It is easy to get the impression that proposed new modular nuclear generating units will solve the problems of nuclear generation. Perhaps they will allow more nuclear electricity to be generated at a low cost and with much less of a problem with spent fuel.
As I analyze the situation, however, the problems associated with nuclear electricity generation are more complex and immediate than most people perceive. My analysis shows that the world is already dealing with “not enough uranium from mines to go around.” In particular, US production of uranium “peaked”about 1980 (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Chart prepared by the US Energy Information Administration showing US production of uranium oxide.
For many years, the US was able to down-blend nuclear warheads (both purchased from Russia and from its own supply) to get around its uranium supply deficit.
Today, the inventory of nuclear warheads has dropped quite low. There are few warheads available for down-blending. This is creating a limit on uranium supply that is only now starting to hit.
Nuclear warheads, besides providing uranium in general, are important for the fact that they provide a concentrated source of uranium-235, which is the isotope of uranium that can sustain a nuclear reaction. With the warhead supply depleting, the US has a second huge problem: developing a way to produce nuclear fuel, probably mostly from spent fuel, with the desired high concentration of uranium-235. Today, Russia is the primary supplier of enriched uranium.
The plan of the US is to use government research grants to kickstart work on new small modular nuclear reactors that will be more efficient than current nuclear plants. These reactors will use a new fuel with a higher concentration of uranium-235 than is available today, except through purchase from Russia. Grants are also being given to start work on US production of the more highly enriched uranium fuel within the US. It is hoped that most of this highly enriched uranium can come from recycling spent nuclear fuel, thus helping to solve the problem of what to do with the supply of spent fuel.
My analysis indicates that while advanced modular nuclear reactors might theoretically be helpful for the very long term, they cannot fix the problems of the US, and other countries in the West, nearly quickly enough. I expect that the Trump administration, which will start in January 2025, will see this program as a boondoggle.
[1] Current problems with nuclear electricity generation are surprisingly hidden. World electricity generation from nuclear has been close to flat since 2004.
Although there was a dip in world generation of nuclear electricity after the tsunami that affected nuclear reactors in Fukushima, Japan, in 2011, otherwise world production of nuclear electricity has been nearly flat since 2004 (Figure 3).
US nuclear electricity production (Figure 4) shows a similar pattern, except that production since 2021 is down.
[2] The total amount of electricity generated by nuclear power plants is limited by the amount of uranium fuel available to them.
I believe that a major reason why the electricity supply from nuclear has been quite flat since 2004 is because total nuclear electricity generation is limited by the quantity of uranium fuel that is available for the nuclear reactors that have been built.
The price of uranium can perhaps rise, but this doesn’t necessarily add much (or any) supply very quickly. It takes several years to develop a new uranium mine.
In theory, reprocessing of spent fuel to produce uranium and plutonium is also possible, but the amount of that has been performed to date is small. (See Section [6].)
[3] The World Nuclear Association (WNA) published Figure 5 that hints at the world’s uranium supply problem:
The black line showing “reactor requirements” (Figure 5) is in some sense comparable to world generation of nuclear electricity (Figure 3). Both figures show fairly flat lines since about 2004. This relationship hints that there has not been a significant improvement in the efficiency of electricity generation using uranium fuel in the past 20 years.
Figure 5 shows a huge gap between the production of uranium from the various countries and “reactor requirements.” The single largest source of additional supply has been down-blended uranium from nuclear bombs. The EIA reports that the US purchased a large number of nuclear warheads from Russia between 1995 and 2013 for this purpose under the Megatons to Megawatts program. The EIA also reports that for the period 2013 to 2022, a purchase agreement was put in place allowing the US to purchase commercial origin low-enriched uranium from Russia to replace some of down-blended nuclear warhead material. In addition, the US had some of its own nuclear warheads that it could blend down. It was the availability of uranium supply from these various sources that allowed US nuclear electricity generation to remain relatively flat in the 2004 to 2023 period, as shown on Figure 4.
The US’s own uranium extraction reached a peak about 1980 and is now close to zero (Figure 1). The world’s supply of warheads is now over 85% depleted, leaving very little stored-away, highly enriched uranium to blend down (Figure 2)
A hidden problem is the fact that uranium production available today is largely from Russia and its close affiliates. The data underlying Figure 5 shows that uranium production in 2022 is dominated by close allies of Russia (55% of the total coming from Kazakhstan (43% of total), Uzbekistan (7% of total), and Russia (5% of total)). The US (at almost 0%), plus production of its close affiliates, Canada and Australia, provided only 24% of world uranium. This imbalance between Russia and its affiliates, and the US and its affiliates, should be of concern.
[4] The current conflict between the US and Russia adds to nuclear problems.
The US is trying to impose sanctions on Russia. The EIA reports:
“The origin of uranium used in U.S. reactors will likely change in the coming years. In May [2024], the United States banned imports of uranium products from Russia beginning in August [2024], although companies may apply for waivers through January 1, 2028.”
This seems to imply that a transition away from Russian uranium dependence must be made in only a little over three years. This is a short time frame, given the difficulty in making such a transition.
EIA data show that in the year 2023, the US sourced only 4.6% of uranium supplies from the US. (This could be partly or mostly down-blended nuclear warheads). Material purchased from Russia comprised 11.7% of uranium. Kazakhstan provided 20.6% of uranium purchased, and Uzbekistan provided 9.5%. Among US allies, Canada provided 14.9%, and Australia 9.2%.
[5] The WNA does not hint at any uranium supply problems.
The WNA is an advocate for nuclear energy; it cannot suggest that there is any problem with uranium supplies. WNA has the opinion that if there is a shortage of uranium, prices will rise, and more will become available. But even if prices rise, it takes several years to bring new mines into operation. Prices need to stay high, or companies will not pursue what appear to be opportunities.
Readers of OurFiniteWorld.com have seen that oil prices tend to spike and collapse. They don’t stay high for very long because if prices stay high, the end products made with oil tend to become unaffordable. I expect a similar problem occurs with uranium.
The necessary price threshold for high uranium extraction that is mentioned by the WNA is $130/kg in 2021. By coincidence, when a translation is made to dollars per pound using 2024$, this corresponds quite closely to the current price line on Figure 6. Indeed, prices do sometimes bounce high. The problem is getting them to stay as high as the dotted line for long enough to support the multi-decade life of a mine. Economists were forecasting a price of $300 per barrel oil a few years ago, but they have been disappointed. The price is under $75 per barrel now.
The country with the most potentially recoverable uranium is Australia. It produced only 9% of the world’s uranium in 2022, but is reported to have 28% of the world’s remaining reserve. Consistently higher prices would be needed for Australia to start opening new mines.
It is also possible that more uranium supply might become available if improved extraction techniques are developed.
The world seems to be past peak crude oil. By itself, the peak oil issue could limit new uranium extraction and transport.
[6] Recycling of spent fuel to recover usable uranium and plutonium has been accomplished only to a limited extent. Experience to date suggests that recycling has many issues.
It is possible to make an estimate of the amount of recycling of spent fuel that is currently being performed. Figure 3 in Section [1] shows about 65,000 metric tons of uranium are required to meet the demands of existing nuclear power generation, and that as of 2022, there was about an annual shortfall in supply of about 26%. Based on what information I have been able to gather, existing recycling of uranium and plutonium amounts to perhaps 6% of the overall fuel requirement. Thus, as of 2022, today’s recycling of spent fuel could perhaps shave this shortfall in uranium supply to “only” 20% of annual nuclear fuel requirements. There is some recycling of spent fuel, but it is small in relation to the amount needed.
There seem to be several issues with building units to recover uranium from spent fuel:
- Higher cost than simply mining more uranium
- Pollution problems from the recycling plants
- Potential for use of the output to make nuclear warheads
- Potential for nuclear accidents within the plants
- Remaining radioactivity at the site at the end of the reprocessing plant’s life, and thus the need to decommission such plants
- Potential for many protestors disrupting construction and operation because of issues (2), (3), (4), and (5)
The US outlawed recycling of spent fuel in 1977, after a few not-very-successful attempts. Once the purchase of Russian warheads was arranged, down-blending of warheads was a much less expensive approach than reprocessing spent fuel. Physics Today recently reported the following regarding US reprocessing:
“A plant in West Valley, New York, reprocessed spent fuel for six years before closing in 1972. Looking to expand the plant, the owners balked at the costs required for upgrades needed to meet new regulatory standards. Construction of a reprocessing plant in Barnwell, South Carolina, was halted in 1977 following the Carter administration’s ban.”
Japan has been trying to build a commercial spent fuel reprocessing plant at Rokkasho since 1993, but it has had huge problems with cost overruns and protests by many groups. The latest estimate of when the plant will actually be completed is fiscal year 2026 or 2027. The plant would process 800 metric tons of fuel per year.
The largest commercial spent fuel reprocessing plant in operation is in La Hague, France. It has been in place long enough (since 1966) that it has run into the issue of decommissioning an old unit, which was started as a French military project. The first processing unit was shut down in 2003. The International Atomic Energy Administration says, “The UP2-400 decommissioning project began some 20 years ago and may be expected to continue for several more years.” It talks about the huge cost and number of people involved. It says, “Decommissioning activities represent roughly 20 per cent of the overall activity and socio-economic impact of the La Hague site, which also hosts two operating spent fuel recycling plants.”
The cost of the La Hague reprocessing units is probably not fully known. They were built by government agencies. They have gone through various owners including AREVA. AREVA has had huge financial problems. The successor company is Orano. The currently operating units have the capacity to process about 1,700 metric tons of fuel per year. The 1700 metric tons of reprocessing of spent fuel from La Hague is reported to be nearly half of the world’s operating capacity for recycling spent fuel.
I understand that Russia is working on approaches that quite possibly are not included in my figures. If so, this may add to world uranium supply, but Russia is not likely to want to share the benefits with the West if there is not enough to go around.
[7] The concentration of the isotope uranium-235 is very important in making fuel for the proposed new modular nuclear reactors.
Uranium-235 makes up 0.72% of natural uranium. Wikipedia says, “Unlike the predominant isotope uranium-238, it [uranium-235] is fissile, i. e., it can sustain a nuclear reaction.” In most reactors used today, the concentration of uranium-235 is 3% to 5%.
According to CNN, the plan in building advanced modular small reactors is to use fuel with a 5% to 20% concentration of uranium-235. Fuel at this concentration is called high assay low-enriched uranium, or HALEU. The expectation is that power plants with this type of fuel will be more efficient to operate.
Producing higher concentrations of uranium-235 tends to be problematic unless nuclear weapons are available for down-blending; warheads use high concentrations of uranium-235. Now, with reduced availability of nuclear warheads for down-blending, other sources are needed in addition. CNN reports that the only commercial source of HALEU is Russia. The EIA reports that the Inflation Reduction Act invested $700 million to support the development of a domestic supply chain for HALEU.
[8] The US is trying to implement many new ideas at one time with virtually no successful working models to smooth the transition.
Strangely enough, the US has no working model of a small-scale nuclear reactor, even one operating on conventional fuel. A CNBC article from September 2024 says, Small nuclear reactors could power the world, the challenge is building the first one in the US.
The new small-scale nuclear projects we do have are still at a very preliminary stage. In June 2024, Bill Gates wrote, “We just broke ground on America’s first next-gen nuclear facility. Kemmerer, Wyoming will soon be home to the most advanced nuclear facility in the world.” The plan is for it is to become operational by 2030, if it has access to HALEU fuel.
With respect to how far along the ability to make HALEU from spent fuel is, an October 2024 article in Interesting Engineering says, “US approves new facility design concept to turn nuclear waste into reactor fuel:”
“The facility whose conceptual design has been approved will be located at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). It will help turn used material recovered from DOE’s former Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II reactor) into usable fuel for its advanced nuclear power plant. . . The plan is to recover approximately 10 metric tons of HALEU from EBR-II fuel by December 2028 using an electrochemical process that was perfected over the years at Idaho National Laboratory (INL).”
Assuming this can be done, it will be a step forward, but it is nowhere near being an at-scale, commercial project that can be done economically by other companies. The volume of 10 metric tons is tiny.
Starting at this level, it is difficult to see how reactors with the new technology and the HALEU fuel to feed them can possibly be available in quantity before 2050.
[9] It is difficult to see how the cost of electricity generated using the new advanced modular nuclear reactors and the new HALEU fuel, created by reprocessing spent fuel, could be low.
As far as I can see, the main argument that these new modular electricity generation plants will be affordable is that they will only generate a relatively small amount of electricity at once —about 300 megawatts or less, or about one third of the average of conventional nuclear reactors in the US. Because of the smaller electricity output, the hope is that they will be affordable by more buyers, such as utility companies.
The issue that is often overlooked by economists is that electricity generated using these new techniques needs to be low cost, per kilowatt-hour, to be helpful. High-cost electricity is not affordable. Keeping costs down when many new approaches are being tried for the first time is likely to be a huge hurdle. I look through the long list of problems encountered in recycling spent fuel mentioned in Section [6] and wonder whether these issues can be inexpensively worked around. There are also issues with adopting and installing the proposed new advanced modular reactors, such as security, that I have not even tried to address.
The hope is that somehow, the whole process of building the advanced modular nuclear reactors and creating the HALEU fuel can be standardized and can be organized in such a way that economies of scale will set in. It seems to me that reaching this goal will be difficult. In theory, perhaps such a goal can be reached in 2060 or 2070, but this is not nearly soon enough, given the world’s current shortage of uranium from mines.
[10] The Trump administration will likely drop or substantially change the current program for advanced modular nuclear reactors.
The US plan that is discussed in this post has been developed under the Biden administration. This group was voted out of power on November 5. The Democratic administration will be replaced by a new Republican administration, headed by Donald Trump, on January 20, 2025.
I would not be surprised if the advanced modular nuclear generation plan disappears, almost as quickly as the currently subsidized offshore wind program, which Trump has vowed to end. The two programs have many things in common: Both programs provide an excuse for more US debt; they provide many jobs for researchers; and the devices that they relate to can be purchased in fairly small increments. But the cost per kilowatt-hour of electricity is likely to be high with either program. In some sense, as they are currently envisioned, they will not efficient ways to produce electricity. A major problem is the lack of fuel for the new modular reactors, and the slow ramp-up time to obtain this fuel.
I expect that under Trump, the sanction against purchasing HALEU from Russia might be replaced with a tariff. That way the US could have the benefit of HALEU, purchased from Russia, but at a higher price. This would allow research to continue, if desired.
[11] If solutions cannot be found, electricity generation from nuclear is likely to gradually disappear.
Over time, the world’s self-organizing economy tends to eliminate its more inefficient parts. When I look at the past experience with nuclear, what I see seems to be another example of the self-organizing economy squeezing out the inefficient parts of the economy (Figure 7):
In this chart, “Advanced Economies, ex US” are defined as members of the Organization for Economic Development (OECD), excluding the US. “Later Entrants” are non-OECD members, excluding Russia and Ukraine. They include China, India, Indonesia, and many other lower-income countries. Many of these countries are in East Asia.
What I see is that the relatively “flat” overall nuclear electricity production has been accomplished, to a significant extent, by the “Advanced Economies, ex US” dropping back in their use of nuclear electricity at close to the same time the “Later Entrants” have rapidly been increasing their use of nuclear electricity. The Later Entrants can make goods for sale in international markets much more cheaply than the Advanced Economies, ex US through their efficient use of cheap energy (often from coal) and their lower wages. This more efficient approach gives the Later Entrants an “edge” in buying the uranium that is available.
I expect to see more of this pattern of squeezing out in the future. In fact, new and recently re-opened nuclear plants will need to compete existing nuclear generation units for available uranium.
Given the way squeezing out takes place, very few people will realize that there is a problem with uranium fuel. It will just be that leaders of some parts of the world, as well as some parts of the US, will start emphasizing stories about how dangerous nuclear energy is. Instead of nuclear, they will emphasize electricity generation from wind and solar and allow these approaches to “go first” when they are available. The result will be wholesale electricity prices that will be far too low for nuclear power plants, much of the time. It will be these low wholesale electricity prices that push nuclear power out.
Thus, unless there truly are breakthroughs in recycling spent fuels, or in uranium mining, electricity generation using nuclear energy may gradually slip away from many parts of the world currently using it.
USD-RUB down 7% today right now. Russia will meet the definition of hyperinflation with a few more days of this. As I’ve said before, Russia is either incompetent, or western interests have figured out how to counterfeit (digitally or otherwise) Russian currency.
drb, any thoughts on how people are reacting?
https://www.investing.com/currencies/usd-rub-chart
This sounds pretty bad. Especially after the falls in recent days.
Relax . See my post earlier to Ivan . Storm in a teacup .
Apparently the Russian central bank announced today or yesterday that it will stop buying dollars … lol. These clowns are still buying dollars after the US waged a proxy war against them and froze/confiscated their reserves. They may have stockpiled dollars (again!) – we don’t know the balance, but with leaders incompetent or compromised as these, this explains everything.
All kinds of strange thing happen.
Hey, sorry but I have no internet at home. Maybe today. I am answering this because I am waiting for a friend at a cafe’. will reply… so far no signs but generally your point is on point. I bought kefir, eggs and grapes yesterday, prices seemed normal (grapes were cheap). the mangoes were rather expensive but unlike normal mangoes they were delicious.
https://www.oftwominds.com/blognov24/superheroes-powerlessness11-24.html
“Superheroes reflect our powerlessness”
Couldn’t help connecting this to the recent publicity regarding all of the things Elon Musk is apparently going to do:
Somehow, superheroes have become important to many people. We feel our own powerlessness.
CHS mentions the many features added to devices to protect us, like WiFi and like child safety locks on microwave ovens. These new “features” add to the cost, but they are not part of inflation, since they add additional value to the devices. And the devices break down more quickly.
“like child safety locks on microwave ovens.”
I never heard of such locks. And I can’t imagine why they would be needed. My daughter figured out how to heat food in a microwave oven when she was three. (She also figured out how to set the clock on the VCR and record her programs at the same age.)
Searching with google finds such locks for sale at $1.70, and a lot of info for baffled people trying to figure out how to open their microwave.
Learn something new everyday.
RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY: DEPLOYMENT OF NUCLEAR ARMS IN UKRAINE IS “INSANE”
https://x.com/FirstSquawk/status/1861769654978707590
I would agree. What country will give Ukraine nuclear weapons? Not the US directly, I would hope.
“nuclear weapons?”
Ukraine is a country with a lot of nuclear knowledge. They could build bombs in very short order–if they have not already done it.
Good point.
Mega Church Bishop T.D. Jakes suffers health incident after delivering sermon
https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/video/dallas-pastor-bishop-t-d-jakes-suffers-health-incident-after-delivering-sermon/
Pingback: Nucleare: tanta fuffa e poco di concreto – Energia per l’Italia
I asked the AI Mistral to transform a 19th century painting of my surroundings into a current photograph. Some interesting deeper meanings:
https://ibb.co/2hWDMMq
https://ibb.co/5c518V3
https://ibb.co/HTm93p7
This clip from the Netflix series ” Landman” going viral .
https://x.com/Oilfield_Rando/status/1860884156810408055
Most people don’t understand how oil-dependent the economy is. They think that somehow, wind turbines and solar panels cans can save the day.
The link you give includes a good video of someone explaining the problem.
The amount of self-deception has become collosal: the people build houses which do not have energy, do not have food and need costly infrastructure and cars to get the energy and food.
The use of mobile electronic devices could achieve some savings, but the end is approaching, as the AI wipes out those savings and easy repetitive work has already been taken over by robots.
houses, by their very nature, do not have food or energy
food and energy can only be supplied and supported by the people who move into them.
if those commodities are not supplied, the house will eventually decay back to nothing.
“food and energy can only be supplied and supported by the people who move into them.”
Absolutely:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_House_That_Dripped_Blood
Right MG, this is from “Being and Oil” by Chad A Haag
James Howard Kunstler..”stupidity and short sightedness of suburban sprawl…single greatest misinvestment of resources in Human History
Worse still, these suburbs were so poorly constructed that they will only semi-viable for a short few decades….
Dimitry Orlov correctly described…shoddy constructed suburban trash, wildly overpriced..housing bubble…
“The housing stock is actually very low intrinsic value, constructed out of sticks, bit of tarpaper and some plastic and sheets. These American-style Potemkin villageswillbe simple to knock down…”
Describes it as boring, unsatisfying to live, prison cell..
Futile project of constructing an enormous cost to coast suburban infrastructure which will shortly become utterly worthless, unusable trash within 90 minutes commutes from home to office become a bad memory..
,,”economic prosperity “is literally just a measure for how rapidly and how irresponsibility we can burn fossil fuels for no goal except to burn fossil fuels”.
…the Religion of Progress …..just a side effect of petroleum, or more precisely the shape of explosive growth and guaranteed surplus, mapped into the spiritual realm.
…so good observation MG
So Musk and Ramaswamy are going to to cut down the govt . Let them try it . Idiots .
https://www.collapse2050.com/financial-collapse-within-18-months/
10 years ago, i forecast economic collapse—mid 2020s
for a variety of reasons—not least a government of self seeking fantasists, daydreamers and jesusfreaks.
all of them in denial of the actual reasons—trying to run an expensive-fuel economic system on the residual income of a cheap-fuel economic system. (another name for debt btw).
All of it on the promise of “Making America Great Again”
driven on by the gullible, believing that can actually happen, not knowing how it came about in the first place.—harking back to a time that never existed for most people.—just a self deluding dream.
and naturally blaming ”others” for collective misfortune.
I bet you didn’t see the 10mbpd shale bump, so we’ll cut you some slack if the estimate is a few years off.
my estimate could well be off—i’ve said as much
but the point you maybe miss, is not ”oil production” per se.
American (and world) ”greatness” was the result, not of oil, but oil energy surpluses. Thats where cheap cars, houses liesure and infrastructure came from.
That surplus no longer exists, no matter how much shale oil is produced.
In the 30s/40s. oil energy return was 100:1
Shale oil returns maybe 8:1
We have to use energy to get hold of energy. —the more we have to use to keep the ”energy system” afloat, the less there is to provide the lifestyle we think of as ”entitlement.”
so no matter how much shale oil is produced, there isnt enough surplus to provide what was available at 100:1.
The best oilwells now deliver less than 20:1
If you compare that to “100:1”—you have 5 times less available oil energy to sustain your lifestyle.
So we make up that difference with debt—-which has been re-named “MAGA”
Which is why collapse is certain.
According to Bronchie, “Every left-winger should have their eyes held open and be forced to watch this on repeat until it sinks in.”
It’s one fictional Texan oilman’s passionate view about oil and wind turbines, which I am sure is widely shared at OFW.
https://x.com/bonchieredstate/status/1860892910079619112
It’s from the TV drama series Landman, set in West Texas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landman_(TV_series)
What about right wingers who think we should drill baby drill so we can get oil down to $40 and be able to drive 2ton vehicles around for errands
Pitch that idea to Netflix.
You could be onto a winner.
Oil at $40 a barrel and a common-sense approach to personalized transport would go a long way towards making “middle class” normies happy for a few years longer.
I never owned a motorized vehicle and never understood the (usually) male passion for big gas guzzlers. But that’s the free market.
I always chuckle when I see a short man having to use the steps to climb into the 2-ton SUV he has selected as his public image. It doesn’t happen often, but it really makes my day when it does.
Kissinger correctly predicted the shale boom in the 70’s. The only one I know.
But who’s counting anyway?
The US economy got to where it is by huge amounts of deficit spending.
Cutting back government will cut back deficit spending. This could lay off a large number of people from work. Prices of commodities would drop. Debt defaults could skyrocket. Banks would find themselves in financial difficulty.
I am not sure how quickly all of these things might happen. Perhaps 2026. These things, by themselves, would be deflationary.
If the government is still operating, one possibility is that the government would reverse course and start bailing out all kinds of banks and citizens who cannot pay their loans. This could send the economy back to inflation. Or even hyperinflation at some point, with virtually nothing to buy, but lots of money.
War could enter into any situation like this. It gives an excuse to hire young people.
All the bad things you mention will happen. A little sooner if the government is cut down to size. A little later if un-backed money is printed with abandon.
Waiting for the responses of our cornocupians who ‘could’ or ‘may’ see the developments which are ‘in sight’ despite of all the gloom going around
When Elon uses Starship to build solar power satellites we are saved. My guess start in two years.
“When Elon uses Starship to build solar power satellites”
He might have changed his mind, but he was really down on power satellites a few years ago.
“start in two years”
Depending on what you mean by “start” maybe so but I kind of doubt it. A serious production rate takes around 70 launches a day. If we reached that, we could replace 1/3 of current energy use in 20 years.
when Henry Ford started to build his first cars, he knew how to do it–personally. He was already a first class engineer
On that knowledge he built the biggest car company in the world. It had purpose
When Elon started building rockets, he had to hire other people to do it, they have been only too happy to take his billions and build fireworks for him. (who wouldn’t?)
That doesnt make Musk a rocket scientist–just an ego boosting big spender.
Starships have no future other than to make jobs for rocket scientists.
Putting up satellites does not ”explore space”—it merely gives us earth-tools, to use energy here more efficiently/
And Elon showed his true intention, power.
All the rocketry wad jusr a tool to get there.
I am inclined to agree with you.
Just an inspired guess, but as Musk assumes the role of chief admirer of the emperors clothes, we may find that he loses interest in rocket ships to concentrate on converting the assets of USA inc, to his own (and a few chums) personal gain.
As I’ve tried to point out elsewhere, there is no profit in taking the physical assets of other space bodies, (it costs too much). he can see there’s no point in it. As we have seen on OFW though—its easy to fire up the fantasies of those who think there is. Remember the Mars BS?
And genuine rocket scientists will always be eager to take their wages from him.
So Musk will concentrate on taking what is here already—with Trump’s support of course. (He will want his cut).
He almost certainly sees himself as becoming the first $trillionaire. He also thinks that extreme wealth grants exemption from economic (energy) collapse–it wont.
To achieve that means draining the natural resources available to everyone else.
“Starships have no future other than to make jobs for rocket scientists.”
That makes no sense.
you summed it up neatly keith
it makes no sense.—none.
as with your other comment on this thread, not a doomer–just trying to get at reality.
the world functions on wage-exchange economic system.
we extract stuff and make that into things, sell those things, throw them away and start over—paying each other wages as we go.
the system depends on extracting-selling more this year than last year. (its called a consumer-economy)
no matter how much asteroid-stuff you acquire, you must fit it into the same wage production process, and ‘consume”.
the alternative is to bring it back, and give away for free.—this is after youve made it into cars, tv sets, toasters—whatever. They require earth-energy to function.
Asteroid-stuff is no use unless you convert it into ”things”—no matter how much ”alternative energy” you have access to.–those ”things” must be usable and useful.
just as we convert metal ores into ”things”—thats where our wages come from.
you cannot send millions of ”miners” to asteroids, their support structure cannot exist.
You discuss ”chemical conversion” as if everything else needed for it will somehow magic itself into existence,
if auto-miners were developed and sent ”out there’—then the economic structure on earth could not support the necessary wage structure to give economic purpose to the resulting production-delivery system,
ie— we on earth would (in theory) have nothing to do but wait for the next batch of goods to come down your space elevator—as freebies.
no biological life form exists on freebies.—or ever will.
no such thing as a free lunch, is another way of putting it.
“it makes no sense”
I was referring to your assertion about jobs for rocket scientists. Jobs related to Starship will mostly be for starlink, IT and communication jobs plus the technical people who build and operate starlink.
“extract stuff and make that into things”
I wonder what fraction of the economy is pure information. Movies, games, news, books, communication, an increasing fraction is pure information. Something around $400 B goes through space.
true
”info” is a big slice of the economic system–i use it all the time, and spent my working life in the business of information transfer, one way or another.
i was reasonably good at it. People paid for my services, i was never out of work. And enjoyed it.
but does it not occur to you, that without the other part, the segment that burns fuel, the information part would simply cease to exist?
i am drawn to the conclusion that it doesn’t.—that somehow AI would whizz around of its own accord, and do ‘stuff’.
thats why i keep repeating my offer.
stop–think, and chuck your calculator away.
“and chuck your calculator away.”
Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best, he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear his shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.
Robert A. Heinlein
oh dear
that’s me to a T then Keith.
fortunately for humankind, we subhumans , (and those far far far more subhuman than me), create great art, conceive thoughts that of no ”use” to anyone, yet render most people (except the mathematicians of course) to emotional wrecks.
How can that be? no doubt you can calculate it.
Like I offered, when AI writes a verse that forces emotion from depths I never knew of—then get back to me.
In the meantime, persist is you must, with the notion that intelligence ”exists” in some kind of perpetuity, with no intervention from outside energy source.
Personally, I cant wait till i can get a car that runs on the battery in the keyfob. (moores law applied to vehicles)
“when AI writes a verse”
You will have to dig around in AI poetry yourself. I would not know what affects you. My mom wrote published poetry, I even helped her finish one of them when she was stuck, I could probably find and post it here, but no idea if it would appeal.
AI and power, at present training one uses immense amounts of power, but as I mentioned, the Chinese reduced the power to train one by a factor of 200.
Key fob. My calculator says that will not power a car. If it did, you would be busted for carrying around a nuclear explosive.
My offer still stands Keith
Verse written by AI with no human ‘prompts’—telling a block of circuitry to search “Sylvia Plath” and write sometime similar just will not cut it I’m afraid.
Frankly, I amazed that you would offer such nonsense into an adult discussion on the subject.
Even a knuckledragger like me can lie awake in the small hours, have a idea for verse pop into my head from nowhere, write it down (before it vanishes) and next day expand it into 500 words of reasonable verse.
Not worthy of a Nobel prize for literature—but OK. With no input from AI whatsoever—and people seem to enjoy listening to my verse., though they could be faking it of course.
On Moores law–it was you who offered the comparison of the growth of computer power as a reference point for the future of other commercial/industrial activities–when clearly there is clearly a difference of functionality….more utter proven BS. A common mistake made by the lower orders.
Again, after being reminded so many times of your intellectual achievements over the years, that was another surprise, especially as I have none, other than writing in the sand with a sharp stick , hoping that striking one stone against another creates a spark of inspiration.
“just will not cut it”
Your opinion. You are more qualified than I am in this area.
“write sometime similar”
The AI is a lot better than I am on this matter. For example, I have no ideas of who Sylvia Plath is. (After looking her up in Wikipedia, I wish I had not. Talk about someone who needed genetic editing.)
“have a idea for verse pop”
Never happens to me. Have come up with technical ideas like a way to prevent rockets from detonating. Patented that one.
“On Moores law–it was you who offered the comparison of the growth of computer power as a reference point for the future of other commercial/industrial activities–when clearly there is clearly a difference of functionality….more utter proven BS. ”
I think that is a confabulation, but I will apologize if you can find anywhere I said that. I do think technical progress will lead to a world we would consider very strange.
“A common mistake made by the lower orders.”
Can you provide an example of ‘lower orders’ who know about the progress in computers?
i am one of the ‘lower orders’—you defined that yourself as knowing little or nothing of mathematics. Subhuman., as you quoted. Me exactly . always hopeless–my maths teacher said so….he was right.
On the other hand, my headmaster made me promise to keep writing. Weird huh?
odd though–i held down a job in design engineering, for 8 years, where accurate mathematics was critical.
but in the end–the artist/writer won out, and i never looked back.
i am aware of moores law in that field, you related it to other industrial activity. Equally weird.
I dont care for Plath’s work either, you brought up Plath for some reason. I’m more Dylan Thomas:
“Where lovers lie with all their griefs in their arms” (in my Craft or Sullen Art)—Imagine AI coming up with a line like that!!
AI can relate—but it cannot create —without human intervention, there’s your difference.
I already have 2 lectures booked for 2025. —remind me to wear gloves so my skinned knuckles dont give me away as subhuman.—I certainly won’t be relying on AI for source material.
“you defined ”
No. I quoted Heinlein.
“you brought up Plath for some reason.”
Sort of, Plath poems were mentioned in an article I quoted form “The Conversation.”
“but it cannot create”
Anything which can write poetry on request is more creative than I am.
@Keith
Does make perfect sense, like the Czarina of Russia hiring Leonhard Euler for the sole reason to keep him out of Europe.
Are you sure you have the right person?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Euler
My contribution to this thread is that I once met Sylvia Plath’s husband, Ted Hughes.
He came to my school to give out prizes when I was twelve years old, and I one a prize for science. My prize was a boy’s pictorial book of science, filled with pictures of rockets, dinosaurs and scientists in white coats with unkempt hair playing with test tubes and bunsen burners.
Sylvia Plath, like her predecessor Virginia Woolf, was far from emotionally stable, had a difficult marriage, and didn’t seem to enjoy her life very much.
These days both of them would probably be on Prozac or else leading some sort Women’s Retribution Movement. Back then, only literature was available, and when that failed, suicide. Tragic. You can blame the husbands if you like, but like a good old London Bobby, I prefer not to get involved in domestic incidents.
impossible to know what drives emotions.
Plath I’ve never given much thought to, one way or the other. Or Ted Hughes.
Keith brought her into the thread, for some reason.
Housman/ Dylan Thomas are more me, though Thomas wrote some weird stuff and he was a bit emotionally unhinged too.
like all creatives, they get to push all the right buttons, but only sometimes. Mozart was maybe the greatest of them all, and he couldnt hold it together either.
i’m obviously one of the lower order geniuses, (no good at maths) as i have no problems in that respect
“impossible to know”
Not at all. Look into evolutionary psychology. We have emotions that contributed to reproductive success in the past. Lots of examples.
“Keith brought her into the thread, for some reason.
She was mentioned in an article about AI writing poetry that I pasted into this thread.
again
AI doesnt write poetry—or anything else.
it is stimulated by a human influence to search for combinations of words that most closely match the poet it is being asked to emulate.
thats all.—not that theres any point to repeating that.
60 years ago i wouldnt have believed that i would be producing 3d artwork on a screen, without pen pencil paints or paper. or that i could talk to my mac and get printed copy out.
but i do, all the time now.
but its still the product of my mind. NOT AI.
my computer doesnt just switch itself on and deliver stuff without input from me. Neither does any other form of AI. (I keep banging on about that to puncture the delusional balloon of those who believe it does)
it reacts to the process i put into it. My mac is still a bundle of circuitry I do not understand…and it isnt ”intelligent”…instead it drives me nuts anticipating words i don’t want.
and all within my working lifetime—started with just a pencil.
“match the poet it is being asked to emulate.”
That is more than I can do.
It is now an empirical fact that he prefers wielding temporal power on earth to shooting power satellites.
Launching SPS directly from Earth is a bad idea. The original plan was to install mass drivers on the moon and launch lunar regolith material to the L1/L2 point. The metal oxides can then be reduced into metals that are used to build SPS components.
The amount of energy needed to lift material from the surface of the moon is only about 2% of that required to lift the same material from Earth. It can be done using electricity. A mass driver could launch many thoysandsof times its own mass into Earth orbit every year.
So ultimately, it would be very cheap to launch materials in this way, especially if done at scale. But a low cost heavy lift vehicle is needed to send the components to the lunar surface and high Earth orbit. That has been lacking until now. Starship is therefore a key enabling technology if it lives up to its promiss. The Artemis project could set the scene for this kind of mining activity. We live in exciting times.
I wonder what would happen to the cornucopians if they cannot use the words ‘could’ and ‘might’
We don’t have such tools now. And even if we had a working model it is too late. It should have been operational by now
” It should have been operational by now”
We tried.
“https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L5_Society”
“Although economic analysis[7] indicated the SPS/space colony concept had merit, it foundered on short political and economic horizons and the fact that the transport cost to space was about 300 times too high for individuals to fund when compared to the Plymouth Rock and Mormon colonies.[8]”
Times and technology has changed.
It may be too late now. Technology advances I expect will make the whole concept seem quaint and out of date.
////when compared to the Plymouth Rock and Mormon colonies.[8]”////
being able to breathe was useful too
As you know, I was deeply involved with the original O’Neill scheme.
But Starship might directly enable power satellites. I spent a lot time looking into the mass needed. I came to the conclusion that it would take 6.5 kg/kW, the Japanese researchers came to a similar number so did Phil Chapman. The key to analyzing the problem is to work the LCOE backwards. Turns out the ratio of cost to the price of electricity is about 80,000 to one, or about the numbers of hours in ten years.
So 3 cent per kWh can’t cost more than $2400/kW. That breaks down to $900 for parts and labor, $1300/kW for transport at $200/kg to GEO and $200/kW for the rectenna. That is at a scale of 5 GW, $12 B and it assumes the transport cost doubles from LEO to GEO. That takes electric propulsion at a large scale, but the engine already exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Enthalpy_Arc_Heated_Facility
O’Neill’s scheme inflated to the present day is around $500 B, this perhaps $40 to $50 B to the first one. The energy return looks good as well, a power satellite pays back the lift fuel in 66 days.
I don’t know if this will ever be done because elements of the singularity change everything.
Neither O’Neill’s cylinder nor singularity will ever be done
“Neither O’Neill’s cylinder nor singularity will ever be done”
That raw assertion is not useful. If you have some logic behind such a view it would be a more interesting post.
Finding space for a rectenna 10km in diameter won’t be easy in most OECD countries.
“Finding space”
Rectennas don’t intercept much sunlight so they can go over farmland.
But do rectennas get in the way of big machinery?
I think I have seen pictures of rectennas supposedly being put over grazing animals, but in the US, animals are increasingly raised indoors, in confined spaces. This means that the crops grown outdoors are grains, various kinds of root crops, and tree crops. I am wondering how realistic having rectennas over the top of these crops would really be.
“But do rectennas get in the way of big machinery? ”
You design them so they don’t, or redesign the machinery.
Probably a moot point anyway.
Empirical fact. We do not have the computing power for singularity and no one has any real plans to build the cylinder
Denial does not brung the stuf you want
“Empirical fact. We do not have the computing power for singularity”
That may be true, though AI on a laptop suggests we are close if not there. In any case, a few more doublings will solve any computing power problem.
“and no one has any real plans to build the cylinder”
They come in pairs so you can keep them pointed at the sun, but in spite of the design contests run by NSS, I agree. After trying to figure out what is going on at Tabby’s star, I find it possible that humans may never build them by skipping over physical space colonies to an uploaded existence within data centers in space hundreds of times the area of the earth. If this makes you queasy, I have the same reaction.
“Denial does not bring the stuff you want”
Of course not, but time and progress will.
////to an uploaded existence within data centers in space hundreds of times the area of the earth.//
sheeesh
i am lost for words
“i am lost for words”
I think the big shadow we see at Tabby’s star is such a data center. That’s not what I expected 12 years ago.
https://web.archive.org/web/20121130232045/http://hplusmagazine.com/2012/04/12/transhumanism-and-the-human-expansion-into-space-a-conflict-with-physics/
We can’t live on or mine the moon. In fact the only place in the Solar system worth mining is the earth because only earth has the live geology (molten core, plate tectonics, volcanoes, liquid water) needed to create useful concentrations of different metal ores.
DOA .
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2024-11-27/doge-dead-government-expenditures
I have a very bad feeling about the real situation of the economy. Reminds me 2008. Like you do not believe what you see and you do not know what will be the next month.
I recently read an article saying that the spread between interest rates charged to entities with poor credit versus the interests rates available on US government debt tends to rise before recessions and stock market crashes. Right now, the spread in these rates is low, suggesting that a crash in not immanent.
On the other hand, we do know that quite a few poor customers are cutting back on their purchases.
That is what is concerning: the weakening consumption because of the lack of affordability.
Ask yourself this how many people do you know that have made large purchases in the last year? I only know about a few and don’t know anyone who doesn’t feel like we could have a crash. Couple that with mass layoffs by every automaker
The race for lower and lower prices means the people are bankrupting each other.
In the midst of the recent Jaguar ad flap, a commenter said they had simply “taken a year off from making cars”. If true, how does this even happen? What about overhead?
https://www.investing.com/currencies/usd-rub-chart
Ruble down 3.6% on the day right now to 107.75 Rubles/USD.
ScarletNovember 24, 2024, 2:17 PM
The rapid devaluation of the ruble in recent days is striking. Despite the economic strength demonstrated so far, rates are already above 20%. With no possibility of obtaining dollars, it is quite possible that they are abusing the printing press to finance the war machine, with the usual consequences.
Reply
GustavoNovember 25, 2024, 3:26 PM
Scarlet, I have the impression that Russia can easily finance the war in Rubles. They have everything they need, I think, to wage a war.
hole in headNovember 25, 2024, 7:49 PM
Gustavo, agree with you. Currency rates are meaningless because they are manipulated. Yen devalued by 30% in a year and the Turkish Lira by 70%. Turkey and Japan exist and Erdogan is in power. The war of attrition is not a sprint but a marathon. Russia has the stamina. The MSM is always setting a narrative — Putin is very sick, Pirgozin (Wagner group) is marching to Moscow, the oligarchs are angry etc. The MSM knows the war is lost, but will not acknowledge it. Anyway, Russia has insulated itself from the dollar (unlike China). The decline in exchange rates is managed by the Russian Central Bank. Hey, Naburova was awarded ”Banker of the year” by the West before the SMO in 2022. Yes, expensive cars and handbags and champagne etc but food and energy, transport etc still cheap to the general public. The West does not understand the psyche of Russia and China. For Russia the loss of 20 million in WW II and in China ” 100 years of shame ” understand the people to make sacrifices they must make to retain their sovereignty. Freedom is not cheap — the Russians and the Chinese know that.
Eliminate
quarkNovember 25, 2024, 7:58 PM
Be careful, don’t forget this image.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjl8CU-uVk6MPpmhRV65wqjFR6Rd9PlIZ6-Ni24CS-X5dXxoU7vCUjkUuWWb_fYuiVX77FznVfj6XencGgGU1Qnoo1uPHLNgyBQ71oIZ2P1GnGQoJhSGce_puzgC81qpDvHrePl8muAF0F1LJmtFnHAlulm0rCTUdlwZj5_W-KzTRAj8U79ZY_syHrw7fVr/w640-h406/rusia%20o.png
Russia is also at peak oil (and further ahead). It depends on oil and gas exports… Bad times are for everyone.
Greetings.
hole in headNovember 25, 2024, 9:25 PM
Yes, Quark – bad times for everyone. but like I said this is a marathon not a sprint. Compared to this we have the EU with no oil or gas and USA producing 13.3 mbpd but 7 mbpd is shale and 3.5 mbpd is NGL, NGPL, refinery gains, etc. The real black goo is only about 3 mbpd which is from Lower 48 and GOM. As per your last post Russia has real assets of USD 75 T and USA only 45 T . The only advantage that the West has is the ”money printer”, but when it will run out of paper or ink we do not know. 😁
>> Russia is also at peak oil (and further ahead).
I don’t believe Russia is further ahead in depletion. Do you? Estimates I’ve seen show the US has less and pumps the little it does have faster.
Peak oil depends a whole lot on how high the price of oil can stay. If oil prices stay as low as they are, there is little motivation for more investment. This dynamic affects oil supplies around the world, causing oil supply everywhere to peak.
Ivan , relax .
Exports The top exports of Russia are Crude Petroleum ($133B), Petroleum Gas ($71.5B), Refined Petroleum ($67.4B), Coal Briquettes ($36.5B), and Gold ($14.6B), exporting mostly to China ($101B), India ($40.4B), Germany ($27.7B), Turkey ($25.3B), and Italy ($25.1B).
In 2022, Russia was the world’s biggest exporter of Semi-Finished Iron ($8.38B), Mixed Mineral or Chemical Fertilizers ($7.45B), Nitrogenous Fertilizers ($6.27B), Non-fillet Frozen Fish ($3.76B), and Iron Reductions ($1.26B)
Imports The top imports of Russia are Packaged Medicaments ($9.11B), Broadcasting Equipment ($7.15B), Cars ($6.38B), Computers ($3.94B), and Motor vehicles; parts and accessories (8701 to 8705) ($3.64B), importing mostly from China ($75.4B), Germany ($15.5B), Turkey ($9.24B), Kazakhstan ($8.78B), and South Korea ($6.33B).
In 2022, Russia was the world’s biggest importer of Furskin Apparel ($802M), Precipitated Copper ($641M), Hydraulic Turbines ($65.9M), and Non-Retail Artificial Staple Fibers Sewing Thread ($63.7M)
The largest imports are from China , 5 times more than that of second largest Germany .
https://oec.world/en/profile/country/rus
Visualized: U.S. Energy Use, by Source and Sector
By Alan Kennedy Graphics & Design Alejandra Dander Athul Alexander
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/sp/rfh01-us-energy-use/
Looks as if transport is the majority sector of energy consumption.
As Gail has pointed out, we are unrealistic in our expectations.
While 93.6 quadrillion Btu of energy is an incredible amount, it is not the peak of U.S. energy consumption. In 2022, for example, America consumed 100 quadrillion Btu of energy. Although the U.S. uses energy in a variety of different ways, over 90% of this energy comes from fossil or nuclear fuels.
Good luck with the clean energy transition…
From the article
Energy consumption in America has been consistently high over the last decade, with no sign of decreasing or shifting dynamics in the near term, making U.S. energy an enticing investment proposition.
As Gail has pointed out recently, doesn’t see it working…
Renewables include wind & solar, hydroelectric, ethanol for fuel, wood burned as fuel, and things like geothermal. Look at the chart and see how little of renewables ends up in the “Power” sector. Wind and solar do not generate much, compared to the other items in this group.
The analysis is based on heat energy, which is pretty much what the economy runs on. Electricity is not a direct producer of heat energy, in the same way that burning coal, natural gas or wood is.
As far as I can see, this chart doesn’t really tell us what the output of the Power sector is, just the input. Perhaps I should look at the detail data produced by the EIA.
I notice the article says near the end,
“Although the U.S. uses energy in a variety of different ways, over 90% of this energy comes from fossil or nuclear fuels.”
Well it will go down when the depression hits. How can employment be up? I don’t see any hiring only layoffs
Sam , the answer to your question . Jobless at all time high .
https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/continuing-jobless-claims-top-19-million-americans-highest-3-years
I thought electricity was ~20% of energy consumption, not 34%?
32/(28+22.6+6.3+4.7+32)=34%
There is primary energy, which includes waste heat from power stations and then there is delivered energy – energy at point of use.
And frequently there is loss in transit.
The US disregards waste heat from power stations, but this can be a significant source of winter heat. China has used this to a significant extent. Sweden has some, but it tends to be pushed out by subsidized renewables, I understand.
My understanding is the 20% figure is after back-calculating how much fossil fuel energy would have been required to produce it. In other words, the 20% figure is if the world ran solely on fossil fuels, then electricity production would require 20% of those fossil fuels and the actual wall-socket electricity would be less than that 20%.
Gail could you chime in? I’m going off memory of ourworldindata.
The chart shows input to make the electricity, not output.
There is a huge energy loss in making electricity from fossil fuels.
There is a different calculation to figure out electricity consumption as % of total. EIA makes it difficult to find.
The biggie is transportation consumption, wonder what it will go down to when bicycles, sandals, and rickshaws (push carts) are the main means of transportation, along with ox carts, draft animals…
A long while ago a comment was made that folks years ago had no reason to travel much, maybe to the field, compost pile or outhouse….and one I remember him saying his grandma would just walk away to milk the cow if their was a fuss about gender identification….couldn’t be at all bothered by such nonsense.
Another big use of energy is heat energy in winter. This actually affects all of the different categories: residential, commercial, and industrial.
The industrial category uses a tremendous amount of fossil fuels for its industrial processes as well. Agriculture is considered part of “industry.” It burns a lot of oil in its field operations. Without oil, it is difficult to grow nearly as much food as we grow today and to transport it, often in vehicles with refrigeration capabilities.
All the ‘solutions’ being offered now are little more than just coping.
None of them has been implemented, nobody is building them and no one has announced plans to finish them off before 2030
Talking about heavy project which has not been built now is simply futile – we are stuck with whatever we have got now
It does seem that way
Yes, that is how I feel about recent announcement to start building a nuclear power station in Poland starting in 2026. Supposedly to be finished by 2032/33. I doubt they do more than break ground. Probably some consultants on the project will make some money getting initial project plans drawn up.
Agreed. It is costing more and taking longer to get anything done in OECD countries. The London crossrail project is a good example of this. Something that could have been done by previous generations ended up being abandoned because the cost seemed to be spiralling to infinity. It is the same whereever we look.
Kim Dot Com just had a stroke
https://x.com/KimDotcom/status/1860944312873468127
It’s interesting how many names I recognize wishing Kim well. He is loved.
Russia recently used a missile of considerable strength. Coupled with BRICS, does this escalate changes from the dollar as a reserve currency?
Dennis L.
In this short video, Catherine Austin Fitts claims that by itself, bitcoin is mostly a pump and dump tool; it is highly illiquid. If a billionaire wants to sell a huge amount, it is impossible. There seem to be requests for a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEBUwlJJTOA
Presumably partly as a way of fixing this illiquidity, she also claims that the US government is starting a long-term buying program for bitcoin, to hold on the balance sheets of governmental units. (I expect the buying program will pump up the price of bitcoin.)
She also seems to suggest that there will be at some point an attempt to back bitcoin using the huge value of governmental land.
Does any of this seem like something that is already underway, or is likely in the future?
I was there when bitcoin was being specified and designed. The market was for people who wanted to hide assets and transactions from the government. The run up is mostly speculation but there is an underlying use for the stuff.
Lyn Aldon is the go to for bitcoin information
I’ve never understood how this works. It doesn’t seem to be anything real and I don’t understand how it can have any value. As a piece of computer software, why does it take energy to mine bitcoin? One can copy computer software and create more copies almost for free. The only cost is the data storage.
This seems to suffer the same problem as other fiat currencies in so far as it isn’t tied to anything that has real value. It is just a computational token represented by ones and zeros on some data storage device. Why would that be of use or interest to anyone? It is like trying to buy a computer game score. It would appear to be valueless and meaningless.
What is it that makes it worth something? If I have I have a piece of gold or platinum, I can ultimately use it to make jewelry, or electrical contacts or a catalyst. Something that is of utility to someone and hence of value. But what can I do with a bitcoin, which isn’t anything real? It doesn’t actually exist. So what the hell is it that people are buying and selling?
This is where I come from also: “I’ve never understood how this works. It doesn’t seem to be anything real and I don’t understand how it can have any value.”
I was there when bitcoin was being designed. The point is that anything like the bitcoin numbers that is limited can form the basis of a money system. The expected progress in computers was compensated by it becoming increasingly hard to find the numbers as more of them were found.
bitcoin is ultimately a ponzi scheme
money can only carry value if it is underpinned by energy
(you sell meat/bread/petrol–i need same–we exchange money to complete the transaction)—it would be inconvenient for me to trade you a sheep (energy on legs) for 50 gallons of petrol—so we use money instead.
in other words, money is no more than a unit of energy exchange.
bitcoin isnt underpinned by anything other than opinion.
The value of ponzi schemes is entirely dependent on suckers at the bottom, propping up the value of the pyramid—ie the lucky ones at the top,
the overall value is only what someone believes it to be.
which is why bitcoin must eventually evaporate.
in the meantime Musk has found the biggest sucker of all to buy bitcoin
For a cashless society to succeed cryptocurrency will have to take over that way negative interest rates can take over and the bubble will expand even more if any drop occurs this is all part of a plan Trump Putin Biden Obama Schwab are just puppets of a grand conspiracy involving the world’s people this plan will succeed because the vast majority of the world’s population are so busy with earning an income and living life that they will welcome any change that prolongs this arrangement indefinitely even if it is as a universal basic income when artificial intelligence takes over their jobs.Cryptocurrency could give them this and then their would be total control every cryptodollar could be taxed, all bank runs would be eliminated and growth could be controlled increased or decreased.
I thought the US government wanted to develop its own digital currency, to take over when the current financial system collapses or needs to be replaced. The amount in each person’s account could be regulated. It might depend on a social credit score. It would have nothing to do with bitcoin.
I’m trying to find out if the price of bitcoin continues does the energy consumption increase as well as more people are chasing after it? It is already using as much energy as Australia
I think that bitcoin, in a way, acts as a subsidy to the fossil fuel industry. “Mining” bitcoin leads to expenditures to fossil fuel producers for natural gas (and other resources) that would otherwise be “stranded,” because of too great distance from where manufacturing is done. Indirectly, mining adds to demand, especially for resources in areas that are distant from populations.
A program to purchase bitcoin would add to bitcoin demand (and price) would thus indirectly be a greater subsidy to the fossil fuel industry. As more and more of fossil fuel production gets stranded, this becomes a way to keep revenue up for the fossil fuel industry, as revenue from other sales drift lower.
Most money is already digital. Very little is now used as paper cash. I’m not sure what a new digital currency can do that the existing one doesn’t. Can anyone here explain what would make a new digital currency different to the (existing) digital dollar?
There would be a lot less of it. The government would control who gets how much. If there are not enough goods and services for everyone, this would be a way of pushing unfavored people out.
Also, as the quantity of goods and services falls, in theory, the quantity of this new government-controlled digital money could also fall. Using gold or silver wouldn’t work as well, because their quantity doesn’t fall.
One good thing about more involvement of Elon Musk in the government is that posts praising him and putting hopes of space exploration on him have disappeared, since it is now a known fact that he prefers wielding power on earth rather than chasing unicorns in the space.
Some people have not given up yet, proposing solutions which do NOT exist now, with endless ‘could’ ‘might’ ‘possibly’ ‘in sight’ and so forth.
The game is over. It ended sometime around 2016. It is OK to remain in the denial mode but that won’t change the reality a bit
You are correct about circa 2016. But you do not need to watch cultural and political markers. That is when diesel peaked. Civ I is diesel, and now there is less and less (space energy is for simpletons consumption).
If renewable energy, including the batteries it requires, worked a whole lot better (and were a whole lot cheaper) there might be a possibility. But things aren’t going so well:
From Zerohedge,
The Poster Child Of Europe’s Electric Car Future Just Filed For Bankruptcy After Burning Through Billions
https://amp.dw.com/en/what-is-peak-oil-and-when-will-we-reach-it/a-70645124
Here is an interesting article on what peak oil is and how we will easily transition away from fossil fuels 😂. I wonder if A I was used to write this?
This is a link directly to the IEA report that is discussed in this document.
https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2024
The IEA seems to be tied to the view that the world’s biggest problem is climate change. Somehow, the world economy can transition to an electricity-based economy, powered by renewable energy.
The IEA reminds me a lot of the World Economic Forum. The WEF is an international NGO and lobbying organization, headquartered in Switzerland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Economic_Forum
The IEA is supposedly an autonomous intergovernmental agency, but it seems to publish views similar to those of the WEF. It is headquartered in Paris.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Energy_Agency
all these organizations repeat the mantra climate change .Why? to guide humanity to the correct course of action that they believe will save humanity.
This youtube video discusses recent Chinese research on the production of artificial starch using hydrogen and carbon dioxide.
https://youtu.be/e2SsheLN1t8?si=Csf-khyGAqfMP668
Chinese researchers calculated a realistic efficiency of producing starch in this way. They assume:
Hydrogen electrolysis: 85%
Hydrogen to methanol: 85%
Methanol to starch: 61%
Additionally, the heat and pressure needed for the reaction steps consume energy, which amount to another 32% energy loss (68% efficiency).
Multiplying all of the efficiencies together, we end up with a 30% conversion efficiency of electricity into starch. Starch is the main ingredient in bread and pasta, which are staples of western diet. The average person needs 2200 Calories to maintain a stable weight. That equates to 2.56kWh. If electricity is converted into starch at 30% efficiency, then 8.53kWh would produce enough starch to feed one person for 1 day. That is equivalent to a constant power of 355W to feed 1 person. At an electricity cost of $0.1/kWh, this would cost $0.85/day. Or to put it another way, a single 1200MWe nuclear reactor with a 90% capacity factor, could feed over 3 million people.
In reality, no one would obtain all of their calories needs from pure starch, because aside from its calorie content it is nutritionally empty. But as an additive to processed food like bread or pasta, this could meet a sizable portion of human calorie needs.
Plain starch is an example of “junk food.” It has no nutrients whatsoever, other than calories. People’s bodies are not meant to live on pure starch.
If you have starch you can use it to make a fuel source
fuel
Why would you do that when you started with fuel?
Indeed. It would be better to use the methanol as fuel or to react the methanol over a catalyst to produce dimethyl ether. That is a diesel substitute. But the problem as always is that turning high grade electricity into liquid fuel is less than perfectly efficient. And the engine subsequently burning the fuel is only 20-40% efficient. So most of the exergy gets wasted.
Using hydrogen from renewables or nuclear power to crack heavy oil or coal into lighter hydrocarbons would give better energy return. But that isn’t a climate freindly solution.
“only 20-40% efficient. ”
True. But fuel gets away from long extension cords out in the fields.
“to crack heavy oil or coal into lighter hydrocarbons would give better energy return.
There may be a better solution. The problem with making hydrogen is the cost of the electrolytic cells. The reason they are so expensive is the platinum electrodes. Starting about a year ago, I proposed heating coal (or anything with carbon) in steam with renewable power. It takes 3 MWh to vaporize a ton of carbon in steam. That makes about 15 MWh of syngas which can make around 4 bbl of diesel. All the pieces are common except the electric powered vaporizer.
“But that isn’t a climate freindly solution.”
Making diesel you can sequester half the carbon, making hydrogen, all of it.
Potentially useful as feedstock for ruminants and swine. The world needs more animal fat.
This is thanks to Mike S . Trump and ” Drill baby drill ” can take a long walk on a short pier .
https://x.com/EnergyCredit1/status/1861077019959664698
Nice thread. One comment: “76% of onshore Federal oil production comes from two counties in New Mexico.”
Also, it is possible to try to lease more land, but it is not clear that any companies will take you up on the offer.
‘Someone’ is ‘optimistic’?
“U.S. crude oil and petroleum products, natural gas, and LNG exports will be unshackled on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2025, solidifying the U.S. as the world’s largest producer and exporter of hydrocarbons. Not only will the U.S. economy benefit, but countries all over the world will benefit from increased exports of U.S. crude oil, petroleum products and LNG. Billions of people all over the world will be helped out of energy poverty, a high priority of President Trump’s choice for the new Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright.
What a tremendous gift for the United States and the world starting January 20, 2025.”?
https://edireland.substack.com/p/in-the-51-years-since-the-arab-oil
eone’ is ‘optimistic’?
King Donald has never been known to tell a lie
just like those he’s gathered around him who can be relied upon to tell him how marvellous his tailor is.
Norman Trump won. Elon will take Stamer down.
At this precise moment, Stamerer is trying to rush the handover of the Chagos islands before Trump enters office on Jan 20th. This will mean the US and UK lising an important naval base innthe Indian ocean. Starmer is a traitor to the entire western world. I hope Trump gives him a really hard time.
(Le Monde)
‘Boots on the ground’ from Paris and London…
“War in Ukraine: discussions about sending European troops.
With the prospect of American disengagement from Kiev following Donald Trump’s return to the White House, Paris and London are not ruling out taking the lead in a coalition in Ukraine, the details of which have yet to be worked out’.”
“Guerre en Ukraine : l’envoi de militaires européens en discussion
Dans la perspective d’un désengagement américain vis-à-vis de Kiev en raison du retour de Donald Trump à la Maison Blanche, Paris et Londres n’excluent pas de prendre la tête d’une coalition en Ukraine, selon des modalités qui restent à préciser.”
Please someone stop these two crazy guys
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2024/11/25/guerre-en-ukraine-l-envoi-de-troupes-occidentales-de-nouveau-en-discussion_6412802_3210.html
Perhaps if the UK and France can see no way out of their problems, war is a way of papering over their problem for a bit. The additional debt will allow more jobs that pay better, for a bit. The news reports can be written in a way that makes it sound like their side can win. But, in fact, it looks an awfully lot like a suicide mission, because there is no way the weapons of UK and France are near adequate. And they can’t expect much support from elsewhere.
sounding more and more like a worse rerun of 1939
That may be a good way of putting today’s energy problems for Europe. They are a lot like peak hard coal in Germany in about 1939.
https://ourfiniteworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/52-peak-coal-in-uk-and-germany-led-to-world-wars.png
Hitler certainly had to get Romanias oil, then he aimed for the Caspian, but never made it.
I also read an article concerning the quality value of the oil product a long while ago.
Seems, from what I recall, the fuel octane was inferior to the allies, putting his war machines at a disasvantage.
Americans used 100 octane fuel while the Germans used 87 octane fuel.
Higher octane prevents knock. Knock degrades the performance of an engine.
In the 1930s Jimmy Doolittle took a job ta Shell oil to manage a project that developed high octane fuel. His team was successful and later contributed to the allied effort in WWII.
Of course, there are books written on the subject and the German developed fuel injection ..so, it’s complicated
It seems like if UK and France leaders wanted to escape their problems with a big ‘bang’ blaming Russia then for that.
Perhaps they want to stimulate a bad Russian reaction in order to obtain their citizens’ reaction against ‘Russian bad behaviour’.
I think we are in a terrible tricky situation in which one can only hope in Russian good decisions, because from European leaders one cannot any more hope for.
Yes. and the significance of the hypersonic strike (which apparently destroyed the whole underground complex) is that they have non nuclear nuclear tactical weapons. This will give Russia some advantage for some time. They should use it.
We in the nosebleed seats have no way of knowing how much damage there was to the underground facilities.
Also, since the recent arrest of a general and some others, the Russian MoD published daily kills are lower by ~25%:
https://mskvremya.ru/article/2023/1520-poteri-ukrainy-za-vremya-spetsoperatsii
https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/11/24/isw-russia-removes-southern-military-district-commander-over-false-progress-reports/
It’s likely coincidence, but perhaps they were inflating the numbers enough to make a big impact and now they better reflect reality.
PS – according to Ritter, much advance notice and additional trajectory information was provided to the US in advance, allowing US to gather lots of data. For example, the emission spectra can inform about the heat shield materials. So it sounds like Russia is eager to transfer tech to the US…
I expect that comments from folks in the US will be low this week. Thanksgiving comes on Thursday of this week. People traditionally spend time with relatives on this holiday, if they can. They often drive somewhere, taking the whole week off. Schools often give the week off. Airlines say that this is the busiest time of the year.
UK , my foot . Startmer is going down like Truss . His decline is fast .
https://rmx.news/article/viral-petition-demanding-uk-general-election-hits-2-million-signatures-in-under-a-week/
” Parliament is obliged to debate all petitions that surpass 100,000 signatures.;;
Understand the issue in the UK is not Ukraine but Palestine . Labor MP ‘s coming from Muslim area are the swing voters . Starmer is absolutely pro Bibi . Grab some popcorn .
https://evrimagaci.org/tpg/financial-crisis-looms-over-uk-social-care-sector-65643
This may be a chance for the UK to put the recent flood of single young men from all over the place to good use?
There were never any jobs for them.
There is a lack of proper housing.
The economy was never going to survive the added costs.
Sending them to the Donbass with a smart phone and a sharp stick could put their tribal instincts to good use.
More fertiliser for the Ukraine black soils?
They need a war to blame for the outcomes of their economic and social mismanagement, otherwise they would be blamed. The last thing they want is a population thinking about the social, economic, and political order.
“• Britain, France Discussing Deployment Of Troops To Ukraine – Le Monde
“Discussing.” Great. Until when was this “Discussion” scheduled? ‘Til the sun burns out? “Discussing” what exactly? How you can send NO men with NO gear supported by NO air and NO artillery? Can you please shut your lie-hole now before I lose my mind?
Here: GO AHEAD. Do it. Don’t do it. Guess what? NO ONE WILL NOTICE. Won’t make a speed bump. Will delay Russia by 30 days, so little that no one will be able to tell. But STOP TALKING ABOUT IT. I can’t stand the stench of your pointlessness and moronacy.😁
Dr D on TAE
Looking forward to the French surrender monkeys fighting.
Grand Charles vs Gail Tverberg . French . Use translate .
http://lachute.over-blog.com/2024/11/il-faut-dire-que-le-grand-charles-sannat-est-un-bon-financier-il-ne-connait-rien-a-l-economie-reelle-bien-sur-que-le-prix-de-notre-electricite-est-absurde-et-ne-sert-qu-a-remplir-les-poches-des-traders-mais-la-n-est-pas-le-probleme-son-yaquafoc.ht
Patrick Raymond did a good job of summarizing what I said in my write up about the nuclear problem. This is especially an issue in France, with all of its nuclear electricity. He ended the report by saying,
“The phenomenon of shortages is simply being swept under the carpet.”
That is precisely the issue.
http://lachute.over-blog.com/2024/11/petit-pensum-sur-le-systeme-electrique-francais.html
Hello Gail,
Here is a little overview.
Have a nice day.
Thank you for another nice post. You wrote another post recently, as well: http://lachute.over-blog.com/2024/11/il-faut-dire-que-le-grand-charles-sannat-est-un-bon-financier-il-ne-connait-rien-a-l-economie-reelle-bien-sur-que-le-prix-de-notre-electricite-est-absurde-et-ne-sert-qu-a-remplir-les-poches-des-traders-mais-la-n-est-pas-le-probleme-son-yaquafoc.ht
In this post, you give an interesting history of electricity in France. France tried coal, then hydroelectric. It didn’t have enough oil. So France decided on nuclear. It had some uranium, but this got used up.
The country went overboard with subsidized nuclear electricity. This allow industrial use of electricity to be very inefficient.
According to Google Translate:
Now all that are left are wind and solar.
You end by saying:
I am afraid you are correct. No one wants to talk about energy limits. Least of all, those in power.
France looses all war but never looses land.
Bonjour gail,
j’ai déjà consacré des articles sur un prototype de rupture d’une société basée sur le fossile. Je m’appuyais sur l’ouvrage “Vie des français sous l’occupation” de Henry Amouroux, qui décrit essentiellement le passage d’une société d’abondance énergétique (pour l’époque) le 1 ° mai 1940 à une société largement mais partiellement post fossile le 1° juillet 1940. Je vous fait passer un article ?
Au plaisir de vous lire.
Translation:
Hello Gail,
I have already devoted articles to a prototype of a break from a society based on fossil fuels. I relied on the book “Life of the French under the Occupation” by Henry Amouroux, which essentially describes the transition from a society of energy abundance (for the time) on May 1, 1940 to a largely but partially post-fossil society on July 1, 1940. Should I send you an article?
Looking forward to reading you.
Yes, that would be very interesting. Post on OurFiniteWorld.com, or email me at gailtverberg@comcast.net. Sometimes I have a mailbox full problem, so you may need a second try there.
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/AIs-Insatiable-Appetite-for-Energy-Threatens-Irelands-Grid.html
AI’s Insatiable Appetite for Energy Threatens Ireland’s Grid
Kengeo
Ignored
11/22/2024 at 9:54 am
Ovi – I’d say it’s a pretty well known issue already (examples below):
1.Ashburn , Virginia, USA: Known as “Data Center Alley,” Ashburn hosts a substantial concentration of data centers, consuming approximately 25.59% of Virginia’s total electricity in 2023. This immense demand has raised concerns about grid capacity and the environmental impact of such concentrated energy usage. 
2. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, USA: The region has experienced a significant increase in data center development, with over 150 facilities established by major tech companies. This expansion has contributed to a 13 TWh rise in commercial power demand between 2019 and 2023, leading to uncertainties in future wholesale power prices and grid stability. 
3. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: Atlanta is emerging as a major data center hub, prompting local utilities to plan new gas plants to meet the growing energy needs. This development has sparked debates over the environmental implications and the strain on the city’s power infrastructure. 
4. Dublin, Ireland: Dublin’s rapid data center growth has led to projections that these facilities could account for up to one-third of Ireland’s electricity consumption by 2026. This surge has raised concerns about the national grid’s capacity to handle such demand and the potential impact on energy prices and sustainability goals. 
5. Amsterdam, Netherlands: The Amsterdam area has faced grid capacity issues due to the rapid expansion of data centers, resulting in delays and restrictions on new projects. Authorities have implemented stricter regulations to manage the impact on the power grid and environment.
6. Singapore: Singapore imposed a moratorium on new data centers in 2019 due to power constraints. Although the ban was lifted in 2022, the country continues to face challenges in balancing data center growth with sustainable energy consumption.
7. Northern Virginia, USA: The region’s dominance in data center capacity has led to concerns about whether residents will have to foot the bill for future power lines, highlighting the strain on local infrastructure.
Copy/paste POB .
I thought of Dennis L. and his thought of zapping weeds when I saw this article:
https://themindunleashed.com/2024/11/farming-robot-kills-200000-weeds-per-hour-with-lasers.html
Farming Robot Kills 200,000 Weeds per Hour With Lasers
1kWh per weed!
i believe it weighs 7 tons and has a 3 litre diesel engine
it gets stuck in mud and nothing grows in the tracks he makes due to compaction. Just plantains. oh wait…
Norman,
Farm chemical usage seems to be ae phenomenon starting in the 80’s. Farm cancer and Parkinson’s are an issue in IA. I have no desire to be around chemicals so zapping things electrically sounds like a good idea to me.
Dennis L.
A great way to ramp up energy demand!
I suppose it also zaps bugs.
Is that a bug or a feature?
Oh, oh, oh I am in pain.
Zerohedge is talking about a new documentary, which the Main Stream Media is ignoring, called, “Thank you, Dr. Fauci.
Bombshell Fauci Documentary Nails The Whole COVID Charade
There is an article about it, including a free link to the movie. Also, a $9.99 rental from the original source is given.
More controlled opposition.
ZH article summarizes:
======
‘Thank You, Dr. Fauci’ raises many critical questions that will come into focus next year under the gavel of Rand Paul:
• Was the pandemic that killed millions and cost trillions of dollars the consequence of scientific arrogance and spy games?
• How did the Anthrax hoax of 2001 create unchecked power for Anthony Fauci?
• Why hasn’t Fauci ever acknowledged that hoax, which resulted in then-Vice President Dick Cheney giving him billions to fund perhaps the most dangerous research on the planet?
• What is the real purpose of Gain-of-Function research?
• Are past outbreaks potentially scientific accidents which were covered up?
• What is Long Covid, and why are people suffering vaccine injuries with similar symptoms?
• Will a lab-generated Bird Flu be the next chapter?
• Are nameless scientists – in the US, China or elsewhere – quietly working on a new global pandemic?
=====
Aside from the vax/LC elision, each of the above burning questions presuppose elements that are quite likely to be untrue.
• The fake pandemic never killed millions.
• Fauci was set up to have the latitude he had, and to be the cartoon villain.
• GOF research is probably a sort of MacGuffin.
• There were never any “past outbreaks”, either.
• A “lab-generated Bird Flu” telegraphed as a likely new false flag “terrah” psy-op.
• Working on the DECEPTION of a new pandemic, yes. On a real one, no.
This documentary is just the Nth propaganda phase laboring to cement the reality of GOF, lab leaks, and pandemics in the public mind, when there’s really no evidence for any of it. A “wrap-up smear” of sorts.
Just the idea of a man-made lethal pandemic makes utterly no sense to begin with: the planners and plotters would be themselves susceptible.
Injections, however…
They got careless and didn’t appreciate the risks. I doubt that the virus was deliberately released for the reasons you listed. But these people have plans in place to take advantage of foreseeable situations.
Check out JJ Couey.. I hate the fact that he presents everything in long streams, but he makes the case that “RNA cannot pandemic”. I adhere to that concept.
Never attribute to malice what can be ascribed to incompetence..No GoF or lab leaks? Perhaps you should read the well cited Wuhan Cover-up by RFK and you may change your mind…
no quotes from RFK—-perrrrrlease!!!!!!
a conspironut joining the rest of the conspironuts in the white house
along with Musk selling bitcoin to Trump
all beyond belief
except that it isn’t
I am not hearing that any of the citations quoted in the Wuhan Coverup were false.. Please be more specific..
there was no wuhan coverup
a virus spread around the world, maybe through someones incompetence
nobody was trying to decimate the global population
fauci was not working for the chinese
the Don is only hiring people who agree with him
RFK is a prime example
From the NYT
I’ll Never Forget What Kennedy Did During Samoa’s Measles Outbreak
Nov. 25, 2024
An illustration of three picture frames, including one with the outline of a man’s face, on a mantel with flowers in front. A shadow of a man’s face fills the entire illustration.
Credit…Hokyoung Kim
By Brian Deer
Mr. Deer is a journalist and the author of “The Doctor Who Fooled the World,” about the anti-vaccine movement.
In November 2019, when an epidemic of measles was killing children and babies in Samoa, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — who in recent days became Donald Trump’s pick to lead the department of Health and Human Services — sent the prime minister of Samoa at the time a four-page letter. In it, he suggested the measles vaccine itself may have caused the outbreak.
He claimed that the vaccine might have “failed to produce antibodies” in vaccinated mothers sufficient to provide infants with immunity, that it perhaps provoked “the evolution of more virulent measles strains” and that children who received the vaccine may have inadvertently spread the virus to other children. “Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance,” he added, writing in his role as the chairman of Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine group.
At the time of his letter, 16 people, many of them younger than 2, were already reported dead. Measles, which is among the most contagious diseases, can sometimes lead to brain swelling, pneumonia and death. For months, families grieved over heartbreaking little coffins, until a door-to-door vaccination campaign brought the calamity to a close. The final number of fatalities topped 80.
I was in Samoa during that outbreak as part of my more than 16 years of reporting on the anti-vaccine movement. The cause of the outbreak was not the vaccine, but most likely an infected traveler who brought the virus from New Zealand, which that year had seen the biggest measles outbreaks in decades, especially among that country’s Indigenous and Pacific Islander communities. Migration and poverty were likely factors in a sudden spread of measles in Samoa and New Zealand. But, as an editorial in the New Zealand Medical Journal reported, so too was a factor that Mr. Kennedy specializes in: “Increasing circulation of misinformation leading to distrust and reduced vaccination uptake.” Samoa’s vaccination rates had fallen to less than a third of eligible 1-year-olds.
Vaccine skepticism has ballooned worldwide, and Mr. Kennedy and others who back him have encouraged it. Americans may be well aware that their possible future health leader holds dangerous beliefs about vaccines. The consequences of his views — and those of his orbit — are not merely absurd but tragic.
In my reporting, parents have mentioned fearing vaccines after watching “Vaxxed,” a 90-minute documentary, which had also toured countries such as New Zealand. The film, focused on unproven allegations, was released more than three years before the Samoa measles outbreak. Among much else, it claimed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had committed fraud.
Two of the filmmakers — Del Bigtree and Andrew Wakefield — are buddies of Mr. Kennedy. The director, Mr. Wakefield, is a former doctor whose medical license was revoked in his native Britain in 2010 amid charges of ethical violations. One of the producers, Mr. Bigtree, became Mr. Kennedy’s presidential campaign communications chief.
In the years before the documentary was released, I revealed, in a series of articles, evidence that Mr. Wakefield’s research in the 1990s had been rigged at a London hospital to make it look as if the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine was linked to autism. This research was retracted in 2010. Mr. Kennedy certainly didn’t seem fazed by Mr. Wakefield’s professional downfall. “In any just society, we would be building statues to Andy Wakefield,” he yelled, for instance, from a platform he and Mr. Wakefield shared at an event in Washington, D.C., a few days before he sent his letter to Samoa.
Reports say Mr. Kennedy is reviewing résumés for his possible Health and Human Services empire. He’s reportedly eyeing Joseph Ladapo, a Florida health official who has questioned the safety of Covid vaccines. I’d say Mr. Bigtree may get a role; Mr. Wakefield is trickier, given how discredited he is, even in the United States. But there are plenty of others in Mr. Kennedy’s circle whose claims ought to concern everyone.
Consider Sherri Tenpenny, a doctor who has been declared by Mr. Kennedy as “one of the great leaders” of the anti-vaccine movement. She has falsely claimed that a “metal” attached to a protein in the Covid shots was making their recipients magnetic. “They can put a key on their forehead and it sticks,” she told Ohio state lawmakers in June 2021. “They can put spoons and forks all over them and they can stick.” I could pluck plenty more outrageous characters from Mr. Kennedy’s circle over the years, including veteran AIDS denialists.
In recent days, Mr. Kennedy appears to have tried to change the conversation around his vaccine views to focus on America’s junk food diets. But his views on vaccines shouldn’t be forgotten. In January 2021, speaking to a gathering of loyalists in Ohio, he outlined a three-point checklist that had to be met for him to consider a Covid vaccine. First, he said, “you take one shot, you get lifetime immunity.” Second, side effects are only “one in a million.” Third, “herd immunity” is achieved at 70 percent public uptake — after which, he stipulated, “nobody in this society” ever gets the disease again.
“If they came up with that product,” he said, “I’d be happy to look at it.”
His audience laughed. But it’s not funny.
thank you Keith—we have numerous difference of opinion, but I’m grateful you took the trouble to bring all that out about Kennedy.—an utter charlatan and a living shame to his forebears.
He joins the loonytoons bunch about to take over the White House.
Lets not forget King Don and his ”inject bleach’ pearl of covid wisdom.
For years on OFW…it was ”covid fake” hysteria by a few dubious individuals, intent on spreading BS to call attention to their own inadequacies mainly. (you know who you are)
all that is still rumbling on.
it is symptomatic of a wider insanity over vaccines. (and much else besides)
they prevent the spread of diseases—yet the lunacy persists that Fauci et al are trying to bump us all off.—and millions of dead lying in the streets (a direct OFW quote btw)
or—Gates is putting iron filings in vaccines to track everybody via his 5g masts
magnetic tenpenny is another classic example.
why people are not embarrassed to write such utter drivel is beyond me—but still it gets trotted out—and always by the same people, whatever “conspiration du jour” happens to be.
Why we live in a loonytoons world is an important question. I think I know based on evolutionary psychology and natural selection in the stone age.
But it is a hard to spread meme, unlike crazy conspiracy memes. Perhaps it would spread better if I could rephrase it as a conspiracy meme, “Our genes are conspiring to kill us!.” Sort of like salmon where reproduction and death are intimately connected. Genes play a long game, to genes, war makes sense.
Genes go on, you don’t.
Keith
personally i think its simpler than that
2 key factors seem to be at play here:
1…….the human instinct for survival—but that has been tempered by a life of comparative ease and comfort for the last century or so.
Survival now, means a nice home, car heat warmth and light, decent food, personal transport, working a few hours a week for high wages and so on.
that is what we strive for, most of us are not prepared to put that at risk, we have convinced ourselves that ”now” is forever.
so when that is threatened…..charlatans take advantage of it, and promise that they can preserve our status quo.
And we believe them, because we want to.
We reject anyone with a brain who tries to tell things as they are.—so we get loonytoon politicians—who must do as their leader wants, or lose their jobs—or worse.
Hit ler hired a bunch of pyschos to do his dirty work
Trump has the same mindset.
(mass deportation camps anyone???)—how long before camps accomodate anyone who disagrees with King Don? Remember ”lock her up?’ from 2016? Anybody still laughing about that??
he has already threatened to use the military.
and 2….. mass social media, where any daft hysteria or conspiracy can go round the world in seconds… whereas in previous times it could not, and idiots pick and choose the conspiracy that best suits the current level of insanity
This is what the USA has elected itself into.
Please be more specific.”
They don’t make a lick of sense.
The New York Times baby! the authoritative newspaper, spending 2 or 3000 words in favor of vaccines.
When Norman and Keith disagree on something, I can usually work out which one of them is definitely wrong, which allows me to credit the other one with some common sense by default.
But when they both agree on something, it’s a safe bet that they are almost always both wrong. They manage this by some combination of cognitive dissonance and cognitive decline, along with all the stuff they know for sure that just ain’t so.
you wait for days
nothing
then you get 5 Timsworths in a row
sounding just like the good ol days, when half the ofw comments were from the same source.
still– if RFK must be regarded as the oracle of truth, despite his written record of utter BS, (accurately documented by Keith) and now his chosen posture of ring kissing,, surrounded by prostrate acoloytes admiring the dress sense of the new emperor—- I guess we have not entirely left that era.
(you REALLY agree with RFK on the measles outbreak Tim?)
“(accurately documented by Keith)”
NYT, I didn’t know any of that about RFK, Samoa, and measles.
Also, a lot of so-called “vaccine” induced disability and death is caused by anaphylaxis.
When the immune system meets an antigen (literally, something that GENerates an ANTIbody response: more precisely, a toxin, protein, or other foreign substance which induces an immune response in the body, especially the production of antibodies) that it has encountered before more than 21 days earlier, the immune system can go wild and mount a completely over-the-top response that can severely damage or kill its owner, sometimes within minutes. This is called anaphylaxis.
Norman and Keith don’t have to worry about anaphylaxis because, being in their 80s, their immune systems are senescent.
A senescent immune system, also known as immunosenescence, is a process of immune dysfunction that occurs with age. Immunosenescence can lead to poor vaccination outcomes, and increased susceptibility to infection, age-related disease, and malignancies. However, on the upside, they can jab themselves crazy without provoking their clapped out immune systems into launching an anaphylaxis attack. So that’s something.
Had Norman and Keith been subjected to the childhood vaccine schedule that is now pushed and coerced onto the vast majority of today’s American children, it is very doubtful that they would have survived to their respective ripe old ages.
And yet they did survive, and without 70 to 80 jabs before the age of 18. If vaccines are so bloody necessary to health and longevity, how on earth did they do that?
Today’s young Americans are facing a tsunami of vaccine-induced health challenges that are likely to prove catastrophic for their long-term health.
Keith and Norman, Norman and Keith, I am sorry. I am truly deeply sorry that you had to live long enough to witness the return of Trump and his numerous cabinet picks that you and the NYT don’t agree with, and especially RFK. Because I know how much you that all that and how much it must trigger you.
I am not a great fan of giving advice, and good advice is seldom taken in any case, but I have something to say on this subject: Get over it, get over yourselves, and get out of the way for the next four years if you don’t want to be run down and crushed by the Trump Train.
For my crescendo, I present Couey’s Thee Laws:
—Intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
—Transfection in healthy humans is criminally negligent.
—RNA cannot pandemic.
I’ll follow this up with a very popular anti-vaxxer meme:
—Why argue with a pro-vaxxer,
when you can just wait?
And as Germ over at The Automatic Earth might say: TVASF ☠️☠️☠️
“subjected to the childhood vaccine schedule”
I don’t think Tim appreciates how old we are. Vaccines like MMR just didn’t exist when I was a kid, even more for Norm. Nor chicken pox, which is way I am subject to shingles. No polio vaccine, I got that long after I was a kid.
“the next four years ”
I suspect that AI development over the next four years will be far more significant than anything Trump does.
But that’s just a guess. Wait and see.
oh i agree
kids got awful diseases
but the anti vaxxers, in order to preserve their righteous stance, would see MMR stopped, pregnant women get Rubella, and kids born deaf and blind.
i was lucky to get nothing more than mild measles.
but as an update, 2 immediate neighbours died this month, but luckily i was out when the grim reaper was making his rounds—he must have been really annoyed because i was at the top of his list.
“I’ll be back” he was heard to mutter.
RFKs conspironuttery
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0mzk2y41zvo
its all out there if you care to check it
The vaccine did not work! If you got sick for over two weeks you developed great antibodies! They lied and said that you need fake vax!
“The vaccine”
Sam, do you have any knowledge of this topic or have you just been infected with crazy memes? It’s not the worst, google for xenu.
and “they”are ??
I think the question was relating to the veracity of GOF and lab leak, your responses were ad hominem attacks on RFK, not any of the citations provided in his book, the Wuhan Coverup.
read keith’s reply on this thread—far more comprehensive than mine
but iif you want to pay homage at the court of king don–theres nothing i can do about it
best of luck
Do you espouse rational?
If so, does this story make rational sense?
If you answer yes, then how about the other spillovers, the original SARs and the one from bats to camels to people.
Look up Pelosi’s “wrap-up smear”.
when you see something like that, it really makes one want to execute these people
you REALLY agree with RFK on the measles outbreak Tim?
I don’t know, Norman. I would have to look up what he actually said about it. One thing I would never do is take the NYT’s word for anything.
I strongly disagreed with RFK’s global warming alarmism about 15 years ago, when he claimed without evidence that the decline in snowfall in New England between when he was a kid in the 1960s and “these days (around 2010) was the result of anthropogenic emissions of CO2.
I don’t take his vaccine statements as Gospel, either, but I note he has never been an anti-vaxxer. All his kids were vaxxed. His biggest sin in the view of the adherents of the Vaccine Cult is to have questioned the dogma that all vaccines are safe and effective, and that any normal child can safely tolerate a thousand antigens at one time (as one of the most eminent and respected vaccine experts has publicly stated).
The Samoa measles epidemic? I had never heard of it. Nor that RKK Jnr. had commented on it. Google and Wikipedia are my friends, and they tell me that the outbreak in 2019 ¥:
“there were over 5,700 cases of measles and 83 deaths, out of a Samoan population of 200,874. Over three per cent of the population were infected.”
So, 97% were not infected? That sounds good.
And out of an infected population of 5,700 people, 83 died, for an infection fatality rate of 1.5%. I really don’t know what the fuss was about.
The first measles vaccine was brought to market in 1963. If you were born before 1957 you likely never had one.
Fun fact about measles:
Prior to the introduction of measles vaccination in 1963, there were >100 million measles cases resulting in 6 million deaths worldwide, with 4 million cases and 450 deaths in the US annually.
And another fun fact:
In 1960, the estimated world population was approximately 3 billion people.
In the United States, the population was about 179 million.
What do these facts tell you, Norman?
Can you “do the math”, as our American cousins say?
It tells me that in the world, about 1 person in 30 was getting measles each year, and of those 1 in 30, about 6% were dying of it.
While in US, about 1 person in 45 was getting measles, and of those 1 in 45, about 0.112%.
That is a HUMONGUS difference, Norman. and it was obviously not caused by vaccination as there was no vaccination available for measles at that time.
RFK said …..
Do you know what he actually said, Norman?
Or do you only know what the lying dying legacy media said he said?
Why don’t you go listen to or read what he actually said, do some proper research, and report back to us?
Go on, prove yourself worthy of expressing an opinion by actually finding out what you are supposed to be opining about, rather than just running around like a kitten chasing a laser pointer spouting your cookie cutter, talking point, mass media propaganda?
If Norman was a kitten.
i can see why Kennedy is your man Tim:
/////He said he “won’t take sides” on 9/11
In July, Kennedy said he was unsure of his take on 9/11. He posted on X: “My take on 9/11: It’s hard to tell what is a conspiracy theory and what isn’t. But conspiracy theories flourish when the government routinely lies to the public.”
He continued: “As President I won’t take sides on 9/11 or any of the other debates. But I can promise is that I will open the files and usher in a new era of transparency.” He said that he was referring to a CBS 60 Minutes segment on possible involvement by Saudi Arabia. He promised transparency on the matter should he become president./////
or
/////Last year, video surfaced that showed Kennedy saying: “Covid-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese. We don’t know whether it was deliberately targeted that or not.”
He said the story was “mistaken,” but also mentioned a study that “shows that COVID-19 appears to disproportionately affect certain races.”//////
or
////////
In other words, a total BS artist
At one time, there were actually studies that claimed most of these things.
you can find a study that claims just about anything about anything
and people who will believe anything.
there was even a study, by someone with a Phd in something or other, who ‘proved’ that there no planes involved in 9/11 at all–that they were just holograms
i post this because it used to be one of tim’s staples
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5654/debunking-911-myths-planes/
a good BS source never dries up. RFK drinks from the same fountain…he’s latched onto Trump, because he knows he hasnt a hope of getting even his foot in the door of the WH without him.
Measles
One of the things about measles that was not recognized until years after they started vaccinating people for it is that measles suppresses the immune system for a few years after you get it. So kids died from other infections that were an indirect result of having measles.
Norman, thank you for conceding my point on measles through your time-honored practice of ignoring it.
If there had been even a tiny flaw in my argument or my arithmetic, you would have jumped on it.
As it was, you changed the subject. Could it be you didn’t expect anyone to notice?
RFK isn’t “my man”, just as Trump isn’t “my man”. But I do love the way they trigger people of your mindset. They will be naming a new syndrome any time now: RFKJNRDS!
Now, mind you don’t send your blood pressure up too high. Keep calm and Carry on.
Keith, Gail’s still here, you’re still here, Norman’s still here, I’m still here. We’re all firing on most cylinders most of the time, and we’re all drawing our pensions. And I assume all of us have had measles and none of us have ever had a measles shot.
Are you seriously suggesting that we’d be doing any better than we currently are IF we’d had two doses of the MMR vaccine?
More than that, are you seriously suggesting we’d be doing any better than we currently are if we’d had all 30 or more doses of the recommended shots on the US normal childhood schedule?
Here’s a partial list of things they’d protect us against.
Hepatitis B
Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis (DTaP)
Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)
Pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13)
Inactivated poliovirus (IPV)
Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR)
Varicella (chickenpox)
Hepatitis A
Meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY)
Human Papillomavirus (HPV)
The HPV vaccine is recommended for all individuals, male and female, age 9-26. This is a two-dose vaccine, 6-12 months apart. It is intended to prevent cervical cancer, although most males don’t actually have a cervix. Oh, and females can still get cervical cancer despite being vaccinated, and the jabs can cause severe or even debilitating side effects.
But please, don’t let me put you off. By all means, listen to your conscience and do your social duty. You certainly should be getting both doses as a poster-boy and role model for the safe-and-effective-vax-advocate community. Don’t just place this burden on the young and refuse to shoulder it yourself on grounds of age.
“although most males ”
The point is to stop the circulation of HPV.
“can cause severe or even debilitating side effects. ”
That’s the nature of vaccines. At the policy level it’s a numbers game. Does the vaccine reduce illness or does it cause more illness than it prevents. For HPV it took over ten years to collect the data. (Girls who were vaccinated for HPV have a near zero rate of cervical cancer as adults. The reason for the cut off date is that almost everyone is exposed by their mid 20s. Vaccinating later is not cost effective.)
A number of vaccines you list I didn’t get because they were developed later than my childhood. Chicken pox vaccine was not developed until after my daughter was ten. She got it and my wife who had never had it as a child had a severe case. On the other hand, being an Army brat, I got the full military schedule when we followed my dad to Japan. It was a substantial list including yellow fever.
It was awful at the time, but does not seem to have done any long term damage.
It is better than nothing.
Fauci even received a prize from Italy: “Knight of the Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic”.
Here the news:
“Italian-American immunologist Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (Niaid) and advisor medical advisor to President Joe Biden in the US anti-Covid task force, becomes today a Knight of the Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic.
Italy.”
https://mediasetinfinity.mediaset.it/video/tgcom24/anthony-fauci-cavaliere-di-gran-croce-al-merito-della-repubblica_FD00000000295843
Depopulation by deception utilising the vaccines the plan being to shorten ones lifespan I remember seeing a plan for four billion by 2100.
there are also ‘plans’ to mine the moons of saturn
all BS
Nothing is black and white in life but 50 shades of grey you may finally get it norm but maybe you won’t all I can do is sow the seed in the soil .
50 shades of grey was utter BS too
but with all the money it made—i wish i’d put it out there
I am fairly well up on space news and I never heard anything about mining the moons of Saturn. From a physics standpoint it makes no sense.
i used ”moons of saturn” as a generic description for all ”off earth” mining fantasies
Keith, me neither. It is just Norman having a cheap dig because he can’t get his head around the idea of space resource utilusation. I don’t know why it is so unbelievable to some people. Satellites have dominated global communications since the 1980s. A lot of people had a hard time accepting the idea of air travel back in the early 20th century. When something is outside of personal experience, it can be tough to accept.
as ive pointed out on numerous occasions
get as much ”starstuff” as you like back to earth
you still have the problem of physically converting it into ”earthstuff” that people want to buy—-and can actually afford.
real wages have only one source.
the conversion of one energy form into another, usually through the application of heat.
overproduce—and wages devalue because goods are in abundance and cant be sold
underproduce and wages feed hyperinflation through shortages
It isnt possible to bring back stuff from ”out there” and just give it away for free.
There has to be a earth-wage structure to make the space-market work.
There wont be one if our supply sources are ”off earth”
and you cant send several million miners out to chase asteroids…the support structure cannot be created for them.—the means to do that has not even been thought up yet, let alone carried out. Musk’s fireworks are not enough.
reading about in sci fi magazines will not make it real, and equating it with ‘flying’ doesnt cut it either.
“the support structure cannot be created for them.”
It’s not worth responding to Norm. He makes these absolute statement about what is possible where engineers just work out what it would take. If we were in the early 1930s he would be telling us Hoover dam was impossible and we don’t need hydro-power anyway.
I don’t know if asteroid mining will happen but given the current and projected technology if it happens, my guess is that it will be done by AIs and not involve humans at all.
again—AIs are not machines—nothing will be “done by AIs” I grant you your level of intellect, yet you persist with such nonsense.
it is a form of intelligence that needs machines in order to exist.–the more to be done, the more complex the machine must be. 20 years ago, cars had no ”intelligence”—now they have, and are far more complex.
the AI in my car would not exist without the car itself.
The men building the Hoover dam could breathe. (just about)
The Hoover dam was an investment of the cheap surplus energy available at the time. (Oil) in order to create employment. The hoover dam delivered even more (electrical ) energy, that in turn expanded the US south west, and helped to industrialse it.
burning even more oil to do so.
We do not have that surplus energy avialable—you cannot burn asteroids
your calculator tells you the sun will supply all the energy we need. (electrical)
now—had the hoover dam energy supply been taken up as it came from the turbines, it would have delivered bright lights to Vegas.—nothing else
as it was, it stimulated a lot of industrial activity, which in turn consumed lots of coal oil and gas.—and provided lots of jobs. (and supported WW2 incidentally)
without that oil coal and gas—hoover energy woulf have dissipated in bright lights—nothing else.
the hoover dam stimulated energy flow, and humankind was able to use it, but only through consumption of increasing volumes of oil.
energy from sunlight and stuff from asteroids will not give the same kind of stimulation.
your calculator will not change that
“you persist with such nonsense.”
See the pointer to the youtube video I just posted. China has reduced the training cost of an open source AI by 200 times. Mind boggling.
my offer still stands Keith
an “AI” of itself, and by itself, with no other intervention, mechanical or human, to move a one ounce weight, one inch. With your knowledge and certainties about it—it should be an easy thing to do.
or AI, of itself should write verse that will bring a stinging behind my eyes.
The big “O” as I previously suggested, half humourously, is too far outside the scope of AI to warrant discussion here, or anywhere else.
no matter what level of accelleration the Chinese put on it.
“it should be an easy thing to do.”
That’s just silly, people can’t teleport and neither can an AI.
But AIs have been moving stuff around for decades, google block world.
“AI, of itself should write verse that will bring a stinging behind my eyes.”
You are not keeping up with the news, that’s been done. I
New research shows people can’t tell the difference between human and AI poetry – and even prefer the latter. What gives?
Here are some lines Sylvia Plath never wrote:
The air is thick with tension,
My mind is a tangled mess,
The weight of my emotions
Is heavy on my chest.
This apparently Plath-like verse was produced by GPT3.5 in response to the prompt “write a short poem in the style of Sylvia Plath”.
The stanza hits the key points readers may expect of Plath’s poetry, and perhaps a poem more generally. It suggests a sense of despair as the writer struggles with internal demons. “Mess” and “chest” are a near-rhyme, which reassures us that we are in the realm of poetry.
According to a new paper in Nature Scientific Reports, non-expert readers of poetry cannot distinguish poetry written by AI from that written by canonical poets. Moreover, general readers tend to prefer poetry written by AI – at least until they are told it is written by a machine.
In the study, AI was used to generate poetry “in the style of” ten poets: Geoffrey Chaucer, William Shakespeare, Samuel Butler, Lord Byron, Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, T.S. Eliot, Allen Ginsberg, Sylvia Plath and Dorothea Lasky.
Participants were presented with ten poems in random order, five from a real poet and five AI imitations. They were then asked whether they thought each poem was AI or human,
[The Conversation]
/////in response to the prompt “write a short poem in the style of Sylvia Plath”.////
ah—now there you have it Keith
“in response to a prompt”
i specifically said—an AI action, of itself, by itself, and with no human intervention. (covering numerous suggestions)
you can’t get off the hook that easily my learned friend.
Even we knuckledraggers have original ideas, sometimes.
“it can be tough to accept.”
In fact, the valuable resources are low grade, in the ppm range and locked inside giant anvils. But we mine gold deposits that low on Earth. It takes a very different mining and processing methods, forget crushing, but the chemistry looks it looks like it can be done on a large scale.
Different story if you want iron and nickel for structural parts for power satellites and L1 sunshades.
But Norm is a doomer, invested emotionally in everything failing and sees no alternatives to energy from fossil fuels.
Peter, in case you haven’t noticed, all Norman’s digs are cheap.
There’s a theory going around that he buys all his spades and other gardening equipment from the local Pound Store.
Gain of fiction as we used to say..
Which reminds me of that other little gem of an aphorism – the only thing mutating were the lies!
I always come back to the ‘ Diamond Princess’..IFR 0.14%..mostly over life expectancy.. everyone breathing the same air..spring 2020. They already knew all they needed to know..about the same as a severe flu..
What was unusual to me as a health practitioner was that the anti parasitics were the most effective treatment… Artemesia annua (Chinese wormwood), manuka (leptospermum scoparium), ivermectin.
https://spacecommune.com/chinas-14-biggest-nuclear-plants-under-construction/
This article goes well with one referenced recently:
https://www.rt.com/business/608081-russia-uranium-exports-china/
China triples uranium imports from Russia
Moscow previously banned the export of strategically important nuclear fuel to the US
Now we know where the new home for the uranium will be.
“I’ve said many times that the scale of energy consumption lies at the heart of the human predicament. It’s woven into every facet of the challenges I write about. While reducing energy use—fossil fuels and renewables—isn’t a solution in itself, any honest assessment of our situation must acknowledge it as part of the pathway forward for humanity and the planet.
“The response I hear most often, and one I can’t disagree with, is: ‘That will never happen.’ Fair enough. But if we’re unwilling to even consider a key piece of the puzzle, how serious are we about the solution?
“Or is this really about change—feeling like we’re doing something—without actually facing the hard truths? We can’t cherry-pick the parts of a solution we like and ignore the rest, then expect it to work.
“So, in response to your calls for solutions, I ask: do you truly want them, or are you just looking for a simple answer to avoid the complexity of the problems we face?
“I suggest putting everything back on the table for discussion—including renewables. They’re just another way to burn through more energy while convincing ourselves we’re solving the problem.”
https://www.artberman.com/blog/solutions-without-understanding-why-were-asking-the-wrong-questions/
Art seems to think that somehow humans, if they put their minds to it, can cut way back on energy consumption. I am doubtful of this.
An easy way to reduce energy consumption would be to increase taxes greatly, and to use the tax revenue to start paying off government debt. With the lower after-tax income, practically everyone could afford to buy much less. The amount of energy required to operate the system would be much lower.
But there would be huge layoffs, in many parts of the world because of lower demand. Debt defaults would become a big problem in the non-governmental sector. (Governments would have the new higher taxes to cover their costs.) Eventually, government revenue would fall also, because of the many layoffs.
I agree that renewables aren’t the solution. They are energy devices with most of their cost at the front end. They produce only intermittent electricity, which is not very useful. They are mostly an excuse to use more fossil fuels now, in the hope that they might eliminate some of the need for fossil fuels later. But they really need huge support to work, and end up costing more than electricity from other sources.
we have built ourselves into a system, where forward growth and infinite expansion is our only option.
this of course is impossible, despite that, we vote for those who make those promises.
the precise endgame of that cannot be accurately predicted, because we will each receive our own termination notice because of it.
we will also have the common certainty that it only applies to ‘other people’,
I think you are right. Even those on this website fall into, “we will also have the common certainty that it only applies to ‘other people.’
and perversely
when it doesn’t happen to ”other people”
it will be ”other people’s” fault
this will be the scary part of the reign of King Donald 1st
Growth works. There are economies of scale. Increased specialization usually leads to improved production, as well. In fact, with growth, debt can be repaid with interest. The availability of a promise of a benefit from the system, before the benefit is really their, tends to pull the system forward.
Shrinkage behaves in precisely the opposite direction.
In fact, even what appears to be staying level works in the opposite direction because diminishing returns with respect to resource extraction means that more and more of the fossil fuels or uranium used in extracting the resources needs to be used in the process.
growth requires consistent and increasing energy input
Agreed! Any transition to any new variety of energy input needs to take place very, very slowly. Usually the new energy type simply adds to the mix.
According to the World Nuclear Association, some 160 tonnes of natural uranium are needed to produce 1GWe-yr (8.766bn kWh) of electrical energy at 0.25% 235U tail assay.
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium
The price of uranium at time of writing, is $82/lb or $180.8/kg. So 160 tonnes of nat U would cost $28,928,000. The raw uranium cost is $0.0033 per kWh, or one third of 1 cent.
Proven and reasonably assured uranium resources amount to about 6 million tonnes. This is sufficient to supply the existing global fleet (400GWe) for about 90 years. The world also has huge quantities of depleted uranium tailings, with a 235U concentration of 0.25-0.5%. This material could be put back through enrichment plants and used as feedstock for new fuel. But this won’t be done until uranium prices are high enough because of the high SWU factor of producing 5% 235U from such thin feedstock.
The present small contribution of uranium costs to generating cost, the large extent of uranium resource and existance of residual tailings, explains why there has been little interest in uranium exploration or the development of a closed fuel cycle. If uranium prices were to triple to $246/lb, natural uranium would still represent only $0.01/kWh of total generating cost. Closing the fuel cycle with reprocessing would halve overall uranium costs with conventional LWRs. But this would only be economically desirable if uranium costs are substantially higher due to the high cost of fabricating MOX fuel from reprocessed uranium and plutonium.
Light water reactors typically have conversion ratio of 0.5 – 0.6, depending upon the enrichment of fuel and total burnup. It is possible to design LWRs to increase conversion ratio. This would allow reactors to produce more fissile plutonium, which coukd be reprocessed into new fuel. This would further reduce the amount of uranium needed per kWh of electricity. But it is only possible if reprocessing is carried out and MOX fuel is produced with the resulting plutonium.
This tends to suggest that the present strategy of focusing new nuclear development on conventional LWR technology is the right one. This is a technology with a huge amount of operating experience. It has proven capable of generating power very cheaply. Improvements to water chemistry control have allowed substantial life extension at existing nuclear powerplants. New build LWRs appear capable of operating with an 80 year lifespan. A 100-year powerplant is within sight, with development of new nuclear alloys with low impurities and precisely controlled alloy composition.
“Proven and reasonably assured uranium resources amount to about 6 million tonnes. This is sufficient to supply the existing global fleet (400GWe) for about 90 years.”
This is the narrative a person hears endlessly with respect to oil, coal, natural gas, copper, lithium, and practically everything else. It is firmly believed by people who do not understand how the economy works. They assume that shortages lead to higher prices, and higher prices lead to more supply of everything required. They also believe that the economy stays together in its current form.
What really happens when an economy reaches limits is wage disparity becomes a huge problem. A few with power or specialized skills receive high pay, but practically everyone else finds high-paying jobs difficult to find. College graduates find few jobs actually requiring a college degree, for example. The problem becomes: More and more people find that they have to squeeze by on a minimal standard of living. Demand for oil, coal, natural gas, uranium, copper, and everything else falls. The price of these materials bounces up and down, but on average, prices stay far too low to encourage greater extraction.
Belief in this model allows people to believe that there is no problem at hand.
The problem is that the quantity of many kinds of resources start falling, on a per-capita basis. It takes resources to allow anything to be produced, from food that is grown, harvested, and eventually sold in grocery stores, to houses and cars and truck. With fewer resources per capita, fewer people can afford cars. Fewer people can afford to live in separate homes of their own; at best they can afford a small apartment.
The amount of goods of all kinds that can be manufactured depends on manufacturing, using energy supply of all kinds. As the amount of energy per capita falls, the amount of goods per capita falls. People (especially young people) become poorer in terms of what they can afford. Debt becomes harder to pay back with interest.
Governments have a difficult (or impossible) time collecting enough taxes to maintain promise programs, like schools and road maintenance. Governments provide fewer and fewer services. Instead, they tend to collapse.
A lot of what look like readily available resources end up left in the ground. The narrative we hear is a fairy tale to support the Business as Usual hope everyone has. It ignores the fact that “energy dissipation” (using the right kind of energy for the particular process) is necessary for every act of GDP. People don’t understand that there is a physics reason why the materials aren’t really available. The 1972 Limits to Growth analysis showed that “running short” of available resources was likely to happen about now. In fact, Rear Admiral Hyman Rickover of the US Navy gave a speech about this problem in 1957.
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2007/07/02/speech-from-1957-predicting-peak-oil/
The effects you describe tend to occur because it takes a certain amount of energy to generate a unit of wealth (Real GDP). It isn’t possible to generate more wealth with less energy, because ultimately all wealth involves the use of energy to reorganise matter. This places limits on what the economy can afford to pay for energy before systems begin to fail. We saw this play out in the Great Recession of 2008, which was triggered by high oil prices. This exposed vulnerabilities in the financial system. Today we face a slow burn situation, in which high energy prices are preventing economic growth and are contributing to a demographic crisis.
But I wonder to what extent this is true for nuclear power? With oil based transportation, a doubling of fuel costs would almost double the cost of transportation, because fuel is a large part of total cost. That is a heavy drag on the economy. But doubling the cost of uranium would only add one third of one cent to the cost of a kWh. As a percentage of total energy costs as seen by the consumer, it is much smaller. Even full reprocessing, as is done in France already, has only a small impact on the price of electricity.
It becomes possible when someone develops a tech to make uranium ores to walk to the facilities on their own
I am sure such tech is ‘within sighr’
The ESBWR has a projected life of 80 years. This is driven by empirically measured corrosion rates of components in existing reactors. Development of nuclear steels and primary circuit chemistry control is an ongoing area of research that continues to yield improvements. This isn’t speculation, it is based upon experimental results. Most LWRs have been granted life extensions beyond their original 40 year design life. There are working light water reactors that are 50 years old and a 60 year life for existing plants will not be a technical stretch. Which is why I think a 100 year reactor is possible. It requires only modest improvements on existing state of the art chemistry control.
The key is that
1. None of them are operational now
2. 80 years is a long time and social instability has a high chance of turning that into a radioactive no go zone
You are right, Kulm.
Nuclear plants could safely operate for 100 years says Grossi
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Nuclear-plants-could-safely-operate-for-100-years,
Whether this will be possible for existing plants I don’t know.
Another ‘could’
There is no guarentee of anything in life. I’m not sure what it is you people want to hear. But I get the distinct feeling that you are emotionally invested in the idea of collapse because the world dissatisfies you in some way. You don’t want solutions. They threaten your worldview.
“They threaten your worldview.”
That’s the case for most but not all of the people who post on OFW. Still, once in a while I find this discussion to kick off thoughts on how to solve the problems.
Energy, for example, is not a problem if you tap the output of the sun. Even the energy that falls on the Earth is enough if you have means to story a lot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Henson
Keith, that is an interesting resume, especially regarding your L5 society involvement. I first read Gerard O’Neill’s legendary book ‘The High Frontier’ in the early 90s when I was still in school. It fired my imagination at the time. Unfortunately, the space shuttle failed to deliver the much hoped for low launch costs. Without that there was really no way forward for space manufacturing. Maybe Starship will do what the space shuttle couldn’t?
Additionally, it looks like the Scientology nuts gave you a hard time.
“the Scientology nuts gave you a hard time.”
They did, Their battle with the net cost them about 90% of their membership. I got two academic papers out of it. “Sex, Drugs and Cults” and “Evolutionary_psychology_memes_and_the_origin_of_war
I have a followup paper “Genetic Selection for War in Prehistoric Human Populations” that I have not yet found a place to publish. If you want a draft copy, ask.
hkeithhenson@gmail.com
@ Peter
There are some guarantees in life. For example no humans are going to develop wings to fly to wherever they feel like. That is a guatantee.
If the solution is feasible i would take it. But the solutions offerred aee pie in the sky, reinventing the wheel or something tried and already failed.
A lot of wouldyas., couldyas and shouldyas. All theories, not tested enough and we don’t have time to waste on the red tape.
@ Keith
There is no means to store enegy now. And no plans to buildvit. Even if we had it it is too late.
“There is no means to store energy now. ”
Batteries, pumped storage, chemical such as alcohol.
And no plans to buildvit. Even if we had it it is too late.
California is adding battery storage rapidly. Of course if nanotech comes along soon, we could replace the whole capital stock of the world in weeks.
Not to underestimate the scale of the problem.
Cheap summer to winter storage is what is needed.
other than hydro—isnt all electric energy storage an ”energy deficit” situation—ie you get out less than you put in?
Cheap summer to winter storage is what is needed.
Overbuild and make transport fuels with the excess.
i can’t wait to run my car on the battery in the keyfob
@Keith
Another ‘could’
Il
“could”
The future is uncertain, But some things are much less likely than others.
The problem is that uranium costs don’t go up high enough, and stay up long enough, to actually get the additional uranium out.
There is a great deal of faith in rising prices leading to greater supply. The system is interconnected in so many ways that what happens instead of rising prices is simply spikes in prices, and wage disparity becoming a larger and larger problem. The many more poor people in the economy cannot afford end products of many kinds.
Uranium spot prices are presently quite high at $80/lb. At $80/lb, the cost of natural uranium amounts to about $0.005/kWh (or 0.5c/kWh) of generation cost. That is small, but certainly not negligible. Wholesale electricity prices in the US are between 2 and 6 c/kWh. LWR generating costs are about 2c/kWh. If uranium prices were to double again, it would increase nuclear generating cost by 25%. If all electricity were nuclear, that would be an extra $44/year per head of US population. Small but not negligible.
It will be interesting to see if present high uranium prices are sustained. There has been very little recent exploration for uranium. If higher prices are sustained, it may become proffitable.
Another ‘within sight’
Yea, like the German soldiers who had the Kremlin ‘within sight’
A year later they were in the ratholes of stalingrad
Kurt Cobb on the stopping of Uranium exports by Russia .
https://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2024/11/more-deglobalization-russia-cuts.html
I saw a comment or read that Russia has tripled its uranium exports to China. Wouldn’t at all be surprised if this was being re-exported to USA. Or if China was using it for nuke production.
Now the world is seeing the folly of not destroying Russia in 1990s
It was, is and will always be a Tartar, an Asian country
By recognizing Chechnya, Usa could have ended Russia without fighting a single shot since that would have led every stan in there to separation movements, fracturing the country into a hundred pieces
the nukes would have flown to destroy Moscow, Petersburg and various cities of the stans , and North Korea would also have ended.
The hypersonic missiles will end Western Civilization. With that the end of all the projects pushed by Cornocupians.
Life condition at Astrakhan, at the mouth of Volga, circa 1910
https://youtu.be/xbKh60kl7NA?si=AEWd0XedgAWfsnet
This is where a Horde ruled world will lead to.
You must admit that also in US in early 1900s, life for poor people was not a so nice…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0EmnXaoulA
I think that the difference is that today we have parts of the world living in excessive opulence, which is surely an unsuistanable opulence for so many people.
In some places today many home owners rent out extra bedrooms to make owning a home work, like in the Boston metro area. By doing so, one can get an extra profit margin.
Of course, getting reliable working stable tenets is the key
“You must admit that also in US in early 1900s, life for poor people was not a so nice”
It was worse before the Civil War. A whole generation was stunted by not having enough to eat.
you maybe miss the point keith
no species, taken collectively is intended to ”have enough to eat”
that is the force of natural selection meant improve the species, whatever species it happens to be.
for a few generations, we have lifted ourselves out of that—it has been a collective delusion.
Yes, it’s very sad. I had an infestation of flour beetles, and then a multitude of spiders. As I cleaned up the beetles with the spiders’ help, the spiders helped doom themselves to die back. Poor little guys… so cute.
Another good summary about diesel from the Honest Sorcerer, with pingback references to Gail at OFW.
For now, “slowly at first ” is the best way to describe where we are at this point.
https://thehonestsorcerer.substack.com/p/a-diesel-powered-civilization-51d?
There were actually two different pingbacks to my work in that article. I also noticed that there is a reference to a relatively new research article called
Recalibration of limits to growth: An update of theWorld3model
By Arjuna Nebel, Alexander Kling, Ruben Willamowski, and Tim Schell published in the Journal of Industrial Ecology.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375610074_Recalibration_of_limits_to_growth_An_update_of_the_World3_model/figures?lo=1&utm_campaign=
The summary figure from this article is a chart that I uploaded to OurFiniteWorld.com
https://ourfiniteworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/State-of-the-world.png
The chart shows Limits to Growth expectations similar to ones we have seen previously, with 25-year divisions clearly shown, which is helpful.
The thing that strikes me (but that B did not remark about, and the article itself did not remark about!!) is that world industrial production is shown as crashing, starting right about now. World food production (which really reflects total calories, including extra calories of grains needed for meat production) also starts dropping about the same time, but not as quickly. World population goes down as slowly as in the original LTG analysis. Pollution seems to be handled a little differently than the original LTG analysis; it is put off more into the future.
I found the colors on the chart a little difficult to read. The five colors include orange, red and a dark pink, besides blue and green.
I assumed in-situ EROI would be higher because it eliminates transportation of sand, but it’s actually generally lower EROI? Anyone here familiar with the processing?
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/5/614
>> Results of this paper show that EROI of both mining oil sands (range of value: 3.9–8) and in situ oil sands (range of value: 3.2–5.4) display an upward trend over the past 7 years; EROI of mining oil sands is generally higher, but is more fluctuating than the EROI of in situ oil sands.
I assume it is because you have to build an in situ heater that will precipitate the sand. In situ means all over the place, many heaters, and more heat losses.
Speaking generally, without digging into technical details, isn’t this what would be expected? As operational experience is gained, processes are optimised. Also, EROI tends to improve with economy of scale.
One thing EROI tends to miss is that different energy inputs have different value. Stranded natural gas has very little value, whereas syncrude has high value because it can be shipped and stored. So even a low EROI process could still be proffitable.
This is how Chinese made PV is able to generate power with at least marginal proffitability in Europe and North America, even though EROI barely makes it into whole numbers. The Chinese use dirt cheap, otherwise stranded coal in uiyger territories to make the polysilicon. The output from the panels is electricity in high priced grids. So a low EROI doesn’t always mean that something won’t work. Though it does suggest that it won’t be very sustainable in the long term.
EROI misses a whole lot. I am not a fan of EROI.
A major thing EROI misses is the timing of inputs, versus the timing of the benefits.
The ideal situation is when the output is at the same time as the input. Burning available biomass leads to immediate benefit, relative to the effort put into the system. Natural gas, burned close to where it is gathered, also has a very favorable return cycle. The device burning the natural gas can be inexpensive to make.
The more additional “stuff” that is required, and the longer the delay, the more “debt” = “future promises with respect to the use of output” that is required. Debt-holders will require interest. There needs to be a whole financial system. The system gradually gets more and more fragile, as debt accumulates. EROI does not measure this at all. It usually does not measure the infrastructure requirements, such as transmission lines for electricity. It doesn’t take into account the fact that businesses generally need to operate 365 days a year, while even hydroelectric is very irregular in its timing. EROI tends to give a very optimistic view of what is available.
So-called renewables might be better called, “slow return energy devices.” They need to be maintained, using fossil fuels, during their lifetimes. They generally only produce electricity, and that on a highly variable basis. For businesses to operate, they need fossil fuels, which can fairly easily be stored until they are needed.
https://ourfiniteworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/US-Industrial-Energy-Consumption-Per-Capita.png
With the advent of AI, we see a collosal crash of law and physics. That is basically the reason for wars: you have the right to grow, but only up to the physical limits, which is basically the land, as it is the Sun that provides the energy for the surface of the Earth , where the life of the humans is situated.
Doesn’t AI crash rather quickly because there is not enough electricity to operate it? It is not something we should want to depend upon.
When the AI reveals that we do not need lawyers, but we need to respect physics, then the AI is beneficial.
you can ignore the laws of physics (until they catch up with you)
you can’t crash the laws of physics
If you want some useful solutions, you can write this prompt to the AI: AI has already killed the lawyers, give me the solution that is within the laws of the physics.
This climate activist says AI is ‘useless, unsustainable and has no benefit to society’
https://fortune.com/europe/2024/11/14/this-climate-activist-says-ai-is-useless-unsustainable-no-benefit-to-society/
She implored tech bosses to embrace the circular economy, which relies on reusing and recycling rather than creating products that end up being junked.
But one year on, Microsoft, Google and others have unleashed an endless stream of energy-gobbling AI products.
They have rushed to reopen nuclear plants, pledged to build many more data centres — and crashed through their climate targets.
Bill Gates has written multiple books on climate change.”
The CEOs really want the image, and succeeded in dodging the kind of scrutiny put on the fashion and automotive industries.
“Then the moment they got an opportunity, with AI, to increase shareholder returns… every single one of them slammed the red button,” she said.
Shit is going to get so bad so fast. The food chain is going to break. We will see mass malnourishment if not mass starvation,” she said.
The power grid, too, will break down.
Against this background, products like cars and new clothes are superfluous.
“You can’t have cars in the long term. It doesn’t matter if they’re electric or not. They’re unsustainable,” she said.
Sounds a little bit like Gail here
circular economy
now theres a subject to laff about
A circular economy cannot work. There is too much loss to the system, every loop through. An awfully lot of recycling is to make more jobs and increase more demand for fossil fuels.
If recycling is truly beneficial, there will be businesses willing to buy the material to be recycled.
If you, the person hoping to do the recycling, has to pay for the recycling, this is a tip that the process is not worth much to the system.
There was a huge cutback in the material China would accept for recycling effective January 1, 2018. Other low income countries cut back shortly after that. Once that happened, much more of the “recycling” went into landfills.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/03/13/fix-recycling-america/
I’ll try again
AI is not a physical entity
it cannot swat flies, let alone kill the lawyers
you might as well say AI has killed checkout girls at supermarkets, or petrol pump attendants. or bus conductors.
meaningless—AI has altered the means of employment.
Everything that can be done on the screen can be done by AI. You do not need a lawyer to find a solution that is within the limits of physics. You just ask the AI. And behave within those limits. The lawyer asks the AI. Which you can do yourself.
You do not need so many jobs you have mentioned, as you do not have money to get ther and buy their products and services. You have to do more things yourself. Or give up fixing them. Let it rot, lie flat – as they have discovered in China.
Only one can save ‘us’?
” I think we only have one chance at
5:29
stopping this nuclear war and that is to get the president
5:36
elect to become actively engaged in calling out the Biden Administration and
5:42
speaking to the American people regardless of what you stand on the election that took place on November 5th
5:48
there was a winner that winner is Donald Trump “?
don’t worry about the don
start to worry about the clownfest he’s gathered around him who can be relied up to nod in subservience to every daft utterance he comes out with.
We will not start to worry Norm, because Truup’s cabinet is shaping up to be real leadership compared to the real clowns in Biden’s cabinet.
lololol
Leader of project 25, now part of it? I strongly suggest you read up on that. In detail.
RFK—ban all vaccines?
fluoride is part of a plot?
i could go on
The American people has voted itself into a theocratic dictatorship—god help you all (if there was one).
/////The decision — which gives presidents broad immunity from prosecution — is “vital” to ensure a president won’t have to “second guess, triple guess every decision they’re making in their official capacity.”////
Kevin Roberts, Project 25.
I’m not laughing btw—weeping inwardly on behalf of the American nation—they know not what they do. (or why for that matter).
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/windsor-detroit-river-illegal-crossings-1.7389322
Here is some of Biden’s cabinet clown show….
Jared Bernstein, Chair of Council of Economic Advisors – not an economist, Bachelor’s degree in music, masters in sociology. Biden’s Head Of Economic Advisors Jared Bernstein was asked about Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). He had trouble explaining the national debt and stated like a fool the government should work to dethrone the US dollar as the reserve currency. He did not understand that the government borrows money by selling bonds.
Pete Buttigieg, Transportation Secretary – no transportation background, Mayor of Indiana, “pothole Pete”. His only qualification was that he liked trains as a child. He wasn’t experienced in the slightest.
Mayorkas, DHS Secretary – no security background, lawyer, Asst U.S. attorney, Obama transition team
Jennifer Granholm, Energy Secy – no energy background, Michigan Governor, who never held any position relating to energy and doesn’t have any qualifications regarding energy just consistently pushed the new green deal agenda and railed against American energy production for four years. She also presided over a culture of corruption where senior DOE employees trade and own stocks related to the agency’s work, as well as lying about her personal stock holdings. She’s also not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Energy Secretary Granholm secretly consulted with a top Chinese Communist energy official before the release of 50 million barrels of oil from the SPR, the largest release of its kind in US history at the time. When Governor she told the Michigan National Guard that said for soldiers to go to Iraq, is like athletes going to the Olympics.
Gina Raimondo, Commerce Secretary – No trade background, Gov of Rhode Island
Deb Haaland, Interior Secy – New Mexico Congressman
And just for kicks…Bill Nye, the environmentalist “Science Guy” — no background in environmentalism or science, he’s a mechanical engineer and comedy writer.
Sam Brinton is a LGBTQ activist who was hired to the office of nuclear energy. They he was later fired for being weird and stealing other people’s clothes and integrating them into their his wardrobe.
Then of course there is “kackles” Kamala…
But then I a sure Trumps Energy secretary pick is not qualified at all. He has only run oil companies and written a book on energy also.
Norm, I think you should apply for Trunp’s energy secretary position. After all, you have written one book on energy and will publish another soon. That make you imminently more qualified to be energy secretary than Trump’s pick. If you will forward your resume I’ll make sure the Trump team sees it.
Biden did not have to pay off a $25m lawsuit before taking office, nor has he had a string of convictions on numerous counts. Biden has not had to buy his wife’s silence on ‘certain matters’. Biden does not tweet at 3am with numerous gripes.
(All politicians are flawed btw)
the don has collected people around him willing to ignore his record just for gain.
The USA has elected a narcissistic crook to lead them…. that’s not just my opinion.
The supreme court (installed by him) has said he has immunity to do as he thinks fit as POTUS.
If you think thats a good idea in a national leader—the best of luck to you, and the USA. I can give you a few examples of what that (invariably) leads to.
The USA will find itself in a theocratic dictatorship.—And I don’t like that any more than you will. But it will happen. not because the don is religious, he most certainly is not—but because dictators need ”others” to blame for their inadequacies.
get rid of ”xyz” and god will look on us with favour.
Now where have we heard that before?
“Now where have we heard that before?”
In all western msm from 2016-2020. Turned out to be a stinking pile of bs then, but you can convince the gullible again and again, no matter how often you have falsely cried wolf before, because they don’t appear to have a memory(much like the present incumbent).
2020-2024 the puppet in office started a war between Russia and Ukraine, then went on to arm a genocide of women and children(196,000 back in June according to the Lancet), but not a peep of complaint from the msm faithful and let’s be honest, it can’t be anything more than blind faith, as anyone with a memory can point out.
2024-2028 refer to 2016-2020 and watch as the faithful are dragged around, following the same idiotic dance as before, without once, for even split second, wondering if they’ve been doing nothing but dancing the same idiotic dance for decades.
The next 4 years are going to be very tedious for a lot of us and full of imaginary, rather familiar hobgoblins that never materalise for the faithful.
How dull. Over to Buddy Knox for some sage advice 😉
https://youtu.be/FMcwD0-YGgA?feature=shared
we are doomed then.
I’m pleased with who has picked as his support group except for his adhd and inability to listen to the other points. According to his supporters there is so much easy oil to get out of the ground that just pisses me off to no end! Ask a republican about oil and they will say the same thing. Then try to get them to study oil and forget about it. They are just stupid and know more about the NFL then the oil problems we face
Bad to worse .
https://www.energyconnects.com/news/utilities/2024/november/europe-is-already-facing-its-next-energy-crisis/
From the article….”Fatih Birol, the executive director of the International Energy Agency, is sounding the alarm. He warned that Europe needs ample inventories for later this winter if Russian gas transit via Ukraine ceases on Jan. 1 with the expiration of a deal between Moscow and Kyiv. In Germany, where many factories had to halt or throttle production because of high energy costs, faster storage withdrawals sends foreboding signals that the strain on Europe’s largest economy could persist for a third straight year.”
Appears hopes are for another mild winter this year to save them from running out…..if not, more liquid gas storage facilities will be needed.
LNG is often expensive. And the natural gas supplies of the US are not growing right now. It is not clear whether the US is hitting peak natural gas. The US has made huge promises for LNG exports. Will these really materialize, at a reasonable price? We don’t know.
Europe is too dependent on high-cost imported LNG from the US.
The very name Fatih is ominous.
Fatih means ‘Victory’ in Turkish, but it specifically refers to the Turkish conquest of Byzantium. The very name Fatih Birol specifies hostility against the Western tradition.
The international agency is now headed by someone who hates the Western Civilization.
Good point!
Here’s an idea.
What if they came out with UBI. And whenever there was forecasted a rough energy squeeze caused by whatever (cold or extreme heat). They just shut down everything that isn’t essential and mandatory work home for those who can, along with schools going virtual. And that would decrease demand which would prevent (power shedding) or controlled blackouts. And the people who are laid off for a few weeks that can’t work at home for example ( a bartender or something). They would have UBI which would be able to cover the slack of missing a few weeks paychecks. Since many people live nearly paycheck to paycheck and can’t afford to just “sit at home” waiting until the surge is over. And since the power surges can come unexpectedly, its hard to budget for something like that. And most people won’t want to work at any place that could just lay you off for a week or so, on demand. Just too much uncertainty.
And many small business owners would be in the same boat as the low wage worker. They may not be able to afford being shut down twice for two months in winter and another 2 weeks in summer. So the UBI would help them cover rent or leasing for their business to help out.
And think parents who can’t afford daycare and rely on schools to be open. Parents would be comped with UBI so maybe mom could be a stay at home mom who can handle schools being shut down a few weeks. And I think many woman would choose to stay home if they could. I think capitalism forces many woman to have to work just so they can afford to have children and that’s cruel and unusual punishment IMO.
And you could be creative too. You could shut down non essential places, but leave a few things open like gyms or pubs, or at least a few of them per capita basis. And make rules where you have to carpool if you leave and went anywhere. You could have rules too like gyms and bars only open 9-5 or something too. Just use our brains.
In theory its sounds great but “they who dont exist” but whose narratives appear simultaneously word for word in mainstream news, advertising and politcal propaganda will likely attach compliance measures to UBI.
would not that increase population at a time when the elites are striving for reduction?
UBI does not work in the real world . Trials have been done in sample groups ranging from 800– 1200 people in Scandinavia and Canada . It failed — many reasons like boredom , mental health ,lack of social cohesion and loss of self esteem etc . Anyway my question is a simple one , who will produce the stuff to buy with this UBI ?
UBI is a nonsense, as is bitcoin
money represents an exchange of energy, it can be nothing else.
energy cannot be printed—money can
money cannot be subsituted for physical energy.
You are basically paying people to do nothing. That means resources are taken from people who are productive and given to people who are non-productive. This in a net drag on the total productivity of the economy and it makes all of society poorer. There are also issues if businesses are temporarily closed and cannot meet orders on time because power isn’t there.
However we try to manage it, intermittency in the energy supply has a cost to society. There certainly are ways of dealing with the problem that minimise the cost. But intermittency in energy supply is a form of entropy. As such, intermittent energy is less productive than reliable energy. And there is an energy cost involved in converting intermittent energy into reliable energy. The increased energy cost of energy will express itself as a poorer standard of living.
Where would UBI come from? There is too much debt already. The Euro would drop even further, relative to the dollar and to other currencies. The taxes governments could collect would fall at the same time because of the closed businesses.
Perhaps, create a one world digital currency and outlaw all the rest. So all tokens of exchange require whatever you choose to purchase anything. As long as there is nothing to compete you could set the value and exchange at whatever you want, as long as you couldn’t hoard any of it.
And you cancel all the debt via “force majeure “. (exactly what they did post WW2 for Germany)
that still doesnt remove the requirement of all money to be underpinned by energy.
you cant set the value of exchange to whatever you want.
if i buy a pound of steak, (say for £5) the meat represents energy input of the animal itself, plus the farmer who looked after it, his support structure, the abbatoir that butchered it, the transport to bring it to my store, store wages and so on.
they are all energy inputs necessary to bring me my pound of steak.
They add up to what I have to pay for it.
if by some insane political intervention, you decree an ”exchange” of only £1, then the supply system for the steak collapses.
If on the other hand the same political nutcase decrees it should be £20, then i can’t afford it, and the same thing happens, the supply system collapses.
The above applies to any commodity you choose btw.
just offering some economic reality here, thats all
And EU leaders are sure they have in their hands key elements to make Russia accept Ukraine inside Nato…
Maybe they will realize that having Ukraine outside Nato (like Austria for instance) was one of the good ideas inside Minsk agreement (that they tore up in front of Russia’s face)
The first line is ridiculous. “Over two years since President Vladimir Putin weaponized energy, Europe is struggling to secure its energy system.”
Years ago I read a study that estimated oil sands have EROI of only ~3-4. Hopefully it’s improved as of late, or else that’s very bad news. Here are some sites on Alberta’s oil production, the first two are specifically on oil sands.
Two interesting graphs: (1) Alberta’s oil sands production through 2018 – broken down by type (in-situ heating vs mining vs “upgrading” bitumen to lighter oil). (2) Oil sands production vs conventional oil vs natgas for Alberta.
https://wernerantweiler.ca/blog.php?item=2021-04-11
This one has a chart (scroll all the way to the bottom) for oil sands production through 2022.
https://www.oilsandsmagazine.com/technical/history-of-alberta-oil-sands-development
This one has more recent data for Alberta oil production (chart 3), but it’s not broken down by source (oil sands vs conventional).
https://economics.td.com/ca-oil-production-2024
Oil sands is expensive to extract and refine. Refiners bid on crude oil based on how much they can sell the refined products for. This issue tends to keep heavy oil prices lower than prices of lighter oil.
Oil sands and fracking are just last ditch attempts of our mode of civilization to keep the wheels on the road and wings in the air, nothing more. This desperation has an external cost of more environment destruction . That’s a fact, and the so called land restoration of oil extracted lands is just PR, along with the long term fracking aquifer contamination
As Art Berman, I believe, said, we can have a civilization without oil, just not this one….
Oil sands companies report that they have reclaimed 13.6% (about 65 square kilometres) of the area they have cleared in their operations since 1967.
https://www.pembina.org › reports
It looks like peak bitumen to me.
The US has tar sands in eastern Utah. Most of this land is locked up in federally protected lands. Biden has enlarged the area. We will know we are near the end of the road when the US is desperate enough to mine it.
“The US has tar sands in eastern Utah”
More reason to massively over build renewables. All the power in excess of what is needed can go into down hole heaters which run just fine on intermittent operation.
Same thing with the Green River shale oil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_oil#Reserves_and_production
Of course this does not solve the CO2/climate problem.
the climate problem is another thing the Don will solve on day one
dont worry
There is no climate problem. We love mild temperatures here in the North. Our plants love it too, and the Sahel too is becoming greener due to the fertilizing effect of CO2.
“There is no climate problem”
It depends on where you are Phoenix had something close to 700 people die from the heat last year, and the projection is that an extended summer power outage would push that to many thousands.
But the real problem would be if the heat caused massive crop failures.
If the shift in climate added to food production elsewhere, the amount of interest would be the net gain or loss.
If the crop fails due to excessive heat it is not the right crop. There is always millet and sorghum. There are peanuts and sweet potatoes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7wUWdlor80
2018 NASA was so optimistic … all our problems solved, with technology. There were some lithium-air batteries which were supposed to take over the following year, in 2019. He says we were supposed to become cyborgs. Not sure what happened…
No real progress for 6 yrs
Timestamp: A nuclear battery for electricity at 1 cent per kwh. Available in 2018 … so was it a lie, or are they just witholding tech?
https://youtu.be/K7wUWdlor80?t=617
I tried to see what I could find:
September 2024: https://interestingengineering.com/energy/tiny-nuclear-battery-promises-decades-of-uninterrupted-power
Tiny nuclear battery promises decades of uninterrupted power in sea, space
This innovative battery uses americium, a radioactive element, to generate energy through the emission of alpha particles.
June 2021 https://news.mit.edu/2021/nuclear-batteries-decarbon-0625
Why “nuclear batteries” offer a new approach to carbon-free energy
Jacopo Buongiorno and others say factory-built microreactors trucked to usage sites could be a safe, efficient option for decarbonizing electricity systems.
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1006/ML100600712.pdf
This is a 2010 calculation of the cost of enriched uranium per kWh when used in nuclear generation.
Thus, if only the uranium cost is considered in the generation of nuclear electricity, it perhaps was something like 1 cent per kWh, back in 2018.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_battery
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator
this isn’t new technology, it’s been around for much of the 20th century,
the RTG concept has been used for space probes because it can keep pushing out a current for decades, how do you think Voyager is still going after all these years!
but it’s expensive and quite a modest wattage, the Soviets made chonkier ones to power unmanned lighthouses and beacons along their northern arctic coast, stuff you could set up and just leave for decades,
what I’ve been noticing is that virtually every ‘exciting’ new technology that is going to save us is really an old technology that worked ok, but was displaced by fossil fuels which were so cheap, portable, produced instantaneous power on demand and relatively hassle free,
I’m not knocking any of these old technologies, I think they should all be explored, rehabilitated and applied if suitable applications can be found,
but you must always remember they were displaced by fossil fuelled equipment because it was more practical,
the Stirling Cycle Engine is as old as the condensing steam engine, they were used quite a bit, but they were displaced by petroleum product powered internal combustion engines which had quicker start up times, produced more power for a given weight and size of engine and could be sped up and slowed down rapidly,
the Stirling engine is an external combustion engine, it can be really efficient, the low temperature differential configurations can run on a temperature difference of 80*C, but it’s bulky and more of a stationary engine, it would be pretty lame as an automobile engine,
this is one of my favorite articles that illustrate there’s nothing new about renewable energy harvesting technology;
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101075886059&seq=607
“there is nothing new under the Sun”
We briefly discussed this some months ago Ivan. Isolating useful amounts of americium is prohibitively expensive.
Agreed. Americium already has niche applications in smoke detectors. But obtaining enough of it to generate useful amounts of power would require reprocessing spent fuel. That means dissolving spent fuel in nitric acid and then chemically seperating americium from other elements. Due to the high toxicity of americium (about 50x more toxic than plutonium), assembly of battery units must take place in glove boxes, which is cumbersome and labour intensive. There is also the issue that alpha decay releases only about 6MeV of energy, whereas fission releases nearly 200MeV of useful energy.
These batteries could serve niche applications, such as long range space probes, remote observatories and maybe certain medical implants. But this implies small amounts of expensive power in situations where reliability is more important than cost.
As I recall, what we discussed was an inefficient process that first hit an element with a high energy beam (nickel? I forget the details) and then that would decay and re-release the energy. In the video I just posted, he claims a process that consumes nuclear waste and is very cheap, which seems like something very different, so either he was BS-ing or the tech is hidden.
we may have discussed that too. But I recall a discussion about nuclear powered batteries. I recall it was a pure alpha emitter that was considered, so it probably was americium.
https://www.youtube.com/live/Quzf5l5YASs?si=AgQdyx6gisMMDnmK
This video by Brent Johnson explains China dollar bond not a game changer. What he says overlaps with comments others have said.
Anyone can create bonds in $; this is what the carry trade is about. The catch is that other countries cannot add new $; only the Federal Reserve and its policies can create new dollars. If available dollars to repay this credit dries up, there is likely to be a problem.
The country’s managed exchange rate policy has restricted the growth in the PBOC balance sheet, but growth in investment and the economy has been sustained by running ever higher debt-to-GDP ratios. With the growth in money supply restricted by the continuation of a managed exchange rate policy, the country’s total nonfinancial debt-to-GDP ratio has grown from 211 percent in 2014 to 290 percent in 2024.10 While higher nominal GDP growth in the developed world since 2022 has somewhat reduced debt-to-GDP ratios there, China’s debt levels march ever higher. In just the first three months of 2024, China’s total nonfinancial debt-to-GDP ratio rose from 284 percent to 290 percent of GDP.11 The country has falling property prices, falling producer prices, consumer price inflation just above zero, and significant distress in its credit system.
Have we finally reached the stage at which the international monetary system, anchored upon China’s managed exchange rate regime, no longer works for China?
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2024/11/america-china-and-the-death-of-the-international-monetary-non-system/
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Alberta-Doubles-Down-on-US-Oil-Exports.html
This article talks about the flow of oil in North America. It Leeds you to believe that oil is going to get cheap in America. I’m not sure…I think in the short term it might. So much going on right now it’s hard to keep up.
This is Canadian oil that is particularly helpful in making diesel for exports around the world. The article says,
Prices will determine everything. I hadn’t realized that with respect to the oil exported by sea, “the U.S. West Coast accounted for just over half of all maritime crude oil exports out of Western Canada.” So it is still being imported by the US.
I would not worry about imported oil reducing oil prices. Layoffs and recession will reduce oil prices.
This is a bit odd. A CEO of a major oil company saying that in five years, US oil production will be in crisis. With the debts these companies have, putting a limit that close is dangerous, because if they run out of oil that soon, banks will deny them renewal loans, to avoid getting caught out.
So when an executive says we have 10-15 years of placements left, he is simply artificially inflating the number, so as not to be compromised.
Almost everyone is putting the focus on the end of this decade.
https://www.worldoil.com/news/2024/11/22/occidental-ceo-warns-us-at-risk-of-shale-plateau-losing-energy-independence/
Occidental Petroleum Corp. has warned that US energy independence is at risk of disappearing if shale production levels off and begins to decline.
“Things are going to start to change, and when they do, the United States will be at risk of losing its energy independence,” said Executive Director Vicki Hollub at a presentation in Midland, Texas, on Thursday. “That could happen in the next five years, when we start to see that stabilization occur.”
Quark in Spain .
Shale production leveling off is a real concern. This is a US total oil production chart. Through August 2024, it is still rising.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=M
I like the use of the word, “stabilization” here.
‘According to the supermajor, global oil production is facing a natural decline at a rate of some 15% annually over the next 25 years. For context, the IEA sees the rate of natural decline at 8% annually. Exxon points out, however, that the faster decline rate is a result of the shift towards shale and other unconventional oil production, where depletion happens faster than it does in conventional formations.
“To put it in concrete terms: With no new investment, global oil supplies would fall by more than 15 million barrels per day in the first year alone.” This is a scary prospect because “At that rate, by 2030, oil supplies would fall from 100 million barrels per day to less than 30 million – that’s 70 million barrels short of what’s needed to meet demand every day.” ‘?
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Exxon-Joins-OPEC-in-Warning-of-Looming-Oil-Supply-Crisis.amp.html
This is US imports of crude oil from Canada through August:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRIMUSCA2&f=M
This is supposedly weekly crude oil imports from Canada until very recently. They don’t seem to be up recently.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=W_EPC0_IM0_NUS-NCA_MBBLD&f=W
All these d*** cards.
ID card
Insurance card.
Credit cards.
Library card.
Just microchip me already!
I think “peak card” was at least 20 years ago or so. Here’s why: I was shopping for a new pocket book and/or wallet, and a lot of them come with fewer slots than they used to. I reckon this is due to people using various digital phone apps (or palm prints, or retinal scans, or whatever) to pay, instead of physical cards.
I currently would like at least six card slots but there are many offerings out there with just two or three. A large and lovely Italian wallet I carried for many years boasted at least a dozen. I remember my mother having a different credit card for every store.
Video of the arrival of hypersonic missile Oreshink recently launched to Ukraine from Russia.
Speed Mach 10.
https://x.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1859659775132492036?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1859659775132492036%7Ctwgr%5Effb59f0ad6e4918d8bff7ab0d531cf264f448c28%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fcomedonchisciotte.org%2Foreshnik-il-colpo-di-scena-da-3-km-al-secondo%2F
Article about the launch:
https://sputnikglobe.com/20241122/pepe-escobar-oreshnik—the-3-km-per-second-plot-twist-1120965738.html
Launched in response to US and UK escalation of long range missiles given to Ukraine to strike Russia.
It is important for us to know that US and UK long range missiles don’t work without US and UK skilled technical soldiers and relative satellites.
I think it may have been Thomas Merton that observed it will be what are perceived as sane, rational, intelligent and operating legally that will act to preserve their way of life which will bring the world to nuclear destruction.
That is the frightening aspect of it all, not some madan acting rogue.
“acting legally”……..the mantra of fools
Putin’ statement:
In case you don’t get the hint!
Has you or anyone else counted the strikes? they were supposed to be 36. obviously no angle is perfect but a combination of angles might give the number.
The real Chinese economy could be one third smaller than officially reported
https://youtu.be/QevQPC4GXpM?si=Blr8NHpFY6CP4Sv2
This is a video showing indirect evidence that the Chinese economy is not doing well. The huge slide in housing prices is part of the issue. The speaker says 30%. Also, many people have been paying on homes that aren’t being built. The minimum wage in China doesn’t buy very much. Obvious imitations of well-known brands are doing well because people can no longer afford the real things. Protests in China are becoming more common. The person in charge of the Economy was recently fired.
The amount of lights at night showing at night are lower than they should be based on some of the information we are told.
https://www.rt.com/business/608081-russia-uranium-exports-china/
China triples import of Uranium from Russia.
Now we can see that the enriched uranium we used to buy from Russia is being sold to China instead.
If anyone wants a copy of Vattel’s Law of Nations – just cuz – it is available at Congress Library in the traditional annotated Chitty translation.
https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/llmlp/DeVattel_LawOfNations/DeVattel_LawOfNations.pdf
China begins issuing dollar denominated bonds that compete with treasuries.
https://indi.ca/how-china-starts-printing-usd/
Meh… how many are you going to buy???
To buy a bond, you pay cash. Does this mean China is trying to get USD cash? Depends on the currency they are selling for, presumably that is the same as the payout, USD.
China has to continuously hold USD “cash” the digital version to run their business. China has many innovative ways to use those digital ones and zeros but they have to hold a bunch. I see this as a hedge by China on their dollar holdings. Saudi is the willing bagholder. China is protected from depreciation of the dollar in excess of the treasury rates. The “cash” they get from the sale gets immediately spent in the different ways they have. The bonds amount to a bet that the dollars they have to hold to do business will depreciate faster than treasury rates. The Saudis get a place to park their dollars with a patron they like. China wont mark those bonds to zero like credit suisse did the CoCo bonds for the Saudi holders. Saudi has to park it somewhere but they like to at least get the principle back.
Its once again deleveraging. Not using the “prime collateral” status of treasuries to leverage. That prime collateral status is the only thing that makes treasuries desuirable at sub 8% interest rates yet the saudis are buying chinese dollar bonds that dont have it.
Its interesting . it reflects the dollar is and will be the reserve currency. BRICS basically just said forget a new BRICS currency in the OCT meeting that was anticipated for years. No one wants reserve currency status.. Remember Saudi wanted the Rembini to be the reserve currency but China said no way that would make their goods too expensive. This is a way for Saudi to confirm China as their preferred trading partner while using dollars. Its also just that many less dollars going into treasuries for the beltway to spend. USA will be spending more on interest payments than military social security and medicaid and medicare combined well before 2050. If prime collateral status value is waning it might be a tad difficult to find buyers.
This was of course a tiny drop in the bucket. The question is will it grow? Saudis put the P in petrodollar. China knows how to ditch those “cash” dollars and Saudi is paying them to do so.
Thanks for your insights. This may be a major reason for what China is doing: “I see this as a hedge by China on their dollar holdings. Saudi is the willing bagholder.”
It is hard to know what to do, now that currencies are becoming a less certain “store of value.”
There is an advantage in being able to devalue the entire pool of USD (foreign and domestic) and thus export inflation. It seems China’s approach doesn’t affect that because it maintains dollarization. The only downside is the competition for issuance. Agree?
We were talking about this a day or two ago. Ravi posted this comment from another site:
Latest from HHH ,
I did a little digging into the Saudi/ Chinese bond sell. The dollar bond issuance was just listed in Saudi Arabia. Not much different than deciding where to list a stock. Like when the Saudi’s wanted to list on the NY stock exchange.
From a Saudi point of view it makes sense to do it because it will help them become more a financial center as they try to diversify from oil and gas.
A lot of the buyers were actually Chinese entities that had some spare dollars to lend.
Beyond that though in the 3rd quarter 2024 both China and Japan sold record amounts of US treasuries. China sold $51.4 billion while Japan sold $61.9 billion. And they both also sold agency debt $9.9 billion and $18.6 billion respectively.
You’ll hear all kinds of nonsense narratives about why they are selling. Be it de-dollarization or Trump or the writing is on the wall get out of US bonds or whatever.
They sell reserve assets to get dollars in times that the dollars are scarce and expensive to get. Japan in particular was intervening in the currency markets to stop the yen’s slide. Which is a stupid way to use up your reserve assets. It only bought them a few months before the exchange rate goes right back where it was before they decided to intervene.
When dollars are plentiful because the risk of lending is lower there are plenty of US dollars, abundant US dollars. When there are plenty of dollars both China and Japan are adding US treasuries as reserve assets.
You don’t see any narrative being pushed when dollars are abundant and they are buying US treasuries.
How many dollars/ treasuries does Russia have to use to defend their currency exchange rate. Oh, that’s right they sold all the reserves assets they had years ago.
One other thing. The Cayman Islands. Thier treasuries holding increased by $100 billion during 3rd Qty 2024.
As we witness treasury buyers are increasingly from nations that have a financial base while nations that have a base in resources or industry are letting their treasuries go to maturity and not replacing them. This reveals the stark difference between new and old dollars.
The new dollars via treasury sales largely enter the USA economy and are distributed to the world via spending on energy and manufactured goods.
When Trump puts his 60% tariff on Chinese goods China will respond in kind. China doesnt have to reject new dollars Trump will do it for them. USA is only 10% of Chinas business now. Tariffs represent the method by which the USAs new issuance of credit offerings will be differentiated from dollar holdings for which energy or manufactured goods were exchanged. Credit is valuable asset but is also subject to non tangible evaluation. The weaponization of the dollar is a double edge sword and which edge is sharper remains to be seen.
If the US could quickly ramp up its own extraction of materials and manufacturing of goods in response to the tariffs, the tariffs might work pretty well. But if energy resources are limited, and necessary supply lines cannot easily be put together, there is a danger of US collapse. I’m afraid the latter will happen.
There is no chance of reviving manufacturing without cheap Chinese technology. In fact cheap Chinese technology is critical to manufacturing. Its not just cost. How are you going to tool manufacturing if there is no manufacturing of the tooling?
Collapse is not necessarily a terrible thing. It is a time to accept reality. We will all just have to do our best.
My one hope is people understand that a adjustment is inevitable. You cant run up debt and live off it forever. If we can have that understanding appropriate changes can be made and we can do our best in the transition. hopefully as our exceptional models are shown to be unrealistic we can ask the question that never should have left our lips. What can we offer to the world that will support our standard of living?
In spite of the idea that we face advesaries I think the world understands that a fast pulling of the rug is not desirable. Presently a acomodation is available where the USA retains its reserve currency status just not as a hedgemon but as a participant in an interconnected world.
Perhaps slow progress can be made toward a hybrid economy. Its somewhat of a paradox. Understanding can not come without pain but that pain can also be the pain of birth. Your note that this comes in a time of unprecedented resource depletion is unfortunatly quite true.
I am not adverse to Trump but in this matter he is incorrect. I understand some medicine is in order but the transition we are discussing will be made much harder by trade wars.
A hard look needs to be taken at why treasurys are suddenly so unpopular. For better or worse reserve currency is the USAs business. The reasons that the USA can not compete against China in manufacturing are multi faceted and profound. Just like any business we have customers and we need to listen to them. In fact no one else wants the reserve currency business and its all we got so we best start respecting our customers. The basic qualities of civilization lie in self determination and respect for all cultures. If we are to be the worlds banker we must respect our customers. Beating them with a stick does not seem to be creating desirable outcomes and the customers seem to have acquired rather large sticks also.
Trade wars will create rampant inflation. Trump will be thrown out on his ear in four years along with the very necessary reforms to reestablish the foundations of this republic he is proposing justice and liberty. It is my belief this can not occur in a vacuum. The USA can not truly represent justice and liberty without extending that to the world in its actions. IMO lack of doing that is the crux of the barriers we face.
Change can be very hard to accept even in the face of less desirable outcomes.
Thanks for your very fine comments.
You say, “Trade wars will create rampant inflation.” I had wondered whether our ultimate problem would be inflation or hyperinflation or even deflation (with nothing to buy). Maybe what happens changes from time to time.
HHH
Ignored
11/23/2024 at 6:05 pm
One other thing that I failed to touch on is these Chinese US dollar bonds are in no way shape or form competing with US treasury bonds.
These bonds don’t have the same utility where you can go into REPO anywhere around the globe and repost them as collateral.
Also when you borrow in dollars you need the dollar to fall against your home currency. With the prospects of 60% or even 100% tariffs in play the Chinese currency will likely fall against the dollar
The situation is set up for the Chinese currency to fall hard against the dollar. Yet at same time the Russian currency falls hard against the Chinese currency.
Russia purchasing power is going to take a hit like it’s never seen before . ”
Complicated
I read that China continues to do business in dollars not by buying US Treasuries but by doing business in Eurodollars, that is, US dollars that are part of the current payment system that are outside the US regulatory control. This is a substantial amount.
Then there is this whole BTC thing, which I frankly can’t get my head around nor really understand. BTC is not being used as currency as a payment system- too slow and too much energy required for that? Furthermore, BTC’s “price” is too volatile to be relied upon as a true “store of value.” But BTC is nevertheless increasingly being used as a “store of value” to act as collateral for dervivatives, for which there are no limits on leverage. Whitney Webb on her Unlimited Hangout blog knows a lot more of this than I do.
Enter the stablecoins (Tether) which apparently are not annoymous and can be tracked, but are yet another form of “cryptocurrency” whose value is tied to other assets, like the US dollar. But since Tether is unregulated, they can off-load all the dollar based debt (US Treasuries) sloshing around by buying Tether, using the US Treasuries as collateral, and from there, use Tether and other stablecoins, to buy more BTC, driving its price ever higher, feeding the Ponzi. Layer upon layer of nothingness.
As Pete Townnshend philosophized in the refrain of his song, Let’s See Action, “Nothing is everything. Everything is nothing….”
But the answer ultimately may lie in the true amount of derivatives, and their disposition when the financial Potemic Village facade collapses. Who, as David Webb asks in his book “The Great Taking,” will wind up with all the assets, or will there be by necessity, a violent revolt to this attempted ultimate transfer of wealth? All this against a background of increasingly fewer resources and less affordable energy to go around.
Will bitcoin become the world’s currency? Or will the u.s treasury buy it to back the dollar? And if Bitcoin keeps rising does that mean it consumes more energy? It already consumes more energy than Australia…maybe this could help the U.S get out of debt
Bitcoin consumes a lot of “hard to transport” electricity that often is not useful for much else. It cannot promise future goods and services, any more than fiat currencies can. People buy it at their own risk. But they also save US dollars, at their own risk. Inflation may cause the true value of either of these to fall. Bitcoin has other dangers, including regulatory changes.
Not being difficult. A serious concern is the world simply cancels all interest in the US dollar. If someone has a pile of them, purchasing something directly from the US is a challenge. Mostly we make bombs and it appears some of our “stuff” has battle field issues.
I think we are going to be bypassed.
Dennis L.
Maybe, as the world goes forward, people will want goods from the BRIC countries, in whatever currency they are using. It is indeed difficult to invest US$ in US made goods, other than real estate. Mostly the US makes “services,” like high-priced medical services or legal services or educational services. A person can often get services cheaper elsewhere, or do without.
Well its interesting. BRICs is not going to issue any sort of currency. No one wants to hold the reserve currency bag. So in some ways the dollar is becoming a true global currency owned by the holders not the issuer. You might call that “bypassing”
What may happen is the world may not need all the dollars the USA government wants to spend. Theres plenty of dollars out there and sovereigns like saudi and china (and yes Russia still) have a bunch. The attitude seems to be use it while it works but hedge and prepare for when it doesnt just a little bit. They will work that out when they come to it. Right now the dollar and the financial system works just fine. Its like Hugh Hefner. Somehow it still works but the day is coming. In the meantime life is good.
The world might agree that the dollars THEY own still have value but the dollars the USA government wants to spend into existence as a function of debt does not. Maybe toss some gold in the mix. While this seems bizarre its not. the countries that hold the dollars actually had to give up goods, resources, and services for them. Those dollars are “proven”. The dollars VISA creates as a credit issuer are not theirs and thats exactly what the treasury is doing issuing credit. The USA government may well want there to be no distinction between “new” “dollars” and old “dollars” but the reality is there are many many many kinds of dollars and they all are subject to relationship change and current events in unique ways.
Ruble now down 3% on the day to 104.35. This is like a penny stock. Ravi, I disagree about the importance of this. The volatility and not just the level is significant for the stability of the Russian economy and the long term tech and military development.
https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/USDRUB/
Saudi Arabia Threatens to Destabilize Russian Economy by Crashing Oil Prices
“Saudi Arabia could plunge the Russian economy into crisis by flooding the oil market and sending oil prices crashing. According to Business Insider, the kingdom has suggested that crude prices could fall to as low as $50 a barrel.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/saudi-arabia-threatens-to-destabilize-russian-economy/ar-AA1uysfQ?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=fd202627db454ec8accefb2903c840de&ei=34
MSM crap . KSA desperately needs high oil prices just like Russia . That is why there is OPEC+ . Business Insider is least reliable source . Prices could fall not because of KSA but if there is a synchronized recession worldwide and of course if the missiles go off in all directions .
That would be a great problem first of all for US shale oil !
Yes . You are on the spot .
NBC Today Show
Will bird flu be the next pandemic and could it cause a lockdown? What experts say
https://www.today.com/health/news/bird-flu-pandemic-rcna179981
You know dems would love to return the car to Trump like this 🙂
(Politico & Ukranian Pravda)
Talking about the dangerous Polish contradictory declarations…
(which initially drove in the wrong direction the European Leaders.
By the way, why we all decided to follow the Polish?)
“Polish foreign minister believes there is no need to fear Kremlin’s nuclear threats – video”
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/09/16/7475261/
“Threat of global war ‘serious and real,’ Poland’s Tusk warns: We feel that the unknown is approaching,” Polish prime minister says”
https://www.politico.eu/article/serious-threat-of-global-war-poland-donald-tusk-russia-ukraine-missiles/