What an excellent series! You two are very complimentary, Irina, and please tell us there are more of these in the pipeline.
And I find this statement of E's quite prescient:
"It seems to me that the primary implication of this new political style is the disempowerment of ordinary voters."
Indeed, and it's the same here in the states. Our elites have forgotten that they are actually public servants, and serve at our pleasure. It's particularly pervasive in our Public School systems, where those bureaucrats have identified concerned parents at school board meetings as "Domestic Terrorists" to the FBI.
This malfeasance is also looking to be their undoing, as there are far more concerned parents than there are radical educators, and they made the mistake of poking our "Mama Bears" one time too many.
I'm beginning to see cracks emerging in all the western powers bases, and am hopeful that we're seeing the beginning of the end of their grasp on power, but we must be wary, as any animal is at it's most dangerous when backed into a corner.
So very true ... disempowered by accepting guilt. Until we waken and fully comprehend that it is our lives they play with, that it is our future they squander, that it is our money that funds them and that it is our apathy that makes it all possible, the game will not end.
Indeed, Garret, and the apathy of which you speak is our biggest hurdle.
What the once self-reliant American public out up with during COVID gave me pause and great concern, but what I'm seeing out of the Parent's Rights movement is giving me new hope!
Our elites have forgotten nothing about the concept of "public service", they have simply flipped the dynamic on it's head while they distracted us with "The Latest Thing" and turned us all into silent and powerless servants of the State. Even successfully electing an "extremist" President, such as Trump, did no good as the State simply rallied around itself to protect the status quo and stymie the duly elected executive from being able to get anything done while rejecting him from the system like the poison to entrenched bureaucracy that he was.
I wish I could share your optimism, yet I believe the only path to stopping the encroaching "liberal" fascism is far down the path and will only come when they have simply gone far too far, if it comes at all. Far too many seem to be contented with the bread and circuses and performative democracy as Eugyppius describes.
Indeed they have forgotten, Davey! They see themselves as our betters, our overlords, and as unaccountable to us.
And believe me, my optimism is also quite cynical and backed up with plenty of life-sustaining supplies., (including ammo), in case this thing goes hot, which is certainly not out of the question.
Keep the faith, but keep your head on a swivel at the same time, just to be on the safe side...
That's my point, Va. The "elites" of today "serving in public office" never knew of any concept of "public service". They had no concept to forget. Ever since Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex, we have had fewer and fewer that run for public office out of a sense of patriotism or service of God or others. Who truly believes in their heart of hearts that Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, Lindsay Graham or Chuck Schumer ever held that sort of idealism in their hearts? HAH!
We agree in the end, but while "power corrupts", in this case, I think it is more a case of the system attracting the most corrupt of society. In fact, few with an iota of moral fabric could survive DC for long. The system doesn't just attract the corrupt and vile, it rejects all others like the body would a stomach virus.
There’s a lot to unpack here but I find myself agreeing with most of what you’ve written here Irina, but I’m reminded of “The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything” — Theodore Roosevelt. And “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts” — Bertrand Russell. We now live in a world with a poly and meta-crisis of our own making, where everyone thinks they have the answers. I believe the CC/AGW, Green Environmentalism will morph into our real problem that of pollution, and access to FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils, as the rising cost of extracting them becomes a case of diminishing returns, putting us on the Road to “The Great Simplification”. Putin’s war with Ukraine will change more than we’d like to think. Germany’s days of cheap and what seemed unlimited access to energy have gone, along with its loss of industrial prowess. None of this is going to end well🤔
What's with the "FREE FINITE" all caps. Of course they're finite, everything physical is finite, that's like saying "WET WATER". And yes like all resources, they are free for the taking, they just cost effort = $$$ to be extracted and utilized, as does "FREE FINITE WIND" and "FREE FINITE SOLAR".
"..where everyone thinks they have the answers..."
I don't know where you get that from. Most people I'm hearing keep saying, "there are no answers". And you seem to think you have the answer: "The Great Simplification".
In truth there are answers, our vast resource of fission & fusion fuels, is obviously the answer to both pollution and energy supply, at least until the sun burns the Earth. That's just basic physics. Developing the tech is straightforward, and would have been done 30yrs ago if not for various unscrupulous organizations and corporations who definitely don't want a free market in energy.
Yes, Yes Yes, but these FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils c/o Gaia are EXTRA EXTRA FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils, not finite in the event horizon finite, or even Earth’s Sun becoming a red giant finite, or when In around five billion years the Earth will likely be engulfed by our own Sun and devoured by a stellar inferno finite, no not finite as any of that. FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils will in our eyes be finite when they’ve been depleted to the point they’re no longer cost effective energy wise to extract and that’ll most likely be within next hundred years. You may presume every one knows how free and finite it is but judging by how fast we’re consuming this precious energy resource you wouldn’t think so.
We’ve been and are living in the golden age of energy, a period of around 200 years, the next 100 years will witness the decline of the golden age of energy, seeing it for what it was a pulse of FREE FINITE Flammable Fossil (FF) energy. FF’s of Coal, Oil and Gas, FREE energy, product of sunlight geologically buried over millions of years, but that we are now extracting 10 million times faster than it was sequestered, and we’ve only had to pay to: extract, process and distribute to point of use. A highly subsidised resource without which we would really have a cost of living crisis but for government borrowing until it’s no longer economic to extract.
Energy = Life (labour), and likewise, Energy = GDP. And so we should reflect on: “Labour without Energy is a Corpse, Technology without Energy is a Sculpture, and a City without Energy is a Museum” - S.Keen/N.Hagens
As for Nuclear Power being our saviour that’s just a very expensive a pipe dream🤔
Well, if you don't mean NOT INFINITE, then you should say "fossil fuels are limited in supply, and economic supply constraints will begin to appear in ????? yrs, first for petroleum in ???? yrs, then for natural gas in ????? yrs, and then for coal in ???? yrs. That would be the proper, rational statement.
And I agree with Nate on energy, but like most of you Energy Doomers, he ignores Nuclear energy or pretends you can't burn thorium and U-238. Sorry Nate, you can, easily, and it is being done right now.
What Nate doesn't understand is the energy trend throughout history has been from energy diffuse sources to energy dense sources. So the natural trend is Wind/Solar --> Biomass --> Coal ---> Petroleum --> Natural Gas --> Uranium/Thorium --> Deuterium/Lithium/Boron. Nate figures that trend must stop at Natural Gas. False. Greenies/Bankers/Malthusians think we need to go back to the beginning and start all over with Wind/Solar. Also False.
You saying Nuclear power is an expensive pipe dream is worthless because you don't know anything about it. China doesn't think so, they are embarking on a program to build 150 NPPs by 2035 for $440B or $3B/GWe. $3B/GWe is ~3 cents/kwh-el, 1 cent/kwh-th. That's lower cost than gas, oil, coal is for most countries nowadays. And now we know Spent Nuclear Fuel is the most valuable resource on the planet right now. Worth more than all of our Petroleum + Coal + Gas reserves put together. That is because the Pu-239/240 in it is the key startup fuel for burning Thorium in molten salt reactors. Unlimited energy. See:
And yes that engineer knows 100X more about Nuclear Power than Nate, You and your Astrologer "expert" put together, otherwise known as the Three Stooges. So I would go with what he says rather than the Three Stooges.
Seems my presentation of FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils has got you rattled, that being the case its drawn attention, so done it’s job, it’s said “There’s no such thing as bad advertising, just some’s better than others”
When it comes to labelling people you can be as rude and disrespectful as you like (Three Stooges) but it doesn’t change the facts, Nuclear as a replacement for FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils is far too costly, struggles to meet deadlines (resulting in inflation pushing costs up in leaps and bounds) and needs government backing at both front and back end (regulation of NPP’s, fuel processing, decommissioning) along with custodians of its waste, externalities that seem to be ignored. If Nuclear Power was as good as you’d have us believe where are all the institutional investors falling over themselves to get involve.
And before you next denigrate Nate Hagens, check out “James Fleay: "What's the Deal with Nuclear Energy?" | The Great Simplification #74”
And just as a reminder: Globally only ~20% of energy is supplied as electricity, and only ~2% of that is from Alternative/Renewable Energy Sources of which NPP’s provide a fraction of that, the rest ~80% is c/o FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils, common physics sense, to quote Vaclav Smil “Scale and Complexity” is the big problem, and time🤔
If in “We” you’re referring to our planet Earth, FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils (FFFF’) will be around to Earths deaths end, that’ll be a few billion years. If your referring to “We” as in we humans, I don’t think so, I’ll even go as far as saying a child born today will be living in “The Great Simplification” whether by design or by force. We won’t run out of FFFF’s (but we’ve already had the best and easiest to access) they’ll just be harder to access, and so depleted, FFFF’s won’t be cost effective to recover. Just think what the implications of that will be on a civilisation that’s built itself from FFFF’s, and particularly from Oil.
Energy = Life (labour), and likewise, Energy = GDP. And so we should reflect on: “Labour without Energy is a Corpse, Technology without Energy is a Sculpture, and a City without Energy is a Museum” - S.Keen/N.Hagens - “Energy Blindness - “The Great Simplification”
I work in the industry. We have, based on today's technology, enough for another thousand years. If we start getting into more expensive and exotic technologies, we have much more. Believe me, we keep our mouths shut when people go off on peak oil or whatever because it just means there is a premium for our product and investors throw money at us.
What as an oil rig roustabout? Well you would say that wouldn’t you, I mean that’s where your paycheque comes from. If it makes you feel better you can go around with the mantra there’s a 1000 years of Oil at todays present demand, as that’s all right with me, but I don’t believe a word of it. Maybe you’d like to check out , for one, Art (Arthur) E. Berman - petroleum geologist, and at ‘X’ @aeberman12 He’s got quite a lot of knowledge in the petroleum industry, try telling him what you’ve told me/us I’d be very interested in his reply🤔
I concur with the final paragraph that the tide is turning. alas, tides move slowly so we are still likely to be subject to this insanity for quite a while yet
Nice article, but I do think you're missing something. That is the very real pursuit of one-world government and total control of everything.
A few prominent people have spoken in sideways terms about depopulation. I say sideways because they don't use the term "depopulation."
It is, however, an inescapable fact that a massive death count is imminent if governments (and the malign supporting actors) are allowed to continue down this climate hysteria path. So, while they may not preach it, they are certainly aware of it. And, I believe, they are perfectly ok with that.
There are myriad other ways they seek to attain this control as well. Food, currency, "medical care," education, and more. In every single vital element of humanity we see the cancerous tentacles of totalitarianism. Call it communism or socialism if you like, and it may have it's roots there, but it is absolute totalitarianism.
This was the point I came in here to quibble about as well. Certainly, some (perhaps much) of the Green movement is useful idiots with no explicit depopulation goal. But there is definitely a portion of the group that does have an explicit depopulation goal, and the results of the campaign will be massive depopulation, whether they explicitly intend that or not.
Without modern infrastructure, billions die, and "renewable" sources physically cannot replace fossil fuels powered sources to equivalent levels. Nuclear is the only thing that stands any chance of doing so, and fossil fuels are still required to push forward on managing to manufacture any of the things needed for a transition anyway. So this whole "stop using oil immediately" thing people have going on is, at least implicitly, a demand for the worst die-off in human history.
And all of that is rather orthogonal to the point that the problem being lamented isn't one in the first place.
The target is presumably a 95% die off, based on the (apparent) desire of The Important Ones to reduce energy consumption by hoi polloi to 15th century levels.
Certain individuals are quite openly talking about depopulation and its benefits for the planet. Funny thing, though, they never go into any detail about the how of the whole thing. They just say it would be a good idea if we could do it.
The only specific move in this respect I've seen lately is the campaign against having children.
Did you know that there's such thing as the "Weather Enterprise?"
I'd also like to draw your attention to this book from 2018 that I recently discovered. This is an important book that describes in great detail how narrative science, social and behavioral science (the mind-farkery science of propaganda/censorship) has been integrated into the natural sciences, climatology and meteorology, focused on the US, but no doubt for all western government audiences.
A coordinated attack on the public mind to push the climate fear porn for their population control agenda. Social and Behavioral Sciences (SBS) has been The Science (TM) of the pandemic: masking, jabbing, lockdowns, vax passports, nudging, manipulation, coercion. In this application of SBS they call it, "The Weather Enterprise" that ”includes the network of government agencies, private-sector companies, and academic institutions that provide weather services to the nation."
You'll even find infamous propaganda specialist Kate Starbird listed in it as a contributor. It further details how they use the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to advance climate fear porn propaganda with health regulatory powers under the auspices of public health. As well as a collection naming of all of the centers of power that are coordinating and collaborating with this massive psychological mind-farkery operation. It's a big, big, big man-caused climate change "enterprise":
Integrating Social and Behavioral Sciences Within the Weather Enterprise
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018.
Front Matter (You've gotta check out the names of some of these Boards and Committees that contributed!)
Summary
Ch 1 Introduction
Ch 2 The Motivation for Integrating Social and Behavioral Sciences Within the Weather Enterprise
Ch 3 Assessing the Current State of Social and Behavioral Sciences Within the Weather Enterprise
Ch 4 Social and Behavioral Sciences for Road Weather Concerns
Ch 5 Research Needs for Improving the Nation’s Weather Readiness and Advancing Fundamental Social and Behavioral Science Knowledge
Ch 6 A Framework to Sustainably Support and Effectively Use Social and Behavioral Science Research in the Weather Enterprise
Ch 7 Summary of Key Findings and Recommendations
Appendix A Examples of Funding for Social and Behavioral Science Activities by NOAA, NSF, DHS1
Appendix B Lessons from SBS Integration into the “Public Health Enterprise”
Appendix C People Who Provided Input to the Committee
Appendix D Committee Biosketches
I've seen no better single resource to putting together their operational plan and strategies in one place than this book. For those who wish to do a very deep dive. A 182-page exercise describing the imposition of stupidity masquerading as intelligence and enlightened thought on an unwitting nation. By reading the plans of our adversaries we become more capable of defeating them. Perhaps you are familiar with it already? Or will be able to derive an experienced-informed analysis of it that others without your education and experience may benefit from? Does this book sound interesting enough to you to explore?
I shout once more: CO2 at 400 ppm (parts per million) constitutes 0.04% of Earth's atmosphere. Not 0.4 (40%) nor 0.04 (4%), but 0.04% (1/100 x 4%). And that is the "doubled" percentage. What is the range of precentages of water vapor (H2O) over the course of a day or season? How many ppm does N2 comprise? (800,000 ppm, or 80%). So who can explain to me how 0.04% concentration of any molecule can affect climate? Do that and I will be willing to listen to an argument that we are not being hoodwinked or lied to.
We have the saying that politics is show business for ugly people. Politicians are the public relations wing of the bureaucracy. You can see it in that they make no decisions and escape all responsibility.
The climate foot soldiers will have to be redeployed at some point. I worry that they will target people instead of carbon dioxide.
Show business for ugly people? What about Newsom? :D (the man makes my skin crawl, to be honest). But yes, it seems that, like eugyppius says, politicians have turned into PR agents above all else.
People are already being targeted with calls to stop procreating because emissions.
A few points on your very welcome focus on the Transition and NET Zero, from someone in Australia who lives off the grid for 30+ years. We here are at least as besieged by Green Ideology as you in Germany, and just as scientifically ignorant. But that ignorance includes most 'scientists' who should no better. The epitome of scientific ignorance for me is belief that Carbon Capture and Storage is feasible, economic and effective, which is surprisingly common amongst leaders and commentators and scientists. Yesterday I heard a minister in the UK saying that "Net Zero doesn't mean there will be no emissions from fossil fuels, but that the excess - say 25% - will be captured and stored underground.
The fact is, that COAL is nature's carbon capture and storage, remaining there for millions of years inert. The cost and difficulty of 'capturing' CO2, pumping and storing under pressure indefinitely will ALWAYS be far greater than simply leaving an equivalent quantity of coal in the ground, unburnt.
As most other means of 'capturing CO2' are unreliable, and none can ever match the effectiveness of forests in sucking CO2 from the air and making wood - the whole idea of 'NET' zero is unrealistic, and only there because Zero itself is impossible.
All the friends I didn't lose over COVID or Russia I now expect to lose over the 'trans-ition' in its many forms, but I hasten to add that I am no climate change sceptic. I just believe that the melting Antarctic sea ice shows that we are at least 30 years too late to attempt to stop the warming and disruption of the global climate that appears to be taking place, so our pathetic and compromised attempts to reduce emissions, at huge cost to society and living standards, are pointless; you may as well rush around in your Hummer or go on burning brown coal to smelt Aluminium - as we do here in Australia - for all the difference it will make.
I also think, in the general scheme of things, that without nuclear, gas pipelines are the only way to go, delivered direct to homes as they have been for years here, as well as to fuel the power stations that will be needed when the sun isn't shining (at night!) and the wind isn't blowing, and the hydro dams need to store water for irrigation. It's just science! And don't ask me about EVs, or batteries, or heat pumps!
Thanks for this comment. I maintain it is utter arrogance to believe we can in any way change climate change by switching to EVs and the rest of it, in part precisely for the reasons you have mentioned. I do hope you don't lose any more friends although I can understand how the transition can make people insufferable.
Pleased to meet you Irina, thanks to Eugyppius! And so pleased to have this solidarity too. Even though I really have no doubts about 'the science', when so many apparently rational and scientific people maintain that black is white it's hard to keep one's head. I also tend to lose it every time I see a Tesla, which is becoming much too frequent. And briefly on that - one of the things that I simply can't get across to people is just how much power is necessary for a charging station, and how impossible it is that it would come from local renewable sources. And if the power is as dear as for a diesel equivalent, and comes from a coal-burning power station, what exactly is it all for? We've reached an unparalleled degree of sophistication in fuel-burning technology for cars and tractors and machinery, and now we want to toss it all out for something that runs on batteries? One could go on, and on!
Indeed, it is quite disturbing how many scientists have sold out although it's not that difficult to see why. Peer pressure is no joke, even in academic circles, especially coupled with financial pressure. Non-scientists, meanwhile, don't ask the questions you -- and the rest of us here -- keep asking. It's easier this way and Teslas are so pretty...
What an excellent series! You two are very complimentary, Irina, and please tell us there are more of these in the pipeline.
And I find this statement of E's quite prescient:
"It seems to me that the primary implication of this new political style is the disempowerment of ordinary voters."
Indeed, and it's the same here in the states. Our elites have forgotten that they are actually public servants, and serve at our pleasure. It's particularly pervasive in our Public School systems, where those bureaucrats have identified concerned parents at school board meetings as "Domestic Terrorists" to the FBI.
This malfeasance is also looking to be their undoing, as there are far more concerned parents than there are radical educators, and they made the mistake of poking our "Mama Bears" one time too many.
I'm beginning to see cracks emerging in all the western powers bases, and am hopeful that we're seeing the beginning of the end of their grasp on power, but we must be wary, as any animal is at it's most dangerous when backed into a corner.
So very true ... disempowered by accepting guilt. Until we waken and fully comprehend that it is our lives they play with, that it is our future they squander, that it is our money that funds them and that it is our apathy that makes it all possible, the game will not end.
Indeed, Garret, and the apathy of which you speak is our biggest hurdle.
What the once self-reliant American public out up with during COVID gave me pause and great concern, but what I'm seeing out of the Parent's Rights movement is giving me new hope!
Our elites have forgotten nothing about the concept of "public service", they have simply flipped the dynamic on it's head while they distracted us with "The Latest Thing" and turned us all into silent and powerless servants of the State. Even successfully electing an "extremist" President, such as Trump, did no good as the State simply rallied around itself to protect the status quo and stymie the duly elected executive from being able to get anything done while rejecting him from the system like the poison to entrenched bureaucracy that he was.
I wish I could share your optimism, yet I believe the only path to stopping the encroaching "liberal" fascism is far down the path and will only come when they have simply gone far too far, if it comes at all. Far too many seem to be contented with the bread and circuses and performative democracy as Eugyppius describes.
Indeed they have forgotten, Davey! They see themselves as our betters, our overlords, and as unaccountable to us.
And believe me, my optimism is also quite cynical and backed up with plenty of life-sustaining supplies., (including ammo), in case this thing goes hot, which is certainly not out of the question.
Keep the faith, but keep your head on a swivel at the same time, just to be on the safe side...
That's my point, Va. The "elites" of today "serving in public office" never knew of any concept of "public service". They had no concept to forget. Ever since Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex, we have had fewer and fewer that run for public office out of a sense of patriotism or service of God or others. Who truly believes in their heart of hearts that Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, Lindsay Graham or Chuck Schumer ever held that sort of idealism in their hearts? HAH!
We agree in the end, but while "power corrupts", in this case, I think it is more a case of the system attracting the most corrupt of society. In fact, few with an iota of moral fabric could survive DC for long. The system doesn't just attract the corrupt and vile, it rejects all others like the body would a stomach virus.
Whatever you had for breakfast eugyppius, please share it. You are absolutely on it!
There’s a lot to unpack here but I find myself agreeing with most of what you’ve written here Irina, but I’m reminded of “The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything” — Theodore Roosevelt. And “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts” — Bertrand Russell. We now live in a world with a poly and meta-crisis of our own making, where everyone thinks they have the answers. I believe the CC/AGW, Green Environmentalism will morph into our real problem that of pollution, and access to FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils, as the rising cost of extracting them becomes a case of diminishing returns, putting us on the Road to “The Great Simplification”. Putin’s war with Ukraine will change more than we’d like to think. Germany’s days of cheap and what seemed unlimited access to energy have gone, along with its loss of industrial prowess. None of this is going to end well🤔
What's with the "FREE FINITE" all caps. Of course they're finite, everything physical is finite, that's like saying "WET WATER". And yes like all resources, they are free for the taking, they just cost effort = $$$ to be extracted and utilized, as does "FREE FINITE WIND" and "FREE FINITE SOLAR".
"..where everyone thinks they have the answers..."
I don't know where you get that from. Most people I'm hearing keep saying, "there are no answers". And you seem to think you have the answer: "The Great Simplification".
In truth there are answers, our vast resource of fission & fusion fuels, is obviously the answer to both pollution and energy supply, at least until the sun burns the Earth. That's just basic physics. Developing the tech is straightforward, and would have been done 30yrs ago if not for various unscrupulous organizations and corporations who definitely don't want a free market in energy.
Yes, Yes Yes, but these FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils c/o Gaia are EXTRA EXTRA FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils, not finite in the event horizon finite, or even Earth’s Sun becoming a red giant finite, or when In around five billion years the Earth will likely be engulfed by our own Sun and devoured by a stellar inferno finite, no not finite as any of that. FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils will in our eyes be finite when they’ve been depleted to the point they’re no longer cost effective energy wise to extract and that’ll most likely be within next hundred years. You may presume every one knows how free and finite it is but judging by how fast we’re consuming this precious energy resource you wouldn’t think so.
We’ve been and are living in the golden age of energy, a period of around 200 years, the next 100 years will witness the decline of the golden age of energy, seeing it for what it was a pulse of FREE FINITE Flammable Fossil (FF) energy. FF’s of Coal, Oil and Gas, FREE energy, product of sunlight geologically buried over millions of years, but that we are now extracting 10 million times faster than it was sequestered, and we’ve only had to pay to: extract, process and distribute to point of use. A highly subsidised resource without which we would really have a cost of living crisis but for government borrowing until it’s no longer economic to extract.
Energy = Life (labour), and likewise, Energy = GDP. And so we should reflect on: “Labour without Energy is a Corpse, Technology without Energy is a Sculpture, and a City without Energy is a Museum” - S.Keen/N.Hagens
As for Nuclear Power being our saviour that’s just a very expensive a pipe dream🤔
Well, if you don't mean NOT INFINITE, then you should say "fossil fuels are limited in supply, and economic supply constraints will begin to appear in ????? yrs, first for petroleum in ???? yrs, then for natural gas in ????? yrs, and then for coal in ???? yrs. That would be the proper, rational statement.
And I agree with Nate on energy, but like most of you Energy Doomers, he ignores Nuclear energy or pretends you can't burn thorium and U-238. Sorry Nate, you can, easily, and it is being done right now.
What Nate doesn't understand is the energy trend throughout history has been from energy diffuse sources to energy dense sources. So the natural trend is Wind/Solar --> Biomass --> Coal ---> Petroleum --> Natural Gas --> Uranium/Thorium --> Deuterium/Lithium/Boron. Nate figures that trend must stop at Natural Gas. False. Greenies/Bankers/Malthusians think we need to go back to the beginning and start all over with Wind/Solar. Also False.
You saying Nuclear power is an expensive pipe dream is worthless because you don't know anything about it. China doesn't think so, they are embarking on a program to build 150 NPPs by 2035 for $440B or $3B/GWe. $3B/GWe is ~3 cents/kwh-el, 1 cent/kwh-th. That's lower cost than gas, oil, coal is for most countries nowadays. And now we know Spent Nuclear Fuel is the most valuable resource on the planet right now. Worth more than all of our Petroleum + Coal + Gas reserves put together. That is because the Pu-239/240 in it is the key startup fuel for burning Thorium in molten salt reactors. Unlimited energy. See:
THORIUM: World's CHEAPEST Energy! [Science Unveiled]:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U434Sy9BGf8
And yes that engineer knows 100X more about Nuclear Power than Nate, You and your Astrologer "expert" put together, otherwise known as the Three Stooges. So I would go with what he says rather than the Three Stooges.
Seems my presentation of FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils has got you rattled, that being the case its drawn attention, so done it’s job, it’s said “There’s no such thing as bad advertising, just some’s better than others”
When it comes to labelling people you can be as rude and disrespectful as you like (Three Stooges) but it doesn’t change the facts, Nuclear as a replacement for FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils is far too costly, struggles to meet deadlines (resulting in inflation pushing costs up in leaps and bounds) and needs government backing at both front and back end (regulation of NPP’s, fuel processing, decommissioning) along with custodians of its waste, externalities that seem to be ignored. If Nuclear Power was as good as you’d have us believe where are all the institutional investors falling over themselves to get involve.
And before you next denigrate Nate Hagens, check out “James Fleay: "What's the Deal with Nuclear Energy?" | The Great Simplification #74”
And just as a reminder: Globally only ~20% of energy is supplied as electricity, and only ~2% of that is from Alternative/Renewable Energy Sources of which NPP’s provide a fraction of that, the rest ~80% is c/o FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils, common physics sense, to quote Vaclav Smil “Scale and Complexity” is the big problem, and time🤔
You ought to talk to someone who is actually in the industry. We have hydrocarbons for another 1000 years.
“We have hydrocarbons for another 1000 years”
If in “We” you’re referring to our planet Earth, FREE FINITE Flammable Fossils (FFFF’) will be around to Earths deaths end, that’ll be a few billion years. If your referring to “We” as in we humans, I don’t think so, I’ll even go as far as saying a child born today will be living in “The Great Simplification” whether by design or by force. We won’t run out of FFFF’s (but we’ve already had the best and easiest to access) they’ll just be harder to access, and so depleted, FFFF’s won’t be cost effective to recover. Just think what the implications of that will be on a civilisation that’s built itself from FFFF’s, and particularly from Oil.
Energy = Life (labour), and likewise, Energy = GDP. And so we should reflect on: “Labour without Energy is a Corpse, Technology without Energy is a Sculpture, and a City without Energy is a Museum” - S.Keen/N.Hagens - “Energy Blindness - “The Great Simplification”
I work in the industry. We have, based on today's technology, enough for another thousand years. If we start getting into more expensive and exotic technologies, we have much more. Believe me, we keep our mouths shut when people go off on peak oil or whatever because it just means there is a premium for our product and investors throw money at us.
What as an oil rig roustabout? Well you would say that wouldn’t you, I mean that’s where your paycheque comes from. If it makes you feel better you can go around with the mantra there’s a 1000 years of Oil at todays present demand, as that’s all right with me, but I don’t believe a word of it. Maybe you’d like to check out , for one, Art (Arthur) E. Berman - petroleum geologist, and at ‘X’ @aeberman12 He’s got quite a lot of knowledge in the petroleum industry, try telling him what you’ve told me/us I’d be very interested in his reply🤔
I concur with the final paragraph that the tide is turning. alas, tides move slowly so we are still likely to be subject to this insanity for quite a while yet
Nice article, but I do think you're missing something. That is the very real pursuit of one-world government and total control of everything.
A few prominent people have spoken in sideways terms about depopulation. I say sideways because they don't use the term "depopulation."
It is, however, an inescapable fact that a massive death count is imminent if governments (and the malign supporting actors) are allowed to continue down this climate hysteria path. So, while they may not preach it, they are certainly aware of it. And, I believe, they are perfectly ok with that.
There are myriad other ways they seek to attain this control as well. Food, currency, "medical care," education, and more. In every single vital element of humanity we see the cancerous tentacles of totalitarianism. Call it communism or socialism if you like, and it may have it's roots there, but it is absolute totalitarianism.
This was the point I came in here to quibble about as well. Certainly, some (perhaps much) of the Green movement is useful idiots with no explicit depopulation goal. But there is definitely a portion of the group that does have an explicit depopulation goal, and the results of the campaign will be massive depopulation, whether they explicitly intend that or not.
Without modern infrastructure, billions die, and "renewable" sources physically cannot replace fossil fuels powered sources to equivalent levels. Nuclear is the only thing that stands any chance of doing so, and fossil fuels are still required to push forward on managing to manufacture any of the things needed for a transition anyway. So this whole "stop using oil immediately" thing people have going on is, at least implicitly, a demand for the worst die-off in human history.
And all of that is rather orthogonal to the point that the problem being lamented isn't one in the first place.
The target is presumably a 95% die off, based on the (apparent) desire of The Important Ones to reduce energy consumption by hoi polloi to 15th century levels.
More than a billion dead Chinese and Indians each.
I quite enjoy asking Greenies why they're so racist that they want to inflict those sorts of casualties on poor brown people.
Certain individuals are quite openly talking about depopulation and its benefits for the planet. Funny thing, though, they never go into any detail about the how of the whole thing. They just say it would be a good idea if we could do it.
The only specific move in this respect I've seen lately is the campaign against having children.
"The precipitous decline in the quality of our politicians reflects their increasing unimportance"
That's it, in a nutshell! I had pondered the why or equivalently "where did all the statesmen go?" and of course there's the answer.
Did you know that there's such thing as the "Weather Enterprise?"
I'd also like to draw your attention to this book from 2018 that I recently discovered. This is an important book that describes in great detail how narrative science, social and behavioral science (the mind-farkery science of propaganda/censorship) has been integrated into the natural sciences, climatology and meteorology, focused on the US, but no doubt for all western government audiences.
A coordinated attack on the public mind to push the climate fear porn for their population control agenda. Social and Behavioral Sciences (SBS) has been The Science (TM) of the pandemic: masking, jabbing, lockdowns, vax passports, nudging, manipulation, coercion. In this application of SBS they call it, "The Weather Enterprise" that ”includes the network of government agencies, private-sector companies, and academic institutions that provide weather services to the nation."
You'll even find infamous propaganda specialist Kate Starbird listed in it as a contributor. It further details how they use the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to advance climate fear porn propaganda with health regulatory powers under the auspices of public health. As well as a collection naming of all of the centers of power that are coordinating and collaborating with this massive psychological mind-farkery operation. It's a big, big, big man-caused climate change "enterprise":
Integrating Social and Behavioral Sciences Within the Weather Enterprise
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018.
https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/24865/chapter/1
https://doi.org/10.17226/24865
Front Matter (You've gotta check out the names of some of these Boards and Committees that contributed!)
Summary
Ch 1 Introduction
Ch 2 The Motivation for Integrating Social and Behavioral Sciences Within the Weather Enterprise
Ch 3 Assessing the Current State of Social and Behavioral Sciences Within the Weather Enterprise
Ch 4 Social and Behavioral Sciences for Road Weather Concerns
Ch 5 Research Needs for Improving the Nation’s Weather Readiness and Advancing Fundamental Social and Behavioral Science Knowledge
Ch 6 A Framework to Sustainably Support and Effectively Use Social and Behavioral Science Research in the Weather Enterprise
Ch 7 Summary of Key Findings and Recommendations
Appendix A Examples of Funding for Social and Behavioral Science Activities by NOAA, NSF, DHS1
Appendix B Lessons from SBS Integration into the “Public Health Enterprise”
Appendix C People Who Provided Input to the Committee
Appendix D Committee Biosketches
I've seen no better single resource to putting together their operational plan and strategies in one place than this book. For those who wish to do a very deep dive. A 182-page exercise describing the imposition of stupidity masquerading as intelligence and enlightened thought on an unwitting nation. By reading the plans of our adversaries we become more capable of defeating them. Perhaps you are familiar with it already? Or will be able to derive an experienced-informed analysis of it that others without your education and experience may benefit from? Does this book sound interesting enough to you to explore?
Very interesting read😊 Thank You🙏
I shout once more: CO2 at 400 ppm (parts per million) constitutes 0.04% of Earth's atmosphere. Not 0.4 (40%) nor 0.04 (4%), but 0.04% (1/100 x 4%). And that is the "doubled" percentage. What is the range of precentages of water vapor (H2O) over the course of a day or season? How many ppm does N2 comprise? (800,000 ppm, or 80%). So who can explain to me how 0.04% concentration of any molecule can affect climate? Do that and I will be willing to listen to an argument that we are not being hoodwinked or lied to.
Many thanks both for the excellent questions and the considered responses. Much appreciated. There is much wisdom here.
We have the saying that politics is show business for ugly people. Politicians are the public relations wing of the bureaucracy. You can see it in that they make no decisions and escape all responsibility.
The climate foot soldiers will have to be redeployed at some point. I worry that they will target people instead of carbon dioxide.
Show business for ugly people? What about Newsom? :D (the man makes my skin crawl, to be honest). But yes, it seems that, like eugyppius says, politicians have turned into PR agents above all else.
People are already being targeted with calls to stop procreating because emissions.
A few points on your very welcome focus on the Transition and NET Zero, from someone in Australia who lives off the grid for 30+ years. We here are at least as besieged by Green Ideology as you in Germany, and just as scientifically ignorant. But that ignorance includes most 'scientists' who should no better. The epitome of scientific ignorance for me is belief that Carbon Capture and Storage is feasible, economic and effective, which is surprisingly common amongst leaders and commentators and scientists. Yesterday I heard a minister in the UK saying that "Net Zero doesn't mean there will be no emissions from fossil fuels, but that the excess - say 25% - will be captured and stored underground.
The fact is, that COAL is nature's carbon capture and storage, remaining there for millions of years inert. The cost and difficulty of 'capturing' CO2, pumping and storing under pressure indefinitely will ALWAYS be far greater than simply leaving an equivalent quantity of coal in the ground, unburnt.
As most other means of 'capturing CO2' are unreliable, and none can ever match the effectiveness of forests in sucking CO2 from the air and making wood - the whole idea of 'NET' zero is unrealistic, and only there because Zero itself is impossible.
All the friends I didn't lose over COVID or Russia I now expect to lose over the 'trans-ition' in its many forms, but I hasten to add that I am no climate change sceptic. I just believe that the melting Antarctic sea ice shows that we are at least 30 years too late to attempt to stop the warming and disruption of the global climate that appears to be taking place, so our pathetic and compromised attempts to reduce emissions, at huge cost to society and living standards, are pointless; you may as well rush around in your Hummer or go on burning brown coal to smelt Aluminium - as we do here in Australia - for all the difference it will make.
I also think, in the general scheme of things, that without nuclear, gas pipelines are the only way to go, delivered direct to homes as they have been for years here, as well as to fuel the power stations that will be needed when the sun isn't shining (at night!) and the wind isn't blowing, and the hydro dams need to store water for irrigation. It's just science! And don't ask me about EVs, or batteries, or heat pumps!
Thanks for this comment. I maintain it is utter arrogance to believe we can in any way change climate change by switching to EVs and the rest of it, in part precisely for the reasons you have mentioned. I do hope you don't lose any more friends although I can understand how the transition can make people insufferable.
Pleased to meet you Irina, thanks to Eugyppius! And so pleased to have this solidarity too. Even though I really have no doubts about 'the science', when so many apparently rational and scientific people maintain that black is white it's hard to keep one's head. I also tend to lose it every time I see a Tesla, which is becoming much too frequent. And briefly on that - one of the things that I simply can't get across to people is just how much power is necessary for a charging station, and how impossible it is that it would come from local renewable sources. And if the power is as dear as for a diesel equivalent, and comes from a coal-burning power station, what exactly is it all for? We've reached an unparalleled degree of sophistication in fuel-burning technology for cars and tractors and machinery, and now we want to toss it all out for something that runs on batteries? One could go on, and on!
cheers David.
Pleasure's all mine, David!
Indeed, it is quite disturbing how many scientists have sold out although it's not that difficult to see why. Peer pressure is no joke, even in academic circles, especially coupled with financial pressure. Non-scientists, meanwhile, don't ask the questions you -- and the rest of us here -- keep asking. It's easier this way and Teslas are so pretty...
Speaking of child rulers siezing power what do you think of Prigozhin's son taking command of the Wagner Group?