselves.

            3. , but it seems to me that battery storage of power from renewable energy (wind/solar) is far, far cheaper than using the atmosphere as a toilet for fossil fuel power.
              Well Said. I’d like to use that in a presentation.
              The only “real” battery that could ship within a week right now is the LG RESU. 10kWh. Life cycle costs is .50 kWh. Rooftop PV watt-hours are a nickel. So Storage 10 folds the cost. To be viable 24/365 you currently have to store thermally or shift loads. Backup costs are another matter.

              A 1500/1800 RPM speed Diesel Gen kWh’s are .25 or so. A home depot 3600 RPM noise generator is $1 to $2 kWh. Externalities cost not included, others and all life pay those.
              Externalities included – watt-hours from pb or cobalt batteries are the second most toxic energy there is, at least in North America where there is no responsibility for the safe isolation of the Neurotoxins. Electrical eChem storage has yet a long way to go. You’re rarely going to use chemical storage when it’s not viable on a daily basis Like to make hot water heater after the sun goes down. Almost all new systems will include load management as standard. It must be set up for positive results.

            4. I think the refurbishment of used EV batteries might help the home and business battery backup industry. Nissan is offering refurbished batteries (24 kWh) for about $2800. Once someone figures out how to adapt these, and possibly refurbish them too, we are probably looking at 24 kWh for under $4000.
              I could run my house for 6 to 8 days on that, even if the solar put out no energy. Typical house might go 2 or 3 if conservative. More if the sun comes out.

              “watt-hours from pb or cobalt batteries are the second most toxic energy there is, at least in North America where there is no responsibility for the safe isolation of the Neurotoxins. Electrical eChem storage has yet a long way to go”
              Have to disagree, Pb batteries not only are easily recyclable but you get some money. Laws require recycling. Large Li-ion batteries are not going to be dumped, too big, not like a cell phone battery. They will be recycled/handled.
              I worked with toxic/hazardous materials for decades and both the handling and waste control were excellent. Industry does a good job but mistakes are usually large in quantity, way bigger than thousands of batteries.
              If you are so worried about batteries, don’t even look at the chemical industry as a whole, you will crawl away shaking when you see what is handled every day and how much. We work with many thousands of tons of hazardous materials every day, not including fossil fuels. Spills and air releases are heavily monitored and fined.

              A big mistake made that involves huge numbers of people permanently was making building insulation using isocyanates. MDI and TDI are not always completely reacted and very dangerous to life. Did lots of work with them and polyurethanes.

              Chemistry, can’t live without it, can’t live with it.

            5. new battery tech is on the way – Long time coming. Availability and Lead times on current Li tech is limited. Lead cannot be recycled into a NEW Premium Storage Battery. Have to pay a lot for triple 9 purity for under 100 lb batteries. A starting battery can use recycled content and they test all over the map. The quality of Lead storage batteries is not what it used to be. Often we can not match up a set of L16’s even with a large selection. Lead prices are way up. We get thousands of dollars per month recycling storage batteries. A least one half ton 24V fork truck battery is the standard for a 8kW inverter.

            6. Availability and Lead times on current Li tech is limited. Lead cannot be recycled into a NEW Premium Storage Battery.

              That led me to think about lead times for lead recycling, done by a leading recycling company that has its headquarters in a LEED certified building. All of their lighting is LED and they don’t use any lead acid batteries for storage. And no, I’m not leading you on! 😉

            7. Study finds nearly 100 percent recycling rate for lead batteries

              Battery Council International (BCI), Chicago, and Essential Energy Everyday have released a study showing lead batteries have a recycling rate of 99.3 percent, making them the No. 1 recycled consumer product in the U.S.

              The groups say the near-perfect rate of recycling is attributed to industry investment in a closed loop collection and recycling system that keeps 1.7 million tons of batteries out of landfills annually.

              Thorsby continues, “On average, a new lead battery is comprised of more than 80 percent recycled lead battery material. Every part of the battery, from lead and plastic to sulfuric acid, is recyclable and reusable in manufacturing new batteries

              http://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/battery-council-international-lead-battery-recycling/

            8. Chemistry, can’t live without it, can’t live with it.

              Especially, ‘BIOCHEMISTRY’! 😉

              Think of all the chemical reactions and pathways involved when a King Cobra sinks its fangs into a large rat and injects it with a potent neurotoxin as it prepares to have it for its next meal…

            9. As Minchin says (yells) “IT’S ALL CHEMICALS” and, speaking of biochemistry,
              he also says that “your dog has a bigger carbon footprint than your 4WD”
              The Fence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGErC6QQdoc

              Don’t forget spiders that can produce 5 different types of silk on demand. Talk about a walking chemical production facility.

            10. “your dog has a bigger carbon footprint than your 4WD”

              Right, both we and our dogs are carbon based life forms. 😉

              Exhibit A) The Citric Acid Cycle, which is the central driver of cellular respiration.
              .

            11. Hey Fred, though not as complex the 4 WD uses oxidation of carbon based fuel from organic sources too. Difference is the freshness factor, been dead much longer. 🙂

            12. Rooftop solar for all your daytime needs. The grid, using daytime solar and wind to charge large flow batteries, to supply nighttime. By large I mean salt cavern scale, as mentioned elsewhere, and charge heftily for nighttime supply to encourage loads on daytime rooftop solar.

              NAOM

  7. Of Interest and amusment – Kaiser Report – Max’s Rant- 8:00 on.. Asia/China committed to Future Energy, US is dust. Fracking is dead – The NYT said so. At least some counter from Fracking has saved the apes. propaganda with a p. — but good numbers on EV Growth, etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pFxO-NQacE

    2. Hey at least they don’t have this to worry about…

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-12/florence-heads-for-duke-nuclear-reactors-near-carolina-s-coast?

      Hurricane Florence Heads for Duke Energy’s Nuclear Reactors

      Overall, there are at least nine nuclear facilities within Florence’s projected impact area.

      “Brunswick is closest to the eye, but every reactor exposed to hurricane-force winds will be shut down,” said Joey Ledford, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “We’ve got inspectors at every plant.”

      Still, the boiling water reactors used at Brunswick are similar to ones that melted down at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan in 2011, according to Edwin Lyman, a nuclear expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists. They have “a particular vulnerability to flooding,” he said.

      Federal regulators added measures to prevent a similar accident in the U.S., including re-evaluating flood risk. But if Florence “truly is significantly greater than anything experienced at these plants, it may exceed even their re-evaluated hazard,” Lyman said.

      1. If there is an incident it will kill nuclear power. Expect major cover ups.

        NAOM

        1. As much as I dislike older style nuclear power plants such as these, let’s hope there is no serious incident!

      2. Meanwhile, the natural gas fires in Massachusetts demonstrated how quickly the emergency response system can respond and also get stressed. A wider emergency would overwhelm the system as happened during Sandy when emergency response was shut down in many areas. You knew who to call but no one was coming out.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSb0_jcjGEA

  11. from here:
    http://www.angi.ru/news/

    Khanty-Mansiysk. The appearance of gas funnels on the Yamal Peninsula is associated with a warming in the Arctic. This was stated by Vladimir Melnikov, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, scientific director of the Academic Chair of Cryosophy of Tyumen State University.

    According to him, possible new emissions from the ground should be taken into account when building social and industrial infrastructure in the region.

    Recall that in 2014 in the area of ​​the Bovanenkovskoye field in Yamal were found two funnels, which are supposed to have appeared due to gas emissions, then filled with water, turning into lakes.

    In recent years, funnels have increased in size, and the water in them differs from nearby lakes by very high turbidity.

    Vladimir Melnikov noted that experts studying these natural phenomena are more often called their explosion funnels.

    “There is a huge amount of gas under a lot of pressure, which throws out a lot of ice, land … Initially, the depth of the funnel in the area of ​​the Bovanenkovo ​​field was 50-60 meters, it was not filled by that time with water, the diameter is also decent – under 40 meters. , but most importantly – its consequences, “- said the scientist.

    The accumulation of gases in the earth sooner or later leads to an excess of the rate of retention of this gas by the rocks, which leads to a powerful release.

    “We began to look at the shape of the funnels, discovering that there are hundreds of such lakes in Yamal, they are round, whereas in nature the lakes that are habitual to us are formed in a different way, there are no such lakes. The bulk of the lakes in Yamal are the results of either thawing, that is thermokarst, or funnel explosion, “- explained Melnikov.

    After their appearance in the area of ​​the Bovanenkovskoye field, gas emissions were recorded on the Gydan peninsula of the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous District, where experts also found several similar funnels. Many specialists became interested in these processes, studied them with the help of aerial and space imagery.

    The phenomenon is not a single one, and it is impossible to accurately name the gas that is thrown out at the time of the explosion, RIA Novosti writes.

    “It’s a gas that rises through the cracks in the frozen ground, which is not so dense.” There is too little organic matter for the methane to accumulate, and the depth is big. “Perhaps there was a screen in the ground, which for hundreds of years streamed down streams of natural gas from below , forming a mass with the pressure, which was enough to throw it up, “- suggested the academician.

    However, with the conclusions of colleagues that the cause of emissions was warming in these areas, he agrees, although research in this direction continues.

    “This is a warming cycle that we have already experienced, its journalists call global warming, which is wrong, because global warming lasts 11,000 years … Calling the 35-year cycle global is wrong, so we call it a cyclical warming, before which there was a cycle of cooling – from about 1946 to about 1980. The current warm cycle proved to be much warmer than the previous one, “said Vladimir Melnikov.

    According to him, this all coincided with a sharp warming in the Arctic, and the upper part of the permafrost heated more than usual, thereby reducing the density of the screen, which for many years held back gas underground. At the same time, the emergence of new funnels should be feared and, first of all, to study enterprises, authorities that build social, transport or industrial infrastructure on Yamal.

    “If it rages somewhere on the road or under the oil and gas refinery, it will not seem very much, for this reason, when research is conducted in the pre-project period, it is necessary to pay special attention to such anomalies that are most likely to be detected by one geophysical method or another” , – said Vladimir Melnikov.

    1. “This is a warming cycle that we have already experienced, its journalists call global warming, which is wrong, because global warming lasts 11,000 years … Calling the 35-year cycle global is wrong, so we call it a cyclical warming, before which there was a cycle of cooling – from about 1946 to about 1980. The current warm cycle proved to be much warmer than the previous one, “said Vladimir Melnikov.

      Perhaps something has either been lost in the translation or Russians are just as prone to climate change denialism as the rest of humanity! For starters, global warming does not last only 11,000 years! All one has to do is look at the Paleo Climatic record to know that is false. Perhaps what they are referring to is cyclical ice ages? Which is not the same as what we currently call global warming which is due mostly to increases in GHGs whether they be anthropogenic or due to other causes. See PETM for time scales involved.

      1. Russia, the story changes as climate change takes it’s toll.

        Yet until recently, tackling climate change was a low priority for the federal government. One reason is complacence, because Russia’s greenhouse gas emissions have already plummeted since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Another is political: Russia’s economy depends heavily on pumping oil and gas out of the ground. Many influential voices here routinely debunked climate change, and some Russian newspapers in recent years chalked up climate variability to a mythical U.S. weapon aimed at Russia, or as a foreign plot aimed at Russia’s energy exports.

        Sound familiar?

        http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/09/russia-wants-protect-itself-climate-change-without-reducing-carbon-emissions

        1. US blames China, Russia blames US. Who does China blame? I wonder how much of the climate change denialism, in the West, is due to the Russian troll factory?

          NAOM

  12. “Perhaps something has either been lost in the translation or Russians are just as prone to climate change denialism as the rest of humanity! For starters, global warming does not last only 11,000 years! ”
    —–
    I think. It is understood that last
    glacial period ended 11 thousand years ago

    1. I think. It is understood that last
      glacial period ended 11 thousand years ago

      Yes, and while the glacial periods end when warming occurs, I very specifically asked if that was what you are referring to?! Because ‘Global Warming’ due to green house gas emissions is a different and separate phenomenon that has causes and potential longer term duration, that lie outside the boundaries of typical glacial periods or ice ages as they are otherwise known.

      The closest analog that we know of, to what our planet is currently experiencing in terms of climate change, i.e. ‘Global Warming’ is the PETM, which may have had impacts that lasted about 200,000 years. Admittedly still merely a blink of an eye when considering geologic time scales.

      For reference, I’m talking about this, which is caused by release of massive amounts of green house gases into the atmosphere :
      https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00292-2
      A probabilistic assessment of the rapidity of PETM onset

      While you seem to be talking about this:
      A hypothesis put forth by the Serbian astronomer Milutin Milankovitch (also spelled Milanković) explains why Earth cycles in and out of glacials and interglacials.

      As the planet circles the sun, three factors affect how much sunlight it gets: its tilt (which ranges from 24.5 degrees to 22.1 degrees on a 41,000-year cycle); its eccentricity (the changing shape of its orbit around the sun, which ranges from a near-circle to an oval-like shape); and its wobble (one full wobble, which looks like a slowly spinning top, happens every 19,000 to 23,000 years), according to Milankovitch.

      1. 1. I am not the author of the article.
        2. I have no idea what the author thought about PTEM.
        3. I agree, greenhouse gases affect the warming of the climate.
        4.But, during the course of human life, warming will not have a strong value comparable with political factors (wars, revolutions, etc.) and with physical, particularly with depletion of the most important minerals such as oil, gas, copper, nickel, coal
        5. Due to the poor knowledge of English I can not continue communication. Please forgive me.
        Sincerely, Alexander.

        1. Due to the poor knowledge of English I can not continue communication. Please forgive me.
          Sincerely, Alexander.

          No problem! My knowledge of Russian is probably much less than your knowledge of English! I never hold a grudge because of language differences.
          Be well!

        2. “4.But, during the course of human life, warming will not have a strong value comparable with political factors (wars, revolutions, etc.) and with physical, particularly with depletion of the most important minerals such as oil, gas, copper, nickel, coal.”

          Opritov — No matter how you define ‘during the course of human life’ I strongly disagree with this statement.

          1. I also strongly disagreed with that point in particular but didn’t want to discuss it in more detail due to his comment about language difficulties. Though to be fair Google Translate does a reasonable job nowadays! It isn’t that difficult to use either.

            1. Okay. Let’s continue.
              If you are satisfied with Google translation.
              ““4.But, during the course of human life, warming will not have a strong value comparable with political factors (wars, revolutions, etc.) and with physical, particularly with depletion of the most important minerals such as oil, gas, copper, nickel, coal.”

              Opritov — No matter how you define ‘during the course of human life’ I strongly disagree with this statement.”
              —–
              Than we people are threatened with warming in the course of life (70 years)?
              -Will the temperature rise gradually on average during this time to 1-3 degrees Celsius.
              – The level of the ocean is 10 cm.
              -The climate will change, somewhere in the best direction, somewhere in the worst.
              In addition, with the depletion of hydrocarbons, the yield of CO2 will decrease, in 70 years I assume 50-80%.
              This will affect the main problem-overpopulation of the planet, which is good.
              –
              With the reduction of nuclear weapons and their further spread, a nuclear war became possible.
              What can lead to the degradation of mankind. The coming of the new “dark ages.”
              —
              Reducing the production of hydrocarbons will lead to economic, way of life, tsivilizatsi.Nu for example there will be nothing to heat and supply energy, food, big cities. Big cities will become unnecessary, because there are consumers.
              The number of products per person will decrease in multiples. What will lead to social wars. To wars in general

            2. Well, a series of papers, to appear in the Jan. 13 issue of the Jour. Phil. Trans. of the Royal Soc., looked at the likelihood and implications of warming well above the 2-degree threshold. The continued rise in greenhouse emissions in the past decade and the delays in a comprehensive global emissions reduction agreement have made achieving this target extremely difficult — arguably impossible.

            3. Than we people are threatened with warming in the course of life (70 years)?

              Yes, but it is important to understand what exactly that means and what the risks are.

              -Will the temperature rise gradually on average during this time to 1-3 degrees Celsius.
              – The level of the ocean is 10 cm.
              -The climate will change, somewhere in the best direction, somewhere in the worst.
              In addition, with the depletion of hydrocarbons, the yield of CO2 will decrease, in 70 years I assume 50-80%.
              This will affect the main problem-overpopulation of the planet, which is good.

              I think you are severely understimating the risks! And while I agree that reducing the overall impact of human population on the planet is a good thing, how that happens can be very bad for many people.
              I highly recommend reading the recent report titled: ‘WHAT LIES BENEATH; THE UNDERSTATEMENT OF
              EXISTENTIAL CLIMATE RISK’.

              If we use even the conservative IPCC scenarios we are already on course for an average global warming of between 3.5 to 4 °C by the end of this century. Note: that this warming is not uniform in all latitudes. Some regions will experience much higher average temperature than others. There are direct consequences of even this level of warming to many ecosystems such as coral reefs, tropical rain forests, artic tundra, permafrost, etc… It also has direct impacts on plant physiology and consequently global agriculture especially on corn, grain and rice production.

              This does not even begin to take into consideration various potential feedbacks and tipping points such as an ice free Arctic ocean in the summer, or melting of the permafrost with massive subsequent releases of CO2 and CH4. All of which would cause even greater increases in temperature with more feedbacks. More severe storms, hurricanes, more drought more floods and more impacts on agriculture and ecosystems in an ever increasing spiral of devastation. And I haven’t even mentioned sea level rise and the displacment of millions of people from coastal regions causing increasing social stress, riots, local wars etc…
              To be clear, my description above is not even a worst case scenario.

              with the reduction of nuclear weapons and their further spread, a nuclear war became possible.
              What can lead to the degradation of mankind. The coming of the new “dark ages.”

              Unfortunately this is a real possibility! How humanity reacts to our common global dilemmas will in large part decide our collective fate. Perhaps we will find some common ground and realize that hiding our heads in the sand will not solve any problems!
              —
              Reducing the production of hydrocarbons will lead to economic, way of life, tsivilizatsi.Nu for example there will be nothing to heat and supply energy, food, big cities. Big cities will become unnecessary, because there are consumers.
              The number of products per person will decrease in multiples. What will lead to social wars. To wars in general

              Again, this is what may happen. but continuing to do things as we are now, is also a guarantee of failure for all of civilization. So either we come up with new ideas for harnessing energy, reducing our impact on the environment and finding ways to co-operate with each other or we are simply not going to survive!

              Удачи нам всем!

            4. “If we use even the conservative IPCC scenarios we are already on course for an average global warming of between 3.5 to 4 °C by the end of this century. ”
              –

              “This does not even begin to take into consideration various potential feedbacks and tipping points such as an ice free Arctic ocean in the summer, or melting of the permafrost with massive subsequent releases of CO2 and CH4. All of which would cause even greater increases in temperature with more feedbacks. More severe storms, hurricanes, more drought more floods and more impacts on agriculture and ecosystems in an ever increasing spiral of devastation. And I haven’t even mentioned sea level rise and the displacment of millions of people from coastal regions causing increasing social stress, riots, local wars etc…
              To be clear, my description above is not even a worst case scenario.”
              —
              I really hope that this will not happen. There is no scientific evidence.
              A lot of factors affecting the situation. To calculate the effect of each is not possible. This means simply baseless assumptions
              _______________
              “Unfortunately this is a real possibility! How humanity reacts to our common global dilemmas will in large part decide our collective fate. Perhaps we will find some common ground and realize that hiding our heads in the sand will not solve any problems!”
              —
              I think the situation in the world depends entirely on understanding responsibility for the fate of the world from the leadership of the United States.
              _____________
              “Reducing the production of hydrocarbons will lead to economic, way of life, tsivilizatsi.Nu for example there will be nothing to heat and supply energy, food, big cities. Big cities will become unnecessary, because there are consumers.
              The number of products per person will decrease in multiples. What will lead to social wars. To wars in general

              Again, this is what may happen. but continuing to do things as we are now, is also a guarantee of failure for all of civilization. So either we come up with new ideas for harnessing energy, reducing our impact on the environment and finding ways to co-operate with each other or we are simply not going to survive!”
              —-
              I believe that nothing can be changed.
              -oil, gas and coal will be extracted depending on the economic situation and until 2030 the peak of consumption will be passed, thus the anthropogenic impact on the palanet will begin to decline.
              -The forest in Amazonia and southern Asia-will be destroyed, they will plant squares with corn and oil palms.
              -Many industrial enterprises will not become necessary, there will be no demand, and so capitalization will collapse, a crisis will begin.
              I hope for pragmatic volitional decisions on resolving the crisis on the part of governments. Understanding them, what must be done.
              Of course I can be wrong.
              I wish everyone good luck!
              —

            5. I really hope that this will not happen. There is no scientific evidence.
              A lot of factors affecting the situation. To calculate the effect of each is not possible. This means simply baseless assumptions

              No they are not baseless assumptions. They are serious attempts at risk assessment and are based on sound scientific evidence from many different fields. If you are interested there are many sources of information to check. You could do worse than read the IPCC Summaries. Followed by the report I suggested above. Here is a link to it.
              http://climateextremes.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/What-Lies-Beneath-V3-LR-Blank5b15d.pdf

              Cheers!

          2. I consider climate change an existential threat for the entire planet, not only for humankind, but that bullet has already been fired and there’s no dodging it. The only question is if we will continue making it worse over time. A lot of experts are warning that we are already commited to go over a tipping point that will take us to the hothouse, pretty much as in the PETM.

            However I agree with Opritov Alexander that the impact of Peak Oil (followed by Peak Everything) is going to be felt a lot more acutely and drastically by humans. I saw what happened in Greece during the worse of the debt crisis. Now multiply that a hundred times. We are going to reach Peak People and a horde of desperate people will descend on the natural world trying to eke a subsistence. Every tree they can put their hands on will be cut. Every animal will be eaten. Society will disappear in anarchy. I guess nobody will be worried about the climate anymore even as it proceeds changing the planet into a completely different one.

            Industrial civilization is not going to die the slow climate change death. It will be overcome by the economic crisis after Peak Oil, followed by financial crisis and finally monetary crisis. With decreasing oil production it will be impossible to recover for a very long time.

            When the oil price crashed in 2014 I saw it coming. I said, “man, this is the beginning of the end.” I predicted that oil production would reach a limit by 2015 (slightly off on that, but not by much). Then oil price would increase and increase and increase leading to the next global crisis. No complete recovery after that one either, and by 2030-32 it will be the end of everything as realization comes that our economy has peaked and it is downward all the time.

            “Apocalypse Please”

            declare this an emergency
            come on and spread a sense of urgency
            and pull us through
            and pull us through
            and this is the end
            this is the end of the world

            it’s time we saw a miracle
            come on it’s time for something biblical
            to pull us through
            and pull us through
            and this is the end
            this is the end of the world

            proclaim eternal victory
            come on and change the course of history
            and pull us through
            and pull us through
            and this is the end
            this is the end of the world

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFrl01aPPkA

        3. Perhaps you can provide a link direct to the story, I only know very few words of Russian so cannot identify the story from your link. Perhaps there are others here who can help with the translation.

          I can’t help wondering if this phenomena may occur in Alaska, maybe linked to a drill site. If one of these holes appeared under a production site…

          NAOM

  13. My energy efficient cottage:

    I designed and built an energy efficient cottage this summer for a friend of mine who is 78 and crippled up. He used to live at my son’s place but the caretaker shack became more shack than home. I used saved up construction supplies, local milled timber, and discounted const grade materials from a local building supply store. (Manager a friend of mine). The deal I made with the tenant is that he had to pay for the well and handle storage problems for all his stuff. (packrat). His shop was previously built on yellow cedar skids, so we were able to tow it in with a 4 wheel drive 580 Case. I also built a new 11 cord woodshed. All structures have green metal roofing. The well and pump, etc cost him $1700 and he spent several thousand for a large insulated C can which is hidden behind some trees. He calls it his gold room. He also bought a new woodstove. In return for his purchases he receives rent at $350/month for as long as he might live…which I hope is many many years. We have an old friend of ours to come in to clean for 1 hour, every two weeks. This takes care of any build up of grime, etc.

    The design is open, with a 10′ vaulted t&g pine ceiling. All lighting is LED, some of the fixtures I designed and built. All electrical is to code and I installed 200 amp service, underground. (This is in case I ever add on). I did my own septic installation. The biggest expense was BC Hydro because I had to buy a pole and transformer, plus pay for hookup, 200′ underground, etc. I also ran pipe and wires for telephone, cable, + a fish string for future considerations. Anyway, the place is a beautiful little gem and people come and look at it because of the design and location. Siding: smart board and old growth yellow cedar board and batten with red cedar gable highligts. Insulation: r 30 ceiling, r20 walls and floor. Windows: double pain recycled. Cabinets: recycled and restored. Combo bathroom and laundry room. Pumphouse attached to back side behind laundry room and it also holds the hw tank. The longest water line run is 20′ to the kitchen sink…through the insulated walls. The shower/tub and washer…vanity etc have about a 10′ run. heat: in wall fan electric with a woodstove central to main room + overhead circulating fan. Electric HW, Range, plus he runs a small freezer in addition to his fridge. With the attached pumphouse (also seperately heated to avoid freezing) total square footage is 700′. The outbuildings are in addition to it. His shop sports a welder, metal lathe, and other assoreted power tools he uses.

    The big deal? The hydro bill. His daily consumption/average works out to $1.01 per day!!!! He runs the electric heaters for 10 minutes every morning until he gets his woodstove going. With minus temps and longer nights coming, I expect this to rise to maybe $1.75 per day. In BC this is, of course, all renewable.

    I will attach a pic, but I have since installed bluestone for the driveway and a chimney ladder on the roof, etc. The mountain behind is about 4500′. The cabin sits on 16 acres.

    I had trouble with a pic so…….. (it couldn’t/didn’t post and I fiddled with it as long as I had patience)

    1. I had trouble with a pic so…….. (it couldn’t/didn’t post and I fiddled with it as long as I had patience)

      Oh yeah! there is a file size limit to post images here. About 45 Kb is a safe max size, I believe.

      Don’t feel bad though, even with 35 plus years of computer graphics experience, I still occasionally stumble and have to go back to the drawing board when I try to post an image!

      Cheers!

  14. NEW GLOBAL STUDY REVEALS THE ‘STAGGERING’ LOSS OF FORESTS CAUSED BY INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE

    “A new analysis of global forest loss—the first to examine not only where forests are disappearing, but also why—reveals just how much industrial agriculture is contributing to the loss. The answer: some 5 million hectares—the area of Costa Rica—every year. And despite years of pledges by companies to help reduce deforestation, the amount of forest cleared to plant oil palm and other booming crops remained steady between 2001 and 2015.”

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/09/scientists-reveal-how-much-world-s-forests-being-destroyed-industrial-agriculture

  15. HURRICANE FLORENCE IS 50 MILES LARGER, WITH 50% MORE RAIN, THANKS TO CLIMATE CHANGE

    “For the first time, researchers have calculated the impact of climate change on a hurricane before the storm is over. Hurricane Florence, they found, will grow about 50 miles (80 kilometers) larger and will dump 50 percent more rain over a period from Sept. 11 to Sept. 16 than it would have in a world before climate change.”

    https://www.space.com/41838-hurricane-florence-bigger-due-to-climate-change.html

  16. Beyond BAU? (or maybe BAU ++)

    ADANI’S GIANT COAL MINE GRANTED UNLIMITED WATER LICENSE FOR 60 YEARS

    “The proposed Adani coal mine, which will be Australia’s biggest, has been granted unlimited access to groundwater by the Queensland government in a move farmers fear will drain huge amounts of water from the Great Artesian Basin. According to a copy of Adani’s water licence signed last Wednesday and obtained by Fairfax Media, the $16 billion Carmichael mine merely needs to monitor and report the amount of water it extracts under a permit that runs until 2077. The mine – one of nine proposed for the Galilee Basin west of Rockhampton – can conduct its own review of its groundwater model without independent or government oversight. There are also no impact levels specified that will trigger a halt to mining, and the company is able to offset any significant water loss elsewhere, the license shows.

    According to a supplementary environmental impact statement, the mine will draw 26 million litres of water a day from its pits by as it ramps out annual production to as much as 60 million tonnes. “In granting this license, the Dept. of Natural Resources and Mines has carefully considered a broad range of information,” a spokesperson said, adding modelling shows that as much as 4.55 gigalitres of groundwater could be taken per year.”

    https://www.smh.com.au/environment/barbaric-adanis-giant-coal-mine-granted-unlimited-water-licence-for-60-years-20170404-gvd41y.html

    1. WOW! You really have to seriously wonder what these people are smoking!
      60 years?!!!! That’s almost 2080. You have to have been living under a rock, or a mountain of coal, to be that delusional…

      I chalk it up to another example of what Daniel Kahneman calls the inside-outside view of the planning fallacy!

      At this point in the 21st century, understanding what that is and how it affects our thinking and decision making, should be mandatory for all leaders be they academics, politicians, economists or CEOs.

      If you don’t get it, that’s ok here’s a sledge hammer, go over to that pile of rocks over there, and start breaking them, because you are simply not qualified to make decisions as a leader!

    2. Uh, oh, the Austrailians are not doing the math. The cost per ton is about $117.
      That produces about 2400 kWh. That is about a nickel a kWh not including transport costs or maintenance/infrastructure costs. Renewables are about half that.
      Seems like they are trying to sell countries something that costs more than twice as much before any externalities are added in to the equation.
      What happens when the buyers start to smarten up? Do they just close the mine or cut back and use it at home?

      But then again I read somewhere that Bangladesh is adding coal power, a country that will suffer from both heat and rising oceans. Not too sensible.
      https://www.export.gov/article?id=Bangladesh-Power-and-energy
      https://www.powerengineeringint.com/articles/2018/05/2bn-coal-fired-power-plant-set-for-bangladesh.html

      A world of much non-sense. But most anything can be justified with the right people in place.

      1. Uh, oh, the Australians are not doing the math.

        Some Australians, the ones in the leadership of the coalition federal government are purposefully ignoring the math. From reneweconomy.com.au Giles Parkinson wrote an article earlier today:

        The case for renewables has never been stronger, says Deloitte study

        He starts the article by writing:

        The latest report from accounting giant Deloitte’s Renewable Energy series declares something that too many people in high places in Australia don’t want to hear: “The case for renewables has never been stronger.”

        On September 12 the same author wrote the article:

        Victoria renewables auction points to another fall in wind and solar costs

        The Victoria government may not have been upfront about the fine details and costs of its ground-breaking renewable energy auction, but there is enough information floating around to suggest that another significant fall in the cost of wind and solar in Australia has occurred.

        The auction was the largest ever renewables auction in Australia, seeking 650MW in capacity. The results were so good, and the prices so low, that 928MW of wind and solar will be built as a result – although it should be pointed out that not all of that capacity is actually contracted.

        Only 121MW of the 336MW Dundonnel wind farm, for instance, is contracted to this scheme, it now emerges. The rest of that wind farm’s output will be sold on the wholesale market, or contracted to other buyers.

        But while Victoria has chosen – unlike the ACT government that ran the country’s first renewable energy auctions – to keep the actual prices and contracts hidden from view, we know enough to suggest that the state has secured a large part of its wind capacity at an effective price of below $50/MWh.

        And solar is not far behind. According to developers and proponents, it has fallen from about $70-$75/MWh a year ago in Victoria to the mid $50s/MWh. In other states with better solar resources, such as Queensland and South Australia, the talk is that the cost of solar is trying to nudge $40/MWh and below.

        That’s a remarkable prospect that is confirmed by the assessment of UK billionaire Sanjeev Gupta, who recently suggested that would be the sort of price of solar submitted in any auction for “dispatchable” energy conducted by the federal government. It’s a price that puts new coal, let alone gas, well out of the ball park.

        This is the extraordinary situation facing Australia’s policy debate, and the energy industry. Almost everyone now recognises that wind and solar costs continue to fall faster than imagined – as they always have – and the addition of storage and smart technologies like batteries and demand response will accelerate the transition.

        This is one of the reasons that utilities and most big business are desperate for some sort of national policy to be put in place. They don’t believe for a minute the ridiculous modelling put forward by the Energy Security Board that the investment in large-scale wind and solar could have been brought to a halt for a whole decade by the National Energy Guarantee.

        But they do want measures to be put in place to bring about some sort of orderly transition – partly to defend their own assets, partly to avoid surges in costs and prices brought about by any free-for-all on policy. The fact the Coalition is dominated by ministers and MPs who don’t believe there is or will be a transition, and want to focus only on “fair dinkum” power, is not helping.

        Parkinson is clearly frustrated with the stance of the coalition government but, until the electorate in Australia ignores the propaganda being foisted on them by the Murdoch owned media among others and puts global warming and energy policy front and center as election issues, Australia will be saddled with the government they have. Bear in mind that despite the best efforts of the Australian federal government, renewables are experiencing an unprecedented boom with total solar installs (including utility scale) expected to morde than double the 1.3 GW of PV installed in 2017. (See Australia could be 100% renewable by 2030s, meet Paris targets by 2025).

  18. Interesting report on Utility-Scale Solar (in the US) from Lawrence Berkeley National Labs, summarised by PV Magazine.

    US southeastern states take the lead in utility-scale solar as interconnection queues swell to 188 GW (w/charts)

    As a further sign that solar is going mainstream across the United States, a new report by Lawrence Berkeley National Labs finds that southeastern states hosted 40% of the utility-scale solar installed nationally in 2017. Interconnection queues have swelled to 188.5 GW of utility solar capacity, eight times more than installed capacity

    Regions outside of California and the Southwest accounted for the lion’s share at 70% of all new utility-scale PV capacity additions in 2017, according to the new Utility Scale Solar report from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL).

    1. Islandboy, This is right up your alley.
      https://www.greentechmedia.com/podcast/the-energy-gang
      Sunnova podcast
      Sunnova is teaming up with ENPH to deploy 50k (my Guess) IQ8 standalone Microinverters.
      The firmware is tweaked for dirty/unstable generator power drop in to immediately save diesel with an eye for future drop in storage as it becomes available.
      There is some discussion on the Partnership in the comments in atricles following ENPH.
      https://seekingalpha.com/symbol/ENPH?s=enph

  20. I do think that offshore wind will grow to be a big industry, as this author suggests.
    https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2018/09/building-americas-regional-offshore-wind-powerhouses-10-gws-counting.html

    The USA, among others, has the potential for very substantial energy production.
    The magnitude will be much greater if deep water production can be pulled off at reasonable price.
    Here is one company working hard in this sector-
    http://www.principlepowerinc.com/en/windfloat

    That company is one of a consortium chosen to take a first crack at offshore wind development in the incredibly windy zone off the northern Calif coast out of Eureka. Eventually this zone may grow to the magnitude of the big NW hydroelectric resource.
    https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/california-chooses-floating-offshore-wind-technology

  21. I suppose this is applicable to oil side but….

    GLOBAL OIL DISCOVERIES SEE REMARKABLE RECOVERY IN 2018

    “An uptick of 30% from the abnormally low levels in 2017 might seem encouraging, but E&P players are currently facing a low reserve replacement ratio, on average of less than 10%. This is worrisome considering the impact on global oil supply in long term,” says Espen Erlingsen, Head of Upstream Research at Rystad Energy.

    https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Global-Oil-Discoveries-See-Remarkable-Recovery-In-2018.html

    1. Those physicists better get cracking. We need a gravity reverser fast, so every hill is downhill no matter which way you go. 🙂

  22. Do events like these get added to the costs of natural gas?
    Houses and buildings burning and exploding because a reducing valve failed for an undisclosed reason.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0E5a8Co8jc

    Nice knowing one’s house is a potential bomb because the pressure can rise suddenly. No pressure sensor after the reducer with automatic shut off on the main? What would have occurred if the valve went in the middle of the night instead of afternoon when people were awake and possibly not even at home?

    This describes natural gas reducer safety systems.
    https://www.fiorentini.com/us/en/product/completesolutions/gas-compressor-stations/prms

    There are over 2 million miles of natural gas distribution and service pipelines in the country. Is anyone checking to see if they have up to date and operational safety systems?

    This is what is supposed to happen. How could a three point safety system fail?
    Once the gas is delivered to the local gas utility at the city gate, the gas utility’s control center monitors
    flow rates and pressures at various points in its system. The operators must ensure that the gas
    reaches each customer with sufficient flow rate and pressure to fuel equipment and appliances. They
    also ensure that the pressure stays below the maximum pressure for each segment of the system. As
    gas flows through the system, regulators control the flow from higher to lower pressures. If a regulator
    senses that the pressure has dropped below a set point it will open accordingly to allow more gas to
    flow. Conversely, when pressure rises above a set point, the regulator will close to adjust. As an added
    safety feature, relief valves are installed on pipelines to vent gas if a line becomes over pressured and
    the regulators malfunction.
    http://pstrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2015-PST-Briefing-Paper-02-NatGasBasics.pdf

    1. My first reaction was- cyberhacked. I still suppose that is one possibility.

  23. I know Dennis keeps assuring us deficits don’t matter but is it true, really true? Maybe Watcher is right, if you want more money all you have to do is just keep printing the stuff.

    US DEFICIT TO APPROACH $1TN AFTER TRUMP TAX CUTS AND SPENDING BILL

    “Many economists believe that if deficits continue to rise and the national debt grows, government borrowing will “crowd out” private lending and force up interest rates. If interest rates go up, the government would have to pay much more to finance the more than $14tn in treasury debt held by investors.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/apr/09/us-deficit-trump-tax-cuts-trillion-cbo-projection

    1. The big question for the wealthiest nation in the world is why are we running a deficit at all?

      World problems in debt. Large debt in a tightening world is like a person having a bleeding wound and not taking care of it. A lot of unnecessary weakness ensues, making survival tougher by the day.

        1. Very amusing. I think I prefer to live here over Qatar.
          Qatar has about the same income inequality as the US, not good. South Africa is one of the worst.
          Back to the sand soon for all petro states that don’t go renewable fast.

          Edit: You are right though, for what the US is and what we have to put up with, we are a poor nation across much of it’s area.

          1. Qatar has about the same income inequality as the US, not good.

            Exactly!

            The inequality of the wealth distribution is not accurately reflected in the GDP per capita numbers. Vast areas of the US are worse off than many third world countries. Not exactly something to be very proud of!

        2. Well, Norway, with 5 million souls, is certainly one of the richer countries (per capita), by almost every measure. The wealth gap is small, and people are happy. The education system is excellent (though not as good as Finland). Some of you will like that Norway has the world’s largest registered stock of plug-in EVs per capita. BTW, Norway sports the highest vertical rock face in Europe — Trollveggen and Trollryggen above the Rauma in Romsdalen (I’m a former keen rock climber. 😉 ).

      2. Because we don’t bother to collect taxes. Pretty much the Greece scenario. Also Americans seem to have a hard time making good decisions about big investments. For example Trump’s Wall is a completely incompetent way to try to reduce the number of illegal immigrants, because most of them cross the border legally and overstay their visas. But nobody seems to grasp this. The same problems exists in the military, where trillions are spent doing nothing in particular, and in infrastructure spending, where poor planning has pretty much bankrupted every city in the country, and vastly oversized highways are crumbling because they are worthless.

        But The US budget deficit is a smaller problem than the foreign trade deficit. That is where people should be focused. And the solution is also raising taxes, especially on oil. This would shift the country away from overconsumption and back on track for higher savings.

  24. The Miracle of the Mundane
    In an excerpt from her new essay collection, Heather Havrilesky calls for tuning out the online cacophony telling us we aren’t enough, and tuning in to the soul-affirming, quiet truth of the present moment.

    https://longreads.com/2018/09/14/the-miracle-of-the-mundane/

    On a bad day, all of humanity’s failures feel unbearably personal: coyotes wandering city streets due to encroaching wildfires, American citizens in Puerto Rico enduring another day without electricity or potable water in the wake of Hurricane Maria, neo-Nazis spouting hatred in American towns, world leaders testing missiles that would bring the deaths of millions of innocent people. We encounter bad news in the intimate glow of our cell phone screens, and then project our worries onto the flawed artifacts of our broken world: the for lease sign on the upper level of the strip mall, the crow picking at a hamburger wrapper in the gutter, the pink stucco walls of the McMansion flanked by enormous square hedges, the blaring TVs on the walls of the local restaurant. On bad days, each moment is haunted by a palpable but private sense of dread. We feel irrelevant at best, damned at worst. Our only hope is to numb and distract ourselves as well as we can on our long, slow march to the grave.

    It’s even worse on a bad day, when humankind’s creations fill us with the sense that we are failing as a people, as a planet, and nothing can be done about it. The chafing smooth jazz piped into the immaculate coffee joint, the fake cracks painted on the wall at the Cheesecake Factory, the smoke from fires burning thousands of acres of dry tinder, blotting out the sun — they remind us that even though our planet is in peril, we are still being teased and flattered into buying stuff that we don’t need, or coaxed into forgetting the truth about our darkening reality. As the crowd around us watches a fountain dance to Frank Sinatra’s “Somewhere Beyond the Sea” at the outdoor mall, we peek at our phones and discover the bellowed warnings of an erratic foreign leader, threatening to destroy us from thousands of miles away. Everything cheerful seems to have an ominous shadow looming behind it now. The smallest images and bits of news can feel so invasive, so frightening. They erode our belief in what the world can and should be.

    But human beings are not stupid. We can detect muddled and self-serving intentions in the artifacts we encounter. Even so, such works slowly infect us with their lopsided values. Eventually, we can’t help but imagine that this is the only way to proceed: by peddling your own wares at the expense of the wider world. Can’t we do better than this, reach for more, insist on more? Why does our culture make us feel crazy for trying?

  25. How MethaneSAT is different from other satellites

    MethaneSAT could help us measure methane pollution from oil and gas facilities worldwide with both broad scope and exacting precision.

    https://www.edf.org/climate/how-methanesat-is-different

    EPA May Slash Obama-Era Methane Restrictions: Report

    The Trump administration’s move is the latest effort to undo much of Barack Obama’s work to address climate change.

    While methane makes up only about 10 percent of those emissions, the gas is about 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

    Current rules mandate energy companies inspect their drilling operations as often as every six months, and those found to be leaking methane must be repaired within 30 days. The proposed plan would allow well owners to space out inspections to just once per year, or even once every two years, and double the allotted time to fix leaks to 60 days.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-administration-methane-restrictions_us_5b972695e4b0511db3e561ef

    1. Methane pollution from oil and gas facilities may soon pale in comparison with Arctic sources.

      RETREAT OF ICE RELEASES GREENHOUSE GAS

      “The scale and volume of the methane release has astonished the head of the Russian research team who has been surveying the seabed of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf off northern Russia for nearly 20 years. In an interview with The Independent, Igor Semiletov, of the Far Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said that he has never before witnessed the scale and force of the methane being released from beneath the Arctic seabed.”

      https://www.commondreams.org/news/2011/12/14/shock-retreat-arctic-sea-ice-releases-deadly-greenhouse-gas

  26. I have a practical/personal question for everyone.

    I just graduated with a Bachelor’s Degree in History, and it looks like I am going to be starting a career as an underwriter with an insurance company. I believe this company will help pay for further education; I would like to take advantage of that to get some sort of graduate degree that would provide me with useful data analysis/modeling/statistics abilities. I think that would be both useful for career advancement and fun; I would love to be able to churn out graphs like Ron and Dennis do.

    What sorts of graduate programs would you guys suggest I look in to? As of now, this certificate has my eye: https://catalog.unomaha.edu/graduate/degree-programs-certificates-minors/management-information-systems/data-analytics-certificate/#requirementstext

    1. CJS, you don’t need any degree to churn out graphs. All you need is a program that will do it. I use Excel. That is part of Microsoft Office. It is unbelievably easy. Just put your data in columns, along with the dates, either horizontal or vertical, it does not matter. Highlight the data and dates, then click “insert”, then click “recommended charts”. It will take you just a few minutes to get the hang of it.

      I once tried insurance underwriting. Back then we called ourselves “insurance salesmen”. I failed miserably at it. Then about 20 years later I tried becoming a stockbroker. That’s another term for salesman. I failed just as miserably. Then I got back into the computer business, a business I had been in since I got out of service in1964, except for the couple of months I tried insurance underwriting. My title was “Computer Field Service Engineer”. That’s another term for “computer repairman”. I did not fail at that job, I was really good at it, and I loved it. (That was in the days of the giant mainframes.) But I was not going to get rich in that business. I thought I was going to get rich as a stockbroker. And I might have except for the fact that I am a terrible salesman. Also, I was just not a good liar, which is a prerequisite for becoming a successful stockbroker.

      1. I was being a little facetious about the graphs part. I’m particularly interested in getting the maths/statistics skills required to really understand and analyze big data sets. A buddy of mine has the skills I’m thinking of, but he also has a Ph.D in Astrophysics….

        I sure hope underwriting isn’t too heavy on the sales; I just quit a tech sales job to get out of that racket. I think the way this company is set up, I work with agents who do the actual selling. A degree of separation would be nice.

        Where did you go from being a stockbroker?

      2. Insurance salesman and underwriter are two different beasts. The underwriter analyses the risks and sets the rates and will accept, decline or modify what the salesman sells. Find a lean on your policy or extra charge – that is the underwriter at work.

        NAOM

    2. I would love to be able to churn out graphs like Ron and Dennis do.

      Churning out graphs is the easy part. Even Astrologers do it! But their graphs, while impressive looking, are still meaningless because they are based on pseudoscience.

      Having said that, anything mathematics based, say a solid foundation in statistics or something that develops your analytical or critical thinking skills would probably serve you well regardless of what the future may hold.

      As for the rest, pretty much what Ron said. I never liked being in sales either, lying was never my forte!

      Cheers!

      1. Thanks for the advice. Maybe just studying statistics would be the best route. Hmm….

        1. Make sure your maths is up to scratch then apply a liberal coating of statistics. Statistics will be hard without a solid maths base – been there!

          NAOM

    1. To the tune of: Where have all the flowers gone? by Peter Paul and Mary.

      Where have all the icebergs gone, long time passing?
      Where have all the icebergs gone, long time ago?
      Where have all the icebergs gone?
      Our emisions have melted them, every one.
      Oh, when will we ever learn?
      Oh, when will we ever learn?

      Where have all the emisions gone, long time passing?
      Where have all the emisions gone, long time ago?
      Where have all the emisions gone?
      Gone to the atmosphere, the only one.
      Oh, when will we ever learn?
      Oh, when will we ever learn?

            1. Horse With No Name

              “After two days in the desert sun
              My skin began to turn red
              After three days in the desert fun
              I was looking at a river bed
              And the story it told of a river that flowed
              Made me sad to think it was dead…”

              White Rabbit

              “When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead
              And the white knight is talking backwards
              And the red queen’s off with her head
              Remember what the dormouse said
              Feed your head, feed your head”

        2. Yeah I like the rhythm of that but IMHO, the lyrics do leave a bit to be desired.

          In any case, I intended the Iceberg lyrics as sort of an homage to Mary Travers who passed on this very day back in 2009. While also mourning the end of an epoch as well. We are entering new and uncharted waters. (pun intended)

          1. Arctic Chorus

            I’m too hot (hot damn)
            Called a scientist and a engineer
            I’m too hot (hot damn)
            Make a icecap wanna retire man
            I’m too hot (hot damn)
            Say my name you know who I am
            I’m too hot (hot damn)
            Am I bad ’bout that monkey, bring it down

            Humans hit your hallelujah (whoo)
            Humans hit your hallelujah (whoo)
            Humans hit your hallelujah (whoo)
            ‘Cause upArctic funk gon’ give it to you
            ‘Cause upArctic funk gon’ give it to you
            ‘Cause upArctic funk gon’ give it to you
            It’s really late and we in the spot
            Don’t believe me just watch (come on)

            Don’t believe me just watch uh
            Don’t believe me just watch
            Don’t believe me just watch
            Don’t believe me just watch
            Don’t believe me just watch
            Hey, hey, hey, oh no

            1. Ok! Guess I was watching the girl and not paying enough attention to lyrics. You win this one!
              Cheers!

    1. Thinking inside the box again. Same old song, same old beat. Rinse and repeat.
      It never was population or energy, it’s always been technology.

    2. Can wealth continue to grow?
      What this means is that we must continue to grow our capacity to consume primary energy reserves just to grow our wealth. We should never conclude that growth can’t continue over coming decades, as some claim in perennial doomsday predictions.
      Bold mine.

      Really?! I conclude exactly the opposite, I guess I must be defective!

      It’s just that there is nothing stronger than inertia to guarantee that it will. The water wheel in the picture above can rot or the river can dry. Hurricane low pressures can dissolve. For us, continued consumption growth may quite plausibly become too difficult due to depletion of energy and mineral reserves or accelerating environmental disasters such as climate change. If this happens, all our efforts to produce growth can be expected to be more than offset by decay.

      Well Du uh!

      http://www.uni-kiel.de/ecology/users/fmueller/salzau2006/ea_presentations/Data/2006-05-24_-_Thermodynamics_I.pdf

      Thermodynamics 101
      Presentation given in the course of the
      Master’s Programme Environmental Management
      – Module 2.1.1 “Ecosystem Analysis” –
      Aiko Huckauf
      Ecology Centre Kiel
      2006-05-24

      http://www.uni-kiel.de/ecology/users/fmueller/salzau2006/ea_presentations/Data/2006-07-05_-_Thermodynamics_II.pdf

      Ecosystem Thermodynamics
      Presentation given in the course of the
      Master’s Programme
      Environmental Management
      – Module 2.1.1 “Ecosystem Analysis” –
      Aiko Huckauf
      Ecology Centre Kiel
      2006-07-05

      Thermodynamics is a terrible game:
      0. You have to play.
      1. You cannot win.
      2. You cannot break even—except on a very cold day.
      3. It does not get that cold.

      Cheers!

      1. Why Growth Can’t Be Green
        By Jason Hickel

        https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/12/why-growth-cant-be-green/

        Warnings about ecological breakdown have become ubiquitous. Over the past few years, major newspapers, including the Guardian and the New York Times, have carried alarming stories on soil depletion, deforestation, and the collapse of fish stocks and insect populations. These crises are being driven by global economic growth, and its accompanying consumption, which is destroying the Earth’s biosphere and blowing past key planetary boundaries that scientists say must be respected to avoid triggering collapse.

        Many policymakers have responded by pushing for what has come to be called “green growth.” All we need to do, they argue, is invest in more efficient technology and introduce the right incentives, and we’ll be able to keep growing while simultaneously reducing our impact on the natural world, which is already at an unsustainable level. In technical terms, the goal is to achieve “absolute decoupling” of GDP from the total use of natural resources, according to the U.N. definition.

        It sounds like an elegant solution to an otherwise catastrophic problem. There’s just one hitch: New evidence suggests that green growth isn’t the panacea everyone has been hoping for. In fact, it isn’t even possible.

        1. Those studies discussed are optimistic in assuming that a choice will be made to do something other than BAU but they also miss that 1) The earth is degrading so the sustainable amount that can be extracted is declining every year, 2) Climate change related losses and infrastructure decay will mean more extraction is required just to stand still, 3) EORI and declining ore concentrations etc. means more and more must be extracted to get the same amount of usable resource.

          1. Ouch…

            Damn The Matrix also carried the article…

            It’s disheartening to read passages from some people such as to the effect that ‘solar panels are required across only 1300 square miles or kilometers, compared with much larger expanses for pre-existing fossil fuel infrastructure’. It’s as if some sort of reset button has been pushed in their heads and Earth is cleansed of ‘everything FF-BAU’ and again pristine and ready to accept all this new infrastructure and related activity…

            “Clickety-click, Barba trick.”

            “Barbapapa himself is a generally papaya-shaped, pink shapeshifting blob-like creature who stumbles upon the human world and tries to fit in. The shapeshifting is usually accompanied by the saying ‘Clickety Click—Barba Trick’, or in the 1970s British dub ‘All Change!’ “

        2. It sounds like an elegant solution to an otherwise catastrophic problem. There’s just one hitch: New evidence suggests that green growth isn’t the panacea everyone has been hoping for. In fact, it isn’t even possible.

          There are not now, nor have there ever been, ‘Elegant Solutions’ to the multiple dilemmas wrapped in conundrums that humanity and our global civilization faces at this particular juncture in our short history.

          Only complete idiots, still think that ‘Growth’ of any kind is at all possible on a finite planet with limited natural resources.

          However that in no way implies that we should not put all our efforts into switching over to 100% renewable energy. Quite the contrary, it is the only path forward that might allow humanity to survive. We need both a ‘No Growth’ paradigm coupled with 100% sustainable resource use. Is that even possible? I don’t have a fucking clue! I just know that the current path isn’t working!

          The linked article is a just another thinly veiled anti renewables, pro growth BAU diatribe! The idea behind it is that if we can’t continue ‘Growing’ by switching to renewables then reneweables are bad! The truth is that what is bad is the idea that growth is possible. It isn’t!

          New data proves you can support capitalism or the environment—but it’s hard to do both.

          Then I guess it is high time for capitalism to go!

          1. States that had once owned to being communist weren’t ever much better on their environment either. I’d suggest rapid environmental destruction is a function of industry/industrial economy, not the method by which economic surpluses are rationed.

            https://www.nytimes.com/1982/09/12/world/pollution-grows-in-eastern-europe.html

            https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/17/communism-leaves-toxic-legacy-in-eastern-europe/

            Although it does seem that capitalism is better at destroying the environment at a rapid pace, it doesn’t seem to have a monopoly on it.

  29. So much for reliable grid and unreliable solar

    “His home in a nearby trailer park had been without power since Thursday. His wife needed ice to keep her insulin cool, and he needed electricity for a breathing machine. ”

    Oh, and gasoline for backup (not to mention the couple who died of CO poisoning)

    “He said he had been running his fridge and freezer on a generator, plugging each in for four hours at a time.
    “I’m going through the gasoline pretty good, and that’s hard to get for a while,” he said.”

    King coal

    “EPA officials said that about 2,000 cubic yards of material — the size of two-thirds of an Olympic-size swimming pool — collapsed into a ditch that leads to an on-site pond used for clean cooling water. Dozens of people from Duke Energy and a contractor were braving the weather with heavy equipment Sunday to construct earthen berms to reroute the coal-ash-contaminated ditch water and keep it from running into the cooling-water pond.”

    WHAAAT!!!

    “The EPA treats coal ash as a toxic substance, and Physicians for Social Responsibility says that it typically contains heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium and selenium, and that if consumed or inhaled, it could cause cancer and nervous system disorders.

    Duke Energy owns all 31 coal-ash ponds in North Carolina and four more in South Carolina. Paige Sheehan, a Duke spokeswoman, said that “coal-ash is nonhazardous. The company does not believe this incident poses a risk to public health or the environment.””

    repeat

    “contains heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium and selenium”
    “coal-ash is nonhazardous”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/carolinas-turn-into-an-archipelago-of-island-communities-as-florences-rain-causes-widespread-flooding/2018/09/16/05f637f2-b9c7-11e8-9812-a389be6690af_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.005eb7337d14

    NAOM

    1. “contains heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium and selenium”
      “coal-ash is nonhazardous”

      No worries! It’s only hazardous if you are exposed to it…

      https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/duke-energy-coal-ash-spill-north-carolina_us_5b9dbce0e4b04d32ebf92af7

      Duke spokeswoman Paige Sheehan said about 2,000 cubic yards (1,530 cubic meters) of ash were displaced at the L. V. Sutton Power Station outside Wilmington and that contaminated runoff likely flowed into the plant’s cooling pond. The company has not yet determined whether the weir that drains the lake was open or if contamination may have flowed into the Cape Fear River. That’s enough ash to roughly fill 180 dump trucks.

      What’s in your drinking water?!

      BTW, Duke Energy also has 9 Fukshima type nuclear reactors in NC in flood prone areas. It’s the newest game in town, it’s called Japanese Roulette. Maybe this time you get lucky!

      1. Yeah, they said they have backup generators – so did Fukupshima.

        NAOM

  30. Scientists Say They’ve Found The Driver of False Beliefs, And It’s Not a Lack of Intelligence
    DAVID NIELD

    https://www.sciencealert.com/feedback-study-explains-why-false-beliefs-stick

    Why is it sometimes so hard to convince someone that the world is indeed a globe, or that climate change is actually caused by human activity, despite the overwhelming evidence?

    Scientists think they might have the answer, and it’s less to do with lack of understanding, and more to do with the feedback they’re getting.

    Getting positive or negative reactions to something you do or say is a greater influence on your thinking than logic and reasoning, the new research suggests – so if you’re in a group of like-minded people, that’s going to reinforce your thinking.

    Receiving good feedback also encourages us to think we know more than we actually do.

    In other words, the more sure we become that our current position is right, the less likely we are to take into account other opinions or even cold, hard scientific data.

    “If you think you know a lot about something, even though you don’t, you’re less likely to be curious enough to explore the topic further, and will fail to learn how little you know,” says one of the team members behind the new study, Louis Marti from the University of California, Berkeley.

    1. Thanks for this link Cats. This is something I have been interested in for a long time. Many people hold some beliefs that are totally absurd, like young earth creationists.

      Children are indoctrinated at a very early age. That’s “Obedience to Authority”. And obedience to authority will stick to them the rest of their lives. And this article points out that what their peers believe is very important. If all their peers believe as they do, that is “Confirmation Bias”. All their authorities tell them the Bible is true and all their peers believe it also. The belief is set as if in cement.

      There is one more important point that I think most researchers overlook is “Repetition Bias”. Moslems pray five times a day, every day. They also have prayer beads which the pull through their fingers while mumbling incantations. Many Catholics do the same thing. Some people pray over every meal. Repetition is cement for the brain.

      1. Many Catholics do the same thing. Some people pray over every meal. Repetition is cement for the brain.

        So how do you explain people like myself who went to a Catholic boarding school as a young boy and by the time I was about 13 was an atheist who thought most of what was in the bible was complete bullshit! Did I have some sort of natural immunity?

        1. Fred, I really can’t explain it right now. But I am searching for an explanation. I was also raised in a fundamentalist Baptist home. We had Bible reading, every morning, in my public school in those days. And chapel every Monday morning. I was always somewhat of a skeptic, a doubter, even as a teenager. But I did not become a full-fledged atheist until I read Thomas Paine’s “The Age of Reason” at about the age of 23.

          It has only been in the last few years that I realized I, like Thomas Paine, am really a deist. I believe some kind of consciousness started the whole ball rolling at the big bang, then from that point on, left everything to its own devices. That is no conscious tinkering with anything from that point on. I think that is what the evidence supports and the evidence supports nothing else.

          But if you have an explanation for your very early age atheism, I would be very much interested in hearing it. Because that is where my hang up is right now. I am trying to figure out why there are exceptions, like you and I.

          1. Clearly your mind was taken over by Satan at a young age. Perhaps you can still be cured of this affliction Ron. In my case its too late so my future is eternity in Hell – which, alas, seems unfair, when you compare a few years on Earth with eternity. But, plainly God is horribly unjust, which is why I rejected him/her/it at a tender age.

            1. But, plainly God is horribly unjust, which is why I rejected him/her/it at a tender age.

              What?! I thought you were a worshiper of Thor! Surely he is more just than that asshole Christian God?! 😉

            2. Of course I worship Thor, Fred, but don’t kid myself that he isn’t a tad testy on occasion and when he gets one of those dark moods you’ll face thunder, lightning, winds and storms – just look at what happened in the Philippines last week (if you need proof).

            3. Yo! I live in South Florida, this is the lightning capital of the world. Thor stops by quite frequently. 😉

            4. It’s all precognition, God was not but will be. The demigods are building the godlets right now that will probably build the big God.
              And so it became that man, for all his effort, was but a smidgen of intelligence compared to his creations.

              It’s Already Too Late – Elon Musk
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3EQqjn-ELs

          2. Deity Shmeity

            Ron, when we get into deities, we would seem to get into the anthropomorphization of the cosmos– kind of like movies with ‘humanesque’ talking and smiling dogs and other animals, like where the pugs might sound like Danny DeVito.

            While we’re on about this, there is something known as determinism, incidentally… But there appears a problem with it, namely that nothing can know all the variables that go into our actions in an infinite universe (or, let’s say, across infinite universes) so that notion appears to simply fall on its ass. ‘Quantum entanglement’ (or whatever it’s called) across infinity? Maybe. Or maybe only one universe at a time? But infinity is a problem and what we appear to have. So the theory goes that there is no deity– because of infinity– there just ‘is’, always was and always will be.

            1. Calean, I wrote: I believe some kind of consciousness started the whole ball rolling at the big bang, then from that point on, left everything to its own devices.

              You replied: Ron, when we get into deities, we would seem to get into the anthropomorphization of the cosmos

              Question: How the fuck did you get from there to there? The definition of anthropomorphism is the act of giving the characteristics of humans to an animal, a god or an inanimate thing. Goddammit, Carlos, I did not give the consciousness that set the universe into motion as some kind of human or animal intervention.

              Goddammit it Carlos, this is the kind of stupid interpretation that really pisses me off. When I say “consciousness”, you think “human intervention”. Or even worse, much worse, some kind of fucking “religious intervention”. Neither humans nor religion has not one goddamn thing to do with it.

              Consciousness came before humans. And it for goddamn sure came before religious stupidity.

              Ask a reasonable question, Carlos, and I will reply to it. But goddammit it, enough with those very stupid questions.

              As for determinism. I would gladly discuss this subject. But I am too upset by your very stupid interpretation of my original statement about consciousness to even broach the subject right now.

            2. Just heading out, Ron, (cafe’s closing) but a quickie for now: A ‘supernatural being’ seems kind of close to ‘some guy creating the universe’, yes?

              Good night!

            3. A ‘supernatural being’ seems kind of close to ‘some guy creating the universe’, yes?

              No, fuck no! Calean, don’t you realize what you are doing. It is you who are anthropomorphizing the creator, or the creation of the universe. You just simply cannot get away from relating consciousness with human consciousness.

              The biblical god created man in God’s image. In reality, it was man who created his god in his own image. And you are doing the exact same thing as those early biblical authors did. You are creating, or at least imagining the creator of the universe in man’s image.

              I would think Caelan, that after three thousand years, you would be a bit smarter than that.

          3. Hi Ron.
            I became an atheist at 16, immediately after my catechism into the Anglican church (Episcopal for you Americans…It was after because I didn’t actually read the Catechism until after the ceremony and eight evenings of instruction that didn’t actually explain most of the tenets of the religion). I also was having stomach pains going into church: I saw my lack of faith as a personal failing, and that the hypocrisy of my presence was essentially a rebuke of those who did believe.

            I think the reason that I was able to do it was because I had no fear that my parents would disown me, or that there would be any adverse social consequences. I also decided (correctly, I believe) that my parents would see the hypocrisy as a greater evil than the not believing.

            I still remember what my father told me when I explained why I was no longer going to church:
            “You know, you don’t have to believe all of it.”
            So it probably helps to have parents who, while religious, are not deeply religious.

          4. I believe some kind of consciousness started the whole ball rolling at the big bang, then from that point on, left everything to its own devices.

            This confusion is based on the idea that to be intelligent, a thing has to be conscious. There’s no evidence of that. Look at the games of these new artificial intelligence chess computers. They seem to have long term strategies, clever insights and strategms like “probing” moves to see what their opponent will do. They are intelligent, they have goals (like winning the game) but they have no consciousness.

            The consciousness argument was also applied to evolution — the stunning designs are signs of intelligence, therefore there must be a (conscious) god. This turns out to be confusing two different things — intelligence and consciousness.

            You may be right that the Big Bang was kicked off by an intelligent being, but that is no evidence that it was a conscious being.

            1. This confusion is based on…

              Sorry but I am not at all confused.

              the idea that to be intelligent, a thing has to be conscious…new artificial intelligence chess computers.

              Oh, I see. And these artificial intelligent chess computers just sprang from nothing. No, some conscious being had to build that computer.

              The consciousness argument was also applied to evolution..

              No, no, fuck no! Evolution happened over time. Change over time. No designer needed. However, all the laws and all the atomic particles did not evolve over time. That is unless you call Planck Time, time, or 10 to the -43 seconds. It all happened in an instant. All the particles and forces, or at least the plasma which they would appear from when the plasma cooled, was created in a tiny fraction of a second.

              Virtually every physicist in existence agrees that the universe is fine-tuned. And almost every one of them opts for the multiverse to explain it. Check it out:
              The Fine-Tuning of the Universe

              Alimbiquated, I think you are very, very confused.

            2. Oh ya, that video… I came across it before recently, thanks to your mention of fine tuning.
              That guy’s voice sounds so confident and authoritative, ay? And those alluring graphics and animations? What’s not to believe about fine tuning?

              More seriously, Ron, what came first; the deity or the universe? What created the deity? The universe? Or was it the other way around?

              If you can imagine a universe that always was, is and will be, then why bother with a deity?

              Then again, maybe it doesn’t fundamentally matter– no pun intended. Maybe it’s just a matter of where the line is drawn.

              So if I say, ‘universe’, and you say, ‘deity’, maybe we are saying the same thing. And therein’s my point, full circle.

              Earthriser

            3. Caelan, I hope you realize that you are way, way, in the minority here. Virtually all cosmologist and physicist agree that the universe is very fine tuned for evolution of stars, galaxies and eventually rocky planets… then life. They all agree. That is what you guys cannot seem to get through your heads. The universe is very, very, fine tuned. About 10% of the cosmologist and physicist opt for some kind of consciousness, of god. The rest, at least 90% opt for the multiverse theory. That is, at least 10 to the 500th power universes have been created. Therefore we should expect that one of them would have been lucky enough to just have all the parameters in place, at the big bang, for the evolution of stars, galaxies, rocky planets and life. in other words, we just won the fucking lottery.

              Well, I disagree. But you can stick with the cosmologists and physicists and the lottery theory if you wish.

              But if you have a different theory, a Caelan theory, then please post it. Perhaps you can get Robert Lawerence Khun to interview you on his “Closer to Truth” series. You could become famous as the man who solved the fine-tuning problem.

            4. Ron, behold the Italian broccoli. I like it because it’s nice and fractally-looking in a certain way, while being quite tasty and healthy for you.

              But anyway, the point is that, what if the universe, or maybe even a ‘multiverse construct’, was a giant Italian broccolo and/or (with the) many broccoli branches? Suggesting that the main branch of the broccoli was ‘fine-tuned’ to produce some other, if smaller branch, seems to be a circular reasoning kind of thing. It is ‘fine-tuned’ because its branch parent is ‘fine-tuned’.

              The point, put another way perhaps, is what if the universe was, itself, ‘alive’ so to speak? To suggest that something is fine-tuned and that there might be a deity behind it as a result is all fine and nice but what if it misses the simple concept of self-similarity and reproduction (going all the way down the line of infinity)? That would seem to remove the concept of a diety tinkering with the buttons and knobs like a human might, yes?, and seems more elegant and simple to boot. I mean, what if, like the broccoli, the truth was right under our noses? (Stillborn universes still seem possible without the need for a deity.)

              As for fame, I’d rather have a pristine/healthy planet to frolic on and joyfully wonder about.

            5. Caelan, that broccoli evolved. However is that broccoli just appeared from nothing, in a tiny fraction of a second, then I would have to say it was fine-tuned by some type of consciousness.

              But your point, that the universe might be alive, is an idea that I have heard from no cosmologists or physicists before. It would still have to appear from nothing, then grew and evolved to where it is today??? Well, I understand why no one except Caelan has ever thought of that before.

              We know, or fairly certain, that there was a big bang. After all, we do have the cosmic microwave background radiation. We know it appeared in a tiny fraction of a second. We know that all the particles, all the forces, and all the laws of nature, all just appeared in that tiny fraction of a second. And we know that if any of those forces were different by a tiny fraction or any of those particles were not exactly as they are, then stars, galaxies, and rocky planets could not have evolved. That all physicist accept. And they all have trouble explaining it. But you are apparently smarter than all of them because you have explained it. Although I am not clear as to exactly what your explanation is.

            6. Sex and The Big Bang

              “But your point, that the universe might be alive, is an idea that I have heard from no cosmologists or physicists before.” ~ Ron Patterson

              If we are ‘alive’ (so to speak), why shouldn’t the universe (and universes preceding/parenting it) not be considered alive in its(/their) own sense, especially given all its(/their) forces like gravity and given that it(/they) gave us what we call, life? Just because you have not heard such an idea from any physicists or cosmo’s doesn’t necessarily mean none have thought of or suggested it. I’d be pretty surprised if none have and considering, too, that some have considered Earth alive in a Gaia sense. What’s life anyway? A manifestation of what we call, physics?

              “It would still have to appear from nothing, then grew and evolved to where it is today???” ~ Ron Patterson

              Why should the universe appear from nothing? Where does the diety appear from? The same unplace? Infinity seems to solve the problem.

              I prefer the idea of the universe and/or its parents or alternative/parallel universes always existing, as per infinity. Mind-boggling perhaps, until you consider any grandkids we might have that may be kicking around long after we are gone.

              Did you come from nothing? Of course not. But maybe the religious of yore thought so before discovering a little more about human reproduction.

            7. Fine tuning is handily explained by the Anthropic Cosmological Principle — if the universe weren’t finely tuned to support intelligent life, we wouldn’t be there to observe it. So we shouldn’t be surprised that the universe is finely tuned, and it requires no special explanation.

              Also the idea of a being to fine tune the universe isn’t really explanatory. Who fine tuned the fine tuner?

            8. “Who fine tuned the fine tuner?”

              Maybe our universe exists between the stations, just some noise in the system.

        2. That happened to me at age 4– never part of my consciousness.

        3. “So how do you explain people like myself who went to a Catholic boarding school as a young boy and by the time I was about 13 was an atheist who thought most of what was in the bible was complete bullshit! Did I have some sort of natural immunity?”

          it must have been the marijuana

        4. At First Communion lessons I learned that the wine really changes to the blood of Christ. But as a child I was not allowed to drink it, because it contained alcohol. Apparently Jesus was such a drunk that his blood is an alcoholic beverage. That definitely got me thinking.

          Also I remember sitting in church at a very young age (I used to go to church 6 days a week!) and listening to some of the parables, like the prodigal son and the thing about hiding your talents under a bushel, and the thing about sowing seeds on stony ground.
          My thought at the time was that it was some pretty low quality material. You’d think if the creator of the universe bothered to send his son to Earth he’d have brought some better stories than that with him. I was probably six or seven years old.
          My mother loved Greek mythology and read all those stories to us when we were little. They are much better than the Bible.

  31. But if you have an explanation for your very early age atheism, I would be very much interested in hearing it. Because that is where my hang up is right now. I am trying to figure out why there are exceptions, like you and I.

    Obviously I don’t really know!

    Perhaps there is some mechanism happening when certain people are exposed to virulent memes, that parallels the naturally acquired active biological immunity which occurs when a person is exposed to a live pathogen, develops the disease, and then develops immunity.

    My hunch is, that after exposure to religion we at first do indeed believe what we are told, how could we not?! So, we probably got a mild form of the disease but somehow manage to shake it off and become immune to future exposure.

    It probably didn’t hurt, that in my case at least, I was also exposed to scientific thinking at a very early age. Which led me to start asking many inopportune questions to which I got no satisfactory answers.

    So my natural curiosity got the better of me and I started looking for answers elsewhere. I was always sort of a black sheep and never really felt the need to fit in socially or otherwise. While not antisocial by any means, I was always a bit of an introvert and quite enjoyed my own company. I would generally prefer to hike in the woods by myself instead of hanging out with the ‘In Group’!

    1. I think that you typically have heavy indoctrination coming at a child from a hundred directions, But when they reach their teens, all it takes is one chance discussion, one story, perhaps even a song, to open the door of their mind to challenge the preconceptions (and falsehoods) of their culture.

      Sometimes this eye-opening happens rarely, and others time more commonly. Free access to books, music, multi-cultural schools, and other media, can surely help. [Pass that joint brother.]
      Fundamentalists fear freedom of thought beyond all else.

      I have known only a few religions (subsets) that encourage discussion, skepticism, debate, and the challenge of authority. It is a rare thing.

  32. PARIS CLIMATE TARGETS COULD BE EXCEEDED SOONER THAN EXPECTED

    “Overshooting is a risky strategy and getting back to lower levels after an overshoot will be extremely difficult. However, since we are officially on an overshooting trajectory, we have to prepare ourselves for the possibility that we may never get back to safer levels of warming. Policymakers should understand that there is no elementary proportionality between cumulative CO2 emissions due to human activity and global temperature, as previously believed, and that overshooting may have serious consequences.”

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-09-paris-climate-exceeded-sooner.html#jCp

  33. Obviously, no one will want to miss this exciting news. BTW, in case you were thinking your fridge magnet is powerful, please note that the surface magnetic field strength of PSR J0250+5854 is 26 trillion Gauss. Your fridge magnet will be, at most, 1.5 tesla = 15000 Gauss.

    SLOWEST-SPINNING RADIO PULSAR DETECTED BY ASTRONOMERS

    Located some 5,200 light years away from the Earth, PSR J0250+5854 is a rotation-powered pulsar, what means the loss of rotational energy of the star provides the power for the radio emission. It has a spin period of 23.5 seconds, which makes it the slowest-spinning radio pulsar known. Moreover, PSR J0250+5854 also has the slowest spin period when compared to any other known magnetars and X-ray dim isolated neutron stars (XDINSs). The authors of the paper noted that the similarity of the rotational parameters of the newly detected pulsar to the XDINSs and magnetars indicates a possible connection between them.

    The researchers also found that PSR J0250+5854 has surface magnetic field strength of 26 trillion G, age of 13.7 million years and spin-down luminosity of 82 octillion erg/s. According to the paper, these values suggest a dipolar magnetic field configuration in this pulsar.

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-09-slowest-spinning-radio-pulsar-astronomers.html#jCp

    1. Just think, in a few centuries we will be using these to power civilizations.

      I used to use 400 MHz NMR which is about 10 Tesla. Used beryllium-copper tools to work on them and never brought my bank cards near them. 🙂

    2. I wouldn’t put too much stock in thezerohedge website- their whole existence depends on being sensational about things with very poor track record.
      As far as I had heard, the Brunswick nuc plants were shut down uneventfully about 2 days before the storm. I have some relatives nearby, and thus had checked the news.
      Of course, I am willing to be wrong. Just not trusting the conspiracy news guys.

      1. YEP, ZH is 90% click-bait. Entertainment not reporting. Who knows who Tyler is? But most in the MSM still have to acknowledge that Fukushima was a Level 7 event caused by external power cutoff. If there is an Level 2 or greater event we have a right to know in real time. We will not know actual status for a while. Hopefully contained and undamaged.

        1. I am really curious to know what caused the 60+ gas explosions in the Boston suburbs. From what I have been able to glean, there are 14 pressure control devices on the line that got ‘over pressured’.
          How and why did it fail?
          Human error, sabotage, cyberattack?
          NTSB is reported to have sent investigators. I presume other agencies as well.

          I suppose it could have also just been gross incompetence by the operators. If that is the case, it is a good reminder why humans shouldn’t be trusted to be impeccable with running dangerous machines like nuclear reactors.

          1. Regulators are pretty simple stand alone mechanical devices. It sounds like common mode or cascade failure of these happened, e.g. one failed (possibly from overpressure caused by human error, but could be a maintenance issue) and then all the others couldn’t cope and failed in turn. There should be an independent relief system (also mechanical) to stop overpressure but those are not infallible – they have testing requirements but it’s impossible to make them 100% failsafe, they only function on demand so until they are called on to act it’s not known for sure if they are going to work (that’s called latent failure – sometimes there are backup systems for those but even they can fail). Systems can be made safer but it costs a lot of money to get the small decimal points increases in safety and at some point it’s not worth doing any more. It’s not something that is really talked about directly in the oil industry but once it costs more than about $2 million dollars per life saved then it’s not worth it and you get better overall benefit by spending the money somewhere else. The safest system is one that doesn’t get built. You are much more likely to die falling off a ladder than from a gas explosion, but ladders are seen as an acceptable risk given their convenience.

            1. Thanks for the info George. Makes me surprised there arn’t more of these incidents.

    3. The current reactor mode is showing as “hot shutdown” and more rain is on the way.

      River waters in the area are expected to rise as much as 20 feet in the coming days. Not to mention, local dams in the area may be to capacity.

      2. Thanks for posting, just about to post same. “hot shutdown” mode is a normal mode for some weeks (depending on run hours of the bundle) after a scram or normal take offline. The Reactor(s) sequenced thru Normal shutdown procedure as required by law upon hurricane force winds. Note that the Fuel pools are in a preputial “Forced Stable State” since these onsite pools were originally designed for limited intermediate staging. NOT for 4+ Decades. The oldest rods should be at least casked for some degree of isolation and risk reduction. All is in Limbo. Mixed aged “spent” fuel pools cannot be unplugged since they are close to capacity and require constant heat extraction. Wish they would use the Internal Scale. This would be Level 1 – ie. a concern. Not an event. Don’t what the Hell Mode 3 means.

  36. 2019 Audi e-tron Debuts In San Francisco, U.S. Price Undercuts Model X

    The Audi e-tron all-electric SUV has finally been unveiled and now U.S. customers can place reservations.

    Audi chose San Francisco, California as the location in which to finally take the wraps off its first-ever, fully electric, fast-charging SUV. The automaker calls it a “spacious five-seater, electric mid-sized premium SUV that is very well equipped to meet premium buyer expectations.” The e-tron provides top-tier infotainment technologies and driver assistance systems, as well as a battery design that Audi built specifically for “repeatable performance, longevity, and safety.”

  37. Interesting op-ed on the issues of corporate growth, disruption and sustainability over at reneweconomy.com.au

    Incumbents fail – so are we wasting our time on sustainability?

    We are now up against time bounded needs that can only be addressed through radical innovation in technology and business models – inevitably resulting in disruptive change across the market. Anything less will see issues like climate change, pollution, inequality and resource constraint pose system wide threats to global economic and social stability.

    Given this, sustainability is only “good for business” for today’s major companies ifthey can transform – either dramatically in how their business operates or in some cases (e.g. oil majors) transforming into different companies entirely.

    This raises my second question. Can incumbents transform? The question can’t be answered in theory or conceptual potential, but in practice – in the reality of how markets work, and how businesses are run. For this we have a great deal of evidence of previous and ongoing transformations and disruptions.

    As I introduced in my last column, the essence of the answer lies in recognising that markets are defined by a process of “creative destruction” – old and slow companies are taken over and replaced by new and fast ones. Not always destroyed but made so small they slip from sight.

    We see this throughout economic history as the key driver of change within the market system and, critically in the sustainability context, the fastest. It doesn’t just apply when the driver of change is inherently disruptive e.g. digital technology or renewable energy.

    It then happens faster and more dramatically, but history tells us it happens anyway. In fact, it defines how markets normally operate. The only difference today is that it is getting faster.

    1. Excerpted from the article.

      But the world has changed. Today sustainability is an existential threat to the global economy and that means the scale and speed of change required is profoundly different.

      Well, assuming that is true, and I think that the fat lady has yet to sing, so the debate isn’t quite over yet, I would have to say that the statement is absurd, prima facie!

      If sustainability is considered an existential threat to the economy, should we therefore pursue unsustainability in the economy at large?!

      To me, it is a no brainer, what needs to change is the economy as it is currently configured. If that means putting the status quo, aka oil, gas, coal, ICEs etc…, out of business, then that’s what needs to happen. That is what will happen. Actually I think there are plenty of signs that it is already happening! I suspect the pace of change towards a sustainable economy can only increase.

      And if it doesn’t, then we are all fucked anyways, so it won’t matter!

      Cheers!

      1. Fred, I think you misinterpreted the intended meaning of the author. The statement “But the world has changed. Today sustainability is an existential threat to the global economy and that means the scale and speed of change required is profoundly different” by itself is somewhat ambiguous but the following text makes it clear, at least to me, that the intended meaning is that sustainability is a threat to the current paradigm and legacy businesses. In other words, the old will go away and be replaced by the new and it needs to happen fast on a global scale.

        1. …but the following text makes it clear, at least to me, that the intended meaning is that sustainability is a threat to the current paradigm and legacy businesses.

          Yes, upon rereading it, I think you are probably right. However, I still have a problem with the author’s phrasing. Because it is really the other way around. It is the current paradigm and legacy businesses that are an existential threat to all life on the planet and therefore unsustainable! While that may sound like a semantic quibble to some.

          To me how something is said is important! Especially since to most people, if you say sustainability is a threat to the economy, they will interpret that as a reason to keep pushing against change. And that those who are for sustainability are the ones who are wrong.

          We no longer have the leisure of time on our side to make the necessary changes! We need to push the legacy businesses over the cliff and let the technological and social disruptions accelerate. Even if we don’t yet know exactly how things will pan out. We are past the time when proceeding with caution is an option.

          Cheers!

          1. I hear you Fred, poor writing can be just as dangerous as anti-environmental writing/anti-sustainable writing. Especially when the anger is rising on both sides. Doesn’t take much to set them off.

            Yep, the Congress and admin control the center of the board now, making all those in your face moves. Sure, build your EV’s and windmills, we don’t care because we can just ship it all out to the world now with our new LNG facilities, our ships and refineries. We are still going to suck the US dry, they think. Sure, put some Democrats in control for a while, we don’t care they say. We know they will not do much, never have. We change things back faster than they will ever improve things because we act like pit bulls when they think they have the upper hand.
            It’s all about money, us making the money and keeping you on the end of the string. We got so much natural gas, oil and coal and some of those gods of SETM will figure out some new energy source to keep you tied to our system long before it runs out, if it ever does, the think. Make America Green Again, green money I mean, for the rich guys.
            So put up your solar panels, maybe they will be taxed soon and controlled so we make money from them too. We own the sun you know.

            What’s that sound, a grinding sound of stone against metal? What’s that other sound, sounds like a shoosh and thump?

      2. Yeah, if sustainability is an existential threat, then it isn’t sustainable by definition. So it isn’t an existential threat after all, right?

        I think some people are pretty stupid, but hey, that’s just my opinion.

    1. Yes, but what are some of the implications of all that in the real world?

      https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254278079_Ecological_Consequences_of_Sea-Ice_Decline

      Ecological Consequences of Sea-Ice Decline
      Article · Literature Review (PDF Available)

      Abstract
      After a decade with nine of the lowest arctic sea-ice minima on record, including the historically low minimum in 2012, we synthesize recent developments in the study of ecological responses to sea-ice decline. Sea-ice loss emerges as an important driver of marine and terrestrial ecological dynamics, influencing productivity, species interactions, population mixing, gene flow, and pathogen and disease transmission. Major challenges in the near future include assigning clearer attribution to sea ice as a primary driver of such dynamics, especially in terrestrial systems, and addressing pressures arising from human use of arctic coastal and near-shore areas as sea ice diminishes.

      http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roybiolett/14/3/20170702.full.pdf

      Effects of sea ice on Arctic biota:
      an emerging crisis discipline

      https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016EF000429

      Mitigation implications of an ice‐free summer in the Arctic Ocean

      Abstract
      The rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic is one of the most striking manifestations of climate change. As sea ice melts, more open water is exposed to solar radiation, absorbing heat and generating a sea‐ice–albedo feedback that reinforces Arctic warming. Recent studies stress the significance of this feedback mechanism and suggest that ice‐free summer conditions in the Arctic Ocean may occur faster than previously expected, even under low‐emissions pathways. Here we use an integrated assessment model to explore the implications of a potentially rapid sea‐ice‐loss process. We consider a scenario leading to a full month free of sea ice in September 2050, followed by three potential trajectories afterward: partial recovery, stabilization, and continued loss of sea ice. We analyze how these scenarios affect the efforts to keep global temperature increase below 2°C. Our results show that sea‐ice melting in the Arctic requires more stringent mitigation efforts globally. We find that global CO2 emissions would need to reach zero levels 5–15 years earlier and that the carbon budget would need to be reduced by 20%–51% to offset this additional source of warming. The extra mitigation effort would imply an 18%–59% higher mitigation cost to society. Our results also show that to achieve the 1.5°C target in the presence of ice‐free summers negative emissions would be needed. This study highlights the need for a better understanding of how the rapid changes observed in the Arctic may impact our society.
      Bold mine.

      And that folks is the typical watered down version of concern from our scientists and political leadership. At a time when all the warning lights should be flashing bright red and the sirens should be sounding at full strength, it seems the best we can muster is some mild concern that by mid century we may be facing problems! Topped off with the admission that to achieve 1.5 °C we need to deploy negative emissions technology, which at this point simply doesn’t exist!

      Recently I have come to the conclusion that Albert Bartlett was only partially correct in his assessment that the greatest shortcoming of humanity is our inability to understand the exponential function. We also do not seem to have even the most basic grasp of risk assessment and non-linear dynamics of complex systems, especially when it comes to understanding tipping points and feed backs.

      1. The earth environmental system is primarily determined by the phase changes of water. Only by removing one of these phases or by having one phase dominate can a more stable result be achieved that needs a large forcing to resume the chaotic system we have existed within for millions of years.

        There are two relatively stable regimes on earth, one has no ice and the other is all ice. Everything in between is chaotic at various time scales and easily perturbed, as we are in the process of experiencing.
        There are no independent variables in the earth system, they just have different rates and interaction capabilities with varying conditions. This means that certain changes have a cascading domino effect if the system is not at a boundary point, while others reach a cascading effect under certain conditions or are not very effective under other conditions.
        A nightmare for modelers since the factors are variables (functions)too.

        Here is a course series on non-linear dynamics and chaos:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycJEoqmQvwg&list=PLbN57C5Zdl6j_qJA-pARJnKsmROzPnO9V

      2. I think the sentence before the one you highlighted needs highlighting too.

        NAOM

          1. I am modifying my opinion of the situation we are in

            First I was : ‘are we or are we not fucked’

            Then : ‘are we fucked or are we really fucked’

            Now : I am tending to ‘are we really fucked or are we really fucking fucked’

            🙁

            NAOM

            1. Access to the brass ring has been offered, yet few even reach for any ring at all. Guess they don’t want to continue the ride.

            2. We’re so far passed really fucking fucked that the light from really fucking fucked won’t reach us for 1.3 billion years.

      3. The inability of climate activists such as yourself to put forward politically viable options is what led to the impasse you complain about. Remember material issues always come before environmental issues for most voters. Electorates with rising income and consumer confidence will willingly sacrifice by paying more for electricity to insure a greater portion of green options. An electorate facing declining income and insecurity combined with demands for sharply increased energy prices will turn on those who propose any such thing and vote for conservative politicians.

        2. Hey Kevin, what you seem to fail to grasp is that most here are just discussing the writing on the wall as we see it based on the available science. Not sure who you think is a climate activist, (whatever that even means)!

          I don’t think too many here are all that politically motivated either. And it won’t matter much what most people think about material vs environmental issues if by the by the time they realize what is happening, it will already be too late to implement any political policies. The time for most of that was decades ago!

          There is a hell of a lot of change in the air right now! (pun intended) The chips will just fall where they will. If you are looking for political or economic solutions here, then you are definitely on the wrong forum. Because none of us here are offering any!

          Edit: Do you really think there are solutions to things like this or do you simply not understand the implications? In any case they pretty much make what most people think about material vs environmental issues completely moot!

          Doug just posted it down thread:
          https://phys.org/news/2018-09-unprecedented-ice-loss-russian-cap.html#jCp

          Cheers!

          1. “If you are looking for political or economic solutions here, then you are definitely on the wrong forum. Because none of us here are offering any!”

            Then I don’t understand why you guys spend sunup to sundown discussing climate change each and every day. What’s the appeal? Form of OCD? I see no reason to study and discuss a problem that apparently has no possible solutions.

            1. Sounds like a familiar tune we have heard before.

              The question is not why people are interested in the world and it’s general condition, but do you think it is a sickness and want us to stop?

            2. Then I don’t understand why you guys spend sunup to sundown discussing climate change each and every day.

              I guess you just aren’t paying much attention to a lot of the other conversations we have! Because we also spend a lot of time discussing topics ranging from fast Fourier transform analysis of dolphin speech, neutron stars, pulsars, the theory of special relativity, QED, paleoclimatology, the latest developments in materials science, non linear dynamics, chaos theory, AI, advances in biotech such as CRISPR-cas 9, advances in alternative energy, political, technological and social changes due to technological disruption, just to cite a few!

              Apparently you must find most of those topics uninteresting because you never comment on any of those. Most of the people here are genuinely interested in the learning about our natural world and the universe at large. Climate change is a part of that knowledge.

              So what are you interested, in other than complaining about just one of the things that we discuss here?!

            3. Till about five years ago I thought the biggest threat we faced was peak oil (or more generally resource limits) and that climate change could and would addressed. I changed my mind fairly quickly for various reasons. One was looking into climate change in more detail in particular the roles of aerosols, arctic sea ice and permafrost. Some new papers on permafrost melt a few years ago convinced me we’d probably gone (or were going) past the point of no return, and things have so far followed the worse case scenarios.

              Second is reading the reason-free comments from deniers on this blog and, especially, any mainstream newspaper article concerning the climate or just the weather. One thing I’ve learnt over the last few years is that in a crisis the last person I’d want to rely on would be a denier type: blinkered, supercilious, wilfully ignorant, innately cowardly, mendacious, bigoted and proud of it, rejecting all ideas of their own responsibilities outside of their own comfort, and with no possible recourse to original thought in response to changing conditions. More than that is how deeply stupid well educated people can be when emotions take over from logic –it’s amazing how many articles are referenced that actually state the complete opposite of what the denier thinks (or hopes) it says.

              Third is another sort of denialism which believes everything can go on as happy motoring BAU with just a few minor technological fixes and no personal privations at all – basing every argument around EVs is part of this (really they are more to do with peakoil).

              And the coup de grace was when President Mangoman Fuckwit was elected, I think that confirmed that no-one really wants to address the big issues, they want to walk around with their heads up their arses telling everyone what a great view they have. I am neither American nor Russian so had no say in the result, but as far as I can tell neither did most of the actual voters. We have allowed the psychopaths in charge to take over completely, and they have no mechanism for thinking or caring about the future of the earth or humanity or anything except themselves, and convincing the populace that there is a political solution for everything is one of their great achievements (for their good not yours).

            4. Well said! I had a somewhat similar experience back when I first became aware of Peak Oil circa late 2007. My younger sister had died from cancer in the middle of the year and I was in a very gloomy place emotionally. When I watched Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth”, I thought the urgency on global warming was misplaced and that Peak Oil was the greatest existential threat facing human civilisation.

              Back then I thought the “drill baby, drill” crowd were just hopelessly optimistic and Al Gore et al were wrong to be focused on global warming. I thought more traction would be gained by warning about the consequences of Peak Oil than fighting the well funded FF lobby misinformation campaign on the global warming front. I thought it would be better if doubt could be sown among the general populace about the petroleum industry’s ability to keep the lifeblood of the global economy flowing.

              In my mind the best response to both the peak resource and the global peak resource problem was more or less the same, EVs, renewable energy and waste recycling. Turns out that I was wrong and the “drill baby, drill” crowd was right but, so was Gore. Global Warming has always been an existential threat while the threat of Peak Oil has been pushed back and we have been given the extra decade or two that we were told would be needed to prepare the world for Peak Oil in The Hirsch Report circa 2005.

              In one of the Peak Oil documentaries that I watched at the time of my epiphany there is a section on Hirsch. The money quote for me was from 55 seconds into this 2 min. 50 sec. clip:

              NARRATOR: The more he looked at the problem Hirsch told me the more alarmed he became. It may be 30 years before peak oil confronts the world or it may be happening now.
              HIRSCH: The worst case is that it’s occurring now or very soon because, the world is unprepared, it’s absolutely unprepared. There are no quick fixes in something like this.

              Ever since I originally watched Hirsch speak those two sentences, they have been irrevocably seared in my memory. The threat posed by Peak Oil has been averted by LTO, for now but global warming just continues to march on!

            5. George- “blinkered, supercilious, wilfully ignorant, innately cowardly, mendacious, bigoted and proud of it, rejecting all ideas of their own responsibilities outside of their own comfort, and with no possible recourse to original thought in response to changing conditions. More than that is how deeply stupid well educated people can be when emotions take over from logic”

              There you go again, talking about the American voter. Right or Left, sorry to say.
              Partisanship is a form of tyranny either way.

              If you make me choose one side or the other, I’m going with science, and separation of church/state, cultural tolerance, and the little guy.
              I guess that makes me a democratic leaning independent.

            6. Kevin —

              “Then I don’t understand why you guys spend sunup to sundown discussing climate change each and every day.”

              Then, what about (human) population overshoot? A subject discussed in detail here, besides the topics mentioned by Fred. Perhaps you’d like to weigh in on this, provide us with potential solutions? I frequently mention climate change but consider the effect of excessive numbers of humans devastating to Earth. Come on man, help us out here. Or, do you think we can keep adding 80 plus million people to our poor planet every year without devastating results — irrespective of climate change?

            7. The key is using our economic and political institutions to raise the incomes, living standards, and education levels of all. We know that increased wealth and access to capitalism along with higher education causes families to choose to have fewer children. Following that, the next problem to solve is how to mitigate the short/medium term social and economic upheaval that not having enough children brings to countries, such as is being experienced by most of Eastern Europe, Japan, Germany, and so on.

        3. I’m not an activist, unless you count commenting on Ron’s fine blog as activism, which I don’t.
          I recommend you try to enjoy the famine. You can look forward to voting conservative, while you get used to eating your lawn.

          1. You can look forward to voting conservative, while you get used to eating your lawn.

            ROFL!

            Maybe he can still stock up on lawn care products and get himself a shiny new lawn tractor while his material benefits are still flowing…

            1. Because burn all lignite now.

              Actually all coal burning in Germany is trending down, albeit lignite just slightly. Even so, lignite currently contributes only 11.1% of the overall enery mix in Germany. And all indications are that with continued strong support for renewables, there will no doubt be further drops in overall coal consumption.

              Energy Consumption
              in Germany in 2017

              https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/index.php?article_id=29&fileName=ageb_jahresbericht2017_20180420_englisch.pdf

              The Federal Government’s energy policy decisions on the continued support of renewable energy and the exit from nuclear power are reflected in the changing structure of primary energy consumption also in 2017.
              In 2017 as well, the most important energy carrier
              continued to be mineral oil with a share of 34.5 %,
              followed by natural gas with a share that increased
              to 23.8 % (2016: 22.7 %). In contrast, a significant decrease was recorded for hard coal (from 12.4 % to 10.9 %). Thus, hard coal only ranked fifth among all energy carriers in 2017 even behind lignite whose share decreased just slightly from 11.3 % to 11.1 %.
              Nuclear energy participated in primary energy
              consumption in 2017 with a mere proportion of 6.1 % – compared to 6.9 % in the previous year. In contrast, renewables were once again able to significantly increase their share; namely, from 12.5 % to 13.1 %. This consolidated their third position in the ranking of energy carriers.
              Bold mine.

              Bottom line, coal use trending down. Renewables still growing strongly. I should be on the ground in Germany in a little over a week from now, so I will be reporting what sense I get of the general situation there at that point. I’m quite curious what the average Germans may think of this past summer’s heat waves and crop failures…

            2. Yup, got wind of this by way of an article over at reneweconomy .com.au:

              Hambach Forest: the front line of Germany’s Energiewende

              While the German government is supposed to set a coal phase-out date, energy utility RWE is putting the breaks on the Energiewende. Police are swarming the ancient forest which sits atop lignite resources, ending a six-year occupation. L. Michael Buchsbaum reports from Hambach forest.

              Hey Michael B, is that you? Sounds about right for BAU. Clear an area of forest which sequesters carbon and replace it with a coal mine so we can pump some more CO2 into the atmosphere. Great!

              How do these people sleep at night? Hremann Scheer must be turning in his grave! The link below is to a two and a half minute video clip of Hermann Scheer talking about vested interests perspective on the energy transition. I was deeply concerned when he passed away on 14 October 2010 but, I’m sure there were many people for whom his death was a dream come true. He was a thorn in the flesh of FF (and nuclear) interests with his 100% renewable agenda!

              Can Renewable Energy Power The World? Hermann Scheer

            3. As if on cue:

              Solar all set for another record in Germany

              This year’s seemingly endless summer is officially set to close at the weekend, as Sunday marks the beginning of fall.

              To mark the change of season, the German Solar Industry Association (BSW-Solar) has calculated how much clean electricity Germany’s PV systems have produced this year.

              At around 40 billion kWh, more than 11% more solar power was generated in the first three quarters than in the same period last year, and the 2017 generation figure – 39.9 billion kWh – is likely to be reached by the end of this month…..[snip]

              “After sensational success in reducing costs, the time has now come for a political reassessment and a significant acceleration of solar technology development. Existing brakes must be loosened and artificial market barriers must be eliminated.”

              BSW-Solar has long been calling for a drastic increase in the annual construction pipeline and a repeal of the 52 GW cap for solar incentives, and says “unjustified charges” on PV self-consumption and tenant electricity should be abolished.

              “These measures [that BSW-Solar is calling for] are overdue for redeeming stricter climate targets, flanking the nuclear and coal exit and against the background of the expected increase in electricity consumption, including for electric mobility,” the association added.

              Starting in the year Hermann Scheers’s death, 2010, Germany installed 7.5 GW per year for three years and then declined to 3.3 , 2.4 , 1.5, 1.5 and 1.8 GW in subsequent years. If Hermann Scherr had not died, I am pretty sure he would have been actively trying to keep the momentum going, to the detriment of companies like RWE.

            4. “L. Michael Buchsbaum reports from Hambach forest.

              Hey Michael B, is that you?”

              Weird f-ing coincidence. I’m just some nobody in Maine.

            5. By the way, where’s Caelan MacIntyre when he’s needed? I’d love to hear his perspective on this Hambach Forest debacle. It’s not like they’re clearing the forest to make way for renewable energy installations! 😉

            6. I’ve been out of the news loop, but will try to look into it and get back to you (If so, not necessarily in the Sept. 12 threads.).

            7. Unrenewable energy– ostensibly of the type that you peddle, Alan, and that you call renewable– isn’t AFAIK, created with its own energy, let alone actual renewable energy, is it?
              Also, how much energy do we actually need? And is there a third option?

              Yes, the third option would appear to be to POWER DOWN (and start learning to live in harmony with the planet, and for example, start planting lots of native plants, such as for food, C02 uptake and revitalizing the ravaged planet).

              Rapidly powering down extends the resources that are left and doesn’t risk other kinds of deleterious effects that so-called renewables threaten.

              Is that the kind of perspective you were looking for from me, or was it just some mindless rhetorical jab?

  40. Sounds like a fun course! As long as you are up to speed with your calculus and algebra… I like that the professor mentions that a good background in different scientific disciplines is also useful.

    I skipped straight ahead to the 4th lecture.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_YCvTabMO4&index=4&list=PLbN57C5Zdl6j_qJA-pARJnKsmROzPnO9V

    MAE5790-4 Model of an insect outbreak

    I’ll probably watch lecture 23 after that. I have a personal interest in some aspects of that particular subject matter.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k5bG6U5byk&index=23&list=PLbN57C5Zdl6j_qJA-pARJnKsmROzPnO9V

    MAE5790-23 Fractals and the geometry of strange attractors

    So how the hell do we get our political and economic leadership to at least be able to understand non-linear dynamics and chaos theory?! Especially given that at the moment we have a POTUS who can barely read and understand English beyond a 5th grade level?!

    BTW if you can think, you can do calculus.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUvTyaaNkzM
    Essence of calculus, chapter 1

    1. Fred, I don’t know how it works in the States but we (Science Program) were taught calculus (differential and integral) in High School. This was only two-dimensional stuff but useful never-the-less. In first year Uni we went straight into equations of graphs in 3-D space (n-space) as well as vector valued functions and doing calculus with them. I’ve often been amazed that High School kids in Japan, Russia and India were routinely doing math normally reserved for third year students in Canada. Embarrassing. Geophysics routinely employs advanced applications of calculus including power series and Fourier series. Always remember, someone saying, “I know calculus.” could be akin to a person saying “I can fly a plane,” following his/her first solo flight — in a Cessna. 😉

      1. Always remember, someone saying, “I know calculus.” could be akin to a person saying “I can fly a plane,” following his/her first solo flight — in a Cessna. ?

        Agreed! However my main point was, that most of our politicians couldn’t even fly a kite if their lives depended on it.

        I’m not expecting everyone to be a mathematician, just some basic mathematical literacy. The non-linear dynamics course GF linked to is an undergraduate level course but you wouldn’t be able to do the course work without some knowledge of calculus.

        There is no way our political leadership can do their job if they don’t understand the implications of climate change and they can’t understand that, if they don’t understand at least the basics of Chaos Theory!

        To your point, if they can’t even fly a Cessna, how the hell are they going to land a 747 in bad weather, on a short runway, after the loss of an engine?!

        At least if we had autopilot…
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw6mjVIdbbc
        Can a PASSENGER land a PLANE? Presented by CAPTAIN JOE

    2. “So how the hell do we get our political and economic leadership to at least be able to understand non-linear dynamics and chaos theory?! Especially given that at the moment we have a POTUS who can barely read and understand English beyond a 5th grade level?!”

      No hope there.

    3. “So how the hell do we get our political and economic leadership to at least be able to understand…” ~ Fred Magyar

      “Grown men do not need leaders.” ~ Edward Abbey

  41. UNPRECEDENTED ICE LOSS IN RUSSIAN ICE CAP

    “Many scientists have assumed that polar ice caps that sit above sea level will only respond slowly to a warming climate—but the authors of this study urge that this assumption be questioned. The rapid collapse of the Vavilov Ice Cap has significant ramifications for glaciers in other polar regions, especially those fringing Antarctica and Greenland.”

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-09-unprecedented-ice-loss-russian-cap.html#jCp

    1. Hmmm, I wonder if the polar vortex has already shifted somewhat toward Greenland leaving northern Russia more exposed to southern heat. That region seems to have a lot of temperature anomalies and methane release activity.

  42. Tesla is an “automobile company that is headed for the graveyard,” as it doesn’t have any advantage over the scores of electric vehicles coming from the legacy automakers and can’t recoup EV sales losses with sales of gas-fired cars, General Motors’s former vice chairman Bob Lutz told CNBC on Tuesday.

    Lutz continues to believe that Tesla Model 3 will never make money because overhead costs are widely exceeding the profits from making fewer than 150,000 cars a year.

    https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Ex-GM-Boss-Tesla-Headed-For-The-Graveyard.html

    1. Sounds like a smear campaign from a company that can’t sell it’s EV’s. Less than 4000 Bolts sold in second quarter. No charging network and lower performance for the same price.

      8000 Model 3 units per week comes out to over 400,000 per year and that is just one model. Plus Tesla has far better marketing.

    2. Bob Lutz doesn’t understand that Tesla is not an automobile manufacturer. It is a technology company. It develops cutting edge technology in alternative energy, battery tech, AI algorithms, etc… some of that technology happens to be bundled into its EV platform. Not to mention that it is also disrupting the ICE business model and is the main reason that GM and every single other automobile manufacturer have been forced to launch EV lines themselves. BTW Tesla was producing 150,000 EVs a year before it launched the Model 3. If Tesla doesn’t make a profit on the Model 3 it will still have plenty of cards up its sleeve. Besides Lutz should just STFU, GM was bailed out by the US taxpayer to the tune of about 12 billion dollars! Maybe they should have just been allowed to fail!

      I’ll bet GM and other automotive companies would love to have a customer base like Tesla has!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AJw9cIlatw
      Tesla Model 3 | Fully Charged

      1. I wonder what Tesla would do with 12 billion dollars, gubernment backing the wrong horse – again!

        NAOM

        ahem – that should have been ‘horseless carriage’

      2. BTW Tesla was producing 150,000 EVs a year before it launched the Model 3.

        Sorry Fred, I’ve got to fact check you on that. At a Wikipedia page on Tesla there’s a table under the heading Production and sales that has quarterly data from Tesla’s Shareholder Letters and press releases. Did a quick spreadsheet to get the annual totals as follows:

        2015 – 51,095
        2016 – 83,922
        2017 – 101,027

        From https://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/ the total YTD sales for the US only, up to the end of August is 84,127 and they are expecting to manufacture more than 20,000 units of the Model 3 from September onward.

        1. Tesla global deliveries, almost doubled from Q2 2017 to Q2 2018.

          Almost doubled in one year, expect that again next year since M3 production is ramped up.

          1. Tesla is at the similar spot after the Roadster went into production. Elon took his Life Savings from Paypal and Rescued the Company. You got to hand it to Mr. Musk, that took balls of faith. This is a much bigger hump in the road which could get Nasty. IMO, If Tesla survives they should drop the Model Y and focus on a Pickup that is also a Power Plant that could also be a hybrid with a gen set and a 50 cal in the bed. Mega disruptive. Sonnen Energy systems are sold out and now sells for 30 to 100k+ USD.
            https://sonnenbatterie.de/en-us/start
            Tesla has to simplify their products. Complexity kills.

        2. Danke schön for the fact check! My bad. I was looking at this graph of cumulative deliveries. In any case over 100,000 Teslas of all models combined were produced in 2017 and that number is going to continue to grow exponentially throughout 2018 with the addition of the Model 3 production line. Notorious climate change denier, Bob Lutz, formerly of GM, can eat his tiny little heart out!
          Cheers!
          .

          1. The electric grid: fragile, filthy, poorly managed, polluting, inefficient, corrupt

            “My own conclusions

            I think it’s too late to do much about the poor state of the electric grid and how it’s operated — oil probably peaked in 2005 (science magazine) or 2006 (international energy agency), so the energy to fabricate, deliver, and maintain new infrastructure and fix existing facilities means it’s too late to add wind, solar, and so on to fill in the fossil fuel gap.

            And don’t forget, this is a LIQUIDS FUEL CRISIS. 99% of transportation is oil-based.

            At the same time, the financial system is in the largest bubble ever and on the brink of collapse. Where will the investment come from? How can such delicate, fragile systems operate as social unrest grows? How will it even be maintained let alone increased in size and stability as declining resources make growth impossible in a finite world?”

      3. “I’ll bet GM and other automotive companies would love to have a customer base like Tesla has!”

        I will take that bet. GM sold over 3 million vehicles in just the U.S. in 2017 and has over 100 years of experience. Get back with me Fred when Tesla has a million customers.

        http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/general-motors-sales-numbers/

        “Bob Lutz doesn’t understand that Tesla is not an automobile manufacturer. It is a technology company.”

        Fred Magyar doesn’t seem to understand any automobile manufacturer today is a technology company.

        “GM was bailed out by the US taxpayer to the tune of about 12 billion dollars! Maybe they should have just been allowed to fail!”

        GM was lent the money to save it’s self and has repaid it all back to the American taxpayer with interest. GM was a victim of the 2008 financial crisis with new vehicle sale dropping by more than 40% and a frozen financial liquidity market. Only a fool would have wished GM the U.S. largest auto manufacture death. Killing it’s suppliers and millions of good paying jobs.

        “main reason that GM and every single other automobile manufacturer have been forced to launch EV lines themselves”

        Wrong, government regulations is the primary driver behind EV’s. Which includes $7500 the Fed’s pays for every new Tesla with rebates. That is not paid back to tax payers.

        “The state’s latest update to its zero-emissions vehicle rules, usually called the ZEV (Zero Emission Vehicle) mandate, won’t resolve the argument, but it will bring big changes to the mix of cars on sale in California, not to mention at least nine other states that collectively make up nearly a third of the U.S. market for new-car sales. You may be a car buyer in Vermont, but California is deciding what cars you might be seeing on dealer lots.
        By the 2025 model year, automakers that sell vehicles in California will have to make 15.4 percent of them ZEV. That’s an estimated annual output for one state of 270,000 EVs, plug-in hybrids and fuel-cell electrics, based on projected 2025 statewide sales of 1.75 million new cars and light trucks. Plug-in hybrids with extended all-electric range are expected to account for about two-thirds of the total.”

        https://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/will-californias-zero-emissions-mandate-alter-the-car-landscape.html

          1. The reality is the timeline is long compared to the necessity of the present.
            Even if all new vehicles were EV it would take 12 years to replace the current stock of ICE vehicles. Since the production level is relatively small now it will take much longer. Don’t expect all new vehicles to be EV (or otherwise clean energy) until after 2030.
            Even then there are so many things that can change or go wrong between now and then, that actual prediction is practically impossible.

            1. A couple of years ago I had a conversation with a GM factory representative at the local auto show. He was telling me that it was GM’s marketing strategy to make EV’s an option across most of their models in the future. The way AC was an option 50 years ago.

            2. An option? You mean we can drop in an electric drive system at will?
              I heard they were going to mostly use the Bolt platform and just make different bodies, etc. The Bolt is a good platform, not as high performance as the Tesla but still good. GM might pull it off in a few years, just to find Tesla way ahead of them. 🙂
              Still, there are a lot of reasons to buy a Bolt, especially if one has chargers in their region.
              https://pluginamerica.org/how-do-chevy-bolt-and-tesla-model-3-compare/

              Me, I’m looking hard at the Chevy Volt, post 2015. Prices are coming down and I can do 90 percent of my driving on battery only, but still take long trips or just go if I forget to plug it in.

              The one thing that stands our as an error in the Model 3 is the center screen system with everything on it. That should be corrected. Driver needs to stay looking forward not glancing sideways.

            4. Good point Bob, never had to try to read the speedometer on them down at chest level though where the radio usually is located. Do you drive down the road looking at the rear view mirror a lot? They do have pull down mirrors right in front of you to put on your makeup and fix your hair.

            5. Well, the speed is shown at the top left corner of the display on a Model 3, so I don’t believe you have to look down at all to see it, but I haven’t driven one yet, so I don’t know whether I will like it or not. I do look at my side mounted rear view mirrors frequently while driving though. More than I look at the speedometer.

              I don’t like the idea of having a big screen in a car, but I do love the minimalist dash of the Model 3, and I think what Tesla did is the obvious next step evolution of user interface for cars.

              As a long time AutoCAD veteran though, the user interface I’d prefer would be a micro-keyboard that I could operate with one hand, entering command aliases for all user operated controls. It wouldn’t be user friendly at first, but once you mastered it, you’d never have to look. You’d just have a muscle memory conversation with your car in the same way you have one with your computer while drafting.

            6. I have a Volt and love the powertrain. I absolutely hate all of the electronic gee-gaws, especially the touch screen. Stupid, stupid stupid.

              I haven’t put gas in it for almost a year.

        2. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/business/auto-sales.html

          The auto industry’s long-running sales party has come to an end.

          After seven straight years of growth in domestic new-vehicle sales, manufacturers on Wednesday reported a decline of about 1.8 percent in 2017, to 17.2 million cars and light trucks.

          Further dampening the mood is the consensus that 2018 will bring an even larger drop. Edmunds.com, an auto-information website, predicts that just 16.8 million light vehicles will be sold this year.

          GM sales were not immune to this trend with sales down 1.3% during the same period!

          While Tesla’s sales are currently still experiencing robust growth with no end in sight.

          BTW, for reference, GM has been around for over 100 years while Tesla has only been producing cars since 2012.

          But to your point that ALL automobile companies are technology companies, comparing the legacy ICE automobile manufacturer’s ‘technology’ to Tesla’s is a bit like comparing a modern jetliner to the Wright brother’s first flying machine.

          Sure, all automobile manufacturers are building EVs with batteries , but Tesla is way ahead of the pack in that game, and that doesn’t even take into consideration their extensive charging network.

          So let me know when GM has Bolt sales are even remotely comparable to the Model 3 and they have completed their own nation wide fast charging network that their customer’s can use free of charge…

          1. “is a bit like comparing a modern jetliner to the Wright brother’s first flying machine”

            I disagree. There is a lot more to building vehicles than the drivetrain. Your point is more like asking GE who makes jet engines to compete building air frames with Boeing. Musk is in over his (smoking)head and only wishes he had GE’s problems.

            Sell your Tesla stock while your friends are still under the ether. Tesla’s cost nearly twice as much as a equivalent ICE. Have you seen or touched the inexpensive materials Tesla uses ? Their 100K interiors are make like a high end Camry with a large display screen. Ask any women, it’s about quality not quantity.

            In a year or two when all the manufactures are offering EV’s. Musk will be filing for unemployment after he files for bankruptcies.

            1. In a year or two when all the manufactures are offering EV’s. Musk will be filing for unemployment after he files for bankruptcies.

              I don’t think Elon is all that worried…

              Elon Musk/Net worth
              20.4 billion USD
              2018

            2. Just another reason not to buy a Tesla. Like a dog, he doesn’t care who he screws.

            3. For the record, I’m not a Tesla salesman nor do I own Tesla stock.

            4. I hope GM does great with EV’s. Would be good if Tesla survived too.
              I would purchase a Chevy Bolt over the small Tesla if I was putting down 35K today.

    1. Re: Methane aka Ch.4. Any living being that flatulates methane contributes to climate change. Would it be possible to alter diets of all living beings so that no more Methane is released in the air? What about limiting ourselves to only altering the human diet, would even a goal like that be possible?

      1. Would it be possible to alter diets of all living beings so that no more Methane is released in the air?

        Nope! Case in point: Termites. Which BTW, are edible and could potentially even become a food and protein source for humans. What complex tangled webs we might weave, eh?!

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4427943/
        Edible and medicinal termites: a global overview

        The reason I mention termites is because thay are also a significant natural source of methane emissions.

        Each termite produces, on average, about half a microgram of methane per day, a seemingly insignificant amount. However, when this is multiplied up by the world population of termites, global methane emission from this source is estimated to be about 20 million tonnes each year.

        Then to make matters even more interesting, climate change and global warming could potentially be contributing to the spread of invasive termite species, especially in the tropics and shifting climate zones. Thus possibly making termite CH4 emissions an additional self reinforcing climate change feedback.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5288252/
        Invasive termites in a changing climate: A global perspective

        Which then brings us back to the discussion of the contributions of Robert May to Population Biology and bifurcations in Chaos Theory.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_YCvTabMO4&index=4&list=PLbN57C5Zdl6j_qJA-pARJnKsmROzPnO9V

        MAE5790-4 Model of an insect outbreak

        Cheers!

        P.S. And unfortunately discussions, involving complex systems, non-linear dynamics, feedbacks and understanding the risks of passing certain tipping points, seem to be beyond the comprehension level of linear one dimensional thinkers such as Kevin Nishimoto who think there are simplistic political solutions to be had!

        Sad! 😉

    1. POWER WARS GAMES Fed Style. You can check in , but you can’t check out.

      Yep! This is a good example of the economic costs of technological disruptions to legacy power generation monopolies. When it comes to sunk costs they just keep sinking deeper and deeper into the morass, with little to no hope of ever getting out of the hole!

      Who would ever have thought, even a decade ago, that nuclear, could be so darn complicated, not to mention uneconomic, eh?!

      1. Below is a flyer of the Pensacola Westinghouse PWR fab plant. Many PWR reactor vessels were made here pre TMI. I knew many in top management and if they knew what we know today these things might have never been build. In his Later years, Admiral Rickover said it was a huge mistake re-introducing so many radioisotopes that had previously prevented life on planet earth. There was MUCH concern and nervousness over the safety aspects of the competing and cheaper type BWR reactors. Today the facility is a GE Wind Turbine assembly plant.
        https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/items/show/7460

  45. This is especially for Kevin Nishimoto who thinks we are too focused on climate change here. Kevin, please give us your thoughts on accretion physis w.r.t. black holes relative to the work cited in the following new paper? Thanks in advance.

    FIRST DETECTION OF MATTER FALLING INTO A BLACK HOLE AT 30 PERCENT OF THE SPEED OF LIGHT

    “An implication of the new research is that ‘chaotic accretion’ from misaligned discs is likely to be common for supermassive black holes. Such black holes would then spin quite slowly, being able to accept far more gas and grow their masses more rapidly than generally believed, providing an explanation for why black holes which formed in the early Universe quickly gained very large masses.”

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-09-falling-black-hole-percent.html#jCp

  46. Fred —

    OCTOPUSES GIVEN MOOD DRUG ‘ECSTASY’ REVEAL GENETIC LINK TO EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL BEHAVIORS IN HUMANS

    “Octopuses are well-known to be clever creatures. They can trick prey to come into their clutches, and Dölen says there is some evidence they also learn by observation and have episodic memory. The gelatinous invertebrates (animals without backbones) are further notorious for escaping from their tank, eating other animals’ food, eluding caretakers and sneaking around.”

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-09-octopuses-mood-drug-ecstasy-reveal.html#jCp

    1. OMFG! Frantically using AI science research assistant, https://iris.ai/ to search all data bases for any research papers that might in some way link this study to climate change… currently searching key words: ‘ a warmer octopus is a happier octopus’, to no avail… 😉

      BTW don’t forget to commemorate Octopus day next month, and check out these interesting facts about our future cephalopod overlords!
      https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/octopus-chronicles/happy-octopus-day-the-8-best-octopus-discoveries/

      Cheers!

Comments are closed.