|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
I have said in recent posts that the world economy is hitting resource limits of many kinds. These limits include oil, coal, and other sources of energy, including uranium, used as a fuel for nuclear power generation. Because of these limits, the world economy is being forced to shrink back. In my opinion, the direction it is headed in is toward smaller, mostly less-advanced, more independent, economies. This change is also likely to lead to various types of financial collapse for many of today’s Advanced Economies.
Per-capita consumption of these early used energy sources has shrunk since peaking in 2007.
Most of us remember the Great Recession of 2007 to 2009. With a declining supply of what used to be inexpensive energy resources, many economies have done poorly. Many of the wealthier countries have papered over their problems with an increasing amount of debt, but the limits to this added-debt approach are now being hit. It is the debt problem that leads to financial collapse.
In this post, I will elaborate on these ideas.
[1] Countries that are today’s Advanced Economies (members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)) are likely to fare poorly in this coming contraction.
The Advanced Economies include the US, most of Europe, Japan, Australia, and a few other countries. Their per-capita consumption of oil, coal and nuclear electricity resources has been shrinking significantly since about 2005. The year 2005 was approximately the peak of “conventional” oil supplies. More oil has become available since this date, but this oil is generally more expensive to extract.
[2] Energy consumption for the Other than Advanced Economies is hitting limits, too.
The Other than Advanced Economies were able to grow in their per-capita use of these three types of fuels between 2001 and about 2013, but since then, their per-capita quantity of these fuels has leveled off. The big impetus for growth was China joining the World Trade Organization in 2001. World demand for inexpensive finished goods empowered China to start extracting coal and other minerals in quantity. But coal mines deplete, just as oil fields deplete, leading to the flat per-capita availability of energy supply for the Other than Advanced Economies since about 2013.
[3] With these changing patterns for the two groups, one potential problem is conflict.
The Other than Advanced Economies have figured out that they are creating a huge share of the world’s goods, but their per-capita use of energy is much lower than that of the Advanced Economies. Why should the Advanced Economies get so much of the finished products available from the world’s resources, when most of the work (and the pollution) has taken place in the Other than Advanced Economies? I would expect this type of thinking to take place in China, Russia, India, Iran and other countries in this group. These countries believe that they could get along perfectly well without the Advanced Economies and their high usage of energy.
[4] With these changing patterns, a second potential problem is financial collapse, especially for the Advanced Economies.
Each economy can be encouraged to grow in two different ways: (1) Through more debt, indirectly adding to more “demand” for finished goods, or (2) Through added supply of inexpensive energy products. Adding debt to pull the economy forward seems to work well if there is not a problem with hitting resource extraction limits. Once an economy starts hitting resource extraction limits, however, the added debt partly adds inflation, rather than finished goods and services, to the output mix. Thus, the debt approach no longer works well.
The world as a whole is now hitting resource extraction limits. Not only do individual citizens become unhappy with the higher inflation level, but investors demand higher interest rates for lending. This higher interest cost becomes a huge problem for the Advanced Economies that already have very high debt levels.
A recently issued report by the US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) shows what is happening in the US.
In a sense, the reports that the CBO publishes are “Best Case” scenarios. The reports are optimistic in two different ways: (1) They assume that no more added-debt bail-out programs will be needed, as were used several times in recent years, and (2) They assume that inflation will quickly fall to 2%, so that interest rates can fall quickly and stay lower from now on.
Even with these assumptions, the results are disturbing. Note that on Figure 3 (in both charts shown), the especially significant increase in debt starts around 2008. This is when the US, and likely most of the other Advanced Economies, started to hide their energy problems by using more debt stimulus.
Even when the most optimistic possible estimate of the future “primary deficit” is made, and when the most optimistic possible forecast of future “net interest” outlays is made, there is still a huge build-up of debt. The implication is that very large tax increases will be needed to maintain current programs. Even with these huge tax increases, the problem will get worse and worse, year after year. There is a need to cut back on existing government programs to avoid adding the need to pay even more interest on debt in the future.
[5] If an economy is forced to shrink back, debts of all kinds become more difficult to repay with interest.
Any economy needs to grow, in order to repay debt with interest. A growing economy has a surplus with which to pay interest.
On the other hand, a shrinking economy tends to lead to major debt defaults. Leveraged debt is especially likely to cause problems.
The CBO is now forecasting that the US government could run into debt limit problems as soon as July 2025. Perhaps the US government will find ways around the current apparent shortfall, but the issue of the government not being able to meet its debt obligations without major tax increases or reductions in programs still looms in the background.
I expect that within the next three months, we will start to see loan defaults of some type, such as defaults by hedge funds. Governments will want to step in, but they will be limited by their own financial problems. Defaults on many other kinds of debts are likely to start taking place, as well. If inflation rates rise, and interest rates rise with them, defaults on many kinds of debt could start taking place.
[6] It seems likely that nearly all the Advanced Economies will have similar problems.
The Advanced Economies have tended to offer their citizens many benefits, including pensions for the elderly and some type of healthcare coverage. Many of them have financially supported what they are hoping will be energy types that will take the place of the energy types they seem to be losing.
If an economic system is not growing as fast as it has in the past (because of low energy consumption growth, and lack of debt stimulus), or is actually shrinking, these economies are likely to face a choice between either cutting back on promised programs or raising taxes. Governments will find themselves needing to cut back on programs that they have promised to their citizens, or, alternatively, they will need to default on their debt.
[7] Adding to the problems of the Advanced Economies will be the issue of goods and services needing to be made closer to home.
Without enough oil for all purposes, a logical way to cut back is to use less oil for international shipping. This would tend to reverse the trend toward globalization that started many years ago.
Figure 4 shows that the US started shifting heavy industry to other countries with better supplies of oil as early as 1974. The Kyoto Protocol of 1997 gave another reason (or excuse?) for shifting heavy industry to countries with less expensive, more abundant, energy supplies.
I expect that in the next few years, the Advanced Economies are likely to need to move industrial production back closer to home, to save on limited world oil supplies. This will be difficult to do, especially in a timeframe of less than 20 to 30 years. New mines will be needed for minerals, but the lead times on these are very long, typically 13 years or more. New processing plants for these minerals will likely be needed as well, potentially adding to the lead time. Whole new, short supply chains will be required. Finally, goods and services manufactured closer to home will need to be transported to citizens, sometimes in new ways.
Many of today’s manufactured goods require imports of minerals from China or Russia. To the extent that specific minerals from these countries can no longer be imported, additional closer sources will be needed. This will further add to manufacturing difficulties.
[8] It will not be surprising if governments, or parts of governments, collapse.
History indicates that when civilizations reach resource limits, governments tend to fail. A recent example of this was the collapse of the central government of the Soviet Union in 1991, after an extended period of low oil prices. The Soviet Union was a major exporter of oil, and the low oil prices (plus other internal problems) led to the inability to repay promised debt. The separate republics within the Soviet Union remained, so the people were not left completely without a government. I expect something similar may happen elsewhere in the future.
[9] History suggests that even in a financial collapse, the entire economy will not fall apart, all at once.
Incremental changes are likely to take place. Governments are likely to try to make cutbacks. Financial investments are likely to do especially poorly in the next several years, and high-paying jobs seem likely to disproportionately disappear. The economy will no longer be able support as many specialists as are working today, in many industries.
The electricity supply likely won’t fall off all at once; instead, electricity will become increasingly intermittent, with some areas having more outages than others. Diesel and gasoline will perhaps be available, at least part of the time.
New car sales in the Advanced Economies are likely to fall very soon, leaving citizens mostly dealing with used cars, and the difficulty of finding appropriate replacement parts for used cars. The problem of “empty shelves” in stores is likely to return and get worse.
There will likely be an increasing divide between the relative handful of citizens who are doing well, and the many others. In fact, we are already seeing a trend in this direction in the US. But many of today’s big spenders are likely to be knocked down in any coming economic contraction.
[10] Perhaps the good news in this contraction is that major international wars may not be a problem.
Instead, civil wars and local skirmishes may be the order of the day. There may not be resources available to fight long-distance wars, even if many citizens might favor this approach. Wars give an excuse for more debt and more income for soldiers, so they are always popular in troubled economic times. But a lack of materials for making military supplies (including insufficient sources of antimony) and the inability to raise debt financing may impede efforts.
[11] What should we expect in the future?
The US and many other Advanced Economies are likely heading into a worse and longer lasting financial crisis than the 2008 crisis, starting as soon as this summer. The problem will likely not start out as a full financial collapse. Instead, various leveraged borrowers will encounter difficulties. Gradually, the finances and very structures of many government organizations are likely to be threatened. Some government structures that we currently depend upon may disappear.
How the long term will unfold is unclear. We know that ecosystems often operate in wide cycles, and that economic systems are a kind of ecosystem. This relationship suggests the possibility of a later renewal.
Furthermore, Eric Chaisson, in Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature, points out that there is a very long term trend in the universe toward more complex and more energy-dense structures. His analysis seems to suggest the possibility of evolution toward a different kind of more complex, energy-dense economy ahead.
In this ever-changing world, there may very well be opportunities for personal success. It will likely be a time of major readjustment, however. Perhaps quite a few people will be able to do well if they can keep their eyes open for opportunities to prosper, making the best possible use (or reuse) of resources that are available.
Appendix: Background on Oil, Coal and Electricity from Uranium
Oil Background
Oil was at one time a very inexpensive fuel, even when adjusted for inflation to 2023’s price level.
With the low prices that were available before 1970, oil could be used widely. It could be used to create electricity, and roads could be paved. Many people could afford cars who could not afford them previously.
In 1973, oil prices soared (Appendix: Exhibit 2). Appendix: Figure 3 shows that between 1981 and 2021, falling interest rates helped to make higher oil prices more tolerable. More debt could be added, and with lower interest rates, monthly payments could stay low.
Appendix: Exhibit 2 also shows that a big part of the problem since 2021 is that while debt levels are now high, interest rates will not stay down. This means that the cost of drilling new wells is now higher, and the general cost of investment in the economy is higher.
Appendix: Exhibit 1, indicates that, since 1991, the greatest per-capita quantity of oil that customers were able to afford occurred in the 2004 to 2007 period. This was a time in which home mortgage debt stimulus was used to keep the US economy growing; it was the time of Alan Greenspan and the NINJA (No Income, No Jobs, No Assets) home loans. The resulting sub-prime US housing bubble is reported to have lasted from 2003 to 2007. This sub-prime debt bubble is at least part of what led to the 2008 financial crisis.
The high US demand for oil as a result of the home mortgage debt bubble of 2003 to 2007 helped world oil prices to rise and consumption to rise. More recently, per-capita world oil consumption has been down, especially in 2020. Oil supply has not regained the 2004 to 2007 level, or even the 2018 level, in the most recent estimates.
Oil extraction has traditionally been a huge source of tax dollars, especially for oil exporters, even when oil was sold at relatively low prices. Anything that replaces oil needs to fill this role as well, because the economy needs energy (and taxes from energy) to operate. This tax revenue is a way to share what is sometimes called the “surplus energy” of the oil with the government of a country. At currently high extraction costs, this surplus energy benefit is largely disappearing.
Coal Background
Appendix: Figure 1 shows that the fuel in second largest supply has been coal. Its supply grew greatly after 2001, when China joined the World Trade Organization. This growth in coal supply did not last long because coal that was cheapest-to-extract and closest-to-markets quickly depleted. Appendix: Figure 1 shows the peak in per capita coal supply was hit in 2011.
Coal helped start the industrial revolution. By 1700, it grew to be the dominant fuel in England. Coal gradually replaced firewood and was used in many new ways.
Appendix: Figure 5 shows the ways coal has recently been used. It is used directly in industry, besides being burned for electricity.
Nuclear Background
Appendix: Figure 1 shows that the peak in per-capita nuclear energy production occurred in 2001. But at one time there had been great hope for nuclear power.
It was known as early as the 1950s that fossil fuel supplies were likely to face depletion issues as soon as 2050. Physicist M. King Hubbert was of the belief that electricity from uranium would be too cheap to meter. He also believed that the quantity of electricity produced could be very high. Neither of these things has come to pass.
Early nuclear reactors were built to avoid problems that engineers could see needed to be avoided. This approach led to accidents: Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986), and Fukushima (2011). It became clear that design upgrades were needed, raising costs and lengthening timelines for building reactors.
In theory, there is quite a bit of uranium to be extracted, but getting the price up high enough, for long enough, has been a problem. The World Nuclear Association shows this chart of production through 2022. Production in recent years has been lower than consumption.
Fortunately, there has been a supply of nuclear warheads which could be down blended to provide uranium for nuclear reactors. This supply of nuclear warheads is now close to being exhausted. If nuclear power is to be expanded, more uranium will be needed.
Other details have proven problematic as well. In theory, the spent fuel can be reprocessed and used as fuel for reactors, but in practice, this process seems to be costly and time-consuming to set up.
Another issue is the high cost of building new nuclear reactors, and the need for debt to fund this cost. Clearly, the higher the interest rate, the higher the cost. Not many organizations can fund these high costs, in advance of actually getting electricity out and delivered to customers.
In general, to keep costs low for customers, the sale of electricity is priced at the margin. In many places, electricity from wind turbines and solar panels is given “priority.” As a result, wholesale electricity prices tend to be too low for electricity from nuclear power plants, driving them out of business. The price level is certainly not high enough to pay high taxes to governments. Such a margin would be needed if nuclear were to have a chance of truly replacing the benefits we have had in the past from inexpensive-to-produce oil.
More economic deflation, well sort of:
Copilot.
“Comparing injury classes per mile traveled between 1970 and 2025 reveals significant changes in road safety and medical reporting standards. Here’s an overview:
1970
Fatal Injuries (K): Approximately 4 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Serious Injuries (A): Around 50 injuries per 100 million VMT.
Minor Injuries (B): Estimated at 150 injuries per 100 million VMT.
Possible Injuries (C): Data was less standardized, but likely higher due to limited safety measures.
No Apparent Injuries (O): Not consistently reported.
2025
Fatal Injuries (K): Reduced to 1.2 deaths per 100 million VMT, thanks to advancements in vehicle safety and medical care.
Serious Injuries (A): Approximately 30 injuries per 100 million VMT, reflecting improved crash prevention technologies.
Minor Injuries (B): Around 100 injuries per 100 million VMT, with better reporting accuracy.
Possible Injuries (C): More standardized, estimated at 50 injuries per 100 million VMT.
No Apparent Injuries (O): Frequently reported due to enhanced data collection.
The decline in fatal and serious injuries per mile traveled highlights the impact of safety regulations, vehicle design improvements, and medical advancements.”
to keep it short, will do a next post on the medical costs.
Dennis L.
I wonder if copilot will tell you that auto injuries and deaths per mile traveled are much higher in the US are much higher than in other countries.
Copilot:
“Yes, the United States has higher rates of auto injuries and deaths per mile traveled compared to many other high-income countries. For example, a study by the CDC found that in 2019, the U.S. had the sixth-highest motor-vehicle death rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled among 28 high-income countries. Additionally, the U.S. experienced more motor-vehicle deaths overall than any other country in the study.”
referenced to injuryfacts.nsc.org by Copilot.
Gail, your thoughts on this, I don’t have a clue.
Dennis L.
The US has a lot of big, heavy vehicles that are hard to stop and do a lot of damage to other vehicles. American drivers are not very respectful of others, either. Drivers want their own way. All of the insurance sets up an adversarial system–who was at fault.
My impression in poor countries (like India) has been that a lot of minor damage is allowed to go un-repaired.
Also, the US has a lot of fancy equipment to allow drivers to see lanes. This equipment is at the edge of the vehicles, so it is easily damaged. This sends costs way up, if there is a minor accident.
In Vietnam, India, and probably many other countries, somehow, huge numbers of small motor cycles and other vehicles manage to avoid each other on the highways. Lane markers are only “lane suggestions,” but somehow the system seems to work. In fact, stop signs can be “stop suggestions.” It is hard to believe how few accidents there are, given the large number of vehicles traveling close to each other.
In the US, we have come to believe that more complexity will fix our accident problems, but there are less complex ways that might work a lot better.
I think you had some experience in India. I had 5 years experience in Bangladesh
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oizn68IY-wI
Yes Gail, people in Asia or Africa use small motorbykes that go at low speed or use even bycicles.
If they make incidents at low speed the damage is little and surely don’t make any claim.
Additionally many people use public transport like train or group-transport like bus.
If they use cars they group together people (cars are always full of people).
All that reduce the total number of people who drive fast cars and so the probability of big incidents.
They also don’t have good paved roads, so it is difficult to go fast on bumpy roads.
In US and Europe we have a lot of people driving fast cars who are additionally distracted by smart phones…
Another interesting element I learnt is that for instance in Iran is forbidden to buy motorbykes and cars with powerful engine over a certain dimension.
The objective is surely to reduce the use of oil internally, but having a total number of cars and motorbykes with low horse power reduce as a consequence the probability of incidents.
Here in Italy is full of cars and motorbikes going in dangerous way imitating F1 or GP, the same happens in other EU Countries.
When I drove in Germany on highway I was obliged to go on the full right for my low speed and I was going 130 km/h with my car !
I was the slowest one…
More on change: Or this is deflation.
Copilot:
Cray-1 (1976)
Performance: 160 megaflops (million floating-point operations per second).
Processor: 64-bit architecture running at 80 MHz.
Memory: 8.39 MB of RAM.
Storage: 303 MB.
Size: Massive, weighing 5.5 tons and requiring a dedicated cooling system.
Cost: $7.9 million in 1977 (equivalent to over $40 million today).
Modern $6K Workstation
Performance: Capable of teraflops (trillions of floating-point operations per second), depending on the configuration.
Processor: Multi-core CPUs like Intel Xeon or AMD Threadripper, often with clock speeds exceeding 3 GHz.
Memory: Typically 32 GB or more of RAM.
Storage: At least 1 TB of SSD storage, with options for additional capacity.
Size: Compact and portable, fitting on a desk.
Cost: Around $6,000, offering immense value compared to the Cray-1.
Per Copilot, the $6K is $1080 in 1976 dollars.
Don’t have time, but think exploring the costs of medical injuries or perhaps the KABCO classes of medical injuries in auto accidents might be interesting. Have newer autos reduces these injuries or decreased the severity?
Laughing quietly, Cray 5.5 tons, now that requires a serious desk.
Dennis L.
How to win friends and influence people:
We like to deal with data here, so a rough comparison of something this site is familiar with:
Copilot:
“1970s: Predictions often suggested a peak in oil production by the 2000s due to the Hubbert peak theory. Actual production exceeded expectations, with global output reaching approximately 65 million barrels per day (mb/d) by 1980.
1980s: Forecasts underestimated the impact of energy conservation and alternative energy sources. By 1990, global production was around 67 mb/d, slightly below optimistic predictions.
1990s: Predictions became more stable, aligning closely with actual production. By 2000, global output was approximately 75 mb/d, reflecting steady growth.
2000s: The rise of unconventional oil sources, like shale oil, led to production surpassing forecasts. By 2010, global production reached about 85 mb/d, driven by technological advancements.
2010s: Forecasts incorporated climate policies and renewable energy growth. By 2020, production was around 95 mb/d, influenced by geopolitical events and shifts in demand.
2020s: Current forecasts predict production to stabilize or slightly decline due to increased focus on renewable energy and climate goals. Actual production figures for 2025 are expected to be around 100 mb/d, depending on global demand and policy changes.”
Compare 1970 to 2025, only off by 35 mbpd, a rounding error I guess.
Weird.
Another, by a Stanford Prof no less, again Copilot:
“Paul Ehrlich, in his 1968 book The Population Bomb, predicted dire consequences related to overpopulation, including widespread hunger. He famously stated that “hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death” in the 1970s and 1980s, regardless of any efforts to prevent it2. Ehrlich believed that overpopulation would outpace food production, leading to catastrophic global famine.”
Looking for a specific, China:
“As of recent studies, approximately 50% of the Chinese adult population is considered overweight or obese. This includes about 30% who are overweight and 20% who are obese. ”
These guys get paid for this and are making the weatherman look brilliant.
Science at its best? This is the best we can do?
Dennis L.
Telling tall tales and taking about outlandish but impractical stories is a surefire way to attract other delusional friends who think they can overcome entropy.
Part of the problem is that people keep defining “oil” differently, to confuse people. At one time, the measure was crude oil. Then it got to be different combinations of things that are all liquids. That is part of the oil problem. What we need is cheap-to-produce crude, which is a subset of crude oil. That has been declining since about 2005.
Slovakman seems to indicate that we are not heading for Peace but for War and quite possibly WW3. There could be a major Russian offensive very soon, regardless the Ukies are in big trouble. This is a very revealing interview by someone who is reporting from the Russian front lines.
Didn’t listen to this one.
Russia has an aging demographic, they are losing young men, they are losing the war. The demographic/declining population has been well known for fifty years.
The slaughter of young men on both sides is a huge loss. Or as WOPR said, “The only way to win is not to play.”
Dennis L.
Removing potentially dangerous younger men is a very excellent strategy
How are the Russians losing the war? Ukraine can’t retake its former territory from the Russians. Also, Ukraine continuously lowers the age of conscription.
And what young men are the Russians losing? They largely commit mercenary units (e.g. Wagner) and ethnic groups (e.g. Chechens) to the heaviest fighting.
How is the war being reported in the US? I suspect this may be the problem.
Russia has an aging demographic, they are losing young men, they are losing the war.
They are without any doubt winning the war due to the industrial impotence of the US and its allies. I’m guessing you get your ‘news’ about the war from American television which is a sewer of lies.
Guest Slovakman says that Putin cannot stop war in Ukraine, as long as there is any occupation by foreign forces. So now Russia is committed to fight to victory. About 300,000 military forces are still being held in reserve by Russia.
Dombass is area difficult to break through, in certain seasons. Does Dombass protects the rest of Ukraine from attack? Tanks will roll easily on dry ground. In summer, ground tends to be firm. Heavy freeze in winter will make it easy to move tanks. Depends on weather.
The biggest issue is that Dombass is filled with small settlements, at close distance. This makes the area difficult to take. [This is only the first 14 minutes.]
CHART OF THE DAY: The Rehden gas storage, the largest in Germany, has emerged from winter virtually empty. Once-routine process, refilling it this spring and summer will be an expensive and difficult task.
https://x.com/JavierBlas/status/1907427644632953210/photo/1
This is the image shown:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GniKUl6WMAEd_qm?format=png&name=900×900
It is easy to believe that the current situation could be like 2022, and that this could be an every-year problem.
The US situation for natural gas is not necessarily very good. This report called, “Natural Gas Overview,” showing data through the end of 2024. indicates that US Dry Gas Production for 20 24 was down slightly from 2023.
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec4_3.pdf
US natural gas net exports for 2024 are down a little as well. If Germany and others are planning on the US greatly ramping up exports, they may be disappointed. US consumption keeps rising.
The WSJ is reporting:
https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/a-big-coal-plant-was-just-imploded-to-make-way-for-an-ai-data-center-cd4bbe32
A Big Coal Plant Was Just Imploded to Make Way for an AI Data Center
The country’s largest natural-gas power plant is planned east of Pittsburgh
I would ask: Does the US really have enough natural gas to do all of these things, including ramping up LNG exports? And what is the real benefit of all of these AI centers? Are they just to keep closer watch on Americans? Or are they to take away current jobs? We need our energy supplies to be providing goods and services we truly need.
If these data centers become detrimental to the masses I suppose the masses will find a way to destroy them.
A guess: AI is topping out, MSFT has cancelled a datacenter whatever that is.
AI is incredible but it does seem to be very inefficient energy wise.
Dennis L.
the ai bubble serving as political cover for US coal production being half of what it used to be.
I always wonder what the US’s coal supply really is like. You are right about production being way down, but this occurred at a time that the US market was being flooded with cheap natural gas. Start-up costs for new natural gas generation was lower too. About this time, rules were added emissions controls equipment.
The US is a major exporter of coal.
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec6_3.pdf
The US exports more coal than South Africa, according to the Statistical Review of World Energy. We send the coal to a range of countries. I remember India is on the list, but I don’t have the list now.
China has put an emphasis on efficient use of coal. I am wondering if a big part of our problem is that the only way the US knows how to use coal is inefficiently. The market allocates the coal that is used to more efficient users.
Thanks, right, the fracking bubble doesn’t help either of course. Pennsylvania is like the California and Texas of conventional oil production – first in first out. It now produces about 6pc of US coal. The plant was probably having to get coal from Wyoming or wherever. And the plant was badly aging. Convergence of crises.
I think that the US’s exporting of coal is yet another example of the globalized management system prioritizing global interests, which is not only a rational prioritization but also a wise prioritization when looked at from the perspective of anyone who wants industrial civilization to continue for as long as possible. We tend to forget that if india doesn’t receive those coal exports then industrial civilization collapses because that set of bilateral contracts represent a plate in the precarious and doomed plate spinning act that is post-growth globalization. Mister T’s job is to be the loudmouth foreman overseeing the TNT crew. A bunch of countries have been floating the industrial albatross that is India big-time for six years now under the non-public Degrowth Agenda. That has to be restructured now, for less. Mister T’s new Russian sanctions will likewise curtail the Russian oil backdoor bailouts to India. Phase 2 of the DA is finally upon us.
I think that’s a fine insight regarding global coal market allocation being based on efficiency aas well as need. You’re right that the old US coal plants are inefficient technology. US consumers of electricity are also extremely wasteful because they can afford to be.
Thanks for reminding us. According to EIA table 6.1 US coal production peaked in 2008 at 1.2 bn short tons, in 2024 only 512 million short tons (out of which 108 m short tons exports). Was the 2008 peak a geological peak? West of the Mississippi? Or what other reasons? Caused by the financial crisis?
Interesting question why we need all these new data centres. Many say its AI use. But there could also be a lot of youtube use and increasingly streaming. The Australian public broadcaster once had excellent transcripts. But now its mostly videos.
Gail, my impression is that at the moment is both reasons, watch on population and take away jobs, but also another point.
In this moment I think that every Country is believing that AI can be a military asset and so it is not willing to potentially lose the race.
Like there was a race on producing vaccines because every Country tought it was also a military asset to avoid other bioweapon attacks.
Luckily it proved to be problematic because the act of taking jabs kill also politicians, journalists, actors (people useful for war propaganda).
At the moment it is not clear if AI is indispensible, my impression is that we could be in a bubble, but no one wants to take a risk.
Amish buggies targeted in armed robberies: Police
An armed man allegedly robbed two Amish buggies in western Pennsylvania, according to police.
Authorities received a report of an armed robbery on a road in Lackawannock Township in Mercer County at approximately 8 p.m. on Thursday, according to information released Sunday by the Pennsylvania State Police Department.
One victim reported that “while in his buggy, a vehicle approached him from the front and stopped,” police said in a statement. A male then approached the buggy, “pointed the firearm at him and demanded he give him his wallet,” police said.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/amish-buggies-targeted-armed-robberies-police/story?id=120327640
Armed robbers are getting desperate.
Not the last word, but in the clinic I was in Amish paid with cash.
From Copilot:
“The Amish predominantly use cash for their transactions as part of their emphasis on simplicity and avoiding modern financial dependencies. Many Amish do not use credit cards, as they prefer to avoid debt and the conveniences of modern technology. However, some may have checking accounts, especially for business purposes, as they do engage in commerce and need ways to manage funds effectively.”
Cash makes them targets, a conundrum for those wanting to live non violent lives. l
Dennis L.
Don’t keep using that thing for research. LLMs frequently get facts wrong, even for simple tasks like summarizing a webpage or article. You’re just creating smog here. Find data.
I grabbed my single malt .
” Around 100 refineries representing 21% of global capacity are at risk of closure. ”
https://elperiodicodelaenergia.com/alrededor-de-100-refinerias-que-representan-el-21-de-la-capacidad-mundial-corren-riesgo-de-cierre/
Use translator .
This doesn’t sound good, at all! Refineries need at least a stable supply of oil that is available at a price that the refinery can make a good margin for its services. Closures of refineries are disturbing!
Here is the English version on the oilprice website:
WoodMackenzie: A total of 101 out of 410 refineries around the world are at risk of getting shut down over the next decade.
This number represented 21% of global refining capacity.
WoodMackenzie: inflated operating costs of refineries are an especially important risk factor for future profitability as well as their investments in decarbonization.
Refineries are switching to biofuels or shutting down due to hostile regulations—but demand for oil products is growing. This could result in either a market imbalance that will make these products more expensive or a geographical imbalance, which those who care about supply security wouldn’t like.
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/One-in-Five-Refineries-Faces-Shutdown-Despite-Rising-Fuel-Demand.html
https://www.akm.ru/eng/news/sber-launches-cfa-for-gold-with-a-fixed-percentage/
Sberbank (Russia’s largest bank) is offering gold-price-backed accounts. Interesting.
The question is always whether the bank will actually be able to do what it is promising.
Also, if the world makes fewer and fewer goods and services in the future, and the amount of gold is fixed or slightly increasing, I would expect gold to buy relatively less and less in the future.
Also, if the finished goods don’t get back to the people growing the food and otherwise involved in the production chain, the production of these things will go to zero, quickly. I would expect today’s (rich, elderly) asset holders to get relatively little of the output of the economy in the future, even if they own gold.
One could argue children are the ultimate store of wealth. Always that damn biology.
Dennis L.
Except it is alwayd those who do not store wealth who have time for children
Where kids are, the wealth is gone – this is what you meant to say, probably?
I wonder how much of the world’s gold coins and bars are real or gold-plated tungsten? Most average people could not tell the difference between plated and real coins.
Easy to test by weighing and comparing to volume.
I know they use tungsten to fake gold coins due to the similar weight density.
Australia is not an advanced economy – ranking 102nd out of 145 in Harvard’s Economic Complexity Index.
https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/36
Far from making us more robust in the face of peak oil, it means we don’t know how to make anything ourselves – our manufacturing ability is nearly gone.
That has been the plan for Australia along
None of this is planned. What happens happens.
As guest2 says, once the resources in the local areas are used up. Either invade, or take other countries’ or negotiate to use other populations’ resources. In this case, it was China’s coal.
The Diggers opposed mechanization so if I were writing under your handle i’d be appreciative of Oz’s collapse positioning as I’m already appreciative of it under my handle.
Nobody knows what “reante” means.
My previous comment was my way of saying that I’m philosophically opposed to mechanization. reante is the conjoining of two prefixes that means “again as before.” It’s an animist handle that looks all the way backwards beyond intermediaries like agrarian resistance to encroaching industrialism, to our common human cultural heritage. Our last universal cultural ancestor, as it were; the other LUCA.
Mechanisation was just something that had to happen. The universe needed the energy resources to be used up to increase entropy.
guest2, as inevitable as mechanization may have ultimately been, the universe obviously isn’t dependant in any way on what humans do do or don’t do so I’d rethink that theory if I was you.
But maybe the universe is dependent on ever-increasing entropy.
Gail, that would mean that civilization is doing ‘god’s work’ so to speak and I refuse to believe that. 🙂 conversely, Collapse slows Earth entropy.
Universally, my feeling is that this it is a cyclical toroidal structure, which is an increasingly popular view these days. The 3D donut universe, except the hole is relatively much smaller. Which means that the early lifecycle of the universe, which we are in now, is expansion/entropy that eventually tips over, at maximum volume/size, into contraction/negentropy for the return function back to the beginning/end.
So yeah it may well be reasonable to say that the universe at this expansionary juncture is structurally dependent on entropic expansion but that’s a universal-scale phenomenon. The universe has plenty of burning stars to take care of that job. The thermodynamic function of biological life is negentropic in and of itself. When we live ecologically we embrace higher ordering (complexity) out of lower ordering. When we live civilizationally we’ve weaponized and leveraged, with technology, that prior embrace of complexity in order to crank up the rate of entropy of our negentropic. resource base. To set it on fire because there’s power in that. Biology is a negentropic harbor in an entropic universe. As of course is all matter negentropic and subject to entropy. We certainly don’t need to be doing entropy’s work for it more than we have to. Doing so is revolutionary. Look at our current reproductive health.
I am certainly not a physicist.
The way today’s ecosystems work, and the economy as a whole works, are miraculous to me. Evolution is better than the current fad of AI. It is hard to me to see that the economy could transition from one energy solution to another, without somehow the Hand of God, or something similar, being involved. The whole system did not spring out of nothing.
In my own life, many things have fallen into place perfectly, to be involved in discussions of these kinds of issues. I haven’t felt a pressing need to try to sell my work, so I have been able to offer OurFiniteWorld.com as a free location to hear about what is really happening.
I meant to say devolutionary and not revolutionary.
I really appreciate your noncommercialism. Thanks for having me back.
It’s all a great gift alright. An intelligent one. Creator gave our metaconscious intelligence a free will to choose what to do with that gift. I suppose miracles do cut both ways if we use the term neutrally in the sense that they’re awesome. And civilization is hyperintelligent but its effects on the ecology make it clear to me that it’s an intelligence rooted in trauma.
Welcome back!
The only result I get for the name “reante” is a website with a past-life regression button at the bottom of the page.
When I set the date to April 3, 2025 here is the result:
“I do not know how you feel about it, but you were a male in your last earthly incarnation. You were born somewhere around the territory of Southern China approximately on 700. Your profession was digger and undertaker.
You were a revolutionary type. You inspired changes in any sphere – politics, business, religion, housekeeping. You could have been a leader. You are bound to solve problems regarding pollution of environment, recycling, misuse of raw materials, elimination of radioactivity by all means including psychological methods.”
https://www.names.org/n/reante/about
Thanks old friend. And thanks for tripping me out too lol.
It would be interesting to see how many ideas Harvard has gotten correct and how many ideas simply didn’t/don’t work.
Harvard seems to be a narrative, along with strong institutional momentum. Once an idea takes hold, no one want to rock the boat.
We are at core biology, the universe does not seem to be a narrative and indeed JWST and other probes seem to be saying something is not complete about our understanding of the universe. String theory seems to be one of those ideas.
This site seems to be mostly open to contrary thought, it is rare.
Dennis L.
“Peer review” is what acts to keep ideas going in the same (often wrong) direction.
Scientific models pick out various variables that the authors consider important, but leave out a whole lot of other variables that may be equally or more important. Scientific models miss many feedback loops.
What industry wants becomes important, too. Industry will fund studies that will help it sell more products. Industry looks closely at what it considers beneficial effects (tastes good, cheap to make, looks good, easy to advertise, provides some supposed health benefit) and ignores longer term harms. Advertising (often on television) reinforces what industry wants.
Not typical for someone impressed very easily by celebrities and would call anyone with a fancy degree from a well known university ‘takented’.
Some 40 years ago I attended an economics course and mentioned Australia was a Third World Economy…my instructor agreed…
Looks as if it still is one.
Betcha FE did his research before settling there..oh, this was just posted on Harrys blog site…
A 2024 study in Science Advances modeled grid collapse scenarios and found that 45% of reactors worldwide would experience cooling failures within just 10 days without human intervention (Schneider et al., 2024). The study’s most alarming conclusion was that spent fuel pools would ignite in 60% of cases, creating uncontrollable radioactive fires. Extending their projections, the researchers estimated that 40-80 full meltdowns could occur globally within 5 years of societal collapse, contaminating 15-40% of the world’s arable land with cesium-137 and other long-lived isotopes.”
I’m an optimistic person and life will find a way to continue…something like the original Outer Limits Series of the 1960s or Chernobyl wikdlife
The assumption that is always made for nuclear reactors is that a supply of grid electricity will always be available, quite quickly, to supply cooling ponds and to restart the system. If the grid becomes intermittent, this assumption goes away, and melt downs could become a problem.
Radiation is assumed to be bad, but if we need a major change in humans to go forward, maybe increased radiation will allow a subgroup to go forward. It is hard to know what changes are truly good and which ones are terrible.
Fallout levels catastrophic to humans and other creatures could not be considered a good. I see dead people. Areas of non-catastrophic fallout, in the right range, could certainly separate the human wheat from the chaff based on the fitness requirements of epigenetic adaptation. Significant mutation of chromosomes over several generations within those non-catastrophic ranges would be unlikely as there’s just too much complexity that has been evolved-up in mammals. Sounds familiar right? What would be required over those several generations is diligent maintenance of underlying fitness such that the nutrient-intensive epigenetic flexibility can be maintained. Ionizing radiation stresses and kills cells, so the adaptation required is to divert nutrient-dense resources toward a permanently increased rate of healing: detoxifying and regrowing.
Given resource limits, population will need to fall quite quickly, one way or another. We don’t necessarily have a choice on the way.
Yeah
Pingback: The Bulletin: March 27-April 2, 2025 – Olduvai.ca
https://energydigital.com/renewable-energy/chinas-1km-solar-array-the-manhattan-project-of-energy
China will power BRICS future.
“In 12 years, Space Solar will deliver an affordable, scalable and fully renewable new baseload energy technology,” the company says.
“Space-based solar power will accelerate the transition to net zero and provide energy security for partner nations, as global demand grows.”
I don’t think I’ve ever taken a side on this possibility.
at least it’s not perpetually 20 years away.
they seem to be saying it’s 100% certain.
I have some doubts, but it might be possible.
but FF based surplus energy is needed to build, maintain and repair, and this surplus energy is heading for decline any year now.
“Space-based solar power will accelerate the transition to net zero and provide energy security for partner nations, as global demand grows.”
There will be no space based solar power. Net Zero will be achieved though the process will be more up close and personal involving blood and screams rather than a technological one and there will be no journalists writing about it, or indeed any journalists or websites at all.
I have no doubt space based solar energy will work; my concerns are in beaming that concentrated energy to and on earth.
Earth is biology and earth as a spaceship seems optimized for biology. Better to put the mechanics in space along with the inorganic pollution, Jupiter is a fine dustbin.
Dennis L.
I have no doubt tgat it won’t work in thus civ’s lifetimw
If anyone had control over such an amount of concentrated electric power, what would that mean to the balances of military and economic power in the world?
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202501/21/WS678eee8ea310a2ab06ea82b3_1.html
Chinese ‘artificial sun’ sets new record in milestone step toward fusion power generation
Chinese ‘artificial sun’ sets new record in milestone step toward fusion power generation
Obviously there will be no fusion power generation. There are no ‘steps’ because the goal is not possible.
true!
it’s a jobs program for PhDs, as others have said.
No electricity generated, and no fuel to power the reactor by
It may well work, it will always be secondary to solar fusion which is fusion at scale.
My bet is use solar heat by moving processes requiring it in proximity to the sun as necessary, mine the solar system, generate solar electricity in space as necessary, use same in space.
Make earth a H economy until something better comes along, and it will. H looks to have minimum pollution.
Feeding our planet will be the real challenge, earth does regenerate but only about a dime’s thickness per year. Modern agriculture is efficient for generating calories, but it is hell on earth. Think of that one as a mixed metaphor.
Dennis L.
It may well work
It can’t work.
Reality does not penetrate into the mind of cornucopians
In a world filled with so much madness you are a voice of clarity & wisdom. Thank you
You are welcome!
somebody has to run the asylum
Fast Eddy is on a leave of absence until further notice..
He’s alone in a cave mumbling something about spent fuel ponds and CEP vac jab with his dog Hoolio
he didnt run the asylum
he was its raison d’etre
I beg to differ, in his own mind, he did and still is according to Hoolio… heard him saying..
“I’ll be BACK”
well—-if he drives a truck through the door, Gail isn’t going to be best pleased
Happy to see Russia telling US to keep hands off Iran. Hope to hear more BRICS protecting Iran from Israeli extermination.
see https://www.newsweek.com/russia-warns-us-strike-iran-nuclear-sites-catastrophic-2053618
The US and Israel can bomb countries that are essentially unarmed but that is all they can do. There will be no attack on Iran.
I am afraid you are right.
Staring Down Blackmail: Talking about RFK Jr. with Charles Eisenstein
This video was posted about 10 hours ago. It is two hours long and I’m still listening to it. The Rumble blurb says:
“Bret Weinstein speaks with Charles Eisenstein on the subject of blackmail in American politics. They explore the complexities surrounding Zionism, the implications of antisemitism in political discourse, and the psychological mechanisms of coercion and blackmail that influence public figures.”
The reason for the two of them having this chat is that JFK Jr. tweeted twice from his official account saying what a terrible health crisis antisemitism was, and Bret, reacting to the second of those tweets, stated his reaction as “Woh, that feels like a hostage video.”
Timestamps:
00:00:00 Welcome Charles Eisenstein to DarkHorse
00:01:03 Is RFK Jr. Being Blackmailed?
00:04:15 Clarifying the Term “Zionist”
00:06:49 RFK Jr.’s Israel Support
00:12:24 The Abuse of the Term “Anti-Semitism”
00:18:26 Explaining the RFK Jr. Blackmail Question
00:21:23 How Collecting Blackmail Material Works
00:57:34 Reciprocity vs. Lineage Against Lineage Violence
01:29:14 Amnesty: Overcoming Blackmail
01:56:47 Anti-Anti-semitism
01:59:38 Closing
Apologies to anyone who thinks this is off-topic.
RUMBLE
https://rumble.com/v6rilqn-staring-down-blackmail-talking-rfk-jr.-with-charles-eisenstein.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
YOU-TUBE
A relative of mine, a doctor in a small and poor Eastern European country was paid by the Gates Foundation or an affiliate (forget which) to study ways to reduce “vaccine hesitancy” in the population. Not on topic, just thought people might be curious to know how far and wide the effort went.
The World Health Organization seems to be an affiliate of the Gates Foundation. In fact, a whole lot of work that was done to encourage vaccines usage was done either by groups that would make money from vaccines, or by Gates affiliated groups.
In retrospect, we prefer if the population is reduced through vaccines rather than through war.
Interesting point. The bright folks figured out that taking vaccines (particularly mRNA vaccines) was a bad idea.
Did you get the shingles vaccine??? It is important to make the distinction.
I did get the shingles vaccine.
That’s not the case in Europe! On the contrary, the responsible persons for the management of the pandemy have mostly been re-elected.
The majority has also voted for parties that support war against Russia. And those parties have declared they position very open before the elections.
About 90% of the adults have been injected at least once, here. Approval rates have fallen since, but the supporters still are in the majority.
In the critical movement the average voter is usually seen as victim of propaganda, mass psychosis and mandates. I have difficulties to confirm this! Five years after Bergamo still traumatized? And the trauma forced the voters to vote for a repetition?
I dont prefer anyone to be “reduced”. But looking back, I am afraid, a lot of people hurt themselves and others. Here, people died like the flies! I am afraid, there will be much more longtime damage, than expected today. And they are going to do it again!
In Austria have been strict mandates – it was even announced, unjabbed would not be allowed to shop food anymore, but this was never put into effect. Still despite all pressure and nudging there is a significant group that have never been injected. Most had to put up with a lot for this!
Interestingly, this group spans all social and educational classes. It seems to be more related to a character trait.
drb753, that is the most terrible thing one can say.
It is the end of freedom.
Then, one can say that a person has no freedom in war or there is no time for escape if there is a nuclear war and so on and so forth, but they are poor reasoning in my view.
Because like one can see in Ukraine, a person can still find a way to escape from war, but a vaccinated person cannot escape from own poisoned blood.
A person can only wait if own blood is killing oneself.
I think that being in Russia you have a different perception of what happened in the so called Western world with mandatory vaccines.
One might wonder about successive generations. Manipulation of DNA(yes the vaccine is mRNA, reverse transcription) could be an issue.
Dennis L.
well, war kills young males mostly. that is terrible too.
Drd
That’s a good point.
Just sucks that so many have to go…
Furthermore, I suspect the load is toxic enough to disable a person such that they transfer their remaining wealth to the medical profession, before finally succumbing to the poison. Thereby depriving their children of any inheritance.
Granted, there have been approximately 7 million “died suddenly” exceptions to the above…
They used to say that the US government were the largest funder of the WHO, but in fact it was Gates. If you add the Gates Foundation and Gavi contributions(he owns both), then he was and is the major shareholder in the WHO and picks “causes” that suit his own agenda(eugenics).
The WHO is a branch of the UN. Which was created by Rockefeller. That’s why its headquartered in his building.
He created it because he didn’t want American to be seen as imperialist taking over the world.
Rockefeller, like Gates and his family was/are corporate eugenicist and that is what they attempt to hide(both words, but the first one the most). Their biggest game was lost just before the Inception of the UN.
Coincidence? I doubt any of them ever cared less about being seen as imperialist(I could be wrong), as that is the whole basis of the “American way of life”. Like all corporate entities, the people of the US were brought up to believe beyond any doubt in their own exceptionalism, because that is the easiest way to get dumb, but well trained people to commit, or accept genocide and oh how regular we have made that for the non corporate peoples of this planet.
Rebranding doesn’t hide anything, unless the people are willing players of the game.
If being perceived as imperialist was really an issue, would they be so bold in Gaza, or are they so bold because they know the people are fine with genocide, just don’t say it out loud?
We’ve got a lot to admit to ourselves, about ourselves and little time left to do it.
“The fog of war, it seems, breeds its own peculiar mirages. Among the most bewildering is the spectacle of observers, adrift in the wreckage of the American imperium, clutching at the notion that Donald Trump, of all people, represents some nascent hope for peace because he speaks of negotiating an end to the Ukraine proxy war. One sees the confusion, the desperate yearning for an exit from the charnel house. But let us be brutally clear: there is no contradiction between Trump’s overtures on Ukraine and his simultaneous, blood-soaked backing of the Zionist entity’s genocidal campaign in Gaza and the war crime of bombing Yemen. To perceive one is to engage in a profound act of self-deception, a flight from reality so extreme it borders on the pathological.”
“And Yemen? The bombing of a nation whose primary “crime” is attempting to hinder the Gazan slaughter reveals the Operational US in its current iteration: the Mercenary Mafia State. Trump, continuing the bipartisan tradition, acts as the muscle, deploying American military power in service of the Zionist entity’s immediate agenda. Yet, make no mistake, this is not distinct from American imperial interests; rather, within the warped logic of the Operational US, propping up and protecting this key regional ally, even through strategically dubious and brutal campaigns like bombing Yemen, is considered integral to maintaining overall American hegemony. It is a futile campaign yet it is pursued with the callous disregard for human life that characterizes the entire imperial project, where serving a vital proxy’s perceived needs becomes synonymous with serving the empire itself.”
https://substack.com/@rajasohailbashir/note/c-104244811?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=7c6fx
The best way to reduce “vaccine hesitancy” would be:
a) make them effective
b) make them safe
There was no “hesitancy”. 90% of the adults have gotten at least one shot! What do they expect? A 100% rate?
LOL! Fair point.
Jan, this is in my view is a poor reasoning based on the presumptuousness of believing that the whole world does what western countries do.
One has to remember that only Europe, US, Australia, New Zeland and some few others had the mRNA vaccine and not all those Countries obliged people to take more than 2 doses.
Italy was a Country with 4 doses suggested!
That’s why every person in Italy is sorrounded by friends and relatives who died or had heart problems or cancer in the last three years.
I can name without thinking at least 6 in my close circle.
The more one takes doses, the more one has probability of adverse events or sum of adverse events as a consequence of dna treatment.
But the key point is that the rest of the world is made by million and million of people in places like Tunisia, Nigeria, Somalia, Kazhakistan, Iran… to make it short, it is full of places in Asia, Africa or South America where people took no vaccine at all during Covid.
And then you additionally have Countries like China or Russia that used not mRNA vaccines.
What the %ell are we talking about when we talk about rate of Covid vaccination in the world?
We are talking (using a word I’ve learnt here) of a nothingburger.
As it seems right now, China has rejected the idea to decide for the mRNA platform. Probably they knew why. Sinovac is based on classic vaccination technology.
Africa denied vaccinations also for a reason.
There have been different risks applied to different countries. Nobody has that figured out, yet.
Austria is currently recommending 12 Pfizer shots – despite the fact that Pfizer announced there is no reduction of transmission and infection. But only about 3% follow these recommendations.
People are getting sceptic with the vaccine but they reelect the responsible. Probably they are victims of something really bad. Traumatized! They cannot concentrate where to make the right cross. And again all these pacifists have reelected war mongerers! These victims cannot imagine how their hands went there! It was not intentionally, believe them!
Who is guilty when the world implodes?
The regional prosecutor in the Banska Bytrica region of the central Slovakia found dead in his car with his head shot through and his short ffirearm next to him
https://www.topky.sk/cl/10/3006315/AKTUALNE-Sokujuci-nalez-v-Banskej-Bystrici–Policia-objavila-v-aute-zastreleneho-krajskeho-prokuratora-
It sounds like he was suicided. Oh and newly elected Florida congresswoman, Anna Paulina Luna says NBC has photos of Lee Harvey Oswald that prove he did not fire the shot that killed JFK. She is looking to get NBC to release those photos.
It’s never as it seems.
Why oil is above $ 75 ?
https://anasalhajjieoa.substack.com/p/brent-above-75-why?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=1222998&post_id=160337853&utm_campaign=email-play-on-substack&utm_content=watch_now_button&r=26quge&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
There is a transcript available:
All of this is happening, just when OPEC+ oil exports were supposed to be increasing.
It is always biology with humans.
From Copilot:
“Russia’s population is currently shrinking. In 2025, the population is estimated to be around 143.5 million, which reflects a decline of 0.32% compared to the previous year. Factors contributing to this trend include a low fertility rate (around 1.5 births per woman) and an aging population.”
Russia’s population has been known to be on a decline for many years, read about this issue in the 1980’s.
From Copilot:
“In 1980, the median age of the Russian population was approximately 30.1 years. By 2025, the median age has increased to 40.3 years. This reflects the aging trend in Russia’s population over the decades.”
My conclusion, the “Collective West” is winning in Ukraine, the Russians are losing their youth.
From Copilot:
“There isn’t a specific median age at which a society begins an irreversible decline, as it depends on various factors like fertility rates, economic policies, healthcare systems, and migration trends. However, when the median age rises significantly—often above 40 or 45 years—it can signal challenges such as a shrinking workforce, increased dependency ratios, and economic strain.”
It is always biology, life seems to have cycles which are the result of evolution from the beginning. It would seem one of the functions of a “good” religion is acceptance of this human frailty as a feature, not a bug.
Dennis L.
Russia us getting rid if its unnecessariats
“Why oil is above $ 75 ?”
first of all, it’s not.
oil has been in a moderate price range for more than 2 years now.
it’s beautiful, really quite lovely.
It’s April Fools Day everyone
Mister T is reportedly intent on rewriting an Environmental Protection Agency’s 2009 endangerment finding, which found greenhouse gases are a threat to public health and welfare, in order to downplay the negative effects of climate change. He’s working to decimate climate reporting in general. He also wants to muddy the waters by producing a National Climutt Assessment written by climutts who argue that the impacts of climate change are overstated — or would even be a net positive.
Works for me..already fooled us all once…from RS mag
It is time to change the narrative. All things are relative. Climate problems become less important as other problems overwhelm the system.
Climate and biology would seem to be intertwined in ways not always understood. Think dinosaurs.
Dennis L.
This should read: “some PERCEIVE climate problems less important..” But nature does not care what we think. It just responds to our emissions
Obviously climate change is a net positive. It expands the human habitat at a time when it is needed.
true!
er
climate change means just that
change
the climate warms and causes fresh water run off from the frozen north and mountain glaciers.
this shuts down the gulf stream.
when that happens europe’s climate ‘changes’ to that of labrador.
so be careful what you wish for
this shuts down the gulf stream.
Says who, “climate scientists”?
Did they go to the same university as the guy who told the UK to expect millions of dead from Covid?
Science used to be real, nowadays those calling themselves scientists are little more than hired propagandists.
oh—-i remember him
he used to come on ofw telling us there were millions of dead bodies lying in the streets…..people were just having to step over them.
dunno what happened to him
he used to come on ofw telling us there were millions of dead bodies lying in the streets
Really, someone was saying that? How silly.
someone saying silly things on ofw??
surely not
Rancourt et al. say it was only 17M due to vaccine. With about 100M dying every year of natural causes, that was not exactly enormous.
That does not concern me. Overall the human habitat will increase because so much land is in the northern latitudes. There is always winners and losers with any change. I doubt that Italy, France or the Balkans will have a climate similar to Labrador.
i enjoy having a lol
and your mindset is fascinating, which is why i have another lol
we have climate ”change”—a totally unknown factor with regard to all biology—approaching, yet somehow all the disturbance will be some kind of benign factor as far as ”we” are concerned.
we will take advantage of defrosted land—somehow—italy and southern france might look like the sahara.—but no matter.
climate change will disturb humankind en masse, whatever change that might be.—-but somehow millions of us will migrate to where the living is easy.
you may have noticed what trouble migration is causing right now
i will allow myself another lol i think
so which it is, labrador or sahara? have you listened to the BBC again lately? Italy specifically has seen record precipitation. Maybe Congo?
Norman’s great granny appears in this video from 3:30.
You can tell where he gets his psychic powers from.
Climate reporting is a bunch of nonsense. Half the temperature gauges are located next to airport runways or in urban heat islands. It’s a joke.
the don will make climate change go away
his sharpie is always at the ready
“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”
— Stein’s Law (Herbert Stein)
true!
mighty IC must end sooner or later, probably in the 2nd half of this century.
But perhaps first half of this century. We depend on economic growth to keep going. As oil supply per capita falls, economic growth changes to shrinkage. Complexity is lost, more in some place than other places. Debt cannot be repaid with interest. Banks fail. Governments tend to fail.
Boy, people are not going to like going back to the stone age. No Starbucks Lattes in their future or supermarkets.
Economics might be seen as a contemporary religion spread by technology. Expensive coffee appears in part an effort to purchase an identity other than the one in which life is lived.
Dennis L.
Thinking about that one, economics is secondary to biology; biology is somewhat self adjusting, demographics are brutal.
Dennis L.
“I see dead people”
You might consider this logic, which you circle around 😉 Credit (and debt created) is going to those who already have wealth. It increases wealth inequality. This isn’t news of course 😉 So I don’t believe the debt itself is a problem, as you say, but how it creates more access to fossil fuels to the wealthy and less to others. It’s why prices can stay the same. (Sort of like Soviet Russia; it wasn’t about the money you had but the access. )
The problem for the increasing debt is it will reach a point where a critical mass of the other 80% will realize there is no hope; they are headed to poverty. Not because of money. Because of the simple fact the physical oil/gas is NOT there to burn for them. The wealthy won’t give up anything. They will continue to give insignificant handouts. More “stimulus” checks will be sent out. They won’t be enough. At least I don’t think they will.
LOVED this piece!
I think the big underlying issue is oil (and other energy type) depletion. When energy supplies were abundant, adding more debt worked to prop up the economy, especially if the additional debt was at a lower interest rate.
Now, the additional debt increases the inflation rate, and the higher inflation rate increases the interest rate lenders require. At a higher interest rate, pretty much all assets are worth less. This is the problem we are reaching now. Leveraged accounts are in particularly bad shape.
Stock prices should fall. Banks find their net worths falling, likely to negative. Governments will need to do lots of bail outs, but they don’t have any money for such bail outs. Eventually, we should expect government organizations to fail. Or shift responsibilities elsewhere. For example, states become responsible for more programs, rather than Federal Government.
Saw a discussion with an older gentlemen, appeared to be a good investor, pondering Federal income tax after revelations of extensive government fraud. Will people revolt and simply not pay their taxes?
Something about the consent of the governed comes to mind, the edifice could be weaker than it looks.
Dennis L.
A currency, including all credits and assets, reflects the value of what is currently produced in the currency area.
If production sinks in degrowth or by falling population numbers, the currency will inflate. Inflation will make a lot of businesses go bankrupt. Now the governments will have to decide, which business is too important to fail. Or if they wanna pay pensions or education. And this will destroy all state of justice. And without state of justice property protection is gone and noone will invest except the state itself or companies so large, that they can force the state.
The question is not whether nations will seek out critical materials and food outside their borders when they cannot produce them at home, but how they will go about it. Trump has not ruled out military action to take the Panama Canal and Greenland. Annexing Canada seems like a passing fantasy. On the other hand, so many things which seemed unlikely on January 19 are now reality, and so it might be premature to rule out increasingly unsettling talk and even concrete moves to annex one or more of these targets.—- Kurt Cobb
http://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2025/03/america-first-can-it-be-squared-with.html#more
This article includes a table of US net import reliance for a whole lot of minerals, illustrating how bad the US dependence is. China especially stands out.
I am not convinced that there is anything that Trump can do to quickly to change the US’s inability to produce a lot of things for ourselves. He can try, however.
Starship, long term(say ten years), mine space. AI seems to be going lightspeed.
The US problem may well not be “stuff” but human capital. AI could change that in ways we as of yet don’t appreciated. Making things requires teams which require skill sets that are difficult to learn and experiments are not graded on a curve.
Starship is about getting to space cheaply, once that is done miners will see the solar system with its lack of pollution laws and extensive minerals and abandon holes in the ground as so yesterday.
Dennis L.
dennis
it has been clearly demonstarted thar long term space exposure/living is seriously detrimental to human physiology.
.
as yet, no one has solved this problem, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline to suggest that they will…….
so on that basis, space mining is more likely to leave you crippled for life, than the old traditional method
France and nuclear fuel problem . Patrick Raymond . Use translator .
https://lachute.over-blog.com/2025/03/apotheose-hourra-youpi-cocorico.html
Thanks! Someone else is finally talking about the uranium shortage.
Patrick Raymond quotes someone else about the uranium shortage.
Raymond doesn’t mention the importance of Russia for processing and upgrading uranium. The US is in a very bad place, also. But France has a disproportionate amount of its electricity from nuclear. And France tends to use electricity for heat, elevating its electricity use.
Raymond says, “The moral of the matter is simple: we’re scraping the bottom of the barrel.”
This is sad. In the US state of Georgia, I get a lot of my electricity from nuclear. In fact, I don’t live too far from the new Vogtle plants.
So, all the producers are going to tell us to fuck off.
France can’t afford to pay a fair price for uranium. It was relying on a corrupt deal with Niger for very low priced ore.
guest2.
What was the value to the average Niger of the uranium if not mined?
Was their life better or worse for the mining?
Why in the Congo do parents have their children digging cobalt with their hands? Were they not digging, what would their lives be like?
Life is complex, not easy and definitely not fair.
Mines in the US were no picnic. In Ishpeming MI 51 miners drowned after digging for iron under a lake, lake sprung a leak, bodies not recovered. Getting stuff out of the ground at a price which makes economic sense is very difficult and very costly to all humans who physically do it; yet for the miners, the alternatives would seem to be worse.
Were you given a choice between being warm and being warmed by some uranium, how would you vote with your thermostat?
Not judgment, observation.
Dennis L.
What is the lifting cost at Aramco is not important . For a country that gets 95% of it’s revenue from oil it is this that matters .
” The Saudi balance of payments for q4 is out, and it confirms that Saudi Arabia ran a current account deficit in 2024 — and (per my estimates), the balance of payments “breakeven” for Saudi Arabia is around $90 a barrel.
https://x.com/Brad_Setser/status/1906811835195797949/photo/1
not to worry
when their oil is gone they intend to get their income from tourism
just how tourists will get there is unclear
why anyone would want to tour saudi is even less clear
The women are so alluring all covered up and with veiled, but that’s why there is London and Amsterdam….
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s34IX9He96o&pp=ygURIHNoZWlraCBpbiBsb25kb24%3D
Yep, can’t wait for the Camels to ride them again in the ocean desert
Breakeven is about $90 barrel. Getting enough money to run the government will require quite a bit higher a price per barrel. Clearly, the current price is way too low. Saudi Arabia needs to try to force the price of oil up.
Breakeven is $90 a barrel? I often look for this information to see where we are on the timeline of crash. $90 seems way too high for Saudi Arabia, I have not seen that figure until now.
An overview regarding the decline in material and energy consumption of the UK. The other European countries will follow shortly.
https://riancwhitton.substack.com/p/britains-age-of-material-austerity
The economy is just four things.
British material consumption, in terms of raw tonnage, is reducible to four significant inputs: biomass, metal ores, non-metallic minerals and fossil fuels. In 2022, total British material consumption (extraction and imports minus exports) was 568 million tonnes, down from 743 million tonnes in 2000.
From 2000 to 2023, fossil fuel consumption declined by 38%, non-metallic minerals by 24%, metal ores by 40%, and biomass stayed roughly the same at 1%. If we say that fossil fuel reductions are mainly due to changes in electricity supply, non-fossil fuel material consumption in Britain has declined 16% during the 21st century, while the population has increased by 15%.
The result is that, on a per capita basis, Britain’s material consumption resembles Latin America more than Europe, North America or East Asia.
This is a very interesting, well-done article. Most people are too far away from how industry really works to understand the need for material inputs of many kinds, and transportation to supply these inputs. The UK is running very short of needed materials now.
Virginia Giuffre – who was sex trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and claims she was sexually assaulted as a teenager by Prince Andrew – says she has been given just four days to live after a car crash.
Ms Giuffre, née Roberts, 41, shared a photograph of herself from her hospital bed, covered in bruises she had said she suffered in a smash with a speeding bus.
Posting to Instagram overnight on Sunday, the sex abuse survivor says she has suffered kidney failure and begged to see her children ‘one last time’ before she dies.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14553687/Virginia-Giuffre-hospital-bed-mystery-accident.html
I am not defending Epstein or Andrew but she is all smiles in those photos and doesn’t appear to me she looks threatened. Besides, kids today are usually sexually active at a younger age.
she wasnt being threatened or in any physixal danger
but you have to draw the line somewhere on age or you finish up with 9 year old brides.
as well to remember that the age of consent in uk was 12 until the late 1800s
She seems to be fake anyways
Pedophiles are not interested in teenagers! Giuffre has been of legal age for a consensual relationship – the only problem is prostitution!
A typical “Lolita” is younger than 14 years.
A teenager of 14 years is already developing secondary sexual characteristics. Surveys show, 60% of all men are attracted by 14 year olds.
Who wants to use photos for blackmail is not interested in teenagers, which could generate the understanding of 60%! You dont need an island, where children cannot escape from, if customers are interested in legal age consensual sex, money would find easier ways than trafficking.
Smiles of abused and raped children on photos are never any indicator for consensuality. Kids are drilled and threatened and know how to behave. They do a job to survive!
I suggest a finer-grained categorization, adding complex vs. hypercomplex to the category of advanced economies. I have been pointing out for years that the key to surviving economic collapse is whether or not an economy can manage contraction. [This is NOT degrowth by the way. Degrowth is a nonsense term. Even if you buy into the degrowth hype, contraction is a better term for the decline in GDP due to forces both within and without the economy. “De” and “post” both depend on the growth model, just like postmodernism depends on the prior existence of modernism.]
In this context, those economies that can manage contraction will do better than those that cannot. But the ability to manage contraction hinges on the acceleration of growth in the first place. In advanced economies, growth has accelerated to the point where the economy depends on it. In the US and UK growth has not only accelerated, but the acceleration itself has accelerated. This is the 3rd derivative in calculus terms. What this means in practical terms is that those advanced economies exhibiting hypergrowth will not be able to contract – no matter how much they want to or need to. They will just implode, i.e contract faster than can be managed or even adapted to. The economies that are “only” complex will be able to shrink, or contract, at a manageable level. Examples of those countries are France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Portugal. I am of two minds about Sweden, as it seems to be hypercomplex, but I don’t know enough about it.
The point here is that the ability to manage contraction will be a necessary skillset for European leaders who are smart enough to put aside their petty squabbling for a moment. The US and UK are just toast. Don’t even bother. Just get out.
In this context, those economies that can manage contraction will do better than those that cannot
It can’t really be managed. Vital Infrastructure starts to fall apart.
I am afraid that you are right: “Contraction can’t be managed. Vital Infrastructure starts to fall apart.”
You are presuming to know all the possible permutations in any contraction. This is false. A better position would be to make a probabilistic assessment. Both you and Gail are – in effect – saying that vital infrastructure starting to fall apart means that it cannot be managed. In other words 100% against. This is bad logic. If you are willing to say INSTEAD that there is a 80% chance that “vital infrastructure falling apart” cannot be managed, I might agree. But to put a blanket 100% veto on the whole idea of managed contraction is absurd. Don’t forget the 1-5% probability of random events too. BTW, my own personal assessment is in more of a ballpark range. That is, France and Germany and the others are more likely than not (greater than 50%) to be able to manage contraction. But they could blow it too. But to arbitrarily condemn the idea is just bad logic.
I’m not a math nerd so I don’t use numbers, in fact I’ve developed a strong aversion to calculators for some reason. I understand the issue on more of an intuitive level.
You can’t control collapse because there will be no spare energy to do so. Infrastructure will fail, there will be no money or parts or materials to fix it, it will stay broken. It will only get worse.
we will call it 99.99% and call it a day. no need to squabble. Other examples follow. 2+2 equals four with 99.99% probability.
Mr Haugen , some quotes for your attention .
1. A small hole can sink a big ship .
2. There is no concept of a ” little bit pregnant ” .
3. There are no prostitutes that are still virgin .
”But to arbitrarily condemn the idea is just bad logic.”
Logic vs realism ? Makes me go — hmmm .
By the way , welcome to OFW .
On the issue of infrastructure Tim Watkins has a nice recap regarding, for instance, the UK.
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2025/03/25/expect-more-of-this-2/
Legacy electricity infrastructure in the UK as in most other developed nations, is reasonably old and in need of updating. This is a challenge that is coinciding with the need to build out extensive new infrastructure to connect renewable generation which is often built in areas without existing electricity infrastructure.
The recent RAAC concrete scandal, which has forced schools, hospitals and other public buildings to close, stems from the same process of failing to maintain or replace ageing structures. RAAC used in the 1980s and 1990s was known to have a short lifespan but was mostly left until it failed before anyone acted. A similar process is developing on Britain’s roads, where decades of neglect are coming home to roost in the form of dangerous potholing resulting from no, or at best cheap, repairs being carried out where full road resurfacing is warranted… cheap repairs (mostly a man with a bucket of asphalt filling the hole) serving to make the damage worse in the long-term.
Britain’s water and sewage system is fast becoming a basket case for the same reason. The privatised water companies have a bad reputation for using borrowed money to pay salaries and dividends rather than maintain and upgrade the network to meet the needs of a growing population. With the result that rivers and beaches which had among the best water quality in the world back in the 1990s are now routinely flooded with sewage every time it rains. And, thankfully less commonly for now, even clean drinking water is no longer guaranteed as a result of compromised infrastructure.
Perhaps the biggest – and mostly overlooked – problem in years to come, however, concerns the 50-year shelf life of concrete structures. Construction carried out on the cheap – as a large amount of Britain’s was back in the 1960s and 1970s – is susceptible to the process of “spoiling” aka “concrete cancer” caused by corrosion and expansion of the reinforcing steel. Where this is visible, remedial measures can (but cost pressures may preclude it) be taken. But spoiling is most often invisible and only becomes apparent when a structure collapses. Certainly, cash-strapped Britain is in no position to carry out a replacement of the bridges, motorways and buildings constructed using reinforced concrete in the boom years of the 1960s and early-1970s… structures, that is, that are now at risk of collapse where unseen spoiling has eaten them away from the inside.
Adding to the immediate problem is that there is little political will to overhaul and upgrade existing infrastructure… politicians preferring to associate themselves with entirely new projects such as new AI datacentres and new airport runways, even though the UK lacks the materials and skilled labour to deliver even a fraction of what the politicians seem to believe can be magicked into existence. Nevertheless, it seems unlikely that anyone is about to deploy what materials and skilled labour we do have to the unattractive, but increasingly urgent, process of maintaining and replacing critical infrastructure.
Good points. One of the many reasons I put the UK into the hypercomplex camp along with the US.
I hadn’t realized things were that bad in the UK.
I am hoping things are less bad in the US. The US had a lot of infrastructure added in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970, but I didn’t think that US cost cutting started in earnest until the 1980s, with Ronald Reagan.
The steel corrosion problem in concrete is a function of time, local climate, temperature variations, geographical location, exposure to rain and salt use on icy roads
a couple of centuries of expansion delivers lots of people, with aspirations
their standard of living and social stability depends on the nonsense of infinite growth.
contraction means loss of wages.
that means unpaid debt—-think mortgages—- you have a mortgage of say 300k, and your income contracts.
but the mortgage doesnt contract—hence you have debt which cannot be repaid.
governments cannot order wholesale house price reduction…..that would collapse the economic system.
and no…i dont have an answer.
The very, very simple idea that if you can manage contraction you will do better than someone who cannot manage contraction seems to be beyond many people’s concept of the world. I am amazed. I feel like I am back in the 1960s, when even a simple concept like “Don’t kill innocent people in a country far, far away,” got significant pushback.
the idea is simple
i can come with lots of simple ideas to fix our problems—ultimately they are all utter bs.
we exist in a world of infinite debt—supported by infinite energy input
contract then—–simple.
work contracts—established contracted debt does not……as i have tried to explain very simply.—its seems difficult to grasp that.
our infrastructure cannot contract—it just ‘is’—roads are built for traffic, railways the same.
a petrol station cannot function on 3 cars a day—the entire fuel backup systems would collapse
contraction means downsize—it does not have a different meaning, even if you think it does.
The very, very simple idea that if you can manage contraction
Contraction is entropy, entropy is chaos and chaos can’t be managed.
Yet the civilizational system is a managed one by hierarchical definition. Structural hierarchies are no longer self-organizing systems; the self-organizing dynamics that do exist are merely feedback loops, positive or negative. Managed systems, in turn, are not chaotic by definition. Structural contraction (collapse) is indeed ultimately a function of entropy and the rational managerial response is to avoid chaos by attempting an engineered collapse aka controlled demolition.
Managed systems, in turn, are not chaotic by definition.
Nobody will be managing anything.
guest2 eventually, no, no one will be managing anything on a global scale yet we’ve been in contraction for six years and the managing persists, so your previous comment is inaccurate.
I’m not an expert but I tend to agree with the premise that the contraction can (possibly) be managed. It’s always about probabilities. Many people in the know about “collapse” are almost always 100% sure that it will happen fast. IMO It’s always a spectrum of possibilities with different probabilities for each scenario. Adding human will to the complexity of our civilisation increases the odds of a managed contraction, with the odds varying with each different geograhical regions/countries.
I am afraid that any economy that uses computers in any way is hypercomplex. Long distance international trade used in supply lines is hypercomplex.
Electricity is likely to be the first type of energy supply to go, because it tends to be the last one added. It requires a lot of complexity. I don’t think that the finances of electricity are self-supporting. Electricity is a benefit of a fossil fuel system with surplus energy to spare on the system.
You are wrong Gail. The term is more precise than that. Complex societies in Africa and Latin America, for instance, use computers and spreadsheet accounting all the time, yet they are not in your category of Advanced Economies. Nor do they rely on the acceleration of acceleration in their growth model. There is a quantitative difference in the growth economy of France (where I am now) and that of the US (where I used to live). This quantitative difference can be measured by the 3rd derivative.
They are not in Advanced Economies because they don’t produce “relevant” stuff in some sense. Yes, they can use a pc and Excel but they don’t produce the ultraviolet lithography machine to produce computer chips that are made by just one company in the entire world (whose process itself relies on other complex machinery like chillers, high-quality air filtration, etc). Advanced economies usually consume a lot of energy and need a lot of material input.
I agree with you that many of the countries you listed above can handle the contraction better than the US. Just think about private transportation: the US has built a nation around car use, unlike European cities that are more or less well served by public transportation.
But there are limits. When the system will start to shrink the entire system that the human race has envisaged will start to fall apart.
Norman above is right when he said: “their standard of living and social stability depend on the nonsense of infinite growth.”
Just for instance. Decline of population due to aging? No need for new houses. No necessity of new mortgage, no more cement production, no more bricks, plumbers, boilers, chillers, pipes, interior furniture, etc.
A smaller population means fewer cars on the road, fewer cars produced down the production line, fewer spare parts, less consumption of gasoline, lubricating oil, tires, etc. Fewer people in general that are put to work.
So the real question is how you can manage contraction with hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of unemployed people in every nation? Can the human race envision a new way of living without capitalism and economic growth before violence erupts among the angry population?
i agree
but in the meantime i need the taxes from all those ‘workers’ to pay my pension and keep me in aged luxury.
without them—i would be in the workhouse or the churchyard, long my their contributions flow.
sure—200 years from now—all contraction will have happened
its the part in between thats going to be unpleasant for all of us
in ‘contraction’ there will be no exceptions. no elite.
everyone will suffer by it
“but in the meantime i need the taxes from all those ‘workers’ to pay my pension and keep me in aged luxury.”
Yes, the question is will you outlive their ability to pay or not.
I see the same thing in the US with SS. What cannot go on won’t, the question is when.
Dennis L.
90 soon
fit as a flea.
but another 5 years?—-10 at most—already the Prudential insurance company have put out a contract on me.
i still intend to be shot by a jealous husband on my 99th birthday—working on that.
Walter I’ve been over this with you numerous times on substack and you fold your hand every time because your argument is not based on structuralism. As best I can tell it’s because you live in France — one of your artificially preferred countries — and therefore you are simply bargaining with Collapse. Nevermind all the nuclear power plants, huh? To rebut your argument, all financing of your so-called complex countries originates in your so-called hypercomplex countries. That’s the nature of globalization. If some countries’ debt structures are less complex it is only because the globalization function best optimized global growth that way, as per the globalized profit motive, but that doesn’t mean that systemic risk isn’t shared more or less evenly across all countries. Given zero focus on self-sufficient economics over the last 50 years, no industrialized country (meaning every country) is remotely well-positioned to transition to industrial autarky. North Korea included, even despite its autarkic political philosophy. Conversely, all industrialized countries *are* well-positioned for collapse into agrarianism, State-based or otherwise.
I think that a big thing that gets the countries in Africa and Latin America in trouble is loans for infrastructure, either financed by the World Bank or by Chinese organizations. This infrastructure rarely turns out to be as profitable as hoped. The countries end up with big bills owed to foreign organizations.
It is the debt system that contributes to the hyper complexity. If these countries can get themselves out from this problem, it would help a great deal.
I put together a talk (mp4) for a group in Kenya, talking about the country’s problems.
https://videos.files.wordpress.com/GfE2reQa/tverberg-a-new-investment-mindset-for-kenya-june-3-2024.mp4
Perhaps I should have said, “Depends on computers.”
If an economy has back up paper and pencil approaches, and can use them instead, it is likely OK. I saw paper and pencil used in India. I haven’t been to Africa.
You are clear and matter of fact as usual about prospects that people overwhelmingly don’t want to face. Of course we don’t know what the universe holds in the future, or even what’s really happening in it now, with our intelligence, which is only designed to, at best understand what is happening immediately around us. The offer of an escapist hope at the end of the article is uncharacteristic of you, Gail, and we don’t need it.
I really don’t want people to overreact and go out and kill themselves and their families. I want to allow at least some hope.
I didn’t want to go to the “sustainable future” story, but I do know that Dmitry Orlov has written about people prospering in post collapse Soviet Union. We also know that stones of the Great Wall of China were sometimes used in rebuilding elsewhere.
Neanderthal ‘population bottleneck’ around 110,000 years ago may have contributed to their extinction
In the study, published online Feb. 20 in the journal Nature Communications, researchers discovered that around 110,000 years ago, our closest human relatives experienced a “population bottleneck” that decimated their genetic diversity.
A population bottleneck occurs when there is a sudden reduction in genetic variation within a species. Bottlenecks in a species can be brought on by a number of processes, such as climate change, hunting or genocide. The end result of a bottleneck may be a population that is sickly or on the verge of extinction.
The scientists identified the bottleneck by analyzing changes in the shape of the Neanderthal inner ear over time.
When they analyzed the inner ears of Neanderthal skulls, they discovered that there was an abrupt decline in variation in this bone in skulls dated to the beginning of the Late Pleistocene, signaling a significant change in the Neanderthal skeleton.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/neanderthal-population-bottleneck-around-110-212844946.html
The scientists identified the bottleneck by analyzing changes in the shape of the Neanderthal inner ear over time.
That’s reassuring.
For a minute there, I thought these scientists were going to say they felt the bumps on the Neanderthals’ craniums.
Of course, they didn’t examine the skulls of even one percent of the Neanderthals who were alive at any one time, as the vast majority would not have made it to the fossil stage.
Incidentally, a commonly cited estimate is that worldwide Neanderthal populations might have been around 10,000 to 15,000 individuals AT THEIR PEAK. That is already fairly close to a bottleneck.
While there is no strict threshold for what population size constitutes a genetic bottleneck, a population size of around 10,000 individuals could indeed be considered relatively small in terms of genetic diversity, particularly for a hominid species.
As of recent estimates, there have been around 400 Neanderthal fossil remains identified, including skulls, limb bones, and teeth. These are considered to come from between 100 and 200 identifiable individuals OVER THE PERIOD FROM 400,000 to 40,000 YEARS AGO based on the composite of various skeletal finds.
Interestingly, estimates of the global population of Homo sapiens around 100,000 years ago typically range from a few thousand to possibly tens of thousands. Some studies suggest that the population may have been between 10,000 to 50,000 individuals at that time, about the same as that of our Neanderthal cousins.
The foot and mouth disaese decimated the second largest milk farm in Slovakia
https://ekonomika.pravda.sk/ludia/clanok/746666-slintacka-zostrelila-druhu-najvacsiu-mliecnu-farmu-slovenska-fico-skody-sa-vysplhali-na-60-milionov-eur-nevieme-co-bude-dalej/?utm_source=pravda&utm_medium=hp-box&utm_campaign=shp_3clanok_box
The increasingly impossible cooperation causes atomization of the economy
Lowering wages, insane contractual obligations for suppliers, taxes, tariffs…
The trend in the USA was clear to those who cooperated with the USA companies and reflects the overall trends in the economies.
Globalization is clearly falling apart. But shifting back to what we had before looks to be close to impossible. Too few resources; transitions too long.
That’s probably the most specific prediction you’ve made, Gail – you’ve always been more “Delphic” before today. We won’t have long to wait to know if you’re right.
Perhaps there are more ways to kick the problem down the road, but the steps Trump and Musk are taking now are the kinds of things that will push the system toward contraction. It is hard to see an alternative, however.
What will be missed? Will it make a difference?
Dennis L.
The US agencies that give out money influence a lot of spending by universities and other organizations. Cutting back at the Federal Level has a great deal of leverage. This chart shows how much college costs have climbed since the Department of Education was added. Whole layers of administration were add. Professors were pushed into writing papers rather than teaching in classes.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/CollegeCost1.jpg?itok=byR6JXHm
the don is using the same playbook as hitler
hitler took germany down the roadto catastrophe in just 12 years—by making germany great again.
germany was rebuilt because the USA was awash with so much oil, they needed to find a use for it—so they bombed germany to oblivion, (with fossil fuels) then rebuilt it, (using fossil fuels)
this made the oil elite of America very rich indeed, via the American taxpayer.
This time round, there will be no surplus energy with which to rebuild America once its economic system has been trashed and bankrupted by the dons misdirected obsession.
all his business ventures have ended in the same way.
Hitler too was voted into office—he then proceeded to decapitate the judicial system that might have stopped him.
the don is doing the same thing.
Don’t panic!
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/13AE0/production/_101980608_mediaitem101980605.jpg.webp
Gail, it seems to me your conclusion that the Advanced Economies are going to collapse while the rest of the world may not fare so badly mirror the economic performance predictions made in the Deagel forecasts, that date back between about 10 and 20 years. Deagel also predicted massive population declines in the same Advanced Economies, with the UK as ground zero if I remember correctly.
And this year is Deagel Year!
https://archive.org/details/deagel-population-reduction-forecast-2025-deagel-corp-is-a-branch-of-us-military-intelligence
US population reduction of 2/3 is in line with predictions for nuclear war resulting in food distribution breakdown
It is just the UK and USA paying the piper after enjoying a couple centuries of prosperity, on the expense of the people in the Continent, which they perhaps did not deserve.
Since they enjoyed too much prosperity it is time for them to pay.
“You cannot spill a drop of American blood without spilling the blood of the whole world…. We are not a nation, so much as a world.”
― Herman Melville
To me, it is clear that the actions of the world’s elite (the real elite) has been completely geared towards a controlled demolition of major economies (which consume lots of fossil fuels), while trying to downscale miserably to renewable “green” energies without success, by the way.
But they predicted these failures, it is part of their plan. That’s why they needed lockdowns during Covid, or why the depopulation agenda is so strong (put here feminism, incels, lgbt, trans stuff, all just to destroy family formation and fertility rates).
Even the immigrant issue is a non-issue. They are just numbers to inflate debt, being possible future slaves or future mercenaries to work for elites against their own populations.
There’s no mystery as to what is happening.
The “right wing” politicians trying to fight this agenda are simply oblivious. In a world of infinite resources, their message would be completely correct, but not in this pre-collapse world.
In this world, it’s every man for himself. Those who don’t realize that are already dead and just don’t know it yet.
Only super cohesive societes, or very primitive ones will survive. Put here the Amish, Mennonites, and Hunter Gatherers around the world.
We won’t have the technology nor the fuel nor the resources to restart the metal ages, we will go back to the neolithic and stay there forever.
This here is the only thing “elites” are still dreaming about: they think they can preserve their power, humanity’s knowledge, or social structures to serve them after everything’s gone.
Well, they wish.
will the amish retain their land rights?
There will be no one to enforce anything, be it the police, bureaucrats, the government itself.
There won’t be any “rights” to anything.
You’ll have to take it by force from them, if you can.
of course, my response was to your apparent suggestion that the Amish will somehow be among the winners
I find it funny about some person who thinks the Amish is special
Whatever they have will be taken by gangs with submachine guns within a day
https://cynthiachung.substack.com/cp/159974809
The AI Chip Race for Technological Supremacy: Has the United States Already Lost & What Does That Mean for the Future?
The US cannot possibly make semiconductor cheaply.
According to the article, “the US has in fact dropped in its share of global semiconductor production from 37% in 1990 to 10% in 2022.”
This Month In China
https://www.pascalcoppens.com/_files/ugd/890aa1_e83f46ef44b84175a12d3c9d2e291726.pdf
3. ‘Super giant reed’ biomass could replace fossil fuels for power generation
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202501/21/WS678eee8ea310a2ab06ea82b3_1.html
Chinese ‘artificial sun’ sets new record in milestone step toward fusion power generation
Reed grass:
Of course, China needs the land to grow food. And I expect that the grass takes nutrients out, so there must be some supplementation of what is lost. I wonder whether the reeds need to be dried first; this would add costs and lead to the need for extra steps. Coal’s big advantage has been cheapness of supply. Would this still hold?
It just doesn’t work. You would exhaust the land in a few harvests.
lol
i opened that link
AI …BS
Another whole minute of my life wasted—-I demand a refund!!!!
“Furthermore, Eric Chaisson, in Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature, points out that there is a very long term trend in the universe toward more complex and more energy-dense structures. His analysis seems to suggest the possibility of evolution toward a different kind of more complex, energy-dense economy ahead.”
a short term trend, about 300 years, is humans burning FF and obtaining massive amounts of surplus energy which flow through the economy and enable IC.
as the flow of surplus energy declines, which is starting to happen just about now, the global economy MUST shrink.
degrowth MUST happen, when the flow of surplus energy declines.
IC surely will end later this century.
Earth will remain highly complex as long as there is a sufficient flow of energy from the Sun, but the complexity will no longer include IC.
it’s nothing to worry about.
BAU tonight, baby!
In theory, the world could figure out a different way of cheaply getting energy and putting it to use than burning fossil fuels. M. King Hubbert seems to have been wrong about his approach but, in theory, there could perhaps be something we haven’t thought of.
possible in theory.
the reality of the past few decades is that there have been inventions and tech but nothing that comes close to providing the massive surplus energy derived from FF production.
I don’t see any problem with the end of IC later this century.
humans burned wood for many tens of thousands of years, and future humans can go back to burning wood again.
humans survived many tens of thousands of years before the blip in time of burning FF, and humans probably will survive many more tens of thousands of years when FF production is back to near zero.
you might have missed the critical equation in all that.
if humankind discovered the way to make fire, using wood, 2 m years ago, then it took all that time for us to reach 1 bn people. (around 1700)
then once we started using FF, it took just 300 years to multiply x8
without FF the world cannot support that many people. (Trees don’t grow fast enough)
this the reality that our leaders cannot accept, or are in denial of.
this why there will be no MAGA.
8 bn people cannot support themselves on an agrarian lifestyle….which means that life is going to get very unpleasant for 7bn of us.
without FF the world cannot support that many people. (Trees don’t grow fast enough)
Trees don’t grow fast enough to support any civilisation. Civilisation just doesn’t work.
on our terms of civilisation….you are quite correct guest.
a civilisation (Rome, say) supported by the speed of plant growth, moves at a walking pace, and no faster.
our civilisation, in order to function as it does, needs the speed of machines.
we didnt have machines on wheels until the early 1800s
thats when our problems started.
on our terms of civilisation….you are quite correct guest.
On any terms.
“Trees don’t grow fast enough to support any civilisation. Civilisation just doesn’t work.”
“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Conan Doyle’s Sherlock-Holmes.
No heat source on earth works, the H economy appears to be expanding what it lacks is a safe, cheap means of conversion of solar to H.
Ah, a cubic mile of Pt which has yet to be found on earth, but the solar system is large.
We can explore the solar system effortlessly, we have endless, safe energy in space. We can use solar energy on earth converted to electricity with minimal harm to our heat budget for spaceship earth.
I posted earlier, Starship has no useful purpose as stated yet it is getting basically unlimited funding. Assuming next week’s launch, that is 33 days from the last “failure.” To me this suggests someone sees the necessity of moving quickly. They are building an inventory of these things, launching them, and correcting problems with the inventory using knowledge based on the latest failure.
Of course Pt is crazy, I am open to another alternative. To me it seems very safe environmentally, water to water, sunshine used in a different manner, same amount of net heat to our precious planet.
Dennis L.
the reality of the past few decades is that there have been inventions and tech
No there haven’t. Absolutely nothing of any significance has been invented since the year 2000.
Thanks for the article, thanks for the complete and probably mostly correct conclusions.
“In theory, the world could figure out a different way of cheaply getting energy and putting it to use than burning fossil fuels.”
The solutions are not on earth, they are above us. Look at SpaceX and the intense pace they are building Starships for which there is no current use. Falcon 9 does nicely for all current launches. Someone knows and for all practical purposes capital seems to come from the air, it is perhaps one of the largest projects of mankind – we are not given financial numbers as far as I know. No government has ever built rockets at this pace or scale.
Humans will have a hell of a time surviving the trip to Mars, let alone the hostile environment,, but it is something to sell not unlike the Appollo program. I once saw a quote that machines could have done everything men did in space except give a political reason to spend money on space.
Robots are advancing at an incredible pace, AI will plateau(a guess) as it assimilates all known knowledge and draws out all possible conclusions. Energy in space is not a problem, heat for manufacturing is not a problem, move whatever is needed the correct distance from the fusion source. MSFT has stopped spending on “data centers.”
Food will become a problem, the US is an example; something is wrong with the diet, obesity is out of control. Land is being treated poorly, management of land is not that easy and to a certain degree solar is competing for land use.
Again, thanks to Gail for information that can improve the guesses of how to adapt in the near term.
Dennis L.
Mars will never be colonized. No child born or raised there would ever be able to visit Earth. Low gravity would not develop bones strong enough
The Soviet Union collapsed because Russia could not supply more oil to East European economies which did not have the foreign exchange to buy oil on the global world market. There was a peak of crude production in West Siberia in the mid 1980s at the technological level available to the Soviet Union at the time. Gorbachev was aware of it. It’s mentioned in my article:
4/10/2010
Russia’s oil peak and the German reunification
http://crudeoilpeak.info/russia%E2%80%99s-oil-peak-and-the-german-reunification
I think that there is room for different people to see the situation differently. Russia was the high-cost producer at this time, because its fields were depleting. Low world oil prices were a problem. Eastern Europe was most likely not using the oil in an efficient way, exacerbating the situation.
In a higher price situation, Russia could have invested in new fields earlier.
The CIA was fully aware about the oil production problems the Russians were facing in West Siberia in the 80s. I found a secret report “Soviet Oil Exports: Understanding the Dynamics
of the Downturn” dated February 1986 (released in 2011), describing that frantic efforts were made to arrest decline in aging fields (Samotlor disease), clearly a geological problem.
Quote: “The Communist world as a whole-particularly Eastern Europe-is heavily dependent on Soviet oil [total 1.9 mb/d in 1983/84 – table on p 12], and these nations have good reason to be concerned about the USSR’s oil-export outlook. Substantial cutbacks in oil deliveries to the East European countries would cause major economic difficulties at a time when those countries are under pressure to expand deliveries of finished products to the USSR. Moscow would have to weigh carefully the attendant risk of economic instability and increased political tensions that could result from a reduction in oil deliveries to these nations.”
This confirms what I said.
The report also mentions that Russia was so desperate it made kind of barter deals with OPEC countries in which Russia exported arms for oil and then re-exported that oil to get foreign exchange. And then there were obligations to supply oil to other communist countries like Cuba.
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP87T00787R000100080003-5.pdf
We can learn from this when Russian oil production declines again…
The West definitely benefited from the fact that Russia did not immediately develop new oil fields. Oil was saved for later, putting off world peak oil.
All of these things seem to work together. I think that there is a Hand of God behind what happens. People look at the individual part of the system that they can see and try to manipulate it, but they cannot see the bigger picture.
Yes, your posts, like this one, try to connect the dots for a bigger picture!
Unfortunately, I can’t see a Hand of God when it comes to reducing GHG emissions. In fact, everything seems to conspire against it
Everything that can be burned will be burned. Like always.
Pt, it solves the GHG problem. Starship is too large for any current problems, it may well be intended to manufacture in space which solves all near term problems.
In the next ten years if we find a cubic mile of Pt, believe in the hand of God.
Dennis L.
I am so worried for our children & grandchildren! Thank you Gail, for explaining things so well.
In some ways, it is a blessing to be not-so-young any more.
as the oldest surviving ofw’er— i agree
No, it is better to be young, life is ahead of one. It has never been easy and the world has always been 80/20.
There is tons of cheap housing, just not where one might like. Move in, move a group in, change the neighborhood. That is a much easier problem than trying to move into a neighboring country. A good religion will be a necessity and will need to match one’s surroundings.
To make this work requires biology, reproduction. It works for the Amish, economics is only possible with biology. Modern career woman need not apply, they will be gone in fifty years in any case, biology, always biology.
Dennis L.
Change tge beighborhood. Evicted by the gentrifiers.
No thanks
The best thing by far about the “good old days” is that back then I wasn’t old.
As we near the end game, the U.S. government seize All remaining energy sources by military force.
and that will shut down the world’s economic system
sorry—but grabbing energy resources will not alter the timetable of collapse.
Nobody said it would. It’s intended to insure US dominance when energy gets scarce. BTW- are you some kind of expert on everything? You sure do dominate the posts here. What is your background?
sorry about dominating the posts—i would have put that accolade elsewhere.—a prevous commenter on ofw used to do 30% +—I’m nowhere near that
maybe my comments irritate you—only you know why.
an expert in nothing other than observation—the university of life.
i’m always happy to be shown to be wrong though—that doesnt annoy me at all.
Try actually reading a post before you criticize the author. You have a way of doing that. I retired from Oxy Petroleum. after 26 years of service. I earned a masters degree from Purdue University in mechanical engineering. I have a pretty good idea about what lies ahead for the U.S. All dying empires seize critical resources by military force when all else fails. It’s called continuity of government.
Are you predicting an invasion of Iran?
What mine isine and what’s yours is negotiable
Another favorite from long long ago
What isy oil doing under your sand?
Them’s fightin’ words, stranger.
This blog ain’t big enough for two retired engineers—you and Keith—let alone three as it will be if we include Norman, with his O-level in technical drawing.
agreed about seizing resources to try to stay solvent.
that has worked in the past, because other empires always had cheap resources to seize, from someone else.
this time its different—-the era of cheap resources is over—permanently.
my expertise, in my very limited way, lies in energy function—ie the production of wages……that is what energy (and resource) usage is all about.
no matter what resources you grab from others, if they can’t be rendered into real time wages for the ordinary individual—then they have no use at all.
you can only turn ”resources” into ”wages” by energy input….. and the only meaningful energy input, within our economic system, derives from fossil fuels.
if you find that difficult to grasp—consider that the Saudis sat on a sea of oil for 000s of years—it didnt make them wealthy until we took it away and burned it.
interesting though, as a petroleum engineer, you appear to consider oil as ‘wealth”, failing to understand how wealth is actually created.
What’s the size of the premium for insuring US dominance?
I wouldn’t expect a payout for that.
I’m afraid the US doesn’t have the military strength to seize all remaining energy sources. This isn’t a detail they have wanted people to know, however.
U.S. government seize All remaining energy sources by military force.
You seem to be suffering from a severe case of US delusionality. The US is in no shape to attempt anything of the kind.
Even disregarding the lack of equipment and ammunition, have you seen the quality of the recruits the US military gets nowadays?
The US has fought its major war of the 2020s, in Ukraine, and it has decisively lost. There’s nothing left to fight with.
“go back to the JCP one
8:29 year Window Guys breakout window one
8:32 year Iran today is literally one
8:36 week one
8:39 week that is
8:43 unacceptable . . .
the
11:00 Iranian program as it currently exists
11:03 is a weapons preparation program there’s
11:05 no other way to describe
11:07 it . . .
15:54 you know who did that Donald
15:56 Trump Donald Trump actually built a
15:59 employment plan to launch preemptive
16:01 nuclear strike against
16:03 Iran we built weapons especially for
16:06 this purpose . . .
16:31 big bombs didn’t work which is exactly
16:34 why Donald Trump has made low yield
16:37 ground penetrating nuclear weapons that
16:39 do
16:40 work . . .
if we’re going to say we’re going
16:53 to take out the Iranian nuclear
16:55 capability then we will take it out
16:56 using the weapons that are designed for
16:58 that
17:00 purpose . . .
17:50 if Iran thinks that the initial attack
17:53 against it is going to be a very limited
17:55 strike they’re wrong if the decision’s
17:58 made to take out Iran’s nuclear
17:59 infrastructure then we will also take
18:01 out the political component of that
18:03 nuclear program the weaponization aspect
18:06 of it which is a regime we believe is
18:08 prepared to either issue the order or
18:10 has already issued the order to create
18:11 nuclear weapons this will be a regime
18:13 change
18:15 operation . . .
because if it gets to
18:55 the point where Iran does this or
18:57 attempts to do this Iran will no longer
19:01 exist . . .
these are
20:50 confessions made by very Senior People
20:53 by policy makers by decision makers by
20:56 members of the Iranian government um
20:59 and it is condemned Iran because now the
21:02 United States has every justification
21:04 under international law to take a
21:06 Hardline stance
21:09 against the Iranian nuclear
21:11 program um and that’s that’s where I
21:14 stand on
21:15 this“?
“The US and many other Advanced Economies are likely heading into a worse and longer lasting financial crisis than the 2008 crisis, starting as soon as this summer. … Perhaps quite a few people will be able to do well if they can keep their eyes open for opportunities to prosper, making the best possible use (or reuse) of resources that are available.” BUT: as opposed to popular opinion, in the future, “doing well” will depend first and foremost on educated intelligence (IQ, which itself is about 75% dependent on genetics). This unwelcome, undemocratic fact means that the few countries that acknowledge and act upon this will survive, while others will not, at least in their Western liberal, “democratic” form. The current (cognitive-dissonantial) governmental talk about the USA taking over Greenland or even parts of Canada reflects awareness of the increasing scarcity and dearth of critical resources of all kinds (energy, minerals). The mass media, of course, engage only in mythmaking.
As far as IQ goes – we already have genetic selection technologies that allows for selecting the “best” embryo of among, typically, up to ~40, or ~2 s.d. above the median. In the near future we will probably be able to modify embryonic DNA, not just select. I would be surprised if this were not already happening among the billionaire class. We will have some scary smart children walking around in the next 10 years.
When I picked 40, by the way, I meant from a successful IVF procedure.
All the brains in the world won’t help you if you cannot obtain and maintain enough technology to overcome a large group of “dumb” people . Good genetics isn’t the cast of Big Bang Theory. A good mix of intelligence and “brawn” (the ability to use force to get things done whether it’s control over a river or to make stuff ) is what will be required in the future.
In other words, I don’t think atomized people with complex technology is a a good bet in a de-globalized world.
“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”
— George Carlin
BUT: as opposed to popular opinion, in the future, “doing well” will depend first and foremost on educated intelligence
It will depend on the power and dexterity with which a person can swing a club or throw a rock at other peoples’s skulls. There will no need for any of this education nonsense.
evolution will then favour those with thicker skulls
please select from OFW’ers
We don’t really know what characteristics will need to be selected for. It may be that resistance to radiation poisoning is high on the list.
Good article.
If a crash occurs, the intensity of the wars may decrease, but for now, there are still risks. The US could open more fronts in the Middle East, and in Europe, our leaders are thinking about rearming.
This possible financial collapse could be more intense than previous ones, but will the system be able to recover? I think there could be many tough years ahead, and then a new system very different from the current one could emerge
I agree that there could be many tough years ahead, and then a new system very different from the current one could emerge.
I agree that wars are terribly attractive when resources are in short supply. But I was hoping that a shortage of the ability to make ammunition would cut down war-making efforts.
Troubling news as Alexander Mercouris is a geopolitical expert. He claims that it has been revealed via Pete Hegseth that the US is preparing to contain China both economically and militarily. In other words, another forever war.
It is somewhat difficult to contain it economically. They are still the workshop of the world, and the largest producer of a variety of minerals, including coal. With Russia, they must be talking about bringing war to the USA, in Greenland or South America for example, to minimize damage near home.
Supply lines for distant wars are harder to maintain, though. I’m not sure they’ll go that route. I suppose they could do something asymmetric like arm the cartels, and perhaps they’re already doing it, or maybe not as they don’t want to antagonize the Mexican govt.
The US can fantasise about ‘containing China’, but as a weak, decaying former hegemon, that is all it can do.
Certainly, but what concerns me is that they might overestimate themselves so greatly that they try something kinetic.
try something kinetic.
With what?
Time to build bases in Venezuela, to be used five years hence?
In my view, the war that US would like to start in collaboration with Israel is the one against Iran.
Maybe that is also the reason why Russia is taking time to solve Ukraine situation (in addition to the problem of Zelensky’s administration).
If the front in Ukraine is closed, US can be freely involved in a war with Iran.
My impression is that China, Russia and Iran know this.
In the following article one can understand something.
It is also explained that US interests in Iran are followed by ‘charge d’affaires of Swiss embassy’ and I find it funny, but I know it is something normal behind what is said in TV propaganda.
“Iran will have ‘no choice’ but to acquire nukes if attacked: Khamenei adviser”
[…] “Glass room. Iran’s foreign ministry summoned the charge d’affaires of the Swiss embassy, which represents US interests in Iran, “following the threats by the US president,” a ministry statement said.”
https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-east/2025/04/01/iran-will-have-no-choice-but-to-acquire-nukes-if-attacked-khamenei-adviser-
China is indeed concerning, but I agree with drb753 that there is not much we can do about this. I don’t think that we can make much of a war against CHina because doing so would require buying materials from China to make military weapons.
I have been following Art B., Gail T., Nate Hagens and other fine writers more numerous to name forever. There is no difference. They are both (all) spot on. Prepare best one can. “it” won’t be pleasant. Makes no difference what your political preferences are. Gonna be bigger than politics. How the decline is handled will make some difference but local will be better.
I think that there is more of a “loss of complexity” issue than most writers understand. Spare parts become difficult to obtain. Machinery of all types will tend to fall apart because necessary parts can’t be found.
Also, services from governments that we now receive are likely to disappear. Pensions are likely to disappear.
Each writer has his or her own emphasis. I know Art and Nate from Oil Drum days.
You’ve been right all along, Gail. I saw this morning on Bloomberg that hedge funds like Blackrock, KKR, and Carlyle are trying to convince fund companies to take private credit and leveraged debt into 401k plans. Clearly, the rich don’t want the stuff. Since the assets can’t be marked to market they can hide the garbage in mom and pop’s retirement plans while the rich cash out.
I noticed something similar. Where do the financial gurus offload the leveraged debt to, now?
When financial markets are being pumped up with added debt, returns to financial markets are high. Leveraging looks like a good idea.
But once it becomes clear that the economy needs to contract, leveraging works the wrong way. Oops!
So what is Art Berman missing in his latest article?
https://www.artberman.com/blog/we-wanted-a-new-world-just-not-this-one/
I suppose what Art is missing is how badly off governments are, in terms of debt levels, and how the high inflation rates are tied to an inadequate supply of inexpensive to produce oil. Thus, the situation we are seeing now is only the predecessor to something worse to come.
He is also missing the fact that wind and solar will never be suitable to carry much of the load. EROI calculations give an overly optimistic view of their benefits.
Also, I don’t think that he ever gets the idea that inadequate energy supply is tied to failing governments. There tends to be a loss of complexity, without enough cheap-to-produce energy supply.
He still seems to have hope for higher prices proving more supply. I wouldn’t count on it.
“Relative decline feels worse than constant hardship, and that’s fueling distrust and unrest across democracies.”
Nobody has a democracy. Nobody. Don’t believe me, then here is Heraclitus, a Greek Philosopher, who defined democracy this way.
In a democracy the people vote and vote all the time, on everything. In a democracy the people are the “deciders.”
In a republic the people vote once the person who will do all their deciding for them.
The United States is a Constitutional Republic (or used to be) with some . . . SOME . . . democratic principles (privileges) which are easily (have been) revoked.
As far as I can tell we are “saving the world” for something that does not exist, something that is a fiction, and is now a delusion.
Can somebody please tell me why so-called intelligent people keep talking about democracy, especially during these times when truth and facts and honesty are so important and so missing?
What is going on with all this stuff about democracy?
unfortunately
if everyone voted on everything every time
then nothing would get done
so we elect people who are much like ourselves—as far as is possible—to do it for us while we get on with our everyday lives.
generally this works reasonably well, but, to quote
but to quote Ed R Murrow—-a nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves–
the USA (and other nations) are seeing that evolve in real time
Democracy, in the sense that people talk about saving or preserving or defending it all the time, is an ideal or a principle that on closer examination turns out to be nothing but hot air. It’s a feel-good word that has been invested with an aura of righteousness, wholesomeness, and moral superiority so that it can serve the propagandists to distinguish our team (those who share our values, worldview and common interest) from their team (those who who don’t).
We have democracy; they have dictatorship. We have administrations; they have regimes. We liberate lands and peoples with appropriate force if necessary. They conquer and invade and enslave lands and peoples using weapons of mass destruction. And of course, it isn’t genocide or evil or an atrocity when we do it, because we are doing it to save, or preserve, or defend democracy.
Rinse and repeat and you have the essence of most of the foreign policy speech as voiced in congress, parliament or the mainstream media.
You and I see “democracy” the same. Nice to be in good company.
This view of ‘democracy’ as opposed to ‘authoritarianism’ is correct.
It’s not even worth 5 minutes of your time to go and vote, don’t do it.
Art actually argues that renewable energies cannot replace fossil fuels.
Do you understand why he is so adversarial to Europe?
He sometimes sends conflicting messages. On one hand he talks about ecocide but when I tweeted about the brine water problems in the Permian he did not like it. Maybe because he is still working there in the oil patch.
Scott Ritter’s description of a Trump nuclear attack on Iran is scary. It renders all our debates academic
Maybe Scott Ritter is out of touch with where the US military is today. I am doubtful that the US could actually perform a nuclear attack on Iran. It certainly could not follow up.
What Art didn’t mention is US Permian oil production is expected to drop 25% in 2025. It’s tapped out. A dying industry.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-permian-basins-oil-output-growth-slow-2025-despite-trumps-plan-executives-say-2025-02-06/
That is disturbing. Permian oil production has been helping the US economy, even if we export it and import other, heavier oil. Permian oil production has been helping keep the world’s production from falling, too.
add the permian problem to the trumpian delusion and you really have problems
Indeed.
US shale oil seems to cover up peaking crude oil production in the rest of the world since 2018
4 Mar 2024
https://crudeoilpeak.info/us-shale-oil-seems-to-cover-up-peaking-crude-oil-production-in-the-rest-of-the-world-since-2018
This is whole shale thing was scraping the bottom of the bottom of oil wells that had stopped being productive decades ago. IMO.
I found this segment by Skynews Australia interesting. You had a debate from one side that we would never run out of oil. The other saying we would and because the price would go so high it would crush the economies of the world.
People never seem to understand how complex the economy is. Consumers cannot withstand high oil prices. Governments dive in with more debt to try to save the economy, (or if they can, they cut interest rates, but that possibility is no longer available). Those extracting oil need high prices. Part of these high prices are to pay taxes to help the economies of the countries extracting the oil.
“Those extracting oil need high prices.”
That’s what one of the oil company said. We need high oil prices, they are too low and we reinvest those profits and put them back for more oil exploration.
most people dont realise that before oil is used it only has a price
it only acquires value at the point where it is used.
after it is used, it dissipates into nothing.
my point being—that if we can’t afford to use oil, that ultimately it will be left in the ground—-so in that sense we will never run out of oil
we will just run out of the means by which we use it, because the use of oil is only facilitated by the surplus energy within that oil.
we must constantly find more oil in order to use the surplus enenrgy in yet more oil by which we drive the world’s economic system.
it is a system that has only existed since the late 1800s—less than 150 years.
this makes it an eyeblink in human history—-a brief anomaly.
and no—there are no alternatives…..energy availability is not the problem.
finding ways to use energy with which to make wages is the problem.
Yes! Yes! I quite agree with the thrust of your comments here.
Unless, or course, space-based solar or methane from Uranus or aliens from the vicinity of Tabby’s Star save us!
In a finite world, if keep expanding you will eventually run up against physical limits. Although you may not experience them as physical limits.
Since we operate within a money-based economic systems, physical limits may be experienced by the man (or woman or differently gendered individual) in the street as affordability (expensiveness) or availability (scarcity) or quality (crappification) issues.
Thanks so much.
the fuels of the industrial revolution kickstarted the money and wealth of the industrial revolution—not the other way round.
unfortunately we have lost sight of that–“we” being our political leaders, and “we” who vote them into office.
As a result “we” are now convinced that money produced the fuel of the industrial revolution—–and the more money is pumped in, the more prosperity we will have—forever.
The reality is—-that we will be pushed into financial collapse because with insufficient energy support, the actual value of money will evaporate.
That’s hard to fault.
I am afraid so.
Good comment. Here is something that will really fry your nugget.
As the price of gold rises the value of the USD falls. Speculation is currently hot that the US Government will revalue gold (currently at $42.22 a troy ounce) to match the current market value approximately $3,100.00. This will cause value of the USD to plummet, causing instant hyperinflation.
Expectations are that this will happen as part of DOGE’s efforts to trim the US Government.
Even more un-nerving are speculation that DOGE’s efforts are really an effort to make the US Government leaner and meaner for an up-coming war. Brian Berletic really seems to be onto something in the attached podcast.
And one last observation. Between 1913 and 2008 the value of the USD had fallen 98-percent. Common knowledge. The Crash of 2008-09 cause the last remaining value of the USD to fall to zero. ZERO. Since 2010 the dollar has been worth nothing. The result is the craziness and insanity that drove previous full-on systemic collapses in the United States pale compared with everything that has been going on from 2010 to present.
https://youtu.be/6Ti1pjFeHQo
however you define ”going on”—-it has been entirely due to the fall in availability of cheap surplus energy in our economic system
the old oilwells of the 30s and 40s delivered 100:1 return
now that return is less that 20:1 at best (and they are Saudi wells)—fracking delivers much less.
in simple terms this means that you have to work 5x as hard to sustain the standard of living that was thought of as ”the american dream”
unfortunately the don and myself are not on speaking terms.
so i havent been able to tell him why there will be no MAGA.
you cannot sustain a modern economy on expensive oil,
Come again?
“the fuels of the industrial revolution kickstarted the money and wealth of the industrial revolution—not the other way round.”
But the fuels of the Industrial Revolution were lying around in the ground the whole time, and were being exploited, albeit on a smaller scale, well before the Industrial Revolution kicked off.
I also believe there was money, there were markets, and there were accumulations of wealth, or capital, well before the Industrial Revolution kicked off, and that many of the wealthy invested some of their capital in the industries that kicked off the Industrial Revolution.
One could argue that this was a chicken and egg situation: Which came first, the fuels or the money? But from my limited and cloudy perspective, having neither an engineering degree or an extensive knowledge of the history of the time, it seems that fuels and money enjoyed a synergistic relationship in which each mutually supported the expansion of use of the other until—bingo!—Dark Satanic Mills everywhere!
But the fuels of the Industrial Revolution were lying around in the ground the whole time, and were being exploited, albeit on a smaller scale
That’s correct, by 1600 or so England was already producing a million tons of coal a year. That made a very significant difference to the economy and freed up timber to be used for ships.
that million tons of coal was being burned for heat extraction—little else.
iron could only be smelted using charcoal
the big shift came when coal was coked to make iron.
that didnt happen until 1700/1750.
after that, the growth in global wealth pivoted on the availability of cheap iron and mass production of cheap iron goods.
that million tons of coal was being burned for heat extraction—little else.
Yes, but what else would you do with a million tons of coal apart from extracting heat out of it?
Answers on a postcard please!
Say I was an industrialist who wanted to start the Industrial Revolution by building some beehive ovens to turn coal into coke, which I could then sell to other industrialists who would use the coke for heat extraction in order to smelt iron.
I would need to invest in land and facilities, perhaps modestly at first, and in labour, for workers to dig the coal, transport that to the ovens, operate the ovens, recover the coke, transport it to the ironworks, and my fellow industrialists would need to invest in land and facilities for the ironworks, and in labour for workers to dig the ore, transport it to the ironworks, operate the foundries, forges and furnaces, heating this, smelting that, pouring the other into molds, quenching, finishing, transporting the finished iron to factories for further processing, etc.
Aye, that were real men’s work, not yer namby-pamby clerical, teaching, or service work.
But from the point of view of the industrialists, enterprise on that scale required capital, and lots of it. You couldn’t just waltz in and start making coke based on the hope the business might go well if you put yer back into it. It required capital, planning, and cooperation among an entire class of entrepreneurs, who needed to have the resources to start it up in order to make it run.
That’s all I’m saying. Pre-existing money and wealth were prerequisites to starting the industrialization by allowing the coking industry to blossom. 🙂
If coal extraction was cheap enough, relative to what it could be sold for (due to its true value to the economy), the operation could be gradually “bootstrapped.” A tiny bit of capital to start with was all that was needed.
Coal also threw off a lot of related jobs for individuals. It had a lot of “surplus energy” to share with the economy, just as early oil did.
early coal was dug sideways from naturally occurring outcrops—needed 2 men and a wheelbarrow, early iron was produced in a bloomery, a few pounds at a time….just a form of clay oven that anyone could make
But wheelbarrows weren’t cheap before industrialization. And nor were picks and shovels.
Even today, you can see people in India and Africa working on quite large construction projects and carrying loads in whicker baskets, presumably because wheelbarrows aren’t cheap.
A tiny bit of capital to start with was all that was needed.
Then why didn’t the Industrial Revolution kick off much earlier? They had the coal. They had the ore. And they had a tiny bit of capital.
Presumably the ancient Romans and Greeks, and before them the Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Indians, and Chinese had access to quite a bit of capital in their time. And none of those peoples were dumb. Why wait until the 1700s to start the Industrial Revolution.
A warmer and stable climate which began 10,000 years ago is why humans were able to focus on building technology to exploit coal (and later oil). When you look at the monoliths and other precisions artifacts from the distant past you wonder if some humans had the technology 8,000 years ago. But I’m stretching here. My main point is that a favorable climate, I believe, is why everything fell into place for humans to exploit what was in the ground for millions of years.
they did not have such tech 8k years ago
cheap iron made cheap steam engines and iron pumps
put engines and pumps together and you can drain deep coalmines
with deep coalmimes you can extract vast amounts of coal
no ”secrets from prehistory” involved
sorry
well, they (advanced economies) are pushed towards war. In Italy 94% are against, but that will not matter. Meanwhile, the independent political leaders are picked off one by one in Europe.
I suppose you are referring to Marine Le Pen, recently. In the US, we don’t see too much news about European political leaders, unless we go looking.
Not just her. Threats against AfD and Meloni, the removal of two right of center candidates in Romania by juridical means, assassination attempts against Fico, and color revolution against Orban, in Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Serbia.
the don is picking off leaders of the US judicial system, one by one.
with the decapitation of the rule of law and subjugation of the military he will be free to make himself absolute ruler—–with all the unpleasantness of his german ancestors resurrected.
he will have no shortage of helpers—dictators never do.
and no—i am not exaggerating at all…… he is breaking the law every day now.
The camps are already being built. D’you think they will hold only deportees?
by now—the don’s ”jokes” about running for a third term are sounding less and less funny.
as i’ve said—-”mid 2020s”—the don arrived right on cue.
Would you be happier if he grew a moustache—just a little one?
Oh, very good, Norman. Standing up for the US judiciary, who have imprisoned untold thousands of innocent people on “trumped up” charges. I for one shed copious crocodile tears for these corrupt gavel-bangers.
Now, prove your anti-Trump credentials are not just MSM-programmed TDS! Give us your honest assessment of Trump’s Israel/Palestine policy. It seems that’s one place where you fear to tread.
Come on, we are all waiting excitedly. Do Israel for us.
I’m pretty sure Norman’s parents or relatives fled Germany during the last Great War. It would explain the Godwin Law he keeps reinforcing, which is a very myopic view of history. In ancient times, claiming to be persecuted did not get immediate sympathy from strangers.
Netanyahu and all his supporters are the ‘antisemites’.
They are willing to ‘sacrifice’ young Israelis { and other ‘Semites’} to prevent Netanyahu facing ‘corruption charges’?
“Come on, we are all waiting excitedly. Do Israel for us.”
Have you seen the reaction to the bbc’s coverage of the 15 medics and firefighters taken out of their vehicles at gun point, hands tied behind their backs and made to kneel at the edge of pit, before being slaughtered(at least one was a UN worker)?
The bbc first accused Hamas, then changed it to something killed them and eventually after lots of people pointing out their hypocrisy, I hear there might be a mention of the genocidal nut jobs masquerading as a country, possibly knowing something about it.
For those that have willingly spent decades imbued in the putrid prose of propaganda, real world events have no meaning and so can be dismissed, if they deviate from the narrative. That’s why we get the reactions we do.
I know. I find this absolutely shocking, barbaric, and disgusting, but at the same time. I don’t find it surprising at all.
This sort of thing happens a lot when young men are turned into soldiers, taught to hate the other, and to regard them as less than human, or as “Amalek,” as I believe Prime Minister Netanyahu told the troops to regard them.
Killing defenseless bound captives, burying them and their vehicles under sand in an attempt to cover up the atrocity, hoping nobody would notice. Norman, with his him ethical standards, will have to address this.
If nothing else, the optics don’t look good. More bloodstains on the image of the most moral army on Earth—as this totally fair and unbiased Jewish woman described the IDF in the Telegraph last year without a shred of irony, and we all had to giggle.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/27/israel-defence-forces-most-moral-soldiers-in-the-world/
“Everyone believes in the atrocities of the enemy and disbelieves in those of his own side, without ever bothering to examine the evidence.”
― George Orwell
“The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”
— Once again, George Orwell
Wait until he hears about self confessed Zionist Starmer, sending his terrorist troop of over 30 thugs to the kick the door in at the Quaker meeting rooms(why not just knock, this is the Quakers, not some zionazi like the PM), all because 6 women were meeting to discuss ways of protesting against genocide. It’s like Hitler has taken office, but he hasn’t noticed because the bbc haven’t said it’s ok to notice.
Over 80% of all targeting for the genocide is supplied by us and the US and the US only supply 37%, so we’re world champions in targeting for genocide. A self confessed Zionist flew to Cyprus to congratulate the scum of the earth for their dedication to genocide and the bbc glorified it(which clearly makes them scum of the earth as well, but we already knew that).
I wonder if the nice men from Yemen might decide that huge base on Cyprus looks too juicy not to take a big bite out of.
Wake me up when he jails a surefire election winner, granpa.
drb
waking you up would stretch my expertise beyond its limits
I too miss Biden. He was a man of great integrity and lucidity. Democracy really depends on personalities.
The camps are already being built. D’you think they will hold only deportees?
by now—the don’s ”jokes” about running for a third term are sounding less and less funny
Thank you for this summary of what the BBC told you to think today.
i want to be as wrong as you think i am
we shall see
how quaint! the camps. and they were built under obama too. the camps, the camps. that’s bulldozing the sacred constitution all right. hopefully the camps are in mild weather areas, we don’t want to heat and dine these campers.
The people of the West are not willing to go to war. Ukrainians are an anomaly, influenced over the course of ~2 decades since the 2004 color revolution and with pre-existing Banderist elements. Whatever they may want, they will have to find another way.
“ I would say during the Cold War they were ready to do the fight but since 1991 when the Cold War ended Europe’s
11:44 been the business of eating schnitzel drinking beer and getting fat they don’t
11:49 fight and they don’t know how to fight they don’t know what fighting is and if they ever went into combat they would
11:55 all die I’m not talking about sending a handful of Europeans off to Afghanistan
12:00 where they engag in low intensity conflict I’m talking about high-intensity conflict like being waged
12:06 between the ukrainians and the Russians there’s not a single European military that can survive in that environment . . . “?