|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Economic growth and added complexity sound like they would be good, but at some point, the combination gets to be too much–simplification is needed.
Too much of the world’s income starts going to non-working individuals and to high-earning workers in privileged fields. Ordinary working citizens start to say, “Wait a minute, there is not enough left for my everyday expenses. The system needs to change.” Elections lead to the selection of politicians who want war, or who want to overturn the current system. The system then changes in a way that leads to less spending on healthcare and other complexities.
In this post, I will try to explain a bit of the underlying problem and give some hints at what the simplification might look like. Part of the problem is too little energy supply. This is a problem that cannot be told to the public; it would be too distressing. In this post, I present the result of a recent academic study that has attempted to recalibrate the findings of the 1972 Limits to Growth study with updated data.
[1] Economies of all types tend to operate in cycles.
Economies need both resources and human participants. Human populations tend to increase in number if conditions are favorable. When population grows, resources per capita, such as arable land and fresh water, tends to fall. Adding complexity helps an economy work around falling resources per capita.
With added complexity, it is possible for resource extraction of many kinds to grow, at least for a time. Deeper wells can sometimes add more fresh water supply. Irrigation and fertilizer can be used to increase crop yields. International trade allows the possibility of getting resources from more distant lands. Adding debt allows factories to be built and to be paid for “after the fact,” using the sales of the goods produced by the factories. Ever-larger governments allow more roads, schools, and services of all kinds.
The use of added complexity helps keep economies growing for a long time, but at some point, things start going wrong. Oil wells and other types of resource extraction become more expensive to build because the easiest to extract resources tend to be used first. Pollution becomes more of a problem. Universities start producing more graduates with advanced degrees than there are job openings paying enough to justify studying for those degrees. Healthcare costs become hugely expensive. Increasing interest on debt becomes a huge burden, both for governments and individual citizens.
When added complexity reaches a limit, citizens sense a problem. They tend to vote the current governments out of power. Or they become rebellious in other ways. I think the world has already reached a complexity limit.
[2] At some point, the added complexity trend needs to shift toward simplification.
When added complexity no longer has sufficient payback, the system seems to sense this and starts pushing economies in the opposite direction. Often, the wages of ordinary workers become too low, relative to the cost of living. They rebel and overthrow their governments. Or central governments may collapse, as the central government of the Soviet Union did in 1991. This happened after oil prices were low for an extended period. The Soviet Union was an oil exporter, depending on oil exports for tax revenue. Revenue from collectivized agriculture was underperforming, also. Thus, getting rid of a layer of government, or too many government programs, seems to be one common theme of simplification.
Another issue today is international trade. Crude oil supplies per capita are low. Somehow, international trade (which uses crude oil) needs to be cut back.
With inadequate total oil supplies available, it becomes very desirable to do manufacturing close to home, rather than at a distance. This is a major reason for the competition in manufacturing between the US and China. If the US can manufacture locally, it will provide jobs and save some of the limited world crude oil supply.
Another issue is the oversupply of workers with advanced degrees, relative to the number of jobs requiring such degrees. A study released in early 2024 indicates that only about half of US college graduates are able to obtain a job requiring a college level degree within a year of graduation. In fact, the majority of those who cannot obtain a job requiring a college-level degree within a year after graduation remain underemployed 10 years after graduation. Pretty clearly, the number of college graduates needs to fall.
I showed in Figure 1 that US healthcare costs are very high, but they have recently been on a plateau. Perhaps these high healthcare expenses might make sense if US life expectancies were longer than elsewhere, thanks to all this spending. In fact, US life expectancy at birth is lower than in any other advanced nation. The CIA Factbook ranks the US life expectancy as 49th from the top in 2024.
Figure 3 (above) shows a chart I found several years ago, showing how US female life expectancy has been dropping, relative to other high-income countries.
Figure 4 shows that US life expectancies have continued to fall relative to other advanced economies. Something is clearly going wrong with health in the United States. It is no wonder that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. wants to “Make America Healthy Again.”
There is also the question of the level of US healthcare spending, relative to GDP. The share for the US, from Figure 1, is about 17%. The shares for the EU, the UK, and Japan are each about 11% according to the World Bank. The share for Russia is about 7%; for China it is about 5%.
Another issue mentioned in the introduction is the proportion of government spending that goes toward non-working individuals. The chart below shows how US Federal Government funds are spent. When the budget is prepared, often many of these programs are lumped together as “Mandatory Spending,” so we don’t see precisely what the spending is for.
Typically, the arguments about spending are on the parts of the budget other than mandatory spending. The problem is that all parts need to be funded, one way or another. Social Security describes its program as largely pay as you go. Mostly, the payroll taxes collected from today’s workers are used to pay benefits to today’s recipients.
Keeping the system working as it does today becomes a problem if the total amount of goods and services produced starts falling at some point. For example, if the total food supply at some point (say 2050) becomes too low, there is a question regarding which citizens should get inadequate food rations: the workers, or those receiving benefits under a pension program for the elderly. I would vote for the workers getting adequate food, if we expect them to continue to work. This issue suggests that at some point, the elderly may have to go back to work to get an adequate share of what is being produced.
[3] I see the results of the recent US presidential election to be a call for simplification: getting rid of the unneeded pieces of the system.
Donald Trump and his team clearly have a much different view of how the government should be operated than Joe Biden did. In particular, the new team would like to get rid of what they see as unneeded parts of the system.
There seem to be many other parts of the world encountering somewhat similar political and funding difficulties. Germany is dealing with a collapse of government. France is facing political and budget crises. Even China’s economy is having huge difficulties.
[4] I see the underlying problem as not enough resources, especially energy resources, for the rising world population.
It is not only oil that is in short supply (Figure 2); coal is also in short supply, relative to world’s population (Figure 6).
Uranium is in short supply, as well. The issue for uranium is that the world’s supply of nuclear warheads that could temporarily serve as a supplement to currently mined uranium is running short. These warheads belonged primarily to the US and to Russia, but Russia has sold a substantial amount of its warheads to the US, to be down-blended for use in nuclear power reactors.
Without enough energy resources per person, the world will likely need to produce fewer goods and services in total. Some uses for energy products, and for the goods and services that can be made with energy products, need to disappear.
Now, all parts of the world need to re-examine energy uses that are currently being made and look for uses that the economy can most easily get along without. For example, the step-down in oil consumption per capita that occurred in 2020 seems to be still having some effect. Some people are still working from home, saving oil that would be used for commuting. Some long-distance airline flights were eliminated, as well, particularly in Asia, reducing jet fuel consumption.
The self-organizing economy tends to push the world in the direction of contraction. How this will work is not at all clear. Most people didn’t understand the response to Covid-19 as a way to cut back oil consumption. It is possible that future changes will, to some extent, come from cutbacks directed by government organizations that are as difficult to understand as the Covid-19 restrictions.
[5] The book The Limits to Growth, published in 1972, modeled when world resources would run short, relative to growing world population. A recent analysis provides updated estimates, using the same model.
The original 1972 analysis, in its base model, suggested that resources would start to run short about now. An article called, “Recalibration of limits to growth: An update of the World3 model” by Arjuna Nebel and others was published earlier this year in the Journal of Industrial Ecology. The summary exhibit of their findings is shown here as Figure 8.
On Figure 8, Recalibration23 is the name given to the new model output. The BAU dotted line shows the indications from the base (business as usual) 1972 model. I found the coloring a little confusing, so I added the labels “Industrial Output” and “Population” to better mark what I consider the two most important model outputs. Food Production per capita is the green line, which is also important. The calculations are all made in terms of the weight of physical quantities of materials used, for the world as a whole. The financial system is not modeled.
We do not know how accurate a forecast such as this is. I know that Dennis Meadows, who was the leader of the 1972 Limits to Growth analysis, has said that once peak was reached, we could not expect the model to necessarily hold.
Even with this caveat, I find this forecast disturbing. Industrial output per capita (which would include things like automobiles, farm machinery, and computers) is shown as already steeply declining by 2025 in the updated model. This trend is much clearer than in the 1972 model. By 2050, industrial output per capita is a small fraction of the amount it was at peak.
Food output per capita is shown to start dropping about 2025. Based on my understanding of the 1972 Limits to Growth analysis, this change might reflect a shift away from meat-eating, rather than simply fewer total calories per person.
World population follows a curve similar to that of the 1972 Limits to Growth analysis with a peak in world population at perhaps about 2030.
In the updated model, pollution has been modeled as CO2 levels. This is different from the mix of pollutants used in the original model. The peak comes around 2090.
[6] Intuitively, the order of forecast changes for the world economy, shown in Figure 8, seems right to me.
Figure 8 indicates that world industrial production is expected to be the first type of output to drop. This makes sense if energy supply is quite limited or is high-priced. Without adequate inexpensive energy supply, a country is likely to cut back on manufacturing its own goods. Instead, it tries to buy from countries with less expensive sources of energy supply.
For example, US industrial production per capita has been falling since 1973. The year 1973 was the year when oil prices first spiked. US business leaders realized that changes were needed: A larger share of manufactured goods needed to be imported from countries with lower-cost fuel supply. Oil needed to be used sparingly because of its high cost. Coal, used heavily in Asia, was typically much cheaper.
China took the lead in industrial production after it joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, but now it is running into obstacles. One issue is that China’s contribution to the world’s supply of goods is taking away high-paying jobs from other countries. Other countries are left with more low-paying service jobs. A second issue is that the US has become dependent upon China for critical materials, such as those used in military armaments. A third issue is that a great deal of China’s growth was financed by debt. As long as China’s exports were growing very rapidly, this was not a problem. But as growth has slowed, China’s debt has become difficult to repay with interest.
The level of conflict between China and other countries has grown, in part because it has become clear that it is not possible for industry to grow rapidly both in China and elsewhere, indirectly because of fossil fuel and uranium limits. The US applies sanctions against some Chinese companies and China retaliates by hoarding scarce resources. These include minerals such as antimony, tungsten, gallium, germanium, graphite, and magnesium.
The world is increasingly operating in a “not enough to go around” mode for scarce resources. At the same time, countries need to somewhat get along. So we get strange narratives in the press giving rationalizations for actions by both sides, without mentioning the shortage issue.
Figure 8 shows that once industrialization drops, food production also begins to fall, but not as quickly. This makes sense because everyone recognizes that food is essential. The falling calories likely reflect people increasingly moving from meat to vegetable products.
Somehow, world population becomes poorer, but the level of population does not drop nearly as rapidly as the drop in industrialization.
[7] Simplification is likely to take place in significant steps, perhaps at the time of strange events, such as those occurring in 2020.
These are a few ways simplification might take place:
[a] High level government organizations might start disappearing. For example, the European Union might not get enough funding and would stop. Or something similar could happen to the International Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organization.
[b] Programs that we expect to be funded by the US Federal Government might be handed over completely to the states, to be funded or not, as the finances of individual states permit. Examples might include Medicare, Medicaid, and even Social Security.
[c] There could be major banking problems, perhaps simultaneously in many countries around the world. The debt bubble holding up stock markets could pop. Governments would try to compensate, but they might not be able to do enough. Or governments could inadvertently create hyperinflation if there is virtually nothing to buy with the newly printed money created to offset widespread bank failures.
[d] There could be a great deal more sharing of homes and of apartments. The current arrangement of many single people living alone, either in an apartment or a stand-alone house could be replaced by many more roommate situations. Multi-generational families living together may become more common.
[e] Healthcare may become much simpler and local. Instead of seeing an array of specialists at a distance, people may walk to a local health provider. Medications from around the world are likely to drop greatly in quantity. Government programs to care for the seriously disabled elderly seem likely to be scaled back.
[f] Universities may be slimmed down greatly. There is no point in educating a huge number of individuals who cannot get jobs requiring a university degree.
[g] The huge amount of effort that goes into taking care of lawns in the US may disappear. Instead, people will put more effort into growing crops locally. Some people may choose to raise chickens, as well.
[h] International travel for pleasure will likely disappear, except perhaps for the very rich. Even business trips will become very uncommon. The amount of goods and services transported internationally seems likely to shrink.
[i] Many types of optional activities that now take place by car may be replaced by more local versions, which will be reached by walking, or perhaps by bicycle. For example, visits to restaurants may largely disappear, but eating with nearby friends or relatives in homes may increase. Visits to churches may drop greatly, as they did during Covid-19 restrictions, but they may be replaced by groups meeting in homes. Gyms for recreation may disappear, but people may obtain more exercise from their gardens and their need to walk to appointments.
[j] Very strange political leaders may take office. One person rule takes much less energy than transporting many representatives to a central location. Some of these leaders may take over as dictators.
Bloomberg: Mystery Congo virus (Disease X)
“The disease emerged at a time of increased influenza circulation, and the culprit is likely to be airborne,”
https://x.com/outbreakupdates/status/1864844787238736275
A small spark can start a great fire.” -Chinese Proverb
Now we have come to wonder whether the US is behind a new emerging illness.
“Now we have come to wonder whether the US is behind a new emerging illness.”
That is exceedingly unlikely. Not impossible, just improbable. In any case, we have plenty of things that can make the jump to humans. The list of ones that did is long, three different corona viruses, maybe 4 if the 1899 “flu” was one, HIV, around 1910, flu, measles a long time ago, it’s a long list.
Cui bono, Keith. Cui bono.
Always worth keeping in mind who profits.
But I think people tend to overestimate how advanced biology science is. Agreed, some people profited by the recent pandemic, but the people who did were not (as far as I know) able to manipulate viruses.
I would be interested in your thoughts on who might be responsible.
Hei Gail,
I left the coast behind and now live inland by one of our beautiful fjords. Moving means new neighbours and what do you know, one family have your surname. According to https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/navn/statistikk/navn#navnesok there are only 236 Tverbergs in Norway so maybe you are related …
It could be. I know that I have relatives in Norway. My husband and I visited Norway a few years ago. We took a bus tour that went near where my father’s father was from (Voss). We were told that hang gliding was now being done where the “farm” used to be. This told us that farm was not well situated. But we did not try to contact any relatives.
There seem to be quite a few Tverbergs in the United States. For example, I keep running across “Ryan Tverberg” in the news. He plays hockey for the Toronto Maple Leaves. I am not aware that he is related.
I took the actual video of the CEO getting clapped and subbed in “Home Alone” soundtrack (when he orders a pizza)
https://www.reddit.com/r/CommunismMemes/comments/1h72pi1/keep_the_change_ya_filthy_ceo_audio_soundtrack/
And he was on a bike. We’re so back!
“Very strange political leaders may take office” says Gail.
Hmmm, who can we think of in that vein? My answer would be most of the Combined West. Delusional to the max.
Anyway, no change in my viewpoint. Da West is gonna be a lot poorer very shortly. Other, saner countries will charge merrily along for a while longer.
Musk keeps posting about population collapse. South Korea is 0.7 birthrate, cities in China are below that e.g. Shanghai at 0.4. The gloomier pundits suggest China will be gorn as a functioning nation in 4 decades or so, due to a lack of people. Supposedly half their population is already over 50.
Don’t know why Gates et al are trying to poison us – we’re going extinct anyway.
But, cheer up doomers, it’s STILL BAU party time, at least here in rural Australia.
Musk and Gates are both eugenicists. The elites need high IQ populations to exist, if they go extinct there is no control grid or technology. Notice they never talk about Africans, Middle East or other populations.
One known unknown is how much power are data centres going to use in the next few years? https://arborealenergy.co.nz/resources/
This link leads (eventually) to a PDF paper called
Forest-to-Furnace
An analysis of the woody bioenergy value chain; with an emphasis on fossil fuel energy inputs, fossil carbon emissions, EROEI and ROI.
Comparing ‘Arboreal Energy ltd biocoal’ with woodchip and white pellets.
It is by an organization called Arboreal Energy, whose slogan is “Making Renewable Energy Dreams a Reality.” I didn’t find any names of real human beings involved.
The authors believe that New Zealand will be having an energy shortfall in the future. The authors conclude:
Shipping wood in any form long distance to use as fuel with oil tends not to work out well. If wood can be made into biocoal, it will be more compact and energy dense, thus better for shipping.
The world population is not rising – only in Africa. Nearly everywhere, including China and India, the fertility rates are beyond 2.2. In the West the populations are shrinking.
While economies have cycles, upturn and recession, they also underly major influences, amoung them climate (the warmer the better), energy availability, population. Population growth usually means growth of GDP and upturn, population decline recession. The West should be in permanent recession just alone because of their fertility rates.
Piketty has pointed out, that a structurally shrinking economy can neither have a capitalist nor democratic organisation. At least negative interest rates are needed. Falling living standards rise unsatisfaction and make it the democratic balance of interests difficult.
The more “adding complexity” cannot provide the daily needs of the people, the more traditional methods of self-sufficiency will be applied, like having hens in the backyard. These collide with “complexity” and regulation.
Hjalmar Schacht has shown with his Mefo bills financing Hitler’s war, that it is possible to enlarge debts without hyper inflation, if the additional debt is isolated from circulating. Whst the governments will do now, is, to enlarge debt under the premise of an economy of war or another state of emergency.
This will not lead to self-sustaining structures like in the Middle Ages. In my opinion, these structures should be implemented, though.
Very likely, the ruling powers will try to get access to as many of resources as possible and to secure their supply chains, while concentrating on centers of high complexity, while the rest will fall into low complexity. State authority will decline in these areas and the vacuum of power will allow the establishment of measures of self-sufficiency.
The covid-19 vaxx still bears many risks towards population growth. The most negative expectation underlied by serious studies that I am aware of calculate with 50% reduction within 12 years (subclinical scars in the heart muscle). Such a scenario would have dramatic effects of the economy, the debt system, the dollar, supply lines, military power and security.
In many countries, there is also a “30% less energy” directive more or less openly implemented.
While we can see, that first steps are made, for example installing CBDCs, it is not guaranteed, that they will work as intended. Looking to Germany, the planned transformation towards alternative energies and electrification doesnt seem to work. Plans rely on models and there is criticism, that the models in macroeconomics have no empiric foundation.
We have undoubtedly entered degrowth and undoubtedly we need “less complexity”. But this “less complexity” must form a workable structure. If we dont have plastic barrels, we need people with the skills to make wooden ones. Wooden barrels are much more heavy and cannot be used for road transports. Old waterways are blocked by water turbines. There are a lot of conflicts dipping deeper into the subject. Undoubtedly “less complexity” needs more bovine and cattle to use grasses growing also in bad climate conditions. To keep sheeps in traditional ways, though, interfere with laws on animal rights. If people dont start to demand the necessary freedom for “degrowth”, it will be much more difficult later on. This discussion is stopped by the avoidance to tell the truth. Perhaps, the upraise of “religious groups” who demand “to go back” might be a way out.
Thanks for your thoughts. What you are saying echos what I am saying in my post. You say, “We have undoubtedly entered degrowth and undoubtedly we need “less complexity”.”
I would point out a detail with respect to population growth. Population growth depends on a combination of births per mother, life expectancy, in and out migration, and how old the mother is when giving birth.
The countries with growing population are much more diverse than just those in Africa. Part of the issue is the migration issue. The population of the United States continues to grow, as does that of the UK. The population of at least some Middle Eastern countries continues to grow. Iraq, Israel, and Palestine come to mind. Some of the fighting is about too many people relative to resources. People tend to migrate to areas where they expect to do better economically .
a very neat and concise summing up of our situation Jan
until the last bit;
////Perhaps, the upraise of “religious groups” who demand “to go back” might be a way out.///
What these groups want is the theocratic absolutisms of the 12th century—where even the most basic scientific truth because heresy (and thus punishable).
Fundamentalism is perhaps the greatest danger we face, at least in the short term, because ‘godwars’ are the worst kind—fighting over certainties that are themselves myths and fables told to frighten the gullible into submission.
fast forward a couple of centuries or so, to when our energy surpluses have completly gone, and we no longer have the magic of instant communication, and no one is alive who can remember such things.
Think of the holocaust deniers—-“it was all a big lie”–or ”moon landing never happened” about that 200 years from now,—how easy it is for the human mind to deny truth.
it is then that the godfreaks will reassert control.
People are not so stupid?—right now Afghanistan is being taken back to the 12th c—by people who see it as a way to control people through terror—don’t kid yourself it couldnt happen in the USA—people really are that stupid to let it, in the name of religion.
We have been living through a period of truth denial already, however. It doesn’t have to take the form of religious fundamentalism. It can be in the form of political over-liberalism.
We are going back to a period with less energy per person. I expect that this means more deaths before maturity for children, and a need for more births per woman. It will also mean less fuel for transportation and less formal schooling available. I expect that the combination of these things will mean that women will again need to work primarily in the home. The stronger muscles of men will better adapt them for some of the tasks we will be taking back from fossil fuels. So traditional religions, or something parallel to them, may again become popular.
traditional religions, more often than not, have ”traditional people’ running them.
check your history books to check on their traditions.—–religion is all about control and power, at the top.
our own archbishop has just been forced to resign, in unpleasant circumstances.
over-liberalism exists only on the cusp of surplus energy, remove that and you will have autocracy—and , if the godnuts get their way, theocratic fascism.
the certainties of region must be shoved down the throats of the infidels.
So Norman, would you then consider God a fascist? He is sort of a my way or the highway type of fellow.
Dennis L.
to consider ”god” is to grant existence.
however—those who choose force to confirm such existence must inevitably take the fascist stance to lend it truth,
because that force carries violence with it, and retribution as the penalty for disobedience.
study the priesthood, and their pursuit of power, down the recorded centuries—study the rantings of modern evangelicals and you will recognise the same evil.
and some priests are gentle men who follow a gentle calling.
” Fundamentalism is perhaps the greatest danger we face, at least in the short term, because ‘godwars’ are the worst kind—fighting over certainties that are themselves myths and fables told to frighten the gullible into submission. ”
Correct , I am seeing that in India . Destroying mosques to prove that there existed a temple 1000 years ago . How the time has come to avenge the atrocities of the Mughal era on the Hindus . How TV , plastic surgery , aviation existed in India 10,000 years ago . Fables and myths that the illiterates buy into while surviving on 5 kg wheat/rice per person/ per month free by the government . Frightening .
We live in the world of the rising amount of unproductive jobs: investing into cryptocurrencies, pensions, dividends, marketing fight over customers, sports and games.
And the people like Elon Musk promise pensions for all in the upcoming era of robots and AI.
So the companies adopt useless technology that first destroys productivity and subsequently the jobs.
We already do not have cheap energy.
The economy shuts down.
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1864804141735842253
Interesting interview, Lavrov and Tucker, but just rehashes everything that those who have been following the conflict already know.
“Russia’s longtime foreign minister describes the war with the United States and how to end it.”
But the video is 1hr 21 minutes. If it is mostly things I already know, it is hard to find time for it.
Russia’s central bankers, because of stupidity or corruption, only now reinstituted some more sensible policies and *lo and behold!* the sensible and obvious policies are working! USD/RUB back to 101 now.
https://tradingeconomics.com/usdrub:cur
The level does indeed look much better now.
And we have lift off . However my stand on exchange rates has not changed , pure manipulation and match fixing .
https://nadinbrzezinski.medium.com/and-we-have-liftoff-the-russian-rubble-0c276621edde
Gail, thanks for pointing out Figure 8, it is very informative and 2025 looks like an interesting year.
Dennis L.
Hopefully, the model isn’t too accurate.
Why the human world is finite? Because there is only this narrow energy band in this specific distance from.the Sun, where the humans can live, where the life evolved into various forms. Everything closer to the Sun is too hot, everything farther from the Sun is too cold.
The efforts to move the humans out of this band are completely nonsensical. The humans are not able to save themselves, as they can resist their energy predicament only temporarily. The length of the human life is fixed.
The efforts to move the energy needed by.humans to robots and computing and data centers are nonsensical, too.
Imagine that elderly want their pensions, so they promote the spread of robots and AI. But the rest of the population is deprived of the resources.
What will follow?
The answer of ChatGPT: https://chatgpt.com/share/67526efa-1ad4-8012-bb37-3eaade95feec
According to ChatGPT:
I am not convinced that we humans have as much control over the situation as the last paragraph suggests. It sounds like ChatGBT is programmed to give results that will be acceptable to most users, whether or not they are right.
“I am not convinced that we humans have as much control over the situation as the last paragraph suggests.”
I have thought (and written) about this for decades. Given the existing dynamics I doubt humans have *any* control. The social dynamics behind AI is looks unstoppable. In the US for the next four years, there will be no controls, not that humans have any idea of how to control something that will shortly be smarter than they are.
The one bright spot is that AIs fail the Turing test–they are too nice.
Why is the world finite? Because it’s round.
Infinite movement in the circle.
Exactly.
dont tell Keith that MG
“specific distance from.the Sun”
Known as the habitable zone where liquid water can exist.
There is a related concept the computational zone. Where there is enough light from the star to power the computation, but cold enough to keep the thermal error rate down.
_If_ Tabby’s star is an example of an uploaded civilization, the largest shadow we have seen is over 400 times the area of the Earth and located 7.8 AU from its star.
Debtors vs savors. Currencies vs money. Growth vs sustainability.
‘Brain quantity is no guarantee for succes’
Quadripled BTC etf goes berserk
Average guy on the jerk
Christmas, under the needles of happiness
Gifts as far as the eye can see
Becomes the guillotine of a mess
Chopping down men and tree
What goes straight up is likely to come straight back down! Buyer beware!
And if you don’t own it
One can always buy a share
I was there when the design specifications for bitcoin were being hashed out.
Bitcoin has a market, people who want to hide assets where governments can’t get at them or even know how much you have.
Bitcoin going way up after the election signals something,
Then why is the ledger public? There are better technologies and better cryptographic solutions, eg XMR.
“Then why is the ledger public?”
The ledger is public, the owners are not.
It can often be deduced
What do you think of the idea that a chief advantage is its inability to be inflated by the issuer?
Dennis L.
“inability to be inflated by the issuer?”
There isn’t any issuer.
Exactly, I meant the issuer being a government. Inflation is basically a tax upon users of currency.
Excess liquidity cannot go to the physical plane. So, crypto is an excellent spunge for excess liquidity. It harms only when it gets exchanged for real goods. That time will come of course. Crypto is what it is; a lifeboat out of fiat currencies, to Cannibal Island.
Interesting way of putting the situation!
“CA’s Solar Surplus Is Driving Up Your Energy Bill
“The Golden State produces enough unused solar energy to power 518,000 homes annually. Meanwhile, other states are cashing in.”
https://patch.com/california/across-ca/cas-solar-surplus-driving-your-energy-bill-analysis-finds
I wonder, does anyone on this forum own solar panels or is that viewed as a waste of resources?
I do. For me I expect my panels to provide me with water pumping and sanitation and lighting year round. During peak summer months I get to add refrigeration to that load. The cost 6 years ago was $23,000, the life expectancy is about 15 years.
The $3,000 worth of electricity I get during those 15 years I pay $23,000. What can I say? I love clean water under pressure, I love my flush toilet even more and what’s not to like about lights? When TSHTF what else am I going to spend money on?
I often run this tablet from a deep-cycle battery, charged from a solar panel on the roof of a truck — I get maybe a few $/year worth of grid power from it, & have had to repair the wiring many times (Costco warrantees their deep-cycle batteries for only 1 year — running them way down, & re-charging them, cuts their life — inverters have limited life, too).
Solar power has always been just an adjunct to fossil fuels — it’s never worked by itself, after the batteries drain.
Ten years solar, five with batteries. Runs most all farm energy needs. Blackouts no longer threaten my freezers. Costs for both solar and batteries have paid back and I probably have another ten years life in system. Has run flawlessly. I do use gas heat, my bill last month was $20. Calif. has lots of sun and winters are pretty mild. Hoping to live it through and feed the family from the farm. Trying to control inflation of energy and food costs.
Solar seems to work best when heating is not needed. I presume your transport energy is in addition also. You still need liquid fuel to run your farm equipment, and probably any personal transportation, too.
So, even in sunny California, electricity is only providing a relatively small share of your total energy needs.
Exactly correct but in any attempt to downsize you also need to drive less at some point. So if you can make subsistence farming work you can also avoid a daily commute.
I have been using an electric tractor for three years so my farm equipment is electric but the technology isn’t really up to the task. It does have a bucket which makes compost building and distribution to the garden beds easier. Or running a brush hog. I am slowly moving backwards which is better than quickly crashing there. For my edification and entertainment, not because I have to.
Solar 8500kW per year , from the grid 500kW
Runs freezers, tractor, well pumps, A/C , home electric needs . So on farm almost all energy needs are solar/ battery which provides much of our food. The biggest offsite energy is really from animal feed which is a commercial hog operation.
So you can drop out , feed yourself, and enjoy your garden but I have doubts about running any business without fuel.
From the article, “Over the past year, the state has curtailed production of 3.2 million megawatt hours, ”
That would convert a million tons of coal or other carbon to about 4 million bbl of diesel or jet fuel.
Not a high fraction of the demand but that is just the excess power from one state.
Look closely at what this article says. This excess generation is simply thrown away. There is not grid capacity to transport this electricity to another state. There is a good chance the other state could not use it either because weather patterns tend to cross state lines. This excess electricity production did not save any coal at all, certainly not a million tons of coal.
There are at least two problems with solar:
1. Quite a bit of this solar energy cannot be used without batteries to hold it over to a time when it is actually needed. The batteries significantly increase cost. There is also some loss from putting the electricity into storage and taking it back out.
2. If solar is just dumped on the grid as it is, it badly distorts the electricity rates for everyone. The rates end up artificially low. This tends to discourage other generation from providing electricity.
“This excess generation is simply thrown away. ”
Exactly.
“This excess electricity production did not save any coal at all, certainly not a million tons of coal.”
The proposal is to use the excess power to vaporize coal with steam into syngas and then convert the syngas to diesel.
The reason to go this way is that making hydrogen with intermittent electrical power is crazy expensive since the platinum containing electrolysis cells are both expensive and not used very much.
The electric resistance heaters for the coal should be *much* less expensive then electrolytic cells.
This has not been done yet. It is the kind of things engineering design to solve a problem like excess intermittent power and the need for diesel.
The plants can be placed to reduce the load on the transmission system.
The question is whether these things can be done cheaply, with material that we have access to.
“The question is whether these things can be done cheaply, with material that we have access to.”
I don’t know. Analyzing this will take considerable design work and probably a pilot plant or two.
On the other hand, there is nothing exotic involved. I think we could repurpose a blast furnace with three large electrodes.
But wide as my knowledge of industrial processes is, I am not competent to cost out such a plant.
This is a very good approach because the existing infrastructure could be used with some adaptations. There is no need to push the complete equivalent of fossile energy through electric wires.
It underlies the laws of physics though. The conversion rates are very low and can probably not increase due to thermodynamics. And 70% of 70% of 70% is only 34.3%. This makes the investment into the infrastructure, also the investment of resources, unefficient. Besides, this infrastructure must be resiliant to disruptions in the supply lines, be it war, pandemy, block building or riots.
“The conversion rates”
Because of the coal input, 3 MWh of electrical heat input produces 15 MWh of syngas, About 75% of that ends up in the diesel fuel.
“investment of resources, unefficient.”
The existing Sasol plant capital cost is around $8/bbl.
“Besides, this infrastructure must be resiliant to disruptions in the supply lines, be it war, pandemy, block building or riots.”
Hard to deal with war, but never have heard of a riot causing problems for a refinery. Always a first time of course.
https://www.revolution-energetique.com/ce-gigantesque-projet-de-stockage-delectricite-que-la-france-a-mis-de-cote/
https://www.revolution-energetique.com/dossiers/ou-se-trouvent-les-stations-de-transfert-denergie-par-pompage-step-en-france/
The first article you link to is
This gigantic electricity storage project that France has put aside
This is about a hydroelectric pumped storage project that was stopped in 1982. The problem seems to be that there was/still is no program for reimbursing the investors for the added flexibility provided by hydroelectric pumped storage.
The second article you link to is called
Where are the pumped storage energy stations located in France?
The article talks about hydroelectric pumped storage facilities being built at the time nuclear power plants were put in place, to better match electricity supply to demand.
I looked at the article again, and it is confusing. It starts out saying:
So some overproduction is, indeed going to other states, and they are paying very little for this electricity.
Then the article goes on to talk about the electricity production that was simply curtailed–not even tried to be sent to other states. The calculation that is made is with respect to the curtailed electricity.
All of the models about how useful the electricity from wind turbines would be were based on the assumption that the wind energy could actually be used, when generated. It turns out that using it is not easy, without batteries. And the distorted power prices are a problem, as well.
That didn’t make sense to me, either — that article was authored by someone here in the east SF Bay, CA — it doesn’t seem like they knew much about it.
Last I heard, the solar power installations were made financially feasible by the grid operators being required by governments to give heavily-subsudized rewards for the solar power they put into the grid (& also, government subsidies on the purchasing of the solar equipment).
The public isn’t very savy about these things, so things like that can easily slip through the cracks.
The article was confusing because it was poorly written. When there us overproduction, the choice is to curtail production or send the excess to other states. If neither is done, the grid melts down. Curtailing production is not easy and it is often financially better to send the excess to other states if they can take it. They may have to curtail their production in order to accept the excess, and doing that costs them money. So often Ca will have to pay them to take it. That costs Ca citizen users, and saves money for the users in the other states.
It would seem as though a disconnection could be made between the spinning turbine and the grid could be made. This is similar to unplugging an unneeded appliance. The problem is that the grid does not have capacity to take the electricity away to another state. Adding grid capacity is costly and very time consuming. Also, grid problems tend to cause a lot of fires, unless the wires are put underground. Putting grid wires underground is terribly expensive.
In Ca it is a delicate balancing act to match supply and demand. They still have to run their natural gas fired plants to supply current when it is cloudy or the winds don’t blow. Not enough batteries yet yo store capacity needed on cloudy days. We may never be able go build that many batteries. And you can’t just disconnect or unplug a turbine, it is a lot more complicated than that.
Someone needs to work on a quick disconnect, or an alternate energy use that wind turbines can quickly be switched to. If a wind turbine is permanently tied to the grid, we have a major problem.
You are right. Tge pribkem sith solar and wing us his to tefucd priduction so tgat uf fies nit exceed drmand st any poinf in time.
In a natural gas plant the computers reduce the amount of gas powering the turbines, the turbines slow down and produce less electricity so that supple and dram d match and maintain the right amount of power. The ability to do that in solar and wind is still not perfected and that leads to problems with the grid. More work needs to be done to make the system function more smoothly without waste.
“the turbines slow down ”
Actually, they don’t. It is not speed, all the synchronous generators and motors on a grid rotate at the same speed. What varies is the torque from the turbine to the generator.
“More work needs to be done”
Within the legal and physical limits, connecting solar and wind to the grid is about as well done as possible.
I only worked on the edge of power engineering, but I did take the courses and have read the power articles put out by the IEEE.
They can adjust the angle of the windmill blades to catch less or no wind to reduce the output.
I looked a bit, and it looks like wind turbines are sometimes turned off to curtail power generation. This is hard on the wind turbines–leads to excessive wear and a shortened lifetime, if it is done excessively.
It is not as clear to me that solar can easily be shut down. It may be better to pay a neighboring state to turn down their fossil fuel generation, so that they can take the solar if the power lines can take the load. If the power lines can’t take the load, batteries would be a good choice. I am sure I am missing things, however.
The situation of today looks to me like the shutting down of the economies: the people losing their income and the subsequent fall of the consumption.
This is not about not being able to buy a luxury car or a holiday, but about the basic survival: eat and heat.
The people who are now losing their well-paid jobs do not understand it at all. They believe that their income is going to be maybe a little bit reduced. But the truth is much more bleak…
If the group under Trump is looking for a way to cut the spending, I would think that transfer payments would be a thing to cut, especially if there were not a problem with voters being unhappy about such a change.
There is a huge amount of transfer payments being made. Pay as you go plans can only get more and more problematic, as there get to be more retirees and fewer workers. Also, the workers are earning less now, relative to what their parents earned at the same time.
Maybe not:
As a nation we are promoting chaos all over the world, currently there is a dead in the water proposal to send more billions to Ukraine before Jan 20. Bring them home.
We are building incredible amounts of useless weapons, planes that at best only fly 50% of the time, F35 comes to mind.
We have Federal office buildings empty, or close to it. Close those buildings, spread out the employees all over the US and solve part of the office building space glut as well as bringing our employees, the fed employees, closer to the people they service. E.g. Dept of Ag in IA would be a start. Latest on the news is an orgy at a VA hospital. Someone has too much time on their hands.
We continually cut spending for our citizens. I don’t have solutions, but a good start would be to downsize the US Government.
You mentioned earlier the declining life span. Maybe women working outside the home and having “meaningful” careers is not as much fun as once thought. Most jobs are drudgery, we can dress them up, but still boring. Even physics, nothing has been discovered in many years at the basic level. Your data suggests medicine is not doing much better. Korea has reached a level of less than one person born per woman or some such. That will not work well.
The Amish I see are doing well on the replacement basis, buggies are full of kids. They have Sunday off, how quaint.
My two cents.
Dennis L.
Full of inbred kids who are all genetic siblings
Don’t know, they have nice, neat homes and harvest their crops with horses. Sundays off are a bonus.
Dennis L.
buying fertilizer in an open system is not going to last long. buggies of kids will be ripped and torned apart.
Building weapons is not useless. By enlarging debt and isolating it from the rest of the economy, it can be a large stimulus. Economy of war can be an excuse for everything, like during the pandemic.
How long this is going well, noone knows. It is a bet on getting access to cheap resources sooner or later.
Good points!
I can see a consistent rise of crazy work and the decline of normal work. A consistent decline of sanity. The rise of unsustainability.
Faster, fantastic, mindblowing etc. – such are the attributes of insanity.
2 074 / 5 000
French life under the occupation 1940-1944.
I corresponded with Gail to tell her that there was already a model of the transition from a developed carbon economy to a largely post-carbon economy.
It was France, following the armistice of June 22, 1940.
The country consumed 3 million tons of oil, the overwhelming majority of which was imported.
The country consumed 72 million tons of coal, of which 24 were imported.
Oil imports fell to zero, the monthly consumption of petroleum products fell to 15,000 tons, 6% of the previous figure.
The automobile fleet (one million trucks and two million cars) was for the most part immobilized.
The occupier, moreover, with the 400 million daily “occupation costs”, provided for by the armistice agreement, bought a good part of this fleet, to equip his own army which lacked vehicles. In 1941, 27,000 trucks ran on Gazogène, but ration tickets were also needed for charcoal.
Ration tickets were also needed to get gasoline, and they were rarely granted. The French economy, then, operates in degraded mode:
all products are subject to ration tickets,
official food rations only provide half of the minimum survival,
the “black market” must provide the rest, prices are much higher than on the official market,
Heating disappears, the remaining coal (37 million tons) is reserved for industry, the country has lost the mines of Lorraine, annexed, and German requisitions concern 5 million tons),
Even cooking becomes complicated, it is necessary to go and get wood, the possession of a handcart is important, the “Norwegian pot” becomes essential,
electricity is rare,
transport networks are reduced to the railways, rare and overloaded,
vegetable gardens, under the influence of the Catholic clergy, anxious to distance these classes from socialism and later from communism, they often take one or two more, so they are not the ones who suffer the most,
The last third of the country suffers the most, the economically well-integrated bourgeoisie, which has large, more heated apartments, and depends on official distribution channels. It also starts to garden vegetables. The transfer of wealth from the bourgeoisie to farmers is colossal. Farmers also take advantage of this to buy back the land that the bourgeoisie had seized during the French Revolution.
the stinky redneck becomes an important business relationship in front of whom the “city gentleman” multiplies the marks of servility and baseness. Besides, visibly, his smell no longer bothers anyone.
The ownership of chickens, ducks, rabbits is widespread,
Everyone, including the government, couldn’t care less about debt, public spending and everything else. Pay-as-you-go retirement pensions are created, spending soars, without anyone worrying…
to be continued…
Thanks for your partial synopsis, in English.
I like the part about the transfer of wealth from the bourgeoisie to the farmers……not sure how that actually translates globally.
What is a Norwegian pot?
https://www.vegetarians.co.nz/what-is-the-norwegian-pot-which-promises-to-revolutionize-cooking/
Interesting:
https://ecomusee.grandorlyseinebievre.fr/collections-documentation/nos-collections/objets-documents/en-temps-de-guerre/marmite-norvegienne
Nice photos of a Norwegian pot.
Point g in paragraph 9 sounds hopeful: replacing lawns with vegetable gardens and raising chickens.
Interesting times indeed
“and raising chickens”
Bird flu makes raising chickens a lot more difficult.
My luck with a vegetable garden hasn’t all that good, however. I found I needed some way to keep critters (deer, rabbits, etc.) out. Fruit trees need sprays of some kind, besides good luck with the weather. There was sometimes a need for water. I could provide this today, but I am not certain that would be a long time option.
The economy can be simplified or “de-grown”, but the problem is that it can only do so within the context of the interconnected global system we live in. The steps that need to be taken to minimizing resource consumption while effectively mitigating the worst effects of climate change or environmental devastation all require massive globe-spanning projects driven by similarly globe-spanning cooperation.
A “return” to the simplicity of the past is impossible, since the conditions which made it possible in that past no longer exist. Soil will not regain natural fertility and ores will not increase their grade because an isolated individual or group decided to grow local buy local. And most importantly, people will not decide to die quietly because you tell them eight billion people are unsustainable. In short, the process of this spontaneous “return” is the biggest obstacle to itself. The “local” today exists only in relation to the global. For the west this is self-evident, but the same holds true for Africa or the Middle East. Even places where tribal/clan level allegiance matters, it’s distorted beyond any semblance of a reasonable mode of life by broader forces beyond its control.
Without a globally coordinated mediation between the needed changes (and sacrifices) on the one hand and acceptable incentives for at least a solid majority of the current human population on the other, return to simplification/de-growth is a middle-class hippie fantasy that won’t even have time to become a cultural phenomenon before cascading collapse and its collateral damage hits almost everywhere simultaneously by the end of the next decade (at the latest). The simplicity we need is something we have to construct for ourselves, using the tools available to us here and now. Whether that is indeed possible remains to be seen, but not for much longer.
I don’t think that humans are in charge of the de-growth process. Or, even if humans are involved, I don’t think they will have any understanding of how or why they are involved.
People will sense something is wrong, and they will do their little bit in the direction of fixing the problem. They will understand that their government is too expensive, and they will do their part in overthrowing the government and replacing it with a lower-cost government, for example. Taxes will be brought down, but services will be brought down as well.
For example, nearly all government pensions are pay as you. If a group wants to cut taxes next year, an easy way is to reduce pensions for all pensioners, even ones who retired 30 years ago.
The reason government pensions are pay as you go is because it is pretty much impossible to “save up” in advance for the goods and services people will need because many of these goods and services depend on commodities that need to be available in the future. If total goods and services keep growing in quantity, having enough to go around is not a problem. But if something causes the quantity of goods (and services) to go down, then there is a real problem in making the system work.
Alexander Mercouris’ speculation about the attempted coup in South Korea.
South Korea is the one country in the US sphere of influence with the capacity to quickly ramp up production of weapons and munitions for Ukraine.
The President was/is in favour, but the parliament – and public opinion – is very much against.
There was recently a visit to the country by a Ukrainian delegation.
The US has about 30000 troops stationed there and has close and intricate links to South Korean military and intelligence going back 70 years.
There was no prelude to the coup rooted in current South Korean politics – no warning that something like this was coming.
The US has expressed ‘concern’, but has not condemned the action of the President.
There was a certain ‘preparation’ with the story of North Korean troops in Kursk.
Speculation – US working with South Korean military and intelligence was behind the events.
Link?
It was his Youtube video from yesterday – about 70 minutes.
This should be it:
Alexander does a good job of explaining what seems to be going on. It was as if the President was attempting to declare Marshall Law, dissolve parliament and take over total power for himself (and a few hand-chosen supporters), with no good excuse for why this was being done.
The President’s political party was in the minority thanks to elections after he was elected. But it became clear within a few hours after the coup attempt was made that not even the President’s political party supported the decision to declare Marshall Law.
The US certainly seems to have a history of meddling in the affairs of other countries. It seems possible the US was involved.
Wonderful work Gail!
Thanks!
It’s the same in personal life, where simplification is almost its own reward.
Turn off your television set. Take it out of your home. This is one kind of thing many people can do. When we last moved to a different home, over 20 years ago, we decided not to have a television set. If there is anything interesting we want to watch, it likely can be seen on our computers on the internet.
Yes, Gail, a lot of things are falling apart. you must have heard about Nate Hagens
https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/
An interesting Australian view in Alan Kohler’s videos
https://iview.abc.net.au/show/alan-kohler-explains
on RBA rates, unemployment and those left behind
https://iview.abc.net.au/video/KOHL2022104670336
I have just done this post:
Load shedding in New South Wales 27 Nov 2024 (part 1)
5/12/2024
https://crudeoilpeak.info/load-shedding-in-new-south-wales-27-nov-2024-part-1
The “system” tries to fix one problem by creating another, thereby increasing complexity and lowering redundancy. The simplification will come when this muddling through no longer works, most likely for energy shortage reasons
as long as we produce more energy that we can use—life is easy
if we produce less energy than we need, some of us will die until the ‘surplus’ factor is restored.
easy to understand really.
Don’t often agree with you, but, agree.
Dennis L.
I know Nate Hagens. We worked together at TheOilDrum.com. I am aware of his videos, but I don’t often listen to them. If he is interviewing Joseph Tainter, I will listen. But otherwise, someone else needs to preview them for me. Is there anything of value that I likely don’t know already?
I found your Load Shedding post interesting. I remember your writing about the aluminum smelter before. It can turn off its heat for only a short time. After that, the aluminum tends to harden and ruins the whole setup. But since it is a big user of electricity, it tends to be where a cut is made. I expect the aluminum smelter will go out of business in not too long, if electricity cuts are made.
I also noticed that people were being asked to adjust their thermostats on their air conditioning to 24 to 26 degrees celsius, from 3:00pm to 8:00 pm.
This is equivalent to 75 to 79 degrees Fahrenheit. This doesn’t seem like a lot. And importing electricity from elsewhere was used.
I noticed in your last image that rooftop solar is down disproportionately after 4:00 pm compared to utility solar. It may be that batteries are helping utility solar.
I am not sure I really understood how much of the problem was a supply problem (not growing enough from past years) vs. demand problem (based on too much air conditioning at high temperatures and industry).
Here are more details:
Load shedding in NSW 27 Nov 2024 (part 3)
6/12/2024
https://crudeoilpeak.info/load-shedding-in-new-south-wales-27-november-2024-part-3
Load shedding in NSW 27 Nov 2024 (part 2)
6/12/2024
https://crudeoilpeak.info/load-shedding-in-new-south-wales-27-nov-2024-part-2
So a fair amount of coal was off line.
With respect to planned LNG availability in the near future, this point is made:
It sounds like natural gas storage needs to be built, as well as getting the LNG ships to discharge their loads. It gets expensive.
Kübler-Ross’ Stages of Grief:
1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
Guess where we in the U.S. are in facing our Limits to Growth.
We have recently been in Denial. I suppose Trump-Vance represent Anger, or perhaps Bargaining.
Gorka is anger. Trump-Vance are a weird mixture of denial and bargaining. Tulsi is acceptance except for Israel.
China: if you want a job, you have to buy it.
https://youtu.be/4NQ-RPF61jc?si=wZvWwhH5zc6w-3GP
This is a story about recent college grads in China not being able to find a job that pays well. This sounds very much like the problem we have in the US.
China has a history of bribes being used for many things. My impression is that these payments are of the nature of bribes. Young people can end up paying the equivalent of many thousands of dollars to get a job. Or the job may not really be there in the end.
At my CC in electronics and mechatronics employers are paying signing bonuses. This week, Mayo had 12 recruiters/interviewers at my school, graduating class maybe 20 students.
Dennis L.
Some majors still doing well for providing jobs.
Dr Peter Hotez: “Pandemics will crash down on Trump on January 21st”
“We have some big picture stuff coming down the pike starting on January 21st.”
https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1864402215806361719
That will help the economy and Trump. What happened to the narrative that the globalists were against Trump? Judging from his foreign policy picks, they are in bed together.
I find this hard to believe. This seems to be on MSNBC.
“A warmongering and genocidal cokehead — bad actor Volodymyr Zelenskyy — was installed by his Khazarian masters to literally oversee a genocide of Ukraine’s white Christian men. Well, in light of the horrendous battlefield realities, is there any doubt about this?!”
https://stateofthenation.info/?p=5844
You linked to an article with crazy white supremacist and antisemitic conspiracy theories. You need to remember that it was Russia that started this war, not Ukraine.
yep, Russia essentially started the war in 2005. Anyway, even if Russia started it, we are treated to the show of two chews sending millions young men to their death. Several months ago I went to a village to talk to someone, and as i was waiting for him I struck a conversation with his wife. She told me Putin had to be a chew, simply because they had been in power since 1917. she also coined the show sentence at the top of this comment. Putin’s mother in fact was, though she did not know that. I was amazed at this village woman insight. One of her sons did go to Novorossia. He was first injured, and, once he returned to the front, killed. I feel deeply for this woman, who could see that far fro that village, and have her observations come baqck at her this way. The family is clearly stalinist orthodox, as many are around here.
This story you report of Putin chew (as you say), it is very similar to the one circulating about Hitler secretly chew.
And it is similar to the ones starting: ‘once, my cousin told me…’.
But it is only an impression
I won’t pretend to fully understand the politics behind the war. From what I understand, Zelenskyy came to power in 2014 as a result of a coup. He then started abusing local Russian populations. We saw that sort of behaviour continue into the war, with the Zelenskyy government banning the Russian church and Russian language books, amongst other things. Banning a religion and books doesn’t exactly make him look like a good guy.
The sooner the war ends the better. The death toll on both sides has been horrific.
Russia did not start the war. NATO/US did. The US overthrew the Russia leaning government with the corrupt/illegal coup of 2014. Then NATO/US was arming/building the Ukrainian army to NATO standards to incorporate into NATO and threaten Russia. Then they planned to place missiles pointed at Moscow in eastern Ukraine, where they would be only a short distance from Moscow which was directly north of that point. They would then have had Moscow surrounded from three sides by NATO missiles.
Another factor that led to Russia’s invasion was to prevent the ongoing attacks and genocide of the Russian speaking population in the east.
It is all tied together. NATO exists to have or create enemies. NATO exists for war. Hence, NATO is a tool to threaten and to defeat Russia.
Saying Russia started this war is plain stupid.
Antisemites probably blame the Jewish people on their Erectile dysfunction if given a chance.
I know in the healthcare industry has become the world largest racketeering operation. My mother receives Medicare and is a cancer survivor. She receives a CT scan at a university hospital and if she didn’t have insurance, it would cost 10,000 dollars but with Medicare they settle for around 500 dollars. It would cost 20 times as much without insurance, if that is not a racket, I don’t know what is.
I had 50 images of my lower back done in Beijing. I have no insurance in China so I had to pay out of pocket. Cost $70. Same GE scanner.
Detroit free press reported a few years ago that Blue Cross Blue Sheild CEO made over 20 million a year. More than Ford Motor CEO. And Blue Cross is a “Non profit organization”.
My late father was a physician, and I heard a lot of stories from him over the years. Many doctors, even very early on, were doing what they did for the money. They did surgeries that were not really necessarily for the money. They did virtually nothing (over what was required) to keep up on was going on.
I later got involved with insurance, particularly medical malpractice. I became aware of the many adverse outcomes, only some of which were related to negligence.
Also, I discovered how much cheaper it would be to have surgery in other countries. I ran into plans that proposed to send patients to countries Asia for elective surgery to save money, rather than get the surgery in the US.
Stimulating, as always! Many thanks.
Two niggles:
1. “as growth has slowed, China’s debt has become difficult to repay with interest.” Growth has not slowed, it has speeded up to a staggering $1.6 billion this year (percentages are not a measure of growth btw).
2. “China’s debt has become difficult to repay with interest”? Not at all. Nor does your WSJ link support that contention: “China’s Local Governments Hold Back Wages in Desperate Scrape for Cash. Beijing’s recent attempt to address municipalities’ trillions in hidden debt only scratches the surface”. Poor municipalities invested faster than they could afford, so Beijing restructured their debt until they can retire the loan. Their creditors are branches of the PBOC, a government department and the world’s richest bank.
I don’t think we can believe China’s growth percentages. And the debt is the debt that is buried everywhere, not in the central government of China.
If Chinese economy is so well managed, then why have they built do many useless homes for nobody, i.e. with zero value? You can not trust China’s official numbers.
It doesn’t matter in the big picture. They reinvest their surplus in further production and R&D, rather than consume it as we do. These gains are compounding, which allows them to bounce back even from major screw-ups like the housing overbuild.
Perhaps keeps peace. In the US we “invest” billions in useless university education. Kids pay it off for the rest of their lives.
Dennis L.
They use CO2 as a pollution indicator in the update. I don’t like that and would have preferred they stick to toxins as in the first model.
Historical CO2 amounts were easy to get. Their argument was that doing almost anything produced CO2.
Gail, I find the last point of your posting intriguing. Would you expound on: ‘[j] Very strange political leaders may take office. One person rule takes much less energy than transporting many representatives to a central location. Some of these leaders may take over as dictators.’ Thank you.
I am not sure I can say too much.
I know that sustainability groups that vote in a leader for a year or two term have a problem with not sticking together well. What is needed is someone with a vision, and perhaps a religious idea, to tie the whole endeavor to. People need to feel like they are part of a group with a purpose. Dmitry Orlov says that having a little persecution from outside helps a group stay together. They have a common enemy they are fighting. A strong leader with an indefinite term of service seems to help as well.
The warlords of Washington DC are already a group devoted to preserving themselves and fighting everyone else in the world. The question is how broad a group do they see as worth saving?
“For those people who do not know what is going to happen in the next few years, the vast majority of filthy rich Republicans have built underground shelters stocked with food and water as well as lots of alcohol to party with. They do not intend to stay underground for long, as they plan on using Nuclear Weapons to blast Dirt, Dust and Sulfur from dormant volcanoes at high latitudes such as from the Aleutian Islands and mainland Alaska. “?
https://www.facebook.com/JoseBarbaNueva/posts/pfbid0wohpJ9w97FfLzzfE2gQmeBiYFmNdozRF93ENJ7m3THmnmdiQpZnQ8a2U3BghuD3Rl?locale=en_GB
“Well, every time I start writing about the Republican plan to reduce human population down to approximately 15 Million!
My computer has been savaged and everything I wrote has been destroyed. “?
https://www.facebook.com/JoseBarbaNueva/posts/pfbid033yoZ3UoyoULPbnKZuAoqjvZngMfbPsS74VPWuCbFWAEchxii95VNc5EeXdmNwjJQl?locale=en_GB
the power of any dictator extends only as far as their outreach
so
when (not if) there is a dictator in Washington, if there isnt sufficient energy in the system to control AZ or CA (for example) then those regions will just break away and secede
The nuclear navy can form the core of the new republic. Nuclear subs, aircraft carriers, and nuclear warheads the world belongs to the new republic. Russia ought to be able to form a similar republic.
Why? What does Russia gain from the world or conquering the world?
If Wolff is correct, the GDP of Russia, China and Iran is already greater than the US.
Russia is a land power, little need to fight wars all over the world, very expensive.
Dennis L.
People are unhappy at the expense of healthcare, and having their claims denied.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/12/04/nyregion/brian-thompson-uhc-ceo-shot
I know someone who has been very unhappy with United Healthcare and its management of people’s requests for healthcare services. In fact, she mentions the organization by name as a problem. It is the largest of its kind, I believe. I would be willing to believe that a lot of other people are quite unhappy with the organization.
Christopher Clugston’s research on nonrenewable natural resource (NNR) depletion shows that more than half the NNRs necessary for industrial economies are past their peaks of extraction and are in irreversible decline, leading to catastrophic results. I urge readers to at least watch the 20-minute “Blip” video on YouTube for an accurate and sobering view of where we are and where we’re quickly going.
The cornucopians who come here defy the laws of thermodynamucs and think their contraptions can bevbuilt from thin air
Made from lunar soil and sunlight. See the publications of the Space Studies Institute circa 1975-1990.
“lunar soil and sunlight”
I co-wrote papers for three of the space manufacturing conferences, The first was with my ex-wife on producing food in space, the second and third were with Eric Drexler who went on to found nanotechnology.
https://htyp.org/File:SMF_1975_Closed_Ecosystems_Chapter.pdf
I can find pointers to vapor phase fabrication and space radiators if anyone wants them.
Lunar soil is just about the worst “ore” you can imagine, but you can make power satellites out of it.
“circa 1975-1990.”
Ah, those were the days!
>> Eric Drexler who went on to found nanotechnology
I would argue that it is the people who create the useful technology, not the futurist prognosticator, that deserves credit for “founding” any field. Nothing against Drexler or Kurzweil; they serve a role too.
“Kurzweil;”
Kurzweil invented a long list of things, including OCR and electronic keyboards. I know him slightly, impressive guy.
In the long run Drexler may be more influential. Hard to say.
No ‘long run’?
No ‘BAU’?
‘Most’ ‘economic thinking’ is ‘short run’ and ‘redundant’?
‘It’ ignores the ‘supply side’?
‘Growth’ {and ‘civilisation’} depends upon ‘cheap’ F.F. – those so called ‘halcyon days’ are ‘over’. ?
“The crisis now unfolding, however, is entirely different to the 1970s in one crucial respect… The 1970s crisis was largely artificial. When all is said and done, the oil shock was nothing more than the emerging OPEC cartel asserting its newfound leverage following the peak of continental US oil production. There was no shortage of oil any more than the three-day-week had been caused by coal shortages. What they did, perhaps, give us a glimpse of was what might happen in the event that our economies depleted our fossil fuel reserves before we had found a more versatile and energy-dense alternative. . . .
And this is why the crisis we are beginning to experience will make the 1970s look like a golden age of peace and tranquility. . . . The sad reality though, is that our leaders – at least within the western empire – have bought into a vision of the future which cannot work without some new and yet-to-be-discovered high-density energy source (which rules out all of the so-called green technologies whose main purpose is to concentrate relatively weak and diffuse energy sources). . . . Even as we struggle to reimagine the 1970s in an attempt to understand the current situation, the only people on Earth today who can even begin to imagine the economic and social horrors that await western populations are the survivors of the 1980s famine in Ethiopia, the hyperinflation in 1990s Zimbabwe, or, ironically, the Russians who survived the collapse of the Soviet Union.” ?
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2022/07/01/bigger-than-you-can-imagine/ https://www.facebook.com/cosheep
Couples that engage in physics violating speculations together, don’t stay together.
Of course you do the same with your pseudo-historical pontifications. Chucky acted according to the entropy principle. so did gavrilo and the rest. and those partial results were to be expected.
Such enemies of civilization putting theit shitty neighborhoods before the world
I see you have not fully accepted physical principles. It is all ideological to you. A new chucky is being born right now.
One of the lines in Figure 8 is Non-Renewable Natural Resources. Figure 8 shows that about 2012, they became 50% depleted. This is why we are having so much trouble extracting lots of minerals today. It pretty much agrees with what Chris Clugston is saying.
“having so much trouble”
Consider copper. It has been displaced by aluminum in many uses like wires.
We don’t know how to manufacture them yet, properly doped carbon nanotubes will carry 50 times as much current as the same cross section of copper.
Several weeks ago I went to the metal scrap shop to dump broken plow blades and other remnants from the concluded hay season. scrap iron 80 rubles a kg, but scrap copper 680 rubles. You can find good cuts of beef from milk industry rejects that cost less.
What date does the industrial output cross the 3.2T horizontal axis? That is a hell of a drop to 2025.
Dennis L.
There is no detail given in the text. We have to look at the graph and figure out for ourselves how terrible the drop is.
:where we’re quickly going
All the projections indicate doom, and I think for static technology they are right.
But how likely is static technology?
keith
you forgot the other possibility
technology in decline—which, without surplus energy input, is certain
Look, you’re not wrong, some unexpected technology could solve everything for the time being. But then we would go back into overshoot. We keep gambling that someone will pull a rabbit out of a hat and so far that’s happened (industrial farming, fertilizer production, fracking). We could have stayed at 1 billion population and had a longer runway and better chances at developing further technologies, but no, we insisted on reproducing like Calhoun’s rats until the end, forcing another roll of the dice.
“We could have stayed at 1 billion population ”
If you know how to do that, I would be extremely interested.
staying at 1 bn would have meant curtailing our favourite pastime. (well mine anyway)
When the pop was 1 bn, there was no birth control method
I agree. We probably will have some technology breakthroughs, somewhere. But it is hard to know how important they will be in the big picture, when we are this far down in the extraction cycle.
“when we are this far down”
As I mentioned, carbon nanotubes can replace copper. Not yet, but it is not hard to see this on the horizon.
video link?
Thanks for the video.
I don’t think our overuse of materials started with industrialization, however.
We started overusing resources back when we first started cooking food. Some sources say this began as much as one million years ago. Humans, now with larger brains, have been able to come out ahead in battles with other animals, and with most microbes.
We have a predicament. We are biologically adapted to cooked food. And there are so many of us that we need many things like roads, transportation, and machinery.
Hello Gail, many thanks for your new article.
It is always a pleasure to read a new one by you for the very good insights and consideration proposed.
I have two questions:
1) You say that “There is also the question of the level of US healthcare spending, relative to GDP. The share for the US, from Figure 1, is about 17%. The shares for the EU, the UK, and Japan are each about 11% according to the World Bank. The share for Russia is about 7%; for China it is about 5%.”
And then, additionally, in the graph it is indicated that 24% of the US budget goes to Health Insurance.
But I don’t understand, there must be something that I’m missing.
How can be possible that, in US, you spend more (!!!) than in Italy for Healthcare system while you have a one almost totaly based on private spending (i.e. people need to pay to be treated in hospital or for visits to Doctors), instead on a one based on public spending like we have here in Europe?
2) Regarding the very interesting part about friendly gathering at home instead of going to restaurants or having long travels, how do you think that this can intersect with the extensive use of smart phones by people in all western society (and not only), which, on the contrary, is individualising and isolating people one another?
Basically ruining classic human relations based on direct talks and meeting…
Many thanks in advance for your feedback.
Sorry for the two long considerations/questions.
Some young folks bought a house near by. They hold a weekly social get together around a bond fire in their back yard, about 20 people. They have bought a big pile of fire wood. Now that the weather has turned cold they are not meeting. With a drink going for $14 at a bar, drinking at home or a friends is much more affordable. People adapt.
I think one reply to the question you asked Gail may be that
a) Italians are relatively healthy and Americans are less so (the average lifespans seem to be USA 77, Italy 84), so Italians need fewer procedures
b) the Italian healthcare system is cheaper to run because its administration is simpler.
I saw figures in 2023 as follows
USA – ultra-processed food makes up 60-70% of a person’s energy intake
Italy – UPF makes up 5-10% of a person’s food intake.
Is that one reason Italians are healthier?
The last time I looked, US public sector spending on healthcare (per capita) was also as high as UK public spending (per capita). The UK doesn’t have very much private sector spending on health, i.e. because most people here use the NHS.
Everything health-care related is incredibly expensive in the United States. Doctors earn hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in the United States. https://www.statista.com/statistics/250160/median-compensation-earned-by-us-physicians-by-specialty/
Median (not even “average”) wages for physicians are given as follows:
Orthopedic specialist $558,000
Plastic Surgery $536,000
Cardiology $525,000
Urology $515,000
You get the idea. Pediatricians will get less, and also some with less specialization.
Prescription pills are much more expensive in the US than they are in other countries, such as Canada. People try to order drugs from Canada, to work around this.
Doctors and health care facilities have all kinds of imaging machines that were very expensive to begin with. To try to pay off the cost of these machines, they use these imaging machines at every excuse. (Many of these machines are harmful to patients, by the way, especially over the long run). Use of this imaging adds to the cost.
Also, these imaging machines come up with many “incidental findings,” that the health care system insists must be chased down, at great cost. For example, once when I tripped and fell, I had an MRI taken, and it showed that I had three nodules on my thyroid. (I looked online, and an article said that 70% of women my age have thyroid nodules. Also, it said that thyroid cancer was usually pretty easily cured, and that it was not very common.)
Then, my provider wanted a biopsy. I was warned that after a big procedure, (with several health care professionals present), the draw of cells might not actually provide sufficient cells to determine anything conclusive. In fact, this was the problem. I told them that no, I did not want another biopsy, I would take an ultrasound scan from time to time, to see that there was no change. I have faithfully done the ultrasound scan. So far (probably 8 years), there has been no change whatsoever.
Needless to say, people making $8 per hour cannot afford these costs. In fact, most people cannot. Insurance doesn’t really solve the problem. The cost of medical insurance is much more than the cost of food for most people.
Thank you Gail.
I must say that it is a similar attitude that it is changing and happening also here, expecially in Lombardia, Emilia Romagna, Veneto and other wealthy Regions.
Sorry if I simplify, but as for Covid I have the impression that there is a tendency of iper capitalism acting currently in societies, which is a sort of snake that – for being too much greedy – it starts eating its own tail (and then collapse/die).
“Cuba’s national grid collapses again, leaving millions without power
“Blackouts reported across country as government grapples with economic crisis, fuel shortages and hurricanes”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/04/cuba-national-grid-collapses-leaving-millions-without-electricity
Asi es la vida …
Electricity powered by oil is very expensive. Cuba hasn’t been able to afford the oil it needs for its electric grid. This seems to be a major contributor to the problem. Two hurricanes have added to the problem.
I am more interested in the sudden surge of contaminated foods…
Cucumbers: In November 2024, SunFed Produce recalled all sizes of whole fresh American cucumbers sold between October 12 and November 26 due to possible Salmonella contamination. The cucumbers were packaged in bulk cardboard containers, a generic white box, or a black plastic crate.
Onions: In October 2024, Taylor Farms voluntarily recalled yellow onions after an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 infections linked to the onions. The onions were served at McDonald’s restaurants in certain states.
Carrots: In November 2024, F&S Fresh Foods recalled organic carrots and celery.
Beef tallow: In November 2024, products imported from Mexico recalled edible fat from beef tallow.
Carrot falafel bites: In November 2024, Fabalish, Inc. recalled Kickin’ Carrot Falafel Bites.
Ground beef products: In November 2024, Wolverine Packing Co. recalled ground beef products.
Cheese: In February 2024, queso fresco and cotija cheese were recalled due to Listeria monocytogenes contamination.
Walnuts: In April 2024, bulk organic walnuts were recalled due to E. coli contamination.
Basil: In April 2024, basil was recalled due to Salmonella contamination.
WHY???
More class I recalls
The majority of food recalls in 2024 have been in the most severe category, class I.
More recalls related to undeclared allergens
More than 80 food and beverage recalls in 2024 were related to undeclared allergens.
Dramatic increase in affected packages
The number of affected packages of food in the first three months of 2024 increased by 395.1 percent.
A friend says in order to recall there have to be ten death.
AI Just Beat Doctors at Diagnosing Illness (Here’s Why That’s Actually GREAT News)
https://youtu.be/6vjXORSuyD4?si=JMpNJcTow-9-zUyG
It’s really not surprising at all that an AI system would excel at medical diagnosis. Doctors are basically taught to diagnose using a flow chart anyway, and the AI can go through that sort of algorithm pretty easily with a huge data set to consult.
“that an AI system”
here is an interesting AI logic fail
On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 6:54 PM Doug Space wrote:
>
> Keith,
>
> Here’s ChatGPT’s calcs:
>
> To compare the energy in a SpaceX Starship launch to the energy released by the Hiroshima bomb, we can analyze the chemical energy in the rocket’s fuel versus the nuclear energy of the bomb.
>
>
> 1. Energy in a SpaceX Starship Launch
>
> Starship uses liquid methane (CH₄) and liquid oxygen (LOX) as propellants. A fully fueled Starship (Super Heavy booster + Starship upper stage) carries approximately 4,800 metric tons (4.8 million kg) of propellant.
>
> • The energy release from methane combustion is approximately 55 MJ/kg.
>
> • Total energy from the fuel:
>
>
> 2. Energy in the Hiroshima Bomb
>
> The Hiroshima bomb, Little Boy, released an estimated 63 TJ of energy (equivalent to 15 kilotons of TNT).
>
>
> 3. Comparison
>
> • Starship Launch Energy: ~264 TJ
ChatGPT obviously multiplied the whole 4800 tons of propellants x the
energy per kg for methane rather than just the methane
part.Interesting logic error and an example of why you need to check
the output of an AI.
I have used (because I saw it somewhere) a figure for LNG/LOX twice
that of TNT. That’s a reasonable number when you consider the
chemistry. Digging around I found a NASA paper that mentioned the mix
being equal to C4. C4 is 1.6 times as energetic as TNT. That’s ~7700
tons of TNT or about half the Hiroshima blast.
It isn’t quite that bad though because a bulkhead failure and mixing
of both stages is unlikely. The booster loads 700 tons of methane. Or
38.5 TJ.
Not as big as the Hiroshima bomb, but it is not something you want to
be close to if it detonated
> • Hiroshima Bomb Energy: ~63 TJ
>
> A fully fueled Starship launch releases about 4.2 times more energy than the Hiroshima bomb. However, this energy is spread out over the duration of the rocket’s flight (several minutes), unlike the instantaneous release of energy in a nuclear explosion, which creates devastating shockwaves, heat, and radiation.
>
> Key Takeaways
>
> While Starship carries significantly more energy in its fuel than the Hiroshima bomb, the controlled combustion process and the purpose of the energy (to lift the rocket) make the comparison more about magnitude rather than effect. The bomb’s destructive energy is concentrated and instantaneous, while the rocket’s energy is spread over time for propulsion.
>
A human doctor can have 50 years experience. An AI can have 50 million years of experience.
if i want some info—i usually google search for it.
that search cannot go beyond the info that human beings have put into it at some previous time.
same applies to any field.
I am going to beat both western doctors and AI 90% of the time in a single line: you have metabolic syndrome/insulin resistance.
Artificial intelligence is penetrating the energy sector and is dramatically changing the way oil is extracted. In the Permian Basin, it will extend the life of wells by decades
https://www.trend.sk/ekonomika/puste-digitalnej-ere-ai-meni-pravidla-hry-ropnom-priemysle?itm_brand=trend&itm_template=hp&itm_modul=trend_topbox&itm_position=3
The headline says that AI will increase the life of wells by decades, but the article itself doesn’t say this, directly. It might be helpful, but we don’t know the extent, exactly.
From the article:
So maybe it will work, but we don’t yet know the extent that it will work.
I’m hearing this drumbeat a lot lately!!
But what about Jevons paradox?
Wonderful, realistic article. Finally someone who faces reality….hope we can adapt.
It ‘s the oil , stupid — Not James Carville 😁 . Tim Watkins .
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2024/12/04/it-was-always-about-the-oil/
From the article:
Currency wars , trade wars and then world wars . — Gerald Celente
There is always ”blowback” /
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-bans-exports-gallium-other-102308172.html
Battles today seem to come in new ways. It is too damaging to try to fight with explosives. Cutting off exports (or imports) is one of the new ways.
In September, Chris Martenson made a video asking the question as to why the government needed the massive amounts of power for the current Data Center frenzy? He could not come up with the answer as to why because the data center frenzy requires “MASSIVE” amounts of energy and that led to a discussion for the need of portable nuclear power plants.
https://peakprosperity.com/what-problem-is-the-data-center-frenzy-aimed-at/
Chris got his answer here at this video and it had to do with the US Federal Government wanting to dominate the AI control grid. That’s where he made the connection as to why the need for the Data Center frenzy. Both are rather short video presentations.
https://peakprosperity.com/lessons-from-mousetopia-are-we-defaulting-our-way-to-zero/
I heard about the plan of the Biden administration to try to control all media stories through a group of large corporations.
I am wondering if the second link is really to a second video, found at the same page as the mousetopia link. “Trump’s election may have averted the worst possible outcome.”
Yes it’s a separate video where Martenson gets his answer.
Chris needs to have his foil hat adjusted.
Gotta love dumb people making dumb comments. No conspiracy theories needed as it is a conspiracy fact. The video includes Marc Andreessen who’s a Silicon Valley Billionaire. He was at a White House meeting and they laid out their plans to Marc. They specifically told him they want to control the AI Grid with just a handful of companies they chose and that’s where the Data Centers are needed.
google is founded by DARPA.
Todd didn’t read RAND report on INTERNET OF BODIES
or DARPA Military BRAIN-CONTROL interface pdfs unfortunately. ELITEs wanting to control evolution of mankind is a plausible motive.
Something tells me the world will be forced to simplify. That which cannot continue won’t.
I am afraid you are correct.
I cannot agree more. Many people claimed that 1972 study was pessimistic and the real limit should be higher. I thought that model was optimistic because when people feel good, they consume more. The consumption rate of oil is not constant, but likely to be rising. Energy efficiency has been increasing, but I think not enough to compensate for the increased consumption per higher population. Although this article focuses on oil, it is the same story for almost all natural resources. The “exception”, if I may say, is the human “resources”. It is fairly easy to increase the population when things are going well. But once the going gets tough, it is not so easy to reduce the population. At the time of reducing government complexities to reduce spending, it may not be sufficient to reduce the population merely by natural economic push and pull (some people will voluntarily leave the USA, for example.)
” (some people will voluntarily leave the USA, for example.) ” .
To where ? Only options are Canada and Mexico . I understand 90% of the Americans don’t even have a passport . The era of low cost flying will soon come to an end so can they afford the airfare ? Sorry sir , peak oil ( PEAK EVERYTHING) is a bitch .
” But once the going gets tough, it is not so easy to reduce the population. ”
You think so ? Read this as a real life example .
” In 1944, 29 reindeer were introduced to the island by the United States Coast Guard to provide an emergency food source. The Coast Guard abandoned the island a few years later, leaving the reindeer. Subsequently, the reindeer population rose to about 6,000 by 1963 and then died off in the next two years to 42 animals. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Matthew_Island#:~:text=In%201944%2C%2029%20reindeer%20were,two%20years%20to%2042%20animals.
Chen , how fast can it go ? Are you following the martial law affair in South Korea that lasted 6 hrs only .? How many in the world were aware of the issues in SK just yesterday .?
The current modelers also looked at a different scenario from the 1972 study, with more resources available. The fit was not good.
in very basic terms:
my taxation pays your wages
your taxation pays my wages
that is the summary of a complex society.—the function of government is to maintain that system.
yes—there are inequalities, but that is the price we pay for the lifestyle we have.
unfortunately that kind of system only works if we have an energy input greater than the required energy output—ie there is a large surplus.—-that is where our complex infrastructure came from.
And why you can fly 2000 miles to lie on a beach for 2 weeks.
agrarian/hunter-gatherer societies didnt have complex infrastructure, because they had no way of accumulating surpluses beyond 1 year’s harvest,—whereas we have tapped into 100 m years of harvests.
neither were they engaged in buying and selling the planet.—-we are.
people will continue to grab excess as long as our complex society exists.
Unfortunately our surpluses are evaporating, while politicos and a few wacky scientists are telling us our lifestyle is forever.
”equality” is a fantasy—–the politics of the pack animal or the hive.—and even packs have top dogs, though their supremacy only extends to choice of females—-one wolf cannot own any more than another.
When the inflection point — the bend or break moment as Nate Hagens prefers to call it — arrives you will find your role and place. While others will go crazy over their lost wealth and opportunities you will already be crafting, teaching, leading, building a lifestyle better adapted to this rapidly changing world. Instead of trying to save civilization, embrace its beauty, and learn to let it go knowing, that what is unsustainable eventually won’t be sustained.
https://thehonestsorcerer.medium.com/the-civilizational-hospice-protocol-abc3fa54e27e
Another perspective is that even though our civilization of right now falls apart to whatever extent that it does, the overarching lesson from history and from our own development is that when we build a new one, it works out better (at least for a while) than the old one. Here we are at the eighth decade of the fourth four-generation-cycle in this imperial round (and I mean that in the musical sense, too, just as history rhymes), and our successes are greater than those of our ancestors. More human beings are living better lives than ever before (whatever our failures), and the highest-integrity things we can do are to make it more likely that the next guys learn the lessons we have revealed and simultaneously more-or-less succeeded-at and more-or-less failed-at. The very most important things are sustainable, even if not actively practiced as long or as well as we’d like. So go softly into the night, and illuminate it with grace and even love.
There is no alternative but to simplify .
Trump is the ”President of the Titanic”. A long time peak oil author Kurt Cobb.
https://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2024/12/president-of-titanic.html
Oil isn’t just another commodity—it is the economy. And the market’s signal couldn’t be clearer: the era of growth is over. Art Berman on OPEC.
https://www.artberman.com/blog/opecs-last-encore-time-to-leave-the-stage/
THANKS very much for your usual incisive and brilliant work.
Question is to me that if oil is in short supply why is the price not over $100 / bbl?
Here is an article on the insane complexity of the electronic computer run Casino to make your eyes cross and your brain twist and turn.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2024-11-30/verge-liquidity-event
The reason the price of oil is not over $100 per barrel is because the problem is on the buyers’ side. With all of the taxes and other commitments, it is not possible to get prices up as high as they need to be. The problem is an affordability issue.
Economists have made a false model. It is only under certain circumstances that prices will spike. But after prices spike, oil will become unaffordable to a wider groups of people, and the prices will fall down again.
The major problem for energy producers of all kinds is that prices do not high enough, for long enough. They spike for a bit, but not for long enough to justify long-term investment.
History shows that economies tend to collapse when resources per capita fall too low. When they are collapsing, the pattern of prices for food and firewood is spikes and collapses in prices.
If you go back and compare the price of WTI or Brent you see it is bringing the same price now as in 2005. Taking even the worst low inflation figure over that period they both should be over $110 per barrel now.
When are the major oil companies and OPEC going to take this mispricing away from the Financial spectators and sell their oil on an exchange that these people are excluded from? The losses over this period for the world’s number one commodity is staggering and there must soon be a day of reckoning soon where the purchasing power of the producers compels them to act.
Richard on OSB.
I agree, if oil is so valuable and equivalent to so many slaves, I don’t really understand why it can’t sell for what it can do. Why would people be prepared to spend $1000 for an iphone but not for a barrel of oil. As the price went up, more frivolous uses should decline. The only reason I can think that it is artificially so low is that “they” want to bankrupt Russia where oil is a main source of income.
because if you have a barrel of oil sitting outside your house—you cant do anything with it, unless you have the neccessary machinery to use it
if you have a $1000 iphone, (I dont) you can use it in all kinds of ways to benefit you directly
Mark ,” $ 70 is the new 100 ” . The producers and the consumer countries know what happens when oil goes into 3 digits . Recall the $ 147 price and the GFC of 2008 . Today the debt is twice/thrice of 2008 . Both parties work in tandem to keep it within a ” goldilocks” range so as not to repeat 2008 . Another bailout like 2008-2023 period cannot be done . Better to keep the system afloat and then pray or try unwinding the knots slowly .
Eventually the price will rise oil companies can’t continue at this rate. Look at shell stocks for example, they have been low for a long time and to keep investors happy they have been paying out large dividends. I see a bumpy plateau were many people are just left out. Price will rise
Or production will fall from low prices. That seems to be mostly what happens.
It is economists who dream about prices rising, based on shortages. A shortage of oil means a shortage of jobs that pay well. When our high cost of living is added to this, it means that many people cannot afford to get married, start a family, and have cars. The economy contracts with less oil.
Whole-heartedly agree with your argument, Gail. Very well articulated. Unfortunately, we humans tend to do the opposite in our attempts to address the stresses/problems we encounter: pursue more complexity. I fear that this will not end well.
We use bombs or sabotage to get rid of unnecessary parts of some systems.
About your
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2024/11/11/nuclear-electricity-generation-has-hidden-problems-dont-expect-advanced-modular-units-to-solve-them/comment-page-6/#comment-473802
Most corporations and individuals pay extension so their taxes are not due until Sep 15 and Oct 15 respectably precisely because there would be more time to raise cash
So no liquidity crisis for another 9 months
When I have filed for an extension, it was my understanding that it was only the paperwork that was delayed. The full amount of tax needed to be paid by the tax deadline, or there would be a penalty.
Your understanding is correct. The problems generally are the paperwork which is huge and a PIA. Storing the documentation behind the paperwork is even more fun.
A background in the medical field helps, document, document, document.
Dennis L.
Excellent summary of our predicament
Thanks!
Simplification = Much less energy consumption = Much less steps
Something the cornucopians here won’t like
Waiting for their answers
Maybe more human steps. Much shorter supply lines for manufacturing and agriculture.
supply lines run to where resources are.
they used to have packhorse trains—it took 10 packhorses to carry 1 ton of anything.
you can figure out th economics of that very easily—the global economic system functioned at a walking pace
that is why you cannot go back to human steps
“Waiting for their answers”
I doubt the future holds simplification. A major collapse and famine might do it, but baring that, the curve is toward more complexity.
It will be forced. No amount of denial will change that