That was a very good read. Simple but powerful. Def. not enough people looking at issues like smelting steel.
The only thing I have is about storing electricity. We are obsessed with using batteries. All well and good but there is a huge cost to that. mining, refining, smelting, international transportation. Why don't we get some dirt, put it in a big container and lift it up with surplus electricity, then let it down to drive turbos when we need it. Right next to the solar or wind turbine. Or could be on a large scale at a big plant. Simple.
You are so right Stephen. I am beginning to feel that engineers have been excluded so much from policy-making that we are driving into a total FUBAR by lawyers, accountants (I'm one!), banksters et al seeking only personal status, power, wealth and control. Engineering makes up 18% of the UK working population when it should be more like >30% to gain influence enough to determine a resilient energy future.
The crazy emphasis on CV's, wind, and solar has to be based on finance when, as you say, any engineer would drive electricity storage by using potential energy as you suggest. Canals have used energy storage using water for centuries - we disregard history at our peril. I think the 21st C mindset focuses on Tech for solutions when simple mechanics alone offers an optimum.
Avoidance of base-load power using tidal, geothermal, hydro, and SMRs with a distributed networked electricity grid rather than a centralised one is so obvious. But of course this doesn't suit the elites and their political lackeys who demand increased controls beyond any rational logic. They will fail IMHO but the damage will be extensive before our engineers return to rebuild a resilient, localised New Economy: This is one of many options:
An interesting idea that seems to make sense. I am not sure about the timetable for this change but it will eventually have to happen. Hybrid should be the way to go during the transition until the electric is more efficient, less labor intensive, more affordable, and reliable.
The proposed change directly from gas to electric is not logical at this point in time, and it should not be mandated. Innovation should determine when the change takes place. Just my two cents.
Agreed Bert but it's not really about electric cars or whatever. There will be personal transport only for the wealthy. They are working on 'Transport-as-a-Service' and that's what EVs will provide.
Most drivers in UK only travel 12,000 miles av/year. At 25mph/av that's 480 hrs, or 20 days or 5.5%, the rest of the time they sit idle and rot. It's really not a brain test. USA is different because of the distances - not sure what will happen for you.
Page 181 of my book Part 1:
"The collapse of the oil industry, transport and related enterprises
Stanford University economist Tony Seba: https://tonyseba.com/ has issued a detailed report recently on the future of oil and transport. Fortunately Tony comes from the real world, having spent decades successfully building, running, and managing businesses and has a lot of practical knowledge and understanding of our present world. He says:
“Oil demand will peak at 100 million barrels per day by 2020, dropping to 70 million barrels per day by 2030. That represents a drop of 30 million barrels in real terms and 40 million barrels below the Energy Information Administration’s current 'business as usual' case. This will have a catastrophic effect on the oil industry through price collapse (an equilibrium cost of $25 per barrel), disproportionately impacting different companies, countries, oil and infrastructure depending on their exposure to high-cost oil.”
His report continues saying that the impact of the collapse of oil prices
throughout the oil industry value chain will be felt as early as 2021.
That's inside info for me Linden. It's an alien project as far as all I know about fracking. I never really believed it was viable but I stand corrected. UK is going SMR which might work if the banksters allow. There are wheels within wheels that defy logic when money contaminates the playing field. Nothing is ever as it appears to be and i have to dig deep for even a glimpse of the reality.
You think the idea of going electric is a replacement for gas cars? No wonder if makes no sense to you, think of it more of a means of controlling people and locking them in their houses and it makes perfect sense.
Not unlike Covid and the vaccines, until you realize “they” want us dead none of it will make any sense.
I think hybrid is the way to go for now. The technology is not there to go all electric. I realized both of those facts when the forced vaccinations were first put into effect. They mean us harm and see us as expendable.
Would be an interesting exercise to figure out should there be enough resources to buy with all money now outstanding. I highly doubt it, too many variables to figure out actually, but I phrased the question in such a way in case you think so. Hahaha!
I don't normally switch gears fast enough and take on heavy book reading, like what's posted about you on SearchGate, but I will follow your Stack. I could learn more about the over riding issues, you might learn from experimentation I have been involved with on the land.
Having family in the Permian Basin oil business, I can attest to the increasing expense of getting black gold out of the earth. There's primary, secondary (water injection), & tertiary recovery (CO2 injection, plus water). When you start tertiary recovery, there's still 60% of the oil in the ground. And it's VERY EXPENSIVE recovery.
Now, horizontal drilling can help, Artic oil can help, offshore can help, but I'd like to see thorium reactors developed, usable at scale, for applications not requiring traditional petroleum.
I was very interested in your distinction between the real/Main St. economy, and Wall St./financilized economy. One of my fave political commentators, Sundance at www.theconservativetreehouse.com, has written extensively on this, and the political/economic consequences of cleaving these two economies. He has the most astute political mind I've ever seen.
Me, I'm heading to my little home in Mexico, to grow a lovely garden, raise chickens, live on largely solar electrical (it's economically viable there, along with solar hot water), in a lovely temperate climate. America will descend into a hellhole. I can walk most places from my house.
Thank you Linden - we walk the same path. I'm off to Cape Town next year (all being well) to do the same thing as you. They can keep their Tech etc - you and I know where it's at. Tim Morgan is continuing with his projections - worth following IMHO: https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/
Thanks. Is sc nuclear feasible within 10 years? RR page is PR page. If yes why would it not be our net zero big alternative given all the negatives associated with solar, wind utilization. Is it like ivermectin and hcq. real Solutions that bring hope are not worthy of coverage?
Lovely analogy Lisa - bang on. Yes, SMRs are almost here BUT it's all about the money (as usual). There are mega investors hanging on to wind and solar. Think of the supply chains involved. There's more fossil fuels involved in the sourcing and construction of wind farms than can ever be recovered over their 25 year life-span - then they end up in landfill. No way do they want SMRs to spoil their patch. Even tidal power is an economic option for base load - but no investment, why?
I know it defies rational logic but this is the world of 'Alice-in-Wonderland' or the 'Wizard of Oz' (BTW - Oz is a metaphor for an ounce of gold - take it from there). These authors were very clued up - they knew the name of the game to which you have alluded. Carry on down the rabbit hole!
They have the technology, I’ve seen it published in Chemistry world a few years ago.
It’s a type of matting for the ocean with very fine hair fibres, using this rules out the need for tidal changes.
The slight movement of the ocean is enough to produce energy for every man woman and child, according to them utilising 1-2% of the ocean.
I’ve read about many breakthroughs and advancements in this magazine, told people about them before they been released, including about lightweight glass lenses and led light bulbs.
Knowing this has had me question every move they’ve and are still making regarding renewables.
One thing is for sure, there’s little profit to be made from literally zero maintenance abundance of energy, versus all those profits as subsidies on what they’re skimming off now.
So true Lizzy, thank you for this about which I had no idea - yet another free energy system!. There are many 'free energy sources' which I have been aware of for 60 years - our Biology master told us about a water engine in 1959.
That was a very good read. Simple but powerful. Def. not enough people looking at issues like smelting steel.
The only thing I have is about storing electricity. We are obsessed with using batteries. All well and good but there is a huge cost to that. mining, refining, smelting, international transportation. Why don't we get some dirt, put it in a big container and lift it up with surplus electricity, then let it down to drive turbos when we need it. Right next to the solar or wind turbine. Or could be on a large scale at a big plant. Simple.
You are so right Stephen. I am beginning to feel that engineers have been excluded so much from policy-making that we are driving into a total FUBAR by lawyers, accountants (I'm one!), banksters et al seeking only personal status, power, wealth and control. Engineering makes up 18% of the UK working population when it should be more like >30% to gain influence enough to determine a resilient energy future.
The crazy emphasis on CV's, wind, and solar has to be based on finance when, as you say, any engineer would drive electricity storage by using potential energy as you suggest. Canals have used energy storage using water for centuries - we disregard history at our peril. I think the 21st C mindset focuses on Tech for solutions when simple mechanics alone offers an optimum.
Avoidance of base-load power using tidal, geothermal, hydro, and SMRs with a distributed networked electricity grid rather than a centralised one is so obvious. But of course this doesn't suit the elites and their political lackeys who demand increased controls beyond any rational logic. They will fail IMHO but the damage will be extensive before our engineers return to rebuild a resilient, localised New Economy: This is one of many options:
https://austrianpeter.substack.com/p/the-financial-jigsaw-part-2-localisation?s=w
An interesting idea that seems to make sense. I am not sure about the timetable for this change but it will eventually have to happen. Hybrid should be the way to go during the transition until the electric is more efficient, less labor intensive, more affordable, and reliable.
The proposed change directly from gas to electric is not logical at this point in time, and it should not be mandated. Innovation should determine when the change takes place. Just my two cents.
Agreed Bert but it's not really about electric cars or whatever. There will be personal transport only for the wealthy. They are working on 'Transport-as-a-Service' and that's what EVs will provide.
Most drivers in UK only travel 12,000 miles av/year. At 25mph/av that's 480 hrs, or 20 days or 5.5%, the rest of the time they sit idle and rot. It's really not a brain test. USA is different because of the distances - not sure what will happen for you.
Page 181 of my book Part 1:
"The collapse of the oil industry, transport and related enterprises
Stanford University economist Tony Seba: https://tonyseba.com/ has issued a detailed report recently on the future of oil and transport. Fortunately Tony comes from the real world, having spent decades successfully building, running, and managing businesses and has a lot of practical knowledge and understanding of our present world. He says:
“Oil demand will peak at 100 million barrels per day by 2020, dropping to 70 million barrels per day by 2030. That represents a drop of 30 million barrels in real terms and 40 million barrels below the Energy Information Administration’s current 'business as usual' case. This will have a catastrophic effect on the oil industry through price collapse (an equilibrium cost of $25 per barrel), disproportionately impacting different companies, countries, oil and infrastructure depending on their exposure to high-cost oil.”
His report continues saying that the impact of the collapse of oil prices
throughout the oil industry value chain will be felt as early as 2021.
I have a small working interest in the Permian that's in tertiary recovery. I need $55/bbl just to break even.
That's inside info for me Linden. It's an alien project as far as all I know about fracking. I never really believed it was viable but I stand corrected. UK is going SMR which might work if the banksters allow. There are wheels within wheels that defy logic when money contaminates the playing field. Nothing is ever as it appears to be and i have to dig deep for even a glimpse of the reality.
I just saw you B/e - looks good at present with OPEC+ cutting - GS are forecasting $100/bbl - that must work?
You think the idea of going electric is a replacement for gas cars? No wonder if makes no sense to you, think of it more of a means of controlling people and locking them in their houses and it makes perfect sense.
Not unlike Covid and the vaccines, until you realize “they” want us dead none of it will make any sense.
I think hybrid is the way to go for now. The technology is not there to go all electric. I realized both of those facts when the forced vaccinations were first put into effect. They mean us harm and see us as expendable.
Would be an interesting exercise to figure out should there be enough resources to buy with all money now outstanding. I highly doubt it, too many variables to figure out actually, but I phrased the question in such a way in case you think so. Hahaha!
I don't normally switch gears fast enough and take on heavy book reading, like what's posted about you on SearchGate, but I will follow your Stack. I could learn more about the over riding issues, you might learn from experimentation I have been involved with on the land.
Thanks Rick and welcome. I will certainly learn from you - I am 30 years out-of-date :-)
As long as you're learning, growing, and seeking WISDOM, you're alive! From an old lady.
Having family in the Permian Basin oil business, I can attest to the increasing expense of getting black gold out of the earth. There's primary, secondary (water injection), & tertiary recovery (CO2 injection, plus water). When you start tertiary recovery, there's still 60% of the oil in the ground. And it's VERY EXPENSIVE recovery.
Now, horizontal drilling can help, Artic oil can help, offshore can help, but I'd like to see thorium reactors developed, usable at scale, for applications not requiring traditional petroleum.
I was very interested in your distinction between the real/Main St. economy, and Wall St./financilized economy. One of my fave political commentators, Sundance at www.theconservativetreehouse.com, has written extensively on this, and the political/economic consequences of cleaving these two economies. He has the most astute political mind I've ever seen.
Me, I'm heading to my little home in Mexico, to grow a lovely garden, raise chickens, live on largely solar electrical (it's economically viable there, along with solar hot water), in a lovely temperate climate. America will descend into a hellhole. I can walk most places from my house.
Really enjoying your posts.
Thank you Linden - we walk the same path. I'm off to Cape Town next year (all being well) to do the same thing as you. They can keep their Tech etc - you and I know where it's at. Tim Morgan is continuing with his projections - worth following IMHO: https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/
And Gail Tverberg has a good handle on this: https://ourfiniteworld.com/
Good luck and go well:
Blessings
AP
Thx for those links!
Would you do an analysis on the potential of small scale nuclear?
Rolls Royce are doing it now Lisa : https://www.rolls-royce.com/innovation/small-modular-reactors.aspx#section-overview
Thanks. Is sc nuclear feasible within 10 years? RR page is PR page. If yes why would it not be our net zero big alternative given all the negatives associated with solar, wind utilization. Is it like ivermectin and hcq. real Solutions that bring hope are not worthy of coverage?
Lovely analogy Lisa - bang on. Yes, SMRs are almost here BUT it's all about the money (as usual). There are mega investors hanging on to wind and solar. Think of the supply chains involved. There's more fossil fuels involved in the sourcing and construction of wind farms than can ever be recovered over their 25 year life-span - then they end up in landfill. No way do they want SMRs to spoil their patch. Even tidal power is an economic option for base load - but no investment, why?
I know it defies rational logic but this is the world of 'Alice-in-Wonderland' or the 'Wizard of Oz' (BTW - Oz is a metaphor for an ounce of gold - take it from there). These authors were very clued up - they knew the name of the game to which you have alluded. Carry on down the rabbit hole!
Blessings
Peter
They have the technology, I’ve seen it published in Chemistry world a few years ago.
It’s a type of matting for the ocean with very fine hair fibres, using this rules out the need for tidal changes.
The slight movement of the ocean is enough to produce energy for every man woman and child, according to them utilising 1-2% of the ocean.
I’ve read about many breakthroughs and advancements in this magazine, told people about them before they been released, including about lightweight glass lenses and led light bulbs.
Knowing this has had me question every move they’ve and are still making regarding renewables.
One thing is for sure, there’s little profit to be made from literally zero maintenance abundance of energy, versus all those profits as subsidies on what they’re skimming off now.
So true Lizzy, thank you for this about which I had no idea - yet another free energy system!. There are many 'free energy sources' which I have been aware of for 60 years - our Biology master told us about a water engine in 1959.
As you say, with no commercial return, no funds are offered, no results achieved. This is what Marx said when he opined that capitalism has within it the seeds of its own destruction. We are not far from it IMHO. Gail Tverberg often writes about it: https://ourfiniteworld.com/2023/04/05/the-fed-cannot-fix-todays-energy-inflation-problem/
Thanks for the link...great article!