Drumbeat: December 25, 2010
Posted by Leanan on December 25, 2010 - 10:54am
Deepwater Horizon’s Final Hours
Nearly 400 feet long, the Horizon had formidable and redundant defenses against even the worst blowout. It was equipped to divert surging oil and gas safely away from the rig. It had devices to quickly seal off a well blowout or to break free from it. It had systems to prevent gas from exploding and sophisticated alarms that would quickly warn the crew at the slightest trace of gas. The crew itself routinely practiced responding to alarms, fires and blowouts, and it was blessed with experienced leaders who clearly cared about safety.On paper, experts and investigators agree, the Deepwater Horizon should have weathered this blowout.
This is the story of how and why it didn’t.
BP to look into locating anchors left over after oil spill boom was removed
BP has agreed to examine how best to locate thousands of boom anchors left behind in the Gulf of Mexico and surrounding waters after the oil spill.But after finding the anchors, the oil giant might not remove them, as Coast Guard officials say BP-hired "experts and contractors" will first determine whether the anchors pose a hazard and whether removal will cause more harm than good.
Kuwait in turmoil as opposition bids to oust PM
KUWAIT CITY (AFP) – Kuwait has plunged into fresh political turmoil after opposition MPs unleashed a serious bid to unseat the oil-rich Gulf state's premier, a senior member of the ruling family.The emirate has been rocked by almost non-stop disputes since 2006 when Sheikh Nasser Mohammad al-Ahmad al-Sabah was appointed prime minister.
38 killed in attacks on churches, festivities in Nigeria
JOS, Nigeria — Explosions in Nigeria's central region killed 32 people on Christmas Eve and six people died in attacks on two churches in the northeast of Africa's most populous nation, officials said on Saturday.On Friday night, a series of bombs were detonated during Christmas Eve celebrations in villages near the central city of Jos, killing at least 32 people while 74 were in a critical condition, the state police commissioner said.
Ivorian crisis provokes gas, kerosene shortage in Mali
Cote d’Ivoire - The current political tension in Cote d’Ivoire has resulted in the scarcity of butane gas and 'jet A1' in Mali, the national daily, L’Essor, reported here Thursday. Jet A1 fuel is used by aircraft.At the international airport of Bamako-Sénou, Mali aviation authorities had displayed notices, indicating the shortage of aviation fuel.
After spending weeks or months preparing to go to various destination for the festive season many people might find themselves grounded as the country has been hit by fuel shortages.
Shares in the natural gas producer surged on word that activist billionaire Carl Icahn had boosted his stake. Icahn filed a document with the Securities and Exchange Commission saying he raised his stake in the Oklahoma-based company to 5.8 percent.
Early Bid for a Reactor Site Draws Opposition in Texas
WASHINGTON — Twenty years ago, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission rewrote its procedure for licensing reactors to cut the time it would take to build new ones. Now an important part of the system is getting its first test, as a Chicago-based nuclear utility clashes with a well-to-do group of Texas ranchers over preapproval of a site about 120 miles southwest of Houston.
Review: "Prelude" by Kurt Cobb
Novels are good ways to impart information and put it into a social context. This one covers all the basics relating to our current predicament concerning peak oil without getting into an apocalyptic futuristic vision that has tempted so many writers.In it a smart likable heroine, who is an oil analyst working for a big name company, meets a Russian channeling Dimitri Orlov (without the acerbic commentary). Skeptical at first, she puts his information to the test by breaking into the boss's files, thus risking her job and drawing the attention of an oil exporting entity. Meanwhile her personal life undergoes similar tensions as she sorts her feelings between her relationship with her boyfriend and the compelling information offered by the Russian.
Review: Coupland’s no longer a player
At parties of a certain type, there will usually be at least one guest who, while very smart and very witty, will veer off into something a bit weird or obsessive.You know the type. They often have tenure and wear jeans and tell amazing stories about the time they met author X. But get them going on 9/11 or Julian Assange or sometimes on legitimate problems like climate change or local food and they get a glint — something in the eye that signals this conversation has become one-sided and that you are now a one-man audience in this person’s personal, obsessive theatre.
peak water: Like “peak oil,” a theory that humans may have used the water easiest to obtain, and that scarcity may be on the rise.
World economy can withstand $100 oil price: Kuwait
(Reuters) - The global economy can withstand an oil price of $100 a barrel, Kuwait's oil minister said on Saturday, as other exporters indicated OPEC may decide against increasing output through 2011 as the market was well supplied.Analysts have said oil producing countries are likely to raise output after crude rallied more than 30 percent from a low in May because they fear prices could damage economic growth in fuel importing countries.
Arabian Gulf tanker rates are little changed as demand slows
The cost of delivering Middle East crude to Asia, the world’s busiest route for supertankers, was little changed as demand slowed for loadings in January.
Russia adds record 5.5 bln barrels to prospected oil reserves in 2010 - minister
Russia added a record 750 million tons (5.5 billion barrels) of oil to its prospected crude reserves in 2010, Natural Resources Minister Yuri Trutnev said on Saturday, citing preliminary geological prospecting data."Now we can say with confidence that we have achieved expanded reproduction of the basic group of natural resources. The increment in oil reserves has registered a record growth of at least 750 million tons. This is 50% more than Russia extracts," Trutnev said at a working meeting with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
Central Arkansas growing weary of relentless tremors
Although drilling for natural gas has been ruled out as a cause for the quakes, experts want to continue looking at salt water disposal wells, said Scott Ausbrooks, geohazards supervisor for the Geological Survey. Disposal wells occur when drilling waster is injected back into the earth after drilling.Earlier this month, the Arkansas Oil and Gas commission issued an emergency moratorium on permits for new disposal wells. The commission will ask for a six-month extension for the moratorium at a January regulatory meeting.
The state also will soon become one of a few to require companies to disclose the chemicals used in fracking fluid, the water-and-chemical solution used in high-pressure drilling operations, said Shane Khoury, deputy director and general counsel for the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission.
Schlumberger Warns of Looming Shortage of Petroleum Engineers
Oil companies face a dwindling pool of engineers and other technical staff needed for exploration and production, the head of the world’s largest oilfield services company said.The number of young recruits hired to replace aging petroleum engineers has declined over the last 10 years, as many college graduates choose managerial positions over engineering jobs and other field assignments, said Andrew Gould, chairman and chief executive officer of Schlumberger Ltd.
Saudi 2011 budget includes $10 billion shortfall
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia—Saudi Arabia on Monday published a budget for 2011 that includes a $10 billion deficit, but the year might end with a surplus because of high oil prices.Past budgets have undervalued the sale price of oil, skewing projected income downward. Saudi Arabia is world's largest oil exporter, and most of its income is from oil sales.
Sunoco Dumps Refineries to Chase Pipeline Profits
Sunoco Inc. Chief Executive Officer Lynn Elsenhans has figured out the best strategy for stanching losses from the refining business: get rid of refineries.
China Gas says top executives "escorted away"
(Reuters) - China Gas Holdings Ltd , which has 114 gas projects in China, said two of its top executives had been "escorted away" by people who identified themselves as security officials in the city of Shenzhen and trading in its shares will remain suspended.
Neb. lawmakers: Pipeline route is out of our hands
LINCOLN - The State of Nebraska should explore enacting regulations to protect landowners and taxpayers from problems associated with pipelines, three state senators said Wednesday.But the state is probably powerless to tell a Canadian company to reroute a proposed 36-inch crude-oil pipeline around the sensitive, groundwater-rich Sand Hills region, they said.
Iraq to activate Kurd foreign oil deals: minister
CAIRO (AFP) – Iraq will recognise contracts the government of its Kurdish north has signed with foreign oil companies, the country's new oil minister, Abdulkarim al-Luaybi, said on Saturday."Yes, we will recognise them," Luaybi told Dow Jones Newswires at a meeting in Cairo of the Organisation of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries.
Female bomber kills 43 at food center in Pakistan
KHAR, Pakistan (AP) — A female suicide bomber detonated her explosives-laden vest killing at least 43 people at an aid distribution center in northwestern Pakistan on Saturday, while army helicopter gunships and artillery killed a similar number of Islamic militants in neighboring tribal regions near the Afghan border, officials said.The bombing appeared to be the first suicide attack staged by a woman in Pakistan, and it underscored the resilience of militant groups in the country's tribal belt despite ongoing military operations against them.
'Father of plug-in hybrids' gets new Volt
SACRAMENTO, Calif. --Andrew Frank's new Chevrolet Volt is literally the car of his dreams.The University of California, Davis, engineering professor is often considered "the father of plug-in hybrid vehicles," a field that is entering into the mass marketing stage with this month's rollout of the new Volt.
"I've been working on this idea for 30 years," said Frank, as he handled his new car's plug-in cords like a proud father. "This is kind of like a culmination of all my work."
African Huts Far From the Grid Glow With Renewable Power
KIPTUSURI, Kenya — For Sara Ruto, the desperate yearning for electricity began last year with the purchase of her first cellphone, a lifeline for receiving small money transfers, contacting relatives in the city or checking chicken prices at the nearest market.Charging the phone was no simple matter in this farming village far from Kenya’s electric grid.
Every week, Ms. Ruto walked two miles to hire a motorcycle taxi for the three-hour ride to Mogotio, the nearest town with electricity. There, she dropped off her cellphone at a store that recharges phones for 30 cents. Yet the service was in such demand that she had to leave it behind for three full days before returning.
That wearying routine ended in February when the family sold some animals to buy a small Chinese-made solar power system for about $80. Now balanced precariously atop their tin roof, a lone solar panel provides enough electricity to charge the phone and run four bright overhead lights with switches.
ADB Considering Loans for 580-Megawatt Solar Power Project in India
The Asian Development Bank may provide loans to a 580-megawatt solar power park in India’s Gujarat state as the country aims to increase its solar power capacity to meet growing demand.
METI OKs project for nuclear power plant in Aomori
TOKYO — The Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry on Friday approved a plan by Tokyo Electric Power Co to set up a nuclear power plant in Aomori Prefecture following a prolonged safety review in light of a major earthquake in a neighboring region and additional inspections of active faults.
Environmentalists deplore Schwarzenegger's corporate turn
As the governor's tenure draws to an end, activists say, his policies grow less green.
Siberian park gets new population in climate change test
A Russian scientist hopes to prove that bringing back animals will save the permafrost and reduce global warming.
Will Santa's reindeer survive climate change?
Santa may need to start looking for back-ups, since reindeer herds are dwindling across much of the Arctic. How much is climate change to blame? That remains a source of debate.
Happy Holidays
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
From link above:
Of course the global economy is well supplied when oil is at $100 a barrel because this price will kill some demand. Next time someone should ask OPEC if the world would still be well supplied if the price was $10 a barrel.
Merry Christmas!
Future stories:
In contrast to the recent past:
April, 2004:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/opec-studying-plan-to-bo...
Some in OPEC went further, resorting to the classic 'oil speculators driving up prices' meme:
http://english.aljazeera.net//business/2010/12/20101225125650171705.html
No wonder there is such a wide spread belief in the US that the price of oil and gasoline is driven higher because of speculative manipulation.
@ Charles Mackay
Speculators as I see them are investors in search of transaction profit. They are agnostic as to market direction - being able to go long or short - have a vested interest in volatility, and are essentially motivated by greed.
What we are seeing now is what happens at the zero bound of 0% dollar interest rates where risk averse investors buy ANY asset - income bearing or not - as a 'hedge' against inflation. They achieve this by investing in funds (ETFs and ETCs, possibly even the sort of ETPs which J P Morgan is allegedly lining up in advance on the copper market) which are essentially off loading dollar risk in favour of commodity risk, and particularly relevant here, oil risk.
In my view the money now inflating the oil market price to the principal benefit of producers is not motivated by the greed of speculators but by the fear of risk averse 'inflation hedgers'.
The outcome is that through financial oil leasing (ie lending oil and borrowing dollars) producers are able, in the absence of over-supply, to support the price at the 'upper bound' where demand destruction sets in, as opposed to the 'lower bound' where production destruction sets in and the lowest cost producer is the last man standing.
The market in natural gas is both over-supplied and - due to its fragmented nature - not financialised on a global basis in the way that crude oil now is. This accounts for the fact that crude oil - at the upper bound - has lost its historic relationship with natural gas, now at the lower bound where production destruction sets in.
If history has taught us anything it is that if producers can support prices, then they will, and in my view this 'macro' manipulation is what is now going on. This can persist for years eg copper, where Hamanaka/Sumitomo manipulated the market for 10 years, for five of them after the whistle had been blown.
If OPEC (possibly the Saudis alone) manage the market well, there is no reason why this unstable equilibrium should not be maintained by the producers and their facilitating bank(s) for some considerable time, but it is IMHO extremely susceptible to supply and demand shocks, and of course also to interest rate rises (not that I expect these).
In principle, one has to approve of high carbon prices, but the outcome at the moment is of a wealth transfer from consumers to producers, with a croupier's cut being paid to the casino operators (financial intermediaries) by everyone, including the speculators, for whom the market is otherwise a zero sum game.
In my view, consumer economies should drastically increase carbon fuel (refined product) prices through levies/taxes and aim thereby to retain more of the carbon surplus value in their economies.
In fact global markets are now almost entirely dysfunctional, having become terminally financialised, and IMHO what is needed is a new settlement - a Bretton Woods II.
In fact global markets are now almost entirely dysfunctional, having become terminally financialised, and IMHO what is needed is a new settlement - a Bretton Woods II.
Could you expand on that?
Two paragraphs and two things:
1. Still happy with 70-80 but won't meet again until June 2011? So in other words 91+ headed for 100 is fine, but we will stand pat on our empty words that 70-80 is good too?
I think Obama needs to come out publicly and request that OPEC (via the Saudi's) raise production to bring down the price. Call them on their so called spare capacity.
2. The 2nd paragraph uses QE's and their potential reduction in the value of the dollar as an excuse to not increase production. So either it is just an excuse to get 100 a barrel or QE's weren't so smart afterall. Take your pick.
request that OPEC (via the Saudi's) raise production to bring down the price.
How about that he works to bring down gasoline prices by creating enough political good will with oil-producing nations that they would increase their supply of crude. “I would work with our friends in OPEC to convince them to open up the spigot, to increase the supply. Use the capital that my administration will earn, with the Kuwaitis or the Saudis, and convince them to open up the spigot.”
That'll work, right?
You're being sarcastic, right? OPEC probably hates us, so trying to be nice is a waste of time. The ME is macho on steroids, so call them on their spare capacity claims. Ante up, let's see the goods if you really have them. That will either work to open the spigots or settle the notion of huge spare capacity once and for all.
Dare to call them on their spare capacity claims and risk having the markets say: "The U.S. is questioning the spare capacity of the biggest oil producers?! panic everyone!" resulting in higher oil prices...
You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.
Edit: which leads me to suggest of a principle: the further down the road we travel in this denial and the higher the prices get the more painful will be the consequences of actually admitting to the situation.
Rather I believe in a few years time forums such as TOD will have to go underground for fear of the inquision that will follow, setup to cover the truth.
Its fairly obvious its a game of don't ask don't tell.
Sorry to use sexual orientation issues as and example but hell if the shoe fits.
Sooner or later someone will force the Saudi's to come out of the closet so to speak.
Well, maybe it's a conversation that can take place by phone rather than publicly.
Speaking of panic, won't the comments by the oil minister of Kuwait and the fact OPEC will not meet again until June, with OPEC output remaining steady as she goes, cause the price of oil to keep edging up?
"You're being sarcastic, right?" Yes, he was . . . it was a direct quote from George W. Bush. You know, the guy that was president during the 2008 oil price spike.
http://www.issues2000.org/celeb/More_George_W__Bush_Energy_+_Oil.htm
Saudi Arabia rebuffs Bush on oil production
5/16/2008
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Saudi Arabia’s leaders made clear Friday they see no reason to increase oil production until customers demand it, apparently rebuffing President Bush amid soaring U.S. gasoline prices.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24660754/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa/
no speculation here, nothing to see, move along.
at least bush's daddy had the good sense to buy oil at $10.
Essentially this is a signal that OPEC will not budge its output even at $100, just as it was not many weeks ago when Saudi Arabia said it was comfortable with $90 oil - which lead to OPEC doing nothing at its last meeting.
The ability of OPEC to deliver on its much hyped 'spare capacity' is open to debate, but probably the more important debate we should be having is whether we finally arrived at the next 'stage' of peak oil - that is whether OPEC and other exporters have decided that holding back production will maximize their income in the long run.
As we see in the shipping reports up top, there are no indications that OPEC has stepped up exports as the price has risen past $80, and now past $90. At least there are no indications that OPEC is cutting back either. Basically, excluding Iraq, OPEC has managed to keep its total exports remarkably level for about 8 months now. The incremental amount of oil available from Iraq and a few others is falling well behind the incremental increase in world demand. This imbalance has been facilitated so far by a draw down in world inventories, more specifically offshore floating storage that was brought ashore to the US the third quarter then drawn down in the US in the fourth quarter. Still most quoted energy analysts don’t see it that way and believe the draw down is part of some year-end tax planning strategy. But if so, what is the strategy to rebuild inventories in the wake of falling net imports of oil and products into the US as compared to year ago levels? What happens if inventories can’t be rebuilt?
If you have just been run over by a speeding 18 wheeler, I suppose it doesn't matter very much to you whether the driver was aiming for you, or whether it was unintentional.
As I previously noted, from the point of view of oil importing countries, the practical effect of falling Saudi net oil exports has been the same, regardless of whether the Saudi net export decline* was voluntary or involuntary. It it is mostly involuntary, the widespread impression that the Saudis have vast excess capacity causes consumers to postpone making fundamental changes in their consumption patterns, especially given recent articles like the "There will be fuel" article in the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/business/energy-environment/17FUEL.html
*The 2006-2010 cumulative shortfall in Saudi net oil exports, between what they would have net exported at their 2005 rate and what they actually net exported from 2006 to 2010 inclusive is in excess of two billion barrels of oil.
Real Prices, WTI Spot FOB:
Will try and inflation adjust that some other time. There's that one website with IA figures for crude prices, if someone wants to do the deed. No denying that the last decade of sustained growth in YOY is unprecedented - and I don't think anything will be gleaned by going further back in time, unless it's to the 1860s.
Bloomberg has an article that explains in some detail the year end tax planning that may account for some of the fall in US oil inventories at year end. Analysts quoted imply, for unexplained reasons, that US oil imports will not only go back to 2010 levels in 2011, but additional imports will be available to meet growing US demands.
Keep in mind even if imports fall in 2011 as little as 2% or 200,000 bpd, oil supplies will hit minimum operating levels by the end of the third quarter 2011. Further if US demand increases at all at the same time in 2011, there could be a 'problem' with oil supplies much sooner than that. In early 2010, US oil demand was falling into the new year, allowing inventories to rebuild. There are no present indications that US oil demand will start 2011 will falling demand.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-27/oil-rise-to-100-may-be-checked-...
I'm in and absolute state of shock over this. I simply cannot believe OPEC is saying these sorts of things. Now I have to find out if a single person that supported OPEC's decision to maintain a price band of 70-80 predicted that they would change their tune and say 100.
Wait a minute not one single person that claimed OPEC was cutting back production predicted this turn of events. Not a single friggin one. Show me a single post by someone that believe they where maintaining prices and would eventually shoot for 100.
You have the rest of the year :)
Suppose I'm the dominant owner of a clearly-delineated finite natural resource, for which there is a well-developed futures market. If the futures market shows price rises exceeding the discount rate, then I reduce production, since the NPV from future production is better than from present production. This causes an immediate shortage, the price for immediate delivery goes up, and the futures curve flattens until price rises are less than the discount rate. I now get better NPV from present-day production, so it's time to increase the extraction rate again.
Political pressures and economic crises also cause fluctuations, but on average the annual price rise should tend towards my chosen discount rate. This is all perfectly obvious to anyone who understands discounted cashflow analysis: the only question is what discount rate do I use? In the oilpatch, I believe 15% is typical for high-profile, high-risk projects, though I have seen 8% for small low-risk projects.
From the BP Statistical Review 2010, average oil price in 1999 was $18, and in 2009 it was $62. That indicates oil producers are using an average discount rate of 13%, which looks very plausible.
So the oil price rise of recent years could have been easily predicted by two hypotheses:
1. Before the end of the millennium, dominant oil producers had a clear understanding of the available oil resource.
2. Dominant oil producers have acted to maximise NPV of their asset.
Seem like pretty plausible hypotheses to me... There's no obvious mechanism to nullify them, hence I predict a continuing increase in average oil price of 13% per annum.
what discount rate do you calculate between say july and december, 2008 ?
you can also blame npv and its first cousin 'rule of capture' for the dismal recovery seen in reservoirs throughout the world. doomers and drummers recognize that overproduction can reduce ultimate recovery but most dont seem to get that production at a lower rate can result in increased recovery, they just can not believe that recovery from saudi arabia's fields, for example, could exceed 35 % on average.
for a vacation from reality, read here:
http://www.aaee.at/2009-IAEE/uploads/presentations_iaee09/Pr_6_Salameh_M...
You shouldn't consider wild temporary price fluctuations in a discounted cashflow analysis. The 1999-2009 period avoids the worst of the short-term fluctuations.
Of course the calculation changes if we take (say) the 1989-2009 period, but in 1989 there wasn't universal concern about reserves replacement. There was a lot of uncertainty about the ultimate resource, and indeed a lot of uncertainty about ultimate recovery factors. New technology was coming in - horizontal wells, subsea production, 3D seismic. Producers in 1989 couldn't assume that oil was a scarce resource. Also, the dominant oil producers back then weren't the informal cartel they are now. Remember the Soviet Union? Remember the Iran/Iraq war?
As I recall, the recovery factor for Forties is already over 65%, and still going up, so I expect Saudi Arabia can average over 35%. But:
1. No oilfield can produce more than 100%.
2. The issue under discussion is not how much oil will be produced, but at what price.
i'm not familiar with the forties field, but 65% recovery is common when the following conditions exist: low density and viscosity oil, good permeability and at least moderate dip - in other words if gravity drainage or gravity segregation are effective.
some examples of gravity segregation i am familiar with are lost soilder and wertz fields in wyoming( ~ 65 % before co2 flooding), and abqaiq and ghawar. abqaiq was already at over 50% recovery in '04 and is expected to recover about 70 % of ooip. ghawar is already in excess of 38% recovery and alledgedly still producing 5 million bpd.
yates field in texas is an example of a gravity drainage field, but recovery is really unknown as some of the oil went down the pecos river and some cross flowed into shallower permian reservoirs(this was the wild west). i would be surprised if yates doesn't recover something on the order of 70% ooip.
east texas is another example with high recovery, alledgedly 85% of ooip.
an oilfield can produce in excess of 100 % of ooip, if the reservoir is refilled with oil from another zone - pseudoabiotic oil. eugene island in louisiana, grant canyon in nevada and labarge in wyoming are possible examples. i wouldn't be surprised if east texas has been refilled from the source rock we hear so much about of late, the eagle ford shale.
There is another effect in the futures market. Owners of Calls who would normally exercise the Call and receive delivery at the appointed date, instead go bankrupt before that date. Since they have been purchasing Calls on a continuing basis, they stop exercising their Calls that have earlier delivery dates as well. The futures market is in near term turmoil as bankruptcy administrators struggle with their paperwork. I wonder what the rational economic man who is managing the dominant oil producer's business would do. Reduce production until all his customers declare bankruptcy? Increase production until what? Board his private jet and fly into hiding somewhere? All of the above seem equally implausible to me.
Your argument from NPV makes perfect sense, putting a cap on the maximum rate of increase as one goes to longer maturities in the futures market. If you assume the futures market is a perfect predictor of actual future prices. But if market conditions (future expectations) change, the entire price curve could shift up or down in little time.
Then we have the fact, that producers usually can't just turn a knob to move production to/from the present and the future. Slow down the rate of pumping, and your well may rust out and need costly replacemenet before the field is exhausted.... Its really tough for producers to cut back, even when it makes sense in the NPV sense.
How do we factor in non-linear substitution into a Hotelling analysis?
EVs are competitive at $80 oil. As oil prices rise, EV volumes will expand, providing increased economies of scale. With increased economies of scale, EVs will become competitive at lower prices, and sales volumes will expand at higher prices.
What if they're killing the golden goose?
EVs are competitive at $80 oil.
You keep saying this even as your own calculations say otherwise. Why?
To be fair, they might be competitive for a very small slice of the market and only because of the rebates.
However I, like you, think they are a long way off from being competitive with the current sweet spot of the market and will be for many years.
Still, I am will to pay a premium to have transportation when the shortages start. I won't buy the 1.0 version of the current crop...I'll wait until the 2012 model year and reassess.
To be fair, they might be competitive for a very small slice of the market and only because of the rebates.
Heck, my calculations didn't include the rebates! With the calculations, they're incredibly competitive.
In California a Leaf only costs $20k!! That's only $2k over the cost of a Corolla. You'll save that in the first year!
I calculated that they would be broadly competitive against $2.20/gallon gasoline... back in 2004. Even solar PV is competitive at today's gasoline prices. That's without rebates, BTW.
What we really need is an industry which can give us economies of scale. The Firefly Energy battery would have been enough to jump-start the (PH)EV phenomenon years ago if we'd made a major push to get production up and consumer cost down. Lithium-ion is, paradoxically, too good; the up-front cost for what you get is the stumbling block for most buyers.
They are competitive only if you ignore little things like their range, the inconvenience of charging, the cost and bother to install a charger that would speed that up, the need for a tow if you run out of juice, the difficulty/reduced range when using them in cold weather, the bother of worrying about how to take care of the battery and the high cost if this isn't done correctly. And so on.
I stand by what I said: EVs are competitive for only a very small slice of the market. In a growing or at least a stable economy it would take ten more years of development before all these issues were effectively non-issues.
Range of a PHEV/EREV is limited only by the size of the fuel tank.
Charging in one's garage is much more convenient than trips to a petroleum dispensary.
A PHEV/EREV can take 40 miles of electric power overnight through an extension cord. A pure EV will need more if it's heavily depleted, but the PHEV will displace almost as much fuel consumption without range or charging issues.
No tow needed, just a fast-charge. Nothing prevents a service vehicle from delivering a fast-charge in much the way they can deliver fuel to people who run out.
Most vehicles have reduced range (higher fuel consumption) in cold weather. An EV will have greater issues, but the 90-odd mile range of a Leaf will not be challenged by the median 22-mile commute.
I believe you're already wrong, and becoming more so with time. The cost of a battery is falling at a fairly rapid pace, and oil's going the other way.
Ah, I feel like a Nick conversation is coming on here where my exact points regarding the problems that exist right now are ignored in favor of some hypothetical future that hasn't arrived yet.
Case in point: "Nothing prevents a service vehicle from delivering a fast-charge"
Thank you for agreeing with me. In other words, they don't exist yet. In which year do you anticipate most of these services vehicles will have this capability? 2015? 2018?
Like I said, EVs (not PHEV's, which I think are great) have many hurdles to overcome before they are solid replacements for the convenience, utility and cost of fuel based cars.
I'm not likely to return to this thread, btw.
I feel like a Nick conversation is coming on
Whoa! I heard my name!
my exact points regarding the problems that exist right now are ignored in favor of some hypothetical future
I find that puzzling. It seems like the reverse to me. I keep seeing comments about a hypothetical future where PO causes TEOTWAWKI, while the world economy continues to grow even with high oil prices.
EVs (not PHEV's, which I think are great) have many hurdles to overcome before they are solid replacements for the convenience, utility
We all agree that the limited range of pure EVs limits their appeal (at least at the moment), and that PHEVs and EREVs will be more widely popular for a while.
Let me say that again - we're all agreed.
EVs...have many hurdles to overcome before they are solid replacements for the ... cost
Not really. See my conversation with Rethin.
No, my calculations say the Leaf is extremely competitive at $3 gasoline, and that was without rebates! Why do you keep saying otherwise??
I'll have to repost the calculations...
Because it took 20 years to get cost equality.
Grant it the rebates will knock that closer to 10 years, but that's far from competitive.
A few thoughts.
First, I believe you're agreeing that a Leaf is, over it's lifecycle, cost competitive with a Corolla. That's where I started: if oil prices rise, the EV value proposition will only get stronger, sales will rise, economies of scale will accumulate, and EVs will gain more and more momentum.
2nd, every vehicle needs to be used for it's full life (it's lifecycle) to realize it's total value. If you throw away a Corolla at 5 or 10 years, you throw away part of it's value.
3rd, the numbers in that table don't account for several factors, which will make a Leaf a much better value than that: first, EVs will depreciate much more slowly than ICE vehicles, just like the Prius did. 2nd, those numbers assumed $3 gas, which is here and seems likely to be a fond memory fairly soon. 3rd, those numbers assumed average mileage, but EVs will be bought mostly by people with above average mileage.
4th, of course, those numbers don't include $7,500 to $12,500 in rebates - an enormous difference.
We can see the truth of all of the above by looking at the lease numbers: the Leaf leases for $350 per month. If we subtract fuel and maintenance savings, we get $250 per month or less, which is a really low cost for a new car with better than average performance.
If you have to drive an EV for nearly 20 years to make up the cost differential then its really not competitive.
If you have to buy a new battery every 7 years, and it take you four years of driving to pay for it, its not very competitive.
If you have to subsidize the vehicle to the tune of $10k+, its not really competitive.
If you have to lease it, its not really competitive.
I'm sorry, you must have a different idea as to what competitive means.
Also, you might be right that future conditions make the Leaf more competitive(I really don't want to argue the point), but that's not the claim you made above, and that's what I was responding to.
If you have to drive an EV for nearly 20 years to make up the cost differential then its really not competitive.
I don't know how else to explain a lifecycle analysis. Does someone else want to take a shot at it?
You might want to look at today's article comparing the cost of coal, nuclear, wind solar and gas plants. They look out 50 years - it's just the right way to do it.
If you have to buy a new battery every 7 years
You very probably don't - I'm making a very conservative assumption. The battery may well last the life of the car.
If you have to subsidize the vehicle to the tune of $10k+, its not really competitive.
You don't - that's a bonus.
If you have to lease it, its not really competitive.
?? A lot of people lease cars - it's a standard business method of paying for a car.
I don't know how else to explain a lifecycle analysis. Does someone else want to take a shot at it?
You can do the analysis. I'm not taking issue with that. I'm just saying if it takes 20 years of heavy driving to get that cost equivalency, people won't buy it. In other words its not competitive.
You very probably don't - I'm making a very conservative assumption.
You are not making any assumption, conservative or not. That number was taken directly off Nissan's website.
You don't - that's a bonus.
You do, well at least you did use the rebates to make your case. But its sort of a moot point anyway. Those tax rebates are going to sunset.
?? A lot of people lease cars - it's a standard business method of paying for a car.
People who are worried about the cost of gas do not and for a good reason.
I'm just saying if it takes 20 years of heavy driving to get that cost equivalency
Well, my first analysis just used the overall US average of 35 miles per day (13k/yr), but that was silly - people like me who only drive 2,000 miles per year aren't going to buy an EV. Not to save money, anyway.
Now, the average is 35/13k, so the median is likely to be roughly the same. That means that half of all drivers drive more than 13k - probably on the order of 50/day,20k per year. That's Nissan's target market, at least for cost-conscious buyers.
With an average of 13k (and other overly conservative assumptions, like fast depreciation) the first analysis found a close break-even. With an average of 20k, a Leaf buyer is going to save quite a bit compared to a Corolla.
That number was taken directly off Nissan's website.
Kind've. Nissan is saying 5-10 years for the battery. OTOH, they're also saying that the battery will really last longer than that. Keep in mind, that most car components are only warranteed for 3 years, yet they last much longer - for many parts, the life of the car. The Leaf battery is warranteed for 8 years/100k miles - quite a bit more than that minimum.
I think it's clear that Nissan is trying to manage expectations. There is a risk that a % of batteries will fail - they're covering themselves.
you did use the rebates to make your case.
Sure - we have to notice that they exist. OTOH, I didn't include them in the 1st cost analysis.
Those tax rebates are going to sunset.
Yes, though like many things they could be renewed. OTOH, they do internalize real costs. On the 3rd hand, EREVs and PHEVs are probably a bigger market.
On the 4th hand, EV costs will fall, and oil prices will rise...
That means that half of all drivers drive more than 13k - probably on the order of 50/day,20k per year. That's Nissan's target market, at least for cost-conscious buyers.
If my commute is a round trip of 50 miles, and I do it 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year I'll only put 12,500 miles/year on the Leaf. If my commute was the average 35 miles I'd put on less than 9k miles/year. To get to 20k miles I'd have to have a commute of 80 miles.
If the battery warranty is 8 years and 100k miles, that's only 12.5k miles a year.
I really don't see any reasonable scenario where commuters will be putting 20k miles a year on the Leaf. Its a commuter car.
I think it's clear that Nissan is trying to manage expectations. There is a risk that a % of batteries will fail - they're covering themselves.
That's not at all why Nissan is saying.
"The battery will have a lifespan for automotive use of 5-10 years under normal use."
http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/faq/list/technology#/leaf-ele...
Again, I'm not saying the Leaf won't be competitive in a few years. But at the moment they aren't competitive to the average consumer on a cost basis.
Rethin,
My original analysis showed that over the lifecycle of the car, the car's costs were the same as a Corolla. That means it's competitive. Sure, some buyers don't weight operating costs properly. Also, for some buyers a new thing has to be clearly better than an old thing, not just as good. But, a lot of buyers don't have that problem.
That said, I agree that pure EVs aren't going to take over the car market overnight (PHEVs and EREVs will do better). As a country, we choose to protect legacy industries, and those whose careers and investments depend on them, so we aren't moving as quickly as we should.
But, we are moving. And, high oil prices will make us move faster, which was my original point.
Now, details:
My 2nd analysis, which was more realistic, showed that the Leaf would save a net of $1,032 in the first 7 years (including the 7 year battery replacement), and would save about $19k over the life of the vehicle.
Interest Depreciation Op Savings Battery Net
1 $2,310.00 1,980 (1,522) 0 2,768
2 $1,848.00 1,861 (1,545) 0 2,164
3 $1,386.00 1,750 (1,569) 0 1,567
4 $924.00 1,645 (1,592) 0 977
5 $462.00 1,546 (1,615) 0 393
6 0 1,453 (1,637) 0 (184)
7 0 1,366 (1,659) $6,000 5,707
Corolla costs
Interest Depreciation Total
1 1,260 2,160 3,420
2 1,008 1,901 2,909
3 756 1,673 2,429
4 504 1,472 1,976
5 252 1,295 1,547
6 0 1,140 1,140
7 0 1,003 1,003
Net savings cum savings
1 652 652
2 745 1,397
3 862 2,258
4 999 3,258
5 1,154 4,412
6 1,324 5,735
7 (4,704) 1,032
If my commute is a round trip of 50 miles, and I do it 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year I'll only put 12,500 miles/year on the Leaf. If my commute was the average 35 miles I'd put on less than 9k miles/year.
The 35 mile figure isn't the average commute, it's the average miles per day for the US, overall. Week day might be higher, weekend lower.
My original analysis showed that over the lifecycle of the car, the car's costs were the same as a Corolla. That means it's competitive.
If it takes 20 years to make up the cost differential then consumers are not going to buy it to save money on gas. That is not competitive. Sorry.
That said, I agree that pure EVs aren't going to take over the car market overnight (PHEVs and EREVs will do better).
I am responding to your comment that the Leaf is competitive now at $80/barrel.
But, we are moving. And, high oil prices will make us move faster
Again, I am responding to your comment that the Leaf is competitive now at $80/barrel.
My 2nd analysis, which was more realistic
Your 2nd analysis has the Leaf retaining $11k of value after 20 years of heavy use. That's not consistent with you comment that the Leaf is now competitive at $80/barrel. Try to stay focused here.
The 35 mile figure isn't the average commute, it's the average miles per day for the US, overall. Week day might be higher, weekend lower.
You are correct. It seems the average one way commute in the US is 16 miles. That works out to 32 miles, not 35. Thanks for correcting me.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Traffic/story?id=485098&page=1
It stills stands I can think of no scenario where the average consumer will put 20k miles/year on a commuter car. Range anxiety alone precludes this. For the Leaf to be competitive with a Corolla it has to make sense for the average consumer.
If it takes 20 years to make up the cost differential then consumers are not going to buy it to save money on gas.
It doesn't. It saves money right away. If someone buys a Leaf and sells it after one year, they'll have more money than their neighbor who buys a Corolla and sells it after one year.
Does that help?
I am responding to your comment that the Leaf is competitive now at $80/barrel.
"competitive " means "costs the same or less".
Your 2nd analysis has the Leaf retaining $11k of value after 20 years of heavy use.
Well, $9k. Yes, I think that an 20 year old Leaf will be of great value. You really don't think that in 20 years that EVs, even old ones, won't be sought after??
That's not consistent with you comment that the Leaf is now competitive at $80/barrel.
I'm not sure what you mean.
I can think of no scenario where the average consumer will put 20k miles/year on a commuter car.
Why would we describe it as just a commuter car? People will use it for everything - commuting, local errands, everything but very long trips. People with 2 or 3 cars in the household will use the Leaf first - it's wasting money not to.
Why would we assume that this is limited to the average consumer? Corporate fleets will be very interested in the Leaf. Taxis are already experimenting with them, using battery changers.
I agree that some people will be concerned about range anxiety. Those people will be more interested in PHEVs and EREVs.
Well, $9k. Yes, I think that an 20 year old Leaf will be of great value. You really don't think that in 20 years that EVs, even old ones, won't be sought after??
This is the root of our disagreement. As things currently stand, no absolutely not. You are assuming an insane depreciation rate for the Leaf. Look, at $80 a barrel, the way things stand now, the Leaf will depreciate slightly slower than the Corolla, but nothing near the rate you propose. What you are proposing is not consistent with present market conditions. And under present market conditions the Leaf isn't very competitive with the Corolla cost wise.
I'm not talking about market conditions 20 years from now. Maybe the Leaf will be a worthless hulk, maybe it'll be worth its weight in gold. All I am responding to is you comment that the Leaf is competitive at current $80/barrel market conditions.
Why would we describe it as just a commuter car? People will use it for everything - commuting, local errands, everything but very long trips. People with 2 or 3 cars in the household will use the Leaf first - it's wasting money not to.
Fine, the family drives their Leaf for 50 miles a day for 6 days a week for 52 weeks a year. That's only 15.6k miles. Who could possibly drive it more than that?
And please, please, stop bringing up PHEVs and EREVs. They are outside the scope of your original comment and my objection to it.
What you are proposing is not consistent with present market conditions.
Well, "present market conditions" are that both the Leaf and the Volt are backordered for about a year. People are "flipping" Volts for well over MSRP. The same thing happened with the Prius - it depreciated very, very slowly. I'm assuming 6% depreciation (vs 12% for the Corolla), which is probably too high.
I'm really baffled - the most common objection to EVs is that car companies won't be able to make enough to satisfy demand. You don't agree with that objection?
That's only 15.6k miles. Who could possibly drive it more than that?
Easy - a lot of people will drive it 75 miles per day - many will charge it twice, and drive 100+: Commuters with long commutes, corporate fleet drivers, tax drivers. Plus, it will get driven on Sunday.
please, stop bringing up PHEVs and EREVs.
They're both forms of Evs, especially EREVs. The Volt is right at home in this analysis. I chose the Leaf for my cost analysis because it's clearer, and because Nissan was more aggressive in it's pricing (GM is in a different, more short term financial position).
I do agree that pure EVs won't be right for everyone. It paints a misleading picture to say that, and not point to PHEVs and EREVs.
Well, "present market conditions" are that both the Leaf and the Volt are backordered for about a year. People are "flipping" Volts for well over MSRP. The same thing happened with the Prius - it depreciated very, very slowly. I'm assuming 6% depreciation (vs 12% for the Corolla), which is probably too high.
Well there is a very definite market for the Leaf. Its people who are tree huggers, or people who want to get off of oil. But the market will be much like the Prius market was when it was first introduced. You didn't buy it to save money but to make a statement or live a lifestyle.
But this group of early adopters don't really care if the Leaf is cost competitive with the Corolla. So they don't really support you argument.
The corolla depreciates $5,448 over the first five years (6.7%/year average). The Prius depreciates $8,058 over the same time period(7.7%/year average).
http://www.automotive.com/2010/12/toyota/corolla/ownership-costs/index.html
http://www.automotive.com/2010/12/toyota/prius/ownership-costs/index.html
The Leaf will be similar once the early adopters are satisfied.
I'm really baffled - the most common objection to EVs is that car companies won't be able to make enough to satisfy demand. You don't agree with that objection?
I never said that. I don't believe that one bit. I think there is a current pent up demand and it might take a couple of years to ramp up and satiate that. But overall I think the EV market will stay small for years to come.
If the Leaf is truly cost competitive with the Corolla it'll appeal to a much broader spectrum of consumers.
Easy - a lot of people will drive it 75 miles per day - many will charge it twice, and drive 100+: Commuters with long commutes, corporate fleet drivers, tax drivers. Plus, it will get driven on Sunday.
I think you'll find these applications, fleet drivers, taxi drivers etc, are not your average consumer. I agree, the Leaf will fit very well in some niche applications. The average consumer will not drive 50 miles, recharge then drive another fifty miles every day. The average commute is only 32 miles a day. Lets say they commute to work every weekday, then drive an additional 28 miles after work, then drive 50 miles on the weekend. That's a lot of driving, and its only 15.6k miles if they do it 52 weeks a year.
I do agree that pure EVs won't be right for everyone. It paints a misleading picture to say that, and not point to PHEVs and EREVs.
I want to address specifically the cost comparison between the Corolla and the Leaf. That's the claim you made and that's the point in contention.
The corolla depreciates $5,448 over the first five years (6.7%/year average).
I'll have to look at that in detail. My first thought: that's almost the same as the 6% I used for the Leaf, and much lower than most cars. Says something about small Toyotas, I guess.
I think you'll find these applications, fleet drivers, taxi drivers etc, are not your average consumer.
I didn't say they were: half of all drivers drive above average...
I want to address specifically the cost comparison between the Corolla and the Leaf. That's the claim you made and that's the point in contention.
No, I said EVs in general. The Leaf is just one good case study.
I'm happy to focus mostly on the Leaf, but we should never leave the impression that the success or failure of EVs in general depends on the pure EVs segment of the EV market.
I'll have to look at that in detail.
Please do. I believe that's the bulk of our disagreement right there.
http://www.money-zine.com/Calculators/Auto-Loan-Calculators/Car-Deprecia...
Most cars depreciate away most of their value by 10 years.
http://pfinvesting.com/2007/08/13/car-depreciation/
Is it possible that there will be a value re-appreciation bump in the curve for EV's once the realization about Peak Oil goes viral in the marketplace?
[ i.mage.+]
Sure. During the last gas price spike there was a measurable uptick in interest in high milage cars.
Okay I threw some numbers together quick and dirty. I think the figures are correct though.
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B12_i5_4pLufMGU2OWU5ZjUtODhmNC00NjkwLWE...
I'm assuming a car loan of 36 months, 10% down and 6% interest. $18k for the Corolla and $31k for the leaf
http://www.bankrate.com/calculators/auto/auto-loan-calculator.aspx
I did the depreciation from this calculator
http://www.money-zine.com/Calculators/Auto-Loan-Calculators/Car-Deprecia...
and assumed the low depreciation rate for each vehicle.
As from before, $5k for a new battery every 7 years and $1250 in gas and maintenance savings for the Leaf.
The result
year Cost diff (Leaf - Corolla)
0 1685
1 1941
2 1806
3 1484
4 1061
5 548
6 4952
7 4285
8 3554
9 2765
10 1936
11 1042
12 117
13 4157
14 3164
15 2144
16 1098
17 30
18 -1059
19 -2165
As you can see it takes 19 year for the Leaf to overtake the Corolla on a cost basis. Of course you have to buy a new battery two years after that and then its off to the races again.
Please check my work and let me know if I screwed up anywhere.
Looks correct to me - note the fact that the Leaf very nearly breaks even at the point each new battery is needed - certainly within the margin of error on the original assumptions.
This raises another concern though - by the time the second battery replacement is needed the value of the car has dropped to very close to the cost of a new battery. You would have to be very confident that you were going to be able to get the full life of the battery out of the car to justify replacing it at that point.
The UK gives a couple of examples why EV take up may be a problem - with our much higher fuel taxes (currently total cost is ~£6 per imperial gallon) they are unambiguously cheaper here (you also pay no road tax on EVs). Reasonably capable EVs have been available for over a decade in the shape of the Citroen Berlingo Electrique yet even among utilities that can afford to take the long view the take up was very small (to the point that Citroen stopped making them) and judging by used ones I have seen they are typically very low mileage - <5000 per year seems the norm.
Another example is the take up of LPG - this is taxed less in the UK and reduces cost enough to pay back the conversion cost in 3 years or so (and with much less negative effect on using the car) but still has not been taken up in any volume.
I think the main issue is for the typical new car buyer the cost of fuel is just not an issue compared to the cost of purchase even at our prices.
The proposed first generation plug in hybrids look pretty rubbish too - the volt proposal seems to be for a parallel hybrid with a fully capable petrol engine where what would make far more sense would be a much smaller generator engine (preferably diesel) sufficient to keep the car moving but not accelerate it with excess power going to the battery and the battery doing the acceleration.
note the fact that the Leaf very nearly breaks even at the point each new battery is needed - certainly within the margin of error on the original assumptions.
Yeah, I noticed that too. And that was with Nick's rather low ball battery price. Reports are the replacement batteries are going to be a lot more than that.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/05/15/nissan-leaf-profitable-by-year-thre...
So lets say they get the battery costs down to half that, $9k. It'll take you 7.2 years of driving the leaf to pay for the battery at which point you have to buy a new battery.
I think the main issue is for the typical new car buyer the cost of fuel is just not an issue compared to the cost of purchase even at our prices.
Another way to look at it is you can buy a Corolla and 19 years of gas and maintenance for the price of a Leaf.
For the UK the cost comparison actually looks OK (if we take the yearly saving to be ~$2000 from the higher fuel prices here) your table looks like:
0 1685
1 1191
2 306
3 -766
4 -1939
5 -3202
6 452
7 -965
8 -2446
9 -3985
10 -5564
11 -7208
12 -8883
13 -5593
14 -7336
15 -9106
16 -10902
17 -12720
18 -14559
19 -16415
So payback after 3 years and most of the cost of the first new battery in the bank by the time you need it. But that still ignores the cost of having (or renting) a second car to cover for journeys the EV can't do (which was the decider against* my buying a used Berlingo when one came up locally).
Also is the US example not still over generous to the EV since no finance cost is being assigned to the new batteries?
*I bought a bicycle instead - a much better buy and almost as much use
No, I didn't include financing charges for the battery. But while we're at it you can also include whatever returns on the initial $15k you saved on getting the Corolla.
Thanks for the UK numbers. Did you include the higher price for the Leaf on your side of the pond? What about the VAT? What driving patterns did you use?
You'd think that if EVs were competitive anywhere the UK would be high on the list.
No that just used your numbers with a rough guess at the differential fuel cost (was roughly 2x the cost compared with Pennsylvania the last time I was over there for work but our electricity cost is more than yours too). All the extra new car taxes etc in the UK would make the comparison worse for the EV and it would likely be better to compare with a diesel hatchback over here too. Evs do seem to be catching on in London where they don't pay the congestion charge (soon to be £10 per day).
My gut feeling at the moment is that improved public transport may well make a better option in the medium term this side of the pond since if EVs do catch on something else will be taxed to make up the losses.
On the other hand your depreciation for the UK looks a bit too slow - at least for the Corolla its residual value should be zero at around 12 years (as an example I currently have a '96 VW golf that cost me £850 in 2007, now worth maybe £250 most of which is the scrap value). It might be worth my reworking your calculation properly for the UK although I think car sharing in a second hand 60-mpg diesel is still the best bet. The EV may do a little better depreciation wise but only with a working battery when sold.
I wasn't really comfortable with the depreciation tables I used above either. It gives too high a residual value to a very old car. If I find some better numbers I'll update it.
Another problem is you pay full retail price for the car, but its only worth wholesale price once you drive it off the lot. And that can be a huge chunk of change that's not reflected in the cost column.
The article you quote names the current price (low-volume, substantially hand-built). This has nothing to do with the cost in volume with automation; projections are for Li-ion costs to drop by half over the next several years.
Good point. Bloomberg does report on that though
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-14/nissan-s-leaf-battery-maker-...
So if Nissan meets that goal, it'll cost $8.8k for a replacement battery. That's half the current price and pretty ambitious if you ask me.
To get a $5k battery pack Nissan will have to almost halve that number again and produce a battery for $208/kwh.
Edit:
I've been trying to dig up any more info on the Leaf's battery.
Apparently Deutsche Bank's automobile analysts are predicting $250/kwh by 2020. So we may have to wait even longer to get it down to $208/kwh.
http://www.consensus-inc.com/002001i/knay1537/fin-com/1223fm-05.pdf
Don't forget that the "dead" batteries will still have 80% or so of their original capacity, and will have considerable value to e.g. electric utilities in load-levelling service. This means that the owner replacing a battery is going to get a substantial discount from the "core charge".
Yep, I hadn't missed that. But I have no way of knowing their value. At present there is no market for used EV batteries and I was really trying to keep the analysis to present market conditions.
Will there be a lucrative market for these used batteries? Quite possibly. It seems to me to make much more sense then V2G. What will their value be in such a stationary use? Who knows. But I bet not much compared to their value in an EV.
It's about time to transport this talk to the bottom to get the column width reasonable again.
Because there aren't any of them to speak of. There is a market in used Prius batteries, from wrecks rather than replacements.
Waitaminnit. You're using the current non-market to speculate about the conditions when there are enough Leafs and such on the road that electric utilities can think about provisioning their systems with the used units? It'll be a different world then.
V2G makes tons of sense, even if it's limited to dynamic charging and reactive power. It doesn't harm the battery to interrupt a charge, and the shallow cycling of AC Propulsion's V2G test appeared to actually do the battery some good.
AC Propulsion found enough value in V2G to pay for the battery. Offsetting even 50% of the battery cost via V2G payments makes an EV a no-brainer for a very large part of the public even at current gas prices.
You can speculate all sorts of scenarios for the future. The whole point of this discussion was to compare the Leaf to the Corolla at current market conditions (ie $80 barrel oil) and see if the Leaf was competitive.
Of course the future will be a different world. You know that, I know that. But currently the market doesn't know that. (fix that and a Nobel prize or two will be in you future).
What I really wanted to know, and what my original objection to what Nick wrote is, are EVs, the Leaf in particular, currently competitive in the market place? That is, will the average consumer go out and buy one because its such a good deal as things currently stand.
I don't really want to get into an argument about future market conditions about used EV batteries. Maybe another day. I only meant the current market conditions don't reflect any value for used EV batteries and without that data I can not update the analysis to reflect that.
I really don't want to redo our V2G argument right now. Perhaps another day. You already have my response to that anyway.
I'm continuing in this comment at the bottom to avoid looking at things too narrowly. ;-)
I said last August 13 not to expect any increase in OPEC output below $100 oil, and I still think so:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6843
At this time, I am not even sure that going over $100 will change OPEC output one bit. Maybe around $110 they will decide to hold some type of ad hoc meeting, just to look like they are doing something.
"Maybe around $110 they will decide to hold some type of ad hoc meeting, just to look like they are doing something."
Maybe they know that they *can not* increase production. Pumping faster just brings up more water with less oil fraction. Maybe they know that they can't manage the theater of another meeting and don't want to be all in one place when TSHTF. Maybe they fear that other OPEC members will send assassins instead of Heads of State. Maybe ...
In short maybe we shouldn't expect rational behavior.
Geek7
If you look at the megaprojects list you will see Saudi Arabia bringing on about 1.7 millions barrels a day from new projects (2008-2009) that they have been developing over the last ten years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_megaprojects_(2009)
They also reduced production in 2008-2009 by a million a day when prices collapsed to £40.
I believe they were taken aback, as many people were by how quickly demand went up during 2005-2008, so have learned a lesson from that.
I think they will try and keep their spare capacity as long as possible and in order to do that will allow oil to go to around the $100-$120 range.
This will do two things, it will reduce the rate which global demand will rise, giving more time for other projects to come on stream.
Also it will ensure that more expensive oil projects will be financed and developed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/8169503...
There is no benefit to Saudi Arabia to have oil prices go to $180 and then collapse again. They need $70 oil for their economy.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1112463556
If oil stayed at $60-$70 all spare capacity would be gone in less than two years, these higher prices will maintain the spare capacity for a while longer.
Expensive oil is our friend...
China's PBOC's Christmas rate rise to weigh on commods at open
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Chinas-PBOCs-Christmas-rate-rb-3241269568....
No cheap petroleum to be expected
Developed reserves are diminishing and it is taking a lot more money to find new reserves. And this situation is expected to last for 40 to 50 years. What then? What does this expert expect to happen in 40 to 50 years that will cause an abundance of cheap petroleum to return?
That is about the dumbest sentence I have read in years.
Ron P.
It's not that dumb. It just means oil will become a more expensive product for 40-50 years, and then it will become an unavailable product. The price won't matter because there won't be any for sale.
Actually, that's not really true. There probably will be some oil available but you, personally, will not be able to buy it. Plan your future driving needs accordingly.
I think that one should be careful. Don't assume too much intelligent thought goes into pundit pronouncements. I doubt very much that the speaker had any thought beyond the vague feeling that 40 to 50 years as a time frame would silence the interviewer (which it apparently did).
I've noticed the use of long time frames by peak oil deniers to not only quell the interviewer, but the audience of readers. As soon as I see multi-decade periods referred to, I immediately presume they are attempting to negate peak oil concerns and provide everybody with a sense of complacency - 'move on, there's nothing to see here' type coercion.
There probably will be some oil available but you, personally, will not be able to buy it.
There may not be rock oil but there will be oil.
Plant seeds will be harvested for their oil. And in the doomer version - you'll be fattened up on High Fructose Corn Syrup and once you go into diabetic shock and die - rendered for that oil.
Perhaps I'm reading my own viewpoint into his, but I expect by then we will have learned to function with very liitle oil. I.E. between using alternatives, and learning to move around/transport a lot less stuff we will find we are getting along OK without cheap oil. Of course the transition should be challenging....
This is very similar to the claims about cheap oil in the future by venture capitalist, Vinod Khosla, in this recent Scientific American podcast "Searching for the Radical Solution" http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=vinod-khosla-se...
He is confident we will have a replacement for oil by then making it less desirable and dropping the price to around $30 per bbl. Good luck on that.
Oil prices 'could be life threatening' for elderly
See: http://www.thisissussex.co.uk/news/Oil-prices-life-threatening-elderly/a...
Good luck to all.
Cheers,
Paul
Nothing to worry about as we'll all be dead from swine flu in a couple of weeks
Intensive care flu cases soar as 24 die from swine flu
Our "cut first, ask questions later" government cancelled the annual flu jab advertising to save money and now swine flu is resurgent with fewer people than usual vaccinated.
HPA National Influenza Report
This needs watching. It had better be a blip.
PS Merry Christmas all :-)
Interesting. Last I heard, we're in pretty good shape on this side of the pond. Perhaps because it was such a big deal last year, a lot of people got their flu shots this year, and got them early.
ILI rates have started to increase recently in parts of the US.
Here's Google Flu Trends for Alabama
2010-2011 Influenza Season Week 50 ending December 18, 2010
What is very curious is that, according to the CDC, A(2009 H1N1) (aka Swine Flu) is virtually non-existent in the US. (http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/). Very strange behavior for a pandemic flu if true. (I was a flu-junkie before PO-junkie. I first heard of Peak Oil on a pandemic flu web-site.)
Well 11% of tested Influenza A samples were positive for swine flu so I wouldn't go quite as far as "almost non-existent". What is almost non-existent is seasonal human H1N1 which swine flu has completely displaced. Curiously in the UK we still have virtually no H3N2 unlike the US where H3N2 is the currently dominant type A flu. Will be watching to see what happens over the next few weeks.
To add to the concern, think of all those air travelers who have recently been forced into confined quarters with other travelers from doG knows where due to the weather in Europe. Sounds like a great opportunity for transmission of what ever flu virus is already in the population...
E. Swanson
Yes, but hopefully the school break over Christmas/New Year in the UK might slow the spread just a bit. However I've just seen a quote from Professor John Oxford.
Swine flu epidemic fear as hospital admissions soar by 250 per cent in a week
Death count is now at least 31 confirmed - up from the figure quoted in the article.
Orlov on Bright New Horizons
I'm not entirely surprised Mr. Savinar jumped an unexpected direction - he was a scared guy - but I initially doubted that astrology was it. But I guess it is, a quick google found this:
http://mattsavinarastrology.activeboard.com
The human mind is a funny thing.
Kurt Vonnegut quote:
John Kenneth Galbraith quote:
Well it seems that Matt was one step ahead of ya all after all.
"Principle of astrology proven to be scientific: planetary position imprints biological clocks of mammals"
http://www.naturalnews.com/030698_astrology_scientific_basis.html
Yes, such an idea does sound preposterous to the scientifically trained and with very good reason.
This whole article shows just some of the mental gymnastics that some people will go to in an attempt to justify their absurd beliefs. Showing that mice born in the winter have different behavioral patterns than mice born in the summer have nothing to do with which house Venus happened to be in on your birthday. For astrologers to take something like this and claim it validates their profession is preposterous.
Ron P.
Maybe not but could it explain a difference between a Leo and an Aquarius? One clue would be if this is reversed in the southern hemisphere.
NAOM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9oq_IskRIg
You mean the difference between a Leo mouse and an Aquarius mouse? These were mice! Mice are, far more often than not, born in an un-climate controlled environment, unlike most humans. Weather effects are not star or planet effects so at any rate this has absolutely nothing to do with astrology. And it would not matter what you found about different climate births it has nothing to do with astrology.
So why on earth would you use the words Leo and Aquarius instead of winter and summer?
Ron P.
Ah,mice and men :) I used the astrological signs simply to link the two, yes, summer and winter would do. The mice show up a difference so the first question would be 'Is the effect reversed in the southern hemisphere?'. If it does then that does strengthen the link. Now take man, true our environment is VERY artificial nowadays. How long ago did the astrological signs originate? A very long time ago when man lived by the sun and the seasons. If the mouse effect is present in man then it may have been more prominent then than now, in our moulded world. Such an effect may have given the humours of those born in summer and winter the characteristics of Leo and Aquarius. Again, are there similar ancient systems that have originated in the southern hemisphere that have the characteristics reversed as are the seasons? That much I would say could, possibly, be shown as a scientific basis. OTOH when you get into the houses and ages etc I put my hands up and say stop. Just some thoughts:)
NAOM
The astrological signs also originated so far ago that precession of the equinoxes has moved them by as much as 2 sun signs, and the Sun even goes through a constellation it didn't before. Yet astrology and astrologers have changed nothing. That ought to be proof enough, if people actually cared about proof instead of feel-good mumbo-jumbo.
I'm hoping that's an attempt at sarcasm.
"He was a scared guy" - that about sums it up. Now he is just another scary guy with a new delusion.
I wonder what he was thinking when he went this route - that this particular brand of magical thinking will supply him with a steady income perhaps???
As collapse quickens, will we drift towards Haiti-ville? I wonder if people like Matt will be the lynchers, or those who are lynched?
He should have chosen reading pig entrails, at least he would have some bacon to share with his fellow magicians.
For the little people, peak oil isn't profitable.
I've realized this myself, which is why I choose to accumulate physical gold and silver. It's my way out.
For Matt Savinar I guess his way out is astrology.
Given the in-your-face fraud that is going on at Wall Street by the Jack-legs in "finance" - what makes anyone think "investments" are going to be "profitable"?
The Jack-legs see the little people as their source of profit.
Yes, the human mind is a funny thing. It was not designed to be rational. It was not designed at all. If your epistemology says knowledge comes from magical sources, then you don’t need any reason or proof. God said it. I believe it. That settles it. If your epistemology says knowledge is ‘self-evident’ and the human brain is sufficient to discover it using the scientific method, then the word ‘proof’ has an entirely different meaning to you. Unfortunately, there is no ultimate proof of either of these beliefs, which is why science does not deal in Truth with a capital T. So there is no common denominator with which these two belief systems can be compared.
Well, not a reason based common denominator. The only way science and superstition can be compared is through utility: Which one works better? Or, like in evolution, which one fits? Creatures that have evolved the scientific method clearly seem more fit than those who believe in some flavor of divine revelation. But that itself could be a magical belief. In our shared past, superstitious beliefs ‘fit’ the social niche in which we developed for hundreds of thousands of years. Along the way we evolved a tool kit of mental skills and beliefs that was sufficient to our survival. Well, for now at least. We may be witness to evolution’s de-selection process and the only ones to survive this century may be the ones with the wackiest beliefs. If the mutation fits, the descendants wear it.
Personally, I believe in chance. It’s the only belief that requires no presupposition at all. Things just happen randomly. Sometimes they make sense. Sometimes our attempts to project meaning and purpose unto meaningless and purposeless chance events make sense. Still, I gave out Christmas presents this year. Ultimately, which one allows us to live our lives and feel fulfilled? Whichever one you feel most strongly about, of course.
Merry socially constructed and religiously themed emotional release day based on a random astrological event. Chance bless us, every one.
Jon.
Utility indeed, also repeatability.
But I believe there is an actual real world, and it's the same for all of us, and that science is useful in formulating concepts and models that are more congruent to reality than other methods, and thus of greater utility.
Do I believe that Science can answer all questions and solve all problems? No. I believe that there are matters of such complexity that humans just can't grapple with them - they are mysteries, not subject to closure. At least not now.
However...
If you jump off a several hundred foot tall cliff, you will die at the bottom. No matter what you believe.
I think I’ll skip the epistemological swan dive, thank you. I agree that science has more utility and provides better explanations than superstition. However, science can’t give people a reason to live. Superstition can. I coined the phrase ‘The lie we live by’ to describe cultural elements that tell us how to make sense of the world. Religions, urban legends, folklore and morality tales are there to persuade us to be like everybody else in the village and know our places in the universe. If we actually believe them, so much the better. But if the universe is truly random, then there is no reason for anything. So, we make one up.
Jon.
The main difference between superstition and science is to reject the hypothesis that do not work. If you fail to reject a hypothesis that do not work it is superstition.
I've never been impressed by Matt's over-the-top fear-mongering. But is this astrology stuff from the same guy? Is this a joke?
Apparently not.
Here's a post at mattsavinar.net about the astrological angles on BP, by another author but apparently endorsed by Matt.
http://www.mattsavinar.net/Archives/BPAstrology.html
Then again, I prefer it to Matt Simmons' plan to nuke the BP well.
This is so disappointing, to have a major peak oil voice go completely coo-coo on us.
Ron P.
Is Savinar delusional--or is he crazy like a fox? Being a successful astrologer can bring in a lot more income than being an unsuccessful lawyer. I expect in years to come that the demand for astrologers will increase--and also the market for fundamentalist preachers. People want answers. Astrologers have answers, as do Bible-thumping preachers.
Humanism and rationalism and science are perceived to have failed. Both religion and magic (including astrology) are due for a big comeback.
I recommend the classic science-fiction novel GATHER DARKNESS by Fritz Leiber on this theme.
Don,
I believe you are probably right about religion and magic making big comebacks. I believe Savinar is crazy like a fox.
If you have charisma and a following and you are quick on your intellectual feet, there can be megabucks in astrology, preaching, or predicting the stock market-even when your batting average exactly matches the odds of throwing darts at the charts.
Skilled operators are very good at taking credit for lucky guesses and weaseling on their unlucky guesses, thus keeping the fees rolling in.
He already has a substantial following-how many followers I have no idea, but almost for sure enough to winnow out a few dozen wealthy suck-er, clients; ability and common sense are distributed in odd combinations in lots of people-I myself know several people who are bright and well educated but who also believe in a couple of oddball or wierd ideas-most of us know at least one or two such people.Some of them are rich, or at least quite well to do.Mat can probably line up a few dozen of this sort easily.
He is VERY well positioned to rake in some very serious coin if he is good at his new trade.
If I could find a surgeon competent to remove my conscience, I would seriously consider becoming an astrologer or televangelist myself. ;)
Absolute nonsense! There are dozens of astrologers selling market advice and they are not making much money, if any at all. A person looking for market advice from the stars is not going to look to Matt Savinar for astrological advice, they will look to someone whom they think knows astrology. There is no money to be made by just pretending you are a nut.
And if you are in the market advice business then turning into a fruitcake will cost you far more clients than it will gain you.
If Matt Savinar is looking to the heavens for advice about peak oil, or even just pretending to do so, he is not crazy like a fox he is crazy like a loon.
Ron P.
Hi, Darwinian,
I look up to you as a rockribbed cast iron copperclad realist in just about every respect;but sometimes it is possible to go overboard even in being rational.
People are illogical-out of a large crowd- meaning of Savinar's followers-there will be a number who are quite well to do for various reasons ranging from being born lucky to getting lucky in the markets to simply being good businessmen and women-all of this number being irrational in at least this one respect, believing in astrology.
Since they are (probably, mostly) otherwise rational, and believe AS YOU DO, in peak oil and gloom and doom-as evidenced by being Savinar's followers-they will be primed and ready and willing to drink his koolaid, and pay dearly for it.
Savinar has, or potentially has, them in his pocket in the same way that any particular highly successful hairstylist or preacher or financial analyst or athlete or politician has a pocket full of loyal followers.
It is true that most astrologists earn only peanuts-just as most preachers earn only peanuts.But I have gone out of my way to see and meet a couple of successful preachers-the kind who earn millions every year and have their own university or tv show for instance.
Savinar doesn't need tens of thousands of followers as an astrologist-he only needs a handful with money who look up to him, as I look up to you, as a hard headed , tough, no nonsense thinker.
This handful will gladly pay him fees that would make a Manhattan corporate lawyer drool for a personal audience-if he turns out to be a talented astrologer.
A talented astrologer is one who is very good at researching his clients backgrounds and who is a skillful practical psychologist;he is thus able to impress his clients with the depth of his insights, and of course by knowing what to say about any given topic, he will make a very powerful impression on the suc- er, client, I mean.
You do believe in the reality of big league con artists, don't you?
The world is chock full of them.
There are also plenty of fools out there who have not yet been separated from their money.
Having read your commentary here for a year, if I met you in the course of business, I would know exactly what to say, and not say, to impress you as being a very sharp thinker.
If I were to make a good impression otherwise, my chances of selling you on a business deal of some sort would be excellent.
Savinar can get rich as a consulting astrologist with only a couple of dozen well heeled clients.
Hey, I did some checking and as far as I can tell Matt does not even give market advice. He is not in that business. So you are now saying that perhaps he has gotten into the business of selling advice... to clients who pay him personally?
Well I doubt it seriously. I believe he has been a believer in such nonsense all along. And that is thinking the best of him, not calling him a fraud or con artist.
Ron P.
He admits it. His goodbye message at LATOC said it's $200 for an astrological analysis, delivered via MS Word.
Does he really believe it? I think he does. He also sees it as a useful profession for the post-carbon age.
Stuart Staniford used to complain about people were "impermeable to evidence." There are those, certainly, but I think the opposite is as big a problem among peak oilers: people who are too open-minded.
"people who are too open minded" ........
Some folks hold to their beliefs despite all evidence to the contrary. Some folks resist forming beliefs, as this hinders the consideration of many possibilities.
Magical thinking vs. seeking reality? I know which side I'll always choose. Perhaps I was genetically programmed this way, but, basically, it seems like more fun. Besides, it really pisses people off when I reject their dogma ;-)
Thanks for clearing that up Leanan. I was completely unaware that he had turned to such activities.
Too open minded? Yes, I think you are correct there. I once met a man who said the answer to the population problem would be migration to other planets. I laughed at the idea. His reaction: "Well, if you don't think that is a possibility then you are pretty closed minded." I don't think I even replied to him at the time but since then I read a quote, by Dawkins I believe: "I have an open mind but it is not so open that my brains fall out."
Yes I completely agree. Some people have a mind so open that their brains appear to have fallen out. And yes a lot of those people are peak oilers.
Astrology is a lot of silly nonsense. I don't believe a damn word of it. My brains have not fallen out... yet.
Ron P.
You are quite right about the problem of people being "too open minded." I think this problem is related to the lack of critical thinking across the curriculum in our schools and colleges. For example, about sixteen hundred years ago Saint Augustine rigorously disproved astrology by pointing out that twins are born at almost the same time and hence have the same horoscopes--but one twin can have a much different life than the other twin. This disproof of astrology is elegant, simple, and requires no math.
Speaking of math, astrology now uses models based on higher mathematics--complex mathematical models with lots of equations--so it looks "scientific" in its methods, such as multiple regression statistical analysis. This appearance of "being scientific" may have misled people like Matt Savinar into believing that astrology is a science.
Don, I modified your last sentence to bring this thread full circle back to Dmitry's point in the post I linked to above... astroeconomist.
The misuse of mathematics in economics is widespread. I had extensive conversations with one of my math profs on this topic, and he agreed with me that economists are almost all the time using differential and integral calculus on functions that are discontinuous and hence cannot be differentiated at all. When I brought that point up to my economics professors, they brushed aside my objections with the claim (in one form or another) that "Everybody does it," i.e. uses differential calculus on discontinuous functions.
The best economics is done in prose, as John Maynard Keynes did it. Anything stated in calculus or statistics or differential equations or linear algebra can also be stated in prose. It is interesting to notice that in Isaac Newton's PRINCIPIA, that before anything was stated in algebra or calculus it was first stated in Latin prose. In other words, the math was just a translation of the prose into another symbolic form.
Thats interesting. One of my complaints about modern math & scientific work is that very little prose is used, but a lot of specialized symbolic manipulation is done. This is probably largely because of publication pages charges, and because, well everybody does it that way. Now you need the equations to be able to compute stuff. And sometimes the thinking in prose can lead one astray, i.e. certain results that are counterintuitive may come out of the math, but be unexpected for the guy who is only thinking in prose. So I think we need both, the prose so as to allow us to develope intuition, and the math to keep our thinking straight (so we don't get trapped by unbvious fallacies). I think the two styles ought to be balanced, they should compliment each other, not have one totally replace the other.
In my view, mathematics is really just another language that is used to express ideas - a unique one no doubt as the ideas expressed are generally numeric in nature and also in that the language is essentially universal all over the world.
The difficulty in expressing mathematical concepts without using the language of mathematics is that if you try and limit yourselves to spoken languages that it is easy to introduce ambiguities. Even when you are talking about probabilities, there is a preciseness to the language that helps to ensure that the meaning is always clear.
Most scientific papers aren't written for a general audience - the audience would be peers of the author, who would be assumed to be fairly familiar with the field in general, and thus there are a lot of things that it would be redundant for the author to explain. Page charges come into some of it, I guess - some journals have limits on paper sizes as well. But the same authors may write books or other longer papers which are intended for students or more general audiences, and these
I would say that disproves astrology as a strong form determinant of the outcome. It doesn't disprove that it might have some subtler effect than total determination of the outcome. That would require a lot of data and statistical analysis. Neither was available to Augustine.
If you think about it, I think you will agree that Augustine's disproof of astrology is both true and logically valid. Astrology depends on casting horoscopes based on time and place of birth. Twins are often born within a few minutes of each other; they share all astrological influences. We know that twins (both fraternal and identical) can have radically different life experiences. But astrology says our destiny is in the stars. In my opinion, Augustine's disproof of astrology is robust. To the best of my knowledge, during the past sixteen hundred years, nobody has offered anything like an adequate objection to Augustine's observation.
Well common sense was available to Augustine. Though he did not use common sense in every case, in this case he did. To assume that the position of Saturn, or any other planet, in the sky on your date of birth determines your destiny in life defies commons sense.
You astrological believers forget one basic principle. The burden of proof, that the position of the planets in the heavens at the moment of your birth, determines your destiny, is upon you. Obviously you cannot prove that. The whole idea is just down in the dirt stupid! No, no, the position of the planets in the sky at the moment of birth does not have even a subtle effect on the total determination of the outcome.
Why don't you guys leave the dark ages and join the modern world before it is too late.
Oh, in the event that you claim that you are not an astrological believer, then why in heavens name are you defending such a very stupid superstition!
Ron P.
I suppose there's also the possibility that the circumstances of your conception may have been related to some astrological (or seasonal) event(s). That might say something about your parents and how they raised you as well. Remember the big blackout in NYC, which was followed 9 months later by a spike in births. Then too, things may have changed since the advent of the birth control pill...
E. Swanson
Check the UK birth records for next year ;)
NAOM
It's not easy for most people to get the fundamentals of science under their belt. Unless it's their profession or a serious hobby, the basic rules are just not easily come by.
I long ago made up my mind about UFOs, ghosts, astrology, supposed paranormal activities and homeopathy. All of it rises to no higher than pseudoscience, at best. The Philosophy of Science and the Occult made a big difference in my understanding, having introduced me to Popper, Gauquelin, Kuhn, Lakatos and so on. It was the text for a wonderful course offered in my engineering program on science vs pseudoscience and I recommend the book highly.
In the section on health in my UnCrash Course I go out of my way to explain why homeopathy likely isn't the solution people think it is. After covering that material (describing how the dilution means there is no active ingredient left and that there is no evidence that water "remembers" what was in it), for some participants, it is as though I plugged them into a 120V socket they get so angry.
But look at how hard it is for someone to discount homeopathy. I've long ago decided that any time homeopathy was supposed to have worked it was actually the placebo effect doing the job. The placebo effect can "work" as much as 40% of the time.
For someone who:
a) is doing several treatments at the same time of which homeopathy is just one,
b) doesn't understand the placebo effect,
c) *does* get better and
d) is surrounded by people who tell them that homeopathy "worked for them"
it is very difficult to have them accept that their newfound health didn't come from a little vial of pure distilled water.
However, I'm committed in the courses that we use science at the best levels available so I make the case that people should stand for access to modern healthcare rather than think a homeopathy kit will be sufficient. I've been approached several times to sell homeopathy kits to the students but you will never see that happen.
For a chuckle, watch this spoof of homeopathy. Depending on the feel of the course, sometimes I share the link if people look to be holding on their homeopathic views lightly. I shared it once in a course in which someone was a serious practitioner and that didn't go over well at all.
how 'bout the science of peak oil ? the starting point for much of the 'analysis' i see on tod seems to be 'they are lying'. how can one get more unscientific than that ?
There is some of that for sure in the comments and even some in the main posts, but what's wrong with that?
Demonstrating that a supposedly honest source is actually lying is entirely scientific. Besides, it's often a good way to open a person's mind to the possibility that their worldview may not be accurate. A lie is often quick and easy to expose. Once the door is open, then you can bring more depth to the conversation.
The reason that exposing a lie is so valuable is because we humans, in general, don't have world views, we are our worldview. It's even embedded in the language we use when discussing ideas. Even I say, "my view is," which denotes possession of the view rather than the view simply being one of many under discussion and the one being discussed at the moment. (Nick raised this excellent point the other day.)
Because a person immediately conflates their view of the world with who they are, any comment that challenges the world view is perceived as a threat that must be defended against because the ego is being threatened. There are any number of topics that I can raise now that would demonstrate this phenomenon. I was involved in a conversation here not long ago where many, many people felt threatened (judging by their highly emotionally charged reaction) because they had conflated their world view with their ego. People just don't get angry about things unless this conflation phenomenon has taken place.
When presented with clear evidence that a lie is being told, the brain can either reject the new evidence or it can, just sometimes, start to wonder what else may not be correct.
I have no idea why you consider exposing lies as "unscientific." It's a very odd opinion to me.
a - Perhaps instead of "lies" perhaps "incorrect assumptions" will be more acceptable to some. I think I may have mentioned to you before about my first stat teacher...a biologist. Every new class he always started with the same question: he tosses as coin 19X and it lands on heads every time. The question: toss it own more time and what are the odds it will be heads? Naturally most would murmur 50/50. And then he would always laugh loudly at the class. And then explain that no matter what the book says the odds are it’s extremely unlikly that any of us would ever see the same coin tossed heads 20X in a row. Much more likely that it was a two-headed coin. He would also point out that even if he said (and really believed it) it was an honest coin it still didn't mean the odds were 50/50. He was far less concerned with our learning the various stat calculation methods as understanding how critical it was to clearly know the dynamics of the population you were studying. If you make significantly incorrect assumptions about the nature of a populations then any stats you generated might not only be off but grossly misrepresenting.
A simple example I tend to not inject into the debates of discovered oil field distribution and what is left to be discovered: is the classic bell shaped curve appropriate? The first assumption is that oil accumulates in such a normal distribution. There is some evidence to that possibility. But that's not the real problem: oil field size has not been discovered on a random basis: we drilled the largest potential traps that had the best supporting evidence for their existence. Especially during the early portion of my career I intentionally ignored small potential traps even if there was strong support for their existence. Very simple: if I'm going to drill a 10,000 well I'll do it for a potential trap of 5 millions bo before I would drill for one with 300,000 bo even if the chance of success was a little less. Of course, many smaller fields were discovered by accident. What makes the stat analysis a little more complicated: sometimes I would find the 300,000 bo field while drilling for the 5 million bo field. Not what I was looking for but it's worth completing and developing. OTOH sometimes the accidental discovery is too small to develop profitably so you walk away. But then 10 years later the price of oil has tripled and you go back and develop that same field.
Bottom line: the history of oil field size discovery is far from random. So taking that distribution and assuming some future discovery stat could be very inappropriate. And it gets even more complex when you move to different geographic locations. One could come up with a rather solid distribution of historic oil field sizes in the Gulf Coast Texas. But what would that say about the potential distribution of oil field size in Deep Water Brazil? Obviously absolutely nothing. And the distribution of field size in DW GOM vs. DW Bz? Again, absolutely no relationship. I’ll skip the proven geologic explanation to support that proposition: too long and tedious
So back to my point about "poor assumptions". What do we know about potential recoveries from KSA fields? Lots of solid reservoir engineering models to use but they all depend on accurate input. But it works both ways: assuming optimistic numbers from the KSA and then discounting them can just as easily lead to bad stats and projections. Not believing the truth can be just as useless as believing a lie. In all my stat courses they've used the same terminology: an "honest population". Honest didn't imply any covert effort to misrepresent the situation. Honest meant that the assumptions about the population were valid compared to the stat analysis being done. A double headed coin invalidated the basic rule of normal distribution in the population of coin flips. Every stat thrown out on TOD should be evaluated from that standpoint IMHO. And that requires that we judge the "honesty" of the data population under discussion. Thus IMHO the honesty issue is at the heart of all scientific analysis.
Very well put, thanks for taking the time to explain all that.
As an aside: one deduction I take from what you say is that we are more likely to see a shark fin depletion curve for this one reason alone. Is that a fair deduction?
As for honesty and lies, I do believe some people are quick to declare that someone is lying when it really is different assumptions that are leading people to different conclusions. It's been said that "given the same information people tend to come to the same conclusion." I can think of seemingly a million exceptions but I still wonder if it isn't still different assumptions that cause those exceptions. I think in many, many cases it is. If someone says, "The tar sands will come to the rescue" their assumption re: tar sands is very different than mine so I don't think they are lying.
Still, many times people do say things that aren't just different assumptions and one is left wondering if a deliberately misleading statement is being said to cover one's derriere i.e. they are deliberately lying.
no doubt. what i have a problem with is: they had a motive to lie so that demonstrates 'they are lying'. that and common sense demonstrates 'they are lying'. well, that and ignoring information that 'demonstrates' they may be telling the truth.
Well, no one said that proving someone is lying is easy. Sometimes they are caught red-handed but many times they aren't.
For instance, I think Bush and Co. lied about WMD's (and several other key items) to lead the U.S. to war. Can I prove it beyond any reasonable doubt? To me, yes, but I certainly have not convinced everyone. In any case, I certainly didn't rush to that judgement.
On balance, and after extensive consideration, I think many ME countries are lying about much of what they are saying.
Of course your "delusion" is shared by Alan Greenspan ;-)
'I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.'
- Alan Greenspan
People probably already figured this out but the first sentence lost the word "always" just before the word easy between my brain and my fingers.
The cases I see around here are more clear-cut.
That kind of smoking gun is enough to support a charge of lying. Pity we have so many examples to choose from.
i was refering to saudi's reserve statement you seem to be refering to wmd's - or something.
And an interesting study has been all over the news this week (sorry no link). The placebo effect works even when the patients are told they are taking a placebo!
Exactly.
I continue to have compassion for people who believe in homeopathy...I refuse to relate to them as stupid. It's just not that easy to sort this stuff out. (Same with what's happening with our collective future...lots of moving pieces.)
NPR recently did a story on how people taking a placebo had results similar to taking the common drug for the illness, and they were even told that they were taking the placebo. There's a cute satire at the end that suddenly doesn't seem so satirical.
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/23/132291795/This-Placebo-Could-Be-The-Drug-F...
The placebo effect can "work" as much as 40% of the time.
The placebo effect can work most of the time: most illnesses get better by themselves (colds, flu, back pain, etc). Humans are built to see patterns, even if they don't exist.
"The kittens were born blind! I prayed for them, and in a few weeks, their eyes opened!"
"His mind is so open that the wind whistles through it." Heywood Campbell Broun, on a fence-straddling radio commentator.
I suspect he's crazy like a fox. I've given quite a bit of thought myself as to how the preaching business is going to need to adapt to be successful.
Such also allows him to tell others to bugger off and not bother him.
And he can obtain a cash flow without having to do things like ship products.
If he believes in that stuff, he is a loon. If he doesn't, and is just doing it for an easy buck, he's a despicable cad.
Sorry, but just because there are fools ready to be parted from their money doesn't make it OK to take advantage of them.
I look forward to your reporting how you spent time at Rev. Billys Church of not buying stuff - because what you are taking 'bout sure sounds like Madison Avenue and most of what martkers push.
?
Good point Sgage. So is Savinar a nut case or a con artist? Either way it puts him in a real bad light. And for sure he will not get the respect from the peak oil crowd that he had duly earned by his book, his blog and all the speaking engagements. This is truly tragic. A real sad case.
Ron P.
And the peak oil crowd has crossed his palms with silver? How much has the past "respect" been worth?
How much "respect" is being shown for his past efforts?
How much "respect" did Cassandra get anyway?
I agree with you but will add the people want "answers" that reinforce at least one belief they already hold. People who fall victim to astrologers, sooth-sayers, fundamentalists, etc. choose those to whom they listen.
The problem with science and the masses is that science by its very nature is exclusive - the scientific method is a systematic method for rejecting claims, and then those rejected claims are excluded from the body of theories that make up scientific knowledge.
As for Savinar (or whoever) going down the path of astrology - one of my beefs with so many Peak Oil websites is how marginal ideas (and the people who are hawking them) are so readily accepted. To separate the truth from the trash (which is so common on websites which deal with controversies) takes a great deal of discrimination.
I think more than that science is a really tough master. Things end up requiring the sort of mathematics that only one in a thousand or fewer can master, so people get turned off because the field (and the papers/theries etc. are not available to them). Partly I think the attraction of magic is that to some extent it is sticking it to all those whose science is exclusive of themselves. I wonder how many of the great scientists of an earlier era (Ben Franklin comes to mind), would not be able to get a modern science degree because the math has made it a very exclusive club.
I suspect that Franklin would have been fine in the basic mathematical tools of modern science, assuming he started young enough. His legacy shows that he was a man of intellect (and beer!)
Beyond mathematical skills, science requires discipline of thought and the willingness to accept when something is disproved. Extensive mathematical training is not that necessary in some scientific fields, but all areas of scientific study require discipline.
The mathematics is not really that hard. Much of the problem is that educational systems (at least in the US) are not keeping up with modern science. Students just don't get enough advanced mathematics in school to allow them to understand modern science. They spend too much time playing football rather than studying calculus.
An interesting result from the recent Programme for International Student Evalutation (PISA) tests was that students from Shanghai China scored #1 in the world for Science, Mathematics, and Reading Comprehension. Even more interesting was the fact that 25% of the Chinese students were capable of solving advanced mathematical problems of the sort that only 3% of students from OECD countries could solve.
So the bottom line is that in most countries students just don't get enough advanced mathematics to understand modern science, not that the science or math are so difficult. When I was in high school, I found science was quite easy, but then I managed to teach myself enough math to understand it. You certainly couldn't count on the teachers to teach you, because they didn't understand it themselves.
I have probably known as many PhD mathematicians as anyone. Most of them believe in nonsense, too. I actually think they are at a disadvantage since most of them have the utmost need to have things black and white -- when the world is shades of gray.
I have probably known as many PhD mathematicians as anyone. Most of them believe in nonsense, too.
Yes but to be clear mathematics is not science, however without a least a basic understanding of math you can not do any science. The converse does not hold true.
Sounds like typical software debbuging or trying to repair a machine that malfunction mysteriously.
I've got one acquaintence at work, who is a whiz in CFD and computers. And his uncle even had a Nobel prize to boot. But he believes everything the New American (renamed John Birch) society puts out. I think they get most of their funding from the Koch's. So he believes in abiotic oil, climate change is imaginary (hey, that's real progress having started at AGW is deliberate fraud), the financial
crash is because Barney Frank and liberals forced banks to loan to unqualified poor people, etc, etc. So yes, these people are just as likely to follow their political gut, and believe or discount stuff based upon how it plays to their Amygdala. And since they are so often right in the technical arena, they think their judgements (like of who to trust and who to totally discount) are dead on.
I have a son in high school in the public school system in Florida who has been taking advanced and college level math courses. The US has some really excellent programs and teachers. I also don't buy the premiss that only a minute percentage is capable of learning math at the level necessary to do science. Something else is going on here. Mostly that we have convinced ourselves that math is too hard for the average person to understand. I think that's bollocks!
Someone posted a link to this talk the other day.
http://www.tvo.org/TVO/WebObjects/TVO.woa?videoid?640650097001
John Mighton on The Ubiquitous Bell Curve
Published Date: 10/30/2010 | Length: 54:02 |
John Mighton of the Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences delivers a lecture on The Ubiquitous Bell Curve. The talk focuses on JUMP Math and Mighton's work helping teachers learn how to excite students about mathematics.
I think you're being too charitable, Fred. Besides, actually knowing something has never been a pre-req for making it big in America. Just ask Paris Hilton or Justin Bieber.
One of the something elses is that being good at math means you are percieved to be an elitist nerd. It is positively harmful to your social life.
Also a lot of poor knowledge about how to train is out there. Its largely up to parental knowledge and ambition. I remeber me, versus the boy next door growing up. Both aspired to science careers. His parents had him add single digit numbers until the sum reached a million. They thought this would make him good at math. The results wre predictably poor. It takes someone with a pretty good level of understanding to give a kid the right early insights.
I remember my kids remarking, about how I could explain stuff, but their high school teachers couldn't. They had lots of training in teaching, and got through at least some college level math. But, apparently a much higher level of subject knowledge is needed to really explain something (and figure out what they are getting wrong). I am reminded of my high school geometry teacher. "I don't get it please explain". She would simply rewind and repeat the part of the lecture word for word. Might as well have had a video lecture that could be replayed....
So FM. I bet you were able to give them a few key insights, that they probably wouldn't have gotten from the public system?
Well, I do remember teaching my son at age five to do fractions and calculate the hypotenuse of the tiles in the kitchen by using one of his scientifically accurate replicas of a tree frog as a unit of measure. We also spent a lot of time outside turning over rocks in the garden and looking at all the insects and other arthropods that we found there.
'A' frogs squared plus 'B' frogs squared equaled 'C' frogs squared... square root of 'C' frogs squared equaled the hypotenuse of the kitchen tile... It was necessary to use fractions of frogs to get a reasonably precise measurement.
We used a calculator for getting the square root by squaring approximations until we got reasonably close to the actual number. So by trial and error.
am reminded of my high school geometry teacher. "I don't get it please explain". She would simply rewind and repeat the part of the lecture word for word. Might as well have had a video lecture that could be replayed....
I remember when one of my sisters (who was home-schooling her kids) was having difficulties with a math problem. I explained the solution the conventional way, and got a blank look. So, I backed up and explained it a completely different way. Stunned silence. "Why that's so simple! It makes complete sense! Why didn't my teachers explain it that way?"
I had to tell her it was because the teachers didn't know that explanation. It wasn't in the curriculum. There are numerous different ways to approach most mathematical questions, but the teachers only knew the one solution they were taught.
One of the most useful university courses I took was, "Elementary Mathematics from an Advanced Perspective". All of a sudden the lights come on. "THAT'S what they were trying to teach us in Elementary School!"
IME, the best teachers are those who struggled to understand the material themselves. Brilliant people often make bad teachers, because it was so easy for them that they simply cannot understand why you don't get it. They have no insight into where the stumbling blocks are.
I think that's one very important route where great teaching has travelled. Another is from teachers who are willing to puzzle and struggle as they see that the message is not getting through. If they can create a feedback loop so they start to get how the listener has heard them, and what gets through, then they have a chance to find the path that will reach into that mind.
We see it in the conversations here often enough, it is the tendency to try to fix an 'incomplete pass' and make it get through to the reciever by simply saying it again louder or angrier. I'm sure I do it too.. but we have to remember to tune into a listener or a student with a growing sense of what they hear, and not just what we said. It's tough because every failed communication, like for those with poor hearing or speaking, reading or writing skills, every missed attempt creates a sense of hopelessness that makes it harder to get back up and try again the next time.
It can require just vast amounts of patience and trust to bridge those gulfs..
One of the key factors that a teacher needs to appreciate is the modality in which a given student thinks.
Is it mostly audio?
Is it mostly visual?
Is it mostly emotional?
Is it mostly along another dimension of cognition?
Jokuhl comes across above as a predominantly auditory thinker.
This is because he repeated talks about "hearing" the other person.
If he had followed the Navi culture on Pandora and had always begun with, "I see you" we might conclude that he is predominantly a visual thinker.
When a visual teacher gets an auditory student the reaction of the frustrated teacher might be something like: "I don't get why you can't clearly see what I am trying to show you!". And the student might say, "If only you could put it in words that I can hear instead of symbols that are incomprehensible to me"
You could be right. I am in a visual profession but come from a Musical/Storytelling family. I find myself caught in-between these modes frequently.
That was a good example.. just the same, it's key to try to become aware of who you're communicating with and figure out when messages are succeeding and figure out how to keep that channel functioning.
Maybe it was here, but I've heard lately of attempts to find alternate teaching pathways for reaching dyslexic people through other parts of the brain to let them have access to written language. (Which was probably why I included the Reading Writing above, besides the fact that written language is almost all we at TOD have for reaching each other, and can be the source of some of our blockages in communication.)
I too am in a mixed mode profession where I have to communicate both in words and in pictures.
I strongly favor the picture form of communicating because I am a highly visual person --you see.
Unfortunately in this forum, our moderator, Leanan disfavors visual communication (for valid reasons) and thus we are constrained into pushing our square peg visual thoughts through circular, verbal communication pipelines.
[ i.mage.+]
Graphics that actually do improve communication, such as charts and graphs, are welcome here.
I think you are mistaken if you believe that random illustrative images aid in communication. That is, a picture for the sake of a picture. They might in offline situations, but online, people don't pay attention to them. We're so bombarded by ads online that we just ignore images that are not extremely relevant. It's more visual clutter in a medium that is already overcluttered.
Leanan,
No doubt you fall into the verbal-thinkers group, not the visual thinkers group.
I have little doubt that verbal-thinkers find pictures annoying, even down right disturbing (because they start wondering, What is it that I am missing out of this incomprehensible part of the communication?)
On the other hand, for visual thinkers, a single picture is often worth 1000 words.
One does not need slow "eye tracking" to comprehend a picture.
A single glance, a split second snapshot is often all that it takes.
You look at it. [ i.mage.+]
Boom.
You know what it was showing.
Indeed, most newspapers include a picture at the top of each main article to draw the reader in.
A bunch of articles with no pictures is boring.
They all look alike.
Why bother reading one over the other?
All the examples in your eye-tracking article include a picture.
The last example is nothing but picture.
(Sometimes, the picture may tell you why you shouldn't waste time reading the post. It can be beneficial in that way.)
Wrong. I am an extremely visual person. Terrible aural learner, but very visual. I'm a photographer and artist in my spare time.
That was true of dead tree publications, and still is. But online is different. That's what the point of the article is. The graphic design rules from the dead-tree age don't necessarily apply online.
Or maybe they do. :-)
I think it's pretty clear they don't. That's one of the reasons we are posting shorter articles these days. People don't have the patience to read longer articles online, so we're trying to break up longer works into Internet-sized chunks.
The rules really are different online.
One thing that does annoy me is when people include things like charts and the information is unreadable. If you are going to include it then we need to be able to read it. Even if I zoom in the pixelation smudges detail and text into an un-readable mass. If the image links to another version of the image then please ensure that is readable ie if the comment contains a 2" square graph and the labels can't be read then a link to the same 2" image is of no help but a 4" or 8" image with crisp text is. If they can't be read then those images may as well just be left out.
NAOM
PS Adblock Plus means I don't get ad-bombed.
PPS Maybe the old dead-tree rules still stand for something. There is bad and good layout in both worlds.
In the past when I included images, I included a hyperlink to the source so the reader could get access to as good a copy as I could get and could read the underlying source site for whatever that might be worth.
Not all images are necessary. Some merely add an additional flavor or spin to what is being said.
The way I look at it, sometimes the picture communicates some deeper insights than what may have been communicated by words alone. If readers are helped by this, then bless them. If not, what's the big harm?
If you look at social networking sites like Facebook and LinkedIn, they include a picture of the face of the commenter. Supposedly that creates a more emotively meaningful understanding of what the commenter is saying. Whether true or not is irrelevant. The point is that many other sites encourage the insertion of pictures rather than discouraging them.
I don't think that's true at all. The photo is supposed to make it more like talking to someone in person (including keeping people from flaming each other). It's not to add understanding.
We encourage the insertion of relevant images here. The vast majority of posters here understand what an appropriate use of images is. They're doing it right.
I don't think it's reasonable to compare us to social networking sites. We're not a social network, and aren't planning on becoming one.
Most blogs don't allow images in the comments at all. There might be a small avatar for each commenter, but you can't post images in the comments. Think of the other blogs people link to here - TAE, Kunstler, etc. They never have images in the comments. (I don't think Google/Blogger or Wordpress even have it as an option.)
Thanks for replying
The problem is it's very difficult to make that sort of image readable for everyone. You have people accessing the site with small mobile devices, 3000 pixel widescreens, and everything in between. Using HTML to forcibly resize the image doesn't work, because browsers are terrible at resizing images. They end up pixelated and unreadable if the change in size is very large. (Honestly, if people could see how bad images resized with HTML look on other people's screens, they wouldn't do it.)
It's also really annoying to use HTML to make a large image small, because people still have to download the full file size, but they don't get to see the full size image.
The best you can do is make a thumbnail that's readable to an "average" viewer (probably people with video resolutions 1000-1200 pixels wide).
Yes, for an in line image a prepared reduced format image is a good solution. Using HTML to resize is just a bodge, well prepared images are the best. You can use different images for different media eg PC use 300x150 while mobile use 100x50 for example. If the image loses important information eg the key to which line is which on a graph, put in the thumbnail and give it a link to a full size image that the viewer can access at their discretion. It is just polite. I also try and compress in-line images as much as I can but avoiding loss of clarity, helps a lot with download speed.
Not to start another answer, David Siegel has been doing work on web layout vs typesetting from the beginning. The examples in the link you gave echo his work. Look at restaurant menus, a simple example, the layout makes a huge difference. Layout on a web page does the same. Take this page I am typing on. I am trying to enter a response. My eye is being called to by a list of links on the left (where the eye spends the most time on a web page and where I look for the start of this box. On the right I have images of graphs, a license(something that the human has been trained to as a legal important so takes attention), twitter, Facebook, Drupal, GAIA etc. Below lots of instructions. Now, the human vision has a high central definition but is very sensitive to the peripheral area. Take a flickering light, it distracts you if in the corner of your eye but if you look at it the flicker goes away. The theory is that this is a defence mechanism left over from our hunter gatherer days to protect us from the incoming predator. Thus the border clutter in a web page can distract us from the task in hand of entering a comment. How does that relate to dead tree? Good publications do not distract from the article. Look at NG for example, there is separation between ads and article. Also, in dead tree, the text is broken up with illustrations to give you time for pause and the brain to catch up. Look at web articles. Which are the easiest to read? The ones that are broken up with relief related to the item, er, image.
Oh, which paragraph was easier to read? First short one or long second one? Back to the old attention span thingy :)
NAOM
A sound byte in the hand
is better than
two bites in the tush ;-)
[ i.mage.+]
Layout does matter (and we do have some problems in that regard, not to mention a color scheme that is not exactly easy on the eyes).
Breaking up the text definitely helps, but online, it's best done with white space, not images, unless you have an image that's extremely relevant - not "a picture for the sake of having a picture." Precisely because so many sites use inline ads, so people are used to screening them out.
As you note, just using shorter paragraphs and putting blank lines between them is a big help for readability.
The NY Times supposedly has close to the ideal layout (given the necessity of advertising). There might be a photo or illustration up top, created especially for the article (rather than the stock photos other sites might use). If there are more photos, they are on a separate page, with a link from the main article. If there's no photo or illustration done specifically for the article, it runs without one. It's very clean, with lots of white space.
The NYT is a comfortable read though the photos tend to be more illustrative. That is a good method for dealing with those. Where an image is directly used as part of an article/comment it does help to associate it in the right place. That is where a smaller version in the text, that provides an overview and anchor, links to a clearer version, for study, helps. It prevents the 'oh, where did I get to'.
NAOM
This doesn't apply to all maths wizards:
'I love being a call girl - I'm in control,' boasts fallen child genius
Well, good thing you didn't post that picture here as it would have been inappropriate.
There is a difference between theoretical math and applied math (just as there is a difference between theoretical 'biology' and applied biology).
One of the main points of TOD is that we are trying to do applied mathematics as it concerns modeling of our society's use of real world crude.
It is not a question of being socially nerdy or not.
When the Global Petro Plummet hits, it will hit all peoples irrespective of their social coolness.
FMagyar:
The "something else is going on" is that America is collapsing. It's no longer a viable political entity. Believe me it was hard for me to accept this.
But there's precedent! And I don't just mean the historical collapse of Empires or something esoteric like that. I mean real, hard, modern precedent.
The two big examples which stand out in my mind are Weimar Germany and the Soviet Union. Both very advanced, technical, and in many ways powerful entities, and they both collapsed, in spectacular fashion.
The center is not holding, people. If you try to make sense out of it, you will fail. Other than to just admit it's basic cost overrun and diminishing marginal returns on complexity.
The average K-12 teacher is convinced that math is too hard, which is probably correct... for them. Applicants to US education schools have the second-lowest SAT scores of all accepted students (just above social workers, IIRC), and even those who pass their classes are notorious for failing simple general-knowledge exams at the end of their studies.
It's no wonder math is a mystery to so many; bad teachers and bad teaching go together.
Previously it was thought Finland was the educational champ. I wonder how they stack up against Shanghai?
I do believe that with the appropriate focus, especially when one is young and the brain is plastic, that a great deal could be accomplished. I grew up reading Fred Hoyle, and similar writers. So I was always imaging how things worked physically. I had great intuition about physics and math, and I think this is where it came from. But, my brain wasn't similarly augmented in highly symbolic math. I think the math required to be much more than an interested amateur in science is ratcheting upwards strongly. And a lot of wanna-bes find they can't cope.
Previously it was thought Finland was the educational champ. I wonder how they stack up against Shanghai?
They came in second after Shanghai. China is becoming extremely serious about education. Their old educational system was basically destroyed by Mao Zedong, but since his death they have rebuilt it completely.
I don't think people in the developed countries realize that the goalposts are being moved. Just because you had a good educational system two decades ago doesn't mean you have one now. Some formerly third-world countries are pushing up the standards dramatically.
Something closer to 10% of the students could make it through 8 semesters of applied math courses, including calculus, linear systems, differential equations, probability and statistics, etc. as needed for the use of science. The 0.1% is probably closer to the number who could master more advanced math for creating new science, and the number that can contribute new math is tiny indeed.
Of course, to achieve the 10% objective would require identifying students who are good at math in elementary school and then using a good math curriculum for instruction. Doing so is at odds with the egalitarian ethic of US schools which focus on uniform mediocrity.
Not sure where you are getting your data. Perhaps from your rigid, myopic ideology?
The Finish and Koreans have high HS graduation rates (97% for Korea, even though High School is not mandatory there), and they rate at the very top for both math and reading.
So either you have to claim some kind of racial superiority of these countries, or you have to admit that the quality of education has something to do with how well people learn.
Your choice.
Agreed. Someone put it this way: in China, they expect everyone to learn calculus, so almost everyone does. Just as in the US, we expect everyone to learn to drive, and almost everyone does.
Ooooh, you struck a chord with that one.
My daughter is about to enter the age when she can get a driving permit and is quite excited about driving.
I am in dread and terror.
Wonder what would happen if everyone had to pass calculus before they were allowed to apply for a driver's license?
The roads would be full of very smart teenagers doing physics experiments.
I would go for the math.
I guess math and prediction have been essential ever since the humans started to do farming. People unable to do simple bean counting and predict how long stockpiles would last simply starved to death before spring.
On the other hand, there are some traditional cultures that seem to have thrived for thousands of years without the use of numbers, such as the Walpiri of Australia and the Piraha of Brazil.
I am betting that a culture that never develops numbers would also never develop capitalism, industrialism, and the other -isms that have conspired to make the world unlivable to most living things.
What do high school graduation rates have to do with the percentage of students who can master a full program of math in a four year college course (about 30 to 40 semester credits)?
Talent does matter. If you took 10,000 6th graders with average achievement scores in mathematics and gave them an intensive education in mathematics, you would still have zero probability of educating a Fields Medal winner.
Culture does matter, and it probably accounts for much of the difference between nations or between ethnic groups in the US. Unfortunately, culture is almost as difficult to change as genetics.
"Culture," yes, and that culture includes willingness to pay for tutors for kids who are struggling--1 in 3 kids get them in Finland, for example.
Kids in these countries are taking math in HS that most American kids don't take till college, if ever.
We don't need most students to perform at the very highest level achievable in math or any other field; we do need most to be able to understand math at a level necessary to understand basic scientific concepts. Korea and Finland (and many other countries) shoe that this is achievable.
Our culture surely plays a role. It is a culture that assumes most can't learn calculus and statistics (which is actually fairly basic math), and that is exactly the culture you are promoting.
I do agree with you that there are real math prodigies out there. I know some. They will not be identified without giving math instruction to all.
If the major US universities required high test scores in the AP Calculus course, things would change.
Speculating on the High Achievement of Korean Students
The one I knew, somehow trained his short term memory so that he could manipulate a hundred objects in his head. Phsychologists tell us we can only do 5-7, and that that number is fixed. He had been the most promising doctoral student in the history of Berkeley. Then he got hit in the head and lost his remarkable ability!
Reminds me of the TMBG song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5IrNUA22ck
I agree entirely. However, the most important part of the educational experience is the students peer group, followed by the parents. If those external (to the school) things are unfavorable, the odds of getting a good result are very low. Our youth culture, encourages high school kids to chase sex and cars, rather than to maximize their academic learning.
Agree that it's much more than just the teachers. It's the entire culture. Whether it values education or not, and what kind of education. It's not really a surprise that the culture that created "math is hard" Barbie has citizens that aren't good at math, and you can't blame the teachers.
Nerds and geeks are looked down upon in many schools, and ability and interest to do math and science is a key indicator for such. My daughter does great in math, because as a fairly social female she has the tools to resist the stereotypes and merge math and science into her life while remaining popular. My son is about as smart, but gets his social perks from playing sports, and falls pretty stereotypically into that lifestyle. He's still doing "OK" compared to his peers, but that's mostly because I reinforce having scholastic success as a requirement for getting into a college with a good sports program.
Honestly, though, I'm not sure the US or Korea will need a bunch of math whizzes. Sure, there is value in being smart and educated, but our issue isn't simply "uncool math", it's "uncompensated math". Where are the jobs for a world full of mathematicians, engineers, and scientists going to come from? Where is the pay scale to make it lucrative and inviting? Where are the policies to keep "brainy work" in the US, instead of lower-wage nations?
marginal ideas are so readily accepted.
Marginal because "the masses" think in a different way?
Marginal because "science" doesn't support the idea?
Marginal because the "taboos" of the society go the other way?
One Man's "Truth" is another's "propaganda". Why, I can think of posters here who claim to be 'rational' posting stuff that "science" or "historic papers/documents" just don't support.
I intentionally used "marginal" rather than "false" in order to avoid getting into debates about the absoluteness of falsity.
And, you seem to be appealing to the idea that if something is mainstream then it ought to be rejected, and if something is marginal then there is merit to that.
When I write "marginal" I mean at the outside limit of what is accepted (for any reason.) It is because of the fringe-i-ness, if you'll let me throw in a synonym, of an idea that it requires work, real mental work and detective work in order to determine how to weigh that idea or make use of it.
It really does turn out that many marginal ideas get rejected for good reason.
Indeed, in science it is usual that hypotheses get rejected, sooner or later. Over time the hypotheses that stick become well established and thus really are mainstream.
When something like astrology, which is so well rejected by the body of science of the last several centuries, is embraced it implies that person is incapable of making rational decisions, at least within certain realms of daily life.
Effective propaganda often includes a large dose of what is indeed true - that becomes a selling point.
Then I take it you agree with me that it takes a great deal of effort (on the part of the reader or listener) to sort through all the claims made?
"Peak Oil" has attracted a rather wide range of an audience, as a subject area and cause. Too many of the writers on the topic have strayed into the intellectual abyss, IMO, and as such the online sources that come up via a Google search are sure to lead any novice inquirer to the writings of people who are selling ignorance or prejudices or mythology, and so on.
avoid getting into debates about the absoluteness of falsity.
In a land of the "Rule of Law" - the only legal truth is what's sworn to in court. Repeatability is another path - Science.
Doing something ones self can be a path to personal truth.
you seem to be appealing to the idea that if something is mainstream then it ought to be rejected, and if something is marginal then there is merit to that.
Not at all. Apply a filter of 'Is religion "X" "true"'. Or how about 'the Earth was thought to be flat 'Till Columbus'. (These are less inflammatory than other topics one can use)
Or, better yet - the idea of an energy peak in the mainstream.
"Peak Oil" has attracted a rather wide range of an audience, as a subject area and cause.
And I shall call forth for the hitting of bulls.
A very small part of the human population cares in any way to attempt change in a way that effects society.
I know of no study with actual numbers. I am rather sure there are over 6 billion people on earth. Lets put 2 billion on the Internet. 1% of that group posting or even reading TOD would bring TOD to its knees. Is 1% a "rather wide range"? I'd say no.
Indeed. Wasn't it Goebbels who said "The best lie, is a half truth".
Since most of the citizens of the United States suffer from Dendrite Deficiency Syndrome it is no wonder that Savinar is moving into an area of magical thinking where shazam revelations can fill even the most challenging mental chasms. It’s time to collect penance from any fool willing to drop coin in your basket.
Here in Kentucky we are building new basketball arenas, a Noah’s Ark theme park and are putting “In God We Trust” on our license plates. With the Mayan apocalypse of 2012 approaching coincidentally with energy shortages and hardship, charlatans should be able to serve easily understood celestial explanations to an abundance of patrons lacking mental acuity.
Manipulating the minds of others for power, profit and social stability is widely practiced but so often invisible to the clueless victims.
D - You remind me of the words of a long ago mentor who taught me how to seperate the oil patch husters from the better prospectors. A lot of anecdotes I'll skip but the most important advice: be careful about the ones who walk through the door with solid references. He asked the simple question: who is the very best con man on the planet? The obvious answer: I don't know. He said I was right...and that he nor anyone else knew. That's why he/she was the very best: pulled the con withot anyone knowing it. You piss away your investment with his help and then you buy him lunch because you feel sorry for him.
So a question for all: we all have someone we believe...either pro or con on any position about PO. But are they so good at weaving their falsehoods that we wrong in following their lead? Of course, the more one defends their "leader" the easier it is to offer the possibility of a false "god". Really a question not some much to solicite an answer but to spur thought.
I posted comment about this book a few days ago, and I will not be a broken record and post it over and over, but I'll post it again on this thread as it pertains to the 'magical thinking' theme:
http://www.amazon.com/2045-Story-Future-Peter-Seidel/dp/1591027055/ref=n...
I read this book a few days ago and recommend it to you.
Is it the best written book out there...no, but it has many ideas and themes that would be familiar to TOD readers/members.
The book depicts a U.S. of 2045 where science is roundly disdained, and to get a decent science/math/engineering education one must go overseas or go to exclusive institutions where foreigners can teach you.
Schools/institution which teach the the theory of evolution must be guarded to prevent domestic terrorist attacks, mainly from ultra-fundamentalist religious groups.
Many new religious cults are thriving, including two competing sects which each predict the coming apocalypse: One in 2054 and one in 2058, and the sects are practically at war with each other.
Wal-Mart has sold most of its stores to these new charismatic mega-churches and profits from thsi rental activity...as the demand for big-box stores has collapsed due to the demise of the car and the demise of people's disposable incomes.
There are so many themes discussed on TOD that are prevalent in this novel that I would have thought it was written by one of the TOD members/readers:
- Detrimental increases in population
- the demise of the private car
- the increased use of (very crowded and hot) rail service
- Desertification and other negative outcomes from human-induced climate change
- The desertion of the suburbs and movement of people into cities where walking, rickshaws, 'took-tooks), etc are the way to get around.
- The increasing divide between the rich and everyone else; the down-slope of the so-called 'Middle class' and the great increase in poverty,
- Sub-division of McMansions to hold three or four families where one once lived
- Sub-division of lots with yards to squeeze in 6-story apartment buildings between homes.
- Mass migration from the SouthWest and SoCal to places such as Chicago and Wisconsin (where it is now regularly in the high 90s (F) in May.
- Governments at all levels wither and become from men for eight huge conglomerates which run the
World from three ultra-swank islands (one in the Caribbean, one in the Med, and one in SE Asia)
- Rampant un-employment results in laws prohibiting more than one person in a household from working, and mandating minimum numbers of employees in establishments, in order to satve off riots which occurred back in the 2020s-2030s.
- Hotels which charge the guest for each toilet flush and each drop of water used in the shower, etc due to shortages of water
- Everyone must have home water purification units...tap water is undrinkable...
- The U.S is depicted as what we would now characterize as a third-world country, and many undeveloped areas in Africa and elsewhere have become nightmare zones, news from which is censored from the 'developed world'.
An interesting and disturbing take on societal collapse...
"The U.S is depicted as what we would now characterize as a third-world country, and many undeveloped areas in Africa and elsewhere have become nightmare zones"
We're pretty much there now, aren't we?
There are also a lot of development in Africa, its not all run by Mugabe.
Thanks - I just downloaded into the Kindle app on my PC. So far it reminds me a bit of Idiocracy, but without the comedic bits.
ericy,
I would say 'enjoy', but the story is depressing to me.
Do you recommend 'Idiocracy'?
Yeah, I can recommend Idiocracy. You won't get any great insights by watching it, but I find it to be funny, and at times prophetic. Sometimes they run it on the comedy channel - normally I would find the commercials annoying, but in this case they merely serve highlight the stupidity of our current culture.
To have another major peak oil voice go completely coo-coo. Matt Simmons was always a bit over the top with stuff like rust and pronouncements of $300/barrel oil. But when he started talking about secret leaks, nuking the GoM, and other nonsense during the leak debacle, I had to write him off as coo-coo. Than again, I think Savinar was coo-coo before this, it just confirms it for me.
I'm a peak oil 'moderate'. I think it will be a significant problem for mankind . . . but basically a controlled problem like it is right now . . . high priced oil strangles the economy but effectively ration the production so there are no shortages.
I often worry that the doomer fear-mongering wing of the peak oil community do more harm than good by discrediting PO as 'the boy who cried wolf' types.
Speculawyer, I am not a moderate at all, I am a doomer and I am not worried one whit about damage I may do to the peak oil community. Soft peddling the coming apocalypse for fear of damaging the peak oil community is not an activity I wish to engage in.
I was a doomer long before I ever heard of peak oil. Years ago I saw our human population exploding while the wild animal population dropping and driving thousands of species into extinction. I knew then that this would eventually lead to collapse, I just had no idea when.
Then a few years ago I read Reg Morrison's "The Spirit in the Gene". There was not one word in the book about the petroleum but he put the collapse, due to human overpopulation and environmental degradation at around 2035. I think that would be pretty close if peak oil were not upon us. I think that will move the collapse up about two decades, give or take.
I am not going to go over the litany of environmental problems that the world suffers from, but I could list at least a dozen, and they are all getting worse. Any one of them would cause severe problems but all of them combined would eventually cause collapse even if we had an infinite supply of fossil fuel. But we don't have an infinite supply of fossil fuel.
So peak oil will only add to the piling on effect of our problems. And you thing these are controllable problems? Which of these problems are we controlling right now?
Ron P.
Ron, " Which of these problems are we controlling right now? "
That is precisely the question I think is relevant. Even if there were solutions to some of these issues, and I have not been convinced yet that there are, we, as a society, will not do anything fast enough to implement those solutions. We showed during World War 2 that we could respond that way, but two things have changed. 1. We no longer have a "can do" society, but rather a narcissistic, gimme, entitlement society.
2. We will be facing a shortage of the necessary energy inputs that would be required to implement those questionable solutions.
I have seen no evidence whatsoever that we, as a society, are willing to face these problems, and Robert Hirsch made it clear that a front loaded effort will be required. I share your doomerism, only I think it is just logical thinking.
We need to do A to fix problem 1. We, instead, do B. Problem 1 gets worse, not better.
Treeman, most of the problems are just not controllable. For instance:
Water Tables Falling and Rivers Running Dry
20 feet per year! 95 percent of the small farmer's wells are dry. How are you going to solve that problem? People require food and food production requires water. Too many people mean too much food must be produced requiring irrigation. So the water table drops and the wells dry up. The problem is just too many people and there is no way humans can solve that problem.
Nature of course will find her own way. I know that and that is why I am called a doomer. For a person who truly realizes the situation then it is totally irrational to be anything but a doomer. However if you have no idea as to the magnitude of the problems, or even what they are, then you can believe that we will find a "soft landing" somewhere in the cards.
Ron P.
"So peak oil will only add to the piling on effect of our problems."
Nice, Darwinian.
IMHO:
Ultimately, the anthropogenic linked great species extinction event underway will settle our hash.
Anything we manage to do that prolongs our Ponzi economy and population overshoot will simply make the sixth great extinction more percipitous and complete.
PO is just frosting (on our hash ;-).
A growing number of eminent scientists are talking about human extinction or near extinction, for some, possibly within the century: Hansen, Hawking, Fenner, Lovelock, Bob Watson, Sir David King, among others.
http://www.physorg.com/news196489543.html
http://www.docudharma.com/diary/8421/
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/why-antarctica-will-soon-be-the...
These are some of the top scientists.
I would say that Darwinian's views are becoming mainstream among the most informed people on the planet.
"These are some of the top scientists."
Appears age and size of the picture viewed matters.
What they say is grim enough.
I'm old enough to extrapolate what they think.
I've learned through this whole process that anyone who doesn't yet understand how bad the situation with oil is calls someone who is further along in their understanding a "fear monger."
Am I a fear monger for pointing the following out?
Many, many people would say yes.
Looks like some of us may be able to give our furnaces a break. Maybe our European friends will muddle through one more year. Happy times indeed.
November 2010 1st or 2nd warmest on record; ZombieSat saga ends
I read that earlier and wondered if Doctor Masters had one too many at an office Christmas party. There is no support for that in any model. All the models currently show that the attempt by the atlantic to break through fails as the front stalls over the UK. This may give a few days of near normal UK temperatures but the cold surface air over continental Europe intensifies and is soon circulated back into the UK by all the models.
Here is the GFS projected 5 day minimum temp from 31st Dec to 4th January for Europe.
When I look at charts like that it reminds me that Russians (like KSA, Kuwait etc) are literally dead without Fossil Fuels - so why wouldn't they try and make them last as long as possible by not exploiting their reserves as fast as possible by exporting? Surely that's what a sensible Nation would do?
Aren't you assuming that the people who control the production of fossil energy sources actually care about what happens to the masses of other people who happen to reside within the borders of the nations where the fossil fuels are found? I think history tells us otherwise...
E. Swanson
Russia had a large population before FF. I think they can figure out how to conserve body heat. Between, building insulation, and human insulation (clothing), one can get by with very much less energy for space heating than is common today.
Undertow,
For Wednesday highs, looks like the UK Met office is forecasting 9 C and wunderground is forecasting 13 C around London. Wunderground would be close to a record high.
13C would be nothing like a record December UK high even if it came about. 18.3C is the record December temp and coincidentally is also the record UK January temp - see http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/extremes/
Wunderground uses the GFS for its forecast temps but I have no idea where that 13C comes from as the GFS is currently forecasting about 7C for London on Wednesday with maximum UK temps about 10C on South coast.
Met Office currently forecasts 6C for London on Wednesday dropping to 5C on Thursday.
Met Office UK text forecast adds
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/uk/uk_forecast_weather.html
The GFS forcast charts I look at (from NCAR) show North America not Europe. But for the first time this winter they show Canada cooling to more normal temperatures. The eastern quarter of Hudson's bay is still shown as open water on the ice extent charts. But it looks like favorable freezing conditions should arrive with the new year. So I would have to say that a major pattern change is being predicted.
I'm not disagreeing that there is a major pattern change indicated but it is not one that will bring record New Year's Eve temperatures to the UK which is what Masters said.
Yes the UK will warm up from extremely below average to just below average and that will feel like a heatwave to us but won't actually be one.
At least Wunderground has backed away from forecasting 13C for London on Wednesday. The only way I can think of that 13C could have appeared is if the London figure was manually entered over-riding the computed value.
I am unfamiliar with typical UK winter weather, but is it:
1. Mostly overcast days during winter or
2. Sunny but cold?
I ask because, if the pattern starts to change to #2 with 'enough' sunny days, it might help promote uptake of residential solar heating (example: http://www.ussolarheating.com/solar-products-model-sh7.htm)
...or residential PV + heat pumps.
In the USA we whine about conversion and conservation, but in Africa the return on investment can be in excess of 500% per year.
From the above story, African Huts Far From the Grid Glow With Renewable Power:
This is a payback rate of $420/year on $80 invested, or 525%/year. How long is it likely to be before cell phones come packaged with a few solar cells, not much bigger than the ones which run battery-less calculators?
Also, gobar gas beats scavenging for firewood:
to charge her cell phone ??
Sheesh, Jmy. It doesn't sound like she's just texting her girlfriends for the latest dish..
"these tiny systems are playing an epic, transformative role.
Since Ms. Ruto hooked up the system, her teenagers’ grades have improved because they have light for studying. The toddlers no longer risk burns from the smoky kerosene lamp. And each month, she saves $15 in kerosene and battery costs — and the $20 she used to spend on travel.
In fact, neighbors now pay her 20 cents to charge their phones,"
Exactly. We take for granted what access to even a small amount of electricity can do for your daily routine.
The light for studying point is crucial - that's a life-changer and that's in no way an exaggeration.
And considering the average wage is around $30 a month in Kenya, that saving of $15 is huge.
I was puzzled about the context of this news report when I read it:
A three hour taxi ride to the nearest 'city', I believe. But the nearest cell phone tower is surely closer than that nearest city. Where does that tower get its power? And what makes that tower an economically viable proposition? It seems that someone is making an irrational investment. Given the existence of the functioning tower. the personal investment a solar power system for lighting and cell phone recharging seems
reasonable. But who is investing in the cell towers? And why?
The cellphone is becoming a very important tool in Africa. It is being used for micro-banking, health care, diagnosing plant diseases, sale to markets and many more uses. Maybe the towers are solar powered as well.
NAOM
The article makes it clear how useful cellphones have become for people in small cottage industries.. it seems that makes the investment in towers and transmission infrastructure not only a smart piece of development, but it probably makes business sense.
Considering this and maybe a radio seems to be the extent of a lot of these people's high-tech assets, it apparently supports my regular contention that communications is a part of electronics that we can support with a modicum of energy use, which still offers very high value for the dollar or the watt invested.
Travel is slow on bad roads. A 3-hour trip may be only a few tens of miles, well within range of a tower in the city with grid power.
Even if a tower is in the countryside and powered by PV itself, it isn't going to support a phone-charging business without excess power and an on-site staff. This is a long way from the business model of cellular providers. Not to say it isn't viable, it's just not the way things have been done; maybe you can persuade someone to go for new revenue sources.
I think the cellphone tower that she uses when at her tin roof domicile is not in the distant town, because the power consumption of a cellphone goes up as the square of the distance to the nearest tower. Battery life would be very poor if the tower were at any great distance. My puzzlement is about the business model of whoever it is that has paid for cellphone towers out in the countryside. Are the rural users of this service able to pay enough in usage charges to sustain such a far ranging operation? Actually there are more questions than just were does it get power. Like, how often must the site be visited by a service tech? And how many sites can a tech visit is a day or a week? What is done to interconnect the towers? In US, interconnect is done with land lines. Do they have land lines for interconnect? Cellphone networks don't just magically happen, I think.
Regardless, cell-systems are going into less-developed areas and have been very popular. Don't forget that this isn't in addition to landlines and grid power in many cases, but instead of them. This becomes THE communication infrastructure.
It's likely that, like our highway system in the US, it also is an enormous benefit to the state as well, for Police, and just for basic business of government. and It's easier to protect a redundant collection of transmitter towers than a web of strung wires.
Elementary Watson. Just generally thinking about rural communications, cellphone towers, like any basic infrastructure is government mandated and probably funded as well in rural areas. The police, emergency services, security services, local government officials, they all need communications coverage there too. So not having the same density of users you get in or near cities doesn't mean cellphone towers don't get built.
Same can be said of power. I bet some of these towers might indeed be powered by solar. Cellphone base station equipment has come down a lot in power consumption in recent years. But the problem is still relatively heavy maintenance due to the panels needing periodic cleaning and the batteries needing eventual replacement. Thus I believe those towers are mostly on the grid.
I saw this personally in the Atlas mountains of Marocco. Rural valleys with sparse villages made of small huts dotted around the hill sides. No infrastructure, plumbing, electricity, phones. But the hill tops all had cell phone towers. Which were powered by overhead lines from the grid, specially constructed along side them. Some of them were just on amazing places with only a donkey trail going up there.
In Africa in general this is the way its going to go. People and government can't afford expensive rural infrastructure like plumbing or the grid on every village path, let alone hut or dwelling. But they can reap the few pennies people have by selling them inexpensive used handsets and cheap pre-paid cards. That's why you get the cell tower there first.
I'm not sure of the economics of it at all, but I can say with some certainty that they do install large cellphone masts in remote areas across Africa and the demand for them has steadily increased in recent years as network providers rush to try and 'capture' as many users as possible.
I say this after having spent some time in very remote central Africa (nearest transport was 100km 4x4 track to then catch twice weekly train). No cars / mains infrastructure in sight as far as you could see, yet I bumped into a bunch of Zain employees that had just finished fine-tuning settings on a mast way out in the back of beyond there.
The locals could all get a signal on their cellphone from that point on. (The local dispensary nurse had also installed solar panels and this was the main way of charging the phones. Although I'm sure the network providers couldn't have known about that, so they must have some other master plan up their sleeves.)
Note that there are at least two generations of obsolete equipment from advanced nations that went on the scrap market, and cobbling together a last-generation system is not that expensive. Neither is putting up point-to-point microwave.
In India circa 2001 the new middle class all had cell-phones, and plans were only a few bucks per month. The lady up-thread who saved $15 on gas might spend $3 to have the ability to make calls.
Generally, a tower is placed due to load as well as coverage area, and different technologies vary in reach. An old analog system could cover a large area if the usage was light (remember the days of bag-phones in the car for emergencies, with reasonable monthly costs but high per-call costs)?
In areas that don't have land-line service, building out for wireless could be cheaper and easier than wired. Easier still if you don't promise to be up 100% of the time, or work during power outages, or so forth.
The cell companies here offer that type of service and it is quite competitive. We have a lot of new housing areas going up and they are sold as lots with basic services; water, sewage, electricity. Phones, cable etc come when there are enough properties built up for the service to move in. Most people have a cell phone and by providing a cheap fixed home cell service they are keeping their clients by bridging that gap. Many small shop units have no phone service either, another potential for clients.
NAOM
Yair...on a similar vein. Our labour government is committed to spending FORTY SEVEN BILLION dollars on a fibre optic broadband network over the next nine years.
This is the biggest infrastructure project in our nations history and I just can't see the need to be able to download movies and whatall in just a couple of minutes.
I have a wireless connection that is affordable, fairly reliable and fast enough for all practical purposes. The talk is that the fibre technology will be out of date before the project is finished.
Any one with any comments?
It's not your need to download the movie but the companies' need to charge you for downloading the movie. There is also a collapsing of communications to a single medium where all TV, radio, cable, telephone, cellphone, oh, and intehweb come down an internet connection. For example my phone line also provides an ADSL connection for my intehweb. In the future it will be a fibre with the telephone provided over the intehweb. Cellphones will be data connections with voice service being one of the apps. A lot of companies want to sell you services over those connections hence the need for a lot of bandwidth. It is not what YOU need that is at issue at all.
NAOM
Thanks Paleocon and iagreewithnick for info.
I think these networks must be government initiatives using second hand equipment. This is good, IMHO. I had wondered how anything good gets allowed to happen, but the world is not so badly run as I had supposed.
Common misconception, but false nonetheless. The power required to communicate back to the tower depends on the gain of the antenna at the tower; this is how the Deep Space Network can get data back and forth to probes 70+ AU out in space whose transmitter power is on the order of a watt. If the tower was designed with many high-gain antennas covering narrow slices of the landscape, low-powered phones could be usable for a considerable distance.
What you can't get around is the inability to re-use spectrum as much with such large cells, but the density of cell phones in the African hinterlands is nothing compared to e.g. Tokyo.
I think I read a similar story about a year ago! It makes no sense. What battery costs is she saving on? If she had been using a 12V battery for lighting, then she could also use it for charging her mobile phone, like they do in other villages!
Cellphone, the cost of going to town to charge the battery.
NAOM
She had been lighting with kerosene. RTFA already.
I did read article, but you have a good point. I guess the travel costs are the most absurd. If she is travelling to town all the time she can make money by performing errands for others. Else she can give her mobile battery to others to take it and have it charged. She could also have two batteries so that she never needs to be out of contact. Either she is very rich (by African village standards) and stupid or the story is made up.
But how much does a 12V cost? I'd say a fair whack of her monthly income. She probably only has one lot of animals to sell and it makes a lot more sense to invest in a sustainable power source than to put it all into a few one-off 12Vs.
If she could afford to buy 12Vs regularly then I'm sure she wouldn't be using kerosene. As would the rest of the millions that still use kerosene in Africa!
Probably an $80 car battery, though I am only taking a guess. Get $10 back for scrap. Maybe there are shops that refurb the batteries that are getting weak. I doubt we are talking 500AHr Trojans.
NAOM
EDIT: should have seen the SCODE link after. It seems the pack she is talking about has a 5Ah battery. That would suggest a SLA of some sort.
Climate Progress points to the same article with 10 still pictures.
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/12/20/science/earth/20101220KENYA-...
The products are being provided by SCODE (SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES)
Conventional landlines don't work out too well in much of Africa. Wooden poles get cut down for cooking fuel, copper wires get stolen. The towers are probably solar powered and connected to the MTSO by buried fiber or point to point radio. Labor is cheap, each tower probably has an armed guard.
In earlier Drumbeats there was some discussion about moving to using rail considerably more for inter-city freight and perhaps using electric delivery trucks to move freight from inter-city rail terminals to intra-city destinations.
I was roaming around the net and found this list of PHEVs and EVs, including some delivery trucks such as this:
http://www.pluginamerica.org/vehicles/evi-md
and this
http://www.pluginamerica.org/vehicles/electrorides-zerotruck
http://www.pluginamerica.org/
From the specs. listed in the links, these delivery trucks have some potential for displacing diesel powered trucks. Over the road "18 wheeler" trucks will never be displaced by EV type due to extreme high cost of eight to ten times the LI battery capacity as these, IMO. Plus, the load on the electrical grid would be massive for 5-10 million 18 wheelers to recharge every night.
If EV trucks could be built to handle local delivery of containers, 20' to 40', then the problem of oil shortage is greatly reduced for transport. Electrified railroads are still the only solution to keep some portion of our US economy functioning in 25 years when oil available (at price we can afford) is only 1/3 to 1/2 of present.
These vehicles look intriguing to me.
I agree with you concerning the need to smartly upgrade our rail systems while we still can.
Another benefit of these trucks is that local, street-level, poluution would be lessened, at least wrt to that caused by the current crop of intra-city diesel delivery trucks.
The site I linked also lists some buses:
http://www.pluginamerica.org/vehicles/designline-tindo-solar-bus
Seems expensive, but I honestly don't know what diesel or CNG busses cost.
http://www.pluginamerica.org/vehicles/sinautec-ultracap-hybrid-bus
and a school bus:
http://www.pluginamerica.org/vehicles/ic-bus-ce-hybrid
Just a few of the ways to support a significantly smaller and slower lifestyle in the future...without requiring the invention of cold fusion or warp drive...
I don't know why people always say that 18-wheeler trucks can never be EV's.
Actually, it is easy to do. Just put overhead electric power lines above a truck lane on the Interstates. Electric buses are already a proven technology (e.g., used in Seattle), and they are roughly the same size as commercial trucks. With wired electric power overhead, the trucks only need enough batteries for the local delivery travel. With GPS and cell phone technology in place, setting up an automatic payment system is easy.
I don't know why people always say that 18-wheeler trucks can never be EV's.
Actually, it is easy to do. Just put overhead electric power lines above a truck lane on the Interstates. Electric buses are already a proven technology (e.g., used in Seattle), and they are roughly the same size as commercial trucks.
However, it is much easier and cheaper to string an electric wire over a railroad track, and that is what is going to kill the electric truck.
A diesel-electric locomotive is just an electric locomotive with its own portable diesel generator. If you tear out the heavy and short-lived (compared to the electronics) diesel engine, you can upgrade it to deliver twice as much power from the overhead wires to the drive wheels, and get by with half as many locomotives. With one BIG electric locomotive, you can move a 100-car train carrying 200 full-size and oversize containers double-stacked, versus 1 container on an 18-wheeler, and cut your labor costs as well.
Railroads already deliver almost half the freight in the US already, and the only reason they haven't electrified their main lines is that they didn't want to spend the money up front because diesel fuel was cheap. If the price of diesel fuel skyrockets, they will probably electrify their lines. Because of their superior fuel efficiency they will increase their share of the market regardless of whether they electrify or not.
Bottom line: The electric 18-wheeler is a non-starter. The electric train is far superior.
"If you tear out the heavy and short-lived (compared to the electronics) diesel engine"
Actually, lightweight is not desireable in a locomotive. Without the diesel engine something else would be needed to give the locomotive sufficient weight to have full traction. And, of course, the weight can be supplied by something much cheaper than a fully functional diesel engine!
Perhaps the locomotives could have batteries and energy recovery from dynamic braking. As I recall, they already use dynamic braking, but the electricity is dumped into resistors and lost as heat. Just another opportunity for conservation awaiting higher oil prices...
E. Swanson
Electric locomotives can use regenerative braking, in which they use the electric motors as generators and dump the braking energy back into the overhead wires.
It's true that lightweight electric locomotives do have a problem with wheelspin at low speed and so can't use full power when starting out, but they do have higher power, acceleration, and top speed.
Diesel locomotives have a problem with exceeding the maximum axle loading on the track due to the heavy weight of the engine. They are best for low-speed operation where the heavy weight is an advantage. Electrics are better in medium and high-speed operation.
One of the christmas traditions in Sweden is that our king holds christmas speech with his views on today issues. It often influences peoples views on issues and this year he talked about a lot of things that are discussed on ToD. The good parts are after the first 1/3 of the speech, here is a clumsy google translation:
King's Christmas speech 2010
Kära svenskar hemma och utomlands. Dear Swedes at home and abroad.
Jag vill tillönska er alla en god fortsättning på julen. I want to wish everyone a happy Christmas.
När jag blickar ut genom fönstret här på Slottet – denna kalla och snöiga vinter 2010 – ser jag Nationalmuseum genom snöyran på andra sidan Strömmen. When I look out the window here at the palace - this cold and snowy winter in 2010 - I see the National Museum by the snowstorm across the stream. Där visas utställningen ”Härskarkonst”. It displays the exhibition "Master Art". Det är en av de många manifestationer som i år har ägnats Bernadottejubiléet. It is one of the many manifestations of this year has been given to Bernadotte Jubilee.
I år är det 200 år sedan som Sveriges riksdag samlades i Örebro och valde Napoleons marskalk Jean Baptiste Bernadotte till ny tronföljare. This year marks the 200th anniversary of the Swedish parliament gathered in Örebro and chose Napoleon's Marshal Jean Baptiste Bernadotte as the new heir apparent. Det var inledningen till den långa fredsperiod som vi har haft lyckan att uppleva allt sedan dess, en förmån som få andra länder på jorden delar med oss. It was the beginning of the long period of peace which we have been lucky enough to experience ever since, a benefit that few other countries on earth to share with you. Under Karl Johans tid som tronföljare och senare regent lades också grunden till det moderna Sverige med bland annat en ny infrastruktur, bankväsende och utbildning. During the Oslo period as heir to the throne and later ruler was also the foundation for modern Sweden, including a new infrastructure, banking and education.
Jag och min familj deltog i högtidlighållandet av tronföljarvalet i Örebro i år. My family and I participated in the commemoration of the tronföljarvalet in Örebro this year. Vi deltog också i firandet i Helsingborg av 200-års minnet när Jean Baptiste Bernadotte först steg i land på svensk jord – en stormig dag, den 20 oktober. We also attended the celebrations in Helsingborg by 200-year memory when Jean Baptiste Bernadotte first landed on Swedish soil - a stormy day, on 20 October. Vi hade väl kanske inte heller någon vidare tur med vädret, men det dämpade inte feststämningen. Det gladde mig särskilt att min kusin, Drottning Margrethe av Danmark, också deltog i firandet. We had well maybe no further luck with the weather, but it did not dampen the party atmosphere. I was especially glad that my cousin, Queen Margrethe of Denmark, also participated in the celebration.
Julen är en tidpunkt då vi kan stanna upp ett tag för att samlas med våra nära och kära. Christmas is a time when we may pause for a while to gather with our loved ones. Det är en tid för umgänge med familj, släktingar och vänner. It is a time for socializing with family, relatives and friends. Men vi måste också komma ihåg att det inte är alla som har någon eller några att dela julens glädje med. But we must also remember that there is anyone who has one or more to share Christmas joy with.
Till alla er som är ensamma eller sjuka denna jul vill jag rikta en särskilt varm hälsning. To all of you who are alone or ill this Christmas, I would make an especially warm greeting. Det är min förhoppning att också ni kan känna något av julens glädje, och att nästa år blir ett bättre och mer glädjerikt år för er. It is my hope that you too can feel something of the joy of Christmas, and that next year will be a better and more joyful year for you. Det vilar ett särskilt ansvar på oss som under julen kan samlas i gemenskap med våra närmaste. There lies a special responsibility on us as a Christmas can gather in fellowship with our loved ones. Vi måste sträcka ut en hand och inkludera dom i vår närhet som inte är lika lyckligt lottade. We must reach out and include them in our neighborhood who are not as fortunate. Detta är julens kärleksbudskap. This is the Christmas message of love.
Julen är också en tid för eftertanke av det gångna året, och för förhoppningar inför det nya. Christmas is also a time for reflection of the past year, and hopes for the new.
En stor händelse för mig och min familj under året var när vår äldsta dotter, och Sveriges tronföljare, Kronprinsessan Victoria vigdes med sin Daniel den 19 juni. A big event for me and my family during the year was when our oldest daughter, and heir to the throne of Sweden, Crown Princess Victoria was ordained by his Daniel on June 19. Det var en strålande festdag, och vår glädje delades med alla de hundratusentals människor som hade samlats längs kortegevägen och nedanför Slottet, och med alla de miljoner som följde bröllopet på TV runt om i hela landet och utomlands. It was a glorious day of celebration, and our joy was shared with all those hundreds of thousands who had gathered along the motorcade route and below the castle, and with all the millions who followed the wedding on television all over the country and abroad. Jag vill framföra mitt och min familjs varma tack för all den uppskattning och värme som har mött Kronprinsessan Victoria och Prins Daniel. I want to express my and my family's heartfelt thanks for all the appreciation and warmth that has come to Crown Princess Victoria and Prince Daniel.
I mitt jultal förra året nämnde jag att Drottningen och jag avsåg att förverkliga en dröm sedan länge, att skapa ett forum för att belysa barn och ungdomars situation i världen. In my Christmas speech last year, I mentioned that the Queen and I intend to fulfill a dream for a long time, to create a forum to highlight children and young people in the world. Syftet är att inspirera och stödja att FN:s barnkonvention efterlevs. The aim is to inspire and support the UN Children's Convention are complied with. Nyligen ägde också det första World Child and Youth Forum rum på Kungliga slottet med över 400 deltagare. Recently, also took the first World Child and Youth Forum held at the Royal Palace with more than 400 participants. Här möttes inte bara företrädare för olika barnrättsorganisationer, utan också många barn och ungdomar. This was met not only representatives of the various child welfare organizations, but also many children and adolescents. Just denna dialog mellan generationerna är viktig – något som Drottningen underströk i sitt inledningstal. This particular dialogue between the generations is important - something that the Queen stressed in his opening speech.
I våras gjorde Drottningen och jag ett statsbesök i Brasilien. Last spring, did Queen and a state visit to Brazil. Jag besökte också Kina strax efter invigningen av världsutställningen i Shanghai, och Kronprinsessan och Prins Daniel var där i höstas. I also visited China soon after the inauguration of the Shanghai World Expo, and Crown Princess and Prince Daniel was there last fall. Vi kunde konstatera att den svenska paviljongen hävdade sig väl bland de 190 länderna. We found that the Swedish pavilion did well among the 190 countries. Det finns ett stort intresse i Kina för vad Sverige och svenska företag står för: kvalitet, hållbar utveckling, ny miljöteknik och innovationer. There is great interest in China for what Sweden and the Swedish company stands for: quality, sustainable development, new technologies and innovations.
I Sverige kan vi för stunden glädja oss åt en stark ekonomisk tillväxt. In Sweden we can for now rejoice in the strong economic growth. Exporten växer och sysselsättningen har börjat öka. Exports are growing and employment has begun to increase. Men vi har skäl att hysa respekt för den finansiella oron i omvärlden och vad den kan få för konsekvenser. But we have reason to respect for those in the financial turmoil abroad and what it can get for the consequences.
Vår planet är sårbar. Our planet is vulnerable. Jag brukar tänka på jorden som ett äpple – med jordskorpan tunn som ett äppelskal. I tend to think of Earth as an apple - with the crust as thin as an apple peel.
Hur skört detta skal är blev vi påminda om flera gånger under det gångna året. How fragile, this shell is, we were reminded several times during the past year. Haiti drabbades av en jordbävning där kanske så många som 200.000 människor omkom. Haiti was hit by an earthquake in which perhaps as many as 200,000 people died. Under året inträffade också kraftiga jordbävningar i Kina, Turkiet, och Mexico. During the year, there was also strong earthquakes in China, Turkey, and Mexico. Vulkanutbrottet på Island – när äppelskalet brast, så att säga – ledde till att en stor del av flygtrafiken i Europa fick ställas in på grund av utsläppen av aska. Volcanic eruption in Iceland - when apple shell burst, so to speak - leading to a large part of air traffic in Europe had to be canceled due to the emission of ash.
Vi skadade också själva jordens yta. We also damaged the earth's surface. Oljeriggen som exploderade i den Mexikanska golfen resulterade i ett omfattande oljeutsläpp där oljan fortsatte att strömma ut i flera månader. Oil rig that exploded in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in a major oil spill, where oil continued to flow out for several months.
Om jorden är ett äpple, så är livet på vår jord – människor, djur och växter – lika ömtåligt som daggen på ett äpple som man lätt kan gnugga bort mot ärmen. If the Earth is an apple, so is life on the planet - humans, animals and plants - as delicate as the dew on an apple that can be easily rub off on your sleeve. Vi måste på alla sätt värna om jordens miljö och arbeta för en hållbar utveckling. We must do everything to protect Earth's environment and promote sustainable development. Vi måste lyckas förena de fattiga ländernas krav på en ekonomisk utveckling med behovet av åtgärder som tryggar vår gemensamma framtid på jorden. We must succeed in reconciling the poor countries for economic development with the need for measures to ensure our common future on Earth.
Många blev besvikna över utgången av FN:s miljömöte i Köpenhamn förra året. Many were disappointed over the outcome of the UN environment meeting in Copenhagen last year. Det är därför glädjande att det senaste mötet i Cancún i Mexico tycks ha lett till resultat – resultat som pekar mot en bättre framtida utveckling, även om det är långt kvar till bindande internationella avtal. It is therefore encouraging that the recent meeting in Cancun in Mexico seems to have yielded results - results that point to a better future development, although it is far from binding international agreements.
Detta är angelägna problem, för vi blir ju bara fler och fler. These are urgent problems, for we are just more and more. Jordens befolkning kommer redan 2050 att vara tre gånger så stor som den är idag. The earth's population will already in 2050 to be three times as large as it is today. Hur skall vi få mat, vatten och energi att räcka samtidigt som vi skapar en hållbar utveckling som bevarar miljön? How can we get food, water and energy sufficient while creating a sustainable development that preserves the environment?
Svaret på den frågan är bättre kunskap. The answer to that question is better knowledge. En kunskap som grundar sig på vetenskapliga fakta. A knowledge based on scientific facts. Det är angeläget i en tid då allt fler människor inbillar sig att astrologi är en vetenskap. It is certainty in an age when more and more people imagine that astrology is a science.
Det här var frågor som diskuterades när de tio Kungliga akademierna samlades på Slottet förra månaden för ännu en omgång seminarier i serien ”Kunskapens krona”. This was the issues discussed when the ten royal academies gathered at the palace last month for another round of seminars in the series' crown of Knowledge ".
Ja, vi kan glädje oss åt att Sverige ligger långt fram som kunskapsnation. Yes, we can be pleased that Sweden is far ahead as a knowledge nation. De svenska universiteten och högskolorna placerar sig allt bättre i de årliga, internationella jämförelserna. The Swedish universities and colleges position themselves better in the annual, international comparisons. I Sverige skapas också flera nya internationellt konkurrenskraftiga forskningsmiljöer. In Sweden, also creates several new internationally competitive research.
I Lund byggs till exempel två nya internationella centrum för avancerad materialforskning, MAX IV och ESS. In Lund, built for example, two new international center for advanced materials research, MAX IV and ESS. Vidare så samverkar KTH, Karolinska Institutet och Uppsala Universitet i ett resurscenter för storskalig forskning inom molekylär biovetenskap och medicin. Furthermore, it interacts KTH, Karolinska Institutet and Uppsala University in a resource center for large-scale research in molecular life sciences and medicine.
Under det gångna året har vi fått nya insikter i människans tidiga ursprung. During the past year we have gained new insights into early human origins. En svensk forskare, Svante Pääbo, har lyckats kartlägga arvsmassan hos vår, sedan länge utdöda, närmaste släkting, Neandertalmänniskan. A Swedish scientist, Svante Pääbo, have managed to map the genetic heritage of ours, long extinct, nearest relative, Neanderthals. Genom att jämföra denna arvsmassa och vår egen har vi fått helt nya kunskaper i vad som gör oss unika – till exempel vårt kvalificerade medvetande och intellekt, och vår utvecklade sociala förmåga. By comparing this genome and our own, we have unprecedented insight into what makes us unique - for example, our qualified consciousness and intellect, and our developed social skills. Låt oss använda dessa egenskaper till att efter bästa förmåga skapa en bättre värld för alla. Let us use these properties to the best of its ability to create a better world for all.
Jag vill avsluta med ett par rader ur Drottning Silvias bönbok. I will conclude with a few lines from the Queen Silvia's prayer book. Det är en bön som har skrivits av ärkebiskop Anders Wejryd: It is a prayer written by Archbishop Anders Wejryd:
”Hjälp oss att bruka den livskraft du har lagt i din skapelse, "Help us to cultivate the vitality you have in your creation,
Så att vi blir förvaltare och inte förbrukare, So that we become managers rather than consumers,
Uppbyggare och inte nedrivare” Builder and not destructive "
Med dessa ord ber jag att än en gång få önska er alla en riktigt god jul, och sända er mina varmaste lyckönskningar inför det nya året. With these words, I ask once again get to wish you a merry Christmas, and send you my best wishes for the New Year.
Translated link to speech rather than that bilingual mess.
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&u=http://m.expressen...
Thank you for a link to a real translation!
I were too busy playing "Settlers" with my family to do a real translation myself, I hope it is an ok christmas excuse. ;)
This game?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Settlers
or this one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlers_of_cataan
Settlers of cataan, an exellently ballanced board game.
Is my cousin Lennart still accurate when he says Swedes all watch D.Duck on the 24th?
- Thanks for the article!
God Jul, MR.
Yes.
That article is absolutely correct.
And it gave me something new, I had newer thought that a black doll taking things in its own hands rather then being blond and clumsy would be conciderd racist. I am soo lucky to not be wired for political correctness.
I don't think it's a matter of being wired for political correctness. It's that you're from a different culture, with a different history. I suspect there are probably things Swedes deem offensive that Americans would find equally baffling.
Good point.
What I realy dislike about political correctness is that the hunt for the incorrect loads whatever deemed offensive with cultural focus, naughtiness and weariness. Why not laugh, reflect, get over it and do something usefull instead?
That might apply to some things, but for cartoons of that era, the offensiveness didn't require much of a hunt, for those in our culture and our history. They were edited long ago, before the term "political correctness" was even invented. The combination of the sheer offensiveness and the fact that the cartoons were aimed at children meant they were cleaned up early.
Wow. That's more intense than I thought. It's good to hear my cousins are geekin' out a bit..
My wife and I have happily adopted 'Love, Actually' as our Christmas special for the last 7 years or so. With the girl, who's a bit young for the adult refs, we still watch the Grinch, too.
Thanks for the speech and its translation. Sweden is fortunate indeed to have wisdom embodied in its Royal family. I especially liked the metaphor about the earth being like an apple, with just a thin skin.
One thing that puzzles me is the statement that population in 2050 will be triple current population. Surely, that is a mistake or a mistranslation. Perhaps what was meant was that population of the world (if present trends continue) will be one-third greater than today in 2050.
Jordens befolkning kommer redan 2050 att vara tre gånger så stor som den är idag.
No, 3x is what it says. Unless there was an error in the original transcription. "att vara tre gånger" means "will be three times"..
Not a big point really, just a small oversight probably on his part I assume, or misreading some UN projections, nothing I'd spend any time worrying about.
Not bad for a king, those guys are just figureheads in Scandinavia anyway, but they tend to be reasonably cool people for that. Average scandinavian is just better educated than here, and they don't watch garbage like Fox news on average, and TV news tends to be reasonably coherent.
After going there this summer I stopped thinking of the USA as a first world country, it makes no sense, if USA is first world, then Scandinavia is a level above, but I'd say it's safe to say in fact the US left their position behind due to a series of catastrophic decisions, electing Reagan, Bush Jr/Sr, Nixon, etc, never passing single payer health care, allowing the rich to take almost full control over the political process, and the distribution of wealth, always now in their favor (a key sign of second world status in my opinion), and, best of all, getting the people to administer their own brainwashing over commercial networks, ie, actually making a profit off right wing radio/news etc. Genius if you think about it. Why spend money brainwashing when you can get them to do it to themselves, and make a profit off those suckers at the same time, while giving them the dream they can be the next Rush or Sarah?
Things like that just aren't really that common over there, though we'll see how far right Sweden swings.
Yes he made a mistake with a simple fact.
I dont realy know how to compare Sweden and our neighbours with USA, I know too little about USA.
Manny of my worst impressions are confirmed by the cablegate leaks but also some of the good ones, there is still a will to do good but also a corporativism poisoning the market economy, politics and foreign relations and manny of the good things that could be done.
I do not think our political right is the same as yours. We have had far more socialism then USA and it is being picked apart by libertarian reforms and a free market agenda that includes ballanced budgets and long term investments. One of the key influenced for this is Margaret Thatcher and we have no problem what so ever to combine her thoughts with Jimmy Carter type energy policies.
We do of couse have lobbyists and cooperation between corporations and politics but it is not dominated by lawyers and finance, our lobbism is dominated by industries and the very large partly healthy and partly sick socialices medical, care and school sector. They mostly want to do constructive things and dont get bail outs, we have alreade made that mistake in a grand scale.
I hope that we continue swinging in this direction, we realy need it to handle peak oil, various resource issues, global competition and to get a nice society to live in. What our king says helps some of this and that make me grateful but he does not say what our governmnet tells him, it is his own call to care about environmental issues.
Where I think we went wrong over here, is that we allowed our political campaigns to be dominated by big money. Expensive TV advertising is crucial, without it your candidate/party is at a huge disadvantage. So the monetary and organizational favors that corporations and ultra-wealthy citizens have is of overwhelming importance to the politicians. Part of the reason we can't attack the problem at its source, is our free market obsession, the buying of speech/propaganda is a more precious right, than the truth. Secondarily, we used to have some oversight of truth in media, but that was allowed to expire, so propaganda reigns nearly unchallenged. And our media is a for profit big business, so a combination of entertainment value, and stuff that doesn't offend the big corporate interests that fund media has eroded journalism. Its so bad, that the major media can not be trusted to give a decent picture of the world anymore.
I hope you will take a good look at this process, and avoid it yourself. I think we are far beyond the tipping point into full-blown oligarchy over here.
Thus are the concepts "free market" and "capitalism" and "democracy" and perhaps even "freedom" warped into something bad when they should be exellent tools for societal and personal well being. :-(
I agree that a lot of media is receptive for doing propaganda, over here it were propaganda for socialism and againt the evil corporations and USA when our socialistical experiment went crazy and hurt personal freedoms and economical freedoms. The "terrible" businesses they attacked back then were a public charity when compared with todays ultra-rich excesses in large countries.
I suspect that it is very good to have the public, politicians and rich people sharing the same values and feel kinship across "clases". Sweden has been small and homogenous with an exchange of people between "classes" and the conflicts whipped up in more revolutionary countries has been copied withouth splitting up society. I dont know how much of this is left and how it develops, it is hard to get a perspective on it.
The right answer about the U.S. being a first world country is "in places".
There are large regions and groups of people who are clearly not part of the first world, many of whom have no interest in participating in a modern, complex society as long as the truck starts in the morning and they can have a few toys. A good many are hoodwinked by very sophisticated propaganda into preferring a neofeudal theocracy, many others don't have the level of human development to leave their ethnic/racial enclaves.
But the U.S is far too complex a country to say that it simply isn't first world.
Other countries are complex, too. Most "third world" countries have elites that live very comfortable lives. A country is not judged by how well its best off population lives, but by how well things are for the majority--what access they have to quality education, health care, public transportation...
For a large and growing majority, the US is third world compared to most other OECD countries.
Don, I have always been intrigued by how thin the earths crust is. It averages 9 miles, or the thickness of three sheets of paper on a twelve inch globe. Literally a floating oasis on a hot molten ball. By the way, Merry Christmas to all.
Wow, an unexpected Christmas present from Leanan!
Thanks, Leanan!
It seems that Iran has largely abolished its oil subsidy. Gasoline prices are up fourfold. It will be interesting to see the concomitant effect on consumption.
So much of oil demand is being subsidised by emerging market governments and that is where the marginal consumption demand is coming from.
If other countries follow Iran than this could all change.
www.marketsandculture.blogspot.com
TOD PV-experts (PVguy and FMygar et al):
Is this deal the current 'about average' or is the moniker 'Affordable Solar' a misnomer in this case?
http://www.affordable-solar.com/asgpower-9900-watt-yingli-grid-tied-kit.htm
Installation is extra...
This is a grid tied system and I prefer a system with at least a battery backup option.
I just did a very quick search on the company and I think it is within reason.
I wasn't super impressed with the panel spec sheet but for the price its about what you might expect.
Here's a link to the spec sheet: http://www.homewind.net/pdf/products/23876_1.pdf
I didn't research the other components but my guess is that given the package price they are probably Ok.
I'd certainly want to do a bit more research on them before I hit the purchase button but given what they offer the price is within the general ballpark.
The name of the company makes me think of Yuengling Beer, not my favorite beer but probably drinkable in an emergency.
Cheers!
Before you sign on, make sure your roof is good to go for 25 years or so. It won't be cheap if you have to remove the panels down the line if the roof gives up.
It isn't that hard to remove the panels and re-roof. I did my own roof and moved my panels and put them back. Some work, yes, but not that big a deal.
We had a hail storm here in PA this summer and I had to get my roof replaced and my 6 KW PV system removed and replaced. No roofer would patch around the PV system so it all had to come down. It was $5k to have the solar installer remove and replace the 30 panels (labor, new wiring, new roof boots, etc.)
Luckily insurance paid for it. No way I would have done in myself.
What shape were the panels in? Did any/a lot of them get smashed?
I always hear that they're tempered glass and rated for 1" hail or whatever, but would love to know what happens in the real world under heavy storms.
I have some of the fairly cheap HarborFreight Panels on my roof which have handled some pretty respectable winds, and whatever else has been thrown at them for the last few years when I wasn't looking.. but I hardly expect them to be immortal, as some of my RE Skeptic friends seem to expect of me.
Bob
The "salesman" for my system claimed he had seen to demonstration of a golfer directly hitting a panel (set up a few feet away). So hopefully my SunTech panels can withstand that threat. I do find a few golf balls in the yard every year, so one hitting the panels is not unexpected. Around here hail would be almost unimaginable.
P.S. in all the other climates I've lived in, 1" hail was not unusual, practically an annual or at least biannual ocurrence.
Consider a metal roof with UNIRACK (or similar) and get the roof conformal coated with 30+ a gal 2000 psi/180 deg epoxy. The wear rate on the conformal coating is "lifetime" - 100+ years for a "coat" or 2.
Consider standing seam and check out a product call S5, no rails required.
As long as your coating, anyone have experience with cool roof coatings?
Scams, ripoffs or real results?
http://www.nansulate.com/insulating_roof_coatings.htm
Does Chu have any AFFORDABLE & field proven products to recommend for his cool roofs? Many Paint companies list reflectivity on coatings now.
A diesel mechanic showed me this sample he had, one half was brown and the other
was white. The white half was conventional paint and was 40 degrees hotter in the Sun.
In the deep/mid South, If you don't have radiant barrier as part the roof system, the reduce cooling load from PV foorprint may be very significant, perhaps as much as the kWh from the PV if you have conventional energy pig for an AC. Those DOE Energy PIG radio commercials are enough to
drive one mad and start eating bacon.
After Hurrican Ivan here in Pensacola, most homes with major heat gain (basically everything built after 1950) had to be vacated until power was restored. Generator companies must make a killing now, it's the accepted fix for total head-up-ass in house design. It's not uncommon to see a roof
on a roof out in rural areas where AC is not affordable.
I do not have experience with these white roof coatings/compounds, but I found this link:
http://www.duracoolinc.com/
There is a useful-bollocking table at the bottom of this page:
http://www.solar-estimate.org/index.php?verifycookie=1&page=white-roof&s...
http://www.roofcoatings.org/wcc.html
http://eetd.lbl.gov/coolroof/coating.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_roof
http://www.roofcoatings.org/pdf/tn06.pdf
I, too, am interested in cool roof/white roof technologies, as I was told that my roof was 'in the second half of its lifetime' several times by the building inspector...I think he was being diplomatic and hinting that I was ~ 5-7 years out from a re-roof job.
I had a few beers with one of the partners who originated this product (a chemical engineer):
http://hytechsales.com/
At the time, they were painting the roofs of trucks and getting great results. I believe UPS is a customer. This insulating ceramic coating is claimed to be derived from the same ceramics used on the Space Shuttle heat shield.
Thinking about it, Yellow School buses in the deep south seem now have a white coating on them. So perhaps there are now Mil or government specs for reflective coatings.
Perfect - The additive product for your own coatings looks very KOOL, I will give it a try.
While constructing my house the upstairs rooms would get, by the afternoon, too hot to stay in for more than a short time. Brick/cement render walls and cast concrete roof made up with 20cm thick 40x80cm styrofoam blocks between the cast in beams. That was without windows too so plenty of air flow. After painting on a good coating of white waterproofing the rooms became usable. I know someone who is complaining about the heat in their house. After checking on Google earth, I could see they had the roof painted dark brick red. I am trying to persuade them to paint it white, they will save about 14KW of heating.
NAOM
That is a picture of my house on the INTK website.I coated the partial roof a little over three yrs ago after I'd read about the 30 degree temp drop when the underside of roof decking was coated.But my roof had 5 different attic pockets a story and a half so I coated the shingles and contacted the company when golfball size hail for 15 minutes took out the roof I sent them shingle samples .I've also coated about 60% of the interior with Nansulate the house is approximately 1700 sq ft with 34 windows'lath and plaster with no insulation in the side walls.Our utility bills ave about 100-20 @ 70 degrees winter or summer.The back two bedrooms with bath in-between which I coated are now warmer in winter than the living and dining where the thermostat is located.The two rooms upstaitrs 10x22 and 10x27 plus hall are usually 5 degrees warmer or colder with the hvac vents shut off with vents open not much difference upstairs to down.Over two summers I left vents shut off for one and open for the other the utility bill varied about five bucks.Two yrs ago when ng was 13 buck the gas company showed up to check my meter It's located in the basement they thought I'd been by passing the meter because our bill had dropped so much.
Yingli is now one of the faster growing China Panels, Aggressive and HOT on the heels of Suntech. There are so many new China panels I can't keep track. if it were my Money, I'd go with a firm with 30 plus years of a known performance, ie, Sharp, Kyocera, BP, Solarworld, etc, They have always made good on warranty claims, even decades out. With lots of panels, possible to have a problem with one 20-25 years out, but ask yourself, will the supplier be around or on good trading terms with the US. If you need the power, IMHO you want the best panel for the buck. That said, I'm considering a pallet of Samsung 250 watt class modules for a client. The Koreans are *serious* about PV and chances are good they are building from the Japanese experience and have a great product out of the gate. The Long term performance of the materials is critical. Remember you are buying a 30-50 year investment and almost every supplier has 25 year warranty now. Most manufactures have responded to China pricing. 2011 prices look to soften just a bit, assuming $100 Oil does not set the market on fire and not overwhelm the growth in production capacity. ELM could apply to Solar exporting countries some day. We just postponed a truckload of Panels, do to permit issues is select areas. The supplier was thrilled and got a premium, I have to ask if they went to Afghanistan. I hear the military is sucking up a lot of PV right now and not just stimulus projects on US bases.
A tip: You can route & loop extra wire for 250 volt stings for future backup. 250 volt and higher charge controllers are shipping and likely to be common. Xantrex has a 600 volt charge controller but it's too new and $$$. Perhaps cheaper than a re-wire.
Affordable used to be Earth Solar. I've spent a lot of money with these guys. Excellent results. They've been around a while.
There're no towers in Nigeria. The phones are satellite. I think the company name is "Glo." No line lines either. Without satellite phones nothing would get done in Nigeria.
idontno,
I can't tell what upstream comment this comment is about, but ---
All the other mentions of 'tower' are in my comment about Kenya and responses to it.
The NYT article on which I was commenting used the word 'cellphone' quite consistently, not the word satellite. Are the two countries, Nigeria and Kenya, that different in their uptake of imported technology? I know so little about Africa that, so far as I know, the answer could be yes or no with equal probability. Satellite phones I think are much more expensive than cellphones. Nigeria has petroleum and Kenya much less, if any. ???
There're no towers in Nigeria. The phones are satellite. I think the company name is "Glo." No line lines either. Without satellite phones nothing would get done in Nigeria.
I think you're wrong.
Telecommunications in Nigeria
My GSM phone worked fine last time I was in Lagos, Nigeria. Darned expensive roaming there, though . . . The landlines don't work most of the time.
FMagyar, Longtimber, Ghung,EricBlair, HankF:
Thank you all for your advice, you are generous with your time and patience.
The comments about ensuring the roof is sound and recommendations regarding the better longer-term roofing choices are very prudent.
What got me started thinking about PV today was dropping my son off at the Albuquerque Sunport for a holiday trip. The airport has installed some PV on the top deck of their parking garage and a few other places.
http://www.cabq.gov/airport/sustainability-at-sunport/photo-voltaic-pane...
I like the solar daily irradiate and power generated bar graphs, and how how their shape grossly resembles the shape of the yearly bar graphs over the months.
http://siteapp.fatspaniel.net/siteapp/simpleView.jsf?eid=373418
There are huge swaths of land which could be covered with PV...on the feeder road to the airport off off I-25. there is an enormous parking lot (already partially covered (~20%) with one-story metal roof)which could be covered with PV 'roofing'...this area dwarfs the area over the top of th parking garage.
A note of interest which reminds me of Paul's work in Halifax with energy-efficient lighting...
http://www.cabq.gov/airport/sustainability-at-sunport/airfield-high-spee...
Yep, I know that putting PV and efficient lighting in an airport doesn't make the airport/airline ops 'green' or any marketing pap like that, but I found it interesting to see PV in action.
Lots of sunny days here, but not as many as Phoenix, Tuscon, Las Vegas!
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/htmlfiles/westcomp.clr.html
http://www.currentresults.com/Weather-Extremes/US/sunniest.php
So much sun, so little transmission and storage...
While the EU & US are trying anything and everything to get their economy's moving again, China is fighting inflation from an economy that has overheated. However, 5.1% inflation in 1 month is definitely cause for concern. Are the predictions of China's impending economic collapse accurate and nearing?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ig8jgvzQEFBPm_WrGoWEMF...
'China's Wen seeks to assure public about inflation'
And the efforts to reign in rising real estate prices?
That's 5.1% up on November 2009. Not up 5.1% in one month.
China’s Major Economic Indicators in November
Then the article I linked was misleading, by stating only the following:
It did not state year on year. There really needs to be a standard that stats are reported, because when they slice a certain bit of information it can easily be misleading.
Nonetheless, it is apparent that China has the opposite problem we are experiencing. Those guys are running with the ball, for as long as the energy supply provides. Of course the real estate is too expensive for a lot their population, so many units remain empty. Should be interesting to see what they do about that.
U.S. gasoline demand has peaked but it has nothing to do with Peak Oil. That the peak gas demand and the peak in conventional oil extraction happened at about the same time was just coincidence.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2010-12-21-gasoline-dema...
Not to worry, policy changes and demographics mean that there will be plenty of gasoline. Problem solved.
I can't make any sense of the figures quoted in that article. It says gasoline demand in the US peaked in 2006 and has declined every year since. It further states that average 2010 demand is 8.2 mb/day. Yet according to the EIA.
So 2006 wasn't the peak demand year, it has not declined every year since 2006 and their figure for 2010 demand is almost 1 million barrels per day too low.Edit: Ah I see they are excluding ethanol blended in sold gasoline from their 2010 figure. Not sure of the logic in that.
Using the total petroleum consumption figures for the US, on an annual basis, which is provided in the MER each month from EIA, I made up the following chart this weekend with the most recent data. | Using Table 1.1 from this EIA portal: http://www.eia.gov/mer/overview.html | (Nota Bene: the 2010 figure is composed of the first 9 months of recorded data through September 2010, then projected at that level for Q4 for 2010. This chart, per 2010, will need updating as the data comes in.)
The 2005 high of US total petroleum consumption reached 40.388 quads. We have "rebounded" to using 35.849 quads in 2010. Macro observers take note: this chart almost perfectly mirrors total US employment. Yet another data point that is presented each day in the MSM as experiencing "a recovery."
In short, there is no recovery in employment, in the economy, or in US petroleum demand beyond the noise that would be expected to be found within a classic economic depression.
G
I find such comments to be insulting to my intelligence. Drop the price of gasoline to 90 cents a gallon and we'll see if demand has peaked. Yes, demand is weak at $3.20/gallon . . . but it is at $3.20/gallon only because we are approaching peak oil (or already there according to some).
Is it just me or has CERA spent the last 5 years desperately trying to rationalize their "Peak oil is a myth!" stance with all sorts of excuses. Look, you are not fooling anyone by calling it 'peak demand'.
Re: NYT: Deepwater Horizon’s Final Hours (uptop)
This is an excellent article and they focus on the "Nine precious minutes," between the first (obvious) signs of trouble and the explosion.
Also in Sunday's NYT, an editorial on the "Looming crisis in the states"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26sun1.html?_r=1&hp
They call for measured tax increases (primarily on high income taxpayers).
On the same topic, Michael Cain (McCain on TOD) wrote the following essay on the problems with state finances, focusing on Texas, where the GOP is in complete control of state finances. I think that the Texas budget battle may be a trial run for how the Tea Party influenced GOP will try to tackle the federal budget mess if they are in complete control of the executive and legislative branches in 2013.
http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-12-14/oil-limits-lead-state-b...
Oil limits lead to state budget squeezes
Yes, a sad and (to an industry outsider) shocking cascade of errors. I'm amazed there is not more discussion of this article here.
According to provisional data [1,2], this year's share of electricity generation from solar and wind for the Iberian peninsula will be close to nineteen percent.
Recent prices being paid for special regimes electricity as its called there can be found on the other end of the following hyperlinks for Spain (page 53) and Portugal (page 5).
Page 19 it is, not 53.
Does Paul Krugman know how to do finite math?
For those who thought the NYT Economics professor doesn't get it:
Great.
Let's hope he's willing to consider the deep ramifications as well.. for instance let's not overlook this early 'conclusion' in there..
It makes it sound like we have no part to play in this, and that even our 'flat' consumption of finished goods and raw materials doesn't make us a Player in this great game.
The code it speaks in is one of denying culpability or responsibility for this situation.. pay no attention to the Empire or the Great Multinational Corporations behind the Curtain. 'The Great and Powerful OZ has misspoken!.. me mighty mateys and mespuchas,'
Yikes! It's like a total mania of 'Don't blame US!.. it's its, China, no it's ummm, anything but US!"
The punishment reminds me of the Monty Python 'Spanish Inquisition' Sketches, where the threat is that we'll bring out the Soft Cushions! Oh, No! A Gradual change in the way we live! Say it isn't so!! Mommy!
I think you misjudge Krugman.
My impression of him as it relates to Peak Oil is that he was aware of it and not in denial of it many years ago.
However, he does soft pedal the implications of Peak Oil to the public, perhaps because he is an "economist" (pejorative word) and as such he might believe in the tooth fairy tale of "substitutes".
Nonetheless and with that said, how many here recall when they doubted they would soon see the Gray Lady (New York Times) publish a line that says: "peak oil has arrived"?
I've just re-crunched Nick's numbers from above, adding a V2G savings equal to 50% of the annual cost of the battery. Here's my comparison between the Leaf and Corolla: