Why a Great Reset Based on Green Energy Isn’t Possible

It seems like a reset of an economy should work like a reset of your computer: Turn it off and turn it back on again; most problems should be fixed. However, it doesn’t really work that way. Let’s look at a few of the misunderstandings that lead people to believe that the world economy can move to a Green Energy future.

[1] The economy isn’t really like a computer that can be switched on and off; it is more comparable to a human body that is dead, once it is switched off.

A computer is something that is made by humans. There is a beginning and an end to the process of making it. The computer works because energy in the form of electrical current flows through it. We can turn the electricity off and back on again. Somehow, almost like magic, software issues are resolved, and the system works better after the reset than before.

Even though the economy looks like something made by humans, it really is extremely different. In physics terms, it is a “dissipative structure.” It is able to “grow” only because of energy consumption, such as oil to power trucks and electricity to power machines.

The system is self-organizing in the sense that new businesses are formed based on the resources available and the apparent market for products made using these resources. Old businesses disappear when their products are no longer needed. Customers make decisions regarding what to buy based on their incomes, the amount of debt available to them, and the choice of goods available in the marketplace.

There are many other dissipative structures. Hurricanes and tornadoes are dissipative structures. So are stars. Plants and animals are dissipative structures. Ecosystems of all kinds are dissipative structures. All of these things grow for a time and eventually collapse. If their energy source is taken away, they fail quite quickly. The energy source for humans is food of various types; for plants it is generally sunlight.

Thinking that we can switch the economy off and on again comes close to assuming that we can resurrect human beings after they die. Perhaps this is possible in a religious sense. But assuming that we can do this with an economy requires a huge leap of faith.

[2] Economic growth has a definite pattern to it, rather than simply increasing without limit. 

Many people have developed models reflecting the fact that economic growth seems to come in waves or cycles. Ray Dalio shows a chart describing his view of the economic cycle in a preview to his upcoming book, The Changing World Order. Figure 1 is Dalio’s chart, with some annotations I have added in blue.

Figure 1. New World Order chart by Ray Dalio from an introduction to his theory called The Changing World Order. Annotations in blue added by Gail Tverberg.

Modelers of all kinds would like to think that there are no limits in this world. Actually, there are many limits. It is the fact that economies have to work around limits that leads to cycles such as these. Some examples of limits include inadequate arable land for a growing population, inability to fight off pathogens, and an energy supply that becomes excessively expensive to produce. Cycles can be expected to vary in steepness, both on the upside and the downside of the cycle.

The danger of ignoring these cycles is that researchers tend to create models of future economic growth and future energy consumption that are far out of sync with what really can be expected. Accurate models need to include at least some limited version of overshoot and collapse on a regular basis. Models of the future economy tend to be based on what politicians would like to believe will happen, rather than what actually can be expected to happen in the real world.

[3] Commodity prices behave differently at different stages of the economic cycle. During the second half of the economic cycle, it becomes difficult to keep commodity prices high enough for producers. 

There is a common belief that demand for energy products will always be high, because everyone knows we need energy. Thus, according to this belief, if we have the technology to extract fossil fuels, prices will eventually rise high enough that fossil fuel resources can easily be extracted. Many people have been concerned that we might “run out” of oil. They expect that oil prices will rise to compensate for the shortages. Thus, many people believe that in order to maintain adequate supply, we should be concerned about supplementing fossil fuels with nuclear power and renewable energy.

If we examine oil prices (Figure 2), it is apparent that, at least recently, this is not the way oil prices actually behave. Since the spike in oil prices in 2008, the big problem has been prices that fall too low for oil producers. At prices well below $100 per barrel, development of many new oil fields is not economic. Low oil prices are especially a problem in 2020 because travel restrictions associated with the coronavirus pandemic reduce oil demand (and prices) even below where they were previously.

Figure 2. Weekly average spot oil prices for Brent, based on data of the US Energy Information Administration.

Strangely enough, coal prices (Figure 3) seem to follow a very similar pattern to oil prices, even though coal is commonly believed to be available in huge supply, and oil is commonly believed to be in short supply.

Figure 3. Selected Spot Coal Prices, from BP’s 2020 Statistical Review of World Energy. Prices are annual averages. Price for China is Qinhuangdao spot price; price for US is Central Appalachian coal spot index; price for Europe is Northwest European marker price.

Comparing Figures 2 and 3, we see that prices for both oil and coal rose to a peak in 2008, then fell back sharply. The timing of this drop in prices corresponds with the “debt bust” in late 2008 that is shown in Figure 1.

Prices then rose to another peak in 2011, after several years of Quantitative Easing (QE). QE is intended to hold the cost of borrowing down, encouraging the use of more debt. This debt can be used by citizens to buy more goods made with coal and oil (such as cars and solar panels). Therefore, QE is a way to increase demand and thus help raise energy prices. In the 2011-2014 period, oil was able to maintain its price better than coal, perhaps because of its short supply. Once the United States discontinued its QE program in 2014, oil prices dropped like a rock (Figure 2).

Prices were very low in 2015 and 2016 for both coal and oil. China stimulated its economy, and prices for both coal and oil were able to rise again in 2017 and 2018. By 2019, prices for both oil and coal were falling again. Figure 2 shows that in 2020, oil prices have fallen again, as a result of demand destruction caused by pandemic shutdowns. Coal prices have also fallen in 2020, according to Trading Economics.

[4] The low prices since mid-2008 seem to be leading to both peak crude oil and peak coal. Crude oil production started falling in 2019 and can be expected to continue falling in 2020. Coal extraction seems likely to start falling in 2020.

In the previous section, I showed that crude oil and coal both have the same problem: Prices tend to be too low for producers to make a profit extracting them. For this reason, investment in new oil wells is being reduced, and unprofitable coal mines are being closed.

Figure 4 shows that world crude oil production has not grown much since 2004. In fact, OPEC’s production has not grown much since 2004, even though OPEC countries report high oil reserves so, in theory, they could pump more oil if they chose to.

Figure 4. World crude oil production (including condensate) based on data from BP’s 2020 Statistical Review of World Energy. Russia+ refers to the group Commonwealth of Independent States.

In total, BP data shows that world crude oil production fell by 582,000 barrels per day, comparing 2019 to 2018. This represents a drop of 2.0 million barrels per day in OPEC production, offset by smaller increases in production for the US, Canada, and Russia. Crude oil production is expected to fall further in 2020, because of low demand and prices.

Because of continued low coal prices, world coal production has been on a bumpy plateau since 2011. Prices seem to be even lower in 2020 than in 2019, putting further downward pressure on coal extraction in 2020.

Figure 5. World coal production based on data from BP’s 2020 Statistical Review of World Energy.

[5] Modelers missed the fact that fossil fuel extraction would disappear because of low prices, leaving nearly all reserves and other resources in the ground. Modelers instead assumed that renewables would always be an extension of a fossil fuel-powered system.

The thing that most people do not understand is that commodity prices are set by the laws of physics, so that supply and demand are in balance. Demand is really very close to “affordability.” If there is too much wage/wealth disparity, commodity prices tend to fall too low. In a globalized world, many workers earn only a few dollars a day. Because of their low wages, these low-paid workers cannot afford to purchase very much of the world’s goods and services. The use of robots tends to produce a similar result because robots can’t actually purchase goods and services made by the economy.

Thus, modelers looking at Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) for wind and for solar assumed that they would always be used inside of a fossil fuel powered system that could provide heavily subsidized balancing for their intermittent output. They made calculations as if intermittent electricity is equivalent to electricity that can be controlled to provide electricity when it is needed. Their calculations seemed to suggest that making wind and solar would be useful. The thing that was overlooked was that this was only possible within a system where other fuels would provide balancing at a very low cost.

[6] The same issue of low demand leading to low prices affects commodities of all kinds. As a result, many of the future resources that modelers count on, and that companies depend upon as the basis for borrowing, are unlikely to really be available.

Commodities of all kinds are being affected by low demand and low selling prices. The problem giving rise to low prices seems to be related to excessive specialization, excessive use of capital goods to replace labor, and excessive use of globalization. These issues are all related to the needs of a world economy that depends on a high level of technology. In such an economy, too much of the output of the economy goes to producing devices and to paying highly trained workers. Little is left for non-elite workers.

The low selling prices of commodities makes it impossible for employers to pay adequate wages to most of their workers. These low wages, in turn, feed through to the uprisings we have been seeing in the last couple of years. These uprisings are part of “Revolutions and Wars” mentioned in Figure 1. It is difficult to see how this problem will disappear without a major change in the “World Order,” mentioned in the same figure.

Because the problem of low commodity prices is widespread, our ability to produce electrical backup of all kinds, including the ability to make batteries, can be expected to become an increasing problem. Commodities, such as lithium, suffer from low prices, not unlike the low prices for coal and oil. These low prices lead to cutbacks in their production and local uprisings.

[7] On a stand-alone basis, intermittent renewables have very limited usefulness. Their true value is close to zero.

If electricity is only available when the sun is shining, or when the wind is blowing, industry cannot plan for its use. Its use must be limited to applications where intermittency doesn’t matter, such as pumping water for animals to drink or desalinating water. No one would attempt to smelt metals with intermittent electricity because the metals would set at the wrong time, if the intermittent electricity suddenly disappeared. No one would power an elevator with intermittent electricity, because a person could easily be trapped between floors. Homeowners would not use electricity to power refrigerators, because, as likely as not, the food would spoil when electricity was off for long periods. Traffic signals would work sometimes, but not always.

Lebanon is an example of a country whose electricity system works only intermittently. It is hard to imagine that any other country would want to imitate Lebanon. Lack of reliable electricity supply leads to protests in Lebanon.

[8] The true cost of wind and solar has been hidden from everyone, using subsidies whose total cost is hard to determine.

Each country has its own way of providing subsidies to renewables. Most countries give wind and solar the subsidy of “going first.” They are often given a fixed rate as well. Both of these are subsidies. In the US, other subsidies are buried in the tax system. Recently, there has been talk of using QE to help wind and solar providers lower their cost of borrowing.

Newspapers regularly report that the price of wind and solar is at “grid parity,” but this is not an apples to apples comparison. To be useful, electricity needs to be available when users need it. The cost of storage is far too high to allow us to store electricity for weeks and months at a time.

If we were to use intermittent electricity as a substitute for fossil fuels in general, we would need to use intermittent electricity to heat homes and offices in winter. Sunshine is abundant in the summer, but not in the winter. Without storage, solar panels cannot even be counted on to provide homeowners with heat for cooking dinner after the sun sets in the evening. An incredibly huge amount of storage would be needed to store heat from summer to winter.

China reports that it has $42 billion in unpaid clean energy subsidies, and this amount is getting larger each year. Countries are now becoming poorer and the taxes they are able to collect are lower. Their ability to subsidize a high cost, unreliable electricity system is disappearing.

[9] Wind, solar, and hydroelectric today only comprise a little under 10% of the world’s energy supply. 

We are deluding ourselves if we think we can get along on such a tiny total energy supply.

Figure 6. Hydroelectric, wind, and solar electricity as a percentage of world energy supply, based on BP’s 2020 Statistical Review of World Energy.

Few people understand what a small share of the world’s energy supply wind and solar provide today. The amounts shown in Figure 6 assume that the denominator is total energy (including oil, for example), not just electricity. In 2019, hydroelectric accounted for 6.4% of world energy supply. Wind accounted for 2.2%, and solar accounted for 1.1%. The three together amounted to 9.7% of the world’s energy supply.

None of these three energy types is suited to producing food. Oil is currently used for tilling fields, making herbicides and pesticides, and transporting refrigerated crops to market.

[10] Few people understand how important energy supply is for giving humans control over other species and pathogens.

Control over other species and pathogens has been a multistage effort. In recent years, this effort has involved antibiotics, antivirals and vaccines. Pasteurization became an important technique in the 1800s.

Humans’ control over other species started over 100,000 years ago, when humans learned to burn biomass for many uses, including cooking foods, scaring away predators, and burning down entire forests to improve their food supply. In my 2018 post, Supplemental energy puts humans in charge, I wrote about one proof of the importance of humans’ control of fire. In the lower layers of a cave in South Africa, big cats were in charge: There were no carbon deposits from fire and gnawed human bones were scattered around the cave. In the upper layers of the same cave, humans were clearly in charge. There were carbon deposits from fires, and bones of big cats that had been gnawed by humans were scattered around the cave.

We are dealing with COVID-19 now. Today’s hospitals are only possible thanks to a modern mix of energy supply. Drugs are very often made using oil. Personal protective equipment is made in factories around the world and shipped to where it is used, generally using oil for transport.

Conclusion

We do indeed appear to be headed for a Great Reset. There is little chance that Green Energy can play more than a small role, however. Leaders are often confused because of the erroneous modeling that has been done. Given that the world’s oil and coal supply seem to be declining in the near term, the chance that fossil fuel production will ever rise as high as assumptions made in the IPCC reports seems very slim.

It is true that some Green Energy devices may continue to operate for a time. But, as the world economy continues to head downhill, it will be increasingly difficult to make new renewable devices and to repair existing systems. Wholesale electricity prices can be expected to stay very low, leading to the need for continued subsidies for wind and solar.

Figure 1 indicates that we can expect more revolutions and wars at this stage in the cycle. At least part of this unrest will be related to low commodity prices and low wages. Globalization will tend to disappear. Keeping transmission lines repaired will become an increasing problem, as will many other tasks associated with keeping energy supplies available.

This entry was posted in Energy policy and tagged , , , , , by Gail Tverberg. Bookmark the permalink.

About Gail Tverberg

My name is Gail Tverberg. I am an actuary interested in finite world issues - oil depletion, natural gas depletion, water shortages, and climate change. Oil limits look very different from what most expect, with high prices leading to recession, and low prices leading to financial problems for oil producers and for oil exporting countries. We are really dealing with a physics problem that affects many parts of the economy at once, including wages and the financial system. I try to look at the overall problem.

2,650 thoughts on “Why a Great Reset Based on Green Energy Isn’t Possible

    • the POTUS has no authority to postpone the election.

      99.9% chance the election happens on schedule.

        • AG Barr seems like a man who actually cares about what is just and right, and so I suspect he would be all for carrying on with the election on its designated date.

          I also suspect that 99% of Americans want the election to happen.

          99.9% chance the election happens on schedule.

          • Just and right!!!!??? I almost pissed myself I laughed so hard! Barr is about as crooked as they come!!!

  1. Boy, my first business suit I bought was from JC Penney and gold signet ring.
    That was close to 45 years ago….now..
    J.C. Penney looks to sell company in bankruptcy to avoid liquidation
    USA TODAY
    Kelly Tyko, USA TODAY
    USA TODAYJuly 29, 2020
    J.C. Penney is looking to go forward with a sale of the business to avoid a brush with liquidation.
    The retailer’s attorney, Joshua Sussberg of Kirkland & Ellis, said during a bankruptcy court hearing Wednesday that the sale should be completed by the fall under an expedited process and rebuffed rumors of a liquidation of the entire chain.
    “We have had not one discussion with our lenders or any other stakeholders about a liquidation. That is simply not in the cards,” Sussberg said.
    The retailer filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in mid-May with 846 stores and 85,000 employees at the time of the filing. J.C. Penney has said it hopes to emerge from bankruptcy with about 600 stores and has begun liquidation sales at around 150 stores.
    ….In mid-July, the company received an extension from certain lenders until July 31 to secure their approval for a business plan to restructure its operations in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and announced plans to cut 1,000 jobs.

    Sussberg said Wednesday there are three separate bids being considered for sale of the company’s real estate and other assets. He did not name the bidders and called the proposals confidential. He said they were actively in negotiations ahead of the Friday deadline.

    During the hearing, Sussberg lambasted an article published earlier this week by The New York Post that reported a $1.75 billion bid by private equity firm Sycamore Partners to buy J.C. Penney and merge with another struggling chain Belk Inc. Sussberg called the report “ill-informed.”
    “We are moving forward with a sales process,” Sussberg said. “We are hopeful.”
    A spokesperson at Sycamore Partners declined to comment.
    The coronavirus has deepened the ongoing troubles for department stores, which have had a difficult time adjusting to the rise of digital threats and nimble physical competitors that offer affordable fast-fashion apparel.
    As many as 25,000 stores could shutter this year as businesses continue to feel the impacts of the pandemic, according to a recent report from Coresight Research.
    Ascena Retail Group, Brooks Brothers, Lucky Brand, J.C. Penney, Neiman Marcus, Sur La Table and J. Crew have all filed for Chapter 11 since May.
    Many others are downsizing locations
    Can’t imagine why there isn’t a financial panic yet….oh, that’s right, free checks from Uncle Sam

    • panic is one of the biggest dangers.

      group behavior might do much more damage to the economy later this year, as the true nature of the present economic damage comes into clearer focus, as the average person sees that mass unemployment is permanent and that we have fallen into a great depression.

      those who still have some money will be holding on to it ever more tightly, and thus the velocity of money will tank even more.

      after the school year restarts, this will be more real to people, that things are far far worse than the 2019 normal.

      • “The U.S. economy posted its worst contraction in history during the second quarter, with GDP from April to June plunging 32.9%. Meanwhile, U.S. weekly jobless claims came in at 1.434 million, roughly in line with estimates. However, continuing claims, or those who have been collecting for at least two weeks, totaled 17.018 million, up from about 16 million last week.”

        the big news may have been that minus 33% but:

        just another Thursday reminder that before covid, the usual weekly jobless claims were about 300,000.

        now after 18 or so weeks of record jobless claims, even though the number has declined from its peak, the number is still ONE MILLION higher than the previous usual weekly number.

        how long can it go on with over a million lost jobs per week?

  2. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/30/astrazeneca-ceo-coronavirus-vaccine-might-require-annual-shots.html

    ‘We don’t know’: AstraZeneca CEO says ‘unpredictable’ coronavirus may require annual vaccinations’

    But I thought AstraZeneca’s vaccine included T-cells which have memory? Maybe this bonanza of pharm money is just too alluring to be satisfied with a single shot. Like hurricane’s are to the weather channel or merchandise sales are at Xmas, they are now use to the flow of billions and want mo money!

    Just to be sure we really ought to inoculate the masses every single year. Oh, ok, here’s another couple hundred billion. Need more?

    • “Just to be sure we really ought to inoculate the masses every single year. Oh, ok, here’s another couple hundred billion. Need more?”

      The Flu model.

      Just call it a “Health Subscription” and people will probably pay up but not take the treatment.

      • Plus, in most cases, you are going to need 2 vaccinations.
        In the US, that will be hard.
        Its a covid, one is going to have to be vaccinated frequently, if it follows other covid .

        • Why not optimize your Vitamin D level, just say “No” to vaccination, and let your immune system take care of this virus? And if you happen to come down with it, take one of the several effective cures that should be available? You know it makes sense.

          Says Catherine Austin Fitts:

          When you help a family with their finances, it is imperative to understand all their risk issues. Their financial success depends on successful mitigation of all risk – whether financial or non-financial – they encounter in their daily lives. All non-financial risks impact the allocation of family resources – attention, time, assets and money.

          Many of my clients and their children had been devastated and drained by health care failures and corruption–and the most common catalyst for this devastation was vaccine death and injury. After their lengthy and horrendous experiences with the health care establishment, they would invariably ask, “If the corruption is this bad in medicine, food and health, what is going on in the financial world?” Chilled by the thought, they would search out a financial professional who was schooled in U.S. government and financial corruption. And they would find me.

          The result of this flow of bright, educated people blessed with the resources to pay for my time was that, for ten years, I got quite an education about the disabilities and death inflicted on our children by what I now call “the great poisoning.” As a result, I had the opportunity to repeatedly price out the human damage to all concerned–not just the affected children but their parents, siblings and future generations—mapping the financial costs of vaccine injury again and again and again. These cases were not as unusual as you might expect. Currently 54% of American children have one or more chronic diseases. Doctors that I trust assure me the number is much higher as many children and their families can not afford the care and testing necessary to properly diagnose what ails them.

          One of the mothers featured in VAXXED—a must-watch documentary for any awake citizen, as is its sequel VAXXED II: The People’s Truth—estimated that a heavily autistic child would cost present value $5MM to raise and care for over a lifetime. When my clients who were grandparents insisted that they would not interfere with their children’s vaccine choices because it was “none of their business,” I would say, “Really? Who has the $5MM? You or your kids? When your kids need the $5MM to raise their vaccine-injured child, are you going to refuse them? You are the banker, and it is your money that is at risk here, so it is your business. Do you want to spend that $5MM on growing a strong family through the generations or on managing a disabled child who did not have to be disabled?” Often, that $5MM in expenditures also translates into divorce, depression and lost opportunities for siblings.

          https://home.solari.com/deep-state-tactics-101-the-covid-injection-fraud-its-not-a-vaccine/

          • I know from looking at medical malpractice claim information that the cost of raising (and lifetime care) for a disabled child is distressingly high. Certainly, it is well over $1 million. And no one is going to cover the cost. The mother (or father) can quit their job to be a full-time caregiver, but this still leaves a lot of physician visits. And a parent doesn’t live forever. How is this person going to be cared for, permanently?

            I have often wondered why the healthcare system tries to “save” so many children who will need permanent care. It would be better for the mother to have another child and try again.

            • Re: long term care.

              News sites are always looking for the “I woke up after several decades in hospital in a coma” stories. Rarely do they report the other side of the coin or consider the benefits for the patient or the society that has supported them.

              Some years ago I read a story about a man involved in a single vehicle car crash in one of England’s less heavily populated areas.

              He was severely injured and brain damaged but the local hospital managed to keep him alive.
              It transpired that he was an immigrant without a valid visa who was meant to have returned to his country in Eastern Europe a year or to before the accident. Obviously that was not now going to happen.

              Being a location with a small population the local health authority had quite a small budget to work with compared to the big cities but this man’s long term care costing circa £350k per annum at the time, became their responsibility.

              There were no local facilities that could provide the service “correctly” and for an extended period, so he was transferred to a Hospital in London where a room, equipment and staff could be provided and paid for by the small health authority up country. That meant their own service to local people were adversely affected by the £350k per annum budget transfer to London.

              The man, as I recall, was about 30 at the time of the accident and was expected to continue to survive, in a vegetative state, for something like 30 years. Maybe longer.

              With the best will in the world I find it very difficult to see a sound moral argument for that sort of situation being useful and acceptable. But equally it would be very difficult, once the medics had “saved” the chap’s life, to take a different decision.

            • The ‘healthcare’ system was what damaged them in the first place e..g. by excessive vaccines administered in the pursuit of profits.

              The reason they’re “saved” is again profits from ongoing treatment, plus it’s the medical cartel who has control of when you’re allowed to die.

              The average American 65 year old takes 27 prescription drugs. What a fantastic business model.

            • I doubt the average 65 year old takes 27 prescription drugs. This 2019 article (from Kaiser Family Foundation) says https://www.kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/data-note-prescription-drugs-and-older-adults/

              Nearly nine in ten (89%) adults 65 and older report they are currently taking any prescription medicine. This compares to three-fourths of 50-64 year olds who report taking prescription drugs, half (51%) of 30-49 year olds, and four in ten (38%) 18-29 year olds. Older adults are also more likely than their younger counterparts to be taking multiple prescription medications. More than half of adults 65 and older (54%) report taking four or more prescription drugs compared to one-third of adults 50-64 years old (32%) and about one in ten adults 30-49 (13%) or 18-29 (7%).

              Of course, I am sure that this doesn’t include the many vaccines and the occasional rounds of antibiotics for “whatever is going around.”

            • There was a podcast by the LA Times some months ago that talked about folks in vegetative states being warehoused in CA “vent farms”. It followed the story of one in particular, an illegal immigrant whose name was unknown for 15+ years. They called him “Sixty-Six Garage”.

              https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/room-20/id1473207217
              (9 episodes.)

              $4 million at least for just this one guy (so far).

            • we used to have a family doctor of the ‘old school’ had no compunction at all about allowing a badly disable baby quietly ‘slip away’ or helping an aged patient ‘on their way’

              it seemed a fairly common and accepted act of kindness in the medical profession.

              the community cannot afford £$ millions to keep people alive indefinetely

            • All of these “care homes” of various types help maintain the view that we need to provide top level care to everyone, no matter how disabled. I know that when we had my husband’s parents in an Assisted Living Center (for people who are better off than require Nursing Home Care) near our home, we would get phone calls from the facility insisting that we pick up our relative and take him/her to an emergency room because of a rash or other minor complaint. I suppose the home was concerned about possible spread within the facility, if the cause was something contagious. An emergency room is the most expensive type of care, but for some reason (health cost reimbursement rules?), lower levels of care facilities, such as “Urgent Care Facilities” could not be used. And we certainly couldn’t just wait and see if the problem went away by itself.

            • Prescription per capita in the United States by age group 2013
              Published by Statista Research Department, Apr 30, 2014

              The average number of prescriptions per capita in the U.S. was, on average, 12.2 per capita in 2013. Trends indicate that the number of prescriptions per capita increases with age. Those aged 65-79 years utilize, on average 27.3 prescriptions per year. The number of prescriptions filled in the U.S. has increased in recent years.

              Prescription drugs in the U.S.
              It is expected that there will be 4.57 billion prescriptions filled annually by the year 2024. The total percentage of the U.S. population that had used prescription drugs in the past 30 days was about 47 percent as of 2014. The top therapeutic area in the U.S. in 2016 was represented through antihypertensive drugs, followed by pain management drugs.

              The U.S. pharmaceutical industry
              Residents in the U.S. pay some of the highest pharmaceutical per capita costs worldwide. One consequence of high pharmaceutical costs in the U.S. is a booming pharmaceutical industry. The U.S. pharmaceutical industry, which is responsible for the production and development of prescription drugs, in the U.S. has grown significantly in recent years. Domestic revenue from U.S. pharmaceutical companies was about 225 billion U.S. dollars in 2017.

              Read more:
              https://www.statista.com/statistics/315476/prescriptions-in-us-per-capita-by-age-group/

            • I imagine most of these prescriptions are for a one-month supply of a drug. Thus, 27.3 prescriptions per year would come out to a little over 2 per person per month.

  3. Best dive ever

    2020-Q2 GDP

    US -33%
    UK -14%
    Germany -11%
    China +3% (if you trust it)

  4. This YT video (6 min) re China floods is from 21 July, but very interesting. Explains why so much farmland is being deliberately flooded, to save cities, especially Wuhan.

    A closing comment – ‘A massive famine in China is expected’

    The deception of the 3 Gorges Dam released
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZCpz0g-IrA

    Today’s Crossroads update has a few items on China food security, or lack of it. (from 2 m 45 s). The CCP is telling the 31 regions of China they are responsible for local food security (reading between the lines – when famine hits we can blame you).

    Food Crisis with the Floods, Locusts, Virus In China; Summer Snow in Beijing; US Forms New Alliance
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtJ4hU6gFEI

    In the meantime, the heavy rain that has been causing the serious flooding the last 50 days or so is forecast to move north (in China) over the next few days. Presumably new lands will be flooded.
    Interesting times ahead, for as all.

    • Thanks for the videos. The story in China does seem to be disturbing. I can see why China would want to protect Wuhan and Shanghai, even if it meant flooding rural areas. There would be fewer people in the way, and it might be more possible to move most of these people, a person might think.

      The food situation is concerning as well. Why do leaders bring it up, if it is not a concern?

      It would seem like China would be ripe for political changes as well, if things get too bad. Between the financial situation, the floods, COVID-19 and the food supply, they definitely have problems.

      • I thought it would be more advantageous to let the Pandemic go around but control its spread. Thereby reducing demand for food that way.

  5. This is why you should always question EVERYTHING. Anthony Fauci says we should obey social distancing laws, wear mask and he says Hydroxchloroquine is safe and doesn’t work but he assures everyone that rushed to market vaccines will do the job. So if Fauci is preaching all the do’s and don’ts about Covid 19 then why is he breaking all of them? Because he is an ELITIST and the rules don’t apply to him but more importantly because Covid 19 isn’t the Monster Virus he and the media have made it to be.

    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/civil-unrest/the-elitists-are-rising-their-lives-to-maintain-lockdowns/

    https://d33wjekvz3zs1a.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Fauci-Anthony-Game-no-mask.jpg

        • And there are many doctors who have come out and would say you are wrong.

          • Duncan is never wrong!

            No doubt he could explain to you why he isn’t wrong on this issue, but his mode of giving out pronouncements is similar to that of the Sibyls such as the Oracle at Delphi.

            The most we can expect out of Duncan the an occasional hint.

        • I wish Trump never mentioned HCQ. Dr Chris Martenson says there is good evidence that HCQ and Zinc are effective if taken early in the disease process. It’s been so politicized that if I became infected I probably won’t be able to be treated with it.

      • How about face shields instead of masks? These might be more acceptable to wearers. I have a face shield I was, usually without a mask. I keep a mask in my purse, in case someone want a mask instead.

        The solutions that work are ones that people can be persuaded to do. Leaders have to be willing to do them as well. I don’t see leaders with both masks and face shields.

        Having both a mask and face shield on makes it difficult to be understood when a person talks. I have also had difficulty with my glasses fogging over, when I have both on.

    • We also saw the earlier video of Fauci, when he took off his mask as soon as the camera was turned away from him, but there were still people around him in the room.

      • Omg I am so sick of the argument of whether or not its fake….just go out and expose yourself to the virus I don’t care!!!! The real matter is what is going to happen to the economy and how and when it is going to affect us….the people on planet earth….

        Do you really think that the PTB can orchestrate something as complicated as this and not have someone screw it up? Really?!?!!??! Have you ever met a politician or a major CEO? I have and most of the time the are about as smart as a box of rocks! They get to their positions by playing the game but by now someone would have spilled the beans. Sorry I am just getting so bored with the constant barrage of this is fake story……..really Dude….you are getting very lame!!

        • Who are you addressing as “Dude”, Dan. It isn’t clear from the context of your comment or its position in the thread.

          Also, your language in general comes over as trolling. If you are not trolling, you would be well advised to employ a different tone. Because the tone you are using now screams, “I am a troll and I live in a hole.” 🙂

        • “Omg I am so sick of the argument of whether or not its fake”

          Who said it’s fake? What I and others have said and fully believe, that it’s not as bad as what you have been led to believe. Look at all the current athletes who have tested positive. Have they “ALL” dropped dead? No !

          They have recovered. Covid 19 is NOT the Black Death II. It’s another variant of the Common Flu albeit a little stronger. You really need to educate yourself. Don’t believe everything the Media and The Elite tell you. Question EVERYTHING !

          • Oh btw, I practice what I preach. I don’t wear mask in public and I don’t partake in social distancing. If Covid 19 strikes me dead, so be it because LIFE is terminal. Something else will get you. That fact has been proven for thousands of years.

            • “If Covid 19 strikes me dead, so be it because LIFE is terminal.”

              But surely wearing a mask and maintaining social distancing at least reduces the possibility of *you* passing Covid 19 on to *someone else*?

              Even if the science is somewhat unsettled and the virus is endemic it would seem a kind thing to do.

              https://comb.io/MsQUWB

            • I don’t wear a mask either, except in shops because I’ll probably get arrested if I don’t (UK). Never put sanitizer on my hands, doing that several times a day has got to have negative affects on your skin, and your natural skin flora.

              If I pass Covid-19 on to someone else, it won’t matter if they are healthy or young because they will not even notice. If they are plumpish or seriously ill, then yes they are susceptible, but then again maybe they should not be out and about.

              As I have mentioned before, I think the almost 8,000 M of us on this planet are killing the planet off, does not seem to bother anyone though. A few less of us would be doing the rest of the planet a favour. There are way too many species on this planet that I like, and on the verge of extinction (most species of vultures for example, are on the brink, and albatrosses too, wonderful birds).

            • Harry, using your logic, we can never end the mask + social distancing custom because there will always be a finite chance of passing some nasty infection or other onto another person.

              Conventionally, people who are showing symptoms of potentially dangerous contagious pathogens are asked (not ordered) to take precautions such as wearing masks when in the presence of others who could be infected. This is the case for people with active tuberculosis for instance. But people who are asymptomatic have not been not asked to do so because up to now this degree of prophylactic caution has been considered overkill.

              Even in the bad old days of combining those with leopracy to certain islands, this policy only applied to those who were symptomatic.

              The virus that causes COVID-19 is a coronavirus, and it’s mode of infection seems to be the same as that of other coronaviruses that frequently cause colds. According to Dr. Pastula (a neurohospitalist at UC Health University of Colorado Hospital and an associate professor of neurology, infectious diseases and epidemiology for the University of Colorado School of Medicine and the Colorado School of Public Health.), “In terms of transmission, this virus appears very similar to other coronavirus strains. It travels through infectious droplets. If someone coughs or sneezes, the droplets fall to the surface. If someone touches that surfaces, then touches their face, they can get the new coronavirus. It’s also possible to have someone sneeze or cough directly towards you, though infectious droplets can only really travel a maximum of about 6 feet before falling to the ground.”

              That’s why public health experts are urging people to keep their distance from one another.

              https://www.uchealth.org/today/viruses-101-why-the-new-coronavirus-is-so-contagious-how-to-fight-it/

              According to Dr. Pastula, most experts agree that to avoid getting this coronavirus,

              “It’s very important to wash your hands frequently (soap and water works best) and not to touch your face with unwashed hands. Contaminated hands are the No. 1 way that this virus is transmitted. You can get it from touching a surface that has virus on it, then touching your face.”

              The upshot. Stop worrying about what other people are doing and protect yourself by taking precautions that you think will work for you. Wear a mask if you like. Avoid French kissing. Bung wet tissue paper up your nostrils. Stay in your basement at all times. Or get yourself a space suit for trips to the supermarket. But even then, you could pick up a coronavirus infection from the germs on you smartphone.

              https://youtu.be/ctGzLjUfpag

            • > Contaminated hands are the No. 1 way that this virus is transmitted.

              That may not be the case, in fact, it probably isn’t.

              As they have learned more about this virus, it looks like the biggest spreading mode is aerosol. It’s not that you can’t get the virus other ways, but those aerosol spreading events seem to be the major way it gets around.

              Fortunately, masks really reduce this spreading mode.

  6. I’ve been discussing the progress of the virus and societal response since it began with a non-conspiracist friend, who’s a really good thinker. We both agree that most data these days is manipulated to fit the narrative, so it’s really hard to get to the truth of any matter.

    He said he’d been looking at excess deaths as the main metric as it’s one that’s hard to corrupt.

    Then it hit me later, that’s why e.g. aged care homes have been deliberately mismanaged, why treatment has been so poor in US hospitals and why safe, effective treatments such as Hydroxchloroquine + zinc are suppressed. It’s to get the death rate up to justify the ongoing panic.

  7. Snapshot from Thailand:

    Population: 69M
    COVID deaths to date: 58 (fifty eight)
    Tourism as % of GDP: 22
    No of visitors per year: ~40M, ~11M of those are Chinese
    The country still had Chinese tourists post-Wuhan
    Current state of international tourism: Complete shutdown, borders closed
    Societal disruption & suicides: Way up, v.limited social safety net

    The interesting question is how do ‘they’ achieve this?

    What could persuade a country to do that much damage to itself with so little justification? What bribery or threats are employed?

    • I believe the WHO is telling governments what to do, and they just follow orders.

  8. https://www.oann.com/fda-chief-covid-vaccine-must-be-at-least-50-effective-to-be-approved/

    “FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn recently announced he will approve a vaccine for COVID-19 if it’s at least 50% effective. On Thursday, Hahn confirmed the U.S. government has several vaccine candidates that have entered the final stages of clinical trials.
    However, he has said he will not approve a vaccine unless it’s proven safe.

    “We all want a vaccine tomorrow, that’s unrealistic,” added Hahn. “We all want a vaccine that’s 100% effective: again, unrealistic.”

    so here you go everybody!

    a lifesaving vaccine that is…

    50% effective!

    • Just watched this today.. the first part is about HCQ censorship, then he gets into some of the sketchy drug and vax papers/trials. The “Frontline” docs seem to be right-ish, but in an interview with Michelle Malkin, Bigtree talks about being a life-long Democrat.

      Very good segment towards the end of the first link where he parses the initial vax trials and shows up how wacky they are! Very chilling overall.

      https://thehighwire.com/videos/the-cyber-attack-on-truth/

      • The HCQ censorship is VERY telling this is a power grab by the Elite. I wonder how many of them including Anthony Fauci will volunteer to take the Vaccine? I bet none of them will but they will push the vaccine on we the people or the useless eaters while Bill Gates is adding to his pile of billions.

        Medical tyranny at its finest. George Orwell in his wildest dreams could not come close to what is happening today. And the SUCKERS i.e. “useless eaters” just continue to get spoon fed lies upon lies and will come begging for “forced injections and the banning of cash”.

      • I only came across Del Bigtree for the first time a few weeks ago. Excellent interview.
        Looks like he got banned from various social mediums this week. Nuff said.

    • Well at 50% we will need to give three vaccines if they each cover a different 50% that will give 87.5% coverage.

  9. https://apnews.com/e3081a60a6abf62effa2e6030556ee30

    “While deaths from the coronavirus in the U.S. are mounting rapidly, public health experts are seeing a flicker of good news: The second surge of confirmed cases appears to be leveling off.

    Scientists aren’t celebrating by any means, warning that the trend is driven by four big, hard-hit places — Arizona, California, Florida and Texas — and that cases are rising in close to 30 states in all, with the outbreak’s center of gravity seemingly shifting from the Sun Belt toward the Midwest.”

    once most of the more densely populated areas get past their “surge”, then the pandemic will be winding down.

    man oh man, I hate being wrong.

    https://covidtracking.com/blog/cases-declining-deaths-rising-hospital-data-remains-a-question-mark

    daily death charts 7 day moving average peaked at about 2,000 and plunged to 500 but is now back up to about 1,000.

    now daily cases are dropping, so the daily death chart should be heading down soon.

    or not.

    • “Before this week’s decrease, we saw five weeks of sharp increases in new cases. This is our third week of sharp rises in COVID-19 deaths. We can expect that the spike in cases from the last several weeks will continue to translate into rising deaths in the first half of August, though the absolute number of COVID-19 patients who will die of the disease in the next few weeks remains unknowable.”

Comments are closed.